WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 256

Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy Programs (C-PACE)

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Tom Davis

Creates the Occupational Therapy Licensure Compact, enabling OTs/OTAs to practice across member states via a compact privilege, boosting mobility and telehealth under a Commission.

Committee Amendment Adopted
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 256

Summary — S 256: Occupational Therapy Licensure Compact (Chapter 112A)

Note: although the bill heading in the provided metadata mentions housing and New York, the text of S 256 is a Massachusetts bill titled “An Act relative to the occupational therapist interstate licensure compact,” inserted as Chapter 112A into the General Laws. The summary below addresses the compact as contained in the supplied text.

Purpose / Intent

Establish a state law implementing the Occupational Therapy Licensure Compact — a multistate agreement that enables licensed Occupational Therapists (OTs) and Occupational Therapy Assistants (OTAs) to practice across member states via a “compact privilege.” The compact is intended to increase workforce mobility, expand patient access (including telehealth), simplify licensing for practitioners working in multiple states, and create a national administrative commission and data-sharing system.

Key provisions and structure

  • Creates Chapter 112A: “Occupational Therapy Licensure Compact.”
  • Section 1 — Definitions: comprehensive definitions for terms used in the compact, including:
    • Compact Privilege (authorization equivalent to a license in a Remote State),
    • Home State / Primary State of Residence,
    • Remote State,
    • Data System (repository with license status, investigative information, adverse actions),
    • Adverse Action, Investigative Information, Encumbered License,
    • Telehealth, Continuing Competence/Education, Active Duty Military, and others.
  • Section 2 — State participation requirements (high-level items shown in the excerpt):
    • A Member State must license OTs and OTAs.
    • Must participate fully in the Commission’s Data System and use Commission identifiers.
    • Must have a mechanism to receive and investigate complaints about licensees.
    • Must notify the Commission of adverse actions and investigative information, per Compact rules.
    • Must implement procedures (including fingerprint/biometric submission) to consider criminal history for applicants seeking an initial Compact Privilege.
  • Establishes a national administrative body — the Occupational Therapy Compact Commission — to administer the compact (rulemaking authority, data system oversight, governance through an Executive Committee is referenced).
  • Clarifies that practice of occupational therapy is considered to occur in the state where the patient/client is located during the encounter (important for telehealth).
  • Recognizes single‑state licenses (licenses that do not grant compact privileges).

(The text provided is truncated; additional sections likely address governance, rulemaking, fees, data sharing protocols, dispute resolution, amendment/withdrawal procedures, and disciplinary reciprocity.)

Who is affected

  • Occupational Therapists and Occupational Therapy Assistants who hold or seek licensure in member states, especially those who practice across state lines or provide telehealth.
  • State occupational therapy licensing boards (must share data, report actions, and adopt procedures).
  • Patients and healthcare employers (greater cross‑state access to clinicians).
  • Active duty military personnel and their families (definitions provide for military mobility considerations).
  • The Compact Commission and participating states will undertake administrative/IT obligations (data system).

Potential impacts

  • Increases cross‑state mobility for OTs/OTAs and may speed workforce deployment to shortage areas.
  • Simplifies licensing for multistate practice, reduces duplicative licensing processes (subject to member-state compliance and Compact rules).
  • Expands telehealth practice across member states, with practice location tied to patient location.
  • Raises privacy, disciplinary reciprocity, and background‑check considerations because of data sharing of investigative information and adverse actions.
  • Fiscal/administrative impacts for states to connect to the Commission’s Data System and to perform fingerprint-based criminal history checks.

Procedural status & timeline (from provided actions)

  • Introduced: January 25, 2025.
  • Referred to committees: Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure; also committee listings show Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs and Local Government in different metadata entries.
  • Hearing(s) scheduled: September 8, 2025 (two identical entries).
  • Reported and committed to Finance: April 29, 2025.
  • Accompanied by new draft: S2672 (noted Nov 12–13, 2025).
  • Related: SD 1426 (replaces), S 6544 (prior session).

Sponsors (as provided)

Richard Blumenthal; Joan B. Lovely; Monica Martinez; James B. Eldridge; Thomas M. Stanley; Sal N. DiDomenico; Robert Jackson; Lea Webb; Leroy Comrie. (The bill text identifies Joan B. Lovely as the presenter in the Massachusetts Senate.)

Notes / Caveats

  • The supplied file is truncated; full compact text typically contains detailed governance, rulemaking, enforcement, interstate complaint processes, withdrawal/amendment clauses, and cost/fee provisions. Review of the full enacted text or later draft (S2672) is recommended for implementation details and state obligations.
  • Metadata appears to mix jurisdictions and titles; confirm the intended jurisdiction (Massachusetts) before relying on this as New York legislation.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.