PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S9125-9126)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 7, 2006
Raising Achievement through Improving Supplemental Education Act of 2006, or the RAISE Act - Amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to direct local educational agencies (LEAs) to make supplemental educational services (SES) (after-school tutoring programs) available to eligible children attending schools identified as needing improvement because of their having failed, for two consecutive years, to make adequate yearly progress (AYP) pursuant to state academic performance standards. (Currently such services are required only after an additional year of failing to meet such standards.)
Makes low-performing children from such schools who are not from low-income families eligible for SES and gives them priority, in the case of insufficient funding, over children who are poor but not low-performing.
Requires LEAs to: (1) create a streamlined SES notification, registration, and provider selection process designed to increase the number of eligible children receiving such services and the information available to parents and SES providers; (2) grant approved providers access to school facilities that is equivalent to access provided to other after-school and extracurricular programs; and (3) enter into a written agreement with the parents' chosen provider, within a specified period, requiring such provider to render services within 20 days after the LEA and provider receive the child's contact information.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires states to: (1) provide advance notice to LEAs of their SES duties; (2) make a downloadable SES application form available to LEAs and parents; (3) evaluate providers in a valid and reliable manner that considers student achievement and parent satisfaction; (4) safeguard against conflicts of interest and underperformance when LEAs provide SES themselves; and (5) prohibit LEAs from reprogramming SES funds when there is inadequate parental notification or unsatisfied demand for services.
Prohibits the offering, by providers, of selection incentives to parents and eligible children.
Allows states to shift to nonprofit organizations, under a contract or cooperative agreement, performance of the SES responsibilities of LEAs that face conflicts of interest or are unreliable.
Directs the Secretary of Education to establish a model program coordinating the provision of SES with 21st century community learning centers.
People & committees
Sen. Martinez, Mel [R-FL] · R–FL
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. (text of measure as introduced: CR S9125-9126)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9124-9125)
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 15, 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.3864 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.3864 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.3864 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.3864 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.