[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6347832,"mediaKeyId","2244482-abd6deb7c62f4356c57c4dacd9707534","parentId",2244482,"title","Subcommittee favors fixing background‑check language and continues dietitian licensure compact bill","audioSeconds",1509,"startMs",2731000,"endMs",4240000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2244482-abd6deb7c62f4356c57c4dacd9707534&start=2731&end=4240","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2244482-abd6deb7c62f4356c57c4dacd9707534/thumbnail_2731000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6347832/New-Hampshire/Subcommittee-favors-fixing-backgroundcheck-language-and-continues-dietitian-licensure-compact-bill","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6347832-62fa6ef82d9dbbc65f66e2bbfcd49b75/orig.mp4?Expires=1771173501&Signature=GQ4zYbRJYYSYoQbso8yZTQoi2TnAsXS31fKcvp4r4oxFEBV5T-5kyvmUu729N5lzHFCZbObvArjvJp2CD255h3ouoDTuNR7W-nSwpuklshBiKq8h0OCEDdNPnNcauX8dTKCJtQgOm4ck6rijWcwMrbL7QdjHtuZ0yUEY~y35KkmGtBD4qirvNkeSzfoiFqOsPhNDVbAjAUmVl0uokJIVQG6wU5-bRQNiELT2GKclfz~2w7NEeFPlTitwpUa1YT6X62ENmTY49OT5xoCVuz5zi6aI1B-NXWztcDX85TG2~g~2si1ZbK80RPI9PbnFqV2kkug8vmRB08iQ74W2ZMVTHA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","NH House of Representatives Committee","date","2025-02-06T00:00:00Z","article","The Executive Departments and Administration subcommittee recommended amending background‑check language in House Bill 145, a measure to adopt a dietitian licensure compact and set criminal-history check requirements, and continued further action so drafters can provide language acceptable to the Department of Safety and the FBI’s background-check rules.

Representative Grotta, sponsor of HB145, said dietitians urged passage and stressed that credentialed dietitians \"work in hospitals\" and should not be conflated with uncredentialed nutrition advisers. Kate Feiffel, a dietitian who said she represents the New Hampshire chapter of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, told the subcommittee there is an incentive for early adopters of the compact: \"There is an incentive to be 1 of the first 7 states to pass the compact licensure. It gets you a seat at the commission to form the commission and be part of the rule making process.\"

The hearing focused on three items: the compact text itself, how background checks are described in the bill (paragraph 3), and whether the statute names an individual or office that can receive FBI criminal-history results. Department of Safety staff and OPLC expressed concern that the FBI will not permit unrestricted dissemination of background-check results to an unspecified \"office.\" Committee members and staff discussed naming a specific officer — for example the OPLC director — or consolidating background-check provisions into a single cleanup bill so language is uniform across many profession-specific bills.

OPLC staff advised the subcommittee that the background-check paragraph is separate from the compact clause and suggested removing the background-check language from HB145 and placing it into a planned amendment in HB82 (or related cleanup legislation) that would standardize the state’s background-check procedure across licensing acts. Staff also said the statute should be explicit about who may receive FBI report data because the FBI limits secondary dissemination and requires a specific authorized recipient.

Committee direction: the subcommittee agreed to request model language from OPLC and Department of Safety, to separate the criminal history/background-check text from the compact clause, and to continue HB145 to the next subcommittee meeting so counsel can draft amendments. No formal vote on adoption of the compact occurred in this hearing.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Executive Departments and Administration Work Session on HB 145, HB 271 (02/06/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","The Executive Departments and Administration subcommittee pressed OPLC and the Department of Safety to tighten background‑check language in House Bill 145 (dietitian licensure compact) and recommended separating criminal-history language into a uniform amendment to be used across several licensure bills before advancing the compact.","taxTitle","Executive Departments and Administration, House of Representatives, Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",17748,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6347837,"Subcommittee delays repeal of LSWA exam, asks OPLC for data and rulemaking options",0,3105000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2244482-abd6deb7c62f4356c57c4dacd9707534&start=3105&end=3105","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2244482-abd6deb7c62f4356c57c4dacd9707534/thumbnail_3105000.jpg","/articles/6347837/New-Hampshire/Subcommittee-delays-repeal-of-LSWA-exam-asks-OPLC-for-data-and-rulemaking-options","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6347837-ec96f2bd6760c1a26a4577dd3a557f62/orig.mp4?Expires=1771173502&Signature=bS5FRm9B7tWZ4Xr-loTpa7eiTFeXuWe~KWt6LEix9l1ucbkZgNzITZprcfHi14eLmRM3MVO6Y5hATXMa2jBOYy3W1XW8GyuLaZb0Eagc8cyFcCKo4Y9Zo82wSXRn3Y~LQrJB6cnI1uY-N8~ngIp2uQdJ48B-usAPTlfFtfndWXNGIYACjdJ03LE4BDHkYFGOp~vVHsyRmI6rpDWANqxCP9AZPzIPnU~-D9ecwr1xpqZJs0x5tgUubcbpCfvQrYn00fz5D1uJvT8mkd6r1LVO481bwJX8Ow9NMewsXpaxWSnp8XFzMkQxySUuXnDPFe6DNVZtXSMPhUzLReG5Zn8yCQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A subcommittee of the Executive Departments and Administration delayed action on House Bill 271, which would strike the exam requirement for Licensed Social Work Associates (LSWA), and asked the Office of Professional Licensure and Certification (OPLC) to provide data and possible rulemaking options before the committee moves the bill to executive session.

Committee members said the requirement is recent and that the state has little performance data to show whether removing the exam would affect public protection or professional competency.

Chair (unnamed) opened the hearing noting the exam requirement was instituted in 2021 and remains \"in its infancy.\" Chair said, \"it's just too early to pull the plug on this until we can have something tangible to show whether this is actually working or not.\" Representative Grama and others pressed for evidence that applicants for the LSWA credential are failing the current exam or otherwise unable to meet the standard; Representative Grama said she found the public testimony \"conflicting\" about whether the LSWA is a clinical or clerical role and said she did not favor licensure without a reliable way to measure competency.

Karina Bonilla, a lobbyist with Connor Blue Strategies representing NASW New Hampshire, told the subcommittee \"there's only 1 person in New Hampshire at the moment who has an LSWA,\" and said the current requirement forces LSWA applicants to sit for the same exam used for licensed social workers (LSW). Bonilla described the LSWA path as including 30 hours of required training and substantial supervised hours, and she told members the exam used now is the LSW exam, which is administered to candidates with a bachelor of social work and that \"we anticipate that someone with no formal social work education from an accredited university\" would have difficulty passing it.

Members and OPLC staff discussed statutory and compact issues. OPLC staff said current statute references a national, proctored examination approved by the board and identified Chapter 330-A:18-c as the statutory provision governing licensed social work associates. OPLC staff said the board has rulemaking authority that could be used to set criteria for the LSWA level, and suggested a path in which the board would develop appropriate criteria (which might include a different exam or other competency measures) through rulemaking and bring those criteria back to the legislature if statutory changes are needed.

Several members raised cross-jurisdictional concerns tied to the social work compact: the compact can allow out‑of‑state practice under compact rules and some members worried about inconsistent exam requirements across compact states. Members suggested retaining the bill or refiling next year while OPLC and relevant boards work on an exam or alternative assessment that fits the LSWA role.

Next steps: the subcommittee asked OPLC to provide the board’s existing rule criteria and to explore whether the board can adopt or develop an appropriate assessment for the LSWA level; the subcommittee will take the record and that information into executive session with the full committee to decide whether to amend, retain, or advance the bill.","A legislative subcommittee paused action on House Bill 271, which would remove the examination requirement for Licensed Social Work Associates (LSWA), and asked the Office of Professional Licensure and Certification to provide data, clarify rule authority, and propose alternatives before the committee considers striking the exam requirement.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Subcommittee favors fixing background‑check language and continues dietitian licensure compact bill

Subcommittee delays repeal of LSWA exam, asks OPLC for data and rulemaking options