As I complete my 5 years service on LSBEP, I find myself reflecting on the experience. It is a Board tradition that the Chair write a message and this message often includes information about why he or she chose to be a candidate for appointment to the LSBEP. Not one to break with tradition, I will start my message from that perspective.
I had no interest in being a candidate for LSBEP. I probably knew as much about what was involved in being a Board member as most of my psychologist-colleagues. I knew I had taken an oral exam for licensure when I moved to Louisiana nd that annually I send the Board a check to renew that license. Beyond that, I had little knowledge of the functioning of the Board. My long-time friend, Tommy Stigall, strongly urged me to consider running for the Board. I reluctantly yielded to his “peer pressure” and completed the application form. I also assumed there was no chance that I would actually be selected (so much for my understanding of many parts of the process)!
Looking back over the 5 years I have spent on LSBEP, I find I have diverse reactions. From a positive perspective, I have had the opportunity to work with my LSBEP colleagues. These are psychologists with whom I might otherwise have had only brief contact at professional meetings. It is not that we become friends in the traditional sense of the word. Working as intensely as we do on a monthly basis has provided me with a sense of appreciation of each of their skills as well as their frustration tolerance that is unique to this setting. Each year the group changes and so has the dynamic of these interactions. I have had the opportunity to meet many psychologists from throughout the United States and Canada at ASPPB meetings. This contact has probably raised more questions than it has answered about licensure issues. I firmly believe this contact stimulates our Board to move forward. We get a perspective on licensing issues that is broader than our state’s boundaries and then try to apply this knowledge to Louisiana’s system. I have also had the opportunity to do considerable “outreach” from the Board. I have spoken to graduate students, interns, and postdoctoral fellows about the licensure process and hopefully helped them begin the process of entering our profession. I have helped both supervisors and supervisees complete the necessary forms for the licensure process. I have met many of the new psychologist who enter practice in Louisiana during the oral examination process--some first-time licensees and others who come with a prior license in another jurisdiction.
From a more negative perspective, I have spent both time and personal funds on Board activities. These demands on my time and resources might have been used in other ways. There have been some unpleasant interactions with a few psychologists. They are hard to forget. My colleagues tell me that is just part of being a member of a regulatory body. They would not have occurred, however, if I were not a member of the Board. Overall, I believe I have contributed to the protection of the public--the ultimate role of the LSBEP--by the work I have done.
I have learned much about how LSBEP operates that I never knew as a licensee. I have developed strong opinions about many of these procedures and have worked with my colleagues to change some of them. For me, having LSBEP members easily accessible to both applicants and licensees who have questions is an important function of Board service. I sincerely hope that future Board members will also see this as an important activity for them. I have never calculated the amount of time I have spent on the phone or e-mail answering questions about how to complete the licensure application form or supervised practice plan. I do not really want to know the total. By having these materials initially completed the way the Board wants them to be done, time is saved for the LSBEP and its staff in terms of requesting revisions, needing further communication, and so on.
As I prepare to leave the Board, I find there are issues we have not yet addressed to the degree I would like. I leave my colleagues with this unfinished business in the hopes they may be able to continue what we have begun. Issues of importance to me include: further development of the procedures for temporary practice in Louisiana by a psychologist who is licensed in another jurisdiction; development of impaired psychologist/colleague assistance policies and procedures; increasing the efficiency of the LSBEP procedures for investigating complaints against both psychologists and those who may be practicing psychology without a license; and developing methods to shorten the time needed to complete the licensure application process. I will leave LSBEP with feelings of freedom in terms of time and pressure in my life as well as a sense of sadness that I will no longer be involved in some of the activities I have come to enjoy.
As you are aware the Louisiana Administrative Code for Psychologists regarding Continuing Education requires each licensed psychologist to complete 30 clock hours of acceptable continuing education within your biennial reporting period. Two of these 30 clock hours must be within the area of ethics and/or forensics issues. Some psychologists miss this last detailed requirement.
Acceptable continuing education activities are defined as:
1. Formally organized and planned instructional experiences;
2. Programs which have objectives compatible with the post-doctoral needs of the licensed psychologist;
3. Professional meetings, conferences, or conventions lasting one full day or longer which are designed to promote professional development.
Please pay close attention to the types of acceptable sponsors available, including accredited institutions of higher education, certain Veterans Administration hospitals, professional associations such as the American Psychological Association (APA), the Louisiana Psychological Association (LPA), the Louisiana State Board of Examiners of Psychologists (LSBEP), the Louisiana Office of Citizens with Developmental Disabilities or the Louisiana Office of Mental Health. You can also accrue CE hours for teaching a graduate level psychology course or giving a workshop yourself for an acceptable sponsor.
Unacceptable offerings and/or activities include personal psychotherapy, holding professional offices, journal clubs or attending case conferences, grand rounds or informal presentations. Unacceptable offerings and/or activities are not credited even if they are given by an acceptable sponsor.
The Board routinely distributes the CE report form along with the license renewal form. Please remember that the form must be signed to signify that the report is true and accurate. Please be careful with the use of abbreviations; write out the full name of the sponsoring organization for the first time you use it on the form. Retain corroborative documentation of your CE as the board routinely requests this documentation of a random ten percent of renewals each year.
The Board is willing to grant extensions or an exemption for extended military service outside of Louisiana or for those who have an illness or some other personal hardship. The Board requires timely confirmation of such status before granting relief, as the Board reviews each case on an individual basis.
Noncompliance with the CE requirements includes, in part, incomplete reports, unsigned reports, failure to file a report, and failure to report enough hours earned. Failure to fulfill the requirements of the CE rule shall cause your license to lapse pursuant to the licensing statute. A person shall not practice psychology in Louisiana while their license is lapsed.
In October, 2003 the Board amended the CE rule to note that “A lapsed license shall be reinstated as of the date all applicable requirements of RS 37:2357 have been met. However, the Board retains the right to reinstate licenses retroactively in unusual circumstances as specified in the polices and procedures of the LSBEP.”
The Board routinely sends out the biennial CE report form with the annual license renewal form during the month of May. License renewal is due July 1st of each year. When you get these forms fill them out accurately and send them in early to avoid a problem. Each year a staff member and a Board member carefully review each CE report form to expedite renewals. The Board would like to thank our licensed psychologists for their helpful assistance and cooperation in implementing the CE rule.
The Role of Supervision in Licensure
The theme of the 43rd Annual Meeting of Delegates of the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) held October 15-19, 2003, in Scottsdale, Arizona, was the role of supervision in licensure. AS LSBEP chair, I represented our jurisdiction in voting matters and was joined by my LSBEP colleagues Drs. Hartwell, McCormick, and Baker in attending the continuing education offerings on supervision. This article is my way of communicating some of the information we received with all Louisiana licensees.
The annual meeting is the one where members of the ASPPB Board are elected. I served as one of the two vote counters during this election process. Kim Jonason of Kentucky was selected as President-elect; Shepard Goldberg of New York was elected to a second term as ASPPB Treasurer; and Ken Roy of New Jersey was elected Member-at-Large of the ASPPB Board of Directors. All of these men have a long history of ASPPB service. We were especially pleased with the election of Dr. Roy because we have spent much time with him at the meetings.
Dr. Emil Rodolfa, one of the CE speakers, noted that a current trend in the practice of psychology is to emphasize the empirical basis of both assessment and intervention. The question can then be raised about the available research on supervision and how that research relates to Board policies on the topic. Although there is a literature on supervisor roles, supervisee roles, and their interaction, it does not seem to be widely read within our disciplines or used as a basis for policy development by regulatory bodies.
Some doctoral programs now offer formal courses in supervision. The California Board reported that in order to be a supervisor of candidates for licensure in that jurisdiction the psychologist must take a 6 hour continuing education course on supervision, approved by the board, every 2 years. Their supervision contract is 4 pages of what described as “small print.” The Alaska delegate noted that their supervision contract is 7 pages long and must be notarized before being submitted to the Board. As many of you know, our form is a single sheet at this time and does not require notarization. Because of the variability among jurisdictions regarding supervision, ASPPB is currently working on a project that will provide summary information about what is required in each of the member jurisdictions as a form of information. The hope is that this level of information sharing will contribute to increased commonality among jurisdictions. There was no suggestion at this time of any national format for supervision forms. Supervision applied to the disciplinary process was addressed by several attorneys rather than by psychologists and was viewed as a different topic and perhaps requiring different forms.
In some jurisdictions the topic of supervision has become so central an issue that businesses actually teach supervision skills and also evaluate the individual supervision process. A speaker who runs one of these businesses described the activities of his form. He suggested that this type of business will become more common in the future
Although the overall theme of the meeting ws supervision, several other topics were also addressed as part of our educational process. There was a panel discussion about the use of technicians in psychological practice. Much of the material presented centered on neuropsychological practice where this topic has been addressed in professional journals. Paul Craig, liaison to ASPPB from the APA Board of Directors and former delegate from the Alaska board, summarized some of these data. Material from two surveys about the use of technicians in psychological practice was also discussed. One survey was conducted by the Arkansas Board of its licensees. This survey addressed the use of technicians in both assessment and intervention. Their data suggested considerable variability both in terms of the use of technicians and licensees’ approval of this procedure. The other survey was an internet survey conducted by ASPPB of its members. Preliminary data from that survey were presented with the promise that further analysis would be done and the results shared with member boards.
Another panel discussed the interaction between licensing boards and wellness committees as a way to decrease complaints about impaired psychologists. Based on discussion with delegates from other jurisdictions, we got the impression that there is no consistency across jurisdictions on this topic.
My final meeting as LSBEP chair will be in April. The typical midyear meeting of ASPPB is held in February. This year, however, ASPPB is co-sponsoring the Third International Congress on Licensure, Certification, and Credentialing of Psychologists to be held in April in Montreal, Canada. Among the speakers listed as confirmed at the time of the Scottsdale meeting were Dr. Ray Fowler, former APA CEO; Professor Trevor Waring, registrar and educator from New South Wales, Australia; and Vaira Vike-Freiberga, former President of the Canadian Psychological Association and current President of Latvia. Former LSBEP Chair, Greg Gormanous is a member of ASPPB’s task force planning this event. The International Congress meeting will replace the annual ASPPB midyear meeting for 2004.
On November 14, 2003 Gabriel Joseph Rodriguez, Ph.D. entered into a Consent Agreement with the LSBEP following an investigation of a complaint alleging violations of R.S. 37:2359 A, B12, and B14; and the Ethical standards of Psychologists, General Standards 1.11 (A) (2), 6.03 (b), 1.09, and 1.22 (b).
Yes, its time to renew your license again. While many of you have been doing this process each year for many years, we thought it would be helpful to address some of the more frequent concerns we get, as well as give you a simplified view of how the process works.
The LSBEP has one Board Member and one employee to process your renewals. This year there will be approximately 580 psychologists renewing their license, of that number, approximately 285 will be reporting their continuing education requirements, with 29 of those being audited.
Remember, your license is renewed annually, and every two years you report continuing education requirements with that renewal. A good rule of thumb to help you remember when to report is: Odd numbered licensed report in odd numbered years; Even numbered licenses report in even numbered years. Another good hint, will be that you will received a reporting form with your Renewal Notice if it is your reporting year.
When your information and check is received at the Board office, your renewal is date stamped, logged as received, your check is deposited (a multiple step process), and if everything is filled out properly, a Renewal Certificate is generated and mailed to you. Each renewal is handled on a first come, first serve basis. Some renewals require special attention such as an address change, telephone change or name change. Sometimes your renewal form is not complete, which would require return correspondence and additional staff time is required to log and track that information. You can expect your renewal to be processed within two weeks.
Those of you reporting Continuing Education will go through the same process but in addition, your CE Reports will be forwarded to the Chair of the Continuing Education Committee for review. The Chair carefully reviews each one, and then forwards that information back with approval, or further instructions for processing. Processing your Continuing Education Reports can, at times, take up to four weeks before you either receive your Certificate, or possibly a request for more information.
Most importantly, please remember that this is an especially busy time of year for returning verifications of licensure to your credentialing and insurance companies. You’ll want to have your new certificate ready for those entities prior to your license expiring on June 30, 2004!
Please know that we do always welcome your questions regarding license renewal, and appreciate your prompt response in returning the required information.
House Bill 1426 Signed by Governor
Governor Kathleen Blanco signed House Bill 1426 into Law. The bill authorizes specially trained psychologists to prescribe and distribute, without charge, certain drugs and other related procedures within the scope of practice of psychology. You can view the entire bill at http:..www.legis.state.la.us/
The LSBEP has been mandated under the purview of this law to develop the guidelines and monitor the regulation of this specialty as indicated by R.S. 37:2351 through 2367 as Part I of Chapter 28 of Title 37 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950 and to entitle such Part “Licensure and Regulation of Psychologists.”
Recently, Chair of the LSBEP, Janet R. Matthews, Ph.D. appointed a committee comprised of current Board members, Linda J. Hartwell, Ph.D. and Kenneth R. Bouillion, Ph.D., as well as former Board Members and Chairs, John F. Bolter, Ph.D. and James W. Quillin, Ph.D., to draft a rule for the current Board’s consideration defining the procedures to implement and oversee the new Medical Psychologist specialty designation.
 | August 6, Baton Rouge |
| September 10, Baton Rouge |
| October 29, Baton Rouge |
License # Licensee
| 939 Denise Benoit Standley, Ph.D. (SC) |
| 940 Lynn R. Schechter, Ph.D. (SC) |
| 941 Katherine A. Robison, Ph.D. (SC) |
| 942 Corby K. Martin, Ph.D. (CL) |
| 943 Lori D. Lindley, Ph.D. (CO) |
| 944 Jonathan Schwartz, Ph.D. (CO) |
| 945 Lorenzo Azzi, Ph.D. (CL) |
| 946 Richard N. Costa, Psy.D. (CL) |
| 947 John Michael Bradley, Ph.D. (CL) |
| 948 Arian Sara Elfant, Ph.D. (CL) |
| 949 David J. Kutz, Ph.D. (CL) |
| 950 Cheryl S. Marsiglia, Ph.D. (CO) |
| 951 Jerald W. Bamburg, Jr., Ph.D. (CL) |
| 952 Sheree Moskow, Psy.D. (CL) |
| 953 David J. Williams, Ph.D. (CO) |
| 954 Gary Edwin Jones, Ph.D. (CL) |
| 955 B. Jean Cottingham, Ph.D. (SC) |
| 956 Lori Angela Carroll, Ph.D. (SC) |
| 957 Rodney D. Hesson, Psy.D. (CL) |
| 958 Thomas Arlo Norris, Ed.D. (SC) |
| 959 Claudia Silva Schott, Psy.D. (CL) |
| 960 Randall M. Graf, Ph.D. (DV) |
| 961 Erin Lizabeth Skaff, Psy.D. (CL) |
| 962 Christopher Lee Kornman, Ph.D. (CO) |
Question: Would it be acceptable for a candidate to pay the difference in his supervisior’s malpractice premium caused by his supervision?
Answer: No, the malpractice premium for adding an unlicensed candidate for licensure in LA should be paid by the supervision psychologist. The candidate is not paying for and should not be paying for supervision. If the candidate does pay, this results in a dual relationship which constitutes an ethical violation. The LSBEP realizes that this adds to the difficulty of obtaining supervisors for candidates leading to licensure, but is avoids the appearance of impropriety.
Question: If an individual is being supervised for licensure by a psychologist and employed by that psychologist, does it make a difference if the candidate for licensure is paid for the services that are performed on a 1099 or a W-2?
Answer: No, it does not matter which form is used for the candidate to report income for taxable purposes or form under which the candidate is paid. This is not under the scope of the LSBEP and does not impact on the role of the supervisor. This is more of a tax form issue.
2003-2004 Staff and Board Committee Assignments
Staff
| Executive Director: Brenda C. Ward |
| Administrative Assistant: Jaime Monic |
| CPA: Ouida Nugent |
| Legal Counsel: Lloyd J. Lunceford |
| Legal Counsel: Wade E. Shows |
| Publications Editor: Brenda C. Ward |
2003-04 Committee Assignments
| Complaints: Janet R. Matthews & Linda J. Hartwell, Co-Chairs |
| Continuing Education: Kenneth Bouillion, Chair |
| Supervision & Credentials Review: Bruce K. McCormick, Chair |
| Legislative Oversight: Kenneth Bouillion & Earl H. Baker, Co-chairs |
| Long Range Planning: Janet R. Matthews & Linda Hartwell, Co-Chairs |
| Oral Examinations: Earl H. Baker, Chair |