New Hampshire’s education freedom account program grew by 12 percent over the past year, the Department of Education announced Thursday. But as Republican lawmakers seek to expand the program and potentially remove all income limits, Democrats continue to raise concerns over the use of funds in the program.
At a hearing for the program’s legislative oversight committee Tuesday, Sen. Debra Altschiller, a Stratham Democrat, argued that more data is needed to demonstrate that students who are taking EFAs are doing better than they would have in public schools – particularly those in religious schools.
“We do not have aggregate information as to how the students in the program are performing using accepted statewide academic assessments or measured progress toward mastering any competencies that are considered part of an adequate education,” Altschiller said.
She added: “You know, we have schools that are not teaching to the standards of some very, very highly respected private, independent schools. They’re not all teaching to the same standards.”
Created in 2021, the education freedom account program allows parents in families making up to 350 percent of the federal poverty level – $109,200 for families of four – to use per-pupil state education funding toward private school and home-schooling costs such as tuition.
The program follows the state’s adequacy formula to determine how much each student receives: Families get a minimum of $4,182 per year per student, but can get more for students who are eligible for free and reduced-price lunches, who are English language learners, or who require special education services.
In the 2024-2025 school year, the program’s fourth year, 5,321 students joined the program, according to the department. About 37 percent of those students – 1,974 – came from families making up to 185 percent of the federal poverty level, or $57,720 for a family of four.
In total, the program is using $27.7 million of funds from the Education Trust Fund this school year, with an average payout per student of $5,204. That’s a 25 percent increase over last year’s spend of $22.1 million. So far, that spending makes up 2.2 percent of the total $1.2 billion estimated to fill the Education Trust Fund this year.
The program grew at a slower rate last year than in past years, such as 2023 to 2024, when the number of students participating increased 39 percent. The change then was partly structural: In 2023, Republican lawmakers raised the income cap from 300 percent of the federal poverty level to 350 percent.
But while the program takes up 2.2 percent of the trust fund now, that portion will likely grow if lawmakers vote to remove all income caps and make the program universal. Gov.-elect Kelly Ayotte said she would support that move in her campaign for governor, and top House lawmakers have also indicated interest.
Republicans and other supporters of the program say it provides helpful state support for families who are not interested in the public education system, or who have tried the public school system and had trouble such as bullying or difficulty acquiring special education services. And they argue making the program universal eliminates the “cliff effect” faced by families who make slightly too much money to qualify for a given cap.
But Democrats argue the state should not be sending public funds to assist with private school expenses and that the money would be better spent on increased state aid to public schools. Making the program universal would allow wealthy families who already pay to put their children in private school the ability to use state funds that could go to public education, they argue.
And the parties have quarreled over how to oversee the program. On Tuesday, members of the Education Freedom Savings Account Oversight Committee met to finalize their annual report looking into how many students are using the accounts and how much the program is spending.
Altschiller argued the committee’s final report presents a rosy picture of success for the families that are taking the EFAs without the necessary data to confirm academic improvement. “We have individual anecdotal reports from a minority of parents who took their children out of the public school system and then put them into a religious school environment, and we have no data on that.”
Republicans on the committee countered that while the state does require standardized testing for students in grades three through eight and 11, the committee could not see how those scores follow EFA students without violating privacy.
Rep. Rick Ladd, a Haverhill Republican and the chairman of the House Education Committee, said the survey responses from parents who have received EFAs are sufficient feedback to know that the program is working for them.
“We’re making decisions based upon social conditions,” he said. “We’re making [decisions] based upon parent information. We’re making decisions that are based upon what is seen in terms of progress, subjectively.”
Sen. Ruth Ward, a Republican of Stoddard and the chair of the oversight committee, agreed.
“I think that what you are proposing is for each individual child that uses EFA, we have to set up a special program finding out how they are taught and what they are learning,” she said to Altschiller. “And I think based on anecdotal evidence, I think what we have heard is that parents are making the choice, and most of the parents who have gone to a different school are happy about the change.”
Altschiller disagreed: “They have the freedom to educate the way they want to,” she said of private schools. “The difference is that now we’re paying for it and we can’t. We have no say. We have no oversight. We don’t even have a look at it.”
Altschiller also wanted the final report to clearly note the number of students who attended public school before receiving EFAs. According to Thursday’s department data, 36 percent of all EFA students left their public school; 64 percent came from families who already were home schooling or sending their children to private school before getting an EFA.
Democrats argue that ratio undermines how the program was presented by Republicans when it passed: as a way for students to have an alternative option if the public school they attended was not right for them.
Republicans say families should still receive the funding even if their children never attended a public school because the EFA will help them to continue to afford that choice.
The hours-long meeting ended with heated words; Altschiller eventually said she would write her objections and clarifications in a minority report attached to the official document.
Meanwhile, after claiming larger majorities in the Nov. 5 election, Republican state lawmakers are gearing up for a budget season next year in which they attempt to make universal education freedom accounts a reality.
House Deputy Majority Leader Jim Kofalt said he expected most House Republicans to be behind that measure – even amid some concerns about ongoing costs to the state.
“I certainly think we could expand it,” he said in an interview shortly after the election.
In May, the Republican-led Senate rejected an effort by the House to raise the cap from 350 percent to 500 percent, arguing that was too high an increase and proposing a jump to 400 percent instead. The House rejected the counter-offer and the bill failed.
Kofalt said next year, House Republicans would start out with an attempt to remove all income limits, and failing that, revert to 500 percent.
“I wouldn’t say we’ll get every Republican, but I think we will get a pretty solid majority of the caucus. So can we pass universal? I don’t know. Possibly.”
In a statement accompanying this year’s numbers, Department of Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut expressed his support for the program.
“It is clear that there is a growing demand for more schooling options in the Granite State,” Edelblut said.
