“Follow the money” is tried and true advice for anyone who wants to know what government is doing – or what it isn’t doing that it’s supposed to be doing. Heightened skepticism is warranted when relevant information mysteriously becomes hard to find.
Such is the case with the Education Freedom Account program, the darling of New Hampshire conservatives, which dispenses millions of dollars in state money each year to families who educate their children at home or in private schools.
The New Hampshire Bulletin news site reported earlier this month that the bipartisan legislative committee that is supposed to monitor the program had not met in a year and had failed to produce its required annual report by the Nov. 30 deadline. State Sen. Ruth Ward, R-Stoddard, who chairs the five-member panel, explained, implausibly enough, that despite several attempts, it was simply impossible to find a mutually convenient time to get together. Somehow though, after the Bulletin’s story was published, a convenient time presented itself – Dec. 16.
Moreover, the Concord Monitor reports that the Children’s Scholarship Fund, which administers the EFAs, took down from its website this summer documents detailing how public money funneled to the program is being spent, including line-by-line lists of where millions of dollars went during the 2021-22 and 2022-23 school years.
Not to be outdone on the plausibility meter, Kate Baker Demers, the executive director of the nonprofit Children’s Scholarship Fund, claimed the action was taken in response to fears that entities providing education services might potentially be harassed. This was apparently prompted by testimony given by a Peterborough resident during a legislative hearing last April, when she said that she had contacted a company listed in the documents to inquire about the services it provided. This, Baker Demers said, was deeply concerning and “could even be viewed as a form of stalking.”
Or perhaps the documents were taken down because they formed the basis of a five-part Monitor series that found that nearly 90% of EFA money spent on tuition goes to religiously-affiliated schools, which are fattening their enrollments by lining up at the public trough. It also documented that families spent more than half a million dollars during the 2022-23 school year on extracurricular activities, including $46,000 at ski mountains, $35,000 at martial arts studios and $16,000 at equestrian facilities.
Baker Demers told the Monitor that she is working to repost the removed documents and add ones for 2023-24 and 2024-25, which have never been published. However, they will be redacted in some form, she said, perhaps by removing any reference to how much money specific providers received.
Before she goes to all the trouble of redaction, she might consult a 1972 New Hampshire Supreme Court case, Mans v. Lebanon School Board, which dealt with public access to teacher salaries. Two things of special relevance: The court specifically said that the plaintiff was not required to demonstrate a need to know the information requested; and that school district taxpayers’ rights are best served “by a full disclosure of the mode and manner of public expenditures for school purposes.”
In this case, the state is expected to spend $51.6 million on the program this year, up from $30.3 million last year. That’s the result of removing income limits, something the Legislature did this past session. Enrollment has nearly doubled to 10,510 students now that even the wealthiest families can tap into an average of nearly $5,000 a year in state education funds.
The EFA’s supporters point to this enrollment surge as evidence of the program’s popularity. Our question is, why would tapping into a pile of free cash from the state not be popular?
Despite the stonewalling from the legislative oversight committee and the Children’s Scholarship Fund, some information is available from the state Department of Education. The program was initially sold as a way for low-income families to access educational alternatives for their children that wealthier residents could afford themselves. But as reported by the Bulletin, with the removal of income caps on participation, the proportion and absolute number of low-income participants has declined. During the 2021-22 school year, the program’s first, 54% of participants were from families in the lowest income bracket; this year, only 19% fall into that category.
Insofar as school choice is the program’s reason for being, 96.7% of current EFA participants were already in private schools or being home schooled before this school year began.
So much for what New Hampshire government is doing. As for what it isn’t: The state Supreme Court recently affirmed that the Legislature is still failing to meet its obligation to fund an adequate education for every New Hampshire student, more than 30 years after the landmark Claremont rulings.