House Bill 815, titled the Voucher School Accountability Act, would substantially revise North Carolina’s Opportunity Scholarship Program. The bill narrows and reorganizes eligibility rules for scholarship recipients, including adding or clarifying categories such as students entering kindergarten through second grade, foster children, recently adopted children, military-connected children, and certain students previously enrolled in public or Department of Defense schools or in nonpublic schools. It also restructures scholarship award priorities and amounts, directing awards first to prior recipients and then to students in lower-income households before other eligible students, while setting different award caps based on household income and whether a student attends full-time or part-time.
The bill’s second major purpose is to increase accountability and reporting requirements for nonpublic schools that accept scholarship funds. It requires schools to provide more information on tuition and fees, criminal background checks for key staff and policies for other employees, standardized testing and graduation-rate reporting, financial reviews or audits for larger schools, public disclosure of certain records and expenditures, teacher qualification standards, minimum instructional days or hours, reserve requirements, and nondiscrimination rules. It also requires schools to comply with certain expulsion-related laws, report expulsions to the state, and maintain an in-state facility for in-person instruction. Schools that fail to comply could lose eligibility to receive future scholarship funds.
In practical terms, the bill would amend multiple sections of Chapter 115C governing the Opportunity Scholarship Program and nonpublic school participation. It would expand state oversight of private schools receiving public scholarship dollars, increase the amount of data collected by the Authority and the Division of Nonpublic Education, and make some information public while keeping other student-level data confidential. It also changes how unused scholarship funds may be used, allowing up to $1 million for parent outreach and application assistance and carrying forward remaining funds for one year. The bill would take effect July 1, 2025, and apply beginning with the 2025-2026 school year.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is one of reform and tighter oversight rather than expansion without conditions. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge support or opposition. Still, the bill’s title and structure suggest an intent to address concerns about accountability in voucher-funded private education while preserving the scholarship program itself.
The main points of contention likely center on the balance between school choice and regulation. Supporters would likely favor stronger transparency, testing, financial review, and staffing standards for schools receiving public funds, while critics may argue that the bill imposes burdens on private and religious schools, increases state control over nonpublic education, and could limit family access by tightening eligibility and award priorities. The provisions on public reporting, criminal history checks, and compliance with state expulsion rules are especially likely to draw scrutiny from private school advocates.
HB815 would amend North Carolina’s Opportunity Scholarship statutes in Chapter 115C by changing who qualifies for scholarships, how awards are prioritized and calculated, and what nonpublic schools must do to receive public funds. It would impose new reporting, testing, audit, staffing, reserve, and nondiscrimination requirements on participating schools, create additional oversight by the Opportunity Scholarship Authority and the Division of Nonpublic Education, and authorize sanctions including loss of future scholarship eligibility for noncompliance. The bill also modifies the use of unspent scholarship funds and would apply starting with the 2025-2026 school year.
No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no direct evidence of legislative debate or recorded support/opposition. Based on the bill’s content, the measure appears to be framed as a accountability-focused reform of the voucher program, suggesting support from lawmakers concerned with oversight and public transparency, alongside likely resistance from those who view the new requirements as burdensome or as an expansion of state regulation over private schools.
Likely points of contention include whether the state should impose public-school-like accountability standards on nonpublic schools that accept scholarship funds, whether the eligibility changes favor some student groups over others, and whether the reporting and audit requirements are too intrusive or costly. Private and religious school advocates may object to testing mandates, criminal background check rules, public disclosure of contracts and expenditures, and compliance with state expulsion laws, while supporters may argue these provisions are necessary because public dollars are involved. The prioritization of lower-income students and the limits on tuition increases may also be debated as either equitable safeguards or constraints on school autonomy.