North Carolina ESA Program

# A Comprehensive Analysis of North Carolina's Personal Education Student Accounts (ESA+) Program: A Case Study in Targeted Intervention

Executive Summary

North Carolina's Personal Education Student Accounts for Children with Disabilities (ESA+) program represents a distinct and noteworthy model within the national landscape of Education Savings Accounts. Enacted in 2017 and refined through subsequent legislation, the ESA+ program is designed as a targeted intervention, exclusively serving K-12 students with documented disabilities. This focused approach stands in sharp contrast to the universal, market-driven ESA programs that have become the subject of intense fiscal and political debate in states like Arizona. The program's architecture is defined by stringent eligibility requirements, most notably the mandate for a formal "Eligibility Determination" document issued by a North Carolina public school, which functions as a primary control on participant entry.

The financial framework is characterized by fiscal prudence, utilizing a capped legislative appropriation rather than an open-ended entitlement. This structure ensures budgetary predictability and has resulted in steady, managed growth, with total funding disbursed reaching $42.2 million for 3,566 students in the 2023-24 school year. A two-tiered award system provides a base annual award of $9,000, with a higher award of $17,000 available for students with specific, significant disabilities. This tiered approach, combined with a differentiated policy on the rollover of unused funds, provides enhanced flexibility to the highest-need families while maintaining fiscal control over the broader program.

Administration is centralized under the North Carolina State Education Assistance Authority (NCSEAA), which partners with the financial technology platform ClassWallet. This administrative ecosystem creates a framework of proactive oversight, with a pre-approval process for all expenses that mitigates the risk of misuse and provides a transparent, real-time audit trail. Furthermore, North Carolina distinguishes itself through its commitment to data transparency. The NCSEAA produces detailed annual reports for the state legislature, providing granular, publicly available data on participant demographics, including race, ethnicity, sex, and grade level. This official reporting grounds policy discussions in a common set of verifiable facts, a practice from which other states could learn. While the program faces challenges, including a significant waitlist due to its funding cap and a critical data gap regarding the prior public school attendance of its participants, its overall design presents a compelling case study in how an ESA can be structured as a controlled, accountable, and fiscally sustainable support system for a specific, high-need student population.

I. Program Architecture: A Targeted Intervention for Students with Disabilities

The foundational identity of North Carolina's Personal Education Student Accounts (ESA+) program is its deliberate design as a targeted intervention. Unlike the universal programs that define the leading edge of the school choice movement in states like Arizona and Florida, the ESA+ program is narrowly tailored to serve a specific, legally defined population: students with disabilities. This focus is not an incidental feature but the core organizing principle of its legislative, statutory, and operational framework. Understanding this architecture is essential to evaluating the program's function, scale, and place within the broader national policy context.

Legislative Genesis and Evolution

The modern ESA+ program was established by the North Carolina General Assembly in 2017, with its legal basis codified in North Carolina General Statute (G.S.) § 115C, Article 41\.1 However, its current form is the result of a significant legislative refinement in 2021, when lawmakers consolidated two previously separate voucher programs for students with disabilities—the Personal Education Savings Account Program and the Special Education Grants for Children with Disabilities Program—into the single, streamlined ESA+ program.3 This legislative action suggests a focus on administrative efficiency and the creation of a more navigable system for families. Rather than forcing parents to choose between or manage multiple similar programs, the consolidation created a single, clear pathway for accessing state support.

This targeted program exists within a broader and more contentious history of private school choice in North Carolina. The state's first engagement with vouchers dates to the post-Brown v. Board of Education era with the Pearsall Plan of 1956, which created "tuition grants" that allowed white families to use public funds to attend segregated private schools to avoid integration.5 These grants were later declared unconstitutional.4 The modern era of school choice began in 2013 with the creation of the income-based Opportunity Scholarship Program, which was soon followed by the initial programs for students with disabilities that would eventually become the ESA+.4

The Statutory Foundation (G.S. § 115C, Article 41\)

The governing statute for the ESA+ program explicitly defines its purpose "to provide the option for a parent to better meet the individual educational needs of the parent's child".2 The law establishes a precise set of definitions that circumscribe the program's scope.2 A "Personal Education Student Account" or PESA is defined as an electronic account holding scholarship funds for an "eligible student" to be used for "qualifying education expenses".2 The definition of an "eligible student" is the lynchpin of the entire program, restricting participation to a North Carolina resident who is a "child with a disability" as defined by state special education law (G.S. § 115C-106.3(1)) and has not yet graduated high school.2

Eligibility: The "Eligibility Determination" Mandate

The most critical architectural feature of the ESA+ program is its stringent and unique eligibility verification process. To qualify, a student must possess a formal "Eligibility Determination" document.7 This is not an internal school document like an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) or a 504 plan; it is a specific legal document issued by a North Carolina public school system (a Local Education Agency, or LEA) or a Department of Defense school located in the state.7 This document, which must have been completed within the last three years, legally certifies that a student has a disability and is eligible for special education services.8 The North Carolina State Education Assistance Authority (NCSEAA), the program's administering agency, is unequivocal that this is the only document it accepts to verify a disability; alternatives like 504 plans or evaluations from private psychologists are not sufficient.7

This requirement functions as an intentional structural gate, fundamentally shaping the program's participant pool and growth trajectory. Unlike universal programs that are designed to create a low-friction "exit ramp" from the public system, the ESA+ program mandates a formal interaction and assessment by an LEA as a prerequisite for participation.2 This forces families, including those already in private or homeschool settings, to engage directly with the public system to secure the necessary documentation. This process ensures that the program serves only those students formally identified by the public system as requiring special education, preventing a broader interpretation of "special needs" and acting as a primary control mechanism on the program's scope.

In addition to the disability documentation, students must meet residency requirements and be at least 5 years old by August 31 of the school year, with a narrow exception for 4-year-olds approved for early kindergarten entry.2

Enrollment Options: A Framework of Flexibility

While eligibility is tightly restricted, the program provides significant autonomy to qualifying families in how they use the funds. The ESA+ framework supports a variety of educational settings, including 7:

• Private School: Parents can use funds to pay for tuition and fees at an eligible nonpublic school.
• Home School: A significant portion of participants use the funds to cover the costs of a customized homeschool education.
• Co-enrollment: Students may enroll part-time in a public school while using a partial ESA+ award to pay for supplemental services and therapies.2

This flexibility in use, combined with the narrowness of eligibility, defines the program's core philosophy: to provide a highly customized and parent-directed educational experience for a small, well-defined population of high-need students.

II. The Financial Framework: A Capped, Two-Tiered Funding Model

The financial architecture of the ESA+ program is designed for fiscal predictability and control, a structure that stands in stark contrast to the demand-driven, entitlement-based funding of universal ESA models. The program operates on a fixed legislative appropriation, employs a two-tiered award system to target resources based on need, and provides parents with broad flexibility in how funds are spent.

Award Calculation and Tiers

The value of an ESA+ scholarship is not uniform; it is determined by a two-tiered structure based on the severity of a student's disability. This approach allows the state to direct greater resources to students with more profound needs.7

• Base Award: The standard scholarship is $9,000 annually, disbursed in two equal semester payments of $4,500.3
• Higher Award: A larger scholarship of $17,000 annually, disbursed in two semester payments of $8,500, is available for students whose Eligibility Determination form lists one of the following as a primary or secondary disability: autism, hearing impairment, moderate to severe intellectual disability, orthopedic impairment, or visual impairment.2

This tiered system results in a blended average award value across the participant population. For the 2023–24 school year, the average account value was $11,846.10

Allowable Expenses

A key feature of the ESA model is the flexibility it affords parents to customize their child's education. The ESA+ program allows funds to be used for a wide array of qualifying education expenses, which are explicitly detailed in the governing statute and program guidelines.2 This empowers parents to unbundle educational services, moving beyond a simple tuition payment to construct a tailored program of supports. A summary of these expenses is provided in Table 2\.

Budget and Scale

Crucially, the ESA+ program's total cost is determined by a legislative budget cap, not by open-ended demand. This makes the program a discretionary appropriation rather than an entitlement, ensuring fiscal predictability for the state. For the 2023-24 school year, the total amount of funding disbursed was $42,241,655.13 The state budget appropriated $49,943,166 for the 2024-25 school year and includes a built-in escalator that increases the appropriation by $1 million each year until 2032-33.10 This budget cap effectively limits the number of students who can participate; for 2024-25, the funding can support a maximum of approximately 4,200 students, depending on the mix of base and higher awards.10 This structure is the primary reason the program has a recurring waitlist.14

The program also features a nuanced policy on the rollover of unused funds. For students receiving the base $9,000 award, any unspent funds must be returned to the state at the end of the fiscal year.3 However, students receiving the higher $17,000 award are permitted to roll over up to $4,500 in unspent funds annually, with a total accumulated account balance not to exceed $30,000.15 This differentiated policy provides greater flexibility to families of students with the most significant needs, who may need to save for expensive, non-recurring items like specialized technology or intensive therapy. At the same time, by requiring the majority of participants to return unused funds, the state avoids accumulating the large, long-term fiscal liability that has been identified as a challenge in universal programs like Arizona's.1

Table 1: ESA+ Program Core Architectural Features

Table 2: Summary of Allowable Expenses under G.S. § 115C-595

III. Administration and Oversight: The NCSEAA and ClassWallet Ecosystem

The operational integrity of an ESA program depends on a robust administrative and oversight framework. North Carolina's ESA+ program is managed through a centralized state agency that leverages a third-party financial technology platform to ensure compliance and control. This structure is designed to provide parents with flexibility while building in multiple layers of accountability to safeguard the use of public funds.

The Role of the NCSEAA

The North Carolina State Education Assistance Authority (NCSEAA) is the sole government body responsible for administering the ESA+ program.1 Unlike states such as Florida, which delegate significant administrative duties to non-profit Scholarship Funding Organizations (SFOs) 1, North Carolina maintains a high degree of centralized state control. This ensures consistency in program rules, data collection, and public reporting. The NCSEAA manages the entire program lifecycle, including 17:

• Application and Eligibility: The agency hosts the online "MyPortal," where parents create accounts and submit applications during the annual enrollment window.7 NCSEAA staff are responsible for reviewing applications and, most critically, verifying the required "Eligibility Determination" documentation.8
• Awards and Communication: The NCSEAA notifies families of scholarship awards and manages all official program communication through the MyPortal.19
• Provider Management: The agency oversees the enrollment and credentialing of all service providers, such as tutors and therapists, who wish to accept ESA+ funds.20

The ClassWallet Platform: Outsourcing Financial Management

Since 2018, the NCSEAA has partnered with ClassWallet, a third-party financial technology company, to manage the disbursement and spending of ESA+ funds.21 This partnership is a core component of the program's administrative design. Instead of providing parents with debit cards or relying on a cumbersome reimbursement process—methods that can be prone to misuse or create barriers for low-income families—the state deposits scholarship funds into a secure digital wallet for each student.21

Through the ClassWallet platform, parents can execute three primary types of transactions 23:

1. Direct Payment to Schools: A portion of the funds is often sent directly to a student's private school to cover tuition and fees.

2. Vendor Payments: Parents can pay approved service providers (e.g., tutors, therapists) directly from their digital wallet by uploading an invoice for review and approval by NCSEAA staff.

3. Marketplace Purchases: ClassWallet hosts an online marketplace where parents can purchase approved educational products, such as curricula and technology, from a network of vendors.9

This use of a digital wallet platform with built-in controls is a proactive accountability solution. It directly addresses the "oversight deficit" that has challenged larger ESA programs that rely on reactive, post-hoc audits of parent spending.1 By requiring pre-approval of expenses before funds are disbursed, the ClassWallet system builds compliance into the transaction process itself, creating a real-time, digital audit trail and minimizing the potential for the misuse of funds.22

Accountability Mechanisms

The ESA+ program is governed by several layers of accountability designed to ensure financial integrity and measure student participation.

• Pre-Approval of Expenses: As required by statute and operationalized through ClassWallet, all requests for qualifying educational expenses are subject to a pre-approval process by NCSEAA staff before funds are disbursed.2
• Parental Agreement: Each year, parents must electronically sign a detailed agreement with the NCSEAA. In this agreement, they pledge to use the funds only for qualifying expenses and, for full-time participants, to release the local public school district of its obligation to educate the student.2
• Student Testing Mandates: Participating students are required to take a nationally norm-referenced achievement test annually. While no minimum score is required to maintain the scholarship, participating schools must report the aggregate, anonymized results to the state.10 This provides a mechanism for tracking the academic participation of scholarship recipients.
• Provider and School Requirements: Service providers must be credentialed and formally enroll with the NCSEAA to be eligible for payment.20 Nonpublic schools that receive more than $300,000 in ESA+ funds in a single year are required to undergo a financial review conducted by a certified public accountant.10 Furthermore, all participating schools must comply with annual reporting requirements established by the North Carolina Division of Non-Public Education (DNPE) to remain eligible to receive scholarship funds.26

IV. Participant Profile: An Analysis of Official Enrollment and Demographic Data

A central question in any school choice policy debate is: who uses the program? In many states, the absence of official data on participant demographics creates a vacuum filled by competing and often contradictory analyses from outside organizations.1 North Carolina's ESA+ program stands as a notable exception. Due to a legislative mandate for transparent reporting, the NCSEAA produces detailed annual reports that provide a clear and verifiable statistical profile of the program's participants.

Enrollment Trajectory

The ESA+ program has experienced steady and significant growth since its inception, indicating strong demand from eligible families. Participation has more than tripled in recent years, growing from 989 students in the 2021-22 school year to 3,566 students in 2023-24.13 This growth has consistently outpaced the program's legislatively capped funding, resulting in a substantial waitlist. For the 2024-25 school year, the NCSEAA received 2,974 new eligible applications for only 958 available new student awards, leaving an estimated 2,015 new applicants on the waitlist.14

Demographic Landscape (FY 2022-23 & 2023-24)

The official annual reports submitted by the NCSEAA to the Joint Legislative Education Oversight Committee offer an exceptionally granular look at the participant population.3 This commitment to data transparency grounds the policy debate in a common set of facts. The demographic profile for the 3,566 students served in the 2023-24 school year is detailed in Table 4\.

The data reveals several key trends. Racially, the program's participants are predominantly White (68%), a significant overrepresentation compared to North Carolina's public school population, which is approximately 44% White. Black or African American students make up the second-largest group at 15%.13 The program also serves a disproportionately male population, with male students accounting for 67% of all recipients in 2023-24.13 This gender disparity may reflect broader patterns in disability identification within the public school system, as diagnoses for conditions like autism and ADHD—which can qualify a student for the higher award tier—are more prevalent among boys.

Geographic Distribution and School Choice

Participation in the ESA+ program is statewide, with recipients residing in a large majority of the state's school districts. However, enrollment is most heavily concentrated in the state's largest urban and suburban LEAs. In 2023-24, Wake County Public School System (127 students), Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (91 students), Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Schools (54 students), and Cumberland County Schools (51 students) were the districts of residence for the largest numbers of participants.13

The data also provides insight into how families are using their awards. While many students attend one of several hundred participating private schools, a significant and growing cohort is using the funds for homeschooling. In 2023-24, 748 students, or 21% of all participants, were registered as homeschool students.13 This demonstrates the program's function as a tool for educational customization that extends well beyond traditional private school tuition.

Table 3: ESA+ Enrollment and Funding Growth (FY 2022 \- FY 2024\)

Table 4: Participant Demographics, FY 2023-24

V. Policy Context and Fiscal Implications

The Personal Education Student Accounts (ESA+) program does not operate in a political vacuum. It is a component of North Carolina's broader, and increasingly polarized, school choice landscape. While the ESA+ itself is a targeted, budget-capped program for a specific population, its fiscal implications and policy debates are deeply intertwined with those of the state's much larger and more controversial Opportunity Scholarship program. Understanding the ESA+ requires situating it within this contentious environment and analyzing the competing narratives about its financial impact.

The Critical "Switcher Rate" Data Gap

The single most important metric for calculating the net fiscal impact of any school choice program is the "switcher rate"—the percentage of participants who were previously enrolled in a public school. A student "switching" from a public school generates a cost savings for the state, which can offset the cost of their scholarship. A student who was already in a private or homeschool setting represents an entirely new cost to the state.

Despite its otherwise exemplary commitment to data transparency, North Carolina does not officially collect or report switcher rate data for the ESA+ program. The NCSEAA's annual report for 2023-24 explicitly states, "Prior public school attendance is not an eligibility requirement for the Program".13 This official data gap is a critical weakness in the program's reporting structure. Without this metric, it is impossible to conduct a definitive net fiscal impact analysis. While direct data is unavailable, analyses of North Carolina's other major choice program, the Opportunity Scholarship, have found very low switcher rates—less than 10% in the first year after its universal expansion—suggesting that a significant portion of choice program participants may come from existing non-public school populations.27 This absence of official data allows competing fiscal arguments to flourish, as neither side can anchor its claims to a verifiable statistic.

The Broader School Choice Debate in North Carolina

The political and fiscal debate surrounding the ESA+ program is not primarily about the program itself. Its relatively small budget (\~$42 million) and sympathetic target population (students with disabilities) make it a difficult target for direct political opposition. Instead, the ESA+ is often swept into the larger ideological battle over the universal Opportunity Scholarship program. The recent expansion of the Opportunity Scholarship program, which removed income caps and dramatically increased its budget, has intensified this debate.

Organizations critical of school choice, such as the Public School Forum of North Carolina and the NC Justice Center, frequently frame the issue as a zero-sum diversion of public funds. They argue that the hundreds of millions of dollars appropriated for private school vouchers represent a direct drain on resources that could otherwise be used to support traditional public schools and increase teacher salaries.29 In these analyses, the ESA+ program is often aggregated with the Opportunity Scholarship program to calculate the total cost of "vouchers," effectively making it a policy rider in the larger fight.5

Competing Fiscal Narratives

The data gap on the switcher rate allows for two diametrically opposed fiscal narratives to coexist.

• Pro-Choice Perspective: Proponents, such as the John Locke Foundation, argue that choice programs are a fiscally responsible and minor component of the state's overall education spending. One analysis found that in 2023-24, the combined cost of the ESA+ and Opportunity Scholarship programs was approximately $225 million, representing just 1.9% of North Carolina's total K-12 education budget of $11.5 billion.32 From this perspective, the programs are not a financial threat to the public school system, and they correctly note that state per-pupil funding for public schools has continued to increase even as choice programs have expanded.33
• Critical Perspective: Critics argue that every dollar spent on vouchers is a dollar that cannot be spent on public schools, which serve the vast majority of students. They focus on the gross cost of the programs and their rapid growth, projecting that hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars will be diverted to private schools in the coming years.29 This perspective views the programs as a direct contributor to the underfunding of the public education system.

The ESA+ program is thus caught in the crossfire. Its specific, targeted nature is often lost in a broader debate that frames all school choice as a monolithic threat to public education or a universal solution to its challenges.

VI. Concluding Analysis: North Carolina's ESA+ in the National Landscape

North Carolina's Personal Education Student Accounts (ESA+) program offers a compelling and instructive case study in the design and implementation of a targeted school choice policy. Its evolution, architecture, and administration provide profound lessons for policymakers, particularly when contrasted with the universal ESA model that has become a national flashpoint. The program demonstrates that an ESA can be structured to prioritize fiscal control, administrative accountability, and data transparency while providing significant flexibility to a high-need student population.

NC vs. Arizona: A Tale of Two Models

The strategic policy choices embedded in North Carolina's ESA+ program become clearest when juxtaposed with Arizona's Empowerment Scholarship Account program, the nation's first and largest universal ESA.1 The two programs represent fundamentally different philosophies of school choice, as summarized in Table 5\. Where Arizona's program is a market-driven mechanism designed for system-wide disruption and universal access, North Carolina's is a controlled support system designed for a specific, high-need population. Arizona's open-ended entitlement funding has led to exponential cost growth and budget uncertainty; North Carolina's capped appropriation ensures fiscal predictability. Arizona's administrative framework has been plagued by an "oversight deficit"; North Carolina's use of a financial management platform builds in proactive, transaction-level accountability. Perhaps most importantly, Arizona's lack of official demographic data has fueled a polarized "battle of the models," while North Carolina's commitment to transparent reporting grounds its policy debates in verifiable facts.

Strengths and Challenges of the North Carolina Model

The analysis of the ESA+ program reveals a model with significant strengths but also identifiable challenges.

• Strengths: The program's greatest strengths lie in its design. The capped funding model provides a high degree of fiscal control and predictability for state budget writers. The centralized administration under the NCSEAA, coupled with the ClassWallet platform, creates a strong framework for financial accountability and proactive oversight. The program provides substantial flexibility for qualifying families to customize their child's education. Finally, its commitment to transparent demographic reporting stands as a national best practice.
• Challenges: The program is not without its weaknesses. The strict "Eligibility Determination" mandate, while effective as a control mechanism, may present a significant bureaucratic barrier for some families, particularly those without easy access to or a positive relationship with their local public school district. The legislative funding cap, while fiscally prudent, has created a system of scarcity where demand from eligible students consistently exceeds the supply of available scholarships, resulting in a large waitlist. The most significant challenge from an analytical perspective is the lack of official "switcher rate" data, which prevents a definitive calculation of the program's net fiscal impact and allows the polarized debate over its cost to persist.

Forward-Looking Implications and Recommendations

The experience of North Carolina's ESA+ program offers actionable lessons for both state and national policymakers.

• For North Carolina:

1. Mandate "Switcher Rate" Reporting: The General Assembly should amend the program's authorizing statute to require the NCSEAA to collect and report on the prior school enrollment status of all new participants in its annual legislative report. This single data point would enable a definitive net fiscal impact analysis and elevate the quality of the fiscal debate.

2. Analyze Barriers to Access: The state should commission a formal study of the "Eligibility Determination" process to identify potential barriers to access for eligible families, particularly those in rural or low-income communities, and develop strategies to mitigate them without compromising the integrity of the eligibility verification process.

• For Other States:

1. A Model for Targeted Intervention: For states seeking to provide educational options for specific populations (e.g., students with disabilities, foster children, military families) without creating an open-ended fiscal entitlement, the ESA+ program serves as a valuable blueprint. Its capped funding model, use of a financial management platform for proactive oversight, and detailed public reporting requirements are all exportable features.

2. The Primacy of Data Transparency: The stark contrast between the data-rich environment in North Carolina and the "data vacuum" in Arizona underscores a critical lesson: enabling legislation for any ESA program should mandate the collection and public reporting of anonymized participant demographic and prior-school-enrollment data from the outset. This is the only way to ensure an evidence-based evaluation of program equity and fiscal impact.

In a policy environment often characterized by ideological fervor, North Carolina's ESA+ program demonstrates a more measured approach. It is a model built on control, accountability, and targeted support, offering a distinct and valuable alternative in the ongoing national conversation about the future of school choice.

Table 5: Comparative Analysis: North Carolina ESA+ vs. Arizona ESA

#### Works cited

1. Arizona ESA Program Deep Dive.pdf

2. NC General Statutes \- Chapter 115C Article 41 \- North Carolina ..., accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/ByArticle/Chapter\_115c/Article\_41.pdf

3. NC Personal Education Student Accounts Program ... \- Webservices, accessed October 28, 2025, https://webservices.ncleg.gov/ViewDocSiteFile/81619

4. The History of North Carolina School Vouchers 2025 \- YouTube, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aVe4KvKi\_I

5. School Vouchers in North Carolina (one pager), accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.ncforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/School-Vouchers-in-North-Carolina-one-pager-1.pdf

6. Perspective | Debating school choice: A historical overview of private school vouchers, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.ednc.org/perspective-debating-school-choice-a-historical-overview-of-private-school-vouchers/

7. The Education Student Accounts (ESA+ Program) \- NCSEAA K12 Scholarships, accessed October 28, 2025, https://k12.ncseaa.edu/the-education-student-accounts/

8. Documentation for a Disability \- NCSEAA K12 Scholarships, accessed October 28, 2025, https://k12.ncseaa.edu/the-education-student-accounts/documentation-of-a-disability/

9. North Carolina ESA+ 2025 | Homeschool Funding for Special Needs \- Miacademy, accessed October 28, 2025, https://miacademy.co/homeschool-curriculum/north-carolinas-education-savings-account/

10. Education Student Accounts (ESA+) \- EdChoice, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.edchoice.org/school-choice/programs/personal-education-student-account-for-children-with-disabilities/

11. ESA+ Scholarship Program \- NCSEAA K12 Scholarships, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.k12.ncseaa.edu/media/cgjhpw2s/k12-schools-esa-2024.pdf

12. NC State Education Assistance Authority \- Homeschool-Life.com, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.homeschool-life.com/4407/custom/130451

13. NC Personal Education Student Accounts (ESA+ ... \- Webservices, accessed October 28, 2025, https://webservices.ncleg.gov/ViewDocSiteFile/91109

14. NC school choice program for special needs students continues growth \- Carolina Journal, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.carolinajournal.com/nc-school-choice-program-for-special-needs-students-continues-growth/

15. Program Rules and Requirements \- NCSEAA K12 Scholarships, accessed October 28, 2025, https://k12.ncseaa.edu/the-education-student-accounts/program-rules-and-requirements/

16. How to use North Carolina ESA+ for Homeschooling \- Compass Classroom, accessed October 28, 2025, https://compassclassroom.com/blog/how-to-use-north-carolina-esa-for-homeschooling/

17. NCSEAA \- \- ABC of NC \-, accessed October 28, 2025, https://abcofnc.org/financial-aid/ncseaa/

18. NCSEAA K12 Scholarships \- Home, accessed October 28, 2025, https://k12.ncseaa.edu/

19. ESA handout for current families, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.ngfs.org/editoruploads/files/Resources%20for%20Families/ESA%20100724.pdf

20. Service Providers \- NCSEAA K12 Scholarships, accessed October 28, 2025, https://k12.ncseaa.edu/families-of-awarded-students/esaplus-program/service-providers/

21. North Carolina Selects ClassWallet to Support State's ESA+ Program, accessed October 28, 2025, https://classwallet.com/press\_releases/north-carolina-selects-classwallet-to-support-states-esa-program/

22. Ensuring Transparency with Education Savings Account Programs \- ClassWallet, accessed October 28, 2025, https://classwallet.com/ensuring-transparency-with-education-savings-account-programs/

23. ESA North Carolina | Education Student Accounts (ESA+) \- Goally, accessed October 28, 2025, https://getgoally.com/blog/neurodiversopedia/education-student-accounts-esa/

24. ClassWallet \- NCSEAA K12 Scholarships, accessed October 28, 2025, https://k12.ncseaa.edu/families-of-awarded-students/esaplus-program/classwallet/

25. Scholarships & Grants \- ClassWallet, accessed October 28, 2025, https://classwallet.com/scholarships-grants/

26. Private School Annual Report Guidance \- NC DOA, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.doa.nc.gov/divisions/non-public-education/private-schools/annual-reports

27. Do private schools in North Carolina have room to grow? \- John Locke Foundation, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.johnlocke.org/do-private-schools-in-north-carolina-have-room-to-grow/

28. Locke report shows NC private schools face hurdles as demand grows \- Carolina Journal, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.carolinajournal.com/locke-report-shows-nc-private-schools-face-hurdles-as-demand-grows/

29. Opportunity Scholarships and the Schools that Receive Them \- Public School Forum, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.ncforum.org/opportunity-scholarships-and-the-schools-that-receive-them/2024/

30. 2023 Conference Budget Analysis \- Public School Forum, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.ncforum.org/public-school-forum-of-north-carolina-2023-conference-budget-analysis/2023/

31. Vouchers: Racist legacy, help the wealthy, hurt rural counties \- Public Ed Works, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.publicedworks.org/2025/03/vouchers-racist-legacy-helps-the-wealthy-hurts-rural-counties/

32. What is the impact of school choice programs on overall education funding?, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.johnlocke.org/what-is-the-impact-of-school-choice-programs-on-overall-education-funding/

33. Responding to Outlandish Claims about the Opportunity Scholarship Program, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.johnlocke.org/responding-to-outlandish-claims-about-the-opportunity-scholarship-program/

34. Critics Claim School Choice Programs Damage the Public Schools Financially. What Do the Numbers Say? \- John Locke Foundation, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.johnlocke.org/critics-claim-school-choice-programs-damage-the-public-schools-financially-what-do-the-numbers-say/

35. Changes to Opportunity Scholarship program would cost NC millions, accessed October 28, 2025, https://www.ncjustice.org/publications/changes-to-opportunity-scholarship-program-would-cost-nc-millions/