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.”
📎 OFFICIAL LRC DOCUMENT LINKS (Unmodified)
1. LOIC Cosmetology Fact Sheet (Nov 14, 2024)
2. LOIC Cosmetology Slides (Nov 14, 2024)
3. LOIC Research Report No. 492 (Adopted Nov 14, 2024)
📄 FULL TEXT EXTRACTION (AS-IS)
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.
✅ DOCUMENT 1 — LOIC COSMETOLOGY FACT SHEET
(Downloaded as of 12-04-2025) – https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/CommitteeDocuments/344/30790/2024-11-14%20LOIC%20Cosmetology%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf
Exact text extracted AS IS from the full-page image:
Report Highlights
Inspections
- 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.
✅ LOIC COSMETOLOGY SLIDES — FULL EXTRACTION START
(Downloaded as of 12-04-2025) – https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/CommitteeDocuments/344/30790/2024-11-14%20LOIC%20Cosmetology%20Slides.pdf
PAGE 1 — EXACT TEXT
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
(Downloaded as of 12-04-2025) – https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/lrc/publications/ResearchReports/RR492.pdf
PAGE 1 — EXACT TEXT
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
Endnotes ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 35
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
[Table appears as text:]
Fiscal Year — Surplus / (Deficit)
2019 — $144,719
2020 — $63,256
2021 — $52,347
2022 — $91,864
2023 — $141,666
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.
[Table text appears as:]
State — Hours Required
Illinois — 14 hours
Indiana — 8 hours
Ohio — 3 hours
Tennessee — 16 hours
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.
Figure 3.A
Salon Inspection Checklist
[FIGURE TEXT EXACTLY AS PRINTED:]
Inspection Checklist
Salon Name: _________________________ License #: _______________________
Date: __________________ Time: ______________
• 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.





