
A wave of psychiatric nurse practitioners are entering the workforce. Not only are they taking jobs in more traditional group settings, but they are also creating their own practices, or working on telemedicine platforms. All you need to do is look at the growth in NP owned practices to see the accelerating trend.
Most psych NPs are working in states where physician collaboration is required by state law. For psychiatrists, this rapid growth has created a whole new type of role, the collaborating psychiatrist. This can be a meaningful role, but it should be approached carefully. To feel confident in starting a collaboration, a psychiatrist needs to understand the clinician, practice, regulatory and professional duties, malpractice coverage, and expected compensation.
This report is written for psychiatrists interested in taking on collaborations with psych NPs. We use Single Aim marketplace data and feedback from psychiatrists to provide guidance on which states have the most collaboration demand, what psychiatrists are being paid, and what physicians should evaluate before agreeing to collaborate.
Psychiatry has become one of the main areas of collaboration demand on Single Aim. Internal Single Aim marketplace data indicates that roughly 60% of jobs posted on the platform now involve mental-health services and are seeking a collaborating psychiatrist, making this the largest category of NP collaboration requests. Psychiatrists interested in this work can review current opportunities through Single Aim collaborating physician jobs.
The states with the most requests for collaborating psychiatrists are, not surprisingly, often large states with more stringent collaboration or prescribing requirements. In Texas, for example, NPs generally need a physician relationship for prescriptive authority. In California, standard NPs furnishing medications under standardized procedures are subject to physician supervision, and a physician may supervise no more than four furnishing NPs at one time.1
More stringent regulations can also create supply constraints. In some states, demand for collaborating psychiatrists appears to exceed the number of available psychiatrists willing or able to take on these roles.
The chart below shows the percentage of Single Aim mental-health jobs where no psychiatrist responded. States like Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia stand out. In several high-need states, licensure, proximity, chart-review, or meeting rules can reduce the pool of psychiatrists who can perform the role.2
For psychiatrists taking collaborations in these high-need states, there may be more opportunities, giving psychiatrists more ability to evaluate clinical and personal fit. These roles can also require more time or logistical commitment, which is often reflected in higher compensation.
Compensation for psychiatrist collaboration varies based on the state, the services being provided, how many patients the NP is seeing, and the time commitment expected from the psychiatrist. For a broader benchmark, see Single Aim's collaborating physician pay data.
In Single Aim confirmed collaboration data, single-clinician psychiatrist collaborations had a median monthly rate of $590. The most common range was $501 to $700 per month, which accounted for over a third of confirmed psychiatrist collaborations.
Rates also vary meaningfully by state. Georgia, Texas, California, and Florida had some of the highest median monthly psychiatrist collaboration rates in the Single Aim data. These higher rates may reflect more stringent state requirements, such as limits on how many NPs one physician can supervise or additional collaboration responsibilities for the physician.1
Psychiatry collaborations fall in the middle of collaboration rates by specialty. Two forces likely pull rates in opposite directions: the limited supply of psychiatrists pushes rates higher, while the fact that many psychiatry collaborations are telemedicine-based and for lower-risk clinics pushes rates lower.
Most psych NPs seeking collaborating psychiatrists on Single Aim are building practices that are remote-first or hybrid. In the data, 94% of mental-health collaboration requests were either fully telehealth or hybrid, while only 6% were fully in person.
These are often individual or small practices with one or a few clinicians. Many get patients through local referral networks and also work on mental-health platforms like Headway, Alma, Grow Therapy, and Rula, often for billing support and sometimes for patient acquisition. Single Aim has a related guide to partnering with mental-health platforms as a nurse practitioner.
A major diligence point is controlled-substance prescribing. Different states give NPs different prescribing authority, especially for Schedule II medications. In states like Texas and Georgia, NP authority to prescribe some Schedule II drugs can be limited or protocol-dependent, which may require tighter protocol language, consultation, or physician involvement. This is an important point for psychiatrists to understand before agreeing to collaborate.3
The role of a collaborating psychiatrist depends heavily on the state and the specific practice. In some states, the role is mostly defined by the collaborative agreement. In others, there may be specific requirements around meetings, chart review, prescribing, or in-person availability. You can reference Single Aim state FAQs for Texas, California, Florida, and Georgia, plus the collaborative agreement templates and 50-state guide.
At a high level, the psychiatrist is not usually treating the NP's patients directly or managing the practice. The role is more about being clinically available, providing feedback, and helping the NP meet state requirements.
The best collaborations are usually clear before they start. The psychiatrist should understand the clinical scope, the NP's patient population, the documentation process, and what would happen if a patient needs a higher level of care.
The process for starting a collaboration is usually straightforward, but the details matter. A good process gives the psychiatrist and NP time to confirm fit before anyone signs an agreement.
Single Aim helps structure this process so psychiatrists can evaluate the collaboration before committing. The goal is not just to fill a role, but to make sure the collaboration is clear, compliant, and workable for both sides.
Malpractice coverage should be decided before the collaboration starts. On Single Aim, psychiatrists typically handle coverage in one of three ways.
The important point is that coverage should be explicit. Before starting, the psychiatrist should know which policy applies, what work is covered, and whether the coverage matches the collaboration being performed.
For psychiatrists interested in collaborating with psych NPs, Single Aim is designed to make the process easier to evaluate before committing.
The process is straightforward:
This gives psychiatrists a way to compare opportunities and choose collaborations that fit their license, clinical interests, and availability.
It depends on the state and the services involved. Texas does not impose a psychiatric board-certification requirement solely to collaborate, while Florida requires psychiatric controlled-substance prescribing by a psychiatric nurse to occur within an established protocol with a psychiatrist. Confirm the specific state rule and role before signing.4
Even when board certification is not legally required, PMHNPs often prefer to collaborate with psychiatrists, and some payers may require specialty alignment for certain clinical services. Board certification can make a psychiatrist's profile more attractive on the marketplace.
It depends on the state, your licensure, and the collaboration model. Some states impose licensure, proximity, chart-review, remote-site visit, or meeting requirements that can affect whether an out-of-state psychiatrist can collaborate. Georgia's principal-place-of-practice rule, Mississippi's quarterly quality meetings, Alabama's on-site/remote-site requirements, and Tennessee's Tennessee-license requirement are examples to check before accepting a role.2
This varies by state. Some states set explicit ratio caps. For example, California limits a physician to supervising no more than four furnishing NPs at one time under BPC 2836.1. Texas generally limits prescriptive delegation to seven FTE APRNs/PAs outside facility-based hospital practices and medically underserved populations. Florida's APRN protocol framework does not use the same simple NP-count cap, but physicians should verify any office, specialty, protocol, or autonomous-practice rules that apply to the specific arrangement.1
Other states do not impose a specific cap. On Single Aim, psychiatrists set their own availability and capacity, so they can start with one collaboration and expand when they are ready.
.png)
.png)