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 · Jul 11, 2013
Family Engagement in Education Act of 2013 - Amends title I (Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) to authorize states to reserve school improvement funds to:
award a grant to a statewide nonprofit organization to establish a Statewide Family Engagement Center that provides comprehensive training, technical assistance, and capacity building to local educational agencies (LEAs), organizations that support family-school partnerships, and other organizations that carry out parent education and family engagement in education programs;
award grants to nonprofit organizations or Indian tribes or organizations that partner with LEAs or schools to establish and operate Local Family Engagement Centers that assist families in becoming engaged in their childrens' education; and
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
develop and implement a statewide family engagement in education plan.
Requires each state school improvement plan to include a plan for strengthening family engagement in education.
Requires each LEA and school receiving school improvement funds to develop policies and practices for family engagement in education that meet specified principles and standards.
Increases the percentage of school improvement funds that LEAs must reserve for family engagement activities. Requires at least 75% of those reserved funds to be distributed to schools served under the school improvement program.
Requires states and correctional facilities to work with family members and aftercare providers in developing educational services and transition plans for youth following their stay in state and local institutions for neglected or delinquent youth.
Requires the Director of the Institute of Education Sciences to develop recommended metrics on family engagement in education for states and LEAs and to make recommendations on the integration of those metrics into state accountability and longitudinal data systems. Directs the Secretary of Education to conduct research on effective family engagement in education.
Requires states to use part of their grant under part A (Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund) of title II of the ESEA to train teachers and principals to effectively engage families in their children's education.
Repeals programs authorizing the Secretary to award grants to: (1) nonprofit organizations and consortia of those organizations and LEAs to establish parental information and resource centers, and (2) local nonprofit parent organizations to support local family information centers.
People & committees
Sen. Reed, Jack [D-RI] · D–RI
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 S5671-5672)
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.1291 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.1291 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.1291 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.1291 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.