House Bill 6017 would make Michigan a member of the School Psychologist Interstate Licensure Compact, an agreement among participating states to streamline cross-state practice for school psychologists. The compact is designed to improve access to school psychological services in educational settings by allowing qualified licensees to obtain an equivalent license in other member states without repeating duplicative licensure requirements, while still requiring compliance with the scope-of-practice laws of the state where services are provided.
The bill sets out the compact’s structure, including definitions, eligibility standards for member states, licensure requirements for participating school psychologists, military spouse and active-duty protections, disciplinary reporting, information-sharing, rulemaking, dispute resolution, and enforcement procedures. It also creates a multi-state commission to administer the compact, collect fees, adopt rules, and oversee compliance. The compact would supersede conflicting state laws to the extent of any conflict, while preserving non-conflicting state authority and disciplinary powers.
If enacted, the bill would amend Michigan law to join a multistate licensure compact for school psychologists and would require state agencies to participate in interstate information sharing, reporting of adverse actions, and compact administration. It would affect licensure rules for school psychologists, including background checks, continuing education, internship and exam standards, and the issuance of equivalent licenses to out-of-state practitioners. It also establishes a new interstate commission with rulemaking and enforcement authority that would operate alongside Michigan’s existing licensing framework, with conflicting state laws superseded only to the extent necessary to implement the compact.
The bill’s overall tone is supportive and administrative, reflecting a policy goal of expanding access to school psychological services and reducing licensure barriers for qualified professionals. The text emphasizes workforce mobility, public access, and support for military families, suggesting a generally favorable posture toward licensure portability. No committee testimony or recorded votes were provided, so there is no additional evidence of opposition or amendment activity in the available record.
The main potential points of contention are the extent to which Michigan would cede regulatory authority to a multistate commission, the requirement to share licensure and investigative information with other states, and the supersession of conflicting state laws. Other issues that could draw scrutiny include the compact’s fee structure, rulemaking authority, immunity and indemnification provisions for commission officials, and the standards for determining whether a state’s compact language is materially different from the model compact. The bill also requires states to accept compact rules and enforcement mechanisms, which may raise concerns about state control over licensure policy and disciplinary procedures.