It will be very important to somehow take back control of ACA in the next election. Please pay attention to how your elected representatives for ACA offices and Governing Council reps from the various ACA divisions are voting on CACREP-Only policy issues.
This FAQ solidifies ACA’s official positions against non-CACREP counselors, with the important exceptions of some grandfathering and time to adapt.
In the attached public policy statement ACA officially:
1. Restates their new Governing Council licensure policy
2. Directly states that ACA is opposed to MCAC
3. Directly states that ACA does not consider graduates of master’s programs in counseling psychology to be professional counselors. They should “focus on licensure within the profession of psychology”.
4. Has revived the “gold standard” language they abandoned for some months.
The “gold standard” rhetoric should be of great concern to already licensed non-CACREP graduates as we would need a comprehensive, well-funded, priority-level campaign from our national associations to undo the damage in the public mind that not being up to the “gold standard” will do to our careers. Please see the many recent messages on employers requiring CACREP in job announcements and the efforts of CACREP-Only partisans to get CACREP language inserted in Medicare, TRICARE, the VA and who knows where else. You may have a license as a non-CACREP counselor after 2020, but the messaging as to your value MATTERS.
MCAC is an up-and-coming accreditation standard, steadily winding its way through the CHEA national accreditation process (accreditors have to be accredited apparently). Several graduate programs have already joined it, their emphasis on social justice is worthy, and their inclusion of counseling psychology programs gets rid of this strange distinction that CACREP-Only partisans have trumped-up which threatens to kill dozens and dozens of fine graduate programs.