PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 12, 2025
Focus on Learning Act
This bill requires certain federal actions to address the use of mobile devices in elementary and secondary schools.
First, the bill directs the Office of the Surgeon General, in consultation with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), to study and report on the use of mobile devices in elementary and secondary schools nationwide. Among other elements, this study must include the impact of mobile device use on student learning and academic achievement, student educational outcomes, and student mental health.
Second, the Department of Education, in consultation with HHS, must establish a pilot program to award grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) to enable participating schools served by such LEAs to purchase secure containers and install lockers in order to create a school environment free of mobile devices.
People & committees
Rep. Westerman, Bruce [R-AR-4] · R–AR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Sep 19, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1275 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1275 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1275 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1275 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-12 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Focus on Learning Act would create a federal study and a grant pilot for elementary and secondary schools to store students’ personal phones and other covered devices in secure containers controlled by school administrators. Participating schools could permit health, disability, and translation exceptions. The study would examine mobile-device use in schools, including its effects on learning, mental health, and classroom instruction.
This Act may be cited as the Focus on Learning Act.
The term school environment free of mobile devices means an elementary school or secondary school in which mobile devices of students are kept in a secure container that is controlled by a school administrator.
shall award grants to local educational agencies to enable participating schools served by such agencies (referred to in this section as participating schools) to purchase secure containers and install lockers in order to create a school environment free of mobile devices.
Participating schools may, while maintaining a school environment free of mobile devices, allow exemptions such that mobile devices may be used during school hours— (1) to monitor or treat health conditions; (2) by students who are children with disabilities; and (3) by students who are English learners for translation purposes.
shall complete a study regarding the use of mobile devices in elementary schools and secondary schools nationwide, including— (1) the impact of such use on— (A) student learning and academic achievement; (B) student educational outcomes and engagement; (C) student mental health; (D) classroom instruction; and (E) school climate and student behavior;
Covered devices would include personal mobile phones, other portable electronic communication devices used for calls or messages, and devices used to play games or watch videos. School-issued devices would be excluded.
The term mobile device means any personal mobile telephone or other portable electronic communication device with which a user engages in a call or writes or sends a message or any device in which the user plays a game or watches a video, except that such term does not include school-issued devices.
“School hours” would include lunch, free periods on school grounds, and time between classes, as well as regular instructional hours. Definitions of school types, local educational agencies, children with disabilities, and English learners would come from an existing federal education law.
The term school hours means regular school hours for instruction, including lunch periods, free periods on school grounds, and time between classroom instruction.
The terms child with a disability, elementary school, English learner, local educational agency, and secondary school have the meaning given those terms in section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
Within two years after enactment, the Surgeon General, consulting with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, would have to complete a nationwide study of mobile-device use in elementary and secondary schools. It would cover learning, achievement, educational outcomes, engagement, mental health, classroom instruction, school climate, and student behavior, and analyze data from pilot schools.
Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Surgeon General, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall complete a study regarding the use of mobile devices in elementary schools and secondary schools nationwide, including— (1) the impact of such use on— (A) student learning and academic achievement; (B) student educational outcomes and engagement; (C) student mental health; (D) classroom instruction; and (E) school climate and student behavior; and (2) an analysis of data collected from participating schools in the pilot program under section 4.
The Surgeon General, consulting with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, would have to report the study results to Congress and make the report public.
The Surgeon General, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall submit a report to Congress containing the results of the study conducted under subsection (a), and shall make such report publicly available.
The Secretary of Education, consulting with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, would establish the pilot and award grants to local educational agencies for secure containers and lockers at participating schools. Applicants would be selected based on whether their participation would likely provide useful information for testing schools’ storage of student devices.
The Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall establish a pilot program, through which the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall award grants to local educational agencies to enable participating schools served by such agencies (referred to in this section as participating schools) to purchase secure containers and install lockers in order to create a school environment free of mobile devices.
shall select local educational agency applicants for participation in the pilot program based on the Secretary of Education's determination that the applicant’s participation will likely yield helpful information relevant to testing a school environment free of mobile devices.
Agencies seeking grants would have to apply under requirements reasonably set by the Secretary. They would have to promise to involve students, parents, educators, school leaders, and specialized instructional support staff in selecting participating schools. Applications would also describe each school’s current device policy and its planned policy upon joining the pilot.
A local educational agency desiring to participate in the program under this section shall submit an application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may reasonably require
an assurance that such local educational agency will identify and select participating schools in a manner that engages the students, parents, educators, principal, school leaders, and specialized instructional support personnel, of such schools;
(4) the policy of each participating school on mobile device use during school hours as of the date of the application; and (5) a description of what each participating school's new policy on mobile device use during school hours will be upon beginning participation in the pilot program under this section.
Applicants would have to assure that participating schools have a system for staff to communicate with one another and local emergency responders; that system could use mobile devices. Schools would also need a clear process for students to contact their parents.
(2) an assurance that each participating school will have a communication system (which may be mobile devices) allowing teachers, administrators, and staff to communicate with each other and with local emergency responders; (3) an assurance that each participating school will have a clear process for students to be able to contact their parents;
Participating schools could allow device use during school hours to monitor or treat health conditions, by students with disabilities, and by English learners for translation. These exceptions would be permitted, rather than required, by this provision.
Participating schools may, while maintaining a school environment free of mobile devices, allow exemptions such that mobile devices may be used during school hours— (1) to monitor or treat health conditions; (2) by students who are children with disabilities; and (3) by students who are English learners for translation purposes.
An applying agency would have to notify parents at schools that might participate at least 30 days before applying and again upon receiving a grant. Before applying, it would also have to seek those parents’ feedback about the proposed device-storage policy.
Each local educational agency that applies for participation in the pilot program under this section shall— (1) notify parents of students enrolled in elementary schools and secondary schools that are served by the agency and that may become participating schools— (A) not less than 30 days before submitting an application under this section; and (B) upon receipt of a grant award under this section; and (2) solicit feedback from such parents before applying for the grant about the local educational agency's desire to implement a school environment free of mobile devices.
The Education and Health and Human Services Secretaries could use up to 2 percent of the funds made available for the pilot section for administration, data collection, and the required study.
The Secretary of Education and the Secretary of Health and Human Services may use not more than 2 percent of the amounts made available to carry out this section for administrative expenses, data collection, and carrying out the study required under section 3.
The bill would authorize Congress to provide $5 million for the pilot section over fiscal years 2025 through 2029, rather than $5 million each year. This authorization would not itself provide the money.
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section, $5,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2025 through 2029.
The supplied action snapshot, updated September 19, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Education and Workforce on February 12, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-19T23:33:35Z. 2025-02-12: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. 2025-02-12: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-12. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed allocation to a particular recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit was identified under the requested criteria in the complete supplied introduced text. Ordinary program eligibility and access accommodations were not treated as preferential benefits. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 19, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI