K-12 public education funding is one of the most prominent and contentious issues in Georgia state politics and elections. This past spring, the issue came to a head when the legislature narrowly passed Senate Bill 233 (SB 233), which creates promise scholarship accounts — a form of school choice that allows parents to receive public funding that can pay for private education. The school voucher-like program was pushed through with support from conservative groups like the Georgia Center for Opportunity (GAO) and Georgia Faith and Freedom Coalition and opposed by groups like the Georgia Budget and Policy Institute (GBPI) and the Professional Association of Georgia Educators.
Proponents of the bill argue that promise scholarship accounts give parents more options to meet their children’s educational needs and push public schools to perform better due to further competition with private schools. One 2023 study published in the American Economic Journal found that as the Florida private school choice program expanded and matured, educational performance in public schools improved, with the greatest improvements among students in the lowest socioeconomic strata and in schools with stronger competitive pressures. GAO’s Vice President of Public Policy Buzz Brockway adds that “when parents have options and the resources to pick and choose, that puts the pressure on the system to improve and keep their students.”
Do promise scholarships serve low-income students?
SB 233 offers $6,500 per year to K-12 public school students to cover private school tuition, fees, homeschooling costs, textbooks, tutoring services, and other “qualified education expenses.” At first glance, the program appears to serve low-income students, as priority is given to families making under 400% of the federal poverty level, which amounts to about $120,000 a year for a four-person household. Program eligibility is limited to students attending public schools in the lowest 25 percent of performance (based on the College and Career Readiness Index).
Ashley Young, senior education policy analyst at GBPI, believes those eligibility provisions are “a charade to gain political feasibility.” According to the Education Data Initiative, the average cost of tuition for private schools in Georgia is estimated at almost $12,000, so for many schools, the $6,500 voucher will not cover the full tuition. Lower-income families who cannot cover the difference still won’t be able to afford it. Thus, the program will largely just subsidize private schooling for middle and upper-class families that can afford a portion of the tuition but need the extra incentive to make the switch.
Young also says that she expects the eligibility cap to be incrementally raised and subsequently removed in the coming years. She points to the HOPE Scholarship as a potential parallel example; the HOPE Program began in the 1990s limited to low-income families and opened up to all Georgian families after only three years.
GAO’s Vice President of Public Policy Buzz Brockway adds that “when parents have options and the resources to pick and choose, that puts the pressure on the system to improve and keep their students.”
How are public schools impacted?
The primary argument from the opposition is that the program will divert funds from public schools. Brockway emphasizes that the promise scholarships won’t pull money directly from public schools because the program is funded through a separate budgetary allocation designated by the legislature. However, the Quality Basic Education (QBE) formula, which Georgia uses to determine public school funding, is dependent on student enrollment.
The QBE formula calculates the number of full-time equivalent students at each school and provides a per-student dollar amount, weighted by certain student characteristics. The weights include grade level and whether the student is an English language learner, disabled, gifted, enrolled in a career/technical program, or in a small district. Therefore, as students access scholarship accounts and make the switch to private schools, the total amount of funding that public schools receive will decrease, while fixed costs like school buses and air conditioning remain. Meanwhile, the legislature will need to appropriate funding for this program for the first time, potentially drawing from other essential state programs.
Young points to research on negative experiences of minority students at predominantly white private schools… saying they often “struggle with the culture, struggle with feeling othered… because it is so far from their world.”
Should the State fund private schools?
Opponents of the bill also criticize the idea of providing private schools with taxpayer dollars. Many private schools in Georgia have religious affiliations, raising the question of whether this program conflicts with the separation of church and state. Some have discriminatory histories, as they were established during the post-Brown v. Board of Education era as “segregation academies” to provide white students with an educational environment unaffected by new integration laws. Young points to research on negative experiences of minority students at predominantly white private schools and competitive colleges, saying they often “struggle with the culture, struggle with feeling othered… because it is so far from their world.” She stresses that the harm done at such institutions must be acknowledged and addressed before programs like this aim to send low-income and minority students their way.
Another concern is that private schools don’t have to follow the same standards as public schools do. Although the bill requires that a recognized accrediting agency accredit participating private schools, the accreditation requirements vary significantly from the parallel requirements for public schools. For example, private school teachers are not legally required to have state-issued teaching licenses, and for students with special needs, private schools are not obligated to provide Individualized Education Plans. Such schools have significant leeway in setting their curriculum; for example, students might not have to take courses in civics or history. Critics of the program see these discrepancies as damaging for students who make the public-to-private switch.
The “focus on what we’ve got” approach
School choice-opposers also argue that the program is harmful in a state where many public schools are already struggling. Young highlights that teachers are leaving the profession due to low salaries, even as the legislature has continually increased them in recent years (by $2,500 in 2024 and $5,000 in 2023).
Young said, “If we were really concerned about making sure impoverished students had what they need to be successful, lawmakers would absolutely invest in an opportunity weight.”
Last year, GBPI’s superintendent survey found that almost one-third of superintendents in Georgia note educating students in poverty as their greatest challenge. Yet, Georgia is one of only six states that does not include a poverty or “opportunity” weight in their funding formula to provide more equitable funding to lower-income students and schools. Young says, “If we were really concerned about making sure impoverished students had what they need to be successful, lawmakers would absolutely invest in an opportunity weight.”
When this bill was voted on in the Georgia House of Representatives, Republican Representative Vance Smith joined the minority party in opposition. He urged the legislature, “Let’s not come up with some [new] program… Let’s look into the [current] education program and see if we’re doing it right… What are we doing for those children that are left in the classroom?”
Looking Ahead
The next state legislative session will commence in January with newly elected state representatives, many of whom campaigned on this specific issue throughout the election cycle. Lawmakers will have to grapple with appropriating funding for the program in their annual budget bill, which will determine how many promise scholarship accounts will be provided to students for the school year starting in fall 2025. Young says that she expects potential expansions of the program which GBPI will oppose, such as increasing the $6,500 figure or expanding eligibility to higher-income families. For GAO, Brockway indicates the education policy focus will be on improving math performance, increasing teacher pay, and responding to economic shifts from the presidential election.
