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 · Nov 7, 2013
Early Childhood Care and Education Workforce Improvement Act - Authorizes the Secretary of Education and the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) (Secretaries) to award competitive matching grants to states to support services for early childhood educators and early childhood care and education programs across all early childhood age groups.
Requires grant applicants to demonstrate that they have a comprehensive early childhood educator professional development system or a plan for developing one.
Requires the grants to be used to:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
provide scholarships to current or prospective early childhood educators to earn a child development associate credential or an associate or baccalaureate degree in early childhood education or a closely related field;
enhance or expand professional development to help early childhood care and education programs improve by at least one level on the state's quality rating and improvement system, if the state has one;
provide ongoing professional development opportunities for early childhood educators;
encourage cross-sector training opportunities for teachers and staff working in Head Start programs, Early Head Start programs, child care programs, early intervention programs, infant and early childhood mental health programs, home visiting programs, and state-funded prekindergarten and preschool programs; and
expand the number of early childhood educators who are trained to work with infants and toddlers.
Requires states to give priority to using the grant funds to provide such scholarships.
Prohibits this Act's grant funds from being used to supplant other federal, state, or local funds provided for early childhood workforce improvement programs.
Directs the Secretaries to carry out their responsibilities under this Act in accordance with the terms they set forth in an interagency agreement.
People & committees
Sen. Franken, Al [D-MN] · D–MN
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.
Introduced in Senate
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: Aug 12, 2025. 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.1673 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.1673 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.1673 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.1673 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.