Bill
S 375
The bill creates a statewide, competitive grant program to establish and sustain teacher leadership programs for distributed leadership, improved retention, and better student outc
Note: metadata supplied with the request is inconsistent. The bill text filed as “Senate No. 375” (presented by Adam Gómez and Pavel M. Payano) is a Massachusetts state bill to create a teacher leadership grant program (adds Section 39 to Chapter 69, General Laws). Other supplied items (title about organ-donation tax deductions, sponsors like Cory Booker, or references to federal committees) appear to be unrelated metadata. This summary reflects the actual bill text (teacher leadership program).
Purpose
- Establish a statewide, competitive grant program to create and maintain teacher leadership programs that expand distributed leadership, increase teacher retention (including for underrepresented teachers), strengthen instructional leadership, and support whole-child practices in schools and districts.
Key provisions
- Adds Section 39 to Chapter 69 (Massachusetts General Laws) authorizing the Commissioner to award competitive grants to eligible entities to establish and sustain teacher leadership programs.
- Definitions provided for: “distributed leadership,” “educational service agency,” “eligible entity” (local education agencies, collaboratives, nonprofits with expertise, institutions of higher education, consortia, etc.), “high-need” agencies, and “teacher leader.”
- Grant funding rules and reserves:
- Commissioner must reserve not less than 5% of annual appropriations for planning grants (subsection (g)).
- Commissioner may reserve up to: 3% for technical assistance/capacity building; 0.5% for administration/data collection; and up to 3.5% to award additional planning grants.
- Grant awards: up to 3-year initial period, with possible 2-year extensions based on performance.
- Commissioner to ensure geographic diversity among grantees (urban and rural representation).
- Application and program requirements:
- Eligible entities submit program proposals describing implementation, budget, sustainability, use of other funds, and teacher engagement in program design.
- Program proposals must explain how teacher leaders will be engaged in goal-setting, professional learning, school and district planning (school climate, community engagement, mentorship, student growth), shared decision-making, and structures for distributed leadership and collaboration.
- Programs must train teacher leaders as instructional leaders/coaches/facilitators and create structures to improve teacher retention—explicitly including recruitment/retention of teachers from underrepresented populations.
- Eligibility to apply as teacher leaders: full-time classroom teachers with at least 3 years’ full-time experience who remain classroom instructors. (Section of selection criteria is truncated in the provided text.)
- Accountability: a portion of funds may be used for program administration and data collection to monitor performance.
Who is affected
- Directly: local educational agencies (LEAs), educational service agencies/collaboratives, eligible nonprofits, institutions of higher education, and participating teachers (classroom teachers with ≥3 years).
- Indirectly: students and families (through improved school climate, supports, and instructional quality), school leaders, and districts—particularly high-need districts/regions.
Procedural status and timeline (from provided legislative actions)
- Filed/introduced in January–February 2025. Read twice and referred to committees (conflicting committee referrals appear in the record).
- Several hearings listed for late 2025 (e.g., 10/14/2025, 12/02/2025). Current official status per the packet: “REFERRED TO INVESTIGATIONS AND GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS” (this appears inconsistent with other entries).
- Because the legislative-action metadata contains contradictions, consult the Massachusetts Legislature’s official docket or bill tracking site for the latest status and full text.
Limitations / missing details
- The provided text is truncated in places (selection criteria and some program requirements are incomplete). The bill does not specify a total appropriation amount — it references “the total amount appropriated to carry out this section” but does not set a funding level. For final implementation details (funding levels, full selection criteria, evaluation metrics), review the complete bill text and any later amendments.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
