Do EFAs Squeeze Public School Funding?
Your July 30, 2026 edition contained the following article about school funding titled: “EFAs squeeze public school funding.” This title gives the impression that children’s education in New Hampshire is not being adequately funded.
Quote from your article: “From 2008 to 2012, New Hampshire was one of 16 states to invest more dollars per student amid the Great Recession, adjusted for inflation — but ever since, those investments have declined, then stagnated.”
Fact: Total public school district spending in New Hampshire increased by an inflation-adjusted $1.25 billion, or 45%, from 2001-2024 as enrollment fell by 54,381 students, or 26%, state data show.
Quote: “Of that funding, 28% came from the state, the lowest share of per-pupil investment across all 50 states.
Fact: NH ranks seventh in per-pupil spending among the states.
Quote: “As spending on school vouchers increases, the pool of money available for public education shrinks, since both are paid out of the Education Trust Fund.”
Fact: EFA’s are grants. The state will now fund 5,321 EFA’s in the 2024-2025 school year, for a total estimated cost of $27.7 million for the year. Total spending on education for the 2024-2025 school year approached a new record of more than $4 billion in NH. EFA’s accounted for less than 1% of spending on education. It is important to mention that EFA’s cost $5,206 per student compared to public schools, which cost $23,700.
Why did your headline say “EFAs squeeze public school funding” when their impact is minimal?
The MLT should be asking…
Why are so many parents choosing alternatives to public schools?
Why have test scores in NH declined and stagnated for many years?
Why have education costs risen while attendance has declined?