Notes from Roudtable Discussion with Joe Vincent and Stan Bowman

There are 3 paths to architectural licensing:
1)Accredited degree (which can now begin ARE testing before completing IDP)
2) Non accredited degree
3) Non degree path

The State of Washington will continue the process as it stands today for those following path 2 and 3. In addition to managing IDP hours, soon NCARB will also manage ARE test results for path 1 stated above.

This will simplify the process for the applicant, facilitate more timely score reporting, and remove processes handled by the State.

NCARB has proven to the state they can handle the added resonsibility. NCARB has recently undergone a complete overhaul/house cleaning where they have had a change in staffing, added new technology, and have changed the process in which they worked. There will be a trial period for this new process and the State has emphasized they have the authority to pull out, if it isn't working. This process is already occurring in many other states.

Beginning in 2009, electronic IDP submittals will be available. This process will be imperative to instating the "6 month rule". The new electronic submittal process will now notify mentors/bosses and applicants. The hope is to add interactions between the applicant and NCARB, and increase the involvement of mentors.

The Licensing Board in the State of Washington is very aware of the problems many of us have had with NCARB. Joe Vincent would like to hear from you about specific issues you have experienced (including dates and names). You can contact him at JVINCENT@DOL.WA.GOV

The AIA at the state level is looking to update their website. Stan Bowman is asking for imput as to what we'd like to see, whether it is links, documents, etc. You can contact Stan at bowman@aiawa.org

More to the Sound Transit Dome train then we thought

Randy Cook asked me to pass on some info to you all in regards to the Sound Transit extension through the dome district. It seems that this issue is not as complete as it seems. As we used to understand it (at least how I had worked it out...). Sound transit was stopped by the city and the local AIA SWW office for the time being and some of the AIA SWW proposals were being considered into the design.

Turns out there are a few more twists and turns to the story that may be provide a good opening for us to get involved with. It seems that the Dome District Association is not happy with the city proposals and is also upset with what it sees as the city trying to hurry the process along with out giving a voice to the Dome district. The dome district would like the city and sound transit to revise their outlook for the dome's master planning. The dome district is also not happy with the proposed solutions on the table for the transit extension, and the master planning that the city has done in the area.

In a letter campaign to the city, the dome district has been invited to sit at the table with the city and sound transit to try to work out the transit extention and master planning of the area. It is the dome associations intentions to get the city to slow the process and allow for time to get the dome area to get a working plan together for itself and propose its own alternatives to the city and sound transit. Their is a meeting at the city on August 5th Tuesday to accomplish this.

Why we should be involved...
Once the dome district association has gotten the city to hold back, they will need to put together some proposals to ammend the city's and sound transit's master plan. This process has just begun, and a workshop has been held to address some issues. The Dome District Association also has regular meetings on Thursday mornings on these topics, and they have asked for AIA support in defining a vision for what the Dome district could become.

Anyone up for it?

Round Table Meeting

So I just wanted to send out a thank you to all those whom attended Wednesday's meeting. The meeting went great, and it was nice to see that it is not just interns that are getting the short end of the stick when it comes to dealing with NCARB.

I think that we have gained some good allies in both Joe and Stan. They have offered to take any difficulties and complaints that we have and take them to the next levels via the NCARB and AIA levels. The one caviot that they gave was that any complaint be written down with as many names and dates as possible.

Overall we were assured that NCARB has been in a process of flux over the last year in a half in the purpose of fixing itself. Joe was able to give us some examples of staffing changes, and has said that the atmosphere in the D.C. office has changed. This was the reason he stated in the 49-1 vote of confidence for NCARB. It will be interesting to see the results in the future as they trickle down to our level. (Trickle down.....wasnt that a Reagon era policy?)

Anyways Joe and Stan have made themselves avalible to us for all of our gripes and are ready and willing to do something about it.

Topics & Questions for the round table discussion

So I'll start with the topics & questions for the round table discussion...

- NCARB has a new Board of Directors for the fical year of 2009, who is the regional director now for the state of Washington?
- In regards to direct registration, how long is the trial period?
- Has a test group been identified for the survey?
- Will the results be public?

Wednesday's Gathering with Joe Vincent

I have invited Stan Bowman who is our lobbyist for WA State. He was pleased to be invited and will be attending the event.
Hope to see many of you there.
Kate

So everyone is just thinking of stuff to write ? Right?

I gave everyone a chance, so here's my thoughts on the state issue. At Face value it seems that the state just wants to do the logical thing and eliminate the extra steps it takes in doing things like reporting test scores, so instead of getting a grade from NCARB and a grade from the state at the same time after taking the ARE, you just get one pass rate from NCARB, and NCARB would let the state know when you are done. Which is about as much as I understand at this moment. At face value this seems very resonable, and if all things are fair and equal I think this is a reasonable step.

But things are not fair and equal when it comes to NCARB reporting something, like test completions and such. A quick browse through the ARE forums (@ www.AREForum.org ) would give you a lot of instant examples of many people that are issued a lisence from their respective states after ARE completion before NCARB has even updated the "test complete" status. When it comes to NCARB and reporting things I feel that the state could stand to do a far better job at reporting test completion, and until NCARB proves that it could actually report accuratly within a reasonable (3 to 6 weeks maybe?) I think the state needs to keep on doing what its doing.

What does everyone else think? What about the bigger picture? What do we discuss about our ongoing NCARB frustrations? Does Joe and the Department of Licensing see the same stuff that we do? or does NCARB just have a particular bane against interns only?

July 30th 5:30 Joe Vincent Round Table Discussion

In case you have not heard, the State of Washington is in negotiations to pass control of licensing procedure over to NCARB. Per conversations at the July 15th Emerging Leaders lunch, many of us have concerns over this announcement.

Joe Vincent, from the State, has said that the change over will pull the Board staff out of the exam management portion of an applicant’s licensing process. The decision was made in an effort to simplify the process for the applicant, facilitate more timely score reporting, and remove processes handled by Board staff where there was no demonstrated value added.

Many of us have stated this is eventually a good idea, but right now NCARB has not proven to us with the IDP process that they are prepared to take on this added responsibility.

With the help of James Mill, we have arranged for Joe Vincent, from the State, to come to Tacoma to participate in a round table discussion. This is a great chance for all of us to let the State know how we feel and to voice our concerns. They are very interested in hearing from us as young professionals. Joe is going to invite other Board members to the discussion.

Please post topics you would like to discuss on the blog page; this can include good and bad experiences with NCARB, the licensing process, etc. I would like to send Joe some comments before the round table.

This change will affect both those of us going through the IDP process as well as ARE exams.

At last week’s AIASWW board meeting I presented our concerns over the State/NCARB partnership, and our local chapter stands behind us. The Board recommended we write one letter that we all stand behind with both our signature and the boards’ president’s signature.

When: Wednesday July 30th, 5:30 pm
Where: McGranahan Architects 1st Floor Conference Room