# Florida FDLR practice questions: Licensure, renewal and CE Five original Florida FDLR practice questions on licensure, renewal and CE, each answered on this page with a rationale and a source. Last updated: 2026-07-27. ## Question 1 A non-dentist investor purchases a Florida dental practice and enters into a management agreement with the lead dentist. The contract grants the investor final authority over patient pricing, refund policies, and the selection of all clinical personnel. Which statement correctly describes the legal status of this arrangement under Florida law? - A. The contract is valid as long as the dentist maintains control over specific treatment plans and patient records. - B. The agreement is a lawful procurement of practice-management services provided the fee is fair market value. - C. The contract is void as contrary to public policy and the arrangement constitutes a third-degree felony. - D. The investor is subject to a first-degree misdemeanor, but the lead dentist is immune from criminal liability. **Answer C:** The contract is void as contrary to public policy and the arrangement constitutes a third-degree felony. Section 466.0285, F.S., prohibits nondentists from controlling pricing, refunds, or clinical personnel selection. Violations are third-degree felonies and the contracts are void. **Common trap:** Relying on more permissive "corporate practice" models from other states like California where management companies have broader latitude. Source: [s. 466.0285, F.S. — Proprietorship by nondentists](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0466/Sections/0466.0285.html) ## Question 2 Dr. Reynolds has held an active, unencumbered license in Georgia for eight years. Three years ago, she received a formal disciplinary reprimand for an advertising violation, though her license was not suspended. She applies for Florida licensure by endorsement under the MOBILE Act. - A. The Board must issue the license within seven days of a complete application. - B. She is eligible if she completes a one-year period of board-mandated supervision. - C. She is ineligible due to disciplinary action within the preceding five years. - D. The Board may waive the violation if she passes the Laws and Rules examination. **Answer C:** She is ineligible due to disciplinary action within the preceding five years. Under s. 456.0145, F.S., an applicant for MOBILE endorsement must have faced no disciplinary action in the 5 years immediately preceding the application. A formal reprimand is disciplinary action. A. is only for qualified applicants. B. and D. are not provided for in the statute. **Common trap:** Assuming only "serious" discipline like suspension or revocation counts toward the five-year lookback. Source: [s. 456.0145, F.S. — Mobile Opportunity by Interstate Licensure Endorsement (MOBILE) Act](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0456/Sections/0456.0145.html) ## Question 3 A dental hygienist is preparing her continuing education dossier for biennial renewal. She has 24 hours of approved clinical courses and holds a current basic life support (BLS) certification obtained via a fully online course with no in-person component. What is the status of her renewal? - A. Deficient, because CPR/BLS training must include an in-person hands-on skills assessment to be accepted. - B. Deficient, because CPR/BLS training must provide at least 4 credit hours to count toward the 24-hour total. - C. Compliant, as long as the online course was provided by the American Heart Association or the Red Cross. - D. Compliant, because basic life support certification is only required for dentists and hygiene supervisors. **Answer A:** Deficient, because CPR/BLS training must include an in-person hands-on skills assessment to be accepted. Rule 64B5-12.013 requires CPR training to be in person or via a blended learning course with hands-on skill competency completed in person; online-only training is not accepted. Furthermore, CPR does not count toward the biennial hour totals (30 or 24). **Common trap:** Believing online-only certification is sufficient due to third-party vendor claims, or assuming CPR counts toward the 24-hour requirement. Source: [Fla. Admin. Code R. 64B5-12.013 — Continuing Education Requirements; Specific Continuing Education Course Requirements; and Cardiopulmonary…](https://www.flrules.org/gateway/ruleNo.asp?id=64B5-12.013) ## Question 4 A busy dentist allows a dental assistant to perform subgingival scaling using a cavitron, which is outside the assistant's lawful scope of practice. What is the criminal exposure for the employing dentist for this specific act? - A. A first-degree misdemeanor for aiding unlicensed practice. - B. A third-degree felony for knowingly employing a person beyond their scope. - C. A second-degree felony for allowing serious bodily injury potential. - D. No criminal exposure, as the dentist holds a valid license and has delegated the task. **Answer B:** A third-degree felony for knowingly employing a person beyond their scope. Section 466.026(1)(c), F.S., specifically targets the employing dentist with a third-degree felony for such unauthorized delegation. **Common trap:** Assuming only the unlicensed worker faces criminal charges while the employer only faces board discipline. Source: [s. 466.026, F.S. — Prohibitions; penalties](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0466/Sections/0466.026.html) ## Question 5 A dentist candidate passed the ADEX clinical examination in another state 14 months ago. She has not practiced since because she was providing full-time care for a parent with a documented serious health condition. She now applies for Florida licensure. - A. The scores are void because they are more than 365 days old. - B. The Board may excuse the practice requirement based on documented hardship. - C. She must complete a two-year supplemental education program before applying. - D. She must retake the diagnostic skills portion but not the clinical portion. **Answer B:** The Board may excuse the practice requirement based on documented hardship. Rule 64B5-2.0150, F.A.C. allows the Board to excuse the full-time practice requirement (for scores >365 days old) for hardship, specifically defined to include the care of a parent with a serious health condition. A. ignores the hardship relief. C. applies to non-accredited graduates. D. is not a standard relief mechanism. **Common trap:** Believing the 1,200-hour practice rule for stale scores is absolute and carries no hardship relief. Source: [Fla. Admin. Code R. 64B5-2.0150 — American Dental Licensing Exam Scores from Other Jurisdiction: Full-Time Practice Requirements](https://www.flrules.org/gateway/ruleNo.asp?id=64B5-2.0150) ## Next step [Take the free 15-question FDLR practice test](https://dentovio.com/florida-dental-laws-rules/free-practice-test) Official reference: [Chapter 466, Florida Statutes — Dentistry, Dental Hygiene, and Dental Laboratories](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0466/0466.html). Original exam-style questions written for study, never recalled exam content. Independent educational preparation, not legal advice, and not affiliated with or endorsed by the Florida Board of Dentistry. Confirm current requirements with the Board.