Closing the gap between educational choice and affordability.
All children deserve an education where they can thrive. Yet, despite the countless conversations we have about personalized learning, meeting students where they are, and recognizing individual needs, our education system continues to operate under the assumption that one educational model should work for nearly everyone. For some children, it does. For others, it doesn’t.
As an educator at The Innovation School, a small, independent nonprofit school in North Dakota, I’ve witnessed what happens when students find a learning environment that truly works for them. I’ve also seen the financial sacrifices families make to access those opportunities. It raises an important question: If we recognize that children learn differently, why is access to different educational environments still so dependent on a family’s financial circumstances?
Beginning in 2027, the federal Education Freedom Tax Credit will introduce another pathway for families to access educational opportunities. According to the Internal Revenue Service, the program allows eligible taxpayers to receive a federal income tax credit of up to $1,700 for qualifying donations to Scholarship Granting Organizations. These nonprofit organizations then distribute scholarships to eligible K–12 students for educational expenses, including private school tuition, tutoring, specialized services, and other qualifying learning supports. Unlike an education savings account funded directly by a state, this program encourages private donations through a federal tax incentive.
But there’s an important distinction. Although this is a federal program, individual states must choose whether to participate. As of October 22, 2026, the IRS reported that 30 states had made advance elections for 2027. Those states must also identify qualifying scholarship organizations before donors can claim the credit. That means that a student’s access to scholarships supported by the program will depend, in part, on decisions made at the state level.
And educational freedom already looks very different depending on where a family lives.
According to Ballotpedia’s national school choice research, as of April 2026, 21 states had enacted education savings account programs, 20 had implemented voucher programs, and 25 had enacted tax-credit or tax-scholarship programs. These categories overlap, but they illustrate how differently states approach educational funding. Arizona allows families to use education savings accounts for approved learning expenses, Florida provides multiple scholarship pathways, and Indiana offers tuition assistance through its Choice Scholarship Program. Meanwhile, other states have few publicly supported options for families seeking education outside their assigned public schools.
North Dakota is one example. Our state does not have an ESA or statewide private-school voucher program. During the 2025 legislative session, lawmakers passed House Bill 1540, which would have established an education savings account program, but the legislation was ultimately vetoed. That same year, North Dakota became the 47th state to authorize public charter schools, making it one of the last states in the country to establish this additional public education option.
For families in states like ours, educational alternatives have historically depended heavily on what they could afford independently. North Dakota’s decision to participate in the federal tax credit program represents another potential funding opportunity, particularly for families who have not had access to established educational choice programs.
But having choices and being able to access those choices are two very different things.
Families with financial resources have long had educational options, regardless of where they live. They can afford tuition, hire tutors, relocate to a preferred school district, or supplement their children’s learning with specialized programs. Families without those resources may recognize that their children need something different but have fewer opportunities to act on that knowledge.
At The Innovation School, we embrace inquiry, project-based learning, mixed-age classrooms, and personalized academic growth. Our students have opportunities to investigate meaningful questions, explore their interests, and demonstrate understanding in ways that extend beyond traditional assessments. But providing this educational experience comes with financial realities. Tuition, fundraising, and private support are essential to sustaining our school without traditional public per-pupil funding.
I know our experience isn’t unique. Across the country, microschools, independent schools, homeschooling cooperatives, and other innovative educational models are working to offer families something different. Many operate with limited resources while trying to keep their programs affordable. Their challenge isn’t always a lack of demand or a lack of innovative ideas. Sometimes, it’s the financial barrier between the families who would benefit and the education those organizations can provide.
The Education Freedom Tax Credit won’t eliminate those barriers entirely. It isn’t a direct payment to families, nor does it guarantee that every eligible student will receive a scholarship. Its impact will depend on donations, eligibility requirements, participating scholarship organizations, and how effectively families can access available funding. There are also legitimate questions about how states will implement the program, whether scholarships will reach families with the greatest financial needs, and how access will vary between rural and urban communities.
These questions deserve attention because expanding educational choice and ensuring equitable access are not automatically the same thing.
It’s also important that this conversation doesn’t become another argument about public education versus private education. I’ve worked alongside exceptional educators in traditional schools, and I know meaningful learning happens in many different environments. Public schools, charter schools, independent schools, and homeschooling families can all play important roles in meeting students’ needs. Discussions about expanded funding should also consider accountability, student outcomes, and the financial implications for existing public schools.
No single model is going to work for every child, and it shouldn’t have to.
What makes the Education Freedom Tax Credit worth watching isn’t simply the tax incentive itself. It’s the potential to create additional pathways for communities to invest in students and for families to explore educational opportunities that may otherwise remain financially out of reach.
For states with established scholarship and education savings programs, it could complement existing resources. For states with fewer options, it could represent a new source of support. And for small educational organizations, it could help connect innovative learning environments with more of the families seeking them.
Of course, the success of any educational funding program should ultimately be measured by more than participation numbers or dollars distributed. We should be asking whether students are gaining access to opportunities they previously lacked, whether families can realistically navigate the system, and whether those opportunities are improving learning experiences.
We regularly encourage students to think creatively, explore different approaches, and recognize that there is more than one path to success. Yet our educational systems have often been slower to embrace those same principles.
The Education Freedom Tax Credit gives us another opportunity to consider what educational freedom should actually mean. Because educational freedom isn’t simply about having different options on paper. It’s about ensuring that families have a realistic opportunity to access an education that meets their children’s needs. And that opportunity shouldn’t be determined by a family’s income or the state they happen to call home.
