The California Board of Psychology’s Licensure Committee discussed ongoing concerns about low pass rates on the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) and outlined steps for public input and agency outreach.

John Burke, executive officer for the California Board of Psychology, told the committee that the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards, or ASPPB, “confirmed receipt” of a recent letter from the board outlining California’s concerns and that the board is pressing for more information and engagement. Burke said ASPPB will hold a virtual town hall for students and licensure candidates on Sept. 18, 2025, and that ASPPB released a job-task-analysis survey with a Sept. 29, 2025 deadline for participation.

The nut graf: committee members framed the outreach as part of efforts to understand and, if warranted, influence planned changes to the EPPP so that any revised exam reflects current practice and minimizes undue barriers to licensure.

Most of the meeting’s public comment focused on the EPPP. Multiple commenters described repeated unsuccessful attempts to pass the test and urged the board to seek alternatives. “There’s a lot of competent unlicensed clinicians, and we’re really finding it’d be a struggle to pass this exam,” said a caller identifying themself as an unlicensed clinician. Doctor Araceli Lopez Arenas, who described passing after multiple attempts, urged the board to seek concrete remedies and follow other states’ actions. Jason Fryer, a commenter who said he is on his fifth EPPP attempt, described the exam as “egregiously difficult” and asked what the board planned to do in response.

Board staff and the committee described three concrete outreach steps: distribute ASPPB’s job-task-analysis survey to California licensees via the board’s email lists and social media; publicize the Sept. 18 ASPPB town hall for students and candidates; and continue the board’s recent written engagement with ASPPB about concerns and possible regulatory impacts. Burke said the board will send email notices and post links to ASPPB materials and that staff will encourage California licensees and trainees to participate.

Committee members summarized prior work on an alternative California exam. Burke said the board previously examined creating a California-specific competency exam but “the primary reason we just the board determined at the time not to go forward with that is cost, primarily. It's a it's an expensive process and also potential risks, [including] the impact it would have on reciprocity and licensure portability.” Committee members added that a new California exam could create a licensing gap during development and require additional state review.

Public commenters also asked the board to coordinate with Texas and other states exploring alternate licensure pathways. Several speakers referenced the Texas Legislature’s recent appropriation to develop an alternative exam and urged California to explore collaboration or to request specifics from Texas on timeline, cost and reciprocity.

The committee did not take formal action on test standards or cut scores at this meeting. Members said they will continue monitoring ASPPB’s communications, distribute the job-task-analysis survey and publicize the Sept. 18 town hall, and discuss the topic again at the board meeting on Aug. 22, 2025.

The meeting moved on to other agenda items after public comment concluded.