Modernizing Operations for Interstate Licensure and Universal Recognition

In today’s regulatory landscape, agencies face mounting pressure to expand workforce mobility, uphold public protection and modernize licensure systems. Regulatory agencies must understand and apply cross-jurisdictional strategies like interstate compacts and universal recognition to modernize licensure systems.

This blog post explores practical approaches for operationalizing those licensure agreements and building the infrastructure needed to support them effectively.

Why cross-jurisdictional licensure matters

Professionals licensed in one state sometimes face significant friction when moving to or practicing in another state. In response, regulators increasingly rely on two complementary mechanisms:

• Interstate compacts, binding agreements between states that establish a license-privilege model wherein a license in one member state triggers eligibility in another.
• Universal license recognition (ULR) policies, where a state grants recognition to an individual licensed in another state, provided specified conditions are met.

As an example, according to the Knee Regulatory Research Center’s Ed Timmons in a podcast hosted by GL Solutions:

“When you move to a state with universal recognition, the new state recognizes the license from the state you left when you meet certain requirements.”

He added that universal recognition has been “popping up in a number of states” in recent years.

Why does this matter for regulatory agencies? Because professional mobility links to workforce flexibility, economic vitality and service coverage—while regulators still must deliver on consumer protection, disciplinary oversight and transparency. For regulatory agencies ready to progress beyond isolated workflows, operationalizing these mechanisms offers a path to modern licensure data systems, streamlined interstate processes and an improved stakeholder experience.

The mechanics of interstate compacts

Interstate compacts carry legal weight. As defined by the Council of State Governments/National Center for Interstate Compacts:

“Interstate compacts are contracts between two or more states … they create reciprocal professional licensing practices between states while ensuring the quality and safety of services and safeguarding state sovereignty.”

Key features and operational implications for interstate compacts follow:

1. Binding agreement and governance

A compact typically includes:

• A model statute adopted by member states
• A governing commission or authority to oversee rule-making, enforcement and compliance
• Uniform eligibility criteria, scope of practice definitions and member-state information-sharing requirements.

Operational takeaway: Agencies must align state statute, board policies and IT workflows with the compact’s governance structure to ensure consistency, manage privileges and exchange data reliably across states.

2. License privilege rather than dual licensure

Under many compacts, a professional holds a license in one member state and obtains a “privilege” to practice in other member states rather than full licensure in each.

Practical step: The licensing system must mark out which licensees qualify for compact privileges, track member-state status and flag any restrictions, investigations or exemptions that affect mobility.

3. Data-sharing, enforcement and public protection

Compacts strengthen public protection by insisting on member-state investigative information sharing, misconduct reporting and a unified approach to discipline and eligibility.

Implementation tip: Agencies must build or adopt systems that support cross-jurisdictional data exchange (e.g., via compact commission portals or APIs), integrate with their case and licensing systems and automate alerts when discipline arises in another state.

4. States engage but retain sovereignty

Even under a compact, each member state retains licensing authority within its borders but commits to collaborate under the compact’s framework.

That means agencies must balance compact responsibilities (uniform standards and data-sharing) with local practice act requirements (scope of practice, renewal cycle, fees).

5. Growth and trend line

According to the National Council of State Legislatures and related research:

• Forty-five states had adopted at least one compact by 2022, with more than 230 pieces of compact legislation introduced across nine professions.
• Compacts have grown especially in healthcare professions: nursing, physical therapy, psychology and other medicine. Regulators looking to future-proof their licensure frameworks view compacts not as unique outliers, but as a mainstream option.

Universal license recognition: the complementary mechanism

While compacts create formal multi-state structures, universal recognition offers more flexible portability. Here are operational elements and implications.

Definition and scope

GL Solutions reports that ULR laws exist in a growing number of states:

“Between 2018 and October 2021, 18 states implemented ULR policies.” And NCSL categorizes Universal License Recognition under its 2022 Occupational Licensing Trends as one of four key areas.

Rather than full reciprocity or a compact, ULR allows a state to recognize a valid out-of-state license under a uniform process (often requiring good standing, background check, residency).

Advantages and pitfalls

Benefits:

• Agencies reduce barriers for professionals relocating or entering the workforce (especially military spouses, veterans).
• Professionals benefit from faster processing and reduced duplication of qualifications.

Concerns:

• Agencies report applicant confusion about requirements and systems challenge.
• Risk of out-of-state licensees with lower standards if policy lacks robust eligibility checks.

Implementation implications

For regulators moving to implement ULR:

• Map out which licenses qualify under ULR vs. standard licensure.
• Create a streamlined application workflow for ULR candidates: verify out-of-state license, check standing, residency, background and fees.
• Ensure public-facing communications clearly delineate ULR paths and standard paths to avoid confusion.
• Leverage digital licensing systems to automate recognition decisions and accelerate timelines.

In short: ULR serves as a pragmatic complement to compact, especially where multi-state reciprocal frameworks do not yet exist.

Operationalizing licensure agreements: A five-step framework

Agencies move from concept to execution by following five operational steps:

1. Define scope and eligibility

• Pinpoint which professions face mobility barriers or workforce shortages.
• Identify whether you plan to adopt a compact, pursue ULR or both.
• Document existing rules, statutes and board policies that impact mobility.

2. Align statute, regulation and processes

• For a compact: draft statute (often adopting model language), review rule-making requirements and define the governing commission.
• For ULR: amend or adopt law clarifying recognition criteria and eligibility conditions (residency, standing and exams).
• Update board workflows to incorporate these pathways.

3. Build or adapt technology workflows

• Design licensing application systems to recognize compact privileges or ULR eligibility.
• Support data exchanges: verify out-of-state licenses, integrate disciplinary databases and support compact commission portals.
• Automate eligibility checks and decision-making where possible.

4. Establish governance, oversight and reporting

• Set up metrics: how many licenses issued, turnaround time, number of practitioners moving across states and issues flagged.
• For compacts: participate in commission rule-making, attend member-state meetings and share data.
• For ULR: review and audit out-of-state recognition decisions to verify consistency and integrity.

5. Communicate with stakeholders and support change management

• Publish guidance for applicants and licensees: what’s new, how it works, timelines and fees.
• Train staff on new workflows, eligibility criteria and system updates.
• Monitor feedback from applicants, boards and employers; iterate based on challenges encountered.

How GL Solutions supports operationalizing mobility frameworks

At GL Solutions we understand that implementing interstate compacts or ULR pathways carries system-wide implications. Our platform, GL Suite, supports modernization through:

• A highly configurable licensing and permitting solution that accommodates privilege-based workflows (compact privileges and recognition eligibility).
• Interfaces and APIs that ease integration with external data sources (member-state discipline databases and compact commission portals).
• Change management services that guide agencies through implementation from workflow redesign to licensee communication.
• Comprehensive dashboards and reporting modules supporting oversight of cross-jurisdiction mobility metrics.

By partnering with an agency workflow platform built for regulatory modernization, agencies avoid “bolting on” mobility features; instead they embed mobility as a natural part of the licensing lifecycle.

Advancing licensure agility through modernized operations

As state regulatory agencies strive to modernize licensing, mobility frameworks such as interstate compacts and universal recognition represent strategic levers. By implementing well-designed, automated workflows your agency meets workforce demands, supports citizen mobility and safeguards public trust.

Operationalizing these frameworks requires intentional alignment across statutes, processes, technology and governance. Leveraging a platform like GL Suite allows your agency to configure mobility workflows, integrate cross-state data sources and monitor outcomes.

If your regulatory agency continues to rely on single-state licensure silos, the winds of reform already favor portability and multi-state collaboration. Your next step: commit to agency modernization today and turn strategic vision into licensure agility.

Sam Hardin

Sam Hardin, Chief Revenue Officer, joined GL Solutions in 2020 with a background in operations management. He is passionate about leadership, enhancing company culture and personal/professional growth. Sam studied business management throughout his undergraduate and graduate studies.