Even the public schools will want to load you up with debt. That is unless you can pay the tuition.

Yes, but I think state school tuition will often be a lot lower than private, making the overall cost of attendance lower and reducing the amount of loans. On the other hand, sometimes private institutions have better aid budgets than their public peers and can give larger amounts of aid, but I'm unsure to what extent that's true for private graduate programs in interior design.

It all depends on the school. Out of state tuition can be very high.

Absolutely. OP needs to do their research.

I'm sorry but that's just not true. Interior design requires formal training. It's a licensed profession. You may be thinking of an interior decorator.

Chad, to become an interior designer, it is not necessarily a requirement to obtain a license. Many states don't even regulate the title. Most states that do, it is the more explicit title of "certified interior designer" or "registered interior designer" that is regulated. In many such states, it's a title act, only and only to the extent that the title infers being registered or licensed. Whereas, saying one is an "interior designer", is not. However, there is still the necessary knowledge and skills to be obtained even if a license is not required. A person may be competing for projects with those with NCIDQ certification and license in some states. Where I am and the state to the north of me, there is no such license at all. You want a license, you become an architect or become an engineer. I pretty much can legally do whatever an interior designer and landscape designer can do in my state but also stuff that may fall outside their wheelhouse but still exempt from architect or engineer's licensure requirement.

It is not a licensed profession EXCEPT in some states. It's not quite like it is with Architectural licensing in the U.S. It's not there yet.

Note: I am not confusing interior designers and interior decorators (or desecrators). Since it is not licensed, they are essentially, within the statutes, permitted to practice projects exempt from requiring an architect or engineer license as any unlicensed building designer. Within case law, an interior designer may be further limited to working within their of competence or they can be found negligent in court. This means, an interior designer may be more limited than a building designer due to educational background, training, etc. This gets into much more nebulous issues of courts and civil cases. Once projects are non-exempt, an architect or engineer stamp is required and work done under their responsible supervision and control.

Interior decorators are likely to be looked at in court as having even less qualification requirements and involves even less HSW matters and an interior decorator is even less qualified to deal with stuff that may require permits or require compliance with regulatory codes.

Someone seemed to like the post more than a year later. Ok, to further add, in any civil case (most likely) in a court, each person will be looked at and evaluated on their own individual knowledge, skills, and experience and evaluated against the customary scope of work customary within the practice of each of these professions: architects, engineers, building designers, interior designers and interior decorators as to whether A) the work was done within ones area of competency, B) the work is or is not within the customary scope of practice that is recognized by the profession (locally, regionally, and/or nationally). 

It is not the title you choose to go by (other than the licensed professions of architecture or engineering or depending on the particular state of the U.S. or jurisdiction in the world, certified interior designer or interior architect) but the profession the title is associated with. In the unlicensed realm, titles can be kind of whimsically used by some so you aren't going to be validated or justified by your mere use of the title. The courts would evaluate the case and understanding of the profession on a basis beyond yourself. 

In many cases, it would be a bench trial (in other words, decided by a judge). A judge when discerning a ruling, it going to do some research into what is interior design? What is building design? What is interior decorator? What are the professional societies of these professions and their positions? What is customarily within the scope of practice? What exceptions to customary practice as defined by the individual state laws exceptions or exemptions? 

For me, my practice in Oregon in building design is defined by the boundaries of ORS 671.030 and ORS 672.060. This currently sets my boundaries which means, in some ways, my scope of practice is a little different than AIBD says building designers do, in that we do small commercial projects where in many other states, we don't have that exemption. In other states, we may have more scope of work in the domain of multi-family dwellings that are not bound by 20-ft. height or ground area rule but maybe limited on number of stories and number of units. 

Interior designers have respective professional societies. One that is more geared towards commercial interior design whom are known to push for interior design licensing regulations. Another that is mostly residential. One that is particularly focused on kitchens and bathroom design. Some people do specialize. You also have interior decorators. This one is less defined as a profession of its own as interior design, building design, lanscape design, etc. but like a subset profession of interior design. But there is the CID Internaional, Inc. with their "certified interior decorator" program. Not to be confused with the more well known CIDs. 

There is a difference in focus as to what interior decorators do from interior designers (although a lot of overlap), and that of building designers, architects, and engineers. I have not bothered with taking those certification exams for interior design. The certification exams I would take are the CPBD certification exam and technically the ARE (which serves for registration as an architect at some point) If all you do is interior design, you'll have a very difficult time passing either the CPBD exam or the ARE. If all you do is interior decoration, it is going to be even harder. This is because there is a big difference in what you do. Your focus. 

I do work, in building design services, that involves applying interior design. I also deal with stuff that involves solid understanding of multiple disciplines or engineering and would say parallels a lot of an architect's scope of practice but on a more smaller scope of project types and scale than is typically in the scope of work for an architect as it pertains to the building design services I perform... namely in the U.S. 

Outside the U.S., that can be significantly different in scope of work allowed but even then, you don't go dog wild crazy doing working on designing SFRs, 2-3 story duplexes, triplexes, townhouses, and 1-3 story small commercial buildings to designing massive skyscrapers in the UK or something. Legally, I could but that would be pretty dumb and reckless for me to do so for any number of reasons and not necessarily by any statutory limitations.

In the UK, although I would typically be using the title building designer, it basically means 'architectural designer' in the UK which so far, is not regulated as the title 'Architect' is. The scope of work isn't any different in the law. It's basically a title law. Things could change. So if I do a project in the UK, I may be listed under the category of 'architectural designer' or 'architectural design firm' so I may be more free to express that, for now. I can safely use the title building designer and it basically translates to exactly that. It would be much like it was in Oregon between 1919 and 1935, except a more modern building code system. In Oregon, during that time, it used to be very similar to the way it is in the UK. A title act. Of course, protectionism and turf wars continued and they turned it into a title AND practice act establishing an oligopoly system of a kind.... a kind of monopoly by a segment of the profession. UK explicitly did not go down that road.

At some point, I may decide to take the IDEX exam from CCIDC. It's a little lower on priorities at this time.

To call yourself an interior designer you MUST be licensed. 

You don't have to be an interior designer to do such work on certain project types. This is dependent on the state your practicing in. This is similar to architecture where you can call yourself a designer, be unlicensed, and still work on certain project types.

Regardless, just like in architecture not all the staff working on a project in a firm will be licensed.  The person signing the drawings will be licensed though.  The same applies to the ID firm you've worked with N.TW. 

While there are a lot of self-taught types running around the interior design business, a person entering the field would be best served by getting some kind of formal training in a school setting. The self-taught people I personally know have wealth and/or upper-class social connections that most people don't have and can't get. And, as Chad says, lacking the academic credential needed to be licensed will greatly reduce the career options of an interior designer.

I agree. You will find trouble if you think you can spend a weekend watching a show on interior design and then think you can just go out and set up shop offering interior design services. There is more to it... to do it competently.

Yes we get signed drawings from ID's. In certain states for certain types of projects (hospitals, hospitality of certain sizes) it's required. It sounds like your working with interior decorators. The OP realistically doesn't have a chance of getting into an interior design program without some related undergrad.

I see, thanks for explaining.

The principals of these firms are licensed IDs. In the types of projects I'm on currently, we take on all of the legal burden, and our fee includes coordination of design provided by ID as another consultant.

You kind of take on the legal burden. . . like any other licensed consultant you're not legally responsible for the accuracy of their work. If they mess up it makes your life a pain but your consultants are the ones that have to pay to fix things. You'll still get sued and pay legal fees. You just won't be held responsible. 

 This exact thing happened to a firm I used to be with. The ID spec'd a waiting room chair that didn't have the required type of flame retardant and anti microbial fabric. The owner sued us when the building department said to replace everything. The ID had to pay for everything to make it right.  We had to pay for a lawyer to say it wasn't our responsibility. 

Chad, IDs in my area have been trying to get recognized as an official profession for several years but the gov told them they need to fit under the existing architects act. The ID body have been at it for years trying to define their “protected scope” but so far, just crickets. We’re happy to collect their dues but they are not happy when they realize how few services they can claim only license IDs can provide to the public.

Interesting Non. In the US there are certain project types in certain states that require any FF&E and interior finishes to be designed by an ID. This is mostly large hospitals and hospitality projects.

We don't have anything like that. Seems weirdly specific. Plenty of IDs make a killing with TI or gov fit-ups but their hands are tied as soon as they touch anything code-related. We get plenty of small jobs from commercial landlords who's tenants hire ID who can't actually get them permits.

We have a system in place that allows ID or any designer, to pass exams and provide professional  services on some type of projects but very very few IDs bother to go through the process.

Chad, while what you say is true for Colorado and some states. Try to present things a little more accurate by not representing that in all states, interior design as a licensed profession. Make explicit clear that it is a licensed profession in SOME states. In many states, there are no license requirements and the title is unregulated. I do not disagree with you said above about FF&E and Interior finishes. Where I am, we can't require items for permits to be stamped by a licensed/registered interior designer if our own state doesn't issue such licenses. We can potentially require someone with a professional certification if they can obtain it. We can't require someone be licensed/registered unless they are licensed/registered with the state and the state has to have such a license. States, in general, do not and can not allow out of state stamp/seals being used to fulfill regulatory requirements for things like permits, as the stamp/seals are suppose to be used only with projects within the state UNLESS the laws of the state where the project is located explicitly provides for such an exception. Likewise, the state where the license/stamp/seal is from, unambiguously allows for the stamp/seal to be used for projects in another state, where the state where project is located states clearly and unambiguously that it is allowed.

I clearly said that depending on the state and the project type an ID can be required. 

However, in all states to call yourself an ID you need to be licensed.

Non - it's a bit different in the US. ID's here do work with building code as it applies to the interior finishes and layouts.  Hence why they are required to be licensed if they want to be called an Interior Designer.  If they're not licensed they are interior decorators.  No license is required to practice as interior decorator. 

fascinating. We don't have licenses for ID here, only registration... which really only grants them membership to the ID title. They need an entire other set of exams before offering services that could lead to building permits (BCIN in ontario).

It's very odd here. Our ID just passed there exams so I've learned quite a bit about this process.

"I clearly said that depending on the state and the project type an ID can be required. 

However, in all states to call yourself an ID you need to be licensed." 

This LAST part is what I said is not true. That is NOT the case. Interior Designer is not a protected title in a number of states. 

In Oregon and Washinton, and more than a dozen other states, there is no regulation, period. No title act. No practice act. Then there are some states, where there is a title act. There are some with title act that has a very specific title they regulate but not the generic "interior designer" title. 

Where I am, it is as unregulated as the title building designer. This is a statement of fact not opinion. There have been attempts to adopt legislation for licensing Interior Design, in Oregon, but that has not succeeded yet.

I do not disagree with what you speak about regarding licensure steps to becoming an interior designs in most states that does regulate the title and maybe the practice.

In my case, I can take the IDEX exam in California from the CCIDC by completing the NCBDC certification or completing the ARE (or both). It's a certification written into the Califoria law for CID title. Getting licensed in other states can be a load of trouble so which path you take will have an impact on getting licensed/registered in another state.

I may even do that at some point. If Oregon and/or Washington adopted something similar to California, I would do so.

The term Interior Designer is protected in all states. 

I think what is confusing is that to be a licensed Interior Designer requires an NCDIQ certification. Many interior decorators illegally still use the ID title.The national regulation body of the NCDIQ made it illegal for a non licensed interior designer to do so.

Confusing I know. 

What's even more confusing is that some states allow person to be sued for calling themselves an Interior Designer when they aren't.  Some don't.  That's why most licensed ID's use the term Licensed Interior Designer, NCDIQ.

How is it so? Go here: CIDQ or NCIDQ.... same organization:

https://www.cidq.org/regulated...

Regulation of interior design is more like things where in architectural licensing in the mid-1920s or so where there were states with title acts, title & practice act, and no licensing or regulation of any kind regarding the title or practice. That is where it is right now. It's not quite like where the Architectural licensing law in the U.S. is at, right now. Yes, you can not under any circumstance represent that you are licensed or registered by the state unless you are. There are still laws regarding fraudulent misrepresentation but that's going into the broader laws not laws specific to any profession. I am just trying to point to facts where things actually are at on this matter. Where I am, I can call myself an interior designer. I just prefer using the title building designer over interior designer. I can and do work that is interior design but not just. Interior design is within the scope of my services as is landscape design. If the scope of work is interior design only, I might just refer to it as interior design services. Just as it may be for you, an Architect. You can do interior design (legally) but you can do more than interior design.

NCIDQ is basically like NCARB. To be a member board, the state has to regulate. Not all states are member boards of NCIDQ. California is not a member board of NCIDQ and the CCIDC is the only legal authority under California law to regulate the Certified Interior Designer title (only "interior designer "-regulated title in California) in California.

I'm done debating this with your Rick. You're incorrect on this. I'm going to believe the licensed interior designers I know.

You don't believe the NCIDQ or simply now called CIDQ? I gave you direct link to the CIDQ whom you referenced that explicitly support what I said. Go through every single chapter of Oregon Revised Statutes and show me where interior designer is licensed in Oregon and the state licensing board. Show me. 

CIDQ is not a licensing board. They can not legally be a licensing board in itself. In the United States, licensing boards have to be the board of a department of the very state or territorial government they are part of... although in theory the national federal government could in theory issue occupational licenses as a nationwide license. In general, they don't. There's a thing called jurisdiction between states, between states & territories, between territories, and between states and federal jurisdiction. 

CIDQ is like NCARB and NCEES. They can not actually issue a license. In the U.S., it has to be an actual state government entity or a federal government department, agency, or territorial government entity. The federal government, aside from individual territories, has not been in the general practice of regulating professions by the form of occupational licensing. Therefore, it has been states and territories that have been administering occupational licensing in the U.S. 

You shouldn't even be debating against the facts that even CIDQ admits. Just because the person is licensed in Colorado, it means nothing to states where there is no licensure of the profession of interior design, yet. That person would be competing with everyone who fashions the title interior design in states where there is no licensing.

Chad, do yourself a favor and look up the CIDQ.

https://www.cidq.org/about-cid...

https://www.cidq.org/regulated...

CIDQ sometimes called NCIDQ, is a certifying body. It is not a licensing board any more than NCARB is. While the member boards are licensing boards, the licensing is issued by the licensing boards of the states or provinces. NCIDQ can not issue licenses in the U.S. The individual states issues licensed.  Currently, not all states regulates the title or practice of architecture. Look at the second link from CIDQ.

As for Colorado, interior design is permitted under the statutes but it's a little different than licensing. NCIDQ (now called CIDQ) merely backed a bill, years ago, that legislatively shaped the interior design exemption to require someone to be certified by them. That would be pretty much the same as if AIBD's NCBDC backed a bill to legislate an exemption for building design requiring that a person practicing building design is certified by them. While it reaches the effect of licensing, it was written in such a way as to not require the establishment of a new state-issued license, and additional state-operated administrative authority as either an expansion of an existing licensing board in the state or a new board. Occupational Licensing/registration must be conferred by a government agency, board, or department, not a third-party organization even if the bulk of the requirement for licensing qualifications is by a third-party entity and it is members are composed of licensing boards of many states. CIDQ kind of achieved the same effective result as a license. So in a sense, I compare it a little bit to NCARB as well in this thread. CIDQ in itself is a certifying body, not a licensing or registration. Chad, what you said is essentially true for Colorado but things are not quite uniform as much as it is in architecture, which we know is not entirely uniform.... but architects have established a uniformed common licensure path that is fairly uniform much more so than the state of affairs of interior design licensing.

They do know the difference. The term ID is legally protected in all 50 states. Each state decides if someone can be sued for erroneously using the term is they're not licensed. Basically it may be illegal but no is going to do anything about it except for NCDIQ in the form of sanctions. 

 Each county decides if an ID can stamp drawings for relevant work.  Depending on the project type an ID may be required if they doing interior finishes.  An architect can also do this.  Typically these projects are government.  Sometimes they are very large hospitality types (think Vegas or Disneyland type scale).

Chad, please site your source for saying the term ID is protected in all 50 states.

https://www.cidq.org/why-ncidq-certification-matters

NCDIQ is the organization that 'protects' the term ID in all 50 states.  

Here are the states recognize ID and the that allow someone to be sued for claiming to be an ID if they aren't:

https://www.cidq.org/regulated...

As I said above - in the states with no regulated jurisdictions all that can be done is NCDIQ will sanction you.  This could be an issue if you tried to become licensed in the future.

I think I know where the confusion is. 

1.Do all states enforce / regulate ID licenture? NO 

2. Can you be sued for calling yourself an ID if your not licensed in all 50 states? NO 

3. Is the term ID protected by NCDIQ in all states? - YES

4. Does the NCDIQ have the authority to enforce licensing requirements and titles in all 50 states?  NO see item 2

5. Will the NCDIQ stop you from being licensed if they find out you've been calling yourself an ID when your not?  Probably

Regarding point #3: Read this: https://casetext.com/case/locke-v-shore

While a state can regulate the practice of interior design but it would be unconstitutional if for the state or CIDQ to regulate and control the title "interior designer" especially when there is no state law to regulate the title. "Interior Designer" is too generic to be trademarked and protected in such a fashion. CIDQ could trademark "CIDQ Certified Interior Designer" (CCID) and regulate that in the same manner CPBD is trademarked and protected by AIBD but "building designer" alone can not be trademark and protected in such a manner. Yes, CIDQ advocates regulating interior design and even interior designer titles. They can enforce and to an extent protect the interior designer titles that are regulated by states such as Certified Interior Designer. If you haven't noticed, that is why you been seeing titles like "Certified Interior Designer" or "Registered Interior Designer" or "Licensed Interior Designer". In order for CIDQ to enforce and protect the more generic title "Interior Designer", the state has to regulate the title itself. Technically, that is in essence what Colorado did. They regulated the title but they could be shot down in Federal court unless they also regulate the practice requiring persons to be certified by the CIDQ to practice at all. If the title "Interior Designer" is regulated too strongly, it would rise to a level to be unconstitutional, because it would impede a person who in fact is providing interior DESIGN services. Calling them an interior decorator would be an insult because interior design is more than decorating. The case in the link is a case precedence in Federal court which means, even Colorado needs to pay attention to such precedence cases. If CIDQ trademarked a certification title "CIDQ Certified Interior Designer" (CCID being a short form but not necessarily a protected trademark unless in connection with interior design), I wouldn't care one iota. They can do that just as AIBD's CPBD (Certified Professional Building Designer) trademark. AIBD would have been sued if they were trademarking "building designer" title in the generic sense and tried to regulate that. CIDQ would be sued, too.... with regards to "interior designer". They can certainly file complaints to state licensing boards where states are regulating title to protect the title as regulated. However, they have no legal leg to stand on to protect the title: "Interior Designer" in states where it is not regulated at all. They can only protect a registered trademark.

I'm not arguing for or against state adoption of licensing regulations and protection of titles within reason. Interior design is not interior decoration. Interior design practices may involve residential or nonresidential or both. In many cases, interior design is regulating nonresidential interior design through title law regulations. However, regulating the title "interior designer" would run against the fair use right of residential interior designers (not decorators.... designers) to lawfully describe their service and title. This is why a more narrow title such as "registered interior designer" or "licensed interior designer" or "certified interior designer" or in cases, "commercial interior designer" can be regulated within the legal context of the law without unduly infringing and harming those residential interior designers not required to undergo a licensing requirement or similar processes. Additionally, when a state does not regulate any interior designer title or the practice of interior design, there is no state authority to regulate and CIDQ would not have any state law to mount a case on and would be limited to federal trademark laws and its provisions and limitations.

Chad, your reference doesn’t say what you say it does. I am sure you are familiar with Colorado’s dept of regulatory agencies where you can look up any professional license holder in the state. There is no license for ID’s. Look for yourself. https://apps.colorado.gov/dora/licensing/Lookup/LicenseLookup.aspx NCIDQ is a certification. It is not a license.

You can search the NCIDQ page for “license” too. The word isn’t used by NCIDQ because they offer certification, not licensure.

Here is the law in Colorado (under an exemption of the Architect Act): https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2021/title-12/article-120/part-4/section-12-120-403/

It's for activities in subsection 6 of the exemption, not subsection 1 (a through C, and d in connection with a through c project types), which is separate. However, if someone does the kinds of activity of subsection 6, for projects exempt under subsection 1 (a through c, and d in connection with a through c project types), but does not have CIDQ certification, then regulating the title may be an issue.... but however, it is not quite a title act in the legal sense. It defines interior designer for purpose of the specific meaning for properly interpreting subsection 6. An interior designer doing subsection 1 work can call themselves interior designers but work where subsection 6 kicks in, interior design work on work not exempt under subsection 1 (a through c or d in connection with a through c project types), like in commercial interior design work, they would need to be certified by CIDQ, in Colorado. However, it does not explicitly prohibits the use of the title "interior designer" by someone who is not CIDQ certified. As I would interpret it, any project type under 1(d) that is not in connection with the kinds of projects outlined in 1(a) through 1(c), I would interpret as projects where subsection 6 would kick in. It seems like subsection 6 was shoehorned in, in an ugly manner.

Subsection 1 of that section 403, predates subsection 6. I'd just get rid of item (d) and apply the words "structural and/or nonstructural" just before the word "alterations" after the comma. I would rewrite subsection 6 so that we are talking of "certified interior designer" and it becomes more of an actual title act where a person may be fined by the Board for using said title without certification, and it be a partial practice act of a sort in that the CIDs would not be limited to projects under 1(a) through 1(c). Originally 1(d) was essentially the provision of law that enabled interior designers (long before NCIDQ) to do interior design work on commercial, institutional, and other buildings besides the residential where these nonresidential projects would be limited to nonstructural alterations and such which is fairly common to a lot of states. I'm guessing, provisions that may trace back to the 1930s era give or take. Subsection 6 was legislatively shoehorned in poorly, in my opinion, much later.

The premise of CIDQ is to provide for a certification package establishing a baseline of qualification of interior designer to their expectation. States can use certifications as part of if not the qualification standard for licensing but the license itself if a state establishes a board and a licensing/registration program, issues the license for use of a protected title under a title act or title act portion of a title & practice act, and if the state regulates the practice of a profession requiring a license to practice then, the qualification would meet the state's standard (or part of it).... the state then issues license/registration. States may also have additional requirements. This, combined becomes the total qualification. Some states have specific interest in special qualifications. California has certain state specific building codes. Architects getting licensed in California has to take not just the national ARE exam but also the CSE. Licensing , registration, or approved certification where the requirement is getting qualified to take the IDEX for certification in California, where national certifications like CIDQ, AIBD's CPBD certification, and others are pre-exam qualifications but the exam takes you through examination on state required codes and regulations akin to CSE without establishing a state government board but is akin to license to a certain degree for use of the title Certified Interior Designer in California... as it's still a title act to a degree. As tintt has said, echoed what I said above.