Screening is necessary to detect risk and prevent reading failure. Yet the amount of screening that commonly occurs in U.S. schools may undermine its value, creating more error in decision making and lost instructional opportunity. This 2-year longitudinal study examined the decision accuracy associated with collecting concurrent reading screening measures and in collecting fall and winter screening measures for all students in Grade 3 in 4 schools in a midwestern district (N = 428) in Year 1. This study also categorized children by proficiency on the Year 1 test and by the amount of screening they received in Year 1 in 7 schools in the district (N = 656) and then examined performance on the Year 2 test to examine screening benefit. Analyses included multiple regression, classification agreement, and multilevel modeling. Results found no added accuracy in using more than one screening in the fall and no added accuracy in using both fall and winter screening data. Students experienced on average a 1.57-point gain on the year-end test for each screening to which they were exposed. Follow-up analyses found benefit for the most at-risk students and little benefit of screening for proficient students.