Research | Public Funds Public Schools

In 2023, Public Funds Public Schools published a research report by Samuel E. Abrams and Steven J. Koutsavlis that examined the growth in voucher programs and spending in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin in the decade following the Great Recession. For comparison, the report provides data for per-pupil expenditures on public education in these seven states and the other forty-three states over the same period. Findings include:

• In each of the seven states, expenditures of public funds on voucher programs increased dramatically from 2008 to 2019, with growth in voucher spending in Georgia reaching 883 percent.
• Florida leads the pack in voucher spending levels, but nearly all the states examined were diverting hundreds of millions of dollars to voucher programs annually by the end of the period studied.
• At the same time funding for vouchers climbed significantly in these seven states, the portion of state GDP allocated to K-12 public education decreased, even though public school enrollment grew over the same period in five of the seven states.

Access one-page excerpts from the report: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

In 2022, Education Law Center and the Florida Policy Institute published a report finding that the diversion of state school aid to vouchers had reached an estimated $1.3 billion in the wake of the 2019 enactment of the Family Empowerment Scholarship voucher program, representing an estimated 10% of state aid for public schools in 2022-23. This diversion of public funds to vouchers directly from school districts is in addition to a potential $1.1 billion in public dollars diverted from the state treasury through vouchers financed by corporate tax credits. In 2023, ELC and FPI released fiscal analyses of the proposals for universal voucher expansion being considered by the Florida Legislature.

A report authored by Education Law Center and the Southern Poverty Law Center, the organizations that collaborate on the Public Funds Public examined public school funding in eight Southern states based on criteria in ELC’s national Making the Grade report, an annual state-by-state analysis of public school funding. The report found that the eight Southern states examined have “woefully insufficient” school funding levels, and most of them fail to equitably distribute additional funds to high-poverty school districts. Concluding that “[s]chool finance in the Southern states is in drastic need of improvement,” the report notes that “a number of challenges threaten to derail attention from the core issue of fair school funding,” including the fact that “[m]any Southern states are facing the expansion of school voucher programs that divert scarce public funds to unaccountable and discriminatory private institutions.”

A 2025 article published in the Education Policy Analysis Archives reviewed and analyzed state voucher policies from 1869 to 2024. The authors found little evidence that private school vouchers created markets with valued educational outcomes, and in many cases vouchers were used as a tool to maintain racial segregation. The report concludes that vouchers have not improved the quality of education, and in many cases, harm children and communities.

A 2025 analysis of Ohio’s state testing data found that on all proficiency tests, students using a voucher for one year or less are about 75% proficient, and three years later they are 54% proficient. The analysis also looked at proficiency rates by subject, finding that there was no subject in which voucher students improved their proficiency over three years.

A 2019 study on the academic effects of the Louisiana voucher program by researchers at the University of Arkansas found that after four years, students using the vouchers to attend private schools "performed noticeably worse on state assessments than their [public school] control group counterparts." The data showed "large negative effects" on assessment results, especially in math. The results of this study conducted over a longer timeframe appeared to contradict earlier claims that the negative academic effects of the Louisiana voucher program could be temporary. A 2019 companion study found that participation in the Louisiana voucher program did not improve rates of college enrollment.

A 2019 evaluation by the Institute for Education Sciences found that the Washington, D.C. voucher program had no statistically significant effect on student achievement in reading or math after three years. It also concluded that the program did not improve parent satisfaction with schools or perceptions of school safety.

A 2018 evaluation by the Institute for Social Science Research at the University of Alabama of the academic achievement of Alabama's tax credit voucher recipients during the 2016-2017 school year found that, "On average, over time, participating in the scholarship program was not associated with significant improvement on standardized test scores." The results of the state-mandated evaluation showed that "scholarship recipients generally performed below the average U.S. student at their grade level."

A 2018 longitudinal study of the Indiana Choice Scholarship Program published in the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management found that low-income students who switched from public to private school using a voucher starting in the 2011-12 school year experienced, on average, an achievement loss of 0.15 standard deviations in mathematics on the statewide standardized assessment during their first year of private school compared to matched students who remained in public schools. This loss remained consistent regardless of the length of time spent in private school, therefore contradicting the claim that loss in achievement is the result of student adjustment to private school. A 2019 study published in the Russel Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences found significant losses in academic achievement for Indiana students who used a voucher to move from public to private school.

A 2018 report by the Institute for Education Sciences (IES) evaluated the impact of Washington, D.C.'s Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP) after two years of participation in the program. Math scores were a statistically significant 10 percentile points lower for students who used a private school voucher compared with students who applied but did not receive a voucher. The year before, IES had found that one year into the program, math scores were a statistically significant 7.3 percentile points lower for students who used a private school voucher compared with students who applied but did not receive a voucher.

A 2018 study found that in unadjusted models, American students who attended private schools had better academic and social outcomes at age 15, however, these advantages were eliminated after controlling for socio-demographic characteristics. Low-income children or children enrolled in urban schools did not benefit more from private school enrollment.

A 2018 study summarized the impact of Indiana's Choice Program on student achievement. The study found that students who used a voucher to transfer to private schools experienced an average loss of 3-4 percentile points in mathematics. The largest loss occurred during years one and two. Voucher students began to show improvement by their fourth year in a private school, but performed no better than their public school counterparts. The research found that in English language arts, there was no statistically significant difference in achievement.

A 2018 report by the Center for American Progress compared the negative effects of participation in the Washington, D.C. voucher program with other negative factors such as feeling unsafe in school and teacher turnover. The authors found that attending a voucher school had a larger negative effect on math achievement than all other factors they reviewed. This was equivalent to the impact of losing one-third of a school year of learning.

A 2017 report by the non-partisan Economic Policy Institute stated: "In the only area in which there is evidence of small improvements in voucher schools - in high school graduation and college enrollment rates - there is no data to show whether the gains are the result of schools shedding lower-performing students or engaging in positive practices." Regarding student achievement, the report concluded, "In the few cases in which test scores increased, other factors, namely increased public accountability, not private school comparison, seem to be the more likely drivers."

A 2016 study of Louisiana's private school voucher program found that students who performed at about the 50th percentile in math and reading prior to participation in the voucher program dropped approximately 24 percentage points in their first year of private school. These students performed slightly better in their second year but still well below non-voucher students in both math and reading.

A 2016 study of the Ohio private school voucher program conducted by a conservative think tank, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, and funded by the pro-voucher Walton Foundation, found voucher students "have fared worse academically compared to their closely matched peers attending public schools...Such impacts also appear to persist over time, suggesting that the results are not driven simply by the setbacks that typically accompany any change of school."

A 2015 working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research compared outcomes of school voucher lottery winning and losing students in Louisiana's Scholarship Program (LSP) (private school voucher program), finding that "This comparison reveals that LSP participation substantially reduced academic achievement."

A 2011 review by the non-partisan Center on Education Policy concluded: "Since 2000, more evidence has accumulated about the impact of vouchers on student test scores, particularly from longer-term studies of publicly funded voucher programs in Milwaukee, Cleveland and D.C. ...these studies have generally found no clear advantage in academic achievement for students attending private schools with vouchers."

A 2008 Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Working Paper reviewing "empirical evidence on the impact of education vouchers on student achievement," stated that, "The best research to date finds relatively small achievement gains for students offered education vouchers, most of which are not statistically different from zero."

A fact sheet from Public Schools First NC presented information on private school tuition increases following expansion of North Carolina’s “Opportunity Scholarship” voucher program in the 2024-25 school year. Public Schools First NC’s analysis found that private schools increased tuition rates in the first year of universal voucher ability, with many raising rates to match the voucher amounts, and private schools provided preferential admission to families who applied for a voucher or required families to apply for a voucher as part of the school’s admissions process.

A 2024 report by the Keystone Research Center found that Pennsylvania spent $470 million dollars on two tax credit voucher programs in 2023-24. The report estimated that at least 78% of voucher funds went to religious schools, and voucher funds were used to subsidize expensive private schools that serve high proportions of affluent children. The report also noted the two voucher programs lack accountability, highlighting that private schools that receive vouchers are not required to report on students’ academic progress or demographics, and voucher students are not required to take tests to measure academic performance. Also, voucher-granting organizations are permitted to keep up to 10% of the funding they receive for administrative costs, the highest of any state in the country.

A 2024 publication by The Kentucky Center for Economic Policy estimated the impact of diverting public money to private school vouchers in Kentucky, finding that establishing a voucher program similar in size to Florida’s would cost the state $1.19 billion annually. The report also found that funding vouchers would harm already inadequate public school funding. The report noted that the state’s poorest rural areas, which depend most heavily on state dollars for public education and are unlikely to have private schools, would be hit the hardest by the cost of vouchers. The report concluded that establishing a voucher program in Kentucky would upend the state’s constitutional commitment to public education and weaken communities.

A 2024 Learning Policy Institute (LPI) report found that participation in Arizona’s education savings account voucher program grew by 409% between the 2021-2022 and 2022-23 school years following expansion of the program to all students in the state, and over 70% of new voucher recipients never attended public school. The report also noted that the cost of the program for the 2023-24 school year would exceed initial estimates and the state budgeted allocation of $625 million. The report noted the state collects much needed data but does not make it available to the public.

A 2024 report by the North Carolina Justice Center documented how the state’s conventional voucher program grew over the previous decade due to increased funding levels and expansion of eligibility to all students. The report noted that spending on the program grew from $10.8 million in fiscal year 2014-15, to $180.8 million in fiscal year 2022-23, and spending on the program is projected to reach $550.1 million in the 2032-33 fiscal year. The report noted that voucher students overwhelmingly attend religious schools, and private schools that accept vouchers are more likely to close than traditional public schools or other private schools. The report also noted the voucher program lacks financial oversight and quality standards and concluded the program should be eliminated.

A 2024 Ed Working Paper from the Annenberg Institute at Brown University examined whether education savings accounts (ESAs) led private schools to increase tuition by comparing tuition changes in Iowa, which implemented ESAs for the 2023-24 school year, and Nebraska, which was poised to implement an ESA program in the 2024-25 school year. The study found that universal eligibility for kindergarteners led Iowa private school tuition to increase tuition by 21-25%. In grades with partial eligibility, tuition increased by 10-16%, and tuition did not increase for preschool, which was ineligible for ESAs.

The Indiana Department of Education’s 2022-2023 Choice Scholarship Program Annual Report showed that participation in the state’s voucher program grew by 20% between the 2021-2022 and 2022-23 school years, resulting in a 29% increase in cost (from $239 million to $312 million). The report showed an increase in the percentage of voucher students from higher income families in 2022-23. following a change in income eligibility requirements for the program. The report also includes demographic data on voucher students, including by grade level, gender, ethnicity, and geographic area, with white students comprising the majority of voucher users at 62%.

A 2023 policy brief from the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy found that the loss of funding from the state’s public education system due to its education savings account voucher program is expected to be $21.6 million in the 2024-25 school year. It estimates that the program will quintuple in cost with the automatic eligibility expansion to all children in the state, a provision built into the voucher law. The brief also highlights that the program lacks accountability and reporting requirements and recommends that lawmakers halt further expansion, implement reporting and accountability measures, and implement stronger guardrails and regulations.

A 2023 report by Save Our Schools Arizona examined the impacts of Arizona’s universal education savings account program after its first year. The report found, among other things, that the cost of the program was 1400% higher than projected, and that costs for 2023-24 were on track to exceed the budgeted amount by nearly 50%. It also found that vouchers were primarily used by families with students who already attended private schools, and that vouchers were benefiting families that live in wealthier zip codes.

A 2023 presentation by Arizona’s Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) found the per pupil state aid for a voucher student was greater than the per pupil state aid for a district public school student. It also noted that the actual student enrollment and cost of the state’s education savings account voucher program was higher than the budgeted amount.

A 2021 policy brief published by the National Education Policy Center (NEPC)explored the cost of shifting an entire public school system to a large-scale voucher system. The brief found that universal vouchers would increase the total public costs of education by 11-33%, amounting to $66-$203 billion per year.

A 2020 report from the North Carolina Justice Center estimated that the expansion of the state’s voucher program, launched in 2014, would cost over $270 million over the next 10 years. The report also explained how vouchers negatively impact public school district budgets by reducing the availability of state funds for public education and increasing the cost of delivering education through declining school enrollment.

In 2023, Public Funds Public Schools published a research report by Samuel E. Abrams and Steven J. Koutsavlis that examined the growth in voucher programs and spending in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin in the decade following the Great Recession. For comparison, the report provides data for per-pupil expenditures on public education in these seven states and the other forty-three states over the same period. Findings include:

• In each of the seven states, expenditures of public funds on voucher programs increased dramatically from 2008 to 2019, with growth in voucher spending in Georgia reaching 883 percent.
• Florida leads the pack in voucher spending levels, but nearly all the states examined were diverting hundreds of millions of dollars to voucher programs annually by the end of the period studied.
• At the same time funding for vouchers climbed significantly in these seven states, the portion of state GDP allocated to K-12 public education decreased, even though public school enrollment grew over the same period in five of the seven states.

Access one-page excerpts from the report: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

In 2022, Education Law Center and the Florida Policy Institute published a report finding that the diversion of state school aid to vouchers had reached an estimated $1.3 billion in the wake of the 2019 enactment of the Family Empowerment Scholarship voucher program, representing an estimated 10% of state aid for public schools in 2022-23. This diversion of public funds to vouchers directly from school districts is in addition to a potential $1.1 billion in public dollars diverted from the state treasury through vouchers financed by corporate tax credits. In 2023, ELC and FPI released fiscal analyses of the proposals for universal voucher expansion being considered by the Florida Legislature.

A report authored by Education Law Center and the Southern Poverty Law Center, the organizations that collaborate on the Public Funds Public examined public school funding in eight Southern states based on criteria in ELC’s national Making the Grade report, an annual state-by-state analysis of public school funding. The report found that the eight Southern states examined have “woefully insufficient” school funding levels, and most of them fail to equitably distribute additional funds to high-poverty school districts. Concluding that “[s]chool finance in the Southern states is in drastic need of improvement,” the report notes that “a number of challenges threaten to derail attention from the core issue of fair school funding,” including the fact that “[m]any Southern states are facing the expansion of school voucher programs that divert scarce public funds to unaccountable and discriminatory private institutions.”

A 2018 policy paper published by the Grand Canyon Institute estimated the cost of Arizona's private school voucher programs, which supporters claim save taxpayer dollars. The author found instead that the cost of a student in a voucher program is 75% higher than the cost of a public school student. The study also found a slight decline in private school enrollment since Arizona's first voucher program was implemented in 1999. At the same time, "the amount spent on private school subsidies from the General Fund has increased nearly 50-fold from $3 million in 1999-2000 to $141 million in 2015-16."

A 2017 policy memo published by the National Education Policy Center examined the fiscal impacts of the statewide Wisconsin private school voucher program on Wisconsin public school districts. Analysis showed that districts are at risk of losing a significant portion of their state aid as participation in the voucher program increases. The author concluded that Wisconsin demonstrates that statewide voucher programs can pose a significant risk to public school funding levels.

A 2025 report by Public Schools First NC, which examined curriculum taught in North Carolina’s K-12 private schools receiving “Opportunity Scholarship” vouchers during the 2024-25 school year, found that the majority of voucher schools used a curriculum that did not align with the rigorous North Carolina Standard Course of Study curriculum required in public schools . The report found approximately three-quarters of private schools receiving vouchers were religious and used curriculum based on a biblical worldview. The report recommended that the North Carolina Legislature appoint a study commission to examine the curriculum taught at private schools receiving voucher funds.

In 2022, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Independent Fiscal Office issued a statutorily required review of the state's tax credit voucher program, entitled Pennsylvania Educational Tax Credits: An Evaluation of Program Performance. The report found that Pennsylvania’s voucher program has a higher qualifying income level than all other states’ programs and allows more funds to be used for administrative costs. The report noted that key data necessary to thoroughly evaluate the program was unavailable because Pennsylvania law expressly limits the information that can be collected.

A 2021 preliminary investigative report by the League of Women Voters of Florida examined the finances and operations of Step Up for Students, one of two authorized Scholarship Funding Organizations, that administers five Florida school voucher programs. The report found that Step Up lacked oversight and accountability and failed to monitor and evaluate program compliance. The report called for a more in-depth investigation into Step Up’s practices and the organization’s connections to key legislators and corporate donors.

A 2020 survey of 29 states with private school voucher programs by the EdWeek Research Center revealed that “few require private schools to follow standard policies used to ensure transparency and accountability in the nation’s public schools.” For example, fewer than half the states require that private voucher school teachers have a bachelor’s degree, and not even a third publicly report student results on state tests or high school graduation rates. The study also found that only three states require private voucher schools to admit students regardless of their sexual orientation, while only six require that students be admitted regardless of their religion.

A 2018 policy brief published by the National Education Policy Center noted that there has been very little research about these types of private school voucher programs. For this reason, and because studies of conventional vouchers have demonstrated poor outcomes, the authors stated that policymakers should be wary of adopting or expanding these private school voucher programs, and "comprehensive evaluation systems" must be implemented.

A 2017 report from Georgetown University think tank, FutureEd, analyzed declining participation in Washington, D.C.'s Opportunity Scholarship Program, the only federally funded private school voucher program in the U.S. FutureEd noted that the use of vouchers has steadily dropped since 2013, due to design flaws and lack of demand. Eligible families and schools worry about funding that is wholly dependent on congressional will. They are provided no data regarding private schools' quality and, historically, administration of the vouchers has been chaotic. Vouchers are awarded after many private schools have finished their admissions process and distributed financial aid. By contrast, enrollment and test scores in D.C.'s public and charter schools are on the rise.

A 2017 investigation of Florida's private school program by the Orlando Sentinel found that the state's private schools would collect almost $1 billion in school voucher money that year. The investigation also found very little oversight and accountability in these schools, resulting in the hiring of teachers without college degrees, falsification of fire safety and health records, and an absence of consequences for poorly performing schools, among other concerns.

A 2016 report to the State Legislature by Arizona's Auditor General about a performance audit of the Arizona Department of Education's oversight of the state's private school voucher program noted that, "Between August 2015 and January 2016, department staff identified more than $102,000 in misspending, which included parents who spent program monies after enrolling children in public school, parents who did not submit required quarterly expense reports, and parents who purchased un-allowed items." The report included multiple recommendations for improved accountability.

A 2018 policy paper from the National Council on Disability examined private school voucher programs and "how this alteration in the flow of public funds results in critical and often minsunderstood changes in protections for students with disabilities and their families, under not only IDEA, but also federal nondiscrimination laws."

A 2017 report by the Center on Education Policy found that limited research has been conducted on the impact, effectiveness, and quality of state special education voucher programs, which vary considerably across states. The report identifies areas of concern and questions that have not yet been examined by researchers and policymakers.

A 2017 report by the Government Accountability Office found that parents are often not informed that students' special education rights are significantly diminished when they use vouchers to attend private schools. The report concluded that "in school year 2016-17, 83 percent of students enrolled in a [voucher] program designed specifically for students with disabilities were in a program that provided either no information about changes in [Individuals with Disabilities Education Act] rights or provided information that [the U.S. Department of] Education confirmed contained inaccuracies about these changes."

A 2017 report by the National Center for Learning Disabilities explored the implications of vouchers for students with disabilities. The report highlighted the important protections in federal law that students with disabilities lose when they attend private schools using a voucher and the lack of information provided to parents about these rights implications. The report also documented the financial implication for families participating in voucher programs due to the fact that the voucher amount often does not cover the full cost of tuition and fees at a private school.

A 2016 report from the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates found that private schools may accept students with disabilities but expel them for behavioral or other reasons, and private school vouchers for special education students "typically fail to include all students with disabilities."

A 2023 report by Public Schools First North Carolina highlighted examples of discriminatory admissions policies in North Carolina private schools that accept vouchers, including exclusions based on religion, academic performance, disability, LGBTQ+ status, and lifestyle. The report called on North Carolina to stop funding vouchers and fully fund the public schools that do not discriminate based on student characteristics and are accountable to taxpayers.

A 2023 report by Education Voters of Pennsylvania found exclusionary and discriminatory policies and practices in private schools that accept vouchers under the state’s Opportunity Scholarship Tax Credit program. The report identified discrimination based on LGBTQ+ status, religious beliefs, academics, disability, pregnancy or abortion, and whether students are the “right fit” for the school. The report concluded that the state should use public funds to fully fund public schools instead of diverting taxpayer dollars to voucher schools that discriminate against students.

A 2022 working paper from the Annenberg Institute at Brown University used longitudinal student records to examine whether evidence supports claims that private schools participating in Indiana’s voucher program were cream skimming the best students from public schools and “pushing out” low-achieving, more costly, and more challenging students. While the report found little evidence consistent with claims that private schools are cream skimming students, it did find that the lowest achieving voucher students are being “pushed out” of private schools. The report urged policymakers to consider the “potential exacerbated inequalities and challenges” experienced by traditional public schools when low-performing students exit private schools and return to public schools.

A 2020 report by the Children’s Law Clinic at Duke University examined the growth of North Carolina’s Opportunity Scholarship voucher program from 2014 to2020, exploring increases in student participation and in the cost of the program. The report also explored the demographics and characteristics of voucher recipients, the types of schools that participate in the program, and the distribution of vouchers by district. Additionally, the report found that North Carolina has one of the weakest private school oversight systems in the country, with no information publicly available on the academic performance of voucher students.

A 2019 issue brief from the Center for American Progress analyzed the civil rights implications of participation in voucher programs. The authors explained the various rights and protections under federal law that apply to public school students but may not apply to students attending private schools through voucher programs, and document which civil rights protections exist for students participating in different voucher programs across the country.

A 2018 policy brief from the National Education Policy Center found that private school vouchers and other privatization programs open the door for discrimination: "First, federal law defines discrimination differently in public and private spaces. Second, state legislatures have largely neglected issues of discrimination while constructing private school voucher laws. Third, because private schools are free to determine what programs to offer, they can attract some populations while excluding others."

A 2018 working paper for the UCLA Civil Rights Project includes a brief history of private school voucher programs, past legal challenges, legal justifications for the programs, and key policy issues focusing on civil rights concerns. The authors offer a series of recommendations for future policies, including ensuring that state voucher laws have "straightforward anti-discrimination provisions" and comply with federal law to protect and serve special education students and English language learners.

A 2025 article published in the Education Policy Analysis Archives reviewed and analyzed state voucher policies from 1869 to 2024. The authors found little evidence that private school vouchers created markets with valued educational outcomes, including improving student achievement, and in many cases were used as a tool to maintain racial segregation. The report concludes that vouchers have not improved the quality of education, and in many cases, harm children and communities.

A 2025 article analyzing private school participation in Alabama's tax credit voucher program found that private schools serving the highest percentage of white students (94%+) were significantly less likely to participate in the program than less white schools (>86%), even when controlling for other relevant factors. The report also found that Catholic schools were 54% more likely to participate in the program than non-sectarian schools.

The Indiana Department of Education’s 2024-2025 Choice Scholarship Program Annual Report found that 70% of voucher recipients in 2024-25 had never attended an Indiana public school, a three percentage point increase from the prior school year. As in previous years, the majority of voucher students (64%) were white. Other findings included that over 50% of voucher recipients lived in metropolitan areas, and the largest increase in voucher recipients were from households with family incomes between $150,001-$200,000 and $200,001+.

A 2024 Learning Policy Institute (LPI) report found that participation in Arizona’s education savings account voucher program grew by 409% between the 2021-2022 and 2022-23 school years following expansion of the program to all students in the state, and over 70% of new voucher recipients never attended public school. The report also noted that the cost of the program for the 2023-24 school year would exceed initial estimates and the state budgeted allocation of $625 million. The report noted the state collects much needed data but does not make it available to the public.

A 2024 report by the Keystone Research Center found that Pennsylvania spent $470 million dollars on two tax credit voucher programs in 2023-24. The report estimated that at least 78% of voucher funds went to religious schools, and voucher funds were used to subsidize expensive private schools that serve high proportions of affluent children. The report also noted the two voucher programs lack accountability, highlighting that private schools that receive vouchers are not required to report on students’ academic progress or demographics, and voucher students are not required to take tests to measure academic performance. Also, voucher-granting organizations are permitted to keep up to 10% of the funding they receive for administrative costs, the highest of any state in the country.

A 2024 Brookings analysis of Arizona’s universal education savings account (ESAs) voucher program compared ESA participation rates by socioeconomic status. The analysis found that families with higher median incomes obtain a disproportionately higher share of ESA vouchers, and that families in the poorest communities are the least likely to obtain ESA funds. The analysis concluded that Arizona’s ESA program does not address inequities in school access by students’ socioeconomic status. The authors also published a follow up article.

A 2023 report by Save Our Schools Arizona examined the impacts of Arizona’s universal education savings account program after its first year. The report found, among other things, that the cost of the program was 1400% higher than projected, and that costs for 2023-24 were on track to exceed the budgeted amount by nearly 50%. It also found that vouchers were primarily used by families with students who already attended private schools, and that vouchers were benefiting families that live in wealthier zip codes.

Data provided by the Ohio Department of Education showed a significant increase in the percentage of higher income students participating in the state’s EdChoice voucher program from 2022 to 2023. In 2023, 85% of voucher recipients were from higher income households.

The Indiana Department of Education’s 2023-2024 Choice Scholarship Program Annual Report showed that participation in the program grew by 32% between the 2022-23 and 2023-24 school years. Additionally, the report showed that the largest increase in voucher students came from families with household incomes between $150,000-$200,000, and the largest decrease came from families with annual incomes in the $50-0001-$100,000 range. The report also noted that only 33% of students who participated in the voucher program in 2023-24 previously attended public school, and the rate of students exiting the program had increased.

The Indiana Department of Education’s 2022-2023 Choice Scholarship Program Annual Report showed that participation in the state’s voucher program grew by 20% between the 2021-2022 and 2022-23 school years, resulting in a 29% increase in cost (from $239 million to $312 million). The report showed an increase in the percentage of voucher students from higher income families in 2022-23. following a change in income eligibility requirements for the program. The report also includes demographic data on voucher students, including by grade level, gender, ethnicity, and geographic area, with white students comprising the majority of voucher users at 62%.

A 2021 working paper by historian Dr. Nancy MacLean explored how the work of economist and school voucher proponent Milton Friedman aided segregationists in their massive resistance to school integration following the Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Board of Education. Friedman’s ultimate purpose in promoting private school vouchers was “offload[ing] the full cost of schooling onto parents as a part of a larger quest to privatize public services and resources.”

A 2020 case study of the Indiana Choice Scholarship Program found that the program recreates “segregation academies,” which originated in southern states in response to Brown v. Board of Education. An analysis of the program’s enrollment statistics found that it had become “less diverse and more affluent” since its inception and that over 46% of voucher schools met the definition of a segregated school by the 2017-18 school year.

An analysis by the Columbus Dispatch of 2014-15 data from Ohio’s EdChoice and EdChoice expansion voucher programs found that white students were more likely than Black students to use private school vouchers, even though Black students made up a larger proportion of those eligible to receive vouchers, and that enrollment in the EdChoice expansion program “grew even more disproportionately white” than in the original EdChoice voucher program.

A 2018 working paper by the UCLA Civil Rights Project examined trends in private school enrollment over the past two decades, including the racial composition of private school student populations, thereby "providing key data for evaluating the civil rights dimension of private school and voucher policies." The report found significant differences in the racial composition of private schools and public schools. White students were overrepresented in private schools, while Hispanic and African American students were underrepresented. Low-income families were also underrepresented in private schools.

A 2018 working paper by the UCLA Civil Rights Project evaluated the implementation of the District's Opportunity Scholarship Program (private school voucher program) since its inception in 2003. The author found that student enrollment in the program has declined and become whiter; participation in the program has had no statistically significant effect on achievement; and private schools in D.C. are less segregated, though they have a majority of white students. The author found that 70% of participating voucher students were enrolled in heavily segregated schools with 90% or more minority students, and 58% were enrolled in all-minority schools.

A 2017 study by The Century Foundation concluded that, "On balance, voucher programs are more likely to increase school segregation than to promote integration or maintain the status quo." The study's analysis of the Louisiana school voucher program confirmed "patterns noted in demographic studies of voucher users and private school attendance: that black students typically used vouchers to leave public schools where their race was overrepresented, but white students tended to leave public schools where their race was underrepresented."

A 2017 report by the Center for American Progress detailed the "Sordid history of school vouchers," starting with "segregation academies" in the Southern United States during Jim Crow. The report noted that today Southern private schools tend to have the largest overrepresentation of white students in the country, and "the strongest predictor of white private school enrollment is the proportion of black students in the local public schools." The report also described Indiana's private school voucher program as a "case study" for the segregating effects of vouchers in states without a history of racial motivation for program creation, noting that, "Indiana's voucher program increasingly benefits higher-income white students, many of whom are already in private schools, and diverts funding from all other students who remain in the public school system."

A 2017 report by the Century Foundation concluded that private school vouchers pose serious risks by diverting scarce resources, diminishing students' civil rights protections, reducing student achievement and further segregating students. "Perhaps most troubling, private schools are not in the business of promoting and strengthening American democracy and democratic values," the report noted, adding that, "integrated schools underline the democratic message that in America, we are all social equals."

A 2018 policy brief published by the National Education Policy Center examined the effects of universal privatization and school vouchers in Chile with an eye towards how that country's experience could inform debate in the United States. Key findings in Chile included the following: a family's choice is limited because schools choose which students to admit; economic and cultural capital matters, and disadvantaged students end up in low-performing schools; better schools attract better teachers. The brief also noted that "there is plausible evidence that privatization is associated with pervasive discrimination and exclusion among students, low public trust, neglect of civic education, and a tenacious social movement clamoring for a stronger and more inclusive public option." And finally, "It is extremely difficult to reverse privatization."

A 2025 review of EdChoice’s Fiscal Factbook: 2025 Edition claimed that vouchers, including education savings account vouchers (ESAs), save taxpayers money, and that public schools benefit financially when they experience enrollment loss due to voucher programs. The NEPC review found that the authors failed to provide evidence to support their arguments, used inappropriate metrics, and omitted key data from their comparisons, rendering the entire report useless.

A 2025 review challenged the findings of a report published by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty and School Choice Wisconsin, Thousands Served: Students with Disabilities in Wisconsin’s Parental Choice Programs. The original report claimed that the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) undercounts students with disabilities in the state’s voucher programs. However, NEPC found that the report relied on flawed research methods, using survey data from private schools estimating how many of their students would qualify as having disabilities if enrolled in public schools. In contrast, DPI data is based on the legal definition of a student with a disability and relies on the law’s procedural requirements to make a determination.

A 2024 review debunked an EdChoice publication entitled The Reality of Switchers, which argued that “switchers” who leave public schools to use vouchers save public schools and taxpayers money. The NEPC review found that EdChoice broadened the category of “switchers” to include students who were already using voucher-like credits or private scholarships to attend private schools and students entering kindergarten for the first time. In fact, the EdChoice report conceded that most voucher users were not in public school immediately prior to their use of a voucher.

A 2023 review of School Choice Wisconsin’s report, The Cost-Effectiveness of Wisconsin’s Private School Choice Program, which compared the cost and academic performance of voucher students to public school students, found that the report ignored studies regarding the academic effectiveness and fiscal inefficiency of voucher programs and failed to employ rigorous research methods to compare voucher recipients to non-voucher recipients.

A 2023 review analyzed the findings of a Georgia Department of Audits and Accounts’ report examining the fiscal impact of the state’s tax credit voucher program. NEPC found that the report relied on a single study to determine the estimated “switcher rate” of students who left public school to attend private school with a voucher. NEPC also found the report inaccurately estimated the costs of private school tuition and the negative short-term costs to school districts from decreased enrollment. NEPC concluded that there was little evidence to support the report’s key findings.

A 2023 review of EdChoice’s annual report, The 123s of School Choice: What the Research Says About Private School Choice Programs in America, 2023 Edition, found that, like previous editions, the report relied on flawed methods and excluded recent studies documenting the negative impacts of voucher programs. NEPC concluded that the report “serves as a selective bibliography of studies” and should not be used to guide policy and practice.

A 2022 review found that the Mackinac Center’s report, Michigan Student Opportunity Scholarships: Overview and Fiscal Analysis, relied on an “overly narrow body of literature,” overwhelmingly authored by pro-voucher think tanks, to inform “questionable assumptions” about the fiscal impact of the Michigan Student Opportunity Scholarship on the state and its school districts. NEPC concluded that the report is misleading and should not be used to inform policy.

A 2022 review debunked EdChoice’s 2021 report, Fiscal Effects of School Choice: Analyzing the Costs and Savings of Private School Choice Programs in America, which claimed that state and local governments saved “between $12.4 billion and $28.3 billion through FY2018” as a result of “switchers,” defined as students who left public schools to enroll in private schools using a voucher. NEPC concluded that EdChoice’s report “uses speculative methods for estimating the number of switchers across programs and for determining resulting variable cost fluctuations” and should not be used to guide policy decisions.

A 2021 review of the Manhattan Institute’s report from the same year, Accountability and Private-School Choice, concluded that the report’s claim that reduced regulation of private schools receiving public funds benefits students academically is not supported by research. NEPC found that the report relied mainly on advocacy reports and some cherry-picked research, which the authors often misread. NEPC concluded that the report “merely repeats well-worn ideological positions and neither advances what we know about the challenge of regulating public schools nor offers useful information for policy decisions.”

A 2020 review discredited the Commonwealth Foundation’s report, Unleashing Educational Opportunity: The Untapped Potential of Expanded Tax Credit Scholarships, which argued that expanding tax credit voucher programs would lead to economic gains for states due to purported higher student achievement and reduced social costs associated with crime. NEPC’s review found that the report’s assertions are not supported by sufficient evidence and are contradicted by recent studies. In addition, NEPC found that the report misapplied research and made faulty assumptions.

A 2019 review cited research studies and other evidence to debunk the “myths” of vouchers and voucher-like programs identified in the Institute for Justice’s 2017 report, 12 Myths and Realities About Private Educational Choice Programs. NEPC’s review found the report failed to provide new empirical evidence or analysis and instead relied primarily on reports from pro-voucher advocacy groups thereby providing “a textbook case of echo-chamber advocacy” that “offers nothing useful in furthering our understanding of school vouchers.”