Alabama ESA Program

# The Alabama Experiment: An Analysis of the CHOOSE Act and the Launch of Universal School Choice

Introduction: Alabama Joins the ESA Movement

In 2024, the state of Alabama enacted one of the most significant education policy reforms in its recent history, positioning itself at the forefront of a profound and rapidly accelerating national trend. With the passage of the Creating Hope and Opportunity for Our Students' Education (CHOOSE) Act, Alabama became the 14th state to establish an Education Savings Account (ESA) program, joining a wave of states moving toward universal or near-universal school choice.1 This legislative action is not an isolated event but rather a reflection of a broader policy transformation sweeping the American K-12 landscape, where the ESA has emerged as the predominant vehicle for expanding parental options in education.2

The CHOOSE Act establishes a state-funded ESA, legally structured as a refundable income tax credit, which will provide funds for families to pay for a wide range of approved educational expenses, including private school tuition, homeschooling costs, tutoring, and therapies.3 The program is designed to launch for the 2025-2026 academic year and will phase into universal eligibility for all K-12 students over a three-year period, a common implementation model for states undertaking such large-scale reforms.4

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the CHOOSE Act, examining its architectural design, financial engine, and the results of its inaugural application and enrollment period. The analysis will argue that the CHOOSE Act's first year reveals a program defined by three critical characteristics. First, it experienced unexpectedly high initial demand, driven primarily by existing private school and homeschool populations, which shapes its immediate fiscal impact as a subsidy for current non-public school families rather than an exit ramp from the public school system. Second, its unique administrative and funding structure—overseen by the Department of Revenue and structured as a tax credit—carries both strategic legal advantages and potential long-term oversight challenges. Finally, the program's initial provider landscape is heavily concentrated in urban and suburban centers, creating significant geographic disparities that raise fundamental questions about equitable access for rural families. These initial conditions frame the central policy debates that will confront Alabama policymakers as the program scales toward its goal of universal entitlement.

The following table provides a high-level summary of the program's core features, serving as a foundational reference for the detailed analysis that follows.

Part I: The Architectural Blueprint of the CHOOSE Act

The design of a new statewide education program is a complex undertaking involving careful legislative drafting, strategic administrative choices, and a clear implementation timeline. The architecture of Alabama's CHOOSE Act reveals a program built with lessons from other states in mind, particularly in its legal structure, yet with unique features that will shape its evolution. This section deconstructs the program's legislative framework, analyzes its administrative design, and details the phased rollout that will govern access for Alabama families over its first three years.

Legislative Framework (HB129)

The CHOOSE Act was officially signed into law on March 7, 2024, as Act 2024-21, following its passage as House Bill 129\.3 The legislation establishes the legal foundation for the program, defining the key terms that govern its operation. An "Eligible Student" is defined broadly as a child residing in Alabama between the ages of five and 19 (or up to 21 if qualifying for services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) who has not graduated high school.4 A "Participating School" must be an accredited public or private K-12 school approved by the state, while the broader category of "Education Service Provider" (ESP) includes schools, organizations, vendors, or individuals approved to provide educational goods and services.13 "Qualifying Educational Expenses" are explicitly enumerated and include a wide range of items such as tuition and fees, textbooks, curriculum, private tutoring, educational therapies, and certain technological aids.4

The Administrative Design: The Department of Revenue as Overseer

In a significant and unconventional departure from the national norm, Alabama has tasked the Alabama Department of Revenue (ALDOR) with the full administration and oversight of the CHOOSE Act.2 Most states, including early adopters like Arizona and large-scale programs like Florida's, place their ESA programs under the purview of their respective Departments of Education.2 This choice in Alabama is not arbitrary; it is a direct consequence of the program's legal structure as a "refundable income tax credit".4

This design appears to be a strategic legal maneuver intended to bolster the program's constitutional resilience. The nation's first ESA, Arizona's Empowerment Scholarship Account, was specifically engineered to circumvent state constitutional prohibitions on the direct payment of public funds to religious institutions by instead allocating funds directly to parents, who then choose where to spend them.2 By structuring the CHOOSE Act as a tax credit administered by the state's revenue agency, Alabama lawmakers have created a similar legal firewall, framing the program as a matter of tax policy and parental finance rather than a direct appropriation to non-public schools.

However, this strategic choice creates a fundamental administrative trade-off. ALDOR's core institutional competency lies in tax administration, financial compliance, and fraud prevention—all critical functions for a program of this scale. Yet, the agency lacks the inherent expertise in educational matters that resides within a department of education. This creates a potential structural weakness in the state's ability to oversee areas such as academic quality, the pedagogical effectiveness of participating providers, and the measurement of student outcomes. While ALDOR is well-equipped to ensure funds are spent on approved items, its capacity to evaluate whether those expenditures are leading to quality educational experiences is an open and critical question. This administrative design choice will be a central factor to monitor as the program matures.

The Phased Path to Universal Choice

The CHOOSE Act is designed to become a universal program, but it implements this goal through a deliberate, three-year phased rollout. This approach allows the state to manage initial demand, control budgetary growth, and build administrative capacity over time. The eligibility criteria and priority system are distinct for each phase.

For the first two academic years, 2025-2026 and 2026-2027, the program is means-tested. Eligibility is restricted to families with an Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) that does not exceed 300% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL).4 For the 2024 tax year, this threshold was approximately $93,600 for a family of four, a level that makes an estimated 75% of all Alabama families eligible to apply from the program's inception.8

Beginning with the 2027-2028 academic year, the income cap is eliminated, and the program becomes universally available to any eligible K-12 student in Alabama, subject to legislative appropriations.4

Within each phase, the law establishes a multi-tiered priority system for awarding ESAs. The first 500 accounts each year are reserved for students with special needs.1 After that, priority is given to students who were previously awarded an ESA and their siblings, followed by dependents of active-duty service members assigned to a priority ("D" or "F" rated) school. Any remaining awards are then distributed to new applicants based on their family's income, with the lowest-income families being awarded first.3 This structure ensures that the most vulnerable populations and existing participants are served first before expanding access to others.

Part II: The Financial Engine: Funding, Awards, and Administration

The viability and scale of any ESA program are dictated by its financial architecture. The CHOOSE Act employs a specific funding mechanism, a differentiated award structure, and a third-party administration platform that collectively define its economic impact on families and the state. The program's financial story in its first year has been one of dramatic, demand-driven expansion, forcing a rapid legislative response to scale its budget far beyond initial projections.

Funding Mechanism: The Refundable Tax Credit

The CHOOSE Act is funded through annual legislative appropriations to a dedicated "CHOOSE Act Fund" established in the state treasury.4 The source for these appropriations is Alabama's Education Trust Fund (ETF), the state's primary funding vehicle for public K-12 schools, which is itself financed by state income and sales tax revenues.7 From the CHOOSE Act Fund, ALDOR distributes the awards to families in the form of a refundable income tax credit.3 This "refundable" designation is critical; it means that a family can receive the full value of the credit even if it exceeds their total state income tax liability. This structure ensures that low-income families with little or no tax burden can still access the full benefit of the program, a key feature for equity.7

Award Structure: Differentiated Support

The program utilizes a two-tiered award system that provides different levels of financial support based on the student's educational setting. This design acknowledges the different cost structures associated with private schooling versus homeschooling.

• Participating School Students: Families of students enrolling in an approved private school or a participating out-of-district public school are eligible for an ESA of up to $7,000 per year.3
• Homeschool Students: Families choosing to homeschool their children are eligible for an ESA of up to $2,000 per student per year. However, the total award for homeschool students is capped at $4,000 per family, regardless of the number of children being homeschooled.3

Budgetary Evolution: From Projection to Reality

The story of the CHOOSE Act's budget in its inaugural year is a clear case of legislative planning confronting overwhelming public demand. The original enabling legislation mandated a minimum annual appropriation of $100 million beginning in fiscal year 2026\.4 This figure was based on the state's initial estimate that the program would attract approximately 15,000 to 16,000 students in its first year.8

However, when the application window closed in April 2025, the state had received applications for nearly 37,000 students—more than double the initial projection.8 This "demand shock" created an immediate need for a significant budget increase to avoid turning away tens of thousands of eligible families. The Alabama Legislature responded swiftly during its 2025 session by adding $80 million to the FY2026 budget, bringing the total funding commitment for the program's first year to $180 million.8

To ensure the program's stability and provide certainty for families and schools, lawmakers went further, establishing a total financial commitment of $530 million over the program's first three years. This includes $180 million for the 2025-26 school year, $200 million for 2026-27, and a baseline of $150 million for 2027-28.9 This proactive, multi-year funding commitment represents a significant investment and signals a strong legislative intent to see the program through its transition to universal eligibility.

Financial Administration: The Role of ClassWallet

To manage the complex logistics of distributing funds to tens of thousands of families and processing payments to hundreds of providers, ALDOR has contracted with ClassWallet, a prominent third-party financial services vendor used by ESA programs in several other states.3 This partnership is central to the program's operational integrity.

Parents of participating students do not receive cash or a check. Instead, ALDOR deposits the ESA funds into a secure, individual digital wallet for each student on the ClassWallet platform.15 From this digital wallet, parents can directly pay approved Education Service Providers (ESPs) for tuition or purchase approved curriculum and materials through an integrated online marketplace.19 This system provides a clear audit trail for every transaction. The program explicitly prohibits direct reimbursements to families for out-of-pocket expenses, ensuring that all funds are spent through the monitored platform.19 Any unused funds remaining in a student's account at the end of the academic year do not roll over; they are returned to the state's CHOOSE Act Fund.1

Part III: Inaugural Enrollment: A Profile of the First Cohort

The initial enrollment data from an ESA program's launch year provides the first empirical glimpse into its real-world function. The numbers reveal who is most eager to use the program, where they are coming from, and how their choices will shape the policy's immediate fiscal and systemic impacts. For Alabama's CHOOSE Act, the inaugural 2025-2026 cohort is defined by a massive wave of applicants from existing private and homeschool settings, resulting in a low initial rate of students switching from public schools.

From Application to Activation

The enrollment process for the first year can be understood as a funnel, starting with a large pool of initial applicants that narrows as eligibility is verified and families finalize their enrollment decisions.

• Applicants: By the April 7, 2025 deadline, ALDOR had received 22,167 family applications representing a total of 36,873 students.25
• Awards Issued: After processing these applications for eligibility under the 300% FPL income cap and other criteria, ALDOR had issued 23,576 awards as of mid-June 2025\.25
• Activated Accounts: An award is not finalized until a family provides proof of enrollment with an approved ESP. As of September 1, 2025, a total of 18,483 ESAs had been "activated," representing 84% of the students who had been deemed eligible.29 This final number represents the cohort of students actively using the program in its first year.

The "Switcher" Analysis: A Low Initial Rate

The single most critical metric for understanding an ESA program's function is the "switcher rate"—the percentage of participants who were previously enrolled in a public school. This metric determines whether the program is primarily functioning as an "exit ramp" from the public system or as a "subsidy" for families already in private educational settings. The initial data from the CHOOSE Act places it squarely in the subsidy category for its first year.

An analysis of the prior-year enrollment of the nearly 37,000 initial applicants reveals a clear pattern. Only 10,287 applicants, or 28%, were enrolled in a public or charter school in the preceding year. The vast majority—a combined 24,506 students, or 66%—were already enrolled in private schools (15,436) or were being homeschooled (9,070).25 While final data on the activated accounts shows a slightly higher proportion of public school switchers among those who ultimately enrolled, the overall trend remains clear: the program's first-year demand was overwhelmingly driven by families seeking state support for educational choices they were already making and funding themselves.25

This low initial switcher rate has profound implications. When a program primarily serves as an exit ramp, it can generate cost savings for the state, as the per-student ESA award is often less than the total per-pupil cost in the public system. Conversely, when a program primarily functions as a subsidy, it represents an almost entirely new cost to the state, as it begins funding tens of thousands of students it was not previously responsible for. Alabama's experience aligns with the typical launch phase of many universal choice programs, which often see an initial surge of adoption from the pre-existing non-public school market.

This stands in stark contrast to the trajectory of a mature program like Arizona's Empowerment Scholarship Account. After more than a decade of operation and expansion, Arizona's program now reports a switcher rate of 57% for new universal participants, fundamentally altering its fiscal and political narrative from that of a subsidy to that of an exit ramp.2 The central policy question for Alabama moving forward is whether its switcher rate will follow a similar upward trajectory as the program becomes more established and moves to universal eligibility, or if it will remain low. The answer to this question will determine the program's long-term fiscal sustainability and its ultimate impact on public school enrollment.

Participant Demographics: An Incomplete Picture

The CHOOSE Act's architecture provides a partial but incomplete demographic profile of its first cohort.

• Income: By legislative design, the entire 2025-2026 cohort is composed of families with household incomes at or below 300% of the FPL. The priority system, which awards funds to the lowest-income applicants first, further ensures that the program is initially targeted toward lower- and middle-income households.15 This provides a clear, albeit temporary, picture of the participants' socioeconomic status.
• Geography: While applications were received from every county in the state, demonstrating statewide interest, the highest concentrations of applicants came from Alabama's four largest metropolitan counties: Mobile (5,056 applicants), Jefferson (4,183), Montgomery (3,849), and Madison (2,395).26 This geographic clustering of demand, when viewed alongside the provider map in Part V, suggests that practical access to the program is heavily skewed toward urban and suburban families.
• Data Gap: A critical omission in the available data is any information regarding the racial or ethnic composition of CHOOSE Act applicants or recipients. Without this data, a comprehensive analysis of the program's equity and its impact on diverse student populations is impossible. This represents a significant data vacuum that hinders a full evaluation of the policy.

Part IV: The Emerging Fiscal Impact Debate

The financial implications of a new, large-scale ESA program are invariably a subject of intense debate. In Alabama, the CHOOSE Act's higher-than-expected demand and its low initial switcher rate have laid the groundwork for a fiscal discussion centered on the program's cost to the state's Education Trust Fund. While a full net fiscal impact analysis requires several years of data, the initial numbers allow for a clear articulation of the two competing models that will define this debate: one that views the program as a new and significant cost to the state, and another that sees the potential for long-term savings.

Calculating the Gross Cost

The top-line, or gross, cost of the program is the most straightforward component of the fiscal analysis. The original fiscal note for HB129 projected a minimum cost of $100 million annually to the Education Trust Fund.22 Based on the awards issued as of May 2025, the total cost for the inaugural 2025-2026 school year is projected to be approximately $125 million.9 In response to the high demand, the legislature has committed a total of $180 million in available funds for this first year to ensure all eligible applicants can be served.8 This gross cost is the undisputed starting point for any further analysis.

The Deficit-Driver Argument (The "Subsidy" Model)

The primary critique of the CHOOSE Act's fiscal impact, particularly in its early years, is that it functions as a significant new drain on the state's resources. This perspective, often advanced by public school advocates and groups like Alabama Arise, is rooted directly in the program's low initial switcher rate.7

The core of the argument is that for every student who receives an ESA but was already enrolled in a private or homeschool setting, the state is incurring a new cost without any corresponding savings from the public school system. In the first year, with approximately two-thirds of applicants coming from non-public school backgrounds, the vast majority of the program's projected $125 million in expenditures represents a direct diversion of funds from the Education Trust Fund to subsidize the educational choices of families the state was not previously funding.7 This model posits that these funds could have otherwise been used for public school priorities, such as increasing teacher salaries or benefits, which were not included in the most recent budget.31 This perspective views the program, in its current form, as a direct net cost to the state, with the potential to grow into a multi-hundred-million-dollar annual expenditure that could strain the ETF.7

The Potential for Future Savings (The "Exit Ramp" Model)

The counter-argument, advanced by school choice proponents, acknowledges the high initial subsidy cost but frames it as a temporary and predictable feature of a new program's launch. This model argues that as the CHOOSE Act matures and becomes a more established option for families, the rate of students switching from public schools will increase, which will, in turn, generate net savings for the state.

This perspective is based on a simple cost comparison. The maximum ESA award of $7,000 is significantly less than the average per-pupil expenditure in Alabama's public schools, which is over $9,000.31 Therefore, every future student who switches from a public school to a private school using an ESA represents a net savings to the Education Trust Fund. This model draws parallels to other states where similar programs have been analyzed. For example, a report on Arizona's ESA program argues that it is a more economical choice for taxpayers and has generated savings 36, while a fiscal analysis of Alabama's previous, more limited Alabama Accountability Act also concluded that it produced a net fiscal benefit for the state.37 From this viewpoint, the initial subsidy costs are a short-term investment that will be offset by long-term savings as the program's user base shifts from existing private school families to former public school students. The long-term fiscal impact, therefore, hinges entirely on the future trajectory of the switcher rate.

Part V: The Landscape of Choice: Provider Availability and Geographic Equity

A core premise of any school choice program is the existence of a robust and accessible market of alternative educational providers. While the CHOOSE Act makes every K-12 student in Alabama eligible for an ESA, the practical ability of a family to use that account is entirely dependent on the availability of participating schools and services in their local area. An analysis of the initial provider network reveals a significant geographic imbalance, with a wealth of options in urban and suburban centers and a scarcity of choices in many of the state's rural counties.

Mapping the Provider Network

For its inaugural year, the CHOOSE Act has attracted a sizable network of providers. As of late 2025, over 245 private schools had been approved by ALDOR to accept ESA funds, along with dozens of other ESPs offering services like tutoring, curriculum, and educational therapies.15 This demonstrates a strong initial interest from the private education sector in participating in the program.

Identifying "Choice Deserts"

Despite the large number of providers statewide, their geographic distribution is highly uneven. A mapping of participating private schools shows that they are heavily concentrated in and around Alabama's four largest metropolitan areas: Birmingham, Montgomery, Mobile, and Huntsville.41 Additional clusters of schools are found in smaller urban centers like Tuscaloosa, Dothan, and the Shoals region.42 For families living in these areas, the program offers a genuine marketplace of diverse educational options within a reasonable commuting distance.

However, outside of these population centers, the landscape changes dramatically. A striking 14 counties in Alabama, primarily located along the state's rural eastern and western borders, have no participating private schools at all. Another 19 counties have only a single participating school.42 This creates vast "choice deserts" where the private school option enabled by the CHOOSE Act is, for all practical purposes, non-existent. For a family in one of these counties, utilizing a $7,000 ESA for private school tuition could require driving an hour or more each way daily, a logistical and financial barrier that is insurmountable for most working families.42

This geographic disparity leads to a significant implication: while the CHOOSE Act is a statewide law, in its current form, it functions as a de facto urban and suburban program. The practical benefits of the private school choice component are disproportionately available to families in metropolitan areas where a critical mass of providers already exists. This raises a fundamental equity concern, as it suggests the program may inadvertently widen the gap in educational opportunities between urban/suburban and rural communities in Alabama. While rural families can still use the smaller $2,000 ESA for homeschooling, the primary $7,000 benefit is largely inaccessible.

Public School Participation

The CHOOSE Act's legislation allows for public school districts to become participating providers and accept out-of-district students using ESAs. However, initial participation from this sector has been extremely limited. Only two of the state's public school systems—Dothan City Schools and Mobile County Public Schools—have signed up to participate.41 Furthermore, early data from September 2025 indicated that not a single student had successfully used an ESA to transfer from one public school district to another, highlighting the significant logistical and administrative hurdles to implementing this public-to-public choice component of the law.29

Part VI: Oversight, Accountability, and Data Transparency

The long-term success and public trust in any large-scale government program, especially one involving the education of children and the expenditure of over one hundred million taxpayer dollars, depend on a robust framework for oversight and accountability. While the CHOOSE Act has several foundational accountability mechanisms in place, a comparative analysis reveals critical gaps in its current structure regarding student academic testing, rigorous financial auditing, and comprehensive public reporting—areas where other mature ESA programs have more developed requirements.

Established Accountability Mechanisms

Alabama's program is built with several important oversight features.

• Financial Controls: The exclusive use of the ClassWallet platform provides a transparent and auditable trail for all expenditures. It prevents the misuse of funds that could occur in a cash-based or reimbursement system by ensuring payments are made directly from the state-managed account to state-approved providers for approved expenses.15 ALDOR has also established a formal channel for reporting suspected fraud or misuse of funds.3
• Provider Eligibility: The program requires a baseline level of quality for participating schools, which must be accredited by a recognized agency or be actively in the process of obtaining accreditation.14 All other ESPs must also be vetted and approved by ALDOR before they can receive payments.6

Critical Gaps in the Oversight Framework

Despite these foundational elements, the CHOOSE Act's current framework lacks the more stringent accountability mandates seen in other states, creating potential blind spots for policymakers and the public.

• Student Academic Testing: The list of allowable expenses includes fees for standardized and nationally recognized assessments, such as college admissions tests.15 However, the available research on the CHOOSE Act does not indicate a statutory mandate requiring all or a representative sample of ESA students to take a specific state or nationally norm-referenced test. Furthermore, there is no requirement for the aggregate results of any such testing to be publicly reported. This is a significant departure from a state like Tennessee, whose Department of Education releases an annual report detailing the academic performance of its ESA pilot program students on the state's TCAP assessment, allowing for direct comparisons to their public school peers.2 Without such a requirement, it will be impossible for Alabama to empirically evaluate the academic impact of the CHOOSE Act on its participants.
• Financial Auditing: While ClassWallet provides for the review of individual transactions, the law does not appear to mandate a more rigorous, systemic approach to financial oversight, such as regular, risk-based audits of a percentage of parent accounts or participating schools.15 This contrasts with the intense debate in Arizona, where the scale of the state's ESA program has led to calls for and the implementation of more sophisticated auditing protocols to detect and prevent misspending on a larger scale.2
• Public Reporting: The enabling legislation requires ALDOR to make aggregate information regarding the number and amount of tax credits claimed available on its website.4 However, this falls short of the comprehensive reporting mandated in other states. Arizona's law, for example, requires the Department of Education to produce detailed quarterly reports for the legislature that include disaggregated data on student enrollment by eligibility category, prior public school attendance (the switcher rate), grade level, and disability type.2 This level of mandated transparency provides policymakers with the granular data needed to conduct ongoing, in-depth analysis of program trends and impacts. Alabama's current reporting requirements do not provide for this level of detail.

Conclusion: Key Findings and Forward-Looking Analysis for Alabama

The launch of Alabama's CHOOSE Act represents a landmark moment in the state's education policy history, aligning it with a powerful national movement toward universal school choice. The program's design and its inaugural year of implementation provide a rich case study with critical lessons for Alabama policymakers as they navigate the path to full universal eligibility. The analysis reveals a program that has successfully generated high demand but now faces significant challenges related to its fiscal model, geographic equity, and long-term accountability.

Synthesis of Primary Findings

This report's analysis yields several key conclusions about the CHOOSE Act in its initial phase. First, the program's launch was met with overwhelming demand that far exceeded state projections, but this demand was driven primarily by families already utilizing private and home education. This has established the program's initial function as a large-scale subsidy, representing a significant new cost to the state's Education Trust Fund. The central question for its fiscal future is whether the "switcher rate" of students leaving public schools will rise over time to generate offsetting savings.

Second, the program's geographic landscape is highly uneven. The concentration of participating private schools in urban and suburban centers has created "choice deserts" in numerous rural counties, raising fundamental questions about equitable access to the program's primary benefits. Third, the decision to house the program within the Department of Revenue is a shrewd legal strategy but creates a potential deficit in educational oversight. Finally, when compared to more mature ESA programs in other states, Alabama's current statutory framework lacks robust mandates for academic testing, systemic financial auditing, and comprehensive public reporting, creating blind spots that could hinder effective long-term evaluation and management.

Actionable Recommendations for Alabama Policymakers

Based on these findings, the following actionable recommendations are offered to strengthen the CHOOSE Act, enhance its transparency, and ensure its long-term viability as it scales toward universal implementation.

1. Mandate Comprehensive Data Reporting: The legislature should amend the CHOOSE Act to require the Alabama Department of Revenue, in coordination with the Department of Education, to collect and publicly report anonymized, disaggregated data on an annual basis. This report should include, at a minimum: participant demographics (including income bracket and race/ethnicity), prior school enrollment status (the "switcher rate"), and academic outcomes, ideally through the administration of a nationally norm-referenced test to a representative sample of ESA participants. This is the only way to provide a factual basis for evaluating the program's equity and effectiveness.

2. Scale Oversight with Enrollment: To avoid the "oversight deficit" that has challenged larger programs like Arizona's, administrative funding for ALDOR's program integrity unit should be explicitly tied to enrollment or budget size within the law. This would ensure that the state's capacity to audit accounts, review expenses, and prevent fraud grows in lockstep with the program itself, rather than lagging years behind.

3. Address "Choice Deserts": The state should commission a formal study to identify the specific barriers to provider entry in the 14+ rural counties that currently lack participating schools. Based on these findings, policymakers could explore targeted incentives, such as grants for new school creation, support for the expansion of high-quality virtual education providers, or streamlined approval processes for innovative educational models in underserved areas.

4. Refine Fiscal Modeling and Budgeting: As the program moves toward universal eligibility in 2027, the state must develop more sophisticated predictive models for projecting future demand and switcher rates. Relying on static, first-year data will lead to the kind of reactive budgeting seen in 2025\. Proactive, dynamic modeling will allow for more stable and predictable appropriations from the Education Trust Fund.

The Alabama CHOOSE Act is now a reality, and its initial rollout provides a valuable real-world laboratory for education policy. Its low initial switcher rate and the resulting rapid budget escalation offer a crucial lesson for other states about the necessity of accurately forecasting and funding the "subsidy" cost in the early years of a universal program. The program's unique administrative structure and its current gaps in accountability will be critical areas to monitor, offering a powerful case study on the long-term importance of building robust oversight and data transparency infrastructure from the very outset of a major policy reform.

#### Works cited

1. CHOOSE Act Information \- AISA, accessed October 28, 2025, https://aisaonline.org/choose-act-information/

2. Building State ESA Tracker.pdf

3. Creating Hope and Opportunity for Our Students' Education Act of 2024 – The CHOOSE Act \- Alabama Department of Revenue, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.revenue.alabama.gov/tax-policy/the-choose-act/

4. Alabama Enacts CHOOSE Act Income Tax Credit Program for Qualifying Educational Expenses \- Thomson Reuters, accessed October 28, 2025, https://tax.thomsonreuters.com/news/alabama-enacts-choose-act-income-tax-credit-program-for-qualifying-educational-expenses/

5. Bill Text: AL HB129 | 2024 | Regular Session | Enrolled | LegiScan, accessed October 28, 2025, https://legiscan.com/AL/text/HB129/id/2952992

6. CHOOSE Act Alabama, accessed October 28, 2025, https://chooseact.alabama.gov/

7. CHOOSE Act will further hurt Alabama's public schools, accessed October 28, 2025, https://alarise.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/CHOOSE-Act-will-further-hurt-Alabamas-public-schools.pdf

8. Alabama House committee approves record $12.1B education package, adds $80M for school choice, accessed October 28, 2025, https://aldailynews.com/alabama-house-committee-approves-record-12-1b-education-package-adds-80m-for-school-choice/

9. Alabama's CHOOSE Act funding grows to $530 million commitment for 3 years, accessed October 28, 2025, https://aldailynews.com/alabamas-choose-act-funding-grows-to-530-million-commitment-for-3-years/

10. yes. every kid. applauds Alabama for nearly doubling CHOOSE Act funding, accessed October 28, 2025, https://yeseverykid.com/press/yes-every-kid-applauds-alabama-for-nearly-doubling-choose-act-funding/

11. HB129 ENGROSSED \- Alabama Legislature, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.legislature.state.al.us/pdf/SearchableInstruments/2024RS/HB129-eng.pdf

12. AL HB129 \- BillTrack50, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.billtrack50.com/billdetail/1698092

13. Rule 810-28-1-.01 \- The CHOOSE Act Program Definitions \- Alabama Administrative Code, accessed October 28, 2025, https://admincode.legislature.state.al.us/administrative-code/810-28-1-.01

14. CHOOSE-Act.pdf \- Alabama Governor's Office, accessed October 28, 2025, https://governor.alabama.gov/assets/2024/02/CHOOSE-Act.pdf

15. CHOOSE Act Alabama, accessed October 28, 2025, https://alabamaschoolboards.org/\_assets/documents/FYI%20Powerpoints-Attachments/CHOOSE%20Act%20Alabama%20Family%20Presentation.pdf

16. Alabama Department of Revenue: Home, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.revenue.alabama.gov/

17. Applying for 2025-2026 CHOOSE Act Alabama is easy as 1-2-3\! \- ClassWallet, accessed October 28, 2025, https://classwallet.com/alchoose/pre-qualify-apply.htm

18. Alabama's New School Choice Program Gets Funding Boost to Meet Overwhelming Demand: 4 Considerations for Private School Leaders | Fisher Phillips \- JD Supra, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/alabama-s-new-school-choice-program-4814822/

19. Parent Guide | ClassWallet, accessed October 28, 2025, https://classwallet.com/alchoose/assets/CHOOSE\_ACT\_parent\_guide.pdf

20. Alabama lawmakers add $35M to CHOOSE Act funding to cover 'overwhelming' interest, accessed October 28, 2025, https://aldailynews.com/alabama-lawmakers-add-35m-to-choose-act-funding-to-cover-overwhelming-interest/

21. How to Use Alabama CHOOSE Act Funds for Homeschooling \- Compass Classroom, accessed October 28, 2025, https://compassclassroom.com/blog/how-to-use-alabama-choose-act-funds-for-homeschooling/

22. FISCAL NOTE House Bill 129 \- Alabama Legislature, accessed October 28, 2025, https://alison.legislature.state.al.us/files/pdf/SearchableInstruments/2024RS/FiscalNotes/FN-3UKHVVZ-1.pdf

23. HB129 INTRODUCED \- Alabama Legislature, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.legislature.state.al.us/pdf/SearchableInstruments/2024RS/HB129-int.pdf

24. Alabama House committee approves record $12.1B education package, accessed October 28, 2025, https://thealabamabaptist.org/alabama-house-committee-approves-record-12-1b-education-package/

25. CHOOSE Act approves nearly 24000 students, most already in private or home schools, accessed October 28, 2025, https://yellowhammernews.com/choose-act-approves-nearly-24000-students-most-already-in-private-or-home-schools/

26. CHOOSE Act applications close; most applicants come from nonpublic schools \- WZDX Huntsville, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.rocketcitynow.com/article/news/state/choose-act-applications-close-most-applicants-come-from-nonpublic-schools-governor-kay-ivey/525-2e9b95f3-4562-47d1-b918-47d2c964127b

27. Alabama House passes record $12.1 billion education budget, boosts school choice and student-based funding \- Yellowhammer News, accessed October 28, 2025, https://yellowhammernews.com/alabama-house-passes-record-12-1-billion-education-budget-boosts-school-choice-and-student-based-funding/

28. Alabama's New School Choice Program Gets Funding Boost to Meet Overwhelming Demand: 4 Considerations for Private School Leaders | Fisher Phillips, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/news-insights/alabamas-new-school-choice-program-gets-funding-boost-to-meet-overwhelming-demand.html

29. Who is using Alabama's CHOOSE Act? | Capitol Journal, accessed October 28, 2025, https://aptv.org/apt-news/who-is-using-alabamas-choose-act/

30. Who is using Alabama's CHOOSE Act?, accessed October 28, 2025, https://aldailynews.com/who-is-using-alabamas-choose-act/

31. How Alabama's CHOOSE Act will impact the upcoming school year \- YouTube, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZsA9Zh2rqg

32. CHOOSE Act Alabama Student Applicants Surpass 20000 Mark, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.revenue.alabama.gov/choose-act-alabama-student-applicants-surpass-20000-mark/

33. CHOOSE Act will further hurt Alabama's public schools, accessed October 28, 2025, https://alarise.org/resources/choose-act-will-further-hurt-alabamas-public-schools/

34. House approves $12.1 billion education budget, nearly doubles CHOOSE Act funding \- Alabama Political Reporter, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.alreporter.com/2025/04/25/house-approves-12-1-billion-education-budget-nearly-doubles-choose-act-funding/

35. Alabama School Choice Participants Outperforming Peers \- ExcelinEd, accessed October 28, 2025, https://excelined.org/2018/09/12/alabama-school-choice-participants-outperforming-peers/

36. Alabama School Choice Advances \- Council for American Private Education, accessed October 28, 2025, https://capenetwork.org/alabama-school-choice-advances/

37. Analysis of the Financial Impact of the Alabama Accountability Act \- American Federation for Children, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.federationforchildren.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/AUM-Fiscal-Impact-Report.pdf

38. First look: CHOOSE Act data show which Alabama private schools enroll the most ESA students, accessed October 28, 2025, https://aldailynews.com/first-look-choose-act-data-show-which-alabama-private-schools-enroll-the-most-esa-students/

39. CHOOSE Act data shows which private schools enroll the most ESA students | The Alabama Baptist, accessed October 28, 2025, https://thealabamabaptist.org/choose-act-data-shows-which-private-schools-enroll-the-most-esa-students/

40. Participating Schools \- Alabama Department of Revenue, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.revenue.alabama.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/CHOOSE-Act-Alabama-Participating-Schools.pdf

41. Alabama's CHOOSE Act in effect: Choices in some areas, fewer in others, accessed October 28, 2025, https://aldailynews.com/alabamas-choose-act-in-effect-choices-in-some-areas-fewer-in-others/

42. Alabama's CHOOSE Act in effect: Choices in some areas, fewer in others | Capitol Journal, accessed October 28, 2025, https://aptv.org/apt-news/alabamas-choose-act-in-effect-choices-in-some-areas-fewer-in-others/

43. CHOOSE Act in effect: Choices in some areas, fewer in others | The Alabama Baptist, accessed October 28, 2025, https://thealabamabaptist.org/choose-act-in-effect-choices-in-some-areas-fewer-in-others/