PEC approves slate of continuing‑education courses, flags recurring after‑the‑fact submissions

The Practice and Education Committee of the California State Board of Optometry met Nov. 21, 2025, and voted unanimously to approve a large batch of continuing‑education (CE) course requests, including several category adjustments and an authorization for staff to make non‑substantive technical corrections to posted minutes.

The committee, chaired by an unnamed chair who opened the meeting, considered courses grouped under agenda item 4 (subsections 4a–4k). Discussion centered on whether several courses submitted as specialty content (for example, glaucoma or ocular disease) actually fit those categories. Dr. Bragg raised concerns about item 4a.4 (navigating intraocular lenses in glaucoma patients), saying the slides appeared to emphasize IOLs more than glaucoma. The chair expressed concern about changing categorizations retroactively because licensees who took a course in good faith might be disadvantaged in an audit if hours were later reclassified.

Counsel and committee members debated options. Mister Bruce told the committee that many of the applications under review had already been offered: "these are courses that have already been offered," and urged caution about effects on licensees who relied on certificates. Counsel noted the law allows after‑the‑fact applications when good cause is provided but warned the practice raises operational issues the committee should address.

After discussion, the committee approved items 4a.1–4a.6 (including retaining the recent course categorization as submitted for the December offering), authorized staff to make technical, non‑substantive corrections to the August 1, 2025 minutes, and then approved blocks of course items for 4b (1–8), 4c (1–13) with a change to 4c.9 (reclassified from glaucoma to general), 4d (1–5), 4e (1–11), 4f (1–3), and combined single‑item subsections 4g1, 4h1, 4i1, 4j1, 4k1 with agreed changes to 4h1 and 4j1 (both reclassified from ocular disease to general). All motions passed by roll call with each voting member recorded as voting aye.

Why it mattered: several members urged the committee to study why a majority of CE applications appear to be submitted after courses have been held, which complicates categorization and may create audit risk for licensees who relied on certificates. A committee member asked staff to prepare data showing the proportion submitted after the fact and recommended stakeholder outreach to identify process fixes. The committee agreed to place a data brief and a discussion of course category alignment on a future PEC agenda.

Votes at a glance: approve minutes from 08/01/2025 and authorize staff technical corrections (motion passed, roll call unanimous); approve items 4a.1–4a.6 (passed, unanimous); approve 4b.1–4b.8 (passed, unanimous); approve 4c.1–4c.13 with reclassification of 4c.9 to general (passed, unanimous); approve 4d.1–4d.5 (passed, unanimous); approve 4e.1–4e.11 (passed, unanimous); approve 4f.1–4f.3 (passed, unanimous); approve 4g1–4k1 with reclassification of 4h1 and 4j1 to general (passed, unanimous). Individual roll‑call votes recorded each time: Dr. Bragg — aye; Dr. Joe Pruett — aye; Dr. Lillian Wong — aye.

What comes next: staff will prepare a data summary for the next PEC meeting quantifying how many CE applications are submitted after courses are offered, and the committee plans stakeholder outreach to consider process or category‑alignment changes. The meeting adjourned with closing remarks and holiday greetings.