U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Group of students study diligently in university library while a professor helps them understand the difficult concepts

Comprehensive Literacy State Development (CLSD): State Literacy Plan Findings from CLSD Grantees

Goal

A cornerstone of the CLSD program is the development of state literacy plans (SLPs) to define states’ approaches to comprehensive literacy instruction. This professional learning module (PLM) provides information about the status of CLSD grantees’ SLP development, commonalities across existing plans, and legislation that supports the plans and implementation efforts.

Objectives

In reviewing this module, participants will:

  • Understand the status of each CLSD grantee’s state literacy plan
  • Identify key components of state literacy plans
  • Recognize the legislation enacted to support state literacy plan implementation
  • Use discussion questions to reflect on the statuses and contents of SLPs

How to Use this Professional Learning Module

This PLM offers details about current SLPs and legislation from CLSD grantees. Using the interactive map and the exhibits below, you will learn about an individual state and notice commonalities across states. As you review the PLM with your team, the following questions may guide reflection and discussions about the content of SLPs.

  1. If our state has an SLP, what elements does it contain? Are they similar to or different from those listed here?
  2. If our state does not have an SLP, what elements would we want to include?
  3. (After selecting two to four SLPs to review in detail):
    • What are the benefits and drawbacks of the different SLP organizational structures? What might we add or change in our plan as a result?
    • What are the differences in level of detail for the literacy frameworks? What are the benefits and drawbacks of the different approaches? What might we add or change in our plan as a result?
    • How is literacy-related legislation and policy referenced in each SLP? What might we add or change in our plan as a result?
  4. What next steps does our team need to take based on the information presented in the PLM?

About CLSD

The CLSD program awards state education agencies (SEAs) funds to advance literacy skills—including pre-literacy skills, reading, and writing—using evidence-based practices, activities, and interventions. The grants must serve children from birth through grade 12, with an emphasis on disadvantaged children, including children living in poverty, English learners, and children with disabilities. There are two CLSD SEA grantee cohorts, including four direct grants to Outlying Areas (OAs) made annually: American Samoa (AS), Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands (CNMI), Guam (GU), and the Virgin Islands and an annual grant to the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE). Thirteen (13) SEA awards were made in FY 2019: Alaska (AK), Arkansas (AR), California (CA), Georgia (GA), Hawaii (HI), Kentucky (KY), Louisiana (LA), Minnesota (MN), Montana (MT), New Mexico (NM), North Dakota (ND), Ohio (OH) and Rhode Island (RI). Eleven SEA awards were made in FY 2020: Arizona (AZ), Colorado (CO), District of Columbia (DC), Florida (FL), Louisiana (LA), Massachusetts (MA), Michigan (MI), Missouri (MO), Tennessee (TN), Texas (TX) and Wyoming (WY). In turn, the SEAs award subgrants to local education agencies (LEAs) and early childhood organizations. As part of their CLSD grant applications, SEAs must have an SLP.

CLSD Grantees with State Literacy Plans and Literacy Legislation

Click on each highlighted state or outlying area below to view the CLSD grantee’s project information, SLP (if publicly available), and supporting resources and legislation.

State / Territory Resources
Alaska Resources
Arizona Resources
Arkansas Resources
California Resources
Colorado Resources
District of Columbia Resources
Florida Resources
Georgia Resources
Hawaii Resources
Kentucky Resources
Louisiana Resources
Massachusetts Resources
Michigan Resources
Minnesota Resources
Missouri Resources
Montana Resources
New Mexico Resources
North Dakota Resources
Ohio Resources
Rhode Island Resources
Tennessee Resources
Texas Resources
Wyoming Resources

Supporting Legislation:

Legislation Topic Area Year

Summary

State Literacy Plan Common Elements

Of the 29 CLSD grantees, 24 had publicly available SLPs as of July, 2023. In addition to these 24 available SLPs, some SEAs are in the process of updating or revising an SLP; thus, they are not publicly available for analysis. The 24 SLPs were analyzed for common elements. In general, each SLP includes background material that provides context for its contents and information about how it aligns with other work (82%); a state literacy framework or plan that outlines its expectation for instruction, assessment, and intervention (74%); how the plan itself will be monitored, implemented, and improved (45%); and supporting references, tools, and resources for LEAs (96%).

The table below outlines the prevalence of different components in the 24 available SLPs.

Prevalence of CLSD SLP Components and Supporting Elements

Component Elements
Background Material (82%)
  • Alignment of SLP With Other State Literacy Work (96%)
  • Plan Background or Purpose (92%)
  • Publication Date or Timeline (79%)
  • State Literacy Team Information (75%)
  • State Needs Assessment (67%)
State Literacy Framework or Plan (74%)
  • State Literacy Framework or Model (100%)
  • State Assessment Approach (88%)
  • State Goals and Activities (83%)
  • Theory of Action or Logic Model (25%)
Monitoring and Continuous Improvement (45%)
  • Continuous Improvement of SLP (38%)
  • How to Implement SLP at Local Level (63%)
  • Local Monitoring (33%)
Resources and Tools (96%)
  • Supporting References and/or Resources (96%)

Search Results

State State Program Alignment Plan Purpose Date Or Timeline State Literacy Team Needs Assessment Literacy Framework Assessment Approach Goals Activities Theory of Action Continuous Improvement Local Implementation Local Monitoring Resources
State State ProgramAlignment PlanPurpose Date Or Timeline State Literacy Team Needs Assessment Literacy Framework Assessment Approach Goals Activities Theory of Action Continuous Improvement Local Implementation Local Monitoring Resources

State Literacy Plan Elements

  Background Material State Literacy Framework or Plan Monitoring and Continuous Improvement Resources and Tools
Grantee

Alignment of SLP with Other State Literacy Work

Plan Background of Purpose

Publication Date of Timeline

State Literacy Team

State Needs Assessment

State Literacy Framework or Model

State Assessment Approach

State Goals and Activities

Theory of Action or Logic Model

Continuous Improvement of SLP

How to Implement SLP at Local Level

Local Monitoring

Supporting References and/or Resources

Alaska
Arizona      
Arkansas              
California
Colorado      
District of Columbia  
Florida  
Georgia            
Hawaii      
Kentucky                        
Louisiana                      
Massachusetts            
Michigan    
Minnesota                
Missouri    
Montana        
New Mexico      
North Dakota              
Ohio
Rhode Island        
Tennessee            
Texas        
U.S. Virgin Islands  
Wyoming            
Total 23 22 19 18 16 24 21 20 6 9 15 8 23

Common Legislation

Twenty-three CLSD grantees have recent legislation related to literacy. The most common focus areas of literacy legislation among CLSD grantee states were dyslexia screening (100%), science of reading/evidence-based practices (91%), and professional development (74%). The category of “Other” (65%) was created to capture additional topics that do not fall into the currently identified focus areas and to address topics such as pilot programs and engaging families. It is also important to note that some states mention the science of reading specifically in the legislation, while others do not use the term – instead referring to the components of the science of reading, such as using evidence- or research-based practices and using explicit and systematic teaching of reading.

The table below outlines the supporting state legislation, organized by focus area.

State Literacy Legislation by Focus Area

Legislation Focus Area Number and Percent of CLSD States With Literacy Legislation Focus Area (n=23)
Dyslexia 23 (100%)
Science of Reading/Evidence-Based Practices 21 (91%)
Professional Development 17 (74%)
Other (e.g., pilot programs, engaging families) 15 (65%)
Reading Interventions 14 (61%)
Early Literacy 11 (48%)
Assessment 10 (43%)
Teacher Preparation 8 (35%)
Licensure and Credentialing 8 (35%)
Standards 7 (30%)
Reading by Third Grade 6 (26%)
Curricula/Materials 5 (22%)
Literacy Supports (e.g., coaches, literacy specialists, mentors, and TA) 5 (22%)
Kindergarten Readiness 4 (17%)
Tutoring and Out-of-School-Time Programs 4 (17%)
Bilingual Education/English Learners/Multilingual Learners 4 (17%)
Secondary Literacy 2 (9%)