Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education And Accreditation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board directs staff to explore removing 75% in‑school clinical requirement; staff warned accreditation timing can leave students ineligible for licensing
Summary
The board authorized staff to develop a regulatory package to remove the rule that 75% of clinical education be conducted in a school‑owned clinic and to propose alternatives (for example, deferring to ACOM standards). Board staff also raised a statutory letter‑of‑intent timing issue that has left some students unable to sit for the licensing exam; staff will include options in the board’s sunset report.
After stakeholder testimony and internal discussion on May 15, the California Acupuncture Board directed staff to explore a regulatory package that would remove the provision requiring 75% of clinical education to occur in school‑owned clinics and to identify alternative standards for safe off‑site externships and supervision.
Multiple school representatives and members of the public described barriers that the current regulation creates for students seeking diverse clinical experiences in hospitals and integrated settings and urged the board to permit more externship opportunities under school supervision. School representatives noted differences between board curriculum requirements and ACOM accreditation standards (for example, physics is a California requirement but not an ACOM required prerequisite) and asked the board to consider harmonization.
The board also discussed a statutory requirement that a new program submit an ACOM letter of intent within 30 days of BPPE approval so the program can be treated as approved by the board. Staff said the accreditation timeline—from letter of intent to pre‑accreditation or institutional accreditation—often exceeds the statutory windows and can leave students unable to sit for the licensing exam. Staff proposed including in the board’s sunset report options such as accepting an ACOM self‑study or pre‑accreditation milestone as the trigger for board approval to reduce student risk; the board asked staff to return with draft language.
The board’s motion directing staff to develop a regulatory package passed by roll call. Staff will return with proposed regulatory language and alternatives for board consideration and will include the accreditation timing concern in the sunset report drafting process.
