New York Senate Bill S00988

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/8/25
• Refer: 1/8/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Repeals the requirement that applicants must pass an examination in order to qualify as a licensed master social worker.

Summary

S00988 would amend the Education Law to eliminate the requirement that applicants pass an examination to qualify for a licensed master social worker (LMSW) license in New York. The bill is narrowly focused: it repeals paragraph (d) of subdivision 1 of section 7704 of the Education Law, which currently makes passage of an exam a condition of licensure. If enacted, the change would remove the exam-based gatekeeping step from the LMSW licensing process, while leaving the rest of the licensure framework in place. The bill takes effect immediately upon enactment. Its practical effect would be to change how social workers enter the profession in New York, potentially making licensure more accessible and reducing time and cost barriers for applicants. It would also affect the state agency responsible for professional licensing and the education and training pipeline for social workers, since the exam requirement is a key component of current licensure standards.

Impact

This bill would directly amend section 7704 of the Education Law by repealing the statutory requirement that LMSW applicants pass an examination. As a result, the state would no longer use that exam as a mandatory licensure criterion for licensed master social workers, altering the standards administered by the licensing authority and affecting applicants seeking entry into the profession. The bill does not appear to change other licensure requirements, such as education or supervised practice, but it would remove one of the principal barriers to initial licensure.

Sentiment

Based on the bill’s sponsorship and the absence of recorded opposition, the measure appears to have been introduced in a supportive policy environment, with sponsors from the Senate Democratic conference backing it. The available record does not include committee debate or votes, so there is no documented public disagreement in the materials provided. Overall, the bill reads as a professional-access reform aimed at easing licensure for social workers.

Contention

The main point of contention, though not explicitly documented in the provided transcripts, would likely be whether removing the exam could weaken professional standards or reduce assurance of competency for licensed master social workers. Supporters would likely argue that the exam is an unnecessary barrier that can delay entry into a workforce with high demand, while critics may prefer to retain the exam as a uniform statewide benchmark for minimum qualification. Because no committee discussion or vote record is provided, the specific positions of legislators, regulators, or professional groups are not stated in the source materials.