How to learn about local candidates for office, the people who can impact you directly

While national or statewide candidates get lots of coverage, and voters likely know their stances on the issues, local candidates are often unfamiliar to voters. But local politics directly touches our daily lives and families. Who is making policies and how do we choose them? In New Hampshire, that can be a daunting process, thanks to the large citizen legislature. However, there are tools out there to help research the candidates and decide who meets your needs and priorities. On this episode of “The State We’re In,” Anna Brown, executive director of Citizens Count, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization dedicated to educating voters about the political process, as well as executive director of the Warren B. Rudman Center for Justice, Leadership and Public Service at the University of New Hampshire’s Franklin Pierce School of Law, discusses these tools.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

Melanie Plenda:

Anna, with elections on the horizon, can you tell us about some of the tools Citizens Count offers to voters?

Anna Brown:

There are 400 state representatives, which means there's roughly 900 candidates that are going to be on your ballot. So probably the tool we're best known for is our candidate profiles, where we provide background, issue positions, and so on. We offer other tools for voters as well.  If you look up your town, we can show your polling location and your clerk info. We have a section called “Prepare to Vote” under our advocacy toolkit that offers information about what to bring to the polls, registering, and absentee ballots. We also have other tutorials on what to do after the election. How do I contact an elected official? How do I advocate for my cause? Then finally, we also offer a candidate comparison tool that lets voters see, “OK just for the candidates on my ballot, where do they stand on certain issues?”

Melanie Plenda:

Why are these tools necessary?

Anna Brown:

I've been covering New Hampshire elections for a while now, and every single election I have seen there are races that come down to less than half a dozen votes. There are multiple recounts, and when you're talking about a recount in New Hampshire, it's literally paper ballots, the secretary of state's office inspecting them one by one, with observers in place. In the primaries, when there's a tie it’s not uncommon enough that they actually have official dice to help settle ties. 

So I always tell voters in New Hampshire that your vote counts. It isn't just a feel-good statement. There's all these candidates, roughly 900. It can be really hard to find information about those folks. Some of them don't have email addresses or websites, so that's where Citizens Count comes in, and we're trying to fill that gap. Because the other thing that's true, they don't always fall on party lines. In New Hampshire, you will find Democrats who are against gun laws. You will find Republicans who favor more lenient laws related to abortion than what is currently on the books. So I always encourage people to check out those individual candidates and don't just rely on the “D” or the
“R” next to someone's name.

Melanie Plenda:

How do you compile this information? Can you describe the process?

Anna Brown:

Our best tool is our candidate survey. We will contact them by email, snail mail, phone, follow up again for the folks that we can't find. I reach out to local parties and county parties sometimes, and we do get over half of candidates to respond to our survey. So most of our background information and issue positions are straight from their own mouth, and that's very important to us. We don't want to have any spin on our issue positions. 

Melanie Plenda:

How much work does that take to put all this together?

Anna Brown:

There's three of us full time, some part time, and every election we also get an elections intern. Shout out to our current elections intern, Anna Steele, who has been incredible this year. It is a lot of hounding candidates, a lot of phone calls, a lot of stuffing envelopes. We also really are trying to hold each other to that rigorous standard of staying nonpartisan and engaging with candidates. When candidates come back to us and they say, “I don't like how that question was worded, or it was biased, or I just want to submit a statement,” we want to work with them. If anybody ever comes to us, including many candidates, and says, “Where are you getting your money from? What is your real agenda? Who's on your board?” These are all questions that we want to be completely transparent about, and so we do a lot of engagement there as well.

Melanie Plenda:

There’s also a constitutional amendment on the ballot related to the ages of judges in the state. Can you tell us about that? 

Anna Brown: 

Many people may not know that the New Hampshire Constitution requires judges and sheriffs to retire at the age of 70. This is a huge contrast to the U.S. Supreme Court, where we have seen, on many occasions, people simply pass away before they retire, and it can have a huge impact on rulings. 

New Hampshire originally included this in the Constitution because they were concerned about the cognitive abilities, potentially, of judges and sheriffs. But that being said, when the Constitution was written, age expectancy was different. So now there is a proposal on the ballot, an amendment to our Constitution, that would raise the age of retirement to 75. This was actually sponsored by a member of the N.H. Supreme Court who was forced to retire at age 70 and is now serving in the House of Representatives. So that is going to be one of the questions on the ballot that you will see. It does require a super majority of voters, in order to change our Constitution. That's a kind of high threshold, but every now and then we do pass constitutional amendments. For example, in 2018 there was a new constitutional amendment that creates a right to privacy. If you do want to dig more into this, we do also have a link on our elections page, again, on https://www.citizenscount.org/ that includes a brief article on the pros and cons on that amendment.

Melanie Plenda:

Can you share a few of those pros and cons with this?

Anna Brown:

We do have some concern about what is going on with people as they are getting older. Is there perhaps some cognitive decline? That's a huge conversation that has happened with President Biden, with former President Trump, and it continues to this day. Another pro is that it actually ensures that you have sort of that fresh issue perspective coming onto the courts. So it's not so much as whether they're cognitively there, but also are they in tune with your average voter? Certainly, we know that demographics change based on what age group you're in, how you feel about certain issues. For example, we think about generational changes, things such as interracial marriage and gay marriage — there were sometimes very big gaps in terms of how younger people felt and how older people felt about the same issue. 

We also have that higher age that people are living, thriving, even working, and especially in New Hampshire we have one of the oldest states on average in the nation. And we're seeing folks who may be past traditional retirement age, say Social Security retirement age, who are still interested in working, are still vibrant, and indeed bring a lot of experience and knowledge to their jobs. The same thing is very much true for judges. The more experience you have on the bench, the more connections you have with lawyers and prosecutors and defenders, and so on. You might be able to have a more efficient court, a more knowledgeable court, as opposed to constantly bringing in new people and just giving up all of that knowledge and experience when there really isn't a reason to boot it out. I will say five years is not a huge change. We're not getting rid of the age limit entirely with this proposal. We're just saying, instead of 70 it’s 75. This also would not affect sheriffs, because there are some arguments, of course, that a law enforcement position is a little bit different. This part of the amendment would only impact the age limit for judges.

Melanie Plenda:

And, as awesome as Citizens Count is, there are also other ways to scope out the candidates. What do you recommend Anna?

Anna Brown:

Definitely, if you can find some local candidate events, parades, at town hall forums, public libraries, sometimes at your local school. There are going to be these events where the candidates are on hand. The audience is probably similar to what you might see at your town meeting. And they'll interact with you. You can get a really good sense of a person, what they'll be like as a legislator, if you have that conversation with them.

I talked about how we call a lot of these candidates and have conversations with them. The vast, vast majority are interested in engaging in that conversation. Because, realistically, these people are volunteers. They get paid $100 a year plus mileage. They're doing this because they are deeply passionate about it. Every now and then you are going to find someone who is contrary and doesn't like to talk to people. But in a House full of 400 representatives, there's always going to be that small margin. Overall, I have such positive experiences, and I hear that from other people too. However, if you're an introvert and you don't want to go out and talk to candidates, your local newspaper is often a wonderful resource in terms of finding these issue positions. They’ll do candidate profiles, have interviews. That's not something you're going to get from national news coverage, and that's one reason why local news sources are so important. You can also go directly to the candidate websites or other interest groups. Just be aware that how certain issue positions are phrased may be intended to lead you in a certain direction, or may be a little general. So if someone says, “I support veterans,” try to dig a little deeper and say, “What does that really mean?”

Melanie Plenda:

Anna Brown is the executive director of Citizens Count, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization dedicated to educating voters about the political process. She is also the executive director of the Warren B. Rudman Center for Justice, Leadership, and Public Service at the University of New Hampshire’s Franklin Pierce School of Law. Thank you for joining us. 

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

How the Civic Health Index sheds light on community trust and how to build it

The University of New Hampshire’s Carsey School of Public Policy released its 2024 Civic Health Index this month. The report examines several aspects of public life, including how much people trust each other and government institutions, attend public meetings, vote, and help their neighbors. On this episode of “The State We’re In,” Carsey School of Public Policy Interim Associate Director Michele Holt-Shannon and the report’s author, Quixada Moore-Vissing, founder of Public Engagement Partners discuss the findings.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

Melanie Plenda:

Michele, can you tell us more about the background of the Civic Health Index? 

Michele Holt-Shannon:

A lot has happened — not just the pandemic, a lot of just increasing division in our country. We had the Jan. 6 incident at the Capitol building, the murder of George Floyd, the response to that, and certainly that experience of the pandemic that really varied for people across the country, depending on their job and where they lived. We had questions around connecting with neighbors, volunteering, helping each other, feeling like you matter and belong. So there's, there's some data to look at today and to discuss and help us think about what we can do in the future.

Melanie Plenda:

Quixada, how was the data gathered for this report and how long did it take? 

Quixada Moore-Vissing:

We really wanted to understand how the pandemic and these other events of 2020 actually impact civic health in New Hampshire. Did it impact civic health? That was one of our big questions. So we looked at both pre-pandemic data, pandemic-level data, and then post-pandemic-level data to just kind of see what the changes are. Are there impacts during this point in time?

We used two data sources for the report. One so is the U.S. Census, and it has a civic engagement and volunteering supplement and a voting supplement. We pulled from both of those census supplements, but we also ran our own survey through the Granite State Poll, and we had used the Granite State Poll in the past, so we were able to make some longitudinal comparisons there as well. 

Melanie Plenda:

What were some of the report’s key findings? 

Quixada Moore-Vissing:

One of the big things that we found that was a surprise is that New Hampshire residents are feeling they matter less to their communities than they did in 2019. In 2019, we were at 76% of New Hampshire residents felt like they matter to their communities, and that fell to 43%. That's a 30 percentage point decrease. 

Connected to that, we also learned that we're generally connecting a bit less with others than we were before the pandemic. New Hampshire residents who do favors for their neighbors, helping someone, loan a lawnmower, or move an air conditioner — that fell from 11% to 5%. In  terms of people working to do positive things for their community, that fell from 27% in 2019 to 21% in 2021. Granite Staters are also hearing from or spending less time with their family and friends, from 85% to 81% — that data point is all 2021 data. So it'll be interesting to see in the next census data pool, if some of that rebounds, or if it stays the same. 

Some of the other things we found are that New Hampshire residents are attending public meetings less, so that that fell from 19% in 2019 to 12% in 2021. We also found that New Hampshire residents have a slight majority engaging across race, ethnicity, or culture that's different from their own. So that was another finding. 

In terms of voting — which I know is everyone's top of mind right now with the election coming up — we found that in the 2020 election there was record voter turnout across the nation. New Hampshire mirrored that trend, both in 2020 and in the midterm elections. In 2022, we had surges in voter turnout. We were above the rest of the country in that, but we kind of sort of mirrored that national trend. But one of the concerning things we saw about voting is that urban residents actually were voting less than suburban or rural residents in that election. 76% of rural people voted, for instance, in the 2020 election, compared with 57% of urban residents. 

We never measured belonging before in New Hampshire. What we found, in general, is that about half of New Hampshire residents are feeling like they belong to their local communities, but about half are feeling that they don't. So 49% of New Hampshire residents share that they belong in their local community; 59% felt comfortable expressing their opinions in their local community. About 55% felt satisfied with their relationships with others in the local community, and 62% felt connected to their local community. So, it depends how you slice the cake, right?  We could see this as a positive that we've got slight majorities feeling like they belong, but you could also say that there's about 50% of people in a lot of these outcomes that aren't feeling like they belong. 

Then the last thing that I wanted to mention, which is a big one, is that our trust in government in New Hampshire has dropped significantly since 2001 — that's trust both in national and local government. The trust in the national government is a more severe plummet. In 2001, about 31% of New Hampshire residents felt trust in the national government. It's now down to 17%, but actually only 1% of New Hampshire residents trust the national government all of the time, and about 49% almost never, trust the national government. Trust from 2019 to 2024 in the national government stayed about the same. So it was low in 2019 and just kind of stayed low. 

Trust in local government also fell from 2001 so we saw it fall from 53% to 36%, and then it stayed about the same from 2019 to 2024. So, interestingly, we're not seeing huge drops in trust in government from pre- and post-pandemic, but we are just seeing a general decline in trusting in both national and local governments since 2001.

Melanie Plenda:

Let’s explore some of those findings a bit more. Michele. When residents say they matter less and engage less, what does that mean and why should we all be concerned about that? 

Michele Holt-Shannon:

The mattering question is compelling, because people interpret it and answer the question differently. I'll note that some of the folks watching this may be familiar with the Youth Risk Behavior Survey that's done in schools. One of the questions on that survey a few years ago was whether or not young people feel like they matter to their community. The question wasn't there for a couple of years, and it's back now. I think it is an interesting one to think about, because I have a reaction that I hope people feel like they matter. When that number is low, it is concerning, and it says something about the state of community, of connectedness — of civic health, broadly. I think it can be a red flag when mattering numbers are low, when fewer people feel like they matter to a community. So it's a way of giving us a chance to say, we want that number to be higher. We want that number to be higher for young people, we want that number to be higher for everyone — that people would feel like they can engage, share their opinions and influence the community where they live.

Melanie Plenda:

Quixada, trust in local and national government is at an all-time low. Why is that, and what does that mean for the community? 

Quixada Moore-Vissing:

One of the frustrations about survey research is, we ask a question, such as how much do you trust the government? How much do you trust the national government? How much do you trust the local government? And people pick an option. I trust the government a lot or I trust the government not so much. What we don't know is the story behind that. What is behind the lack or loss of trust? 

But I can make some guesses. I think the one thing that's going on with trust nationally is that we've become such a polarized country, and that polarization at the national level is trickling down to the state level and is trickling down to local communities and public meetings. The fact is that whoever is elected, whatever party, there will be some people who are alienated by that leadership simply because of the party identity and how they conceptualize that now. I do think it's possible for a Democratic leader to try to really be inclusive of a lot of Republican ideas or a Republican leader to be inclusive of a lot of Democratic ideas, especially at the local level, and really, really listen to those points of view. 

The other thing that I think has been really difficult for trust in government is the amount of misinformation that we have right now, where it's very hard to know what is truth and what is something that has been fictionalized to try to sort of influence people towards a certain policy outcome. I think that's a big reason why we need lots of media literacy in our K-12 education to try to help prepare the next generations of Americans to be able to sort of make those judgments based on facts. 

I think there’s also a lot that government can do, particularly at the local level to try to build up trust. I would say some local governments are pretty good at these things, and some local governments aren’t. These are things like just being transparent about your processes. How do you make decisions? Why did you make a decision? Being inclusive about your processes. Did you really hear from everybody in the community? Did you go out of your way to hold a meeting at a time that would work for folks who were at work, or different kinds of populations in the community? Then also demonstrating responsiveness and following through when there's lots of people in the community asking about something or expressing concerns. If you gather the community and ask for their opinion, you actually follow through and tell them how their opinions were used to make a decision. 

Melanie Plenda:

Michele, now that this report is completed, what happens next? How can this information be used? What needs further study? 

Michele Holt-Shannon:

We hope people will certainly read this report and think about how it applies to their own work and community. One of the things that we're thinking about is voting. It is top of mind right now with the election coming up, and we are curious about some of those patterns. Are there linkages in terms of mattering and voting, and are there linkages across political identity and voting, and certainly digging into that urban-rural-suburban connection. We work with schools and towns and government commissions and nonprofits and help them think about how more people and more organizations are trying to engage the public or engage people in their community. How can they do that in ways that build trust, that are authentic?

I think we also are looking forward to understanding, as New Hampshire's diversity grows, what are the ways that we can foster belonging across differences in lots of different ways — racial, political, economic, and so on. Are we living in very isolated groupings, and are there ways to foster people coming together across different groups that help people feel connected to their community and interacting with people who are different from themselves, which is something that is helpful for us to do.

We all have biases. We all have experiences that you know can be limiting, and then we don't know what we don't know. Until we meet other people.  So talking across politics, I will say, is one thing that it actually can help us feel better and more hopeful about the direction of the country. If we get into a place where we're not talking with people who vote differently than us, then if I do that for too long, I'm starting to make up stories about the people who vote differently from me, and I need to interact. And for me, those people are in my family, and so I especially want to interact and save those relationships. So I think there's lots to think about personally in reading this — like, what do I want to do more of? And then also, as someone who works with communities, how do we help communities engage authentically, foster trust and enfranchise their community members?

Melanie Plenda:

This question is for both of you — what is the major takeaway for New Hampshire residents about this report, and what do you advise them to do about it?

Quixada Moore-Vissing:

We’ve presented some research findings to viewers of this show, and I hope that you can take action. The point of doing these reports is to actually inform some interventions around civic health that you build and can move positive outcomes forward and in the state. So that would be one thing. 

The other, I would say, is I think a lot of us are feeling pretty powerless when we look at national democracy and civic health right now. There's a lot going on nationally, and it can feel like you can’t even make a difference with the complexity of what's happening. The fact is, it's going to be hard to impact national policy sitting from our homes in New Hampshire, but what we can do is act locally and try to strengthen civic health at the local level.

For some of you, this may be work that you take on through an organization that you work with, that you volunteer with, but this can also be very individual behavior. Small acts, like showing someone in your community that they matter to you who might not know that. Some other things that can be done is that institutions, like local government, public schools, nonprofits, can try to brainstorm, “What are three ways this year that we can build community trust, and let's do that as part of our strategic plan.” I really encourage that at every level. I hope that we can take action around civic health. I am an idealist, but I do believe that if a lot of people are influencing their direct spheres of reference, that it can be a ripple effect, and that change can happen. So I hope to see that positive change in New Hampshire.

Michele Holt-Shannon:

I have to double down on local because it's where most of us have a stronger tie. We have relationships locally that start to be more distant the further away they are geographically. That's a place where I think you can think small but still have a big outcome, you can go out and meet more of your neighbors or go join a group in the community. From an individual level to all the things that you can do at your job, your organization, and a community group that you're a part of — I think little things pay off.

Melanie Plenda:

Thank you for joining us, Carsey School of Public Policy Interim Associate Director Michele Holt-Shannon and report author and founder of Public Engagement Partners Quixada Moore-Vissing.

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

Critics blast adequacy of PragerU online personal finance course

The online course consists of 15 educational videos, averaging five minutes apiece

By: Patrick Adrian - Granite State News Collaborative

CONCORD — The state Department of Education is drawing criticism again from educators and some lawmakers for renewing its partnership with PragerU, a conservative media nonprofit, to provide online instruction to students for high school credit. 

In addition to concerns about the organization’s right-wing political agenda and often-skewed educational content, education advocates said the approved financial literacy course is inadequate in content and quantity of instruction to qualify as a for-credit course. 

Megan Tuttle, president of the National Education Association New Hampshire chapter testifying against a bill earlier this year. (Post on X)

“Throughout his tenure, Commissioner (Frank) Edelblut’s agenda has been focused on weakening public schools, which are attended by nearly 90% of Granite State students,” said Megan Tuttle, president of the National Education Association New Hampshire chapter, in an email. 

“The renewal of a contract with an ideological profit-based entity to serve as a replacement for in-classroom financial literacy instruction is just another example of the Edelblut agenda that illustrates what’s at stake in the elections this fall,” Tuttle wrote. 

On Sept. 16, the State Board of Education voted unanimously to approve a five-year renewal with PragerU Kids to offer its online personal finance course, titled Cash Course, as part of the state’s Learn Everywhere program, which allows students to earn high school credits through state-approved extracurricular programs. 

The renewal extends a partnership that the board initially approved in September 2023 with PragerU for one year.

Crash Course is intended to be an alternative approach to traditional classroom learning, which is not effective with some students, a Department of Education spokesperson said. 

The online course consists of 15 videos, averaging five minutes apiece, on topics that include employment wages and benefits, budgeting, income taxes, types of investment accounts and managing credit and debt.  

A 32-question summative assessment is taken at the end of the course, according to PragerU’s renewal application to the board. A student must answer at least 26 questions correctly to receive a certificate of completion, which may be redeemed for academic credit. 

“The commissioner of education, for the last eight years, has been focused on creating quality opportunities for students to have bright futures,” the education department spokesperson explained in an email. 

‘There is a huge difference’

But many educators and lawmakers question whether Prager’s online course provides enough information and instruction to constitute a sufficient education in personal finance — or to merit half an academic credit, which is typically earned by completing a semester-long course. 

“There is a huge difference between a 60-hour semester-long course on financial literacy and 75 minutes of videos,” said John Pelletier, director of the Center of Financial Literacy at Champlain College in Burlington, Vt. 

John Pelletier Courtesy Champlain College Website

“Would (the New Hampshire Board of Education) call 75 minutes of videos an adequate course for driver’s education?” Pelletier asked. 

The State Board of Education also received strong pushback last year from educators, parents and other members of the public due largely to PragerU’s other video content. The organization, co-founded by conservative pundit Dennis Prager, frequently produces videos for children and adults that feature right-leaning viewpoints on topics that include climate change, LGBTQ and immigration. 

Educators and lawmakers said they do not object to the Cash Course content, which provides accurate information in an objective and straightforward manner. 

But five-minute videos on complex topics such as investing and retirement planning are, at best, supplemental learning materials, as opposed to a replacement for a substantive, semester-long course, Pelletier said. 

“For the (Board of Education) to say that these two are equivalent is an insult to the state legislators, the governor and to educators all across the country,” Pelletier said. 

A growing need for financial literacy

New Hampshire is one of 26 states in the country that are on track to require schools to provide instruction in personal finance literacy by 2031, said Pelletier, whose center provides resources to help educators nationwide create financial literacy programs. 

New Hampshire lawmakers passed a bill in 2022, HB 1263, making personal finance literacy a requirement in school curricula. The law took effect last school year. 

Rep. Rick Ladd, R-Haverhill, chairman of the House Education Committee, said too many New Hampshire students are graduating without a basic understanding of essential personal finances, from budgeting to balancing a checkbook.

“Too many students coming out of high school do not have an awareness of what they will face financially in the real world,” Ladd said in an interview. 

The law gives schools flexibility to decide how to deliver this instruction, which could include creating a self-contained personal finance course or embedding the curriculum into other courses, such as math or an economics elective, Ladd explained. 

Under House Bill 1263, each school district must develop competencies and curriculum for personal finance literacy that align the state’s academic standards. The State Board of Education approved a set of standards for financial literacy at its meeting in September. 

These standards must receive approval next from the Legislative Oversight Committee, which was scheduled to review them, along with new proposed educational rule changes, on Oct. 17. 

‘Turning it into a nothing-burger’

Some lawmakers worry that the board acted prematurely by extending the PragerU course before academic standards are finalized. 

“Public schools haven’t been able to use the course for long enough to provide (adequate) feedback on it,” said Rep. David Luneau, D-Hopkinton, a member of the House Education Committee and Joint Legislative Oversight Committee. 

At a Monday meeting, members of the Manchester Board of School Committee peppered N.H. Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut at a meeting of the Manchester Board of School Committee earlier this year.. Andrew Sylvia—Manchester Ink Link

Members of the education committee are also concerned that Commissioner Edelblut’s proposed rule changes would make personal finance literacy a graduation requirement, which goes against the law passed by the legislature, Luneau said in an interview. 

School districts that are already financially stretched might feel compelled to enroll students in the PragerU course, which is free, rather than increase their budgets to staff a course in-house, Luneau said. 

“Watching videos online is clearly not education,” Luneau said. “It’s not even close to the rigor (and content) that a public school course would offer.”

The national standards for financial literacy, developed jointly by the Council for Economic Education and Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy, spans over 40 pages and provides academic standards and learning outcomes for students in grades 4 through 12. Pelletier, who cited this as an example of an ideal curriculum model for finance literacy, said 75 minutes of videos is about 4% of the instructional time that a semester-long course would provide. 

“It feels as if the Board of Education is trying to take a substantial educational requirement (by the Legislature) and are turning it into a nothing-burger,” Pelletier said. 

‘Positive feedback’

The Department of Education said the PragerU partnership is intended to expand learning opportunities in financial literacy, not to undermine the Legislature’s goal. 

“PragerU Kids Cash Course, as one of those very successful alternative educational opportunities, has received positive feedback from its Learn Everywhere participants,” the department spokesperson said. “Financial literacy is a crucial life skill (and) students with the tools to manage their finances early helps them to become financially successful adults.”

As of last month, 37 students in New Hampshire had enrolled in Cash Course, including 11 who have passed the course, 23 who are in progress toward completion and three who have dropped the course, Dzana Homan, director of education and education outreach at PragerU Kids, told the board at its meeting Sept. 16. 

Seven of nine students who participated in a post-course survey said that they found the course an effective way to learn and that they were satisfied with the content. 

In survey comments, two students suggested updating the curricular content to show how changing economic conditions are impacting young adults or the ways that people make personal finance decisions. 

New Hampshire is one of several states that have approved PragerU as an education program vendor. Other states include Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Montana, Oklahoma and Texas.

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

Funding concerns weigh heavily on state’s public charter schools

Amid pending lawsuits, they seek a seat at the table over any changes in the system

By Susan Geier-Granite State News Collaborative 

Amid lawsuits over how New Hampshire funds its public schools, the level of scrutiny into how those taxpayer dollars are used remains hotly debated among educators and policymakers. 

And while proponents of so-called “school choice” say it’s good for families to have options beyond traditional public schools, those options aren’t held to the same standards. 

Outside of traditional public schools, the state will spend $60 million on public charter schools and nearly $28 million for 5,321 school vouchers in the 2024-25 school year. The vouchers are used to pay for homeschooling, private or religious education expenses to qualifying families. 

Advocates of charter schools emphasize that they are public schools monitored by the state and held to the same financial and academic standards as traditional schools, unlike non-public schools and homeschools in the Education Freedom Account program, which are not.

The EFA program is managed through a contracted third party, the Children’s Scholarship Fund, but much of the data on the program is not publicly available. 

“There is no accountability at all” for the EFA program, said Jodi Adams, executive director of the N.H. Alliance for Public Charter Schools. “Charter schools have the same type of paperwork as traditional public schools do. We have to follow the same rules.”

The state’s Office of the Legislative Budget Assistant, which is responsible for conducting a performance audit of the EFA, said during a recent meeting of the Joint Legislative Performance Audit and Oversight Committee that most documents pertaining to the EFA program are missing due to the “lack of access to primary program data and information.” 

Since EFA’s inception in 2021, vouchers have accounted for more than $73 million from public education funding.

The state’s 32 charter schools serve 6,015 students at a cost of about $60 million this school year. They are funded directly by the state at approximately $9,000 per student ($4,100 in state adequacy aid plus a $4,900 additional grant). That is considerably less than the statewide average cost of $20,000 per traditional public school student, according to state data.

Charter schools also receive differentiated aid for certain individual factors, such as English language learners, free and reduced lunch, and students with special needs. They must fundraise to cover the rest of their costs — such as renting space at market rates, and buying materials and equipment. 

While the primary focus of two pending school-funding lawsuits  – Contoocook Valley School District et al. v. State of New Hampshire and Steven Rand et al. v. State of New Hampshire –  is “traditional public-school funding … we want to make sure charter school advocates are at the table and involved,” says Jodi Adams, executive director of the N.H. Alliance for Public Charter Schools. (Courtesy photo)

“The primary focus of those (school funding) lawsuits are traditional public-school funding, but we want to make sure charter school advocates are at the table and involved,” said Adams, whose own child attended a charter school. “If there's anything that comes out of the lawsuit(s) that looks at redoing funding or making over how public schools are funded in the state, charter schools want to be part of the conversation. We don’t want to get lost in the shuffle.”

Becoming a charter school

A proposal for a new charter school must go through several steps once an application is filed, according to the N.H. Department of Education. There is a legal review of the application, a peer review, a commissioner review, then a state board review for approval. 

Once in operation, charter schools undergo reviews and site visits in the first and third years, followed by a five- year charter renewal review and site visit. Additionally, charters pay for an external audit, submit an annual accountability report, and file an annual financial report — something all public schools must do, and which are available online. 

Still, charter schools struggle with enrollment and financial issues, or worse. For example, Lionheart Classical Academy in Peterborough, which opened in 2022, is under scrutiny for its governance and financial practices. Eleven charter schools have closed since the first one opened in 2004. Most recently, LEAF Chartered Public School in Alstead filed for bankruptcy and shut its doors in April after seven years. Coastal Waters School in Exeter closed earlier this year in the face of alleged embezzlement and fraud after just two years of operation.

“There are some nefarious actors out there,” Adams said. “But our position is that N.H. DOE has safeguards in place so that these things are found out and people are monitored and audited.” 

The N.H. Department of Education’s Bureau of Federal Compliance conducts an annual risk assessment of traditional and charter schools. It oversees activities of federal grant programs to determine whether organizations are following federal fiscal requirements.

According to the bureau, risk assessment is used to determine the likelihood that a school may fail to comply with applicable rules. A high-risk level doesn’t indicate failure to comply nor does a low-risk level indicate the school is compliant. 

During the 2023-24 school year, the bureau found 19 high-risk traditional districts and five high-risk charter schools after conducting site monitoring visits. The bureau looks at a variety of things, including policies and procedures, cash management and use of money.

Adams was on the board of Making Community Connections, which had a school in Keene and one in Manchester. The Keene school was thriving, but Manchester’s was not.

“We had more at-risk students (in Manchester), and once COVID hit, we had a struggle to get these kids to continue,” Adams said. “We would try different ways to engage them, but it was hard for them to come back.”

Many students were unsheltered, worked full time, or had families with substance abuse issues. With a drop in enrollment, the school closed at the end of the 2021 school year. 

‘Public funds to support private schools’

Meryl Levin, director of Mill Falls Charter School, deliberately chose to be in Manchester. Mill Falls was opened in 2011 through a group of parents who wanted a Montessori education beyond preschool. Today, it has a freestanding kindergarten and serves students through sixth grade as the state’s only public charter Montessori school. 

It provides special education services and is reimbursed by the local school district.

“We share students,” Levin said of the school’s relationship with the local district, adding the majority of them are from Manchester, but there are students from other towns, selected through a public lottery. “We are leaning into the public piece. I am a product of public schools. More than a third of our students live below the poverty line. It is baked into our mission to be here. “

Levin has strong feelings when it comes to the EFA program.

“It’s using public funds to support private schools,” she said. “It doesn’t just affect charter public schools, but all public schools. The state doesn’t put enough money into education. They need to invest in its future so that there are more teachers, cops and firefighters, lawyers and managers.” 

To Levin, it’s not about traditional public versus charter schools, but the entire education ecosystem. 

“I don’t differentiate between charter and traditional public in terms of funding, because as a state we have not made the best choices what schools need,” she said.

She noted that, for kids who require special education and related services, such as physical and occupational therapies, there is a shortage of funds and practitioners, especially in rural areas. Only students enrolled in public schools or placed in a private school by the district have a right to comprehensive special education services. 

Emily Whelan is executive director of the Next charter school in Derry, which serves at-risk high school students. The school is capped at 80 students and is located inside the Gilbert H. Hood Middle School in Derry. About 10 percent of its students come from outside of Derry, but the majority are tuition students from Derry.

“The idea of the school came from the district,” Whelan said. “The superintendent said, ‘There are students who are not finishing high school,’ and came to us with a solution to offer those students a different kind of education.” 

The school receives federal Title I, II, VI funding to support its students, and Whelan supplements that money by lining up grants. She said slow, intentional growth has been key to the school’s success over the 11 years since it opened with the help with a federal charter school startup grant. 

When it comes to oversight, Whelan said no one on the board has access to money or students. There is a double signature policy in place — only the board president or treasurer can sign a check with Whelan. 

She declined to comment about the EFA program and its effect on public schools. 

Whelan did question how feasible it will be to continue to increase the number of charter schools, since they must raise so much money to stay in operation. 

“New Hampshire is not a young and vibrant state. School enrollment across the state is decreasing,” she said. “I don’t see charter schools popping up all over the place.” 

Two new charter schools, Synergy in Concord and Seacoast Classical in Newton, opened this school year. Four are set to open next year: Cornerstone in the Mount Washington Valley, Wellheart in Milford, Northstar in Ossipee and New Hampshire Career Academy (which will have multiple sites in partnership with the Community College System). 

Decreasing enrollment

Charter schools have reported a steady increase in enrollment, while homeschooling attendance has dropped since the height of the pandemic, according to a 2023 Reaching Higher NH report. Private school enrollment has dipped slightly. 

News reports have touted that public school attendance has been in a steady decline, but that tracks with the fact that there are fewer school-age children. The state experienced the largest percentage reduction in people under age 18 (about 10.5 percent) of any state from 2010 to 2020, according to the N.H. Fiscal Policy Institute. 

For Levin, the greatest challenge for charter schools is funding. She said she is fortunate to have dedicated staff members, but cannot offer them the kind of retirement and health care packages available in traditional districts.

Plus, there are the lingering effects of COVID. 

“It’s hard to find people to volunteer their time,” she said. “COVID is still clearly in play. It is not in the rearview mirror. The mindset of the community has shifted.” 

Levin said Mill Falls had a robust after-school program, but since COVID there has been a lack of participation. 

“People are slow to volunteer and come to things. It impacts funding,” she said. 

That is why the fate of public school funding is so important, said Christina Pretorius, public policy director of Reaching Higher NH, a nonprofit public education policy organization. 

“Every dollar spent on vouchers is money that is not being spent in district schools and public charter schools,” Pretorius said, referring to the EFA program. “Year after year, we have bills to do things like increase special education funding that don’t succeed … but we have $28 million (this year) to give to school vouchers?” 

Reaching Higher, Pretorius said, doesn’t support or oppose any specific legislation but it does want to shed light on the voucher program. 

“We are not unique in this trend here in New Hampshire,” she said. “We are seeing across the country that wealthier families are receiving them, and there is a real lack of transparency and accountability on how they are being used. “

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

How the ‘Counting the Vote’ special on PBS debunks concerns about the election process

On this episode of “The State We’re In,” Melanie Plenda talks with Margaret Hoover, host of PBS’s “Firing Line” about the show’s recent one-hour special, “Counting the Vote.”  It contains fascinating sections about election procedures and all things that, perhaps in the past, people didn't think about much, but today have become embroiled in controversy.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity.

Melanie Plenda: 

When you were conceiving the special with your team, what went into it? What was it like putting this show together? 

Margaret Hoover:

I’m glad to help shine a light on what I think is ultimately one of the most important functions of democracy, which is how we administer a vote in a way that engenders confidence with the electorate. After 18 months of conceiving of this project and bringing it to air, I have concluded, and I hope viewers will conclude, that there is a very, very good case to be made that elections in the United States are safe, secure, transparent and trustworthy. They are not only those four things – they are the most safe, the most secure, the most transparent and the most trustworthy in the world by a lot, and probably in the course of human history. We have a lot to be confident about, but we also need to shine a light on how we do it, so that we can demystify and answer some of the conspiracy theories and doubts that circulate, so that people will have confidence in the integrity of our elections.

What went into it was simply traveling and talking to people and doing the research. We don't have one election for president in this country on Nov. 5, 2024. We have 50 state elections for electors, and those 50 states administer the elections in 10,000-plus jurisdictions across the country, and in a way that federalism really protects the security of our elections. There's no way to rig the presidential election in this country, which is a wonderful sort of innovation of the founding fathers that is embedded in the Constitution. Every state gets to choose how to administer its votes. What it also means is, when there are states that are incredibly close, one has to really understand how that state chooses to administer its elections. 

Melanie Plenda:

As you went through this process and conducted these interviews what surprised you?

Margaret Hoover:

One of the things that surprised me is that you hear as you evaluate — and we all hear some of the doubts and concerns that are circulated on the Internet amongst our friends and neighbors — one you hear frequently is, “Well, we should just all have paper ballots” because there's this concern or fear that some of the election machinery might be susceptible to being hacked or manipulated. People suggest that perhaps the algorithms can be changed, or we don't know what they are. Actually, as it turns out, about 98% of the ballots in the United States have a paper trail. In other words, you count on a machine, but there is an actual paper ballot correlated to each individual's vote. So we do have a way of checking. There is no way of hacking or manipulating the election machinery or the algorithms or the computers to change the votes because we have a process for hand-counting ballots in certain states just to ensure that they work. Also, many states implement automatic audits, where you audit the vote almost immediately following the vote itself, just to ensure the integrity of the vote. 

The other thing that was really wonderful to see, particularly in the battleground states we visited, but also in the states that are deep red — states like Utah, that administers 100% mail-in voting. The election boards love to have people come and watch. They have basically created facilities where journalists, media, civic groups — any kind of group — can come and visit and see how elections are administered. 

I really encourage anyone who has concern about how your local elections are administered to get in touch with your local election board and see if you can set up a visit or volunteer, because there is, first of all, a real dearth of people who are wanting to volunteer because there have been so many threats leveled at individuals who volunteer. These are volunteers in a service that is critically necessary for representative democracy, that depends on ensuring that we have a stable and confident vote amongst our people in order to secure our elected representatives. Go volunteer and take a look around, because those folks are doing really great work. They're fastidious in every single state about how they count the ballots, secure the ballots, process the ballots, and are doing really good work on behalf of all of us.

Melanie Plenda:

Which states do you think might face some challenges? 

Margaret Hoover:

The first time we saw real challenges to the counting in many, many states, which led to the challenging of accepting the slates of electors at the counting of the electoral ballots last Jan. 6, 2020. The states that were questioned last time are still of concern this time maybe perhaps with the exception of Michigan. But I think Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona and Georgia are all states that are going to be very, very close, but they have done different things in each state to prepare. 

So Georgia, for example, passed an election law which actually led to more people voting in 2022 than had ever voted in the state of Georgia before. They've really done a number of things to increase the transparency, security, trustworthiness and integrity of the elections in Georgia. 

On the other hand, Pennsylvania we know will be very, very close. The legislature tried to consider several bills, but they just could never get anything passed in order to lock down any of these standards of election integrity or apply any of these new standards of election integrity.

You'll see in the film a very frustrated election commissioner from Philadelphia, who actually was the only Republican from Philadelphia Election Commission to stand up — well, not the only one, but one of the ones who stood up — and said, “In fact, I've counted and I've recounted and we've re-audited, and I can confirm that Joe Biden won Philadelphia and won Pennsylvania,” to much criticism, frankly, and direct threats by the Republican Party and Donald Trump. But still, Pennsylvania has not taken the steps it needs to pre-process ballots, and so it will take longer for them to process and get a result in Pennsylvania — in particular the Philadelphia area, because in Philadelphia, they cannot start opening ballots and counting ballots until 7 p.m. on Election Day.

Melanie Plenda:

We recently had state primaries for congressional districts and governor. New Hampshire officials have always talked about how secure our elections are — even before 2020, that was really a point of pride for our former secretary of state. What struck me when I listened to the most recent slate of candidates was the number of them who didn’t outright deny the election results, but said, “they had questions” or thought there were “irregularities.” What is the advantage for candidates to say this? You would think in some respects it would depress turnout because they are essentially saying the process might be rigged. What do you think the political calculus is there?

Margaret Hoover:

Well, there isn't a sensible one, honestly. Arizona is a great example actually, where people would say, “Maybe there were some uncertainties or problems in Arizona.” Except Republicans won all down the ballot in Arizona in 2020, but Donald Trump didn't win the state. What happened, as election officials and also former state representatives and electors in Arizona explained, is that many, many Republicans — as many as 12,000 — left the top of the ballot blank, didn't vote for Donald Trump and then voted for Republicans all down ballot. So it's hard if you're a Republican in Arizona to say there was election fraud because you got elected as a Republican, even though Donald Trump didn't. 

I say this as a Republican who has observed what has happened in the Republican Party and the realignment. There has been, I've observed, a shift in how we talk about elections. I think it's so important to shine a light on this issue because, for certain Republicans, it has become a litmus test to suggest there might be something untoward about elections, and if New Hampshire Republicans say the election was great in New Hampshire, it's just somewhere else that there might have been trouble they’re contributing to this sowing of doubt because we have audited elections in all four of the states that were challenged in for the Electoral College in 2020 on January 6. Those ballots have been counted and recounted. They have been audited. They have been viewed by outside groups. You can go look at all of the information and all of the theories, and that's why administration officials from the Trump administration, in the Department of Justice, in the Department of Homeland Security, in the Department of Defense have all said that 2020, was actually the most secure election in American history. 

This is about politics, not about how well we administer our elections, and I think as long as we can point that out to people and people can recognize or actually just ask themselves, if they're hearing some kind of uncertainty around the elections, is this a political point or is this actually about the transparency and the integrity of how my local elections are being administered? 

Because one of the other things that we see recently in the news is that many people believe that their state and their locality does a good job administering elections, but they worry about other states. I think that's another piece of this too, that transparency helps shine a light on how every state does this, and how we can improve the functioning of the election administration in each state. It's up to each state legislature and each secretary of state and governor to get that done in their state. But, I think, too often casting doubt on the integrity of our elections has become a political talking point on the right that actually undermines the public's confidence in our elections. 

Melanie Plenda:

What are you working on now for “Firing Line?” What’s coming up in the next few weeks? 

Margaret Hoover:

I think I can tease that we’re planning to have Gen. H.R. McMaster on the program in the coming weeks. I also plan to have some election administration officials on the program to talk about what has been happening in some of these key swing states that are likely to be states that we're talking about on election night and election week that take a little bit of time to vote. 

An election official from Arizona will be on along with an election official from Michigan, and a Republican election lawyer, will also be on. We're going to just spend some time making sure that the public is aware that we're probably not going to know the answer of who won the election on Nov. 5. It's going to take several days, maybe even a week or two, to ensure that all the ballots are counted, especially with the tragic and really cataclysmic storms that have hit Florida and North Carolina that will just inevitably slow down the process. We want to make sure we count every ballot and ensure that it is secure and transparent and trustworthy and fair.

Melanie Plenda:

Margaret Hoover, host of “Firing Line,” thank you so much for joining us. 

“The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members. These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.

Fostering civic engagement: New Hampshire's initiative to strengthen voter education

Pretty much everyone agrees — civic education is important. But why? And what exactly does that entail? On this episode of “The State We’re In,” New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan and Lily Woo, the state’s Civic and Voter Education Coordinator talk about a new initiative to foster civic education in the state.

By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been edited for length and clarity. 

Melanie Plenda:

First, let’s talk about civics. Secretary Scanlan, how would you define what that is and why it’s important? 

David Scanlan:

Well, civics is a basic understanding of our government, and from my perspective, state government is just very, very important. Every citizen of New Hampshire has the opportunity to participate in their government, and they do that through their right to vote, and if they are a registered voter, then they also have the right to run for office. That process is integral, integral to our society and the way that it operates. So it is really, really important that that system function very, very well.

Melanie Plenda:

Tell us about the role of the civic and voter education coordinator and what you hope comes from it. 

David Scanlan:

In my experience in government, which has spanned over several decades in a number of different areas, there just seems to be a general decline in confidence that voters have when they go to the voting booths. Along with that comes a lot of misinformation and disinformation that is out there flowing around, and it is becoming more and more prevalent through the use of social media and the sophisticated and technical ways that we have to communicate today, as opposed to the way we communicated 20 years ago. That coincides with a decline in the knowledge that voters have about how their electoral system works.

While I have spent a lot of time over the last 20 years helping to educate poll workers and individuals that are engaged in the actual process of conducting elections, I find now that it is really important that we reach out to voters and educate in those processes as well. 

Most voters, when they go to their polling place, they check in, they receive a ballot, they mark the ballot, and they turn it into the moderator, and then they leave the polling place. What they may not be aware of when they go through that process is the many checks and balances that are built into our system that help guarantee and make sure that their votes are accurately counted and that the process is working properly. We have to take the time to help our voters understand that, and the way we do it is to be more transparent and educate the voting public — not only when they go through the polling place, but at every opportunity that we have when they engage in their civic government. 

So that's why I believe it's important that we have this position now of civics and voter education outreach coordinator, so that we can be proactive in reaching out to students and groups and everyday citizens about how our governmental system works, and why it is important that they understand that process and participate in it.

Melanie Plenda:

Lily, I'd love to know how you are finding the role, and tell us more about what you've been up to.

Lily Woo:

First of all, not having a blueprint has been a bit challenging. I think the atmosphere is very fraught right now with misinformation, disinformation, and that is challenging. But I think with all of these challenges, there comes excitement for the opportunity to be part of a team that works hard to be proactive and that combats the misinformation, the disinformation.

I think, as a former teacher, it's ironic to me that we teach our students to hand in work that is theirs. We teach our students to do the right thing when nobody's watching. So the excitement of this position is to be part of a team that combats the misinformation, the disinformation and the artificial intelligence that's out there. I think that's pretty common with challenges and opportunities. 

One of the things that I really enjoyed was being part of the election training and talking to the election officials out there and hearing from them what they're seeing in the public, and eventually putting together a curriculum that will address the issues that the election officials are bringing up.

Melanie Plenda:

What are they seeing in the public? What are the issues?

Lily Woo:

They are issues that can be as foundational as, what do you need to register to vote? I think there can be issues that are more complex, like, what are you allowed to wear in a polling station to, when can I change my party affiliation? There's a primary election, there's a general election, and the rules are different — or at least to a certain extent — not vastly different, but there are things that are different. So I think there are issues that certainly we can help to educate the public on that will help election officials be able to concentrate on having a polling station that is run efficiently and eliminate all of those layers of having to repeat the answer to the same questions.

Melanie Plenda:

Lily, you mentioned the curriculum. What are your goals for developing a curriculum about civics? 

Lily Woo:

Anytime you develop a curriculum, you always have to begin with the end in mind. In this case, you begin with an end in mind of two pillars. The one pillar being the foundational elements of civics, which is individual rights, the rights guaranteed in the Constitution, the rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. The other pillar is civic responsibility. 

So if you begin with that end in mind, the other piece you need is the why. If you can get to the foundational elements of “what does it mean to be a citizen with individual rights?” you can start to give students the tools to combat the misinformation, the disinformation. If you can give students a sound relation to what it means to be civically responsible. Well, then you give them a tool to be good citizens in society, and then ultimately that's going to hopefully build trust in foundational systems that have been the bedrock of communities and this country.

Melanie Plenda:

This question is for both of you. How will this help educators? Lily, let's start with you.

Lily Woo:

Being an educator myself, I think it's not just about handing the school a curriculum and saying, “have at it.” I think there are a lot of factors that go into being in front of a body of students, whether it's 15, 25, 35. So I think knowing classroom teachers have a resource here, knowing that I understand what it is like to be in a classroom, I hope is helpful to educators.

David Scanlan:

This is really a multi-stage program, and the curriculum part of it is the long-term planning. How do we get a program, a solid program, that school districts can use around the state to teach students in the classroom? But beyond that, there are other groups out there that are important to this process, and it’s important that we reach out to them as well.

So we have some initiatives going where we've been working with veterans’ groups to try and get out and communicate with veterans.They already know about civics because they have sacrificed for our country in different ways, and we want to pull from that experience that they've had and the respect that they have in their own communities and try and engage them to become participants in the election process in terms of helping at polls and other things.

We had a great “I Voted” sticker contest that was in the school system. That's something that we can continue as a program. That's kind of a short-term initiative, but it generates tremendous interest and gets students engaged at a very early level. There may be other things that we can do, like essay contests in the higher grades. There are some awards that we can issue that are sponsored by national organizations, like the National Association of Secretaries of State, to young adults — whether they're high school seniors or college students or even slightly beyond that — to recognize individuals for their efforts in the community that have engaged in a civic way. 

Melanie Plenda:

That leads to our next question for the both of you: How will this help students and/or the general public?

David Scanlan:

The idea is just to help students and the general public understand things about the election process that they might not know. And if they do know, we'll give them confidence that we have a great system in New Hampshire, and that because of that, you should have confidence in the results of the elections. And to let them know that the opportunity is certainly there for them to become active participants in that process, so they can see firsthand and experience firsthand how these systems work and understand the checks and balances that are at play.

If we can encourage adults and voters to do that, then I think the misinformation part is going to take care of itself. When people become aware and knowledgeable, it is less easy to fall victim to incorrect facts out there about the election process itself. 

Lily Woo:

One of the things that I know about this office, and I know the secretary is very keyed in on, is recognizing and acknowledging when students or when the public is engaged in the civic process. If we can continue building the foundation for students and creating civically literate graduates who enter into this world, hopefully that spirit of engagement will continue and will carry on for a lifetime — whether it is volunteering at the polls on Election Day or whether it is continuing to look out for neighbors, be part of the community, that everyone's moving in the same direction toward the public good. When everybody's rowing in the same direction, good things are going to happen.

Melanie Plenda:

Here’s another question for the both of you: As we approach the election, what would you like people to know about the process as it stands right now? 

David Scanlan:

Well, New Hampshire has a unique system in terms of its elections, and what makes it unique is the fact that we elect our local election officials at the local level, so people's neighbors, their peers, family and friends, are actually the ones that are running the election — the polling place that voters will go to in that community. Those individuals are elected because people have faith in their ability, they believe in their integrity and their honesty, and that goes a long way in giving them some confidence. 

We have a very human process too, and errors can be made. I mean, people can make an error in adding numbers together when they're reporting final results, but our system is built to withstand that because it is easy to request a recount in the state. We now perform audits of ballot counting devices and things like that. So while the system was not designed to be perfect, it was built to accurately reflect who won an election when the dust settles, and New Hampshire does a great job. 

I mentioned that there are checks and balances at play in the polling place, and some of those involve the political parties themselves. They are allowed to make appointments of participants in the polling place, and the best example of that are the inspectors of election, which are more commonly known as the ballot clerks. Those individuals are the ones that hand a ballot to the voter when they're checking in, while the other individual crosses the name of the voter off the checklist. That's usually a Republican and a Democrat sitting side by side, engaging in that process. So not only can they keep an eye on each other, but they can also see what is going on in the polling place itself — and it's those checks and balances that are really important to just making sure that the system works properly. 

At the end of the night, when the moderator announces the results, the ballots are all packaged up and placed in boxes with security tape. There's a seal that is placed over those boxes that has to be signed by the selectmen in the town, and those seals are not broken unless there is a request for a recount or a court orders a ballot box be opened up for some reason. So those are the things that we need voters to understand and become aware of, and that's part of the importance of the program that Lily is engaging in right now. 

It’s also important for voters to understand the three different branches of government and the role that each plays in the process of elections. That's something that people are becoming less and less knowledgeable about, and it's time that we reverse that trend and make sure that people understand that the judicial branch of government, the executive branch of government and the legislative branch of government all have really important roles to play in our democratic process.

Lily Woo:

Having gone with the election trainers from this office and meeting with the election officials in the different towns across the state, what I would want the public to know is, as the secretary said, these people are your friends and your neighbors, and they are the ones that are making the process as efficient and as comfortable as possible for everyone. I think the public needs to know that.

As somebody said to me in one of the training sessions, “New Hampshire is working hard to do it right.” I think that is something that is a credit to the office here that is training the officials. I think it's a credit to the election officials, and I think it's a credit to the patience of the public — that if something is not going right at the polls, well, it's time to find the moderator and to ask the moderator questions about what is going on. But I think, as the secretary said, there are checks and balances built into the process. I think certainly voters should go in confident that New Hampshire is getting it right.

Melanie Plenda:

Well, you two have a lot on your plate, especially in the coming weeks. Good luck with these endeavors. Thank you for joining us, Secretary of State David Scanlan and Lily Woo, the state’s civic and voter education coordinator

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visitcollaborativenh.org. “The State We’re In” is a weekly digital public affairs show produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members.

Percentage of low-income families receiving school vouchers has dropped significantly since start of EFA program

Analysis of state numbers shows proportion has dropped from 54% to 37% since 2021

By Susan Geier-Granite State News Collaborative

More New Hampshire families that don’t qualify as low-income are receiving publicly funded school vouchers to pay for private, religious and homeschooling expenses through the state’s Education Freedom Account program.

The information, based on data from the New Hampshire Department of Education, shows enrollment in the school voucher program grew 25 percent since last school year. The state will now fund 5,321 school vouchers in the 2024-2025 school year, for a total estimated cost of $27.7 million for the year, according to an analysis by Reaching Higher NH, the nonprofit that studies education and education policy.

It's striking that the data shows proportionally fewer students receiving the vouchers are low-income, said Christina Pretorius, Reaching Higher’s public policy director. 

In 2021, nearly 54 percent of the total student enrollment were low-income (879 students out of 1,635), Reaching Higher found. This year, 37 percent of students, or 1,974 out of 5,321 students, were low-income.

In its analysis, Reaching Higher measured low-income students as those eligible for participation in the Free and Reduced Price Meals Program.

The vouchers are given through the state’s Education Freedom Account program and funded through the state’s Education Trust Fund.  To qualify for EFA money, a family household income may not exceed 300 percent of the poverty level. In 2021, that was $79,500 for a family of four, and now it is $93,600.

After that first year, families are not required to prove income eligibility while the child is in school up to the age of 20.

The EFA program has been subject to a strong partisan divide since a sole-source contract to manage the program and distribute the money was awarded to the New York-based Children’s Scholarship Fund in 2021. Democrats and others say it diverts essential public school funds, while Republicans and program supporters say it gives parents education choice.

The Children’s Scholarship Fund and details of the EFA program are not subject to the same level of accountability – financially and academically – as traditional public schools and public charter schools in the state. 

“Every dollar spent on vouchers is money that is not being spent in district schools and public charter schools,” Pretorius said in an interview. “Year after year, we have bills to do things like increase special education funding that don’t succeed … but we have $28 million (this year) to give to school vouchers.” 

Reaching Higher noted by the end of this school year, $73 million in school vouchers will have been distributed through the EFA program.

Gov. Chris Sununu and EFA proponents say the money is justified to give parents options beyond traditional public schools. 

But, Pretorius said, other public programs, like Medicaid, WIC (the Women’s, Infants and Children food nutrition program), fuel assistance and free and reduced lunch, require annual income verification and are subject to public scrutiny. Recipients of EFA funds aren’t.

Sununu has said it would be disruptive if a family had to change schools because of a change in income, adding that public school students are not means-tested.

Pretorius also questioned whether families would actually withdraw from private, religious or homeschooling if their family went over the income limit. 

“Between 70 and 80 percent of these (EFA) students had already been enrolled in homeschooling or private schools,” she said. “What we are seeing is the subsidizing of choices that were already made.”

Reaching Higher, Pretorius said, doesn’t support or oppose legislation and is focused on tracking public education policy and sharing how vouchers are being used in New Hampshire. 

“We are not unique in this trend here in New Hampshire,” she said. “We are seeing across the country that wealthier families are receiving them, and there is a real lack of transparency and accountability on how they are being used.”

These articles are being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.