The Home Education Advisory Council (HEAC) is intended to support and advise the NH Department of Education regarding their work with the home education community and be a bridge to education agencies in the public-school arena. It is the only public board that represents the home-education community at the state level. It is established in state law RSA 193-A:10 with more definition of the function and purpose in Ed rules 315.09 and 10.
Members typically meet every-other month of the traditional school year, unless otherwise announced, to discuss relevant issues and happenings that impact the independent, unfunded, RSA 193-A home ed community.
GSHE publishes HEAC videos on our YouTube channel to benefit the home ed community. They are unedited, published without alternations or modifications.
Find HEAC members’ contact information on the NH Department of Education’s website page for HEAC. The public is welcome to attend in person at the DOE’s Concord office or via Zoom. Details are available at the bottom of this article.
May 9, 2025
Video – note the recording was accidentally started after discussion began and was initiated immediately upon realizing it
Summary
The June 2025 meeting of the Home Education Advisory Council (HEAC) was intended to finalize the council’s annual report to the State Board of Education. Instead, the meeting was derailed by procedural disruptions and extended fallout from a politically motivated legislative attempt to repeal the council. Despite its statutory obligation to focus on home education under RSA 193-A, HEAC is now facing criticism—from the very individuals who pushed it toward Education Freedom Account (EFA) topics—for returning to its legal mandate.
Agenda Delay Sparks Point of Order
Before the meeting was officially called to order, Althea Barton (NHHC) raised a point of order regarding the agenda not being posted 24 hours in advance with Dianne Nolin (CUHE) moving that the session proceed as a non-voting work session. While the agenda was posted late, the meeting itself was properly noticed under RSA 91-A, and the council had previously voted to hold this June session for the express purpose of finalizing its report as noted in the May meeting minutes that are posted on the NH Department of Education’s website.
HEAC’s internal best practices policy—originally adopted amid controversy in spring 2023 and revised later that year—was reviewed but is not publicly available. GSHE submitted a Right-to-Know request to obtain a copy. After discussion, Nolin’s motion failed, though the procedural issue consumed a quarter of the meeting.
Repeal Attempt and Gaslighting
The discussion then turned to the non-germane amendment to SB 57, which sought to repeal HEAC entirely. Read GSHE’s breakdown of the amendment.
While some members—Rep. Peternel, Dianne Nolin, and Althea Barton—claimed the repeal attempt was about HEAC “losing its mission” or becoming too contentious, Chair Marcus Zuech (GSHE) and Michelle Rohrbacher (CHENH/SME) firmly rejected that framing. They called it what it is: political retaliation against HEAC members who have insisted that the council fulfill its lawful purpose—serving families under RSA 193-A only.
GSHE views this as a textbook case of gaslighting. Those now claiming HEAC has gone astray are the same voices who welcomed EFA-related discussions in the past—so long as HEAC echoed the messaging they wanted. The criticism only began when the council worked to clarify that EFA students are not home educators under the law, and that HEAC’s work does not apply to EFA families.
Lawmakers Take Issue with Statutory Clarity
Rep. Peternel repeated her claim that HEAC was unfocused and out of touch. Yet this is the same legislator who objected to GSHE using the word “terminate” to describe ending a home education program—despite the fact that this is the actual term used in RSA 193-A:5. See GSHE’s clarification and GSHE response to the September 2024 meeting.
Rep. Cordelli, who introduced the repeal amendment, attended the meeting and claimed HEAC was “out of control” and misaligned with its duties. GSHE strongly rejects this characterization. Cordelli has no operational authority over HEAC, and his comments reflect a broader effort to silence opposition to the conflation of education pathways.
HEAC’s Role: Fulfilling Statutory Duty, Not Political Convenience
Barker argued that HEAC has an important role and should not have its own “policy platform;” it is simply advisory to the Commissioner. She cited Ed 315.09 to confirm HEAC’s role is limited and “should work with civility and in the best interest of the home education community and all stakeholders.” There was broad agreement with her remarks. Zuech added that HEAC serves a dual purpose: (1) helping families and educators comply with existing law, and (2) advising on improvements to law and rule when necessary as that is expressly stated in home ed statute.
HEAC’s return to focusing solely on 193-A has provoked political pushback precisely because the council is refusing to endorse policies that blur boundaries between home education and publicly funded alternatives. See GSHE’s explainer on NH’s four educational pathways.
Rohrbacher emphasized that HEAC is not focused on overseeing or supporting EFA, but that EFA administration is causing confusion and misapplication of 193-A throughout the community. That impact falls squarely within HEAC’s advisory scope.
Throughout the meeting, Zuech and Rohrbacher consistently pushed back on the notion that HEAC had overstepped its role. They reaffirmed that HEAC’s mission is to serve families educating under RSA 193-A, and that highlighting how other educational programs—like the EFA—create confusion or unintended consequences for those families is entirely within scope.
Rohrbacher made clear that when HEAC discusses EFA-related issues, it is not to support or oversee EFA, but rather to document the real-world impact these public programs have on home educators operating under 193-A. She stated:
“When the legislature tells us they want us to stop talking about the EFA at HEAC—we’re not talking about the EFA like, ‘Oh, I wonder what we can do with the EFA?’ We’re talking about the EFA in the context of how it is directly impacting 193-A families.”
Zuech agreed and expanded on the council’s dual purpose. While HEAC is indeed advisory to the Commissioner, it also plays a vital role in informing both law and rule. He pointed out the irony that HEAC was previously permitted to weigh in on EFA-related concerns—as long as it didn’t challenge the conflation of EFA with 193-A. He noted that:
“No one raised objections when HEAC addressed EFA concerns in ways that aligned with political messaging. It was only when HEAC returned its focus squarely to 193-A that accusations of ‘straying from the mission’ emerged.”
Zuech emphasized that this political backlash confirms the value of HEAC’s role: when the council is doing its job correctly—providing clarity and statutory alignment for 193-A families—it inevitably “steps on someone’s toes.” That discomfort, he argued, should not be a reason to silence or dismantle the council. That is not straying from HEAC’s purpose, as characterized by legislators and other members.
Zuech reminded members that while legislators can introduce bills, they do not govern the council’s day-to-day operations. Rohrbacher reiterated that CHENH and GSHE support maintaining HEAC—but not at the cost of its integrity. If controversial but relevant topics must be avoided, the council cannot serve its purpose.
Barker, Zuech, and Rohrbacher agreed that HEAC has responsibility to discuss topics that may be uncomfortable with civility when they are in the interests of the independent home education community. HEAC is a voice to home educating families and the purpose is to defend their rights. Keeping the pathways clear is an important outcome of this year’s work.
Even after all that discussion, Rep. Peternel insisted that HEAC is not following the rules, “has lost its way, hopefully temporarily.” Adding, “it’s hard as a representative to find sympathy for that.” She said she is here to support HEAC but is unhappy with the tone. Rep. Margaret Drye added that there “was a lot going on that people didn’t know about regarding the repeal of HEAC.” She agreed that the amendment was not appropriate when it wasn’t discussed with home ed organizations and introduced right before a major holiday.
Misuse of Public Testimony
Nolin also questioned the loyalty of some members and organizations based on testimony submitted at the SB 57 amendment repeal hearing. She read excerpts from statements by Michelle Levell and Amanda Weedon – who represent GSHE and CHENH — that she believed showed a lack of support for HEAC. However, neither Levell nor Weedon is a HEAC member and neither was contacted or invited to clarify their testimony. They had no opportunity to respond to these interpretations during the meeting.
Zuech clarified that Levell’s position was that if HEAC were going to be dismantled, then the legislature should also address the Board of Education’s rulemaking authority—not that she wanted HEAC abolished. GSHE wants to keep HEAC but not at the cost of limiting open discussion that serves the interests of 193-A families. This is a tactical position based on the supposition that Republicans had votes to dissolve the council. Rohrbacher confirmed this understanding.
Rohrbacher said CHENH’s position is that this was a retaliatory amendment and undermines confidence in the legislature to protect the 193-A community.
Drye said that members made many assumptions about the House Education Policy and Administration Committee’s positions and discussion.
Cordelli was given an opportunity to comment and said that it wasn’t “a failed repeal attempt” because the amendment was withdrawn and not put forward for a vote after the hearing. This is a technical issue and ignores that fact that it was introduced and had a public hearing that required the community to raise an alert immediately prior to a major national holiday. He indicated that discussion on potential 2026 legislation is anticipated. He characterized HEAC’s recent discussions as “out of control” and “not in line with the duties” of the council.
Statutory Tweaks Floated
Barker, Drye, and others raised the idea of legislative “clarifications” to better define HEAC’s role. Cordelli said he’d be open to “tweaks” to RSA 193-A and RSA 194-F. Nolin urged the council to “follow the rules” to avoid future repeal threats.
Annual Report Delayed Again
Due to lost time, the council was unable to finalize the end-of-year report. A motion to approve Zuech’s draft and allow for a minority report failed. The council instead voted to reconvene in July to review the report line by line, with the option for dissenting members to submit a minority report following adoption.
Next Meetings
HEAC meets at the NH Department of Education’s office at 25 Hall Street in Concord on the second Friday of alternating months starting at 2:30pm, unless announced otherwise. The public may attend in-person or online. Zoom meeting information is available here. The scheduled 2024-25 meeting dates are as follows.
Thursday, July 24, 2025 from 10am to noon – special meeting for the annual report
An initial schedule for the 2025-26 HEAC year is as follows:
September 12, 2025
October 10, 2025 if needed
November 14, 2025
December 12, 2025 if needed
Links to meeting minutes and members’ contact information are available on the NH DOE’s HEAC page.
Read More About HEAC
HEAC Seeks Clarity re Home Education
HEAC Attempts to Improve Home Ed Communication
HEAC is Focused on Home Ed and the EFA is Public Education
HEAC Struggles to Define Mission and Statutory Obligations
Response to HEAC’s September 2024 Meeting
Confusion About Terminating a Home Ed Program
HEAC summary written by Deb Sullivan and Michelle Levell
