When a licensee is referred for remediation, the violation on paper usually looks clinical — a failed procedure, a documentation issue, a standard of care complaint. But Catrice Opichka, who has spent thirty years in dentistry and the last two and a half running customized remediation programs at CRDTS, keeps finding that the clinical problem is almost never the whole picture.
“There is always an ethical component,” Catrice explains. “Even when the cases that we are working with have a heavy clinical component where one would think, oh, this is a clinical issue, it oftentimes or almost all the time stems from an initial ethical issue.”
The word she uses to describe what she sees across nearly every case: shortcuts.
Catrice directs the CARE programs (Calibrate, Assessment, Remediate, and Educate) at CRDTS, a dental and dental hygiene testing agency that launched its remediation arm about three years ago. In Episode 1 of Board Insights, she sits down with EBAS to talk about how that work actually functions, what she’s learned about ethics and judgment along the way, and why the standard approach to remediation keeps falling short.
How Shortcuts Become Clinical Violations
Catrice describes a pattern she sees consistently: a licensee cuts a corner, that decision leads to another, and eventually the clinical violation that lands on the board’s desk is just the end of a chain of judgment calls that started well before the procedure in question.
“Every case that is a clinical case has an ethical component that stems from probably initial decision-making that leads to shortcuts, that leads to the clinical components.”
Because of this, CRDTS builds ethics into the core of every program. It’s not an add-on for cases that seem to involve ethical issues. It’s a starting point for all of them, addressed before the clinical component.
The Problem With Standardized Remediation
One of the more pointed moments in the conversation comes when Catrice describes what she calls the “boot camp” approach to remediation. A licensee gets placed into predetermined courses alongside everyone else, they all work through the same material, and completion equals compliance.
CRDTS does it differently. They use pre-assessment to determine where each licensee actually needs development. In ethics, that means using EBAS as part of the pre-assessment. If a licensee demonstrates strong ethical reasoning, the program doesn’t belabor ethics education. If the assessment reveals gaps, the program is built around those gaps. And because ethics assessment is built into every case rather than applied selectively, licensees don’t feel singled out. It’s a baseline, not a response to their specific situation.
“We don’t believe in just checking a box,” Catrice says. “We really do believe in digging in deeper, seeing what the issues are and then building the education.”
The process doesn’t end with the remediation itself. CRDTS conducts a post-assessment to confirm that there’s been a measurable change in behavior, knowledge, and clinical understanding. The goal, as Catrice puts it, is that they never see the licensee again.
What Makes EBAS Different in Practice
When asked specifically about EBAS and how it compares to other remediation tools, Catrice points to the psychometrics. EBAS is a psychometrically validated ethics assessment used by remediation providers and boards across multiple professions. Boards need more than a subjective impression when they’re deciding whether a licensee is ready to return to practice. EBAS gives CRDTS a defensible score on something that’s usually difficult to quantify, which makes it easier to report back to boards with confidence.
CRDTS also uses the EBAS webinars with every licensee, and Catrice notes that licensees consistently rate them among the most beneficial parts of the program. She describes the webinars not as teaching ethics in a traditional sense, but as getting licensees into an ethical mindset before they sit for the assessment.
“You can’t really teach ethics, but it does get them in an ethical mindset that kind of allows them to dig into those pieces of their understanding.”
CRDTS encourages licensees to complete the webinar before the exam, though it’s not required in that order. Getting into that mindset first sets them up for success on the assessment.
Working With Boards on Order Language
When the conversation turns to operational challenges, Catrice reframes the question. She doesn’t really see them as challenges. The work CRDTS does means their standard operating procedures aren’t standard. They’re custom to each board.
What that looks like in practice is CRDTS working directly with board leadership and board attorneys to help shape order language. The goal is making sure what’s written in the board order is something CRDTS can actually deliver on, and that the order isn’t missing pieces that would help guide the remediation.
“It is one hundred percent relationship building with the boards and helping them know what we are capable of and building that into the board order.”
When order language is written in coordination with the remediation provider, the gap between what the board requires and what the licensee actually experiences narrows considerably.
The Role Nobody Talks About: Emotional Buffer
One of the most revealing parts of the episode comes when Catrice is asked what she would tell herself when she started in this role just over two and a half years ago.
Her answer isn’t about process or compliance. It’s about the emotional weight of the work.
Licensees show up in the middle of what is probably the hardest thing they’ve ever had to deal with professionally. They’re angry. They’re defensive. They don’t always present as their best selves. Catrice says she didn’t fully appreciate going in how much of her role would involve being the link between the licensee and the board.
“We are a remediation and reeducation organization, but really we are counseling these individuals during the hardest time of their professional life.”
CRDTS helps licensees understand that the board isn’t the enemy. That the process exists to protect the public. That they can get through it and return to practice. It’s what allows accountability and learning to actually take hold.
When Remediation Becomes Closure
Catrice shares one case that stayed with her. A medical emergency in a dental practice where the patient lost their life. The gravity of the situation was felt by everyone involved from the start.
The licensee arrived angry, frustrated, and appeared to lack accountability. CRDTS began with the ethical component through EBAS, then moved into intensive clinical education on medical emergencies.
By the end of the program, the shift was dramatic. In the closing discussion where CRDTS asks every licensee what they got the most out of, the dentist said something Catrice didn’t expect. He called it closure.
What had looked like a lack of accountability at the beginning was actually someone dealing with enormous guilt and sadness over the loss of a patient he had known for a long time. The remediation gave him education and clinical reinforcement, but it also gave him a way to process what had happened and recommit to safe practice.
“It helped us realize just because it seems like they’re angry at the beginning, there’s so many underlying things that they’re going through emotionally.”
What Boards Should Hear
Toward the end of the conversation, Catrice is asked what she would tell a licensee just starting the process. Her answer is really directed at boards as much as licensees.
“Nobody wants to pull somebody’s license. It’s the last thing the board wants to do.”
She describes conversations with boards during severe cases where the question isn’t “how do we punish this person” but “how can we help this individual?” What boards need in those moments is evidence. Not a feeling that the licensee has changed, but defensible data showing they’ve reached a standard of safe practice. That’s what a psychometrically scored assessment provides that a course completion certificate can’t.
That’s where assessment fits. Not as a punitive checkpoint, but as the thing that gives boards confidence in the decisions they’re already trying to make.
Advice for Boards Looking to Modernize
The final stretch of the conversation gets practical. Catrice’s advice to boards considering changes to their remediation approach: ask for what you need.
She’s seen boards hesitate because they’re used to the way things have always been done. Remediation was rigid. Options were limited. But organizations like CRDTS can collaborate and build something better if boards are willing to say what’s not working.
She points to professional monitoring as an example. Within the last year, CRDTS built a professional monitoring division because boards told them they needed a way to track licensees during practice rather than restricting them from practicing entirely. That capability didn’t exist until a board said “you know what we really need?” and CRDTS figured out how to deliver it.
“They have to say it because customization can happen and we can meet those needs,” Catrice says.
Placing Ethics Assessment Earlier in the Process
For boards interested in implementing what Catrice describes, we’ve put together a short guide on placing ethics assessment earlier in the remediation process with sample consent order language for three violation types and a checklist for reviewing your own orders.
Join the Conversation
We’re continuing the discussion from this episode on LinkedIn. What’s working in your board’s approach to remediation? What’s not? Follow EBAS on LinkedIn and let us know.
