Utah Fits All, the education savings account scholarship (ESA) for Utah families, is unique among similar school-choice programs in other states in that it has a large majority of recipients using it for home education. Some states completely exclude homeschoolers from the funding, while others cap the number of homeschoolers they will accept. Even Arizona, whose program appears quite homeschool-friendly, only has 40% of ESA funds going toward homeschooling products and services. Utah, by contrast, has 80% homeschooled recipients.
This difference is noteworthy because I actually think the homeschool community played a large part in getting the law passed. As a longtime homeschooler, charter school teacher, and Utah resident, I have seen “voucher” bills come and go in Utah legislation over the years, but when Utah Fits All was proposed in 2023, I noticed something different. This time the messaging seemed targeted at homeschoolers. In the past, the program was always described as a means to help more families afford private school. As the name describes, the goal of Utah Fits All was to help each child find their “fit” by opening up a variety of options to families including homeschool, microschool, hybrid, and private school. The new program appeared to have a very open definition of education, something highly valued by homeschoolers. In 2023, with a promise of $8,000 per student to personalize your child’s education, the Utah homeschool community seemed to rally behind the proposed law, and it passed.
But not everyone rallied for it. I came across many voices of warning in the different online forums, declaring that this program would open the floodgates of regulation for homeschoolers. After years of homeschooling, my family had grown accustomed to the flexibility of home education, and we weren’t in a hurry to give it up. Although I felt somewhat cautious, I was also hopeful for the opportunities the scholarship could provide, and we applied for the program in its first year.
Although regulation was expected, many families, including ours, were surprised when significant changes to the program took effect before the first school year had ended. The most notable change created separate funding tiers, reducing the scholarship for home-educated students while students enrolled in qualifying private schools continued to receive the full award.
The new funding structure naturally raised questions about what would qualify as a private school. Families who had planned their educational approach around the original scholarship began exploring models that could preserve both educational flexibility and eligibility for the higher funding level. In response, a variety of hybrid programs emerged, offering to serve as the student’s school while still leaving substantial responsibility for day-to-day learning with parents.
These new models highlighted the challenge facing policymakers. The scholarship had been designed to expand families’ choices, and the market had responded to the increased demand with innovative models. Yet administering the program with its new categories also required clear distinctions between different educational models. As new approaches developed in response to the law, legislators returned to a central question: How should a “private school” be defined without unintentionally excluding the very kinds of innovation the program was created to encourage?
After five iterations of the clean-up bill, the final bill actually introduced very few changes, protecting most of the flexibility that had been intended in the first bill, and allowing many nontraditional schools to remain eligible options for Utah Fits All families.
This tension is not likely to disappear, however. New educational models are coming to market rapidly, especially in states that offer educational choice. The public funds infuse the market with shoppers looking for innovative options, and creative edupreneurs respond with solutions. It is an exciting time to be a homeschooler, microschooler, or edupreneur. However, the urge to regulate the responsible use of these funds means that policymakers are grappling with defining education.
As a microschool founder with an unconventional approach to education, I am heading into my third year, sometimes feeling like I am building on a sandbar, never quite sure how the shorelines will shift. I wonder if my nervous system can handle the shifting tides every legislative session. It reminds me of economist F.A. Hayek’s quote on the dangers of central planning: “The more the State plans, the more difficult planning becomes for the individual.”
Nonetheless, without Utah Fits All, I would have never started on this journey, and whether it’s zoning, taxes, or wages, I am learning that adapting to changing laws is part of business ownership, especially when building something new. I appreciate policymakers who recognize that innovation and regulation exist in a delicate balance. The definitions they write shape policy, but those policies shape the opportunities available to families, educators, and entrepreneurs trying to build tomorrow’s solutions.
