PREP Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Sen. Kaine, Tim [D-VA]
- Committees
- Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 24, 2026
Bottom line
The PREP Act of 2026 aims to improve the quality and retention of teachers and school leaders, particularly in high-need areas, by reforming preparation programs and enhancing institutional support for educator development.
What it actually does
This bill reauthorizes and significantly revises Title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965, focusing on teacher and school leader quality enhancement through competitive grants for eligible partnerships. It establishes new programs for teaching residency, "Grow Your Own" initiatives, and school leadership development, while also updating accountability measures for preparation programs. Additionally, it expands the allowable uses of institutional aid for various minority-serving institutions to include teacher and school leader education programs.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that the bill addresses critical shortages and quality gaps in the education workforce by promoting evidence-based preparation, extensive clinical experience, and ongoing support for new teachers and leaders. They contend that by focusing on high-need areas and diverse candidates, the bill will lead to improved student achievement and more equitable educational outcomes.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that the bill's prescriptive nature regarding preparation program reforms could stifle innovation or impose undue administrative burdens on institutions, especially smaller ones. Concerns could also be raised about the effectiveness of federal intervention in areas traditionally governed by states, or whether the funding mechanisms are sufficient to achieve the ambitious goals.
This bill is highly detailed and requires significant time to understand its intricate program requirements and amendments to existing law, making it challenging for a casual reader to fully grasp within a short timeframe.
Section 2, amending Title II of the HEA
Comprehensive Reauthorization of Teacher and School Leader Quality Enhancement
This section completely rewrites Title II of the Higher Education Act, renaming it "Teacher and School Leader Quality Enhancement." It establishes new definitions for key terms like "2+2 program," "eligible partnership," "high-need local educational agency," "teaching skills," and "school leadership skills," setting the framework for all subsequent grant programs and accountability measures.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that clear, updated definitions are essential for effective program implementation and accountability, ensuring that federal funds are directed towards high-quality, evidence-based educator preparation.
Critics contend
No specific opposition to updated definitions, but some might argue that overly prescriptive definitions could limit flexibility for states and institutions to innovate or address unique local needs.
Tradeoffs
Balances the need for national consistency and quality standards with state and local autonomy in education.
Section 2, new Section 202(d) of HEA
Partnership Grants for Pre-Baccalaureate and 5th-Year Teacher Preparation
This provision authorizes competitive grants to eligible partnerships (State educational agencies, high-need local educational agencies, and institutions of higher education) to implement reforms in teacher preparation programs. These reforms focus on developing effective teaching skills, using evidence-based practices, ensuring collaboration with arts and sciences departments, and establishing induction programs for new teachers. It also emphasizes recruiting diverse candidates and those for shortage areas.
Section 2, new Section 202(e) of HEA
Establishment of Teaching Residency Programs
This section authorizes grants for eligible partnerships to establish teaching residency programs. These programs require prospective teachers to teach alongside an expert mentor for at least one academic year, receive concurrent graduate-level instruction, and earn a master's degree and full certification upon completion. The program also provides a 1-year living stipend or salary to residents, with a service obligation to teach in a high-need school for at least three years.
Section 2, new Section 202(f) of HEA
Establishment of "Grow Your Own" Educator Programs
This provision authorizes grants for eligible partnerships to create "Grow Your Own" programs, aimed at addressing teacher/school leader shortages and increasing workforce diversity. These programs integrate career-focused education courses with school-based learning, support candidates through degree completion and credentialing (including 2+2 programs), and offer financial aid. They specifically target paraprofessionals, instructional assistants, district employees, and other career changers from the local community.
Section 2, new Section 205 of HEA
Enhanced Accountability and Reporting for Educator Preparation Programs
This section mandates annual reporting by institutions of higher education and states on the quality of teacher and school leader preparation programs. Institutions must report on goals, pass rates for certification exams (disaggregated by race, ethnicity, gender), program admissions, clinical experience hours, completion rates, and retention rates. States must report on assessment reliability, certification standards, and identify low-performing programs, which face consequences like ineligibility for federal funding and restrictions on enrolling Title IV aid recipients.
Section 2, new Section 209 of HEA
Honorable Augustus F. Hawkins Centers of Excellence
This section authorizes competitive grants to eligible minority-serving institutions (e.g., Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, Tribal Colleges) to establish "centers of excellence." These centers aim to ensure current and future teachers and school leaders develop essential skills by implementing evidence-based reforms, providing high-quality clinical experience, promoting retention, awarding scholarships, and disseminating effective practices.
Section 3, amending various sections of HEA Title III and V
Expansion of Institutional Aid to Include Teacher and School Leader Education Programs
This section amends several parts of the Higher Education Act related to institutional aid for various types of institutions (e.g., Strengthening Institutions, Tribally Controlled Colleges, Alaska Native-Serving, Predominantly Black Institutions, Native American-Serving, Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving, Historically Black Colleges, Hispanic-Serving Institutions). These amendments explicitly add "establishing or enhancing a program of teacher or school leader education" as an allowable use of institutional aid funds, aligning with the new Title II definitions and goals.
Defines "trauma-informed care" by cross-referencing a specific section of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), rather than providing the definition directly within the bill.
Section 2, new Section 200(27) of HEA
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to avoid redundancy and ensure consistency with existing federal definitions.
Case for: Ensures definitional consistency across federal education laws, streamlining implementation for states and districts already familiar with ESEA terms.
Case against: Requires additional research for readers unfamiliar with the ESEA, potentially obscuring the full meaning of the term within this bill's context.
Estimated impact: Ensures that programs receiving funds under this Act will implement trauma-informed care practices consistent with established federal guidelines, impacting the well-being and learning environment for students.
Allows the Secretary of Education to waive all or part of the 100 percent non-Federal matching requirement for grants if applying it would result in "serious hardship or an inability to carry out the authorized activities."
Section 2, new Section 203(c)(2) of HEA
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to provide flexibility for implementation, especially for smaller or financially constrained entities.
Case for: Ensures that eligible partnerships in high-need areas or with limited resources are not excluded from participating in beneficial programs due to an inability to meet matching requirements.
Case against: Could potentially reduce the overall non-federal investment in these programs if waivers are granted too broadly, or create an uneven playing field among grantees.
Estimated impact: Could significantly increase accessibility to grants for partnerships in economically disadvantaged regions or those with less access to private funding.
Explicitly states that "The Secretary shall not create a national list or ranking of States, institutions, or schools using the scaled scores provided under this subsection."
Section 2, new Section 205(b)(3) of HEA
Why it matters:This is a politically sensitive clause, likely included to assuage concerns from states and institutions about federal overreach or the potential for punitive comparisons based on potentially incomplete or incomparable data.
Case for: Protects states and institutions from potentially unfair or misleading national comparisons that might not account for diverse contexts and student populations, fostering cooperation rather than competition.
Case against: Some might argue that national rankings, if done transparently and with appropriate context, could drive greater accountability and highlight best practices across states.
Estimated impact: Prevents a specific type of federal accountability action, shaping how data collected under the bill can be used publicly.