LATC hears exam pass‑rate analysis, enforcement trends and raises DSA school‑project sign‑off concerns

LATC’s program manager reviewed exam performance data, enforcement case trends and outreach activities, and members pressed staff for deeper breakdowns of candidate performance and raised questions about Division of the State Architect (DSA) practice restrictions for school projects.

Exams and subject matter expertise
LATC staff reported that 29 candidates took a recent California supplemental exam administration; first‑time pass rates for that run were 74 percent while re‑taker pass rates were much lower. The committee asked staff to seek CSC (exam contractor) data showing whether candidates came from California schools, out‑of‑state programs or allied professions, and to disaggregate pass rates by school and candidate background. Members said that information would be useful to inform outreach and the committee’s subject‑matter expert recruitment.

Enforcement and outreach
Staff reported 11 new enforcement matters in the reporting period; roughly half involved people using the title without having a license and several were applicant background disclosures related to convictions that required analysis. Most first‑time unlicensed‑use cases are resolved through educational letters, staff said. The LATC asked the enforcement office to continue tracking and to report back if cases escalate to formal action.

School projects and DSA
Members raised an ongoing concern: the Division of the State Architect is requiring a licensed architect on some school projects where LATC believes the work is within the landscape‑architect practice act. LATC members and guests said DSA is interpreting “path of travel” triggers to require an architect’s stamp on projects that do not include buildings, which LATC members said conflicts with their practice authority. LATC asked staff to pursue a meeting with DSA and explore whether the issue resides in the Education Code (which would require legislative change) or in DSA interpretation and guidance.

Data and follow‑up requests
Members asked staff to provide: a clearer month‑by‑month fund condition report for the committee’s budget packet; a breakdown of pass rates by school and candidate type (in‑state vs. out‑of‑state); and more granular CSC/LARE cross‑analysis if possible. Several members volunteered to serve as subject‑matter experts for exam item writing and review.

Ending: LATC directed staff to seek clarifying data from CSC, to request a meeting with DSA about the school path‑of‑travel sign‑off issue, and to continue recruiting subject‑matter experts to improve exam relevance.