Provides for the licensure of school psychology practitioners; authorizes the use of the title "licensed school psychology practitioner" to licensed or exempt individuals; defines practice of licensed school psychology practitioners; sets forth requirements for professional licensure (including educational attainment, experience, exam and fee); provides for issuance of limited permits under specified circumstances; identifies exempt persons.
This bill creates a new licensed profession in New York for “licensed school psychology practitioners” and establishes a full licensing framework for that title. It defines the scope of practice to include psychoeducational, developmental, and vocational assessment; counseling and interpretive services; consultation with schools, families, and agencies; and the development of educational and psychologically sound programming for children and adolescents. The bill also limits the title to licensed or exempt individuals and sets out rules for limited permits, exemptions, and special transition provisions for current practitioners.
To qualify for licensure, applicants must meet education, supervised experience, examination, age, character, and fee requirements. The education standard includes at least 60 graduate semester hours, an advanced degree or doctorate in school psychology, a 1,200-hour supervised internship, and 3,000 hours of post-master’s supervised experience. The bill also imposes mandatory continuing education, with triennial registration and disciplinary consequences for noncompliance. It further restricts licensees from prescribing drugs, using invasive procedures, or engaging in dual practice with students from their own school employment, and it bars the article from granting hospital privileges.
The bill would amend several existing laws to integrate the new profession into New York’s regulatory structure. It adds licensed school psychology practitioners to the state’s child abuse and maltreatment mandatory reporter list, includes them in the State Board for Psychology, and updates the education law’s licensing and waiver provisions to recognize the new article. It also makes conforming changes to social services and education law terminology, including references to the Office of Addiction Services and Supports and the child abuse reporting framework.
The general sentiment reflected in the bill text is supportive and expansionary, with a strong public-health and student-wellbeing rationale. The legislative findings emphasize the post-COVID increase in children’s mental health needs, the national children’s mental health emergency, and the need to expand access to services outside traditional school settings. The bill presents licensure as a way to ensure competent services while broadening access to prevention, assessment, and counseling for children, youth, and parents.
Notable points of contention are limited in the available record because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided. However, the bill’s structure suggests likely policy sensitivities around professional scope, overlap with existing psychology and mental health licenses, and the restrictions on school-employed practitioners providing private services to their own students. The bill also distinguishes school psychology practitioners from other licensed professionals and preserves existing school psychologist certification rules, indicating an effort to avoid conflicts with current credentialing systems.
The bill would add a new Article 153-A to the Education Law establishing licensure, practice rules, continuing education, and disciplinary boundaries for school psychology practitioners. It would also amend the Education Law, Social Services Law, and related licensing provisions to recognize the new title, require child abuse reporting by these practitioners, and place two licensed school psychology practitioners on the State Board for Psychology. In practical terms, it creates a new regulated pathway for school psychology professionals to provide services beyond school settings while preserving existing certification and other licensed professions’ authority.
The bill’s tone and findings are strongly favorable toward expanding access to child and adolescent mental health services. It frames licensure as a response to increased social-emotional needs after COVID-19 and as a way to improve access to prevention, assessment, and counseling. Because there are no committee transcripts or votes in the provided record, there is no documented opposition or support beyond the bill’s own stated policy rationale, but the text suggests broad support for professionalization and access expansion.
No formal debate or vote record is provided, so specific objections are not documented. The main likely areas of concern are professional scope and regulatory overlap: the bill creates a new licensed title that may intersect with psychologists, school psychologists, social workers, mental health counselors, and other licensed mental health providers. Another possible point of contention is the restriction on dual practice for school-employed practitioners, which limits private services to students from the same school or program. The bill also imposes significant education, experience, and continuing education requirements, which could be viewed as either necessary safeguards or barriers to entry depending on the stakeholder.