Requires the state board of education to annually review education freedom account service providers for continued compliance with state and federal anti-discrimination laws.
relative to review of education freedom account service providers.
As a native NH retired senior citizen & property tax payer who has lived frugally in the same house for the past 45 years, and can barely subsist in it due to exorbitant property taxes, I expect and demand accountability for EFAs expenditures and for student outcomes. You are using taxpayer money for this boondoggle and we have every right to know who's getting these funds and for what purpose and whether or not kids are actually learning.
I support this bill because I think it would provide oversight and accountability on EFA account spending."
The Education Freedom Account is in great need of oversight and complete auditing, I urge the members of this committee to Support this bill. Thank you.
This bill would provide oversight and accountability on EFA account spending. The Education Freedom Account vouchers program is spending a lot of money and the public needs to know how the money is being spent.
AFT-NH believes that students in New Hampshire must be able access their education free from discrimination of any kind. This legislation is critical because it requires education service providers, who receive school vouchers funded with public tax dollars, to adopt policies that comply with state and federal anti-discrimination laws and undergo annual reviews by the State Board of Education. These measures ensure accountability and help guarantee that all students—regardless of race, gender, disability, or socioeconomic status—are treated fairly.
The EFAs need all the accountability and oversight we can provide. This is about money being taken away from our public schools, who need the money more.
It is absolutely necessary to verify of expenditures from the public coffer. The years of failure to disclose precisely where the voucher money is going validate this requirement for requiring reporting fully and on time.
I support this bill because state funds are being used for Education Freedom accounts. I am opposed to Education freedom accounts because they take away money from public education, although in some cases the community may have to send a student with special needs out of district when the community does not provide the needed educational environment. It is important that the dollars for education of NH students support local schools as much as possible to assure an educated population and work force. As long as these education freedom accounts exist, there should be oversight. Our NH dollars should not be issued for any kind of school, including home schooling, without accountability. If people are just being given money for home schooling, children could be missing out on a good education and the other benefits children get from the access to school based activities. Public schools also offer counseling and therapy for children who have emotional/psychological problems. As a retired child and family therapist I am aware of the needs many children have and often collaborated with educators, The Public schools have requirements of their teachers and allied professionals, which ensure quality education and support.
If the state is using our property tax dollars to go towards private education then logically need oversight and accountability on the EFA account spending.
There must be accountability for all private education paid through the Education Freedom Accounts. A complete education equal to that provided by public schools must be given. This includes hone schooled children.
Testimony in Opposition to HB 1819 Honorable Members of the House Education Policy and Administration Committee, I am here to express my opposition to House Bill 1819, which proposes criteria for the review of Education Freedom Account (EFA) service providers. While the intent behind the bill may appear positive, aimed at establishing standards and oversight for service quality, it raises significant concerns regarding equity and systemic effectiveness in our educational landscape. 1. Resource Constraints and Ineffective Oversight While HB 1819 seeks to introduce review criteria for EFA vendors, it allocates no additional funding or staffing to enable this process. Given the already limited resources of the state board of education, adding the responsibility to oversee hundreds of vendors is not only impractical but also sets the stage for ineffective implementation. Adverse Underpinnings: The lack of resources threatens the efficacy of oversight, reducing it to a symbolic gesture rather than an actionable framework for ensuring quality education. This could lead to uneven standards across vendors, ultimately jeopardizing educational outcomes for vulnerable students. 2. Diverting Focus from Public Schools By prioritizing oversight of EFA vendors, the bill diverts attention and resources away from the public school system, which should be the primary focus of educational policy. Instead of strengthening public educational institutions that serve the majority of students, this bill seems to cater to a niche program without sufficient consideration for comprehensive educational needs. Who Benefits: EFA vendors may benefit from increased visibility, but this does not guarantee improved outcomes for students utilizing their services. Instead, this focus might consolidate power and resources among a select group of vendors, leaving community schools underfunded and undervalued. Who Does Not Benefit: Students enrolled in public schools, particularly those from marginalized communities, may find themselves deprived of essential funding and support that could improve their educational experiences. By shifting focus to the EFA program, we risk exacerbating existing inequalities in educational access and quality. 3. Impact on Student Choice and Parental Involvement The bill, while theoretically supportive of educational choice, may inadvertently complicate the landscape for families. Parents seeking to ensure high-quality educational options for their children could find themselves navigating an increasingly convoluted and inadequately supported EFA system. 4. Need for Systemic Reform At its core, HB 1819 does not address the underlying issues within the state's educational system. Instead of focusing on vendor oversight, lawmakers should consider strategies that prioritize funding adequacy, resource allocation, and support for public schools. This will better serve all students, particularly those who may not have access to alternative educational avenues. Conclusion In conclusion, while House Bill 1819 ostensibly seeks to improve the quality of services available through the EFA program, it falls short in practical execution and diverts necessary focus away from public education. To genuinely support all students in New Hampshire, we should prioritize reform that reinforces public school systems and addresses systemic inequities within our educational landscape. Thank you for your attention and consideration.
The reach of EFAs is very very broad. Recipients may be up to 20 years old!! There is universal eligibility for this payout!! Whether you agree with the eligibility is not the point of HB 1819. Fiscal prudence requires oversight of the "service providers" implementing this program.
Such a signifcant and growing budget item should have significant and growing oversight.
We MUST have oversight and accountability over the out of control and deliberately obscure EFA account spending."
We would like to know that state funds are being spent in accordance with applicable regulations.
Mr. Chair: I support HB1819 because it is a small attempt at providing accountability to the EFA program. I believe the provider of EFAs should also be subject to federal and state anti-discrimination laws, and the only way to know if they are in compliance is to audit its activity. Thank you.
I am concerned about the impact this bill would have on families in rural communities, It will create more hardships for families that are already struggling to keep their differently-abled child at home. Don’t send these much-loved children from the communities that love them.
Whatever one thinks of "education freedom accounts," surely we can agree that they should be subject to appropriate oversight. Requiring that account service providers be reviewed annually by the state board of education to ensure they're in compliance with all state and federal laws should be, as it were, a no-brainer.
A well-educated student will become a well-educated adult.
I contend that Education Freedom Vouchers threaten the integrity and sustainability of public education in New Hampshire by channeling public funds to private and religious schools with minimal oversight, accountability, or assurance educational quality. The cost overuns have been substantial and adding to a growing state deficit while depriving lower income students or students with disabilities access to education. Public schools are the foundation of our society. Finally, this program is unconstitutional. The New Hampshire Constitution explicitly prohibits public funds from supporting religious education (Part I, Article 6; Part II, Article 83). As substantial portion of this program funds support schools with non-secular agendas. Regulaton and oversight are needed.
This bill is a step toward creating some accountability in the Education Freedom Account Program. Unlike our public schools, currently EFA service providers do not have any requirement to be compliant with anti-discrimination laws. Providers receiving state funding should be required to comply with anti-discrimination laws.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.