1 / 13

Credentialing Fees Department of Regulation and Licensing

Credentialing Fees Department of Regulation and Licensing. Legislative Audit Bureau September 2004. Department of Regulation and Licensing’s Regulatory Activities. Support 21 boards with independent authority to license and discipline members

lindsey
Download Presentation

Credentialing Fees Department of Regulation and Licensing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Credentialing FeesDepartment of Regulation and Licensing Legislative Audit Bureau September 2004

  2. Department of Regulation and Licensing’s Regulatory Activities • Support 21 boards with independent authority to license and discipline members • Support 17 additional boards and councils with more limited authority • Regulate directly a limited number of professions • Wisconsin has 318,000 individual and business credential holders in 84 professions and 26 business types

  3. Largest Regulated Professions

  4. Staffing and Funding • 125.5 full-time equivalent staff and a FY 2003-04 budget of $11.1 million • All funds are program revenue, primarily from new and renewal credentialing fees • Statutes require that credentialing fees for each profession reflect the cost of services received by that profession

  5. Fee Concerns • New credentials are $53; renewals vary from $53 to $343 • Department’s proposal for new fees in FY 2003-05 budget rejected for two reasons:–calculations were based on estimates rather than actual costs– proposal resulted in significant fee changes for some professions • LAB directed to determine whether the fee methodology reflected actual regulatory costs

  6. Current Allocation Method • Most costs (72.6%) are allocated equally, regardless of differences in level of service to different professions • Costs that are allocated by level of service (27.4%) are allocated by inaccurate measures of service delivery costs

  7. Proposed Allocation Method • Percentage of costs allocated based on level of services increases from 27.4% to 58.2% • Costs will be calculated based on actual time spent rather than estimates

  8. Comparison of Current and Proposed Allocation Methods

  9. Recommended Improvements to Proposed Method • Increase further the proportion of costs allocated based on actual staff time spent • Provide clear explanations of allocation methods to make the process more transparent and understandable

  10. Future Considerations • Determining levels of service for the boards • Determining total revenue needs

  11. Appropriation Balances (in millions)

  12. Legislative Options • Make no fee changes • Consider surcharges for those professions wishing increased levels of service • Consider adding an inflation factor to all fees • Implement the proposed methodology with the recommended improvements

  13. Renewal Fee Comparisons

More Related