AN ACT Relating to establishing a public school-based mental health internship grant program;
SB 5666 establishes a new public school-based mental health internship grant program in Washington. The bill is aimed at addressing the shortage of school psychologists by helping school districts, educational service districts, charter schools, and state-tribal education compact schools attract and pay full-time school psychology interns enrolled in accredited training programs. The Legislature’s findings describe school psychologists as essential to student learning, mental health, behavior, and academic, social, and emotional success, and state that increasing high-quality internships can help build the workforce and reduce turnover.
Under the bill, the Washington School-Based Mental Health Services Council would administer the program, coordinate with schools and higher education institutions to identify eligible internship sites, and distribute grants through a competitive process. The grant amount would be tied to a percentage of the entry-level salary for a school psychologist or a similarly credentialed educator with a master’s degree and credits. The bill also creates an advisory committee to make funding recommendations and include representatives from school psychology preparation programs, teacher preparation programs, and diverse communities.
The bill also requires annual reporting to the Legislature beginning in December 2025 and continuing each year thereafter. Those reports must include workforce and program data such as the number of school psychologists and other licensed professionals employed or contracted in Washington, the number working in person and remotely, the number of applicants, the number and amount of grants awarded, and demographic information on grant recipients. The reports must be made publicly available on the council’s website.
The bill’s impact on state law is to add new sections to chapter 28A.300 RCW and create a new state grant program focused on school mental health workforce development. It would not directly change licensure standards, but it would create a new funding and administrative structure for internship placements and require ongoing data collection and public reporting. Affected parties include school districts, educational service districts, charter schools, state-tribal compact schools, higher education institutions with school psychology programs, and school psychology interns and supervisors.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is strongly supportive of expanding school-based mental health capacity and addressing workforce shortages. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no evidence of formal opposition or amendment debate in the available materials. The main policy tension apparent from the bill itself is how grant funds will be allocated competitively, what eligibility and supervision standards will be used, and whether the program will be funded at a level sufficient to meaningfully expand the pipeline of school psychologists.
The bill adds new sections to chapter 28A.300 RCW to create a state-administered grant program for school psychology internships and to require annual reporting on workforce and grant outcomes. It affects school districts, educational service districts, charter schools, state-tribal education compact schools, higher education institutions, and school psychology interns by establishing eligibility rules, grant administration, advisory oversight, and public data reporting requirements.
The bill is framed in supportive, problem-solving terms, with legislative findings emphasizing the importance of school psychologists and the need to address a statewide shortage. No committee testimony or vote history is provided, so there is no recorded opposition or support from legislators or stakeholders in the available materials. Based on the text alone, the bill appears to have a broadly favorable policy intent centered on student mental health and workforce development.
No specific contention is documented in the provided transcripts or votes. The most likely areas of policy debate, based on the bill text, are funding levels, the competitive grant process, how eligible sites and supervisors are selected, and whether the program will adequately address shortages across different school settings and communities. The advisory committee’s composition and the demographic reporting requirements could also raise questions about implementation and equity.