The reclassification of more than 100,000 individuals who in recent years passed the LEED Accredited Professionals test, along with increased demands on new applicants for the credential, has significantly changed the value of the program and the risks to program's participants.

LEED Accreditation Changes Create Three-Tiered Structure
Two of the accreditation categories have little value in the design and construction of projects meeting sustainability requirements. The LEED Green Associate credential, sometimes referred to as "Green Lite," will provide a badge of accomplishment for those interested in sustainability in the construction industry. At the other end of the LEED credentialing effort will be the Fellows. While this category is still being defined, it will constitute a reciprocal congratulatory effort where sustainability leaders benefit from recognition by the LEED program, and the LEED program benefits by having what LEED has referred to as "gurus of the industry" exhibit a LEED credential.

The AP+ Program Focuses on Expertise
The true advancement of the LEED Accredited Professionals program is the group that will pass both a general exam on LEED and sustainability issues and one of five specialty exams. The accreditation also requires an indication of expertise beyond the examinations. This LEED AP+ program comprises those individuals who have, through testing and experience, become knowledgeable in building design and construction, interior design and construction, residential projects, neighborhood development, or operations and maintenance. Members of this group of LEED Accredited Professionals also have both an ethical and a continuing education requirement to remain designated.

Exposure and Risk May Increase
Members of the upgraded LEED AP+ program now will face a higher standard of care for their services. Many of the individuals who will carry the new credential provide services through design firms. Their credential claims specialized expertise in sustainability-even if that expertise is in one form of defining and measuring sustainability-and that means they must meet a standard of care beyond that of a non-accredited licensed design professional. Currently this increased exposure is a manageable risk. Current claims information does not indicate a need for additional insurance premiums to cover the exposure created by the higher standard of care.

Individuals, and the firms that employ them have to be increasingly concerned with other causes of action the law may apply to those who market their services based on a specialized expertise. The successful marketing of the LEED program has led to a situation in which project-based incentives are tied to a private certification. And because of this, contracting parties can face significant financial repercussions if a project is not granted a desired level of LEED certification.

Governmental enticements to support the pursuit of these LEED accredited projects and their environmentally conscious goals represent a level of risk that approaches a project-based warranty.

As the level of interest goes beyond societal recognition of green efforts to significant financial exposure for failure to achieve a specific certification, the risks facing firms and individuals accredited as specialists in LEED programs can intensify.