Is ESA draining ICCSD enrollment?

Education Savings Account use vs. actual movement from public to private ยท ICCSD boundary (Iowa DE district 3141), 2022-23 to 2025-26

A high voucher count is not the same as students leaving. ICCSD has 1,440 resident students on an Iowa Education Savings Account (ESA) voucher in 2025-26. That number only means a public loss if those students would have enrolled in ICCSD without the program. Most of them would not have. They were already in private school.
ICCSD-resident ESA users (2025-26)
1,440
headline voucher count
Already private
~78%
about 1,130 students, no enrollment effect
Real move from public to private
120-190
over 3 years, under 1.5% of the district

From 1,440 vouchers down to about 175 transfers

The headline ESA count cannot show a transfer by itself. Most of it is the eligibility phase-in, income-capped in 2023 and universal by 2025, reaching families who were already in private school. Take out the students who were never going to be in ICCSD and a much smaller number is left for real movement from public to private.

ESA users down to real transfers (2025-26)
All ICCSD-resident ESA users2025-26 headline count1,440Already privateabout 78%, a subsidy with no enrollment effect1,129Upper-bound net move to privateconstant-share counterfactual311Minus newly-accredited schoolsalready non-public students136Real move from public to privateRegina +130, Faith +39175

Funnel logic from ESA_ICCSD_Decomposition.xlsx. "Upper-bound net move" is the private enrollment above what the pre-ESA private share would predict. "Newly-accredited schools" are Montessori, Hillside, and the Tamarack microschool entering the certified count by getting accredited for ESA. Those students were already non-public.

Why the count overstates the effect

Private share of the resident school-age pool
6%7%8%9%10%2022-232023-242024-252025-267.6%8.3%9.0%9.6%

The private share of the ICCSD-resident pool rose from 7.6% to 9.6% over the ESA period. Real, but modest. Hold the pre-ESA share constant, apply it to each year's resident pool, and the "excess" private enrollment (the part population growth does not explain) is about +311 by 2025-26. That is the upper bound on would-be-public families moving to private. Most of the 1,440 ESA users sit below that line. They were private already.

ICCSD-resident pool (dist 3141)2022-232023-242024-252025-26
Public certified14,44014,37914,55114,370
Private enrollment1,1921,3021,4341,523
Private share of pool7.6%8.3%9.0%9.6%
ESA residentsn/a4717731,440

Five reasons it holds

The voucher count is not the cause of the plateau. ESA use is high mainly because families already in private school became eligible for a subsidy. The real move from public to private that ESA can account for is about 120 to 190 students over three years, under 1.5% of the district. It is small, concentrated at Regina, and not what flattened ICCSD enrollment. The plateau is demographic.

What would have changed the conclusion

Two things together would signal a real mix shift. Private schools growing sharply, with new buildings, new K-12 schools, or waitlists. And ICCSD falling below its post-ESA demographic forecast at the same time. Neither happened. The private growth was modest and demographically plausible, and the public count held.

Caveats

What's driving ICCSD enrollment? Full factor decomposition →
ICCSD enrollment forecast, three scenarios →

Source: Iowa DOE Certified Enrollment by District (public & non-public, dist 3141), 2022-23 through 2025-26. Iowa Dept. of Education ESA program counts. ICCSD ESA Private Study (ESA_ICCSD_Decomposition.xlsx, FINDINGS.md). Built iccsd-esa-decomposition.html via scripts/build_esa_decomposition.py.