Proposed CE Rules Changes Explained Pt 3

In post #1 of this series we discussed the two main proposed ce rules changes: the 50% Rule and the Approved Providers list. Post #2 covered items 1-4 of the remaining topics (see list below) of which we think you need to be aware. In this final post in the series we'll cover items 5-7, then try and put a bow on this thing.

More Proposed CE Rules Changes

1. Jurisprudence Exam would be optional.
2. Ethics hours required would increase to (6), and that which would constitute "Acceptable Ethics Hours".
3. (3 Hrs) Cultural Diversity would be required.
4. The Carry-Forward Rule explained.
5. How Supervisor hours would be handled.
6. What would constitute "Acceptable CE Activities".
7. The "Yeah, But...." List of acceptable hours.

5. About Your Supervisor Refresher Hours

Currently the requirement for supervisors is (6) additional hours beyond your base requirement of (24) for LPC's and (30) for LMFT's. The proposed change would eliminate the additional aspect and simply require that (6) of your base requirement hours be on supervision related topics.

For an LPC Supervisor it would look like this: 24-16 Required Hrs = 8 elective hours per 2 year cycle.

For a non-Supervisor LPC it would be, 24-10 Required Hrs = 14 elective hours per 2 year cycle. (For LMFT's, SW's, and Psych's simply substitute whatever number of CE's are required of you every 2 years for the LPC's 24 in the equation. Got it?)

Sounds great! (6) less required hours, woo-hoo! Another way to look at it is to view it as (6) fewer elective hours now because (6) more of your base hours are now required.

Of course, you can always take as many elective ce hours over your (24/30) base requirement as you want to, they just won't count towards your renewal cycle and you'll have to....wait for it....carry them over to the next renewal period and hope they count. Not a deal-breaker issue, you just need to understand how this works so you're not caught by surprise.

6. Acceptable CE Activities Defined

This is a rather benign list of statements in the proposed changes but some minor clarification is helpful.

Point #1 says that you must take all of your hours you'll be claiming for the current renewal, during your current renewal period. What about those carry-over hours you're allowed? Apparently they'll count but it sure isn't worded very well.

Point #2 simply says that if there is any question about whether or not something you're claiming as a ce activity is valid or not, the BHEC Council shall be the judge of that. That's a good thing because the last thing we need is a return to the days of DSHS wherein the Board simply made things up as they went. BHEC has already proven that they're sticklers for following the written word. I can only assume that the question of validity would be most likely to come up, if you were ever audited.

Point #3 says that the ce certificate you get has to clearly spell out what topics were covered during the training.

And point #4 lets you know that you can take a course as many times as you want but you may only count it once during any renewal period.

7. About The "Yeah, But...." Acceptable CEU's List

There is a segment in the proposed ce rules changes that looks to address a short list of about 5-6 items that are frequently questioned as to their ce acceptability. It addresses things like hours for speaking, writing a book, teaching grad-level courses, stuff like that. It's very specific, non-categorical stuff that you may count towards your renewal-cycle hours in limited fashion. It doesn't read to me as if it's intended to be an "Other, Non-Approved" list of providers. It just answers several very common questions that people ask. You know, "Yeah, but...what about...(fill in the blank)?".

Really? That's All You Got?

So here's how this thing came into being and has arrived in its current form, as we understand it:

Step 1. The Standards Committee cobbled together each Boards "sacred cow" ce requirements and declared their work finished. On the 2nd Day they rested!

(To my eyes it doesn't read as if anyone funneled any real-life scenarios through it to see what pooped out the other end. And the ce requirements have gone from just over 1 page to almost 4. What's that tell you about "standardized" and improved?)

Step 2. BHEC sent it to the Boards for consideration. (Remember, it's the BOARDS that are responsible for changes and making sure they make sense.)

Step 3. On Feb 11 the LPC Board voted on it and passed it exactly as it was given to them by the Standards Committee. Not sure if the other Boards have passed it yet or not.

Summary

So here we are, left hoping that our Boards will listen to our 3 minute public comments and take action (if we can be heard amongst the "procedurally misguided" folk who keep showing up to meetings to plead a specific complaint. Boards don't handle complaints anymore and BHEC can take no action on that case because it's tied up in the courts.).

Dare we hope the Boards give any credence to our written submissions and quietly admit they should have done their due diligence, and not relied on the Standards Committee to do that? (the Standards Committee was obviously hoping the Boards would do it!)

I don't know but it's all we have left. Public comments at Board and BHEC meetings, and written statements sent to general@bhec.texas.gov. We'll be doing both. Emails are free, so pen your own thoughts or copy/paste from this post and be a part of the solution before this thing with purple hair falls permanently into our laps.

In the next post I want to give you a ce scenario and run it through these new rules. I think that will be very helpful to us all.

Oh, and here's the actual verbiage for the rules change. Download it and review all 3 posts in this series again with this document in front of you this time. Comment below!

Proposed CE Changes

Plan Smart. Be Safe. Serve Others.

Kathleen Mills, LPC-S, CEAP