need help to approve NACHI courese for cont ed. in Wash state

[Ron E. Perkerewicz]

This is the response from DOL about counting courses taken prior to the state approval even if we have certificates. any help getting to ok them would be appreciated.

Mr.(s) Perkerewicz:

The Education rules in RCW 18.280 do not provide for, or allow courses to be taken prior to approval by the board and/or by the department. At this time your courses would not count towards your continuing education credits. However, to allow this, a new rule would need to be created by the board. I will bring this to their attention, and to see how they would or would not like to address this issue.

Rhonda Myers
Program Manager
Home Inspectors
Business & Professions
Department of Licensing
Direct Line (360) 664-6487
Fax (360) 586-0998


.AOLWebSuite .AOLPicturesFullSizeLink { height: 1px; width: 1px; overflow: hidden; } .AOLWebSuite a {color:blue; text-decoration: underline; cursor: pointer} .AOLWebSuite a.hsSig {cursor: default}

[Nick Gromicko]

Our free, online courses are already approved in Washington: http://www.nachi.org/washington-appr...-education.htm

Is it that they won't accept them from you because you took them too early?

[Ron E. Perkerewicz]

that is correct, even though we have certificates

[Nick Gromicko]

They will rule in your favor. I'd have a field day with a licensing board rule that harmed consumers by providing an incentive for inspectors to delay taking courses.

I suspect that me merely posting the paragraph above will cause the board to "get religion." It's pretty hard to argue in favor of consumer harm.

This exact situation is why I'm a proponent of "carry forward" CE rules... just as InterNACHI adopted years ago. You want to encourage, not discourage, inspectors to take lengthier, more robust courses, earlier in their careers, when they need the education the most. InterNACHI's system of Carry Forward Approval works for both inspector and consumer.

This from InterNACHI's CE policy:

Cumulative Exception : Members need not complete 24 hours of continuing education if their average continuing education hours completed per year is equal to or greater than 24. Example: An inspector who completes 48 hours of continuing education in his first year would not be required to complete any continuing education in his second year. In other words, members are not penalized for completing more continuing education than the required minimum. This exception was adopted to encourage inspectors to seek out continuing education options longer than 24 hours in length.

[Mike O'Handley]

Gee Nick,

The board is quaking in its collective boots now that the great and powerful Nick Gromicko has decreed that course to be approved or else......NOT!

Check out RCW 18.235.190

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=18.235.190

Ron,

Rhonda will have to take it up with the Education Sub-Committee chair and then it will have to be brought before the full board. If the board votes to write a rule, the Ed Sub-Committee will go back and put something together and then submit it to the board for approval. Rhonda has the sub-committee meeting schedule and she can tell you when/how they are meeting next.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike O'Handley, LHI
Your Inspector LLC.
Kenmore, Washington
Wa. Lic. Home Inspector #202

[Nick Gromicko]

Let me know if you want me at the meeting to argue on behalf of the citizens of Washington. Carry-forward CE policies, such as InterNACHI's, encourage inspectors to choose robust courses. By contrast, pigeon-hole CE policies provide incentives to inspectors to choose only those courses that barely cover their CE requirements and provide incentives for inspectors to delay taking more courses early on in their careers, when consumers would most benefit from them.

[Mike O'Handley]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Let me know if you want me at the meeting to argue on behalf of the citizens of Washington. Carry-forward CE policies, such as InterNACHI's, encourage inspectors to choose robust courses. By contrast, pigeon-hole CE policies provide incentives to inspectors to choose only those courses that barely cover their CE requirements and provide incentives for inspectors to delay taking more courses early on in their careers, when consumers would most benefit from them.

Dude!

Seriously, you just made an implied threat against the board. If you want Ron to have a chance at getting the rules changed, it would be best if you stayed out of it.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike O'Handley, LHI
Your Inspector LLC.
Kenmore, Washington
Wa. Lic. Home Inspector #202

[Harold E. Miller]

Ron

I honestly like the idea of carrying forward CE. This is the problem with the SPI license also. You can only collect 15 credits max per year, anything over that does not count to anything.

And yes if you have taken the course already, this should count. The question I have is how far back should it count. CE taken in the last calendar year? Last 5 years? Where do you draw the line?

[Mike O'Handley]

Originally Posted by hmiller

The question I have is how far back should it count. CE taken in the last calendar year? Last 5 years? Where do you draw the line?

That's already been answered by WAC 308-408A-110:

A licensee shall submit to the department evidence of satisfactory completion of clock hours, pursuant to RCW 18.280.110 in the manner and on forms prescribed by the department.

(1) A licensee applying for renewal of a license shall submit evidence of completion of twenty-four hours of instruction in a course(s) approved by the board and commenced within twenty-four months of a licensee's renewal date.

(2) The twenty-four hours shall be satisfied by evidence of completion of approved real estate courses as defined in WAC 308-408B-040.

(3) Courses for continuing education clock hour credit shall be commenced after issuance of a first license.

(4) Approved courses may be repeated for continuing education credit in subsequent renewal periods.

(5) Clock hour credit for continuing education shall not be accepted if: The course is not approved pursuant to chapters 308-408B WAC and 18.280 RCW.

(6) Instructors shall not receive clock hour credit for teaching or course development.

(Statutory Authority: RCW 18.280.050 and 18.280. [18.280.060](6).o9012-001 Sch. 308-408A-110, filed 6/3/09, effective 7/4/09.]

Bottom line, you have to have taken the course after you were issued your initial license, not before, and you have to complete the twenty-four hours by your renewal date.

For me, that meant getting 24 hours within 13 months. I generally spend a few hundred hours a years taking free courses on the internet and so far none of those have been approved by DOL and I don't anticipate that they will be, because those folks have no vested interest in paying a state to get their course work evaluated when they're giving it away for free. Still, so far I haven't had any difficulty garnering hours and I'll have my 24 well under my September deadline.

Now, Nicks coursed on the other hand.......are they free to everyone or just to members? If they're "free" to members and non-members must pay, they aren't free for members at all, because you still have to join and pony up some membership money. True, they might be dirt cheap, but free they ain't.

I get it, Nick has a vested interest in seeing to it that as many people as possible are encouraged to take his courses. That still doesn't mean you can hang an accident on a board's neck because a course provider didn't bother to apply as soon as word came down that licensing was coming and waited a year before submitting.

Pete is right; Nick is stretching - or should we call it spinning?

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike O'Handley, LHI
Your Inspector LLC.
Kenmore, Washington
Wa. Lic. Home Inspector #202

[Nick Gromicko]

So let me get this straight... in Washington, you can't carry forward, which means inspectors are given an incentive to delay education early on in their careers, which harms consumers... but you can repeat the same course over and over and over again and that same course counts each time?

You all really need to get out of the licensing business. You are giving licensing boards a bad name.

[Mike O'Handley]

Originally Posted by gromicko

So let me get this straight... in Washington, you can't carry forward, which means inspectors are given an incentive to delay education early on in their careers, which harms consumers... but you can repeat the same course over and over and over again and that same course counts each time?

You all really need to get out of the licensing business. You are giving licensing boards a bad name.

Tsk,

How rude. Is pow widdle Nicky angwy because he can't get his way again?

OT - OF!!!

M.

[Nick Gromicko]

Yes pow widdle Nicky is angwy. Allowing an inspector to take the same course over and over and over and over again and have it count EACH time is harmful to consumers. Perhaps Washington should adopt an exam that asks the same question over and over and over again. If you answer it right 100 times in a row, you pass with an A++!

[Mike O'Handley]

Spin, Spin, Spin! Now, imagine that a fellow takes one of your courses - I dunno, an electrical course, maybe - and finishes it but still feels like he's only absorbed maybe 40% of the material. So, here he has a chance to go out there and get hands on for a while, get more familiar with the subject matter, and, if he wants to, he can take it again. Maybe this time he comes away with an 80% understanding of the subject matter and he's able to do a better inspection for the consumer. Seems to me, that's a win situation.

I've sat through a half dozen of Douglas Hansen's identical presentations over the past 13+ years. Douglas puts out a lot of information in a very short time and it's impossible to absorb all if it. However, each time I've attended the same presentation I've always come away with a better understanding of some electrical issue that was just not sinking in during those prior presentations. I've never felt that my money was wasted because electrical is my weakest area.

I think each inspector should have the right to decide what classes he wants to take. If he wants to repeat a class, that's the inspector's business - not widdle Nicky's.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[Nick Gromicko]

That's a strong point. But a very rare situation and resolved by online course delivery which permits an inspector to learn at his/her own pace and repeat as much as needed at no additional cost or inconvenience.

What more often happens in licensed states is that inspectors scramble at the end of their licensing period to get their CE's in, and so end up taking whatever approved course is most convenient.

Financially, it is difficult for home inspection schools to continually fill advanced course classroom seats. What invariably happens is that the continuously running courses are mostly Intro and Pre-Licensing which draw larger attendance, and are thus more financially feasible for schools to offer.

I leave it to you to put 2 and 2 together. All I'm saying is that permitting an inspector to take the same course over and over and over again and get credit for it each and every time is a disincentive to learn something advanced, new, or out of the box.

[Nick Gromicko]

Remember, we're not worrying about the inspector who voluntarily takes way more CE than is required, just to improve his skills. Such an inspector doesn't even need a licensing board to compel him to stay educated.

This matter is in reference to the licensed inspector who does the bare minimum, and isn't that the type of inspector that licensing is really meant to regulate? The CE requirement's purpose is to force the lazy inspector to take a course. Do you really want him/her taking the same course every 2 years?