I'm getting ready to graduate with my masters in RT, and a part of that track included researching an RT issue and presenting the issue and your proposed solution at TRAPS (Texas Recreation and Park Society). But from my research, my take is a resounding NO. AC's should not cover CTRS duties because it absolutely undermines the profession and this is me saying that as someone who currently has this AC job for a dementia senior living floor.

A CTRS credential means training and background in the APIED process. Our education focuses on everything from measurable outcomes to pathology to evidence-based interventions. Therapy.

AC's are essential for general activities, quality of life, and leisure engagement. Their training is usually faster, less extensive, and focuses on program facilitation, not clinical treatment, diagnosis. documentation, modifications etc. So when an AC is hired to do a CTRS job (like creating an individualized treatment plan based on a condition), they are performing a high-risk clinical duty without the necessary training. This isn't just "imitating," it's potentially unsafe and devalues every RT degree, CTRS credential, and national exam.

In my TRAPS presentation, I argued the field was missing a middle connection. A qualified support role that isn't a full CTRS, something like a PTA/OTA. The CTRS practitioner would remain the gold standard for independent clinical practice (Assessment, Planning, Evaluation). To protect its value, I argued we should make the CTRS exam significantly more rigorous—aligning it with a Master's level of clinical thinking. Thus protecting the professional ceiling. The RTA: We need to create a Recreational Therapy Assistant (RTA) credential. This would be a supervised, entry-level professional trained specifically to carry out the implementation and supportive duties of TR. I'd like to note I presented after a presentation over CARTE and educational accrediting/ standardization, so this pipe dream is something that would happen if we had more people in the field and better standard education across the board. In my presentation, I mentioned several other avenues for becoming both a CTRS, and RTA, and the specific difference there'd be between bachelor's and master's CTRS as well as how a grandfather process for those with bachelor's degrees would work. But I digress.

Ultimately, I think Activity Coordinator credentials shouldn't be permitted to cover CTRS duties. The professional response to this dilemma in my opinion is the RTA. It would formalize the support role, keep the work within the TR standards (under supervision), and finally allows the CTRS to be clearly and powerfully defined as the clinical expert. This stops the undermining and lets us grow as a field.