Compliance Analysis Overview

DIRECTOR’S POLICY #100-14

PUBLIC SERVICE HOURS

Effective Date: September 24, 2009

Jay DeBoer I am approving this document Approved By: 2009.09.24 14:56:42 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish public service hours for the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation public service hours are 8:15 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday with the exception of those days when state offices are closed due to holidays, inclement weather, emergencies, or as otherwise lawfully directed.

III. DEFINITIONS: N/A

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. PUBLIC SERVICE HOURS ESTABLISHED BY THE DIRECTOR

The Director of the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation shall establish the Department’s public service hours in accordance with operational and customer service guidelines set for state agencies.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-14 Public Service Hours Effective: 09/24/2009 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Policy, Planning & Public Records Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-14 Public Service Hours (Effective 05/21/2003) Page 1 of 1

DIRECTOR’S POLICY #100-14

PUBLIC SERVICE HOURS

Effective Date: September 24, 2009

Jay DeBoer I am approving this document Approved By: 2009.09.24 14:56:42 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish public service hours for the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation public service hours are 8:15 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday with the exception of those days when state offices are closed due to holidays, inclement weather, emergencies, or as otherwise lawfully directed.

III. DEFINITIONS: N/A

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. PUBLIC SERVICE HOURS ESTABLISHED BY THE DIRECTOR

The Director shall establish the Department’s public service hours per operational and customer service guidelines for state agencies.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-14 Public Service Hours Effective: 09/24/2009 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Policy, Planning & Public Records Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-14 Public Service Hours (Effective 05/21/2003) Page 1 of 1

DIRECTOR’S POLICY #100-17 POSTING INFORMATION IN PUBLIC ACCESS AREAS Effective Date: June 8, 2017

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Approved By: Reason:documentI am approving this Date: 2017.06.08 13:55:45 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to identify the types of information and promotional materials that may be displayed in the Department’s public access areas.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Only those informational materials produced by the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation or another state, local or federal authority associated with one of the Department’s programs may be displayed in DPOR’s public access areas. All other information and items (including but not limited to awards and certificates presented to the Department) may be displayed at the Director’s discretion. The Communications Director shall coordinate the placement of information. Nothing in this policy shall permit placement of materials in any public area DPOR shares with other building tenants.

III. DEFINITIONS: Public Access Areas For the purposes of this policy, DPOR public access areas are located on the fourth floor in the reception area and the sitting area outside of the reception area, and on the first floor in the DPOR Customer Assistance suite. DPOR public access areas do not include Perimeter Center Conference Center waiting areas, hallways or rooms.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. EXCEPTIONS The following items are exempt from the criteria set forth in this policy.

1. A photograph of the governor
2. The pictorial history of the Department’s Directors
3. Employee Recognition plaques and photographs B. REQUESTS Requests to display information and promotional materials shall be submitted to the Communications Director for consideration. Only those items produced by the organizations included in the Policy Statement with the intent of increasing public awareness and/or educating regulants may be displayed in the Department’s public access areas.

C. REMOVAL OF INFORMATION AND MATERIALS Information shall be displayed until the materials are no longer current or for a length of time established by the Communications Director.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-17 Posting Information in Public Access Areas [POL401-100_17-v4] Effective: 06/08/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-17 Posting Information in Public Access Areas (Effective 10/31/2011) Page 1 of 1

DIRECTOR’S POLICY #100-17 POSTING INFORMATION IN PUBLIC ACCESS AREAS Effective Date: June 8, 2017

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Approved By: Reason:documentI am approving this Date: 2017.06.08 13:55:45 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to identify the types of information and promotional materials that may be displayed in the Department’s public access areas.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Only those informational materials produced by the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation or another state, local or federal authority associated with one of the Department’s programs may be displayed in DPOR’s public access areas. All other information and items (including but not limited to awards and certificates presented to the Department) may be displayed at the Director’s discretion. The Communications Director shall coordinate the placement of information. Nothing in this policy shall permit placement of materials in any public area DPOR shares with other building tenants.

III. DEFINITIONS: Public Access Areas For the purposes of this policy, DPOR public access areas are located on the fourth floor in the reception area and the sitting area outside of the reception area, and on the first floor in the DPOR Customer Assistance suite. DPOR public access areas do not include Perimeter Center Conference Center waiting areas, hallways or rooms.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. EXCEPTIONS The following items are exempt from the criteria set forth in this policy.

1. A photograph of the governor
2. The pictorial history of the Department’s Directors
3. Employee Recognition plaques and photographs B. REQUESTS Requests to display information and promotional materials shall be submitted to the Communications Director for consideration. Only those items produced by the organizations included in the Policy Statement with the intent of increasing public awareness and/or educating regulants may be displayed in the Department’s public access areas.

C. REMOVAL OF INFORMATION AND MATERIALS Information shall be displayed until the materials are no longer current or for a length of time established by the Communications Director.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-17 Posting Information in Public Access Areas [POL401-100_17-v4] Effective: 06/08/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-17 Posting Information in Public Access Areas (Effective 10/31/2011) Page 1 of 1

LICENSING & REGULATION POLICY #300-02 APPLICATION & APPLICATION FEE EXPIRATION Effective Date: July 1, 2018

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer DN: cn=Jay W. DeBoer, o=DPOR, ou=Director,, email=jay.deboer@dpor.virginia.gov, c=US Approved By: Date: 2018.07.26 14:35:24 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to document the length of time license applications are valid.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Unless otherwise stated in Department or Board regulations, initial and reinstatement applications for licensure, certification or registration shall be valid for one year from the date the application is received by the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR). If the requested authorization to practice the profession or occupation is not granted within the period established by this policy, the application shall expire.

III. DEFINITIONS: Application For the purposes of this policy only, applications shall include applications for initial licensure, certification or registration; applications for reinstatement of licensure, certification or registration; and all required supplemental documentation and fees. Renewal applications are excluded from the provisions of this policy.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. Unless otherwise stated in Department or Board regulations, initial and reinstatement applications for licensure, certification or registration shall expire one year from the date the application is received by the Department.

B. Fees associated with unexpired reinstatement applications shall be assessed once per transaction (decision to approve or deny). This includes reinstatement applications valid for more than one year pursuant to Department or Board regulations.

C. Application and reinstatement fees associated with unexpired applications may be transferred to another application in the same board or regulatory program at the Board’s discretion. This includes updated applications requested by the Board or regulatory program.

D. Application and reinstatement fees for expired applications are nonrefundable and shall not be applied or transferred to another application.

Policy Title: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-02 Application & Application Fee Expiration [POL427-300_02-v3] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Mary Broz-Vaughan, Deputy Director of Communications & Board Operations Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-02 Application & Application Fee Expiration (Effective 10/31/2011) Page 1 of 1

LICENSING & REGULATION POLICY #300-02 APPLICATION & APPLICATION FEE EXPIRATION Effective Date: July 1, 2018

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer DN: cn=Jay W. DeBoer, o=DPOR, ou=Director,, email=jay.deboer@dpor.virginia.gov, c=US Approved By: Date: 2018.07.26 14:35:24 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to document the length of time license applications are valid.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Unless otherwise stated in Department or Board regulations, initial and reinstatement applications for licensure, certification or registration shall be valid for one year from the date the application is received by the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR). If the requested authorization to practice the profession or occupation is not granted within the period established by this policy, the application shall expire.

III. DEFINITIONS: Application For the purposes of this policy only, applications shall include applications for initial licensure, certification or registration; applications for reinstatement of licensure, certification or registration; and all required supplemental documentation and fees. Renewal applications are excluded from the provisions of this policy.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. Unless otherwise stated in Department or Board regulations, initial and reinstatement applications for licensure, certification or registration shall expire one year from the date the application is received by the Department.

B. Fees associated with unexpired reinstatement applications shall be assessed once per transaction (decision to approve or deny). This includes reinstatement applications valid for more than one year pursuant to Department or Board regulations.

C. Application and reinstatement fees associated with unexpired applications may be transferred to another application in the same board or regulatory program at the Board’s discretion. This includes updated applications requested by the Board or regulatory program.

D. Application and reinstatement fees for expired applications are nonrefundable and shall not be applied or transferred to another application.

Policy Title: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-02 Application & Application Fee Expiration [POL427-300_02-v3] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Mary Broz-Vaughan, Deputy Director of Communications & Board Operations Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-02 Application & Application Fee Expiration (Effective 10/31/2011) Page 1 of 1

FINANCE POLICY #700-04 REVENUE REFUNDS Effective Date: July 1, 2018

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Approved By: DN:ou=Director,,cn=Jay W. DeBoer, o=DPOR, email=jay.deboer@dpor.virginia.gov, c=US Date: 2018.07.17 11:31:16 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for refunding fees and other monies paid to the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation shall process revenue refunds in an accurate and timely manner and in accordance with state policy and Board regulations.

III. DEFINITIONS: Overpayment A payment that exceeds the amount due to the Department.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. REVENUE REFUNDS

1. The Department shall issue refunds for overpayments of fees and monetary penalties.
2. The Department shall issue refunds for Contractor and Real Estate Transaction Recovery Fund assessments and Appraiser National Registry fees collected from applicants not granted a license.
3. Application fees for licenses, certifications, and registrations and renewal fees are non-refundable.
4. The Finance Section shall process refund requests in accordance with state procedures. a. All checks will be made payable to the regulant regardless of who paid the fee. However, refunds of overpayments may be made to the payer if the payment was for the benefit of more than one regulant. b. Non-regulant refunds shall be made to the original payer. c. Checks will be mailed to the address of record unless different mailing instructions are submitted with the refund request. d. Overpayments made with a credit card shall be refunded to the credit card. Overpayments more than 180 days old will be refunded by check.
5. Whenever a refund request from a regulant is not authorized, the section that received the refund request shall be responsible for informing the regulant.

Policy Title: Finance Policy #700-04 Revenue Refunds [POL405-700_04-v7] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Jeff Waite, Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Finance Policy #700-04 Revenue Refunds (Effective 02/10/2012) Page 1 of 1

FINANCE POLICY #700-04 REVENUE REFUNDS Effective Date: July 1, 2018

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Approved By: DN:ou=Director,,cn=Jay W. DeBoer, o=DPOR, email=jay.deboer@dpor.virginia.gov, c=US Date: 2018.07.17 11:31:16 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for refunding fees and other monies paid to the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation shall process revenue refunds in an accurate and timely manner and in accordance with state policy and Board regulations.

III. DEFINITIONS: Overpayment A payment that exceeds the amount due to the Department.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. REVENUE REFUNDS

1. The Department shall refund overpayments of fees and penalties.
2. The Department shall refund Contractor and Real Estate Recovery Fund assessments and Appraiser Registry fees from applicants not licensed.
3. Application fees for licenses, certifications, and registrations and renewal fees are non-refundable.
4. The Finance Section shall process refund requests in accordance with state procedures. a. All checks will be made payable to the regulant regardless of who paid the fee. However, refunds of overpayments may be made to the payer if the payment was for the benefit of more than one regulant. b. Non-regulant refunds shall be made to the original payer. c. Checks will be mailed to the address of record unless different mailing instructions are submitted with the refund request. d. Overpayments made with a credit card shall be refunded to the credit card. Overpayments more than 180 days old will be refunded by check.
5. If a regulant's refund request is denied, the receiving section must inform the regulant.

Policy Title: Finance Policy #700-04 Revenue Refunds [POL405-700_04-v7] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Jeff Waite, Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Finance Policy #700-04 Revenue Refunds (Effective 02/10/2012) Page 1 of 1

LICENSING & REGULATION POLICY #300-11 REGULANT NAME & ADDRESS CHANGES Effective Date: June 13, 2017

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Approved By: Reason:documentI am approving this Date: 2017.06.14 15:13:48 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to ensure consistent processing of name and address changes received by the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: DPOR shall accurately record all requests for name and address changes in a timely manner and in accordance with established EAGLES address definitions, licensing and enforcement systems data entry standards, and United States Postal Service Address Standards.

III. DEFINITIONS: N/A

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  Data Entry Standards  USPS Address Standards

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. WRITTEN REQUESTS REQUIRED

1. Name and address change requests may be submitted by mail (including e-mail) or facsimile on a DPOR Name Change Form, DPOR Address Change Form or other written format. On-line address changes may be performed by the regulant on the Department’s website. Telephone requests for name and address changes shall not be accepted.
2. Individual name change requests must be accompanied by a copy of a marriage certificate, divorce decree, court order, or other official documentation that provides legal proof of the name change.
3. Business name change requests must be accompanied by all information required by the appropriate board regulations for changing a business name (based on State Corporation Commission or locality business requirements).

B. REQUESTS NOT INITIALLY RECEIVED BY THE APPROPRIATE LICENSING SECTION

1. Any regulatory board receiving a request for a name and/or address change not related to the profession or occupation handled by that section shall forward the request to the appropriate licensing section for processing.
2. Compliance and Investigations Division personnel who determine that a regulant’s name, main address and/or physical location is different from the name and address of record shall inform the regulant that a written request for the change with required documentation must be submitted to the appropriate licensing section at the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation. The licensee’s record shall be changed only upon receipt of written notification.
3. Name and/or address changes submitted to the Education and Examinations Section will be posted to the candidate’s record, then forwarded to the appropriate licensing section to ensure three-year retention in the section’s daily files.

Policy Title: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-01 Regulant Name & Address Changes [POL406-300_01-v7] Effective: 06/13/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-01 Regulant Name & Address Changes (Effective 10/09/2009) Page 1 of 1

LICENSING & REGULATION POLICY #300-11 REGULANT NAME & ADDRESS CHANGES Effective Date: June 13, 2017

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Approved By: Reason:documentI am approving this Date: 2017.06.14 15:13:48 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to ensure consistent processing of name and address changes received by the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: DPOR shall accurately record all requests for name and address changes in a timely manner and in accordance with established EAGLES address definitions, licensing and enforcement systems data entry standards, and United States Postal Service Address Standards.

III. DEFINITIONS: N/A

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  Data Entry Standards  USPS Address Standards

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. WRITTEN REQUESTS REQUIRED

1. Requests may be submitted by mail (including email), facsimile, or other written formats using DPOR forms. Online changes are available; telephone requests are not accepted.
2. Individual name change requests must include legal proof such as marriage certificate, divorce decree, or court order.
3. Business name change requests must include all info required by board regulations and applicable local or SCC requirements.

B. REQUESTS NOT INITIALLY RECEIVED BY THE APPROPRIATE LICENSING SECTION

1. Boards receiving unrelated name/address change requests shall forward them to the appropriate licensing section.
2. Compliance and Investigations Division personnel who determine that a regulant’s name, main address and/or physical location is different from the name and address of record shall inform the regulant that a written request for the change with required documentation must be submitted to the appropriate licensing section at the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation. The licensee’s record shall be changed only upon receipt of written notification.
3. Changes submitted to Education and Examinations will be posted to the candidate’s record and forwarded to ensure three-year retention.

Policy Title: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-01 Regulant Name & Address Changes [POL406-300_01-v7] Effective: 06/13/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-01 Regulant Name & Address Changes (Effective 10/09/2009) Page 1 of 1

LICENSING & REGULATION POLICY #300-03 EXPEDITED LICENSING OF MILITARY SPOUSES Effective Date: October 7, 2016 Approved By: DigitallyReason: signedI am approvingby Jay W.thisDeBoerdocument Date: 2016.10.07 15:00:50 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to document the requirements that must be met for military spouses to qualify for expedited processing of license applications under the provisions of § 54.1-119 of the CodeofVirginia.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Pursuant to § 54.1-119 of the CodeofVirginia, the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation shall expedite the processing of applications for military spouses that meet the qualifications set forth in statute.

III. DEFINITIONS: Expedited processing Processing of applications under the provisions of § 54.1-119 of the Code of Virginiais performed as soon as practicable and not based on order of receipt.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: n/a

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. APPLICABILITY This policy applies to those applicants who hold a license, certificate, registration, permit or other authorization in another jurisdiction where the Virginia Board has deemed the entry requirements to be substantially equivalent to those in Virginia.

B. REQUIREMENTS The Department shall expedite the processing of applications for individuals that meet the following criteria.

1. The applicant shall submit a complete application.
2. The applicant must hold the same or similar license, certificate, registration, permit, or other authorization required for the practice of any business, profession or occupation issued by another jurisdiction based on requirements in such other jurisdiction that are substantially equivalent to those required in Virginia.
3. The applicant shall not have engaged in any act that would constitute grounds for disciplinary action.
4. The applicant’s spouse must be the subject of a military transfer to the Commonwealth of Virginia.
5. If the board is unable to complete the review of the documentation provided by the applicant or make a final determination regarding substantial equivalency within 20 days of receipt of a completed application, the board shall issue a temporary license, permit or certificate provided the applicant otherwise meets the qualifications set forth in subsection A of §54.1-119 of the CodeofVirginia. A temporary license, permit or certificate shall be valid for twelve months or until the permanent license, permit or certificate is issued, whichever occurs first. Temporary licenses, permits or certificates shall not be renewed or reinstated.

C. NON-QUALIFIED APPLICANTS Applicants applying under the provisions of §54.1-119 of the CodeofVirginiathat do not appear to meet all requirements for expedited processing shall have their application reviewed, receive notification of deficiencies and be scheduled for any administrative proceedings in an expeditious manner.

D. EXEMPTIONS The provisions of §54.1-119 of the CodeofVirginia do not apply to Branch Pilot licenses issued by other jurisdictions as they are not deemed substantially equivalent.

Policy Title: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-03 Expedited Licensing of Military Spouses [POL406-300_03-v4] Effective: 10/07/2016 Submitted By: Mary Broz-Vaughan, Communications Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-03 Expedited Licensing of Military Spouses (Effective 07/01/2016) Page 1 of 1

LICENSING & REGULATION POLICY #300-03 EXPEDITED LICENSING OF MILITARY SPOUSES Effective Date: October 7, 2016 Approved By: DigitallyReason: signedI am approvingby Jay W.thisDeBoerdocument Date: 2016.10.07 15:00:50 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to document the requirements that must be met for military spouses to qualify for expedited processing of license applications under the provisions of § 54.1-119 of the CodeofVirginia.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Pursuant to § 54.1-119 of the CodeofVirginia, the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation shall expedite the processing of applications for military spouses that meet the qualifications set forth in statute.

III. DEFINITIONS: Expedited processing Processing of applications under the provisions of § 54.1-119 of the Code of Virginiais performed as soon as practicable and not based on order of receipt.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: n/a

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. APPLICABILITY This policy applies to those applicants who hold a license, certificate, registration, permit or other authorization in another jurisdiction where the Virginia Board has deemed the entry requirements to be substantially equivalent to those in Virginia.

B. REQUIREMENTS: The Department shall expedite applications for individuals meeting the following criteria.

1. The applicant shall submit a complete application.
2. The applicant must hold the same or similar license, certificate, registration, permit, or other authorization required for the practice of any business, profession or occupation issued by another jurisdiction based on requirements in such other jurisdiction that are substantially equivalent to those required in Virginia.
3. The applicant shall not have engaged in any act that would constitute grounds for disciplinary action.
4. The applicant’s spouse must be the subject of a military transfer to the Commonwealth of Virginia.
5. If the board is unable to complete the review of the documentation provided by the applicant or make a final determination regarding substantial equivalency within 20 days of receipt of a completed application, the board shall issue a temporary license, permit or certificate provided the applicant otherwise meets the qualifications set forth in subsection A of §54.1-119 of the CodeofVirginia. A temporary license, permit or certificate shall be valid for twelve months or until the permanent license, permit or certificate is issued, whichever occurs first. Temporary licenses, permits or certificates shall not be renewed or reinstated.

C. NON-QUALIFIED APPLICANTS Applicants applying under the provisions of §54.1-119 of the CodeofVirginiathat do not appear to meet all requirements for expedited processing shall have their application reviewed, receive notification of deficiencies and be scheduled for any administrative proceedings in an expeditious manner.

D. EXEMPTIONS: §54.1-119 does not apply to Branch Pilot licenses issued by other jurisdictions, as they are not deemed substantially equivalent.

Policy Title: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-03 Expedited Licensing of Military Spouses [POL406-300_03-v4] Effective: 10/07/2016 Submitted By: Mary Broz-Vaughan, Communications Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Licensing & Regulation Policy #300-03 Expedited Licensing of Military Spouses (Effective 07/01/2016) Page 1 of 1

DIRECTOR’S POLICY #100-11 INTERNET WEBSITE Effective Date: June 8, 2017

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Reason: I am approving this Approved By: document Date: 2017.06.08 13:43:38 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to provide clear and concise Internet website content guidelines to the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation employees and contractors to ensure continuous access to accurate information through consistent management of the Department’s website, including authorized placement and removal of information.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department’s Internet website shall present information about the Department’s mission, regulations and services provided to regulants and the public. To the extent possible, the Department shall provide data and on-line services to regulants and the general public. The contents of the Department’s Internet website are the property of the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation and are subject to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act.

III. DEFINITIONS: Data services Regulant information available for public disclosure, including but not limited to license status and disciplinary actions.

Internet A global web of interconnected networks and computers.

Hyperlink/link In hypertext systems, such as the World Wide Web, a link is a reference or connection to another document or Internet site.

Online services Interactive transactions offered to regulants and the general public.

Web coordinator An individual within the Communications and Board Operations Division responsible for website updates, security and maintenance as well as ensuring website availability to the Department and the general public.

Website A site (location) on the World Wide Web. Each website contains a home or main page that typically serves as an index or table of contents to other documents stored on the site. The site may also contain additional documents, files and links to other sites. Each site is owned and managed by an individual, company or organization.

Website liaison An individual designated within each operational unit to review and prepare website information relevant to the work unit.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. WEBSITE FORMAT The Department Communications Director shall be responsible for the layout and content of the DPOR website.

Web site page templates shall be developed or provided by the Communications Director in consultation with the site vendor.

B. GENERAL

1. The Communications Director shall oversee the Department’s website to ensure that the information on the site is professional, clear, accurate, current and concise.
2. Each operational unit shall designate a website liaison responsible for the accuracy of the unit’s website

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-11 Internet Website [POL401_100-11_v6] Effective 06/08/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-11 Internet Web Site (Effective 02/25/2010) Page 1 of 2information. The website liaison shall consult with the Communications Director prior to submitting any substantive website changes to the Web Coordinator.

1. The Department’s Internet website and its document collection may include hyperlinks to sites on the World Wide Web or Internet. Links that have value as educational, reference or research tools or relate to the mission of the Department and the Commonwealth of Virginia may be included on the Department’s website.

Any proposed links shall be submitted for approval to the Communications Director.

1. Data and online services shall be developed by the Information Systems Division in cooperation with the appropriate operational units and shall not be subject to the content review and approval provisions of this policy.
2. Applications and other forms developed in accordance with Information Management Procedure #1002 Forms Design shall not be subject to the content review and approval provisions of this policy. Requests to post applications and forms shall be submitted to the Forms Design Analyst or Web Coordinator with a copy to the appropriate operational unit.

C. CHANGES TO THE DEPARTMENT WEBSITE

1. Each operational unit shall perform periodic reviews of the information on the Department’s website.
2. The unit’s website liaison shall e-mail new or revised information to the DPOR Web Coordinator. Substantive changes to website content shall be reviewed by the Communications Director prior to submittal to the Web Coordinator.
3. The Web Coordinator will transfer files to the Department’s website. If necessary, links to access the information will be added or modified by the Web Coordinator. E-mail notification shall be sent to the website liaison when the new information is available to the public.
4. Web content files shall be supplied in an Internet ready form as an HTML document, Adobe Acrobat .pdf format, or graphic format such as .jpd, .gif or .bmp. Forms and license applications shall be available in Adobe .pdf format only.

D. RETENTION OF INFORMATION ON THE DEPARTMENT’S WEBSITE

1. Information may remain on the Department’s website for as long as it is current.
2. Any unique information available only on the Department’s website (and not in any other format) shall be printed by the unit’s website liaison and forwarded to the Information Management Section for retention in a state archives file. Website information that is a duplication of a public record available in another format does not require separate record retention consideration.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-11 Internet Website [POL401_100-11_v6] Effective 06/08/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-11 Internet Web Site (Effective 02/25/2010) Page 2 of 2

DIRECTOR’S POLICY #100-11 INTERNET WEBSITE Effective Date: June 8, 2017

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Reason: I am approving this Approved By: document Date: 2017.06.08 13:43:38 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to provide clear and concise Internet website content guidelines to the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation employees and contractors to ensure continuous access to accurate information through consistent management of the Department’s website, including authorized placement and removal of information.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department’s Internet website shall present information about the Department’s mission, regulations and services provided to regulants and the public. To the extent possible, the Department shall provide data and on-line services to regulants and the general public. The contents of the Department’s Internet website are the property of the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation and are subject to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act.

III. DEFINITIONS: Data services Regulant information available for public disclosure, including but not limited to license status and disciplinary actions.

Internet A global web of interconnected networks and computers.

Hyperlink/link In hypertext systems, such as the World Wide Web, a link is a reference or connection to another document or Internet site.

Online services Interactive transactions offered to regulants and the general public.

Web coordinator An individual within the Communications and Board Operations Division responsible for website updates, security and maintenance as well as ensuring website availability to the Department and the general public.

Website A site (location) on the World Wide Web. Each website contains a home or main page that typically serves as an index or table of contents to other documents stored on the site. The site may also contain additional documents, files and links to other sites. Each site is owned and managed by an individual, company or organization.

Website liaison An individual designated within each operational unit to review and prepare website information relevant to the work unit.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. WEBSITE FORMAT The Department Communications Director shall be responsible for the layout and content of the DPOR website.

Web page templates shall be developed or provided by the Communications Director in consultation with the vendor.

B. GENERAL

1. The Communications Director shall oversee the website to ensure information is professional, clear, accurate, current, and concise.
2. Each operational unit shall designate a liaison responsible for their website’s accuracy.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-11 Internet Website [POL401_100-11_v6] Effective 06/08/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-11 Internet Web Site (Effective 02/25/2010) Page 1 of 2information. The website liaison shall consult with the Communications Director prior to submitting any substantive website changes to the Web Coordinator.

1. The website may include hyperlinks to sites that serve educational, reference, research, or mission-related purposes.

Any proposed links shall be submitted for approval to the Communications Director.

1. Data and online services shall be developed by the IS Division with operational units and are exempt from content review under this policy.
2. Forms developed per Procedure #1002 are exempt from review; requests to post forms go to the Forms Analyst or Web Coordinator, with a copy to the operational unit.

C. CHANGES TO THE DEPARTMENT WEBSITE

1. Each unit shall periodically review website information.
2. Liaisons shall email new or revised info to the Web Coordinator; substantive changes require review by the Communications Director before submission.
3. The Web Coordinator will upload files, modify links if needed, and notify liaisons when info is public.
4. Content files shall be in HTML, PDF, or graphic formats; forms and applications in PDF only.

D. RETENTION OF INFORMATION ON THE DEPARTMENT’S WEBSITE

1. Information may stay on the website as long as current.
2. Any unique information on the Department’s website must be printed by the website liaison and forwarded to the Information Management Section for archival retention. Duplicates of public records in other formats do not require separate retention.

Same as previous, administrative details repeated; no reduction needed.

FINANCE POLICY #700-03 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE & DEBT COLLECTION Effective Date: July 1, 2018

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer DN: cn=Jay W. DeBoer, o=DPOR,

c=US Approved By: ou=Director,,email=jay.deboer@dpor.virginia.gov,Date: 2018.07.26 14:36:29 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the management and collection of accounts receivable as required by the State Comptroller.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation shall take all appropriate and cost effective actions to aggressively collect its accounts receivable in accordance with the Code of Virginia and Commonwealth Accounting Policies and Procedures.

III. DEFINITIONS: Accounts Receivable Any amount owed to the Department, including monetary penalties, recovery fund payments, employee reimbursements, and miscellaneous billings arising from the sale of goods or services. An accounts receivable is also referred to as a receivable. Receivables do not include travel advances, which are addressed separately in Finance Policy #700-01 Travel and Business Meals.

Monetary Penalties Penalties assessed against licensees under § 54.1-202 of the Code of Virginia for the violation of any statute or regulation pertaining to a regulatory board of the Department.

Other Receivables Amounts owed for services rendered (e.g., license transcripts, FOIA requests, employee reimbursements, and other miscellaneous billings).

Recovery Fund Payments Amounts owed for Recovery Fund claims paid in accordance with § 54.1-1120, § 54.1-2114 and § 55-530.1 of the Code of Virginia.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  Commonwealth Accounting Policies and Procedures Topic 20505 Accounts Receivable  Set-Off Program Information Guide (published by the Virginia Department of Taxation)  Attorney General Debt Collection Procedures  Certification of Final Order Form  Director’s Policy #100-05 License Suspensions  Finance Procedure 600-601 Receivables  Finance Procedure 600-505 Recovery Fund Receivables

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. MONETARY PENALTIES

1. Creation of the Receivable The approval of any Consent or Final Order that assesses monetary penalties or costs creates a receivable. The receivable is due from the moment the Director signs the Order. However, most Orders give the debtor a fixed amount of time to pay before the account is deemed past due.
2. License Suspension The licensing sections are responsible for monitoring disciplinary orders until compliance is obtained. If the order assesses penalties or costs and payment is not made by the due date, the account is deemed to be past due and the Executive Director shall suspend the debtor’s license for non-payment according to the provisions of Director’s Policy #100-05 License Suspensions.

Policy Title: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection [POL405-700_03-v7] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Jeff Waite, Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection (Effective 02/10/2012) Page 1 of 43. Collection Efforts on Unpaid Accounts Following the license suspension, but not more than 30 days after the payment due date, the board shall notify the Finance Section of the need for collection. The Finance Section shall employ the collection procedures outlined in Finance Procedure #600-601 Receivables to collect the amount owed to the Department.

B. RECOVERY FUND CLAIMS

1. Payment from the Fund Recovery Fund claims are paid pursuant to approved Final Orders. The payment of any Recovery Fund claim creates an immediate obligation for the regulant to repay the Fund with interest.

Upon payment from the Fund, the Finance Section shall employ the collection procedures outlined in Finance Procedure #600-505 Recovery Fund Receivables to collect the amount owed.

1. License Revocation The Finance Section shall notify the regulatory board sections whenever a payment is made from the Recovery Funds. Upon receiving this notice, the board sections shall revoke the regulant’s license except for claims against the Contractor Transaction Recovery Fund or when prevented by bankruptcy.
2. Calculation of Interest The Department shall assess interest on all Recovery Fund accounts receivable according to the Virginia Debt Collection Act § 2.2-4805 of the Code of Virginia. Interest is imposed at the judgment rate as provided in § 6.2-302 of the Code of Virginia.

C. OTHER RECEIVABLES The Information Management Section is responsible for billing and collecting all license transcripts, FOIA and other public record fees. If any billed amount remains unpaid on the last day of any quarter, the Information Management Section shall report the amount owed to the Finance Section so that it can be included in the Comptroller’s Quarterly Accounts Receivable Report. In the event that the Information Management Section is unable to obtain payment from the debtor within a reasonable time period, they shall forward the account and all supporting documentation to the Finance Section for further collection efforts.

D. PARTIAL PAYMENTS

1. The Department does not accept installment agreements and debtors must pay the full amount owed on or before the required payment due date.
2. If partial payment is made, the Department will receipt the funds and apply them to the appropriate account. The receipt does not constitute an installment agreement and will not prevent or stop outside collection efforts if full payment is not received before the required due date. In addition, the debtor’s license shall remain suspended for nonpayment and/or the regulant will be ineligible to reapply for a new license until the account is paid in full.
3. Partial payments in disciplinary cases will be applied to costs first and penalties second. All collections on monetary penalties will be deposited to the State Literary Fund in accordance with § 19.2-353 of the Code of Virginia. Partial payments in recovery fund cases will be applied to accrued interest first and then to the principal balance.

E. DEBT SET-OFF MATCHES

1. Debt Set-Off The Department participates in the Department of Taxation’s Individual Debt Set-Off Collection Program and the state Comptroller's Debt Set-Off program. These programs intercept state tax Policy Title: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection [POL405-700_03-v7] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Jeff Waite, Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection (Effective 02/10/2012) Page 2 of 4 refunds, lottery winnings, and targeted vendor payments and use them to offset debts owed to state agencies.
2. Debtor Notification The state Department of Taxation notifies DPOR via e-mail when available funds have been matched to the agency’s debt. Within ten calendar days of the match date, the Finance Section shall notify the debtor in writing that the Department of Taxation is holding available funds against the debt. The purpose of the letter is to inform debtors that they have thirty calendar days to contest the validity of the debt before the funds are seized.
3. Right to Contest The debtor has the right to contest the validity of a claim before the set-off agency. The debtor must give written notice of his desire to contest a claim within 30 calendar days of the mailing date of the set-off agency’s letter. This will suspend further set-off action.

When the Finance Section receives notice that a debtor is contesting, they shall schedule a Set-Off Hearing. The Finance Section shall select a Presiding Officer that has no prior involvement in the circumstances that culminated in the dispute. The Presiding Officer shall establish a date, time and place for the hearing and shall notify the debtor of these facts using certified mail within ten days of receiving the hearing request.

1. Hearing Procedures a. The Presiding Officer shall conduct the Set-Off Hearing on the appointed date. The scope of the hearing shall be limited to determining whether the amount in set-off is an obligation that remains due and owed to the Department. The underlying basis of the debt shall not be addressed in the Set-Off Hearing. b. A representative from the Finance Section shall attend the hearing to present the Department’s evidence and may call witnesses on the Department’s behalf. The debtor shall also be allowed to submit evidence relevant to the matter and to call witnesses. A tape recorder or court reporter shall provide a record of the proceedings. c. The Presiding Officer shall consider all the evidence presented at the hearing and shall make a determination as to whether the Department is entitled to the amount held in set-off.

While usually made at the conclusion of the hearing, the Presiding Officer may elect to delay the decision if additional information is needed. In such cases, the Presiding Officer shall notify the debtor of the hearing outcome within three days of receiving the additional information. After the final determination of the validity of the debt is determined, the Finance Section shall finalize the match in the Debt Set-Off system in order to collect or release the funds being held.

1. Failure to Appear The debtor’s failure to appear at the hearing at the appointed time and place shall be deemed a forfeiture of their opportunity to contest the claim and final set-off shall be awarded by default.
2. Appeal/Grievance Procedures The decision of the Presiding Officer shall be final. However, this does not prevent the debtor from appealing the decision in circuit court as provided in § 58.1-527 of the Code of Virginia. All appeals must be filed in circuit court within thirty days of the Department’s decision.

F. BANKRUPTCY STAYS Bankruptcy law requires the Department to suspend collection efforts against individuals or companies that have filed bankruptcy. To ensure compliance with this law, any DPOR employee who receives notice of a bankruptcy (including those received through the Recovery Fund process) should immediately forward a copy of the notice to the Financial Services Director. The Financial Services Policy Title: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection [POL405-700_03-v7] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Jeff Waite, Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection (Effective 02/10/2012) Page 3 of 4 Section staff will remove the account from the tax set-off program and notify the outside collection agent or Office of the Attorney General of the need to suspend collection efforts until the bankruptcy case is closed. The Financial Services Director or designee shall take appropriate action to protect the Department’s interests during the bankruptcy proceedings.

G. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY The Director has authorized the Executive Director and Board Administrator of the board issuing the order to sign the Certification of Final Order that accompanies account referrals to the Office of the Attorney General.

Policy Title: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection [POL405-700_03-v7] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Jeff Waite, Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection (Effective 02/10/2012) Page 4 of 4

FINANCE POLICY #700-03 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE & DEBT COLLECTION Effective Date: July 1, 2018

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer DN: cn=Jay W. DeBoer, o=DPOR,

c=US Approved By: ou=Director,,email=jay.deboer@dpor.virginia.gov,Date: 2018.07.26 14:36:29 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the management and collection of accounts receivable as required by the State Comptroller.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation shall take all appropriate and cost effective actions to aggressively collect its accounts receivable in accordance with the Code of Virginia and Commonwealth Accounting Policies and Procedures.

III. DEFINITIONS: Accounts Receivable Any amount owed to the Department, including monetary penalties, recovery fund payments, employee reimbursements, and miscellaneous billings arising from the sale of goods or services. An accounts receivable is also referred to as a receivable. Receivables do not include travel advances, which are addressed separately in Finance Policy #700-01 Travel and Business Meals.

Monetary Penalties Penalties assessed against licensees under § 54.1-202 of the Code of Virginia for the violation of any statute or regulation pertaining to a regulatory board of the Department.

Other Receivables Amounts owed for services rendered (e.g., license transcripts, FOIA requests, employee reimbursements, and other miscellaneous billings).

Recovery Fund Payments Amounts owed for Recovery Fund claims paid in accordance with § 54.1-1120, § 54.1-2114 and § 55-530.1 of the Code of Virginia.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  Commonwealth Accounting Policies and Procedures Topic 20505 Accounts Receivable  Set-Off Program Information Guide (published by the Virginia Department of Taxation)  Attorney General Debt Collection Procedures  Certification of Final Order Form  Director’s Policy #100-05 License Suspensions  Finance Procedure 600-601 Receivables  Finance Procedure 600-505 Recovery Fund Receivables

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. MONETARY PENALTIES

1. Creation of the Receivable: Approval of any Consent or Final Order assessing penalties or costs creates a receivable due upon the Director’s signature, with most Orders allowing a fixed payment period before becoming past due.
2. License Suspension: Licensing sections monitor disciplinary orders; if penalties or costs are unpaid by due date, the Executive Director shall suspend the license per Policy #100-05.

Policy Title: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection [POL405-700_03-v7] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Jeff Waite, Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection (Effective 02/10/2012) Page 1 of 43. Collection Efforts on Unpaid Accounts Following the license suspension, but not more than 30 days after the payment due date, the board shall notify the Finance Section of the need for collection. The Finance Section shall employ the collection procedures outlined in Finance Procedure #600-601 Receivables to collect the amount owed to the Department.

B. RECOVERY FUND CLAIMS

1. Payment from the Fund: Claims paid per Final Orders create an immediate obligation for the regulant to repay with interest.

Upon payment from the Fund, the Finance Section shall employ the collection procedures outlined in Finance Procedure #600-505 Recovery Fund Receivables to collect the amount owed.

1. License Revocation: Finance shall notify boards of Recovery Fund payments; boards shall revoke licenses unless against Contractor Fund or due to bankruptcy.
2. Interest Calculation: The Department shall assess interest on Recovery Fund receivables per Virginia Debt Collection Act §§ 2.2-4805 and 6.2-302, at judgment rate.

C. OTHER RECEIVABLES: The Information Management Section bills and collects license transcripts, FOIA, and public record fees. Unpaid amounts at quarter-end are reported to Finance; unresolved accounts are forwarded for collection.

D. PARTIAL PAYMENTS

1. The Department does not accept installment agreements; debtors must pay in full by the due date.
2. Partial payments will be receipted and applied but do not constitute installment agreements or stop outside collections. Licenses remain suspended until full payment.
3. Partial payments in disciplinary cases are applied to costs first and penalties second. Penalty collections are deposited to the State Literary Fund per § 19.2-353. In recovery fund cases, payments go to interest first, then principal.

E. DEBT SET-OFF MATCHES

1. Debt Set-Off The Department participates in the Department of Taxation’s Individual Debt Set-Off Collection Program and the state Comptroller's Debt Set-Off program. These programs intercept state tax Policy Title: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection [POL405-700_03-v7] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Jeff Waite, Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection (Effective 02/10/2012) Page 2 of 4 refunds, lottery winnings, and targeted vendor payments and use them to offset debts owed to state agencies.
2. The Department of Taxation notifies DPOR via email when funds match the debt. Within ten days, the Finance Section must notify the debtor in writing, informing them they have thirty days to contest before funds are seized.
3. The debtor may contest the claim’s validity before the set-off agency by giving written notice within 30 days of the letter’s mailing, suspending further set-off.

When notified of a contest, Finance shall schedule a Set-Off Hearing, appoint a neutral Presiding Officer, and notify the debtor via certified mail within ten days.

1. a. The Presiding Officer conducts the Set-Off Hearing to determine if the amount owed remains due; the debt’s basis is not addressed. b. Finance staff present evidence and may call witnesses; the debtor may do the same. Proceedings are recorded. c. The Presiding Officer decides if the Department is entitled to the set-off amount.

The Presiding Officer may delay decision pending additional info, notifying the debtor within three days. Once final, Finance will finalize the debt match for collection or release.

1. Failure to appear at the hearing forfeits the right to contest, and final set-off is awarded by default.
2. The Presiding Officer’s decision is final but may be appealed in circuit court within 30 days as per § 58.1-527.

F. BANKRUPTCY STAYS Bankruptcy law requires the Department to suspend collection efforts against individuals or companies that have filed bankruptcy. To ensure compliance with this law, any DPOR employee who receives notice of a bankruptcy (including those received through the Recovery Fund process) should immediately forward a copy of the notice to the Financial Services Director. The Financial Services Policy Title: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection [POL405-700_03-v7] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Jeff Waite, Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection (Effective 02/10/2012) Page 3 of 4 Section staff will remove the account from the tax set-off program and notify the outside collection agent or Office of the Attorney General of the need to suspend collection efforts until the bankruptcy case is closed. The Financial Services Director or designee shall take appropriate action to protect the Department’s interests during the bankruptcy proceedings.

G. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY: The Director authorizes the Executive Director and Board Administrator to sign the Certification of Final Order for account referrals to the Attorney General.

Policy Title: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection [POL405-700_03-v7] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Jeff Waite, Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Finance Policy #700-03 Accounts Receivable & Debt Collection (Effective 02/10/2012) Page 4 of 4

DIRECTOR’S POLICY #100-04 RELEASE OF INFORMATION Effective Date: June 5, 2017

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Approved By: Reason:documentI am approving this Date: 2017.06.05 10:55:39 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to provide Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR) employees with guidelines for responding to requests for information. As a DPOR guidance document, it is intended to provide the public with a general understanding of DPOR’s record disclosure practices.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Pursuant to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (§ 2.2-3700 et seq. of the Code of Virginia), the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation assumes a predisposition toward full disclosure of all public records in the Department’s possession. Specific exclusions shall apply in accordance with § 54.1-108 and §§ 2.2-3705.1 through 2.2-3706 of the Code of Virginia and, in the absence of any board policy to the contrary, when the Department exercises its discretionary authority to withhold personal or confidential information that may compromise an individual’s safety and security. A subpoena duces tecum for the production of records shall be processed in accordance with Director’s Policy #100-06, Subpoenas, Service of Process and Notices.

III. DEFINITIONS:

Personal information As defined in § 2.2-3801 of the Code of Virginia is information that (i) describes, locates or indexes anything about an individual including, but not limited to, his social security number, driver's license number, agency-issued identification number, student identification number, real or personal property holdings derived from tax returns, and his education, financial transactions, medical history, ancestry, religion, political ideology, criminal or employment record, or (ii) affords a basis for inferring personal characteristics, such as finger and voice prints, photographs, or things done by or to such individual; and the record of his presence, registration, or membership in an organization or activity, or admission to an institution. "Personal information" shall not include routine information maintained for the purpose of internal office administration whose use could not be such as to affect adversely any data subject nor does the term include real estate assessment information.

Public record Recorded information that documents a transaction or activity by or with any public officer, agency or employee of an agency. Regardless of physical form or characteristic, the recorded information is a public record if it is produced, collected, received or retained in pursuance of law or in connection with the transaction of public business.

The medium (e.g., electronic documents and mail) on which such information is recorded has no bearing on the determination of whether the record is a public record or whether it is subject to public disclosure.

Record Custodian A public official or official designee in charge of an office housing public records.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  Virginia Freedom of Information Act  Government Data Collection and Dissemination Practices Act  Director’s Policy #100-06 Subpoenas, Service of Process and Notices

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 1 of 7V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. CUSTODIAN OF RECORD

1. The Records and FOIA Manager shall serve as the custodian of all Department records with specific positions designated as custodians for disclosure and authentication purposes. In the absence of the designated custodians, the Records and FOIA Manager and the Information Management Director shall authenticate records for court submission. The following individuals shall serve as custodians of any record created, processed and/or maintained by their respective sections. These individuals shall designate a backup custodian to perform record authentications in their absence. a. Executive Directors in the Communications and Board Operations Division b. Directors in the Compliance and Investigations Division (Investigations, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Complaint Analysis and Resolution, Adjudication, and Fair Housing) with Field Supervisors and Investigators designated as record custodians for the purpose of authenticating licensing and investigation records in court. c. Human Resources Director d. Senior Manager Administrative and Financial Services e. Budget and Financial Services Director f. Education and Examinations Director

B. RESPONDING TO INFORMATION REQUESTS

1. All requests for records are subject to the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. A requester is not required to reference FOIA in order to be subject to the provisions of the Act.
2. Generally, DPOR does not require FOIA requests to be submitted in writing; however, in situations where the requested records are not identified with reasonable specificity (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3704.B), DPOR may require a detailed written or e-mail request to ensure accurate response preparation.
3. To prepare a response within five workdays of receipt, immediate delivery of a FOIA request to the appropriate (responsible) section is essential. The first workday following receipt of the request is considered day one when calculating the response deadline.
4. The Records and FOIA Manager shall make all decisions concerning routine FOIA requests and provide guidance to DPOR staff in determining the appropriate response to information requests. Specific exclusions shall apply in accordance with § 54.1-108 and §§ 2.2-3705.1 through 2.2-3706 of the Code of Virginia and any applicable board or agency policies. Non-routine FOIA requests from the public shall be communicated to the Information Management Director. Non-routine requests from the media and elected officials shall be communicated to the Deputy Director for Communications and Board Operations.
5. In accordance with § 2.2-3704.F of the Code of Virginia, DPOR may assess reasonable charges for the actual costs associated with accessing, duplicating, supplying or searching for records. Documents requested by a federal, state or local governmental or law-enforcement agency shall be provided at no cost. Photocopies are available for $.25 per page for 40 or more pages. Copies of less than 40 pages shall be available at no charge.

Furthermore, pursuant to § 2.2-3704.H unless approved by the Information Management Director, DPOR shall require advanced payment for requests that are likely to exceed $200 prior to preparing the response.

1. Pursuant to § 2.2-3704.I of the Code of Virginia, before processing a request for records, DPOR may require payment of any amount owed for previous FOIA requests that remain unpaid for at least 30 days. A letter requesting payment prior to providing additional records shall be mailed within five workdays of receiving the new request.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 2 of 7

C. RECORD CATEGORIES AND FOIA RESPONSE ASSIGNMENTS

1. Applications Direct record requests to: Information Management Section Applications for admission to examinations or for licensure are exempt from public disclosure (§ 54.1-108.2 of the Code of Virginia). Applications include initial, reinstatement and upgrade applications, as well as license maintenance documents that include social security numbers or other personal information.

However, applications are subject to disclosure when: a. Requested by the regulant/applicant (or any party authorized by the regulant or applicant). The regulant or their representative may obtain copies of their own applications for admission to examinations or licensure (§ 54.1-108.2 of the Code of Virginia). b. Requested by agencies in another state, district, or territory of the United States where the information is requested by the state, district, or territory in connection with an application for a service, privilege or right under their laws. Requests shall be made in a manner that substantiates the requester’s affiliation (on official letterhead or by e-mail) and states the reason for the request. c. Requested by any federal, state or local law enforcement agencies to be used in conjunction with an investigation or authentication of credentials. Requests shall be made in a manner that substantiates the requester’s affiliation (on official letterhead or by e-mail) and states the reason for the request. A letter or e-mail from the Department must accompany the information verifying that DPOR is releasing this information for investigative or authentication purposes only.

1. Bonds Direct record requests to: Licensing Section Copies of and information related to performance bonds required for licensure (including the amount of the bond and the issuer) are subject to public disclosure upon request.
2. Certifications of Regulant Status Direct record requests to: Licensing Section Individual licensing sections are responsible for preparing Certifications of Regulant Status in accordance with DPOR Licensing and Regulation Procedure #903, Certifications of Regulant Status.
3. Complaint Files Direct information requests to: Compliance and Investigations Division The Compliance and Investigations Division is responsible for responding to general inquiries regarding the number and nature of complaints against a specific respondent. Open complaints may be publicly acknowledged when a Department investigation has determined that sufficient evidence exists to establish probable cause that there was a violation of a law or regulation; however, the case file is exempt from disclosure until case closure. Cases where probable cause has been found are disclosed on the Department’s web site. Nothing in this policy shall conflict with the release of complaint information during disciplinary investigations as provided for in the Administrative Process Act.

Direct record requests to: Information Management Section a. Closed case files are subject to public disclosure with the following exclusions: 1) Application Case Files Application file information resulting in licensure shall be transferred to the license application file and handled according to Section V.C.1 of this policy.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 3 of 7 2) Criminal (Unlicensed Activity) Case Files a) Criminal incident information as defined in § 2.2-3706.A of the Code of Virginia and closed unlicensed cases may be exempt from public disclosure when the release is likely to jeopardize an ongoing investigation or the safety of an individual; cause a suspect to flee or evade detection; or result in the destruction of evidence. No exclusion applies when disclosure is not likely to cause the above-referenced damage. b) Criminal incident information as defined in § 2.2-3706.A of the Code of Virginia and closed unlicensed cases may be exempt from public disclosure when the release is likely to jeopardize an ongoing investigation or the safety of an individual; cause a suspect to flee or evade detection; or result in the destruction of evidence. No exclusion applies when disclosure is not likely to cause the above-referenced damage. c) The identity of any individual providing information about a crime or criminal activity under a promise of anonymity shall not be disclosed. 3) Alternative Dispute Resolution Files All memoranda, work products or other materials contained in the case file of a mediator are confidential and all materials in the case file of a mediation program pertaining to a specific mediation are confidential. Any communication made in or in connection with mediation, that relates to the dispute, including communications to schedule mediation, whether made to a mediator, a mediation program, a party, or any other person is confidential. Confidential materials and communications are not subject to the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, nor discovery in any judicial or administrative proceeding unless permitted under § 2.2-4119 of the Code of Virginia. b. The Information Management Section is responsible for preparing closed disciplinary and fair housing complaint files in response to FOIA requests. Prior to releasing closed files, information exempt from public disclosure pursuant to Section V.E of this policy shall be removed or redacted. Unless specifically requested by an involved party, e-mail addresses contained in closed case files shall be disclosed. c. Open case files are exempt from public disclosure under the provisions of § 54.1-108.3 of the Code of Virginia. Nothing in this policy shall conflict with the release of complaint information during complaint investigations as provided for in the Administrative Process Act. d. Orders (final and consent) and written settlement agreements resulting from a voluntary alternative dispute resolution proceeding e.g., conciliation, mediation or facilitation are subject to public disclosure unless the involved parties agree in writing that the agreement is to remain confidential and the respective board determines that disclosure is not required to further the purposes of the law. e. Due to the public forum in which an informal fact-finding conference is held, IFF transcripts contained in case files (both open and closed) are subject to public disclosure. Open file IFF transcripts may be released by Adjudication Section staff.

1. Contracts and Procurement Records Direct record requests to: Procurement Section of Administrative and Financial Services Division Procurement and contract records may be released in accordance with § 2.2-4342 of the Code of Virginia.
2. Electronic Mail Direct record request to: Custodian of Record All documents sent or received on the state electronic mail system and any associated attachments are subject to public disclosure. Specific exclusions shall apply in accordance with § 54.1-108 and §§ 2.2-3705.1 through 2.2-3706 of the Code of Virginia and any applicable board or agency policies. When responding to Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 4 of 7 requests for electronic mail, the content of the e-mail transmission shall be used to determine if the record is subject to any disclosure exemptions.
3. Examination Information Direct record requests to: Education and Examinations Section or Information Management Section a. Examination questions, papers, booklets, answer sheets and scoring keys are exempt from public disclosure pursuant to § 54.1-108.1 and § 2.2-3705.1.4 of the Code of Virginia, except in situations where the Department deems that the validity or security of future examinations will not be compromised. At the discretion of the Executive Director, examination information may be released to other state agencies. b. Examination scores may be released to candidates or other jurisdictions (on Certifications of Regulant Status) if permitted by board regulation and policy.
4. Financial Records Direct record requests to: Finance Section of Administrative and Financial Services Division Requests for records maintained by the Finance Section shall be submitted to the Budget and Financial Services Director.
5. Governor’s Working Papers Direct record requests to: Custodian of Record Reports, projects, correspondence and other documents classified as working papers of the Office of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, the Attorney General, the members of the General Assembly, or the Division of Legislative Services are not subject to public disclosure. 10. Legal Documents Direct record requests to: Custodian of Record a. Written advice of legal counsel to DPOR or the officers or employees of the Department, and any other related correspondence are protected by attorney-client privilege and therefore, not subject to public disclosure. b. Legal memoranda and other work products compiled specifically for use in litigation or for use in an active administrative investigation concerning a matter that is properly the subject of a closed meeting under § 2.2-3711 are exempt from public disclosure. 11. License Maintenance Records Direct record requests to: Information Management Section License maintenance records such as name and address changes, fee payment records and renewal cards are subject to public disclosure with the redaction of any information exempt from public disclosure per Section V.E of this policy. 12. License Transcripts Direct record requests to: Information Management Section a. License Transcripts summarize the activity associated with the license, certification or registration from initial date of licensure through fee/license expiration date. Usually prepared for court submission, License Transcripts are frequently used as an alternative to Department staff providing personal testimony regarding a specific license or lack thereof. They are prepared by the Information Management Section and authenticated by the appropriate licensing section. Other information prepared by Information Management for court in lieu of testimony include copies of official records (orders, regulation booklets, etc.) authenticated in accordance with § 54.1-112 of the Code of Virginia.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 5 of 7 b. License Transcripts are available for a fee of $40.00 per requested individual/business entity name; however, no fee shall be charged to organizations providing legal aid to the indigent or governmental/law enforcement agencies participating in an active criminal investigation. c. Upon request (from DPOR staff or a Commonwealth Attorney), License Transcripts may be prepared and authenticated by field investigators and regional supervisors to corroborate investigator testimony. 13. Meeting Minutes and Documents Direct record requests to: Licensing Section or Information Management Section a. Draft minutes of public meetings are available on the Department website and the Commonwealth Calendar no later than ten workdays following conclusion of the meeting (§ 2.2-3707.1 of the Code of Virginia). Final meeting minutes are available within three workdays of final approval of the minutes. b. Documents recorded in or compiled exclusively for use in closed meetings lawfully held pursuant to §

1. 2-3711 are not subject to public disclosure. However, no record that is otherwise open to inspection under this chapter shall be deemed exempt by virtue of the fact that it has been reviewed or discussed in a closed meeting. 14. Personnel Records Direct record requests to: Human Resources Section a. All requests for individual employee records shall be handled by the Human Resource Section according to the provisions of the Department of Human Resource Management Policy 6.05 Personnel Records Disclosure, the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and any guidance from the Office of the Attorney General. With the exception of the information listed in the next section, no employee information shall be released to a third party without the written consent of the subject employee. b. Upon disclosure of the following information to a third party, the Human Resource Section shall notify the subject employee of the release of information including the name and address of the individual requesting the information. 1) Employee’s position 2) Employee’s job classification 3) Dates of employment 4) Annual salary, official salary or rate of pay if such pay exceeds $10,000 per year 15. Property Registration Files Direct record requests to: Property Registration Office of the Common Interest Community Section Property registration files are available in electronic format for public disclosure. 16. Recovery Fund Files Direct record requests to: Custodian of Record Copies of Contractor and Real Estate Recovery Fund claim files are available upon request, regardless of case status. 17. Regulant Lists Direct record requests to: Information Management Section Statewide regulant lists for specific boards and occupations are available electronically for distribution on CD, DVD or e-mail.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 6 of 7 D. OTHER DISCLOSABLE INFORMATION While the Virginia Freedom of Information Act addresses the disclosure of “records”, other “information” shall be available to the public in order to afford them with the consumer protection associated with using appropriately credentialed practitioners. The appropriate licensing section is responsible for responding to general inquiries regarding licenses and licensing requirements. The licensing, certification, and registration information listed below may be released to the public via telephone, facsimile, e-mail or any other form of communication agreed to by both the requester and the Department.

1. Last 4 digits only of a licensee’s social security number or Virginia DMV Control Number
2. License number
3. Date of initial licensure
4. Expiration date of license
5. License classification
6. Method of obtaining license (e.g., exam, reciprocity, comity)
7. License classification
8. License status
9. Address of record (alternate addresses of individual regulants may be disclosed if the physical address required at the time of licensure has been replaced in order to protect regulant privacy) 10. E-mail address (if available) 11. Identity of individuals required as a condition of business licensure (e.g., qualified individuals, designated employees, brokers, compliance agents, responsible management) and the company with which they are affiliated. 12. Bond information

E. OTHER NON-DISCLOSABLE INFORMATION

1. 9 character social security numbers or Virginia DMV control numbers (at the Executive Director’s discretion, social security numbers/DMV control numbers may be disclosed on Certifications of Regulant Status)
2. Bank routing and account numbers
3. Credit/debit card numbers
4. Examination scores, pass/fail status or number of times an examination was taken by a candidate/licensee unless a board policy to the contrary exists
5. State income, business and estate tax returns and personal property tax returns are exempt from public disclosure.
6. Any information that may compromise the privacy or safety of an individual or business (i.e., medical/mental records, scholastic records, etc.) may be disclosed only upon approval of the Director, Deputy Directors, or Information Management Director.

F. PROCEDURE FOR CORRECTING PERSONAL INFORMATION Pursuant to § 2.2-3806.A.5 of the Code of Virginia, in the event that a regulant determines that the Department’s information on that person is inaccurate, obsolete or irrelevant, the individual may submit a written request for correction, removal or amendment to the Information Management Section. The Information Management Director shall be responsible for reviewing the request, determining if corrective action is warranted and coordinating any corrective action and written response to the requester.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 7 of 7

DIRECTOR’S POLICY #100-04 RELEASE OF INFORMATION Effective Date: June 5, 2017

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Approved By: Reason:documentI am approving this Date: 2017.06.05 10:55:39 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to provide Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR) employees with guidelines for responding to requests for information. As a DPOR guidance document, it is intended to provide the public with a general understanding of DPOR’s record disclosure practices.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Pursuant to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (§ 2.2-3700 et seq. of the Code of Virginia), the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation assumes a predisposition toward full disclosure of all public records in the Department’s possession. Specific exclusions shall apply in accordance with § 54.1-108 and §§ 2.2-3705.1 through 2.2-3706 of the Code of Virginia and, in the absence of any board policy to the contrary, when the Department exercises its discretionary authority to withhold personal or confidential information that may compromise an individual’s safety and security. A subpoena duces tecum for the production of records shall be processed in accordance with Director’s Policy #100-06, Subpoenas, Service of Process and Notices.

III. DEFINITIONS:

Personal information As defined in § 2.2-3801 of the Code of Virginia is information that (i) describes, locates or indexes anything about an individual including, but not limited to, his social security number, driver's license number, agency-issued identification number, student identification number, real or personal property holdings derived from tax returns, and his education, financial transactions, medical history, ancestry, religion, political ideology, criminal or employment record, or (ii) affords a basis for inferring personal characteristics, such as finger and voice prints, photographs, or things done by or to such individual; and the record of his presence, registration, or membership in an organization or activity, or admission to an institution. "Personal information" shall not include routine information maintained for the purpose of internal office administration whose use could not be such as to affect adversely any data subject nor does the term include real estate assessment information.

Public record Recorded information that documents a transaction or activity by or with any public officer, agency or employee of an agency. Regardless of physical form or characteristic, the recorded information is a public record if it is produced, collected, received or retained in pursuance of law or in connection with the transaction of public business.

The medium (e.g., electronic documents and mail) on which such information is recorded has no bearing on the determination of whether the record is a public record or whether it is subject to public disclosure.

Record Custodian A public official or official designee in charge of an office housing public records.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  Virginia Freedom of Information Act  Government Data Collection and Dissemination Practices Act  Director’s Policy #100-06 Subpoenas, Service of Process and Notices

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 1 of 7V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. CUSTODIAN OF RECORD

1. The Records and FOIA Manager shall serve as the custodian of all Department records with specific positions designated as custodians for disclosure and authentication purposes. In the absence of the designated custodians, the Records and FOIA Manager and the Information Management Director shall authenticate records for court submission. The following individuals shall serve as custodians of any record created, processed and/or maintained by their respective sections. These individuals shall designate a backup custodian to perform record authentications in their absence. a. Executive Directors in the Communications and Board Operations Division b. Directors in the Compliance and Investigations Division (Investigations, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Complaint Analysis and Resolution, Adjudication, and Fair Housing) with Field Supervisors and Investigators designated as record custodians for the purpose of authenticating licensing and investigation records in court. c. Human Resources Director d. Senior Manager Administrative and Financial Services e. Budget and Financial Services Director f. Education and Examinations Director

B. RESPONDING TO INFORMATION REQUESTS

1. All requests for records are subject to the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. A requester is not required to reference FOIA in order to be subject to the provisions of the Act.
2. Generally, DPOR does not require FOIA requests to be submitted in writing; however, in situations where the requested records are not identified with reasonable specificity (Code of Virginia § 2.2-3704.B), DPOR may require a detailed written or e-mail request to ensure accurate response preparation.
3. To prepare a response within five workdays of receipt, immediate delivery of a FOIA request to the appropriate (responsible) section is essential. The first workday following receipt of the request is considered day one when calculating the response deadline.
4. The Records and FOIA Manager shall make all decisions concerning routine FOIA requests and provide guidance to DPOR staff in determining the appropriate response to information requests. Specific exclusions shall apply in accordance with § 54.1-108 and §§ 2.2-3705.1 through 2.2-3706 of the Code of Virginia and any applicable board or agency policies. Non-routine FOIA requests from the public shall be communicated to the Information Management Director. Non-routine requests from the media and elected officials shall be communicated to the Deputy Director for Communications and Board Operations.
5. In accordance with § 2.2-3704.F of the Code of Virginia, DPOR may assess reasonable charges for the actual costs associated with accessing, duplicating, supplying or searching for records. Documents requested by a federal, state or local governmental or law-enforcement agency shall be provided at no cost. Photocopies are available for $.25 per page for 40 or more pages. Copies of less than 40 pages shall be available at no charge.

Furthermore, pursuant to § 2.2-3704.H unless approved by the Information Management Director, DPOR shall require advanced payment for requests that are likely to exceed $200 prior to preparing the response.

1. Pursuant to § 2.2-3704.I of the Code of Virginia, before processing a request for records, DPOR may require payment of any amount owed for previous FOIA requests that remain unpaid for at least 30 days. A letter requesting payment prior to providing additional records shall be mailed within five workdays of receiving the new request.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 2 of 7

C. RECORD CATEGORIES AND FOIA RESPONSE ASSIGNMENTS

1. Applications for admission, reinstatement, upgrade, or license maintenance documents with personal info must be requested from: Information Management Section. They are exempt from public disclosure (§ 54.1-108.2).

However, applications are subject to disclosure when: a. Requested by the regulant/applicant (or any party authorized by the regulant or applicant). The regulant or their representative may obtain copies of their own applications for admission to examinations or licensure (§ 54.1-108.2 of the Code of Virginia). b. Requested by agencies in another state, district, or territory of the United States where the information is requested by the state, district, or territory in connection with an application for a service, privilege or right under their laws. Requests shall be made in a manner that substantiates the requester’s affiliation (on official letterhead or by e-mail) and states the reason for the request. c. Requested by any federal, state or local law enforcement agencies to be used in conjunction with an investigation or authentication of credentials. Requests shall be made in a manner that substantiates the requester’s affiliation (on official letterhead or by e-mail) and states the reason for the request. A letter or e-mail from the Department must accompany the information verifying that DPOR is releasing this information for investigative or authentication purposes only.

1. Requests for performance bonds (amount, issuer) required for licensure should be directed to: Licensing Section; such info is publicly accessible.
2. Request Certifications of Regulant Status from: Licensing Section, prepared per DPOR Procedure #903.
3. Requests for complaint info go to: Compliance and Investigations Division. Open complaints with probable cause are disclosed after investigation; case files remain confidential until closure, per law.

Direct record requests to: Information Management Section a. Closed case files are subject to public disclosure with the following exclusions: 1) Application Case Files Application file information resulting in licensure shall be transferred to the license application file and handled according to Section V.C.1 of this policy.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 3 of 7 2) Criminal (Unlicensed Activity) Case Files a) Criminal incident information as defined in § 2.2-3706.A of the Code of Virginia and closed unlicensed cases may be exempt from public disclosure when the release is likely to jeopardize an ongoing investigation or the safety of an individual; cause a suspect to flee or evade detection; or result in the destruction of evidence. No exclusion applies when disclosure is not likely to cause the above-referenced damage. b) Criminal incident information as defined in § 2.2-3706.A of the Code of Virginia and closed unlicensed cases may be exempt from public disclosure when the release is likely to jeopardize an ongoing investigation or the safety of an individual; cause a suspect to flee or evade detection; or result in the destruction of evidence. No exclusion applies when disclosure is not likely to cause the above-referenced damage. c) The identity of any individual providing information about a crime or criminal activity under a promise of anonymity shall not be disclosed. 3) Alternative Dispute Resolution Files All memoranda, work products or other materials contained in the case file of a mediator are confidential and all materials in the case file of a mediation program pertaining to a specific mediation are confidential. Any communication made in or in connection with mediation, that relates to the dispute, including communications to schedule mediation, whether made to a mediator, a mediation program, a party, or any other person is confidential. Confidential materials and communications are not subject to the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, nor discovery in any judicial or administrative proceeding unless permitted under § 2.2-4119 of the Code of Virginia. b. The Information Management Section is responsible for preparing closed disciplinary and fair housing complaint files in response to FOIA requests. Prior to releasing closed files, information exempt from public disclosure pursuant to Section V.E of this policy shall be removed or redacted. Unless specifically requested by an involved party, e-mail addresses contained in closed case files shall be disclosed. c. Open case files are exempt from public disclosure under the provisions of § 54.1-108.3 of the Code of Virginia. Nothing in this policy shall conflict with the release of complaint information during complaint investigations as provided for in the Administrative Process Act. d. Orders (final and consent) and written settlement agreements resulting from a voluntary alternative dispute resolution proceeding e.g., conciliation, mediation or facilitation are subject to public disclosure unless the involved parties agree in writing that the agreement is to remain confidential and the respective board determines that disclosure is not required to further the purposes of the law. e. Due to the public forum in which an informal fact-finding conference is held, IFF transcripts contained in case files (both open and closed) are subject to public disclosure. Open file IFF transcripts may be released by Adjudication Section staff.

1. Requests for contracts and procurement records go to: Procurement Section; release per § 2.2-4342.
2. Requests for email records go to: Custodian of Record. Emails and attachments are public unless exemptions apply per law and policies; email content determines disclosure.
3. Requests for exam info go to: Education/Examinations or Info Management. Questions, answer sheets, and keys are exempt unless security is unaffected; scores may be released per policy.
4. Requests for financial records go to: Finance Section; directed to the Budget and Financial Services Director.
5. Requests for governor’s working papers go to: Custodian of Record; these are confidential. Legal advice and litigation work products are privileged. License maintenance info is public with exemptions. License transcripts summarize license activity, often for court, and are authenticated per law.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 5 of 7 b. License Transcripts are available for a fee of $40.00 per requested individual/business entity name; however, no fee shall be charged to organizations providing legal aid to the indigent or governmental/law enforcement agencies participating in an active criminal investigation. c. Upon request (from DPOR staff or a Commonwealth Attorney), License Transcripts may be prepared and authenticated by field investigators and regional supervisors to corroborate investigator testimony. 13. Meeting Minutes and Documents Direct record requests to: Licensing Section or Information Management Section a. Draft minutes of public meetings are available on the Department website and the Commonwealth Calendar no later than ten workdays following conclusion of the meeting (§ 2.2-3707.1 of the Code of Virginia). Final meeting minutes are available within three workdays of final approval of the minutes. b. Documents recorded in or compiled exclusively for use in closed meetings lawfully held pursuant to §

1. 2-3711 are not subject to public disclosure. However, no record that is otherwise open to inspection under this chapter shall be deemed exempt by virtue of the fact that it has been reviewed or discussed in a closed meeting. Requests for personnel records go to: Human Resources. Employee info is released only with consent, except for position, classification, employment dates, and salary over $10,000, with employee notified of disclosures. 15. Requests for property registration files go to: Property Registration Office; files are available electronically for public disclosure. 16. Requests for Recovery Fund claim files go to: Custodian of Record; available regardless of case status. 17. Requests for regulant lists go to: Information Management Section; available electronically via CD, DVD, or email.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 6 of 7 D. OTHER DISCLOSABLE INFORMATION While the Virginia Freedom of Information Act addresses the disclosure of “records”, other “information” shall be available to the public in order to afford them with the consumer protection associated with using appropriately credentialed practitioners. The appropriate licensing section is responsible for responding to general inquiries regarding licenses and licensing requirements. The licensing, certification, and registration information listed below may be released to the public via telephone, facsimile, e-mail or any other form of communication agreed to by both the requester and the Department.

1. Only last 4 digits of SSN or DMV Control Number.
2. License number
3. Date of initial licensure
4. Expiration date of license
5. License classification
6. Method of obtaining license (e.g., exam, reciprocity, comity)
7. License classification
8. License status
9. Address of record (including updated addresses for privacy), email (if available), key individuals (e.g., qualified persons, brokers), company info, and bond details are disclosed as applicable.

E. OTHER NON-DISCLOSABLE INFORMATION

1. 9 character social security numbers or Virginia DMV control numbers (at the Executive Director’s discretion, social security numbers/DMV control numbers may be disclosed on Certifications of Regulant Status)
2. Bank routing and account numbers
3. Credit/debit card numbers
4. Examination scores, pass/fail status, or attempts may be disclosed unless policy states otherwise.
5. State income, estate, business, and property tax returns are exempt from disclosure.
6. Privacy or safety-sensitive info (e.g., medical, scholastic) may only be disclosed with approval of senior officials.

F. PROCEDURE FOR CORRECTING PERSONAL INFORMATION Pursuant to § 2.2-3806.A.5 of the Code of Virginia, in the event that a regulant determines that the Department’s information on that person is inaccurate, obsolete or irrelevant, the individual may submit a written request for correction, removal or amendment to the Information Management Section. The Information Management Director shall be responsible for reviewing the request, determining if corrective action is warranted and coordinating any corrective action and written response to the requester.

Policy Title: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information [POL401-100_04-v16] Effective: 06/05/2017 Submitted By: Dawn Waters, Information Management Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Director’s Policy #100-04 Release of Information (Effective 04/01/2015) Page 7 of 7

Guidance Document Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals Adopted by: Real Estate Board on October 26, 2016 Fair Housing Board on March 1, 2017 As a means of providing information or guidance of general applicability to the public, the Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board issue this guidance document to interpret the requirements of 18 VAC 135-50 (Fair Housing Regulations).

The purpose of this guidance document is to address issues regarding the “verification” of reasonable accommodation requests for assistance animals, particularly those assistance animals that provide emotional support or other seemingly untrained assistance to persons with a disability.1 I. INTRODUCTION When the Virginia Fair Housing Law (“VFHL”) and its federal counterpart, the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), were amended in the late 1980s to include disability as a protected class, legislators created targeted protections for persons with a disability. Specifically, persons with a disability were given the right to seek reasonable accommodations (changes to rules, practices, policies, etc.) and modifications (physical alternations to the premises) to ensure the opportunity to enjoy equal access to housing.

Since that time, and perhaps with greater frequency in recent years, persons with a disability and housing providers have faced questions over making accommodations to policies that restrict pets or assistance animals. While service animals—such as dogs that guide visually impaired persons, alert hearing impaired persons to sounds and alarms, or perform tasks for mobility impaired individuals—are not a new phenomenon, increasingly there are a growing number of instances in which persons with a disability derive other types of support or assistance from animals.

Today, it is just as common for an animal to provide emotional support, comfort, or companionship to a person with a mental impairment. Some animals are naturally sensitive to a person’s blood sugar levels and can alert when an individual who has diabetes reaches a dangerous threshold; others will alert when sensing that a person with a disability is about to experience a seizure. Often, the animal in question provides such assistance without any formal training but instead through innate abilities the animal possesses. Such innate assistance, though, 1 While fair housing laws use the term “handicap,” this document uses the more preferred term “disability” and its variations, which have the same legal meaning. See, 18 VAC 135-50-200; Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624 (1998).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals particularly when coupled with a person who has “invisible” impairments, reportedly presents challenges for housing providers with pet restriction policies.

Housing providers suggest that some individuals “game the system,” and abuse the legal protections in place for persons with disabilities, by fraudulently claiming an “invisible” impairment and declaring their pet an assistance animal. For instance, housing providers complain that there are an influx of websites and other third-party sources offering assistance animal “certifications” without any firsthand knowledge of whether the animal provides a needed service or support, or even if the individual tied to the request is a person with a disability. More recently, some housing providers point to what appear to be form letters from medical professionals vouching for persons to have such an animal without evidence of effort to verify either disability or the claimed assistance.

Fundamentally, some housing providers contend that the VFHL and FHA, in their current form, leave little room to question such verifications—especially when an individual presents an assistance animal “certification” obtained from an online source—without the risk of inviting a discrimination charge. For the reasons below, we believe this is not the case, as adequate, appropriate protections already exist in both fair housing and health professions laws.

II. BACKGROUND In the late 1980s, Congress and the General Assembly amended their respective fair housing laws to prohibit discrimination against persons with a disability in residential housing transactions.2 To ensure full and equal access to housing, the VFHL and FHA were further amended to provide persons with a disability additional protection in the form of requiring reasonable accommodations “in rules, practices, policies, or services when such accommodations may be necessary to afford such person [an] equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.”3 A person is considered disabled under the VFHL and FHA when the person: (1) has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of their major life activities; (2) has a record of having such an impairment; or (3) is regarded as having such an impairment.4 “Mental impairments” include, but are not limited to, “emotional or mental illness . . . autism,

2 See, Va. Code § 36-96.3(A)(8)(9); 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f). 3 See, Va. Code § 36-96.3(B)(ii); 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B). 4 See, Va. Code § 36-96.1:1; 42 U.S.C. § 3601. Further, such definitions are consistent with the definition of “disability” found in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 2 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals epilepsy . . . [and] emotional illness.”5 Thus, an accommodation aimed at ameliorating the effects of a mental impairment may be required where it is shown that the accommodation is reasonable and necessary to afford a person with a mental or emotional impairment an equal opportunity to use and enjoy the dwelling.

The mental impairments above are emphasized because such so-called invisible impairments are often at the center of an accommodation request for an assistance animal.

Differentiation between assistance animals—a different and broader class of animals that assist people with disabilities—and “service dogs” is a fundamental legal distinction for purposes of fair housing accommodation request.

A. Service Animals and Public Accommodations The federal Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended (“ADA”),6 and its state counterpart, the Virginians with Disabilities Act, as amended (“VDA”),7 prohibit discrimination against people with disabilities (physical or mental) in employment, the provision of public services, and in public accommodations. Both laws focus, in part, on ensuring that persons with a disability have equal access to places of public accommodation (e.g., hotels, shopping centers, restaurants, etc.) in all areas otherwise open to the public.

Provisions of the ADA and VDA apply to public accommodations and do not extend to residential housing. Public entities covered by these laws must allow a person with a disability to be accompanied by a service animal, narrowly defined as an animal trained to assist persons with visual, hearing, or mobility impairments.8 Under the ADA, “the provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship” is not, by itself, sufficient to be classified as a service animal.9 When evaluating a reasonable accommodation request, a public accommodation may verify that an animal is required because of a disability (although it cannot inquire about the

5 See, 18 VAC 135-50-200; 24 CFR § 100.201. 6 See, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq. 7 See, Va. Code § 51.5-1 et seq. 8 See, Va. Code § 51.5-40.1; 28 C.F.R. § 36.104. 9 See, 28 C.F.R. § 35.104. The term “service animal” is defined in part as “any dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability[…]The work or tasks performed by a service animal must be directly related to the individual's disability…[T]he provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship do not constitute work or tasks for the purposes of this definition.” Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 3 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals nature of a person’s impairment) and ask what tasks the service animal has been trained to perform.10 During its 2016 legislative session, the Virginia General Assembly amended the VDA to deem it a misdemeanor criminal offense for a person to access a public accommodation by falsely representing an animal as a service dog or hearing dog.11

B. Assistance Animals, Private Homes, and Fair Housing In contrast, the VFHL and FHA focus exclusively on accommodations needed by a person with a disability in order to have full and equal access to their home. These laws take a broader approach and require housing providers to accommodate not only service animals as traditionally understood under the ADA, but assistance animals that offer necessary support to persons with a disability without regard to training or tasks performed.12 Accommodation of untrained emotional support animals may be required under the FHA if such accommodation is reasonably necessary to allow a person with a disability an equal opportunity to enjoy and use residential housing.13 When evaluating a reasonable accommodation request under fair housing law, a housing provider may verify that the requester meets the definition of disabled (although it cannot inquire about the specific nature of a person’s impairment) and ask how the claimed assistance animal will allow the person with a disability to use and enjoy the dwelling.

C. Assistance Animal and Accommodations Case Law The physical and philosophical distinction between public and private spaces underscore why the law requires different approaches to reasonable accommodations in each setting. In

10 See, 28 C.F.R. § 35.136(f). 11 See, Va. Code § 51.5-44.1. 12 The U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development jointly administer the FHA under 42 U.S.C. §§ 3614(a) and 3612(a), and maintain that the ADA’s definition of the term “service animals” should not inform the FHA’s broader definition of assistance animals. See, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities, 75 Fed. Reg. 56236 (Sept 15, 2010) and Pet Ownership for the Elderly and Persons with Disabilities, 73 Fed. Reg. 63834, (Oct. 27, 2008). 13 See, Janush v. Charities Housing Development Corp., 169 F.Supp.2d 1133, 1136 (N.D. Cal. 2000) (denying a motion to dismiss a claim to permit keeping birds and cats as emotional support animals because “plaintiff has adequately plead that she is handicapped, that defendants knew of her handicap, that accommodation of the handicap may be necessary and that defendants refused to make such accommodation…”); Fair Housing of the Dakotas, Inc. v. Goldmark Property Management, Inc., 778 F.Supp.2d 1028, 1036 (D.N.D. 2011) (holding that “the FHA encompasses all types of assistance animals regardless of training, including those that ameliorate a physical disability and those that ameliorate a mental disability”).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 4 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals publishing its final rule regarding assistance animals in government-funded housing, the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), which is the agency charged with enforcing the FHA, recognized that “assistance animals” include “service dogs” but also animals that “alert[] individuals to impending seizures and providing emotional support to persons who have a disability-related need for such support.”14 During its rule-making process, HUD found “a valid distinction between the functions animals provide to persons with disabilities in the public arena, i.e., performing tasks enabling individuals to use public services and public accommodations, as compared to how an assistance animal might be used in the home.”15 In particular, HUD reasoned that assistance animals, including emotional support animals, “provide very private functions for persons with mental and emotional disabilities” that alleviate the effects of such disabilities without any specialized training.16 In essence, the federal rule-making process concluded that there is a notable difference in the type of accommodation one may need in order to access public venues (e.g., restaurants, shopping centers, etc.) than in the type of accommodation a person with a disability may need to have full access to and enjoyment of their home.

While this issue has not been addressed under the VFHL by Virginia courts, federal courts have found HUD’s reasoning persuasive in evaluating reasonable accommodation issues under the FHA for private residential housing as well.17 For instance, in Overlook Mutual Homes, Inc. v. Spencer, an Ohio federal district court thoroughly weighed whether the FHA imposed a training requirement on an animal in order for it to be approved as a reasonable accommodation.18 In ruling the FHA imposed no such requirement, the court reasoned, “Simply stated, there is a difference between not requiring the owner of a movie theater to allow a customer to bring her emotional support dog, which is not a service animal, into the theater to watch a two-hour movie, an ADA-type issue, on one hand, and permitting the provider of housing to refuse to allow a renter to keep such an animal in her apartment in order to provide emotional support to her

14 See, 73 Fed. Reg. 63834 (Oct. 27, 2008). 15 Id., at 63836. 16 Id. 17 See, Overlook Mut. Homes, Inc. v. Spencer, 666 F. Supp. 2d 850, 858-61 (S.D. Ohio 2009); Fair Housing of the Dakotas, Inc. v. Goldmark Prop. Mgmt., Inc., 778 F. Supp. 2d 1028, 1035-36 (D.N.D. 2011); Falin v. Condo. Ass’n of La Mer Estates, Inc., No.: 11-61903-CIV, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73453, at *10 (S.D. Fla., May 28, 2012); Sanzaro v.

Ardiente Homeowners’ Association, LLC, 21 F. Supp. 3d 1109 (D. Nev. 2014). 18 See, Overlook Mut. Homes, 666 F. Supp. 2d at 857 (rejecting prior cases that imposed an ADA-like training requirement for an animal to qualify as a reasonable accommodation).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 5 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals and to assist her to cope with her depression, an FHA-type issue, on the other hand.” 19 This analysis alone was enough to sway the court, but it further discussed with approval the distinctions drawn by HUD in issuing the above-cited rule to hold that an animal can qualify as a reasonable accommodation under the FHA even if the animal is not individually trained (as required by the ADA for public accommodations) but rather is an emotional support animal.20 Other federal courts have since adopted this reasoning. In North Dakota, the district court denied summary judgment for a housing provider who refused to provide an accommodation to its policy of charging additional fees for an untrained assistance animal.21 In doing so, the court held that “the FHA encompasses all types of assistance animals regardless of training” that ameliorate the effects of either physical or mental disabilities.22 Before reaching its decision, the court reviewed the competing positions on this issue and reasoned that it must necessarily distinguish accommodations for places of public accommodation from those for housing given the type of access a person with a disability needs to have full and equal enjoyment of each.23 A federal district court in Florida reached the same conclusion in holding that an untrained “emotional support animal” could be a reasonable accommodation under the FHA.24 Similarly, the federal district court in Nevada likewise held that the FHA imposed no training requirements for assistance animals, and in doing so, refused to apply the ADA definition of service animal when analyzing issues related to accommodations for assistance animals under the FHA.25 The clear trend in FHA case law is to permit reasonable accommodations for (untrained) assistance animals where a nexus exists between the requesting persons’ disability and the function or assistance that the animal provides. If the requester is able to show how the accommodation (here, for example, an assistance animal) ameliorates one or more effects of their disability, such a connection exists and the accommodation should be granted as “necessary

19 Id., at 859. 20 Id., at 861. 21 See, Fair Hous. of the Dakotas, 778 F. Supp. 2d 1028 (D. N.D. 2011). 22 Id., at 1036. 23 Id., at 1035-36. 24 See, Falin v. Condominium Assoc. of La Mer Estates, Inc., No.: 11-61903-CIV-Cohn/Seltzer, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73453 (S.D. Fla., May 28, 2012). 25 See, Sanzaro v. Ardiente Homeowners’ Assoc., LLC, 21 F. Supp. 3d at 1117-19.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 6 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals to afford such person an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.”26 For assistance animals, this means there must be a relationship between the person’s disability and the function or assistance provided by the animal.27 There is, however, no requirement under the VFHL or the FHA that an animal must be trained or “verified” to provide the claimed assistance.

III. ANALYSIS We agree with HUD, DOJ, and the multiple federal courts that have addressed this issue, that providing an accommodation to allow a person with a disability full access to and enjoyment of their home is necessarily different from providing accommodation to access a public place for an abbreviated period of time. Given the persuasive reasoning expressed by these authorities, we posit that the VFHL likewise distinguishes between ADA/VDA “service animals” and imposes no such training requirement for assistance animals.

Nor should there be. Increasingly, animals are proving useful to lessen the effects of mental and emotional disabilities such as anxiety, autism, post-traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”), etc. because animals have been shown to have the innate ability to relieve depression and anxiety, reduce stress and stress-related pain, provide companionship, and detect seizures.28 In particular, it is widely recognized that animals, typically dogs, are helpful in treating military service members and veterans diagnosed with PTSD.29 For instance, the Richmond Times-Dispatch not long ago profiled a Mechanicsville veteran and Purple Heart recipient who described the assistance he received from an animal to lessen the effects of PTSD and anxiety.30

A. Reliable Verification of Disability Housing providers seeking clarification about third-party verification should redirect their attention away from animal training or certification, which is unnecessary and legally insufficient. They also should not be daunted by the prospect of potential litigation into accepting dubious verifications limited to vague statements of how an assistance animal would

26 See, 73 Fed. Reg. 63834, 63835 (Oct. 27, 2008); see also, Commonwealth of Virginia ex rel Fair Housing Board v.

Windsor Plaza Condo. Ass’n, Inc., 289 Va. 34, 54, 768 S.E. 2d 79, 88 (2014). 27 See, 73 Fed. Reg. at 63835; see also, Overlook Mut. Homes, 666 F. Supp. 2d at 857. 28 See, 73 Fed. Reg. at 63835. 29 See, U.S. Dep’t of Veteran Affairs, PTSD: National Center for PTSD, “Dogs and PTSD,” http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/treatment/cope/dogs_and_ptsd.asp (last visited Oct. 21, 2016). 30 See, RICHMOND TIMES-DISPATCH, “Dog Changes Veteran’s Life,” http://www.richmond.com/article_7921daf7-6d03-583e-aad8-588c455e3cbc.html (last visited Oct. 21, 2016).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 7 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals benefit the requester, but rather should insist on supplemental credible confirmation of underlying disability. As with any other reasonable accommodation request, housing providers are absolutely within their rights to focus first on establishing the legitimacy of the requesting party’s disability status as defined by fair housing law. Then, as stated above, the only issue remaining is evaluation of information to determine whether the animal provides assistance that ameliorates the effects of the established disability.

Thus, if a person suffering from PTSD—as diagnosed by their treating physician— receives assistance from an untrained dog in the form of emotional support, lessened anxiety, or exiting a building quickly when experiencing a flashback, the housing provider must make exceptions to any pet limitation policies that may normally apply to the housing in question (with no further requirement that an assistance animal be trained, certified, or verified).31 Conversely, where a prospective tenant fails to provide credible documentation of either a qualifying disability, or cannot show a relationship to the claimed assistance from an animal, the housing provider may request additional information from a reliable third party “in a position to know about the individual’s disability.”32

B. Best Practice Recommendations Housing providers should only seek “reliable disability-related information” that: (1) establishes that the person is “disabled” as defined by the FHA and VFHL; (2) describes the needed accommodation (e.g., assistance animal); and (3) demonstrates how the requested accommodation is related to and will help ameliorate the effects of the disability.33 We caution, however, that housing providers should rarely require access to an individual’s medical records or details concerning the nature or severity of the person’s disability. Additionally, care should be taken to keep the documentation confidential given its personal and health-related nature.

Finally, we cannot warn strongly enough against rules or procedures that would unduly restrict the process a person with a disability uses when seeking a reasonable accommodation; to do so

31 See, 18 VAC 135-50-200(D)(2) incorporating by reference the JOINT STATEMENT OF U.S. DEP’T OF HOUS. AND URBAN DEVEL. AND DEP’T OF JUSTICE, “Reasonable Accommodations under the Fair Housing Act,” May 17, 2004, p. 13 (Response to question 18) (link: http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/library/huddojstatement.pdf) 32 Id. 33 See, 18 VAC 135-50-200(D)(2) incorporating by reference the JOINT STATEMENT OF U.S. DEP’T OF HOUS. AND URBAN DEVEL. AND DEP’T OF JUSTICE “Reasonable Accommodations Under the Fair Housing Act” at 13-14.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 8 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals could have a chilling effect on persons with disabilities, perhaps most especially those with intellectual or mental impairments.

Housing providers should not impose additional deposits or fees as a condition of granting a reasonable accommodation request for an assistance animal.34 Charging such fees in the absence of significant damage, or based only on unjustified assumptions about an animal, goes against the anti-discrimination nature of the statutes in place to protect persons with a disability. The animal is essentially functioning as an assistive device in such circumstances; so just as a housing provider should not impose a wheelchair deposit for potential carpet damage, it should not demand upfront money for animal damage that may never occur. Of course, persons with a disability are nonetheless responsible for any damages actually caused by an assistance animal, and housing providers retain the right to seek recovery for damages that exceed normal wear and tear (whether caused by an assistance animal or a wheelchair).35 When a housing provider seeks additional information from a person seeking a reasonable accommodation for an assistance animal, it may be advisable to grant a temporary exception to any pet limitation policy pending its submission. Such a temporary exception may serve to avoid claims that the housing provider refused the reasonable accommodation request.

Ultimately, if the person seeking a reasonable accommodation for an assistance animal cannot provide reliable evidence supporting their disability status as defined by FHA or VFHL, or fails to establish the required nexus between the disability and the assistance the animal provides, then the housing provider may deny such request.

C. Therapeutic Relationships The evaluation of a reasonable accommodation request is “a highly fact specific inquiry”36 demanding individual, case-by-case consideration by housing providers. As a result, compiling an exhaustive inventory of “acceptable” documentation (or, alternatively, a list of unacceptable authenticators) for verification purposes is inadvisable, if not practically impossible, because a requester must be allowed to submit credible information that may not otherwise appear on a list.

34 See, 18 VAC 135-50-200(D)(2) incorporating by reference the JOINT STATEMENT OF U.S. DEP’T OF HOUS. AND URBAN DEVEL. AND DEP’T OF JUSTICE “Reasonable Accommodations Under the Fair Housing Act,” Question 11 at 9-10. 35 Id. 36 See, Windsor Plaza, 289 Va. at 55 citing Scoggins v. Lee's Crossing Homeowners Ass'n, 718 F.3d 262, 272 (4th Cir. 2013).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 9 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals We caution against limiting the pool of acceptable persons or entities qualified to verify disability status—as well as the imposition of higher or different standards based on type of disability (e.g. mental health vs. physical impairment)—to avoid the risk of discrimination against a qualified person with a disability in an unusual or unforeseeable circumstance. For example, limiting verification documentation exclusively to physicians, psychiatrists, or similar healthcare professionals may disenfranchise otherwise eligible persons with a disability who lack the financial or logistical means to access medical care for a period of time.

However, this does not mean housing providers are prohibited from asking disability verification sources for reasonable documentation of their reliability. In light of expressed concerns from some housing providers about hesitancy to request any information to avoid a potential fair housing complaint or charge, this guidance document provides examples of sources considered to meet the “reliable third party” standard as expressed in the HUD/DOJ Joint Statement. In general, housing providers may ask that the verifier have a therapeutic relationship with the requester, in order to establish their reliability as a “third party who is in a position to know” about the individual’s disability.

For disability verification purposes, we consider “therapeutic relationship” to mean the provision of medical care, program services, or personal care services done in good faith, in the interests of the person with a disability, by: (1) a mental health service provider as defined in Va.

Code § 54.1-2400.1; (2) an individual or facility under the rights, privileges, and responsibilities conferred by a valid, unrestricted state license, certification, or registration to serve persons with disabilities; (3) a member of a peer support or similar group that does not charge service recipients a fee, or impose any actual or implied financial requirement, and who has actual knowledge about the requester’s disability; or (4) a caregiver with actual knowledge about the requester’s disability.

Housing providers also may request verifiers authenticate all or some of the following information to help evaluate their reliability and knowledge of the requester’s disability:

• General location of the provision of care, as well as duration (for example, number of in-person sessions within the preceding 12 months);
• Whether the verifier is accountable to or subject to any regulatory body or professional entity for acts of misconduct;

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 10 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals

• Whether the verifier is trained in any field or specialty related to persons with disabilities in general or the particular impairment cited (again, being cautious not to venture into the nature and scope of the requester’s disability); or
• Whether the verifier is recognized by consumers, peers, or the public as a credible provider of therapeutic care.

D. Examples of Presumed Reliable Third-Party Verifiers37

• Persons licensed or certified by the Virginia Boards of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology; Counseling; Dentistry; Medicine; Nursing; Optometry; Pharmacy; Physical Therapy; Psychology; or Social Work, when acting within their scope of practice to treat the requester’s claimed disability.
• Any health care provider on active duty in the armed services or public health service of the United States at any public or private health care facility while such practitioner is so commissioned or serving, and in accordance with his official duties and scope of practice to treat the requester’s claimed disability.
• Persons in compliance with the regulations governing an organization or facility qualified to treat the requester’s claimed disability and licensed by the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services; the Department for Aging and Rehabilitative Services; or other similar non-medical service agency.
• Unlicensed counselors or therapists rendering services similar to those falling within the standards of practice for professional counseling, as defined in Va. Code § 54.1-3500, including members of peer support groups, so long as the person with a disability benefiting from such services is not subject to a charge or fee, or any financial requirement, actual or implied.
• A licensed or certified practitioner of the healing arts in good standing with his profession’s regulatory body in another state, who has a bona fide practitioner-patient relationship with the requester in compliance with all requirements of applicable Virginia law and regulations.

37 This list is not meant to be exhaustive.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 11 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals A note about online disability verifications or other documentation that appear formulaic: In situations involving verification from an out-of-state practitioner not regulated by the Virginia Board of Medicine, the practitioner should be licensed or certified by both the other state’s applicable regulatory body as well as the jurisdiction where the person with a disability was located at the time services were provided (presumably, in most cases, Virginia).

Housing providers with reason to believe a disability verification was obtained via telemedicine in particular (e.g., online verification) may authenticate the information to ensure compliance with Virginia Board of Medicine guidance that states, in part: “Practitioners who treat or prescribe through online service sites must possess appropriate licensure in all jurisdictions where patients receive care.” 38 In order to assess the reliability of the verifier when evaluating a reasonable accommodation request, a housing provider—or the Virginia Fair Housing Office (VFHO) in the event of a complaint investigation—may question the basic nature of the interaction among the verifier and the requester. (In fact, as part of perfecting a fair housing complaint for filing, the VFHO asks medical or mental health professional verifiers to certify their willingness to testify under oath as to the disability-related need for the requested accommodation.) We emphasize the need to focus not on the nature or severity of the condition or diagnosis, but rather the credibility of the information provided in establishing the verifier’s qualifications as being in a position to know about the person’s disability.

To determine whether a disability verification that appears questionable to the housing provider—or the VFHO in the event of a complaint investigation—results from a bona fide practitioner-patient relationship, the verifier may be asked to affirm compliance with Virginia law governing the practice of health professions, as well as adherence to Board of Medicine official guidance on telemedicine39 as applicable.

IV. CONCLUSION The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the FHA is remedial in nature and requires “generous construction” in order to combat pervasive discrimination against persons with a

38 See Department of Health Professions, Virginia Board of Medicine, Guidance Document 85-12 (http://www.townhall.virginia.gov/L/ViewGDoc.cfm?gdid=5712). 39 Id.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 12 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals disability.40 Allowing housing providers to challenge disability verifications arbitrarily, or require overly burdensome documentation from individuals making reasonable accommodation requests, would jeopardize the fundamental protections in place for persons with a disability under fair housing laws. Moreover, amending the VFHA to make state-level rules governing assistance animals more stringent would only create a false sense of security or safe harbor;

Virginia housing providers would remain subject to federal complaints or charges by HUD under FHA, just as they are now.

At the same time, ensuring that residential housing providers can request and obtain reliable, credible disability verification in support of accommodation requests for assistance animals preserves the integrity of the process for all parties. Virginia law governing professional licensure of health care practitioners sufficiently addresses the stated concerns of housing providers regarding requests for a therapeutic relationship between the requester and the verifier.

The Board of Medicine’s guidance on telemedicine in particular appears to prohibit the fraudulent “verification mills”41 cited by some industry advocates.

Given that no statutory deficiency appears evident in relation to the issues raised, we offer this guidance to demonstrate that asking disability verification sources to document a therapeutic relationship with the accommodation requester is a reasonable way for housing providers to evaluate third-party reliability. Pending submission of additional supporting information, it may still be prudent for housing providers to grant a temporary exception to any pet limitation policy, in the spirit of the kind of informal interactive process preferred by HUD.42 In this way, discussions remain open and the housing provider may avoid claims of undue delay in providing a response to the accommodation request, which could be considered a denial.

40 See, e.g., City of Edmonds v. Oxford House, Inc., 514 U.S. 725, 731 (1995); Trafficante v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 409 U.S. 205, 212 (1972). 41 See, “Fraudulent Requests for Accommodation of Assistive/Emotional Support Animals,” Virginia Apartment Management Association for Affordable Housing, Real Estate Law and Mortgages Workgroup of the Virginia Housing Commission, July 2016 (http://services.dlas.virginia.gov/User_db/frmView.aspx?ViewId=4608&s=16). 42 See, 18 VAC 135-50-200(D)(2) incorporating by reference the JOINT STATEMENT OF U.S. DEP’T OF HOUS. AND URBAN

DEVEL. AND DEP’T OF JUSTICE, AT P. 7-9 (ANSWER TO QUESTION 7).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 13

Guidance Document on Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals adopted by: Real Estate Board (Oct 26, 2016) and Fair Housing Board (Mar 1, 2017) to interpret 18 VAC 135-50 (Fair Housing Regulations).

The purpose of this guidance document is to address issues regarding the “verification” of reasonable accommodation requests for assistance animals, particularly those assistance animals that provide emotional support or other seemingly untrained assistance to persons with a disability.1 I. INTRODUCTION When the Virginia Fair Housing Law (“VFHL”) and its federal counterpart, the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), were amended in the late 1980s to include disability as a protected class, legislators created targeted protections for persons with a disability. Specifically, persons with a disability were given the right to seek reasonable accommodations (changes to rules, practices, policies, etc.) and modifications (physical alternations to the premises) to ensure the opportunity to enjoy equal access to housing.

Recently, persons with disabilities and housing providers increasingly face questions on pet and assistance animal accommodations. Service animals like guide or alert dogs are common, but more animals now provide other support types.

Today, it is just as common for an animal to provide emotional support, comfort, or companionship to a person with a mental impairment. Some animals are naturally sensitive to a person’s blood sugar levels and can alert when an individual who has diabetes reaches a dangerous threshold; others will alert when sensing that a person with a disability is about to experience a seizure. Often, the animal in question provides such assistance without any formal training but instead through innate abilities the animal possesses. Such innate assistance, though, 1 While fair housing laws use the term “handicap,” this document uses the more preferred term “disability” and its variations, which have the same legal meaning. See, 18 VAC 135-50-200; Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624 (1998).

Guidance documents lack the force of law.

Statutes override conflicting guidance in this document.

This guidance notes challenges for housing providers with pet restrictions when accommodating persons with invisible impairments.

Housing providers allege some misuse protections by falsely claiming invisible impairments and using fake certifications or vague medical letters without verifying disability or animal support.

Some housing providers argue current laws make verifying assistance animal claims difficult without discrimination risk, but protections in fair housing and health laws already address this.

In the 1980s, laws were amended to prohibit housing discrimination and require reasonable accommodations for disabilities, defined as impairments that limit major activities, have a record, or are regarded as such. Mental impairments include emotional illness, autism, etc.

References to statutes confirm definitions align with the ADA’s definition of disability.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 2 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals epilepsy . . . [and] emotional illness.”5 Thus, an accommodation aimed at ameliorating the effects of a mental impairment may be required where it is shown that the accommodation is reasonable and necessary to afford a person with a mental or emotional impairment an equal opportunity to use and enjoy the dwelling.

Invisible mental impairments often underpin assistance animal accommodation requests.

Assistance animals differ from “service dogs,” a key legal distinction for fair housing requests.

The ADA and VDA prohibit discrimination in employment, public services, and accommodations, ensuring equal access for persons with disabilities to public places.

ADA and VDA apply to public, not residential, spaces, requiring public entities to allow trained service animals for visual, hearing, or mobility impairments. Emotional support alone isn't enough. Verification can confirm animal necessity but not disability details.

5 See, 18 VAC 135-50-200; 24 CFR § 100.201. 6 See, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq. 7 See, Va. Code § 51.5-1 et seq. 8 See, Va. Code § 51.5-40.1; 28 C.F.R. § 36.104. 9 See, 28 C.F.R. § 35.104. The term “service animal” is defined in part as “any dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability[…]The work or tasks performed by a service animal must be directly related to the individual's disability…[T]he provision of emotional support, well-being, comfort, or companionship do not constitute work or tasks for the purposes of this definition.” Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 3 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals Public entities can verify the animal’s required role but cannot inquire about the impairment. Virginia law makes falsely claiming a service dog a misdemeanor.

VFHL and FHA focus on accommodations in housing, requiring providers to accommodate assistance animals, trained or not, if reasonably necessary for equal access. Verification can confirm disability and how the animal helps.

Case law highlights differences between public and private spaces, requiring different accommodation approaches.

Legal cases affirm that the FHA covers all assistance animals, trained or not, for physical or mental disabilities, and distinguish from ADA service animal definitions.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 4 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals publishing its final rule regarding assistance animals in government-funded housing, the U.S.

HUD recognizes assistance animals include service dogs and emotional support animals, with a key distinction: public access requires trained service animals, while emotional support animals provide private support at home.

Federal courts, like Ohio’s in Overlook Mutual Homes, agree FHA does not require trained animals; emotional support animals can be reasonable accommodations in housing, unlike public venues.

14 See, 73 Fed. Reg. 63834 (Oct. 27, 2008). 15 Id., at 63836. 16 Id. 17 See, Overlook Mut. Homes, Inc. v. Spencer, 666 F. Supp. 2d 850, 858-61 (S.D. Ohio 2009); Fair Housing of the Dakotas, Inc. v. Goldmark Prop. Mgmt., Inc., 778 F. Supp. 2d 1028, 1035-36 (D.N.D. 2011); Falin v. Condo. Ass’n of La Mer Estates, Inc., No.: 11-61903-CIV, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73453, at *10 (S.D. Fla., May 28, 2012); Sanzaro v.

Ardiente Homeowners’ Association, LLC, 21 F. Supp. 3d 1109 (D. Nev. 2014). 18 See, Overlook Mut. Homes, 666 F. Supp. 2d at 857 (rejecting prior cases that imposed an ADA-like training requirement for an animal to qualify as a reasonable accommodation).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 5 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals and to assist her to cope with her depression, an FHA-type issue, on the other hand.” 19 This analysis alone was enough to sway the court, but it further discussed with approval the distinctions drawn by HUD in issuing the above-cited rule to hold that an animal can qualify as a reasonable accommodation under the FHA even if the animal is not individually trained (as required by the ADA for public accommodations) but rather is an emotional support animal.20 Other federal courts have since adopted this reasoning. In North Dakota, the district court denied summary judgment for a housing provider who refused to provide an accommodation to its policy of charging additional fees for an untrained assistance animal.21 In doing so, the court held that “the FHA encompasses all types of assistance animals regardless of training” that ameliorate the effects of either physical or mental disabilities.22 Before reaching its decision, the court reviewed the competing positions on this issue and reasoned that it must necessarily distinguish accommodations for places of public accommodation from those for housing given the type of access a person with a disability needs to have full and equal enjoyment of each.23 A federal district court in Florida reached the same conclusion in holding that an untrained “emotional support animal” could be a reasonable accommodation under the FHA.24 Similarly, the federal district court in Nevada likewise held that the FHA imposed no training requirements for assistance animals, and in doing so, refused to apply the ADA definition of service animal when analyzing issues related to accommodations for assistance animals under the FHA.25 The clear trend in FHA case law is to permit reasonable accommodations for (untrained) assistance animals where a nexus exists between the requesting persons’ disability and the function or assistance that the animal provides. If the requester is able to show how the accommodation (here, for example, an assistance animal) ameliorates one or more effects of their disability, such a connection exists and the accommodation should be granted as “necessary

Federal courts, including Florida and Nevada, uphold that untrained emotional support animals can be reasonable accommodations under FHA, emphasizing the difference from ADA-trained service animals.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 6 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals to afford such person an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.”26 For assistance animals, this means there must be a relationship between the person’s disability and the function or assistance provided by the animal.27 There is, however, no requirement under the VFHL or the FHA that an animal must be trained or “verified” to provide the claimed assistance.

Agrees with HUD, DOJ, courts: home accommodations differ from public access; VFHL, like FHA, does not require training for assistance animals.

Animals are increasingly recognized for their role in alleviating mental and emotional disabilities like anxiety, autism, PTSD, by relieving depression, reducing stress, providing companionship, and detecting seizures. Dogs are notably helpful for veterans with PTSD, as highlighted by a Richmond Times-Dispatch profile of a veteran aided by an animal to lessen PTSD and anxiety effects.30

A. Reliable verification: housing providers should avoid animal training or certification as legally insufficient and not be deterred by litigation risks from accepting vague assistance animal statements.

26 See, 73 Fed. Reg. 63834, 63835 (Oct. 27, 2008); see also, Commonwealth of Virginia ex rel Fair Housing Board v.

Windsor Plaza Condo. Ass’n, Inc., 289 Va. 34, 54, 768 S.E. 2d 79, 88 (2014). 27 See, 73 Fed. Reg. at 63835; see also, Overlook Mut. Homes, 666 F. Supp. 2d at 857. 28 See, 73 Fed. Reg. at 63835. 29 See, VA VA PTSD Center, “Dogs and PTSD,” http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/treatment/cope/dogs_and_ptsd.asp. 30 See, RICHMOND TIMES-DISPATCH, “Dog Changes Veteran’s Life,” http://www.richmond.com/article_7921daf7-6d03-583e-aad8-588c455e3cbc.html.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 7 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals benefit the requester, but rather should insist on supplemental credible confirmation of underlying disability. As with any other reasonable accommodation request, housing providers are absolutely within their rights to focus first on establishing the legitimacy of the requesting party’s disability status as defined by fair housing law. Then, as stated above, the only issue remaining is evaluation of information to determine whether the animal provides assistance that ameliorates the effects of the established disability.

If a diagnosed PTSD individual receives untrained assistance from a dog (e.g., emotional support, anxiety relief, quick exit), housing must waive pet limits without needing certification. If documentation or disability link is lacking, providers may seek info from a reliable third party.

Housing providers should seek reliable info confirming disability, needed accommodation, and its relation to the disability, rarely requiring medical records, and must keep documentation confidential.

Avoid rules or procedures that unduly restrict a person with a disability seeking reasonable accommodation.

31 See, 18 VAC 135-50-200(D)(2), referencing HUD/DOJ guidance on reasonable accommodations. 32 Id. 33 See, 18 VAC 135-50-200(D)(2), referencing same guidance.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 8 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals could have a chilling effect on persons with disabilities, perhaps most especially those with intellectual or mental impairments.

Housing providers should not impose extra deposits or fees for assistance animals without significant damage; animals are akin to assistive devices. They remain liable for actual damages, and temporary pet policy exceptions are advisable during info requests.

If the requester cannot provide reliable evidence of disability or link it to the assistance animal, the housing provider may deny the request.

C. Therapeutic relationships: evaluating requests is highly fact-specific, requiring case-by-case review. Housing providers should not rely on exhaustive lists of acceptable or unacceptable documentation, as credible info must be considered.

34 See, 18 VAC 135-50-200(D)(2) incorporating by reference the JOINT STATEMENT OF U.S. DEP’T OF HOUS. AND URBAN DEVEL. AND DEP’T OF JUSTICE “Reasonable Accommodations Under the Fair Housing Act,” Question 11 at 9-10. 35 Id. 36 See, Windsor Plaza, 289 Va. at 55 citing Scoggins v. Lee's Crossing Homeowners Ass'n, 718 F.3d 262, 272 (4th Cir. 2013).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 9 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals We caution against limiting the pool of acceptable persons or entities qualified to verify disability status—as well as the imposition of higher or different standards based on type of disability (e.g. mental health vs. physical impairment)—to avoid the risk of discrimination against a qualified person with a disability in an unusual or unforeseeable circumstance. For example, limiting verification documentation exclusively to physicians, psychiatrists, or similar healthcare professionals may disenfranchise otherwise eligible persons with a disability who lack the financial or logistical means to access medical care for a period of time.

Housing providers may request reliable documentation from verification sources, preferably those with a therapeutic relationship, to establish their reliability as knowledgeable third parties.

Therapeutic relationship: provision of good-faith medical, program, or personal care services in the interest of the disabled person by: (1) a mental health provider as defined in Va.

2. A licensed or certified individual or facility; 3. A peer support member with actual knowledge; 4. A caregiver with actual knowledge about the disability.

Housing providers may request verifiers authenticate relevant information to assess reliability and knowledge of the disability.

• Location of care and duration (e.g., number of in-person sessions in past 12 months);
• Whether the verifier is accountable to or subject to any regulatory or professional body for misconduct;

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 10 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals

• Whether the verifier is trained in a field or specialty related to disabilities or the cited impairment (not delving into the disability’s nature or scope);
• Whether the verifier is recognized by consumers, peers, or the public as a credible provider of therapeutic care.

D. Examples of Presumed Reliable Third-Party Verifiers37

• Licensed or certified persons by Virginia Boards of Audiology, Speech-Language Pathology, Counseling, Dentistry, Medicine, Nursing, Optometry, Pharmacy, Physical Therapy, Psychology, or Social Work, acting within scope to treat the disability.
• Active-duty U.S. armed or public health service providers at any health facility, acting within official duties and scope to treat the disability.
• Persons compliant with regulations of organizations or facilities licensed by the Department of Behavioral Health, Aging and Rehabilitative Services, or similar non-medical agencies.
• Unlicensed counselors or therapists providing services within professional counseling standards, including peer support members, if no charge or fee applies to the person with a disability.
• Licensed or certified healing arts practitioner in good standing in another state with a bona fide practitioner-patient relationship, complying with Virginia law.

37 This list is not exhaustive.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 11 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals A note about online disability verifications or other documentation that appear formulaic: In situations involving verification from an out-of-state practitioner not regulated by the Virginia Board of Medicine, the practitioner should be licensed or certified by both the other state’s applicable regulatory body as well as the jurisdiction where the person with a disability was located at the time services were provided (presumably, in most cases, Virginia).

Housing providers with reason to believe a disability verification was obtained via telemedicine in particular (e.g., online verification) may authenticate the information to ensure compliance with Virginia Board of Medicine guidance that states, in part: “Practitioners who treat or prescribe through online service sites must possess appropriate licensure in all jurisdictions where patients receive care.” 38 In order to assess the reliability of the verifier when evaluating a reasonable accommodation request, a housing provider—or the Virginia Fair Housing Office (VFHO) in the event of a complaint investigation—may question the basic nature of the interaction among the verifier and the requester. (In fact, as part of perfecting a fair housing complaint for filing, the VFHO asks medical or mental health professional verifiers to certify their willingness to testify under oath as to the disability-related need for the requested accommodation.) We emphasize the need to focus not on the nature or severity of the condition or diagnosis, but rather the credibility of the information provided in establishing the verifier’s qualifications as being in a position to know about the person’s disability.

Verifiers may be asked to affirm compliance with Virginia health law and telemedicine guidance to confirm bona fide practitioner-patient relationships.

IV. Conclusion: The U.S. Supreme Court states FHA is remedial, requiring generous interpretation to combat discrimination against persons with a

38 See VA Board of Medicine Guidance Document 85-12. 39 Id.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law. 12 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Reasonable Accommodation Requests for Assistance Animals disability.40 Allowing housing providers to challenge disability verifications arbitrarily, or require overly burdensome documentation from individuals making reasonable accommodation requests, would jeopardize the fundamental protections in place for persons with a disability under fair housing laws. Moreover, amending the VFHA to make state-level rules governing assistance animals more stringent would only create a false sense of security or safe harbor;

Virginia housing providers would remain subject to federal complaints or charges by HUD under FHA, just as they are now.

Ensuring providers can request credible disability verification preserves process integrity; Virginia licensure laws address concerns about verifying therapeutic relationships.

The Board of Medicine’s telemedicine guidance appears to prohibit the fraudulent “verification mills”41 cited by some industry advocates.

Since no statutory deficiency appears evident, this guidance shows that requesting verification sources to document a therapeutic relationship is a reasonable way for housing providers to evaluate reliability. Pending additional info, housing providers may grant a temporary pet policy exception, aligning with HUD’s informal process. This keeps discussions open and may prevent claims of undue delay or denial.

40 See, e.g., City of Edmonds v. Oxford House, Inc., 514 U.S. 725, 731 (1995); Trafficante v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 409 U.S. 205, 212 (1972). 41 See, “Fraudulent Requests for Accommodation of Assistive/Emotional Support Animals,” Virginia Apartment Management Association for Affordable Housing, Real Estate Law and Mortgages Workgroup of the Virginia Housing Commission, July 2016 (http://services.dlas.virginia.gov/User_db/frmView.aspx?ViewId=4608&s=16). 42 See, 18 VAC 135-50-200(D)(2) incorporating by reference the JOINT STATEMENT OF U.S. DEP’T OF HOUS. AND URBAN

DEVEL. AND DEP’T OF JUSTICE, AT P. 7-9 (ANSWER TO QUESTION 7).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions override this guidance if conflicting with state or federal law. 13

ADMINISTRATION POLICY #500-02 CONTRACT AND PURCHASE ORDER MODIFICATIONS Effective Date: July 1, 2018

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer DN: cn=Jay W. DeBoer, o=DPOR, Approved By: ou=Director,,email=jay.deboer@dpor.virginia.gov, c=US Date: 2018.07.06 10:25:10 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish agency restrictions on contract and purchase order modifications.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR) shall comply with the requirements of Chapters 3.5, 10.12, and 14.4 of the DPS Agency Procurement and Surplus Property Manual (APSPM), Chapter 10 of the Virginia Information Technologies Agency IT Procurement Manual (ITPM) and §2.2-4309 of the CodeofVirginia as it relates to contract modifications and purchase order changes.

A change order shall be processed for all issued purchase orders when requested by the supplier, or when the invoiced dollar value is greater or less than 10% of the total purchase order value.

III. DEFINITIONS: Contract An agreement enforceable by law, between two or more competent parties, to do or not to do something, not prohibited by law, for consideration. A contract is any type of agreement or order for the procurement of goods or services.

Purchase Order A document used to execute a purchase transaction with a vendor. It serves as a notice to a vendor that an award has been made and that performance can be initiated under the terms and conditions of the contract. It includes a description of what good/service is ordered, how much is needed, and what it will cost. A PO is a legal offer to buy goods and services.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  DPS Agency Procurement & Surplus Property Manual (APSPM)  Virginia Information Technologies Agency IT Procurement Manual (ITPM)  § 2.2-4309 of the Code of Virginia  Commonwealth of Virginia Vendors Manual

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A supplier may request a contract modification or purchase order change by contacting the contract administrator or the DPOR Procurement Office. Any request to change contract price, quality, quantity, delivery or cancellation will be evaluated for validity and price reasonableness. The supplier will receive approved changes through Virginia’s eProcurement portal (eVA) or by other written notification.

Policy Title: Administration Policy #500-02 Contract and Purchase Order Modifications [POL410-500_02-v3] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Cassandra Lewis, Administration and Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Administration Policy #500-02 Contract and Purchase Order Modifications (Effective 01/01/2017) Page 1 of 1

ADMINISTRATION POLICY #500-02 CONTRACT AND PURCHASE ORDER MODIFICATIONS Effective Date: July 1, 2018

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer DN: cn=Jay W. DeBoer, o=DPOR, Approved By: ou=Director,,email=jay.deboer@dpor.virginia.gov, c=US Date: 2018.07.06 10:25:10 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish agency restrictions on contract and purchase order modifications.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR) shall comply with the requirements of Chapters 3.5, 10.12, and 14.4 of the DPS Agency Procurement and Surplus Property Manual (APSPM), Chapter 10 of the Virginia Information Technologies Agency IT Procurement Manual (ITPM) and §2.2-4309 of the CodeofVirginia as it relates to contract modifications and purchase order changes.

A change order shall be processed for all purchase orders when requested by the supplier or if the invoiced amount exceeds or is less than 10% of the total value.

III. DEFINITIONS: Contract An agreement enforceable by law, between two or more competent parties, to do or not to do something, not prohibited by law, for consideration. A contract is any type of agreement or order for the procurement of goods or services.

Purchase Order A document used to execute a purchase transaction with a vendor. It serves as a notice to a vendor that an award has been made and that performance can be initiated under the terms and conditions of the contract. It includes a description of what good/service is ordered, how much is needed, and what it will cost. A PO is a legal offer to buy goods and services.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  DPS Agency Procurement & Surplus Property Manual (APSPM)  Virginia Information Technologies Agency IT Procurement Manual (ITPM)  § 2.2-4309 of the Code of Virginia  Commonwealth of Virginia Vendors Manual

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A supplier may request a contract modification or purchase order change by contacting the contract administrator or the DPOR Procurement Office. Any request to change contract price, quality, quantity, delivery or cancellation will be evaluated for validity and price reasonableness. The supplier will receive approved changes through Virginia’s eProcurement portal (eVA) or by other written notification.

Policy Title: Administration Policy #500-02 Contract and Purchase Order Modifications [POL410-500_02-v3] Effective: 07/01/2018 Submitted By: Cassandra Lewis, Administration and Financial Services Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Administration Policy #500-02 Contract and Purchase Order Modifications (Effective 01/01/2017) Page 1 of 1

HUMAN RESOURCES POLICY #200-18 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY Effective Date: March 17, 2010

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Reason: I am approving this Approved By: documentDate: 2010.03.17 14:52:26 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: In accordance with DHRM Policy 2.05 Equal Employment Opportunity, the purpose of this policy is to document the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation’s commitment to EEO in all aspects of human resource management.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation shall comply with all state and federal laws pertaining to Equal Employment Opportunity and all applicable Executive Orders and Directives.

III. DEFINITIONS: N/A

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  DHRM Policy 2.05 Equal Employment Opportunity  Governor’s Executive Order Number Six (2010)  Governor’s Executive Directive Number One (2010)

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. APPLICABILITY The provisions of this policy prohibit against discrimination in all aspects of the hiring process and employment practices including: hiring, demotion, promotion, role change, in-band adjustment, layoff, and transfer; application of performance management and development; application of corrective actions, including disciplinary actions; and, compensation, pay practices, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment.

B. MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE

1. The Human Resources Section shall monitor all aspects of DPOR human resource management to ensure compliance with all federal, state and agency EEO requirements and provisions.
2. The Human Resources Section shall investigate any allegation of discrimination by gathering information and corresponding with state and federal agencies regarding any discrimination claims.

Policy Title: Human Resources Policy #200-18 Equal Employment Opportunity Effective: 03/17/2010 Submitted By: Pratt Stelly, Human Resources Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Human Resources Policy #200-18 Equal Employment Opportunity (Effective 03/05/2010) Page 1 of 1

HUMAN RESOURCES POLICY #200-18 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY Effective Date: March 17, 2010

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Reason: I am approving this Approved By: documentDate: 2010.03.17 14:52:26 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: In accordance with DHRM Policy 2.05 Equal Employment Opportunity, the purpose of this policy is to document the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation’s commitment to EEO in all aspects of human resource management.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation shall comply with all state and federal laws pertaining to Equal Employment Opportunity and all applicable Executive Orders and Directives.

III. DEFINITIONS: N/A

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  DHRM Policy 2.05 Equal Employment Opportunity  Governor’s Executive Order Number Six (2010)  Governor’s Executive Directive Number One (2010)

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. APPLICABILITY The provisions of this policy prohibit against discrimination in all aspects of the hiring process and employment practices including: hiring, demotion, promotion, role change, in-band adjustment, layoff, and transfer; application of performance management and development; application of corrective actions, including disciplinary actions; and, compensation, pay practices, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment.

B. MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE

1. The Human Resources Section shall monitor all aspects of DPOR human resource management to ensure compliance with all federal, state and agency EEO requirements and provisions.
2. The Human Resources Section shall investigate discrimination allegations by gathering information and coordinating with relevant agencies.

Policy Title: Human Resources Policy #200-18 Equal Employment Opportunity Effective: 03/17/2010 Submitted By: Pratt Stelly, Human Resources Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Human Resources Policy #200-18 Equal Employment Opportunity (Effective 03/05/2010) Page 1 of 1

COMPLIANCE & INVESTIGATIONS POLICY #800-02 FILING OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST REGULANTS Effective Date: March 5, 2010

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Reason: I am approving this Approved By: documentDate: 2010.03.05 15:47:24 -05'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation guidelines for receiving complaints filed against regulants.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Complaints against DPOR regulants shall be handled in accordance with § 54.1-307.1 of the Code of Virginia. The Department shall consider a complaint sufficient when the alleged facts, if shown to be true, would constitute a violation of law or regulation of any regulatory board within Subtitle II of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia or any of the programs which may be in another title of the Code for which any regulatory board within Subtitle II has enforcement responsibility.

III. DEFINITIONS: N/A

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. COMPLAINT FILING DEADLINES In order to be investigated by the Department, complaints shall be filed in accordance with the provisions of § 54.1-307.1 of the Code of Virginia.

B. COMPLAINT FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

1. All complaints shall be submitted in writing except for: a. Situations where the complainant indicates that filing a written complaint will impose a hardship b. Life-threatening situations or situations that have resulted (or have the potential to result) in harm, personal injury or loss to a consumer or the public c. When the Department becomes aware of information indicating that a regulant has engaged in criminal activity that a regulatory board, through its regulations and applicable statutes, has determined may be related to the practice of the profession or occupation, for which disciplinary action may be taken.
2. Anonymous complaints may be accepted.

C. SOURCES OF COMPLAINTS

1. Information obtained from the media or other public source or from any court or other public record/document shall be deemed equivalent to a written complaint.
2. Written or verbal complaints resulting from information submitted to or obtained by any sworn investigator of the Compliance and Investigations Division indicating that a regulant has violated or is about to violate a law or regulation shall be accepted.
3. Written or verbal complaints submitted by other law enforcement or regulatory agencies shall be accepted.

Policy Title: Compliance & Investigations #800-02 Filing of Complaints Against Regulants Effective: 03/05/2010 Submitted By: David Dorner, Investigations Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Enforcement #800-02 Filing of Complaints Against Regulants (Effective 02/10/2003) Page 1 of 1

COMPLIANCE & INVESTIGATIONS POLICY #800-02 FILING OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST REGULANTS Effective Date: March 5, 2010

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer Reason: I am approving this Approved By: documentDate: 2010.03.05 15:47:24 -05'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation guidelines for receiving complaints filed against regulants.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Complaints against DPOR regulants shall be handled in accordance with § 54.1-307.1 of the Code of Virginia. The Department shall consider a complaint sufficient when the alleged facts, if shown to be true, would constitute a violation of law or regulation of any regulatory board within Subtitle II of Title 54.1 of the Code of Virginia or any of the programs which may be in another title of the Code for which any regulatory board within Subtitle II has enforcement responsibility.

III. DEFINITIONS: N/A

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. COMPLAINT FILING DEADLINES In order to be investigated by the Department, complaints shall be filed in accordance with the provisions of § 54.1-307.1 of the Code of Virginia.

B. COMPLAINT FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

1. All complaints shall be submitted in writing except for: a. Situations where the complainant indicates that filing a written complaint will impose a hardship b. Life-threatening situations or situations that have resulted (or have the potential to result) in harm, personal injury or loss to a consumer or the public c. When the Department becomes aware of information indicating that a regulant has engaged in criminal activity that a regulatory board, through its regulations and applicable statutes, has determined may be related to the practice of the profession or occupation, for which disciplinary action may be taken.
2. Anonymous complaints may be accepted.

C. SOURCES OF COMPLAINTS

1. Media, public sources, court, or public records are equivalent to written complaints.
2. Written or verbal complaints from investigators indicating a regulant's violation or imminent violation shall be accepted.
3. Complaints from law enforcement or regulatory agencies shall be accepted.

Policy Title: Compliance & Investigations #800-02 Filing of Complaints Against Regulants Effective: 03/05/2010 Submitted By: David Dorner, Investigations Director Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Enforcement #800-02 Filing of Complaints Against Regulants (Effective 02/10/2003) Page 1 of 1

EXAMINATION POLICY #600-01 EXAMINATION FEES Effective Date: October 17, 2018

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer DN: cn=Jay W. DeBoer, o=DPOR, Approved By: ou=Director,,email=jay.deboer@dpor.virginia.gov,c=US Date: 2018.10.18 12:10:10 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to ensure accurate and consistent handling of examination fees received by the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR).

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department shall utilize consistent and objective standards in handling examination fees. This policy applies only to those fees collected for examinations administered in-house. This policy does not apply to fees paid directly to vendors under contract with DPOR.

III. DEFINITIONS: Extenuating Circumstances For the purposes of this policy, extenuating circumstances refer to specific events, conditions, or situations beyond the candidate’s control (e.g., hospitalization, short-term disability, death or illness in the candidate’s family, or a call to active duty in the United States military).

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. All examination fees are non-refundable and due on or before the applicable examination fee deadline. Examination fees received are applied to the upcoming scheduled administration unless a candidate explicitly requests approval to apply for a different administration date.

B. Candidates whose fees are received after the examination fee deadline shall automatically be scheduled for the next regular examination administration.

C. A candidate whose examination fee is received past the deadline shall not be eligible to sit for that administration unless the Director of Education and Examinations, in his sole discretion, grants a waiver based on evidence of extenuating circumstances.

D. Fees paid for a scheduled examination for which a candidate fails to appear shall be forfeited, unless the candidate requests a one-time approval to apply the missed examination fees to the next regularly scheduled administration. Approval will be granted only upon evidence of extenuating circumstances. If approved, examination fees will only be forwarded once to the next scheduled examination date.

E. All examination fees shall remain active for one year from the date of receipt by the Department or until the examination is administered, whichever occurs first. After that time, all fees shall be forfeited.

Policy Title: Examinations Policy #600-01 Examination Fees [POL543-600_01-v7] Effective: 10/17/2018 Submitted By: Shannon Webster, Director of Education and Examinations Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Examinations Policy #600-01 Examination Fees (Effective 03/17/2010) Page 1 of 1

EXAMINATION POLICY #600-01 EXAMINATION FEES Effective Date: October 17, 2018

Digitally signed by Jay W. DeBoer DN: cn=Jay W. DeBoer, o=DPOR, Approved By: ou=Director,,email=jay.deboer@dpor.virginia.gov,c=US Date: 2018.10.18 12:10:10 -04'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to ensure accurate and consistent handling of examination fees received by the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (DPOR).

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Department shall utilize consistent and objective standards in handling examination fees. This policy applies only to those fees collected for examinations administered in-house. This policy does not apply to fees paid directly to vendors under contract with DPOR.

III. DEFINITIONS: Extenuating Circumstances For the purposes of this policy, extenuating circumstances refer to specific events, conditions, or situations beyond the candidate’s control (e.g., hospitalization, short-term disability, death or illness in the candidate’s family, or a call to active duty in the United States military).

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: N/A

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS: A. All examination fees are non-refundable and due on or before the applicable examination fee deadline. Examination fees received are applied to the upcoming scheduled administration unless a candidate explicitly requests approval to apply for a different administration date.

B. Candidates whose fees are received after the examination fee deadline shall automatically be scheduled for the next regular examination administration.

C. Late fee receipt disqualifies a candidate unless the Director grants a waiver for extenuating circumstances.

D. Fees paid for a scheduled examination for which a candidate fails to appear shall be forfeited, unless the candidate requests a one-time approval to apply the missed examination fees to the next regularly scheduled administration. Approval will be granted only upon evidence of extenuating circumstances. If approved, examination fees will only be forwarded once to the next scheduled examination date.

E. All examination fees shall remain active for one year from the date of receipt by the Department or until the examination is administered, whichever occurs first. After that time, all fees shall be forfeited.

Policy Title: Examinations Policy #600-01 Examination Fees [POL543-600_01-v7] Effective: 10/17/2018 Submitted By: Shannon Webster, Director of Education and Examinations Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Examinations Policy #600-01 Examination Fees (Effective 03/17/2010) Page 1 of 1

EXAMINATIONS POLICY #600-03 RESTRICTED PARTICIPATION IN EXAMINATION DEVELOPMENT & REVIEW Effective Date: June 3, 2014

Digitally signed by DeBoer Jay mkw69795 Reason: I am approving this document Approved By: Date: 2014.06.03 09:55:29 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to identify individuals who are not permitted to participate in the development or review of examinations used by or on behalf of the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (Department) or its policy boards.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: In order to ensure examination security and integrity, any individual affiliated with a regulated school, course or program shall not be permitted to participate in the development or review of examinations used by or on behalf of the Department or its policy boards.

III. DEFINITIONS: Regulated school, course or program Educational providers and curricula approved by the Department or its policy boards to qualify individuals for a license, certificate or registration.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: n/a

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. RESTRICTED PARTICIPATION The following are not permitted to participate in the development or review of examinations used by or on behalf of the Department or its policy boards:

1. Owners or employees of a regulated school, course or program, including instructors;
2. Instructors currently regulated by the Department or one of its policy boards;
3. Individuals with a contractual relationship with a regulated school, course or program;
4. Anyone disciplined by a regulatory board or agency in any jurisdiction for violation of laws and regulations related to educational services or activities; or
5. Individuals convicted of a felony or misdemeanor related to educational services or activities.

B. WAIVER OF RESTRICTION The Director of the Department may, in his sole discretion, waive the restrictions stated in this policy for good cause shown, which said cause shall be stated in writing and retained on file.

Policy Title: Examinations Policy #600-03 RESTRICTED PARTICIPATION IN EXAM DEVELOPMENT & REVIEW [POL543-600_03-v1] Effective: 06/03/2014 Submitted By: Mark Courtney, Senior Director, Regulatory & Public Affairs Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: n/a Page 1 of 1

EXAMINATIONS POLICY #600-03 RESTRICTED PARTICIPATION IN EXAMINATION DEVELOPMENT & REVIEW Effective Date: June 3, 2014

Digitally signed by DeBoer Jay mkw69795 Reason: I am approving this document Approved By: Date: 2014.06.03 09:55:29 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to identify individuals who are not permitted to participate in the development or review of examinations used by or on behalf of the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation (Department) or its policy boards.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: In order to ensure examination security and integrity, any individual affiliated with a regulated school, course or program shall not be permitted to participate in the development or review of examinations used by or on behalf of the Department or its policy boards.

III. DEFINITIONS: Regulated school, course or program Educational providers and curricula approved by the Department or its policy boards to qualify individuals for a license, certificate or registration.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: n/a

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. RESTRICTED PARTICIPATION The following are not permitted to participate in the development or review of examinations used by or on behalf of the Department or its policy boards:

1. Owners or employees of a regulated school, course or program, including instructors;
2. Instructors currently regulated by the Department or its policy boards;
3. Individuals with a contractual relationship with a regulated school, course or program;
4. Anyone disciplined by a regulatory board or agency in any jurisdiction for violations related to educational laws or activities;
5. Individuals convicted of a felony or misdemeanor related to educational services or activities.

B. WAIVER OF RESTRICTION The Director of the Department may, in his sole discretion, waive the restrictions stated in this policy for good cause shown, which said cause shall be stated in writing and retained on file.

Policy Title: Examinations Policy #600-03 RESTRICTED PARTICIPATION IN EXAM DEVELOPMENT & REVIEW [POL543-600_03-v1] Effective: 06/03/2014 Submitted By: Mark Courtney, Senior Director, Regulatory & Public Affairs Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: n/a Page 1 of 1

COMPLIANCE & INVESTIGATIONS POLICY #800-01 CRIMINAL HISTORY & ONLINE PUBLIC RECORDS INFORMATION Effective Date: June 13, 2011

Digitally signed by Dixon Gordon Approved By: gfq34896Date: 2011.06.13 16:28:20 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for requesting and handling criminal history and public records information in compliance with federal/state laws and applicable information system service/security agreements.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Compliance and Investigations Division of the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation is authorized to enforce laws and conduct criminal investigations within its jurisdiction (§ 19.2-389 of the Code of Virginia). Pursuant to § 54.1-306 of the Code of Virginia, the Director and investigators are authorized to request and receive criminal history and public records information from Central Criminal Records Exchange (CCRE), Virginia Criminal Information Network (VCIN), National Crime Information Center (NCIC), the Interstate Identification Index (III) files, and the LexisNexis ® Accurint® Public Records System. In addition, select Licensing and Regulation Division personnel are authorized to utilize the LexisNexis ® Public Records Depository for information verification purposes only.

III. DEFINITIONS: Criminal History Information Information regarding arrests and disposition received from the Central Criminal Records Exchange (CCRE), other state central bureaus, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  DPOR IT Policy #400-03 Information Technology Security Program  Information Security Access Agreement

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. REQUESTS FOR CRIMINAL HISTORY INFORMATION

1. All Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation employees and consultants are required to sign an Information Security Access Agreement in accordance with Information Technology Policy #400-03, Information Technology Security Program.
2. Investigators may use criminal history information during a criminal investigation. Investigations are deemed criminal in nature until a determination has been made to proceed under the Administrative Process Act (APA) for a case decision. Matters of a criminal nature arising after an APA case decision shall be reviewed by the appropriate Executive Director and the Investigations Director. Licensing and Regulation Division staff who believe that an applicant has provided false information on an application regarding criminal convictions or any other false information shall forward that information to the Compliance and Investigations Division for alleged violations of §54.1-111 of the Code of Virginia or other applicable code section.
3. Investigator requests for criminal history information shall be directed to the investigator assigned to the secured VCIN terminal in the Compliance and Investigations Division.

B. USE AND DESTRUCTION OF CRIMINAL HISTORY INFORMATION

1. All criminal history information is confidential and its use is limited to those individuals who are authorized by statute to receive such information.
2. Criminal history printouts from the VCIN terminal shall not be copied or shared with personnel outside of the Compliance and Investigations Division. Criminal history documents shall not be stored in investigation files, but shall be secured with the investigators’ working papers during the investigation. Upon completion of the investigation, the records shall be shredded.

Policy Title: Compliance & Investigations Policy #800-01 Criminal History & OL Public Records [POL700-800_01-v1] Effective: 06/13/2011 Submitted By: Mark Courtney, Deputy Director Licensing & Regulation Division Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Compliance & Investigations Policy #800-01 Criminal History Information (Effective 03/05/2010) Page 1 of 2C. LexisNexis

® ACCURINT

® PUBLIC RECORDS

1. All Compliance and Investigations and Licensing and Regulation Division personnel shall comply with the terms and conditions of the LexisNexis ® Non-FCRA (Fair Credit and Reporting Act) Agreement and the Department’s Information Security Access Agreement.
2. All LexisNexis ® Accurint ® Public Records inquiries shall be logged on the LexisNexis User Inquiry Log which shall be available for management inspection at all times.
3. Information obtained by the Licensing and Regulation Division from LexisNexis ® Accurint ® Public Records System shall be used for information verification purposes only and shall not be disclosed to anyone outside of DPOR. Only information verified through a publicly available source may be disclosed to an outside party.

Policy Title: Compliance & Investigations Policy #800-01 Criminal History & OL Public Records [POL700-800_01-v1] Effective: 06/13/2011 Submitted By: Mark Courtney, Deputy Director Licensing & Regulation Division Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Compliance & Investigations Policy #800-01 Criminal History Information (Effective 03/05/2010) Page 2 of 2

COMPLIANCE & INVESTIGATIONS POLICY #800-01 CRIMINAL HISTORY & ONLINE PUBLIC RECORDS INFORMATION Effective Date: June 13, 2011

Digitally signed by Dixon Gordon Approved By: gfq34896Date: 2011.06.13 16:28:20 -04'00'

I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for requesting and handling criminal history and public records information in compliance with federal/state laws and applicable information system service/security agreements.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: The Compliance and Investigations Division of the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation is authorized to enforce laws and conduct criminal investigations within its jurisdiction (§ 19.2-389 of the Code of Virginia). Pursuant to § 54.1-306 of the Code of Virginia, the Director and investigators are authorized to request and receive criminal history and public records information from Central Criminal Records Exchange (CCRE), Virginia Criminal Information Network (VCIN), National Crime Information Center (NCIC), the Interstate Identification Index (III) files, and the LexisNexis ® Accurint® Public Records System. In addition, select Licensing and Regulation Division personnel are authorized to utilize the LexisNexis ® Public Records Depository for information verification purposes only.

III. DEFINITIONS: Criminal History Information Information regarding arrests and disposition received from the Central Criminal Records Exchange (CCRE), other state central bureaus, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  DPOR IT Policy #400-03 Information Technology Security Program  Information Security Access Agreement

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. REQUESTS FOR CRIMINAL HISTORY INFORMATION

1. All DPOR employees and consultants must sign an Information Security Access Agreement per Policy #400-03.
2. Investigators may use criminal history during investigations, which remain criminal until an APA case decision. Post-APA criminal matters are reviewed by the Executive and Investigations Directors. Staff suspecting false info on applications must forward to Compliance for violations of §54.1-111 or other applicable law.
3. Requests for criminal history must be directed to the assigned investigator at the secured VCIN terminal.

B. USE AND DESTRUCTION OF CRIMINAL HISTORY INFORMATION

1. All criminal history info is confidential and limited to authorized individuals by law.
2. VCIN printouts must not be shared outside the Division. Documents are secured with working papers and shredded after investigation.

Policy Title: Compliance & Investigations Policy #800-01 Criminal History & OL Public Records [POL700-800_01-v1] Effective: 06/13/2011 Submitted By: Mark Courtney, Deputy Director Licensing & Regulation Division Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Compliance & Investigations Policy #800-01 Criminal History Information (Effective 03/05/2010) Page 1 of 2C. LexisNexis

® ACCURINT

® PUBLIC RECORDS

1. All personnel must comply with LexisNexis ® Non-FCRA and Department’s Information Security agreements.
2. All LexisNexis ® Accurint ® inquiries must be logged and available for management inspection.
3. Division info from LexisNexis ® Accurint ® is for verification only and must not be disclosed outside DPOR. Only verified public info may be shared externally.

Policy Title: Compliance & Investigations Policy #800-01 Criminal History & OL Public Records [POL700-800_01-v1] Effective: 06/13/2011 Submitted By: Mark Courtney, Deputy Director Licensing & Regulation Division Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Compliance & Investigations Policy #800-01 Criminal History Information (Effective 03/05/2010) Page 2 of 2

In accordance with § 2.2-4002.1 of the Code of Virginia, this guidance document conforms to the definition of a guidance document in § 2.2-4101.

Guidance Document

HOUSING DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF SOURCE OF FUNDS

ISSUED BY:

Virginia Real Estate Board EFFECTIVE DATE: April 16, 2021 As a means of providing information or guidance of general applicability to staff and the public, the Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board issue this guidance document to interpret the requirements of 18 VAC 135-50 (Fair Housing Regulations).

The purpose of this guidance document is to address issues regarding housing discrimination based on lawful “source of funds,” particularly what actions or inactions by housing providers may or may not constitute unlawful discrimination under the Virginia Fair Housing Law.

Introduction The Virginia Real Estate and Fair Housing Boards (“Boards”), through the Virginia Fair Housing Office (“VFHO”), are jointly responsible for enforcing the Virginia Fair Housing Law (the “VFHL”), which prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, elderliness, familial status, national origin, source of funds, sexual orientation, gender identity, or status as a veteran.1 As of July 1, 2020, VFHO is responsible for investigating allegations of discrimination on the basis of the source of funds of a buyer or renter of housing. Because the “source of funds” protected class is new to Virginia, many questions have been raised regarding what may constitute this type of discrimination.

This guidance provides technical assistance regarding what actions, behaviors, policies, and procedures likely do and do not violate the Virginia Fair Housing Law’s prohibition on discrimination on the basis of one’s lawful source of funds.

Background House Bill 6, sponsored by Delegate Jeffrey Bourne, passed the 2020 Session of the General Assembly and was signed into law by Governor Ralph Northam on March 27, 2020.2 The law defines “source of funds” as: any source that lawfully provides funds to or on behalf of a renter or buyer of housing, including any assistance, benefit, or subsidy program, whether such program is administered by a governmental or nongovernmental entity.3 1 Va. Code §§ 36-96.1, et seq. 2 2020 Acts Ch. 477. 3 Va. Code § 36-96.1:1.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Housing Discrimination on the Basis of Source of Funds The new law adds “source of funds” to all of the unlawful discriminatory practices that appear in Virginia Code § 36-96.3, including prohibitions on, for example: (1) refusing to rent or sell based on someone’s source of funds; (2) imposing terms, conditions, or privileges of the sale or rental of a dwelling based on one’s source of funds; (3) placing advertisements that express a preference or limitation for certain sources of funds; and (4) representing that, based on someone’s source of funds, a dwelling is unavailable for inspection, sale, or rental.4 According to the patron, the primary impetus for the bill was to protect prospective renters and buyers from discrimination if they intend to pay for housing using a Housing Choice Voucher (“HCV,” commonly referred to as “Section 8” or “Section 8 rental assistance”). Local public housing agencies (“PHAs”) receive federal funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) to administer the HCV program. HUD summarizes the program as follows:5 It is the federal government’s major program for assisting very low-income families to afford decent, safe, and sanitary housing in the private market. A voucher holder is free to choose any housing that meets the requirements of the program and is not limited to units that are located in subsidized housing projects.

A housing subsidy is paid to the landlord directly by the PHA on behalf of the participating family.

The family then pays the difference between the actual rent charged by the landlord and the amount subsidized by the program.

Stakeholders have raised questions about how the new source-of-funds provision applies to certain existing policies and procedures often followed in the housing market. To provide clarity, promote compliance, and avoid unnecessary litigation, this guidance addresses these issues below.

Analysis The policy of the Commonwealth is to prohibit discriminatory practices with respect to residential housing on the basis of source of funds6—not to prevent non-discriminatory consideration of financing during housing transactions.

Sellers may consider financial terms and conditions from prospective purchasers.

Oftentimes, home sellers will receive multiple offers to buy their home. In order to decide which to accept, the seller will review and weigh the financial terms of each contract. Nothing in the text or legislative history of the source-of-funds law suggest that such non-discriminatory consideration should 4 Va. Code § 36-96.3(A)(1), (2), (3), and (4), respectively. 5 See, U.S. Dep’t of Housing and Urban Dev., Housing Choice Vouchers Factsheet, available at: https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/hcv/about/fact_sheet, last visited December 4, 2020. 6 Va. Code § 36-96.1.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

Page 2 of 8 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Housing Discrimination on the Basis of Source of Funds be prohibited. Therefore, it is not unlawful under the VFHL for a seller of a dwelling to consider the financial terms and conditions, including the loan amount, loan program or type of loan, of a real estate purchase contract from a prospective purchaser.

EXAMPLE: Mary is selling her home at a listing price of $300,000. She’s excited to move to Senegal as soon as possible to join her daughter who has just gotten employment abroad. After only two days on the market, her real estate agent presents Mary with three offers to purchase the home. Each offer has slightly different terms.  Offer 1: $300,000; 20% down payment; conventional loan for the remainder; close in 60 days as long as the prospective buyer sells her current home.  Offer 2: $310,000; 10% down payment; VA loan for the remainder; close in 45 days.  Offer 3: $290,000 all cash; close in 21 days.

Mary and her real estate agent discuss the offers. Mary does not violate the VFHL prohibition on source-of-funds discrimination by taking into consideration how each offeror will pay to buy her home.

Housing providers can ask about income on an application and verify same.

It is axiomatic that every housing provider has a legitimate business interest in assuring tenants can pay rent. That assurance often necessitates verification of income: a longstanding, rational industry practice.

Accordingly, housing providers may ask about and verify sources of funds, as long as they do so in a non-discriminatory manner. It does not constitute discrimination based on source of funds to make a written or oral inquiry concerning the amount or source of income.

The prohibition against source-of-funds discrimination does not prohibit a housing provider from determining the ability of any potential buyer or renter to pay a purchase price or pay rent by verifying—in a commercially reasonable manner—the source and amount of income, including any payments or portions that will be made by other individuals, organizations, or voucher and rental assistance payment programs.

However, housing providers are cautioned not to read a sense of permanency into the definition of “source of funds” that is plainly absent. The definition is silent as to the duration of the source of funds in question; rather, “source of funds” means any source that lawfully provides funds. For instance, one-time assistance grants or other temporary subsidies such as unemployment benefits are covered.

Housing providers must accept all lawful sources of income equally. Accordingly, landlords may not refuse sources of funds based on the duration of such funds without potentially violating the VFHL.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

Page 3 of 8 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Housing Discrimination on the Basis of Source of Funds Therefore, to the extent a housing provider qualifies applicants on their income at the time of application, the landlord should be consistent, including for applicants with income that specifies a defined end date. Screening policies that consider past income of all applicants as a predictor of stability are not unreasonable.

Income qualifying criteria must be applied fairly.

Many housing providers require a tenant to meet an income threshold in order to qualify for housing. To be sure, landlords have a strong interest in assuring their tenants can afford to pay rent. This policy is not problematic in and of itself, unless it is applied in a discriminatory manner (e.g. making the threshold higher for those who have a particular source of funds). Housing providers should be careful to ensure this otherwise neutral criteria is not applied in a manner that results in the automatic disqualification of HCV holders who, by definition, have a portion of their rent paid by a third party.

To determine if a tenant can afford the rent, the relevant factor for a landlord’s risk assessment is the tenant’s portion of rent, not the total rent. The voucher portion of the rent is secured under a contract with the administrative agency that has already qualified the HCV holder. The landlord’s reasonable focus should be on whether the tenant can afford the tenant’s share of the rent. Therefore, to avoid source-of-funds discrimination liability, housing providers should subtract any source of funds from a rental assistance program (like the HCV) from the total of the monthly rent prior to calculating whether the tenant satisfies the income criteria.7 Subtracting the HCV portion from the total rent leaves the amount for which the tenant will be responsible. It is that figure against which the prospective tenant’s other income should be compared.

Housing providers who add the voucher payment to a tenant’s other income and then use that total to determine if criteria are met improperly treat the voucher portion.

EXAMPLE 1: A housing provider requires all tenants, regardless of their source of funds, to demonstrate that they have income that is three times the amount of the monthly rent. The monthly rent for the unit in question is $1,000. The tenant earns employment income of $800 per month. Under the terms of their HCV, the tenant pays $240 per month towards rent (30% of their income), and the HCV agency pays the remainder, or $760.

The housing provider subtracts the HCV portion from the total rent to get the tenant’s share of rent: $1,000 - $760 = $240. The housing provider then determines that the tenant meets the 7 Other states articulate this calculation method in their source-of-funds anti-discrimination statutes. See, e.g.

Washington: “If a landlord requires that a prospective tenant or current tenant have a certain threshold level of income, any source of income in the form of a rent voucher or subsidy must be subtracted from the total of the monthly rent prior to calculating if the income criteria have been met.” WAST 59.18.255(3); and California: “It shall be unlawful … In instances where there is a government rent subsidy, to use a financial or income standard in assessing eligibility for the rental of housing that is not based on the portion of the rent to be paid by the tenant.” CA GOVT 12955 (o).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

Page 4 of 8 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Housing Discrimination on the Basis of Source of Funds income-qualifying standard because the tenant’s employment income ($800) is at least three times as much as the tenant’s share of the monthly rent, $240 when multiplied by three is $720.

This application of income-qualifying criteria does not discriminate against HCV holders who apply to live in this complex.

EXAMPLE 2: A landlord requires all tenants, regardless of their source of funds, to demonstrate that they have income that is three times the amount of the monthly rent. The monthly rent for the unit in question is $1,000. The tenant earns employment income of $800 per month. Under the terms of their HCV, the tenant pays $240 per month towards rent (30% of their income), and the HCV agency pays the remainder, or $760.

To determine whether this prospective tenant meets the income criteria, the landlord adds the tenant’s employment income to the monthly HCV funds: $800 + $760 = $1,560. The landlord declines to rent to the prospective tenant because $1,560 is not at least three times the monthly rent ($3,000). This method of calculating income discriminates against HCV holders.

Justifying a refusal to rent to HCV holders based on “administrative burdens” is not a defense.

In jurisdictions that have source of funds protections, courts have long held that refusing to rent to a HCV holder because of “administrative burdens” still blocks housing opportunities for applicants who would otherwise qualify. Housing providers that allow objections about administrative requirements, HCV regulations, or specific housing authorities to form the basis for a refusal to rent (other than the statutory exemption discussed below) risk liability for source-of-funds discrimination against HCV holders. To aid this guidance, we reference the following court decisions from other jurisdictions that have analyzed these issues:

• “Interpreting [source-of-funds protections] to allow an exception to its antidiscrimination provisions for those landlords who refuse to use the required section 8 lease would eviscerate the basic protection envisioned by the statute. It would lead to the unreasonable result that while the legislature mandated that landlords may not reject tenants because their income included section 8 assistance, the legislature at the same time also intended that landlords might avoid the statutory mandate by refusing to accede to a condition essential to its fulfillment. Such a result is untenable. Statutes are to be construed in a manner that will not thwart [their] intended purpose or lead to absurd results.” Comm’n on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Sullivan Assocs., 250 Conn. 763, 778, 739 A.2d 238, 248 (1999).

• “The only rationale [the housing provider] has suggested for its [no-HCV] policy is that it did not want to accept vouchers because the voucher program’s requirements are burdensome, particularly the requirement that the landlord execute an initial lease or ratification with the tenant. Were we to accept that excuse, however, we would render the [D.C.] Human Rights Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

Page 5 of 8 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Housing Discrimination on the Basis of Source of Funds Act’s definition of ‘source of income’ nugatory. The Act expressly defines ‘source of income’ as encompassing the Section 8 program; indeed, Section 8 vouchers are the source-of-income provision’s paradigm case. Permitting [the housing provider] to refuse to accept Section 8 vouchers on the ground that it does not wish to comply with Section 8’s requirements would vitiate that definition and the legal safeguard it was intended to provide.” Feemster v. BSA Ltd. P'ship, 383 U.S. App. D.C. 376, 383, 548 F.3d 1063, 1070 (2008).

• “To permit a landlord to decline participation in the Section 8 program in order to avoid the ‘bureaucracy’ of the program would create the risk that ‘[i]f all landlords . . . did not want to ‘fill out the forms’ then there would be no Section 8 housing available.” Franklin Tower One v. N.M., 157 N.J. 602, 621, 725 A.2d 1104, 1114 (1999) (citing Templeton Arms v. Feins, 220 N.J. Super. 1, 9, 531 A.2d 361 (App.Div.1987)).
• “The case review board […] concluded that administrative burden was not a proper defense in any event, that ‘[i]f a landlord could avoid the mandate of the County’s fair housing law with the defense of ‘administrative burden,’ then landlords could easily thwart the Council’s intent underlying the law.” Montgomery Cty. v. Glenmont Hills Assocs., 402 Md. 250, 276, 936 A.2d 325, 340 (2007).

Exemptions Related to Source of Funds The General Assembly articulated two specific exemptions from VFHL coverage in the context of source-of-funds discrimination. Note that in keeping with longstanding fair housing case law, the burden to raise and prove exempt status lies with the person or entity claiming the exemption.8 The first exemption applied a provision initially codified in 2020 to remove smaller, non-professional owners and landlords from VFHL coverage.9 The second balanced the interests of HCV holders seeking housing with the substantial interest of housing providers in reducing unit vacancy times. Given that units must pass inspection before a voucher can be approved, landlords raised concerns about losing rental income during the time in which a unit is kept off the market until approved for HCV tenancy. In weighing those interests, the General Assembly struck a balance in the second exemption that reads: It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for an owner or an owner's managing agent to deny or limit a person’s rental or occupancy of a rental dwelling unit based on the person’s source of funds for that unit if such source is not approved within 15 days of the person’s submission of the request for tenancy approval.10 8 Commonwealth ex rel. Real Estate Board v. Tutt Taylor & Rankin Real Estate, LLC, 102 Va. Cir. 125, 136 (Loudoun Cir. Ct., May 9, 2019). 9 Va. Code § 36-96.2(I), exempting from the prohibition on source-of-funds discrimination, an “owner or an owner's managing agent” so long as such “owner does not own more than four rental dwelling units in the Commonwealth at the time of the alleged discriminatory housing practice.” 10 Va. Code § 36-96.2(J).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

Page 6 of 8 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Housing Discrimination on the Basis of Source of Funds For purposes of determining if this exemption applies, two specific events must be identified so that the time between them can be accurately calculated. First, the “submission of the request for the tenancy approval” (“RFTA”) is the date on which a complete RFTA package is mailed, emailed, or delivered to the voucher administrator (by either the housing provider or prospective tenant). Note that sometimes an incomplete set of documents is submitted, to which voucher administrators respond by requesting complete information. It may take some time for a complete package to be submitted, but none of that elapsed time triggers the 15-day clock for purposes of this exemption. The second event, or when the source of funds is considered “approved,” is the date that the unit passes inspection as indicated on the inspection report.

Implicit in this 15-day approval exemption is an expectation that the housing provider participates in good faith with the home seeker and voucher administrative agency to consummate the housing transaction. The RFTA package requires the landlord to compile minimal documentation for submission: lease and lease addendum; ownership verification, W-9, and direct deposit form; and lead-based paint certification. Moreover, the inspection process requires cooperation by the landlord (e.g., providing timely access to the unit).

To the extent a landlord unreasonably delays or postpones RFTA submittal or inspection, that behavior may evince an intent to refuse to rent to someone based on their source of funds in contravention of the source-of-funds fair housing protections.11 However, where a landlord does cooperate in good faith with the potential tenant and the agency administering the voucher, but more than 15 days elapse between the submitted RFTA and unit-inspection approval, that landlord may decline to rent to the HCV holder on that basis and not face liability for source-of-funds discrimination.

EXAMPLE 1: A prospective tenant approaches a landlord about an available, vacant apartment advertised by the landlord. The prospective tenant otherwise qualifies for the unit. When the prospective tenant tells the landlord she will be using a HCV to help pay her rent, the landlord grows concerned. Knowing that he cannot deny this prospective tenant the chance to rent the unit just because she uses a HCV, he does not respond to her or the voucher administrator’s request to complete the RFTA package. Once he finally does, he misses three appointments for inspection of the unit, allowing three weeks to go by before the unit eventually passes inspection. Even though 21 days may have elapsed between the RFTA submission and inspection approval, this landlord did not cooperate in good faith and cannot claim the exemption.

EXAMPLE 2: The property manager of a large apartment building in a hot market helped a prospective tenant submit the RFTA to live in the complex. The voucher administrator did not schedule the unit inspection until a week later. That inspector cancelled. The administrator scheduled the second inspection appointment 21 days after the RFTA was submitted. Because this property manager has participated in good faith in the process, she may claim the 15-day 11 Seattle, Washington explicitly prohibits this in its source-of-funds anti-discrimination ordinance: “It is an unfair practice for a person to fail to: cooperate with a potential or current occupant in completing and submitting required information and documentation for the potential or current occupant to be eligible for or to receive rental assistance from Section 8 or other subsidy program […].” S.M.C § 14.08.020(H).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

Page 7 of 8 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Housing Discrimination on the Basis of Source of Funds approval exemption and decline to rent to the prospective tenant without being liable for source-of-funds discrimination.

Conclusion Through its amendments to the VFHL during the 2020 Session, the General Assembly affirmed the state’s official policy: . . . to provide for fair housing throughout the Commonwealth, to all its citizens, regardless of [. . .] source of funds [. . .], and to that end to prohibit discriminatory practices with respect to residential housing by any person or group of persons, in order that the peace, health, safety, prosperity, and general welfare of all the inhabitants of the Commonwealth may be protected and ensured.12 As with all other protected classes enumerated in the VFHL, the source-of-funds provision requires liberal construction so that the law has its fullest remedial effect. A statute that is remedial in nature is “liberally construed so that the purpose intended may be accomplished,” and is to be “read so as to promote the ability of the enactment to remedy the mischief at which it is directed.”13 Simply put, the new law requires housing providers to treat all tenants, applicants, prospective purchasers, clients, etc. equally, regardless of their source of income.

Aligned with that principle, housing providers should be sure not to take actions or implement policies that frustrate the purpose of the law. While housing providers may ask about income (including the source of income) and require documentation of income, they must accept all lawful sources of income equally. To avoid risk of liability for source-of-funds discrimination, housing providers should not use information about income or the source of income in a way that has either the intent or the effect of frustrating the purpose of the law.

To report potential housing discrimination, contact:

VIRGINIA FAIR HOUSING OFFICE Phone: 804-367-8530 Toll-Free: 1-888-551-3247 TDD: Virginia Relay 711 FAX: 866-480-8333 Email: FairHousing@dpor.virginia.gov 12 Va. Code § 36-96.1. 13 Bd. of Supervisors of Richmond Cty. v. Rhoads, 294 Va. 43, 51, 803 S.E.2d 329, 333 (2017) (citing Manu v. GEICO Cas. Co., 293 Va. 371, 389, 798 S.E.2d 598, 608 (2017)).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

Page 8 of 8

In accordance with § 2.2-4002.1, this guidance conforms to the definition in § 2.2-4101.

Guidance Document

HOUSING DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF SOURCE OF FUNDS

ISSUED BY:

Virginia Real Estate Board EFFECTIVE DATE: April 16, 2021 This guidance interprets requirements of 18 VAC 135-50 (Fair Housing Regulations).

This guidance addresses housing discrimination based on lawful “source of funds,” clarifying actions or inactions that may or may not violate Virginia Fair Housing Law.

The Boards, via VFHO, enforce the VFHL, prohibiting housing discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, disability, elderliness, familial status, national origin, source of funds, sexual orientation, gender identity, or veteran status. Since July 1, 2020, VFHO investigates source-of-funds discrimination, a new protected class raising questions.

This guidance offers technical assistance on actions, behaviors, policies, and procedures that likely do or do not violate Virginia Fair Housing Law regarding source of funds discrimination.

Background House Bill 6, sponsored by Delegate Jeffrey Bourne, passed the 2020 Session of the General Assembly and was signed into law by Governor Ralph Northam on March 27, 2020.2 The law defines “source of funds” as: any source that lawfully provides funds to or on behalf of a renter or buyer of housing, including any assistance, benefit, or subsidy program, whether such program is administered by a governmental or nongovernmental entity.3 1 Va. Code §§ 36-96.1, et seq. 2 2020 Acts Ch. 477. 3 Va. Code § 36-96.1:1.

Guidance documents lack the force of law.

Statutes override this guidance if conflicts arise with state or federal law.

This guidance adds “source of funds” to unlawful practices in Virginia Code § 36-96.3, including refusing to rent or sell, imposing terms, advertising preferences, or claiming unavailability based on source. The bill aims to protect prospective renters and buyers using Housing Choice Vouchers (“Section 8”). PHAs, funded by HUD, administer the program, which helps very low-income families afford decent housing; voucher holders can choose any qualifying housing.

The PHA pays housing subsidies directly to landlords for participating families.

The family pays the difference between actual rent and subsidy.

Stakeholders questioned how the new source-of-funds law applies to existing policies. This guidance clarifies and promotes compliance to prevent litigation.

The Commonwealth prohibits housing discrimination based on source of funds, not non-discriminatory consideration of financing during transactions.

Sellers can consider financial terms from buyers.

Home sellers often receive multiple offers and can consider financial terms when choosing. Nothing in the source-of-funds law prohibits non-discriminatory financial consideration.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

It is not unlawful under VFHL for a seller to consider financial terms, including loan amount, program, or type, of a purchase contract.

Example: Mary lists her home at $300,000. Three offers: 1) $300,000, 20% down, conventional loan, 60-day close; 2) $310,000, 10% down, VA loan, 45-day close; 3) $290,000 cash, 21-day close.

Mary and her real estate agent discuss the offers. Mary does not violate the VFHL prohibition on source-of-funds discrimination by taking into consideration how each offeror will pay to buy her home.

Housing providers may ask and verify income on applications.

Housing providers have a legitimate interest in ensuring tenants can pay rent, often verified through income checks, a longstanding industry practice.

Housing providers may ask and verify sources of funds non-discriminatorily; inquiries about income source or amount are not discriminatory.

Prohibition does not prevent verifying a buyer’s or renter’s ability to pay, including source and amount of income, in a commercially reasonable manner, even if payments are from others or assistance programs.

Housing providers should not assume permanency in “source of funds,” which includes any lawful source, such as one-time grants or temporary subsidies like unemployment benefits.

Housing providers must accept all lawful income sources equally; refusing based on duration may violate VFHL.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

Page 3 of 8 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Housing Discrimination on the Basis of Source of Funds Landlords qualifying applicants by income at application should be consistent, including for income with end dates. Using past income to assess stability is reasonable.

Income qualifying criteria must be applied fairly.

Housing providers often require income thresholds to qualify tenants, which is lawful unless applied discriminatorily, such as unfairly disqualifying HCV holders who have third-party rent payments.

To assess affordability, landlords should consider the tenant’s share of rent, subtracting rental assistance (like HCV) from total rent before income comparison, avoiding discrimination.

Housing providers that combine voucher payments with other income to meet criteria improperly treat the voucher portion.

EXAMPLE 1: A housing provider requires all tenants, regardless of source of funds, to show income three times the rent. Rent is $1,000; tenant earns $800, pays $240, HCV pays $760.

The provider subtracts HCV from rent to find tenant’s share: $1,000 - $760 = $240. Other states use similar methods in their statutes.

Washington: Income from vouchers must be subtracted from rent before assessing eligibility. California: Rent subsidies cannot be used to disqualify tenants based on income.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

The income standard is met because $800 income is at least three times $240 rent share ($720).

This income-qualifying standard does not discriminate against HCV applicants.

EXAMPLE 2: A landlord requires all tenants to show income three times rent. Rent is $1,000; tenant earns $800, pays $240, HCV pays $760.

The landlord adds employment income and HCV funds: $800 + $760 = $1,560, which is less than three times rent ($3,000). This method discriminates against HCV holders.

Justifying refusal based on “administrative burdens” is not a defense.

Courts have long held that refusing to rent HCV holders due to “administrative burdens” still blocks housing opportunities. Providers risking liability if objections lead to refusals, except as exempted below. Referenced court decisions analyze these issues.

• “Interpreting [source-of-funds protections] to allow an exception to its antidiscrimination provisions for those landlords who refuse to use the required section 8 lease would eviscerate the basic protection envisioned by the statute. It would lead to the unreasonable result that while the legislature mandated that landlords may not reject tenants because their income included section 8 assistance, the legislature at the same time also intended that landlords might avoid the statutory mandate by refusing to accede to a condition essential to its fulfillment. Such a result is untenable. Statutes are to be construed in a manner that will not thwart [their] intended purpose or lead to absurd results.” Comm’n on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Sullivan Assocs., 250 Conn. 763, 778, 739 A.2d 238, 248 (1999).

• “The only rationale [the housing provider] has suggested for its [no-HCV] policy is that it did not want to accept vouchers because the voucher program’s requirements are burdensome, particularly the requirement that the landlord execute an initial lease or ratification with the tenant. Were we to accept that excuse, however, we would render the [D.C.] Human Rights Guidance documents lack the force of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

Page 5 of 8 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT | Real Estate Board and Fair Housing Board Housing Discrimination on the Basis of Source of Funds Act’s definition of ‘source of income’ nugatory. The Act expressly defines ‘source of income’ as encompassing the Section 8 program; indeed, Section 8 vouchers are the source-of-income provision’s paradigm case. Permitting [the housing provider] to refuse to accept Section 8 vouchers on the ground that it does not wish to comply with Section 8’s requirements would vitiate that definition and the legal safeguard it was intended to provide.” Feemster v. BSA Ltd. P'ship, 383 U.S. App. D.C. 376, 383, 548 F.3d 1063, 1070 (2008).

• Refusing Section 8 to avoid paperwork risks eliminating all Section 8 housing (Franklin Tower, 1999).
• “The case review board […] concluded that administrative burden was not a proper defense in any event, that ‘[i]f a landlord could avoid the mandate of the County’s fair housing law with the defense of ‘administrative burden,’ then landlords could easily thwart the Council’s intent underlying the law.” Montgomery Cty. v. Glenmont Hills Assocs., 402 Md. 250, 276, 936 A.2d 325, 340 (2007).

Exemptions Related to Source of Funds The General Assembly articulated two specific exemptions from VFHL coverage in the context of source-of-funds discrimination. Note that in keeping with longstanding fair housing case law, the burden to raise and prove exempt status lies with the person or entity claiming the exemption.8 The first exemption applied a provision initially codified in 2020 to remove smaller, non-professional owners and landlords from VFHL coverage.9 The second balanced the interests of HCV holders seeking housing with the substantial interest of housing providers in reducing unit vacancy times. Given that units must pass inspection before a voucher can be approved, landlords raised concerns about losing rental income during the time in which a unit is kept off the market until approved for HCV tenancy. In weighing those interests, the General Assembly struck a balance in the second exemption that reads: It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for an owner or an owner's managing agent to deny or limit a person’s rental or occupancy of a rental dwelling unit based on the person’s source of funds for that unit if such source is not approved within 15 days of the person’s submission of the request for tenancy approval.10 8 Commonwealth ex rel. Real Estate Board v. Tutt Taylor & Rankin Real Estate, LLC, 102 Va. Cir. 125, 136 (Loudoun Cir. Ct., May 9, 2019). 9 Va. Code § 36-96.2(I), exempting from the prohibition on source-of-funds discrimination, an “owner or an owner's managing agent” so long as such “owner does not own more than four rental dwelling units in the Commonwealth at the time of the alleged discriminatory housing practice.” 10 Va. Code § 36-96.2(J).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

The exemption applies if the complete RFTA is submitted and the unit passes inspection, with the 15-day clock starting at submission, excluding delays for incomplete documents.

Implicit in this 15-day approval exemption is an expectation that the housing provider participates in good faith with the home seeker and voucher administrative agency to consummate the housing transaction. The RFTA package requires the landlord to compile minimal documentation for submission: lease and lease addendum; ownership verification, W-9, and direct deposit form; and lead-based paint certification. Moreover, the inspection process requires cooperation by the landlord (e.g., providing timely access to the unit).

Unreasonable delays by landlords may indicate intent to discriminate. Good-faith cooperation with delays over 15 days is not liability for discrimination.

EXAMPLE 1: A tenant using HCV approached a landlord who delayed RFTA and missed inspections, passing after 21 days. The landlord did not cooperate in good faith and cannot claim the exemption.

EXAMPLE 2: The property manager of a large apartment building in a hot market helped a prospective tenant submit the RFTA to live in the complex. The voucher administrator did not schedule the unit inspection until a week later. That inspector cancelled. The administrator scheduled the second inspection appointment 21 days after the RFTA was submitted. Because this property manager has participated in good faith in the process, she may claim the 15-day 11 Seattle, Washington explicitly prohibits this in its source-of-funds anti-discrimination ordinance: “It is an unfair practice for a person to fail to: cooperate with a potential or current occupant in completing and submitting required information and documentation for the potential or current occupant to be eligible for or to receive rental assistance from Section 8 or other subsidy program […].” S.M.C § 14.08.020(H).

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

Good-faith participation allows landlords to claim the exemption and decline to rent without liability.

Conclusion The 2020 amendments affirm fair housing for all, prohibiting source-of-funds discrimination. The law is to be liberally construed to ensure equal treatment regardless of income source.

Housing providers may ask about income and documentation but must accept all lawful sources equally and avoid actions that frustrate the law’s purpose.

To report potential housing discrimination, contact:

Virginia Fair Housing Office: 804-367-8530; Toll-Free: 1-888-551-3247; TDD: Relay 711; Fax: 866-480-8333; Email: FairHousing@dpor.virginia.gov; citing Va. Code § 36-96.1 and case law.

Guidance documents do not have the force and effect of law.

Statutory provisions supersede if guidance in this document conflicts with state or federal law.

Page 8 of 8

EXAMINATION POLICY #600-02 EXAMINATION SITE CONDUCT Effective Date: December 1, 2019

Digitally signed by Mary Broz Vaughan Approved By: Date: 2019.12.16 15:59:08 -05'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation and examination vendor/contractor staff to follow when dealing with prohibited conduct or irregularities at examination sites.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Pursuant to § 54.1-102 of the Code of Virginia, it is unlawful for any person to procure or assist another individual to procure, through theft, fraud or other illegal means, a license, certificate, permit, or other authorization issued by the Department. Conduct exhibited by an examination candidate at examination sites that compromises the validity, reliability and security of the examination as well as the efficient and effective administration of the examination is prohibited.

III. DEFINITIONS: Prohibited Conduct Any behavior taking place before, during, or after an examination that compromises the validity, reliability or security of an examination; is disturbing to others; or detracts from the efficient and effective administration of an examination including, but not limited to:

• Looking at another candidate’s computer screen, test booklet, or giving improper assistance to another candidate during administration of an examination.
• Unauthorized use of electronic devices. These devices include but are not limited to: cell phones, smart watches, audio and video recording devices, cameras, spy equipment, and other communication devices.
• Use of notes, sample tests, references, answer keys, calculators, manuals, note pads, or other aids that have not been explicitly approved for use during the examination.
• Copying, recording, transmitting or attempting to copy, record, or transmit examination items, questions, answers, or other content in any form. This includes writing in authorized reference materials during open-book exams and writing in or on unauthorized note or scratch pads.
• Reconstructing or attempting to reconstruct from memory any examination content for any purpose.
• Receiving, soliciting, or possessing current or prior examination content from a person who was not explicitly authorized in writing by DPOR to share the examination content.
• Communicating with any person before, during, or after the examination about specific examination items, questions, answers, or other confidential examination content.
• Exhibiting irrational or disruptive behavior at the examination site.
• Continuing to respond to exam questions whether verbal, online, or in writing after time has been called.

Policy Title: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct [POL543-600_02-v16] Effective: 12/01/2019 Submitted By: Shannon Webster, Director of Education & Examinations Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct (Effective 06/26/2014) Page 1 of 3• Impersonating or attempting to impersonate an examination candidate, or using or attempting to use false identification to take an examination.

• Allowing another person to take or attempt to take your examination.
• Failure to follow any provision of the Candidate Information Bulleting/Handbook or instructions given at the examination site.
• Any non-compliance with § 54.1-102 of the Code of Virginia.

Irregularity Report This report is prepared by DPOR examination proctor(s) that details irregularities encountered during the administration of an in-house examination. Examples of irregularities include emergencies, improper identification, disturbances, or any prohibited conduct defined above.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS:  Testing Irregularity Report  Examination Agreement

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. EXAMINATION SITE CONDUCT AGREEMENT Prior to administration of the examination, all approved examination candidates shall be required to read, complete, sign, and submit an Examination Agreement provided by the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation which acknowledges the candidate’s understanding of actions that constitute prohibited conduct and any consequences associated with the conduct.

B. HANDLING PROHIBITED CONDUCT When prohibited conduct is observed at an examination site, proctors are encouraged to exercise sound judgment in handling each incident. Proctors are discouraged from confronting hostile candidates, making physical contact with a candidate, or placing themselves in a position where the candidate could harm them. If possible, the conduct should be brought to the attention of a second proctor to corroborate the incident. All observations of prohibited conduct shall be handled in accordance with the specific guidelines below and documented on a Testing Irregularity Report. Specific guidelines are as follows.

1. In situations where a candidate is looking at another candidate’s computer screen, answer sheet/test booklet, or giving assistance to another candidate during administration of an examination, the proctor shall reclaim all examination materials and expel the candidate from the test site.
2. In situations where there is unauthorized use of electronic devices, notes, unauthorized notes or scratch pads, sample tests, references, and answer keys during the administration of an examination, the proctor shall reclaim all examination materials and expel the candidate from the test site.
3. In situations where the candidate is copying, recording, transmitting, or attempting to copy, record, or transmit in writing, electronically or by other means, any part of an examination, with or without intent to remove the material from the examination room, the proctor shall reclaim all examination materials, both authorized and unauthorized, and expel the candidate from the test site.
4. In situations where a candidate exhibits distracting or disruptive behavior at the examination site: a. The proctor shall discuss the observed behavior with the exam candidate and request correction of the behavior. b. If the prohibited conduct continues, the proctor shall reclaim all examination materials and expel the candidate from the test site.
5. Continuing to respond to exam questions whether verbal, online, or in paper/pencil format after time has been called: a. The proctor shall warn the candidate that time has been called.

Policy Title: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct [POL543-600_02-v16] Effective: 12/01/2019 Submitted By: Shannon Webster, Director of Education & Examinations Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct (Effective 06/26/2014) Page 2 of 3 b. After the initial warning, any continuation of the prohibited conduct shall result in the collection of all examination materials and expulsion from the test site.

1. Any determination of false identity, impersonation, or an attempt to use false identification to impersonate an examination candidate will result in immediate expulsion from the test site. The proctor shall reclaim all examination materials, document the incident, and make copies of any documents provided by the candidate.

Policy Title: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct [POL543-600_02-v16] Effective: 12/01/2019 Submitted By: Shannon Webster, Director of Education & Examinations Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct (Effective 06/26/2014) Page 3 of 3

EXAMINATION POLICY #600-02 EXAMINATION SITE CONDUCT Effective Date: December 1, 2019

Digitally signed by Mary Broz Vaughan Approved By: Date: 2019.12.16 15:59:08 -05'00' I. PURPOSE: The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation and examination vendor/contractor staff to follow when dealing with prohibited conduct or irregularities at examination sites.

II. POLICY STATEMENT: Pursuant to § 54.1-102 of the Code of Virginia, it is unlawful for any person to procure or assist another individual to procure, through theft, fraud or other illegal means, a license, certificate, permit, or other authorization issued by the Department. Conduct exhibited by an examination candidate at examination sites that compromises the validity, reliability and security of the examination as well as the efficient and effective administration of the examination is prohibited.

III. DEFINITIONS: Prohibited Conduct Any behavior taking place before, during, or after an examination that compromises the validity, reliability or security of an examination; is disturbing to others; or detracts from the efficient and effective administration of an examination including, but not limited to:

• Looking at another candidate’s computer screen, test booklet, or giving improper assistance to another candidate during administration of an examination.
• Unauthorized use of electronic devices. These devices include but are not limited to: cell phones, smart watches, audio and video recording devices, cameras, spy equipment, and other communication devices.
• Use of notes, sample tests, references, answer keys, calculators, manuals, note pads, or other aids that have not been explicitly approved for use during the examination.
• Copying, recording, transmitting or attempting to copy, record, or transmit examination items, questions, answers, or other content in any form. This includes writing in authorized reference materials during open-book exams and writing in or on unauthorized note or scratch pads.
• Reconstructing or attempting to reconstruct from memory any examination content for any purpose.
• Receiving, soliciting, or possessing current or prior examination content from a person who was not explicitly authorized in writing by DPOR to share the examination content.
• Communicating with any person before, during, or after the examination about specific examination items, questions, answers, or other confidential examination content.
• Exhibiting irrational or disruptive behavior at the examination site.
• Continuing to respond to exam questions whether verbal, online, or in writing after time has been called.

Policy Title: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct [POL543-600_02-v16] Effective: 12/01/2019 Submitted By: Shannon Webster, Director of Education & Examinations Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct (Effective 06/26/2014) Page 1 of 3• Impersonating or attempting to impersonate an examination candidate, or using or attempting to use false identification to take an examination.

• Allowing another person to take or attempt to take your examination.
• Failure to follow any provision of the Candidate Information Bulleting/Handbook or instructions given at the examination site.
• Any non-compliance with § 54.1-102 of the Code of Virginia.

Irregularity Report: Prepared by DPOR proctors detailing irregularities like emergencies, improper ID, disturbances, or prohibited conduct.

IV. RELATED DOCUMENTS: Testing Irregularity Report, Examination Agreement

V. GENERAL PROVISIONS:

A. EXAMINATION SITE CONDUCT AGREEMENT Prior to administration of the examination, all approved examination candidates shall be required to read, complete, sign, and submit an Examination Agreement provided by the Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation which acknowledges the candidate’s understanding of actions that constitute prohibited conduct and any consequences associated with the conduct.

B. HANDLING PROHIBITED CONDUCT When prohibited conduct is observed at an examination site, proctors are encouraged to exercise sound judgment in handling each incident. Proctors are discouraged from confronting hostile candidates, making physical contact with a candidate, or placing themselves in a position where the candidate could harm them. If possible, the conduct should be brought to the attention of a second proctor to corroborate the incident. All observations of prohibited conduct shall be handled in accordance with the specific guidelines below and documented on a Testing Irregularity Report. Specific guidelines are as follows.

1. In situations where a candidate is looking at another candidate’s computer screen, answer sheet/test booklet, or giving assistance to another candidate during administration of an examination, the proctor shall reclaim all examination materials and expel the candidate from the test site.
2. In situations where there is unauthorized use of electronic devices, notes, unauthorized notes or scratch pads, sample tests, references, and answer keys during the administration of an examination, the proctor shall reclaim all examination materials and expel the candidate from the test site.
3. In situations where the candidate is copying, recording, transmitting, or attempting to copy, record, or transmit in writing, electronically or by other means, any part of an examination, with or without intent to remove the material from the examination room, the proctor shall reclaim all examination materials, both authorized and unauthorized, and expel the candidate from the test site.
4. In situations where a candidate exhibits distracting or disruptive behavior at the examination site: a. The proctor shall discuss the observed behavior with the exam candidate and request correction of the behavior. b. If the prohibited conduct continues, the proctor shall reclaim all examination materials and expel the candidate from the test site.
5. Continuing to respond to exam questions whether verbal, online, or in paper/pencil format after time has been called: a. The proctor shall warn the candidate that time has been called.

Policy Title: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct [POL543-600_02-v16] Effective: 12/01/2019 Submitted By: Shannon Webster, Director of Education & Examinations Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct (Effective 06/26/2014) Page 2 of 3 b. After the initial warning, any continuation of the prohibited conduct shall result in the collection of all examination materials and expulsion from the test site.

1. Any determination of false identity, impersonation, or an attempt to use false identification to impersonate an examination candidate will result in immediate expulsion from the test site. The proctor shall reclaim all examination materials, document the incident, and make copies of any documents provided by the candidate.

Policy Title: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct [POL543-600_02-v16] Effective: 12/01/2019 Submitted By: Shannon Webster, Director of Education & Examinations Guidance Document: Yes Supersedes: Examination Policy #600-02 Examination Site Conduct (Effective 06/26/2014) Page 3 of 3