S. 1110: Educational Accountability and State Flexibility Act of 2013
Before you vote › Federal bills
S. 1110: Educational Accountability and State Flexibility Act of 2013
113th Congress · introduced 2013-06-06 · Education · Latest: Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4401-4402)
federal
Follow this bill, step by step
- Where it came from: introduced 2013-06-06 · official record
- Who proposed it: Sen. Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK] · what a sponsor is
- What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
- Where it stands now: Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4401-4402) Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
- If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.
Official title
Educational Accountability and State Flexibility Act of 2013
Plain summary
Educational Accountability and State Flexibility Act of 2013 - Revises and reauthorizes programs under title I (Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). Amends the school improvement program under part A of title I of the ESEA to eliminate the requirement that local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools make adequate yearly progress toward state academic content and achievement standards. Requires states to adopt challenging academic content and achievement standards for mathematics, reading or language arts, and science that ensure that their high school graduates who are deemed proficient are fully prepared to succeed in higher education, job training, or work. Requires states to implement a set of high-quality assessments of student progress toward those standards that: (1) involve multiple measures of student achievement; (2) measure the overall performance of students in each public school and the performance of their poor, minority, disabled, and limited English proficient student subgroups; and (3) are used as the primary means of determining the yearly performance of each of their schools. Allows states to adopt alternative assessments for students with significant cognitive disabilities. Requires each state to establish a multi-tiered accountability system that places each public school in a tier that reflects, at a minimum, the state's annual assessment of the extent to which each student at the school is: (1) proficient on state standards or is making satisfactory progress in attaining such proficiency, and (2) on track to graduate from high school on time. (Replaces the current system of assessing schools as needing improvement, corrective action, or restructuring due to their failure to make adequate yearly progress for a specified number of years.) Requires, at a minimum, distinct tiers for schools that: (1) have met the state standards, (2) have not met those standards for up to two student subgroups but that are making satisfactory progress in doing so, (3) have not met those standards for a significant number of student subgroups and are not showing satisfactory progress in meeting the standards or improving the subgroups' graduation rates within the time frame required by the state plan, and (4) have not met the state standards for a significant number of subgroups and are showing little or no improvement. Lists the minimum consequences for schools placed into each of these tiers, ranging from requiring states to recognize successful schools to requiring LEAs to implement alternative school governance models or school improvement strategies based on a specified system of support model. Requires students in the lowest tiered schools who did not meet or exceed the proficient level on the most recent state assessment in mathematics or in reading or language arts to be provided with supplemental educational services. Allows the LEAs serving such schools to provide those students with the option to transfer to a higher-performing school served by the LEA, if that option is not prohibited by state law. Denies the Secretary of Education any authority to approve or disapprove a state's multi-tiered accountability system. Allows states that received a waiver of statutory or regulatory requirements under the ESEA before this Act's enactment to implement the school improvement program set forth in the waiver or implement a school improvement program that meets this Act's requirements. Requires states and LEAs to consult with representatives of Indian tribes and Native organizations within their jurisdiction in implementing their school improvement programs. Includes American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian children as children eligible for services under targeted assistance programs that direct school improvement funds toward the children in a school who are failing or most at risk of failing. Requires each school and LEA receiving school improvement funds to establish mechanisms to overcome barriers to effective Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian parental involvement in their children's education. Eliminates the requirement that teachers be highly qualified, requiring instead that they be deemed highly effective in accordance with state standards. Requires teachers and paraprofessionals to meet state standards for certification or licensure, knowledge of the subject matter being taught, and competency in assisting students to meet or make satisfactory progress toward meeting state academic achievement standards. Repeals the definition of "highly qualified" teachers. Repeals the programs under subparts 1 (Reading First), 2 (Early Reading First), and 3 (William F. Goodling Even Start Family Literacy Programs) of part B (Student Reading Skills Improvement Grants) of the ESEA.
Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.
What a vote does
A “Yea” vote
If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.
A “Nay” vote
If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.
PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).
What does this mean? (plain words)
Official text
Educational Accountability and State Flexibility Act of 2013
Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate)
AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text
No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.
Limited to a few requests an hour per person.
The strongest published arguments
Arguments for (supporters)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Arguments against (opponents)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Alternatives
Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes
Officials and money
Sponsor: Sen. Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK] · 0 cosponsors
Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.
Sponsor's campaign money: Sen. Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK] reported raising $1.4 million (2025–2026). Details. Shown for context only; it does not mean any donor supported this bill.
No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.
Words on this page, explained (2)
- Jurisdiction
- The area or the matters a government or court has authority over.
- Statute
- A written law passed by a legislature. A statute can be changed by a later law; changing a constitution needs an amendment.
Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.
Sources
- Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate)
- Congress.gov
- Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-113s1110.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/113/s>
Record fed-us-cong113-s1110 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong113 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong113