I am strongly opposed to any state moving towards a CACREP only standard. CACREP is not the gold standard when you look objectively at all programs. Those who are in support are citing faulty research produced by CACREP biased researchers. The majority of practicing clinicians have not graduated from a CACREP program as CACREP hasn't been around long enough nor accredited a majority of programs. Studies misrepresent the data to make these programs seem superior. Professional associations have been commandeered by CACREP biased leadership unchecked. These associations should be neutral, but are now being cited as pro-CACREP. Telling a majority of your members that they are amoral and unqualified seems like a great way to sustain an organization. Additionally, supporting CACREP will not change laws to allow LPCs to enroll in Medicare or Tricare for reimbursement.

CACREP is supposedly focused on accreditation, but their organization is working awful hard on changing licensure standards to meet CACREP's needs. Cohesive program standards and licensing standards existed before CACREP and will continue long after CACREP. All programs are accredited for educational purposes, and all state boards have licensure requirements. State boards should not get into the business of selecting any specific accreditation body to dictate its licensure standards/requirements. This is about money, not about consumers or the profession.