The Black History is American History Act amends multiple provisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act to require that federal programs and activities about American history “shall include Black history.” It inserts that language into the statutory authority for American history grant programs (Sec. 2231), the Presidential and Congressional Academies for American History and Civics (Sec. 2232), national activities (Sec. 2233), and the NAEP U.S. history framework.
Practically, the bill forces the U.S. Department of Education and its grantees to center the history and contributions of peoples of African descent in federally supported curricula, professional development, and public history partnerships — and directs a specific role for the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture in providing educator resources. The change shapes what federal education dollars and national assessments prioritize without directly rewriting state academic standards or authorizing a discrete appropriation amount in the bill text.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill amends ESEA sections governing federal American history grants, Presidential and Congressional Academies, and national activities to add the requirement that programming “shall include Black history.” It also amends the NAEP statute to clarify that the U.S. history framework must include Black history and expressly references the Smithsonian NMAAHC as a resource partner.
Who It Affects
The Department of Education, eligible grant applicants (schools, districts, museums, nonprofit educators), teacher training programs, and organizations that provide curricular materials and professional development will be directly affected. NAEP contractors and assessment publishers will also face content implications if the NAEP framework is changed.
Why It Matters
By embedding Black history into federal grant language and the nation’s history assessment framework, the bill uses federal funding levers and assessment design to influence curricula, teacher preparation, and educational resources nationwide — effectively shaping instructional priorities even though it does not directly mandate state standards.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill’s findings set out Congress’s view that African and African-American history is fundamental to understanding U.S. history and that federal support can aid teachers and students in accessing accurate resources. Those findings provide the policy rationale the statute uses to justify inserting Black history across several existing federal programs.
Substantively, the bill is surgical: it amends existing ESEA authorities to require that any federal activity, grant, academy, or national program established under those sections include Black history. That language is terse but broad — it applies to competitive grants for American history and civics education, to the Presidential and Congressional Academies that deliver intensive teacher training, and to national activities the Department supports for curriculum and instruction.
The bill also alters the NAEP authorization so the U.S. history framework explicitly “include[s] Black history,” signaling assessment-level attention.Implementation will rely on existing program rules and definitions. The Department of Education would continue to operate these programs under current award mechanisms, but solicitations, selection criteria, and allowable activities will need revision to reflect the new statutory requirement.
The bill also calls out the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture as a resource partner for Academy activities and educator resources, which creates a concrete federal partnership channel for content development.Two practical consequences are worth noting: first, recipients of federal grants and participants in Academies should expect explicit review of how their proposals address Black history; second, NAEP’s framework revisions could change what topics are sampled on national U.S. history assessments, which in turn influences state and local curriculum alignment and the materials assessment vendors produce. The bill does not itself appropriate money or command states to change their academic standards; it shifts federal programmatic priorities and the national assessment agenda instead.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill inserts the phrase “which shall include Black history” into ESEA Section 2231 (American history grants), 2232 (Presidential and Congressional Academies), and 2233 (national activities).
Section 2232(e)(4) is amended to add that Academy programming may include work with the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of African American History and Culture to provide programs and educator resources.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress Authorization Act is amended so the U.S. history framework ‘‘shall include Black history,’’ signaling assessment content changes at the national level.
The text authorizes the Secretary of Education to award grants to eligible entities for programs covering broad topics — from the West African origins of African peoples to the economics and politics of slavery and its abolition — without specifying new appropriations or funding levels.
The bill does not directly alter state academic standards or impose a federal curriculum; it works through federal grants, teacher academies, national activities, and NAEP to influence instructional priorities.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Provides the Act’s name: the 'Black History is American History Act.' This is a technical placement that frames the bill’s purpose for readers and drafters; it carries no operative rule but signals legislative intent.
Findings supporting federal action
Lists factual and policy findings about the centrality of African and African-American history to United States history, the role of the National Museum of African American History and Culture, and state-level trends. These findings are not regulatory but bolster the statutory changes that follow by articulating Congress’s rationale for using federal educational programs to promote Black history.
Require Black history in American history grants
Amends the opening language of the American history and civics grant authority to say that 'American history' grants 'shall include Black history.' Practically, the Department must ensure grant solicitations, applications, and allowable activities align with that mandate; evaluation criteria may be rewritten to prioritize proposals that demonstrate comprehensive Black history content.
Embed Black history in Presidential and Congressional Academies and add Smithsonian partnership
Inserts Black history throughout the Academies’ statutory description, explicitly bringing teacher-training academies under the new requirement and adding language that Academy programming can include resources and programs provided by the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture. This creates a concrete content partner and a likely source of curricular materials and professional development modules for academies.
Require Black history in national activities and NAEP framework
Extends the insertion to 'national activities' under ESEA and amends the NAEP Authorization Act so the U.S. history framework 'shall include Black history.' For national activities, that means federally supported curriculum projects and resource hubs must incorporate Black history. For NAEP, it signals that the national assessment framework and any future test blueprints could explicitly sample topics related to Black history, which can influence curriculum alignment nationwide.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Education across all five countries.
Explore Education in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Students — All K–12 students gain greater statutory support for classroom access to the history and contributions of peoples of African descent, which can broaden historical literacy and classroom representation when grantees turn funding into curriculum and instruction.
- Teachers and teacher-preparation programs — Teachers can access more federal-funded professional development, Academy training, and Smithsonian-provided materials tailored to integrating Black history into U.S. history instruction, reducing the burden on individual educators to source accurate resources.
- Museums and nonprofit education organizations — Cultural institutions, especially the National Museum of African American History and Culture and local museums, become prioritized partners for federal-funded programs and can receive grant awards or Academy contracts to develop curricular resources, exhibits, and teacher training.
Who Bears the Cost
- Local school districts and state education agencies — Districts and states must adapt professional development schedules, curricula, and instructional materials to align with grant-funded priorities; districts with limited budgets face time and expense to implement new training and resources.
- Department of Education — The Department must revise grant solicitations, review criteria, monitoring systems, and guidance; absent explicit new appropriations in the bill, these administrative responsibilities may compete with existing priorities.
- Curriculum publishers and assessment vendors — If NAEP’s framework changes, textbook authors and assessment contractors will need to revise content, teacher guides, and practice materials to reflect increased emphasis on Black history, incurring development and editorial costs.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between promoting a consistent, federally supported emphasis on Black history to address long-standing curricular omissions and preserving state and local control over academic standards and classroom instruction; using federal grant conditions and assessment frameworks increases national coherence but risks uneven implementation, contested definitions of adequate coverage, and the impression of federal curriculum influence where Congress has not legally overridden state authority.
The bill is narrowly drafted as amendments to existing authorities rather than as a standalone funding authorization; it therefore depends on the Department of Education to operationalize the 'shall include Black history' requirement through Notices of Funding Opportunity, selection criteria, and program guidance. Because the statute does not set appropriation levels, practical expansion of programming depends on future funding decisions, which could produce uneven rollout across regions and types of grantees.
The phrase 'which shall include Black history' is intentionally broad and creates implementation discretion — useful for flexibility but likely to yield inconsistent definitions and depth of coverage across grantees. Similarly, adding the Smithsonian as a resource partner directs a national content source into Academy programming, but it does not create exclusive content standards or require states to revise their K–12 standards.
Finally, changing NAEP’s framework can have indirect but powerful downstream effects on curricula and materials, yet such assessment shifts raise methodological questions about trend comparability and the timeline for redesigning test blueprints and sampling frameworks.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.