Relating to the purchase, adoption, and use of instructional materials by public schools.
ModeratePlan for compliance
Medium Cost
Effective:2025-06-20
Enforcing Agencies
State Board of Education (SBOE) • Texas Education Agency (TEA)
01
Compliance Analysis
Key implementation requirements and action items for compliance with this legislation
Implementation Timeline
Effective Date: June 20, 2025
Compliance Deadline: August 2026 (Start of 2026-2027 School Year). While the law is effective immediately, the statutory prohibition on "use" and the inventory requirements apply beginning with this school year.
Agency Rulemaking: The SBOE must establish the administrative process for the "Proposed Rejected List" and the specific submission mechanics for the 45-day cure period prior to the 2026 adoption cycle.
Immediate Action Plan
Audit Inventory: Immediately cross-reference all current district inventory (including OER and locally funded materials) against the current SBOE rejected list.
Update Vendor Agreements: Draft and deploy contract amendments regarding "buy-back" and "termination" rights for all renewals occurring after June 20, 2025.
Establish Monitoring: Vendors must subscribe to SBOE notifications immediately; missing the "Proposed Rejected List" publication forfeits the right to cure.
Segregate Non-Compliant Materials: Districts should physically quarantine any materials currently on the rejected list to prevent accidental distribution in the 2026 school year.
Operational Changes Required
Contracts
Regulatory Riders: All Master Services Agreements (MSAs) extending into 2026 must include a "Regulatory Change Rider."
Termination Rights: Districts must insert "Termination for Cause" clauses triggered specifically by placement on the SBOE Rejected List.
Refund/Buy-Back: Contracts must mandate that vendors refund pro-rated costs or provide compliant replacement materials at no cost if the original product is banned mid-contract.
Hiring/Training
SBOE Monitoring: Vendors must assign regulatory liaisons to monitor SBOE agendas for the "Proposed Rejected List" to utilize the 45-day cure window effectively.
Rapid Response Teams: Publishers require an editorial/legal task force capable of reviewing objections, modifying content, and resubmitting within 45 days.
Strict Liability Training: District staff must be trained that "legacy" materials or personal teacher resources found on the rejected list are banned from classrooms, regardless of when they were acquired.
Reporting & Record-Keeping
Pre-Purchase Vetting: Procurement systems must integrate with the SBOE Rejected List to automatically flag prohibited ISBNs before Purchase Orders are generated.
Audit Trails: Districts must retain documentation proving materials were not on the rejected list at the time of adoption to defend against potential funding clawbacks.
Fees & Costs
Inventory Replacement: Districts face unbudgeted costs to replace "local fund" materials that are currently in use but appear on the SBOE rejected list.
Indemnification: Vendors should anticipate higher E&O insurance premiums to cover expanded indemnification requirements from districts.
Strategic Ambiguities & Considerations
Definition of "Use": The statute prohibits "adoption or use." It is currently unclear if this extends to incidental possession (e.g., a book in a library archive) or strictly classroom instruction. Rulemaking will likely clarify the scope of "possession" vs. "instruction."
Technical Standards for "Cure": The law allows for revision within 45 days but does not define an acceptable format. It is unclear if digital patches, physical stickers, or full reprints will be required to satisfy the SBOE.
"Harmful" Content Thresholds: While linked to the Penal Code, the SBOE has discretion in applying these standards. Expect shifting goalposts on what constitutes "harmful" until the first few test cases are decided.
Need Help Understanding Implementation?
Our government affairs experts can walk you through this bill's specific impact on your operations.
Information presented is for general knowledge only and is provided without warranty, express or implied. Consult qualified government affairs professionals and legal counsel before making compliance decisions.
The bill author has informed the committee of constituent concerns that schools are purchasing, adopting, and using instructional material that does not meet the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills curriculum standards. While current law provides for the State Board of Education to maintain a list of instructional materials it has rejected for use by school districts and charter schools, there is no express statutory prohibition or limitation on the adoption and use by a school district of such rejected material. H.B. 100 seeks to address these concerns by amending various sections of the Education Code to regulate how public school districts and open‑enrollment charter schools select and use instructional materials.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS
H.B. 100 amends the Education Code to set out the following provisions with respect to the list of rejected instructional materials maintained by the State Board of Education:
·a prohibition against a public school district using its instructional materials and technology allotment to purchase such instructional material;
·a prohibition against a district adopting or otherwise using that instructional material;
·a provision limiting the adoption or use of an open education resource instructional material by a district or open-enrollment charter school to instructional material that is not on the list; and
·a provision specifying that the authorization for a district or charter school to use local funds to purchase instructional materials does not include instructional material that is on the list.
H.B. 100 applies beginning with the 2025-2026 school year.
EFFECTIVE DATE
On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2025.
HB100 eliminates the "local control" loophole for instructional materials, prohibiting Texas public schools from using—not just purchasing—any content rejected by the State Board of Education (SBOE), regardless of the funding source. For vendors, the law introduces a critical 45-day statutory "cure period" to revise flagged content before a final ban, necessitating immediate changes to editorial workflows and contract liability terms. Implementation Timeline Effective Date: June 20, 2025 Compliance Deadline: August 2026 (Start of 2026-2027 School Year).
Q
Who authored HB100?
HB100 was authored by Texas Representative Terri Leo-Wilson during the Regular Session.
Q
When was HB100 signed into law?
HB100 was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on June 20, 2025.
Q
Which agencies enforce HB100?
HB100 is enforced by State Board of Education (SBOE) and Texas Education Agency (TEA).
Q
How urgent is compliance with HB100?
The compliance urgency for HB100 is rated as "moderate". Businesses and organizations should review the requirements and timeline to ensure timely compliance.
Q
What is the cost impact of HB100?
The cost impact of HB100 is estimated as "medium". This may vary based on industry and implementation requirements.
Q
What topics does HB100 address?
HB100 addresses topics including education, education--primary & secondary, education--primary & secondary--textbooks, education--school districts and education, state board of.
Legislative data provided by LegiScanLast updated: November 25, 2025
Need Strategic Guidance on This Bill?
Need help with Government Relations, Lobbying, or compliance? JD Key Consulting has the expertise you're looking for.
