Rep. Becky Edwards, a Bozeman Republican representing House District 61, introduced House Bill 654 to the House Education Committee, saying the bill would expand classroom‑based early literacy for Montana 4‑year‑olds by clarifying that districts may partner with community providers, allowing districts to receive A and B funding in year one, and creating a one‑time boost grant to retrofit or equip classrooms.

"This bill is a pathway for rural and underserved communities to not only create opportunities to grow access to early lit programs, but it also supports local small business already providing these programs to partner with local districts," Edwards said during the hearing. She told the committee the measure responds to concerns in rural communities about space, staffing shortages and startup costs.

The bill would (1) clarify that school districts may contract with community‑based providers to deliver early literacy instruction under district direction, (2) allow districts to receive A and B account funding when expanding early literacy programs in the first year rather than waiting until year two, and (3) create an "early literacy intervention boost grant" described by witnesses as a one‑time grant to help retrofit classrooms and buy supplies.

Proponents included classroom teachers, school advocates and parents. Kim Popham of the Montana Federation of Public Employees said the bill "could provide districts with the resources needed to bring more students into early lit programs so that they can enter kindergarten ready to learn to read." Rob Watson, representing the Coalition of Advocates for Montana's Public Schools, explained the bill addresses three common barriers superintendents cited: staffing, lack of upfront money to hire a teacher in year one and lack of supplies. Watson said the boost grant provision provides "a one time only grant of a thousand dollars per kid for retrofitting the room and to purchase supplies," and that the bill also proposes that some A and B funding be available in the first year so districts do not have to wait a year to hire staff.

Representatives of 0 to 5 Montana testified in support. The organizationexecutive director (surname Jensen) described the bill as providing "critical infrastructure needs" and praised its allowance for district‑community partnerships, for example with Head Start. Alex DuBois, testifying as a parent, described his family's experience with a Butte early literacy classroom and the logistical strain of a school day that runs from 8:15 a.m. to 1:15 p.m., saying the measure could help districts and community providers coordinate schedules and services to better serve working families.

Paul Taylor of the Office of Public Instruction (OPI) served as an informational witness on fiscal and implementation details. Taylor said the bill includes an appropriation of $2,000,000 "from the state facilities and technology account" (statutory language appears in section 5 of the draft) to fund classroom improvements. He described the bill's principal fiscal effect as allowing more students to enroll in the program, which increases average number belonging counts used to calculate state base aid; that enrollment growth is what drives the larger ongoing fiscal exposure in the fiscal note, not solely the $2,000,000 appropriation.

Taylor summarized assumptions in the fiscal note: currently about 2,000 students are enrolled in classroom‑based early literacy; Montana has about 11,000 students per grade; the fiscal note assumed 12,000 additional students could enroll as an incentive and with continued growth. He said the bill permits early budget amendments to provide A and B funding in the first year, but that statute includes a callback provision to adjust funding if anticipated students do not materialize.

Committee members pressed witnesses on staffing and budget mechanics. Members asked whether mixed delivery (districts partnering with community providers) is already occurring; Watson described a few local examples (childcare programs that transitioned 4‑year‑olds into an early literacy classroom and a Bozeman summer ELL program run by a private organization paid with jump start money). Witnesses, including Jensen and Watson, said mixed delivery can work where districts retain instructional control and send qualified district educators to offsite community facilities.

Questions also focused on how children are identified and assessed for enrollment. Witnesses said assessments for 4‑year‑olds are generally observational measures (letter names/sounds, basic story comprehension, other developmentally appropriate checks) and that the Board of Public Education did not mandate a single statewide instrument, leaving districts to use locally chosen assessment rubrics.

Committee members raised the likely timeframe for measurable results. Witnesses cited research showing early interventions have strong returns and said improvements in third‑grade reading rates can be observed within a few years, though long‑term effects (dropout rates, workforce outcomes) take longer to manifest.

Edwards closed by saying the bill "builds upon that great bipartisan work that was established in the 2023 session" and asked the committee for a due‑pass vote. The hearing was closed and no committee vote on HB 654 was recorded in the transcript.

Ending: The committee moved on to executive action on several Education Interim Committee bills after the HB 654 hearing; committee members flagged technical and fiscal questions for follow‑up before any floor action.