Research · Dataset v1.0
Education Savings Account Administrator Contracts by State (2026)
Education savings account administrator contracts by state almost never come down to one company per program. In this 21-program, 18-state audit, 19 of 21 programs — 90.5% — use at least one named outside program manager, scholarship organization, or account/payment platform, while Mississippi and Montana use state-run reimbursement models in the current official materials reviewed. States split legal authority, applications, account technology, expense review, payment processing, and family support among different entities, which is why “who administers this program?” often has more than one correct answer.
The second finding is the one that trips people up: a published contract number and an administrator’s compensation are frequently not the same thing. Tennessee’s current shared electronic-wallet contract carries a maximum liability of $636,949,396.23. The payment schedule identifies $632,048,007.21 — 99.23% — as scholarship pass-through, and the contract says Student First Technologies receives no additional compensation for allowing those funds to move through the platform. The headline ceiling is about 130 times the amount left after the enumerated pass-through; treating the entire ceiling as vendor revenue would misclassify more than $632 million in scholarship funds.
The current map, normalized cost records, and procurement history follow. The sources reviewed did not surface another current national tracker organized by administrative function, current-versus-superseded status, and cost basis in this exact form.
The headline numbers
The defined July 31, 2026 universe contains 21 state-funded K–12 ESA programs in 18 states. Nineteen programs use at least one named outside operating entity; the two state-run reimbursement rows are Mississippi and Montana.
Table 1. ESA administrator landscape at a glance, July 31, 2026
| Metric | Finding |
|---|---|
| ESA programs reviewed | 21 |
| States represented | 18 |
| Programs with a named outside operator or platform | 19 (90.5%) |
| States with at least one named outside operator or platform | 16 (88.9%) |
| Public-agency-plus-outside-platform programs | 16 |
| Approved scholarship-organization / program-manager programs | 3 |
| State-run reimbursement programs | 2 |
| Spread between the highest and lowest Arkansas bids on the same solicitation | 22.5% |
| Tennessee maximum liability made up of enumerated scholarship pass-through | 99.23% |
| Last fully verified | July 31, 2026 |
Source: NCSL state-policy scan, EdChoice national ESA inventory, and The School Choice Index 21-row dataset. Percentages are original calculations: 19 ÷ 21 = 90.48%; 16 ÷ 18 = 88.89%.
Three figures are worth carrying through the rest of the page:
- $636,949,396.23 / $632,048,007.21 / 99.23% — Tennessee’s maximum liability, enumerated scholarship pass-through, and pass-through share.
- $15,170,000 / $16,430,000 / $18,584,500 — the three bids recorded under the same 2024 Arkansas solicitation.
- $8,030,000 authorized / $13,996,250 projected — Arkansas’s later current ClassWallet contract record, which covers EFAs and tutoring grants and therefore cannot be treated as an EFA-only price.
What this data shows — and what it does not
This dataset identifies which public and outside entities perform named administrative functions and reports a price only when an official or primary record supports it. It does not turn unlocated prices into zero, contract ceilings into revenue, or old bid records into current contracts.
The dataset shows:
- the public authority responsible for each program;
- who handles applications and eligibility;
- the account, wallet, or payment platform families use;
- the named outside operator or scholarship organization;
- whether the current model is public administration with an outside platform, an approved scholarship-organization model, or direct public reimbursement;
- current contract terms and cost components when a primary record makes them available;
- protested, superseded, and terminated records kept separate from the current operating map; and
- evidence grades so readers can calibrate confidence in each row.
The dataset does not show:
- vendor revenue — contract ceilings, maximum liabilities, and authorized amounts are not the same as fees collected;
- performance or satisfaction data;
- state agency internal budgets or appropriation lines beyond what is publicly disclosed;
- subcontractor relationships not named in reviewed primary records; or
- cost figures that were not found in an official or primary record.
Current map: 21 ESA programs across 18 states
Nineteen of the 21 programs use a named outside program manager, scholarship organization, or platform, but the outside entity's job varies sharply. The table separates public authority, applications, account technology, and current outside entities so a platform vendor is not mistaken for the legal administrator.
Evidence grade definitions
- A
- Current executed contract, legislative review record or official audit.
- B
- Current official program page, board minutes, or agency FAQ.
- C
- Program announcement, selection notice, or agency press release.
- D
- Program page only; no outside operator named.
- T
- Transition context — row or records include a superseded or terminated element.
Table 2. Current education savings account administrator map, July 31, 2026
| State | Program | Public authority | Applications & eligibility | Account / payment platform | Named outside entities | Operational model | Grade | Primary record |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | CHOOSE Act | Alabama Department of Revenue | ALDOR application system | ClassWallet | ClassWallet | Public agency + outside platform | A | ALDOR · Contract review record |
| Arizona | Empowerment Scholarship Account | Arizona Department of Education; State Treasurer for the financial-management procurement | ADE ESA Applicant Portal | ClassWallet | ClassWallet | Public agency + outside platform | B | ADE · Official quarterly report |
| Arkansas | Education Freedom Account | Arkansas Division of Elementary and Secondary Education | DESE application process | ClassWallet for current 2026–27 family account activity | Kleo, Inc. dba ClassWallet; earlier procurement records also name Student First Technologies and Odyssey | Public agency + outside platform | A / T | Current program page · Current contract review |
| Florida | Family Empowerment Scholarship — Educational Options | Florida Department of Education | Approved scholarship-funding organizations | Varies by approved SFO | 2026–27 approved roster: AAA Scholarship Foundation–FL, Step Up For Students, Sunshine State Kids; program assignment varies | Approved SFO model | B / C | FDOE approved SFO roster |
| Florida | Family Empowerment Scholarship — Unique Abilities | Florida Department of Education | Approved scholarship-funding organizations | Varies by approved SFO | 2026–27 approved roster: AAA Scholarship Foundation–FL, Step Up For Students, Sunshine State Kids; program assignment varies | Approved SFO model | B / C | FDOE approved SFO roster |
| Georgia | Georgia Promise Scholarship | Georgia Education Savings Authority | Odyssey portal under GESA oversight | Odyssey; Stripe payment rail | Primary Class, Inc. dba Odyssey; Stripe | Public agency + outside platform | B | Current program site · Official 2026 materials |
| Indiana | Education Scholarship Account | Indiana Department of Education | Access Indiana | ClassWallet | ClassWallet | Public agency + outside platform | B | IDOE 2026–27 FAQ |
| Iowa | Students First Education Savings Account | Iowa Department of Education | Odyssey ESA portal | Odyssey; Stripe transaction rail | Primary Class, Inc. dba Odyssey; Stripe | Public agency + outside operator | A | Current state page · Auditor report |
| Louisiana | LA GATOR Scholarship Program | Louisiana Department of Education / BESE | Odyssey program interface | Odyssey | Primary Class, Inc. dba Odyssey | Public agency + outside program manager | A | Current program site · BESE April 2026 minutes |
| Mississippi | Equal Opportunity for Students with Special Needs ESA | Mississippi Department of Education | MDE special-needs portal | State reimbursement portal | No outside operator named in the current official materials reviewed | State-run reimbursement | D | MDE program page · MDE portal announcement |
| Montana | Special Needs Equal Opportunity Education Savings Account | Montana Office of Public Instruction | OPI application process | Direct reimbursement through OPI | No outside operator named in current official materials reviewed; OPI says the litigation stay covered the remainder of the 2025–26 school year | State-run reimbursement | D / T | OPI program and legal-status page |
| New Hampshire | Education Freedom Account | New Hampshire Department of Education | Children’s Scholarship Fund New Hampshire | ClassWallet inside the CSF-administered program | Children’s Scholarship Fund; ClassWallet | Approved scholarship-organization model | B / C | NHED program page · Current ClassWallet guide |
| North Carolina | Education Student Accounts (ESA+) | North Carolina State Education Assistance Authority | NCSEAA MyPortal | ClassWallet | ClassWallet | Public agency + outside platform | B | NCSEAA ClassWallet page |
| South Carolina | Education Scholarship Trust Fund | South Carolina Department of Education | State process supported by ClassWallet | ClassWallet | ClassWallet | Public agency + outside platform | A | SCDE program page · Contract 4400033633 |
| Tennessee | Education Freedom Scholarship | Tennessee Department of Education | Student First Technologies platform | Student First Technologies | Student First Technologies, LLC | Public agency + outside platform | A | Current shared contract |
| Tennessee | Education Savings Account Pilot Program | Tennessee Department of Education | Student First Technologies platform | Student First Technologies | Student First Technologies, LLC | Public agency + outside platform | A | Current shared contract |
| Tennessee | Individualized Education Account | Tennessee Department of Education | Student First Technologies platform | Student First Technologies | Student First Technologies, LLC | Public agency + outside platform | A | Current shared contract |
| Texas | Texas Education Freedom Accounts | Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts | Odyssey program portal | Odyssey | Primary Class, Inc. dba Odyssey | Public agency + outside operator | B / C | Comptroller selection announcement |
| Utah | Utah Fits All Scholarship | Utah State Board of Education | Odyssey platform | Odyssey | Primary Class, Inc. dba Odyssey | Public agency + outside operator | A / T | Current board record · Transition FAQ |
| West Virginia | Hope Scholarship | Hope Scholarship Board / West Virginia State Treasurer’s Office | Student First Technologies system | Student First Technologies | Student First Technologies, LLC | Public agency + outside operator | B | Current parent handbook |
| Wyoming | Steamboat Legacy Scholarship / ESA | Wyoming Department of Education | Odyssey application portal | Odyssey marketplace and account platform | Primary Class, Inc. dba Odyssey | Public agency + outside platform | C | WDE program page |
Source: The School Choice Index, compiled from the primary records linked in the final column. Last fully verified .
Verified cost records and cost-basis labels
Any dollar figure on this page carries one of these labels. A figure without a label should not be compared with one that has a label. Never use $0 for an unlocated amount.
Current contract totalAuthorized amountProjected amountMaximum liabilityFixed annual baseOne-time implementation feePer-student feePercentage-of-spending feePer-transaction feeProcessing cost at costScholarship pass-throughBid onlySuperseded contract amountAmount not located in reviewed public recordsTable 3. Verified contract cost records, current and superseded
| State | Amount | Cost-basis label | Notes | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | $2,734,950 | Current contract total | Contract C24019002; amendment increased the agreement by $1 million and extended the current term to Oct. 1, 2025–Sept. 30, 2026. | Alabama contract review agenda, p. 78 |
| Arkansas | $8,030,000 authorized; $13,996,250 projected | Current contract record | Contract 4600055576 with Kleo, Inc.; Dec. 1, 2024–Nov. 30, 2028. Scope covers EFAs and tutoring grants, so it is not an EFA-only price. | Arkansas Legislative Council review |
| Iowa | $682,333 in year one; $729,550 in year two and later | Fixed annual base | The fixed amount includes a $100,000 annual Standalone System Fee that the Auditor said was not in Odyssey’s original proposal. | Iowa Auditor of State |
| Iowa | 25 basis points of qualified spending; $0.25 per consolidated transaction; Stripe fees at cost | Variable fees | Added by Amendment 1 signed July 14, 2023. The fixed base is not the complete cost. | Iowa Auditor of State |
| Louisiana | $4,574,072 | Current amended total | Primary Class, Inc. dba Odyssey; prior amount $2,844,917 plus a $1,729,155 amendment; Nov. 25, 2025–June 30, 2027. | BESE minutes, item 6.4.5 |
| Louisiana | $350,000 startup + $143.50 per student | Initial pricing structure | The initial procurement used a one-time startup component and an enrollment-dependent account-management rate. | Louisiana procurement record |
| South Carolina | $4,200,000 target value | Current contract target value | Contract 4400033633 with ClassWallet; validity Dec. 21, 2023–June 30, 2027. The target value is a contract field, not proof of actual spending. | South Carolina contract record |
| Tennessee | $636,949,396.23 | Maximum liability | One umbrella contract supporting three account programs through May 25, 2028. This figure includes scholarship pass-through. | Tennessee contract amendment |
| Tennessee | $632,048,007.21 | Scholarship pass-through | The contract describes the contractor as a conduit and states that it receives no additional compensation for allowing these funds to pass through the platform. | Tennessee contract amendment |
| Tennessee | $3,930,000 | Specified EFS integration and subscription lines | $100,000 integration plus two years at $695,000 and two years at $1,220,000. This is not presented as total contractor compensation. | Tennessee contract amendment |
| Utah | $9,737,500 | Current contract amount | Contract USBE250075CT with Primary Class dba Odyssey; May 16, 2025–June 30, 2027. | USBE board record |
| Utah | $9,151,808.83 original; $11,000,000 after amendment | Superseded contract amount | Contract USBE240045CT was amended in June 2024 and later terminated for convenience effective May 15, 2025. | Original board record |
Source: The issuing-state records linked in the final column. Compiled by The School Choice Index; last fully verified . For Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, North Carolina, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming, a current outside entity is named but a usable current executed price was not located in the primary records reviewed for this version.
Why Tennessee’s $636.9 million ceiling is not vendor revenue
Tennessee’s contract is the clearest demonstration of why headline contract totals need to be normalized. The maximum liability is $636.9 million, but the current payment schedule identifies $632.0 million as scholarship funds moving through the platform without additional contractor compensation.
Table 4. Tennessee’s current shared electronic-wallet contract, normalized
| Component | Amount | Calculation or meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum liability | $636,949,396.23 | Contract NV78276 after Amendment 03 |
| Enumerated ESA and EFS pass-through | $632,048,007.21 | Sum of five scholarship-fund lines in the payment schedule |
| Pass-through share | 99.2305% | $632,048,007.21 ÷ $636,949,396.23 |
| Maximum liability less enumerated pass-through | $4,901,389.02 | A derived remainder; not automatically profit or total contractor compensation |
| Specified EFS integration and subscription lines | $3,930,000 | $100,000 + ($695,000 × 2) + ($1,220,000 × 2) |
Source: Tennessee Department of Education contract with Student First Technologies, Amendment 03. Calculations by The School Choice Index.
The five pass-through lines are $32,030,472.21, $77,744,535, $107,098,000, $145,900,000, and $269,275,000. The contract describes Student First Technologies as a conduit for those payments and says the contractor receives no additional compensation merely for allowing them to pass through the platform.
The $4.90 million remainder is not a profit calculation. It is simply what remains after subtracting the listed pass-through from the maximum liability. The $3.93 million figure is narrower still: it is the sum of the amendment’s stated EFS integration and annual subscription/license lines, not a claim about every dollar of contractor compensation across the agreement.
That is why Tennessee’s $636.9 million cannot be put beside Louisiana’s $4.57 million amended total and treated as the larger version of the same thing. The Tennessee number is 99.23% scholarship pass-through; the Louisiana figure is an amended program-manager contract total.
What did Student First, Odyssey, and ClassWallet bid for the same Arkansas solicitation?
Arkansas’s 2024 protest file records Student First Technologies, Odyssey, and ClassWallet bidding under one solicitation with the same scoring framework. The highest bid was 22.5% above the lowest, and Student First and ClassWallet received identical technical scores, making cost the entire difference between those two combined scores.
Table 5. Arkansas Solicitation S000000313 bid and evaluation record, 2024
| Bidder | Bid amount | Technical score (700) | Cost score (300) | Combined score (1,000) | Order |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Student First Technologies (Sid3car Co.) | $15,170,000 | 700.00 | 300.00 | 1,000.00 | 1 |
| Odyssey (Primary Class) | $16,430,000 | 676.67 | 276.99 | 953.66 | 2 |
| ClassWallet (Kleo, Inc.) | $18,584,500 | 700.00 | 244.88 | 944.88 | 3 |
Source: Sid3car Co.’s April 17, 2024 response to Kleo, Inc.’s protest of anticipation to award, filed in the Arkansas procurement record.
The high-low spread is reproducible:
($18,584,500 − $15,170,000) ÷ $15,170,000 = 22.51%
Student First and ClassWallet each received a technical score of 700.00. Their 55.12-point combined-score difference came from the cost score: 300.00 for Student First and 244.88 for ClassWallet. Odyssey’s technical and cost scores both fell between the other two in different ways, producing a combined score of 953.66.
The bid table is procurement history, not the current contract map. The later current legislative record identifies Kleo, Inc. as the contractor under contract 4600055576 from Dec. 1, 2024 through Nov. 30, 2028, with $8.03 million after review and $13.99625 million projected. That contract covers EFAs and tutoring grants. The current amount therefore cannot be divided by EFA participation alone, and it should not be treated as a clean repricing of the earlier bids without matching every scope and term.
What did the Iowa Auditor find in the Odyssey contract?
Iowa’s Auditor of State documented a fast procurement, a fixed fee that did not capture the full variable cost, an added $100,000 annual system fee that was absent from the original proposal, and a contract amendment that did not receive formal Bureau of Accounting approval until almost a year after it was signed.
Table 6. Iowa ESA contract findings reported by the Auditor of State
| Date or component | What the Auditor reported |
|---|---|
| Jan. 24, 2023 | The Students First Act was signed. The state’s notice for the ESA-administration RFP was posted the same day. |
| Jan. 26, 2023 | The RFP was issued to vendors. |
| April 6, 2023 | Odyssey was selected; the initial term was three years with three annual extension options. |
| Initial contract | A $100,000 annual Standalone System Fee appeared in the contract even though the Auditor said it was not in Odyssey’s original proposal. |
| July 14, 2023 | Amendment 1 added Stripe costs at cost, 25 basis points of qualified spending, and $0.25 per consolidated transaction. |
| Auditor estimate | The 25-basis-point component alone was estimated at $267,250 in FY2024, $390,750 in FY2025, $784,750 in FY2026, and $852,750 in FY2027. |
| Auditor comparison | The report calculated that the added cost was 39% above the fixed contract amount in year one and 117% above it by FY2027. |
| Approval control | The amendment signed July 14, 2023 was not formally approved by the Bureau of Accounting until July 12, 2024; the Auditor found the department’s amendment policy was not followed. |
Source: Iowa Auditor of State, Report of Recommendations to the Iowa Department of Education, dated July 22, 2024.
The auditor’s percentage comparison is frequently lost when the contract is described only by its $729,550 later-year base. The report estimated the 25-basis-point component at $852,750 in FY2027, before the $0.25 transaction charge and Stripe processing costs. That does not make $1,582,300 a final invoice; it shows why a fixed base alone is an incomplete description of the fee model.
The report’s control finding matters separately from the price: Amendment 1 was signed July 14, 2023, but formal Bureau of Accounting approval was documented on July 12, 2024 — and the need for the modification was not documented as required by the department’s amendment policy.
How did Utah’s program-manager contract change?
Utah’s original ACE Scholarships agreement was amended from $9.15 million to $11 million and later terminated for convenience. Odyssey began the replacement term the next day under a $9.7375 million agreement running through June 30, 2027.
Table 7. Utah Fits All program-manager contract history
| Stage | Contractor | Agreement | Term or effective date | Published amount | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Original award | Alliance for Choice in Education dba ACE Scholarships | USBE240045CT | Nov. 2, 2023–June 30, 2028 | $9,151,808.83 | Superseded |
| June 2024 amendment | ACE Scholarships | USBE240045CT Amendment 2 | Effective June 6, 2024 | $11,000,000 new contract amount | Superseded |
| Transition | ACE Scholarships | — | Termination for convenience effective May 15, 2025 | — | Terminated |
| Current award | Primary Class, Inc. dba Odyssey | USBE250075CT | May 16, 2025–June 30, 2027 | $9,737,500 | Current |
Source: USBE original ACE record · June 2024 amendment · USBE transition FAQ · Current Odyssey board record.
The amounts are contract ceilings across different terms and program conditions, not measures of actual spending or service quality. No per-month comparison is published here because the program’s duties, scale, and governing law changed during the transition.
How is ESA administration funded?
States do not use one funding mechanism. Some deduct a statutory administrative percentage from scholarship funds, some authorize separate public and outside-organization allowances, and some pay through fixed, variable, or ceiling-based contracts.
Table 8. Verified examples of ESA administrative funding mechanisms
| State or group | Verified mechanism | What it means | Primary source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Georgia | GESA may withhold up to 5% of scholarship proceeds for administrative purposes. | The administrative share is stated as a deduction from scholarship proceeds. | Georgia Promise Scholarship |
| Montana | The final student amount is adjusted by 5% for OPI administrative cost. | The program is a direct OPI reimbursement model, not a private-vendor fee. | Montana OPI |
| New Hampshire | The scholarship organization may withhold or deduct up to 10% annually. | This is a statutory maximum, not proof that the full percentage was spent. | RSA 194-F:4(V) |
| Texas | State law creates two separate allowances: up to 3% for the Comptroller’s administrative cost and up to 5% for certified educational assistance organizations. | These are separate authorizations, not one disclosed vendor fee. The same law bars a CEAO from charging a participant an account-related fee, including a transaction fee. | Texas SB 2, §§ 29.360(g) and 29.362(b)–(c) |
| Alabama, Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Tennessee and Utah | The reviewed records disclose contracts, amendments, fixed fees, variable fees or ceilings rather than one common statutory percentage. | The figures still cannot be compared without preserving scope and cost basis. | See the verified cost table above |
Source: Current statutes, agency pages, and contract records linked in the final column. These mechanisms are not presented as a lowest-to-highest comparison because their scopes and denominators differ.
Texas is the easiest place to see why separate authorizations should remain separate. Section 29.362(b) permits the Comptroller to deduct up to 3% of the appropriation for its own administrative cost. Section 29.362(c) separately permits up to 5% to be disbursed to certified educational assistance organizations for services. The law does not say Odyssey’s executed compensation equals the combined 8%, and the reviewed public records did not supply a current executed price.
Which companies operate ESA platforms across multiple states?
In current direct roles, ClassWallet appears in seven program contexts, Odyssey in six, and Student First Technologies in four. These are operating footprints, not exclusive shares: programs can involve more than one organization, and Tennessee’s three contexts share one contract.
Table 9. Current ESA operator and platform footprint
| Operator or model | Program contexts | States | Qualification |
|---|---|---|---|
| ClassWallet (Kleo, Inc.) | 7 | Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, South Carolina | The role ranges from payment platform to broader program support. In New Hampshire, CSF remains the administering scholarship organization. |
| Odyssey (Primary Class, Inc.) | 6 | Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Texas, Utah, Wyoming | A Florida SFO separately documents an Odyssey relationship, but that is not a statewide Florida award. |
| Student First Technologies (Sid3car Co.) | 4 | Tennessee’s three programs; West Virginia | Tennessee’s three program rows share one umbrella contract. |
| State-run reimbursement | 2 | Mississippi, Montana | No named outside operating entity in the current official materials reviewed. |
Source: The School Choice Index current operating map, compiled from the row-level primary records in Table 2. Counts are program contexts, not exclusive shares or contract-dollar shares.
Why Florida cannot be assigned to one platform
Florida approves scholarship-funding organizations rather than procuring one statewide ESA administrator. The current 2026–27 roster names AAA Scholarship Foundation–FL, Step Up For Students, and Sunshine State Kids, and FDOE tells families to contact the SFO to determine which programs it administers. One SFO’s technology relationship does not become a statewide vendor award. The same distinction applies in New Hampshire: ClassWallet is the digital-wallet layer inside a program administered by Children’s Scholarship Fund New Hampshire.
What does “administrator” mean in an ESA program?
“Administrator” is not a uniform statutory or procurement category. Depending on the state, it can mean the public agency, a nonprofit scholarship organization, the application processor, the program manager, the wallet platform, the expense reviewer, or a combination of those roles.
Table 10. Administrative terms used across state ESA programs
| Term | Meaning in this dataset | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Public authority | The agency, board, or statutory entity that retains public responsibility. | ALDOR in Alabama; the Texas Comptroller; NCSEAA in North Carolina |
| Program manager | An outside entity performing multiple operating functions under public oversight. | Odyssey in Louisiana and Utah; Student First Technologies in West Virginia |
| Scholarship-funding organization | A Florida-approved nonprofit that administers one or more scholarship programs under state law. | AAA Scholarship Foundation–FL, Step Up For Students, Sunshine State Kids |
| Scholarship organization | The New Hampshire entity that accepts applications, administers accounts, and may contract for financial-management technology. | Children’s Scholarship Fund New Hampshire |
| Certified educational assistance organization | A Texas entity that may perform all or part of the application, expenditure, verification, support, and website functions assigned by statute. | Odyssey at launch |
| Financial-management or wallet platform | The software and transaction layer. Supplying it does not by itself transfer legal responsibility for the program. | ClassWallet in Arizona and North Carolina |
| Payment processor | The underlying transaction rail used by a platform or administrator. | Stripe in Iowa and Georgia |
| Expense approver | The entity that decides whether a purchase is allowable. | NCSEAA staff review ClassWallet submissions in North Carolina |
Source: The statutes and current program records linked throughout this page. Definitions are the dataset’s functional classifications, applied consistently across the 21 rows.
A useful way to read any state record is to ask five separate questions:
- Who holds public authority?
- Who accepts the application and determines eligibility?
- Where does the account live?
- Who decides whether a purchase is allowable?
- Who releases payment or reimbursement?
A single company may answer several of those questions, but the answer should be demonstrated rather than assumed.
Which records are most likely to change next?
Contract end dates, active market reviews, amendments, and litigation make several rows time-sensitive. The page should change only when the controlling agency, contract, court, or procurement record changes.
Table 11. Recency and re-verification watch list
| Jurisdiction | Time-sensitive element | Verification method |
|---|---|---|
| Alabama | Current ClassWallet term ends Sept. 30, 2026. | Recheck the Alabama Legislature’s contract-review agendas and ALDOR materials before changing the row. |
| Arizona | The Treasurer issued RFI 26A on May 27, 2026 as a market-review step for ESA financial-management services. | Recheck Treasurer procurement postings and ADE’s current platform notice. |
| Louisiana | The current Odyssey amendment runs through June 30, 2027. | Recheck BESE minutes and LDOE contract records for another amendment or procurement. |
| Utah | The current Odyssey term runs through June 30, 2027. | Recheck USBE board approvals and the data-agreement repository. |
| Tennessee | The current shared Student First contract runs through May 25, 2028. | Recheck Fiscal Review Committee files for amendments, transition records, or a replacement agreement. |
| Arkansas | The current ClassWallet contract runs through Nov. 30, 2028. | Recheck Legislative Council reviews because the contract bundles EFA and tutoring-grant work. |
| Montana | OPI says a full stay allowed the program to continue through the remainder of the 2025–26 school year; a later post-school-year status must come from a controlling court or official state notice. | Recheck the OPI legal-status page before describing later operations. |
| Wyoming | WDE says the Wyoming Supreme Court lifted the injunction, allowing payments while the underlying constitutional case continues. | Recheck the WDE legal-status page and the most recent controlling court order. |
Source: Current contract terms and agency records cited in the table and elsewhere on this page. This is an update protocol, not a prediction that a vendor will change.
The full dataset receives a monthly source check, a row-by-row review each quarter, and an immediate update after a documented award, amendment, protest decision, termination, migration, or controlling court order.
Limitations
The dataset makes the public record easier to compare, but it cannot make unlike state structures identical or create contract details a state has not disclosed. Every conclusion below is bounded by that limitation.
- States use genuinely different legal structures. Florida’s approved-SFO system and New Hampshire’s scholarship-organization model are not conventional single-vendor platform contracts.
- Public disclosure is uneven. Some states publish executed agreements and amendments. Others publish only a current vendor statement, board item, handbook, or award announcement.
- A ceiling is not spending. It can include options, contingent work, operating costs, and scholarship pass-through.
- A platform is not necessarily the legal administrator. The public authority can retain eligibility, purchase approval, compliance, and appeals.
- Subcontractors can be organization-specific. One Florida SFO’s platform relationship does not establish a statewide contract.
- Transitions overlap. An award date, contract effective date, technical migration, and family-facing launch may differ.
- Bid records are not current contracts. Arkansas’s 2024 bid values remain useful, but the current ClassWallet agreement is a separate record with bundled scope.
- Cost figures are not a service-quality judgment. The dataset records roles, dates, terms, and cost bases, not whether a contractor performed well.
- An unlocated record is not proof of absence. “Amount not located in the records reviewed” is not the same as “no contract exists.”
- Litigation can change operating status. Montana’s stay was described by OPI through the end of the 2025–26 school year, while WDE says Wyoming may currently distribute funds even though the underlying case continues.
- The program universe can change through legislation, appropriations, implementation decisions, or court orders.
- Derived calculations remain derived. Tennessee’s 99.23%, Arkansas’s 22.5%, and every count in the headline table are reproducible calculations from cited source values, not numbers published by a state as a national comparison.
Methodology
Function-level classification
The research separately records public authority, applications and eligibility, account/payment technology, expense review, and named outside entities. A company is not labeled the complete administrator merely because it supplies the digital wallet.
Current-status rule
Current family-facing and agency evidence takes precedence over a historic award, protested procurement, terminated contract, or superseded handbook. Those records remain valuable, but they belong in procurement history rather than the current map.
Cost normalization
Maximum liability, current contract total, fixed annual fee, one-time implementation fee, per-student fee, percentage-of-spending fee, per-transaction fee, processing cost, scholarship pass-through, and bid amount remain separate fields. The page does not add unlike amounts together or treat them as interchangeable.
Original calculations
The 19-of-21 and 16-of-18 figures come from the current map. The Arkansas 22.5% spread comes from the three recorded bids under Solicitation S000000313. Tennessee’s 99.23% comes from dividing the five enumerated pass-through lines by the published maximum liability.
Verification date
Every current row and every published calculation was rechecked for this version on . A cosmetic edit does not change the verification date.
Data downloads
The complete dataset is published in two formats with row-level source URLs, evidence grades, and verification dates.
- ESA Administrator Contracts Current Map — CSVCurrent-map distribution with row-level source URLs and evidence grades
- ESA Administrator Contracts Research Workbook — XLSX (cost normalization, procurement history, data dictionary, claim ledger, and source log)
Primary sources
Current program and agency records
- Alabama — ALDOR CHOOSE Act page
- Alabama — Contract review agenda (ClassWallet, p. 78)
- Arizona — ADE ESA/ClassWallet page
- Arizona — ADE official Q4 FY2024 quarterly report
- Arkansas — DESE current program page
- Arkansas — ALC contract review report (Nov. 14)
- Arkansas — Bid protest file (Sid3car response to Kleo)
- Florida — FDOE approved SFO roster
- Georgia — Georgia Promise Scholarship current site
- Indiana — IDOE 2026–27 ESA FAQ
- Iowa — Iowa Department of Education ESA page
- Iowa — Auditor of State, Report of Recommendations (July 22, 2024)
- Louisiana — LA GATOR current program site
- Louisiana — BESE official minutes, April 2026, item 6.4.5
- Louisiana — DOA initial procurement record
- Mississippi — MDE ESA program page
- Montana — OPI ESA program and legal-status page
- New Hampshire — NHED EFA page
- New Hampshire — CSF NH ClassWallet guide (Sept. 2025)
- New Hampshire — RSA 194-F:4(V)
- North Carolina — NCSEAA ClassWallet page
- South Carolina — SCDE ESTF program page
- South Carolina — Contract 4400033633 detail
- Tennessee — Student First Technologies contract amendment (Amendment 03)
- Texas — Comptroller selection announcement (Oct. 2025)
- Texas — SB 2 bill text
- Utah — USBE original ACE Scholarships board record
- Utah — ACE Scholarships June 2024 amendment
- Utah — USBE transition FAQ
- Utah — USBE current Odyssey board record (USBE250075CT)
- West Virginia — Hope Scholarship parent handbook 2026–27
- Wyoming — WDE ESA program page
Sector reference
How to cite this page
The School Choice Index. “Education Savings Account Administrator Contracts by State (2026).” Dataset version 1.0. Last fully verified .
https://theschoolchoiceindex.com/research/education-savings-account-administrator-contracts-by-state/
The School Choice Index is an independent research and reference resource on K–12 education savings accounts and school-choice programs. This page was researched, assembled, and verified under the byline shown above. It reports program structures, contract records, statutory provisions, procurement history, and dates. It does not evaluate the merits of ESA policy and does not assess the performance of an administrator.
Last updated: · Last fully verified: · Dataset version 1.0
Frequently asked questions
How many states have education savings account programs?
The defined universe contains 21 state-funded K–12 ESA programs in 18 states. Florida contributes two separately named programs and Tennessee three, so the program count exceeds the state count.
Who administers education savings accounts in each state?
There is rarely one complete answer. A public agency or statutory board retains public responsibility, while a program manager, scholarship organization, wallet platform, or payment processor may perform some operating work. The current map separates those functions so the platform is not mistaken for the public authority.
Which ESA programs use ClassWallet?
ClassWallet appears in seven current program contexts in this dataset: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Its role differs by program; in New Hampshire it is the digital-wallet platform inside a program administered by Children’s Scholarship Fund New Hampshire.
Which ESA programs use Odyssey?
Odyssey, operated by Primary Class, Inc., appears in six direct current program contexts: Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming. A Florida scholarship-funding organization separately documents an Odyssey relationship, but that is not one statewide Florida award.
Is an ESA contract total the same as the administrator’s fee?
No. A contract can combine fixed fees, per-student charges, transaction fees, implementation work, processing costs, and scholarship funds passed through to families or providers. Tennessee is the clearest example: 99.23% of its $636.9 million maximum liability is enumerated scholarship pass-through.
How much of an ESA can be used for administration?
There is no single national answer. Georgia permits up to 5% of scholarship proceeds to be withheld, Montana adjusts the student amount by 5% for public administration, New Hampshire permits its scholarship organization to withhold or deduct up to 10%, and Texas separately authorizes up to 3% for the Comptroller and up to 5% for certified educational assistance organizations. Those percentages cover different entities and functions and should not be treated as one comparable rate table.
Does the administrator’s fee reduce the student’s award?
Sometimes. Georgia says up to 5% may be withheld from scholarship proceeds, Montana adjusts the final student amount by 5%, and New Hampshire law permits withholding or deduction from EFA deposits. Other states disclose separate contract or fee records, but the state’s current program materials control.
Why do some ESA programs have more than one administrator?
Because states divide the work. Indiana runs applications through Access Indiana, administers the program through IDOE, and continues payments through ClassWallet. North Carolina uses NCSEAA for awards and purchase review while ClassWallet supplies the purchasing platform. New Hampshire uses Children’s Scholarship Fund for program administration and ClassWallet for the digital wallet.
Where can I verify these figures?
Every current row links to an issuing-agency, program, contract, board, legislative, or audit record. The downloadable CSV includes row-level source URLs and verification dates.
The School Choice Index is an independent comparison and research resource for U.S. school choice programs. Material corrections are recorded with the date, affected records, previous and revised values, reason, and source. Read our methodology, editorial standards, and corrections policy.