It has truly been a privilege for me, an architect from a small firm, in a small town in Arkansas, to have represented you for this past year. It has been the high point of my career, I assure you.

 

When I started this journey a year ago in San Diego, I said that my desire for the coming year was to preserve the status quo.

 

I explained that this comment had to be considered in the context of what the term “status quo” meant at that time in our organization. Our “status quo” for the past several years has been to question why we are doing what we’re doing in everything; to make sure that our decisions are justifiable and defensible with respect to our mission, that they make sense, and are consistent with our basic mission of protecting the public and our goal to facilitate licensure. It meant that we were an NCARB of innovation, of experimentation, and of evolution; an NCARB actually anxious to re-examine ourselves and to adjust where appropriate to assure its continued relevance and effectiveness.

 

Throughout this year we have continued to evaluate our major programs and have proposed changes that seemed to be ripe for consideration. I'm happy to stand here today and tell you that, thanks to the countless hours of dedicated service of our committee and task force volunteers and staff, we have maintained the “NCARB status quo.” We should be proud of all that we have accomplished. We truly are making history.

 

This time last year, a revolutionary change in direction for the ARE came about as the result of an innovative cross-departmental project team concept. In my president-elect remarks last year, I announced we would be launching similar project teams to consider potential evolutionary changes to both the IDP and Broadly Experienced Architect programs that could be enacted without sacrificing their defensibility, effectiveness, and rigor. Let me emphasize that last point. Rigor for rigor’s sake alone is an outdated, un-justifiable concept. But rigor for a reason is what should guide us as we consider the logical evolution our programs.

 

Just so you are aware of how these various special project teams did their work, their initial responsibility was to conduct research and potential options to deliver to our Board for consideration, taking into account feedback provided us over the past several years through blue-sky thinking engagements with Council membership, the Board’s on-going strategic planning focus, committee and task force recommendations, and multiple engagements with collateral organizations and other affected constituencies. The Board was then tasked with assessing and considering this research and fine-tuning the focus of the teams so that a clear path to a logical evolution was being developed.

 

 

IDP Special Project Team

Last year, much was said about how I happened to be the first NCARB president to have gone through the IDP. So not only was I keenly interested in the work of the IDP Special Project Team, but also in any interim administrative improvements that could be made to the current IDP 2.0. By the end of calendar year 2013, and after discussions and feedback from our Member Boards, the Board voted on two such improvements: to eliminate the duration requirement (an acknowledgement that "experience is experience”), and to simplify the eligibility requirement to having a high school diploma.

 

After receiving overwhelming Member Board support, the Board voted to allow 50 percent credit for experience beyond six months, up to five years. Again, an acknowledgement that “experience is experience.” These are significant improvements to the program that will benefit countless interns on their path to licensure. We also debuted our first mobile app allowing submittal of experience hours via an iPhone. In partnership with the AIAS, we moved past a pilot phase into implementation of the IDP Student Coordinator Program, which facilitated widespread attendance at our annual IDP Coordinators Conference.

 

Now we are poised to consider recommendations for a two-phased proposal to streamline and then overhaul the IDP.

 

●  The goal of streamlining is to move the IDP away from a mathematical equation or “seat time”-based program, and apply what our Practice Analyses have to say regarding which categories are truly necessary to develop and demonstrate competence. Through looking at other models, reviewing state law and rules, speaking with interns and supervisors, consulting with the Internship Advisory Committee, and providing research to the Board, we believe we have developed a streamlined model that recognizes that it is the core requirements that lead to an architect who can practice independently.

●  As part of the second phase, we will work on adjusting the IDP categories to align with the phases of architectural practice today. In this way, both the IDP and ARE will reflect the six areas of architectural practice.

 

Following this Annual Business Meeting, the proposed changes will be put before the membership for comment, with decisions on both the streamlining and overhaul recommendations planned for September.

 

We understand that some jurisdictions will have challenges in adopting the proposed streamlined model due to statutes or rules that may prescribe a specific minimum length of time for experience. The Board believes that the time is ripe to consider these changes, and as such, that this is a leadership moment for the Council. Should the recommendations be approved in September, we are committed to working with each of you to assist you in the adoption process.

 

 

BEA/BEFA Special Project Team

As we went down concurrent paths regarding BEA and BEFA, we saw a similar consensus emerge. Our programs, as well-intentioned as they are, had become too cumbersome and were inconsistent in the treatment of those considered deficient in education, experience, or examination.

 

●  Our new Mutual Recognition Agreement with Canada, for example, provided a clearer and faster path to reciprocity than the BEA provides to already-licensed U.S. architects who don't have an NAAB-accredited degree.

●  The BEFA Program was minimizing the one most verifiable element in the portfolio—work for a U.S. licensed architect.

 

Further, we were ignoring the experience of a segment of the population who had an NAAB degree and were ready to take the ARE, but had been working in firms for years.  Facilitating licensure means recognizing that, in the end, we must deliver competent architects, considering their entire path as potentially qualifying them for licensure. So we are now proposing a new Broadly Experienced Intern Program to close this gap without undermining the value of the IDP.

 

 

Licensure Task Force

Concurrently with the establishment of these special project teams, I also announced we would convene a new Licensure Task Force led by Past President Ron Blitch. The charge to this group was to explore the possibility of creating an additional, optional path to licensure that could potentially result in a license upon graduation—not a replacement of the traditional path. We made sure we had voices from academia, our collateral partners at ACSA, AIA, AIAS, the NAAB, Member Board Members and Executives, interns, and recently licensed architects. I’m proud to say that, as I hope you have seen in recent weeks, the concept has captured the interest of virtually all constituencies affected by the path to licensure.

 

In its efforts this year, the task force conducted research on existing academic programs and evaluated necessary versus unnecessary duplication of subjects within the three essential components of licensure: education, experience, and examination.

 

Lastly, the Licensure Task Force is now ready to seek input regarding a pilot phase for a path that results in licensure at graduation. What does this mean?

 

●  It does not mean we are rejecting the current, traditional path. It means that as we evolve the traditional path, we will provide an additional path that still has all the familiar pieces: an accredited degree, completion of the IDP, and passage of the ARE.

●  The difference will be that some students may be ready to enroll in a program that imbeds IDP during school and opens up ARE access a year or more before graduation.

●  We have been advised that only 10 percent or fewer of students may be ready to make this choice, but it allows a fast-track for a segment of the population.

 

The success of this pilot will depend on a close partnership between a school and its licensing board, and not every jurisdiction will want to participate.  Much work is to be done yet this coming year, and we will keep you apprised of the progress. There is clearly much more work to be done by the task force in the coming years, which will, of course, be discussed and debated by the Council prior to any decisions being made.

 

 

Making History

Lastly and most importantly, the friendships I've acquired with many of you will last a lifetime. I have had new experiences with old friends, and made new friends along the way. What a privilege it has been to be part of making history—preserving rigor for a reason—as we continue to pursue our mission of protecting the public. As you heard from our treasurer, our finances are strong. As you heard from our CEO, our capacity, image, and credibility are stronger. As you will hear from my good friend and successor, Dale McKinney, our future is bright indeed.

 

Thank you all for giving me this opportunity, especially to the folks at my Arkansas firm who allowed me the opportunity to dedicate this time to serving the Council, and to my Region 3 family and the Arkansas Board for encouraging and supporting me for the past 15 years.

 

I must thank my colleagues on the Board, the hard-working NCARB staff, and Dan Taylor for keeping me on track and providing wise counsel. It's been worth it—all 363.44 plus days! Thank you!