August 28, 2012

LICENSING PROGRAM UPDATE

LICENSE APPLICATION WORKLOAD

The number of applications received is still declining because of the county's economic recession and the housing market. This fiscal year shows an 8% decrease from last year.

LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES (LLCs)

The CSLB is now authorized to issue contractor licenses to Limited Liability Companies (LLCs). LLCs have an additional $100,000 bond requirement to benefit workers with respect to wages and benefits as well as $1,000,000 in liability insurance for five or fewer personnel with $100,000 for each additional personnel (not to exceed $5 million) that is not required for corporations.

The CSLB has received 421 LLC applications from January 1, 2012 through July 31, 2012, and 71 licenses have been issued. The most common reason for the rejections is being unable to confirm the LLC name with what the Secretary of State is able to provide since the Secretary of State has such a delayed processing time.

FEE INCREASE AND APPLICATION REVISIONS

July 1, 2011, saw the CSLB fees increased to their statutory limits. This required 8 applications to reflect the new fees.

LICENSE TRANSACTION PROCESSING TIMES

The CSLB monitors processing times for the various units on a weekly and monthly basis. There is automatically about a two day backlog because cashiering and image scanning must be performed before any application is pulled for processing. Overall, various applications currently have a one to four week processing time. These are acceptable processing times with the use of minimal overtime.

FINGERPRINTING/CRIMINAL BACKGROUND UNIT

All CSLB license applicants, including each officer, partner, owner, responsible managing employee and home improvement salespersons have been fingerprinted since January 2005 for the purpose of a criminal background check by the California Department of Justice. Licensed individuals that have not applied for changes nor joint venture applicants have not been required to be fingerprinted yet.

The Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) is processed the same day it is received and minor offenders are cleared. Applications that did not disclose minor violations that would normally be cleared may be given an opportunity to withdraw the incorrect application and submit another one, with additional fees.

There have been more than 263,000 transmittals from the Department of Justice since the fingerprinting program began. The CSLB has received reports on more than 45,000 applicants that had criminal conviction(s) on record. The CSLB has denied over 1,000 licenses; about half of those appealed the denial. There have also been over 1,200 probationary licenses issued.

LICENSING INFORMATION CENTER (LIC)

Call Center Workload

The first quarter of 2012 saw an 11% increase in call volume. Most of this was attributed to seasonal increase but also because of the backlog of workers' compensation certificates. Once the backlog was handled, call volume returned to normal.

The call wait time is on the high side because of lack of call center agents. However, between utilizing the Automated Call Distribution system and two additional full-time call agents, the wait time is getting under control.

Staffing Update

In addition to the two full-time call agents, there are also two part-time retired annuitants for the peak lunch hours to help with calls. They previously worked in the call center and have all had training.

There is a new Supervision Program Technician III that oversees the call center and front counter. She has already made positive contributions to the Licensing Information Center.

Four student assistants are also providing support by assisting customers at the front counter, handling return mail, processing forms and publication requests, research and other special projects. These student assistant positions will be eliminated by August 30, 2012, causing their workload to be shifted to the full-time staff.

Increased Training

Thirty new employees attended a Board Orientation and Licensing Training program in July. It was a very good way to give these new employees a look at the CSLB as a whole as well as the roles of the various units.

Quick Tip Program

This program was developed for the entire Licensing division for training and development purposes. Each day a "Quick Tip" is emailed to all Licensing staff. These emails include information on CSLB laws, regulations and policies. This is a good way to keep staff updated with critical information and changing policies or procedures.

Call Center Processing

There has been an email address created as a full-service resolution program for those licensees that need licenses updated to satisfy a suspension or to avoid a suspension. Having this email allows these urgent matters to be handled on the spot and prevents additional strain on the other processing units.

The scanning and emailing of renewal applications to licensees with expiration dates within 30 days is now available. These requests are processed within 24 hours.

The call center will also be cross-training with other Licensing units to increase knowledge of policies and procedures to help make sure that customers are getting accurate and consistent information.

JUDGMENT UNIT

The Judgment Unit processes all outstanding liabilities, judgments, and payment of claims reported to the CSLB by licensees, consumers, attorneys, credit recovery firms, bonding companies, CSLB's Enforcement Division, and other governmental agencies as well as processing all documentation and correspondence related to resolving these issues.

STAFFING - LOSS OF STUDENT ASSISTANTS IN LICENSING DIVISION

The CSLB currently has 13 Student Assistants in New Application Process, License Maintenance and License Information. They have helped to provide critical support which has reduced the backlog and wait times for calls and the front counter. The Licensing division will lose all of the Student Assistants on August 30, 2012, because of an employee contract negotiation.

The loss of the Student Assistants will have a big impact on day-to-day operations to include processing delays, increased customer wait times, increased complaints from customers and external agencies and postponement of legislative and other mandates.

REJECTED APPLICATIONS

The CSLB is rolling out a narrated tutorial on YouTube to help people fill out applications. The hope is that this will avoid all of the rejected applications for issues such as a missing signature or other minor issues.

TESTING PROGRAM UPDATE

STAFFING

There are vacant positions for a testing specialist in the Examination Development Unit and a test monitor in San Diego.

The Testing division is working with the CSLB to come up with an alternative solution to the Department of Consumer Affairs refusal for the creation of a Staff Services Manager I position to replace the two management positions that had been supervising the Examination Administration Unit.

EXAMINATION WAIT TIME

The statewide examination wait time is three weeks. However, on any given day, there is a good chance of walking in and finding a seat available at one of the test centers.

TESTING CENTER STATUS

The Oakland testing center will be relocating to an office building in Berkeley that offers free parking and has easy freeway access.

UTILIZATION OF TESTING CENTERS FOR OTHER PROJECTS

Since there is a reduced number of licensing examinations being held, the use of the testing centers is being expanded for other purposes. In September, Norwalk and San Bernardino will be used by the Department of Consumer Affairs to train other boards on the new BreeEZe software.

CHANGE TO EXAMINATION ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES

The existing policy gives 2.5 hours for each examination and if more time is needed, an additional hour can be requested. The new policy will give all applicants the 3.5 hour window for each application.

EXAMINATION DEVELOPMENT

The Examination Development Unit ensures 45 examinations are maintained and updated in accordance with testing standards, guidelines and regulations. There are two phases in the development process: occupational analysis and new examination development. These must be done every five to seven years for each examination.

Occupational analysis has recently been completed for:

• Hazardous Certification

New examinations have been completed for:

• C-4 Boiler, Hot-Water Heating and Steam Fitting
• C-7 Low Voltage

Current occupations analyses in progress:

• C-34 Pipeline
• C-45 Signs
• C-50 Reinforcing Steel
• C-55 Water Conditioning
• C-57 Well Drilling

New Examinations in Progress

• C-16 Fire Protection
• C-21 Building Moving and Demolition
• C-42 Sanitation Systems
• C-46 Solar
• C-47 Manufactured Housing
• Hazardous Certification

ONGOING CONSUMER SATISFACTION SURVEY

The Testing division conducts this survey of consumers whose complaint cases have been closed. This is designed to assess the overall satisfaction with the Enforcement division's handling of complaints in various content categories.

EXAMINATION DEVELOPMENT STAFF WORK ON DCA PROJECTS

The Examination Development Unit is assisting the Department of Consumer Affairs Office of Professional Examination Services with two occupational analyses and one examination development project because they have experienced a staffing shortage.

CSLB TRANSLATOR TESTING

CURRENT TRANSLATOR TESTING METHOD

Currently, for an exam to be translated, an applicant must bring their own translator as long as that translator does not work in the legal, accounting or construction-related industry and the approved translator may not translate more than once a year. This translation is strictly a "sight" translation and given to the applicant verbally and the translation is recorded.

NUMBER OF TRANSLATED EXAMINATIONS

From 2008 through 2011, there were over 3,700 examinations administered with translators.

LANGUAGE BY TRADE PATTERNS

The largest number of translated examinations are in Spanish. The next top languages are Chinese, Korean, Armenian and Vietnamese.

ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE TRANSLATION METHODS

Although the CSLB is not required by law to translate examinations, they are trying to determine the fairest way for these exams to be administered that is feasible and effective. The current manner's disadvantage is the quality of the translator that is provided by the applicant.

The following are the alternative translation methods that were reviewed:

1.Disallow any translations

a.CSLB communicates to applicants that all examinations are to be taken in English only.

b.It would be advantageous because all examinations would be given in English only.

c.The disadvantages are that the CSLB would be perceived as not accommodating the needs of ESL applicants and the ESL applicants could file a lawsuit against the CSLB

d.The approximately cost to the CSLB would include a reduction in staff time.

2.Allow sight translation by applicant-provided translator (current method)

a.Applicants requesting a translated examination provide their own translator (a certified interpreter, family member or friend) and the translation is recorded and reviewed in case of suspected misconduct.

b.It would be advantageous because the translated examinations contain the same questions as the non-translated examinations and the CSLB is not liable for the translation.

c.The disadvantages are the possible use of non-qualified translators leading to inconsistency in translations.

d.The approximate cost to the CSLB would include one staff person that is dedicated to the translator program.

The Committee voted and decided that this is the option they would like to present to the full Board.

3.Allow sight translation by certified translators only

a.Applicants requesting a translated examination provide the certified interpreter and the translation record is recorded and reviewed in case of suspected misconduct.

b.It would be advantageous because the translated examinations contain the same questions as non-translated examinations.

c.The disadvantages are the higher cost for applicants, the applicant's need for a specific dialect may not be met, potential protests by applicants over quality of translation, if CSLB limits their options, the CSLB could not control that the interpreter does not have construction law or knowledge, and the CSLB could not control how often the interpreters translate a given examination.

d.The approximate cost to the CSLB would include a reduction in staff time.

4.Translate the whole item bank for main languages/classifications

a.Test development staff coordinates written translations by subject matter experts of seven item banks (approximately 5,000 items) into different languages requiring new validation and pass point.

b.It would be advantageous because of the consistent translation for the main languages/trades and the possible misconduct between the translator and applicant is eliminated

c.The disadvantages are that no translation services would be provided to less popular target languages and classifications, unequal treatment for ESL applicants needing translations for the non-target languages and classifications leading to lawsuits, potential protests by applicants over quality of translation, CSLB would have to hire more test development staff to take over management of translated banks and subject matter expert recruitment.

d.The approximate cost to the CSLB would be very high.

5.Translate one version for main languages/classifications

a.Test development staff coordinates written translations by subject matter experts of seven examination versions (approximately 730 items) into different languages, requiring new validation and pass point.

b.It would be advantageous because of the consistent translation for main languages/trades and the possible misconduct between translator and applicant eliminated.

c.The disadvantages are that preferential treatment to those with translated examinations who, upon retest, are always exposed to the same questions, whereas others take different versions, no translation service provided to less popular target languages and classifications, unequal treatment for ESL applicants needs translations for the non-target languages and classifications leading to lawsuits, potential protests by applicants over quality of translation, the CSLB would have to hire more test development staff to take over management of translated versions and subject matter expert recruitment.

d.The approximate cost to the CSLB would be high.

RETROACTIVE FINGERPRINTING FOR LICENSED CONTRACTORS

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED POSITION

Existing California licensed contractors should not be fingerprinted retroactively. The Committee voted and will present this recommendation to the full Board.

CURRENT LAW

All Boards are required to get a full set of fingerprints in order to conduct a criminal history record check.

IMPLEMENTATION OF EXISTING REQUIREMENT

The CSLB has fingerprinted about 40 percent of its licensees since 2005. Any new application or a modification of an existing license requires fingerprinting. Approximately 44,000 Criminal Offender Record Information reports have been produced, 1,079 applications denied and 1,208 probationary licenses issued in that time. Keep in mind that the CSLB does not just license individuals but partnerships, corporations, limited liability companies, and joint ventures. This means that the fingerprinting for one license will include all of their personnel, with an average of three to five per license.

RETROACTIVE FINGERPRINTING OF ALL LICENSEES

There have been various pieces of legislation that have required all licenses be fingerprinted in order to obtain a criminal history background check as well as notices of any subsequent conviction. At this point, none of the legislation has come to pass but it appears as if it is soon on the horizon and the CSLB is attempting to plan accordingly.

POLICY CONCERNS WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF RETROACTIVE FINGERPRINTING

Industry Impact

If retroactive fingerprinting occurs it would most likely happen upon license renewal which would probably result in a significant delay for many of those licenses. This could cause many temporarily unlicensed contractors, who would then be operating illegally if they continued to work during the time their license is inactive and also make them unable to collect for work during that same time.

Public Protection

Retroactive fingerprinting would not guarantee public protection. For instance, those that are fingerprinted are not necessarily the ones that enter the consumers home.

Impacted Resources

Retroactive fingerprinting is not something that the CSLB supports because it is already having issues meeting the existing requirements and responsibilities of the Board.

Significant Costs

The workload would be greatly increased if retroactive fingerprinting went into effect and the CSLB would need additional resources to handle that workload.

Plan

The CSLB is working on a plan to implement retroactive fingerprinting over three renewal cycles so that it would occur over a six year period. However, they also believe that this plan should not be instituted until all of the current investigations into the licensees who have already been fingerprinted are completed.

CONTINUING EDUCATION

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED POSITION

The CSLB opposes requiring licensees to complete a continuing education requirement as a condition of license renewal. The Committee voted and will present this recommendation to the full Board.

BACKGROUND

Many professions require continuing education or continuing competency to be completed as a requirement of license renewal. Continuing education is a way to require a licensee to stay current with standards and practices. Continuing competency is a way to measure or verify whether a licensee is still able to competently perform their functions.

ISSUES TO CONSIDER BEFORE IMPLEMENTING CONTINUING EDUCATION

Specific questions to consider before implementation are:

1.Is there a clear problem adversely affecting consumers?

2.If so, is continuing education the best way to address that problem, versus information dissemination of trends/standards, enforcement, or licensing?

3.If so, is there a clear connection between the problem and the solution as proposed by continuing education?

4.If so, does the board have the necessary staff and budget to make the continuing education effective, or will it need additional resources?

5.If so, is there are clear measurement tool to demonstrate that continuing education solves the problem?

6.If so, is the solution worth the costs to licensees, consumers, the board and the public?

EXISTING LAW ON CONTINUING EDUCATION PROGRAMS

Although continuing education rules have never been adopted, the statutes provide that they must meet the following standards:

1.Course validity

2.Occupational relevancy

3.Effective presentation

4.Material assimilation

5.Potential for application

FISCAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT

Such a program would impose a significant financial burden on licensees as well as the CSLB. The licensees would have to pay to attend the required courses, distance education, or other format, and would need to take time away from work to complete the requirement. The CSLB would need additional resources.

CONCLUSION

Without an identified problem with the construction industry that the continuing education would address and due to the significant cost impact as a continuing education requirement on licensees and the Board, the CSLB cannot support a continuing education requirement.

DELINQUENT RENEWAL FEES

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED POSITION

Contractors who file a renewal application timely with the applicable renewal fee should not be subject to the delinquency fee if the renewal application is subsequently rejected, provided corrections are received within 90 days. The Committee voted and will present this recommendation to the full Board.

BACKGROUND

Currently, if a licensee sends in a timely renewal application and the renewal fee but the application is later rejected for some reason (usually the lack of a signature), the licensee is required to pay a $180 delinquency fee if they are not able to return the application prior to the license expiration date.

RECOMMENDATION

To amend the statutes so that the licensee that sends in a timely renewal application and the renewal fee but the application is later rejected for some reason is no longer required to pay the delinquency fee if they are not able to return the application prior to the license expiration date but within 90 days of the original expiration date.

UPDATE ON STRATEGIC PLAN OBJECTIVES

The Board has identified the following objectives to help meet its goals:

1. To work with industry stakeholders regarding legislation that will provide for disclosure of a partnering agencies administrative action. This will be the lead responsibility of the Enforcement division. The target date is the third quarter of 2012.
2. To implement a workers' compensation insurance recertification process for contractors exempt from workers' compensation coverage. This will be the lead responsibility of the Licensing division. The target date is the third quarter of 2012.
3. To complete the flagship contractor and consumer publications. This will be the lead responsibility of the Public Affairs division. The target date is the third quarter of 2012.
4. To develop criteria and controls to monitor and prioritize proactive enforcement. This will be the lead responsibility of the Enforcement division. The target date is the fourth quarter of 2012.
5. To develop an educational letter to consumers who repeatedly hire unlicensed operators. Work with IT to automate the letter. This will be the lead responsibility of the Enforcement division. The target date is the fourth quarter of 2012.
6. To work with EDD to develop an outreach packet to educate legislators, contractors, and consumers about the dangers of the underground economy. This will be the lead responsibility of the Enforcement division. The target date is the fourth quarter of 2012.
7. To develop a plan to explore licensure for solar/alternative energy contractors. This will be the lead responsibility of the Enforcement and Licensing divisions. The target date is the fourth quarter of 2012.
8. To increase examination testing sessions from 2.5 to 3.5 hours. This will be the lead responsibility of the Testing division. The target date is the fourth quarter of 2012.
9. To evaluate the potential to expand use of CSLB testing centers for training and/or civil service exams. This will be the lead responsibility of the Testing division. The target date is the fourth quarter of 2012.
10. To develop a contractor outreach program. This will be the lead responsibility of the Public Affairs division. The target date is the fourth quarter of 2012.
11. To develop language for a regulation to clarify asbestos certification as trade-specific. This will be the lead responsibility of the Licensing division. The target date is the first quarter of 2013.
12. To identify strategies to collect licensee email addresses to improve contact for examination development surveys. This will be the lead responsibility of the Testing division. The target date is the first quarter of 2013.
13. To develop a contractor presentation kit. This will be the lead responsibility of the Public Affairs division. The target date is the second quarter of 2013.
14. To create a website section with streamlined access to contractor outreach materials. This will be the lead responsibility of the Public Affairs and Information Technology divisions. The target date is the second quarter of 2013.
15. To develop a CSLB style guide and identification standards manual. This will be the lead responsibility of the Public Affairs division. The target date is the third quarter of 2013.
16. To implement BreeEZe for CSLB. This will be the lead responsibility of the Information Technology division. The target date is the third quarter of 2013.
17. To implement an online licensure tool for credit card payment. This will be the lead responsibility of the Licensing division. The target date is the fourth quarter of 2013.
18. To staff a Subsequent Arrest Unit through the BCP process. This will be the lead responsibility of the Executive division. The target date is the first quarter of 2014.
19. To review Contractors State License Law to simplify and update. This will be the lead responsibility of the Legislative division. The target date is the first quarter of 2014.
20. To submit a sunset review report. This will be the lead responsibility of the Legislative division. The target date is the third quarter of 2014.

UPCOMING BOARD MEETINGS

September 11, 2012 in Sacramento

December 11, 2023 in Norwalk

February 26, 2013 in the San Francisco Bay Area

April 23-24, 2013 in Riverside

June 11, 2013 in Orange County

Abdulaziz, Grossbart & Rudman

provide this information as a service to its friends & clients and it does not establish an attorney-client relationship with the reader. This document is of a general nature and is not a substitute for legal advice. Since laws change frequently, contact an attorney before using this information.

Abdulaziz, Grossbart & Rudman

(818) 760-2000 FAX (818) 760-3908

info@agrlaw.comwww.agrlaw.com