BRN denies Samuel Merritt request to expand Sacramento enrollment after members cite clinical impaction

The Board of Registered Nursing on Feb. 26 voted to deny Samuel Merritt University’s request to increase enrollment at its Sacramento campus, after trustees and public commenters said the Greater Sacramento region is already heavily impacted for clinical placements.

Samuel Merritt had proposed to add both accelerated bachelor’s students and entry-level master’s students in Sacramento, an increase the school later pared back at the board’s request during discussion. The Education and Licensing Committee had asked the full board to review the Sacramento campus request after hearing public comments about clinical impaction.

At the board meeting, multiple nursing program directors and educators from Sacramento-area colleges told the board they have lost clinical placements or seen cohort sizes reduced. Sierra College’s Dean of Nursing said some clinical sites reduced cohorts “from 10 down to 6,” and Sacramento State’s nursing faculty said placements in the region are scarce and already claimed by existing programs.

Samuel Merritt representatives said the university has established clinical agreements in the area — including some non-acute and long-term care partners — and that the university can staff an expanded program and provide additional faculty. Program director Steven Rush told the board the campus intends to use a mix of hospital and non-hospital sites and argued the school could supply needed clinical capacity.

Board members deliberated on two motions. An initial motion to approve a reduced enrollment pattern failed on a roll call vote. The board then moved, by majority roll-call vote, to deny Samuel Merritt’s enrollment increase for the Sacramento campus. The final roll call on the denial recorded votes in favor from Dolores Trujillo, Nilu Patel, Vicki Granowitz, Lisonbee Cormack, Patricia Wynne, David Lawler and Allison Cormack; opposition or abstentions were noted prior in the deliberations.

During debate board members emphasized they were not judging the quality of Samuel Merritt’s program but were focused on regional capacity: clinical sites, preceptor availability and whether the increase would disadvantage students already enrolled at other local programs. Several members said the board has previously deferred or denied enrollment increases in heavily impacted regions and that the board must weigh program requests against regional clinical capacity.

The board’s denial is limited to the specific Sacramento expansion request. Samuel Merritt may pursue other options such as relocating clinical components to less-impacted locations or returning with a modified plan. Board staff noted approval of an enrollment increase requires schools to complete the board’s self-study and show they meet clinical and faculty requirements before any student admission changes can occur.

Action on the item was taken after public comment and an Education and Licensing Committee referral. The board’s vote concluded the matter; staff will notify Samuel Merritt of the decision and outline the board’s concerns about regional clinical impaction.