Dental Assisting Council members and stakeholders spent the Aug. 14 meeting in Sacramento debating a legislative proposal that would shift approval and oversight of dental assisting educational programs away from the Dental Board and toward outside accrediting or approving agencies.

The proposal, presented by council members Jerry Fowler and Kara Miyazaki, would amend multiple Business and Professions Code sections to permit board approval of programs only when an educational provider is accredited or authorized by a recognized accreditor. Fowler told the council that the board lacks the staffing capacity to continue reviewing, approving and auditing the large number of courses and programs under its current practice, and staff recommended moving oversight to other agencies to reduce cost and workload.

Why it matters: The council must balance public-safety standards for hands-on clinical education against a stated goal of increasing access to training and reducing costs for providers and students. Stakeholders warned the proposed change could fragment curriculum standards and reduce essential hands-on clinical requirements.

Board staff and working-group members presented a draft that would amend many specific Business and Professions Code sections (see authorities). The materials and discussion also reviewed AB 873, a state bill that would revise a range of dental assisting statutes; the author postponed the bill and left it as a two-year measure.

Stakeholder reaction was sharp. Melody Randolph of the Dental Assisting Alliance told the council the alliance is "deeply concerned" and said the proposal, as drafted, would risk eliminating mandatory hands-on training, allow non-dental accreditors that have no dental-specific curriculum requirements, and likely reduce protections for patients and cause closures of existing programs. Sherry Becker, president of the California Association of Dental Assisting Teachers, urged minimum hour requirements rather than eliminating hour requirements entirely.

Council members said the draft was intended to be a starting point for stakeholder meetings. Council member Kara Miyazaki thanked staff and counsel for extensive briefings and urged robust stakeholder engagement so the DAC can return to the council with options, while member Jerry Fowler emphasized that the primary mission must remain public safety.

DANB presentation and possible alternative pathway

Following that discussion, representatives from the Dental Assisting National Board (DANB) outlined component written exams DANB administers, including the Radiation Health & Safety (RHS), Infection Control Exam (ICE), Coronal Polishing (CP) and Sealants (SE) tests. DANB director Catherine Landsberg said component exams are already recognized in many states and could be considered as a pathway to qualify candidates for some functions or to build toward certification.

Landsberg noted RHS and ICE can be taken without course prerequisites and are offered in multiple languages; she also highlighted study guides DANB and its foundation make available. DANB staff provided pass-rate slices for component exams: for example, Landsberg reported national pass rates for RHS in earlier years around the mid-60s to high-60s percent range and for ICE in the low-to-mid 70s percent range, and that many candidates pass on a first or second attempt. (DANB provided more detailed pass-rate figures in the meeting.)

Council members and staff discussed how DANB exams might fit with existing California requirements. Christy Bell, the boardinterim executive officer, told the council the board was considering whether to accept DANB component exams as an alternative pathway: if accepted, candidates who pass DANB RHS or ICE could, in the boardstaff proposal, use those results rather than taking the board-approved course again in California. Council members noted this would expand options for people studying in rural areas or relying on on-the-job training, but several speakers asked how clinical competencies would be assured if written exams were accepted without a hands-on requirement.

No formal action was taken. The council directed the working group to convene stakeholder meetings and return with revised proposals and additional information at future meetings.

Ending: The dental assisting council scheduled stakeholder sessions and said it will come back to the full council before the board takes any formal policy changes. The proposal as drafted remains subject to revision; the council emphasized public safety, and multiple stakeholders asked the council to retain minimum hands-on requirements.

Sources: Aug. 14, 2025 Dental Assisting Council meeting, presentations by Jerry Fowler, Kara Miyazaki, Christy Bell, Melody Randolph, Sherry Becker, Catherine Landsberg (DANB).