Committee approves concept to pursue rulemaking to accept AMFTRB national exam for LMFT licensure

The California Board of Behavioral Sciences Policy and Advocacy Committee voted Jan. 24 to approve in concept proposed regulatory text that would enable the board to adopt the Association of Marital and Family Therapy Regulatory Boards (AMFTRB) national clinical exam as the LMFT clinical licensure exam.

Roseanne Helms, legislative manager for the Board of Behavioral Sciences, told the committee the board currently administers its own LMFT clinical exam and is the only state that does not use the AMFTRB national exam. "Right now, the Board administers the LMFT clinical exam. The Board does not utilize the national exam. The Board is the only state that doesn't utilize the national exam currently," Helms said, describing staff work with AMFTRB on content and accessibility and with the Department of Consumer Affairs' information services office to enable automated score transfers.

Why it matters: adopting the national exam would align LMFT testing with the board's existing practice for other license types and could ease portability for candidates who move between states. Committee members approved the concept to allow staff to prepare the formal rulemaking package and return later for final authorization.

The committee motion authorized staff to: (1) approve the proposed regulatory text in Attachment A in concept; (2) draft the initial rulemaking documents for review by the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) director and the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency; and (3) return the proposal to the board for final consideration after staff completes the implementation steps described in the meeting materials. Chris Jones, committee chair, moved the recommendation; Kelly Ranasinghe seconded. The recorded vote was Chris Jones — yes; Abigail Ortega — yes; Kelly Ranasinghe — yes. The motion carried.

Helms summarized timing: statutory language that would permit adoption would be pursued in the board’s sunset bill this year and, if the statute is enacted as planned, regulations would still require the standard multi‑agency review and public comment process. "We're looking at at least probably a couple years" before implementation even if both the statutory and regulatory processes proceed without delay, Helms said.

Public commenters representing professional organizations expressed support. Chaunte Edron of the California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists said the transition would aid workforce portability and continuity of care, and thanked staff for work on accessibility and measurement concerns. Ben Caldwell, an MFT and educator, and Kathy Atkins of CAMFT voiced similar support and asked about public participation in discussions of exam measurement and scope; Helms said the board would return to a board meeting and regulatory public comment periods would provide opportunities for input.

Next steps: staff will complete collaboration with AMFTRB and DCA information services on technical and accessibility issues, finalize the rulemaking package, and bring the package back to the full board for final authorization to file with the director and agency for formal regulatory review and public comment.

Votes at a glance: the committee approved the concept proposal by a 3–0 recorded vote; the full board will consider final authorization in a later meeting.