Schools must invest in attendance, not punishment—and ban suspensions for absences
H.R. 9320 — All in For Attendance Act · Filed by Christian Menefee (D-TX) · 12 cosponsors · Introduced Jun 15, 2026 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill amends federal education law to require schools receiving federal funding to implement comprehensive strategies to reduce chronic absenteeism (missing 10% or more of school days). Schools must establish data-tracking systems, create tiered support for at-risk students, provide professional development for teachers, partner with community organizations and health services, and explicitly prohibit suspensions, fines, or academic penalties for students with absences. The bill emphasizes evidence-based interventions like tutoring, mentorship, social-emotional learning, and family engagement.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core mechanism is establishing federally-funded, evidence-based interventions to reduce chronic absenteeism and explicitly prohibiting punitive discipline. It is fundamentally a public health and educational equity measure, not a market-oriented or narrow-beneficiary provision.
What the text implies
- Schools may face significant implementation costs for data systems, professional development, and community partnerships, which could strain budgets in under-resourced districts unless accompanied by adequate federal funding.
- The prohibition on suspensions, fines, and academic penalties for absences may shift school discipline culture but could create tension with existing zero-tolerance or attendance-based grading policies.
The full analysis lists 4 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
tutoring service providers; educational technology companies (data systems, attendance tracking); social-emotional learning curriculum vendors