The Survey Schedule - University of Manitoba

advertisement

University of Manitoba

Pre-Survey Meeting with

Program Administrators

Date:

Time:

July 3, 2013

2:00 to 4:00 p.m.

Room: Pharmacy Apotex, Theatre # 264

Objectives of the Meeting

• Provide an overview of

• Accreditation Process

• Questionnaire and Appendices

• Schedule

• Standards

• Opportunity to network with colleagues

• Who has been involved in a survey process?

• Last regular survey in 2008

• External review

• Internal review

Accreditation

• Is a process to:

• Improve quality of postgraduate medical education

• Provides a means for assessment of residency programs

• Assists program director in reviewing conduct of program

• Based on Standards

5

Six Year Survey Cycle

6 1

Monitoring

4

Internal Reviews

3

2

Pre-Survey Process

Specialty

Committee

University

Questionnaires

Questionnaires

Comments

Royal College

Comments

Program

Director

Questionnaires &

Comments

Surveyor

Questionnaire and Appendices

• First impression of the program by the surveyor is the questionnaire and appendices

• All sections of the questionnaire are complete

• Error-free vs typos

• Neat vs sloppy

• Clear descriptions vs confusing information

• Spell out abbreviations

Questionnaire and Appendices

When submitting your questionnaire and appendices please format and name them as follows:

Questionnaire

• Each individual section (i.e. each standard) is submitted as a separate PDF file

• The files are named as:

• General_Information.pdf, Standard_B1.pdf,

Standard_B2.pdf, etc.

Questionnaire and Appendices

Appendices

• For each appendix, the name of the appendix (e.g.

Appendix A) is clearly indicated on the first page.

• Each individual appendix is submitted as a separate

PDF file.

• The files are named as: Appendix_A.pdf,

Appendix_B.pdf, etc.

• Any additional attachments are labelled/formatted as above with the name corresponding to the appendix name as listed in the General Information section of the PSQ (e.g. Appendix_K.pdf,

Appendix_L.pdf, Appendix_M.pdf, etc.)

The Survey Schedule

• Review – Length & Day

• Based on

• Number of residents in program

• Traveling to different sites

• Last schedule in 2008

• Coordinated by the Royal College and PGME office

• Inform PGME office if you foresee a scheduling conflict

• PGME office will notify the program of the day of the review

 Surgical Foundations will be reviewed on Monday morning.

The Survey Schedule

• Transportation

• Arranged by program

• Include details

• Name & contact info for person responsible

• Morning

• Pick-up at 07:45 a.m.

At the Fairmont Winnipeg

• To and from different sites

• When required during review

• Afternoon

• Survey must end no later than 4:00 p.m.

At the Fairmont Winnipeg

The Survey Schedule

• Sequence to follow

• Document review

(30 min)

• Program director

(75 min)

• Department head *

(30 min)

• Residents *

(per group of 20 - 60 min)

• Teaching faculty *

(60 min)

• Residency Program Committee

(60 min)

• Exit Meeting

(15 min)

• Morning after the review concluded

• 07:30-07:45 a.m. at the Fairmont Winnipeg

* Scheduled anytime after program director but before RPC

The Survey Schedule

Document Review

(30 min)

• Scheduled at beginning of schedule

• Available in meeting room

Residency Program Committee minutes - last 6 years

• Resident assessment files

If automated, arrange access to a computer, make sure that it is easy to navigate and retrieve

Provide assistance/demo

• Remember surveyors have limited time to review the documents on-site

The Survey Schedule

• Program director

(75 min)

• Scheduled after document review

• To discuss

• Overall view of program

• Evaluation of Standards

• Strengths, challenges and weaknesses

• Specialty Committee Comments

Sent by email to program director week prior to on-site visit

The Survey Schedule

• Department head

(30 min)

• Scheduled anytime after program director but before RPC

• To discuss

• Support for program director and program

• Resources available to program

The Survey Schedule

• Residents

(60 min)

• Scheduled anytime after program director but before RPC

• Groups of 20 residents

Can be organized in various groups

By postgrad year

By Junior & Senior years

• Encourage residents to:

• Complete the ‘confidential’ CAIR questionnaire

• Sent by CAIR

• Meet as a group to discuss strengths & challenges prior to visit

• Send reminders – date, time, locations

The Survey Schedule

• ALL residents invited to attend/participate in their resident meeting(s)?

• Residents who cannot attend

• Arrange link by video- or tele- conferencing

• Are visa trainees or (clinical) fellows invited to attend?

• Different funding / title across Canada

• For accreditation purposes only, a resident is a person who is following the same academic program/training as a resident eligible to write College exams – funding doesn’t matter !

The Survey Schedule

• Teaching faculty

(60 min)

• Scheduled anytime after program director but before RPC

• To discuss

• Involvement with residents

• Communication with program director

• Teaching faculty who sit on RPC need only attend RPC meeting

The Survey Schedule

• Tours

(15 min)

• Optional

• Tours of wards/clinics not necessary

• Is there something special to showcase?

• MUST be scheduled before RPC

The Survey Schedule

• Residency Program Committee

(60 min)

• Program director attends first half of meeting

• Resident representative(s) attend the meeting

• Smaller programs

• Often faculty all sit on RPC

• Can combine faculty & RPC together into one meeting

• MUST be scheduled as LAST meeting of review

The Survey Schedule

• Survey Team Discussion

• Your program will be discussed the evening of the day that your review ends

• Identify the strengths & weaknesses

• Provide a recommendation

The Survey Team

• Chair - Dr. Sarkis Meterissian

– Responsible for general conduct of survey

• Deputy chair – Dr. Maureen Topps

– Visits teaching sites / hospitals

• Surveyors

• Resident representatives

CAIR

• Regulatory authorities representative

FMRAC

• Teaching hospital representative

– ACAHO

The Survey Schedule

New terminology – June 2012

• Approved by the Royal College, CFPC and CMQ.

• Recommendation

• Accredited program

• Follow-up:

Next regular survey

Progress report (Accreditation Committee)

Internal review

External review

• Accredited program on notice of intent to withdraw accreditation

• Follow-up:

External review

The Survey Schedule

• Exit Meeting

(15 min)

• Morning after review

• 07:30 – 07:45 a.m.

• At the Fairmont Winnipeg

• Program director will be informed

• Survey team recommendation

• Strengths & weaknesses of program

The Survey Schedule

BE PROACTIVE

• Start early

• Share the information with your program director

• Make a plan and set timelines

• Create and use your own checklist

• Consult with the PGME office

• In doubt: ask questions

Day of the Survey

• Be available to assist the surveyors as needed.

• ‘Do Not Disturb – Meeting in Progress’ sign on door.

• Ensure that the surveyors are comfortable (i.e.: private room, water, a layout of the area, etc.)

• Arrange for beverages, healthy snacks for breaks and a lunch, when appropriate.

• Organize all the required documents in the room and ensure that there is a computer with internet access available to the reviewers.

• Retrieve all confidential documents from the room(s) at the end of the day.

After the Survey

• Final exit with University

• Friday, February 28, 2014 between 9:00 and 10:00 a.m.

• CFPC/Royal College Chairs present a summary of survey week

• Survey reports sent to PGME

• 6 to 8 weeks post-survey

• Program response sent to College

• Report any errors of fact only

• Accreditation Committee Decisions

• May/June 2014

• Dean & postgraduate dean attend

• Appeal process is available

General Standards of

Accreditation

“A” Standards

• Apply to University, specifically the PGME office

“B” Standards

• Apply to EACH residency program

• Updated January 2011

“C” Standards

• Apply to Areas of Focused Competence (AFC) programs

“A” Standards

• Applicable to the University

• Reviewed by chair’s team

(Team A)

• Schedule organized by PGME office

• Looking at

• Structure in place

• Training sites

• Liaison with hospitals

“B” Standards

• Applicable to ALL programs

• Reviewed by surveyors

• Looking at

B1 Administrative Structure

B2 Goals & Objectives

B3 Structure and Organization

B4 Resources

B5 Clinical, Academic & Scholarly Content

B6 Assessment of Resident http://www.royalcollege.ca/portal/page/portal/rc/common/documents/accreditation/ac creditation_blue_book_b_standards_e.pdf

B1 – Administrative Structure

There must be an appropriate administrative structure for each residency program.

Program director

Time & support

Residency Program Committee

Operation of the program

Program & resident evaluations

Appeal process

Selection & promotions of residents

Process for teaching & assessment of competencies

Research

Regular review of program

Faculty assessments

B1 – Administrative Structure

“Pitfalls”

• Program director autocratic

• Residency Program Committee dysfunctional

– Unclear Terms of Reference (membership, tasks and responsibilities)

• Agenda and minutes poorly structured

• Poor attendance

– Department head unduly influential

– RPC is conducted as part of a Dept/Div meeting

• No resident voice

B2 – Goals and Objectives

There must be a clearly worded statement outlining the

Goals & Objectives of the residency program.

Rotation-specific

Address all CanMEDS Roles

Functional / used in:

Planning

Resident assessment

Distributed to residents & faculty

Reviewed regularly

At least every 2 years

B2 – Goals & Objectives

“Pitfalls”

• Missing CanMEDS roles in overall structure

– Okay to have rotations in which all CanMEDS roles may not apply (research, certain electives)

• Goals and objectives not used by faculty/residents

• Goals and objectives dysfunctional – does not inform assessment

• Goals and objectives not reviewed regularly

B3 – Structure & Organization

There must be an organized program of rotations and other educational experiences to cover the educational requirements of the specialty.

Increasing professional responsibility

Senior residency

Service / education balance

Resident supervision

Clearly defined role of each site / rotation

Educational environment

B3 – Structure & Organization

“Pitfalls”

• Graded responsibility absent

• Service/education imbalance

– Service provision by residents should have a defined educational component including evaluation

• Educational environment poor

B4 - Resources

There must be sufficient resources –

Specialty-specific components as identified by the Specialty Committee.

Number of teaching faculty

Number of variety of patients, specimens and procedures

Technical resources

Ambulatory/ emergency /community resources/experiences

Educational

B4 – Resources “Pitfalls”

• Insufficient faculty for teaching/ supervision

• Insufficient clinical/technical resources

• Infrastructure inadequate

B5 – Clinical, Academic &

Scholarly Content of Program

The clinical, academic and scholarly content of the program must prepare residents to fulfill all the Roles of the

specialist.

Educational program

Organized curriculum

-

Content specific areas defined by Specialty Committee

CanMEDS Roles

Teaching of the individual competencies

B5 – Clinical, Academic & Scholarly

Content of Program “Pitfalls”

• Organized academic curriculum lacking or entirely resident driven

– Poor attendance by residents and faculty

• Teaching of essential CanMEDS roles missing

• Role modelling is the only teaching modality

B5 – Clinical, Academic &

Scholarly Content of Program

Appendix ‘H’

Formal Academic Curriculum

• The surveyor will be verifying that the content of the academic curriculum covers all the of the CanMEDS Roles.

B6 – Assessment of Resident

Performance

There must be mechanisms in place to ensure the systematic collection and interpretation of assessment data on each resident.

Based on objectives

Include multiple assessment techniques

Regular, timely, formal

Face-to-face

B6 – Assessment of Resident

Performance “Pitfalls”

• Mechanism to monitor, promote, remediate residents lacking

• Formative feedback not provided and/or documented

• Assessments not timely, not face to face

• Summative evaluation (ITER) inconsistent with formative feedback, unclearly documents concerns/ challenges

University of Manitoba

Regular on-site Survey

February 23 to 28, 2014

44

Contact Information at the

Royal College accred@royalcollege.ca

613-730-6202

Office of Education

Sarah Taber

Assistant Director

Education Strategy & Accreditation

Educational Standards Unit

Sylvie Lavoie

Survey Coordinator

Download