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 10, 2011
Literacy Education for All, Results for the Nation Act or LEARN Act - Authorizes the Secretary of Education to award grants to states for comprehensive planning to improve the literacy of children from birth through grade 12.
Directs the Secretary to award grants to states to implement their comprehensive literacy plans for such children through: (1) competitive subgrants to local educational agencies (LEAs) or early childhood education programs to carry out certain high quality early literacy initiatives for children from birth through kindergarten entry; (2) competitive subgrants to LEAs for certain initiatives to improve the literacy of students in kindergarten through grade 12, provided such LEAs have jurisdiction over a significant number or percentage of underperforming schools or have a high number or percentage of underperforming or impoverished students; and (3) state activities that include providing technical assistance to subgrantees, coordinating literacy programs and resources throughout the state, disseminating information on promising literacy programs, and enhancing the credentials of literacy instructors.
Gives subgrant priority to applicants serving a high number or percentage of impoverished children and, for those serving students from kindergarten through grade 12, a high number or percentage of students reading and writing below grade level.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary to: (1) contract with an independent organization for a five-year national evaluation of the implementation and effect of the literacy initiatives supported by this Act, and (2) provide technical assistance and information on literacy instruction to educational entities.
Authorizes the Secretary to withhold this Act's funding from states and subgrantees, and states to withhold funding from subgrantees, whose initiatives are not making significant progress in improving student literacy.
People & committees
Sen. Murray, Patty [D-WA] · D–WA
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.929 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.929 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.929 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.929 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.