Telehealth FAQ
What is changed by the new regulations? Are they more expansive or more restrictive than previous rules about interjurisdictional practice?
The regulations are not intended to be more expansive or restrictive. The purpose of these regulations is to outline the steps a California licensee should take before entering into psychological services via telehealth with a client. The scenarios listed in 16 CCR 1396.8(a)(1-3) do not restrict or expand the existing laws governing interjurisdictional practice but serve as examples of steps that should be followed by licensees when providing telehealth.
Can a California licensee provide long-term telehealth services to a client located in California?
Yes. It is not the Board’s intention to limit a California licensee’s ability to provide services to a client in California (16 CCR 1396.8(a)(1)). Assuming the case is appropriate for telehealth, the licensee is permitted to provide such services to any client located in California.
Can a California licensee provide telehealth services to a client while either or both the client or psychologist are outside of the state?
It depends. The Board regulates practice by its licensees in California when the client seeking services is in California or initiates services within California. But the answer to this question will likely be dependent on whether it is permitted under the laws and regulations of the jurisdiction(s) other than California where the client or psychologist is located. (16 CCR 1396.8(a)(2))
How should the psychologist proceed in an emergency if interjurisdictional practice is not allowed according to the rules of California or the other jurisdiction?
It is not the Board’s intention to limit a California licensee’s ability to provide telehealth services to a client in another jurisdiction. The regulations allow for temporary telehealth practice to clients outside of California, however the laws and regulations of the jurisdiction where the client is located may determine whether it is permissible (16 CCR 1396.8(a)(2)).
The Board cannot dictate rules for another jurisdiction and providing services via telehealth does not release a licensee from any legal or ethical responsibilities for practicing in or treating someone in that jurisdiction.
(See also Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (2010), American Psychological Association, standard 2.02).
Does PSYPACT allow me to engage in interstate practice?
California is not a part of the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Board’s Interjurisdictional Compact (PSYPACT) so PSYPACT has no impact on a California licensee’s ability to provide telehealth services.
Do the regulations allow telehealth services when the psychologist and/or the patient has moved permanently out of state?
It depends. Consideration should be given to the licensing laws and regulations of the jurisdictions in which the psychologist and client are located as the licensee may be considered to be practicing in the jurisdiction in which they are located and/or the jurisdiction in which the client is located. A California license does not counter the obligation to practice in accordance with the laws and regulations of the jurisdiction to which the psychologist and/or the client has permanently relocated.
The Board will investigate any complaint made against a California licensee regardless of where the services were delivered or received (16 CCR 1397.2(b-c)).
What if both patient and psychologist are located out of state but there is still a connection to California? For example, is practice permitted if a California licensee is temporarily visiting the East Coast and wants to provide services to a client who also lives in California and is temporarily on a trip to Arizona?
The regulations allow for temporary telehealth practice to clients outside of California, so in this scenario the provision of services is permitted.
Consideration still should be given to the licensing laws and regulations of the jurisdictions in which the psychologist and client are located as the licensee may be considered to be practicing in the jurisdiction in which they are temporarily located and/or the jurisdiction in which the client is located.
The Board will investigate any complaint made against a California licensee regardless of where the services were delivered or received (16 CCR 1397.2(b-c)).
