PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 26, 2011
Impact Aid Fairness and Equity Act of 2011 - Amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, with respect to the Impact Aid program (which compensates local educational agencies (LEAs) for the financial burden of federal activities affecting their areas), to alter the formula for determining the payments due LEAs for federal ownership of property in their areas.
Prohibits LEAs from being paid amounts that: (1) exceed their total current expenditures in the second prior fiscal year; or (2) are less than 85% of their payment for the prior fiscal year, in FYs 2012, 2013, and 2014.
Requires the ratable reduction of payments due LEAs for federal ownership of property when appropriations for a fiscal year are insufficient to provide them with full compensation.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Alters the formula for determining the payments due LEAs for eligible federally-connected children.
Includes not only children in average daily attendance, but also those enrolled pursuant to a state open enrollment policy. Caps such payments for heavily impacted LEAs at the amount needed to raise their per-pupil expenditures to the higher of 110% of the average per-pupil expenditure of their state or the average per-pupil expenditure of three comparable LEAs. Continues a heavily impacted LEA's eligibility for such payments while activities associated with military base closures and realignments or force structure changes or relocations are ongoing.
Alters the formula for determining the construction payments due LEAs that are eligible for other Impact Aid payments.
Requires the Secretary of Education to use all Impact Aid construction appropriations to award: (1) emergency construction grants to LEAs that have no practical capacity, or minimal capacity, to issue bonds or are otherwise eligible for Impact Aid and have a school facility emergency; and (2) modernization grants to LEAs that are eligible for other Impact Aid payments.
People & committees
Rep. Boren, Dan [D-OK-2] · D–OK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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
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.472 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.472 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.472 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.472 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.