Referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 18, 2013
Student Support Act - Amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to require the Secretary of Education to make matching grants of at least $1 million to states for allocation to local educational agencies (LEAs) so that additional school-based mental health and student service providers may be hired, thereby reducing the student-to-provider ratios in elementary and secondary schools to specified minimum levels recommended by the leading counseling, guidance, and mental health organizations.
Sets those minimum ratios at: (1) 1 school counselor for every 250 students, (2) 1 school psychologist for every 1,000 students, and (3) 1 school social worker for every 250 students.
Requires grants to states and state allocations to LEAs to be made pursuant to specified formulas that take into account a state's and school district's share of children in poverty.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.320 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.320 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.320 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.320 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.