Public Comments

I am writing in support of HB 5345, bipartisan legislation requiring enrollment-based childcare subsidy payments.

Childcare providers operate with fixed costs that do not change hour by hour. Staffing ratios must be maintained, employees must be paid, and facilities must remain open and operational whether a child attends two hours or a full day. The current attendance-based reimbursement structure relies on an outdated hourly conversion model that does not reflect the true cost of delivering care.

Enrollment-based payments provide stability and predictability, allowing providers to budget responsibly, retain qualified staff, and continue serving working families. Codifying this structure in state law also protects providers and families in the event federal policy changes in the future.

A sustainable childcare system is essential to supporting West Virginia’s workforce and economic growth. HB 5345 is a practical and necessary step toward strengthening childcare access and provider stability across our state.

I am writing in support of HB 5345, bipartisan legislation requiring enrollment-based childcare subsidy payments.

Childcare providers operate with fixed costs that do not change hour by hour. Staffing ratios must be maintained, employees must be paid, and facilities must remain open and operational whether a child attends two hours or a full day. The current attendance-based reimbursement structure relies on an outdated hourly conversion model that does not reflect the true cost of delivering care.

Enrollment-based payments provide stability and predictability, allowing providers to budget responsibly, retain qualified staff, and continue serving working families. Codifying this structure in state law also protects providers and families in the event federal policy changes in the future.

A sustainable childcare system is essential to supporting West Virginia’s workforce and economic growth. HB 5345 is a practical and necessary step toward strengthening childcare access and provider stability across our state.

I oppose this bill and urge a No vote on this bill for these and many other reasons.

The bill is based on a false premise. For their own well-being, many students (some of which may have had several absences) NEED to leave the public school system quickly.

• This bill is based on a FALSE PREMISE that ALL families who file an NOI to homeschool while involved in a truancy process are simply looking for an “easy out”, and it omits safeguards for the students who have a LEGITIMATE NEED to exit a public school system in an immediate timeframe.
• There can be compelling reasons for a student’s absence from school: severe bullying, personal conflict or bullying from a teacher, mental health issues, etc.  Assuming they are looking for an “easy out” and requiring such students to keep attending school could indeed cause harm to them.
• According to the National Household Education Survey, the number one reason parents choose to homeschool is concern about school environment including classroom safety, drugs, bullying, or negative peer pressure. In other words, they withdraw from public school for their children’s safety. Unfortunately, the threat of injury is not an excuse for missing school under West Virginia law.
• Lacking reasonable safeguards for such situations, this bill essentially prohibits well intended parents from acting in the best interest of their child.

Existing law already provides the best solution.

• The existing law provides a mechanism for superintendents to seek to deny the homeschooling option by filing a petition in court. This is the best solution for whatever problem exists. It maintains due process, enables parents to act in the best interest of the child, and gives superintendents a directive to act whenever the parent is not acting in the best interest of the child.
• Rather than using the existing authority and maintaining due process, this bill creates an “easy out” for the school system by enacting a blanket prohibition that has a high likelihood of negative impact on some children’s well-being.
• Even if a majority of truants did not have legitimate reasons to withdraw to homeschool, some students do have a very real need to leave the school system quickly. Provisions must be made to preserve their well-being!

The bill raises equal protection concernsby unfairly targeting a single category of public school alternatives – those seeking to homeschool.

• There is no mention of, or impact on, students schooling under other exemptions, like Hope or microschools.

The bill is poorly written:

• It doesn’t define when the “pre-petition process” begins. It is possible that this process could start as soon as the student has three unexcused absences. The bill is susceptible to subjective and inconsistent application, i.e. overreach and misuse.
• The factual findings in the bill are neither “factual” nor “findings.” They are merelynegative assumptions about homeschooling without citations to objective evidence to support the need for the legislation in the first place. The “findings” seem based on negative assumptions rather than objective facts.
• Finding (2) is not at all germane to the bill’s stated purpose or the provisions to be enacted in section (b). Rather it seems placed there to simply cast aspersion toward homeschoolers, generally.
• The directive for the Department of Education to survey families who leave the public school to homeschool is not germane to the stated purpose of the bill.  Further, the survey again only targets one group of non-public school alternatives (homeschooling, and no others). Once again, this raises equal protection concerns regarding the constitutionality of the directive.
• The language for the survey is broad and invites the State to invade the privacy of families. If the goal of a survey is to collect accurate data that can be used to better identify the drivers of the decision to file an NOI to homeschool, that research is currently available.
  • • COE – Homeschooled Children and Reasons for Homeschooling by the National Center for Educational Statistics
    • How many US students are homeschooled, and for what reasons?| Pew Research Center

We need a raise it’s hard to make it on what we make

I respectfully urge lawmakers to reconsider this bill’s approach to imposing additional oversight measures on homeschool families, particularly provisions aimed at verifying educational quality through government review of coursework, core subject performance, or concerns about so-called “manufactured grades.”

While ensuring that children receive a meaningful education is a goal everyone shares, this proposal risks creating broad, burdensome regulation based on the assumption that families cannot be trusted to educate their own children without intensive monitoring. The overwhelming majority of homeschool parents are deeply invested in their children’s academic growth and often exceed standard expectations through individualized instruction, flexible pacing, and real-world learning opportunities that do not always fit neatly into traditional grading systems.

A central concern is that this bill appears to equate educational quality with conventional grading and standardized structures. Homeschool education often uses alternative assessment methods such as portfolios, mastery-based progression, project-based learning, dual enrollment, apprenticeships, and online coursework. These approaches can be academically rigorous while looking very different from a public school report card. Labeling nontraditional evaluations as potentially “manufactured” risks misunderstanding legitimate educational models and penalizing innovation.

There is also the issue of government overreach into the home. Increased documentation requirements, grade audits, or subjective reviews of curriculum could place families under constant scrutiny without clear evidence that such measures improve student outcomes. This may create stress and administrative burden for compliant families while diverting state resources away from students who are truly struggling and in need of support.

Policies built on suspicion rather than partnership can damage trust between families and the state. Instead of presuming poor quality, lawmakers could focus on accessible resources, optional academic support, and clear, reasonable pathways for demonstrating progress that respect the diversity of homeschool methods.

Most importantly, educational policy should remain student-centered. A one-size-fits-all accountability model may unintentionally limit flexible learning environments that help many children thrive — including students with learning differences, medical needs, mental health challenges, or those who simply learn best outside a traditional classroom structure.

For these reasons, I encourage a more balanced approach that protects educational freedom while offering support where it is truly needed, rather than expanding regulatory control over families who are already working hard to provide strong, individualized educations.

WITHDRAW THE BILL. Decisions for our children are OUR right. Our children’s education is our right. We are the sole decision makers on a day to day basis, education is no different. School systems should never have the right nor the authority, even if it includes involving other entities to obtain said authority, to make such decisions on behalf of what we as parents decide. Government, State, nor anyone else for that matter, besides the parent should never have authority. Especially when the true baseline of their decision is affected by money and numbers. Grants and funding are issued based upon the “numbers” that are submitted. Public school systems are dropping those numbers daily and it affects their money. Never let the money blur the lines of any child’s wellbeing. This does exactly that. And it is not welcomed. Our children deserve better. They deserve the best that we as parents can provide. Public schools are not the best. That is clear and is supported by the lack of education in this state in comparison to the entire country. It’s supported by the bullying that goes on daily with little to nothing done. The statement “bullying is not tolerated” does nothing. Meaningless promises and words but no action. Only when it benefits the numbers AKA ..MONEY. This was not meant to be a formal style comment. This is a nicely put, straight to the facts comment. WITHDRAW THE BILL.

This bill is governmental overreach. This is in no way protecting the rights of kids and parents. It places unnecessary power into the hands of BOE members and other state officials who clearly aren’t handling their duties well with public school students

I am writing to ask that you oppose HB 5053. I am concerned that this bill places excessive power in the hands of county superintendents, allowing them to potentially force children to remain in systems that are detrimental to their well-being.   Furthermore, parents should not be required to justify their decision to homeschool. The bill is vague regarding the steps that could be taken against parents who choose this path. Current laws already allow superintendents to obtain court orders to delay homeschooling for students who may be in danger; superintendents should not act as both judge and jury in a parent's decision.   I urge you to oppose this bill, as it represents significant government overreach.  

Please withdraw HB 5053!!

I have not personally had to deal with leaving the public school system, as we have always homeschooled. However, I have so many friends with kids in the public school system, some of those friends have kids who are being bullied. They have spoken to the schools about it, with nothing being done to the bullies and no resolution to the issue. This has caused serious mental health issues. I have one friend, whose child become suicidal due to the bullying. With this bill, If they had decided to pull out of public school to homeschool, that would've been denied. This is not okay, there are legitimate reasons to pull out of public to homeschool quickly. It is NOT safe to ASSUME that everyone who has truancy issues is just trying to get an out. I do not believe in my heart that passing this would be going in the right direction. I do feel like this is only trying to discourage parents from doing what is best for their children.

My name is Karleigh Hale, and I serve as Vice President of Youth Development for the YMCA of Kanawha Valley, overseeing early learning, Pre-K, and school-age programs serving working families in our community.

I strongly support HB 5345, which would require child care subsidy payments to be based on monthly enrollment rather than daily attendance.

Child care programs operate with fixed costs. Staffing ratios must be maintained regardless of whether a child attends two hours, a full day, or is absent due to illness or other unforeseen circumstances. Employees must be paid. Facilities must remain open and operational. These costs do not fluctuate based on daily attendance.

Private-pay families are charged based on enrollment, not attendance. When a child is enrolled, that space is reserved and staffed accordingly. Subsidy reimbursement should follow the same enrollment-based structure to ensure fairness, equity, and operational consistency across all families.

Attendance-based reimbursement models create financial instability and unpredictability for providers. They make responsible budgeting nearly impossible and undermine our ability to retain qualified staff and maintain consistent, high-quality care for children across West Virginia.

Enrollment-based reimbursement provides stability for providers, protects access for families, and strengthens the overall sustainability of West Virginia’s child care system.

A sustainable child care system is essential to supporting West Virginia’s workforce and economic growth. HB 5345 is a practical and necessary step toward strengthening child care access and provider stability across our state.

I am writing in support of HB 5345, bipartisan legislation requiring enrollment-based childcare subsidy payments.

Childcare providers operate with fixed costs that do not change hour by hour. Staffing ratios must be maintained, employees must be paid, and facilities must remain open and operational whether a child attends two hours or a full day. The current attendance-based reimbursement structure relies on an outdated hourly conversion model that does not reflect the true cost of delivering care.

Enrollment-based payments provide stability and predictability, allowing providers to budget responsibly, retain qualified staff, and continue serving working families. Codifying this structure in state law also protects providers and families in the event federal policy changes in the future.

A sustainable childcare system is essential to supporting West Virginia’s workforce and economic growth. HB 5345 is a practical and necessary step toward strengthening childcare access and provider stability across our state.