A Republican bill with 3 Democratic cosponsors · See all 5 cosponsors
Last activity — Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 549.
Cleared committee, waiting for its first floor vote
A committee approved it and it is on the calendar of the chamber it started in.
This is further than most bills get, and still no promise of a vote: the calendar is a queue, and the majority leadership decides what is called. A bill can sit here until the Congress ends.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- On Calendar
What this bill would do
This bill is known as the Reading Excellence and Achievement for Development Act or the READ Act. It updates the comprehensive literacy State development grant program to focus on the science of reading and evidence-based instruction. The legislation provides competitive and absolute priority grants to State educational agencies to improve literacy outcomes from birth through grade 12. States must use these funds for teacher training, universal early literacy screenings, high-impact tutoring, and instructional materials. Schools are also required to notify parents if a student is identified as at risk for reading difficulties or performing below grade level. Additionally, the bill directs the Institute of Education Sciences to conduct literacy research and mandates the reporting of National Assessment of Educational Progress results to States.
Yes· 3 of 15
- Scored +7
Would children be better off under this?
Directly supports students from birth through grade 12 with early screenings, tutoring, and evidence-based reading instruction.
- Scored +7
Would students be better off under this?
Improves reading instruction, provides targeted tutoring, and ensures early interventions.
- Scored +6
Does this put more money into public schools?
Reauthorizes and provides competitive and absolute priority grants to states and local educational agencies to improve literacy instruction.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this give the federal government more power?
Sets specific federal curriculum standards by excluding certain instructional methods like the three-cueing model.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Parental Notification and Engagement: Section 3(4)(F) amends section 2222(d)(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to require schools to provide sufficient and timely notification to parents of students identified as at risk of reading difficulties or performing below grade level. This ensures parents are informed about assessment results, support strategies, and home learning methods in an understandable format and language.
-
Early Literacy Screening and Support: Section 3(6) adds section 2222(f)(1)(A)(iii) and section 2222(f)(2)(D), requiring universal early literacy screenings at least once before grade 3 to identify reading difficulties or dyslexia early. This allows schools to provide timely interventions such as high-impact tutoring and summer learning programs to help students reach grade-level standards.
-
Teacher Training and Materials: Section 3(6) amends section 2222(f)(1)(A)(i) and section 2222(f)(2)(A) to ensure pre-service and in-service training for educators are aligned with the science of reading. It also helps local educational agencies purchase high-quality instructional materials and employ literacy instructional coaches and interventionists.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Restrictive Instructional Definitions: Section 2(b) amends section 2221(b)(1) to explicitly exclude three-cueing models and related instructional approaches from comprehensive literacy instruction. This places specific federal limitations on the teaching methods and curriculum options that schools and educators can utilize.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would children be better off under this? — Directly supports students from birth through grade 12 with early screenings, tutoring, and evidence-based reading instruction. Would students be better off under this? — Improves reading instruction, provides targeted tutoring, and ensures early interventions. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Prioritizes funding and resources for low-performing schools and districts serving children from low-income families. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Aims to close achievement gaps among student subgroups through targeted literacy support. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Supports evidence-based bilingual literacy instruction and resources for English learners. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Provides support for English learners and requires parent notifications in primary languages to the extent practicable. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Provides better notifications and academic interventions for students struggling with reading. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Enhances identification and support for students with dyslexia and other reading difficulties. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Allocates dedicated funding for schools operated or funded by the Bureau of Indian Education.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into public schools? — Reauthorizes and provides competitive and absolute priority grants to states and local educational agencies to improve literacy instruction. Does this put more money into scientific research? — Directs the Institute of Education Sciences to conduct expanded basic and applied literacy research.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — Supports early identification and intervention for reading difficulties, including dyslexia, while maintaining IDEA protections. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The bill aims to close opportunity gaps and target resources toward low-performing student populations.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — Long-term improvements in literacy and workforce readiness may provide broader economic benefits.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Mandates public reporting of implementation data and NAEP performance metrics to states and the public. Does this give the federal government more power? — Sets specific federal curriculum standards by excluding certain instructional methods like the three-cueing model.
- 8/6/2026
- Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Reported by Senator Cassidy with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
- Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 549.
- 7/30/2026
- Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
- 6/4/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- 5 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Jim BanksRepublican · Indiana
John HickenlooperDemocrat · Colorado
Maggie HassanDemocrat · New Hampshire
Mark KellyDemocrat · Arizona
Tim ScottRepublican · South Carolina