Document Sample
					CERTIFICATION BOARD FOR ALCOHOL AND DRUG PROFESSIONALS MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARING The Certification Board for Alcohol and Drug Professionals convened at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, April 20, 2006, in Room 412, Fourth Floor, State Capitol, Pierre, South Dakota. The purpose of the meeting was to conduct a public hearing on the proposed rules of the board numbered Article 46:33, inclusive, adopted under the authority of SDCL 3634-12. Hearing Officer: Velda Bartel, Pierre, South Dakota. Members of the Board in Attendance: Robert Bogue, Mark Bratt, Dennis Darrington, Kelly Johnson, Patrick Powers, and Kristi Spitzer. Others in Attendance: Tina Nelson, Administrative Officer for the Certification Board. Written Testimony The hearing officer marked and entered into the record six letters which had been received by the hearing officer and the board before the hearing and during the hearing. These letters were received from Billie J. Brewer, BS, PST, CDCT, Yankton, SD; Sue Collins, CITY/COUNTY ALCOHOL REVIEW COMMITTEE, Rapid City, SD; Jami Kuchenbecker, MS, NCC, CDCT, CITY/COUNTY ALCOHOL AND DRUG PROGRAMS, Rapid City, SD; Terrance L. Dosch, Executive Director of the SD Council of Substance Abuse Directors, Inc., Pierre, SD; Melinda Olson, SD Prevention Network, Sioux Falls, SD; Marta Mohr, Ph.D, Killian Community College, Sioux Falls, SD. Oral Testimony Oral testimony of the proposed rules was presented by Melinda Olson, Marta Mohr, Greg Bennett, Capt. Don Johnson, Donna Kenneally, Dodi Hauge, and Ann McLaury. 1. Melinda Olson, (submitted written comments attached Exhibit 5) Her comments pertained to 46:33:05:04 and 46:33:06:05 specifying that prevention specialist be required to take and ethics course specific to prevention and that prevention specialist trainees be supervised by Certified Prevention Specialists and change the contact hours to four hours face to face with four hours being by phone or email. Melinda represents the South Eastern Prevention Resource Center in Sioux Falls SD and has been a certified prevention specialist for 15 years. She included a listing of the SD Prevention Network along with her letter.


These are not the only prevention workers in SD. But is a list of prevention professionals that are at least partially funded by the Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse. This group indicated by the list is in agreement with her comments. 2. Marta Mohr. (submitted written comments attached Exhibit 6) Marta represents Kilian Community College. 46:33:03:02 (1). Would like the board to consider posting all the applications on the state website so a consumer could print off an application instead of sending a letter to the board with a charge of $25 and then having to mail out that application. 46:33:03:02(4) (13) Renewal fee for both the certified counselor and prevention specialist. Believes this fee should be cut in half. 46:33:07:01 in regard to the written exam. Have concerns about the IC&RC written exam. Recommends that the board appoint a task force either among themselves (board) or bring in people to get some hard facts about this exam. She believes it was compromised in Texas and Florida. She believes IC&RC doesn’t have anyone maintaining the exam, nor have a current contract with either a psychomatrician as an expert consultant or a testing company. It’s her understanding that NAADAC and IC&RC are talking about a merger. The NAADAC executive director told her they have submitted an offer but there has been no discussion after that. She advised the board that they NAADAC do contract with a testing company, they have three exams and have three iterations of each of those exams that are tracked by a professional testing company in New York. NAADAC has said that states are coming to them because they have concerns about the IC&RC exam and they are willing to let states access their exam as if they were members. She is concerned that if SD doesn’t have a legally defensible test for counselors it could cause us some problems. Next comment is in the same rule regarding case presentation oral method. It is an IC&RC artifact and would like to take a look at it. Does it do what we want it to? 46:33:05:02 and 03. CCDCII and CCDCIII to be Effective January 1, 2008. Subsectionone deals with courses that a level II or III would need to submit on a transcript. It requires that there be a cultural competency and special population courses. Instead of requiring a special population course she recommends the board leave it as an elective. She feels there needs to be something in the elective category. Finally, is wondering if there is going to be reciprocity between this board and the IHS board?


3. Greg Bennett USD Coalition of Addiction Students. 46:33:05:05 suggests that a bachelor’s recognition trainee also include the five major category of CD specific coursework completed prior to applying for bachelor recognition trainee status. 46:33:05:06 Effective January 1, 2008. Suggests that subsection (a) be split into two separate classes and would like to have the Helping Skills class added. This would bring it to five classes and a total of 15 credits. 4. Capt. Don Johnson, Chemical Dependency Association. Would like to see more in writing on how the classes are going to be accepted, so a student doesn’t go into a class thinking its going to be good because it says alcohol and drug studies then it gets to the board and it doesn’t meet the criteria. Or if that’s not appropriate then put the classes on the website so it’s clear on what is accepted and not. Not specific to any rule. The board presented Captain Johnson with a spreadsheet of approved courses. Capt. Johnson asked if there can be options to those already approved. The board stated they would look at the courses and let an individual know if it meets the criteria or not. 5. Donna Kenneally with the Alcohol and Drug Studies Department at the USD. 46:33:05:02 and 03. Effective January 1, 2008. Generally, these standards were established in 1982 and SD was considered leaders of the time. Donna advised that there is a shift in the field and if SD wants to continue to be leaders in the field we need to step up to the plate and realize that these 12 core functions serve as a good entry level training ground for our substance abuse professionals but the movement is really toward a masters degree in addiction studies. The movement is toward licensure and SD needs to have a graduate degree to have licensure. Donna encouraged the board to move in that direction. 14 states have moved to licensure and it really is on the horizon. IC&RC, NCASE and ATTC are working together to look at curriculum standards for colleges in alcohol and drug coursework. Donna advised there were seven areas of upgraded that need to be considered. (1) research findings and applying that research in alcohol and drug counseling; (2) developing comprehensive client assessment competency; (3) looking at the client population that is much more diverse and complex; (4) match the client to the selected treatment process; (5) evaluating alcohol and drug treatment program effectiveness and outcome; (6) to conduct supervision in all aspects of drug and alcohol treatment; leadership, network and (7) collaboration with other organizations in the community; and developing a professional code of ethics and additional three credit hours.


Board asked for clarification that her comments were directed toward education and that the current core functions were adequate but she was saying we needed to look at moving toward upgrading? Donna indicated this was correct. She also clarified that the additional seven areas she spoke to were based on studies she had read. 6. Dodi Hauge, North East Prevention Center in Watertown. Representing the SD Prevention Network. 46:33:05:04 subsection (e) states professional ethics for the addiction counselor. Dodi stated she is a prevention specialist and have no intent of ever becoming an addiction counselor and would really like to see maybe something rewritten as far as it can be a prevention specific ethics course. 46:33:06:05 Prevention Trainee Specialist supervision. Some of the concerns are that they do not have prevention specialists on staff to supervise a trainee. So the cost to that agency to contract out for that would be burdensome especially when the prevention contracts aren’t that great. Have started the dialogue with the Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse in hopes that they would be able to put some money into a certified prevention specialist contract to then be able to oversee a prevention specialist trainee in their area. So she is requesting that the board look at the contact hours maybe be only four a month and have four over the phone or email. So it would be a little more flexible if they have to travel. 7. Ann McLaury, Student at USD alcohol and drug addiction studies. 46:33:05:06, supports Capt. Doug Bennett’s proposal that the three areas be made into five. Believes its best to have these classes before applying for recognition time but if that’s not possible then there should be more supervision time while the trainee is completing these classes. I would recommend doubling the supervision hours for someone who hasn’t completed these classes. Change it to two contact hours for every ten (46:33:06:01). Respectfully submitted, ___________________________ Velda Bartel Hearing Officer Department of Human Services Adjournment: 11:00 a.m. Attachments: Summary of comments and responses Copies of written comments Exhibits 1-6



Shared By: