HB1401

We NEED oversight! It is prudent to track taxpayer funds. Scholarship organizations should be ONLY nonprofit to receive taxpayer dollars.

I absolutely support establishing a commission to study public school open enrollment.

I do NOT believe the administration of the EFA should be moved outside the preview of the CSF. CSF has been doing a fine job and is a local entity which we have used for years. Big corporation oversight has never equalled "a better experience" and I do not believe it will do so in this instance either!

EFAs are bad enough without explicitly making it so private entities make even more profit off public money. I oppose this bill.

Please vote against this bill. Don't reduce oversight of scholarship programs.

EFAs and alternatives to public education need more oversight, not less.

For-profit entities should not be administrators of the Education Freedom Account.

I respectfully oppose HB 1401. This bill would permit the Department of Education to select for-profit entities to administer Education Freedom Accounts (EFAs), expanding the definition of “scholarship organization” beyond nonprofit organizations approved under RSA 77:G. The administration of public education funds carries fiduciary responsibility, transparency expectations, and public trust obligations. Allowing for-profit entities to administer EFA funds introduces a structural incentive for profit extraction from taxpayer-supported education appropriations. Even where contractual oversight exists, a for-profit administrative model differs fundamentally from a nonprofit model in mission alignment and financial incentive structure. Public education funding — whether delivered through districts or alternative pathways — should prioritize educational outcomes and stewardship of public funds over return on investment. Before expanding eligibility to for-profit administrators, the legislature should carefully consider: • Oversight and transparency mechanisms • Administrative fee structures and profit margins • Public records applicability • Long-term accountability safeguards Altering the definition of scholarship organization in this manner shifts the governance model of EFAs without a broader review of its fiscal and accountability implications. For these reasons, I respectfully oppose HB 1401. Steven J. Snelling Charlestown

I oppose this bill which would weaken the already minimal oversight over the scholarship organization that handles tens of millions of taxpayer dollars every year. Currently only tax-exempt charitable organizations [501(c)(3)] that are qualified to do business in NH may be scholarship orgs., and they must comply with applicable anti discrimination and privacy laws and register with the director of charitable trusts. Under this bill, for profit businesses based anywhere could qualify and the explicit guarantees listed above would disappear.

Vouchers (EFAs) need transparency, not more manipulation!

Dear Representatives, I am writing to oppose New Hampshire's EFA program going corporate. Please keep this about the children and not about making money for a corporation. We already have a corporation in the public school system. Taking the EFA program from non-profit to a corporation can only mean less money for children. Support our kids by keeping this program not for profit. Thank you, John Mendenhall

Dear Representatives, I am writing to oppose New Hampshire's EFA program going corporate. I believe going corporate would drift from the original mission which is to serve kids who need a different educational path. I further feel the EFA program would lose community support. I am concerned about the high fees and overhead that would be imposed taking this non-profit to corporate oversight. Corporations are about making money and often put profits above important causes. Please oppose this bill to incorporate the EFA program and keep this program about children's educational needs. Thank you, Jamie Mendenhall

I oppose this bill because I don't think it improves on the current system of oversight.

As a homeschooling parent living in the northern district of our state, I strongly oppose this amendment to the Education Freedom Accounts and Scholarship Organization program. Northern New Hampshire faces distinct challenges. Our region is both geographically and financially remote, with limited access to academic and extracurricular opportunities. While I now homeschool my children, I hold a Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education and understand firsthand the significant challenges educators face in striving to provide students in our state with the same level of education available elsewhere. It is deeply concerning that some state representatives would consider further stepping back from the responsibility to ensure equitable educational access for all of New Hampshire’s youth. For families in rural areas like ours, these funds have helped bridge critical gaps. They have made possible educational and extracurricular opportunities that would otherwise be financially out of reach. Without this support, many children in northern communities would face even greater disparities compared to their peers in more populated regions. Homeschooling has given our family the flexibility to provide an individualized education that works best for our children, but choosing this path does not mean our children should be excluded from state support. They are residents of this state and deserve the same consideration as any other students. My children and I are active members of both our local and statewide communities, particularly through volunteer and youth development programs such as 4-H, which enrich their education and civic engagement. Having lived in New Hampshire for most of our lives, my husband and I have personally witnessed a steady decline in accessible opportunities for children compared to what was available when we were growing up. We made a conscious decision to raise our family in a rural area, understanding that physical access to certain programs would be limited. However, the dramatic increase in the cost of participating in local extracurricular activities has been shocking. Programs that were once affordable and widely accessible are now financially out of reach for many families. New Hampshire is often recognized for the strength of its elementary education system. Yet the ongoing lack of adequate state funding makes it clear that this strength depends heavily on the perseverance and dedication of educators and families rather than consistent structural support. Reducing or restricting these funds would only intensify existing inequities, particularly for rural students who already face significant barriers. I urge you to carefully consider the real and lasting impact this amendment would have on families in northern New Hampshire. Our children deserve access to meaningful educational and extracurricular opportunities, and our state has both the responsibility and the opportunity to support every young person to the best of its ability.

Home education freedom does not allow for corporations to dictate which methods are appropriate for our students. We choose which curricula is best for them and use the best means to that end. Teaching methods meant for a classroom setting may not be the educational environments desired by home educators and should not be limiters of choice in an educationally freedom to choose state nor does the content of any lobbying entities policies or mandates apply.

I am writing today to voice my strong opposition to House Bill 1401, which I believe would further restrict educational opportunity and exacerbate the growing inequities many families in New Hampshire already face. For far too long, many of our communities, especially rural areas have been educational deserts. Families are struggling with limited school options, understaffed classrooms, and a lack of specialized programs that meet the diverse needs of our students. Instead of addressing these challenges, HB 1401 moves us in the wrong direction by reducing choices and stifling innovation in education. Parents and guardians know best what their children need to succeed. Whether it’s a specialized curriculum, an alternative learning environment, or a school that aligns with their child’s learning style and values, families should have access to meaningful choices. HB 1401 would make those choices harder, not easier. New Hampshire should be leading the way in expanding educational freedom, not restricting it. By limiting available options, we risk deepening the divide between those who can afford alternative opportunities and those who cannot. Education should not depend on a family’s ZIP code or financial means, it should be about providing every child the chance to thrive. I urge the committee to stand with New Hampshire families especially those living in areas where educational options are already scarce. Please vote No on HB 1401 and support policies that expand, rather than limit, access to quality education for all. Thank you for your time and your commitment to serving our state’s students and families.

This bill would reduce the already minimal oversight over the scholarship organization that handles tens of millions of taxpayer dollars every year. Currently only tax-exempt charitable organizations [501(c)(3)] that are qualified to do business in NH may be scholarship orgs., and they must comply with applicable antidiscrimination and privacy laws and register with the director of charitable trusts. Under this bill, for profit businesses based anywhere could qualify and the explicit guarantees listed above would disappear.

This bill would reduce the already minimal oversight over the scholarship organization that handles tens of millions of taxpayer dollars every year. Currently only tax-exempt charitable organizations [501(c)(3)] that are qualified to do business in NH may be scholarship orgs., and they must comply with applicable anti discrimination and privacy laws and register with the director of charitable trusts. Under this bill, for profit businesses based anywhere could qualify and the explicit guarantees listed above would disappear."

This bill would reduce the already minimal oversight over the scholarship organization that handles tens of millions of taxpayer dollars every year. Currently only tax-exempt charitable organizations [501(c)(3)] that are qualified to do business in NH may be scholarship orgs., and they must comply with applicable antidiscrimination and privacy laws and register with the director of charitable trusts. Under this bill, for profit businesses based anywhere could qualify and the explicit guarantees listed above would disappear.

NH is passing out cash fast and loose. Rein that in please! Oppose HB 1401.

“This bill would reduce the already minimal oversight over the scholarship organization that handles tens of millions of taxpayer dollars every year. Currently only tax-exempt charitable organizations . . . that are qualified to do business in NH may be scholarship orgs., and they must comply with applicable antidiscrimination and privacy laws and register with the director of charitable trusts. Under this bill, for profit businesses based anywhere could qualify and the explicit guarantees listed above would disappear.” Kent Street Coalition Fully fund our public schools as directed.

This will encourage voters to think more about the party and less about the substance of the bill. Not a healthy choice.

I state my opinion for this bill for the sake of residents in NH.

This bill would reduce the already minimal oversight over the scholarship organization that handles tens of millions of taxpayer dollars every year. Currently only tax-exempt charitable organizations [501(c)(3)] that are qualified to do business in NH may be scholarship orgs., and they must comply with applicable antidiscrimination and privacy laws and register with the director of charitable trusts. Under this bill, for profit businesses based anywhere could qualify and the explicit guarantees listed above would disappear.