Review of State Professional and Occupational Licensure Board Requirements and Processes

BPOA worked in coordination with Saint Francis University’s Knee Center for the Study of Occupational Regulation (CSOR) to compile data on regional equivalent professional and occupational licensure. The report found that regionally Pennsylvania typically had lower than average initial fees, continuing education requirements, and training requirements. Pennsylvania has a few license types that were only present in a minority of states in the region, and an even smaller amount that were exclusive to Pennsylvania. Where Pennsylvania is above the regional average for fees, training, and continuing education requirements and where license types are not widely present in other regional states, the report recommends the governor and administration officials evaluate the health and safety protections associated with licensure against the impact of employment restrictions on Pennsylvania residents and businesses. Additionally, the Wolf Administration should examine policies that have the potential to mitigate the mobility problems associated with state licensure, such as interstate compacts, reciprocity, endorsement, uniformity, and lessor forms of regulation such as certification or registration. A review of current interstate agreements, both in Pennsylvania and regionally, is included in this report and the data can assist in assessing impact of accessing licensure for residents entering the commonwealth.
In addition to the analysis referenced above, the report also includes a review of criminal history bans, disciplinary actions, licensure processing times, and demographic makeup. The data collected shows that while disciplinary actions vary widely by board, the annual number of actions is steadily growing. Additionally, processing times for initial applications vary significantly from board to board, ranging from less than a day to 53 days, with the average application processing time for all boards at 13.8 days. Criminal history bans also vary from board to board, with significant bans set in statute for most healthcare-related occupations. Lastly, the requirement to demonstrate “good moral character” is loosely defined and while this administration has provided guidance through policy statements regarding the use and review of criminal histories there is the potential for it to be applied unevenly across boards. The governor and administration officials should examine the impact of criminal history bans and “good moral character” requirements on ensuring Pennsylvania residents are able to engage in the workforce without unnecessary barriers.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

June 11, 2018

External Link