Occupational Regulation - Office of the Legislative Auditor

More documents

Recommendations

Info

10 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION Figure 1.1: Organization of Professional and Occupational Regulation: Three Models Several organizational models operate across the country, each with certain strengths and weaknesses. Model 1: Model 2: Model 3: Boards are autonomous. They hire their own staff, make decisions about office location, purchasing, and procedures. Each board receives and investigates complaints and disciplines licensees. Each board is responsible for the preparation, conduct, and grading of examinations or the contracting out of these tasks. Each board sets qualifications for licensing and standards for practice. Boards collect fees and maintain financial records. Board staff prepares and mails applications for licensing and renewal, and answers inquiries from licensees and the public. Boards are autonomous and have decision making authority in many areas. The central agency, however, has greater authority over certain functions. Its powers go beyond housekeeping. For example, board budgets, personnel, and records may be subject to some control by the agency. Complaints, investigations, and adjudicatory hearings may be handled by a central staff, even when boards continue to make final decisions with respect to disciplinary actions. The regulatory system is run by an agency director, commission, or council, with or without the assistance of a board. Where boards do exist, they are strictly advisory. The agency director, commission, or council has final decision making authority on all substantive matters. Boards may be delegated such functions as preparing or approving exams, setting pass/fail points, recommending professional standards, and recommending disciplinary sanctions. SOURCE: Adapted from Benjamin Shimberg and Doug Roederer, with Kara Schmitt, ed., Questions a Legislator Should Ask, (Lexington, KY: The Council on Licensure, Enforcement and Regulation, 1989), 20-21. Models 1, 2, and 3 directly correspond to Shimberg and Roederer’s models A, C, and E, respectively. centralized investigative functions tend to take greater disciplinary actions than those where the investigative functions are left to each independent board. 34 Thus, the researchers observe that, “the hypothesized advantages of centralization may apply for some specialized functions.” 35 34 In Minnesota certain investigative functions are centralized in the Attorney General’s Office. This is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 3. 35 Elizabeth Graddy and Michael B. Nichol, “Structural Reforms and Licensing Board Performance,” (1990): 393-4. They also find that the disciplinary actions of independent boards is strongly and positively related to the number of board-controlled investigators. These findings lead the researchers to the preliminary conclusion that the key to disciplinary action lies less with the institutional arrangement, and more with the amount of resources dedicated to the investigation of complaints.
BACKGROUND 11 Figure 1.2: Perceived Benefits of Autonomous Boards and Central Agencies Autonomous Boards Professional Expertise - Assures appropriate peer review of professional practice standards - Qualified personnel to investigate complaints - Professional perspective of the public interest Administrative Efficiency - Ability to hire staff at the appropriate level and salary - Less bureaucracy - Increased decision making capabilities - Greater visibility to the public and deterrent to potential violators - Public’s perception that there is easier access to the board members - Greater personal ownership of and responsibility for decisions made Insulation from Political Interference - Greater freedom in decision making without political pressure - Better understanding of licensees’ and publics’ concerns Accountability - Better control by executive and legislative checks and balances - Greater control over allocation of funds - Clearer levels of accountability Central Agencies Administrative Efficiency - Consolidation of staff, space, time, and equipment - Capability to hire more professional staff or consultants to assist the boards Coordination - A logical focal point for decisions requiring consideration by executive branch - Provides a comprehensive forum for review and resolution of jurisdictional disputes - Provides executive and legislative branches with a single point for interaction - Better allocation of funds based on overall view of licensing functions - Enhances the coordination of the executive branch’s policies - Development of standard operating procedures, including training - Permits a single point of contact for consumer questions and complaints - Coordinates legislative proposals to identify conflicting positions Oversight - Application of uniform criteria to board decisions that yield increased equity - Serves as an appeal body for board decisions Accountability - Provides greater accountability to the legislature and public - Uniformly implemented policies across all boards - Multi-disciplinary decision making resulting in dispute resolution - Better recruitment, appointment, and orientation of board members - Better control of the agency director by the executive branch - More removal from the pressure of professional lobbyists SOURCE: Kara Schmitt and Benjamin Shimberg, Demystifying Occupational and Professional Regulation: Answers to Questions You May Have Been Afraid to Ask, (Lexington, KY: Council on Licensure, Enforcement and Regulation,1996), 11-12.
Page 1: Occupational Regulation February 19
Page 4 and 5: List of Tables and Figures Page Tab
Page 6 and 7: MINNESOTA OFFICE OF THE LEGISLATIVE
Page 8 and 9: SUMMARY Across the country, several
Page 10 and 11: SUMMARY xiii In addition, there are
Page 12 and 13: SUMMARY xv · Whether the overall c
Page 14 and 15: SUMMARY xvii agency and board staff
Page 16 and 17: SUMMARY xix include nurses, commerc
Page 18 and 19: SUMMARY xxi services unit, an arran
Page 20 and 21: 2 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION process b
Page 22 and 23: 4 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION classes f
Page 24 and 25: 6 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION Most requ
Page 26 and 27: 8 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION that resu
Page 30 and 31: 12 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION Sunrise
Page 32 and 33: 14 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION Sunset l
Page 34 and 35: 16 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION in Figur
Page 36 and 37: 18 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION · Wheth
Page 38 and 39: 20 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION Figure 1
Page 40 and 41: 22 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION The Task
Page 42 and 43: Organization of Occupational Regula
Page 44 and 45: ORGANIZATION OF OCCUPATIONAL REGULA
Page 66 and 67: 50 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION decision
Page 68 and 69: 52 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION Table 3.
Page 72 and 73: 56 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION · Creat
Page 76 and 77: 60 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION Minnesot
Page 78 and 79:
62 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION There ar
Page 80 and 81:
64 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION Table 3.
Page 82 and 83:
66 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION It is im
Page 84 and 85:
68 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION there is
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
72 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION Although
Page 90 and 91:
74 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION professi
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
78 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION occupati
Page 96 and 97:
80 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION ARIZONA
Page 98 and 99:
82 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION Departme
Page 100 and 101:
84 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION WASHINGT
Page 102 and 103:
86 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION Centrali
Page 104 and 105:
88 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION CPA exam
Page 106 and 107:
90 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION board pe
Page 108 and 109:
92 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION NATUROPA
Page 110 and 111:
94 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION The firs
Page 112 and 113:
96 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION re-affir
Page 114 and 115:
98 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION of plumb
Page 116:
100 OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION During
show all

Occupational Regulation - Office of the Legislative Auditor

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?