For many decades, some people have believed every child should be in public schools and only the wealthy should be able to secure any alternative type of education for their children. Sometimes it is just institutional protectionism (public schools deserve everything), religious bigotry since the vast majority of private schools in Iowa are faith-based, a lack of historical context and wrong information about the relationship of church and state and private and public sectors, or a genuine fear that private schools are somehow inferior to or will harm public schools.
There are also political candidates who will say anything to get your vote. Those closed to the idea of parental rights in education or options outside of the public school system create a prime environment for some of these politicians to come after parents and schools trying to provide choice in education with hyperbolic claims. The most prevalent misleading claim heard on the campaign trail is that “private schools are unaccountable” or that Iowa’s school choice program is “primed for fraud, waste, and abuse.” Sometimes it’s because the particular politician wants to audit every private school’s books. Sometimes it’s because it’s the easiest and laziest criticism of school choice programs. Usually it is a combination of pandering and laziness. These same politicians have almost never actually visited schools of choice in person or sought to understand how things actually work in the field. Considering universal public schools didn’t come about until well after the founding of our nation and is still a relatively young experiment that other Western nations are often surprised by, we have to keep an open mind to ensure we are doing what’s best for kids. Especially since regulation and immense increases in spending haven’t resulted in increased achievement or parent satisfaction.
Let’s take a look at private school accountability in Iowa so that the next time you hear a politician saying things like “public funds are for public schools” or “private school principals can go to St. Thomas and sip Mai Tais on the public’s dime,” you’ll know the truth and see their hyperbole or blatant lies for what they are.
Transparency
Iowa Code, across the board, tends to respect the differences between political subdivisions of the state (counties, cities, townships, and public institutions like public schools) and the nature of private institutions. Iowa imposes limited disclosure requirements on private schools. Nonpublic schools are not required to publish budgets, curriculum, or most outcome data. The 2023 Students First Act (ESA program) requires participating schools to be accredited but did not add new transparency rules (State of Iowa, 2023). Private schools file basic enrollment data (fall/spring surveys) and, if state-accredited, a school improvement plan (Iowa Department of Education, 2023a). Independently-accredited schools face fewer reporting requirements to the state and exponentially more accountability to their accreditors. Critics note that Iowa’s ESA program bars the state Auditor from reviews or audits of school spending. Nationally, this level of oversight aligns with most if not all choice programs. A 2020 federal review found few states require private choice schools to report graduation rates, teacher degrees, background checks, or financial audits; for example, only six states mandate reporting of graduation rates in choice schools (U.S. Department of Education, 2019).
In Iowa’s neighboring states, transparency requirements are similarly hands-off. Minnesota, Wisconsin, and South Dakota (unlike Iowa) allow most private schools to operate with no state registration or financial disclosure (U.S. Department of Education, 2019). Wisconsin only imposes accreditation and reporting on schools in voucher programs. Nebraska requires detailed student and performance reporting for approved private schools via the state portal (Nebraska Department of Education, n.d.-b), but schools may choose “exempt” status to avoid most oversight (Nebraska Department of Education, n.d.-a). In short, few states—including Iowa—demand the kinds of financial audits or reporting that public schools must provide, even in states with robust school choice programs.
State Oversight and Teacher Certification
Iowa requires any private school that wants state support (AEA services, transportation aid, ESA participation, etc.) to be accredited by the Iowa Department of Education or an approved accrediting agency (Iowa Code §256.11, 2024; Iowa Admin. Code r. 281-12.1 to 281-12.5, 2024). State accredited nonpublic schools must meet Iowa Code §256.11 standards, employ licensed/certified teachers with a few exceptions, and follow public-school curriculum requirements. State-accredited schools file annual “improvement” plans along with any other data requested by the Department. (Iowa Department of Education, 2023b).
By contrast, neighboring states impose far fewer rules. Minnesota and South Dakota do not require teacher certification in private schools; Minnesota teachers need only a bachelor’s degree or minimal competency testing, and South Dakota allows non‐certified instructors (limited to small classes). Wisconsin does not require licensure unless the school participates in choice programs (then teachers must hold a bachelor’s degree). Nebraska requires approved private schools to hire state-licensed teachers and principals but allows “exempt” schools to operate with non-certified instructors (subject to periodic competency exams). Nationally, few voucher programs insist on credentialed teachers or mandated curricula; one analysis found only 11 states require bachelor’s degrees for all teachers in participating private schools.
Although most require it, the exceptions some accrediting agencies make for teacher licensure usually revolve around religious education and/or shortage areas or specialty subject areas where non-licensed instructors may be allowed but with the same rigorous background checks as licensed teachers and with extra work to justify the hire and train the teacher in classroom management and ensure oversight by school leadership. The bottom line is that most of Iowa’s private school teachers are licensed and those that aren’t are rigorously vetted in order to keep their accreditation. We’ve also seen in the news ad nauseam that teacher licensure doesn’t guarantee anything except, in some states, a protection from teachers hopping districts and states after disciplinary action.
Accreditation Requirements
There are only two types of education in Iowa law: schools and homeschools. Accreditation is what makes a school. A non-accredited school with its own building, flag pole, buses, licensed teachers, and all of the things that make a school a school is a homeschool group under the law if it is not accredited.
Iowa is relatively strict in this area. Every nonpublic school that wants to be identified as a school and participate in any state programs must choose accreditation to be “approved” by the state (Iowa Department of Education, 2023a). Schools can be accredited by the Department or by one of several approved independent agencies. State accreditation ensures schools meet minimum standards and typically includes improvement plans, periodic visits (although in-person visits are now only for exceptional cases) (Iowa Admin. Code r. 281-12.1 to 281-12.5, 2024). The only exceptions to this rule are some specially exempt schools in the Amish and Mennonite communities after the state’s Amish schools debacle in 1965 that led to embarrassing nationwide news coverage, a documentary, and an exemption from regulation for religious schools not wanting to participate in state programs and that still want to be seen as a school and not a homeschool group under the law.
Independent vs. State Accreditation
Independent accreditation is an alternative to direct state accreditation. Independent agencies—such as Cognia, Christian Schools International (CSI), National Lutheran School Accreditation (NLSA), or other regional faith-based accrediting bodies evaluate schools against theirs and the school’s academic, operational, and governance standards. These accrediting agencies largely align with each other on the core standards and specialize in keeping particular types of schools accountable. These standards are rigorous, requiring multi-year self-studies, actual in-person site visits (unlike state accreditation), peer reviews, continuous improvement plans, and regular financial audits or reviews depending on the size of the school. However, because these agencies are private organizations, their processes are not subject to open records laws, and reporting to the state is often minimal beyond confirmation of accredited status. This creates less direct governmental oversight, but for many schools, independent accreditation offers more flexibility to align curriculum, teacher qualifications, and operational practices with the institution’s educational philosophy or religious mission (Iowa Department of Education, 2023a). It also allows schools to market themselves (rightfully so) as hyper-accountable compared to state accreditation which is largely desk audits. Independent accreditors, unlike the state’s accreditation program, do not hesitate to remove accreditation from schools that do not perform. There are a few examples of this in Iowa over the last few years. This is a consequence state accredited schools never face and is good for students and taxpayers. The state board of education does have the ability to question and remove an accrediting agency that isn’t performing or misbehaves.
Private schools that choose state accreditation, by contrast, must comply with all the requirements of Iowa Code §256.11, which prescribes specific curriculum elements, teacher licensure requirements, and annual school improvement plans submitted to the Department of Education (Iowa Code §256.11, 2024). This approach imposes a more standardized regulatory burden and aligns private schools more closely with public school accountability structures. In terms of student outcomes, research is mixed: some studies suggest state-accredited schools demonstrate more consistent academic performance due to mandated curriculum alignment and certified teachers, while others find independently accredited schools can achieve equal or better outcomes when their missions are tightly integrated with instructional quality and community engagement (U.S. Department of Education, 2019). Because independent accrediting agencies often emphasize mission-driven education, their graduates may show strengths in specific academic areas, college preparedness, or values-based learning that state metrics do not fully capture. The simple fact that independent accreditation is so much more rigorous and that schools actually face loss of accreditation unlike state accredited schools should give Iowans comfort that there is no greater system of accountability.
Neighboring State Context
In Minnesota, most private schools operate without mandatory state accreditation, but many voluntarily seek independent accreditation from regional or religious agencies. These agencies often set high internal standards, but because the state does not require adherence to state curriculum or teacher licensure rules, the regulatory burden is lighter than Iowa’s state-accredited track (U.S. Department of Education, 2019). Wisconsin requires accreditation only for schools in voucher programs; many use independent accrediting bodies, which can maintain quality but allow more curricular flexibility (U.S. Department of Education, 2019). Nebraska offers both “approved” (state-accredited) and “exempt” options. Exempt schools that choose independent accreditation often avoid the full state regulatory load, but outcome data is less systematically collected (Nebraska Department of Education, n.d.-a). South Dakota and Missouri similarly leave accreditation optional, so independent agencies serve as the main quality-assurance mechanism for many schools (U.S. Department of Education, 2019). Across these states, independent accreditation tends to provide rigorous internal review without the statutory requirements tied to public school standards—reducing direct state oversight but allowing for diverse instructional models, innovation, and intense consequences for failure.
Recent Policy Changes
The major change is Iowa’s 2023 Education Savings Account law (Students First Act). It expanded funding to thousands of private school parents and their children but explicitly left oversight duties unchanged— requiring accreditation (State of Iowa, 2023). Since enactment, some statewide officials and legislators have clashed: the state Auditor warn the law hinders scrutiny of spending, while state agencies insist existing audits and financial reporting of the program suffice (Bleeding Heartland, 2025; Iowa Starting Line, 2025a, 2025b; Iowa Public Radio, 2025; KCRG News, 2024). The program itself is totally auditable. The individual schools’ budgets are not and can’t be as the religious liberty, government overreach, and risk of homogenizing schools to please the worldview or political bent of any part of the executive branch is counter to the purpose of the program. The state doesn’t audit grocery stores taking food assistance program dollars or construction companies who build roads for the DOT. Every independent accrediting agency requires an annual financial review for smaller schools or a full audit for larger schools and poor performance in this area is grounds for losing accrediting and access to the ESA program. No additional transparency or reporting mandates for private schools have passed. Thus, Iowa’s private-school accountability still largely relies on accreditation and market forces, with Iowa imposing more regulatory burden overall on private schools than its neighboring states.
The Ultimate Accountability
The biggest source of accountability for private schools is parents. Shane Vander Hart recently posted an article that sums this up very well:
“Unlike public schools, private schools must earn the trust and satisfaction of families every year. If parents feel their child isn’t being served well—academically, socially, or spiritually—they can leave. That’s an accountability mechanism public schools often lack.
And parents are paying attention.
According to the 2024 EdChoice “Schooling in America” survey, a full 72 percent of private school parents would give their child’s school an A or B grade—compared to just 46 percent of parents in public district schools. Families choosing private schools are engaged, informed, and hold their schools to high standards.
The result? Private schools in ESA programs must consistently perform—or lose students and funding. That’s accountability with teeth.”
The Central Truth of the Matter
Iowa’s private schools have two great pressures to perform and stay above board in their operations:
- An accreditation regime that, at the very least, is the same accreditation as public schools with half of Iowa’s private schools (and growing) choosing the alternative option of independent accreditation that costs them money, way more time, and offers significantly more accountability and consequences than state accreditation.
- Parents – Anyone who has had significant experience in the private school sector has seen it. A private school board that is micromanaging its administration, administration not creating an environment of excellence, etc. Despite still outperforming its local public school on test scores and college or technical school entrance and despite 100% graduation rates, parents start to leave – to the point where some schools have closed with little time to react. This is a good thing. Private schools are always on notice – parents want safety and a good education for their children. What has made parents less than effective at keeping public schools accountable is the school district and state regulatory structure that schools often hide behind and the often adversarial relationship between schools and any parent who questions the school’s process or results.
This may change. Parents can now tell their public schools they have options. Iowa has opened up open enrollment between public schools, we have a growing number of public charter schools, the federal government is currently encouraging more choices through the recently passed national school choice tax credit, and Iowa’s ESA program and tax credit scholarships can combine to ensure that even the lowest income single parent with multiple children can, for the first time in Iowa’s history, secure the educational environment for her children that best meets their needs.
This should be celebrated. Iowa needs adequately funded and highly functioning public schools. Parents need choices. Iowa has and can continue to improve on both. Although in the minority, too many Iowans are stuck in an antiquated 20th century educational mindset that public schools can or even should be all things to all students. Too many Iowans allow their anti-religious bias to work against parents who just want their kids to have an education that best meets their child’s needs or reflects their overall worldview as a family.
Iowa has been a vanguard of school choice and parental rights since 2006 when the Educational Opportunities Act passed creating its tax credit scholarship program. With the opening up of open enrollment, the expansion of charter schools, an Iowa Code that respects homeschoolers and gives them options, and a Students First Act that allows parents to have meaningful choices through ESAs; Iowa arguably has one of the best overall environments in the nation for parents. Let’s keep it that way. Strong public schools. Meaningful resources and choices for parents, and a friendly bit of competition that helps all ships rise. That’s the best way to honor Iowa’s motto: “Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain.”
References:
Bleeding Heartland. (2025, April 17). On Iowa school’s voucher law, claims about accountability don’t add up. Retrieved from https://www.bleedingheartland.com/2025/04/17/on-iowa-schools-voucher-law-claims-about-accountability-dont-add-up/
Iowa Admin. Code r. 281-12.1 to 281-12.5 (2024). General accreditation standards. Retrieved from https://www.legis.iowa.gov/law/administrativeRules
Iowa Code §256.11 (2024). Educational standards. Retrieved from https://www.legis.iowa.gov/law/iowaCode/section/256.11
Iowa Department of Education. (2023, May). Accreditation for nonpublic schools. Retrieved from https://educate.iowa.gov/pk-12/accreditation-standards/accreditation-nonpublic-schools
Iowa Department of Education. (2023, May). Nonpublic school improvement plan guidance. Retrieved from https://educate.iowa.gov/pk-12/school-improvement/nonpublic-school-improvement
Iowa Public Radio. (2025, February 19). Gov. Reynolds defends her refusal to give Rob Sand ESA documents. Retrieved from https://www.iowapublicradio.org/state-government-news/2025-02-19/gov-kim-reynolds-defends-her-refusal-esa-documents-state-auditor-rob-sand
Iowa Starting Line. (2025, February 18). State agencies block Auditor Sand during review of private school voucher program. Retrieved from https://iowastartingline.com/2025/02/18/sand-education-school-voucher-audit/
Iowa Starting Line. (2025, June 2). Critics warn of ‘money laundering’ as Iowa expands school voucher program. Retrieved from https://iowastartingline.com/2025/06/02/lawmakers-warn-private-school-vouchers-esa/
KCRG News. (2024, July 23). State Auditor: ESA agreement is a ‘bait and switch’. Retrieved from https://www.kcrg.com/2024/07/23/state-auditor-esa-agreement-is-bait-switch/
Nebraska Department of Education. (n.d.). Exempt school [home school] program. Retrieved from https://www.education.ne.gov/fos/exempt-schools/
Nebraska Department of Education. (n.d.). Nonpublic – Nebraska Department of Education. Retrieved from https://www.education.ne.gov/dataservices/nonpublic/
State of Iowa. (2023, January 24). Students First Act [House File 68]. Retrieved from https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ga=90&ba=HF68
U.S. Department of Education. (2019, September). Nebraska state regulation of private and home schools. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/admins/comm/choice/regprivschl/nebraska.html