How ESAs Affect Microschools' Tuition

When parents can utilize the ESA funds their child qualifies for in their state to spend on tuition and fees to attend a microschool, how does this impact those tuition costs? According to new data obtained for the 2024-25 school year, microschool pricing does, in fact, show different trends in ESA states than in states without ESAs.

School choice programs are about empowering parents to select the options they feel the best match for their children’s educational needs. Education Savings Account programs (ESAs), in place in 18 states, have emerged as the most efficient and effective model for this, when the program details are designed optimally.

The National Microschooling Center studied microschools in states with ESA programs where microschools were able to participate as of last school year: Arizona, Arkansas, Florida and West Virginia. Other state had ESAs underway as well, but restrictive eligibility requirements like accreditation blocked families from being able to use program dollars to attend them.

A comparison of microschools’ tuition and fees in ESA state versus non-ESA states shows the following differences:

• The midrange of microschool tuition, between $5,000-$10,000, is even more common in the ESA states studied, 68 percent, compared with 40 percent in non-ESA states. This is also the category most eligible children can receive from their state’s ESA program, while amounts can vary widely from one program to the next.
• While in non-ESA states, where microschools are predominantly tuition-based, the share of these with tuition and fees below $5,000 is 31 percent, this category falls to 9 percent in ESA states.
• The high end of microschool tuitions also fell dramatically in ESA states. While 13 percent of microschools in non-ESA states cost more than $15,000, just 4 percent charge tuition at this upper end of the range in ESA states.

Some pertinent observations add context to these trends:

While some may see the difference in prevalence of the least-expensive category of microschools as evidence of upward price pressure from ESA programs, the reality is that in the economics of microschooling, when costs related to staffing, facilities and other expenses are considered, very few microschool models can be sustainable at tuition levels this low. More microschools moving into the $5,000-$10,000 range indicates that microschool leaders are much more likely to earn a livable wage, and for the business side of their work to be sustainable.

Because microschools for this research self-identified absent uniform definitions, it is quite likely that some more expensive, higher-end small schools in ESA states simply did not choose to identify as microschools.

With best estimates of microschooling’s market size at about 2 percent of students nationally, or approximately 1.5 million students, the movement remains in its early adoption stage. As microschooling’s popularity continues to increase, and regulatory obstacles and required frameworks continue to modernize to accommodate its growing profile, compliance costs can be expected to decline. Microschooling business models can also be expected to move toward increased sustainability as the market matures.