TO AUTHORIZE THE INTRODUCTION OF A NONAPPROPRIATION BILL CONCERNING THE ARKANSAS CHILDREN'S EDUCATIONAL FREEDOM ACCOUNT PROGRAM.
Senate Resolution 16 is an authorization measure that allows Senator King to introduce a nonappropriation bill revising the Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom Account Program. The underlying bill would change how much money is deposited into each participating student’s account, moving the annual allocation to 90% of the prior year’s statewide foundation funding per student, while capping the amount for homeschooled students at $5,000 per school year.
The bill also tightens program oversight by tying continued access to account funds to annual assessment performance. It requires a minimum score on the annual assessment for most participants, directs the Department of Education to reduce account amounts based on performance, and makes students who fail to meet the minimum score ineligible for the next school year. Students from lower-performing public schools in their first year in the program and students with significant cognitive disabilities are exempted from the minimum-score requirement. The bill further bars students who were already enrolled in private school at the time of initial application, or who had previously attended private school before receiving an account, from eligibility.
In addition, the bill standardizes annual testing requirements for participating students and service providers, requiring assessments approved by the State Board of Education and administered through educational service cooperatives in Arkansas. For students with significant cognitive disabilities, it allows alternate assessments or a portfolio option. The bill also expands the list of mandated reporters under Arkansas child-abuse law to include participating service providers when the participating student is homeschooled.
The bill’s impact on state law would be to amend multiple sections of the Arkansas Code governing the Educational Freedom Account Program and child-abuse reporting. It would affect the Department of Education, participating private schools, service providers, homeschool families using the program, and students seeking or maintaining eligibility. Because SR16 is only a resolution authorizing introduction of a bill, it does not itself change law; the substantive changes would occur only if the authorized bill were later enacted.
The general sentiment reflected in the available record is limited, but the resolution appears to support a more structured and accountability-focused version of the school choice program. No committee transcript or recorded vote is available, and SR16 ultimately died in the Senate at sine die adjournment. The main points of contention likely center on the stricter testing and eligibility rules, the exclusion of some private-school students, and the performance-based reduction or loss of funding, which may be viewed as either accountability measures or barriers to participation depending on perspective.
SR16 authorizes introduction of a nonappropriation bill that would amend Arkansas’s Educational Freedom Account statutes, including funding levels, eligibility rules, assessment requirements, and mandated-reporter provisions. If enacted, it would alter Arkansas Code §§ 6-18-2505, 6-18-2506, and 6-18-2509, and add a child-abuse reporting duty under § 12-18-402 for certain participating service providers. The resolution itself has no direct legal effect beyond permitting the filing of the proposed bill.
There is little direct discussion or recorded voting history available for SR16, so sentiment must be inferred from the text. The measure appears to reflect support for expanding accountability and tightening administration of the Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom Account Program. Because the resolution died at sine die adjournment and no votes are recorded, there is no clear evidence of broad legislative consensus or organized opposition in the available record.
The likely points of contention are the bill’s stricter academic requirements, including a minimum test score tied to continued eligibility and funding reductions based on performance. Another potential dispute is the exclusion of students already enrolled in private school from initial or continued eligibility, which narrows access to the program. The homeschool cap, the standardized testing mandate, and the addition of mandated-reporter obligations for service providers may also draw concern from school-choice advocates, private schools, homeschool families, and child-welfare stakeholders, though no transcript evidence is available to identify specific arguments.