[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,87,98],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6357117,"mediaKeyId","2215425-3dc2f66f965b32f04b3a4f3be7f49827","parentId",2215425,"title","Education Freedom Accounts grow toward $30M; phase‑out grant expires July 1, 2026, DOE says","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",6102,"endMs",6725,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215425-3dc2f66f965b32f04b3a4f3be7f49827&start=6&end=6","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215425-3dc2f66f965b32f04b3a4f3be7f49827/thumbnail_6102.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6357117/New-Hampshire/Education-Freedom-Accounts-grow-toward-30M-phaseout-grant-expires-July-1-2026-DOE-says","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6357117-805753d750ea1578da99091489234dfe/orig.mp4?Expires=1770450614&Signature=d5LEWsIRs8~oOXQzBAZAcMk3S-RTfH1ZjO0kGKbkTYPz3h4B7FgylzWi2ZeUH3N3KdDiCAGNZwXGmRjxwY9wGFDL1JlRsk-jnL4aIgITB8omcjzH5XU8RTxjYrUXT8u2hkIvrQl2KophwP8m8Kf0IXz4zqcJzvx0I3sLe0rSHTR3nIaLVkorz3GKRTK9CrD3dgO2cTuxUFVr8oY13huZKYeDvRITJ8~fkbgpJuanTSirKTLKeysiRGBW3-45qvan-YX04G79ZfSHqkH~rfi8ABqyZeEES00p0c5Pkfvf3CVRHgVbZZTFol60Zc9hM6I9CstEO2fYtbfcSMKB6KGTWw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","NH House of Representatives Committee","date","2025-02-03T00:00:00Z","article","Department of Education staff reviewed the operational mechanics, scope and fiscal impacts of Education Freedom Accounts (EFAs), the statewide scholarship‑style program that routes funds to scholarship organizations which then distribute digital‑wallet assistance to participating families.

Mark Manganiello described how the EFA payments follow the adequacy components (base adequacy, F&R, special education and ELL differentials) but are paid in the current fiscal year to a scholarship organization that may retain up to 10% for administration before placing the remainder in a family’s digital wallet. Staff cited per‑pupil rates used in the packet: base adequacy $4,265.64, F&R differential $2,392.92, special education $2,184.84, and ELL $832 (packet examples).

The department’s packet showed EFA participation rose from 1,635 pupils (first year) to 3,025 pupils (second year) and an estimated 5,852 pupils for the current fiscal year; the department estimated program disbursements at approximately $30 million for the current year. Manganiello also explained the phase‑out grant: the statute provides transitional payments to districts after a pupil leaves for an EFA (first year the district retains a portion of the lagged adequacy payment, the next year it receives 50% of that adequacy amount for the departed pupil, then 25% the following year). He told the committee the phase‑out ends on July 1, 2026; pupils who enroll in EFAs in FY26 will be the last cohort to generate phase‑out payments to their former districts.

Committee members asked questions about accountability and implementation. Representative Kelly asked how the ‘‘digital wallet’’ operates and whether families may withdraw funds for higher education; staff said the scholarship organization, not the department, oversees wallet mechanics and educational‑appropriateness determinations and suggested the committee contact the scholarship organization for operational details. Representative Papovich asked whether unspent funds left in an account after a pupil’s K–12 eligibility ends are returned to the state; staff said the department reconciles accounts and instructs scholarship organizations to remit remaining funds as required by statute.

Ending: Staff said the department conducts annual reconciliations with scholarship organizations, will share annual oversight reports and reconciliation summaries, and will arrange for a representative of the scholarship organization to appear for committee questions if members want operational detail about the digital‑wallet system.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Finance Division II (02/03/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","Department of Education staff told the committee that Education Freedom Accounts (EFAs) have grown from roughly 1,635 students in year one to an estimated 5,852 this year and that the state’s phase‑out grant, which cushions districts when students leave for EFAs, ends on July 1, 2026.","taxTitle","Finance - Division II, House of Representatives, Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",17751,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":42,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6357122,"Charter school aid mirrors adequacy rates; VLACS and other charters receive additional grants",5122,5376,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215425-3dc2f66f965b32f04b3a4f3be7f49827&start=5&end=5","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215425-3dc2f66f965b32f04b3a4f3be7f49827/thumbnail_5122.jpg","/articles/6357122/New-Hampshire/Charter-school-aid-mirrors-adequacy-rates-VLACS-and-other-charters-receive-additional-grants","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6357122-686da6b1760b5a7e4ddd9863ed5f7db7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770450614&Signature=AIjYlgBtOE6bSQHtOr~a-fQ6gSUpBo2mXkeSBq9RUXQQvwTQOikPxXnXAplvTPoW98OCEc3E61oRWvRBS67NxBsjcfNP5~3Lgd1PWATFUFv7cUUHWldriiC8pplXvAeOZiZZZtLJcSjOYdrCvo88eoygmeomYCXfGBMLUiyJWndtl9thGK3FKH2bVIphxve73uTTLGL8A-F0r2CoUM~4aS8lGC~2C3CNFD6EVcGGGC9rMX9Rb-TWIBpW5RbesnSMlTxWdff2F~L5PTVH7lh4hdDR4ZgXZ3iVxPJ6AQtDPzsPgA1~oy0wWzQistxkGM4p68f3jaJFS-96CIsMcigRmg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Brian Eaton of the Department of Education’s Bureau of School Finance briefed the committee on how the state funds charter public schools.

Eaton said charter aid is largely derived from the same components as district adequacy (base adequacy, F&R differential, special education differential and ELL differential), but with two key differences: charter aid is paid in the current fiscal year for the students attending (whereas district adequacy is paid on a one‑year lag), and a statutorily defined ‘‘additional grant’’ is added for each charter pupil.

Eaton provided the rates used in the department’s packet: the base adequacy figure matched the packet’s district rate ($4,265.64); the additional grant for non‑VLACS charters was $5,097.96 per pupil (producing a combined base+additional of about $9,363.60 in the packet example), while VLACS (Virtual Learning Academy Charter School) received a smaller additional grant rate ($2,445.15), producing a lower combined per‑pupil amount in that example ($6,710.79). Eaton also noted special education aid is paid to the student’s district of responsibility rather than directly to a charter when the district remains responsible for special education services.

Eaton walked members through multi‑year tables in the packet that show historical ADM and aid totals for each charter school and explained his FY26/FY27 estimates include expected openings and enrollment trends as well as carryforward for schools that plan to expand. He also reminded the committee that changes to adequacy rates typically cascade to charter aid because the charter formulas reference the same statutory adequacy rates.

Ending: Staff said the department will provide the committee with the FY24 final payments and estimated FY26/FY27 charter aid by school for budget deliberations.","Bureau staff said state charter‑school aid is computed from the adequacy formula but paid in the current year; charter schools also receive an ‘‘additional grant’’ with different rates for VLACS and non‑VLACS schools.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":42,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6357125,"How New Hampshire’s education adequacy formula works: base aid, differentials and the hold‑harmless schedule",273,812,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215425-3dc2f66f965b32f04b3a4f3be7f49827&start=0&end=0","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215425-3dc2f66f965b32f04b3a4f3be7f49827/thumbnail_273.jpg","/articles/6357125/New-Hampshire/How-New-Hampshires-education-adequacy-formula-works-base-aid-differentials-and-the-holdharmless-schedule","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6357125-c9b27426ac3be07f4d9005152a93faeb/orig.mp4?Expires=1770450614&Signature=FEtpfpAmXrA~5YFTZB9OuH1UssFjJD4L75NFlgUF6EVNjzmEQgkd0OCrvsVbUiTtI~-w0D47ZJ0Yekx3Ks9~ooHXiUT7-sWwRXNiMKvWuw3hfdHbD70VXlCzFH5EM3NMWeH7U2o8B2hlZ-mUo6UEO5MqwtxdD2DlIVWHIZX7vQ8gQ2UhX3W9iyDhJOqEHSRo76NhZFkq05a~Kebg60f-72Yv1yLx66Ebu4IGks7~KFnf0qmKpZncvfXQXjC~bPTNOUCJG29RUb6~thl9xBXA7I~L534oUQJKwVcsYrkj~VOSTNx8nulXUSgKwRHY3JaCxwxnXWpoitAKfz-6EAky6g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Mark Manganiello of the Department of Education Bureau of School Finance reviewed the adequacy formula used to calculate state aid to school districts and the components that augment base aid.

He summarized the main components: base adequacy aid (staff cited $4,265.64 per average daily membership in residence for the year used in the packet), a free‑and‑reduced‑price‑meals (F&R) differential ($2,392.92 per eligible pupil in the packet example), special education differential aid ($2,184.84 per identified special education pupil), and an English‑language‑learner differential. Manganiello explained membership (ADMR) as the measure of students for whom the town is responsible and said the formula uses one year’s lagged student counts for district adequacy.

He described the extraordinary needs grant, which targets districts with low equalized valuation per F&R pupil; in fiscal 26 the maximum per‑pupil amount is $11,500, up from $8,670 the prior year. The packet’s example showed Albany and Allentown receiving modest extraordinary‑needs grants while Alton did not because its equalized‑valuation‑per‑F&R metric was above the eligibility threshold.

Staff also reviewed ‘‘hold harmless’’ payments that preserve a portion of prior aid for certain districts after recent formula changes. Manganiello said the hold harmless pool was estimated at roughly $59 million for fiscal 25 and that the law phases the pool down: fiscal 26 payments will be 80% of the fiscal 25 amount, fiscal 27 will be 80% of that same fiscal 25 baseline, fiscal 28 60%, and the hold‑harmless schedule will continue stepping down over a 10‑year period until it reaches zero.

He reminded members that some historic elements (stabilization grants) were removed in recent years and that the formula has many moving parts; changes to one component (for example, the F&R eligibility definition) can affect multiple grants. He also noted a recent statutory change to collect activity from home‑educated students who take district classes and convert course participation into ADM credit for modest statewide compensation.

Ending: Staff said the packet and line‑by‑line figures will be available to the committee during the budget process and cautioned members that changes to adequacy rates or eligibility often have multi-year effects on district budgets and on the Education Trust Fund.","Department of Education staff walked the committee through the components of the state adequacy formula — base adequacy aid, free‑and‑reduced differential, special‑education and ELL differentials, extraordinary‑needs grant and the phased‑out hold‑harmless program — including dollar amounts and statutory history.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6357129,"Supreme Court review of ‘excess SWEPT’ could force towns to remit millions, DOE staff warn",1,296,1626,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215425-3dc2f66f965b32f04b3a4f3be7f49827&start=0&end=1","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215425-3dc2f66f965b32f04b3a4f3be7f49827/thumbnail_296.jpg","/articles/6357129/New-Hampshire/Supreme-Court-review-of-excess-SWEPT-could-force-towns-to-remit-millions-DOE-staff-warn","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6357129-16632f71e640d9c516027af5d0943fe1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770450614&Signature=V92TilJgSoVdM1BrBNWrqdvf3ww7yK-gqZAzh0JW2rNRMo5WTczVw23-giNzug18uEkh7GFEpDBPOTfaGnzfCXtNMJ48B8IMvXf-GwShHyCg-8PMm8jre4AhBib93Jxb32s6iVit9HdgHEWt1l7e2lFiMW2TMN0H-LEP1t1~nbQwmzPBSEimkRU-Pnu3I4cBuxIDmQfKVFWDRKJ~59LCEMTI4D96w5QHZbK6i950zA6biRCejPUFbVldLJB9SZCm9OaLP60UgByqwggWddD0PWMDXMDGRX4SnFIJszcIbggKd39UWe1fLV4ZOQxK1JVUN5tT2-mpPm~0hMubFMqw~g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Department of Education Bureau of School Finance staff briefed House Finance Division II on a contested part of the statewide education property tax known as SWEPT (statewide education property tax), saying a pending Supreme Court order could require communities that now retain “excess SWEPT” to remit that money back to the state.

Mark Manganiello, of the Department of Education Bureau of School Finance, used a town-by-town handout to show how SWEPT currently operates and how an adverse court ruling could affect communities that collect more SWEPT revenue than the state’s calculated cost of an adequate education. ‘‘If the Supreme Court upholds the superior court order, at some point the Supreme Court would direct DRA to start collecting that excess SWEPT,’’ Manganiello told the committee. He said statewide SWEPT collections are $363,000,000 and the current equalized-rate proxy used in the model is about $1.12 per $1,000 of value.

Manganiello illustrated the potential effect with three towns in the packet: Albany and Allentown (neither excess swept) and Alton (an excess‑swept community). In his example, Alton’s cost-of-adequacy calculation was about $2.7 million while its SWEPT revenue was roughly $4.2 million, leaving roughly $1.4 million in ‘‘excess SWEPT’’ that the superior court ruled should be remitted to the state. He said the superior court’s order is now before the Supreme Court and the timing of any mandate is uncertain.

Committee members raised operational concerns if excess SWEPT is remitted to the state. Representative Murray asked whether towns would experience a one‑time or repeated collection; staff clarified the effect would be measured annually but the fiscal disruption could feel like repeated transactions because of timing differences between when towns collect taxes and when state disbursements occur. Representative Popovich warned remitting excess SWEPT could create ‘‘significant cash flow issues’’ for towns that would be forced to send funds to the state on a schedule that does not match their tax collection timetable. Representative Waller and Representative Weiler discussed potential offsets such as credits against other state distributions (meals‑and‑rooms, highway block grants) to reduce visible transfers between towns.

Manganiello said the statewide total of communities currently showing excess SWEPT in his packet was about $28.6 million. He and staff emphasized they are preparing models so the committee can evaluate policy options if the Supreme Court requires collection. Staff also noted that the court’s order, if it requires collection, would not itself dictate how the state spends any newly collected funds; an implementation policy would be needed.

Division members asked about possible mitigation designs — lump‑sum collection, scheduled disbursements, credits against other state aid — and about the accounting mechanics (the department books SWEPT as a journal entry at present because under current law the money remains with districts). Manganiello advised members to expect complicating details if the court order arrives during the budget process and to plan for both the legal outcome and implementation mechanics.

Ending: The committee did not take action; it heard the briefing to inform future budget or statutory decisions. Members asked staff to continue preparing town‑level analyses and to coordinate with DRA and municipal finance staff on cash‑flow and implementation scenarios.","Department of Education staff told the House Finance Division II that a pending Supreme Court decision in the “Rand” matter could require towns to remit so-called excess SWEPT revenue to the state, potentially shifting $28.6 million statewide and creating cash‑flow and tax‑rate impacts for certain municipalities.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Education Freedom Accounts grow toward $30M; phase‑out grant expires July 1, 2026, DOE says

Charter school aid mirrors adequacy rates; VLACS and other charters receive additional grants

How New Hampshire’s education adequacy formula works: base aid, differentials and the hold‑harmless schedule

Supreme Court review of ‘excess SWEPT’ could force towns to remit millions, DOE staff warn