The bill creates a new "providing effective education for reentry success act" and a corresponding program in the Department of Corrections (DOC), adds a new section to chapter 28B.50 RCW, and amends existing provisions in RCW 72.09.460 (and cites amendments to RCW 72.09.465 and 72.09.480). It permits incarcerated individuals to purchase and keep personal laptop computers with Wi‑Fi, an external mouse, camera, and microphone (with DOC authority to approve additional health-related digital technologies), and directs DOC, subject to appropriations, use of the incarcerated individual betterment fund, and grants or donations, to install and maintain broadband infrastructure at every correctional facility so that incarcerated people with approved laptops can access the internet from where they reside. The bill requires DOC to make educational websites accessible within two weeks of request, to cooperate with the governor’s statewide broadband office on digital inclusion and equity, and to approve accredited distance education and correspondence programs that lead to associate, bachelor, or graduate degrees (including direct transfer associate degrees) as prison education programs for federal Pell grant purposes. The bill changes procedures and financial rules for correctional education programs. It restates that incarcerated people must participate in DOC‑approved education programs, work programs, or both unless exempted, establishes a prioritized order for allocation of education and work resources, and sets rules on who pays program costs depending on program priority and eligibility for financial aid. It requires a postaward payment formula for participant contributions with a two‑year review, allows third parties (including nonprofits and community postsecondary programs) to pay tuition or costs without those payments being subject to specified deductions, and requires that incarcerated people receive financial aid and academic advising from an accredited institution before enrolling in financial‑aid‑eligible postsecondary programs. The bill requires DOC to assess and provide accommodations for learning disabilities and cognitive impairments, to establish behavior standards and program outcomes, to provide education for people under 18 consistent with chapter 28A.193 RCW, and to provide unofficial transcripts at no cost upon release, transfer, or program completion. The bill also changes inmate fund and collection procedures in statutory sections it amends by defining terms such as "cost of incarceration" and "program" and specifying deduction percentages and caps from inmate funds for listed obligations; it authorizes DOC to accept donations, requires DOC to provide at least one room per facility for approved nonprofit/community programs’ use of technology, and requires collaboration with the college board to help eligible incarcerated people file FAFSA or state aid applications. It creates special rules for certain immigration‑related individuals under 8 U.S.C. § 1227, limits state‑funded seat reservations in programs, and directs periodic reviews of medical and financial responsibility standards. Several important details are not present in the extracted text: the chunked text ends mid‑provision in subsection (4)(c) of the amended RCW 72.09.460, the full text of the amendments to RCW 72.09.465 and 72.09.480 is not shown, exact appropriation amounts and implementation timelines are not provided, detailed security or monitoring procedures for internet access are not included, the statutory description of the incarcerated individual betterment fund is not provided here, and no effective or operative date for the act appears in the provided excerpts.

If enacted, incarcerated people would be able to buy and keep Wi‑Fi–capable laptops and access approved online college courses from inside Washington correctional facilities, while the Department of Corrections would be directed to install broadband in every facility (to the extent funded) and work with the governor’s broadband office to expand digital inclusion. That would likely increase access to accredited distance education that can count as prison education for federal aid purposes, require the DOC to provide financial aid and academic advising before enrollment, and let nonprofits or other third parties pay tuition or costs without those payments being subject to inmate‑fund deductions. Nonprofit and community partners would be expected to provide staff and pay for the technology they use and be given at least one room per facility for program tech, while DOC would face new responsibilities to prioritize programs, set payment rules (including a postaward payment formula reviewed every two years), provide accommodations, and make educational websites available within two weeks of request. The groups most affected are incarcerated individuals (including youths, people with disabilities, people of color, and those with immigration-related restrictions), DOC (new infrastructure, program administration, and rulemaking duties), accredited colleges and nonprofit partners (new program obligations and opportunities), and third‑party funders (new ability to cover costs without deductions). Costs and risks shift toward DOC for building and maintaining broadband and managing program rules, but those costs can be offset by appropriations, the incarcerated individual betterment fund, grants, donations, and third‑party payments; exact funding amounts, timelines, security and monitoring practices, full payment‑calculation details, and effective dates are not provided in the extracted text, leaving key implementation details uncertain.