This bilateral agreement recognized that persons certified by ASHA or CASLPA were deemed to meet the requirements of the other association`s university courses, clinical placements and examinations. Individuals with an ASHA certification who wished to obtain certification through CASLPA only had to submit an application, verify their ASHA certification and pay a reasonable fee to CASLPA. CASLPA certificate holders who wished to obtain ASHA certification were required to complete the additional step of completing a clinical internship experience or documenting their work experience. A copy of the Mutual Recognition Agreement [PDF] is available on the ASHA website, as well as the application form and instructions [PDF], which can be used by CASLPA, RCSLT, IASLT, SPA or NZSTA certified persons who wish to apply for ASHA certification. Specific questions should be emailed to the ASHA Certification Unit in certification@asha.org. It is important to note that the MRA is not a “reciprocal” agreement in which associations commit to accepting all standards from other signatory associations without additional work or documentation. Rather, the MRA is an “essential equivalence” when it may be necessary for certificate holders from one of the signatory associations to complete additional standards before obtaining certification from another of the signatory associations. For example, both ASHA and CASLPA have an audit component as part of their certification standards, while the other four associations do not. Therefore, individuals from one of the other associations (SPA, IASLT, NZSTA or RCSLT) who wish to be certified by ASHA must pass the practical exam in speech-language pathology conducted by the Educational Testing Service (ETS) in Princeton, New Jersey. The revised MRA was signed and entered into force on November 10, 2017. Certified persons who apply for certification by one of the other signatory associations after that date of entry into force may do so through this Agreement.

As ASHA certification standards are developed and implemented by the Council For Clinical Certification in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology (CFCC), the CFCC had to be kept informed and consulted during the ongoing negotiations. This also applied to other associations and, once the negotiations were completed, the standard-setting bodies of the various participating associations had to approve the agreement. Another important factor to keep in mind is that the agreement exists between the professional associations. Applicants are informed that while they may be certified by the new association using the MRA, the agreement does not guarantee that the person has completed the national, state or provincial/territorial license or registration that may be required to practice in a particular jurisdiction. The MRA for Speech-Language Pathologists (S-LP) allows for mutual recognition of the essential equivalence of certification or full membership in the following associations: The MRA allows certified or full members of national speech-language pathology professional associations in Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States to access expedited application procedures for membership and certification in the SAC. To obtain mutual recognition, S-LPs must have completed their vocational training in an MRA signatory country. To obtain mutual recognition, S-LPs must have completed their professional training in a country that has signed the MRA AND fall into one of the following categories: The Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) [PDF] is an agreement between the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (USA), Speech-Language & Audiology Canada (SAC), the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (UK), the Speech-Language Association of Australia Limited, the Irish Association of Speech and Language Therapists (Ireland) and the New Zealand Speech-Language Therapists` Association (Incorporated) mutually recognize the essential equivalence of the speech-language pathology certification programs they each run. The “quadrilateral” mutual recognition agreement remained in force until 20 November 2008.

At that time, two other associations, the Irish Association of Speech and Language Therapists (IASLT) and the New Zealand Speech-Language Therapists` Association (NZSTA), joined the other four associations in signing the current Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA). The MRA is only in the field of speech-language pathology and only applies to people who have the full references of the signatory associations. During the period when the bilateral speech-language pathology agreement between ASHA and CASLPA was in force, two other associations, the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (RCSLT) and Speech Pathology Australia (SPA), requested a four-page agreement. An agreement was signed in August 2004 after reviewing academic and experiential requirements to establish comparability. In drafting the agreement, the negotiators felt that there should be an understanding between all associations of the terminology used. For example, if a person has met all ASHA standards, they are considered certified, whether they practice or not and whether they are a member of the association or not. For IASLT and NZSTA, individuals who have met all of their certification standards are considered “full members.” The signatory associations agreed that it is very beneficial for the international community to create a basis for the mutual recognition of certificates of speech-language pathologists certified by the six signatory associations. They recognized that increased trade and mobility between Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States has increased the need for and opportunity for a mechanism for holders of certificates of an association to be recognized and certified by other associations. SHA concluded its first Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) in 1997 when an agreement was signed betweenSHA and the Canadian Association of Speech-Language Pathologists and Audiologists (CASL).

That agreement, which entered into force on 1 January 1998, concerned recognition in both speech-language pathology and audiology. The audiology agreement with CASLPA expired in 2009 due to changes to ASHA`s audiological certification standards. The MRA does not apply to national, state or provincial/territorial licenses or registrations that may be required for exercise in a particular jurisdiction. As already mentioned, the agreement only applies to people already certified by their home club. Students or individuals who practice in the country of one of the signatory associations but do not have current identification from their home association are not eligible to use the MRA if they apply for certification by one of the other associations. What does the MRA mean to me as a certificate holder from one of the signatory associations? Each of the undersigned associations has requirements that individuals must meet in order to maintain or renew their certification. .