Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Licensing And Supervision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board says licensing processing improved but supervisor audits raise concerns for associates
Summary
Board staff told the California Board of Behavioral Sciences that application volumes and processing times improved after added headcount and workflow changes. The meeting focused on supervisor audits that found several supervisors out of compliance and on steps staff will take to protect associates who relied on self‑certified supervisors.
The California Board of Behavioral Sciences on Feb. 20 heard that licensing and registration units have processed more applications and reduced some processing times, but members pressed staff on the results of recently launched supervisor audits and how to protect associates who rely on supervisors.
Lisa Sigelski, the board’s licensing manager, said the registration unit processed 4,481 applications in the quarter and the licensing unit handled 2,603 applications overall. “We were able to do this because of the additional headcount we got in 2024,” Sigelski said, describing cross‑training and an Excel tool used to calculate supervision hours that sped evaluations.
Executive Officer Steve Sodergan told the board the department began the fiscal year with a reserve balance of roughly $26.2 million and expects about $24.9 million in revenue this fiscal year; staff said a fee change planned for July 1 will address reserves.
A significant portion of the board’s discussion centered on the enforcement and supervisor‑audit reports. Staff said they mailed 26 supervisor audit letters in one initial batch; of those, five licensees failed that audit and several failed to respond. Board members described the failures as an early red flag.
Board member John Sobek and others urged caution because a supervisor’s failure can leave an associate’s hours in jeopardy. “People are desperate to get supervision wherever they can because it’s required for them to get their hours,” Sobek said during the discussion, noting a power imbalance that can make it difficult for associates to question supervisors.
Members asked whether the board can reduce harm to associates who relied in good faith on self‑certified supervisors. Board member Justin Hough requested staff and counsel research whether the law contains discretionary provisions that could, in limited circumstances, excuse hours earned under a supervisor later found to be deficient. Staff characterized that request as direction to prepare a legal memo and report back.
The board also discussed other operational improvements flagged by staff, including outreach to schools to reduce common application deficiencies and work to move more application workflows online. Several board members praised licensing and registration staff for faster turnaround on applications and outreach work.
What happens next: staff will prepare the requested memo about discretionary authority regarding supervisees’ hours, continue the supervisor audits, and report back to committees and the full board as results and policy options are developed.
