Public Policy Center | Part 4: Licensure and Assessments

Part 4: Licensure and Assessments

In a series of questions relating to licensure and assessments, the majority of survey respondents’ programs use the Addiction Severity Index (ASI) and Behavioral Health Integrated Provider System Intake (BHIPS) assessment instruments. Furthermore, the majority of survey respondents had suggestions for improving the BHIPS and Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory (SASSI) assessment instruments; they feel the changes to the Occupational License Statutewill cause a shortage of practitioners in the field; and though their training credentials were diverse, the largest number of respondents are Licensed Chemical Dependency Counselors.

Substance Abuse Assessment Instrument(s) Used[1]

For the 50.6% of respondents who indicated this is applicable to them:

· 8.4% use the TCU CJ CEST – TCU Criminal Justice Client Evaluation of Self and Treatment

· 9.6% use the TCU CJ CI – Texas Christian University (TCU) Criminal Justice Comprehensive Intake

· 22.9% either use a different assessment instrument altogether, or use another assessment instrument in addition to the above options.

· 51.8% use the BHIPS – Behavioral Health Integrated Provider System Intake

· 72.3% use the ASI – Addiction Severity Index

NOTE:Please see Appendix C (Question 11) for other or additional substance abuse assessment instrument(s) used by respondents.

Improvements that Would Make Assessment Instrument More Efficient, While Preserving Quality and Validity[2]

· 6.8% had suggestions for improving the TCU CJ CEST

· 9.1% had suggestions for improving the TCU CJ CI

· 15.9% had suggestions for improving the ASI

· 22.7% had suggestions for improving a different assessment instrument

· 45.5% had suggestions for improving the BHIPS

NOTE: Please see Appendix C (Question 12) for respondents’ suggested improvements to these assessment instruments.

Ways in which Recent Change to Occupational License Statute (lengthened waiting periods between conviction and qualification for internships/licensure, including for Licensed Chemical Dependency Counselors)[3] will Impact the Substance Abuse Field[4]

· 9.7% believe that the statutory change will result in fewer people with recovery experience.

· 11.7% believe the statutory change will improve the field.

· 14.6% believe the statutory change will have no impact on the field.

· 64.1% believe the statutory change will cause a further shortage of practitioners in the field.

Note: Not all respondents identified themselves as a member of the substance abuse service field.

NOTE: Please see Appendix C (Question 13) for respondents’ examples of how a recent change to the Occupational License Statute will impact the substance abuse field

Training Credentials[5]

For the 51.5% of respondents who provide substance abuse interventions/counseling:

· 5.8% have a Licensed Professional Counselor certification

· 6.6% have a Psychology degree

· 7.3% have a different training credential

· 11.7% have a Counseling degree

· 12.4% have a Social Work degree

· 13.1% have a Faith-based counseling certification

· 17.5% have a Certified Criminal Justice Professional certification

· 25.6% have a Licensed Chemical Dependency Counselor (LCDC) certification

NOTE: Please see Appendix C (Question 14) for other training credentials held by respondents.

[1] The percentages in these responses do not add up to 100% because respondents were given the option of selecting more than one assessment instrument.

[2] The percentages in these responses do not add up to 100% because respondents were given the option of providing more than one suggestion.

[3] Please see Appendix D for the Occupational License Statute changes.

[4] The percentages in these responses do not add up to 100% because respondents were given the option of providing all feedback they felt was necessary.

[5] The percentages in these responses do not add up to 100% because respondents were given the option of selecting more than one training credential.