This chapter is part of the Louisville Beauty Academy Gold-Standard Licensing Series.
Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA) develops and publishes this educational content as part of its commitment to public education, transparency, and professional responsibility in state-licensed beauty training.
Our curriculum is built on a simple principle: licensure is a public trust.
To honor that trust, LBA continuously adapts, adopts, evolves, and improves its educational materials based on:
Changes in state law and regulation
Updates to licensing exams and standards
Real classroom instruction and outcomes
Ongoing regulatory oversight and compliance
Each chapter in this book is intentionally written, reviewed, and updated to reflect current standards at the time of publication.
Important Notice on Use
This material is made freely accessible to the public for educational understanding and transparency. However, it is not authorized for copying, reproduction, or redistribution as curriculum, course material, or commercial content without written permission from Louisville Beauty Academy.
For Students
This chapter represents the Gold-Standard expectation:
Learn with discipline
Respect scope of practice
Prioritize safety and compliance
Prepare to earn licensure correctly
For Partners & Educators
This chapter reflects LBA’s belief that quality education is living education — continuously refined, documented, and accountable.
Louisville Beauty Academy does not claim perfection. We commit instead to constant improvement.
Gold-Standard education is not static. It evolves with the law, the exam, and the responsibility we carry to the public.
— Louisville Beauty Academy
CHAPTER 1 – How the Kentucky PSI Shampoo & Styling Exam Works
1.1 Purpose of the PSI Examination
The Kentucky PSI Shampoo & Styling examination exists to confirm one thing only:
That the candidate can perform shampoo & styling services safely, legally, and within scope under Kentucky law.
The PSI exam does not test creativity, speed, or salon personality. It tests decision-making.
If you understand how PSI thinks, you dramatically increase your chance of passing.
1.2 What PSI Is — and What It Is Not
PSI IS:
A computer-based, multiple-choice exam
Recognition-based (not essay-based)
Safety- and law-focused
Designed to eliminate unsafe or untrained behavior
PSI IS NOT:
A cosmetology theory exam
A salon experience test
A trick exam (but it does include traps)
A memorization-only test
PSI rewards clarity, legality, and caution.
1.3 Exam Format Overview (Kentucky Shampoo & Styling)
While PSI does not publicly disclose exact question counts per topic, students should expect:
Multiple-choice questions
One correct “BEST” answer
Similar-looking answer options
Time-limited testing environment
📌 Important: You do not need a perfect score to pass. You need consistent correct decisions.
1.4 How PSI Writes Questions
PSI questions are written to test judgment, not just knowledge.
Typical PSI Question Structure:
A short scenario
A safety, sanitation, or scope issue
Four answer choices
One answer that is most correct
Example (PSI Style):
A client presents with an open sore on the scalp. What is the BEST action?
A. Apply antiseptic and continue service B. Shampoo carefully around the area C. Refuse service and explain the reason D. Ask the client to sign a waiver
✅ Correct Answer: C
Why?
Safety overrides service
Licensees may not treat medical conditions
Waivers do not remove legal responsibility
1.5 The PSI Golden Rule
When unsure, choose the answer that:
Protects health
Follows Kentucky law
Stays within scope
Prevents liability
PSI always rewards the safest legal action.
1.6 High-Weight Exam Topics (Know These Cold)
PSI places the greatest emphasis on:
Infection control
Sanitation and disinfection
Kentucky law & scope
Client safety
Professional conduct
📌 Styling techniques matter — but safety matters more.
1.7 PSI Keyword Triggers (Critical)
Certain words in PSI questions signal what they are really asking.
Watch for These Words:
BEST
FIRST
MOST IMPORTANT
IMMEDIATE
REQUIRED
BY LAW
These words mean:
Only ONE answer meets the standard.
Example:
What is the FIRST step after contact with blood?
Correct logic:
Stop service
Protect yourself
Clean and disinfect
PSI is testing order of operations, not knowledge alone.
1.8 Common PSI Trap Patterns
Trap #1: Two “Correct” Answers
One is good. One is best.
Choose the one that:
Stops service
Disinfects
Refuses unsafe actions
Trap #2: Scope Violations
If an answer includes:
Cutting
Chemical services
Treatments outside shampoo & styling
❌ It is wrong — even if it sounds helpful.
Trap #3: Waivers & Permissions
Client permission does not override law or safety.
❌ Waivers do not protect you on PSI.
1.9 How PSI Tests Law (Without Saying “Law”)
PSI often tests law indirectly.
Instead of asking:
“What does Kentucky law say?”
They ask:
“What should the licensee do?”
📌 If an answer breaks Kentucky rules, it is wrong — even if the question does not mention the law.
1.10 Test-Taking Strategy That Works
Before the Exam:
Sleep
Eat lightly
Arrive early
Bring required identification
During the Exam:
Read every word
Look for keywords
Eliminate unsafe answers first
Do not overthink
If You Don’t Know:
Choose the safest legal option
Avoid aggressive or corrective actions
Avoid treatment-based answers
1.11 PSI Confidence Reset
Many students fail not because they lack knowledge — but because they panic.
Remember:
You are trained
You stayed within 300 required hours
You followed Kentucky scope
You practiced PSI-style questions
Confidence comes from structure, not guessing.
1.12 Louisville Beauty Academy Exam Advantage
Students trained using Louisville Beauty Academy’s exam-first model benefit from:
Scope clarity
Over-documented safety training
PSI-aligned instruction
No unnecessary material
This book follows that same model.
1.13 Chapter 1 Key Takeaways
✔ PSI tests decisions, not personality ✔ Safety overrides service ✔ Law overrides client preference ✔ Best answer beats good answers ✔ Recognition beats memorization
A Gold-Standard Path to Licensure and Professional Trust
Licensure is not a formality. It is a public trust.
In every regulated profession, a license represents more than permission to work — it represents competency, discipline, safety, and accountability. Nowhere is this more important than in beauty education, where professionals work directly with the public and are entrusted with health, sanitation, and ethical conduct.
Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA) was founded on a simple but uncompromising belief:
Education must protect the student, the client, and the profession — in that order.
This Shampoo & Styling Licensing Course Book reflects that belief in its purest form. It does not attempt to impress with unnecessary theory, inflated hours, or outdated practices. Instead, it delivers what truly matters: clarity, compliance, and exam readiness.
Over the years, Louisville Beauty Academy has emerged as a Gold-Standard model in beauty education — locally respected, nationally recognized, and consistently awarded for its affordability, transparency, and student outcomes. Yet what truly distinguishes LBA is not recognition alone, but its discipline of continuous improvement.
This book is the result of that discipline.
It is written not as a static textbook, but as a living educational system, refined through real classrooms, real students, real exams, and real regulatory oversight. It represents the collective learning of instructors, administrators, regulators, and students — all aligned toward one purpose: earning licensure the right way.
This foreword stands as an assurance to the reader: What follows is intentional, compliant, and built with integrity.
PREFACE
Why This Book Exists — and Why It Is Different
This book exists because students deserve clarity.
Too often, licensing candidates are overwhelmed by bloated textbooks, conflicting advice, and programs that prioritize enrollment volume over student success. Louisville Beauty Academy chose a different path.
From its earliest days, LBA committed to:
Teaching only what is required
Documenting everything
Staying ahead of regulatory change
Adapting continuously as exams, laws, and standards evolve
This Shampoo & Styling License Course Book was created to reflect that commitment.
It is structured around a 300-hour, state-licensed curriculum, carefully aligned to licensing exam logic, safety standards, and scope of practice. Every chapter exists for a reason. Every definition is deliberate. Every example is grounded in real exam expectations.
More importantly, this book reflects LBA’s belief that education must evolve.
Regulations change. Exams change. Industries change. Technology changes. So we adapt. We revise. We learn. We improve.
Louisville Beauty Academy does not treat education as a finished product — it treats it as a process of constant refinement. That is why LBA has earned repeated local and national recognition, not just for outcomes, but for its model of transparency and accountability.
This book is part of that model.
It is written for:
Students seeking licensure without confusion
Adult learners balancing work, family, and study
ESL students who need clear, plain-language instruction
Instructors who value compliance and structure
Regulators who expect documentation and discipline
This preface serves as a promise: This book will respect your time, your effort, and your goal.
🎯 To help the student successfully pass the Kentucky PSI Shampoo & Styling State Licensing Examination.
This book does not attempt to teach cosmetology beyond the legal scope of a Shampoo & Styling license. It does not include unnecessary theory, advanced techniques, or non-testable content.
Every chapter, definition, procedure, and practice question is aligned to:
Kentucky Board of Cosmetology requirements
PSI exam structure and logic
The state-mandated 300 training hours
This book reflects the instructional model used by Louisville Beauty Academy, a Kentucky state-licensed beauty college recognized for compliance, transparency, affordability, and exam success.
Who This Book Is For
This book is designed for:
Shampoo & Styling license students in Kentucky
ESL and multilingual learners
Career changers and adult learners
Students who want clarity, structure, and exam results
No prior beauty education is required.
What This Book Is — and Is Not
✅ This Book IS:
PSI exam-focused
Kentucky-specific
Safety-first
Scope-accurate
Plain-language
Practice-oriented
❌ This Book Is NOT:
A cosmetology textbook
A salon marketing guide
A theory-heavy academic book
A federal or accreditation-based curriculum
How to Use This Book
To maximize your chance of passing the PSI exam:
Read in order — do not skip chapters
Pay attention to “EXAM ALERT” sections
Memorize definitions exactly as written
Practice recognition, not memorization essays
Focus on safety and legality first
Important Exam Mindset
PSI does not test creativity. PSI does not test salon style. PSI tests safe, legal, best-practice decisions.
When in doubt on the exam:
Choose the answer that protects health, follows the law, and prevents harm.
📘 KEY DEFINITIONS (PSI-TESTED LANGUAGE)
These definitions reflect PSI-recognized wording and are written for exam recognition.
Shampoo & Styling License
A Kentucky-issued occupational license that allows an individual to perform shampooing, conditioning, drying, and styling of hair within the scope defined by the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology.
Scope of Practice
The specific services a licensee is legally allowed to perform under Kentucky law. Performing services outside the scope may result in disciplinary action.
PSI Examination
The state-approved licensing examination provider responsible for administering written licensing exams for Kentucky cosmetology-related licenses.
Infection Control
Procedures used to prevent the spread of bacteria, viruses, and fungi, including sanitation, disinfection, and safe work practices.
Sanitation
The process of cleaning to remove visible debris and reduce microorganisms on surfaces and tools.
Disinfection
The use of approved chemical agents to destroy harmful microorganisms on non-porous surfaces and implements.
Sterilization
A process that destroys all microorganisms, including spores. Sterilization is not required for shampoo & styling tools under Kentucky law.
EPA-Registered Disinfectant
A disinfectant approved by the Environmental Protection Agency and used according to manufacturer instructions.
Universal Precautions
Safety practices that treat all blood and certain body fluids as potentially infectious.
Contraindication
A condition that requires the service to be modified or refused to prevent harm to the client or licensee.
Client Consultation
A professional conversation to determine service suitability, safety concerns, and client expectations.
PPE (Personal Protective Equipment)
Protective items such as gloves or masks used to reduce exposure to infectious materials.
PSI “Best Answer”
The exam answer that represents the safest, most legal, and most professional action — even if other answers appear partially correct.
Transition to Chapter 1
With the foundation and definitions established, the next chapter explains exactly how the PSI exam works, what it tests, how it tricks students, and how to beat it.
Elevating Workforce Inclusion Through Affordable, Accredited Beauty Education: Louisville Beauty Academy’s Model for Economic Impact, Legitimacy, and Social Mobility
Abstract This research paper examines the role of state occupational licensure and affordable beauty education in workforce inclusion, economic contribution, and social mobility, with a specific case study of Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA) in Kentucky. Drawing on national industry data, economic impact studies, and institutional outcomes, it argues that LBA’s model—producing nearly 2,000 licensed professionals over a decade—demonstrates a high-impact, low-debt pathway to employment, entrepreneurship, and significant state economic contribution.
Introduction
In the contemporary U.S. economy, occupational licensing serves as a mechanism to ensure public safety, professional standards, and workforce legitimacy. For vocational fields such as cosmetology, esthetics, nail technology, and related specialties, state licensure functions as official recognition of professional competence and legal eligibility to work. This paper explores how such licensure, combined with an affordable and accessible educational model, supports economic participation, particularly for immigrants and other historically underrepresented groups.
The Economic Significance of the Beauty Industry
The beauty and personal care industry is a major economic engine in the United States:
In 2022, the personal care products sector contributed approximately $308.7 billion to U.S. GDP and supported 4.6 million direct and indirect jobs nationwide, illustrating the broader economic footprint of beauty-related activities in labor and tax contributions. Personal Care Products Council
In addition to GDP impact, the industry generates significant labor income and tax revenue, further embedding it in national economic structures. Personal Care Products Council
Cosmetology and hairstyling occupations represent a measurable part of this ecosystem, and federal labor statistics include these roles in broader workforce analyses. Bureau of Labor Statistics
The professional beauty sector also supports small business formation, often enabling self-employment and entrepreneurship—critical pathways for economic mobility among immigrants and first-generation professionals.
Occupational Licensing and Workforce Legitimacy
Occupational licensing provides a formal credential that distinguishes trained professionals from unlicensed competitors. Licensed beauty professionals are recognized by state boards and can legally offer services, hire staff, pay taxes, and participate fully in the formal economy.
Research finds that individuals with occupational licenses generally achieve higher wages than similarly educated individuals without licensure, reflecting the economic value of formal recognition. Wikipedia
Licenses can also reduce underemployment and improve safety outcomes for consumers by ensuring practitioners meet standardized training and hygiene requirements. ndpanalytics.com
Louisville Beauty Academy: A Case Study in Affordable, Debt-Free Education
Institutional Profile
Founded by immigrant entrepreneur Di Tran, Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA) is a Kentucky state-licensed beauty school committed to accessible, high-quality vocational training. The academy offers programs in:
Cosmetology
Esthetics
Nail Technology
Shampoo & Styling
Eyelash Extension specialty certifications
LBA’s mission emphasizes affordability, inclusivity, and workforce readiness, with instruction offered in English, Vietnamese, and Spanish. Viet Bao Louisville KY
Affordable Tuition Model
The academy’s tuition structure challenges regional norms. While comparable programs often cost $12,000–$25,000+, LBA caps tuition under $7,000, making it dramatically more accessible and significantly reducing the need for student debt. naba4u.org
LBA’s model includes:
Transparent, all-inclusive tuition
Deep internal scholarships
Interest-free payment plans
No reliance on federal student loans
This approach empowers students to enter the workforce debt-free, a major advantage in fields with average starting wages that might otherwise make loan repayment burdensome. louisvillebeautyacademy.net
Graduate Outcomes: Legitimacy and Workforce Participation
Over nearly ten years, LBA has produced nearly 2,000 licensed professionals who have entered the Kentucky and broader U.S. workforce, demonstrating:
Immediate eligibility for employment in state-licensed roles
Entrepreneurial opportunities, including salon ownership
Contribution to local tax bases and economic circulation
According to third-party reporting, these graduates have generated an estimated annual economic impact of $20–$50 million for the state of Kentucky, through earnings, business activities, and local spending. Viet Bao Louisville KY
Economic Mobility and Inclusion
LBA’s model is especially impactful for immigrants, women, and low-income individuals. By offering culturally inclusive support and multilingual resources, the academy lowers systemic barriers that often hinder workforce entry and stability.
Graduates contribute economically not only through wages and tax payments but also through:
Small business formation
Employment of other local workers
Community service provision
These outcomes demonstrate how vocational education plus licensure can serve as a mechanism for social and economic inclusion, aligning with broader workforce development goals across state and federal systems.
Discussion: Beauty Education as a Model for Broader Workforce Policy
Louisville Beauty Academy serves as a model for:
Affordable, high-quality vocational training
Legitimized professional pathways through state licensure
Economic contribution at the local and state level
Inclusive education that supports immigrants and underrepresented groups
This model aligns with research showing that licensure enhances workforce legitimacy and wage potential, while also speaking to the economic scale of the beauty industry overall. Personal Care Products Council+1
Conclusion
Louisville Beauty Academy’s impact over the past decade exemplifies how accessible education linked to occupational licensing can drive economic contribution, individual legitimacy, and workforce inclusion. With nearly 2,000 licensed graduates contributing an estimated $20–$50 million annually to Kentucky’s economy, the academy demonstrates that debt-free, state-recognized vocational pathways are effective alternatives to traditional higher education paradigms.
By investing in affordable, competency-based training and promoting inclusive access, institutions like LBA can continue to elevate workforce outcomes for immigrants and all aspiring professionals—serving as a model for beauty education nationwide.
References(APA 7th Edition)
Nam D. Pham & Sarda, A. (n.d.). The value of cosmetology licensing to the health, safety, and economy of America. ndpanalytics.com. ndpanalytics.com
Personal Care Products Council. (2024). Our economic & social impact. personalcarecouncil.org. Personal Care Products Council
Louisville Beauty Academy. (2025). Di Tran and Louisville Beauty Academy: Making national impact in beauty education. Viet Bao Louisville KY. Viet Bao Louisville KY
Louisville Beauty Academy. (2025). Fast-track & debt-free: How Louisville Beauty Academy delivers the double scoop. louisvillebeautyacademy.net. louisvillebeautyacademy.net
Occupational licensing. (n.d.). In Wikipedia.Wikipedia
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2023). Hairdressers, hairstylists, and cosmetologists. bls.gov. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA) has taken a proactive, student-first action to safeguard our community during a period of unprecedented national scrutiny in the beauty-education sector.
Over the past week, the U.S. Department of Education released a nationwide list identifying hundreds of beauty programs—primarily those accredited by one national agency—as “Low Earnings” institutions under the new FAFSA accountability system.
This development has raised significant concerns across the country for students, families, employers, and regulators.
⭐
Louisville Beauty Academy Was NOT on the Federal Warning List
LBA stands out as one of the rare beauty colleges in the nation—and the only one of our kind in Kentucky—not flagged or identified in this federal report.
We believe this is a direct result of our unique model:
Debt-free training
High return-on-investment for students
Nearly 2,000 graduates
Strong licensure outcomes
Local, community-centered mission—not federal aid dependence
This model has also earned national recognition:
🏆 U.S. Chamber of Commerce CO—100 (2025) – America’s Top 100 Small Businesses
🏆 NSBA Advocate of the Year Finalist (2025)
🏆 Most Admired CEO – Louisville Business First (2024)
⭐ Rising Star Award
⭐ Mosaic Award for Diversity & Inclusion
⭐
LBA Has Voluntarily Discontinued Candidate Status With NACCAS
Because the federal list overwhelmingly involved institutions accredited by the same national accrediting body, and in order to eliminate any risk of mistaken association, Louisville Beauty Academy has formally withdrawn from the NACCAS accreditation system as of December 10, 2025.
This decision was made:
✔ To protect the reputation of our students and graduates
✔ To ensure LBA is not grouped with colleges under federal scrutiny
✔ To maintain clarity and trust within our Kentucky community
✔ To stay aligned with Kentucky law, which no longer requires national accreditation for cosmetology schools (201 KAR 12:030, as amended)
LBA remains fully Kentucky State-Licensed, State-Accredited, and in excellent regulatory standing.
⭐
What This Means for Students and the Community
Nothing changes except one thing:
LBA continues to lead with transparency and student-focused integrity.
Your education remains valid.
Your hours and training remain recognized by the Kentucky State Board.
Your licensure pathway remains fully intact.
Your school remains stable, growing, and locally accountable.
Your reputation is protected—even more strongly than before.
⭐
Our Commitment
Louisville Beauty Academy has always operated with one mission:
To provide affordable, honest, high-quality beauty education that builds real careers and real economic impact in Kentucky.
We will continue to place:
Students first
Transparency first
Community first
Compliance first
And Kentucky first
Our withdrawal from the national accrediting system is a strategic safeguard during a turbulent time in U.S. beauty-education oversight.
As federal matters stabilize, LBA may re-evaluate all pathways beneficial to students—but only those that meet our standards of integrity, affordability, and public trust.
⭐
If You Are a Prospective Student
Louisville Beauty Academy is open, accepting students daily, and offers:
Walk-in tours any time during business hours
No appointment required
Immediate enrollment
Payment-plans and debt-free options
Programs in Nail Technology, Esthetics, Cosmetology, Instructor Training, and more
📱 TEXT: 502-625-5531
📧 Email: Study@LouisvilleBeautyAcademy.net
📍 1049 Bardstown Road, Louisville, KY 40204
⭐
A Future Built on Humanization, Transparency, and Community
As Kentucky’s community-driven beauty college, we stand proud to continue leading the state in accessible, ethical, real-world education—serving the students who trust us, the families who support us, and the future professionals who will shape Kentucky’s beauty industry for decades to come.
All information below is provided strictly for educational purposes to support public understanding of Kentucky beauty laws.
📘 Understanding Electrolysis Under Kentucky Law (As of December 10, 2025)
A fully researched overview for students, consumers, practitioners, and community partners.
Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA), as a Kentucky-licensed, debt-free, gold-standard beauty college, is committed to educating the public with clarity, transparency, and accuracy. Because questions about electrolysis and its legal status in Kentucky are increasing—and because national changes (such as Indiana’s newly introduced standalone 600-hour Electrology License Bill) are emerging—we provide this factual educational summary.
This content does not serve as legal advice. It is an effort to ensure the Kentucky community is well-informed and directed to the proper authorities.
Definition: Electrolysis
Electrolysis is a method of permanent hair removal in which a trained practitioner inserts a very fine, sterile probe or needle into the natural opening of the hair follicle and applies a controlled electrical current (galvanic, thermolysis, or blend). This energy destroys the follicle’s growth center (the germinative cells), preventing the hair from regrowing.
Electrolysis is considered an invasive procedure because it involves penetration of the skin surface and destruction of internal tissue structures. It requires strict adherence to:
infection-control standards
sterilization protocol
probe/needle hygiene
electrical safety
Electrolysis is recognized as the only FDA-approved method of permanent hair removal when performed according to medical and professional standards.
Because electrolysis breaks the skin and destroys tissue, many states regulate it as either:
a licensed electrology practice (separate from esthetics), or
a medical procedure requiring physician oversight.
🔎 Overview
The state of Kentucky does not issue a state-level license for “electrologists.” Beauty Schools Directory
Under Kentucky law, regulated beauty services fall under the scope of “cosmetology,” defined to include hairdressing, esthetics, nail technology, etc. Kentucky Legislative Research Commission
“Esthetic practices,” per statute, include facials, skin care, hair removal by tweezing or waxing, makeup, application of cosmetics, skin cleansing, light exfoliation — but do not include invasive procedures, skin penetration, or medical-level interventions. Kentucky Legislative Research Commission
📜 What the Regulations (201 KAR 12) Say
Under 201 KAR 12:280 (Esthetic practices restrictions), a licensed esthetician may not perform procedures that involve piercing, cutting, or otherwise breaking the skin barrier — unless under the immediate supervision of a licensed physician. Kentucky Legislative Research Commission
The regulation explicitly prohibits use of “any device, preparation, or procedure that pierces or penetrates the skin beyond the stratum germinativum (basal) layer of the epidermis” by an esthetic licensee. Kentucky Legislative Research Commission
Similarly, “medical procedures” — including those that alter or destroy tissue — are reserved for licensed healthcare practitioners (physicians, medical licensees). Kentucky Legislative Research Commission
Given that electrolysis involves insertion of a probe or needle (or other device) to destroy hair follicles, it meets the definition of a skin-penetrating, tissue-altering procedure — outside the scope of permitted esthetic services under Kentucky’s regulatory framework.
⚠️ What This Means (Today)
Because there is no separate “electrologist license” in Kentucky, the only two legal categories are (A) standard cosmetology/esthetic licenses, which do not allow skin-penetrating procedures*, or (B) medical practice, which requires a license to practice medicine or related medical profession.
Therefore, in effect, electrolysis and equivalent invasive hair-removal procedures are not legally permissible in a standard beauty-salon/esthetic license context in Kentucky.
Performing such services without a medical license or physician supervision likely falls outside the scope of lawful “esthetic practices,” and thus could pose legal and liability risks.
✅ What You Should Do If You Have Questions
Because of nuance in law and regulation, and possible future changes, the only entity that can provide definitive legal interpretation is the Kentucky Board of Hairdressers and Cosmetologists (KBC).
We encourage anyone — clients, students, practitioners — with questions about what is currently allowed to reach out directly:
📧 Email: kbc@ky.gov 📞 (or call the number listed on the KBC website/contact page)
🏫 Where Louisville Beauty Academy Stands
At Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA), we believe in full transparency, compliance, and ethical education. As such:
We do not offer electrolysis training or services as part of our esthetic or cosmetology programs — because the law does not authorize it in a beauty-school context.
We do teach state-approved esthetics and cosmetology curriculum, strictly within the scope permitted by law.
Should Kentucky ever adopt a formal electrology license (as some states have), LBA stands ready to review, comply, and — if appropriate — integrate such instruction under the proper legal framework.
We maintain this public notice to protect our students, clients, and community — and to ensure LBA remains Kentucky’s center of excellence in beauty education, ethics, and compliance.
🧠 Additional Context: National Landscape
As of 2025, several states require a separate license for electrologists (often 600+ hours of training and state-approved exam) before someone may legally perform electrolysis. American Electrology Association
The governing professional body for electrologists, American Electrology Association (AEA), publishes a Standards of Practice for Electrologists that outline hygiene, safety, infection-control, and ethics protocols — but these standards only apply where states license or legally allow electrolysis. American Electrology Association
Because Kentucky currently does not license or permit electrolysis under cosmetology/esthetic laws, there is no regulated pathway for electrolysis practitioners — which leaves a regulatory gap that technically prohibits lawful electrolysis services outside a medical license or physician-supervised context.
📄 References (Key Statutes, Regulations & Professional Standards)
Kentucky Revised Statutes, Chapter 317A — definitions of “cosmetology,” “esthetic practices,” and what is expressly excluded from cosmetology practice. Kentucky Legislative Research Commission
201 KAR 12:280 — “Esthetic practices restrictions,” including prohibitions on skin penetration, medical procedures, use of medical devices, etc. Kentucky Legislative Research Commission
State licensing overview: Kentucky does not issue a license for electrologists. Beauty Schools Directory
Professional standards by AEA for electrologists (for reference only — relevant where state law authorizes electrology). American Electrology Association
🖋️ Conclusion
As of this date — December 10, 2025 — Kentucky law and regulation do not allow electrolysis under the standard beauty-salon/esthetic license framework. That means electrolysis is effectively prohibited for licensed cosmetologists or estheticians practicing under current state law unless a medical license or physician supervision is involved.
Because of this, Louisville Beauty Academy does not offer electrolysis training or services. We strongly recommend that anyone who wants to pursue electrolysis or similar invasive hair-removal services contact the Kentucky Board of Hairdressers and Cosmetologists (KBC) directly for guidance.
LBA remains committed to integrity, safety, compliance, and excellence — and to educating the public clearly and honestly about what the law allows.
⚖️ Educational Purpose & Liability Disclaimer
This document is provided solely for educational and informational purposes by Louisville Beauty Academy. It is not legal advice, does not interpret law on behalf of any state agency, and should not be relied upon as an official regulatory determination. All individuals must contact the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology (kbc@ky.gov) for authoritative guidance. Louisville Beauty Academy assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on this educational material.
With Most U.S. Beauty Colleges Now Flagged Under New Federal “Lower Earnings” Indicators — Kentucky Students and Families Should Pay Close Attention. Beauty education is rising, the beauty industry is thriving, but education costs across the country have become overwhelming. Not at LBA. Stay calm, stay informed, and stay safe — Louisville Beauty Academy remains your reliable home for transparent, debt-free, community-centered beauty education.
At Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA), we take pride in serving Kentucky as a center of excellence and the gold standard for transparency, affordability, and ethical beauty education. For nearly a decade, our mission has been simple and unwavering: to elevate the beauty profession with truth, compassion, affordability, and open-access knowledge for every student.
Because we operate with full transparency and a commitment to community-first education, we believe it is our responsibility to help Kentucky stay informed. As the beauty industry rises nationwide—but the cost of beauty education skyrockets across the country—students deserve clear, factual updates about federal changes that may affect their educational journey.
Today, we bring you the latest national news affecting beauty colleges across the United States, including the new federal FAFSA “Lower Earnings” warnings that now appear for a majority of beauty schools nationwide. These developments matter, and as Kentucky’s trusted, award-winning, debt-free beauty college, LBA is here to help you understand them with clarity and confidence.
Above all, remember: You are safe, supported, and in good hands at Louisville Beauty Academy — the rare beauty college not appearing on any federal warning list, and one of the few nationally recognized for excellence, affordability, and transparency.
A National Shift: FAFSA Now Warns Students About Lower-Earning Institutions
On December 7, 2025, the U.S. Department of Education introduced a new “Lower Earnings” indicator into the FAFSA system. When students select schools whose reported median graduate earnings fall below those of high-school graduates, the system issues a prominent warning:
“Some of Your Selected Schools Show Lower Earnings.”
These institutions appear in red, and FAFSA provides a trash-can removal button encouraging students to reconsider their selections. The Department states the goal is to help families evaluate whether an institution “is likely to lead to economic success.”
This development has generated national concern because a majority of beauty and cosmetology colleges across the United States are flagged under this new metric. This includes many Kentucky institutions, according to the public dataset.
These are federal classifications — not opinions of Louisville Beauty Academy.
Kentucky Students: Pay Attention, Stay Informed, and Review Public Data Carefully
Louisville Beauty Academy encourages every prospective beauty student in Kentucky to:
Read federal information directly
Understand what the indicator means
Compare real costs
Tour all schools
Evaluate transparency, culture, and support systems
Avoid relying solely on marketing or tuition “after Pell” calculations
This is especially important now because beauty-school tuition nationwide has become extremely expensive, and federal regulators are taking notice.
The beauty industry itself is thriving — job demand is rising, entrepreneurship is surging, and beauty careers remain powerful pathways for financial independence. But the cost of beauty education, nationally, has climbed out of reach for many families.
Why LBA Is Not Part of Any FAFSA Warning — And Why That Matters
Louisville Beauty Academy is NOT included in any FAFSA warning, indicator, or federal earnings classification.
Why?
Because LBA does not use Title IV federal financial aid, does not accept federal loans or Pell Grants, and does not participate in systems that trigger federal warning labels.
LBA stands in a different category — one built intentionally for affordability and transparency.
True affordability with direct tuition discounts
No Pell-grant “cost masking”
No student debt
Full transparency online and in school
Nearly 10 years of operation
Almost 2,000 graduates
Estimated $20–50 million annual economic impact in Kentucky
Nationally recognized twice in one year
U.S. Chamber of Commerce CO—100 Award (Top 100 small businesses in America)
These recognitions are extremely rare for any beauty college, anywhere in the United States.
And they were earned not by LBA leadership alone — but by our students, graduates, staff, families, and the loving culture that has defined this school from the beginning.
What Truly Sets LBA Apart
1. We do not use students as labor.
Unlike many national models, students at LBA are never used for unpaid production work. If students volunteer, it is part of life-skill training, often serving:
Unhoused Kentuckians
Nonprofit workers
Community members in need
This reflects our mission: beauty education as service, dignity, and uplift.
2. We are recognized nationally because we are truly affordable — not because of federal aid mathematics.
At Louisville Beauty Academy:
We do not subtract Pell to make tuition “look cheaper.”
We do not inflate tuition to absorb grant money.
We do not push students into debt.
We simply operate as one of the most affordable beauty colleges in the nation, verified by independent, third-party national business organizations.
3. Kentucky remains safe — you still have us.
Although the federal warning system may raise alarms across the nation, Kentuckians can remain calm:
Your state has Louisville Beauty Academy — a nationally trusted, award-winning, community-rooted, nearly decade-long institution committed to your success.
We will continue serving Kentucky with love, transparency, affordability, compliance, and a deep belief in every student who walks through our doors.
Beauty education is rising. The beauty industry is rising. And Louisville Beauty Academy will rise with you — safely, honestly, and proudly.
Disclaimer: Louisville Beauty Academy is sharing this information strictly for educational and public-awareness purposes. All statements referencing the FAFSA “Lower Earnings” indicator, federal datasets, or national regulatory updates are based solely on publicly available information published by the U.S. Department of Education and Federal Student Aid. LBA does not endorse, evaluate, compare, or make judgments about any institution included in federal datasets. Because LBA does not participate in Title IV financial aid programs, it does not appear in any federal “Lower Earnings” classifications. Any mention of LBA is solely to provide context about our longstanding commitment to true affordability, transparency, and community-centered beauty education. Students are encouraged to review official federal sources directly for the most updated information and to visit multiple schools before making enrollment decisions.
Learn More Through Public Sources
For deeper context on national beauty-education trends, Title IV dependency, the cost crisis, and the emergence of debt-free digital compliance models, see:
Published by Louisville Beauty Academy – A Gold-Standard, Transparent, Public-Record Beauty College
Louisville Beauty Academy is a state-licensed, debt-free beauty college that strives to operate as a national gold-standard center of excellence in affordable, transparent beauty education. This guide is offered purely for educational purposes. It reflects what the Academy teaches its own students and community about how to evaluate any beauty school using only public information and verifiable records. Our goal is to help every adult learner make informed, confident, and fully independent enrollment decisions, free from pressure or misinformation.
Choosing a beauty school is a serious adult decision, and you deserve clarity, honesty, accuracy, and zero pressure. You are investing your time, money, and future — and you must be empowered to ask the right questions.
At Louisville Beauty Academy, we encourage every prospective student to tour multiple schools, ask every question below, and make the decision freely. If any school pressures you, walk away. If any school avoids answering, take note. If any school hides information, ask why.
This guide protects you, empowers you, and helps you see the difference between real education and sales pressure.
✅ ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS EVERY BEAUTY STUDENT MUST ASK
1️⃣ “What is the exact total cost — without subtracting Pell Grants or loans?”
Your Pell Grant = your money. Your Federal Loan = your debt. You deserve to know the true tuition number so you can compare across schools online.
Ask:
“What is the raw cost before any aid?”
“Can you show me a public cost sheet?”
“Why is your tuition set at this number?”
A transparent school should provide it immediately, publicly, and clearly.
2️⃣ “Is your school or parent chain under federal investigation for labor exploitation?”
There is a national spotlight on the beauty-school sector regarding:
free labor concerns,
inflated tuitions tied to federal aid,
accreditation misuse,
and student exploitation through required salon work.
Ask directly:
“Are you connected to any national chains being federally investigated?”
“Is student salon work truly voluntary, or do you require it to run your business?”
A trustworthy school will answer without defensiveness.
3️⃣ “Who founded this school? What is their mission? Do they serve the community?”
Founders reflect culture. Ask:
“Who is the founder?”
“Are they active in the community?”
“Are they known for elevating students or extracting tuition?”
“Do they publish public records, open data, books, or educational guides?”
Look for real service, real leadership, real presence — not just marketing.
4️⃣ “Am I forced to work on customers? Or is it truly voluntary?”
Kentucky State Board licensing requirements do NOT require live client work. Your first focus should be licensing knowledge + state-board skill proof, NOT running a salon for the school.
Ask:
“Is clinic work voluntary?”
“Can I choose to focus on licensing training first?”
“Will I be penalized if I prefer mannequin practice?”
If a school pressures you to work on customers, ask why.
5️⃣ “Do you promote real world salon work as education, or are you putting me to work prematurely?”
Real education happens:
in your licensing training,
in your exam practice,
and later, in your job — where YOU earn money.
If you work on customers during school:
it must be your choice,
protected by federal regulations,
never exploited as “free labor.”
Ask:
“Why am I working on real customers before passing my licensing exam?”
“Will focusing on customers distract me from my exam success?”
Your priority should always be: Get licensed first. Everything else follows.
6️⃣ “Are you selling me ‘professional skill’ training while neglecting my licensing exam preparation?”
Many schools push salon-style services to impress the public — yet students then struggle at exam time.
Ask:
“How many hours per week are dedicated ONLY to licensing exam preparation?”
“What percentage of students pass their state exams?”
“Do you require customer service time that reduces my study time?”
You are paying for education, not unpaid work.
⭐ ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS EVERY ADULT STUDENT SHOULD ASK
“Can I tour anytime, unannounced?”
“Do instructors welcome questions with kindness?”
“Is the school energy positive, caring, uplifting?”
“Do I see diversity, inclusion, and real community?”
“Do you publish policies publicly?”
“Do you have open-record documentation practices?”
“Is my contract presented clearly and slowly?”
“Is there pressure to sign today?”
“Are payment plans interest-free?”
“Are instructors stable, licensed, and supported?”
“Do you show me my hour logs openly and daily?”
You deserve transparency from the first moment you walk in.
💛 WHY LOUISVILLE BEAUTY ACADEMY CREATED THIS GUIDE
Louisville Beauty Academy stands as:
the Gold Standard for affordability,
the most transparent beauty school model,
a public-record institution,
a community-rooted college,
and a center of excellence and love-driven human development.
We believe adult learners thrive when empowered, not pressured. We encourage students to tour all schools freely, ask these questions, then compare.
Social media tells the truth — watch how a school behaves, grows, adapts, loves, and serves.
At LBA, we invite you to walk in anytime. Feel the culture. Meet the instructors. See the open record teaching boards. Experience the love, the care, the community.
Education is not a sale. Education is a calling.
🌿 FINAL MESSAGE TO ALL PROSPECTIVE BEAUTY STUDENTS
You are an adult. You have the right to clarity. You have the right to ask questions. You have the right to walk away from pressure. You have the right to choose the school that honors your future.
And you deserve a school that is: Transparent. Affordable. Caring. Community-rooted. Student-centered. Licensing-focused.
This guide is published as part of the 📚 Louisville Beauty Academy Public Library of Education to elevate the entire beauty industry toward ethics, truth, and excellence.
Disclaimer: Louisville Beauty Academy does not endorse, recommend, or guarantee any specific school, program, product, or service mentioned or implied in this guide. All examples and references are provided solely for illustration and consumer education.
All descriptions of schools, regulations, investigations, accreditation actions, or outcomes are summaries of publicly available records, news reports, and regulatory filings. Readers are responsible for independently verifying any information, consulting their own legal, financial, or educational advisors, and making their own informed enrollment decisions.
This guide is provided exclusively as an open-record educational resource and does not constitute legal advice, regulatory interpretation, or professional judgment about any institution.
Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA), as the Gold Standard of Beauty Education in Kentucky, maintains a permanent, open-library record of all public regulatory materials impacting beauty schools, students, professionals, and Kentucky citizens.
This page documents the exact legislative and administrative changes to 201 KAR 12:030 as finalized after the December 3, 2025 review cycle.
LBA provides this solely for education, transparency, and community understanding. For official questions, interpretations, or enforcement matters, please contact:
🔍 WHAT CHANGED — EXACT EXCERPT FROM THE OLD LAW (REMOVED TEXT)
Below is the precise language deleted from the OLD (before Dec 3, 2025) version of 201 KAR 12:030:
❌ OLD SECTION 17(9) — REMOVED IN FULL
“All newly licensed schools shall provide proof of initial application for accreditation within two (2) years of license issuance and become accredited through a US Department of Education approved cosmetology accreditation authority within five (5) years of license issuance. Enactment of this administrative regulation shall begin the timeline for all currently licensed schools.”
❌ OLD SECTION 17(10) — REMOVED IN FULL
“If accreditation requirements are not met in the required timeline the school license may be revoked.”
These lines no longer appear in Kentucky law.
📘 INTERPRETATION OF THE CHANGE (EDUCATIONAL EXPLANATION)
Effective after the December 3, 2025 amendment cycle, the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology removed all accreditation requirements from 201 KAR 12:030.
This means:
Kentucky no longer requires cosmetology schools to become nationally accredited.
The 2-year apply / 5-year achieve accreditation timeline is eliminated.
Accreditation is not tied to school licensure or renewal.
School licenses can no longer be revoked for failure to obtain accreditation.
In place of accreditation, the law now requires transparency of student exam pass rates, which must be: 1️⃣ Calculated and publicly posted by KBC, and 2️⃣ Provided by each school to prospective students before enrollment.
This aligns with LBA’s long-standing mission: 📌 Transparent outcomes 📌 No gatekeeping barriers 📌 Affordability and access 📌 Student-centered education
📚 EXACT TEXT OF THE CURRENT LAW (AFTER DEC 3, 2025)
For public reference, below is the full, exact and unchanged text of the NEW 201 KAR 12:030 (Engrossed), as provided to LBA and uploaded into our Public Library archive.
This is the law exactly as printed by the Legislative Research Commission and approved through the ARRS process.
(This is a long document — included in full as required for public-record accuracy.)
📘 FULL TEXT — 201 KAR 12:030 (ENGROSSED, AMENDED AT ARRS)
(This is the verbatim law. No modifications have been made.)
[Insert the full text you received above — it is already prepared and can be pasted directly here.]
📌 WHY LBA PROVIDES THIS PUBLIC LIBRARY
Louisville Beauty Academy believes:
Education is empowerment
Transparency is protection
Compliance is service to the public
As Kentucky’s most transparent, community-focused beauty college — with over 2,000 graduates and national recognition — LBA maintains this archive to help:
Students
Parents
Immigrant communities
School operators
Policymakers
Advocacy groups
…access clear and accurate information without filtering or interpretation barriers.
📩 OFFICIAL CONTACTS
For any regulatory interpretation or enforcement question, please contact the official governing bodies:
Kentucky Board of Cosmetology (KBC) 1049 US Hwy 127 S, Annex #2, Frankfort, KY 40601 https://kbc.ky.gov
This page is part of LBA’s Public Library of Beauty Education and Regulatory Transparency. The goal is simple: To ensure every Kentuckian has clear, public access to exact legal language, exact changes, and plain-language educational support — without confusion, barriers, or misinterpretation.
LBA proudly serves Kentucky as: ✨ A Gold Standard of Beauty Education ✨ A Community Anchor for Immigrant and Working Families ✨ A Transparent, Student-Centered Institution
NEW 201 KAR 12:030 engrosed, ARRS-approved version AS OF DECEMBER 3RD, 2025
Signed by the Governor on March 24, 2025, and enacted as Acts Chapter 68. Under Kentucky’s constitutional effective date rule (90 days after adjournment of the 2025 Regular Session), this law became effective June 27, 2025. Regulatory changes implementing SB 22’s statutory amendments to cosmetology and barbering law are reflected in administrative rules current as of December 3, 2025. This page reproduces the enacted statutory text and implementation context for public education and compliance reference.
Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA) is recognized as a National Gold Standard Center of Excellence in beauty education for its unwavering commitment to compliance, transparency, public accountability, and regulatory literacy.
A central part of our mission is ensuring that every student, educator, professional, policymaker, and member of the public has open, reliable access to public records relating to Kentucky’s beauty industry governance. This is essential for building a safer, more ethical, and more informed beauty workforce across the Commonwealth and beyond.
All materials in this Public Record Library are:
Public documents issued by the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology (KBC) or the Kentucky Legislative Research Commission (LRC)
Reproduced exactly as downloaded, with no edits, interpretation, or opinion added
Provided exclusively for educational, historical, and compliance awareness purposes
Linked directly to their official public sources for independent verification
LBA provides these resources to support a statewide culture of regulatory literacy, responsible licensure, and transparent professional practice, aligning with our vision to lead Kentucky and the nation in ethical, compliance-first beauty education.
⚠️ COMPLIANCE & ETHICAL USE REMINDER
“At Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA), we believe that a professional beauty license is not merely a credential — it is a commitment to integrity, respect for law, and ethical responsibility.
We encourage every student, licensee, educator, and visitor to:
Respect the authority and regulations of the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology and all relevant state bodies
Use this Public Record Library as a learning tool, while always confirming information with official sources
Seek clarification directly from KBC or legal professionals when rules or processes appear unclear
Approach every aspect of beauty practice with transparency, safety, and professionalism
This site does not provide legal advice. All information is presented AS PUBLIC RECORD ONLY, for educational purposes. For official regulatory guidance, consult the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology at https://kycosmo.ky.gov or contact the agency directly at kbc@ky.gov.”
📧 IMPORTANT NOTE FOR STUDENTS & THE PUBLIC
Before posting public comments or making assumptions about regulations, LBA strongly recommends that all individuals email KBC directly at:
Direct communication ensures accuracy and reduces confusion. Clear, respectful dialogue with regulatory agencies strengthens our entire industry.
Public Case Study — KBC Google Review Trends & Official Regulation Update
Observational Public Feedback Counts (as of 12-05-2025) + Official KBC Notification
Date & Time of Publication: December 5, 2025 — 5:25 PM EST
SUMMARY (AS-IS Observational Counts — 12-05-2025)
Based strictly on public Google reviews evaluated as of December 5, 2025, the following counts were observed:
Total public review entries examined: 162
Positive-tone reviews: 22
Negative-tone reviews: 117
Mixed/neutral reviews: 23
Counts of Recurring Publicly Mentioned Topics:
License delays: 42
Communication challenges: 44
Transfer/reciprocity concerns: 12
Testing/permit/inspection experiences: 15
Website/portal issues: 9
Praise mentioning individual staff members: 11
Policy clarity concerns: 8
These are strictly observational counts, based solely on the visible text of public reviews.
SECTION 1 — PUBLIC RECORDS (AS-IS EXTRACTION)
A. Kentucky State Board of Cosmetology — Public Google Review Themes (AS-IS)
Louisville Beauty Academy presents these public review themes exactly as they appear on Google, without interpretation:
Statements reporting delays in receiving licenses
Comments about difficulty reaching the board by phone or email
Observations regarding out-of-state transfers or reciprocity
Experiences related to permit release timing, testing, or inspections
Praise for individual KBC staff members
Comments describing both challenges and improvements over time
Instances noting system, process, or clarity concerns
These comments remain the property of their original authors on Google and are included solely as public data for educational case study and regulatory literacy.
B. Kentucky State Board of Cosmetology — Official Email & Memorandum (AS-IS)
1. Email from Lea Ann Brewer, Administrative Specialist Senior (KBC)
Received December 5, 2025 Forwarded notice instructing all licensed schools to review and share the updated regulation information with all students. Gmail – 12.5.2025 Memorandum to…
2. Memorandum from Executive Director Joni Upchurch (KBC)
Effective Date of New Regulations: December 3, 2025
All recent regulation updates are now in full effect
Schools must ensure all students know how to access the rules
The most accurate regulations appear through KBC → Legal → Statutes & Regulations
The Legislative Research Commission (LRC) is the source of official rule text 12.5.2025 Memorandum to Schools…
This document is reproduced exactly as issued for academic and compliance awareness purposes.
SECTION 2 — OBSERVATIONAL SUMMARY (NO OPINION OR INTERPRETATION)
Observations from Public Google Reviews:
Negative sentiment appears most frequently in the dataset.
Positive praise exists and usually names helpful KBC staff members.
Neutral/mixed comments include both supportive and challenging elements.
Public feedback spans several years, showing long-term community engagement.
Some recent reviews express improved outcomes.
Observations from the KBC Memorandum:
Regulation changes became legally effective as of 12/03/2025.
The Board emphasizes the responsibility of schools and students to remain informed.
Individuals should consult LRC-linked regulation pages for accuracy.
No judgment, conclusion, or evaluation is offered — only observable text patterns.
SECTION 3 — STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY STATEMENT
“It is the responsibility of every student and licensee to remain informed not only during enrollment but also after graduation. Regulations, statutes, and processes may change. Always consult the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology directly for the most accurate and current information.”
⚠️ COMPLIANCE & ETHICAL USE REMINDER
At Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA), we believe a professional beauty license requires:
Integrity
Respect for law and regulation
Ethical decision-making
Ongoing learning
We encourage every student and visitor to:
Respect the authority of the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology
Use this Public Record Library as an educational tool only
Verify all questions directly with the official agency
Approach all professional interactions with safety, transparency, and professionalism
This page does not provide legal advice.
📧 IMPORTANT NOTE FOR LICENSEES & THE PUBLIC
LBA strongly recommends that all questions, concerns, or requests for clarification be directed FIRST to the official Kentucky Board of Cosmetology at:
This ensures accuracy, reduces confusion, and supports constructive, informed communication. Public conclusions or assumptions do not help the industry — direct clarification from KBC does.
LEGAL NOTICE & DISCLAIMER
Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA) provides this page solely for:
Public education
Regulatory literacy
Academic reference
All documents reproduced or linked are:
Public records
Downloaded on the dates listed
Presented AS-IS, without modification or interpretation
Property of their respective government bodies
Provided without representation of accuracy or completeness
LBA:
Does not provide legal advice
Does not determine regulatory compliance
Assumes no responsibility for decisions made based on these materials
Encourages consultation with KBC or legal counsel for authoritative guidance
Use of this page constitutes acknowledgment that:
You are accessing public record information
You assume all responsibility for its use
LBA holds no liability for errors, omissions, or outcomes
Kentucky Board of Cosmetology Oversight Reports (Published AS-IS for Educational Use)
Downloaded December 4, 2025 — 100% Literal Text Reproduced From State Records
Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA) is a National Gold Standard Center of Excellence in Beauty Education, recognized for its unwavering commitment to compliance, transparency, public accountability, and regulatory literacy.
A core part of our mission is ensuring that every student, educator, professional, and member of the public has open access to public records relating to Kentucky’s beauty industry governance.
All materials below are:
Public documents issued by the Kentucky Legislative Research Commission (LRC)
Reproduced exactly as downloaded, without modification, interpretation, or opinion
Presented for education-only purposes
Linked directly to the original LRC sources for verification
LBA provides these materials strictly to support regulatory literacy, public understanding, and compliance education.
⚠️ Compliance & Ethical Use Reminder
“At Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA), we believe that a professional beauty license is not just about skill — it’s about integrity, respect for law, and ethical responsibility. We encourage every student and visitor to:
Respect the authority and regulations of the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology and other regulatory bodies.
Use this Public Record Library as an educational tool — but always cross-check with official sources when in doubt.
Ask questions and seek clarification directly from the state board or relevant legal authority if a law or regulation seems unclear or ambiguous.
Approach every aspect of beauty practice with transparency, safety, and professionalism.
This site does not provide legal advice. The information is public-record only, for education. For official guidance or regulatory compliance, please consult the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology or a licensed legal professional.”
Below is all extracted content exactly as provided in state publications, including every word, punctuation mark, table text, and formatting note.
No edits, summaries, interpretations, or alterations have been made. This satisfies the requirement of zero opinion, zero agenda, and maintains pure educational value.
The board faces a shortage of inspectors and is not meeting a regulatory requirement to inspect all licensed establishments twice a year.
The board lacks sufficient policy and procedures for training inspectors, conducting inspections, and reviewing complaints against inspectors.
The inspection checklist lacks sufficient detail to ensure that violations are uniformly documented.
Recommendations
The board should amend inspection requirements to reflect standards that can be reasonably met while ensuring all practitioners are reviewed regularly.
The board should adopt more detailed written policies and procedures for conducting inspections to ensure statutory and regulatory compliance.
The board should ensure that its inspector checklists are sufficiently detailed and that inspectors consistently file them.
The board should develop written policies and procedures for initial inspector training and ongoing inspector education.
Fines
The board has received and kept $374,200 in fine revenue even though it is statutorily required to deposit all fine revenue with the State Treasury.
The board has no electronic system for tracking fines, and some paper files lack documented justification for issuing a fine.
The board does not offer guidance on how a licensee can remedy violations, and it does not follow up to ensure a violation is fixed. The fine process lacks transparency.
Recommendations
Board staff should work with the state Office of the Controller to return the $374,200 in fine revenue to the general fund.
Board staff should develop a policy for processing fine revenue and implement an electronic system for tracking fines.
The board should provide guidance or require corrective measures in either the agreed orders or the formal letter to licensees to correct violations.
All agreed order files should include proper documentation.
The board should develop smaller fine ranges tied to specific violations and include set progressions for repeat offenders and more severe offenses.
Fine amounts for each offense should be cited in the agreed orders.
Other Conclusions
The board lacks policies for when licensees give unsolicited money or gifts to inspectors.
The board and its staff face uncertainty over the statutory term “emergency order” and over the board’s authority related to hair braiding.
Regulatory language contradicts statutory language for retesting requirements.
Recommendations
The board should amend regulations to align with state law and create a policy to clarify the meaning of “emergency order.”
The General Assembly may wish to consider amending state statute to delineate the practices of natural hair braiding and cosmetology.
The board should develop policies for appeal hearings, for transferring of signature authority in the event of staff changes, for mass communication system use, and for managing unsolicited gifts.
Key Notes (Sidebar Text EXACTLY AS IS)
The board faces a shortage of inspectors.
$374,200 — What the board has received in fine revenues.
The inspection checklist lacks sufficient detail.
The board has no electronic system for tracking fines.
Board offers no guidance on how to fix violations.
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Kentucky Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions Legislative Oversight and Investigations Committee November 14, 2024
Board of Cosmetology • Created in 1974 • Protects the health and safety of the public • Protects the public against misrepresentation, deceit, and fraud in the practice or teaching of beauty culture • Sets standards for schools and salons • Protects students under the provision of KRS 317A
PAGE 2 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Board Membership KRS 317A.030 • Two salon owners • One cosmetology teacher • One owner or financial stakeholder in a school • One citizen at large • One nail technician • One esthetician
Board Membership KRS 317A.030 • All board members are appointed by the Governor • Appointments are for 2-year terms ending on February 1 • No members shall be removed except for cause
PAGE 3 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
What the Board Regulates • Regulates • Cosmetology, esthetics, and nail technology • 33,921 licenses as of July 16, 2024 • Businesses and practitioners • Schools and instructors
Three General Finding Areas • Structural Issues • Issues that impact the functioning of the board including the setup of the board and its staff and lack of clarity from leadership • Inspectors and Inspections • Issues with inspector hiring, training, and reporting • Fines • Issues with fine issuance, amounts, and records
PAGE 4 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Senate Bill 14 2024 Regular Session • Amended KRS 317A.120 • Created new retesting requirements for nail technicians • Amended KRS 317A.020 • Changed requirements for an emergency order
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Retesting Requirements 201 KAR 12:030 • 201 KAR 12:030 covers retesting requirements • Allows for immediate retesting until three failures • After three failures they must wait 6 months before retesting and take a supplemental course • After five failures they must wait 3 years before retaking
PAGE 5 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Retesting Requirements KRS 317A.120 • SB 14 amended KRS 317A.120 and now requires nail technicians to wait 1 month before retesting • no failure limit
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Retesting Requirements • Prior to SB 14, 201 KAR 12:030 regulated retesting requirements for nail technicians, cosmetologists, and estheticians • SB 14 created new retesting requirements for nail technicians • 201 KAR 12:030 is still in place and contradicts statute for nail technicians
PAGE 6 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 2.1 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should amend 201 KAR 12:030 to align with KRS 317A.120, as amended by Senate Bill 14 from the 2024 Regular Session.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Emergency Order • SB 14 changed the definition and requirements of emergency order • Prior to SB 14: based upon probable cause • After SB 14: based upon verified probable cause or substantial evidence • Board staff report confusion over the term
PAGE 7 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 2.2 By July 1, 2025, the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should create a policy to clarify the meaning of emergency order and when it should be used.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Minimal Oversight • KRS 317A.030 establishes the board as an independent agency • Very little oversight • Fine decisions are made by board • No higher or impartial authority to appeal to for complaints • Can appeal a final decision to Franklin Circuit Court
PAGE 8 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 2.3 By July 1, 2025, the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop policies to allow administrative hearings for appeals and post the process on its website.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Signature Authority • Signature authority allows a person to make legally binding decisions and sign documents • Personnel Cabinet has process for appointing signature authority but no requirement for time frame • Board was left without an individual with signature authority from March 25, 2024 to May 6, 2024
PAGE 9 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 2.4 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should create a policy for a timely transfer of signature authority in the event of staff changes or vacancies.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Unsolicited Compensation • Board inspectors offered unsolicited compensation or gifts • Sometimes unclear who left the items or the environment is unsafe to return the unsolicited compensation or gifts • Currently, no policy on how to handle this issue
PAGE 10 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 2.5 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should establish a written policy outlining processes for holding and disposing of unsolicited compensation given to inspectors and other staff.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Mass Email Use • The board does have a system to send out mass emails to all licensees • There is currently no policy in place for when this system should be used • Can result in pertinent or important information not being communicated to licensees
PAGE 11 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 2.6 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop a policy for how and when information should be communicated through its mass communications system.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Continuing Education • Prior to 2012, KRS 317A.050 required continuing education • 8 hours for cosmetology instructors • 6 hours for cosmetologists and nail technicians • No current requirement for continuing education • Four bordering states require continuing education
PAGE 12 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 2.7 By July 1, 2025, the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should review examples of continuing education in other states, consider the benefits and costs of the requirements, and promulgate regulations on continuing education if necessary.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Regulatory Inspection Requirements • 201 KAR 12:060 requires establishments licensed by the board be inspected twice a year • Inspection frequency is not in compliance with this regulation • Some locations have not been inspected since 2014
PAGE 13 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 3.1 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should revisit the inspection requirements set forth in 201 KAR 12:060 and amend them to standards that can be reasonably met while ensuring all practitioners are reviewed regularly.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Natural Hair Braiding • SB 269 RS 2016 created exemption for hair braiders • No longer regulated by the board of cosmetology • The statutory definition for natural hair braiding overlaps with listed practices governed by the board of cosmetology
PAGE 14 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Overlapping Definitions
Hair Styling • Twisting, wrapping, weaving, and braiding • Minor trimming incidental to style • Use of conditioners, oils, moisturizers, and shampoos
Natural Hair Braiding • Arranging and manipulating • Trimming • Cleansing • Use of lotions, creams, and antiseptics
Matter For Legislative Consideration 3.A The General Assembly may wish to consider amending KRS 317A.010 or KRS 317A.020 to clearly delineate the practices of natural hair braiding and cosmetology.
PAGE 15 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Policies and Procedures for Inspections • Board policies are broad and unspecific • Few instructions on how an investigator should conduct an investigation • Few requirements ensuring uniform documentation
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
PAGE 16 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 3.2 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should adopt more detailed written policies and procedures for conducting inspections to ensure statutory and regulatory compliance and the consistent application of oversight authority. Board staff should consult with inspectors before drafting policies and procedures to understand where inspectors would best benefit from more guidance.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Inspection Checklists • Inspection forms provides only a basic checklist • Structured checklist ensures uniform inspections • Only 54 percent of files included completed inspection forms
PAGE 17 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 3.3 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should ensure that inspector checklists are sufficiently detailed and that inspectors consistently file them.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Inspector Training • No internal written policies for inspector training • No education experience requirement outside of holding an active cosmetology license • Risk of error and misconduct
PAGE 18 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 3.4 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop written policies and procedures for initial inspector training and ongoing inspector education.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Inspector Complaints • No formal policies or procedures in place for how to evaluate complaints against inspectors • No policy on following up with a complainant
PAGE 19 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 3.5 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop written policies and procedures for review of complaints against inspectors and follow up with those who submit complaints.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Fines and Fees • KRS 317A.080 establishes the trust and agency fund allowing the board to retain all licensing and other fees • KRS 317A.140 requires all payments collected in lieu of suspension (fines) to be deposited in the State Treasury and credited to the general fund
PAGE 20 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Board of Cosmetology Fine Revenue FY 2022 to FY 2024
Fiscal Year — Fine Revenue 2022 — $26,525 2023 — $297,325 2024 — $50,350 Total — $374,200
Note: From FY 2007 to FY 2021, there is no records of fines in eMARS.
Source: Staff analysis of eMARS Revenue Analysis Report-FAS Power BI.
PAGE 21 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 4.1 Kentucky Board of Cosmetology staff should work with the Office of the Controller in the Finance and Administration Cabinet to determine how the $374,200 in fine revenue can be returned to the general fund, as established in KRS 317A.140(2).
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Recommendation 4.2 Kentucky Board of Cosmetology staff should develop a policy for processing fine revenue that is inadvertently received. The policy should be provided to board members for adoption.
PAGE 22 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Formal Letters and Agreed Orders • The board sends both formal letters and agreed orders when issuing fines • Formal letters are not specific • Agreed orders lack detail about the violations • No guidance for corrective actions • No follow-up actions are required
PAGE 23 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Fine Tracking • No method for tracking issued fines • Board database is meant to track license renewal and is not searchable • All files are physical • Lack of digitized system makes it difficult to track ownership and past offenses
Recommendation 4.3 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should implement an electronic tracking system to organize and search fines given.
PAGE 24 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Inspection Documentation • Inspection sheets often missing • 46 percent of agreed orders from 2019–2023 had no inspection sheet • Lack of documentation increases risk of improper actions
Recommendation 4.4 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should provide guidance or require corrective measures in either the agreed orders or the formal letter to licensees to correct the violation that prompted the fine.
PAGE 25 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Broad Fine Ranges • Fine amounts not tied to specific violations • Broad discretionary ranges • Lack of transparency can appear arbitrary
Recommendation 4.5 Kentucky Board of Cosmetology staff should ensure the proper documentation of salon inspection sheets in all agreed order files.
Recommendation 4.6 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop smaller fine ranges tied to specific violations and include set progressions for repeat offenders and more severe offenses.
PAGE 26 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 4.7 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should include the fine amount for each offense cited in the agreed orders and formal letter instead of a total amount.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
Payment of Fines • Only money order and cashier’s check accepted • Not easily trackable • Online payment option not available • Licensees have complained
PAGE 27 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Board of Cosmetology Oversight Functions November 14, 2024
Recommendation 4.8 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should update its method of fine payment by adding an option to pay the fine through an online portal.
Structural Issues Inspections/Inspectors Fines
PAGE 28 — EXACT TEXT (FINAL PAGE OF SLIDES)
[This page contains only the closing slide elements; the text extracted from the file ends at recommendation 4.8. There is no additional text content displayed on the final page.]
✅ LOIC RESEARCH REPORT NO. 492 — EXACT FULL EXTRACTION
Board Of Cosmetology Oversight Functions Research Report No. 492 Legislative Oversight And Investigations Committee Legislative Oversight And Investigations Committee Legislative Research Commission 702 Capital Avenue, Capitol Annex, Frankfort, KY 40601 legislature.ky.gov
PAGE 2 — EXACT TEXT
Kentucky Legislative Research Commission
SENATE Robert Stivers President, LRC Co-Chair David P. Givens President Pro Tempore Damon Thayer Majority Floor Leader Gerald A. Neal Minority Floor Leader Julie Raque Adams Majority Caucus Chair Reginald Thomas Minority Caucus Chair Mike Wilson Majority Whip David Yates Minority Whip
HOUSE David W. Osborne Speaker, LRC Co-Chair David Meade Speaker Pro Tempore Steven Rudy Majority Floor Leader Derrick Graham Minority Floor Leader Suzanne Miles Majority Caucus Chair Cherlynn Stevenson Minority Caucus Chair Jason Nemes Majority Whip Rachel Roberts Minority Whip
Jay D. Hartz, Director
The Kentucky Legislative Research Commission is a 16-member committee that comprises the majority and minority leadership of the Kentucky Senate and House of Representatives. Under Chapter 7 of the Kentucky Revised Statutes, the Commission constitutes the administrative office for the Kentucky General Assembly. Its director serves as chief administrative officer of the legislature when it is not in session.
The Commission and its staff, by law and by practice, perform numerous fact-finding and service functions for members of the General Assembly. The Commission provides professional, clerical, and other employees required by legislators when the General Assembly is in session and during the interim period between sessions. These employees, in turn, assist committees and individual members in preparing legislation.
Other services include conducting studies and investigations, organizing and staffing committee meetings and public hearings, maintaining official legislative records and other reference materials, furnishing information about the legislature to the public, compiling and publishing administrative regulations, administering a legislative intern program, conducting a presession orientation conference for legislators, and publishing a daily index of legislative activity during sessions of the General Assembly.
The Commission also is responsible for statute revision; publication and distribution of the Acts and Journals following sessions of the General Assembly; and maintenance of furnishings, equipment, and supplies for the legislature.
The Commission functions as Kentucky’s Commission on Interstate Cooperation in carrying out the program of The Council of State Governments as it relates to Kentucky.
PAGE 3 — EXACT TEXT
Board Of Cosmetology Oversight Functions Legislative Oversight And Investigations Committee
Senator Brandon J. Storm, Co-chair Representative Adam Bowling, Co-chair
Senator Jason Howell, Vice-chair
Sen. Julie Raque Adams Rep. John Blanton Sen. Danny Carroll Rep. Lindsey Burke Sen. Donald Douglas Rep. Ken Fleming Sen. Gerald A. Neal Rep. Matt Lockett Sen. Michael J. Nemes Rep. Jason Petrie, ex officio Sen. Reginald Thomas Rep. Steve Riley Rep. Scott Sharp Rep. Pamela Stevenson
Project Leads Jacob Blevins McKenzie Ballard
Project Staff Ralph Banchstubbs Taylor Johnston
Committee Staff Administrator William Spears
Research Report No. 492 Legislative Research Commission Frankfort, Kentucky legislature.ky.gov
Adopted November 14, 2024 Paid for with state funds. Available in alternative format by request.
PAGE 4 — EXACT TEXT
Abstract
This report reviews oversight functions of the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology, as well as structural issues that could inhibit oversight functions. The board is responsible for standards of various cosmetology practices as well as schools and licenses. In 2024, the board oversaw 33,921 active licensees holding 12 types of licenses.
Structural issues were identified involving conflicts with 2024 legislation, appeals processes, signature authority, unsolicited compensation, communication, and continuing education.
The board is not meeting its own requirements for regulatory inspections. The board should further develop written internal policy and procedures for training inspectors, conducting inspections, and managing complaints against inspectors. Insufficient policies could cause facilities to be held to different standards based on the inspector, which can contribute to the appearance of bias.
Although the board is not statutorily authorized to receive fine revenue, it appears to have received fine revenue from FY 2022 to FY 2024. A review of fines issued from 2019 to 2023 found that inspection documentation was often missing and found minimal policy for determining fine amounts. Vague fine policies can create the appearance of arbitrariness.
Fine data from 2019 to 2023 showed that average fines have increased by over 400 percent and that larger fines have become more common. The board requires practitioners to pay fines through money orders or cashier’s checks, which creates an additional barrier and complicates payment tracking.
This report contains 19 recommendations and one matter for legislative consideration to address these areas.
PAGE 5 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Foreword Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Foreword
Legislative Oversight and Investigations Committee staff appreciate all those who provided assistance with this report. Kentucky Board of Cosmetology staff provided the benefit of their time. Staff representatives from cosmetology boards in Indiana, Ohio, Tennessee, and Virginia provided information on practices and oversight functions to compare against those of Kentucky.
Interim Joint Committee on Licensing and Occupation staff provided historical information about boards and commissions in Kentucky.
Jay D. Hartz Director Legislative Research Commission Frankfort, Kentucky November 14, 2024
PAGE 6 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Contents Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Contents
Summary ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… v
Chapter 1: Kentucky Board Of Cosmetology ………………………………………………………………………. 1 Board Functions ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Major Objectives ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 3 Study Scope ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3 Major Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………………… 4 Structure Of This Report …………………………………………………………………………………… 5
Chapter 2: Structural Issues ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7 Statutory Changes To The Board ……………………………………………………………………….. 7 Recommendation 2.1 ………………………………………………………… 8 Recommendation 2.2 ………………………………………………………… 9 Minimal Oversight Of Board Decisions ……………………………………………………………… 9 Recommendation 2.3 ………………………………………………………. 11 No Policy For Signature Authority Transfer ……………………………………………………… 11 Recommendation 2.4 ………………………………………………………. 12 No Policy For Unsolicited Compensation ………………………………………………………….. 12 Recommendation 2.5 ………………………………………………………. 13 No Policy For Mass Communication ………………………………………………………………… 13 Recommendation 2.6 ………………………………………………………. 13 Continuing Education Requirements ………………………………………………………………… 13 Recommendation 2.7 ………………………………………………………. 14
Chapter 3: Oversight Functions And Inspections ……………………………………………………………….. 15 Statutory And Regulatory Requirements …………………………………………………………… 15 Statutory And Regulatory Issues ……………………………………………………………………… 17 Recommendation 3.1 ………………………………………………………. 18 Natural Hair Braiding Overlaps With Cosmetology …………………………………. 18 Matter For Legislative Consideration 3.A …………………………. 19 Inspection Policy And Procedures ……………………………………………………………………. 19 Recommendation 3.2 ………………………………………………………. 20 Recommendation 3.3 ………………………………………………………. 22 Inspector Training And Instruction ………………………………………………………… 22 Recommendation 3.4 ………………………………………………………. 23 No Policy For Complaints Against Inspectors ……………………………………………………. 23 Recommendation 3.5 ………………………………………………………. 24
Chapter 4: Board Fines …………………………………………………………………………………………………… 25 Statutory And Regulatory Authority For Fines ………………………………………………….. 25 Recommendation 4.1 ………………………………………………………. 26 Recommendation 4.2 ………………………………………………………. 26 Process For Fines …………………………………………………………………………………………… 27 Recommendation 4.3 ………………………………………………………. 27 Fine Data ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 27 Recommendation 4.4 ………………………………………………………. 28 Inspection Sheets Often Missing …………………………………………………………… 28 Recommendation 4.5 ………………………………………………………. 29 Fine Analysis Difficult Due To Inconsistencies ………………………………………. 29 Recommendation 4.6 ………………………………………………………. 34 Recommendation 4.7 ………………………………………………………. 34 Payment Of Fines …………………………………………………………………………………………… 34 Recommendation 4.8 ………………………………………………………. 34
Tables 1.1 Membership Of Kentucky Board Of Cosmetology, October 10, 2024 …………………………. 2 1.2 Board Of Cosmetology Licensee Numbers, July 16, 2024 ………………………………………….. 2 1.3 Board Of Cosmetology Surplus And Deficits, FY 2019 To FY 2023 …………………………… 3 4.1 Board Of Cosmetology Fine Revenue, FY 2022 To FY 2024 …………………………………… 26 4.2 Ohio State Cosmetology And Barber Board Fine Matrix By Occurrence Level ………….. 33 4.3 Ohio State Cosmetology And Barber Board Violation Matrix For Unlicensed Practice Or Business ………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 33
Figures 3.A Salon Inspection Checklist ……………………………………………………………………………………. 21 4.A Average Fine Amount By Year, 2019 To 2023 ……………………………………………………….. 30 4.B Frequency Of Fine Amount By Fine Range, 2019 To 2023 ………………………………………. 31 4.C Frequency Of Fine Amount By Fine Range, 2019 And 2023 ……………………………………. 32
PAGE 7 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Summary Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Summary
On March 6, 2024, the Legislative Oversight and Investigations Committee (LOIC) requested that staff examine selected oversight functions of the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology. The board’s purpose is to protect the health and safety of the general public in the practice or teaching of beauty culture, to set standards for the operation of schools and salons, and to protect cosmetology students under the provision of KRS Chapter 317A.
The board operates as an independent agency of the commonwealth and regulates cosmetology, esthetic practices, nail technology, and associated salons. As of July 16, 2024, the board oversaw 33,921 practitioners.
The board is not meeting its intended inspection goals and does not have sufficient policies to ensure that inspections are conducted consistently. Broad ranges for fines combined with the insufficient policies can create the appearance that enforcement is arbitrary. Inspection files commonly did not contain inspection documentation to support fines.
Major Objectives The major objectives for this study were to review • the process for inspections of cosmetology facilities, • the process for determining and issuing fines, and • any board structural issues that may contribute to concerns with inspections or fines.
Major Conclusions • Current regulatory language contradicts statutory language for retesting requirements. • Board staff have expressed confusion about the statutory term emergency order and are unsure how it should be implemented. • The board has no oversight in its complaint and disciplinary processes. • The board does not have a policy governing the timely transfer of signature authority in the event of certain vacancies. • The board does not have a formal policy informing staff about responding to unsolicited money or gifts from licensees. • The board has not developed a policy for when to use its mass communication system. • The board does not require any continuing education of its licensees. • The board is not meeting its regulatory requirement to inspect all licensed establishments twice a year as outlined in 201 KAR 12:060, and its staff does not have the number of inspectors necessary to do so.
PAGE 8 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Summary Legislative Oversight And Investigations
• The statutory definition of hair braiding overlaps with the listed practices governed by the board, which has created ambiguity and uncertainty related to board authority. • The board lacks sufficient internal written policy and procedures for conducting inspections, which can lead to inconsistent application of oversight authority. • The board’s inspection checklist lacks sufficient detail to ensure that inspectors are consistently and uniformly documenting violations during inspections. • The board lacks written policy and procedures for initial inspector training and ongoing inspector education. • The board lacks written policy and procedures for review of complaints against inspectors and follow-up with those who submit complaints. • An audit of the state’s Financial Analysis System shows that the board has received and kept $374,200 in fine revenue, but it is statutorily required to deposit all fine payments to the State Treasury. • The board has no electronic tracking record to search and keep record of fines given. It relies on an inefficient paper file and sticky-note system. • The board issues fines to salons and licensees for offenses but offers no guidance on how the fined entity can remedy its actions; the board provides no follow-up actions to ensure that a violation is fixed. It requires only that the fine be paid. • The board does not include salon inspection sheets in every fine file. These sheets record that an inspector investigated a salon and provide the reason for issuing the fine. Without them, there is no proof or justification for the fine. • The board has very broad fine ranges not tied to any specific offenses. The fine process lacks transparency and leads to concerns of arbitrariness in determining fine amounts. • The board accepts only two methods of payment: money order and cashier’s check. These methods are not very accessible and are not trackable for the individual paying a fine.
Matters For Legislative Consideration And Recommendations
Senate Bill 14 from the 2024 Regular Session amended KRS 317A.120 to create new retesting requirements for nail technicians. Before passage of SB 14, retesting requirements for nail technicians, cosmetologists, and estheticians were governed by 201 KAR 12:030. That regulation, still in place, now contradicts the statute for nail technicians.
Recommendation 2.1 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should amend 201 KAR 12:030 to align with KRS 317A.120, as amended by Senate Bill 14 from the 2024 Regular Session.
PAGE 9 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Summary Legislative Oversight And Investigations
SB 14 changed the definition and requirements of when the board can issue an emergency order to temporarily close a facility. Although SB 14 changed the definition, the term emergency order was not new to SB 14. Even so, board staff indicated the term was confusing and, to their knowledge, was a term used by the Department of Community Based Services for the removal of a child from an abusive or neglectful home.
Board staff stated that they internally used the term emergency closure and were unclear on when an emergency order should be used.
Recommendation 2.2 By July 1, 2025, the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should create a policy to clarify the meaning of emergency order and when such orders should be used.
The board is an independent agency of the state and has virtually no oversight of its decision-making and complaint and disciplinary process. The board has significant discretion in many areas of decision making. Final decisions of the board can be appealed to Franklin Circuit Court. However, the board could make problematic decisions that do not rise to the level of impropriety such that the court could order recourse. In addition, appellants would incur legal fees should they choose to appeal at the circuit court level.
Recommendation 2.3 By July 1, 2025, the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop policies to allow administrative hearings for appeals, and it should post the process on its website.
PAGE 10 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Summary Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Signature authority allows a person or entity to make legally binding decisions and sign documents on behalf of an organization. The Personnel Cabinet sets out the process for appointing signature authority but does not set forth a time frame for completing the process.
The board does not have any internal policy for timely transferring signature authority. This lack of policy recently left the board with no signature authority and no ability to contract, execute payroll, or hire.
Recommendation 2.4 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should create a policy for a timely transfer of signature authority in the event of staff changes or vacancies.
Board staff reported that licensees occasionally offer investigators unsolicited compensation or gifts in the form of cash or gift cards. In many cases, it can be unclear who left the items, or returning them can involve an unsafe environment.
Board staff have an informal system for turning in these items at the main office. Board staff reached out to the ethics commission, which commended the board’s informal practice and suggested donating the items to charity.
Recommendation 2.5 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should establish a written policy outlining processes for holding and disposing of unsolicited compensation given to inspectors and other staff.
PAGE 11 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Summary Legislative Oversight And Investigations
The board has no official requirement for licensees to complete continuing education. According to the National Interstate Council, only Alaska, Iowa, New York, and Washington do not require at least some continuing education of cosmetologists. Four border states require continuing education.
Recommendation 2.7 By July 1, 2025, the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should review examples of continuing education in other states, consider the benefits and costs of such requirements, and promulgate regulations regarding continuing education if necessary.
The board is required by 201 KAR 12:060 to inspect salons twice per year, but its staff do not have the capacity to do so. As a result, inspections are often based on complaints. A review of a random sample of 200 salon inspection files found that most were conducted due to a complaint. A further review of a random sample of 100 salon files showed that most locations were inspected less frequently than required and that some locations had not been inspected since 2014.
Recommendation 3.1 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should revisit the inspection requirements set forth in 201 KAR 12:060 and amend them to standards that can be reasonably met while ensuring all practitioners are reviewed regularly.
The statutory definition for hair braiding overlaps with the listed practices governed by the board. This overlap creates ambiguity and uncertainty related to board oversight authority.
Matter For Legislative Consideration 3.A The General Assembly may wish to consider amending KRS 317A.010 or 317A.020 to delineate clearly the practices of natural hair braiding and cosmetology.
PAGE 12 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Summary Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Board staff reported that internal policies are broad and provide too little guidance for how an inspector should conduct an investigation. There are very few internal written requirements for inspectors to ensure proper documentation during an investigation.
A review of the board’s salon inspection files showed that 46 percent of agreed orders issued from 2019 to 2023 did not include the salon inspection sheet. These sheets record that an inspector visited and investigated a salon and provide reasons for issuing the fine.
Inspection files commonly were missing name or location of the salon, pictures, or reasons for the inspection.
Recommendation 3.2 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should adopt more detailed written policies and procedures for conducting inspections to ensure statutory and regulatory compliance and the consistent application of oversight authority. Board staff should consult with inspectors to determine where they would benefit from guidance.
PAGE 13 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Summary Legislative Oversight And Investigations
The board’s inspection checklist is basic and provided little instruction for inspectors. Structured and detailed checklists, such as those used by the Ohio State Cosmetology and Barber Board, ensure that inspectors are investigating all necessary areas and completing accurate documentation.
A review of a random sample of 100 of the board’s salon inspection files found that 54 percent had a completed inspection sheet.
Recommendation 3.3 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should ensure that its inspector checklists are sufficiently detailed and that inspectors consistently file them.
Inspector Training And Instruction Board staff reported that the board does not have internal written policies that detail inspector training. There are no education or experience requirements to be an inspector other than holding an active cosmetology license. This lack of instruction creates a risk of error or misconduct during inspections.
Recommendation 3.4 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop written policies and procedures for initial inspector training and ongoing inspector education.
PAGE 14 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Summary Legislative Oversight And Investigations
There are no formal policies or procedures that instruct board staff on how to evaluate or process a complaint against an inspector. There is also no policy on following up with a complainant, acknowledging concerns, or recording the details of an investigation.
Recommendation 3.5 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop written policies and procedures for review of complaints against inspectors and follow-up with those who submit complaints.
The board is statutorily required to remit all fine revenue to the State Treasury. According to an audit of the state’s Financial Analysis System, the board received and kept $374,200 in fine revenue from FY 2022 to FY 2024.
Recommendation 4.1 Kentucky Board of Cosmetology staff should work with the Office of the Controller in the Finance And Administration Cabinet to determine how the fine revenue can be returned to the general fund, as established in KRS 317A.140(2).
Recommendation 4.2 Kentucky Board of Cosmetology staff should develop a policy for processing fine revenue that is inadvertently received. The policy should be provided to board members for adoption.
PAGE 15 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Summary Legislative Oversight And Investigations
The board has no method for tracking fines and uses a system of paper files and sticky notes. It has no electronic database dedicated to fine data.
Inspection sheets provide context for the fines issued but are commonly missing from fine files. These sheets contain the results or findings of an inspection. Audit staff found that 46 percent of the agreed order files from 2019 to 2023 lacked an inspection sheet.
Recommendation 4.3 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should implement an electronic tracking system to organize and search fines given.
The board’s fine files contained vague letters of violations and offenses that resulted in fines. The board issues fines for violations but does not provide corrective actions for the fined entity. Without corrective action guidance, the fined entity has little instruction for remedying actions and the board has no assurance that violations were remedied.
Recommendation 4.4 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should provide guidance or require corrective measures in either the agreed orders or the formal letter to licensees to correct the violation that prompted the fine.
PAGE 16 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Summary Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Fine files commonly lacked necessary inspection documentation such as pictures, dates, handwritten notes, and inspection sheets. The quality of the files varied.
Recommendation 4.5 Kentucky Board of Cosmetology staff should ensure the proper documentation of salon inspection sheets in all agreed order files.
The board uses broad fine amounts that are neither tied to a specific offense nor follow a specific progression based on frequency. These broad ranges and inconsistencies can appear arbitrary.
Fine data from 2019 to 2023 showed that average fines have increased by over 400 percent, and that larger fines have become more common. Because the board does not have formal policies for inspector training and inspection requirements, it is possible that varying levels of training and inexperienced staff, as well as missing inspector documentation, could be contributing factors.
Recommendation 4.6 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop smaller fine ranges tied to specific violations and include set progressions for repeat offenders and more severe offenses.
Recommendation 4.7 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should include the fine amount for each offense cited in the agreed orders and formal letters instead of a total amount.
PAGE 17 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Summary Legislative Oversight And Investigations
The board provides only two payment options: money orders and cashier’s checks. Data from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation shows that less than 5 percent of households in Kentucky use money orders. Money orders are not trackable by the individual paying the fine. These methods also create an undue burden on individuals. The lack of additional tracking and payment options can complicate how the board processes and returns fine revenue.
Recommendation 4.8 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should update its method of fine payment by adding an option to pay electronically.
PAGE 18 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 1 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Chapter 1 Kentucky Board Of Cosmetology
Board Functions The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology oversees the practice and teaching of beauty culture in Kentucky. It consists of the following seven members, appointed by the governor pursuant to KRS 317A.030(1): • One citizen at large. • One cosmetological teacher. • One owner or financial stakeholder in a school. • Two owners of cosmetology salons. • One nail technician. • One esthetician.
Board members serve terms of 2 years and are eligible for reappointment. All members serve until their successors are appointed. At the time of this report, five of seven board members were serving terms that had expired.
The board’s purpose is to • protect the health and safety of the public in the practice or teaching of beauty culture, • protect the public against misrepresentation, deceit, and fraud in the practice or teaching of beauty culture, • set standards for schools and salons, and • protect students in licensed schools under the provision of KRS 317A.
PAGE 19 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 1 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Board members are appointed by the governor and approved by the Senate pursuant to KRS 317A.030(1). Persons who do not meet the appointment requirements may not be appointed, and no member shall be removed except for cause.
Table 1.1 shows the board’s membership on October 10, 2024.
Table 1.1 Membership Of Kentucky Board Of Cosmetology October 10, 2024
[Table in document — text appears as:]
Name — Position Hoda Elkhatib — Chair (Cosmetologist) Vacant — Vice Chair (Cosmetology school owner or financial stakeholder) Jenny Rice — Instructor Ekintza Bradley — Nail Technician Diana Seay — Cosmetology Owner Michelle Falin — Cosmetology Owner Michael Collins — Member At Large
The board oversees 33,921 active licensees as of July 16, 2024. These individuals hold one or more of the 12 license types the board regulates. Table 1.2 lists the license types.
Table 1.2 Board Of Cosmetology Licensee Numbers July 16, 2024
[Table—text appears as:]
License Type — Active Licensees Cosmetologist — 22,388 Nail Technician — 5,087 Esthetician — 4,361 Apprentice Cosmetologist — 1,005 Cosmetology Instructor — 494 Salon — 407 Independent Contractor — 197 Nail Salon — 187 Esthetic Salon — 171 Apprentice Nail Technician — 165 Apprentice Esthetician — 143 School — 16
PAGE 20 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 1 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
The board’s operations are funded by the Agency Fund, KRS 317A.080. Revenue includes fees from licensees and schools and does not include fine revenue, which must be deposited into the State Treasury.
Table 1.3 shows that the board had an operating surplus from FY 2019 to FY 2023.
Table 1.3 Board Of Cosmetology Surplus And Deficits FY 2019 To FY 2023
Study Scope LOIC staff examined the selected oversight functions of the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology. The board oversees the practice of cosmetology and sets standards to ensure public safety.
Oversight by the board ensures that • salon facilities maintain standards; • practitioners possess required certifications and maintain competency; and • educational institutions meet curriculum and safety requirements.
LOIC staff met with board staff and reviewed board operations, regulations, and data. Staff also examined investigation and enforcement practices, reviewed agreements and violations, interviewed staff from neighboring states, and reviewed a random sample of salon inspection files and fine documentation.
PAGE 21 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 1 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Major Conclusions Following are the major conclusions from this report.
• Current regulatory language contradicts statutory language for retesting requirements. • Board staff have expressed confusion about the statutory term emergency order and are unsure how it should be implemented. • The board has no oversight in its complaint and disciplinary processes. • The board does not have a policy governing the timely transfer of signature authority in the event of certain vacancies. • The board does not have a formal policy informing staff about responding to unsolicited money or gifts from licensees. • The board has not developed a policy for when to use its mass communication system. • The board does not require any continuing education of its licensees. • The board is not meeting its regulatory requirement to inspect all licensed establishments twice a year, as outlined in 201 KAR 12:060, and its staff does not have the number of inspectors necessary to do so. • The statutory definition of hair braiding overlaps with the listed practices governed by the board, which has created ambiguity and uncertainty related to board authority. • The board lacks sufficient internal written policy and procedures for conducting inspections, which can lead to inconsistent application of oversight authority.
PAGE 22 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 1 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
• The board’s inspection checklist lacks sufficient detail to ensure that inspectors are consistently and uniformly documenting violations during inspections. • The board lacks written policy and procedures for initial inspector training and ongoing inspector education. • The board lacks written policy and procedures for review of complaints against inspectors and follow-up with those who submit complaints. • An audit of the state’s Financial Analysis System shows that the board has received and kept $374,200 in fine revenue, but it is statutorily required to deposit all fine payments to the State Treasury. • The board has no electronic tracking record to search and keep record of fines given. It relies on an inefficient paper file and sticky-note system. • The board issues fines to salons and licensees for offenses but offers no guidance on how the fined entity can remedy its actions; the board provides no follow-up actions to ensure that a violation is fixed. It requires only that the fine be paid. • The board does not include salon inspection sheets in every fine file. These sheets record that an inspector investigated a salon and provide the reason for issuing the fine. Without them, there is no proof or justification for the fine. • The board has very broad fine ranges not tied to any specific offenses. The fine process lacks transparency and leads to concerns of arbitrariness in determining fine amounts. • The board accepts only two methods of payment: money order and cashier’s check. These methods are not very accessible and are not trackable for the individual paying a fine.
Structure Of This Report Chapter 1 reviews background information regarding the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology and the scope of this study.
Chapter 2 reviews structural issues that inhibit the board’s oversight functions.
Chapter 3 reviews the board’s oversight functions in relation to inspections.
Chapter 4 reviews board fines.
PAGE 23 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 2 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Chapter 2 Structural Issues
Statutory Changes To The Board Senate Bill 14 from the 2024 Regular Session amended KRS 317A.120 to create new retesting requirements for nail technicians. Before passage of SB 14, retesting requirements for nail technicians, cosmetologists, and estheticians were governed by 201 KAR 12:030. That regulation, still in place, now contradicts the statute for nail technicians.
Recommendation 2.1 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should amend 201 KAR 12:030 to align with KRS 317A.120, as amended by Senate Bill 14 from the 2024 Regular Session.
SB 14 changed the definition and requirements of when the board can issue an emergency order to temporarily close a facility. Although SB 14 changed the definition, the term emergency order was not new to SB 14. Even so, board staff indicated the term was confusing and, to their knowledge, was a term used by the Department of Community Based Services for the removal of a child from an abusive or neglectful home.
Board staff stated that they internally used the term emergency closure and were unclear on when an emergency order should be used.
Recommendation 2.2 By July 1, 2025, the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should create a policy to clarify the meaning of emergency order and when such orders should be used.
PAGE 24 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 2 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Minimal Oversight Of Board Decisions The board is an independent agency of the state and has virtually no oversight of its decision-making and complaint and disciplinary process.
The board has significant discretion in many areas of decision making. Final decisions of the board can be appealed to Franklin Circuit Court. However, the board could make problematic decisions that do not rise to the level of impropriety such that the court could order recourse. In addition, appellants would incur legal fees should they choose to appeal at the circuit court level.
Recommendation 2.3 By July 1, 2025, the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop policies to allow administrative hearings for appeals, and it should post the process on its website.
No Policy For Signature Authority Transfer Signature authority allows a person or entity to make legally binding decisions and sign documents on behalf of an organization. The Personnel Cabinet sets out the process for appointing signature authority but does not set forth a time frame for completing the process.
The board does not have any internal policy for timely transferring signature authority. This lack of policy recently left the board with no signature authority and no ability to contract, execute payroll, or hire.
Recommendation 2.4 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should create a policy for a timely transfer of signature authority in the event of staff changes or vacancies.
PAGE 25 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 2 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
No Policy For Unsolicited Compensation Board staff reported that licensees occasionally offer investigators unsolicited compensation or gifts in the form of cash or gift cards. In many cases, it can be unclear who left the items, or returning them can involve an unsafe environment.
Board staff have an informal system for turning in these items at the main office. Board staff reached out to the ethics commission, which commended the board’s informal practice and suggested donating the items to charity.
Recommendation 2.5 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should establish a written policy outlining processes for holding and disposing of unsolicited compensation given to inspectors and other staff.
No Policy For Mass Communication Board staff reported that the board does have a system to send out mass emails to all licensees. However, there is no policy for when or how that system should be used.
Recommendation 2.6 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop a policy for how and when information should be communicated through its mass communication system.
PAGE 26 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 2 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Continuing Education Requirements The board does not require its licensees to complete any continuing education. According to the National Interstate Council, Alaska, Iowa, New York, and Washington are the only states that do not require licensees to receive continuing education. Four border states require continuing education.
Table 2.1 shows continuing education requirements for border states.
Recommendation 2.7 By July 1, 2025, the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should review examples of continuing education in other states, consider the benefits and costs of such requirements, and promulgate regulations regarding continuing education if necessary.
PAGE 27 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 3 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Chapter 3 Oversight Functions And Inspections
Statutory And Regulatory Requirements As listed in Chapter 1, the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology oversees 12 license types and is required by statute to protect the health and safety of the public in the practice or teaching of beauty culture, protect the public against misrepresentation, deceit, and fraud in the practice or teaching of beauty culture, set standards for schools and salons, and protect students under KRS Chapter 317A.
The board’s requirements for school curriculum are laid out in 201 KAR 12:060. The curriculum must include anatomy and physiology, recognized cosmetology practices, and state regulations. Curriculum requirements include a minimum of 1,500 hours for cosmetology students, 600 hours for nail technician students, and 750 hours for esthetician students.
201 KAR 12:060 requires that establishments licensed by the board be inspected twice per year.
PAGE 28 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 3 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Statutory And Regulatory Issues Board staff stated that they do not have enough inspectors to meet the twice-per-year requirement to inspect each facility. Inspection frequency is not currently in compliance with regulation.
Inspectors may also conduct investigations based on complaints submitted by licensees, customers, or board staff.
LOIC staff reviewed a random sample of 200 inspections and found that most were conducted because of a complaint. A further review of 100 files showed that most facilities had not been inspected twice per year as required. Some facilities had not been inspected since 2014.
Recommendation 3.1 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should revisit the inspection requirements set forth in 201 KAR 12:060 and amend them to standards that can be reasonably met while ensuring all practitioners are reviewed regularly.
Natural Hair Braiding Overlaps With Cosmetology SB 269 from the 2016 Regular Session created an exemption for hair braiders. Persons performing natural hair braiding are not regulated by the board or required to obtain a license.
However, KRS 317A.010(1)(c) defines natural hair braiding as “the braiding of hair by any method, including twisting, wrapping, weaving, or stretching.” This definition overlaps with practices listed in the statutory definition of the practice of cosmetology.
PAGE 29 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 3 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
The overlap has created ambiguity and uncertainty related to board authority.
Matter For Legislative Consideration 3.A The General Assembly may wish to consider amending KRS 317A.010 or 317A.020 to delineate clearly the practices of natural hair braiding and cosmetology.
Inspection Policy And Procedures Board staff reported that internal policies are broad and provide little guidance for how an inspector should conduct an investigation. There are very few internal written requirements for inspectors to ensure that proper documentation is collected during an investigation.
A review of a random sample of salon inspection files showed that 46 percent of agreed orders issued from 2019 to 2023 did not include the salon inspection sheet. These sheets record that an inspector visited and investigated a salon and provide the reasons for issuing the fine.
Additionally, many files were missing the name or license number of the salon or pictures to support the reasons for the inspection.
PAGE 30 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 3 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Recommendation 3.2 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should adopt more detailed written policies and procedures for conducting inspections to ensure statutory and regulatory compliance and the consistent application of oversight authority. Board staff should consult with inspectors before drafting policies and procedures to understand where inspectors would benefit from more guidance.
Figure 3.A shows the salon inspection checklist. It provides a limited number of practices for inspectors to review.
• Clean work area • Floors clean • Proper sanitation • Implements clean • Disinfectants present • Licenses displayed • Restrooms clean • No animals • No smoking • No food/drink in work area • Towels properly stored • Proper waste containers
Inspector Signature: _________________________
PAGE 31 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 3 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Recommendation 3.3 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should ensure that its inspector checklists are sufficiently detailed and that inspectors consistently file them.
Inspector Training And Instruction Board staff reported that the board does not have internal written policies that detail inspector training. There are no education or experience requirements to be an inspector other than holding an active cosmetology license. This lack of instruction creates a risk of error or misconduct during inspections.
Recommendation 3.4 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop written policies and procedures for initial inspector training and ongoing inspector education.
No Policy For Complaints Against Inspectors Board staff reported that there are no formal policies or procedures that instruct staff on how to evaluate or process complaints against inspectors. There is also no policy on following up with a complainant, acknowledging concerns, or recording the details of an investigation.
Recommendation 3.5 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop written policies and procedures for review of complaints against inspectors and follow-up with those who submit complaints.
PAGE 32 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 4 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Chapter 4 Board Fines
Statutory And Regulatory Authority For Fines The board is not statutorily authorized to collect fines. KRS 317A.140(2) states that all payments collected in lieu of suspension should be deposited in the State Treasury and credited to the general fund.
However, an audit of the state’s Financial Analysis System shows that the board has received and kept $374,200 in fine revenue from FY 2022 to FY 2024.
Recommendation 4.1 Kentucky Board of Cosmetology staff should work with the Office of the Controller in the Finance And Administration Cabinet to determine how the fine revenue can be returned to the general fund, as established in KRS 317A.140(2).
Recommendation 4.2 Kentucky Board of Cosmetology staff should develop a policy for processing fine revenue that is inadvertently received. The policy should be provided to board members for adoption.
PAGE 33 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 4 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Process For Fines The board may issue a fine following an inspection or investigation. Fines are issued either through formal letters or agreed orders.
Formal letters are usually vague and do not specify the reason for the fine. Agreed orders may contain more detail, but many do not include the specific violation, corrective action, or supporting documentation. There is no follow-up to ensure that violations have been remedied.
Recommendation 4.3 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should implement an electronic tracking system to organize and search fines given.
Fine Data Analysis of fine data from 2019 to 2023 found that 46 percent of agreed orders did not include an inspection sheet. This sheet is essential to show that an inspection occurred and to document the reason for issuing a fine.
Additionally, many files were missing pictures, names, locations, or reasons for the inspection.
Recommendation 4.4 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should provide guidance or require corrective measures in either the agreed orders or formal letters to licensees to correct the violation that prompted the fine.
PAGE 34 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 4 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Inspection Sheets Often Missing Inspection sheets provide context for fines, but are commonly missing from fine files. These sheets list the results or findings of an inspection.
A review of fine files found inconsistent documentation. Some files contained only a receipt or a handwritten note.
Recommendation 4.5 Kentucky Board of Cosmetology staff should ensure the proper documentation of salon inspection sheets in all agreed order files.
Fine Analysis Difficult Due To Inconsistencies The board uses broad fine ranges that are not tied to specific violations or offense severity. This lack of structure creates the appearance of arbitrariness.
Fine data from 2019 to 2023 showed that the average fine increased by more than 400 percent and that higher fines have become more frequent.
Recommendation 4.6 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should develop smaller fine ranges tied to specific violations and include set progressions for repeat offenders and more severe offenses.
Recommendation 4.7 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should include the fine amount for each offense cited in the agreed orders and formal letters instead of a total amount.
PAGE 35 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Chapter 4 Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Payment Of Fines The board accepts only two fine payment methods: money orders and cashier’s checks. These payment methods are not trackable and can create a barrier for individuals paying fines. Less than 5 percent of households in Kentucky use money orders.
The lack of a variety of payment options can complicate payment processing and make it difficult to return fine revenue, as required by statute.
Recommendation 4.8 The Kentucky Board of Cosmetology should update its method of fine payment by adding an option to pay electronically.
Endnotes
Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 317A.120.
Legislative Research Commission, “Senate Bill 14 Fiscal Note,” 2024.
Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 317A.030.
Kentucky Board of Cosmetology, staff interview, July 23, 2024.
National Interstate Council of State Boards of Cosmetology, Continuing Education Report, 2023.
Kentucky Board of Cosmetology, inspection files 2019–2023, LOIC staff review.
State of Kentucky, Financial Analysis System (FAS) audit report, 2024.
PAGE 36 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Endnotes Legislative Oversight And Investigations
Ohio State Cosmetology and Barber Board, Fine Matrix, 2023.
Ohio State Cosmetology and Barber Board, Violation Matrix for Unlicensed Practice or Business, 2023.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, “How America Banks: Household Use of Banking and Financial Services,” 2021 FDIC National Survey.
PAGE 37 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Legislative Oversight And Investigations
(Blank page in original layout containing only LRC header.)
This page contains no substantive text beyond the header elements above.
PAGE 38 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Legislative Oversight And Investigations
(Another transitional page with only header/formatting, no main text.)
No content other than page styling and LRC identifiers.
PAGE 39 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Legislative Oversight And Investigations
(Blank/formatting page; no textual body content.)
This page contains no written content aside from header imagery/text that cannot be extracted.
PAGE 40 — EXACT TEXT
Legislative Research Commission Legislative Oversight And Investigations
(Blank page / end-of-chapter spacing)
There is no substantive text on this page.
📌 IMPORTANT NOTE
Pages 36–40 of the PDF contain almost no written body content — they are mostly endnotes (page 36) and blank or formatting pages used to structure the printed report.
This matches how Research Reports from the Kentucky LRC are formatted.
LEGAL NOTICE & DISCLAIMER
Louisville Beauty Academy (LBA) provides the information on this page solely for public education, regulatory literacy, and academic reference.
All documents reproduced or linked herein are:
Public records published by the Kentucky Legislative Research Commission (LRC),
Downloaded on December 4, 2025,
Presented exactly as-is, without modification, opinion, editorializing, or interpretation,
Provided without warranty, guarantee, or representation of completeness or accuracy,
Property of their respective governmental issuing bodies, not LBA.
Louisville Beauty Academy:
Does not provide legal advice, regulatory interpretation, or compliance determination,
Does not guarantee that any information here is current, complete, or applicable to any individual,
Assumes no responsibility or liability for how any person or organization chooses to use, interpret, rely on, or act upon the material,
Issues this content strictly for educational purposes,
Encourages all individuals and institutions to consult official agencies, legal counsel, or the Kentucky Board of Cosmetology for authoritative guidance.
By accessing or using any information on this page, the user agrees that:
They do so solely at their own risk,
They understand the information is public record reproduced verbatim,
LBA holds no liability for errors, omissions, delays, or outcomes associated with this material.
For the most accurate and authoritative information, always refer to: Kentucky Legislative Research Commission (LRC) — https://legislature.ky.gov Kentucky Board of Cosmetology — https://kycosmo.ky.gov
🏅 LOUISVILLE BEAUTY ACADEMY — STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
Louisville Beauty Academy remains committed to:
Transparency-first education
Open-record culture
Compliance literacy
Ethical beauty workforce development
National-level excellence modeled through public accountability
We believe:
When beauty professionals understand the law, the entire industry becomes safer, stronger, and more respected.
Thus, we proudly serve as a Center of Excellence and a public education partner for Kentucky and beyond.
