Skip To main content

Renzulli Learning

Menu

Title-1

Gifted and Talented Education · New Hampshire

Gifted Education in New Hampshire: A Three-Domain Statute with Locally Selected Assessments, a Mandatory Annual Narrative Report by August 1, and a “State What You Don’t Have” Public Transparency Requirement

RSA 189:29-b defines gifted and talented students across academic, artistic, and athletic domains using locally selected assessments. Every public school must file an annual narrative report with NHED by August 1 detailing its G/T policies, programs, and procedures. If nothing exists, the school must publicly say so. NHED makes all reports available online.

Start Your Free 30-Day Trial Schedule a Demo Download the Alignment Summary
3
domains in RSA 189:29-b: academic, artistic, and athletic potential; all identified via locally selected and administered assessments
Aug. 1
annual deadline: every public school files a narrative report with NHED; if no G/T policies programs or procedures exist the school must state that explicitly
Public
NHED publishes every district’s annual report on its public website; transparency without enforcement; community scrutiny without legal mandate
Top 10%
New Hampshire ranks in the top 10–12% nationally on NAEP reading and math (4th and 8th grade, 2024); strong overall academic performance
RSA 189:29-b in full: the complete statute

New Hampshire’s Gifted Education Law: Three Subsections, One Governing Philosophy

RSA 189:29-b was enacted by HB 321 in 2021, signed by Governor Sununu on July 23, 2021, and first applied in the 2022-23 school year. The full text of the statute reveals a distinctive design philosophy: recognize giftedness, require transparency, respect local authority, enforce nothing programmatically.

RSA 189:29-b Identification and Accommodation of Gifted and Talented Students
I.
In this section, “gifted and talented student” means a student identified as having unique academic, artistic, or athletic potential according to assessments selected and administered locally.
II.
Beginning in the 2022-2023 school year, every New Hampshire public school shall submit to the department of education, no later than August 1, an annual narrative report detailing the policies, programs, and procedures that are in place to identify and accommodate the unique needs of gifted and talented students. If no such policies, programs, or procedures exist, the report shall so state.
III.
The department shall develop a standardized format for the submission of such information and shall reassess the format each year to ensure the required information is useful. The department shall make the reports available on its public Internet website.
The most consequential sentence in the statute: “If no such policies, programs, or procedures exist, the report shall so state.” This sentence is the engine of New Hampshire’s approach to G/T accountability. Every other state in this series that has a no-mandate framework simply has silence: no requirement to report, no requirement to explain the absence of programs. New Hampshire requires every school to break that silence annually. A school that provides nothing for gifted students must publish that fact in a report that appears on NHED’s public website, visible to every parent, school board member, advocate, and journalist in the community. There is no legal consequence for providing nothing. But there is a transparency consequence that operates through community scrutiny.
The three-domain definition: academic, artistic, athletic

New Hampshire’s Three Domains: The Most Decentralized Definition in This Series, and the One That Includes Athletics

Section I of RSA 189:29-b is the only gifted education definition in this entire series that (1) explicitly names athletic potential as a recognized domain of giftedness and (2) delegates both the selection of assessments and their administration entirely to local districts. Every other state in the series provides at minimum a suggested list of instruments or a requirement to use multiple measures. New Hampshire says only: identify students with unique potential in these three areas using whatever assessments you choose locally.

🧠

Academic Potential

Unique academic potential identified through locally selected and administered assessments. This is the broadest category and could encompass cognitive ability tests, achievement tests, subject-specific assessments, portfolio review, teacher nomination, or any other instrument the district selects. The law specifies no minimum number of measures, no preferred instruments, and no required cut-scores.

Renzulli: Profiler (academic interests), EFA (cognitive profile), PBL (demonstrated academic performance)
🎭

Artistic Potential

Unique artistic potential identified through locally selected assessments. Artistic giftedness can encompass visual arts, music, theatre, dance, creative writing, film, and other artistic disciplines. The broad “artistic” language without further specification gives districts maximum flexibility to recognize the range of arts-based talents their communities most value.

Renzulli: CTC (scored creativity across artistic domains), Profiler (arts-area interest identification)
🎯

Athletic Potential

Unique athletic potential identified through locally selected assessments. This is the domain that makes New Hampshire’s definition most distinctive. No other state in this series names athletic giftedness as a statutory category. NH’s inclusion reflects the state’s local control philosophy: if a community values and wants to serve athletically gifted students, the law provides authority to do so. What constitutes “athletic potential” and how it is assessed is entirely a local decision.

Renzulli: Leadership Assessment (behavioral evidence of competitive drive and team leadership), Profiler (sports and physical activity interest domains)
Why “assessments selected and administered locally” is the key phrase in Section I: Every other state definition in this series provides at minimum a framework for what identification should involve (multiple measures, specific domains, identification by qualified professionals, etc.). New Hampshire’s Section I provides only the categories and then says: use whatever locally selected and administered assessments you choose. A district could use a nationally normed cognitive ability test, a teacher nomination form, a portfolio review, a student audition, or an athletic performance trial. A district could use all of these or just one. No state guidance specifies otherwise. This maximum local flexibility is consistent with New Hampshire’s constitutional and political culture, but it places the full burden of assessment quality, equity, and defensibility on local districts.
The annual narrative report: what every NH school must file by August 1

Section II in Detail: What the Annual Narrative Report Must Cover and Why the Transparency Mechanism Matters

Section II’s annual narrative report requirement is the operational center of RSA 189:29-b. Understanding exactly what the law requires (and does not require) helps districts design programs that both meet the transparency obligation and genuinely serve gifted students.

Who

Every public school (not just every district)

The statute says “every New Hampshire public school,” not “every school district” or “every school administrative unit.” This means each individual school building must file its own report. A district with five elementary schools, two middle schools, and one high school files eight separate reports, one per school. This school-level granularity creates visibility into intra-district variation: a district may have a robust G/T program at one elementary school and nothing at another.

When

No later than August 1 each year

The August 1 deadline falls at the start of the planning season for the next school year, not at its end. This timing creates an opportunity: a report filed in August can inform community discussion before the school year begins, giving families, school boards, and advocacy groups time to respond to what schools are or are not providing before students are in classrooms.

What

Policies, programs, and procedures for identification AND accommodation

The statute covers two distinct obligations: what the school does to identify gifted students (assessment processes, referral procedures, documentation) and what the school does to accommodate their unique needs (differentiated instruction, enrichment programs, acceleration options, individual learning plans, etc.). Both sides must be described, or the absence of both must be stated.

Key Clause

“If no such policies, programs, or procedures exist, the report shall so state”

This is the transparency enforcement mechanism. There is no legal requirement to have any programs. But there is a legal requirement to publicly acknowledge the absence of programs if none exist. A school that provides nothing for gifted students must tell the public that, in a standardized report format, on the state department’s public website. The reputational accountability this creates is real and ongoing: the same report appears every year.

Format

NHED standardized format, reassessed annually

NHED develops and annually reassesses the standardized format to ensure the reported information remains useful. The Technical Advisory (May 31, 2022) explains the survey format. Districts should consult NHED’s current format before each August 1 filing since the format evolves. The Bureau of Educational Opportunities handles questions about the technical advisory and reporting format.

Public

NHED publishes every report on its public Internet website

All submitted reports are publicly accessible on NHED’s website. This creates a statewide public record of what every NH public school does (or does not do) for gifted students. Parents can compare their school’s report to neighboring schools. Journalists can analyze patterns across the state. Advocates can identify which communities are most in need of support. This transparency function is the law’s primary accountability mechanism.

The annual reporting cycle and what it means for district planning

The Reporting Calendar and the Strategic Planning Opportunity It Creates

The August 1 deadline creates a natural annual planning cycle that districts can use to strengthen their G/T programs year over year. Filing a meaningful report requires knowing what programs exist; knowing what programs exist requires having intentional program design; intentional program design benefits from strong identification data and structured program documentation.

Sept–Dec

Program Delivery

G/T programs and services run for identified students. Documentation of identification decisions, services delivered, and student progress begins accumulating for the current year’s report.

Jan–Apr

Identification and Review

Ongoing identification of students with unique academic, artistic, or athletic potential. Annual re-evaluation of existing program participants. Program review for effectiveness. Data collection from locally selected assessments.

May–Jul

Report Preparation

Compile data on policies, programs, and procedures. Complete NHED’s standardized narrative report form. If programs are improving, document changes. If gaps are identified, plan for next year. File report with NHED by August 1.

August 1

Report Due and Published

NHED receives all reports. NHED publishes reports on its public website. Community and school board review of the published report. Reports inform next year’s program decisions. The cycle restarts.

What meaningful reporting looks like vs. minimal compliance: A school that files a minimal report (“we have no formal G/T policies, programs, or procedures”) is in technical compliance with RSA 189:29-b. It has done what the law requires. A school that files a detailed report describing its locally selected assessments, its identification criteria for all three domains, its program model for identified students, its accommodation strategies, its student outcome data, and its plans for improvement is doing what the law intended. The difference between these two reports is the difference between a school that treats RSA 189:29-b as a compliance checkbox and one that treats it as an accountability platform for genuine talent development. Renzulli Learning supports schools that choose the second path.
Platform tools mapped to RSA 189:29-b’s identification and accommodation requirements

What Renzulli Learning Provides: From Locally Selected Assessment Evidence to Annual Report Documentation

Renzulli Profiler, Section I Identification (Academic and Artistic Domains) and Section II Annual Report Evidence (Policies and Procedures for Identification): RSA 189:29-b requires that gifted and talented students be identified through locally selected and administered assessments. The Profiler is a locally administered student self-report instrument that generates structured evidence of academic interests, intellectual engagement patterns, and artistic-area enthusiasm. For the Section II report’s description of identification procedures: the Profiler provides a documented, standardized assessment that the school can name in its annual narrative. For the Section I academic domain: Profiler data identifies which students show the depth and intensity of intellectual interest that characterizes academic giftedness beyond what standardized achievement tests capture. For the artistic domain: Profiler arts-area interest and engagement data contributes to the multi-source evidence portfolio for artistic identification.
Cebeci Test of Creativity (CTC), Section I Identification (Artistic Domain) and Section II Annual Report Evidence (Locally Selected Assessment for Artistic Potential): New Hampshire’s artistic domain requires identifying students with unique artistic potential. The CTC is the purpose-built creativity assessment that provides scored evidence directly relevant to artistic giftedness. In New Hampshire’s framework, the CTC qualifies as a locally selected and administered assessment for the artistic domain, fulfilling Section I’s identification requirement. For the Section II narrative report, the CTC is a named assessment that the school can describe in its policies and procedures for identification section. Because the CTC’s scored creativity evidence does not depend on prior exposure to formal art instruction, it is particularly valuable for identifying artistic potential in students from communities with limited arts program infrastructure.
Executive Function Assessment, Section I Identification (Academic Domain for Twice-Exceptional Students) and Section II Annual Report Evidence (Accommodation Procedures for Students with Complex Profiles): RSA 189:29-b’s requirement to detail procedures for “accommodating the unique needs” of gifted students encompasses twice-exceptional students, whose academic giftedness is often masked by a learning disability, ADHD, or autism. The EFA provides the executive function and self-regulatory profile that makes the 2E pattern visible: a student with strong metacognitive ability and task flexibility but poor task initiation may be academically gifted and twice-exceptional rather than a student with no exceptional ability. For the annual report’s accommodation section, the EFA data informs the individualized accommodation strategies that constitute meaningful service for 2E gifted students.
Leadership Assessment, Section I Identification (Athletic and Artistic Domains: Competitive and Performance Leadership) and Section II Annual Report (Policies for Identifying Leadership-Dimension Giftedness): New Hampshire’s inclusion of athletic potential creates a domain where behavioral leadership evidence is directly relevant: athletic giftedness often manifests not just in physical performance but in competitive drive, teamwork capacity, and the ability to elevate the performance of others. The Leadership Assessment provides scored behavioral evidence of these dimensions. For districts that choose to identify athletic giftedness or that want to capture leadership components of artistic performance (conducting an orchestra, directing a play, leading a debate team), the Leadership Assessment provides structured data that complements performance-based athletic or artistic assessments. In the annual narrative report, the Leadership Assessment can be named as one of the locally selected assessment instruments for the athletic or artistic domains.
Enrichment Database, Section II Annual Report (Programs to Accommodate Unique Needs) and Moving from Compliance to Substance: Section II requires reporting on programs to accommodate gifted students’ unique needs. A school that reports having an enrichment program must actually have one; NHED’s public posting of reports creates accountability for the substance of what schools claim. The enrichment database delivers the actual programming content that makes an enrichment program real: 40,000+ interest-matched, above-grade-level activities across academic, artistic, and other domains. For the annual report’s program description section, the enrichment database provides the specific program infrastructure a school can describe: student-interest-matched enrichment activities aligned to the academic domain, creativity-focused activities for the artistic domain, and cross-domain investigations that serve students identified in multiple categories.
Project-Based Learning (PBL) Tools, Section II Annual Report (Programs for Accommodation) and Academic Domain Depth: PBL tools provide the original student investigations that constitute the most educationally substantive form of accommodation for academically gifted students. A school whose annual report describes its accommodation program can point to PBL as the structured framework through which identified students pursue in-depth investigations of real problems producing genuine academic products. For New Hampshire’s academic domain: PBL’s documented student investigations provide measurable evidence of the above-grade-level academic engagement that gifted accommodation programs are designed to enable. For NHED’s annual reassessment of the report format to ensure “the required information is useful,” the ability to report specific PBL project outcomes and student products is more useful evidence than generic descriptions of enrichment intent.
Personal Success Plan (PSP), Section II Annual Report Documentation (The Central Evidence Record) and NHED Public Website Preparation: The annual narrative report must describe policies, programs, and procedures across both identification and accommodation. The PSP is the individual student record that contains this documentation for each identified student: what assessment was used (Profiler, CTC, Leadership Assessment, EFA), what was found (identification domain and evidence), what program the student participates in (enrichment database activities, PBL projects), and what progress has been made. For the school-level annual report: PSP records aggregate into the school’s description of its policies, programs, and procedures. A school whose PSPs document robust identification and accommodation programs for 15 identified students has clear, specific, defensible content for its August 1 report. A school with no PSPs has exactly the challenge RSA 189:29-b’s “if no programs exist, say so” clause was designed to expose.
RSA 189:29-b and Renzulli alignment

New Hampshire’s Gifted Education Law and Renzulli Learning: Side by Side

RSA 189:29-b Requirement Renzulli Learning Contribution
Section I: Academic Domain
Unique academic potential; assessments selected and administered locally; any instruments the district chooses qualify		 Profiler (academic interest and intellectual engagement evidence as a locally administered student self-report assessment), EFA (academic potential profile including twice-exceptional patterns), PBL products (demonstrated above-grade-level academic performance as locally generated evidence).
Section I: Artistic Domain
Unique artistic potential; locally selected assessments; visual arts, music, theatre, dance, creative writing, and other artistic disciplines		 CTC (scored creativity assessment directly addressing artistic giftedness; qualifies as a locally selected and administered assessment for this domain), Profiler (arts-area interest identification). CTC is the purpose-built instrument for the artistic domain.
Section I: Athletic Domain
Unique athletic potential; locally selected assessments; the only state in this series to name athletic giftedness as a statutory category		 Leadership Assessment (behavioral evidence of competitive drive, team leadership, and performance leadership dimensions of athletic giftedness), Profiler (sports and physical activity interest domains). Together these provide structured behavioral evidence to complement performance-based athletic assessments.
Section II: Identification Policies and Procedures
Describe the policies and procedures in place to identify gifted students; if none exist, say so; filed by August 1; published publicly by NHED		 Profiler + CTC + Leadership Assessment + EFA provide four named, structured, documented identification instruments across all three statutory domains. PSP records document the identification decisions made for each student. Together they give the August 1 report specific, defensible content for its identification section.
Section II: Accommodation Programs and Procedures
Describe programs and procedures to accommodate unique needs; if none exist, say so; filed by August 1; published publicly by NHED		 Enrichment database (the program content: interest-matched above-level activities across all three domains), PBL (original investigations as the most substantive form of academic domain accommodation), PSP (individual student records documenting accommodations provided). Together they give the report specific, defensible content for its accommodation section.
Section III: NHED Public Website
NHED publishes all reports publicly; community can compare schools; NHED reassesses format annually to ensure reported information is useful		 PSP aggregate data (what was identified, what was provided, what outcomes were achieved) generates the specific, outcome-focused information that NHED’s annual format reassessment aims to make more useful. Schools using PSP can report program quality measures, not just program existence claims.
The “If Nothing Exists” Clause
If no policies, programs, or procedures exist, the report shall so state; this creates transparency accountability without legal mandate; community scrutiny mechanism		 The strongest argument for building a real program rather than filing a null report: Renzulli Learning provides the tools to move from “we have nothing” to “we have a documented, multi-source identification process and an interest-matched enrichment program” in a way that is accessible to districts of every size and every resource level. The “if nothing exists, say so” clause is an incentive structure; Renzulli provides the means to respond to that incentive.
Frequently asked questions

New Hampshire Gifted and Talented Education: Common Questions

New Hampshire’s primary G/T statute is RSA 189:29-b, enacted by HB 321 in 2021 and first applicable in the 2022-23 school year. The law: (1) defines gifted and talented students as those with unique academic, artistic, or athletic potential, identified through locally selected and administered assessments; (2) requires every public school to file an annual narrative report with NHED by August 1 detailing its G/T policies, programs, and procedures; (3) requires that if no such policies, programs, or procedures exist, the report must explicitly state that; and (4) requires NHED to develop a standardized format for reports, reassess it annually, and publish all reports on its public website. The law creates no requirement to have programs, no service entitlement, no state funding, and no enforcement mechanism beyond public transparency.
New Hampshire’s three-domain definition (academic, artistic, athletic) is unique among states in this series. The inclusion of athletic potential reflects New Hampshire’s deep local control philosophy: if a community values and wants to serve athletically gifted students, state law should provide the authority to do so. Athletic giftedness may encompass exceptional performance in individual or team sports, unusual physical talent development, or competitive achievement that sets a student apart from peers in ways that warrant specialized support. The law leaves the definition of athletic potential and the selection of assessments to identify it entirely to local districts. No minimum performance standard, no required assessment type, and no specific sports or activities are named in the statute.
The annual narrative report must describe: (1) the policies the school has in place for gifted and talented students (what the school’s official position and commitment to G/T education is); (2) the programs the school has in place (what specific services, enrichment, acceleration, or accommodation programs exist for identified students); and (3) the procedures the school uses to identify and accommodate gifted students (what assessment instruments are used, how referrals are made, how students are identified, how accommodation decisions are made). If any of these three elements (policies, programs, or procedures) do not exist, the report must explicitly state that. NHED provides a standardized format for the report; the Technical Advisory (May 31, 2022) explains the format in detail.
There is no legal consequence. RSA 189:29-b does not require New Hampshire schools to have G/T programs. A school that reports having no G/T policies, programs, or procedures is in full compliance with the law. However, NHED publishes every report on its public website, which means the school’s null report is visible to every parent in the community, every member of the school board, every journalist, and every advocacy group in the state. The “if nothing exists, say so” clause creates reputational accountability: a school must publicly acknowledge the absence of programs it has chosen not to provide. Whether this transparency leads to community pressure, school board discussion, or no consequence at all depends on the local community context.
No. New Hampshire provides no state-mandated identification assessments, no state-funded G/T programs, and no state G/T teacher certification. RSA 189:29-b explicitly delegates assessment selection and administration to local districts. NHED provides: the standardized format for the annual narrative report, the Technical Advisory explaining the law and reporting requirements, and the public website where reports are posted. NHED does not provide, endorse, or fund any specific identification instruments or program models. Districts build their own programs using whatever resources they choose to invest. Federal ESSA funds (Title I, II-A, and IV-A) can support G/T identification and programming for eligible districts. New Hampshire has no dedicated state G/T funding line.
New Hampshire’s approach is distinctive in the New England region. Vermont has a statutory definition and an MTSS enrichment mandate but no reporting requirement. Massachusetts has no definition and no reporting requirement (though active legislation may change this). Rhode Island has a permissive statute with detailed identification regulations that only apply to state-funded programs (which no longer exist). Connecticut has mandatory identification through the PPT process and discretionary programming. Maine and New York have no mandate and no state funding. New Hampshire is the only New England state that requires every individual school to file an annual public narrative report specifically about G/T policies, programs, and procedures, and requires schools to explicitly state when they have nothing. This makes New Hampshire’s transparency mechanism the most specifically targeted accountability tool in the region.
Official sources

New Hampshire Gifted and Talented Education Resources

Explore Renzulli Learning’s gifted and advanced learner alignment for neighboring states:

All States G&T Alignment Vermont Massachusetts Maine Rhode Island Connecticut

Ready to File a Meaningful August 1 Report, Build a Documented G/T Program, and Move Beyond “We Have Nothing” to “Here Is What We Provide”?

Start a 30-day free trial with full platform access, no credit card required. Or schedule a free QuickStart with a consultant who understands New Hampshire’s RSA 189:29-b reporting requirements, the three-domain locally assessed definition, and how to build the identification and accommodation documentation your annual narrative report needs.

Start Your Free Trial Schedule a Demo Download the Alignment Summary

Call +1 (203) 680-8301  ·  Email [email protected]