volume 28, number 1 • January/February 2018

Congratulations to Jennifer Henkel, director of member services. She recently earned the designation of Certified Associ-ation Executive (CAE) from the American Society of Association Executives (ASAE). The CAE is the highest professional credential in the asso-ciation industry. The CAE program is accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agen-cies (NCCA). Henkel is one of 24 association executives in Virginia to have earned the credential in the Winter class of 2018, joining more than 4,200 association profes-sionals who hold the CAE creden-tial nationwide.

To earn the credential, Henkel had to complete a minimum of 100 hours of specialized professional development, pass a stringent exam in association management, and pledge to uphold a code of ethics. To apply for the CAE program, individuals must have a minimum of three years of experience in nonprofit organization manage-ment. To maintain the certification, Henkel will have to pursue ongoing professional development and

activities in nonprofit and association management. Henkel’s CAE certification is effective through December 2020.

“Jennifer completed a rigorous program to earn the CAE designa-tion,” said CEO Mary Jo Monahan, “and ASWB is proud of her accomplishment.” The association’s culture

of learning encourages all staff to identify professional development goals to achieve annually. ASWB’s Education and Training Services department plans an annual all-staff training focused on increasing knowledge of working at ASWB. Education subsidies are available to full-time staff members for degree attainment in accordance with government guidelines. In addition, the association may pay for rele-vant continuing education courses to ensure staff maintain their licensure as well as increase skills and broaden knowledge. “ASWB makes an investment in our staff by contributing to their professional development,” Monahan said. “Staff thrive from the enrichment, and in turn they make ASWB even more respected, influential, and organizationally strong.”

Investing in staffJennifer Henkel was

among 141 professionals in the Winter Class of 2018 to earn the

Certified Association Executive credential

volume 28, number 1 • January/February 2018

Au revoir, but not good-bye

RICHARD SILVER, legal counsel to the Québec Order, announced his retirement, effective

March 31. He writes that his last day in the office was February 20. He sent thanks to his colleagues on the administrators list serve: “I have many happy memories of our time together at Spring Meetings and Delegate Assemblies, committee meetings, training sessions … . Your participation on the adminis-trators’ listserve (hats off to ASWB for this great service) has also been extremely beneficial to the Order and me professionally.” RICHARD will be missed at ASWB. He has made so many contributions, as member of the Board of Directors, chair and facilitator of the New Board Member Training (NBMT) program, Membership Task Force chair, and speaker at many educa-tion conferences—to name but a few. He has accepted reappointment as Membership Task Force chair and will facilitate NBMT through 2018, so it’s not good-bye, but au revoir!

*****

association asides

Send all news and pictures to Jayne Wood,

newsletter editor, at jwood@aswb.org or

call Jayne at 800.225.6880, ext. 3075.

Under construction…at last

After being stopped for months by regulatory red tape, ASWB was given the green light to start clearing land at the new headquarters site. DWIGHT HYMANS has been reported to have been seen doing a “happy dance.”

*****

Oversight panel members David Aiken (FL), Amanda Duffy Randall (NE), Bynia Reed (MD), and Nancy Sidell (PA) accept service awards at the dinner in Culpeper. Not shown: Monica Roth Day (MN), who was stranded in Atlanta because of snow.

As new exams launch, a time to celebrate

The Exam Development depart-ment celebrated the launch of the new exams in January by holding a party for staff complete with sweet treats. The party coincided with a meeting of exam development volunteers and item development consultants, who were at ASWB offices to review the next set of tests to be released this spring. Following the staff party, LAVINA HARLESS, exam development director, hosted a dinner to honor the work of the item development consultants, who served as an oversight panel throughout the three-year process of updating the exams to reflect current social work practice.

Secretary Carson in Kentucky

JANICE JAMES of Kentucky led a tour of the Hope Center, where she is deputy director, for Ben Carson, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Carson was in Lexington to tour transitional housing and discuss homeless prevention with nonprofits. JANICE writes, “Secretary Carson was very kind in his interactions with clients and staff. His ultimate goal is for every individual and family to achieve success.”

volume 28, number 1 • January/February 2018

The ASWB Board of Directors met in person on Sunday, January 28, at the Loew’s Coronado Bay Resort Hotel in Coronado, California, in conjunction with the Federation of Associations of Regulatory Boards (FARB) Forum. Here is a recap of the activities of the Board at those meetings.

Treasurer’s report: Board members received the Treasur-er’s report, accepted financial statements through November 30, 2017, and reviewed statements from ASWB’s short- and long-term investment accounts through November 30, 2017.

Board members were informed that ASWB’s line of credit was accessed in December, with plans to repay it in first quarter 2018. Board members requested reports on annual expenses related to legal fees and other operational expenses related to processing applications.

Board members approved changes to carriers for ASWB’s group term life and long-term disability insurance.

Staff presented a construction update about the new headquarters project since November 2017.

Strategic discussions: Board members participated in strategic discussions about the following subjects.

CEO succession plan. Board members reviewed and approved the CEO succession planning policy developed by the Succession Planning Task Force.

ASWB Foundation Task Force report. Board members approved recommendations of the Foun-dation Task Force to: continue to explore collaboration with the Regulatory Healthcare CEO group, move regulatory research functions within ASWB and suspend activ-ities of the Foundation, propose amendments to the Foundation bylaws to ensure compliance and consistency with ASWB bylaws for adoption at the May Board meeting, and conclude the work of the task force with additional meet-ings in 2018.

Plan for strategic planning. Board members received a report from ASWB’s president and CEO about the strategic planning process and approved the recommendation to contract with Tecker International, LLC, to serve as ASWB’s strategic planning consultant.

Annual Meeting of the Delegate Assembly evaluations and discus-sion. The Board reviewed the eval-uation comments from attendees at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Delegate Assembly. In response to member feedback, the Board of Directors discussed the

Your board in actionA summary of the work

of ASWB’s Board of Directors at its

January 28, 2018, meeting in

Coronado, California

© 2018, Association of Social Work Boards www.aswb.org

nominations and voting process. Options for the Board of Directors are to 1) express their concerns to the Bylaws Committee and have the committee suggest changes to the nominations process, or 2) make a proposal to the Bylaws Committee to amend the Bylaws.

Executive session: The Board entered executive session to discuss nomination processes and ratified the decisions made in session to appoint a subcommittee of Board members to evaluate the nomination process.

Review and adjustment of strategy: The Board reviewed the president’s report and the 2018 Education Conference agenda. The Board approved: funding for up to seven staff members and up to seven board members of ASWB member boards to attend the Education Conference, requiring that two of the member board members funded must be public members; Chicago, Illinois, as the location for the 2020 Education Conference; the theme of the 2019 Education Conference as “Educating and Partnering on Legislation and Regulation”; the CEO job description; 2018 committee appointment list and committee charges; the 2018 CEO and operational goals; and the 2018 Board governance goals as amended.

Policy updates: The Board reviewed and approved updates to the ASWB Policy Manual with the exception of a new policy on virtual meetings, which is to be revised by staff and reintroduced at the May Board meeting.

Ongoing Board business:

Approval of minutes. The Board approved the minutes of the November 16 and 18, 2017, Board of Directors meetings in Atlanta, Georgia. The Board approved the minutes of the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Delegate Assembly.

Confirmation of decisions made in email meetings. The Board confirmed the decisions made in an email meeting conducted on November 29, 2017.

Consent agenda: Reports approved via consent agenda included: the CEO leadership report, the Chief Operating Officer’s report, a summary of the Mobility Task Force’s accom-plishments, and the Examination Services report. The Examination Services report will continue to be included in the consent agenda.

Committee, Task Force, and Meeting reports: The Board received a report about ASWB participation at the CSWE Round-table in December.

Board Meeting Evaluation. The Board was asked to complete a self-evaluation of the Board meeting by February 4, 2018.

Executive session: The Board entered executive session to discuss exam issues and ratified the deci-sions made in session.

volume 28, number 1 • January/February 2018

Modular, agile, mobile-friendlyLaunched in 2004, the custom software behind the Social Work Registry served as the underpin-nings of ASWB’s first foray into application processing. Because of ASWB’s experience with the Registry software, the association was ready to hit the ground running with application processing for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Board of Registration of Social Workers in 2005. ASWB added online applications for Massachu-setts in 2016, and began processing preapprovals for the Utah Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing in 2014.

In November 2017, ASWB began processing preapprovals—giving applicants permission to take the ASWB social work licensing exams—on behalf of a third ASWB member, the Colorado State Board of Social Work Examiners. While the existing software offered Colorado a workable solution, ASWB opted to invest in the future of its contract services—and the success of its members—by building a new suite of software from the bottom up.

Work that had previously been done by a seasoned contractor needed to come in-house, in order to turn around the solution fast enough. ASWB’s IT department, steered by IT Director Dan Sheehan, expanded to include

three additional programmers and a project manager. The last new IT staff reported for duty in June 2017, and the software for Colorado was completed within four months.

“We started with the application on the Colorado board’s website,” says IT project manager Robert Adach, “and we built the system based on that.” In addition to letting social workers apply online for preap-proval, the software provides the Colorado board with a portal that lets board staff track application processing. Color-coded design makes it easy for them to see which applications are completed (green), which are pending (yellow), and which need attention from the board before they are ready to be preapproved (red).

The new system is responsive, meaning that the software scales well from desktop computers to mobile devices. This design makes it easier for board staff to review progress from any device, and for applicants to complete an online application even if they do not have ready access to a desktop or laptop computer.

“The state needed zero training to acclimate to and use the portal,” says Contract Services Senior Manager Dave Ryczko. “Processing is fluid, and we’ve had no complaints or problems

With the customized software, preapprovals

for Colorado applicants average 14.35 days from

application completion to exam approval

© 2018, Association of Social Work Boards www.aswb.org

from Colorado staff or applicants.” ASWB has processed more than 129 preapproval applications since the association launched the new software and began taking phone calls on behalf of the Colorado board. The average time from completed application to preap-proval is less than 15 days—14.35, to be exact, Ryczko says.

The front and back end of the new software was designed to be flex-ible. “We can add questions to the application if Colorado wants us to, or modify the existing questions with minimal impact to the end users,” says Adach. That flexibility isn’t limited to the application content, either. “We can continue to expand the base of the system, which is modular,” he continued. This modular approach means that ASWB can develop specialized components and implement them without affecting existing func-tions. “With the base that we’ve built,” Adach says, “once we have the application process require-ments, we can turn around a basic customized approval process for social work boards within six to twelve weeks.”

Now that Colorado’s preapproval is up and running, Adach’s team is turning their attention to other ASWB software systems. They anticipate moving existing contracts over to the updated software within the next 12 to 18 months. “The system allows us to provide data in whatever format the board needs,” Adach says, making it easy for social work boards to monitor the progress of their applicants.

“Colorado, for us, was the proof of concept that this approach works,” says Adach. Ryczko adds that by handling preapproval, ASWB simplifies the work of the Colorado board, because “they don’t need to handle an application until the

applicant has already passed the exam.”

“Whenever ASWB can help our members with their administrative work,” says Jennifer Henkel, director of member services, “we are happy to step up and offer a solution that works for them.” With social work practice mobility on the horizon, the new software brings ASWB’s software development full circle. “The original Registry software made contract services feasible for ASWB,” says Henkel, “and now that we’ve got this new modular approach in place, we can build the new Registry software within that same framework when we begin updating it later this year.”

volume 28, number 1 • January/February 2018

By Dale Atkinson, Partner,

Atkinson & Atkinson

Dale Atkinson is a partner with the Illinois law firm that is counsel

to ASWB. He is also executive director of the Federation of

Associations of Regulatory Boards (FARB).

The political and legal climates are promoting challenges to the state-based regulatory systems to which “we” are all accustomed. (Defining the “we” is critical to this discussion and will be addressed below.) Politicians are introducing legislation intended to address “barriers” to entry into a profession or occupation and citing these barriers as thwarting economic growth. Examples of regulated occupations that politicians cite as unnecessary or that contain exces-sive criteria to entry are often used to paint all regulated professions with the same brush as unnecessary or anti-competitive.

Lawyers are now emboldened by the 2015 United States Supreme Court decision in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission. Based on this judicial decision, lawyers are challenging state-based regulation of the professions under the antitrust laws. In fact, since that decision, more than 25 cases have been filed challenging regulatory structures under antitrust theories. The simple basis for such legal challenges involves the fact that licensees (referred to by the Supreme Court as “active market participants”) are unable or cannot be trusted to act in the best interest of the public when undertaking their regulatory responsibilities.

This form of “self-regulation” has prompted the current climate and triggered a review of regulation in general. In addition, states are reacting to the opinion by creating state government oversight to enhance or preserve defenses to antitrust claims.

As regulators—not social workers, not licensees with a vested interest in protecting their own turf—state board members should welcome this intense scrutiny and embrace the fact that regulation must be justified. The first and most fundamental question that must be asked is: Why is government involved in regulation? Some may quickly opine that the answer is public protection. While accurate, there is much more to government regulation of the professions. An in-depth discussion as to govern-ment involvement is missing from the debate. Indeed, the need for government regulation, which was once presumed when duly enacted through legislative action, has now shifted to a presumption that government regulation is not needed and whose existence must be justified to continue to exist.

This shift in presumptions involves both an economic approach to regulation and a legal approach to the responsible party respon-sible for carrying the burden of

A look at the current regulatory climate

© 2018, Association of Social Work Boards www.aswb.org

proof. Rather than focus on the need for public protection, the current climate emphasizes on economic factors. In short, the government-imposed need for education, entry-level competence testing, applications, licensure fees, renewals, and continuing education may not be an efficient approach to public protection. Under some circumstances, advocates of dereg-ulation question whether public harm is even at stake. Where there is no or little potential for public harm, why should government be involved? In other circumstances, advocates will question the eligi-bility criteria for licensure. Why do applicants for licensure in certain occupations need thousands of hours of education? Critics compare the education criteria for one occupation to other occupa-tions and use such discrepancies as a basis for challenge. These approaches ignore the rights of the states to make such determina-tions—a right fundamental to the United States Constitution.

Others argue that the approach should be left to the consumer to enforce; that is, “buyer beware.” Some would rather leave decisions to the consumer and rely upon a “Yelp” approach to consumer choice. Consumers can research the professional(s) and self-determine what choice makes sense. In the event of harm, consumers can enforce their rights through a liti-gious approach.

Further, a strict economic approach is also being propounded by advo-cates. This market-driven approach attempts to use studies to illustrate the economic impact of regulation. These economic studies are used to identify the barriers to becoming licensed and how regulation keeps

persons interested in entering the market from actually realizing their employment potential. Layered into these arguments are questions about whether regulation of a particular occupation is necessary to protect the public. While there are numerous articles from libertarian-based organizations that argue the economic indicators, recent research establishes that state-based licensure actually provides criteria to increase access to jobs for minorities.

As a reaction to these deregulation efforts, numerous options are being promoted, ranging from deregula-tion to modifications of how states regulate. Deregulation simply removes government from the equation and places responsibility on the consumers and the private sector. Such an approach will stimulate private-sector certification programs, which may or may not promote consumer and public protection. Modifications to how states regulate include efforts to consolidate boards for economic efficiencies, combine boards to remove the influence that active market participants have on decision-making, or departmen-talize regulation under a bureaucracy that places decision-making in state bureau-crats. Keep in mind that changes in law encompass both state and federal proposed legislative initiatives. Under some theories, the effect on interstate commerce justifies federalization of licensure of the professions and occupations.

One such federal effort currently in committee, the Restoring Board Immunity Act (referred to as the RBI Act) involves providing state boards with immunization from antitrust liability in exchange for

state oversight and the creation of private causes of action for persons who wish to challenge the regulatory scheme. Under the RBI Act, legal challenges related to the scope of board authority may result in a shifting of the burden to require the board to substantiate its existence in the interest of public protection, rather than requiring the plaintiff to prove inappropriate government action. The legal theory requires heightened scrutiny from a rational basis to interme-diate scrutiny. This increases the burden on government when the need for regulation is challenged.

Returning to the theme of this article, why is government involved in the regulation of the professions? This fundamental question will provide social work boards and board members with a basis for continued justification for state-based regulation. State boards should have a mission statement that accurately describes the basis for board existence, and this state-ment should be front and center on their website. Board members should have their “elevator speech” prepared so that they can easily and consistently articulate this perspective. These mission state-ments and elevator speeches can provide a unified message and set forth the basis for regulation of the profession.

Elements of the mission statement should include the involvement of government through legislatively enacted statutes. These statutes will set forth the intent of the legislature, the scope of practice, the criteria for licensure and the delegated authority of enforce-ment. Enforcement encompasses licensure, renewal, investigations, administrative prosecutions, and

© 2018, Association of Social Work Boards www.aswb.org

board operations. Through the promulgation of rules/regulation, boards, through expertise of board members, add specificity to the laws. Expertise on boards is necessary to provide an efficient means of enforcing laws related to a specific profession and eliminate the need for expert testimony. In short, the regulation of the profes-sion is premised on government actions that can be uniformly applied.

Equally important, and not mentioned often enough, is the administrative structure in place to provide a mechanism for consumers harmed by licensees (or unlicensed persons engaging in practice). This administrative prosecution functions similarly to a criminal justice system. On

behalf of the citizens of the specific jurisdiction, the board administra-tively prosecutes respondents and, if determined necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, administers sanctions. These sanctions can range from removal of licensure to letters of reprimand. Administrative prosecu-tions are pursued at no cost to the complainant and are intended to protect society as a whole.

This article merely scratches the surface of what constitutes govern-ment regulation and why it exists. Boards of social work are encour-aged to reflect upon these issues and develop talking points to antic-ipate political and legal scrutiny.

volume 28, number 1 • January/February 2018

Member Services helps boards through customized research

Recently, David Hamilton, exec-utive secretary of the New York State Board for Social Work, was working with his board to prepare for its triennial review. When he found he needed information about exemptions to licensure requirements, he turned to ASWB’s Member Services department. To place New York in a larger regula-tory context, he requested a review of regulations across U.S. jurisdic-tions to better inform his board’s work. Cara Sanner, ASWB member services specialist, responded by researching the various types of exemptions provided for in U.S. social work regulations.

The report Sanner produced for New York’s board identifies and presents every exemption found in U.S. social work regulations. “Even as states introduced social work licensing requirements to promote public protection and ensure minimum competency for social work practitioners,” the report explains, “exemptions were also adopted to allow selected groups of individuals to practice without a license.” Sanner presented the information using tables, allowing Hamilton to easily see how his state’s exemptions compare to those of other jurisdictions. The pertinent regulatory language of each of the 54 jurisdictions Sanner

reviewed is also included in the report, making it equally useful to other members with similar concerns.

Sanner is ready to provide research support to any member board, just as she responded to the New York board. “Often,” says Sanner, “… an issue has come before a board and there isn’t precedent, or board staff are evaluating or developing policy, regulation, or license require-ments.” She says member boards ask for help with research when they have been asked to explore, respond to, or provide support for a legislative effort.

“Topics typically center on license requirements or jurisdictional poli-cies for specific aspects of regu-lation,” Sanner says. “And then there are ‘hot button’ issues that arise for which input is requested.” She says regulators often want to know how others are responding to a challenge. Some recent topics she has researched for members and other stakeholders include how jurisdictions process applications, the use of background checks of licensure candidates, licensing fees charged by each jurisdiction, and regulations that pertain to elec-tronic practice (telehealth).

Sanner begins her research process by consulting the resources at her

ASWB has been providing dedicated research

support since 2011 in response to the growing

need for information requested by social work

regulatory boards and other stakeholders—

among them the National Association of Social

Workers (NASW), which partners with boards to

assist with legislative advocacy efforts

© 2018, Association of Social Work Boards www.aswb.org

disposal, including ASWB’s laws and regs database. “Sometimes,” she says, “… comprehensive research has been performed in the recent past that I can refer to. By ‘comprehensive’ I mean the issue has been reviewed for every state and province.”

Most of Sanner’s research is focused on regulation, but some issues are not covered. In those cases, she reaches out to staff of member jurisdictions, typically administrators, for input by sending an inquiry through the administra-tors’ list serve or contacting them directly. “Typically there is enough variety in responses that it gives the requestor a good representa-tion of how other jurisdictions are handling or responding to an issue,” she says. Sanner also has access to Lexis Advance, a legal research tool, through which she can search sources including stat-utes and legislation, administrative code and regulations, administra-tive and agency materials, and legal cases.

“As Cara has said, regulatory research at ASWB includes more than just research based on written regulations,” agrees Jennifer Henkel, director of member services. “Member input from the list serve and staff expertise from years of meeting with board members are also incorporated. This creates a broad-lens perspec-tive through which ASWB staff view and synthesize information. Member boards benefit from the diversity of perspectives and experience so they are supported in making informed decisions.”

Research support and other resources The process of initiating a research request is simple. “Members can feel free to email or call,” Sanner says. “If the information is already available, the turnaround time is quick, just a couple days,” says Sanner. If research is needed, it can take from two to six weeks, depending on the topic and Sanner’s existing workload. When responding to requests, Sanner provides comprehensive documentation and presents information in table format, which helps make the data easily understandable.

Members will find other resources to help them on the ASWB website’s publications page. References include publications about preparing for a sunset review and guidelines for disciplinary actions, as well as the regulatory and practice standards for technology and social work practice published by ASWB and the National Association of Social Workers (NASW), respectively.

Information sheets on topics such as the importance of licensure and regulation and board structure best practices provide talking points that boards can use when responding to their stakeholders, including legis-lators, social work practitioners, educators, and the public. Members can request talking points on other topics by emailing Jennifer Henkel.

An administrators’ list serve allows board staff to ask their peers directly about how they have faced challenges. When topics of broad interest are addressed, Sanner often compiles the thread into a report that is available upon request. To join the list serve, administrators or their staff can contact Cara Sanner, email group administrator.

When boards and their administrators need more specialized help, Member Services staff are also available for phone consultation or to submit letters to legislatures in support of regulation. In addition, Henkel, Chief Operating Officer Dwight Hymans, and CEO Mary Jo Monahan are available to visit boards.

volume 28, number 1 • January/February 2018

Social work regulators were well represented at the 2018 FARB Forum in sunny Coronado, California, according to Jennifer Henkel, director of member services, who was a participant this year and provides this report. All 11 members of the ASWB Board of Directors took part; their January meeting is scheduled to coincide with the annual forum hosted by the Federation of Associations of Regulatory Boards (FARB). In addition, ASWB member board members from Arizona, Arkansas, District of Columbia, Louisiana, Minnesota, Ohio, and British Columbia were there, too.

The three-and-a-half-day event focused on the latest trends in professional regulation, centering on the topics of deregulation, anti-trust issues, and new legislation.

FTC and regulatory boards share values

The first presentation of the conference was from Tara Koslov, acting director of the Office of Public Policy at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). She was the epitome of grace under fire as several regulators took aim. She began her presentation with an illustration of the shared values between the FTC and regulatory boards. Koslov also offered helpful information about how to engage with the FTC, including seeking its input to proposed legislative changes.

FARB Forum continues to enlightenGreat networking, new

information, some surprising

perspectives, and more

© 2018, Association of Social Work Boards www.aswb.org

Licensing is good for women, minorities, safety, and income

Beth Redbird, Ph.D., was the next presenter. She was funny, bright, and engaging throughout a research-driven presentation. If you have not yet had the opportunity to read her findings on the positive effects of licensure, you should. Redbird’s sociological research findings defy the existing beliefs held by economists.

Executive orders, new legislation impacting regulation, and top regulatory cases

As you all are aware, regulation is under a political microscope. Three different sessions were dedicated to highlighting what is happening now. Presentations by attorneys Jennifer Semko of Baker & McKenzie and by Amy Richardson and Dale Atkinson of Atkinson & Atkinson illustrated what we know, need to know, and are learning.

There is hope!

Joel Albizo, president of FARB, provided a wonderful presentation on use of effective marketing to support regulatory efforts. One suggestion: Think about use of social media as a way of driving a positive conversation about occu-pational licensure and regulation.

Special topics of interests to the daily running of your boards

Robin Jenkins, executive director of the Washington, D.C., Board of Social Work, and Panravee Vong-jaroenrat, assistant general counsel for the D.C. Department of Health, presented on open records. This was a truly enlightening session and a reminder to all: Follow the rules! The other interesting presen-tation was by Mai Lin Noffke, an attorney with Atkinson & Atkinson, about website accessibility. Is your website ADA compliant? It should be; if it’s not, you may be at risk.

And then

Working group sessions were also held to explore board structure, practice mobility, and interstate cross-professional communication. Participants also took part in a mock board meeting.

FARB's mission is to advance excellence in regulation of the professions in the interest of public protection. The annual forum pres-ents an opportunity for members of regulatory boards to learn about best practices for administering state regulatory boards as well as insights about the latest regulatory trends. ASWB is a governing member of FARB.

volume 28, number 1 • January/February 2018

Since the passage of Resolution 2017-1 and the Mobility Strategy at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Delegate Assembly, ASWB staff have begun helping member boards understand their Mobility readiness and providing them with the tools they need to complete the four tasks of the resolution. Every board received two copies of the Mobility book, ASWB Member Readiness for Mobility, in January with their dues statement. Delegates had already received a copy of the Mobility book when they arrived at the annual meeting last year. “We had quite a few requests for extra copies to be sent to each board,” said Jennifer Henkel, director of member services. “Delegates thought the information provided a global overview that would be helpful for administrators as they looked for commonalities between jurisdictions.”

To further assist members in completing the resolution tasks, ASWB is currently creating a jurisdiction-specific Mobility worksheet for the regulatory boards in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Each individualized fill-able PDF puts in one document all the information ASWB has about the jurisdiction and the information

the jurisdiction needs to provide to complete the four resolution tasks. Once jurisdictions have filled out and returned the worksheets, their work to complete the resolution tasks is done, and they will be ready to dig in for the implementa-tion phase.

The worksheets include resources to help administrators and boards take the next step toward prac-tice mobility by showing where consistency and inconsistencies exist between jurisdictional stan-dards and the Mobility Strategy standards and essential criteria. Member boards can further eval-uate their readiness for Mobility by reviewing other jurisdictional resources, including practice acts, regulations, policy manuals, knowledge of staff and board members, and clarification from legal representatives.

“The purpose of completing the resolution tasks is to establish the baseline for determining how all ASWB members can participate in the Mobility initiative,” said Henkel. “We know that some jurisdictions will have exceptions to the Mobility Strategy standards. By completing the tasks, members will determine barriers that truly exist due to statutory limitations, as opposed to barriers that are

Mobility worksheet simplifies resolution tasks

Once jurisdictions have filled out and returned the worksheets, their work to

complete the resolution tasks is done and they will

be ready to dig in for the implementation phase

© 2018, Association of Social Work Boards www.aswb.org

perceived but may easily be over-come because they are procedural only.” Individual jurisdictional concerns or roadblocks can be evaluated, and ASWB will develop more resources as needed to help members offer greater practice mobility within their jurisdictions.

“This is a huge step in moving forward with Mobility,” Henkel continued. “ASWB members’ voices were heard when they adopted the resolution. Their vote demonstrated that social work practice mobility is a priority. We are committed to moving forward together with next steps.”

As the Mobility initiative continues to move forward, ASWB staff will use the information gathered to support members as they work toward implementation. Mobility readiness will be the focus of this

year’s ASWB Education Confer-ence “Developing Tools for Social Work Mobility,” May 17–19, in Halifax, Nova Scotia. The meeting will provide an opportunity for members to talk about strategies, gain awareness of legal issues that might surface, and learn about resources available from ASWB and other members.

One way that ASWB remains committed to its mission of supporting the social work regu-latory community is by helping its members implement common-sense solutions to the challenges posed by the physical and virtual mobility of social workers who practice in multiple jurisdictions. The Mobility worksheets will help simplify and clarify the next steps for both member boards and ASWB staff.

Registration now open

for the ASWB Education

Conference

volume 28, number 1 • January/February 2018

We are just into the first few months of 2018, but the ASWB executive staff and the Board of Directors are already planning for our organization’s future. I’m excited to share with you that I am faithfully working with the exec-utive staff and leading the Board of Directors in one of our most important responsibilities of 2018: strategic planning. We anticipate that our collective labor, activities, and involvement with our many stakeholders will produce a stra-tegic plan that will guide us into a social work regulatory future filled with many new opportunities.

Strategic planning is an important pursuit for our membership, volunteers, staff, and Board of Directors. It engages each group in a process that is vital to the success of ASWB by focusing each important cadre on defining our purpose, mission, and vision and laying out the road map of how we will achieve the organization’s goals. By entering the strategic planning process, ASWB will develop new directions and a path for our continued success as a top regulatory organization.

Each of us has experienced being pulled away from our long-range plans and objectives because of day-to-day activities or working on a task that requires our immediate

attention. This dynamic is true for organizations, too. A strategic plan identifies our high-priority, long-range objectives and keeps them in front of those of us working on behalf of the organization so that we can refocus and stay on track to accomplish them.

For some, the anticipation of change and planning for the future invokes anxiety. To those people I would share a quote by Walter Anderson that I adhere to: “Nothing diminishes anxiety faster than action.” I have great antici-pation that our united, purposeful action as we enter a process of strategic planning will result in outlining many opportunities for our organization’s future.

ASWB has in place a strong mission and vision, as well as a current strategic plan. That plan culminates, however, at the end of 2018. As we implement the process to design our new strategic plan, I want to assure you that ASWB leadership is committed to engaging membership in the process. Doing anything less would limit the meaningfulness of the document and plan.

You should anticipate that the ASWB Board of Directors, executive management, and other facilitators will engage ASWB

Timothy M. Brown, MSW, LCSW, ACSW ASWB President 

Anticipation: ASWB begins strategic planning

© 2018, Association of Social Work Boards www.aswb.org

staff, volunteers, and other stake-holders in meaningful activities to help us develop a rich and dynamic strategic plan. Interviews with members of other regulatory organizations and other social work organizations will inform our work, as will consultations with member boards, including focus groups during the 2018 ASWB Education Conference.

I have great anticipation that when ASWB reaches out, those of you who are invited to contribute ideas, share experiences, and offer insight into future needs will partici-pate fully in strategic planning activities to achieve this essential common goal for ASWB. From our endeavors, I am anticipating a great strategic plan that will guide ASWB into our future.

volume 28, number 1 • January/February 2018

An amazing two-day training titled “Race Inside and Outside the Therapy Room,” took place recently in Charlottesville, Virginia, as part of the ongoing effort to help heal Charlottesville after the events of August 12, 2017. The training was organized by a former colleague of mine, Gene Cash Jr., LCSW, who is the founder and executive director of the Coun-seling Alliance of Virginia (CAVA).

Four white ASWB staff—CEO Mary Jo Monahan; Jan Fitts, education and training services senior manager; Lisa Casler Haun, manager of continuing competence; and I, all social workers—had the privilege of attending the second day of the event, which focused on creating “a beloved community for supporting and sustaining those who are actively and passionately committed to social justice work.”

Why did I highlight white? Because race matters, and partici-pants were encouraged to identify their races clearly and deliberately as part of being “challenged to explore their respective racial selves, including how racial

socialization, biases, blind spots, and triggers may impede their ability to fully participate in mean-ingful race-centered interactions” in an experiential learning environ-ment. The training was challenging and potentially offensive.

The presenter and keynote speaker was Kenneth V. Hardy, Ph.D. Dr. Hardy currently serves as a professor at Drexel University in the couples and family therapy department. He is an internation-ally recognized clinician, author, and trainer. It is fair to say that Dr. Hardy does not pull any punches. He speaks truth and is not afraid to bring intensity into the room. If you spent time in that training and did not have an emotional reaction, then you were not paying attention.

Exploring white privilege in all its variety, including how it appears consciously, subconsciously, and unconsciously was especially enlightening to me. The training intended to teach community awareness related to cultural humility, diversity, inclusion, and sensitivity. For me individually, I felt challenged to be more aware

Race! “Outside” of Therapy—Racial Sensitivity

Jennifer Henkel, LCSW, CAE

director of member services

Discussions of

diversity, inclusivity, race, and inquiry

© 2018, Association of Social Work Boards www.aswb.org

and responsible for joining ongoing conversations. Dr. Hardy gave participants rules to have those tough conversations. There was one set of rules for the “subjugator” and one set for the “subjugated.” What a telling way to introduce those rules and that dynamic.

As a social worker, mother, friend, citizen, and human, I was troubled by the events of August 12, 2017, in Charlottesville. I have lived in the Charlottesville area for 18 years. I worked as an intensive in-home therapist for 11 of those years. I have served families in many neighborhoods of Charlottes-ville. I have had the opportunity to meet and know people of different socioeconomic backgrounds, religions, races, education levels, and professions. The events in August surprised me. However, those events also challenged me to open my eyes. I began taking a more intentional look at race in my community. I attended several community meetings, prayer services, and coffee dates to try to make sense of it all. That mission has yet to be accomplished.

As an employee of ASWB, I felt strongly that we needed to do something. Culpeper, where our headquarters is located, is 44 miles from the park where the events occurred. How could we sit by on our hands and do nothing? ASWB’s mission is “to strengthen protection of the public by providing support and services to the social work regula-tory community to advance safe,

competent, and ethical practices.” I felt that there must be something we could do that was in line with ASWB’s mission and an appro-priate response to the events in Charlottesville and the subsequent national conversation. However, the something eluded me.

M. Jenise Comer, past president of ASWB, challenged all of us to address diversity during her pres-ident’s report at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Delegate Assembly:

The reality is, diversity matters. It is included in our code of ethics and cannot be minimized. …. Progressive organizations are making a corporate commitment to diversity. … As we engage in strategic planning next year, I will encourage ASWB to develop a comprehensive commitment to diversity.

Jenise’s comments resonated with me. Maybe this was the “some-thing” that ASWB could do.

An ASWB value is “respect” (the ‘R’ in Raise, as Mary Jo likes to say). “Respect: Embracing commonalities and differences in regulatory practice.” Is that defini-tion the same thing as embracing diversity? Does that value speak at all about race? Perhaps the ‘A’ makes more sense: “Account-ability: Operating responsibly toward members, professionals, and the public.” Does operating responsibly charge us with being more intentional regarding race?

“Integrity”… “Service”… “Excel-lence”: Do any of these words truly illustrate our values. Perhaps they all do, and perhaps none do—because this topic is not in line with regulation. Perhaps regulation does not discriminate based on race; but unfortunately, racism still exists.

I am happy to discuss at length with anyone interested more of what I learned and of what I am learning. However, I am now wondering, “What is ASWB’s organizational responsibility?” Do we have one?

Diversity, inclusivity, and race will be a part of the discussion in the new strategic plan. What are your thoughts? What would you like to see happen in this association, given our mission and values? The ASWB Board of Directors and staff will be focusing on this topic, but our members’ input is vital. Together we need to create a vision that embraces all our diverse values.

From the editor: This article is the first of a series titled “Discussions of diversity, inclusivity, race, and inquiry” that will run in association news through 2018. We welcome your comments and encourage your participation. Submissions will be published in future issues. Please send your comments to: jwood@aswb.org.