Referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 27, 2007
Homeless Education Improvement Act of 2007 - Amends the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act to require each state and local educational agency (LEA) to ensure that each homeless child and each homeless youth has access to the same free, appropriate public education, including state-funded or LEA-funded preschool programs, as is provided to other children and youths.
Authorizes the Secretary of Education to make grants to states and U.S. territories for specified state and local activities, including mandatory establishment or designation of an Office of Coordinator for Education of Homeless Children and Youths in each state educational agency (SEA).
Prohibits segregation of such children and youths into separate schools or programs within schools.
Requires each SEA to make subgrants to LEAs to facilitate the identification, enrollment, attendance, and success in school of homeless children and youths.
Directs the Secretary to make grants to states for transportation for school stability, readiness, and success for such children and youths.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H10248)
Referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.3205 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.3205 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.3205 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.3205 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.