"Reading Recovery" is in use in a number of English-speaking countries.

Australia
In 2015, a report from the New South Wales Department of Education, concluded that Reading Recovery was largely ineffective, and should not be used for most children. As a result, in 2016, Reading Recovery lost its "mandated status" as part of the curriculum in NSW's more than 900 public schools, although individual schools may still opt to use it. A further consequence of this shift in policy is that, in 2017, the NSW Department of Education initiated a hiring program to recruit dozens of new literacy and numeracy experts to support teachers in "evidence-based professional learning", according to NSW Minister for Education, Rob Stokes.

New Zealand
After Reading Recovery was removed from the curriculum in many Australian schools, its utility has been questioned by researchers and policy makers in New Zealand as well. By 2019, this had led to reduction in use of Reading Recovery in New Zealand's public schools, and toward a greater emphasis on phonics-based instruction. Parent activism has also contributed to a rise in phonics based instruction and a concomitant decrease in three cueing system based instruction in New Zealand schools.

North America
The Reading Recovery Council of North America, Inc. is a not-for-profit association of Reading Recovery professionals, advocates, and partners. It is an advocate for Reading Recovery throughout North America (United States and Canada). It publishes two journals for this purpose: The Journal of Reading Recovery and Literacy Teaching and Learning.

Reading Recovery and philosophically similar programs are still used in the United States, but there has been significant push back against the approach. Several large school districts have rejected the approach in favor of phonics based instruction. These include Columbus, Ohio, and Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

On April 23, 2022, the Center for Research in Education and Social Policy at the University of Delaware presented the results of a study of the long-term effects of Reading Recovery. The conclusion was that the "long-term impact estimates were significant and negative". The study found that children who received Reading Recovery had scores on state reading tests in third and fourth grade that were below the test scores of similar children who did not receive Reading Recovery. It suggests three possible hypotheses for this outcome:

While Reading Recovery produces large impacts on early literacy measures, it does not give students the required skills for success in later grades; or,
The gains are lost because students do not receive sufficient intervention in later grades; or,
The impacts of the early intervention was washed out by subsequent experiences.

Source:Wikipedia