[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-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",[32,76,88],{"_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",6707742,"mediaKeyId","5585204-58f51da769d1f1ff64a5d922e4da0455","parentId",5585204,"title","Cosmetology and Barber board approves multiple new schools, denies two applications; several test and reciprocity requests granted","audioSeconds",6143,"startMs",238000,"endMs",6381000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5585204-58f51da769d1f1ff64a5d922e4da0455&start=238&end=6381","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5585204-58f51da769d1f1ff64a5d922e4da0455/thumbnail_238000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6707742/Tennessee/Cosmetology-and-Barber-board-approves-multiple-new-schools-denies-two-applications-several-test-and-reciprocity-requests-granted","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6707742-e35a194c323f2ebe4912099f3b081f0d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770590732&Signature=kXHKMecZDv0ft4Oydpau5uKFOL3E01gey~CVVBCPvQ8qtGzF7RlaQoQ8bjfI3Da61Yzr3wsxD4SJ0AQf2nK8Ud4En8yNiZTl27eYlo9NoN9bzEa71lNyCcFa2-Zsnv1rYwzFCAtTSpzCZIvg0ih7vi3OoSjc5nM7RMQHCfoevfWTbqqVBZgDCT4N0bRc3meDmmIK2hKG3nDCDKE-vinXg~DNUd4MDutRUikrPZnbrVsJ5I4WV8sRJRA7tDQTm03IFV~vDRONuaTt5Sn3pjp-s9Gl0xCLj4gtZsqTSGQkcyTay3z64lkeIiurBMmikAw4qp0nqttsl4K1diy8zgaGAA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Commerce & Insurance","date","2025-08-14T19:07:50Z","article","The Tennessee State Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners approved nine new or branch school applications and conditionally approved several others at a board meeting where members also voted on multiple testing and reciprocity requests.

Board members emphasized accuracy in enrollment agreements and contingency plans, frequently asking applicants to: place hours and cost information prominently on enrollment agreements; clarify the hybrid (synchronous) vs. asynchronous lesson delivery; verify clock‑hour and weeks/months math; and remove or clearly explain language that would let apprentices move back and forth between apprentice and traditional programs.

Several approvals were explicitly conditioned on applicants submitting requested corrections (for example, clearer statements that instructors will provide synchronous instruction during hybrid sessions, corrected clock‑hour calculations, and a signature line confirming students sign before payment). At least two applications were denied and staff asked the applicants to reorganize and resubmit materials for clarity about which programs (traditional or apprenticeship) the campus will offer.

Votes at a glance
- Skills Barber Academy (new barber school, Portland area): Approved. Motion by Monica Lemons; second by Perry Baldwin. Board requested that hours be moved to the front of the enrollment agreement and minor wording changes. Motion carried.
- Maryville Aesthetics (change of location): Approved with a request that the school correct its weeks/months-to-hours calculations and confirm part‑time status. Motion carried.
- Shiva Training Center (Knoxville; previously presented in June): Approved pending the applicant’s revisions to the contingency/lessons paragraph to make synchronous instruction explicit and removal of text that would allow apprentices to complete practical hours at the school if they change mentors. Motion carried.
- Memphis Barber College (new branch): Approved; school will notify staff when ready for inspection. Motion carried.
- Day College of Cosmetology (Sevierville branch): Approved pending a few clarifications (hours/week calculation for full‑time students, clearer placement of payment/cost language, and duplication of refund/cancellation language). Motion carried.
- Elevate Barber Academy (Kingsport): Approved. Board requested clearer crossover curriculum language for cosmetologists crossing into barbering. Motion carried.
- URZ Professional Lash Academy (specialty eyelash program, Knoxville): Approved pending clearer cost breakdown (tuition vs. kit vs. fees) and clarification of attendance/termination language. Motion carried.
- Hideout Academy (Sylvan Park, Nashville, cosmetology): Approved. Motion carried.
- Beauty and Barber College (change of ownership; Hixson): Approved conditioned on aligning cosmetology and barber curricula to the state’s required curriculum listed by the board. Motion carried.
- Golden Shears Beauty Academy (Nashville branch): Denied. The board asked the applicant to rework the application to present apprenticeship‑only materials (remove traditional program references) and resubmit.
- Urban Beauty and Barber Institute (Memphis; change of ownership including cosmetology and barber licenses): Denied pending reorganizing materials to clearly separate apprentice programs from traditional programs; resubmit requested.

Testing and reciprocity decisions
- Omar Ziyad Ahmed Antuly (1800 hours in Palestine): Board approved allowing him to test as a master barber (requested). Motion carried.
- Tot Tai Huang (manicure applicant with prior Tennessee hours): Board approved the applicant to test. Motion carried.
- Emma Nang Nguyen (manicure applicant; prior Tennessee school; passed PSI theory and practical on separate dates): Board granted the license based on verified passing scores. Motion carried.
- Jaden Davis (cosmetology, reciprocity from Texas; 1,000‑hour Texas training; military move complicated licensure timing): Board approved licensure without retesting given the circumstances and prior PSI testing overlap. Motion carried.
- Thuy Thai Vu (manicure reciprocity from Florida; 25 years of licensure): Board approved reciprocity and waived additional exam requirements; board noted previous policy had waived exams at 30 years and extended discretion was applied in this case. Motion carried.

What changed or remains next
Applicants approved with conditions were told to send revised documents (enrollment agreements, contingency plans, clock‑hour calculations, apprenticeship language and transfer provisions) to the board office (Roxanna Gomusio) before inspection and final licensing steps. For denied applicants, the board requested reorganization of application materials to make program types (traditional vs. apprenticeship) and transfer/clock‑hour policies explicit before resubmission.

Board members and staff repeatedly asked that enrollment agreements show the hours/days of operation and cost breakdowns in prominent locations, that signature lines state the student signs prior to payment, and that contingency plans explicitly state synchronous instruction with an instructor during hybrid sessions. Inspectors were noted as the next step for approved schools.

Speakers quoted in the meeting included Executive Director Roxanna Gomusio (presenting logistics and next steps), Board Chair Becky Russell (leading applicant questioning), applicants who presented (e.g., Jeremy Garrett for Skills Barber Academy; April Harden for Shiva Training Center; Emery Hammonds for Memphis Barber College; Amanda Young for Day College; Robert Johnson for Elevate Barber Academy; Elvin Mejia for Golden Shears; Krishona Wilson for URZ Lash Academy; Chelsea Joffrey for Hideout Academy; Marcy Levesy representing Brian Reynolds for Beauty and Barber College; Eric Johnson for Urban Beauty & Barber Institute), and board members who moved/seconded motions (including Monica Lemons and Perry Baldwin among others).

Ending
Board staff will follow up with applicants to confirm receipt of the corrections requested; inspections will be scheduled for approved schools once paperwork is complete. Several applicants were told to return corrected documents to Roxanna Gomusio for final review before inspection and final licensure steps.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","TN Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners meeting 8/4/2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Tennessee State Board of Cosmetology and Barber Examiners approved nine new or branch school applications and conditionally approved several others at a meeting where members also voted on multiple testing and reciprocity requests.","taxTitle","Commerce & Insurance, Deparments in Office of the Governor, Organizations, Executive, Tennessee","taxId",17379,"location","Tennessee","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6707738,"Board defers decision on 'Avagon Pro' body‑sculpting device for aesthetics; legal staff recommends formal advisory opinion",800,7592000,8392000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5585204-58f51da769d1f1ff64a5d922e4da0455&start=7592&end=8392","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5585204-58f51da769d1f1ff64a5d922e4da0455/thumbnail_7592000.jpg","/articles/6707738/Tennessee/Board-defers-decision-on-Avagon-Pro-bodysculpting-device-for-aesthetics-legal-staff-recommends-formal-advisory-opinion","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6707738-63042e1dc0d019d92bbbfd3a969e6842/orig.mp4?Expires=1770590732&Signature=NvPNzRBRjv-EyxfT7VwbyAYKtULicCtlL6-tKHaRI9fouBaUrOAvmEY38kww2V-UDU7xTY8sLdJlqVSlgFoYRR5VLOulzVAZlDrtoznY8NvJ3ARHWrNWrwsOSlV658t6sOMoVCsVQWn~Zp63CGAGoBbmhSALatmba6J154op7wSyffZ5HAORHXKwgtWvtlJyp9J5D-Hp3IDoypB5Z0ejK8Sd0U33AhTtx6Hg7OsQv9FmkLAhMK~NfSbjV9-2JKgYmnSbNgmjVQawQSmPB9j57UQZN1gYVPVh~s9Ypc2qIPBg-nVrvPjJ-xWYqvFaEC6RaNrzddfFYbiR6yW4NWhjGA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Cosmetology and Barber Examiners Board discussed a licensee’s inquiry about a multi‑technology device (described in materials as the Avagon Pro) that combines cavitation, radio‑frequency (bipolar and tripolar RF), vacuum therapy and infrared light for body sculpting and facial rejuvenation. Board legal counsel and members agreed a decision requires more research; they suggested the licensee may request a formal advisory (public opinion) from the department for a documented legal response.

What the board heard
Legal counsel summarized the device as a “5‑in‑1” system whose handpieces are designed for both body‑contouring (fat breakdown/cavitation) and facial tightening (radio frequency). Counsel noted that body treatments intended to break down adipose tissue occur below the top layers of the skin and are commonly regulated as medical interventions in many jurisdictions. The board’s regulatory authority covers services limited to the epidermis/dermis (skin surface and superficial layers) and not procedures targeting subcutaneous fat.

Board concerns and discussion
Board members said the facial RF components (tri‑ or bipolar RF) sounded more closely aligned to licensed aesthetics work when the treatment is noninvasive and limited to skin tightening in the dermis. However, the panel agreed that cavitation and other modalities targeting adipose tissue likely fall outside a cosmetology/aesthetics license and may be better categorized under medical/regulatory oversight (for example by nurses, physician assistants, or medical boards) in many cases.

Legal options and next steps
Counsel advised that the board could issue a general, cautious response on the record but recommended the licensee file a formal advisory‑opinion request (a public opinion request through the department). That process would trigger deeper legal and technical review, produce an official memo, and carry a fee to cover the department’s research; it would also give the board stronger legal protection if the device’s manufacturer or subsequent events raise follow‑up questions.

No regulatory change was adopted at the meeting. The board did not approve the device for use by aestheticians at this time and encouraged the inquiring licensee to pursue the formal advisory option if a definitive, documented determination is required.

Ending
Board staff said they would share the conversation’s summary with the licensee and that a formal advisory opinion is the recommended route for a binding departmental response.","Board discussion flagged a multi‑mode body‑sculpting and facial rejuvenation device as likely outside the board's scope for body treatments and recommended a formal 'public advisory' request for a written opinion to protect consumers and the board.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6707730,"Board accepts legal report, discusses Colorado unlicensed‑activity cases and inspection cadence",119,6880000,6999000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5585204-58f51da769d1f1ff64a5d922e4da0455&start=6880&end=6999","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5585204-58f51da769d1f1ff64a5d922e4da0455/thumbnail_6880000.jpg","/articles/6707730/Tennessee/Board-accepts-legal-report-discusses-Colorado-unlicensedactivity-cases-and-inspection-cadence","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6707730-b8a11bde896d9bb39b6907954bc3e003/orig.mp4?Expires=1770590732&Signature=VEcuqX~UDeF~zzF9Cq61B3MhncA1urgkqTAbyKFJoaA1fHXXKeLdF7lB8W6h39BflI5LNR7tWOVWMfeNtfyXiRRx963taLjrnifMj1Bcy9ZjyGsAwlKsxZba605Mdikq-FWBGm6e30-M7s1DO3gsZnuPiAzf1-oYgEidukx1~IqhU9dpYmtZLTRXt8gyNB4NSEbAblYWorTqW8nl3qX0U9e0zeyq41l1lU8s-FriHAdPKOjZK1PKFF-i~y8fLROFu4jTP5DQGYvvY6-G0cfHMrzDSiCW5FJtiizew2m9t4B6IXXp0yKsBTwck9D4RwCXhYV1a4dDmdRJ8pGmKS~6cQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Cosmetology and Barber Examiners Board accepted the legal report at the meeting and discussed a set of cases involving apparent misfiled or fraudulent licensure records that originated in Colorado. Legal counsel recommended case closures where appropriate and advised aggressive action (consent revocation or fines) for confirmed unlicensed activity.

Colorado cases and enforcement
Legal counsel described a set of cases the office has labeled the “Colorado cases,” in which audit work identified name, date‑of‑birth and Social Security mismatches between applicants and records in another state. Counsel recommended voluntary license revocation by consent, or, if the cases proceed to hearing, revocation and fines for unlicensed activity.

Inspection policy and frequency
Several board members raised concerns that some shops were not being reinspected frequently enough. Staff explained that the office typically avoids reinspecting premises within a short window (about 3–4 months) of a recent inspection unless complaints include detailed evidence (photographs, specific allegations) that justify an immediate visit. Members asked staff to flag anonymous complaints tied to recently inspected locations for earlier review and suggested the board may consider rulemaking language to refine inspection cadence and authority.

Other legal report items
Counsel noted item 69 had received an appropriate response and recommended closure. The board discussed consumer complaints filed shortly after inspections and reaffirmed that substantiated complaints with photos or specific allegations will be prioritized for follow‑up, while anonymous, non‑specific complaints may be triaged to conserve inspection resources.

Board action
Members voted to accept the legal report. Staff said rule changes to calibrate inspection frequency will be considered in upcoming rulemaking work and presented back to the board for direction.

Ending
Legal counsel and executive staff will continue audits on the Colorado cases and pursue consent orders or hearing actions as advised; board staff will prepare language options on inspection cadence for future rulemaking.","The board accepted the legal report, including closure recommendations and a series of out‑of‑state unlicensed‑activity cases referred from Colorado; members asked staff to consider inspection frequency and indicated rules changes may address inspection cadence.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Cosmetology and Barber board approves multiple new schools, denies two applications; several test and reciprocity requests granted

Board defers decision on 'Avagon Pro' body‑sculpting device for aesthetics; legal staff recommends formal advisory opinion

Board accepts legal report, discusses Colorado unlicensed‑activity cases and inspection cadence