The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
S. 5659·119th Congress·Introduced Sep 30, 2026

Literacy Improvement for Transformation Act of 2026

IntroducedEducationSubstantive
View bill text
Sponsor
Sen. Heinrich, Martin [D-NM]
Committees
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (primary)
Last action
Sep 30, 2026

Bottom line

This bill seeks to improve student literacy outcomes by increasing the number of dedicated, certified reading and literacy specialists in K-12 schools nationwide through a new federal grant program.

What it actually does

This bill establishes a competitive grant program through the Department of Education to help state and local educational agencies hire, train, and retain full-time reading or literacy specialists in elementary and secondary schools. The grants prioritize states with low reading proficiency, elementary schools, and high-need local educational agencies, aiming to ensure at least one full-time specialist per school.

Proponents argue

Supporters argue that dedicated reading specialists are crucial for addressing widespread literacy challenges, especially for students with learning disabilities like dyslexia. They contend that a federal grant program can provide the necessary resources to schools, particularly those in high-need areas, to implement evidence-based literacy interventions and ensure all students receive the support they need to become proficient readers.

Opponents contend

Critics might argue that this bill represents an unfunded mandate or an overreach of federal authority into local education decisions, preferring that states and local districts determine their staffing needs. They might also contend that the funds could be better spent on broader teacher training or curriculum development rather than on a specific specialist role, or that the program's effectiveness might be limited without addressing other systemic issues in education.

The bill is relatively short and clearly structured, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its core provisions and implications within a reasonable timeframe.

Sections 3 and 4(a)

Establishment of Literacy Improvement and Transformation Grant Program

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section authorizes the Secretary of Education to create a competitive grant program. Its main goal is to help state and local educational agencies ensure that every elementary and secondary school has at least one full-time certified reading or literacy specialist on staff, and to support the recruitment, hiring, retention, and professional development of these specialists over a five-year grant period.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupState and Local Educational Agencies (SEAs/LEAs)ImpactReceive federal funding and support to address literacy needs.MechanismCompetitive grants.ScalePotentially nationwide, targeting specific high-need areas.
GroupStudents in elementary and secondary schoolsImpactIncreased access to specialized literacy support and improved reading outcomes.MechanismMore reading specialists on staff.ScaleDirect impact on students in grantee schools.

Supporters argue

Supporters argue that a dedicated federal grant program is essential to address the national literacy crisis and provide targeted resources to schools that lack the funding or expertise to hire and retain reading specialists independently.

Critics contend

Some might argue that federal grant programs can create administrative burdens for states and districts, and that funding should instead be block-granted to states to allow for more flexible local decision-making on educational priorities.

Tradeoffs

Balances the need for federal intervention in a critical educational area against concerns about local control and administrative overhead.

Sections 2(3) and 4(b)

Defining Eligible Entities and Application Criteria

prominently featuredmoderately complex

The bill defines "eligible entities" broadly to include local educational agencies, state-LEA partnerships, non-profits with literacy expertise, Bureau of Indian Education/Tribal schools, and higher education institutions. Applicants must submit a detailed needs assessment, demographic data (disaggregated by disability status and reading proficiency), academic performance data, and a comprehensive plan for using funds, including how they will sustain specialist positions after the grant ends.

Section 4(c)

Prioritization for Grant Awards

prominently featuredstraightforward

The Secretary must prioritize grant applications based on a tiered system. First, priority goes to states in the lowest half for 4th and 8th-grade reading proficiency on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Second, if the first priority is met or no such applicants exist, priority shifts to applicants focusing funds primarily on elementary schools. Third, if both prior priorities are met, high-need local educational agencies or partnerships involving them receive preference.

Section 4(d)

Permitted Uses of Grant Funds

prominently featuredstraightforward

Grant recipients can use funds for various activities aimed at increasing and supporting reading specialists. These include recruiting, hiring, and developing full-time specialists; funding existing part-time teachers to earn full-time certification; increasing salaries to retain specialists; ensuring at least one full-time specialist per school; and providing ongoing professional development on reading difficulties, including identifying dyslexia in students with other diagnoses.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
Ask Ledger AI about this