Martin Heinrich (D-NM)
Literacy Improvement for Transformation Act of 2026
A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
S. 5659 establishes a competitive grant program administered by the Secretary of Education to help local educational agencies ensure that every elementary and secondary school has at least one full-time certified reading or literacy specialist on staff. The program provides five-year grants to eligible entities, which include local educational agencies, state partnerships, and specific non-profit or tribal organizations. Grant funds can be used for recruiting, hiring, retaining, and training reading and literacy specialists, as well as providing professional development on reading difficulties and disabilities like dyslexia. Priority is given to applicants in states with lower student reading proficiency levels, those directing funding to elementary schools, and high-need local educational agencies. Grant recipients must ensure that funded specialists spend at least 80 percent of their time working with teachers and students to improve literacy outcomes, and they are required to submit annual progress reports to the Secretary.
Yes· 3 of 15
- Scored +7
Would children be better off under this?
Students benefit directly from having dedicated reading and literacy specialists to support their reading proficiency and learning needs.
- Scored +7
Would students be better off under this?
The primary focus of the bill is to improve literacy outcomes and provide full-time reading specialists for elementary and secondary students.
- Scored +7
Does this put more money into public schools?
The bill authorizes a competitive grant program to fund reading and literacy specialists in public elementary and secondary schools.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 3 and Section 4(d)(4): These provisions aim to ensure that every elementary and secondary school has at least one full-time certified reading or literacy specialist on staff to support the recruitment, hiring, retention, and development of these professionals. This directly benefits students who struggle with reading and writing by providing dedicated on-site experts.
-
Section 4(d)(2): This provision allows grant funds to be used to fully fund teachers who are currently employed by the eligible entity so they can earn an evidence-based reading or literacy specialist certification from an accredited institution of higher education. This benefits current educators by covering the costs of professional advancement and career development.
-
Section 4(d)(3): This provision supports the retention of reading or literacy specialists at schools, including by increasing their salaries. This provides a financial benefit to these specialized educators and helps keep them in schools.
-
Section 4(d)(5): This provision provides continual professional development opportunities regarding reading difficulties in students who are children with disabilities, including how to identify dyslexia in students with other diagnoses. This benefits educators and students with disabilities by improving how schools recognize and address specific learning challenges.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Section 4(b): This provision requires eligible entities applying for a grant to submit extensive information, including detailed needs assessments, student demographic information disaggregated by various categories (such as section 504 plans, IEPs, and specific learning disabilities), academic needs, and graduation, attendance, and disciplinary data. This requirement creates a significant administrative and reporting burden for schools and educational agencies applying for the funds.
-
Section 4(f): This provision requires grant recipients to submit an annual report to the Secretary of Education that compiles relevant data from served schools, including progress summaries, data on the number of specialists employed, and ratios of students to reading or literacy specialists. This imposes an ongoing paperwork and administrative burden on schools throughout the five-year grant period.
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? — Students benefit directly from having dedicated reading and literacy specialists to support their reading proficiency and learning needs. Would students be better off under this? — The primary focus of the bill is to improve literacy outcomes and provide full-time reading specialists for elementary and secondary students. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — The bill provides targeted support for students with dyslexia, specific learning disabilities, and IEPs by training specialists in structured literacy. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Priority is given to high-need local educational agencies and states with lower reading proficiency levels, which typically serve low-income students. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Schools operated by the Bureau of Indian Education or Indian Tribes are explicitly included as eligible entities for the grant program. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — High-need educational agencies and rural school districts are prioritized for receiving grant funds. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Current teachers and educators have opportunities for professional development and career advancement funded by the grants. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class families benefit from improved literacy instruction and resources in public schools.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into public schools? — The bill authorizes a competitive grant program to fund reading and literacy specialists in public elementary and secondary schools.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill provides grant funding to recruit and hire full-time reading and literacy specialists in schools. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Improving student literacy and educational outcomes supports long-term workforce readiness and economic potential.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The legislation establishes a new federal grant program administered by the Department of Education with specific application and reporting requirements. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Grant recipients are required to submit comprehensive annual reports and data summaries to the Secretary of Education.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — Tribal schools and high-need local educational agencies in rural or underserved areas can benefit from the grant program.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Enhancing educational achievement and literacy helps lift individuals and communities out of poverty over the long term.
- 9/30/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
Bill CassidyRepublican · Louisiana