The Pharmacy Law provides for the licensure and regulation of pharmacists and pharmacy technicians by the California State Board of Pharmacy. Existing law authorizes the California State Board of Pharmacy to issue a pharmacy technician license to an individual if that individual is a high school graduate or possesses a general educational development certificate equivalent and has obtained an associates degree in pharmacy technology, completed a specified course of training, graduated from a specified school of pharmacy, or is certified by the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board.

This bill would substitute for the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board a pharmacy technician certifying organization offering a pharmacy technician certification program accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies that is approved by the California State Board of Pharmacy.

The Pharmacy Law provides for the licensure and regulation of pharmacists and pharmacy technicians by the California State Board of Pharmacy. Existing law authorizes the California State Board of Pharmacy to issue a pharmacy technician license to an individual if that individual is a high school graduate or possesses a general educational development certificate equivalent and has obtained an associates degree in pharmacy technology, completed a specified course of training, graduated from a specified school of pharmacy, or is certified by the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board.

This bill would substitute for the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board a pharmacy technician certifying organization offering a pharmacy technician certification program accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies that is approved by the California State Board of Pharmacy.

The Pharmacy Law provides for the licensure and regulation of pharmacists and pharmacy technicians by the California State Board of Pharmacy. Existing law authorizes the California State Board of Pharmacy to issue a pharmacy technician license to an individual if that individual is a high school graduate or possesses a general educational development certificate equivalent and has obtained an associates degree in pharmacy technology, completed a specified course of training, graduated from a specified school of pharmacy, or is certified by the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board.

This bill would substitute for the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board a pharmacy technician certifying organization offering a pharmacy technician certification program accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies that is approved by the California State Board of Pharmacy.

Date of Hearing: June 29, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 952

Author:(Anderson) – As Introduced Ver:February 4, 2016

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill, for purposes of meeting requirements for pharmacy technician licensure:

1. Deletes a reference to a specific certifying entity.
2. Allows for additional entities to provide certification that meets the board's licensure standards, by allowing licensure requirements to be met if an applicant is certified by any accredited organization approved by the Board of Pharmacy (Board), as specified.

FISCAL EFFECT:

The Board will incur a one-time cost of $75,000 for an occupational analysis and additional implementation work (Pharmacy Board Contingent Fund). An occupational analysis is required to ensure that examinations intended for the pharmacy technician program are psychometrically sound. The Board would also need to update forms and to promulgate regulations.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. This bill would expand the number of pharmacy technician certification programs that could be recognized by the Board for licensing and strike from existing law specific reference to the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board, instead referencing accredited certifying organizations approved by the Board. The author explains this will give pharmacy technicians more flexibility in terms of testing locations and ensuring healthy competition among certifying entities.
2. Related Legislation. AB 2331 (Dababneh) adds an additional license exam option for purposes of dental licensure.

Analysis Prepared by: Lisa Murawski / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: June 14, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS

Rudy Salas, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 952

Author:(Anderson) – As Introduced Ver:February 4, 2016

SENATE VOTE: 39-0

SUBJECT: Pharmacy technicians: licensure requirements

SUMMARY: Expands the number of pharmacy technician certification programs that may be recognized for pharmacy technician licensure by the Board of Pharmacy (Board).

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the Board within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) to regulate the practice of pharmacy and to administer and enforce the Pharmacy Law. (Business and Professions Code (BPC) 4000, et seq.)
2. Defines a pharmacy technician as an individual who assists a pharmacist in a pharmacy in the performance of his or her pharmacy related duties. (BPC Section 4038)
3. Authorizes the Board to issue a pharmacy technician license to an individual if he or she is a high school graduate or possesses a general educational development certificate equivalent, and meets any one of the following requirements:
   1. Has obtained an associate’s degree in pharmacy technology;
   2. Has completed a course of training specified by the Board;
   3. Has graduated from a school of pharmacy recognized by the Board; or,
   4. Is certified by the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board (PTCB). (BPC Section 4202)
4. Authorizes a pharmacy technician to perform packaging, manipulative, repetitive, or other nondiscretionary tasks only while assisting, and while under the direct supervision and control of, a pharmacist, who is responsible for the duties performed under his or her supervision by a technician and may not supervise more than two pharmacy technicians at any time, expect as specified. (BPC Section 4115)
5. Requires the Board to ensure that every licensing examination administered by or pursuant to contract with the Board is subject to periodic evaluation. The evaluation must include:
   1. A description of the occupational analysis (OA) serving as the basis for the examination;
   2. Sufficient item analysis data to permit a psychometric evaluation of the items;
   3. An assessment of the appropriateness of prerequisites for admittance to the examination; and,
   4. An estimate of the costs and personnel required to perform these functions. (BPC Section 139)
6. The evaluation of licensing examination must be revised whenever, in the judgment of the Board, there is a substantial change in the examination or the prerequisites for admittance to the examination. (BPC Section 139)

THIS BILL:

Permits a pharmacy technician applicant to attain certification at any pharmacy technician certification program approved by the Board and accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies (NCCA).

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Committee on Appropriations, this bill will result in one-time costs of $75,000 for the Board to conduct an OA and adopt regulations (Pharmacy Board Contingent Fund).

COMMENTS:

Purpose. This bill would expand the number of pharmacy technician certification programs that could be recognized by the Board for licensing and strike from existing law specific reference to the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board, instead referencing accredited certifying organizations approved by the Board.

According to the author, “[This bill] allows the [Board] to approve any accredited certifying organization and thereby allow that organization to administer a pharmacy technician certification program as a pathway to licensure in California. This will give pharmacy technicians more flexibility in terms of testing locations. In addition, because the [Exam for the Certification of Pharmacy Technicians (ExCPT)] is less expensive, pharmacy technicians will have the benefits of consumer choice. Finally, the bill will eliminate a statutory monopoly and allow a free market for any reputable certifying organizations.”

Background. Under current law, applicants for licensure as a pharmacy technician must have a high-school diploma or general educational development certificate and also meet one of four requirements: 1) possess an associate’s degree in pharmacy technology; 2) have completed a course of training specified by the Board; 3) have graduated from a school of pharmacy; or, 4) be certified by the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board. When the current licensing requirements were adopted, the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board was the only national certification program. Today, the National Healthcareer Association also offers certification for pharmacy technicians.

Office of Professional Examination Services (OPES). Licensing boards and bureaus in this state are required to ensure that national examination programs selected for use in the licensure process comply with psychometric and legal standards. The Board requested that OPES review the PTCE and the ExCPT to determine whether to include the ExCPT as a route to certification. According to the OPES, the Texas Board of Pharmacy conducted a similar review to assess the state’s professional guidelines and technical standards. This review included: 1) occupational analyses; 2) examination development; 3) passing scores; 4) test administration; 5) examination performance; and, 6) test security procedures.

When the OPES requested a copy of this review, the OPES determined that both exams met the professional guidelines and technical standards outlined in the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing and BPC Section 139. However, upon further review of the examinations by a panel of subject matter experts (SMEs), i.e. pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, questions were raised about using these examinations as a route to certification in California. The range of skills used by pharmacy technicians can vary greatly by location and practice setting. Although the ExCPT covered a broader range of retail and hospital setting responsibilities, PTCE covered more in-patient skills. As a result, neither panel could recommend either exam without condition.

OPES recommended that the Board commission an OA so that either or both examinations could be recommended. The Board has indicated that it intends to do an OA to evaluate the ExCPT, but argues that each OA is costly. The Board also argues that the cost of an occupational analysis and updates to the Board’s regulations, as estimated by the Senate Committee on Appropriations, would take several years to recoup.

Current Related Legislation. SB 1193 (Hill) of the current Legislative Session extends the sunset date for the Board and is executive officer until 2021. STATUS: This bill will be heard in the Assembly Committee on Business and Professions on June 28, 2016.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:

The National Healthcareer Association writes in support, “NHA has been working diligently to give pharmacy technicians in California a choice of which exam to take in order to obtain their license. The ExCPT is a less expensive but more thorough exam…. In addition, because NHA contracts with a different testing facility than PTCB, passage of [this bill] would effectively double the number of testing locations in California, thereby making it easier for applicants to access the exam facilities most convenient to their homes or workplaces. SB 952 will allow greater access and opportunity for pharmacy technicians to obtain licensure in California, and will give them a much needed choice in terms of vendors. Moreover, [this bill] would open up competition to any other vendors that meet with Board approval.”

The National Association of Chain Drug Stores (NACDS) and the California Retailers Association (CRA) write in support, “NACDS and CRA members support efforts to allow alternative training programs. [This bill] would allow for flexible and alternative pathways to becoming a pharmacy technician. We encourage legislators to expand the options for technicians to meet the certification requirements by completing a program accredited by the [NCCA].”

The California Council for the Advancement of Pharmacy writes in support, “…[the Board’s] Licensing Committee acknowledged that based upon an extensive review by the states [OPES] that the PTCB exam, and the exam given by the National Healthcare Association (ExCPT) are equivalent in testing of knowledge and skill levels for pharmacy technicians. CCAP contends that competition amongst the examination organizations will keep them focused, innovative and foster the best all-around examination.”

The California State Board of Pharmacy writes in support, “… [this bill] would specify that an individual may be certified by a pharmacy technician certifying organization offering a pharmacy technician certification program that is accredited by the [NCCA] and that is approved by the Board.”

IMPLEMENTATION ISSUE(S):

This bill strikes references to a single offering of an examination and existing law requires an OA of every examination required. As such, the Board already has authority to conduct the OA and any examination it offers. Therefore, as previously stated in the Senate Committee on Business, Professions, and Economic Development analysis, the Board should conduct an OA, or work with potential examination vendors to conduct the OA, before it accepts any new examinations as a path towards certification.

REGISTERED SUPPORT:

National Healthcareer Association (sponsor)

National Association of Chain Drug Stores

California Council for the Advancement of Pharmacy

California Retailers Association

California State Board of Pharmacy

REGISTERED OPPOSITION:

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Gabby Nepomuceno / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 952

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE BUS, PROF. & ECON. DEV. COMMITTEE: 9-0, 4/4/16

AYES: Hill, Bates, Berryhill, Block, Galgiani, Hernandez, Jackson, Mendoza, Wieckowski

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 4/18/16

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, De León, Hill, Mendoza, Nielsen

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: National Healthcareer Association

DIGEST: This bill expands the number of pharmacy technician certification programs that may be recognized toward pharmacy technician licensure by the Board of Pharmacy (BOP).

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the BOP to regulate the practice of pharmacy and to administer and enforce the Pharmacy Law. (Business and Professions Code (BPC) Sections 4000 et seq.)
2. Defines a pharmacy technician as an individual who assists a pharmacist in a pharmacy in the performance of his or her pharmacy related duties.
   (BPC § 4038)
3. Authorizes the BOP to issue a pharmacy technician license to an individual if he or she is a high school graduate or possesses a general educational development certificate equivalent, and meets any one of the following requirements: (BPC § 4202)
   1. Has obtained an associate’s degree in pharmacy technology;
   2. Has completed a course of training specified by the BOP;
   3. Has graduated from a school of pharmacy recognized by the BOP; or,
   4. Is certified by the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board (PTCB).
      
4. Authorizes a pharmacy technician to perform packaging, manipulative, repetitive, or other nondiscretionary tasks only while assisting, and while under the direct supervision and control of, a pharmacist. The pharmacist shall be responsible for the duties performed under his or her supervision by a technician, and a pharmacist may not supervise more than two pharmacy technicians at any time, expect as specified. (BPC § 4115)
5. Requires the BOP to ensure that every licensing examination administered by or pursuant to contract with the BOP is subject to periodic evaluation. The evaluation shall include: (a) a description of the occupational analysis serving as the basis for the examination; (b) sufficient item analysis data to permit a psychometric evaluation of the items; (c) an assessment of the appropriateness of prerequisites for admittance to the examination; and (d) an estimate of the costs and personnel required to perform these functions. The evaluation shall be revised whenever, in the judgment of the BOP, there is a substantial change in the examination or the prerequisites for admittance to the examination.
   (BPC § 139)

This bill:

1. Permits a pharmacy technician applicant to attain certification at any pharmacy technician certification program approved by the BOP and accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies (NCCA). 
2. Makes a technical change.

Background

Pharmacy technicians are licensed by the BOP to perform nondiscretionary tasks under the direct supervision of a pharmacist. The BOP allows four pathways to become a pharmacy technician, one of which is to take the Pharmacy Technician Certification Exam (PTCE) and become certified by the PTCB.

This bill is sponsored by the National Healthcareer Association, a competing certification association to PTCB. Both certification entities are accredited by the NCCA, which accredits programs that certify individuals in a range of healthcare and non-healthcare roles.

Current law requires every licensing exam used by a board to be evaluated for legitimacy. Among other requirements, the evaluation must include an occupational analysis, which establishes which skills to be tested. This is particularly important for pharmacy technicians because there are different requirements depending on where they practice. However, there is no California occupational analysis for a pharmacy technician.

At the BOP’s request, the Department of Consumer Affairs’ Office of Professional Examination Services (OPES) evaluated the PTCE and the Exam for the Certification of Pharmacy Technicians (ExCPT) in 2014. The lack of an occupational analysis was an impediment to a decisive review. OPES writes, “A consistent issue with this examination review project was to attempt to reach consensus among practicing pharmacists and pharmacy technicians regarding the specific level of task and knowledge proficiency required for licensure/certification.” OPES ultimately concluded that because of the disagreements about universal threshold skills, “…it was not possible for either [subject matter expert] group to give either examination an unqualified endorsement.” OPES found that the ExCPT covered a broader range of retail and hospital setting responsibilities, but PTCB covered more inpatient skills. Of particular concern is that OPEC also found that PTCE covered skills outside of a pharmacy technician’s scope of practice.

OPES recommended that the BOP commission an occupational analysis so that either or both exams could be recommended. However, it does not appear that the BOP is planning to conduct such an analysis. The BOP argues that it is not required to do one because neither test are the BOP’s own examination, nor is certification by examination the only route to licensure. Further, the BOP argues that it does not have the financial or personnel resources and does not believe that such a study would add value to the BOP’s existing knowledge about the exams.

This bill will allow the BOP to approve any certification program accredited by NCCA toward pharmacy technician licensure. However, the BOP should conduct an occupational analysis and any other steps necessary to be in full statutory compliance with its current exam and prior to approving any additional programs.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill will have one-time costs of $75,000 for the BOP to conduct an occupational analysis and adopt regulations (Pharmacy Board Contingent Fund).

SUPPORT: (Verified 4/19/16)

National Healthcareer Association (source)

California Retailers Association

National Association of Chain Drug Stores

Rite Aid Corporation

OPPOSITION: (Verified 4/19/16)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The NHA writes, “Both NHA and PTCB are accredited by the same well-respected accrediting body (NCCA), which ensures an objective third party assessment of program governance psychometric soundness and exam administration and security. Each must reapply for accreditation every
5 years, and must make annual reports during the accreditation period.

“Currently, NHA’s ExCPT exam is recognized in virtually all the states that require or encourage certification for pharmacy technicians. There are only a handful of states that still give an exclusive monopoly to PTCB in this area.”

“…NHA has been working diligently to give pharmacy technicians in California a choice of which exam to take in order to obtain their license. The ExCPT is a less expensive but more thorough exam. Specifically, the ExCPT exam fee is only $105, compared to the $129 fee for the PTCE. And the ExCPT contains 120 questions, compared to the PTCE’s 90 questions. (The ExCPT allows an additional 10 minutes to complete the test.) In addition, because NHA contracts with a different testing facility than PTCB, passage of SB 952 would effectively double the number of testing locations in California, thereby making it easier for applicants to access the exam facilities most convenient to their homes or workplaces.

“…SB 952 will allow greater access and opportunity for pharmacy technicians to obtain licensure in California, and will give them a much needed choice in terms of vendors. Moreover, SB 952 would open up competition to any other vendors that meet with Board approval. Open competition always inures to the benefit of the consumer.”

Prepared by:

4/20/16 15:58:15

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

SB 952 (Anderson) - Pharmacy technicians: licensure requirements

This bill does not meet the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

SB 952 would expand the number of pharmacy technician certification programs that could be recognized by the Board of Pharmacy for licensing pharmacy technicians.

Fiscal Impact:

One-time costs of $75,000 for the Board of Pharmacy to conduct an occupational analysis and adopt regulations (Pharmacy Board Contingent Fund).

Background:

Under current law, applicants for licensure as a pharmacy technician must have a high-school diploma or general educational development certificate and also meet one of four requirements: possess an associate’s degree in pharmacy technology, have completed a course of training specified by the Board of Pharmacy, have graduated from a school of pharmacy, or be certified by the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board.

When the current licensing requirements were adopted, the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board was the only national certification program. Today, the National Healthcareer Association also offers certification for pharmacy technicians.

Proposed Law:

SB 952 would expand the number of pharmacy technician certification programs that could be recognized by the Board of Pharmacy for licensing. The bill would strike from existing law specific reference to the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board and instead reference accredited certifying organizations approved by the Board.

Staff Comments:

Current law requires Department of Consumer Affairs’ licensing board and bureau licensing exams to be evaluated using an occupational analysis. The purpose of the occupational analysis is to determine what knowledge and skills are required for a licensed profession, to ensure that a licensing exam fairly and accurately tests for those attributes. Currently, there is no occupational analysis for pharmacy technicians. This posed a problem for the Office of Professional Examination Services within the Department of Consumer Affairs when it attempted to assess the certification examinations offered by the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board and the National Healthcareer Association. The Department of Consumer Affairs indicates that the Board of Pharmacy intends to perform an occupational analysis in order to determine whether to recognize additional certification exams.

Increasing the number of entities that are eligible to certify prospective pharmacy technicians is not expected to significantly increase the number of applicants for licensure in the state.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Senator Jerry Hill, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: SB 952 Hearing Date: April 4, 2016

Subject: Pharmacy technicians: licensure requirements

SUMMARY:

Expands the number of pharmacy technician certification programs that may be recognized toward pharmacy technician licensure by the Board of Pharmacy (BOP).

Existing law:

1. Establishes the Board of Pharmacy to regulate the practice of pharmacy and to administer and enforce the Pharmacy Law. (Business and Professions Code (BPC) Sections 4000 et seq.)
2. Defines a pharmacy technician as an individual who assists a pharmacist in a pharmacy in the performance of his or her pharmacy related duties. (BPC § 4038)
3. Authorizes the BOP to issue a pharmacy technician license to an individual if he or she is a high school graduate or possesses a general educational development certificate equivalent, and meets any one of the following requirements:
   (BPC § 4202)
   1. Has obtained an associate’s degree in pharmacy technology;
   2. Has completed a course of training specified by the BOP;
   3. Has graduated from a school of pharmacy recognized by the BOP; or,
   4. Is certified by the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board (PTCB).
      
4. Authorizes a pharmacy technician to perform packaging, manipulative, repetitive, or other nondiscretionary tasks only while assisting, and while under the direct supervision and control of, a pharmacist. The pharmacist shall be responsible for the duties performed under his or her supervision by a technician, and a pharmacist may not supervise more than two pharmacy technicians at any time, expect as specified. (BPC § 4115)
5. Requires BOP to ensure that every licensing examination administered by or pursuant to contract with the BOP is subject to periodic evaluation. The evaluation shall include: (1) a description of the occupational analysis serving as the basis for the examination; (2) sufficient item analysis data to permit a psychometric evaluation of the items; (3) an assessment of the appropriateness of prerequisites for admittance to the examination; and (4) an estimate of the costs and personnel required to perform these functions. The evaluation shall be revised whenever, in the judgment of the BOP, there is a substantial change in the examination or the prerequisites for admittance to the examination. (BPC § 139)

This bill:

1. Permits a pharmacy technician applicant to attain certification at any pharmacy technician certification program approved by the BOP and accredited by the National Commission for Certifying Agencies (NCCA). 
2. Makes a technical change.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Unknown. This bill has been keyed “fiscal” by Legislative Counsel.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. This bill is sponsored by the National Healthcareer Association (NHA), a wholly owned subsidiary of Ascend Learning, Inc. According to the Author, this bill “eliminates a statutory monopoly for one company that administers certification examinations to pharmacy technicians, and instead allows the BOP to approve any accredited certifying organization.

“When PTCB was established in 1995 it had no competitors on a national level. However, over the last decade or so, at least one competitor has emerged: NHA, which administers the Exam for the Certification of Pharmacy Technicians (ExCPT). NHA is a national professional certification agency for healthcare workers in a variety of allied health fields. Because California law has created a statutory monopoly for PTCB, the BOP is unable to approve any other certification tests developed by anyone else, including NHA.”

1. Background. Pharmacy technicians are licensed by the BOP to perform nondiscretionary tasks under the direct supervision of a pharmacist. The BOP allows four pathways to become a pharmacy technician, one of which is to take the Pharmacy Technician Certification Exam (PTCE) and become certified by the PTCB.

This bill is sponsored by the NHA, a competing certification association to PTCB. Both certification entities are accredited by the NCCA, which accredits programs that certify individuals in a range of healthcare and non-healthcare roles.

Current law requires every licensing exam used by a board to be evaluated for legitimacy. Among other requirements, the evaluation must include an occupational analysis, which establishes which skills to be tested. This is particularly important for pharmacy technicians because there are different requirements depending on where they practice. However, there is no California occupational analysis for a pharmacy technician.

At the BOP’s request, the Department of Consumer Affairs’ Office of Professional Examination Services (OPES) evaluated the PTCE and the ExCPT in 2014. The lack of an occupational analysis was an impediment to a decisive review. OPES writes, “A consistent issue with this examination review project was to attempt to reach consensus among practicing pharmacists and pharmacy technicians regarding the specific level of task and knowledge proficiency required for licensure/certification.” OPES ultimately concluded that because of the disagreements about universal threshold skills, “…it was not possible for either [subject matter expert] group to give either examination an unqualified endorsement.” OPES found that the ExCPT covered a broader range of retail and hospital setting responsibilities, but PTCB covered more inpatient skills. Of particular concern is that OPEC also found that PTCE covered skills outside of a pharmacy technician’s scope of practice.

OPES recommended that the BOP commission an occupational analysis so that either or both exams could be recommended. However, it does not appear that the BOP is planning to conduct such an analysis. The BOP argues that it is not required to do one because neither test are the BOP’s own examination, nor is certification by examination the only route to licensure. Further, the BOP argues that it does not have the financial or personnel resources and does not believe that such a study would add value to the BOP’s existing knowledge about the exams.

This bill will allow BOP to approve any certification program accredited by NCCA toward pharmacy technician licensure. However, BOP should conduct an occupational analysis and any other steps necessary to be in full statutory compliance with its current exam and prior to approving any additional programs.

1. Related Legislation. SB 1193 (Hill) extends the sunset date on the BOP and the BOP’s Executive Officer until 2021. (Status: This bill is pending in the Senate Committee on Business, Professions, and Economic Development.)
2. Arguments in Support. The NHA writes in support, “Both NHA and PTCB are accredited by the same well-respected accrediting body (NCCA), which ensures an objective third party assessment of program governance psychometric soundness and exam administration and security. Each must reapply for accreditation every
   5 years, and must make annual reports during the accreditation period.

“Currently, NHA’s ExCPT exam is recognized in virtually all the states that require or encourage certification for pharmacy technicians. There are only a handful of states that still give an exclusive monopoly to PTCB in this area.”

.…”NHA has been working diligently to give pharmacy technicians in California a choice of which exam to take in order to obtain their license. The ExCPT is a less expensive but more thorough exam. Specifically, the ExCPT exam fee is only $105, compared to the $129 fee for the PTCE. And the ExCPT contains 120 questions, compared to the PTCE’s 90 questions. (The ExCPT allows an additional 10 minutes to complete the test.) In addition, because NHA contracts with a different testing facility than PTCB, passage of SB 952 would effectively double the number of testing locations in California, thereby making it easier for applicants to access the exam facilities most convenient to their homes or workplaces.

….”SB 952 will allow greater access and opportunity for pharmacy technicians to obtain licensure in California, and will give them a much needed choice in terms of vendors. Moreover, SB 952 would open up competition to any other vendors that meet with Board approval. Open competition always inures to the benefit of the consumer.”

SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:

Support:

National Healthcareer Association (Sponsor)

California Retailers Association

National Association of Chain Drug Stores

Rite Aid Corporation

Opposition: None on file as of March 29, 2016.

-- END --