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 · Mar 30, 2011
Charter School Quality Act of 2011 - Amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to add to the criteria the Secretary of Education is to consider when deciding whether to give a state priority in the receipt of public charter school grants.
Favors states that ensure that public charter schools are held to the student performance standards set forth in their performance contracts, and: (1) have a statewide authorized public chartering agency; (2) work with authorized public chartering agencies to streamline data collection and reporting; (3) ensure that those agencies follow high-quality standards that reflect best practices; (4) have a transparent process for accrediting, training, or evaluating those agencies; and/or (5) make student achievement a primary factor in decisions to approve, renew, or revoke school charters.
Directs the Secretary, when assessing a state's grant application, to consider the rigor of the process it establishes to ensure that subgrants are awarded only to high-quality applicants that are likely to create high-performing charter schools.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to award grants to successful public charter schools, high-quality public chartering agencies, and experienced nonprofit organizations to: (1) disseminate information about successful innovations in education; or (2) assist other schools, chartering agencies, charter support organizations, and nonprofit organizations in utilizing such innovations.
Requires public charter schools to: (1) conduct an annual, independent, and timely financial audit that is filed with their chartering agency; (2) have a written, legally-binding performance contract or charter with an authorized public chartering agency in their state; and (3) be governed by a board that is independent from the chartering agency and has autonomy over decisions.
Requires authorized public chartering agencies or authorizers to use student performance and growth at the whole school level and for certain student subgroups as a primary factor in assessing public charter schools and determining whether to renew or revoke their charters.
People & committees
Sen. Landrieu, Mary L. [D-LA] · D–LA
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 14, 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.686 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.686 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.686 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.686 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.