Supplemental pay and loan repayment programs; add salary supplement for school psychologists.
SB 2595 creates a new Educational Counselor, Psychologist and Psychiatrist Loan Repayment Program to be administered by the Mississippi Postsecondary Financial Assistance Board. The program would offer annual loan repayment awards to eligible full-time counselors, psychologists, and psychiatrists working in Mississippi public school districts, colleges, or universities, with higher award amounts for those serving in schools designated as Comprehensive/Targeted Support and Improvement schools. Applicants must have graduated from an accredited institution, hold a standard professional license, have qualifying educational debt, and not be in default or have received certain other forgivable loan benefits. Awards are made year-to-year, paid directly to lenders, and the board is authorized to limit applications and awards to stay within available funding.
The bill also amends Mississippi’s teacher salary supplement law to add licensed school psychologists who hold Nationally Certified School Psychologist credentials to the list of employees eligible for an annual $6,000 salary supplement plus fringe benefits, so long as they are employed by a local school board or the State Board of Education and are not serving as administrators. The measure further creates two special treasury funds to support the loan repayment programs and requires the board, in coordination with the State Board of Education, to track recipients to evaluate whether the program improves retention. The new loan repayment section would be codified in Title 37 and would sunset on July 1, 2029.
In practical terms, the bill would expand state financial incentives for hard-to-staff student support professionals and add a new recurring salary supplement for nationally certified school psychologists. It would affect the Mississippi Postsecondary Financial Assistance Board, the State Department of Education, local school districts, colleges and universities, and eligible counselors, psychologists, and psychiatrists. It also reinforces existing state efforts to use salary supplements and loan repayment as recruitment and retention tools in education-related professions.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text and caption is supportive of increasing compensation and debt relief for school mental health and counseling professionals, especially in high-need schools. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented public debate in the available materials. The bill’s structure suggests a policy focus on workforce recruitment and retention rather than controversy, but its funding limits and first-come, first-served award structure indicate that implementation would depend on appropriations and administrative capacity.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be fiscal and administrative: whether the state should create new ongoing obligations for loan repayment and salary supplements, how much funding should be appropriated, and whether the first-come, first-served system fairly allocates limited awards. Another possible issue is the bill’s narrow eligibility rules, including the exclusion of provisional emergency license holders and people in default on educational loans, as well as the requirement that recipients remain in qualifying employment to keep benefits.
The bill would add a new state-administered loan repayment program in Title 37 for counselors, psychologists, and psychiatrists working in Mississippi public schools, colleges, and universities, funded through dedicated nonlapsing special funds in the State Treasury. It would also amend Section 37-19-7 to extend the annual $6,000 salary supplement and fringe benefits to licensed school psychologists with Nationally Certified School Psychologist credentials. The measure would affect the Mississippi Postsecondary Financial Assistance Board, the State Department of Education, local school districts, and eligible education and mental health professionals, while requiring rules, tracking, and funding controls to administer the program.
The bill appears generally favorable toward recruitment and retention of school-based mental health and counseling staff, with a clear policy emphasis on compensation, loan relief, and support for high-need schools. No committee discussion or vote history is provided, so there is no recorded opposition or support in the available materials. Based on the bill’s design, the likely sentiment is positive among education and workforce advocates, with practical concerns centered on funding and administration rather than the underlying goal.
The likely points of contention are funding availability, the size and structure of the awards, and whether the state should create another dedicated compensation program during a period of budget constraints. Stakeholders could also differ on the fairness of first-come, first-served awards, the preference given to renewal applicants, and the exclusion of provisional emergency license holders or borrowers in default. Another possible issue is whether the salary supplement should be limited to nationally certified school psychologists and whether the new benefits should be tied to employment in designated high-need schools.