BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Hearing Date:April 23, 2012 |Bill No:SB |
| |1183 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Senator Curren D. Price, Jr., Chair
Bill No: SB 1183Author:Lieu
As Amended:April 12, 2012 Fiscal: Yes
SUBJECT: Marriage and family therapists: clinical social workers:
continuing education.
SUMMARY: Requires continuing education providers, with the exception
of accredited educational institutions and certain other institutions,
to be approved by an accrediting organization, and would delete the
requirement for the Board of Behavioral Sciences (Board) to approve or
revoke those continuing education providers.
Existing law:
1) Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of marriage
and family therapists (LMFTs), clinical social workers (LCSWs),
licensed professional clinical counselors (LPCCs) and licensed
educational psychologists (LEPs) by the Board of Behavioral
Sciences. (Business and Profession Code (BPC) � 101.6, 4990.18,
4980.20)
2) Requires continuing education units in order for a licensee to
renew their license. (BPC � 4980.54 (c), � 4989.34 (b)(1), �
4996.22 (d)(1), � 4999.76 (d))
3) Specifies that certain accredited schools shall be deemed to be
approved continuing education providers for these licensees. (BPC
� 4980.54 (f)(1), � 4996.22 (d)(1), � 4999.76 (d))
4) Requires the Board to approve continuing education providers, other
than at an accredited school, and authorizes the Board to revoke or
deny the right to offer coursework if the provider fails to comply
with specified requirements. (BPC � 4980.54 (f)(2), � 4980.54 (g),
SB 1183
Page 2
� 4996.22 (d)(1), � 4999.76 (d))
This bill:
1) Specifies the authority of the Board to approve certain providers
of continuing education for LMFTs and LCSWs. This bill adds the
requirement that continuing education providers first receive
accreditation from an accredited educational institution or an
accrediting organization, such as a statewide or national mental
health association, in order to ensure that all continuing
education providers are subjected to a stringent review by subject
matter experts and practitioners.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill has been keyed "fiscal" by
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose. This bill is sponsored by the Author. According to the
Author, this bill seeks to ensure that the continuing education
programs available to the various licensees of the Board are
accredited and thus, high quality. The Author states that the
current process of approving continuing education providers lacks
both quality assurance of the continuing education program's content
and does not include a review of the content, such as the
effectiveness of the therapeutic techniques that are taught to
licensees. This bill will ensure that all continuing education
providers go through a stringent review by subject matter experts
and practitioners. The Author states that if the continuing
education programs are required to be approved by an accrediting
organization or an accredited educational institution, the overall
quality of the continuing education programs will be improved.
2.Continuing Education Requirements for the Board.
a) General Requirements. Existing law requires LMFTs, LCSWs,
LEPs, and LPCCs to have 36 hours of continuing education every
two years. Licensees must take courses from accredited/approved
schools or Board-approved continuing education providers. The
Board also requires that the subject matter of the course be
related to the licensees' scope of practice. (BPC Chapters 13,
13.5, 14 and 16, California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 16
Division 18)
Currently, the process to become an approved provider of continuing
education by the Board is the following:
SB 1183
Page 3
i) Complete an application to be a continuing education
provider.
ii) Board staff reviews the application to ascertain if the
provider's continuing education program is relevant to the
practice of the Board's licensees and the program's content
addresses direct or indirect client care.
iii) If the application meets the minimum requirements, the
provider pays the $200.00 continuing education provider fee.
Once the provider is approved, they may offer unlimited
continuing education courses over a two year time period. After
two years, the provider must submit a renewal application and
fee.
b) Renewal Process for Continuing Education Providers. For the
renewal process, the Board sends a renewal notice to the provider
90 days before their two-year time period is complete. The
continuing education provider submits a renewal application and a
$200.00 renewal application fee to the Board. If the renewal
application and fee is submitted by the two-year deadline, the
provider status is renewed. If the provider submits their
renewal application and pays their renewal fee after the two year
deadline, they are charged an additional $100.00 delinquent
renewal fee. If the provider does not renew within one year
after the two year period, they lose the right to renew and their
provider status will be cancelled. Any course offered after the
renewal period will not be accepted towards Board required
continuing education units. During the renewal process, the
content of a continuing education provider's program is not
reviewed by the Board staff.
c) Unacceptable Courses. Course subject matter outside of the
scope of practice for licensees is not accepted by the Board.
The Board does not approve individual courses. The Board issues
approval based on the sample course information that is submitted
with a provider's application.
d) Course Instructor Requirements. Providers are responsible for
ensuring that instructors meet at least two of the following
criteria:
i) A current, valid, license, registration or certificate
free from disciplinary action in an area related to the subject
SB 1183
Page 4
matter of the course.
ii) If at any time an instructor's license is restricted
pursuant to disciplinary action in California or any other
state or territory, he or she must notify all approved
providers that he or she is providing instruction for, before
instruction begins or immediately upon notice of the decision,
whichever occurs first.
iii) A master's or higher degree from an educational
institution in an area related to the subject matter of the
course.
iv) Training, certification or experience in teaching related
to the subject matter of the course; or at least two years'
experience in an area related to the subject matter of the
course.
e) Audits. The Board is authorized to audit records, courses,
instructors, related activities of a provider and licensees to
assure compliance with the law and regulations.
f) Denial of an Application to be a Continuing Education
Provider. If there is any disciplinary action against the
license of the individual who applies to be a continuing
education provider, this may affect ones provider approval by the
Board. The Board can deny an application for the following
reasons:
i) A provider is convicted of a felony or misdemeanor offense
related to the activities of a provider.
ii) A provider, if a licensee, violates any laws or regulation
relating to the practice of LMFT, LCSW, LEP or LPCC.
iii) A provider makes a material misrepresentation of fact in
information submitted to the Board.
A notice of denial will be sent to the provider and the provider
will have an opportunity to appeal the denial.
3.Suggested Author's Amendment. Sections of the BPC included in this
bill only relate to continuing education requirements for LMFTs and
LCSWs (BPC 4980.54, � 4996.22). However, if it is the will of the
Author to include all professions that fall under the jurisdiction
of the Board, then the bill should be amended to include those
SB 1183
Page 5
sections of the BPC that relate to the continuing education
requirements for the other licensed professions that fall under the
Board's jurisdiction including LEPs (BPC � 4989.34) and LPCCs (BPC �
4999.76).
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support:
None received as of April 16, 2012.
Opposition :
None received as of April 16, 2012.
Consultant: Le Ondra Clark