Reading First and Early Reading First: Background and Funding

Reading First and Early Reading First: Background and Funding

Order Code RL31241
Reading First and Early Reading First:
Background and Funding
Updated February 6, 2008
Gail McCallion
Specialist in Social Legislation
Domestic Social Policy Division

Reading First and Early Reading First:
Background and Funding
Summary
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), including the Reading
First and Early Reading First programs, is being considered for reauthorization by the
110th Congress. Both reading programs were originally authorized by the No Child
Left Behind Act (NCLBA) of 2001 (P.L.107-110). Reading First and Early Reading
First were authorized at $900 million and $75 million, respectively, for FY2002 and
such sums as may be needed for the succeeding five fiscal years.
In FY2008 Reading First funding was cut by over $636 million in response to
criticisms of the program’s administration. FY2008 funding for the program is
$393.012 million. Early Reading First funding was also cut (but by a much smaller
percentage). Its funding for FY2008 equals $112.549 million. The Administration
has requested FY2009 funding of $1 billion and $112.549 million, respectively, for
the two programs.
Reading First and Early Reading First were created to broaden and expand
existing reading programs to address concerns about student reading achievement
and to reach children at younger ages. The Reading First program includes both
formula grants and targeted assistance grants to states. For FY2002 and FY2003,
100% of funds, after national reservations, was allocated to states as formula grants.
States are allocated funds in proportion to the number of children, aged 5 to 17, who
reside within the state from families with incomes below the poverty line. All states
receiving funds will receive at least one-fourth of 1% of the funds distributed to the
states. Beginning with FY2004, 10% of funds in excess of the FY2003 appropriation
or $90 million, whichever is less, was to be reserved for targeted assistance state
grants; however, the first targeted assistance award was delayed until FY2005 in
order to allow more states to have sufficient data to meet the requirements for receipt
of the award.
The Early Reading First Program is a competitive grant program with awards
not to exceed six years. Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) eligible for Reading
First grants, and community-based organizations (CBOs) serving preschool-age
children, or combinations of one or more LEAs and or CBOs, may apply for these
grants. This program, among other things, supports professional training, and
provides preschool-age children with greater opportunities for exposure to high-
quality language and literature-rich environments to build pre-reading skills.
This report will updated in response to legislative developments.

Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Reading Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Reading First . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Formula Grants to States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Targeted Assistance Grants to States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Reading First Controversies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Early Reading First . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Competitive Grants to States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Relationship to Other Relevant Federal Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Reading First and Early Reading First:
Background and Funding
Introduction
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), including the Reading
First and Early Reading First programs, is being considered for reauthorization by the
110th Congress. Both reading programs were originally authorized in the last
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), by the No
Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLBA). This report summarizes the major
provisions of these two programs, and will be updated in response to legislative
developments.
During consideration of the last ESEA reauthorization, President Bush proposed
a major reading initiative titled “Reading First,” with funding for this new initiative
at $5 billion over five years. The major components of the President’s proposal were
to
! conduct diagnostic testing of children (K-2) to determine those who
need reading help;
! require reading curriculum funded under this initiative to use
scientifically based reading instruction; in particular by drawing on
the research on reading conducted by the National Reading Panel;
! fund training for teachers of grades K-2 in how to teach reading;
! provide extra help in reading to those children in grades K-2 who are
not reading at grade level; and
! conduct ongoing reading assessments for students in grades 3-8 and
link them to an accountability system for states.
The reauthorization of the ESEA in P.L. 107-110 incorporated much of the
Administration’s reading proposal. The NCLBA authorized Reading First at $900
million for FY2002, and such sums as may be necessary for the succeeding five fiscal
years. Early Reading First was authorized at $75 million for FY2002 and such sums
as may be necessary for the succeeding five fiscal years. Other literacy programs
consolidated into this new Part B include Even Start (formerly in Title I Part B of the
ESEA), 1 and a new program to assist school libraries, titled “Improving Literacy
Through School Libraries.”2 In addition, in 2005, a new reading program for
adolescents, Striving Readers, was authorized by the FY2005 Appropriations Act
under ESEA Title I Part E, demonstration authority.
1 CRS Report RL33071, Even Start: Funding Controversy, by Gail McCallion.
2 CRS Report RS21284, Improving Literacy Through School Libraries, by Bonnie Mangan.

CRS-2
In contrast with its predecessor, the Reading Excellence Act (REA),3 which
provided a one-time-only competitive grant to states, the Reading First program
includes both formula grants (employing a poverty formula) and targeted grants for
states. Additionally, Reading First and Early Reading First are authorized at higher
levels than the REA, with a total first year authorization and appropriation for both
programs of $975 million. The REA was funded at $286 million in its third and final
year of federal funding, FY2001. In addition, unlike under the REA, all states will
receive a share of Reading First funds.
Reading First and Early Reading First, as well as their predecessor, the REA,
were created to broaden and expand existing reading programs to address concerns
about student reading achievement and to try and reach children at younger ages.4
The most recent (2005) National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) data
indicate that many 4th grade students are not proficient readers.5 These data indicate
that only 31% of 4th graders were at or above the proficient level. For 4th graders
eligible for free/reduced-price lunches, only 16% were at or above the proficient
level.
Reading Research
Reading First and Early Reading First were drafted with the intent of
incorporating the latest scientific understanding on what works in teaching reading.6
In this regard, two influential research reports on reading are frequently cited by
practitioners and policy makers working on reading issues. In 1998, the National
Research Council (NRC) published a report titled Preventing Reading Difficulties in
Young Children. The NRC report examined skill and environmental factors that
facilitate acquisition of reading skills; it did not explicitly investigate how those skills
could be transferred to classroom settings. The NRC report concluded that (1) early
exposure (in the home and in school) to language and books is critical; (2) effective
reading instruction requires well trained preschool and elementary school teachers;
and (3) elementary school teachers should include all of the following components
in reading instruction: alphabetics, reading sight words, techniques in sounding out
letters and words, and achieving fluency and comprehension.
In 2000, the National Reading Panel (NRP) issued a report titled Teaching
Children to Read. The NRP was convened by the National Institute of Child Health
3 CRS Report RL30663, The Reading Excellence Act: Implementation Status and Issues,
by Gail McCallion.
4 For a discussion of Reading First implementation issues see CRS Report RL33246,
Reading First: Implementation Issues and Controversies, by Gail McCallion.
5 “Students reaching this level (proficient) have demonstrated competency over challenging
subject matter including subject-matter knowledge, application of such knowledge to real-
word situations, and analytical skills appropriate to the subject matter.” The National
Education Goals Panel, [http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/].
6 CRS Report RL32145, Early Intervention in Reading: An Overview of Research and
Policy Issues, by Gail McCallion.

CRS-3
and Human Development (NICHD), with the consultation of the U.S. Department of
Education (ED), in response to a congressional charge to review the literature on
reading and use it to assess the effectiveness of different techniques for teaching
reading, and whether these techniques were ready to be applied to classroom settings.
The NRP research was intended to build on the earlier research conducted by the
NRC.
The NRP conducted a literature review of studies that met “rigorous scientific
standards in reaching conclusions.” The following instructional topics were examined
by the NRP: phonemic awareness and phonics; fluency; comprehension; teacher
education and reading instruction; and computer technology and reading instruction.
The NRP limited its selection of topics because the volume of reading research was
too extensive for examination of all potential topics. The selected topics were chosen
based on the NRP’s assessment of issues central to reading instruction and
achievement, and based on input received from public forums.
The NRP has been criticized by some for its omission of other topics. In a
minority view attached to the NRP report, one panel member argued that the NRP
early on in its decision making effectively excluded: “any inquiry into the field of
language and literature”; and that the research examined by the NRP would be “of
limited usefulness to teachers, administrators, and policymakers because they fail to
address the key issues that have made elementary schools both a battleground for
advocates of opposing philosophies and a prey for purveyors of ‘quick fixes.’”7
The NRP majority, however, stated that it does not view its research as
exhausting all reading topics that need study; rather, it noted that it believes further
research on reading instruction, including research that examines qualitative data, is
needed: “[T]he Panel identified areas where significantly greater research effort is
needed, and where the quality of the research efforts must improve in order to
determine objectively the effectiveness of different types of reading instruction.”8
In summarizing the implications of its work for the teaching of reading, the NRP
noted that not all the areas it investigated contained sufficient data to reach
conclusions; however, it did find that the data supported the following conclusions:
! Systematic phonics instruction (the teaching of a planned sequence
of phonics elements) is effective for children in grades K-6, and for
children who are having difficulty learning to read. Systematic
phonics instruction was found to be so successful that the NRP
recommended it as appropriate for routine classroom instruction.
! Phonemic awareness (teaching children to associate phonemes with
letters) is a crucial building block for phonics.9
7 Report of the National Reading Panel: Reports of the Subgroups, Minority View of
Joanne Yatvin, 2000.
8 Report of the National Reading Panel, Executive Summary, p. 21.
9 Phonemes are the smallest units of spoken language (the word go, for example, consists
(continued...)

CRS-4
! As early as kindergarten, children benefit significantly from phonics
instruction.
! Children with learning disabilities, low-achieving children, and
those from low socioeconomic levels benefit from systematic
phonics instruction in conjunction with synthetic phonics instruction
(teaching students to convert letters into phonemes and then blend
the phonemes to form words).
! Reading fluency, word recognition, and comprehension are
enhanced by repeated, guided oral reading.
Reading First
The purposes of the Reading First program are the following:
! To provide assistance to state educational agencies (SEAs) and local
educational agencies (LEAs) in establishing scientifically based
reading programs for children in kindergarten through grade 3.
! To provide assistance to SEAs and LEAs in providing reading
related professional training for teachers, including special education
teachers.
! To provide assistance to SEAs and LEAs in selecting or
administering screening, diagnostic, and classroom-based
instructional reading assessments.
! To provide assistance to SEAs and LEAs in selecting or developing
effective instructional materials, programs, learning systems, and
strategies.
! To strengthen coordination among schools, early literacy programs,
and family literacy programs, in order to improve reading
achievement for all children.
Formula Grants to States
The Reading First program includes both formula grants and targeted grants to
states. For the first two years of the program, 100% of funds, after national
reservations, was allocated to states as formula grants. To receive formula grants,
states must submit an application for a six-year period. States must establish a
reading and literacy partnership (or have a preexisting partnership established under
the REA), and must submit a progress report10 to the Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Education (hereafter, the Secretary) after the first three years of
9 (...continued)
of two phonemes).
10 Because of the time involved in initial implementation of the program, ED is making some
adjustments to the time line. Since many states have insufficient data at this point for a
useful review, ED will be conducting mid-term reviews on a rolling basis. This would allow
all states to have participated in three grant cycles, as envisioned by the statute, before they
undergo a mid-term peer review. CRS Report RL33246, Reading First: Implementation
Issues and Controversies, by Gail McCallion

CRS-5
funding to be reviewed by the peer review panel (discussed below). States are also
required to provide annual reports on implementation of this program to the
Secretary. States are allocated funds in proportion to the number of children aged 5-
17 from families with incomes below the poverty line who reside within the state.
All states receiving funds will receive at least one-fourth of 1% of the funds
distributed to the states.11 States are required to use at least 80% of the funds they
receive on subgrants to eligible LEAs.
Beginning with FY2004, 10% of funds in excess of the FY2003 appropriation
or $90 million, whichever is less, was to be reserved for targeted assistance state
grants; however, the first grant was delayed until FY2005 in order to allow more
states to have sufficient data to meet the requirements for receipt of the award.
Other State Uses of Funds. States may use up to 20% of the formula grant
funds they receive for state purposes. Of this 20%, states may use not more than:
! 65% for professional development, strengthening K-3 teacher
training at all public institutions of higher education in the state, and
making recommendations on how state licensure and certification
standards in reading might be improved;
! not more than 25% for technical assistance for LEAs and schools
and for providing expanded opportunities for K-3 students to receive
reading assistance from alternative providers; and
! not more than 10% for planning, administration, and reporting.
National Reservations. One-half of 1% of total appropriations is reserved
for outlying areas; the same amount is also reserved for the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
The Secretary may reserve 2½% or $25 million, whichever is less, for an external
evaluation and national activities. Five million dollars is reserved, in total, for
information dissemination for the Reading First and the Early Reading First
programs.
Peer Review. A peer review panel reviews state applications for grants (both
formula and targeted). The review panel is composed of experts in reading and
professional development. At a minimum the panel shall include three members
selected by each of the following: the Secretary, the National Institute for Literacy
(NIL), the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences (NRC),
and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).
Subgrants to Local Educational Agencies (LEAs). Subgrants are
awarded competitively. Eligible LEAs are among those in the state that have the
highest numbers or percentages of K-3 aged children reading below grade level;
AND have jurisdiction over an empowerment zone or enterprise community;12 OR
11 The percentage of funds allocated to Puerto Rico may not exceed the percentage it
received under Subpart 2 of Part A of ESEA Title I for the preceding fiscal year.
12 Empowerment zones are defined in Subchapter U of Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, while enterprise zones are defined in Section 701(a)(1) of the Housing and
(continued...)

CRS-6
have jurisdiction over a significant number or percentage of schools identified for
school improvement under Section 1116(b) (schools that fail to make adequate
progress for two consecutive years by state measures); OR have the highest numbers
or percentages of children counted under Section 1124(c) (a count of poor and other
school-age children for purposes of Title I).
At a minimum, LEAs, receiving grants shall receive a share of total funds that
is proportionate to the share of funds they received under Title I, Part A, in the
preceding fiscal year. In making subgrants to LEAs, SEAs shall give priority to
LEAs that have at least 15% of students in each school from families with incomes
below the poverty line; or 6,500 children served by the LEA are from families with
incomes below the poverty line. SEAs shall provide subgrants of sufficient size to
enable LEAs to improve reading instruction; and shall provide funds in relation to
the number or percentage of K-3 children reading below grade level.
Eligible Schools. Schools receiving funds must be among those in the LEA
with the highest number or percentage of K-3 students reading below grade level;
AND are identified for school improvement under Section 1116(b); OR have the
highest percentages or numbers of children counted under Section 1124(c).
LEA’s Uses of Funds. LEAs that receive Reading First grants shall use
those funds for the following purposes:
1.
Selecting and administering screening, diagnostic, and classroom-
based instructional reading assessments.
2.
Selecting and implementing a learning system or program of reading
instruction based on scientifically based reading research that
includes the essential components of reading instruction.
3.
Procuring and implementing classroom instructional materials based
on scientifically based reading research.
4.
Providing professional development for teachers of grades K-3, and
special education teachers of grades K-12.
5.
Collecting and summarizing data to document the effectiveness of
these programs; and to accelerate improvement of reading instruction
by identifying successful schools.
6.
Reporting student progress by detailed demographic characteristics.
7.
Promoting reading and library programs that provide access to
stimulating reading material.
LEAs may use Reading First funds for the Prime Time Family Reading Time
program; for training parents and other volunteers as reading tutors; and for assisting
parents to encourage and provide support for their child’s reading development.
12 (...continued)
Community Development Act of 1987. Both are local areas of high poverty that meet
certain eligibility requirements to receive specified forms of aid or regulatory flexibility.
For additional information, see CRS Report RS20381, Empowerment Zones/Enterprise
Communities Program: Overview of Rounds I, II & III, by Bruce K. Mulock.

CRS-7
LEAs may use not more than 3.5% of formula grant funds for planning and
administration.
Targeted Assistance Grants to States
Targeted assistance grants are intended to reward states that are achieving the
goals of
! increasing the percentage of 3rd graders (broken down into subgroups
by detailed demographic characteristics) who are proficient readers;
and
! improving the reading skills of 1st and 2nd graders.
States must meet both of these criteria for two consecutive years to be eligible
for targeted assistance grants. Beginning with FY2004 Reading First grants, $90
million, or 10% of funds in excess of the FY2003 appropriation, whichever is less,
was authorized to be awarded to states as targeted grants. However, in order to allow
more states to meet the requirement of having one year of baseline data and two years
of follow-up data showing improvement, the first targeted assistance award was
delayed until FY2005. States that have been approved to receive formula grants are
eligible to apply for these targeted grants.13
An SEA awarded a targeted assistance grant will continue to receive these
awards for each succeeding year in which the SEA demonstrates that it is continuing
to meet these criteria. SEAs must agree to award 100% of the targeted grant funds
they receive to LEAs. LEAs eligible for formula grant awards will be eligible to
apply for targeted assistance awards. LEAs receiving targeted assistance grants shall
use these funds for the same purposes as for Reading First formula grants. SEAs
receiving targeted assistance grants will receive a share of the total proportionate to
the count of poor children under Section 1124(c)(1)(A).
Reading First Controversies14
The Reading First program has been criticized for perceived
“overprescriptiveness” of the program as it has been administered, perceptions of
insufficient transparency regarding ED’s requirements of states, and allegations of
conflicts of interest between consultants to the program and commercial reading and
assessment companies. Three groups representing different reading programs filed
separate complaints with ED’s Office of Inspector General (OIG), asking that the
program be investigated. ED’s OIG has issued several audit reports on selected
aspects of the program. The OIG reports were highly critical of ED’s implementation
of the Reading First program, and essentially validated many of the concerns raised
in the complaints filed with the OIG. In addition, the House Committee on
Education and Labor held two oversight hearings on Reading First; the Senate
13 For a list of grant recipients see CRS Report RL33246, Reading First: Implementation
Issues and Controversies, by Gail McCallion.
14 These issues are discussed in detail in CRS Report RL33246.

CRS-8
Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions issued a report indicating that
four out of five Reading First Technical Assistance (TAC) directors had financial ties
with publishers while serving as TAC directors.
Early Reading First
There are five stated purposes underlying the Early Reading First program:
1.
To support local efforts to enhance the early language, literacy, and
pre-reading development of preschool-age children, particularly those
from low-income families.
2.
To provide preschool-age children with cognitive learning
opportunities in high-quality language and literature-rich
environments.
3.
To demonstrate language and literacy activities based on scientifically
based reading research that supports (the) age-appropriate
development of pre-reading skills.
4.
To use screening assessments to effectively identify preschool
children who may be at risk for reading failure.
5.
To integrate such scientific reading research-based instructional
materials and literacy activities with existing programs of preschools,
child care agencies and programs, Head Start Centers, and family
literacy services.
Competitive Grants to States
The Early Reading First Program is a competitive grant program with awards
not to exceed six years. LEAs eligible for Reading First grants, as well as other
public or private organizations serving preschool-age children,15 or combinations of
one or more of the above, may apply for these grants. Grantees are required to
submit an annual progress report to ED.
National Reservations. The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education
reserves not more than $3 million for the period beginning October 1, 2002 and
ending September 30, 2006, for an independent evaluation of the effectiveness of this
program. The statute specifies that the Secretary submit an interim report to
Congress by October 1, 2004 and a final report by September 30, 2006.16
Information dissemination for Early Reading First is included in the Reading First
program.
15 In addition to LEAs, an eligible applicant means: “one or more public or private
organizations or agencies, acting on behalf of 1 or more programs that serve preschool age
children (such as a program at a Head Start center, a child care program, or a family literacy
program), which organizations or agencies shall be located in a community served by a local
educational agency described in subparagraph (A)....”
16 ED submitted a status report in January of 2005, and submitted the final report in May of
2007.

CRS-9
Peer Review. The same peer review panel convened for evaluating Reading
First applications will review Early Reading First applications except the Early
Reading First legislation specifies that “Such panel shall include, at a minimum, three
individuals ... who are experts in early reading development and early childhood
development.”
Local Uses of Funds. Recipients of Early Reading First grants shall use the
funds received for the following activities:
! Providing preschool-age children with high-quality oral language
and literature rich environments in which to acquire prereading
skills.
! Providing professional training to early childhood staff that provides
them with scientifically based knowledge of early reading
development.
! Identifying and providing scientifically based language and literacy
activities and instructional materials for preschool-age children.
! Acquiring, providing training for, and implementing scientifically
based screening reading assessments.
! Integrating these instructional materials, activities, tools and
measures into the grant recipients’ programs.
Funding
FY2002 was the first year of funding for Reading First and Early Reading First.
FY2002 appropriations were passed in H.R. 3061, the FY2002 Departments of
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act. The Reading First and Early Reading First programs received
$900 million and $75 million in funding, respectively, for FY2002. FY2003 funding
was passed in the Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003 (P.L. 108-7).
FY2003 funding for Reading First and Early Reading First was $993.5 million and
$74.5 million (including the FY2003 across-the-board reduction), respectively.
FY2004 funding was passed in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004 (P.L. 108-
199). FY2004 funding for Reading First and Early Reading First was $1.0239 billion
and $94.44 million, respectively. FY2005 funding was passed in the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005 (P.L. 108-447). FY2005 funding for Reading First and
Early Reading First was $1.0416 billion and $104.16 million (including the FY2005
across-the-board reduction), respectively. FY2006 funding was passed in the
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related
Agencies Appropriation Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-149). FY2006 funding for Reading
First and Early Reading First was $1.0292 billion and $103.118 million (including
the FY2006 across-the-board reduction), respectively. FY2007 funding for Reading
First and Early Reading First was $1.0292 billion and $117.666 million, respectively.
In FY2008 Reading First funding was cut by over $636 million in response to
criticisms of the program’s administration. FY2008 funding for the program is
$393.012 million. Early Reading First funding was also cut (but by a much smaller
percentage). Its funding for FY2008 equals $112.549 million. The Administration

CRS-10
has requested FY2009 funding of $1 billion and $112.549 million, respectively, for
the two programs.
Relationship to Other Relevant Federal Programs
Some of the components of the Reading First and Early Reading First programs
are also present in other federal programs. Many existing federal programs support,
among other things, reading instruction for children in preschool through 3rd grade,
and reading-related professional training for teachers of children in preschool through
3rd grade. However, these are the only programs (along with their predecessor the
REA), solely devoted to this purpose.
Other federal education programs that include reading programs as part of the
services provided are ESEA Title I-A; The Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act; and ESEA Title III, Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient and
Immigrant Students. The Even Start program (ESEA Title I-B, Subpart 3) provides
family literacy to low-income families, and both Even Start and Head Start provide
early learning experiences (including reading readiness) to preschoolers. The
Literacy Through School Libraries program (ESEA Title I-B, Subpart 4) provides
competitive grants to help LEAs provide up-to-date library services. A
demonstration program, Striving Readers, provides funding for middle and high
school reading programs. The Inexpensive Book Distribution Program’s
(reauthorized as Part D-5 of Title V) mission is to encourage children to read.
Finally, ESEA Title II authorizes programs for teacher training, although the
emphasis is on mathematics and science.