Oregon and Wisconsin have announced plans to pursue the Access MFTs model law in their 2027 legislative sessions. Neither has adopted it. Until a bill passes or a rule takes effect, both states operate under their existing endorsement requirements.
Two more states are on the way, and the single most common error in published portability advice is treating that sentence as though it meant two more states have arrived.
Announced means intended
Oregon and Wisconsin have announced they will pursue streamlined endorsement during their 2027 legislative sessions. That is a statement by advocates about what they plan to attempt. It is not a bill that has passed, not a rule that has taken effect, and not a change to what either board requires of you today.
Legislative sessions are short and crowded. Most bills introduced in any session do not pass, and a professional licensure change competes for committee time with everything else a legislature is doing. Plenty of well-supported bills die simply because the calendar ran out.
This profession has the proof
Kentucky is the cautionary case and the encouraging one at the same time. Its 2025 bill failed. The measure came back in 2026 as House Bill 459 and passed.
A therapist who relocated to Kentucky in 2025 on the strength of the announcement would have arrived to find the full requirements in force, and would have waited a year for the change they had been planning around. Texas considered a bill that did not pass for reasons unrelated to its substance and has not been reported as returning.
Between them those two cases cover the realistic outcomes of an announcement: success after a delay, or no change at all.
Why this error keeps recurring
The same mistake made most published writing about the physical therapy compact wrong for years. Guides colored states in as members once a bill had been introduced, or once a state had enacted but not yet begun issuing privileges, and readers acted on maps showing access that did not yet exist.
Announcements are more quotable than enactments and arrive earlier, so they dominate coverage. By the time a bill actually passes, the story has usually already been written.
Planning sensibly around 2027
If Oregon or Wisconsin is where you want to practice and your timing is flexible, it is reasonable to watch the 2027 sessions and decide once something passes. Check the bill's effective date as well as its passage, since the two can be months apart.
If your timing is not flexible, plan against the requirements in force now. Both states have endorsement pathways today, and a well-sequenced full application is entirely workable.
What does not work is committing to a start date, a lease, or giving notice on the assumption the law will have changed by the time you arrive.
Common questions
- Has Oregon adopted Access MFTs?
- No. It has announced for its 2027 session. Its current endorsement requirements apply in full until something is enacted and takes effect.
- Should I wait for 2027 before applying to Wisconsin?
- Only if your timing genuinely allows it and you accept the risk the bill fails. Planning a move around an announced bill is how people end up facing the old requirements.
- How likely are announced bills to pass?
- There is no reliable rate. Kentucky's first attempt failed in 2025 and succeeded in 2026; Texas considered one that did not pass.
Need Help with Your Application?
We handle the MFT licensure process end-to-end — eligibility screening, documents, board follow-ups, and tracking.