Petitioner tells PT Board he accepts responsibility; board hears evidence and submits matter for closed deliberation
Loading...
Summary
At a Dec. 11 hearing before the Physical Therapy Board of California, licensee Scott Wei Ho Kwan acknowledged supervisory and recordkeeping failures from a 2018 case, described clinic policy changes and mitigation, and introduced exhibits. The Attorney General urged denial; the record was closed and the board moved to deliberate in closed session.
Scott Wei Ho Kwan, a licensed physical therapist, told the Physical Therapy Board of California on Dec. 11 that he accepts responsibility for lapses in supervision and recordkeeping that led to discipline after a 2018 patient complaint.
Kwan testified under oath during an evidentiary hearing presided over by Administrative Law Judge Corin Wong and summarized corrective steps he said his clinic has taken, including removing electrical stimulation and traction from duties performed by unlicensed aides, assigning and labeling single‑use electrodes for patients, and implementing written competency sign‑offs and more complete SOAP documentation. “I accept responsibility for that,” Kwan said when asked whether he failed to maintain adequate and accurate records.
Deputy Attorney General Jade Walensky, representing the people of the State of California, reminded the board the burden is on the petitioner to prove clear and convincing rehabilitation. Walensky summarized the accusation — which alleged multiple causes for discipline related to inadequate supervision, documentation failures and permitting unlicensed practice — and the procedural history, including an ALJ proposed decision, a board rejection, a Superior Court remand and a subsequent board order placing Kwan on four years’ probation. Walensky argued that mere compliance with probationary terms does not, on its own, establish rehabilitation and urged the board to deny the petition.
Kwan told the board he has completed roughly three of four years of the current probation and that the office has changed training and documentation practices ‘‘right away’’ after the events that prompted the discipline. He introduced two documents — an electrical‑stimulation policy and a physical‑therapist‑aide competency checklist — which the judge admitted over the Attorney General’s objection. Kwan described operational details: the clinic uses labeled electrode kits for individual patients, therapists now apply and set parameters for electrical treatment when used, and competency documentation for aides is retained in personnel files.
After testimony and cross‑examination, the Attorney General made a closing argument urging denial of the petition. Kwan delivered a closing statement asking the board to consider the changes and the time served on probation. The presiding judge closed the record and submitted the matter to the board; the board adjourned to closed session to deliberate, and no final decision was announced at the session’s close.
The board’s materials list the agency case number as 7202025005362 and OAH number 2025100529. Exhibits admitted during the hearing included the clinic’s electrode‑use policy and a PT‑aide competency checklist. The matter will be decided following closed‑session deliberations and any additional required process under law.
