Editor’s note: This essay is an entry in Fordham’s 2025 Wonkathon, which asked contributors to answer this question: “What needs to happen next—at the state, district, and school levels—for the science of reading revolution to fulfill its promise and ensure that far more children learn to read well?” Learn more.
America is facing a literacy crisis that threatens the futures of millions of children and the fundamental skillsets of our future workforce. The most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress revealed the lowest average 12th-grade reading scores since the exam began in 1992, with one third of children scoring below the Basic level. Millions of children are leaving high school without the ability to read proficiently, undermining their readiness for college, careers, and civic life. Parents see the consequences of this crisis every day and are demanding stronger reading instruction and schools that set them up for success.
Such a national crisis requires a swift national response—one that stitches together federal leadership to establish a strong foundation, state action to drive innovation, and local commitment to ensure effective implementation in every classroom.
The path to stronger literacy outcomes is clear, and it’s built on strategies we’ve known for decades. Literacy outcomes improve when schools make sustained, systemwide commitments to evidence-based practices: high-quality professional development and coaching for teachers, targeted tutoring for students, and curricula grounded in the science of reading. Mississippi’s investment in these strategies, coupled with strong accountability for results, launched them from 49th in the country to the top ten in fourth-grade reading.
With such impressive results, it’s no surprise that many states across the country have attempted to replicate Mississippi’s success. Some states like Louisiana have shown early signs of growth, but outcomes vary greatly from state to state. Some states lack sufficient funding, others face resistance to changing entrenched practices, and many struggle to provide teachers with the sustained, high-quality professional learning needed to shift instruction. What families are left with is a patchwork of results. Some districts have carefully chosen new curricula and built capacity for progress monitoring and interventions, but unfortunately, most districts across the country are still waiting on the promise of the Mississippi Miracle.
This raises an important question: Do states really have the support that they need to transform literacy outcomes? While state and district leadership are essential in shaping and implementing policies to meet local circumstances, the federal government still has a vital role to play. Local control should not mean going at it alone. Washington must provide the resources, guardrails, and guidance necessary to ensure that every state can deliver on the promise of a strong public education.
In fact, Congress has already taken the first step by creating Comprehensive Literacy State Development Grants (CLSD). Established under the Every Student Succeeds Act in 2015, CLSD provides competitive grants to 26 states to develop or strengthen statewide comprehensive literacy plans. The program has earned rare bipartisan support, with neither the House nor the Senate proposing any significant cuts in their FY26 budget bills.
The CLSD program is a vital federal investment, giving states and districts the resources to advance literacy reform. The program has a rigorous definition of the science of reading. But it does not actually require states to align with them, instead asking them to merely provide “assurances” that they will use funds for those purposes—a lot of nice words but not enough to drive effective action.
Without clearer safeguards, there’s no guarantee that the grants are being used for evidence-based policies and practices. Meanwhile, states that do attempt meaningful change often face significant pushback, even for proven strategies like phonics-based instruction or bans on three-cueing. By holding states accountable for both their investments and their outcomes, the federal government can give them the political cover and incentives they need to make bold commitments to literacy reform.
Beyond its weak accountability structure, the CLSD program also limits states’ ability to lead coherent, statewide literacy reform. By requiring that 95 percent of grant funds be passed directly to districts, the program leaves states with only a fraction of the resources they need to build capacity, monitor implementation, and scale what works. Results from Mississippi and early gains in Louisiana—coming in, now, ten years after CLSD was created—show that a strong state role is essential. Both states maintain lists of high-quality, phonics-based curricula and provide incentives for districts to adopt them. They also invest in ongoing professional development and send literacy coaches to low-performing schools to ensure strong implementation. States cannot replicate these strategies if they are left with just 5 percent of federal funds.
The Comprehensive Literacy State Development program remains one of the most important (and one of the only) tools for improving reading outcomes nationwide. But it hasn’t been updated in nearly a decade, and in that time, we’ve learned far more about what works. Parents and families are calling for change. They want assurance that their tax dollars are being used to give every child access to effective reading instruction. Congress should not only preserve and fully fund CLSD, but also modernize it to reflect the lessons of the past ten years: strengthening accountability, empowering states, and ensuring that every dollar supports evidence-based literacy practices. Our nation’s children can’t afford another decade of uneven progress.
