Candidacy Reviewer Training

1. Candidacy Reviewer Training August 31, 2009

2. Definition: Candidate for Accreditation It is a pre-accreditation status, awarded prior to enrollment of students in the technical / professional phase of the program, which indicates that the physical therapy education program is progressing towards accreditation • Provides reasonable assurance that program could, with continued development, be able to obtain accreditation • However, attainment of Candidate for Accreditation status does not assure accreditation by CAPTE

3. Purpose of Candidacy Status • Ensure that institutions implement program following adequate planning and with necessary resources • Offers developing programs opportunity to establish formal relationship with CAPTE

4. Resources for Candidacy Reviewers (CR) • Accreditation Handbook • Part 7: Candidacy • Appendix: Additional Information Regarding the Candidacy Program • Comparison chart: Accreditation vs Candidacy • Delineates candidacy expectations • Shows difference in evidence requested • Candidacy Visit Report • Includes expectations and evidence list • Staff: feel free to contact us! • dougclarke@apta.org • ellenprice@apta.org

5. Candidacy Process • Institution notifies Department of Accreditation that program director (PD) is hired • PD submits form that identifies timelines and institutional contacts • PD and at least 1 other appropriate institutional administrator must attend Developing Program Workshop prior to AFC submission • Institutional rep can attend prior to hiring PD

6. Candidacy Process • Program submits Application for Candidacy: AFC • Staff determines if bona fide application • Candidacy Reviewer (CR) assigned • Reviews AFC • Does on-site visit • Emails written report • Candidacy decision made by CAPTE • Grant Candidate for Accreditation status • Deny Candidate for Accreditation status

7. After Candidacy is Granted • Program submits Annual Accreditation Reports (AAR) including compliance questions • Initial accreditation decision made in last term of charter class • OSV in last semester of charter class

8. Candidacy Cycles • CAPTE makes Candidacy decisions 4 times/year • 4 cycles with specific timelines for the program, for staff, for candidacy reviewer and for CAPTE • Program must meet deadlines if to maintain candidacy cycle

9. Candidacy Timelines

10. How is the review the same? • Role is to verify and clarify Application for Candidacy (AFC) • Triangulation of data • Not your role to do their job • Provide consultation at end if they want it • E-mail written report within 2 weeks of visit: • Respond to every criterion • Include: • General Information Form • Person’s Interviewed Form • Materials Reviewed On-Site Form

11. How is the review the same? • Program submits conflicts • When assigning, staff confirm CR not in conflict • Program provides Travel Information Form directly to CR • Program makes hotel reservations • Reviewer pays hotel bill • All CR expenses related to visit are paid by Department of Accreditation • Can request travel advance of up to $500 • Allow 2 weeks for processing

12. How is this review different? • Only 1 reviewer • Honorarium; paid in one check • $175 to review the AFC • $350 for the two-day Candidacy Visit • Visit is 2 days • No Saturday night stay over is required • Some differences in who meeting with • Date of visit is negotiated between program and reviewer within a 2 week window • Inform APTA staff of final dates

13. How is this review different? • SSR/OSV • Looking for evidence of compliance with all aspects of all criteria • Candidacy • Program only has to make satisfactory progress towards compliance • Candidacy expectations are delineated in rules (Part 7) & included in Candidacy Visit Report • Evidence of compliance listings relate directly to Candidacy expectations

14. Visit Schedule Overview • Sample schedule in Appendix: • Additional Info Regarding Candidacy Program • Can provide list of folks & times & let them organize • Tell ‘em no: PDs tend to think need to take you to dinner • Day 1: • Tour facilities • Interviews: have written questions • Day 2 • Finish writing report • Exit Summary (late morning) • Meet with PD first • Consultation session (if requested)

15. Tour Facilities • Tour Facilities • Proposed or assigned classroom & labs • Faculty & staff offices • Library & independent study space • Are renovations needed? • If so, what are the timelines • Is there a backup plan • If fits your schedule, could tour day before • Suggest: leave something for day 1 so can get up and move around!

16. Interviews • Program Director/Administrator • multiple meetings • some brief to get questions answered & request additional materials • Administrators • How program fits with institution • Specific questions related to mission, strategic plan, community partners, research agenda (PT), etc • Plans for program • Often ask if see any deal breakers • Reiterate CR role vs CAPTE • Honest assessment of problem areas, especially if not aware • Students: if already accepted into program • Advisory Committee

17. Interviews • Core Faculty: without PD present; individual interviews • Clarify expertise in assigned areas • Discuss responsibilities: teaching/advisory/administrative • Role in program development • If no ACCE/DCE met with individual developing clin ed • Opportunities for professional development • Adjunct / associated & basic science faculty • Support faculty are good source of info on faculty governance, quality of support services, budgeting process, etc • Clinical Education Faculty • Role in planning experiences • Communication to date with program • Responsibilities; privileges; timing of experiences • Development of CIs about this program

18. Exit Report & Consultative Session • Exit Report • PowerPoint presentation • Read Overview from Candidacy Visit Report • Consultative Session • If they want; they decide who attends • Request submit questions / topics prior to visit • Refrain from consulting during interviews! • Balance between curriculum/program development & faculty development

19. Candidacy Visit Report Similar to ROSRT (Now Visit Report) • Overview • Must respond to each criteria, including each • including each curriculum content criterion • Last page: list any materials requesting that program submit to CAPTE with their response to your report

20. Overview of the Quality of the Program • Gestalt: provides sense of quality  • Includes • Brief description of history of program development • Brief description of program • Summary relative to each section/subsection • MUST include all areas in which insufficient progress towards compliance is noted • List significant strengths: areas well developed/supported • List deficiencies, weaknesses or inadequacies: areas in need of most attention/support • Avoid extreme or excessive use of analogies or comments not grounded in fact as described in the findings related to the specific criteria

21. Visit Report Comments in 2 Categories Comments related to: • Satisfactory progress towards achievement of candidacy • Rules delineate expectations • 82 expectations for PTA • 99 expectations for PT • Use evidence list to confirm inclusion of requested materials • Comment on quality • Required to comment in this category • The continued development of the program • Sufficient progress towards compliance but development to date or planned development appears to be insufficient to meet all aspects of the criterion • Not required to comment in this category

22. Red flags that must be included in Visit Report • Missing or incomplete information • Poorly constructed responses • Didn’t answer the question • If minor, can include or clarify in your report • E.g., Ie: have credentials not evident on CVs • Not your responsibility to do their job though! • Significant missing info regarding curriculum content (PT: CC-5’s; PTA: 3.3.2.7 [1-29] or 3.3.2.8 [1-35]).

23. Red flags that must be included in Visit Report • Program plans on admitting > 1 cohort per year or teach the program at >1 site (prior to achieving initial accreditation) • Print or web materials do not accurately describe their pre-accreditation status • Expect programs to avoid any implication that accreditation is guaranteed in any way • Minimum language to describe program is delineated in §7.3 (c)

24. Red flags that must be included in Visit Report • Program has changed its timelines and is scheduled to graduate students prior to CAPTE decision • Course syllabi are not fully developed for the first year of the curriculum • Have not identified first year faculty; 2nd faculty member not employed; first year faculty not qualified • PT: faculty assigned to teach basic science course that don’t have credentials to teach content • Ie: pharmacology; anatomy, pathology

25. Red flags that must be included in Visit Report • Insufficient clinical education written agreements • Minimally must have signed contracts for 125% of expected # of students to be enrolled in 1st class • PTA: with sufficient variety to meet objectives of the clinical education experiences in the first year of the technical program • PT: with sufficient clinical placements to meet the needs of the first full-time clinical experience and any experiences that may precede it.

26. Other Red Flags

27. Visit Report Examples • PTA • PT

28. Travel • Must be booked through Garber Travel, but will be able to book online through Garber Travel once APTA staff notifies you • Directly billed to APTA • Call Garber if have difficulty • Take Garber’s phone #s with you in case of flight problems during the trip • M-F, 8-5: • 24 hour emergency # (only for when office is closed): 800-

29. Travel • As with on-site visits, can: • Arrive the evening before • Stay over the second night: near the school or at an airport hotel • If unable to get flight all the way home after the visit, can fly part way, stay at an airport hotel and then complete travel • Rental cars need APTA Department of Accreditation staff prior approval

30. Questions • Can CR act as consultant to developing program it is reviewing? • Can CAPTE withdraw Candidate for Accreditation status? • Your questions?