Advisory committee reviews addiction‑counselor survey: telehealth widely used, training and supervision gaps noted

Addiction Counselor Advisory Committee of the Behavioral Sciences Regulatory Board · January 14, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Committee members reviewed draft addiction‑counselor survey reports: most respondents reported no telehealth issues but raised concerns about confidentiality, documentation, reimbursement, and uneven preparedness for clinical tasks; the committee earmarked questions on supervision and AI for future meetings.

Members of the Addiction Counselor Advisory Committee spent a substantive portion of the Jan. 13 meeting reviewing draft survey results collected from clinicians across licensing levels.

Executive Director David Fye summarized question 13 (practice‑related negative issues) and question 14 (telehealth). He reported that a significant share of LAC respondents indicated no identifiable practice‑related negative issues, while others listed specific problems; across license levels most respondents similarly reported no telehealth issues, though open responses raised concerns about technology, confidentiality, documentation and reimbursement.

Fye noted that many respondents also highlighted telehealth’s benefits, particularly for rural access, and that most practitioners continue to provide a mix of in‑person and remote services rather than shifting entirely to telehealth. He emphasized the survey’s design: responses were anonymous and open comments are included in report appendices for context.

Committee members discussed whether some requested learning areas (for example, co‑occurring disorders and medication‑assisted treatment) reflected realistic scopes of practice for LACs and whether educational programs adequately prepare clinicians for on‑the‑job expectations. One member urged caution when presenting survey language to federal partners because of recent federal guidance affecting terminology used in SAMHSA‑funded programs.

The advisory committee agreed to prioritize a closer review of questions on supervision and AI use at the March meeting and to incorporate open‑ended responses in final report materials.