Leveraging The Federal Education Tax Credit: State-Level Decisions That Will Shape Impact

My advice for people on the call is to make your voices heard at the state level about whether you like it or you dislike it or where you want them to improve upon it….I think it’s really important that you advocate to your state leaders about your thoughts on the program and how to shape it in a way to best meet the needs of students in your communities.

– Christopher Duncombe, Education Commission of the States

Christopher Duncombe of Education Commission of the States offered the above advice during the February 3, 2026 GLR Learning Tuesdays webinar, a session that was co-sponsored by Alliance for Youth Thriving. The conversation — part of CGLR’s new series Leveraging the Federal Education Tax Credit: Opportunities and Challenges — explored how the Education Freedom Tax Credit enacted under H.R. 1 could play out at the state level, highlighting key uncertainties, tradeoffs, and decision points facing governors and state leaders who have the choice to opt-in to this program.

Merita Irby of Alliance for Youth Thriving moderated the discussion and framed the new series as an ongoing space where we hope to better understand the still-evolving tax credit, and the role it could play in our communities. 

The conversation opened with Keri Rodrigues of the National Parents Union, who grounded the discussion in how parents actually experience and understand these policies. Rodrigues emphasized that broad support for “school choice” often hinges on details, noting that parents are far more supportive when funds can be used flexibly — including for extended learning opportunities for public school students — than when they are limited to private school tuition alone. 

While clear that this policy is unideal, she stressed that advocacy helped ensure the final language of H.R. 1 allowed funds to be used for a broader range of services beyond private school tuition alone. Rodrigues encouraged communities to proceed with caution, closely analyze forthcoming regulations, and weigh tradeoffs transparently. 

Rodrigues also urged local leaders and advocates to stay engaged, pointing to community foundations and locally driven scholarship-granting organizations (SGOs) as one way communities could help ensure funds, if used, are utilized to meet local needs.

Building on this, Alexis Steines Rao of the Afterschool Alliance explained that while her organization does not support the policy, it could nonetheless become a meaningful funding opportunity for afterschool and summer learning programs if states opt in. She highlighted the scale of unmet demand — with 23 million children currently waiting for access to afterschool programs — and stressed the importance of ensuring that any scholarships support comprehensive programs and reach students with the greatest need. 

At the same time, she noted that many providers and funders remain unaware of the policy and that significant questions persist about infrastructure, eligibility, and participation, all of which will depend heavily on forthcoming federal regulations.

Turning to the state decision-making landscape, Duncombe shared what Education Commission of the States is hearing from governors and other state leaders as they weigh their options. He noted that most early action has favored opting in, particularly among states with existing tax credit scholarship programs, but emphasized deep uncertainty around cost and growth. He also underscored that many states are waiting to decide until Treasury guidance clarifies how much discretion they will have over approving SGOs.

Offering a contrasting perspective, Jessica Levin, Esq., of the Education Law Center and Public Funds Public Schools argued that the Education Freedom Tax Credit is fundamentally a federal voucher program whose harms outweigh any potential benefits for public school students. She warned that large, multistate SGOs with established marketing and infrastructure are likely to capture most contributions, making it highly unlikely that public schools or inclusive afterschool providers would meaningfully benefit.

Levin closed the conversation with a reminder about the values that must continue to guide decision-making as states consider their next steps:

We do have to operate in the world that we’re living in, but I don’t think we should lose the aspiration of what public education needs to be and should be and what’s already in the law and guaranteed to students, which is an adequate and equitable public education for everybody.