Bill would move Education Freedom Account administration to Department of Education; sponsors cite transparency and cost savings

Senator Deborah Altschuler told the Senate Education Committee she filed Senate Bill 207 to require the New Hampshire Department of Education (DOE) to administer the Education Freedom Account (EFA) program.

Altschuler said moving administration under the DOE would reduce administrative fees currently retained by the third‑party manager and make program records available for legislative auditing. "Currently the Children's Scholarship Fund can use up to 10% of deposits ... Pulling this program under the Department of Education will significantly reduce those costs," she said, noting a projected program cost near $30 million and that limiting administrative holdbacks to no more than 5 percent would free roughly $1.5 million for direct education uses.

Key provisions and rationale: SB207 would let the Department extend a competitive offer to ClassWallet or other vendors to handle payment, purchasing and reimbursements; it would clarify the process for evaluating preferred vendors; and it would allow the Legislative Budget Assistant access needed to audit the program and report to the joint legislative performance audit committee. The bill would also limit rollover balances and require more transparent recordkeeping, the sponsor said.

Support and testimony: Deborah House (American Federation of Teachers New Hampshire), Bridal Hawkins (NEA New Hampshire) and others testified in favor, saying the Department of Education — as a state agency subject to public‑records and auditing standards — should administer the program. Witnesses pointed to instances from a 2024 compliance review and to the potential for large carryover balances in other states; a witness cited an Arizona study that identified $360 million in unspent carryover funds in that state's program. Multiple witnesses urged the committee to advance the bill to improve accountability and protect taxpayer dollars.

Opposition and concerns: Testimony opposing SB207 argued that families would be disrupted if administration changed, and some parents and advocates argued continuity and parental choice should remain priorities. The Children's Scholarship Fund and vendors were discussed but did not present direct testimony at the hearing.

Discussion vs. action: Committee members questioned specific fiscal estimates and asked about the Department of Education’s current capacity; Altschuler and witnesses said DOE already has at least one position coordinating with the scholarship fund and that procurement should be competitive. The hearing closed without a formal committee vote on SB207.

Ending: Proponents framed SB207 as a transparency and efficiency measure; opponents stressed continuity for participating families. The committee requested clarifications on vendor procurement, administrative cost projections and audit access before advancing the measure.