Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Telehealth Licensure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advisory committee flags telehealth licensing limits at state borders as continuity-of-care issue
Summary
Kansas advisory committee discussed frequent telehealth problems when clients or clinicians cross state lines, including verification of client location, limits on cross‑state practice, temporary permits and impacts on students and families.
The Kansas Behavioral Sciences Regulatory Board(BSRB) Master's-Level Psychology and Clinical Psychotherapy Advisory Committee discussed telehealth licensing limits and client-location verification at its Oct. 1 meeting, saying those limits are creating continuity-of-care problems for clients who cross state lines for short periods.
Committee members described repeated situations in which clients travel across state lines for work, college or short trips and cannot use their established Kansas providers remotely because the client, not the clinician, is physically located out of state. "We ask them at the beginning of the session where they're located," said Ginger Hill, advisory committee member, describing how providers currently document location for each telehealth visit.
The committee said the restriction matters for parents who travel for work, college students who move between semesters, and people who cross into border communities for short periods. "It adds to the workforce shortage because starting and ending a therapeutic relationship is time consuming," said Lauren Lott, advisory committee member, describing the time and care continuity costs when a patient must change providers.
Why it matters: Kansas allows multiple tiers of psychological practice, including master's-level licensure that other states may not recognize. That difference complicates cross-border telehealth. Executive Director David Fye said policy differences reflect state sovereignty: "I think it's just a very complex set of laws," he said, noting that some states limit master's-level independent practice and that Kansas is among the minority that license at certain master's tiers.
Committee discussion and examples: Members said common clinic practice is to verify and document client location at the start of each telehealth encounter and to collect local emergency contact information and the nearest local hospital in case a safety referral is needed. Sarah McMillan, advisory committee member, noted clinicians often confirm a local hospital or emergency contact before beginning telehealth when safety concerns exist. Members also said providers sometimes ask clients to travel physically into Kansas for a telehealth appointment if they are close to the border, an inefficient workaround that can burden patients.
The advisory committee reviewed existing temporary pathways: Fye described a short-term permit that initially allowed up to 15 days of in-state practice and was later extended to 30 days, and he reiterated the board's temporary reinstatement license that can allow practice for up to six months while a clinician completes continuing education. He also said the board has previously reduced reinstatement fees in some cases to encourage workforce reentry.
No formal regulatory change was adopted at the meeting. Committee members asked staff to compile comparisons with neighboring states' approaches and to bring possible options for how Kansas might increase flexibility while maintaining consumer protection.
Ending: The committee flagged telehealth across state lines as a recurring issue to monitor in legislative and rule discussions, and asked staff to follow up with comparative research on neighboring states' temporary permits and reciprocity arrangements.
