The EPPP does not have equal pass rates by ethnicity. That is not an opinion. It is what the numbers show. And once you see the numbers, it is hard to look away.

This post is about EPPP pass rates by ethnicity, what the data says, and why it matters for anyone studying for this exam right now. We are going to keep it simple and honest. This is not about blame. It is not about ability. It is about whether the test is fair, and whether it actually measures what it claims to measure.

The numbers nobody hands you up front

One study looked at 4,892 applicants in a large U.S. state. It tracked who failed the EPPP on their first try, broken down by group. Here is what it found (Sharpless, 2019):

• Black applicants: 38.5% first-time failure rate
• Hispanic applicants: 35.6% first-time failure rate
• Asian applicants: 24.0% first-time failure rate
• White applicants: 14.1% first-time failure rate

Sit with that for a second. The highest failure rate was more than 2.5 times the lowest (Sharpless, 2019). Same exam. Same passing line. Very different odds depending on the group you are in.

If you want the broader picture on how often people pass and fail overall, we cover that in our post on EPPP pass rates. But the gap above is the part most prep companies will not put on a slide.

This is a fairness question, not a blame question

It would be easy to read those numbers wrong. So let me be very clear about what they do not mean.

They do not mean one group is smarter than another. They do not mean one group will be a better or worse psychologist. The data simply does not say that.

In fact, here is the part that should stop you cold. The EPPP is built on something called content validity (Sharpless, 2019). In plain words, that means experts looked at the questions and agreed the questions cover psychology topics. That sounds fine. But there is a catch.

There is still no evidence that your EPPP score predicts who becomes a good clinician (Sharpless, 2019). None. The test checks if you can answer the questions. It does not show that a higher score means better care for real patients.

So now you have two facts sitting next to each other:

1. The exam fails some groups at more than 2.5 times the rate of others (Sharpless, 2019).
2. The exam has never been shown to predict who is actually good at the job (Sharpless, 2019).

When a test has a big gap between groups and no proof it measures real skill, that is a validity problem. That is the whole point. We are not asking anyone to lower the bar. We are asking whether the bar is measuring the right thing in the first place.

Why the gap costs more than feelings

A failed attempt is not just a bad day. It is real money and real time.

Every failed attempt means another exam fee. It means more weeks or months of prep. It means a delayed license, which means delayed income and a delayed career. For someone already stretched thin, that snowball gets heavy fast.

Now layer the data back on. If your group fails at 38.5% on the first try versus 14.1% (Sharpless, 2019), you are far more likely to eat those extra costs. The price of an unfair test does not land evenly. It lands hardest on the people already facing the steepest odds.

If you are staring down a retake right now, you are not stuck and you are not alone. We wrote a practical guide on what to do after failing the EPPP so the next attempt is smarter, not just harder.

The EPPP2 problem

There is a newer version of the exam, sometimes called the enhanced EPPP or EPPP2. It adds a skills section on top of the knowledge test.

On paper that sounds like an upgrade. But researchers raised a serious warning. Rolling out EPPP2 before it is properly validated could further restrict a workforce that is already not very diverse (Callahan et al., 2020).

Read that again. The worry is not that a skills test is a bad idea. The worry is timing. If you add a new, harder gate before you have proof it is fair and that it measures real skill, you risk widening the exact gap we just talked about (Callahan et al., 2020). You could screen out good future psychologists from underrepresented groups for no good reason.

Validation is not red tape. It is the difference between a gate that protects patients and a gate that just blocks people.

What this means for you, right now

You probably did not come here for a policy debate. You came here because you have an exam to pass. So here is the honest takeaway.

You cannot change the test today. Fixing test fairness and test validity is a long fight, and it should happen. But while that fight goes on, you still have to walk through the door in front of you.

That means the smart move is to control what you can control. You can prepare in a way that is efficient, that targets your weak spots, and that does not drain your savings before you even sit down. You should not have to pay for an expensive course on top of an expensive exam just to get a fair shot.

If you want the most recent look at how pass numbers are trending, check our 2026 update on EPPP pass rates. Knowing the landscape helps you plan, not panic.

Where we stand

I am Dr. Anders Chan, a licensed clinical psychologist, and here is my plain stance.

The goal is a fair shot. Not a lower bar. The data shows a real gap in EPPP pass rates by ethnicity (Sharpless, 2019), and it shows the score has never been proven to predict who becomes a good clinician (Sharpless, 2019). That is a problem worth naming out loud.

Until the test itself gets fixed, the best thing I can offer is prep that is affordable, focused, and built to give every candidate a real chance to pass without going broke or burning out. That is the whole reason this platform exists.

You deserve a clear, fair path to your license. The exam may not be fair yet. Your prep can be.

Try it free: https://www.thepsychology.ai/go/eppp-fairness