LegislativeCorner
by Diane Charles,
OAW Legislative Director
Resolution #1:
Whereas, opticianry today requires more technical knowledge than ever, and
Whereas, the national optician associations have called for greater educational requirements for licensed dispensing opticians, and
Whereas, the OAW membership has previously voted in favor of adding an associates degree to the requirements for receiving a state license, but lacks the financial resources to bring about a change in the state law,
Therefore, be it resolved that the Opticians Association of Washington go on record as favoring the addition of an associates degree as a requirement to receive a state license.
Resolution #2:
Whereas, the Opticians Association of America has voted to accept a national definition of apprenticeship which requires related formal instruction in addition to on-the-job training, and
Whereas, many other highly skilled occupations such as electricians accept a definition of apprenticeship which includes related formal instruction of at least 144 hours per year in addition to on-the-job training, and
Whereas, opticianry today requires more technical knowledge than ever,
Therefore, be it resolved that, for as long as apprenticeship exists, the Opticians Association of Washington go on record in favor of a definition of apprenticeship that requires formal instruction in addition to on-the-job training.
Both proposed resolutions are submitted by member Dennis Prescott for comment and consideration before adoption at the Fall convention in Chelan.
|
||||||||||||||||||
The following memorandum explains some of the steps DOH is taking to speed up the renewal process for health care professionals, as there has been a delay in renewals for the last two months. To inquire about a pending renewal the telephone number is (360) 236-4700.
Please feel free to share this with other health
care professionals.
*****************************************************************************************
From:
Beigert, Shannon L , Customer Service Office
Director
Sent:
Thursday, May 15, 2008 9:10 AM
Subject:
Update HSQA Renewal Status
DOH takes steps to speed licensing and cut
backlog.
We launched a new computer licensing system in
February. As many of you know, we had a rise in backlog during that startup.
This has caused serious delays for our customers. We apologize for this.
We do have good news.. During the past several weeks, we have reduced the backlog from 18 days to about 10 days. Each day represents the amount of work typically done in an eight- hour workday.
We expect processing to continue to speed up. Many factors have contributed to the improvement. Some of the most important are:
· Staff are learning the system.
· Additional hardware, memory and Internet
capacity has improved system performance.
· We have added staff resources.
We have also focused attention on the most
urgent license renewals. This will help us avoid having licenses expire when the
department has already received a renewal with the correct information and fee.
Those seeking renewals can help speed the process. Our automatic renewal system is working smoothly. If a customer submits the correct fee, provides required information and has no changes to a license, we can process the renewal in a day or two.
By contrast, manual renewals are currently taking us about two weeks to process. We have to do manual renewals when a customer wants to make changes, such as in an address, forgets to submit continuing education information or submits the incorrect fee. We hope to see the two week lag time reduced to less than a week very soon.
We are encouraging customers to submit address changes separately. This allows them to get a faster renewal. Customers can send changes in names or address to either our email box or fax machine. Our email address is hpqa.csc@doh.wa.gov and fax number is 360-236-4818..
We are working hard to get our new system running smoothly. Thank you for your patience.
You are receiving this e-mail because you have been identified as an interested party. You may leave this list at any time, or view the archives of messages that have been sent to this list, by going to
http://listserv.wa.gov/archives/wa-brd-optometry.html
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Olympia, Washington 98504
On Wednesday, May 7, we filed proposed rules for health care professional licensing fees. The fees in the proposed rules are at or less than the level the legislature authorized this year.
License Fees Frequently Asked Questions
Why is the Department of Health raising fees?
By law a profession’s fees must cover the costs to administer the profession.
Some fees were increased in the past two years. Before that, fees had not been raised for many years. A number of fees were actually reduced in 2005.
Recent legislation has increased costs to administer programs.
·
2007 – The Blue Ribbon Commission bill (ESSB5930) added a fee to access some resources on the University of Washington online library.·
2008 – 4SHB1103 required fingerprint-based federal criminal background checks for out-of-state applicants. This adds to the disciplinary workload. The bill called for additional rulemaking activities and more national databank checks.Discipline drives 85 percent of the costs. Disciplinary activity has increased dramatically in recent years.
·
Some professions’ disciplinary actions have risen 83 percent since 2001.·
Authorized investigations increased by over 30 percent in the same time period.·
Court cases added requirements for how evidence is collected. Courts raised the level of proof necessary to move forward with discipline.The department had to replace seven outdated licensing systems it had been using to license all professions. They were consolidated into one system to meet current and future demands.
Has the department ever lowered fees and when?
Yes. In 2005 fees for some professions were reduced because we had more revenue than the legislature authorized us to spend. Unfortunately, soon after the fees were lowered, discipline cases exceeded projections and new legislation created new requirements.
What drives disciplinary costs?
Fees must cover investigation, legal, and other administrative costs.
Investigations and legal analysis cost staff time and money. Boards and commissions must also expend time to review and make decisions. This adds up to about $9 million per year.
Money must be spent in many cases to pay outside experts to determine whether a standard of care has been met. This adds up to about $500,000 per year.
Fees must pay for Attorney General advice and prosecution. This amounts to about $1.5 million per year.
Fees must also cover records collection and reproduction, staff attorneys, health law judges, and hearing room rentals.
Why are some fees higher than others?
There are many factors that influence the fees differently in each profession, including:
A profession’s current biennium budget and expenditure trends.
The number of licensees in a profession. If there are few practitioners in the profession and high costs to regulate, fees will be higher.
Fees for some professions were lowered too far in 2005. There was no cushion for unanticipated legislative mandates that followed.
·
Some professions began quickly depleting their revenues. Some profession fees were raised again in 2006.·
State law requires professions to be self-supporting. Even with the proposed fee increases, it may still take more than a year for all professions to be self-supporting.The amount of discipline for a profession and the complexity of its cases.
What is included in the fee?
The basic fee pays to support the regulation of the profession, including:
·
Setting standards for the profession.·
Credentialing.·
Disciplinary activities.Some of the proposed application and renewal fees also include surcharges required under state law, including:
·
Up to $25 for the University of Washington (UW) online journal access fee.·
The nurse’s $5 pass-through fee for the Washington Center for Nursing.·
Up to $35 for the Washington Physicians Health Program.
What is the UW fee and why do I have to pay it?
The legislature recently made this fee a requirement. It was also recommended by the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Health Care Costs and Access. The law requires that certain professions pay the fee to receive online access to a set of health-related journals and other publications through the University of Washington Health Sciences Library.
The department was directed to include up to $25 in the license fees for these professions to pay for this access. The department is required to obtain the fees and transfer the funds to the university. The university is responsible for providing the access. These professions include:
·
Acupuncturists·
Chiropractors·
Clinical Social Workers·
Massage Therapists·
Mental Health Counselors·
Naturopathic Physicians·
Optometrists·
Osteopathic Physicians, Osteopathic Physician Assistants·
Physicians, Physician Assistants·
Podiatrists·
Psychologists·
Registered NursesThe legislation did not make access to the online library and the fee optional. The access and fee are required for the listed professions.
How are fees approved?
In the fall of 2007, Washington citizens passed Initiative 960 (I-960). I-960 requires state agencies that charge fees to project expenses and revenues for a 10-year period. It also requires legislative approval for fees.
The 2008 legislature approved fees up to a certain amount. All proposed fees are within the legislatively approved levels. Some are less than the approved maximum.
Raising fees also requires a public rule-making process to allow public and practitioner input.
We expect the rule-making process to conclude in June with new fees in place by
August 1, 2008.
Shouldn’t more licensees in a profession mean marginally lower fees?
Generally, yes. While there are more practitioners to share the costs, there may also be more costs to share. Some professions receive more complaints, require more investigations, and have higher rates of disciplinary activity.
Does the department consider a practitioner’s income when determining the amount of the fee?
The department does not have this option. We are required to consider two factors when setting fees. These two factors are revenue and expense. The department must determine if the fees charged will cover the profession’s expenses.
How many and what professions will be bankrupt if fees are not raised this year?
Fifteen professions are spending more than they are receiving in revenue. This cannot continue. The law requires that each profession be self-supporting. These professions include Dental, Recreational Therapist, Denturist, Massage Therapist, Radiologic Technologist, Nursing Assistant, Mental Health Counselor, Social Worker, Chemical Dependency Professional, Healthcare Assistant, Registered Counselor, Respiratory Therapist, and Chiropractor.
What happens if fees aren’t raised?
Patient safety is threatened. The department would not be able to:
·
Investigate complaints about health care professionals.·
Resolve complaints in a timely manner.·
Implement legally required fingerprint-based federal background and other national databank checks.A growing backlog of cases slows decisions. In some cases, incompetent or unethical health providers could continue to practice. Failure to do the required background checks could allow health professionals with criminal histories to practice in the state.
The legislature has also required us to begin regulating a number of new professions. Without fees for these professions, the department could not provide licenses and make sure these new professions are properly regulated.
Can I pay my fees online?
Not yet, but we are working on this option. We recently started accepting payments made by Visa, MasterCard, or debit if paid in person at our offices in Tumwater.
Where can I get more information on fees?
More information is available on the Department of Health’s fee information Web page (http://www.doh.wa.gov/hsqa/FeeInformation/FeeInfoDefault.htm). You can also check your profession’s individual Web page for fee information.
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Olympia, Washington 98504
In response to the State Auditor’s Office health professions audit, Governor Gregoire is proposing legislation. Items 1-3 below will look familiar. They were unsuccessfully introduced during the 2007 legislative session. This draft is preliminary and could still be modified. We welcome your feedback and/or comments. The concepts covered in the legislation include:
- Simplifying the process for denying an application for licensure. It would amend the Uniform Disciplinary Act., chapter 18.130 RCW, to shift the burden of proof to the applicant to prove he or she is fit to practice. Currently the Department must prove the applicant is unfit to practice. Many other state licensing systems take this approach, and health care should be no exception.
2) Authorizing disciplining authorities to assess fines against practitioners who do not produce documents, including patient records, within a proposed statutory time limit of 21 calendar days of the request. The legislation would amend the Uniform Disciplinary Act, chapter 18.130 RCW to allow issuance of a citation for failure to produce records and a fine of up to $100 a day until the documents, records, or other requested items are produced. The fine cannot exceed $5,000. The licensee may request an extension, if there is good cause, not to exceed 30 additional calendar days. Current law allows for issuance of charges for failure to cooperate with an investigation, but does not include a fine.
3) Granting the disciplining authority the ability to permanently revoke a license in cases of the most egregious offenses. The legislation would amend the Uniform Disciplinary Act, chapter 18.130 RCW to allow a permanent revocation. Permanent revocation would be conditioned on the disciplining authority making a finding that the licensee can never be rehabilitated or can never retain the ability to practice with reasonable skill and safety.
4) Authorizing access to state and federal criminal history information. The legislation would amend the Uniform Disciplinary Act, chapter 18.130 RCW amendments would:
 | Give the secretary clear authority to
receive criminal history information (FBI), including non-conviction data
for licensing and complaint investigations.
| Prohibit further dissemination of
non-conviction information.
| Give the secretary authority to examine
national criminal history information.
| Require criminal justice agencies
(including local law enforcement) to provide the secretary with both
conviction and non-conviction information.
| Add language which would allow the
Washington State Patrol to maintain the department’s designation as a
criminal justice agency. | |
5) Expanding the list of cross-matched crimes. The legislation would amend Restoration of employment rights, Chapter 9.96A RCW and Washington state patrol, Chapter 43.43 RCW, to further protect patient safety. The proposal adds crimes to the list of those now cross-checked quarterly with the Washington State Patrol database. Currently, the quarterly cross match includes assault, all sex crimes, homicide and kidnapping. The proposal adds financial crimes, drug crimes, and all felonies to the quarterly cross match list.
Bonnie King, Director
Health Professions Quality Assurance
Department of Health
PO Box 47860
Olympia, WA 98504-7860
Voice: (360) 236-4995 Fax: (360)236-4626
E-Mail: Bonnie.King@doh.wa.gov
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Olympia, Washington 98504
MANDATORY REPORTING RULES
DRAFT OCTOBER 2007
 | Merge
existing rules to ensure mandatory reporting of unprofessional conduct
covers all professions. Current language is used where possible.
|
Many disciplining authorities have reporting rules that
provide information from the license holder’s workplace. Those rules are good
models.
| Require
license holders to self-report and to report other license holders.
SHB 2974 made this a requirement. |
| Address
stakeholder concerns about when to submit a report. A report is required
when: |
| There
is a determination or finding of unprofessional conduct.
Stakeholders did not want to report rumors and suspicions of
unprofessional conduct. |
| A
license holder’s mental or physical condition poses a risk to patients.
Stakeholders opposed reporting when a practitioner’s mental and
physical condition is being appropriately treated.
Reporting risk to patients is similar to a license holder’s legal
“duty to warn”. |
DRAFT
RULE LANGUAGE:
WAC 246-16-200
Mandatory Reporting of unprofessional conduct and inability to practice
with reasonable skill and safety.
This section establishes mandatory reporting requirements related to health care practitioners who commit unprofessional conduct or who are unable to practice with reasonable skill and safety due to a mental or physical condition. It is not intended to limit reports from any person who has concerns about a license holder’s conduct or ability to practice with reasonable skill and safety.
(1) Definitions. For purposes of this section:
(a) “Approved impaired practitioner or voluntary substance abuse program” means a program authorized by RCW 18.130.175 and approved by a disciplining authority listed in RCW 18.130.040.
(b) “Conviction” means conviction of any gross misdemeanor or felony, and includes all instances in which a plea of guilty or nolo contendere is the basis for the conviction and all proceedings in which the sentence has been deferred or suspended.
(c) “Determination or finding” means a decision by an employer, association, professional review organization, state or federal agency, or court, regardless of whether adverse action or sanction has been imposed and regardless of whether the license holder appeals the decision.
(d) “License holder” means those persons holding a credential in a profession described in RCW 18.130.040(2).
(e) “Unable to practice with reasonable skill and safety due to a mental or physical condition” means a license holder who has been determined by a court to be incompetent or mentally ill, or a license holder who is reasonably likely to cause harm to a patient or client because of a mental or physical condition.
(f) “Unprofessional conduct” includes the acts, conduct, or conditions described in RCW 18.130.180, such as, not limited to:
(i) Conviction of any crime or plea of guilty, whether or not the crime relates
to the license holder’s profession;
(ii) Conduct which leads to dismissal from employment
for cause;
(iii) Conduct which reasonably appears to be a
contributing factor to the death of a patient;
(iv) Conduct which reasonably appears to be a
contributing factor to the harm of a patient that requires medical intervention;
(v) Conduct which reasonably appears to violate
accepted standards of practice and reasonably appears to create a risk of
physical and/or emotional harm to a patient;
(vi) Conduct involving a pattern of repeated acts or
omissions of a similar nature in violation of the standards of practice that
reasonably appears to create a risk to a patient;
(vii) Drug trafficking or diversion;
(viii) Conduct involving the misuse of alcohol,
controlled substances, or legend drugs, whether or not prescribed to the license
holder, where such conduct is related to practice or violates any other drug or
alcohol-related law;
(ix) Conduct involving sexual contact with a patient or
other sexual misconduct;
(x) Conduct involving patient abuse, including
physical, verbal, and emotional;
(xi) Conduct indicating unfitness to practice the
profession or that would diminish the standing of the profession in the eyes of
the public;
(xii) Conduct involving fraud related to the practice;
(xiii) Conduct involving practicing beyond the scope of
the individual's license;
(xiv) Practicing, or offering to practice, without a
valid license, including practicing on a license lapsed for nonpayment of fees;
and
(xv) Violation of a disciplinary sanction imposed on
the license holder’s license by the disciplining authority.
(2) Reports: content and method.
(a) Reports required under this section must be submitted to the department of health. The department will forward the report to the appropriate disciplining authority.
(i) If a patient has been harmed, a report to the department is required and a report to one of the approved impaired practitioner or voluntary substance abuse programs is not a substitute for reporting under this section.
(ii) Reports to a national practitioner data bank do not substitute for meeting the reporting requirement of this section.
(b) Reports should contain the following information, if
known:
(i) The name, address, and telephone number of the
person making the report;
(ii) The name, address, and telephone number(s) of the
license holder being reported;
(iii) The case number of any patient or client whose
treatment is a subject of the report;
(iv) A brief description or summary of the facts which
gave rise to the report, including dates of occurrences;
(v) If court action is involved, the name of the court,
the date of filing, and the docket number; and
(vi) Any further information which would aid in the
evaluation of the report.
(c) All reports required under this section should be submitted as soon as possible, but must be submitted no later than thirty days after a determination is made or actual knowledge is acquired by the person reporting, whichever comes first.
(3) Self Reporting by license holder. Each license holder shall report:
(a) Any conviction, determination, or finding that he or she has committed unprofessional conduct or is unable to practice with reasonable skill and safety due to a mental or physical condition; and
(b) Any determination that he or she is disqualified from participation in the federal Medicare program or the federal Medicaid program.
(4) Reports by a license holder about another license holder.
(a) Every license holder shall report:
(i) Any conviction, determination, or finding that another license holder has committed an act that constitutes unprofessional conduct, and
(ii) Information that indicates another license holder may not be able to practice his or her profession with reasonable skill and safety to consumers as a result of a mental or physical condition.
(b) A license holder is not required to report under this subsection if the reporting license holder:
(i) is part of a professional review organization as provided in subsection (5)(e) of this section;
(ii) is providing health care to the other license holder and the other license holder does not pose a clear and present danger to patients or clients; or
(iii) is part of a federally funded substance abuse program or approved impaired practitioner or voluntary substance abuse program and the other license holder is participating in treatment and does not pose a clear and present danger to patients or clients.
(5) Reports by corporations, organizations and health care facilities.
(a) Professional liability insurance carriers. Every institution or organization providing professional liability insurance directly or indirectly to a license holder shall send a complete report to the department of any malpractice settlement, award, or payment in excess of twenty thousand dollars as a result of a claim or action for damages alleged to have been caused by an insured license holder’s incompetence or negligence in the practice of the profession. Such institution or organization shall also report the award, settlement, or payment of three or more claims during a twelve-month period as a result of the license holder's alleged incompetence or negligence in the practice of the profession.
(b) Health care institutions. The chief administrator or
executive officer or designee of any hospital or specialty hospital defined in
chapter 70.41 RCW, ambulatory surgery center defined in chapter 70.230 RCW,
childbirth center defined in chapter 18.46 RCW, nursing home defined in chapter
18.51 RCW, chemical dependency treatment programs defined in chapter 70.96A RCW,
drug treatment agency defined in chapter 69.54 RCW, and public and private
mental health treatment agencies defined in RCW 71.05.020, and 71.24.025, shall
report to the department when:
(i) Any license holder’s services
are terminated or are restricted based upon a determination that the license
holder has committed an act which may constitute unprofessional conduct; or
(ii) The license holder may be unable to practice with reasonable skill or
safety to clients by reason of a mental or physical condition.
Reports made by a hospital pursuant to RCW 70.41.210 meet the requirement.
(c) Associations and societies. The president or chief executive officer of any health care profession association or society within this state shall report to the department when the association or society determines that a license holder has committed unprofessional conduct or that the license holder may not be able to practice their profession with reasonable skill and safety to patients or clients as the result of any mental or physical condition. The report required by this section shall be made without regard to whether the license holder appeals, accepts, or acts upon the determination made by the association or society. Notification of appeal shall be included in the report.
(d) Service contractors and insurance carriers.
The executive officer of every insurer and health care service contractor
licensed under title 48 RCW operating in the state of
(e) Professional review organizations.
Unless prohibited by
federal or state law, every peer review committee, quality improvement
committee, or other similarly designated professional review organization
operating within the state of
(i) when it determines that a license holder has committed an act which constitutes unprofessional conduct, including consistent, excessive utilization of any test, treatment, or procedure when the services are clearly not called for under the circumstances in which such services were provided, and
(ii) Information which indicates that the license holder may not be able to practice their profession with reasonable skill and safety to consumers as a result of a mental or physical condition.
Professional review organizations and individual license holders participating in the professional review organization are not required to report during the investigative phase of the professional review organization’s operation if the organization completes the investigation in a timely manner.
(f) The department requests the assistance of the clerk of trial courts within the state to report all professional malpractice judgments and all convictions of the license holder, other than minor traffic violations.
(i) has been determined to have demonstrated his/her incompetence or negligence in the practice of the profession,
(ii) has otherwise committed unprofessional conduct, or
(iii) is unable to practice with reasonable skill and safety to patients or clients.
This request does not supersede any federal or state law.
(6) Immunity. A person is immune from civil liability, whether direct or derivative, for providing information to the department under this section.
(7) Public disclosure.
(a) Mandatory reports shall be exempt from public inspection and copying to the extent permitted under chapter 42.56 RCW.
(b) The identity of a whistleblower is protected as provided in chapter 246-15 WAC.
For the Draft Rules for changes to the Consumers Access to Vision Care (our contact lens law), please click HERE
Go to www.doh.wa.gov and then to Provider Credential Search in the right hand menu. Pick the profession in the drop down box, and fill in the name - you will be able to see if there has been action by the Department since 1998. This will only tell you if the person has a record in Washington State. DOH is working on a system to do more exclusive BG checks. Some persons may have a record that is not known if they were licensed before WA began doing BG checks.
March 25th, 2007
The question asked was "Does a felony conviction automatically disqualify me
for optician licensure?" The official word is Maybe!! The state looks at each
application on an individual basis. The examples were, if it was armed robbery
20 years ago and the person did their time and is clean, yes. If it is a crime
against kids, absolutely not, if it is a felony in healthcare, no. There is a new
law going through right now this session that will make it clear and very specific.
In other words which crimes are acceptable and which ones won't be accepted.
Don't know if it will pass out of committee and what form it will be in and what
words will count.
Hope that answers the question.
March 22nd, 2007
It is time for the biennial adjustment to the allowable fees for searching and duplicating medical records. The current fees are effective through June 30, 2007.
RCW 70.02.010 requires the Department of Health to adjust these fees biennially according to the change in the Consumer Price Index. In addition to adjusting the fees, the department is also proposing an amendment to correct the statutory authority reference from 70.02.010(14) to 70.02.010(15). The subsection number was changed by 2006 legislation (ESSB 6106, Chapter 235, Laws of 2006).
A public hearing will be held April 26, 2007 at 9:00 AM at the Department of Health, 310 Israel Road SE, Room 153, Tumwater, Washington.
You may submit comments via our Rules Comment Web Site at http://www3.doh.wa.gov/policyreview/, or you may mail them to Sherry Thomas, Policy Coordinator, at Department of Health, P.O. Box 47850, Olympia, WA 98504-7850. Comments are due by April 19, 2007.
More details and a copy of the proposed rule amendment are available at the Rules Comment Web Site at the above link.
November 6th, 2006
The vision care consumer assistance act has been in place in the state of Washington for many years.
However, it only passed nationally last year. Our law did not allow for it in this state. Therefore the
Department of Health has suggested some changes to our law to bring it in compliance with the federal law.
The changes are minor, but here is the simple definition of the purposed changes.
1) References that now include plano or non-corrective contact lenses in the law.
2) The definition of an 'initial prescription' and a 'finalized prescription'
3) Release of prescription when verification of insurance coverage is required
4) Release of prescription by electronic means when directed by, or on behalf of the patient
5) The title of this rule will now be 'Initial prescription' for corrective lenses.
6) The prescriber who completes the final follow up and final evaluation MUST provide a copy
of the finalized contact lens prescription to the practitioner who preformed the initial fitting and the
prescriber who performed the initial prescription.
7) Retention of private label contact lens info
8) Verbal explanation must be given to the patient at the time of exam if there are contraindications
to contact lens wear.
Any comments must be received no later that November 27th, 2006 by the Department of Health.
Find out which legislative district you reside in and who your representatives are HERE
October 18th, 2006
FYI
It was asked at fall convention---Since an apprentice optician must
be supervised 100% of the time when doing contact lenses, can they
hand out boxes of contact lenses to a patient when a LDO is not on
the premises?
The answer, according to the DOH is Yes!! Our law says that they must
be supervised 100% of the time when fitting and adjusting contact lenses.
There is no reference for dispensing!
September 6th, 2006
In answer to the concerns raised at spring convention.
August 10th, 2005
Benefits
of OAA
Many
of you ask what is OAA and what does it do for me?
It provides many of the same functions as your state association times 50
states. Although you may not see a
direct benefit, let me try to list some of things I have seen over the years.
The national speakers that we get for our conventions.
You have commented about the new format for Roundtable, that comes from
OAAs direction. Ideas for our
newsletter. Fundraising ideas,
chapter growth ideas, connections with neighboring states.
We have a lobbyist who monitors national legislation, the new contact
lens release bill! There is a new
move about to try and get every state across the country to have at a minimum,
registered opticians if not licensed opticians.
For those of you who are not aware, our college program is in trouble.
We have been able to make contact with an optician in
October 27th, 2003
Your Washington State License must be displayed in plain view of your customers. If you wish for privacy, you may black-out your mailing address.
Alphabet
Soup for the Ophthalmic Industry
AAO
American
Academy of Optometry
AAO
American Academy of
Ophthalmology
ABO
American Board of Opticianry
AOA
American Optometric
Association
BVI
Better Vision Institute
CLAO
Contact Lens Association of
Ophthalmologists
CLI
Contact Lens Institute
CLES
Contact Lens Eyecare
Symposium
COA
Commission on Opticianry
Accreditation
EFOO
Educational Foundation in
Ophthalmic Optics
JCAHPO
Joint Commission on Allied
Health Professionals in
Ophthalmology
NAO
National Academy of Opticians
NCSORB
National Committee of State
Opticianry Regulatory Boards
NCLE
National Contact Lens
Examiners
NFOS
National Federation of
Opticianry Schools
OAA
Opticians Association of
America
VCA
Vision Council of America
It will take time
It will take
commitment
It will take money
·
The patients see
us as professionals, but with formal education, other health care providers will
see us as the professionals we are. As stated before, opticianry is the only
health related job that can be attained other than by going to school. There
must be input from opticians everywhere as to why this change is needed.
·
All interested
parties must meet together. This proposal requires meeting with all interested
and involved parties around the entire state. These will NOT be one time
meetings, rather it can be planned that there will be MANY meetings involved in
submitting this proposal.
·
Feasibility of
the proposal needs to be discussed with all parties, and this includes technical
college representatives. Could such a program be made available to all
interested parties across the state? The question of conquering
geographical/physical barriers should be addressed. Since this would involve the
colleges, what would they have to do to make sure that this could move forward?
It should be kept in mind that if the law is changed, schools must abide by
state law. If the law changes, the school system will change. It should also be
noted that there are now several “on line” opticianry degrees available; for
example, the Charter Oaks State College degree.
·
Meetings must
occur with the Department of Health. Are there any barriers to this new
requirement that they can see and state? It needs to be known if this proposal
impacts the DOH financially, and along with the DOH are there potential impacts
to employers and health care in general?
·
Meetings must
happen with the Department of Labor and Industries. These meetings must be of a
collaborative nature to see what could be done about implementing this change.
·
Meetings must be
held with the optometrists, the ophthalmologists, the chains and any and all
other parties that can be identified. These types of meetings must
include ANY INTERESTED PARTIES.
·
Build and
prepare legislation reflecting what has been learned by meeting with all
interested parties.
How
Long Will This All Take?
Best
estimates range in the area of 8-12 years. This will allow time for all
meetings to occur and all apprentices registered to finish out their allotted
time under the current law.
How
Would This Affect Current License Holders?
Any
legislation would have to include a “grandfather” clause under which all
current license holders would still continue to hold their licenses; basically,
if this law were to pass, all current license holders would be unaffected by
the change. The proposed change would only affect persons wishing to sit for
the LDO exam after the law goes into effect, and not already enrolled as an
apprentice.
How
Much Money Do We Need To Make This Happen?
The best
estimates put the cost of developing this legislation at approximately 50-55
thousand dollars per year for the time noted above, depending on the
rapidity of the process. This amount should cover the cost of a lobbyist and PAC
contributions. We do not need to have all the money in hand to begin the
process! As far as money to fund this project, it is recommended that we should
contact all national organizations, state organizations and the national
federation of opticianry schools to present our mission and to ask for their
financial support. THE AMOUNT NOTED IS A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF THE COSTS OF
ENACTING THIS LEGISLATION.
This proposal, as noted near the beginning of this report, is going to take time, effort and money. Every optician in this state should be informed as to what is being proposed. If it is decided that this project should go forward, all opticians must understand what is being proposed, support the proposal and the outcome. It needs to be said that if we go ahead, every member of the OAW will need to become a “de facto” member of the committee and be prepared to work as needed to