PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 26, 2011
Eunice Kennedy Shriver Act - Reauthorizes the Special Olympics Sport and Empowerment Act of 2004 for FY2012-FY2016.
Directs the Secretary of State to act through the Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs in awarding grants or entering agreements with Special Olympics for activities outside the United States. Includes community-based prevention among the activities for which the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) may award grants or enter into agreements with Special Olympics. Requires grant or agreement applications to include a description of specific measurable annual benchmarks, as well as long-term goals and objectives, to be achieved through specified activities, which must include: (1) activities to increase the full participation of people with intellectual disabilities in inclusive school and community activities with people without disabilities, (2) education programs that dispel negative stereotypes about people with intellectual disabilities, and (3) activities to increase the participation of people with intellectual disabilities in Special Olympics outside of the United States. Requires annual reports by Special Olympics to describe demographic data about Special Olympics participants.
Authorizes the Secretary of Education to award grants or enter into contracts or cooperative agreements to promote the expansion of Best Buddies, including activities to increase the participation of people with intellectual disabilities in social relationships and other aspects of community life, including education and employment, within the United States.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary of Education to award competitive grants to institutions of higher education to establish Eunice Kennedy Shriver Institutes for Sport and Social Impact. Requires recipients to use grant funds to advance the quality of life and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities through research and evaluation, technical assistance, training, data collection, evaluation, collaboration, and dissemination of evidence-based best practices.
People & committees
Sen. Harkin, Tom [D-IA] · D–IA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3431)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 10, 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 S.1086 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 S.1086 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 S.1086 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 S.1086 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.