What California's 31 Approved Literacy Programs Mean for You

Thirty-one early literacy training programs made California's approved list on Sept. 11, 2026, backed by $200 million in state funding for science-of-reading instruction. For M.Ed. students and teacher candidates, the decision turns a policy debate into concrete coursework, credential, and hiring signals.

The list is roughly twice as long as some reading-reform advocates wanted, with approved providers scoring from 30 to 53 on WestEd's 54-point review. That spread means future elementary teachers cannot treat state approval as a uniform guarantee of quality, especially as the new hours requirement, reading added authorization versus specialist credential, and literacy performance assessment come into view.

What California Approved and Why

On Sept. 11, 2026, the California State Board of Education approved 31 early literacy training programs¹, a decision EdSource reported as the state’s latest step toward the science of reading. The approved list creates a common menu of providers that school districts and teacher preparation pathways can use to meet new literacy expectations. For M.Ed. students and early-career teachers, including those pursuing a Master's in Reading & Literacy, this is no longer a policy abstraction: the training behind a reading credential or district PD will increasingly draw from this list.

A $200 million investment

California allocated $200 million in last year’s state budget, at Gov. Gavin Newsom’s request, to train teachers in effective reading instruction. The funding is intended to expand access to high-quality training and reduce uneven quality across districts, especially in early childhood education and elementary grades where foundational reading skills are built.

The shift toward phonics

Unlike balanced literacy, which often combines cueing strategies with varied text types, the approved programs emphasize systematic phonics and explicit decoding. That distinction matters because it changes what future teachers practice in fieldwork and what districts expect in lesson planning. The science of reading framework treats explicit, sequenced phonics as the baseline, not one option among many.

Wider list, more evaluation

Reading-reform advocates had recommended roughly half as many programs, but the final approved list is about twice that length. Board members removed about a half-dozen of the lowest-ranked programs before the vote. The broader list gives districts flexibility, yet it also means M.Ed. candidates should not assume that any approved provider offers the same depth or rigor. Future educators should treat the approval as a floor, not a guarantee, and compare provider training models before enrolling in or accepting a PD pathway.

How the 31 Approved Programs Were Scored

WestEd led the review for the California Department of Education. A panel of 29 teachers and experts scored each of 37 eligible providers on 18 criteria using a three-point scale, for a maximum of 54 points. The board removed about a half-dozen of the lowest-ranked applicants before approving 31 programs with scores ranging from 30 to 53.

Who Must Complete the New Training

The clearest line in AB 121 falls on TK-5 classroom teachers, but the edges blur quickly once you move beyond the certificated classroom.

Certificated TK-5 Teachers Are the Core Requirement

TK-5 certificated teachers are explicitly required to complete state-approved early literacy training.² The approved programs run at least 30 hours and may exceed that threshold.¹ Districts must ensure participation begins no later than September 1, 2027, with completion required by August 31, 2029.¹ State funding supports training during the 2025-26 and 2026-27 years.²

Why the Edges Are Less Clear

A separate mandate uses the phrase "all applicable personnel," which leaves room for interpretation.¹ Without a full statutory definition in the public excerpts, the safest approach for paraprofessionals, coaches, and administrators is to confirm with their employer rather than assume exemption. The funding track is broader than the mandate track, so some classified staff may be eligible for paid training even if the requirement does not clearly name them.²

Classified Staff and Support Roles: Covered, but Not Codified

Eligible staff for the funded training include certificated and classified staff who provide literacy instruction, or who support any teacher who provides literacy instruction, to TK-5 pupils.² That language may sweep in some paraprofessionals, but they are not named as a distinct statutory category. Reading specialists and literacy coaches appear in AB 121's separate grant program, not as a plainly mandated training class. Administrators are not specifically identified in the available requirement language.

Tracking and Verification

Responsibility for tracking completion and verifying participation sits with districts, county offices, and charter schools. The California Department of Education's guidance for in-service programs was due by September 30, 2026, which gives districts the framework to monitor compliance. No recurring renewal cycle is specified in the current language; the requirement reads as a one-time completion by the August 31, 2029 deadline.¹ Early-career teachers should keep their own completion records, even when their district tracks attendance, because those records may be requested in future credential reviews or hiring processes.

CDE's September 30 Guidance: What's Confirmed and What's Still Pending

Districts now face two tracks for state-funded early literacy training: choose from the 31-program approved list with no separate alignment review, or use a nonapproved program and verify its science-of-reading alignment independently. The California Department of Education (CDE) has confirmed some details, while other points remain open.

What the deadline requires

The Legislature set September 30, 2026 as the statutory deadline for the state board to approve TK-5 in-service literacy training criteria and a provider list under Education Code Section 33319.6 (Assembly Bill 121, Section 15, 2025). The CDE published its Literacy Professional Development Programs page and the approved-provider list by September 24, 2026, before that deadline. The page itself was last updated September 22, and the broader CDE professional learning page was updated September 23.

What the guidance covers for districts and higher-ed programs

The approved list lets county offices, districts, charters, and state special schools use a share of $200 million in state funding¹ to train certificated and classified staff supporting TK through grade 5 without conducting their own alignment review. If a district selects a nonapproved program, it must independently verify science-of-reading alignment before relying on state funding. That independent verification has no standardized state form, approval number, or CDE portal. The exact evidence, reviewer, retention, and submission channel are not yet specified. The published materials do not create a separate higher-ed approval track; California master's in education programs can use the approved list as reference points for literacy coursework and related masters in education specialization and licensure requirements.

What is still pending for M.Ed. students and employers

No statewide teacher-level completion process is established for the 31 approved programs. There is no uniform certificate format, transcript upload, or CDE record entry, and the provider-specific memoranda do not set one participant documentation rule. Students and hiring districts should watch for any additional September 30 guidance that clarifies verification or completion documentation, because current published materials reflect publication by September 24, not necessarily a final September 30 version.

Reading and Literacy Added Authorization Vs. Specialist Credential

California offers two related literacy credentials, but they serve different stages of a literacy career. The Reading and Literacy Added Authorization is the entry-level classroom credential, while the Reading and Literacy Leadership Specialist Credential adds leadership capacity at the school, district, or county level. Programs often build one into the other, but the prerequisites, units, and career outcomes are distinct.

Related Articles

RICA's Retirement and the New Literacy Performance Assessment

RICA is gone, and California's next generation of literacy candidates now proves their skills through performance-based assessments rather than a standalone teacher certification exam.¹

What RICA Was and Why It Ended

The Reading Instruction Competence Assessment, known as RICA, was California's long-standing exam for measuring reading instruction knowledge. RICA's retirement is part of California's broader move away from a single exam-day hurdle and toward assessments embedded in preparation programs. Its final attempt date was October 31, 2025.¹ After that date, RICA is no longer available, and no new attempts can be scheduled. Candidates who passed RICA before the sunset can still apply those score reports toward their credential requirements.

What Replaces RICA

The replacement path is the Literacy Performance Assessment model, which functions differently. Instead of a single external competency exam, future candidates must pass the Foundations of Reading exam and complete an approved literacy performance assessment such as CalTPA, edTPA, or FAST.¹ The performance assessment route is typically embedded in approved teacher preparation programs, shifting the measure from isolated test questions to tasks tied to student teaching and classroom practice.

Transition Timeline for Candidates

The practical cutoff depends on where you are in your credential program. The final COVID-era flexibility for certain preliminary credential holders with RICA renewal codes ended June 30, 2026.¹ Those candidates could clear their credential by completing an approved induction program or two years of satisfactory service. If you still hold a RICA renewal code, verify your credential clearance status with your preparation program now, because the RICA window has fully closed and the LPA or Foundations of Reading path is the current route for new and continuing candidates.

Structured Literacy Vs. Balanced Literacy in M.ed. Coursework

The reading instruction debate has tilted decisively toward explicit, code-based teaching, and California M.Ed. programs, including CSULB M.Ed. programs, are now rewriting literacy sequences to keep pace.

What the two approaches mean

Structured literacy is direct and cumulative: letter-sound correspondences, decoding, spelling patterns, syllable types, and morphology taught in a planned order. Balanced literacy blends phonics with whole-language routines such as leveled texts, three-cueing, and independent reading, giving students more strategies to draw on but less systematic skill building.

How California coursework is changing

California's science-of-reading shift is pushing graduate syllabi away from balanced literacy and toward structured literacy principles. Some programs, including CSUF M.Ed. programs, are replacing broad literacy surveys with two-course sequences on word recognition and language comprehension. M.Ed. candidates increasingly complete phonemic awareness modules, practice with decodable texts, and diagnostic assessment training woven into foundational reading courses. Programs may require candidates to administer phonics screeners, interpret error patterns, and plan small-group reteaching rather than only discuss reading theory.

Why alignment matters

Because districts will select from the 31 state-approved training providers, your M.Ed. literacy concentration should reflect those provider frameworks. Given the scoring rubric's attention to English learners, aligned coursework may also include structured supports for multilingual students. Candidates who can name the structured literacy sequence, use diagnostic assessments, and align lessons with decodable text practice are more competitive for early literacy and reading specialist positions.

What to Look for in an M.ed. Literacy Concentration

Match Coursework to Structured Literacy

Compare course descriptions and syllabi against structured literacy and science-of-reading principles. Look for explicit, sequenced instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Avoid programs that present balanced literacy as an equivalent framework. Strong programs name their approach clearly and require candidates to practice decoding routines, diagnostic assessments, and small-group intervention planning. Programs that weave multilingual and English learner strategies into that sequence, as in an M.Ed. in TESOL, are even stronger.

Confirm Assessment Alignment

Ask whether the program was updated for the Literacy Performance Assessment, not legacy RICA content. Coursework should include clinical assignments, case studies, and feedback cycles that mirror the new assessment's format. If an advisor describes RICA prep as the measuring stick, treat that as a red flag.

Check Credential Pathways

A strong concentration should map directly to the Reading and Literacy Added Authorization or the Reading and Literacy Leadership Specialist Credential. Verify that the program lists required courses, supervised practicum hours, and portfolio or exam milestones needed for California teaching credential authorization. The path should be visible before you enroll.

Look for Provider-Grounded Practice

Give preference to programs with faculty or field placements tied to state-approved provider frameworks. When professors, cooperating teachers, and district partners use approved programs from providers such as SchoolKit, CORE Learning, or county office models, coursework reflects the practices districts actually expect new hires to implement. Ask where candidates complete practicum hours and whether mentor teachers have completed the state-approved training.

How Other States Are Following California's Lead

For M.Ed. students weighing where to teach and the teaching job outlook, California's $200 million investment is one of the largest state literacy training funds, but the underlying policy shift is no longer regional.

States with new or expanded mandates

Massachusetts H.B. 5511 requires districts to adopt state-approved, evidence-based reading curricula starting in 2027-28.¹ New Mexico S.B. 37 sets pre-service and in-service training, coaching, K-3 assessments, and intervention requirements.¹ Minnesota's READ Act phases training deadlines: pre-K-3 teachers, interventionists, special education, and ESL staff by July 1, 2026, with grades 4-12 foundational reading teachers by July 1, 2027.² Arizona S.B. 1572 requires a literacy endorsement and Foundations of Reading exam for K-5 teachers, including current teachers by 2028.¹ Ohio added literacy intervention through Senate Bill 19³, building on its ReadOhio initiative².

What Changes for M.Ed. students

Nationally, 43 states and Washington, D.C. have passed evidence-based reading laws or policies since 2013.² Yet few match California's $200 million allocation, so graduates in other states may fund their own training or complete district-led professional development. Choose a nationally accredited M.Ed. literacy concentration that explicitly covers phonemic awareness, phonics, dyslexia screening, English learner strategies, and progress monitoring. Those competencies align with structured literacy mandates across most states and travel better than program names tied to a single state's approved list.

Explore California Resources