Committee backs bill to create licensure pathway for internationally trained physicians

The Ways & Means Committee on Friday voted to find S142 favorable after staff outlined a multi-step plan to create a pathway for internationally trained physicians to obtain licensure in Vermont.

Jen, the staff presenter, said section one directs the Department of Health, in collaboration with the Board of Medical Practice, to produce a report (due in January) analyzing how other states evaluate and license physicians trained outside the United States, what external assessment resources exist, proposed qualifications and supervision requirements, recency-of-practice standards and a recommended implementation timeline. "The report would look at other states' processes...what external resources would be needed to evaluate the education experience and examinations of physicians trained outside the U.S., and are they available?" Jen said.

Sections two and three would allow the Board of Medical Practice to issue provisional licenses to internationally trained physicians to practice at participating facilities and direct the board to adopt implementing rules. Jen said the rules must reflect "the least restrictive form of regulation necessary to protect the public interest" and must spell out provisional qualifications, standards for participating facilities to assess provisional license holders, and what additional qualifications are required for full licensure. She said the rulemaking is scheduled to take effect July 1, 2027 and the pathway would begin in July 2028.

Jen described the definition of a participating healthcare facility to include hospitals, federally qualified health centers and community health centers that agree to provide mentoring, evaluation and assessment by fully licensed physicians employed by the facility, and to carry medical malpractice insurance covering provisionally licensed physicians.

A committee member raised whether the bill includes background-check requirements for internationally trained physicians; Jen said the bill does not include detailed background-check language and that background checks are generally part of board licensure requirements and would be addressed during the board's rulemaking and in the report's consideration of external evaluators.

Nolan of the Joint Fiscal Office told the committee that, as amended, the bill has no fiscal impact and contains no fees. The clerk called the roll on a motion by Representative Maslo to find S142 favorable; the transcript records the outcome as "voted the bill favorable 10–1." The committee's action is procedural: it found the bill favorable to be reported out of committee, and rulemaking and any licensing standards would be developed during the board's subsequent rule process.

The committee did not adopt licensing rules on the floor; staff and the board of medical practice will be responsible for drafting any required rules and for specifying operational details such as background-check procedures.