NEPC Review - Fiscal Effects of School Choice - The Costs and Savings of Private School Choice Programs in America Through FY 2022

Oct 15, 2026

NEPC review of an EdChoice report assessing the fiscal effects of private school “choice” programs in the United States through FY 2022. The review argues that voucher-related subsidy assumptions, including estimates of student incentives to switch from public to private schools, are invalid. It further contends that the report overlooks cost differences between public and private sectors, mischaracterizes student needs, and applies flawed methodologies that likely understate real program costs. As a result, its recommendations are considered unreliable for policymakers.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages14

Reading Time35 min

AccessFree to download

Summary

I. Introduction

Fiscal diversion from public schools

Additional taxpayer burdens for students already in private schools

Critique of underlying assumptions and conclusions

NEPC Review: Fiscal Effects Of School Choice: The Costs and Savings of Private School Choice Programs in America Through FY 2022 (EdChoice, October 2024) [M-SUR/](M-SUR/Shutterstock.com)[Shutterstock.com](M-SUR/Shutterstock.com) Reviewed by: Mark Weber Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey New Jersey Policy Perspective February 2025 National Education Policy Center School of Education University of Colorado Boulder [nepc.colorado.edu](nepc.colorado.edu) Acknowledgements NEPC Staff Faith Boninger Publications Manager Mark Paige Academic Editor Elaine Duggan Production Design Alex Molnar NEPC Director Kevin Welner NEPC Director Suggested Citation: Weber, M. (2025) . NEPC review: Fiscal effects of school choice: The costs and savings of private school choice programs in America through FY 2022. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. Retrieved [date] from [https://nepc.colorado.edu/review/fiscal-effects](https://nepc.colorado.edu/review/fiscal-effects) Funding: This review was made possible in part by funding from the Great Lakes Center for Educational Research and Practice. GREAT LAKES CENTER For Education Research & Practice This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercialNoDerivatives 4.0 International License. This publication is provided free of cost to NEPC’s readers, who may make non-commercial use of it as long as NEPC and its author(s) are credited as the source. For inquiries about commercial use, please [contact NEPC at](contact NEPC at nepc@colorado.edu)[ nepc@colorado.edu](contact NEPC at nepc@colorado.edu). The National Education Policy Center (NEPC), a university research center housed at the University of Colorado Boulder School of Education, sponsors research, produces policy briefs, and publishes expert third-party reviews of think tank reports. NEPC publications are written in accessible language and are intended for a broad audience that includes academic experts, policymakers, the media, and the general public. Our mission is to provide high-quality information in support of democratic deliberation about education policy. We are guided by the belief that the democratic governance of public education is strengthened when policies are based on sound evidence and support a multiracial society that is inclusive, kind, and just. Visit us at: [http://nepc.colorado.edu](http://nepc.colorado.edu) [http://nepc.colorado.edu/review/fiscal-effects](http://nepc.colorado.edu/review/fiscal-effects) 2 of 14 NEPC Review: Fiscal Effects of School Choice: The Costs and Savings of Private School Choice Programs in America Through FY 2022 (EdChoice, October 2024) Reviewed by: Mark Weber Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey New Jersey Policy Perspective February 2025 Summary The expansion of school “choice”(i.e., voucher) programs, which provide taxpayer-financed subsidies for families enrolling students in private schools, has prompted a debate about their fiscal impact. A recent EdChoice report argues that these subsidies of private school costs save taxpayers money when—as is typically the case—the per-pupil cost of the subsidies is less than the average per-pupil spending of public schools. However, the report’s estimation of the number of students likely incentivized by vouchers to switch from public to private—as opposed to students who use the vouchers to subsidize a private-school education that they would avail themselves of even without the voucher—is wholly invalid. Thereport also fails to apprehend that private and public schools serve different students, with public schools enrolling more students with specific educational needs that drive up costs. In addition, the report’s methodological assumptions are fatally flawed; consequently, it almost certainly underestimates the true costs of “choice” programs. Ultimately, the report’slack of empirical evidence, reliance on poorly formed theories, and slapdash methods

FAQs

What is the main fiscal impact question addressed by the review?

How private school “choice” programs affect public school finances and overall taxpayer costs, including whether they generate savings or create additional burdens.

Why does the review claim the EdChoice estimation is invalid?

It argues the report’s assumptions about how many students are incentivized to switch from public to private are wholly invalid and lead to incorrect conclusions.

What methodological issues does the review highlight?

It states the report relies on unvalidated assumptions and flawed methods, fails to account for differences in the students served by public versus private schools, and likely underestimates the true costs of “choice” programs.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Taylor Morgan