A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered 22.1-289.2:1, relating to public school teachers; teacher compensation; Professionally Licensed Teacher Supplemental Pay Program established.
HB31 would create the Professionally Licensed Teacher Supplemental Pay Program to provide additional pay to certain public school teachers in Virginia. Beginning with the 2026-2027 school year, each professionally licensed teacher working in a “high-vacancy public school” would receive an annual $10,000 supplemental payment. The bill defines high-vacancy schools as those in the top 10 percent of public schools with the highest teacher vacancy rates, using Department of Education vacancy data.
The program is designed to address teacher shortages, reduce reliance on provisionally licensed teachers, and improve recruitment and retention of fully licensed teachers in hard-to-staff schools. The supplemental payment would be treated as part of salary rather than a bonus, subject to payroll deductions, and counted as creditable compensation for Virginia Retirement System purposes. The Department of Education would identify qualifying schools, distribute funds to school divisions, and report annually on the program’s effects and recommendations for improvement.
HB31 would add a new section to the Code of Virginia, § 22.1-289.2:1, establishing a state-administered teacher compensation program tied to vacancy rates in public schools. It would require the Department of Education to use existing vacancy reporting systems to identify qualifying schools every four years, direct school boards to report needed data and disburse payments, and mandate annual public reporting on program outcomes. The bill would also affect teacher compensation and retirement calculations by treating the supplement as salary for payroll and VRS purposes.
The available record suggests generally positive policy intent, focused on addressing teacher shortages and improving staffing in high-need schools. The bill’s structure indicates support for targeted compensation as a recruitment and retention tool, especially for fully licensed teachers. However, the bill was left in the House Committee on Appropriations, which suggests that funding concerns or budget priorities likely limited advancement, even though no committee transcript or recorded vote is available to show direct debate.
The main likely point of contention is cost: the bill requires a $10,000 annual supplement for each eligible teacher, but it is contingent on appropriations, making fiscal impact central to its viability. Another possible issue is the bill’s narrow targeting, since only teachers in the top 10 percent of vacancy-rate schools would qualify, which may raise questions about fairness, coverage, and whether the program would sufficiently address shortages across the Commonwealth. Administrative complexity may also be a concern because the Department must identify qualifying schools, update the list periodically, and oversee reporting and distribution.