An Act to amend and reenact § 54.1-2957.18 of the Code of Virginia, relating to Advisory Board on Behavior Analysis; composition.
HB465 amends Virginia law governing the Advisory Board on Behavior Analysis by changing the board’s membership requirements. The bill keeps the board’s role in assisting the Board in regulating licensed behavior analysts and licensed assistant behavior analysts, including recommending licensure criteria and professional conduct standards. It also preserves the board’s general advisory authority over other behavior analysis matters as directed by the Board.
The main substantive change is to the composition of the Advisory Board. Under the amended statute, the board consists of five gubernatorial appointees serving four-year terms, but the membership categories are adjusted so that three members must be licensed behavior analysts or licensed assistant behavior analysts with at least three years of practice, one member must be a licensed assistant behavior analyst with at least three years of practice, one member must be a physician familiar with behavior analysis, and one member must be a consumer of applied behavior analysis who is not licensed in the field. The bill also clarifies how vacancies are filled.
The bill directly amends § 54.1-2957.18 of the Code of Virginia, affecting the statutory structure of the Advisory Board on Behavior Analysis. Its practical effect is to alter who may serve on the board and to increase the representation of licensed behavior analysis professionals, while retaining a physician and consumer perspective. The change may influence future regulatory recommendations on licensure standards, professional conduct, and other oversight matters for behavior analysts and assistant behavior analysts in Virginia.
The available record shows the bill was enacted as Chapter 618 and approved on April 13, 2026, with no recorded committee transcripts or vote details indicating opposition. The overall sentiment appears neutral to favorable, consistent with a technical or administrative board-composition update rather than a controversial policy change. The enactment suggests legislative support for refining the advisory board’s membership to better align with the profession it oversees.
No committee discussion or vote record is provided, so there is no documented controversy in the available materials. The only potentially notable issue is the shift in board composition, especially the increase in the number of licensed behavior analysts or assistant behavior analysts serving on the advisory board. That change could matter to stakeholders concerned about professional representation versus consumer or physician input, but no explicit objections are shown in the record.