Download
1 / 27
270 likes | 379 Views
Promotion 2005: Physicians’ Benchmarks and Proposed Revisions. Physicians’ Professional Advisory Committee (PPAC) Promotion Benchmarks Committee, Nov 2004. Prepared by CDR Jeffrey Kopp, MD. v.7May05. PPAC Benchmarks Subcomittee 2004. CAPT Sarah Linde-Feucht, FDA and
E N D
Promotion 2005: Physicians’ Benchmarks and Proposed Revisions Physicians’ Professional Advisory Committee (PPAC) Promotion Benchmarks Committee, Nov 2004 Prepared by CDR Jeffrey Kopp, MD v.7May05
PPAC Benchmarks Subcomittee 2004 CAPT Sarah Linde-Feucht, FDA and CDR Jeffrey Kopp, NIH, Co-Chairs
Background • Promotion precepts 2 and 3 are prepared by PPAC • Precepts 1 and 4 are prepared by the Chief Professional Officer/PAC Chair committee (CPO committee) • Precept 5 (Readiness) is prepared by Office of Force Readiness and Deployment • Each precept contains multiple factors (elements) • Benchmark revision process - prepared by PPAC subcommittee - approved by full PPAC - approved by the CPO committee - approved by Asst Sec Health (pending) in consultation with Surgeon General
Note: relative weights are determined by CPO committee and are identical across categories
Precepts 5 and 6 • Readiness (precept 5), PY 2005: Details pending from OCCFM • Assignment (precept 6), PY 2006: Recognizes and rewards isolated/hardship positions and similar positions, details pending from OCCFM
Proposed revisions to Physicians’ benchmarks • Revised cover letter and revised benchmarks (presented on the following 14 slides) were generated by PPAC Benchmarks subcommittee • Approved by the full PPAC Nov 2004 • Submitted to the CPO committee Nov 2004 • Response was that changes for the category- specific precepts 2 and 3 were likely to approved for PY05 • As of May 2005, the PHS website provides only the PY04 Benchmarks
Cover letter: comments proposed by the PPAC for the PY05 benchmarks • Four factors are denoted “required’: promotion readiness, integrity/duty, professional degree, state medical licensure • For all other factors, the descriptions of activities are examples of excellence and are not to be construed as requirements
Cover letter: comments proposed by the PPAC for the PY05 benchmarks • The promotion board may identify similar activities that completely fulfill a given factor • The promotion board may deem other activities to be lesser in quality or quantity and to constitute partial fulfillment of the factor • The term value added should be dropped, since all but the required factors may be partially or completely fulfilled (partial fulfillment resulting in reduced precept score)
Cover letter: comments proposed by the PPAC for the PY05 benchmarks • The relative weighting among the factors in determining the score for a precept is left to the discretion of the promotion board • There is no time limit on performance of activities that fulfill a factor (e.g. activities from 5, 10, or 15 years ago are eligible for consideration)
Cover letter: comments proposed by the PPAC for the PY05 benchmarks The promotion board is urged to consider • Existence of diverse career tracks, including clinicians, epidemiologists, researchers, regulatory officers, policy makers, and administrators • Individuals in different career tracks will achieveexcellence in different ways
Cover letter: comments proposed by the PPAC for the PY05 benchmarks The promotion board is urged to consider conflicting goals inherent in the promotion process • Promote diversity of achievement : PHS needs individuals with diverse education, training, skills, and achievement and PHS needs to elicit excellence from officers in diverse ways • Ensure equality of opportunity: achieving the highest level of performance for some factors may be a challenge for officers who face limitations due to agency mission or geographic location The promotion board is asked to take into account the officers’ assignments, past and present
Some issues for discussion • Can leadership be demonstrated only by committee service or can it be demonstrated also by written communications? • Should CME be required for all officers, even if their state (e.g. New York) does not require it for licensure? What should the minimum number of hours be? How many years of documentation should be required? When can we reasonably impose a new requirement that requires documentation of past CME? • Should there be formal tracks within the physician category? How might they be structured? - Clinician, researcher, regulator, manager - Generalist, specialist • Should BOTC/IOTC be the only orientation course fulfilling the factor or should prior PHS orientation courses be acceptable?
More information PPAC home page http://usphs-ppac.org/ • 2004 Benchmarks • Draft of PPAC proposal for 2005 benchmarks • Tips for success with promotion boards • Preparation of CV and sample CV from promoted officers Comments on benchmarks should be addressed to LCDR Rochelle Nolte - rnolte@tracencapemay.uscg.mil
