Skip to main content
Denials FAQ

Understanding Student Loan Repayment Application Denials

Why was my application for the FY25 Student Loan Repayment Program denied?

Between mid-May and mid-July 2025, all applications submitted from individual educators for the FY25 Student Loan Repayment Program went through a two-step verification process:

  1. Michigan Department of Education (MDE) staff completed a review of the application data and loan documentation submitted by applicants.
  2. Staff from districts employing those applicants provided verification of the employment requirements:
  • Must be employed in an intermediate school district, traditional public school district, or public school academy for at least 32 hours per week; and
  • Must spend at least 50% of their working time with pre-K to Grade 12 students.

To qualify, applicants had to show proof they met all of the eligibility requirements in accordance with the statute (MCL 388.1627k), in addition to the employment requirements above. Submitted documents also had to meet the requirements and follow the examples provided in the two downloadable instructional documents that were available on the Student Loan Repayment Program website. For reference, those documents are still on the website.

Accordingly, all applications that were approved showed evidence of meeting all eligibility requirements. However, many applications were denied based on one or more of the following reasons:

Failure to show evidence of current participation in federal Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF), or failure to show months of payments claimed on the application were eligible under PSLF.

The first requirement for eligibility is that participants had to be approved for PSLF at the time of application, and PSLF was active for any month claimed on applications. In some cases, applicants could show they were in PSLF at the time of application, but not for some portion of the past months they claimed on their application. Some applicants uploaded documents that showed they had applied for PSLF or that their employer had submitted required forms as a Qualifying Employer, but the process was not complete at the time of application. Unfortunately, some applicants did not include any PSLF documentation. Others provided PSLF-related documents, but they were missing identifying information per posted instructions (see below). For more information about PSLF, visit the federal website at www.studentaid.gov/pslf.

Failure to show evidence of current participation in an income-driven repayment (IDR) plan, or failure to substantiate the months of payments claimed were made under an IDR plan.

The second requirement for eligibility is that participants are paying their loans under an income-driven repayment (IDR) plan. MDE staff carefully reviewed applications for evidence of IDR plans, including Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE), Pay as You Earn (PAYE) and Revised Pay as You Earn (REPAYE), Income-Based Repayment (IBR), and Income-Contingent Repayment (ICR). An exception was made in statute if an applicant’s loans were not able to be converted into an IDR plan.

Failure to show evidence that claimed payments (past or current) listed on the FY25 application were owed or paid, or are currently owed or being paid, for one or more months.

If an applicant entered a non-zero number for any month, they had to provide proof of payment for that amount (for past months) or proof that the payment was expected (for current or future months). This requirement was waived for months when loans were in forbearance, deferment, or grace period status.

Failure to upload documentation that included applicant identifying information, such as name or account number(s) necessary to link participant identity to the application.

Applicants uploaded documentation but failed to include evidence on one or more documents that could link that document to their identity. This was an anti-fraud requirement that was clearly explained in the instructional documents that were available on the Student Loan Repayment Program website (see below). Thus, to protect against possible fraud, submitting a document along with an individual’s application was not considered evidence enough that it belonged to that person. At least one identifying feature (name or account number, for example) had to be present on each document to be able to positively associate it with that application. 

During the employer verification process, the applicant’s employer responded that the applicant did not meet one or both of the employment criteria for the program.

In accordance with the statute, employers were asked to verify two items in MDE’s application system: (1) whether or not this educator is employed for 32 hours or more per week, and (2) whether or not at least 50% of the educator’s working time is spent in contact with pre-K to Grade 12 students. If either or both of these answers was “no,” the application was denied, regardless of whether all other requirements described above were present.

The applicant’s employer did not complete the employer verification process.

In a small number of situations, the employment eligibility requirements for individuals were not verified because their employer did not complete the employment verification process. The official MDE memo announcing the District Employment Verification Window was posted on May 22, 2025.

The application was submitted after the deadline of 5:00 p.m., Monday, May 19, 2025.

For a small number of applications, the automated MDE application system allowed submissions after the 5:00 p.m. deadline on Monday, May 19. These applications were not reviewed by MDE staff since these are not considered valid submissions. Although these few applicants may have received an automated e-mail stating their submission was successful, these applications were not reviewed by MDE staff due to submission after the deadline. In addition, these late applicants will not receive a notification about the outcome of their applications.

What can I do if I want more information about my application denial?

The first thing to do is to understand that two downloadable instructional documents had been made available on the Student Loan Repayment Program website in advance of the opening of the application window in mid-April; those documents are still on the website.

Next, you should understand that as an individual educator, you do not have the right to appeal the result of the application review conducted by MDE. However, as an intermediate school district, traditional public school district, or public school academy, your employer has the right to appeal the decision on your behalf. This would be considered an informal appeal.

Your first step would be to contact your district administration to request an informal appeal on your behalf. Please be aware of the following:

  • MDE will release additional information about the reasons for your denial to your district administration. From there, releasing it to you is at their discretion.
  • Submitting an informal appeal on your behalf does not automatically result in a denial being overturned.
  • There is no set time limit for the resolution of an informal appeal.
  • You will communicate with your district administration regarding the status or the results of an informal appeal; MDE staff will not be able to communicate directly with you about it.

What can I do to help ensure my FY26 application will be approved?

The first thing you can do is review the FY25 eligibility requirements and the associated downloadable instructional documents (see FAQs above). Even though these pertain to the FY25 application cycle, MDE anticipates these will likely be very similar for the FY26 application. This gives you an opportunity to make sure you have gathered and submitted improved documentation in anticipation of FY26 application.

Next, be sure you are aware of all the ways you can receive announcements or notifications regarding the FY26 Student Loan Repayment Program application: