Oregon's top social worker licensing official asked Governor's top lobbyist for help killing proposal by bipartisan group of representatives to ease chronic social worker shortage
Yep, they can and they should. But if the governor has the agency head's back Dems probably not up to the fight. Will be interesting to see if Dems join with Diehl again in 2025.
More great reporting, Jeff. You're a must-read in state coverage.
Here's my summary: Director Miller sure understands the law of supply and demand. Less of something, you get to charge more. Create a monopoly, you get pricing power.
Licensing decreases supply which increases wages. It is one of the intentions of licensing and licensing requirements. (I know you said the same thing.)
Oregon did away with the Bar exam for attorneys, approved by the Oregon Supreme Court. I don't think Oregon needs more attorneys. I vaguely remember that there was a public defender shortage in Multnomah County and maybe that was why this was done. But I am cynical of Oregon governance and wonder if someone's relative couldn't pass the test.
Anyway, they could do the same for social workers.
Why would social workers need to be licensed anyway? They are not psychiatrists or psychologists etc.
I am a retired attorney. It has been some time since I left the practice of law, but I still track some stories involving the Oregon State Bar.
Oregon has not eliminated the bar exam. What the Oregon State Bar proposed and the Oregon Supreme Court approved was an alternative to the bar exam. Here is how the Oregon State Bar describes the change:
The Supervised Practice Portfolio Examination (SPPE) is a new pathway to becoming a licensed attorney in Oregon in addition to the traditional bar exam.
Approved by the Oregon Supreme Court in November 2023, this new model of exam will allow applicants to work in supervised apprenticeship settings following graduation from law school. They would then submit a portfolio of work to be examined by the Oregon Board of Bar Examiners (BBX) for admission to the OSB. This assessment will be an option for graduates of ABA-accredited law schools beginning in May 2024.
In developing the SPPE, the Board of Bar Examiners examined other jurisdictions that offer multiple licensure pathways. The foremost guiding principle in development has been to ensure that the new examinations protect legal consumers by adequately measuring applicants’ competence to practice law while not placing unnecessary or inequitable barriers to licensure.
The OSB will continue to offer the Oregon Bar Exam, which will allow applicants to receive a portable Uniform Bar Exam (UBE) score accepted in other jurisdictions.
The National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE), which administers the Uniform Bar Exam in conjunction with the OSB, is in the process creating a “NextGen Bar Exam.” The new exam will also place greater emphasis on practical skills testing to effectively and equitably assess the competence of bar applicants. The Oregon Board of Bar Examiners expects to recommend to the Oregon Supreme Court that Oregon be one of the first jurisdictions to offer the NextGen Bar Exam in July 2026. The NCBE will then transition to the new model over a three-year phase-in period. More information is available at https://nextgenbarexam.ncbex.org.
This is how one legal news outlet appraised the development:
Bloomberg Law
March 26, 2024
ANALYSIS: Why Oregon’s Bar Exam Alternative Could Gain Momentum
Oregon’s new Supervised Practice Portfolio Examination (SPPE), which will allow ABA-accredited law school graduates to join the state’s bar by completing a legal apprenticeship instead of taking the bar exam, could serve as a model for other states as scrutiny of the current bar exam mounts. Although the bar exam itself is facing an overhaul in 2026, Oregon’s apprenticeship alternative appears poised in the near term to strengthen real-world lawyering skills—skills that recently surveyed lawyers are finding lacking among new practitioners.
The SPPE, authorized by the Oregon Supreme Court last fall and set to become operative in May, mandates that applicants for bar entry complete a 675-hour apprenticeship under a qualified supervising Oregon-licensed attorney. Two of the SPPE’s prerequisites involve leading “at least 2 initial client interviews or client counseling sessions” and “at least 2 negotiations.”
These requirements directly address competencies that early-career lawyers appear to need more proficiency in: client advising and leadership skills.
Since we're living in a post-George Floyd America, some in the legal establishment looked beyond mere business necessities when justifying the change. The dean of one of Oregon's three law schools saw the reform as a way of offsetting privilege:
"I also talk about how the exam is one of privilege—it favors those who don’t have to work, those who don’t have families to care for, those who have the time to put in because of their life circumstances, and perhaps some candidates even have a job that is paying for their bar prep program and a living stipend. I will also talk about the cost of the bar exam, which is separately funded from or separately financed through bar loans rather than through education loans. Most people are really surprised to hear that."
"I have a slide that I use that calculates what I think of as the total cost of the bar exam. It includes your bar provider, the lost wages because of the time you take away from working, the exam fee, character and fitness, the investigation, the laptop fee, then the living expense cost of waiting for the score. I calculate sitting for one bar exam at around $29,400. That often changes people’s minds!"
Changing subjects, social workers are licensed for many of the same reasons that psychologists and psychiatrists are. That's apparent from the National Association of Social Workers' description of what clinical social workers do:
Clinical Social Work
Clinical social work is a specialty practice area of social work which focuses on the assessment, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of mental illness, emotional, and other behavioral disturbances. Individual, group and family therapy are common treatment modalities. Social workers who provide these services are required to be licensed or certified at the clinical level in their state of practice.
Clinical social workers perform services in a variety of settings including private practice, hospitals, community mental health, primary care, and agencies. NASW advocates for clinical social workers through the legislative and regulatory process.
The bar exam is fine. It tests whether people have a fairly wide range of legal knowledge. It also tests whether people are committed enough to practicing law that they'll basically extend their law school career by two months to study for and take the bar exam right after their third year. It is no more inequitable than having people attend law school, which I presume the dean of the law school very much wants people to keep doing. The apprenticeship stuff is not a substitute for the bar. It might be fine, but I assume, given the state of things, there will be cheating.
Just more evidence that the law and Legislature have next to nothing to do with how the State operates. They can, however, find ways of spending other people's money and negating Capitalism in all its forms. It seems even bipartisanship can't cut through the power binge.
The governor appoints the BLSW board. If the board and staff (Miller) don't like something, they tell the gov to oppose it. If gov opposes it, it usually becomes a no-go for Democrats. Democrats control the legislature. Repeat.
Most professional programs have standardize their curriculum nationally; licensing compacts are now routine. Miller's objection ( is he an MSW, PhD SW ?) is more about turf protection, dog in the manger action than any justifiable public protection. As to their efficiency my experience with other state boards has not been impressive and so while I can't reliably say the BLSW would be that is the way I'd bet. personally I think Mr. Miller needs to be invited to seek employment elsewhere. As an aside I suspect one of the reasons for a lack of MSW's in Oregon is the expense of living coupled with the dismal re-imbursement for services by Medicaid in Oregon.
The LSCW Board has a staff of six. In 2022, there were 1,168 applicants. This means each staff member would be responsible for processing about 194 applications per year. With 365 days in a year, this isn’t a staff shortage issue; it’s an incompetence issue. It’s not unreasonable to expect each staff member to process at least one application per day in a timely manner.
I imagine given my 2 years at the OHA reviewing licenses myself that their system to enter information is outdated and sluggish, designed by IT personnel (or oracle Jk) who aren’t social workers at the State of Oregon who prioritize capturing every possible data point in the event we may need that information later Most of this information is irrelevant and never used, serving only to waste time and complicate the process.
It’s offensive that people have to wait six months for their license. This delay isn’t just about waiting; it’s about not being able to work, pay off student loans, or support their families. Furthermore it’s even more appalling the inefficiencies extend to processing ethics complaints. It can take up to a year to process these complaints, allowing social workers who harm their clients or engage in misconduct to continue practicing for a bonus year.
In 2022, only 39 ethics complaints were processed, which seems low given that social workers, like any other professionals, are not immune to committing infractions. In fact, i would argue social workers are more crime ridden given the amount of “recovering people” who become social worker and let’s be honest we’ve seen how recovery leaders and advocates can go “hood” faster than a person can finish the serenity prayer, if they aren’t monitored. If they say they are being thorough they are not, I had close contact to them and their are just inefficient compounded by endless Zoom meetings, exacerbate these delays.
Lastly here are some more complaints about the social work board.
1. Nobody answers the phone you can never get a hold or someone to answer questions with their cryptic application process
2. The board’s requirements for continuing education can be seen as burdensome, particularly the specific stipulations for different statuses and the need for documentation upload, which must be meticulously followed to avoid penalties
3. Over the top requirements which isn’t a good thing when PSU cranks out hundreds of social workers each year who in my opinion aren’t qualified to do the work.
4. The make up of LCSW is 90% white which is not representative of the population of Oregon and creates a gap in services serving communities of color and this board has not implemented processes that are empowering or inclusive.
5. I knew a native women who was once denied by this board because she didn’t list her one and only non violent crime from her adjudicated record as a juvenile and they said she isn’t trustworthy if she hide this which I think comes back to my main point that this board is incompetent
The legislators should not cave to the back channel attempts. They can limit the agency power however they like.
Yep, they can and they should. But if the governor has the agency head's back Dems probably not up to the fight. Will be interesting to see if Dems join with Diehl again in 2025.
More great reporting, Jeff. You're a must-read in state coverage.
Here's my summary: Director Miller sure understands the law of supply and demand. Less of something, you get to charge more. Create a monopoly, you get pricing power.
A guiding principle of Oregon politics.
Thanks, Richard! Professional licensure is part racket - lawyers included!
Exactly!
Licensing decreases supply which increases wages. It is one of the intentions of licensing and licensing requirements. (I know you said the same thing.)
Oregon did away with the Bar exam for attorneys, approved by the Oregon Supreme Court. I don't think Oregon needs more attorneys. I vaguely remember that there was a public defender shortage in Multnomah County and maybe that was why this was done. But I am cynical of Oregon governance and wonder if someone's relative couldn't pass the test.
Anyway, they could do the same for social workers.
Why would social workers need to be licensed anyway? They are not psychiatrists or psychologists etc.
I am a retired attorney. It has been some time since I left the practice of law, but I still track some stories involving the Oregon State Bar.
Oregon has not eliminated the bar exam. What the Oregon State Bar proposed and the Oregon Supreme Court approved was an alternative to the bar exam. Here is how the Oregon State Bar describes the change:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supervised Practice Portfolio Examination (SPPE)
The Supervised Practice Portfolio Examination (SPPE) is a new pathway to becoming a licensed attorney in Oregon in addition to the traditional bar exam.
Approved by the Oregon Supreme Court in November 2023, this new model of exam will allow applicants to work in supervised apprenticeship settings following graduation from law school. They would then submit a portfolio of work to be examined by the Oregon Board of Bar Examiners (BBX) for admission to the OSB. This assessment will be an option for graduates of ABA-accredited law schools beginning in May 2024.
In developing the SPPE, the Board of Bar Examiners examined other jurisdictions that offer multiple licensure pathways. The foremost guiding principle in development has been to ensure that the new examinations protect legal consumers by adequately measuring applicants’ competence to practice law while not placing unnecessary or inequitable barriers to licensure.
Please see SPPE Resources for further information. https://www.osbar.org/sppe/resources.html
Uniform Bar Exam
The OSB will continue to offer the Oregon Bar Exam, which will allow applicants to receive a portable Uniform Bar Exam (UBE) score accepted in other jurisdictions.
The National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE), which administers the Uniform Bar Exam in conjunction with the OSB, is in the process creating a “NextGen Bar Exam.” The new exam will also place greater emphasis on practical skills testing to effectively and equitably assess the competence of bar applicants. The Oregon Board of Bar Examiners expects to recommend to the Oregon Supreme Court that Oregon be one of the first jurisdictions to offer the NextGen Bar Exam in July 2026. The NCBE will then transition to the new model over a three-year phase-in period. More information is available at https://nextgenbarexam.ncbex.org.
https://www.osbar.org/sppe
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is how one legal news outlet appraised the development:
Bloomberg Law
March 26, 2024
ANALYSIS: Why Oregon’s Bar Exam Alternative Could Gain Momentum
Oregon’s new Supervised Practice Portfolio Examination (SPPE), which will allow ABA-accredited law school graduates to join the state’s bar by completing a legal apprenticeship instead of taking the bar exam, could serve as a model for other states as scrutiny of the current bar exam mounts. Although the bar exam itself is facing an overhaul in 2026, Oregon’s apprenticeship alternative appears poised in the near term to strengthen real-world lawyering skills—skills that recently surveyed lawyers are finding lacking among new practitioners.
The SPPE, authorized by the Oregon Supreme Court last fall and set to become operative in May, mandates that applicants for bar entry complete a 675-hour apprenticeship under a qualified supervising Oregon-licensed attorney. Two of the SPPE’s prerequisites involve leading “at least 2 initial client interviews or client counseling sessions” and “at least 2 negotiations.”
These requirements directly address competencies that early-career lawyers appear to need more proficiency in: client advising and leadership skills.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/bloomberg-law-analysis/analysis-why-oregons-bar-exam-alternative-could-gain-momentum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since we're living in a post-George Floyd America, some in the legal establishment looked beyond mere business necessities when justifying the change. The dean of one of Oregon's three law schools saw the reform as a way of offsetting privilege:
"I also talk about how the exam is one of privilege—it favors those who don’t have to work, those who don’t have families to care for, those who have the time to put in because of their life circumstances, and perhaps some candidates even have a job that is paying for their bar prep program and a living stipend. I will also talk about the cost of the bar exam, which is separately funded from or separately financed through bar loans rather than through education loans. Most people are really surprised to hear that."
"I have a slide that I use that calculates what I think of as the total cost of the bar exam. It includes your bar provider, the lost wages because of the time you take away from working, the exam fee, character and fitness, the investigation, the laptop fee, then the living expense cost of waiting for the score. I calculate sitting for one bar exam at around $29,400. That often changes people’s minds!"
https://clp.law.harvard.edu/knowledge-hub/magazine/issues/rethinking-licensure/new-practice-pathways/
Changing subjects, social workers are licensed for many of the same reasons that psychologists and psychiatrists are. That's apparent from the National Association of Social Workers' description of what clinical social workers do:
Clinical Social Work
Clinical social work is a specialty practice area of social work which focuses on the assessment, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of mental illness, emotional, and other behavioral disturbances. Individual, group and family therapy are common treatment modalities. Social workers who provide these services are required to be licensed or certified at the clinical level in their state of practice.
Clinical social workers perform services in a variety of settings including private practice, hospitals, community mental health, primary care, and agencies. NASW advocates for clinical social workers through the legislative and regulatory process.
https://www.socialworkers.org/Practice/Clinical-Social-Work
The bar exam is fine. It tests whether people have a fairly wide range of legal knowledge. It also tests whether people are committed enough to practicing law that they'll basically extend their law school career by two months to study for and take the bar exam right after their third year. It is no more inequitable than having people attend law school, which I presume the dean of the law school very much wants people to keep doing. The apprenticeship stuff is not a substitute for the bar. It might be fine, but I assume, given the state of things, there will be cheating.
Just more evidence that the law and Legislature have next to nothing to do with how the State operates. They can, however, find ways of spending other people's money and negating Capitalism in all its forms. It seems even bipartisanship can't cut through the power binge.
The governor appoints the BLSW board. If the board and staff (Miller) don't like something, they tell the gov to oppose it. If gov opposes it, it usually becomes a no-go for Democrats. Democrats control the legislature. Repeat.
Most professional programs have standardize their curriculum nationally; licensing compacts are now routine. Miller's objection ( is he an MSW, PhD SW ?) is more about turf protection, dog in the manger action than any justifiable public protection. As to their efficiency my experience with other state boards has not been impressive and so while I can't reliably say the BLSW would be that is the way I'd bet. personally I think Mr. Miller needs to be invited to seek employment elsewhere. As an aside I suspect one of the reasons for a lack of MSW's in Oregon is the expense of living coupled with the dismal re-imbursement for services by Medicaid in Oregon.
Miller's tone regarding the legislators (dismissive) is why I initially wanted to write about this.
Certainly is stunning Seems obvious Miller considers himself both highly and untouchable
who is "ray miller", and what are his qualifications for the position he serves?
He is attuned to threats to his bureaucratic fiefdom?
The LSCW Board has a staff of six. In 2022, there were 1,168 applicants. This means each staff member would be responsible for processing about 194 applications per year. With 365 days in a year, this isn’t a staff shortage issue; it’s an incompetence issue. It’s not unreasonable to expect each staff member to process at least one application per day in a timely manner.
I imagine given my 2 years at the OHA reviewing licenses myself that their system to enter information is outdated and sluggish, designed by IT personnel (or oracle Jk) who aren’t social workers at the State of Oregon who prioritize capturing every possible data point in the event we may need that information later Most of this information is irrelevant and never used, serving only to waste time and complicate the process.
It’s offensive that people have to wait six months for their license. This delay isn’t just about waiting; it’s about not being able to work, pay off student loans, or support their families. Furthermore it’s even more appalling the inefficiencies extend to processing ethics complaints. It can take up to a year to process these complaints, allowing social workers who harm their clients or engage in misconduct to continue practicing for a bonus year.
In 2022, only 39 ethics complaints were processed, which seems low given that social workers, like any other professionals, are not immune to committing infractions. In fact, i would argue social workers are more crime ridden given the amount of “recovering people” who become social worker and let’s be honest we’ve seen how recovery leaders and advocates can go “hood” faster than a person can finish the serenity prayer, if they aren’t monitored. If they say they are being thorough they are not, I had close contact to them and their are just inefficient compounded by endless Zoom meetings, exacerbate these delays.
Lastly here are some more complaints about the social work board.
1. Nobody answers the phone you can never get a hold or someone to answer questions with their cryptic application process
2. The board’s requirements for continuing education can be seen as burdensome, particularly the specific stipulations for different statuses and the need for documentation upload, which must be meticulously followed to avoid penalties
3. Over the top requirements which isn’t a good thing when PSU cranks out hundreds of social workers each year who in my opinion aren’t qualified to do the work.
4. The make up of LCSW is 90% white which is not representative of the population of Oregon and creates a gap in services serving communities of color and this board has not implemented processes that are empowering or inclusive.
5. I knew a native women who was once denied by this board because she didn’t list her one and only non violent crime from her adjudicated record as a juvenile and they said she isn’t trustworthy if she hide this which I think comes back to my main point that this board is incompetent