If an applicant submitted supervision hours with a supervisor who was not licensed, what is the result?

The situation described in the question revolves around the validity of supervision hours submitted by an applicant under a supervisor who is not licensed. The correct outcome in this scenario is that the Board accepts broader definitions of a delegated supervisor, which implies that while a supervisor being licensed is typically required for certain types of supervision, there may be allowances or broader interpretations in certain contexts regarding what qualifies as acceptable supervision.

This suggests that the Board recognizes that certain qualifications or experiences can still contribute to the applicant's development and learning, even if the supervising individual does not meet the traditional licensure requirement. Such allowances could be based on the nature of the work experience, the context in which supervision occurred, or specific exceptions outlined in board regulations.

In contrast, the alternatives present outcomes that do not accurately reflect the likely stance of the Board in considering supervision accountability. The automatic disqualification or prosecution for fraudulent reporting would imply a stricter interpretation without considering extenuating circumstances or alternative definitions of supervision. The option suggesting a requirement for additional hours with a licensed supervisor, while potentially a corrective action, does not encompass a broader acceptance of delegated supervision roles that may exist within regulatory frameworks.