This report doesn't appear to come to the same conclusions as the House Intelligence Committee's. Democrats have said that the panel's Republicans, led by Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., are trying to protect Trump.
The committee said there was a body of intelligence "to support the assessment that Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for Trump".
Part of a wide-ranging series of topics Trump plans to discuss with Putin is the issue of Russian meddling in the USA presidential elections of 2016.
The assertion followed the White House National Security Adviser John Bolton's reassurance on Sunday that Trump would address election meddling during his summit in two weeks with Putin.
The Senate Intelligence Committee, which is still in the process of conducting a full bipartisan review, said in its initial report on Tuesday that Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) is a "sound intelligence product" whose conclusions were "reached in a professional and transparent manner".
The panel's conclusion on this finding is likely to infuriate Trump, who has repeatedly criticized the intelligence community's assessment that Russian Federation sought to tilt the election in his favor. But the strong endorsement nonetheless marks a significant milestone in the continued debate over Russia's role in the 2016 campaign.
"The bottom line: The Russians did commit active measures against our election in 2016, and we think they will do that in the future", Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, said in March. One of the issues it will investigate is an allegation by former British spy Christopher Steele, that Kremlin has some damaging information on Trump. "So many questions, so much corruption!"
The Senate committee, however, said the scope of Russian interference has only become clearer in the years since the campaign. No further detail was given.
A subtle difference in confidence between the NSA and the Central Intelligence Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation on the assessment that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to help Trump's election chances "appropriately represents analytic differences and was reached in a professional and transparent manner", the Senate panel found.
The FBI's and CIA's "analytical disagreement" with the NSA over whether Russian Federation sought to bolster the Trump presidential campaign was "reasonable", the report also said.
Democrats on the House panel sharply disagreed, saying the Republican-controlled panel had not interviewed enough witnesses or gathered enough evidence to make a definitive assessment.
Trump and his allies have also floated the theory - without evidence - that the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the intelligence community relied extensively on an unverified dossier compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British spy, to inform their conclusions and embark on a politically motivated "witch hunt".
Trump and his associates are now under FBI investigation over whether his campaign colluded with Moscow during the election, an accusation the president and his allies have vehemently denied.
In addition, the report said there were no signs that President Barack Obama's administration improperly tried to interfere with intelligence agencies' analysis.
"In all the interviews of those who drafted and prepared the ICA (intelligence community assessment), the committee heard consistently that analysts were under no politically motivated pressure to reach any conclusions", the committee said.
The report is the latest example of how the Senate Intelligence Committee has diverged from its House counterpart.
Russia's hack of the Democratic National Committee before the election.