Task force backs tiered licensure, bureau at PED to shore up school leadership

Erica Hunt (EdRD), presenting on the culmination of three years of work, summarized recommendations that informed House Bill 22 and related task‑force products: updated compensation, redesigned principal preparation through residency pilots, mentoring and induction for new leaders, and a proposal for tiered administrative licensure.

Hunt said New Mexico’s leader turnover is high: data cited from the New Mexico Coalition of Education Leaders showed that “over the last 3 years, 72 out of your 89 superintendents have turned over,” which task‑force members interpreted as evidence the state needs stronger preparation, mentoring and support. The proposed licensure framework would include three tiers (initial site administrator, professional site administrator, and superintendent), multiple pathways (standard in‑state programs, alternative regionally accredited programs, residency pilots, reciprocity with mentoring for out‑of‑state candidates, provisional candidates and waivers for emergency hires), and grandfathering for current licensees.

Presenters proposed creating a Bureau of School and District Leadership at PED to centralize program approval, mentoring and monitoring, and to coordinate existing external providers (e.g., CES, New Mexico Superintendents Association) and universities that might expand superintendent preparation. The proposal included funding recommendations for PED administrative capacity and for outsourced program development and pilot grants over a three‑year rollout.

Alexis Eslinger (Deans/Directors group) and Candace Castillo (Deputy Secretary, PED) reinforced the field perspective: higher education and alternative licensure programs are active partners, residency pilots are underway, and more detailed curriculum and specialization work will be refined by a continued task‑force process. Castillo said PED will need internal capacity and data systems to monitor leader preparation, retention and mobility, and to align efforts across programs.

Committee members asked about leveraging higher‑education programs, the scope of outsourced programs, and why statutory language is preferred to an administrative action; presenters said many elements could be done administratively but embedding changes in statute clarifies roles and funding lines. The presenters recommended piloting programs, creating data tracking for leaders, funding mentoring and induction, and revisiting detailed curriculum and budgeting in follow‑up task‑force work.

The session ended with committee discussion and no vote on policy during this hearing.