NHPA Recommendation Included in Final Draft

The changes NHPA has identified include:   

1.    In this draft, the rules now allow psychologists to complete their second year of required supervision prior to the doctoral degree. Although requirements for the amount of practical experience and supervision would be the same, the sequence of supervision requirements would allow early career psychologists to get a start in earning potential and ensure a workforce that is viable, especially in light of our aging population.    This change was recommended by NHPA at the public hearing last year and was incorporated into the final draft of the rules. 

2.    In this draft, the rules now allow for mediation as an option for action to be taken by the BMHP in response to findings of misconduct.  This was a critical recommendation to be included in this draft but there is no procedure or process defined for how this will be done.

3.    In this draft, the rules now allow the BMHP to provide information of an allegation of misconduct to the licensee for which the allegation is against. Although it is possible that some discretion may be needed to protect a complainant, the intent of NHPA’s recommendation is that the language requires this, unless it would pose danger to the complainant. NHPA further recommends that he rules should specify that the licensee “will” rather than “may” receive the allegation, and clearly identify any specific condition for which this would not be allowed (i.e., in case when it is the determination of the board that the release would result in serious harm to the complainant).

4.     In this draft, the rules now allow the BMHP to provide licensees under investigation with a summary of the "report of investigation" (ROI) before they choose to either proceed to formal hearing or negotiate a settlement agreement.  The ROI contains the facts and data collected during an investigation and NHPA's recommendation was for licensees under investigation to have access to the entire ROI before making this decision.   In the past, licensees who wanted to see the ROI would only be able to do so if they proceeded to formal investigation. So, this revision partially addresses our recommendation and may allow the licensee to have some of the facts revealed during the investigation thus allowing for more informed decision-making by the licensee. The value of this change will depend greatly on the quality and consistency of the summary provided to clinicians - and when called for in a settlement agreement, the summary provided to supervisors of the clinician.

5.   We make note of the fact that the BMHP has undertaken efforts to be more transparent in the procedures and process of investigations as recommended by NHPA. This has been done through postings on their website, new email alerts, and through inclusion of language clarifying procedures of investigation.  Some of the NHPA recommendations advocating for greater description of the procedures are not present in the rules, although may exist in internal policies.  However, regardless of whether these are present in such internal documents, the rules should mandate that the policies be written, publically available, and include the NHPA recommendations for optimal clarity and transparency in the investigative process.

 6.   NHPA has been notified and invited to participate in a Bill of Rights committee formed by the BMHP. This committee is charged with reviewing this section of the rules and making recommendations for improvements and changes.  However, we have not been notified yet of the timetable for this important review.