Are Educational Savings Accounts The Future of Homeschooling?

[SeaConquest]

Did anyone see this article in Politco?

 

States weigh turning education funds over to parents

A radical new idea is catching fire across the country.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/state-education-savings-accounts-taxpayers-114966.html

 

Thoughts? I assumed that the money could only be used secularly, as with charter schools, but that seems to not always be the case.

[EmseB]

I don't know about getting money from the state, but we've had a Coverdell Account for a few years now, which is what I thought they originally meant by education savings account.

[Farrar]

It's appealing in one sense - just give me the money, right?

 

But there are soooo many issues I have with this. I don't think it's the best way to use public funds. And the government should - rightfully! - be tracking that money. I homeschool in part to avoid that kind of bureaucratic tracking and oversight.

 

[JumpyTheFrog]

I don't know about getting money from the state, but we've had a Coverdell Account for a few years now, which is what I thought they originally meant by education savings account.

The article was referring to something completely from a Coverdell. I agree that the similar names are confusing.

[Tsuga]

I think the reason they don't have vouchers for private education is that what people actually do in these cases is all pool their vouchers for schools that poor/disabled people cannot attend. So you get the public funds and multiplication effect, but only for people who are doing well. And then those who are behind cannot pool their funds, because they are the ones who would have had the multiplication effect $ spent on them.

 

This is in fact what is actually happening, at this very moment, with some charter schools. (Though I would be happy to see examples of charters that do serve the poor, the disabled, the kids who are behind, and do not push out those people by not providing services. Hard to imagine since they have to be profitable and surprise surprise, educating people is extremely expensive and it's hard to turn an annual profit...)

 

So I do not see this as something that is feasible in the long-term if we are going to continue having a real public education system that includes all and which values educational parity.

 

A homeschooling tax deduction is an interesting idea. If you don't use the school you get your $ back. The problem is that people would homeschool just for the cash and then not put in the effort. Anything which can be turned into cash for parents at the possible expense of the children is going to be problematic because of The People Who Make It So We Can't Have Nice Things.

[Serenade]

Well, that would be awesome.  I think.  

 

I could give my kids a much better education if I had a little more money to spend.  We are not poor, by any means, but it seems like I'm always having to put off homeschool purchases, and sometimes that delays coursework that would have been better started earlier.  

 

ETA:  It's high school that's so expensive.  Man.   

[Serenade]

It's appealing in one sense - just give me the money, right?

 

But there are soooo many issues I have with this. I don't think it's the best way to use public funds. And the government should - rightfully! - be tracking that money. I homeschool in part to avoid that kind of bureaucratic tracking and oversight.

 

 

I get what you're saying, and I have to admit, all that government involvement would bug me, too.  Still, the thought of even having access to a fraction of that money is rather swoon-worthy.  My state gives homeschool students nothing.  They can't take any classes at public school, nor participate in any public school activities.  Oh, how I would love the opportunity to farm out one or two classes.  But you're probably right, it sounds good on paper, but would not be so simple in reality.

[Heather in WI]

Oh, I dream about my child getting the same amount of money for his education as every other child in my country does, whether they are in public or private school!

 

.....

 

I'd like to see homeschool education funded as a tax deduction, or a reduction in student loans or something.

 

 

Last summer, they proposed giving homeschoolers & private schoolers a tax credit  in WI. A group of homeschoolers organized and got the legislature to take out the homeschoolers part over fears of accountability in the future. So, now the private schoolers get a $10,000 tax deduction and we get diddly squat.   :glare:

[BigMamaBird]

While, in a fantasy world it would be great to get a couple thousand to HS, they wouldn't pay half of our curricula because we use some religious materials.  And all the oversight that would be required just wouldn't be worth it for me.  

[SeaConquest]

Some of the quotes are interesting:

 

For example, re services for the disabled:

 

John Kurnik, a 12-year-old from Tampa, is among nearly 1,500 students participating in the Florida ESA. His parents have home-schooled him and his older sister since kindergarten but weren’t able to afford additional support for John, who has autism.

 

Through the ESA, the state has deposited $10,000 in an account for John this year; his parents have used it for behavioral counseling, math tutoring and other needs, said his father, also named John Kurnik.

Regarding religious materials:

 

ESAs are also catching on because they offer a way to circumvent provisions in many state constitutions that prohibit spending public funds on religious schools. Such language often trips up traditional voucher programs. But the Arizona Supreme Court last springlet stand a lower-court ruling that found the ESA structure was constitutional because it puts the public funds, and the choice of how to spend them, in the hands of parents.
 

[Farrar]

To be honest, I don't think the government should be paying for kids to learn religion.

 

I like the idea of being able to access better services for special needs kids... Homeschooling often is a better fit. But not always. I mean, if a child needs a huge amount of services, then 10K is only a drop in the bucket. And I wonder what happens if districts get out of the business of educating special needs kids. It seems like a lot of this is about districts trying to get out of the IEP business more than to fund homeschooling. Or maybe it's to be able to dump those kids out of the system so the districts can raise their test scores since so many fewer accommodations are allowed under a lot of the new CC tests like the PARCC.

[StephanieZ]

Honestly, I think it is a bad idea for kids for there to be any feasible financial incentive to homeschool. Parents who really want to homeschool should do it and find a way to self fund. Sure, it burns my butt to think of the 12k/per kid that the state saves each year since I've homeschooled . . . and, oh, what I could have done with just a fraction of it . . .

 

But, there are really truly plenty of crappy parents out there. Give them a financial incentive to "homeschool" and watch them yank their kids out of schools, plop them in front of the TV (or put them to work babysitting younger siblings or others) . . . and the parents take the $$ and do whatever with it. Sounds like a short cut to much more stringent gov't oversight of homeschooling, that's for sure. 

 

I like it just fine the way it is. They're my kids. I pay for them. That's fine. Let the gov't school systems keep my tax dollars and use it to better educate all those kids stuck in the public system. My kids will need good employees one day, lol. (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

[Ravin]

I think the reason they don't have vouchers for private education is that what people actually do in these cases is all pool their vouchers for schools that poor/disabled people cannot attend. So you get the public funds and multiplication effect, but only for people who are doing well. And then those who are behind cannot pool their funds, because they are the ones who would have had the multiplication effect $ spent on them.

 

This is in fact what is actually happening, at this very moment, with some charter schools. (Though I would be happy to see examples of charters that do serve the poor, the disabled, the kids who are behind, and do not push out those people by not providing services. Hard to imagine since they have to be profitable and surprise surprise, educating people is extremely expensive and it's hard to turn an annual profit...)

 

So I do not see this as something that is feasible in the long-term if we are going to continue having a real public education system that includes all and which values educational parity.

 

A homeschooling tax deduction is an interesting idea. If you don't use the school you get your $ back. The problem is that people would homeschool just for the cash and then not put in the effort. Anything which can be turned into cash for parents at the possible expense of the children is going to be problematic because of The People Who Make It So We Can't Have Nice Things.

There is a charter school in my city which focuses on catering to the needs of homeless children. They will bus the children from wherever the family is staying, have free breakfast/lunch programs, and work with various social service organizations to help the families at least keep the children's school/educational environment stable.

[Ravin]

Honestly, I think it is a bad idea for kids for there to be any feasible financial incentive to homeschool. Parents who really want to homeschool should do it and find a way to self fund. Sure, it burns my butt to think of the 12k/per kid that the state saves each year since I've homeschooled . . . and, oh, what I could have done with just a fraction of it . . .

 

But, there are really truly plenty of crappy parents out there. Give them a financial incentive to "homeschool" and watch them yank their kids out of schools, plop them in front of the TV (or put them to work babysitting younger siblings or others) . . . and the parents take the $$ and do whatever with it. Sounds like a short cut to much more stringent gov't oversight of homeschooling, that's for sure.

 

I like it just fine the way it is. They're my kids. I pay for them. That's fine. Let the gov't school systems keep my tax dollars and use it to better educate all those kids stuck in the public system. My kids will need good employees one day, lol. (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

In Arizona, the program is limited to children in crappy schools (by even Arizona's standards), disabled children whose needs aren't adequately met by their public schools, or children in permanent foster care or who were adopted from foster care. Authorized expenditures are defined and regular reporting has to be done by the parents (not a free for all).

[Tsuga]

There is a charter school in my city which focuses on catering to the needs of homeless children. They will bus the children from wherever the family is staying, have free breakfast/lunch programs, and work with various social service organizations to help the families at least keep the children's school/educational environment stable.

 

So it is all homeless kids in one school, though? Like the idea, don't like the idea that they can't just get bussed to their home school with other homed kids, but it's better than nothing. Thanks for sharing.

[SeaConquest]

Honestly, I think it is a bad idea for kids for there to be any feasible financial incentive to homeschool. Parents who really want to homeschool should do it and find a way to self fund. Sure, it burns my butt to think of the 12k/per kid that the state saves each year since I've homeschooled . . . and, oh, what I could have done with just a fraction of it . . .

 

But, there are really truly plenty of crappy parents out there. Give them a financial incentive to "homeschool" and watch them yank their kids out of schools, plop them in front of the TV (or put them to work babysitting younger siblings or others) . . . and the parents take the $$ and do whatever with it. Sounds like a short cut to much more stringent gov't oversight of homeschooling, that's for sure. 

 

I like it just fine the way it is. They're my kids. I pay for them. That's fine. Let the gov't school systems keep my tax dollars and use it to better educate all those kids stuck in the public system. My kids will need good employees one day, lol. (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

 

You can already get $1-2,000/year per kid via homeschooling charter programs in my area. It does come with strings attached, but people are still free to self-fund and self-regulate if they don't want to deal with the strings. But even 2k/year is still much less than the cost of the average public school student. I think it would have to be a fair amount of money to entice uncommitted people away from the free babysitting that is public school.  

[Ravin]

So it is all homeless kids in one school, though? Like the idea, don't like the idea that they can't just get bussed to their home school with other homed kids, but it's better than nothing. Thanks for sharing.

When a family is moving from one temporary living situation to another, they are often shifting between districts. The charter provides an option, it's not something families are forced into.

http://www.cfatempe.org/about_c_f_a-_t

[Tsuga]

In some areas they will bus the kids to and from the original school. But that can get very long. I imagine it could end up being a long ride in this case as well. Still, every little bit helps.

[Farrar]

This is in fact what is actually happening, at this very moment, with some charter schools. (Though I would be happy to see examples of charters that do serve the poor, the disabled, the kids who are behind, and do not push out those people by not providing services. Hard to imagine since they have to be profitable and surprise surprise, educating people is extremely expensive and it's hard to turn an annual profit...)

 

There are many such good charter schools doing good work for disadvantaged kids in my city. You're right that they don't cater to the kids with the most severe special needs, but they do often cater to kids from poor backgrounds or kids who are struggling learners with lesser special needs. There are also the profiteers and private companies, but many of the schools are doing great work for all kinds of kids. However, the entire district is urban so all kids can access public transit to get to any other school in the city. And it's a city with a high enough population to support a wide variety of charter models. More than half the students in the city attend charters. As such, you can really see it flourishing. This is really in contrast to smaller, more geographically diverse districts that can't support a hundred different charter elementary schools, all with different missions and target families. In those districts, I do question whether charters can work.

[mamaraby]

Last summer, they proposed giving homeschoolers & private schoolers a tax credit in WI. A group of homeschoolers organized and got the legislature to take out the homeschoolers part over fears of accountability in the future. So, now the private schoolers get a $10,000 tax deduction and we get diddly squat. :glare:

Yeah, it was kind of a pretty big group of homeschoolers and there was sort of a good reason. Would money be cool? Sure. More classes, books, and bookshelves are always awesome, but there's no such thing as a free lunch and WI has a pretty awesome homeschool law I'd be loathe to change.

 

Quite frankly, I didn't appreciate being used as a pawn in the governor's game. Sorry.

[Mergath]

Yeah, it was kind of a pretty big group of homeschoolers and there was sort of a good reason. Would money be cool? Sure. More classes, books, and bookshelves are always awesome, but there's no such thing as a free lunch and WI has a pretty awesome homeschool law I'd be loathe to change.

 

Quite frankly, I didn't appreciate being used as a pawn in the governor's game. Sorry.

 

I'd be willing to bet most of the families who lobbied against it were upper income families who don't need the money in the first place.  The lower income homeschoolers who really could have used the money most likely didn't have the opportunity to make their voices heard.  

[mamaraby]

I'd be willing to bet most of the families who lobbied against it were upper income families who don't need the money in the first place. The lower income homeschoolers who really could have used the money most likely didn't have the opportunity to make their voices heard.

I guess that would depend upon the demographics of te membership in the WPA. We don't qualify as upper income and I agreed with the WPA.

[SeaConquest]

I'd be willing to bet most of the families who lobbied against it were upper income families who don't need the money in the first place.  The lower income homeschoolers who really could have used the money most likely didn't have the opportunity to make their voices heard.  

 

That's kinda where I am at with it. I imagine that something like this would open up school choice and homeschooling to many more families. Of course there is no such thing as a free lunch, and frankly, I am totally cool with the very minimal hoops we have to jump through with our charter (at least, at this point -- that may change as we approach high school). Again, if you don't need or want the funds, you can always decline and do your own thing.

[Leav97]

Yeah, it was kind of a pretty big group of homeschoolers and there was sort of a good reason. Would money be cool? Sure. More classes, books, and bookshelves are always awesome, but there's no such thing as a free lunch and WI has a pretty awesome homeschool law I'd be loathe to change.

 

Quite frankly, I didn't appreciate being used as a pawn in the governor's game. Sorry.

 

MN has had a tax credit option for a long time.  They recently just changed the homeschooling laws to be less restrictive.  Kind of shoots the whole slippery slope (falicy) in the foot.

[EKS]

The last thing I want is for the government to be mucking about in my homeschool.  Which is what would happen if the state funded homeschooling.

[Paige]

I think it is a great idea for families who want it as long as families who don't want the money are still allowed to homeschool freely. 

[Mergath]

The last thing I want is for the government to be mucking about in my homeschool.  Which is what would happen if the state funded homeschooling.

 

Not necessarily.  See the aforementioned tax credit we get here in MN and the subsequent easing of the laws.  Plus homeschoolers here can take advantage of state laws that let them attend community college as high schoolers on the state's dime (you can even get reimbursed for transportation).  And here in our district, homeschool students can take part in all school activities and even take some classes without registering as a public school student.  All with a bare minimum of government mucking.

[Carrie12345]

I really want the *option.
I don't mind a certain degree of regulation (not that I'd ever push for more just for the heck of it, and I'm happy PA is loosening up a bit.)  I think there are plenty of things I'd be willing to add to my plate in that regard if it meant I could elevate my kids' education to a place I only dream about now.

 

My district's per pupil spending times four kids, reduced to 80% (based on the one example in the article) would be 50k a year in this house.  I don't need/want and probably couldn't even figure out how to spend THAT much on "qualifying" expenses in one year, but 10 or 20? I'd file more paperwork for that opportunity!!!

 

I also think the possibility would open up great opportunities for new and existing businesses to cater to the needs of homeschoolers, which would be pretty awesome in my local economy.

[mamaraby]

MN has had a tax credit option for a long time. They recently just changed the homeschooling laws to be less restrictive. Kind of shoots the whole slippery slope (falicy) in the foot.

I didn't suggest a slippery slope, but whatever. Better to argue against the strawman version of me I guess. I'm not interested in taking money away from public schools because I'm not anti-public school. I'm also not interested in being a card the governor plays on his run for president. Good for MN, but it's a slightly different ball of wax down here in WI.

 

FWIW - rather than a tax credit or voucher, I'd rather have a savings account like a HSA where any parent could save for educational expenses pre-tax. Public school parents could save for school supplies, fees, etc. Homeschoolers could buy curriculum or whatever. Private school parents could save for tuition. Put a max $ amount per year on it and allow it to be rolled over to pay for higher education.

 

We don't make enough for a tax credit to be of any huge impact unless we're talking about making that credit refundable like the child tax credit. Otherwise, explain to me how a tax credit is the ideal way to help lower income homeschoolers again? A tax credit is only super helpful if you a) have enough taxable income to decrease and b) make it refundable like the child tax credit or EIC.

 

ETA: In WI, the last time the Republicans wanted to do us homeschoolers a favor, they took something we were already able to do (play on public school sports teams) and added requirements to it. The rep thought he was helping....turns out, not so much. There's already talk about additional requirements for public and private schools that receive state money.

 

So, yeah, great that things worked out for you in MN. I'm sure you can understand that things are quite different in WI. The last time the governor gave my dh more "freedom" it cost us money. Turns out freedom only applies to non-union, non-government employee households. You'll excuse me if I don't trust the Guv.

[Serenade]

 

 

My district's per pupil spending times four kids, reduced to 80% (based on the one example in the article) would be 50k a year in this house.  I don't need/want and probably couldn't even figure out how to spend THAT much on "qualifying" expenses in one year, but 10 or 20? I'd file more paperwork for that opportunity!!!

 

I also think the possibility would open up great opportunities for new and existing businesses to cater to the needs of homeschoolers, which would be pretty awesome in my local economy.

 

 

Shoot, I'd be happy with a couple thousand. 

 

 

Good point about possibly increasing business opportunities. 

[SparklyUnicorn]

Shoot I'd even be happy with a couple of hundred. I won't hold my breath that this will ever come to my state though.

 

 

[Farrar]

FWIW - rather than a tax credit or voucher, I'd rather have a savings account like a HSA where any parent could save for educational expenses pre-tax. Public school parents could save for school supplies, fees, etc. Homeschoolers could buy curriculum or whatever. Private school parents could save for tuition. Put a max $ amount per year on it and allow it to be rolled over to pay for higher education.

Oh, that's the best idea I've heard. I think I could get behind that. It would still disproportionately help the richer because they'd be able to use up the cap, but it would help everyone without hurting anyone or taking money directly from schools.

[SparklyUnicorn]

From my perspective we already have the government breathing in our business.  So if you want to give me some financial compensation for that fact, yes please.

 

I would think oversight of it would be fair.  There is also nothing stopping me from buying items they don't approve of with my own money and using them anyway.  So this idea that they will control every single book I use...well I'm not buying it.  As it is here they won't even lend us public school textbooks (yet do so to private schools).  Not that I want their books, but they are certainly not interested in forcing me to use them. 

[Orthodox6]

I vote "NO!!!" to any method or law that lets the Government Fox into my Parental Hen House under the guise of monetary gifts with not strings, but ten-ton chains attached.

[mamajag]

Did anyone see this article in Politco?

 

States weigh turning education funds over to parents

A radical new idea is catching fire across the country.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/state-education-savings-accounts-taxpayers-114966.html

 

Thoughts? I assumed that the money could only be used secularly, as with charter schools, but that seems to not always be the case.

 

I want nothing to do with it. Government money comes with government strings.

[SparklyUnicorn]

I want nothing to do with it. Government money comes with government strings.

 

What are the regulations like in your state?

 

I am just wondering if people who are saying this live in states without much oversight.  I truly cannot fathom the state I live in becoming more intrusive than they already are.  So this reasoning makes no sense to me.  I already have them nosing in my business.

[lea1]

In my state (OK) we have no oversight at all and I know many homeschoolers here would not want to receive anything from the gov't if it required oversight.  I personally would be OK with some sort of tax credit or a tax-free savings account or something to help off set the costs, and we would probably be considered upper middle class that doesn't really need it.  It would be nice to at least have a choice.

[mamajag]

What are the regulations like in your state?

 

I am just wondering if people who are saying this live in states without much oversight.  I truly cannot fathom the state I live in becoming more intrusive than they already are.  So this reasoning makes no sense to me.  I already have them nosing in my business.

 

I fill out a card for each child once a year for the truant officer and give her a receipt for curriculum. That's it. I'm not willing to accept any more than that.

[JumpyTheFrog]

Isn't private school tuition already tax deductible at the federal level? Did that lead to more regulation?

[Orthodox6]

Isn't private school tuition already tax deductible at the federal level? Did that lead to more regulation?

 

It was deductible in my dreams!  :glare:  

Out of medical necessity, one child spent some years at a private, "therapeutic" day school.  Very far from affordable, and not one penny was deductible.

[Orthodox6]

What are the regulations like in your state?

 

I am just wondering if people who are saying this live in states without much oversight.  I truly cannot fathom the state I live in becoming more intrusive than they already are.  So this reasoning makes no sense to me.  I already have them nosing in my business.

 

Texas likely would benefit from having a tad more oversight than currently is in place.  (Nothing at all is required beyond the unenforced and wholly murky dictate to teach "good citizenship" and to have a legitimate curriculum for all subjects -- which latter requirement is not investigated, either, unless CPS has been sent in for some reason.) 

 

My strong negativity relates only to a state dangling money in front of me.  They already do, come to think of it, since the K-12 "public-school-at-home-but-managed-by-the-state" choice exists.  (which choice I can see as an acceptable compromise for families in certain situations)

 

[Murphy101]

Texas likely would benefit from having a tad more oversight than currently is in place. (Nothing at all is required beyond the unenforced and wholly murky dictate to teach "good citizenship" and to have a legitimate curriculum for all subjects -- which latter requirement is not investigated, either, unless CPS has been sent in for some reason.)

 

My strong negativity relates only to a state dangling money in front of me. They already do, come to think of it, since the K-12 "public-school-at-home-but-managed-by-the-state" choice exists. (which choice I can see as an acceptable compromise for families in certain situations)

 

This is similiar to my view. My state has very nearly zero oversight for home schoolers and I'm quite happy with that.

 

If someone wants to choose approved materials to be bought and paid for by the state and still have access to school services, they can choose one of the several public virtual school at home programs.

[Ausmumof3]

Oh, I dream about my child getting the same amount of money for his education as every other child in my country does, whether they are in public or private school!

 

It will never happen here.

 

And there are all sorts of problems with transparency and accountability.

 

I'd like to see homeschool education funded as a tax deduction, or a reduction in student loans or something.

I'd love that - we could have some awesome curriculum, but...

 

I would be concerned it might attract people to homeschooling purely for easy money. Not that it is easy money in terms of how much work it really is but ya know.

 

I guess it could be a deduction based on receipts or something.

[Lucy the Valiant]

*RESURRECTING AN OLD THREAD*

 

Resurrecting an old thread because my tiny state (New Hampshire) is actually considering this very thing - a universal ESA that would apply to *all* kids in the entire state. It has already passed our state senate, and is on its way to the house (next week).

 

To phrase it simply, our schools are funded on a town-by-town basis, with funds coming from 2 places: a portion from the town (this is one huge factor in our property taxes as our state does not have income or sales tax) and a portion from the state (these are a mix of federal funds and state funds re-distributed). The ESA (if it passes) will give 90% of that state portion TO THE PARENTS OF THE STUDENTS; the town-specific portion will stay in the town with the public school.

 

Our state average per pupil spending is $17K.

 

This ESA Bill is HUGE! It's a base rate of $3200 per kid that parents would receive on a debit card to be used for educational expenses - tutoring, classes, lessons, books, field trips, private school tuition, possibly to be saved for college, etc. . . . it's pretty wide open. The remaining 10% of that state portion will be divided 2 ways: 5% is an automatic savings to the state (hence the "SAVINGS" part of Educational Savings Account), and 5% will create an administrative office to oversee / check the expenditures. So basically, the schools will still be receiving the same funding for >$12K per pupil that they are NO LONGER EDUCATING (for any kids who leave the public schools for private or home schooling), but school children across the state will now have access to about 20% of those "per pupil" funds currently controlled 100% by the public school districts.

 

There is a separate bill that applies (slightly differently but the same principle) to special education, allowing parents to go outside the districts for testing & therapies, if they so choose.

 

I don't want to post political things that violate the terms here, but this is certainly a relevant example to this thread - and very interesting to me personally.

 

 

[Ravin]

I think the reason they don't have vouchers for private education is that what people actually do in these cases is all pool their vouchers for schools that poor/disabled people cannot attend. So you get the public funds and multiplication effect, but only for people who are doing well. And then those who are behind cannot pool their funds, because they are the ones who would have had the multiplication effect $ spent on them.

 

This is in fact what is actually happening, at this very moment, with some charter schools. (Though I would be happy to see examples of charters that do serve the poor, the disabled, the kids who are behind, and do not push out those people by not providing services. Hard to imagine since they have to be profitable and surprise surprise, educating people is extremely expensive and it's hard to turn an annual profit...)

 

So I do not see this as something that is feasible in the long-term if we are going to continue having a real public education system that includes all and which values educational parity.

 

A homeschooling tax deduction is an interesting idea. If you don't use the school you get your $ back. The problem is that people would homeschool just for the cash and then not put in the effort. Anything which can be turned into cash for parents at the possible expense of the children is going to be problematic because of The People Who Make It So We Can't Have Nice Things.

 

There are some good nonprofit charters out there. In my state, there is one that serves autistic kids specifically, and one that serves homeless children, with busing from wherever in the county the family is staying so the child can have a stable school situation even when home isn't so stable, as well as other social supports for the families.

 

There is also the elitist pooling factor going on, and some for-profit charters IMO taking families for a ride and doing a lousy job.

 

What there currently isn't in my area is the level of support available at one of private LD jr high/high schools, available as a charter or in the public school setting. There are ways to get state funding to get a child into one, but it involves the child first being failed by the public school system, no way to do that from homeschooling.

[mommyoffive]

This has been my idea for years.  

 

 

Are there any states that actually do this?

Edited March 30, 2017 by mommyoffive

[Bambam]

Our state (basically no regulation) has a bill for ESAs in front of the legislature currently.

 

I'm against it. People who are for it think we should have access to the school taxes we pay, but there are lots of people who pay for schools that do not have children who attend school - those retired people, the people who do not have children.  School taxes are paid - just like highway/bridge taxes - so we can have those services available to our society. I pay taxes for our volunteer fire department, and I hope never to need their services, but I am happy to pay for them.

 

And, as a tax payer, if you are using my money, I want accountability. I want to know you are using my money wisely and efficiently. And for education - that is going to mean standardized testing or portfolio reviews. And, for those of us with no regulation, why would we want to enter that arena? And, no, I don't believe it will always be limited to those who elect to take advantage of this "free" money.

 

If you want to take advantage of school tax money, simply stick your child in your local public school. Done. 

 

[La Condessa]

You can already get $1-2,000/year per kid via homeschooling charter programs in my area. It does come with strings attached, but people are still free to self-fund and self-regulate if they don't want to deal with the strings. But even 2k/year is still much less than the cost of the average public school student. I think it would have to be a fair amount of money to entice uncommitted people away from the free babysitting that is public school.

 

We lived in Southern California when I first started investigating homeschooling when dd1was a baby. I am so envious of all the options there!

[La Condessa]

dp

 

Edited March 30, 2017 by La Condessa

[GoodGrief]

This has been my idea for years.  

 

 

Are there any states that actually do this?

 

Our state does something like this. Various school districts run programs for homeschoolers. For each student they get half (or so; not sure the current precise percentage) the funding from the state that a student in a building-based program would receive. The family can then receive a percentage of that funding (generally $1600-2800) for education expenses. 

 

The families do not receive the money outright though, so there would be little incentive to homeschool for the money. There is documentation of expenses required, receipts to turn in, approval of vendors to obtain, sometimes you order items through the program; it can be somewhat complicated. There are other hoops too...mandatory testing (same as the building-based students), documentation of learning plan, sometimes work samples, contact with a teacher from the program.

 

It's been going on here since 1998, and is very successful.