Board hears OPES on exam development; directs staff to explore updated occupational analysis and criterion‑referenced passing score

The Structural Pest Control Board heard a detailed presentation from the Department of Consumer Affairs’ Office of Professional Examination Services on how licensing examinations are developed, and the board directed staff to begin exploring an updated occupational analysis for the applicator examination and the feasibility of moving from a fixed passing score set by regulation to a criterion‑referenced passing score.

The Office of Professional Examination Services presentation laid out the standard, multi‑stage process for creating and validating licensure exams and emphasized that examinations must be linked to the actual tasks and knowledge required on the job. “The purpose of licensing is to identify individuals who can do their work safely and competently so that the public is protected from harm,” said Heidi Linser, chief of the Office of Professional Examination Services. The DCA requirement in Business and Professions Code section 139 that boards conduct an occupational analysis every five to seven years was cited as a driver of the recommended updates.

The nut of the board's decision was practical: OPES recommended the applicator occupational analysis be updated and advised the board to consider criterion‑referenced standard setting for passing scores. Tracy Montez, division chief of program and policy review, told the board that criterion‑referenced standard setting uses subject matter experts (SMEs) to define a minimally competent candidate and then judges each test item against that standard. Montez said that approach is “the most valid and defensible process for developing passing scores for licensure.”

Board members and industry speakers raised concerns about implementation. Industry representatives said low pass rates and the costs of repeat testing were hurting operators. “I’ve been in the business 38 years, and I have never experienced what I’m experiencing right now, and my biggest financial pain is this test,” said Sue Fries, owner of Ecola Termite Pest Control, describing the cost and time burden of multiple re‑tests for employees. Jim Steed, president of the Pest Control Operators of California, thanked the board and OPES for engaging the industry and said his association would help recruit SMEs and publicize upcoming stakeholder opportunities.

OPES outlined the tasks required for an occupational analysis: SMEs and focus groups to map tasks and knowledge, a survey of licensees to rate frequency and importance, a final SME workshop to produce an examination blueprint, item writing and item review workshops, exam construction, administration, and ongoing psychometric monitoring. OPES stressed SME selection rules: SMEs must be currently licensed in California, not be CE providers or preparatory class instructors (to avoid conflicts of interest), and must be trained in item writing and review protocols.

Board members asked about timing and SME participation. OPES and staff said the branch‑1 occupational analysis was already scheduled and budgeted and that the applicator occupational analysis could begin in mid to late 2019. OPES recommended beginning with a stakeholder meeting open to employers, operators and other industry stakeholders to gather broad input before narrowing to licensed applicator SMEs for the tasks that feed the exam blueprint.

On scoring, OPES recommended moving away from a fixed passing score set in regulation toward a criterion‑referenced passing score established through a post‑development workshop with SMEs. OPES warned this approach requires additional workshops and SME time but said it better accounts for differences in test difficulty between forms and is legally defensible. Board members asked staff to explore costs, scheduling, and a phased implementation that would avoid disrupting industry hiring peaks.

Public commenters offered solutions and sought clarification about who may participate in SME workshops. OPES staff reiterated that SMEs should be licensees who do the work, though stakeholder meetings may include operators and supervisors to surface broader industry concerns. “A registered applicator is an entry‑level license,” said an industry commenter identified as Dean (Terminix), arguing that operators also have “skin in the game” and should be consulted during stakeholder outreach.

Next steps: Board members directed executive staff to work with OPES to scope the applicator occupational analysis, plan stakeholder outreach, and return with an update at the board’s next meeting. OPES also recommended the board consider regulatory changes needed to move to criterion‑referenced passing scores, including the likely need for regulatory language and a multi‑month lead time.

Votes at a glance

- Minutes from the July 26 meeting: motion and second were offered; minutes approved by voice/roll call (no individual dissent recorded). (See actions[] for details.) - Board leadership election: Darren (last name recorded in the minutes) was elected board president and Dave Tamayo elected vice president by roll call; appointments recorded as approved by the board.

Ending

Board staff will work with OPES and industry groups to schedule stakeholder outreach, begin the applicator occupational analysis planning, and report progress at the January meeting.