Physical Therapy Board says workforce data will shape sunset report; seeks statute changes on reinstatement petitions

The Physical Therapy Board of California said it will use newly collected workforce data and other findings to shape its sunset review report and proposed statutory changes, and set draft-review workshops for Oct. 15 and Nov. 19.

Board President Dale Armstrong opened discussion about the board’s sunset committee and schedule, saying the committee has met twice and will distribute a draft about a week before the Oct. 15 workshop. “The fifteenth meeting will be, very much a classroom setting,” Armstrong said, adding the board must finish the report at the December meeting so it can be submitted to the Legislature and edited for public distribution.

Why it matters: The sunset report explains to the Legislature why the board’s regulatory authority should continue and flags statutory changes the board is asking lawmakers to consider. Staff and committee members told the board that workforce data gathered over the last five years will be used throughout the report to substantiate findings about access, demographics and retirement risk.

Staff reported the board’s workforce collection shows the profession is growing and that about half of licensees indicated they do not expect to retire for 11 or more years. Executive staff told members that stronger workforce numbers have helped the board’s fiscal outlook and will be used to address legislative questions that change from session to session.

Discussion and proposals: The board identified several recurring or new issues that will be covered in the report:

- Petition-for-reinstatement authority: Staff recommended seeking statutory language to make petition-for-reinstatement authority consistent with application-for-licensure authority and to allow delegation to staff for petitions that would otherwise be denied because the petitioner is subject to a sex-offender registration requirement. Staff said the change would conserve board adjudicative resources for higher‑priority matters. When asked for clarification about the change, staff said the proposal would prevent the board from having to hear petitions that, under current statute, it could not lawfully grant. A speaker identified in the meeting as Michael (role not specified in the transcript) said the change would be consistent with analogous provisions in the Medical Practice Act.

- Fee statutory caps: The board reiterated a long‑standing “old issue” carried from prior sunsets: the board is at statutory fee caps and lacks authority to increase fees without new legislation. Staff said the board does not currently intend to raise fees but would like the Legislature to increase the statutory cap so the board has flexibility if an unforeseeable event requires additional resources.

- Workforce and data collection: The committee plans to emphasize workforce data in the report. Staff said the board has participated in national efforts to collect comparable workforce information and that the data will inform findings about underserved or overserved areas, licensee demographics and retirement risk.

- Other pending matters: The board will address previously identified items in the report (for example, an Electronic Patient Record request) in the section for carryover issues and will continue evaluating potential new issues for the October draft.

Board direction: Staff will continue drafting statutory language and work with the Committee and the consultant assigned to the bill. The board expects to workshop the draft on Oct. 15 and revisit it in November if needed.

What’s next: A draft will be distributed about a week before the Oct. 15 workshop for full-board review; the board expects to finalize the report in December for submission to the Legislature.