Workgroup on Social Worker Requirements for Licensure - Extension and Duties
SB 379 makes two main changes to Maryland’s social work licensing framework. First, it repeals the statutory examination requirement for bachelor social worker and master social worker licenses, while leaving in place the existing education, age, character, fee, and criminal history requirements. The bill also updates the certified social worker and certified social worker-clinical provisions to remove the exam language from those pathways as part of the broader licensing revision.
Second, the bill expands and extends the temporary Workgroup on Social Worker Requirements for Licensure. It increases the State Board of Social Work Examiners from 12 to 14 members by adding consumer members, and it extends the workgroup’s sunset date from June 30, 2025 to June 30, 2027. The workgroup is given additional duties to study the Association of Social Work Boards exam, including bias concerns, accommodations, alternative assessment methods, temporary licensing options, supervision without cost to licensees, and whether the exam should continue to be used at all.
The bill amends the Health Occupations Article, especially Title 19 governing social workers, by deleting exam-based licensure language for bachelor and master social worker applicants and revising related provisions for certified social worker licenses. It also changes the composition of the State Board of Social Work Examiners and extends the life and scope of a legislatively created workgroup, which means the State will continue studying licensure barriers and exam fairness before making any permanent policy changes. In practical terms, the bill affects applicants for social work licenses, the Board, the Department of Health, and the organizations and communities represented on the workgroup.
The bill appears generally supportive of reducing barriers to social work licensure and continuing a policy review process focused on fairness, diversity, and efficiency. Its emergency status and favorable committee report suggest legislative interest in moving the issue forward quickly. The structure of the bill also indicates a compromise approach: it removes exam requirements in the licensing statute while simultaneously extending the workgroup to continue studying whether and how examinations should be used.
The main point of contention is the role of standardized examinations in social work licensure. Supporters of the bill are likely concerned that the Association of Social Work Boards exam may create unnecessary barriers, bias, or inequitable outcomes for applicants, especially those from underrepresented groups, those with disabilities, English language learners, and recent graduates. Opponents or skeptics would likely argue that examinations remain an important measure of competency and public protection. The bill’s expanded workgroup membership, including representatives from social work organizations, HBCUs, health equity entities, and individuals negatively affected by the exam, reflects that the issue is contested and that the legislature is seeking broader stakeholder input before finalizing long-term policy.