The Challenges of Hope

On March 29, 2021, West Virginia enacted the Hope Scholarship Program. In doing so, the state created a separate and distinctly different approach to traditional public K-12 education: a taxpayer-funded near-universal voucher program that pays for tuition and related educational expenses at private schools, including religious schools. When a student leaves a public school with a HOPE scholarship and enrolls in a private school, the public funds, currently $4,488.82 ($4,921.39 in 2024-2025), follow the student to the private school or an individual instructional plan. This type of program is generally labeled “education savings account” or “tuition+ vouchers,” with this latter term more accurately describing the program. The Hope program is neither a scholarship program nor a savings account.

This first part of this essay provides a general overview of the program and introduces some significant accountability and transparency issues generated by the Hope program. It does this by describing some of the problems that the state of Florida encountered in its public funding of private schools and suggesting implications for West Virginia’s Hope program.

The longer second part focuses in more detail on the financial, accountability, and transparency challenges generated by the Hope program and makes recommendations for ensuring adequate accountability and transparency.

I Overview of key issues

Florida’s Orlando Sentinel newspaper undertook a deep look over multiple years at various practices at private schools receiving public voucher funds. Studies of other states, such as Arizona, Ohio, and Wisconsin, illustrate similar problems.

The newspaper identified several different problems at multiple schools. One set of issues dealt with the hiring of teachers. This included hiring teachers who, in their employment backgrounds, had issues such as being charged with crimes or fired for incompetence. In recent years, while investigating other issues, Florida’s education department found at least eight schools with staff members with criminal records. Some teachers lacked educational credentials even if hired to teach special needs students. In some instances, schools did not do background checks on employees or did not keep employment-related records. Some schools had employee turnover rates well above 50%.

A second set of problems dealt with the school facilities. Some schools had no outdoor spaces for education or recreation or were in areas inappropriate for children's schooling. Some schools did not meet acceptable occupancy or fire/safety requirements. In one instance, a school forged official documents to hide these problems. At least 19 schools submitted documents since 2012 that misled state officials about fire and health inspections, including some with forged inspectors’ names or altered dates. Eight of these schools continued to receive public funding.

Most of the problems identified in the newspaper’s investigation seem to rest with smaller schools, especially those schools that formed once the legislation was enacted. Florida allows private schools to begin enrolling students when they open their doors. It was not unusual for such schools to have all or almost all students using public funds.

The Sentinel’s examination showed that the Florida state government essentially took a hands-off approach to monitoring the private schools. Although some disenchanted parents mistakenly assumed the state has some say over academic quality, the state education department noted that the participating schools can conduct their schools as they believe appropriate. The state sees curriculum issues as solely between the private schools and parents, assuming that the free market would sift out poor-quality schools. As one department spokesperson states, “Families who opt for private school through any one of our scholarship programs have made the decision that best meets the needs of their students.”

The state also assumes that the private schools were following the relatively few requirements placed on them. The state often declined to act even when informed about problems. 

Part of this weak oversight was baked into the philosophy and overall approach to creating and funding private schools. The state has minimal resources to undertake meaningful oversight. The law limits the number of participating schools the state can visit each year to 10, although this limit does not prevent the state from checking on schools with a history of problems. In one recent year, the state visited 27 of the state’s nearly 2000 participating schools and found only four compliant with all regulations. 

West Virginia is not Florida. Nonetheless, the two states use similar oversight frameworks. Nearly all of West Virginia’s Hope program monitoring focuses on the appropriateness of the cash flow among the state, parents, and participating schools and education service providers. This narrow approach to oversight seems purposeful as the statute says, “The rules or policies adopted by the board should avoid excessive bureaucracy and overly prescriptive mandates and instead focus on encouraging participation in the program and encouraging education service providers to provide parents and Hope Scholarship students with a broad array of educational options.” Yet voucher funds are public funds that require more than a very cursory at-a-distance approach to oversight. 

2 The Challenges of funding, accountability, and transparency

Advocates of public funds for private schooling highlight "empowering parents" by allowing them to determine how to use their tax dollars to educate their children in private schools. But what does "using their tax dollars" mean? For the 2022-23 academic year, it meant $4,298.60, the funding that follows the student when enrolling in a private school or in an individual instructional plan.

Let's approximately explore this with Jefferson County data. The fiscal year 2024 median property tax in Jefferson County is $1,379, the highest median among the state's 55 counties. Let's assume the average property tax is 28% higher than the median, or $1,765. Let's also assume that each household with children pays the estimated average property tax of $1,765. The county school board collects about 62% of the county's property tax revenue. Per household, the amount of property tax going to the board of education is 0.62 x 1,765, or $1,094. In this calculation, the school board receives $1,094 from each household with children. 

The Hope scholarship award amount is much larger than a household’s property tax payment to the school board, and this is particularly true if the household has more than one student receiving a Hope scholarship. Other taxpayers are helping to provide a good portion of the "scholarship" amount, 75% in this calculation. 

Indeed, taxpayers generally have a right to see how their funds are used. However, the West Virginia taxpayer needs more information about education in private schools funded by public school funds. The legislation, the Hope rule, and the stance taken by the Hope board generate an at-a-distance oversight. This is particularly true regarding school curriculum, generally seen as a topic that rests almost solely with the school and parents. 

Snapshot of Hope's first year 

According to Hope’s first annual report, overall, the Hope program for the 2024-25 school year spent a total of $7,771,761.39. Most of this money, $6,079,113.87, went to nonpublic schools. The Hope program distributed funds to 108 participating schools, about 93% of which were religious schools, nearly 100% being Christian. For example, the Catholic Diocese recently reported that of the 4,706 students enrolled in the state’s Catholic schools over 1,400, or about 30%, are receiving Hope Funds in the 2024-2025 school year. Seventeen of the 108 schools were outside the state: 7 in Maryland, 4 each in Ohio and Virginia, and 1 each in Pennsylvania and Kentucky. 

About 23% of Hope awards fund individual instructional plans, which are used for customized education at home or another location and include students who attend a micro-school. The geographical distribution of these awards has yet to be available.

Hope spent $406,609 reimbursing parent expenditures. "MyScholarship Suppliers" received $977,761.23. Finally, payments to Education Service Providers totaled $308,271.93.

As in many other states, students in the lower grades received most of the funds. Kindergarten students totaled 1,099, 47% of all students. Only 5% of Hope students enrolled in grades 9 to 12. Most Hope students were enrolled in nonpublic schools, 1,717 or 76%. Students with individualized instructional plans numbered 529, 23% of all students. The high number of students in the lower grades may explain the relatively high number of IIPs. Racially, Hope students generally tracked well with statewide racial percentages. White students numbered 2,135, or 91.5% of all students, closely matching the state's white population of 91.2%. Black or African American students numbered 102, or 4.36% of all students, close to their statewide percentage of 3.7%.

The Funding Challenge

A recent Education Law Center report examined voucher programs' fiscal impact in seven states (Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin) from 2008 to 2019. The report shows that the public funds spent on vouchers and the number of students using vouchers dramatically increased after the first two or three years of initial funding. Spending on vouchers has more than doubled in all seven states, with voucher spending in Georgia and Florida climbing by nearly 900%. 

On the other hand, funding for traditional public schooling declined for all seven states when measured by the percentage of K-12 funding as a portion of each state's gross domestic product. Yet, during this time, public school enrollment increased. Moreover, while the other 43 states increased spending for public education by an average of 10.7 percent, only Ohio matched or exceeded this average increase in public funding. In Arizona and Florida, per pupil expenditure on traditional public schooling dropped by 5.7 percent and 12 percent, respectively. Voucher funding increased by 270% and 313% in these two states.

The dominant reason for the significant expansion of voucher funding is that nearly all the early voucher programs were tied to relatively narrow, specific purposes—for example, limited to children from low-income families or students with special needs. But after a few years, state legislators found it relatively easy to make voucher programs available to most, if not nearly all, children.

West Virginia's Hope program started broadly compared to the above states so that it may see the fiscal impact sooner than the above states. For example, by early June 2024, the state had approved 5,099 Hope applications, withdrawing nearly $23 million from traditional K-12 funding.

An illustration

The example I use for potential future fiscal impact comes from Broward County, Florida. Broward is a large urban county, but it represents the fiscal dilemma urban counties tend to face in states with education savings accounts. Rural counties seem much less affected because they don't have the private school infrastructure as metropolitan areas and have few public schools, which are often vital centers of activity for rural areas. 

On June 18, 2024, the Broward County School Board directed the Superintendent of Schools to close at least five schools for the 2025-26 school year. Seat utilization, or declining enrollment, primarily drove this decision. 

Broward County Public Schools have about 43,000 empty seats. The county has a little over 300,000 school-age children, of which about 200,000 are in the public school system. The county has 137 elementary schools, 35 middle schools, 32 high schools, and nine combination schools. While 66 public schools have seat utilization under 70%, 18 elementary schools, and four middle schools have seat utilization under 55%. This condition exists although the state department of education this year awarded an A grade to the Broward public school system, as well as the Miami-Dade public school system.

The board referenced the fiscal impact of this situation: schools with high seat utilization typically have lower costs per student; small schools often do not have special programs and electives that other schools have. These dynamics apply to elementary, middle, and high schools. The board estimates that closing an elementary school would provide about $1.8 million in potential savings; closing one middle school $2.7 million; and one high school $4.3 million. Numerous costs, such as teachers, programs, security personnel, and course materials, are not saved because these costs follow the students from a closed school to another school.

Nearly all underutilized public schools are geographically proximate to one or more charter or private schools. The county contains 87 charter schools and 309 private schools. On average, each charter school enrolls 575 students, and each private school enrolls 162 students.

The Broward County situation is not unique in Florida. This year, consultants to the Duval County (Jacksonville) school board recommended closing 30 of its 197 schools to help address a projected $1.4 billion deficit. In the 2022-23 school year, 24% of available student seats were vacant. Other urban school districts are facing similar problems. Hillsborough County public schools closed five schools in May. Miami-Dade closed two schools this year and will close five schools next year. Other urban counties are experiencing student enrollment declines. These examples point to the gradual decline in public school enrollment as student enrollment increases in publicly funded private schools.

In West Virginia

As with nearly all states with education savings account programs, the Hope program is urban. About 60% of Hope awards go to the ten most populous counties, accounting for 1,382 Hope students. The remaining 45 counties have only 951 Hope students. Kanawha County has the largest Hope student count, 337, spread among 11 private schools and individualized instructional plans. Berkeley County is second, with 208 Hope students in 3 private schools and individualized instructional plans. Jefferson County has the sixth highest number of Hope students, 114 in 2 schools and individualized instructional plans. 

For Kanawha County and Jefferson County, the loss of Hope students represents about 1.4% of enrolled students, resulting in a loss of $1,448,628 for Kanawha and $490,040 for Jefferson. Berkeley County lost about 1% of enrolled students and $894,109. Unfortunately, looking solely at county data does not tell us very much. The Hope program provides no data on individual schools and does not break down individual instructional plans by county. School-level data is critical if taxpayers want to know what is happening to public education in their county. 

In the classroom

The Orlando Sentinel identified curriculum as a significant issue in private schools using public funds. The Sentinel's investigation showed that when parents complained about private schools, they generally mentioned (1) disappointment in the curriculum, (2) disappointment in the quality or effectiveness of the teachers, or (3) not knowing enough about the schools before enrolling their children. Perhaps because many of the schools are relatively small or are new to education, very little information was available on their websites, with many having no websites.

Critics of the curriculum focused on some particulars in history, social studies, and science. For example, some schools teach that dinosaurs and humans lived together, that slaves who knew Christ were better off than free men who did not, and that God's intervention prevented Catholics from dominating North America. Science curricula were criticized for the frequent absence of lab work. 

The ACE (American Christian Education) curriculum was the most criticized curriculum. In this curriculum, students individually complete workbooks at their own pace. Students sit at partitioned desks and fill out up to 70 workbooks with little interaction with teachers or other students. One ACE advocate argues that these workbooks are effective regardless of the skills of the teachers—even if they lack college degrees.

In Florida, about 80% of the private schools receiving public funds are religious schools, nearly all Christian. The Sentinel's investigation showed that some schools do not admit LGBTQ students. One school did not admit students of LGBTQ parents.

In West Virginia

What the Jefferson County taxpayer knows specifically about the Hope program is that for the 2022-23 academic year, 114 students left public schooling for Hope-funded private or IIP schooling. Second, three private schools in the county enrolled Hope students: Wee Disciples Christian Academy, which received $25,792, Morgan Academy, which received $11,175.26, and Grace Baptist Church School, which received $6,600.00. Some students from Jefferson and Berkeley likely enrolled in out-of-state or out-of-county schools. We can get some idea of the number of IIP students by dividing the amount of Hope funds each school received. This is a rough estimate because some students received only a prorated amount, and we need to know the number of students attending out-of-state or out-of-county schools. Six students were probably enrolled in Wee Disciples Christian Academy, three in the Morgan Academy and two in the Grace Baptist Church School. This suggests that most Hope students who left Jefferson County public schools may have enrolled in IIPs or in out-of-county private schools.

Berkeley County lost 208 students with Hope scholarships going to three schools: Faith Christian Academy, $245,020.20; St. Joseph School, $191,154.00; and Martinsburg Christian Academy, $26,182.06. This suggests that 57 students enrolled in Faith Christian Academy, 45 in St. Joseph, and 6 in Martinsburg Christian Academy. The remaining 100 students either enrolled in non-county schools or IIPs.

Statewide, the schools obtaining the largest receipt of Hope funds included Cross Lanes Christian School, $309,470, in Kanawha County; Faith Christian Academy in Berkeley County, $245,020.20; Bible Center Church in Kanawha County, $232,355; Sacred Heart Grade School in Kanawha County, $191,333; and St. Joseph School in Berkeley County, $191,154.00.

Hope students in Kanawha County were probably less likely to enroll in non-county schools. The data suggest 72 Hope students enrolled in Cross Lanes, 54 in Bible Center Church, and 45 in Sacred Heart Grade School. Perhaps one-half of Kanawha’s Hope students enrolled in IIPs.

State actions addressing accountability or transparent concerns

Very recent changes in the Hope program take some steps toward ensuring accountability. A recent amendment to the Hope legislation (HB 4945) makes a small step toward ensuring accountability of public funds for private education. It requires education service providers to do a criminal background check and certify that the background check indicates no conviction of a felony involving violence and no listing on a federal or state sex offender registry. However, as shown in Florida, this paper checkoff must also be accompanied by site visits. This new legislation does give the Hope board the option to provide legislative rules for random auditing of education service providers. 

Second, the Hope board in February this year identified a specific set of unallowable expenses in February this year. This list should help the state avoid expense issues faced by other states, such as snack foods, aeroponic indoor gardens, and pianos for use in homes (in Arizona, for example, $2 million was spent on music expenses that included the purchasing of pianos), and other controversial expenditures such as golf store purchases, driving lessons for driving luxury cars, passes for ski resorts, and martial arts instruction.

Third, it codifies the Board’s rule prohibiting education service providers from requiring costs above the provider’s regular tuition and fee schedule. A 2024 study found that in Iowa’s first year of education savings accounts, private schools, on average, increased prices by 21-25%, although there was much variation among the schools. Other research shows that private schools often capture subsidy funds by increasing tuition and fees.

Recommendations

However, more significant changes are needed to promote transparency and oversight. These recommendations attempt to make the Hope program more transparent and accountable, given that non-Hope households make a significant tax payment to fund the program. 

The Orlando Sentinel’s investigation clearly showed that the state cannot assume that private schools will follow all the rules and regulations. The state should undertake annually a limited number of random on-site visits to ensure the participating schools meet all requirements. The monitoring should be centered on relatively new schools and schools that have grown rapidly in student counts due to the Hope program. A good focus for this monitoring is hiring/background checks and facility standards (fire, safety, occupancy, and building standards).

West Virginia has a significant advantage over most other states that provide public funds for 1000 or more private schools. Weak oversight is not a funding issue but an ideological issue, as in Florida.  As one Ohio voucher advocate stated, “It’s the parents’ money to use as they see best. We don’t necessarily see it as taxpayer money.”

Second, the state should require each participating school to have a website that (1) identifies teaching staff with their academic background and any certifications they may hold; (2) provides information about the curriculum so that parents of potential students can know what is being taught and the course resources (such as texts or on-the-shelf curricula); (3) provides some background on the school, such as the year it was formed, its leadership, and some historical background; and (4) a statement of admission policies. After the first year of schooling Hope participants, the website should provide the number of Hope students and the total number of students. This set of recommendations will help parents understand the school's academic focus and provide a sense of the school’s fiscal status or the extent to which the school depends on Hope’s subsidies.

Third, each county school board should identify on its website each year the individual public schools sending students to Hope participating schools and IIPs if available. The data should show the annual number of exits to the Hope program and a running total of exits. If possible, the state or county school board should show the annual number of IIPs in micro-schools. The annual Hope data should also show Hope students returning to county public schools

Fourth, each county school board should indicate the extent to which individual schools led to decreased seat utilization and the level of seat utilization. This information will provide public school parents and the public generally of schools that may be heading toward significant seat underutilization. Seat underutilization at a public school can potentially indicate future changes in the community.

Finally, the Hope board should consider two accountability/transparency recommendations. The Hope board should annually require several Hope schools to conduct periodic audits by certified public accountants, with copies of the audit sent to the Hope board. The Hope board should summarize the audit findings in its annual reports. These audits should focus primarily on schools where Hope students comprise a large portion of the school's enrolled students. The state of Florida, for example, requires each public charter school to conduct yearly audits by CPAs. These audits are provided to the state’s Auditor General, who produces an annual report each year summarizing the overall findings of the audits. Second, to the extent that Hope schools undertake no normed assessments of student progress, the Hope board should consider periodically requiring the larger Hope schools to undertake periodic assessments identical or very similar to the state's requirements for its public schools. In both cases above, the size of the participating schools and the number and percentage of Hope students should be considered. 

The HOPE program generates a zero-sum game: for every dollar added to the voucher program, the traditional public school system loses a dollar. Parents and taxpayers should be kept updated on the impact of Hope on public school viability. This may not be a significant issue now. Still, it may soon become necessary as the Hope program develops and funds increasingly more students and as charter schools become more prominent in the state's overall approach to education.