Education freedom policies like Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) continue to gain traction across the country. The flexibility they offer allows families to customize learning rather than conform to a one-size-fits-all system.
Unlike traditional public education systems, ESA programs do not prescribe a set curriculum or instructional method. Families are free to continue educating their children in the way that best meets their needs — whether that is through classical education, unschooling, faith-based instruction, or another approach.
While ESA programs include accountability measures, these are focused on ensuring funds are used for legitimate educational expenses, not on controlling how children are taught.
Take the proposal in Minnesota H.F. 19, which would establish an ESA program in the state worth roughly $7,000 per participant — less than half of the average per-pupil funding for public schools. Homeschool students, like those in other nonpublic learning environments, would be eligible to participate if they meet income requirements. Participating students would not be reclassified as public school students simply for accepting ESA funds. This is one safeguard against regulatory creep.
The bill includes additional guardrails to prevent government overreach. It specifies that an eligible nonpublic school “is autonomous and not an agent of the state or federal government,” and goes on to state:
the creation of the ESA program does not expand the regulatory authority of the state, the commissioner, the department, any other government agency or officers, or any school district to impose any additional regulation of nonpublic schools or educational service providers…
and upon being recognized by the commissioner, an eligible school shall have the freedom to provide for the educational needs of students and be able to offer diverse learning opportunities. Upon such recognition, no additional mandates to participate in the ESA may be imposed on an eligible school that would require a change to the school’s admission criteria, employment practices, pedagogy, or curriculum.
While homeschool enrollment has reached an all-time high, it still represents less than 4 percent of Minnesota’s total K-12 population. ESAs would expand what is possible within the homeschooling framework without changing how families educate, making it more accessible to a wider range of families. These funds could be used for tutoring, learning co-operatives, and other curriculum resources.
Minnesota Total Homeschool Counts, 1999-2025
*NOTE: No data available for 2009-2010
Research also suggests programs like ESAs don’t lead to increased homeschool regulation. A national 2024 study by Johns Hopkins School of Education found that states with school choice programs have not increased homeschool regulations. And, overall, homeschool regulation has decreased over time.
It is also important to remember that every school choice program is voluntary. Families who are concerned about government involvement can simply continue homeschooling as they have been. ESAs won’t be the right fit for everyone. But families who want to homeschool and currently can’t (perhaps they aren’t able to drop an income) shouldn’t be prevented from making the decision to participate if they want to.
And regardless of ESAs, the potential for increased government regulation already exists. There is nothing stopping a state’s government from passing legislation that increases mandates and regulations on nonpublic education, whether a choice program is in place or not.
At their core, ESAs and homeschooling rest on the same idea: Parents should be trusted to make the best decisions for their children’s education. When designed well, ESA programs don’t undermine that principle; they reinforce it.
