Program Review Report
Health Services
Administration
Stempel School of Public Health
College of Health and Urban Affairs
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ... 1
ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN... 3
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES... 6
PROGRAM VISION... 11
ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF PROGRAM GOALS, OUTCOMES, AND RESULTS ... 12
PROGRAM GOALS AND OUTPUTS/OUTCOMES... 12
INSTRUCTION AND LEARNING... 12
Enrollment, graduation, retention, degrees awarded ... 12
Student learning outcomes ... 15
RESEARCH... 15
PUBLIC AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICE... 16
CURRICULUM REVIEW: PROGRAM COMPONENTS/COURSES/REQUIREMENTS ... 17
BREADTH OF COVERAGE... 18
RATIONALE... 19
CURRENCY AND RELEVANCE... 21
PROGRAM REVIEW MEASURES ... 22
DEPARTMENT PLANNING INDICATORS... 22
PROGRAM REVIEW MEASURES... 25
RESOURCES AND SUPPORT SERVICES ... 25
OPPORTUNITIES AND BARRIERS ... 25
UNIT RECOMMENDATIONS ... 26
BUDGET AND RESOURCE ESTIMATES... 27
COST-TO-CONTINUE... 29
ASPIRATIONAL INVESTMENTS... 29
CONCLUSIONS... 30
APPENDICES ... 32
DEPARTMENTAL INDICATORS... 34
DEPARTMENT FACULTY PROFILE... 38
LIBRARY RESOURCES... 41
GRADUATION AND RETENTION REPORT... 48
INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES... 53
Executive Summary
The Programs in Health Services Administration in the Department of Health Policy and Management provide adult and working students with the opportunity to obtain an undergraduate or graduate degree that promotes the professional knowledge, the conceptual, analytical and technical skills, and the ethical foundation to manage healthcare systems with caring, competence and integrity. The Program offers evening courses to respond to a growing market of students who work full time and pursue their degrees on a part-time basis. A particularly strong market is health care professionals who currently work in the field and require further education and degrees to advance in their careers. The graduate program, the Master’s of Health Services Administration, is accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Management Education (CAHME). This accreditation provides us with national recognition for quality and provides a competitive advantage in both the national and local market.
The Programs share the mission of the Stempel School of Public Health (SSPH), the College of Health and Urban Affairs (CHUA) and the University to advance the University’s Health Initiative that will culminate with a community-based School of Medicine within the next ten years. The anticipated growth in need for healthcare services and healthcare professionals provides fertile ground for the growth of the Programs and for support of the Health Initiative. The diversity of our students and the South Florida environment provide a unique opportunity to meet the demand for racial and ethnic minorities in the management and delivery of healthcare.
The Programs have a great opportunity for expansion but have not met this opportunity to date due largely to changes required in Program course offerings and locations made necessary by a decrease in the complement of faculty. The small number of faculty (four) currently supporting both a graduate and undergraduate program coupled with diminished budgetary and staff resources allows for maintenance of Program essentials but hinders faculty’s ability to extend themselves further. The Programs seek to increase ties to students, alumni and the community in order to build a stronger South Florida identity and community support. With increased faculty, time for community relationship building and targeted marketing, the Programs in Health Services Administration could grow stronger in our student, community and research bases. A simultaneous opportunity exists for the Programs to benefit from a stronger
relationship with the College of Business Administration. Collaboration in joint degree offerings and research would benefit both the students and faculty. With concentrated efforts supported by the University, the Programs in Health Services Administration can meet its potential to excel.
Names of persons responsible for self-study
Description and Mission
The Programs in Health Services Administration serve a highly diverse, largely part-time population of students in the dynamic environment of Miami and South Florida. The Program is committed to serving adult and working students who have traditionally represented the vast majority of students. Students may obtain the Bachelor of Health Services Administration (BHSA) degree or the Master of Health Services Administration (MHSA) degree through evening courses. The Program is designed to prepare students for entry level positions in health services delivery organizations or for advancing in current healthcare administrative career tracks.
The mission of the Programs in Health Services Administration at Florida International University is to improve the delivery of healthcare through research, education and training of health care managers and services to the community and the profession. The Program focuses on a balance of evidence and value-based approaches to healthcare management and policies that promote better community health and healthcare with a special emphasis on urban and multi-cultural populations.
The Department and Programs’ mission mirrors that of the School, the College and the University in its commitment to quality education, research and service and to an interdisciplinary model of excellence. The missions also share a focus on multicultural, multiethnic and multiracial populations. The School, the College and the Department and its Programs are also consistent in their emphasis on urban settings.
The Master’s Program in Health Services Administration was initially accredited by the Accrediting Commission on Education for Health Services Administration (ACEHSA) in 1992. The Program was re-accredited in 1997 and in 2004. The ACEHSA was
reorganized in 2004 and is now the Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare
Management Education (CAHME). The next site visit by CAHME is scheduled for Fall 2007. (Further information on Accreditation is provided below). Our Bachelor’s
Program in Health Services Administration is designed to conform with the CAHME accreditation criteria; however, CAHME does not accredit undergraduate programs. Undergraduate programs may be reviewed and affiliated with the Association of University Programs in Health Administration (AUPHA). While we maintain membership in AUPHA, this membership is due to our graduate accreditation. The undergraduate program is not currently reviewed by an external agency.
Until January of 2004, the Program was housed within the School of Policy and Management (SPM). The SPM was composed of three Programs (Criminal Justice, Public Administration and Health Services Administration). Each program coordinator administratively reported to the Director of the School, who reported directly to the Dean of the College of Health and Urban Affairs (CHUA). The School had and maintains several interdisciplinary courses that are shared across the three programs. These courses are identified by the URS prefix and expose the students to broader views of issues in health care, social and public services.
In the past year, the Program has relocated into the Stempel School of Public Health (SSPH). The SSPH brings together the Programs in Public Health, Dietetics and Nutrition and Health Services Administration. An accreditation visit by the Council on
Education for Public Health (CEPH) is planned for the Fall of 2006. Over the next two years, the Program will integrate within the Stempel School of Public Health in
compliance with both CAHME and CEPH accreditation criteria.
Environmental Scan
Health services organizations are known to be among the most complex organizations to manage. The forces and issues facing these organizations are changing rapidly.
Competition and controls on reimbursement for services require managers to increase efficiencies and contain costs. Focus is also being placed on evidence based
management, measurement of quality and better value in the delivery of health care services. Graduates of healthcare management programs are employed by a variety of health care settings including hospitals, managed care organizations, ambulatory clinics, physician group practices, long-term care settings, insurance companies, and government agencies. Effective healthcare management programs are interdisciplinary, calling upon social and behavioral sciences, economics, finance and accounting, quantitative/analytic skills, policy, law and ethics and values.
Given the interdisciplinary aspects of the field, programs in health services administration or healthcare management are located in a variety of institutional homes including
schools of business, public health, allied health and medicine, with most accredited programs in schools of business and public health. The most common degrees are the MHA, MBA, MPH, MPA, MS, MA and MSHA. The most distinguishing feature of a program in healthcare management is its achievement of accreditation by the CAHME. Currently, 71 accredited graduate health services administration programs in the United States and Canada are listed on the CAHME website. The growing importance and value of accreditation can be demonstrated by the increased number within the State of Florida. Throughout the 1990’s, only three programs in the State were accredited: Florida
International University, University of Florida and University of Miami. In the past two years, the University of Central Florida (2004) and the University of North Florida (2005) have been accredited.
Accreditation
The Master’s Program in Health Services Administration at Florida International University was initially accredited by the Accrediting Commission on Education for Health Services Administration (ACEHSA) in 1992. The Program was re-accredited in 1997 for five years (2002) but requested a one-year extension which was approved. Our last site visit was in April 2004. During 2004, ACESHA was reorganized and renamed. Our accreditation is now granted by the Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Management Education (CAHME). In November 2004, the CAHME awarded
The reorganization of the Commission and changes in accreditation followed a two-year review in which all accredited programs participated and provided input to the process. The process began in June 2002 when a Blue Ribbon Task Force was created by the National Center for Healthcare Leadership (NCHL) and the Accrediting Commission on Education for Health Services Administration (ACEHSA) to ensure that health services education accreditation is relevant and responsive to the changing needs of the broad range of stakeholders in the healthcare industry. Some of the major conclusions of this Task Force were:
• Accreditation overall is considered an important factor in maintaining standards of education programs.
• The processes and criteria for accreditation are influenced by the disciplines involved, the mission of the specific program where it is located and how close the program is to the field of practice.
• Accreditation for education programs in health services administration is valued by many individuals, programs and experts. Many scholarships, residencies and job opportunities require healthcare management students and/or graduates be from a healthcare management accredited program (CAHME).
o Students and alumni indicated that the accredited status of a program was important in their decision to apply to programs. Over 90% of students and 85% of alumni indicated that accreditation had an impact on the quality of the education they received. Students and alumni felt that the accredited status of their program helped them in searching for field experiences and internships, and in their job search upon completion of their academic program.
• Accreditation processes should promote continuous quality improvement in programs. To achieve this, there needs to be greater emphasis on performance measurement, benchmarking and public reporting. (BRTF, 2003)
Outcomes are the principal focus of change in the accreditation process. Outcome measures by programs are expected to be consistent with the Program’s own mission, goals and objectives and to be in concert with the practice world since programs prepare graduates for entry into practice. The BRTF called for greater collaboration and
strengthened partnerships between the education and practice communities. Program faculty must be engaged at every step of the process, shape their course in response to lessons gained from the practice community and have a broader
understanding of the entire curriculum and how the curriculum builds graduate
competencies. Continuous quality improvement activities require faculty to participate in evaluation and change between accreditation visits. The concerns (deficiencies) noted in a CAHME site visit report must be corrected within a two-year period.
National and State Benchmarks
The benchmark institutions in Table 1 represent a cross-section of Carnegie
Research Universities (high research activity) across the U.S. and Florida that offer Health Services Administration programs.
Table 1
Benchmark universities, programs/degrees offered, institutional setting, number of faculty members, average of degrees awarded
Institution Name Programs
Offered Institutional Setting Faculty Average Degrees Awarded Total Students # Undergraduates # Graduates
National Benchmarks Und. Grad Total Und Grad
Johns Hopkins University MS Public Health 7 NA 18 32 - 32
Oregon State BS, MS, MPH1 Health and Human Sciences 3 38 4 117 103 14 Penn State BS, MHA, MS, PhD Health and Human Development 15 70 10 215 170 45
Temple University MBA Business 5 NA 20 55 - 55
University of Alabama at Birmingham MPH,MSPH Health-related Professions 8 NA 42 110 - 110 State of Florida Benchmarks
University of Central Florida BS, MS, PhD
Health and
Public Affair 10 80 36 725 500 225
University of Florida MHA
Public Health and Health
Professions 7 NA 13 37 - 37
University of South Florida
MSPH, MHA,MPH,
PhD Public Health 7 NA 22 80 - 80
Florida International
University BHSA, MHSA Public Health2 53 63 31 215 142 73
1
Not accredited by CAHME
2
Beginning January 2004 – Previously in School of Policy and Management
3
One position is unfilled. Number of faculty has been reduced from 10 to 5over time
South Florida Healthcare Management Programs
In the South Florida market, three other universities offer healthcare management programs: the University of Miami, Barry University and St. Thomas University. Of these, the University of Miami is currently the only one accredited by CAHME. Barry University is in candidacy status (pre-accreditation) with the CAHME. Barry and St. Thomas offer both undergraduate and graduate programs while the University of Miami only offers a graduate program. The programs in the local market are housed in a variety
School of Natural and Health Sciences. The program at FIU is the only one located within a School of Public Health.
While the Program at the University of Miami is accredited by CAHME, and thus, quality measures would suggest that it be our main competitor, this is not the case. Their market focus is physicians. Plus the costs of tuition at the University of Miami remove it as a major competitive threat.
Barry University, on the other hand, is aggressively marketing its program and is providing tuition discounts to capture a shared market of students. In addition, the number of hours in the program is only 30 plus an internship for students without two years of experience in healthcare. Nationally, most accredited programs require 45 – 60 credit hours to meet the content coverage of the CAHME. It will be interesting to see how the Barry MHA withstands the accreditation review, a date for which, to our knowledge, has not yet been set. Currently Barry is listed on the AUPHA website but it is not listed on the CAHME website.
St. Thomas University is currently not seeking accreditation. The faculty of this program is very involved in the community and more active in student recruitment through this means than FIU. St. Thomas holds open chat sessions for the public to ask questions about their program as an additional marketing tool.
A student case competition was sponsored by the local chapter of the American College of Healthcare Executives (ACHE), the South Florida Healthcare Executive Forum (SFHCEF), in 2002 and 2003 to showcase the potential of students in the area. This organization brings together professionals in the healthcare field and is also open to student membership, serving as a great networking opportunity for jobs and residencies. The University of Miami did not compete but students from Barry, St. Thomas and FIU entered the competition. In the first year, the FIU team took second place in the
competition but made a strong showing in 2003 with a first place win. There is another case competition planned for 2005-2006 academic year and we hope that our students will once again prove the best in South Florida.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths • Accreditation
Accreditation is an important mark of quality for students seeking a program at the national and international as well as local level. Of the four MHSA programs in the South Florida area, FIU and University of Miami are accredited and Barry University is in pre-accreditation.
Many opportunities for students (e.g., scholarships, including military sponsorship of education), residency placements and graduate job opportunities require matriculation
in a CAHME accredited program. The CAHME accreditation is an essential benefit to the Program and for the students.
• Accessibility and Availability to Part-Time Working Students
The Program is committed to serving adult and working students who have
traditionally represented the vast majority of students. Over 75% of the students are currently employed in the health care industry in South Florida and the focus of their employment represents the full range of the health care facilities (chronic and acute care facilities, third party payer groups, governmental agencies, medical supply or pharmaceutical companies). Their positions cover a variety of functions, including medical records administration and encoding, nursing at all levels, financial analysis, accounts receivable and billing, marketing, planning, pharmacy, pharmaceutical sales, occupational and physical therapy, research and general administration.
Course offerings are provided in the evenings, and until recently, on weekends to accommodate the working student. A course plan is provided for students entering the Program that provides a student with a semester by semester plan to efficiently matriculate on a part-time basis (6 hours per semester for graduates, 6 and 9 credit hours per semester for undergraduates) based on the Program’s annual schedule of courses. A weakness in this effort does exist, however, as the Program does not control the scheduling of all required courses. The Program can only request
scheduled times from other units within the School and College for course offerings. • Diversity of Students and Faculty
The Program’s commitment and success in achieving diversity are demonstrated in the composition of its students. During the Self Study Year, the Program students were: 41.5% Hispanic, 38 % African American, 2.3% Asian American, 3.6% Non Resident Aliens, and 14.6% White Non-Hispanic. The majority of the students were female (68.3%). This breakdown only touches the surface of the true diversity of our students. For example, those who may be classified as African American represent a heritage from a number of very different Caribbean and African nations as well as those born in the United States. Likewise the Hispanic category is generic, while our students’ heritages range across many Latin American and Caribbean nations and varying cultural experiences. Additional diversity is provided by our international students.
The Program faculty is diverse in terms of ethnicity and sex. Even within the small number of current faculty, 50% are female and 50% are of Asian origin. Of the four faculty lost in the past few years, two were black and one was of Asian origin. • Fit with University Initiative on Health
Health Initiative that will culminate with a community-based School of Medicine within the next ten years. Creation of the Robert R. Stempel School of Public Health and resource allocations by the University for approximately 18 new faculty positions within the School, including at least two additional faculty in Health Services
Administration, are concrete examples of this shared commitment and mission. In a similar vein, the State Board of Governor’s Strategic Plan includes Health Services Administration as a target area for degree production. Opportunities for expansion of degree production in the field are anticipated but have not yet been fully experienced in our programs in health services administration (see weaknesses below on marketing, reduced faculty and reduced offerings).
• Student and Alumni Support
Alumni contribute to the Program by serving as adjuncts, preceptors and
advisors/evaluators for some of our courses (e.g., HSA 6930 and HSA 6756) and the field experiences. Our capstone course (HSA 6717) is based on case studies, and during the final week of the semester, alumni serve as advisors and judges in the capstone course case competition among student teams.
The Program intends to strengthen our Alumni support through annual meetings on campus to update alumni on changes in the Program, to build an FIU network for students to access for mentoring, and to assure the Program maintains an accurate database on the alumni and their career paths.
• Alumni Advisory Board
The current external committee, the Alumni Advisory Board, has been helpful in their advisory function. A number of their suggestions have been woven into our
curriculum, particularly a greater emphasis on financial considerations. One of the finance courses increased from two to three credits and the capstone course (HSA 6717) increased its emphasis of integrating financial issues into the case analyses. During the Self Study Year, the Alumni Advisory Board held two meetings. This Board sought to re-energize the HSA Alumni Association and these efforts are continuing.
The University’s Office of Alumni Affairs acts as a liaison for the Program and maintains a University-wide Alumni Association. The SSPH is developing a school-wide alumni association.
Weaknesses
In 2000-2001 the Program had eight full-time faculty; we are now down to four full-time faculty. This loss is even more severe when one considers that 3 of the faculty members who resigned or retired were on 4-4 course loads. We have utilized the OPS dollars available to cover the courses taught by the losses of Professor Mills (4-4 load), Professor Batavia (2-2 load), Professor White (4-4 load) and Professor Foster (4-4 load). The loss of Dr. Sari (3-3 load at the end of the 2003-2004 AY) resulted in more losses in FTEs as we cancelled two of his courses and covered only course offering through faculty overload in the 2004-2005 AY. The total number of courses covered by un- replaced faculty equates to 17 courses per semester. If adjuncts covered only these 17 courses per semester, this would translate into a minimum of $35,700 per semester (at $2100 per course, which is not realistic) and would not include specialized courses, such as law and information systems in which we utilize individuals with expertise in the fields. It is impossible for 4 faculty members to cover a graduate and an
undergraduate program without significant adjunct coverage and costs. In
addition, the use of adjuncts is monitored by both CAHME and SACS. When one begins to utilize more adjuncts than Program faculty, it is seen as diminishing quality. In order to avoid CAHME concerns, we assign most of the adjuncts to undergraduate courses. However, students have commented on the lack of Program faculty teaching at this level and view it as a lack of commitment. • Reduction in Campus Locations and Course Offerings
The HSA Program has struggled with campus location and coverage by a limited number of faculty. In the late 1990’s the Program was covering four locations: University Park, Biscayne Bay Campus, and the Broward Community College (BCC) Campus in Davie and the University Tower in downtown Fort Lauderdale. Our 1997 accreditation review by the Accrediting Commission on Education for Health Services Administration (ACEHSA) suggested faculty were spread too thinly by the numerous locations. The faculty discussed and reviewed the data available at the time and made a decision to consolidate offerings in north Dade/South Broward to one location BCC – Davie. This location was centrally located to the zip codes of the students at BCC and Broward, and had easy access from the Florida Turnpike. Unfortunately, this decision was accompanied by an immediate loss of FTEs from the Biscayne Bay Campus and the University Tower. These FTEs were rebuilding and increasing when the Program faced the challenge of lost faculty and faculty lines.
As a result of faculty losses and in conjunction with the relocation of Program offices and administration to the University Park Campus (December 2003), the Program has had to:
1. Limit undergraduate elective coursework offered within the Program (starting 2002-2003)
3. Suspend our course offerings at the Biscayne Bay Campus (starting 2003-2004)
4. Discontinue teaching undergraduate elective courses (starting 2003-2004) forcing students to take more electives outside the department, school and college
5. Eliminate 12 credit hours per undergraduate student in required specialization tracks (starting 2004-2005) and
6. Suspend our weekend Program (starting 2004-2005).
• Lack of an Active External Advisory Group and Community Relationships There is a need to extend our Alumni Advisory Group to include a broader base of those involved in the Healthcare Administration and Management in South Florida. Discussions with potential candidates have already begun and appointments should be initiated soon.
Our recent CAHME accreditation site visit report provided the following
consultation recommendation “The program would be strengthened by a focused outreach effort to a variety of health services organizations. This would lead to enhanced residency/fellowship opportunity for students.”
• Lack of Program-specific Student and Alumni Database
Our recent CAHME (accreditation) report noted “The program depends on University wide centralized data to monitor and support program students; these data do not allow the department to produce information necessary to assure program integrity and support evaluation of students' progress” and provided the following criterion-related recommendation, “The program should develop its own database to monitor and track student progress unless an effective centralized alternative is feasible.”
• Lack of Investigator Initiated External Funded Research
The Program is in a field in which research dollars are limited for managerial topics but there may be potential opportunities for involvement with more fundable areas in health status and health care access. The Program needs to recruit senior faculty who have external funding and who will mentor junior faculty in the development of fundable research grant proposals.
• Lack of Targeted Marketing
The Program has been dependent upon general marketing efforts of the School(s) and College. This market is broad and not focused on specific organizations, i.e., local hospitals and other healthcare organizations. As noted above, Barry is aggressively marketing its program with ads in local print media and are offering tuition discounts to healthcare organizations that have two or more students
enrolled in the program. Since many healthcare organizations provide tuition reimbursement for employees, this is an effective tool and a very important market. Most of our students are currently working in healthcare facilities. With targeted marketing, we should be able to increase the number of students from each of these facilities.
Program Vision
The Program’s ten-year vision is to become the leading healthcare management program in South Florida that is known locally and nationally as providing exceptional leadership, particularly for diverse racial and ethnic students. Nationally, there is a shortage of minority healthcare managers. Our geographic location and the demographics of our student body provide us with a unique opportunity to address this shortage. The Program also seeks to maintain a strong, diverse faculty who achieve recognition for their
contributions in research, education and service to the field of healthcare management. The Program also believes there is a potential to significantly increase the number of students through the implementation of additional programs at all academic levels. We have developed the following goals in concert with our ten-year vision and to guide us in our activities. Our vision calls for the Program:
1. To be the eminent leader in South Florida by
a. provision of well trained minority undergraduate, masters and doctoral level administrators to meet the demands of the South Florida’s healthcare industry as well as feeding these graduates into the national healthcare industry and the academic community; and,
b. generation of management and policy research that will help guide the future of healthcare service delivery.
2. To have sufficient faculty actively involved in funded research to initiate a Ph.D. program in Policy & Management.
3. To increase the number of Program faculty at least to the level of our previous resources and thereby be able to provide more course and degree offerings. With increased faculty, we can significantly increase the number of undergraduate and graduate offerings for students and also consider secondary sites that may be more marketable.
4. To have sufficient faculty to support parallel masters and doctoral tracks in both Healthcare Policy and Healthcare Management.
5. To shift or extend our undergraduate program to be a day time program either instead of an evening program or in addition to a evening program.
7. To maintain CAHME accreditation.
Accomplishments of Program Goals, Outcomes, and Results
Program Goals and Outputs/Outcomes
The goals and objectives serve to guide and measure improvement of the Department’s effectiveness in meeting its mission. The procedures used to develop the objectives and the corresponding evaluation process followed a five-step process that has become an ongoing cycle. First the faculty identified and prioritized the objectives within each of five goals. Second, the faculty set the outcome assessment criteria and procedures for observing the outcomes. In the third step of the development process, measures were collected and in the fourth, the results were presented to the faculty. Fifth, the faculty determined if the results warranted changes in the Program and/or the criteria. Where the outcome criteria were met, the faculty chose to continue current practices; however, performance monitoring would continue. If the results identified a need for
improvement, faculty proposed follow-up action for the following year. Following initial development, steps three and four became the beginning point for renewed evaluation of goals and objectives each year.
The first cycle of this review process was developed in 2000 and the first measures collected in Spring of 2000. Each year, measures are collected and results examined, and the criteria reviewed. The faculty have reviewed, revised and responded, as needed, to the objectives and measures in October of each of the following years. The Programs provide the annual report on measurement and review of the educational
goals/competencies to the College and the University as part of a University-wide commitment to measuring Institutional Effectiveness (IE).
In Spring 2004, a workshop was presented by Dr. Marie Zeglen and Dr. Kyle Perkins on the concepts of Academic Learning Compacts and outcome measures to the faculty at an HSA faculty meeting. As a result of our increased knowledge and understanding, the Program has developed draft Learning Compacts for the undergraduate degree as required by the State. The Program has also reviewed and begun to draft new measures for the graduate program.
Copies of the learning outcomes and draft Learning Compacts are provided in the appendices.
Instruction and Learning
Enrollment, graduation, retention, degrees awarded
Enrollment and Student Credit Hours in the Program have been declining overall; however, a closer look at the numbers by degree and location provides insight into possible reasons as well as potential solutions. As noted above, two of the Program’s weaknesses are changing locations and classes and reduction in the complement of faculty. Reviewing the changes in concert with the course offerings and campus location
changes, it is clear that enrollment loss has been exacerbated by decisions not to offer courses on particular campuses.
Fall Headcount Enrollment
Fall 1999 Fall 20001 Fall 2001 Fall 2002 Fall 20032 Fall 20043 BHSA 177 142 149 161 169 143 MHSA 90 66 70 82 88 56
1
Decision to limit discontinue graduate courses at Biscayne Bay Campus and University Tower and consolidate offerings to Broward Community College South Campus
2
All courses, graduate and undergraduate only offered at University Park Campus due to decreased contingent of HSA faculty
3
Decision to discontinue weekend course offerings due to decreased contingent of HSA faculty Fundable SCH Report by Campus1
2001/20022,3 2002/2003 2003/20044 2004/20055 Campus Upper Division Graduate Upper Division Graduate Upper Division Graduate Upper Division Graduate UP 1350 626 1818 512 3219 1168 3685 865 BBC 1412 24 1460 133 0 0 0 0 Broward Davie 692 378 0 0 0 0 Broward Pines 309 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2762 1339 3338 1326 3219 1165 3685 858 1
Numbers do not include enrollments in Interdisciplinary Courses (URS and IHS) required by Degree
2
Implementation of new curriculum requiring URS courses replacing HSA courses and Program not credited with SCH
3
Decision to discontinue graduate courses at Biscayne Bay Campus and University Tower and consolidate offerings to Broward Community College South Campus
4
All courses, graduate and undergraduate only offered at University Park Campus due to decreased contingent of HSA faculty
5
Decision to discontinue weekend course offerings due to decreased contingent of HSA faculty
SOURCE: FOCUS REPORT OPIE
Retention and Graduation
The average four-year graduation rate for undergraduates is 54% for the Program and 46% university-wide. The average five-year retention rate is 60% for the Program and 50% university-wide. (See Tables in Appendices). These data are the most recent available through the University system.
Community College transfer students. These rates are lower than the Within the University for CIP. The Program does match the Within the University CIP retention rate for FTIC students. FTICs have retention rates that range from 12 – 56 percentage points higher than the rates of other transfer student cohorts. The FTIC retention rate with the Program (87%) is approximately 19% higher than other program averages for FTICs in the College (68%). The Associate of Arts (AA) Transfer retention rate (65%) is 7% higher than the CHUA program retention average for AA transfer students (58%). Clearly, the Program needs to work more closely with Undergraduate Studies and the local community colleges. As a first step in the process, the Program is currently working to re-establish Articulation Agreements for both AS and AA students. In addition, advising for transfer students is essential. The Program is working to improve this function.
Internal marketing to the University lower division students would be beneficial as well. These students provide the Program with the highest retention rates and are, therefore, an ideal market to explore.
Graduate student retention and graduation rates are more difficult to interpret. At any one time, a majority of our graduate students are part time (taking less than 9 semester credit hours per semester), with the current level of part-time students at 57.3%. Less than 30% of our students maintain a full time student status for the entire period they are enrolled in our program. The primary problem for our students is that over 75% of the students are working full time, and almost 90% of these students are working in some aspect of the health care industry which seems to be in constant flux. There are a variety of reasons for what appears to be delays in graduating “on time”. A reduced course load for any one semester may be due to such diverse reasons as:
a) Student’s work site is undergoing an accreditation review requiring overtime work.
b) Student’s worksite is undergoing a shift in ownership or is being “re-engineered” such that overtime work is required.
c) Family demands (many of our students have dependent children/ relatives for whom they are the sole support).
d) Lack of course offerings due to the limited faculty.
If a graduate student takes a course load of 9 hours per semester, the student is able to complete the coursework in five semesters. Less than 50% of the students are able to achieve graduation in accordance with the five semester plan, although approximately 80% do complete the graduation requirements in six to eight semesters.
Degrees Awarded
1998/1999 1999/2000 2000/2001 2001/2002 2002/2003 2003/2004 BHSA 41 69 63 53 53 69 MHSA 18 34 32 27 18 31 Source: Focus Report OPIE
Student learning outcomes
Criteria and measures of Student Learning Outcomes are provided in the Appendices. Research
The faculty of the Program conducts research which is consistent with the mission, goals and objectives of the Program. The research addresses vital issues in utilization, delivery, financing and evaluation of health care services. Many of the research activities involve practitioners in the field or collaboration with other health care researchers, both inside and outside FIU. Collaborative research activities among Program faculty, other faculty and/or practitioners are described below:
Dr. Newman serves as a methodology co-investigator on several grants within CHUA including faculty in the Schools of Social Work, Public Health, Nursing and the Center on Aging. He also served on a grant in the psychology department. His off campus projects with researchers and practitioners in the field have included: Peer Center of Broward County; Center for Family Studies, Dept of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Miami; Center for Behavioral Health Prevention, Department of
Epidemiology & Public Health, University of Miami; Innovative Training Systems, (A Behavioral Research Firm), Newton, Massachusetts; and the Indiana Division of Mental Health. Dr. Newman consistently funds approximately 12.5 % of his academic year and 100% of his summer salary through his collaboration on five federally funded projects with colleagues within the School and College. For the 2004-2005 Academic Year, salary recovery for Dr. Newman’s time (direct costs) was $70,500. Currently Professor Newman is the co-investigator on three federal grant proposals out for review. Professor Newman published two articles in peer reviewed journals and three chapters in 2004, and two articles in peer reviewed journals in 2003. Currently there are three articles that have been submitted to peer reviewed journals, one of which was invited to be revised and resubmitted. Dr. Newman anticipates two or three additional articles to be submitted each year.
Dr. Deckard worked with Dr. Judy Rosenbaum, Field Office Manager, and Agency for Health Care Administration, State of Florida, Miami, Florida, on research opportunities as well as on the Mayor’s Healthcare Task Force. Drs. Rosenbaum and Deckard
developed a paper and presentation for an international conference and have a journal article in review based on the public/private partnership philosophy in the Task Force report and operations. They are currently reviewing data on emergency room utilization and the costs of inappropriate care delivery.
Dr. Guo has worked with Center on Aging on two funded research projects: (1) a report to the Miami Jewish Home and Hospital for the Aged that details quantified data
physical exercise, and mental health needs. The initial findings will be used to provide a comparison for additional data that are collected on minority elders in Florida. In addition, Drs. Suh and Guo have submitted a grant proposal to the FIU Foundation on research that examines the impact of patient involvement in quality improvement. This proposal was not funded. Dr. Guo has co-authored a book on Health Care Policy in the States (in press).
Dr. Suh’s area of interest and research includes strategic management of health care organizations (i.e. Diversification) and health care finance. During the past year, Dr. Suh worked with faculty in the Robert Stempel School of Public Health and submitted two grant proposals. Externally, Dr. Suh worked with Dr. Susan Key, Professor at UAB, and published one journal article (Management Decision) and developed two papers for presentations at the major conferences in the field of strategic management (International Conference of Strategic Management Society and Academy of Management). They are currently reviewing the data on structural and organizational issues in patient safety. The challenge for the Program is to increase research and contract funding to meet the goals of the SSPH, CHUA and the University. Historically, the senior faculty in the Program were not researchers so the importance of grants was not within the culture of the unit. As the College and University have evolved in research status, the Program has not kept pace. The Program recognizes the need to increase research funding across the faculty. 2001/2002 2002/2003 2003/2004 E&G Expenditures1 0 0 0 Contract and Grant2 355,227 419,622 173,731
C&G/ E&G N/A N/A N/A
Federal 41,384 State N/A Private N/A 8,520 5,000 1 Source: IRDF 2
Source: Office of Sponsored Research Public and Professional Service
Faculty participation in community service activities is encouraged and utilized as a means of public relations and marketing for the Program. The Program also incorporates the information gained in these services to assure that current trends and activities in the South Florida health care market are woven into the curriculum as case studies and examples. Community service is one of the means the faculty utilizes in monitoring the health care and community environment of the Program. This participation, however, is
limited due to constraints of research, teaching and administrative roles. The recent CAHME site visit report comments on the need for the Program to become more
involved in the community and the opportunities and benefits that would be by-products of such relationships through the following concerns and recommendations:
“The program has a currently unfulfilled potential to be a major influence in the South Florida Health System. The program should consider revising its mission to serve as a guide in that effort.”
“A Health Care Administration program has a unique need for a strong relationship with the community, the program will benefit by supporting senior faculty in the development of stronger community relations.”
“The program would be strengthened by a focused outreach effort to a variety of health services organizations. This would lead to enhanced residency/fellowship opportunity for students.”
Dr. Deckard served on a subcommittee on Governance for the Mayor’s Healthcare Access Task Force. This Task Force performed a comprehensive review of the health care system in Miami-Dade county and made recommendations for improving access, insurance alternatives, and governance. She also coordinates the FIU grant reviewers for the Health Foundation of South Florida which reviews grants for local projects twice a year. She volunteers as a consultant for organizations associated with the Foundation or those seeking funding from the Foundation. Dr. Deckard is a committee member on the Health Administration/Health Information Management Subcommittee for Establishing Common Prerequisites and Course Leveling for the Division of Colleges and
Universities, Tallahassee. She is Chair of the Health Administration Section of the Association of Schools of Public Health and Chair-elect of the Public Health Forum of the Association of University Programs in Healthcare Administration,
Dr. Guo provided service to the Latin American and Caribbean Center of FIU and
interacted with leaders in health care markets that many of our students also represent and supports the international multicultural mission of the Program. She is working closely with the Center on Aging. Dr. Guo is a reviewer for three journals: Management
Decision (2004-2005), Journal of Health Organization and Management (2005), and the International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance (2005).
Dr. Newman serves on the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Task Force on Evidence Based Practice. He also serves as a consulting editor for the Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology and Mental Health Services Research and has reviewed for six other peer review journals.
Curriculum Review: Program components/Courses/Requirements
provide students with foundational knowledge and understanding of the health care system and its environment, health status and trends in disease patterns and health care data. Basic quantitative, administrative and managerial skills then extend this foundation. The curriculum is sequenced into 4 groups (presented on the following pages). These groups distinguish for students the courses required as foundation (Group 1) and more integrative (Groups 2 and 3) with the capstone courses presented in Group 4. As students advance through the Program following the prescribed course sequencing, they are required to demonstrate application, analytical and evaluation proficiency through assigned projects and field experiences. The Program requires students in the
Professional Seminar HSA 6930 to design an integrative field elective (residency or master’s research project) to meet individual development needs based on self-assessment of needed skill development in alignment with their career goals. Faculty work to assure that the curriculum offers students optimum preparation for their career advancement or career entry into the health care system.
The Department has improved the quality of the curriculum through curriculum and program review. Specifically, we have increased the foundations in quantitative
principles in statistics, accounting and economics in both the undergraduate and graduate degree programs. We assist in development and review the syllabi of all adjunct faculty and have a joint faculty/adjunct meeting every semester. The Program has also assisted in the development of organizations to enhance student and alumni relations, and
developed linkages both within and outside the University. Each of these factors
facilitates our effectiveness and the achievement of our educational goals and objectives. The Program’s move into the Stempel School of Public Health (SSPH) initiated a review of the curriculum in conjunction with the accreditation requirements of the Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH). As a result of this review shared interdisciplinary courses in statistics and research methods have been developed with other departments in the School, i.e., Public Health and Dietetics and Nutrition.
Initial program changes that included these courses were submitted to the College and University for approval in Spring 2004. Approved changes took effect in Fall 2004. Curriculum review will continue over the next year as the (SSPH) becomes more integrated and begins to prepare for the 2006 CEPH Site Visit.
The Program is also reviewing its curriculum in conjunction with the concerns and recommendations noted in the CAHME report. Specifically, the Program is
strengthening its coverage of accounting principles, fundamental micro- and macro- economic principles, ethics, health policy formulation, implementation and effect. The Program had not been successful in hiring a health care economist and considered this as a critical need. A health care economist has been hired to start in the 2006-2007
academic year.
Breadth of Coverage
Both the BHSA and the MHSA are structured into sequenced groups which present foundational knowledge first and then integrate and build component knowledge throughout the Program. The foundation courses provide the most breadth of coverage within each course while the integrative course focuses on tying the breadth of concepts
together and exploring the interrelationships between the managerial, financial, policy and health care system outcome components. The breadth of knowledge includes content in the areas listed below:
1. health care system
2. management, organization behavior and human resource management 3. quantitative methods: statistics, accounting, finance and economics 4. health policy
5. current issues: costs, quality and access Rationale
The curriculum has been designed as an integrated series of learning experiences which move from the introductory level, to the advanced, and then to the integrative courses. The curriculum requirements have been organized as four groups which are designed to build on each other and create the sequence in which courses are taken. Students are expected to move through the courses by group. As students advance through the Program following the prescribed course sequencing, they are required to demonstrate application and evaluation proficiency through assigned projects and field experiences. More specifically, the foundation courses provide the student with a broad understanding of the U.S. health care system, its environment and the organizations which deliver health services. In addition, this content track introduces the concepts of health, disease and disability in the population, population-based planning, and social values. To this foundation, the management, quantitative, finance and policy sequences build the skills necessary to analyze the health care system and organizations. Finally, the integrative component allows the student to use the skills learned in the other sequences by
addressing more complex problems which require a broad set of approaches and to assess their own skills and development needs as they plan for graduation and new career opportunities.
The majority of the curriculum is prescribed with 43 of the 51 graduate credit hours contained in the required core Program. Of the remaining eight credit hours, five to six credit hours are limited electives (selected from a prescribed list) and the two to three credit hours are an open elective. At the undergraduate level, 48 of the 60 upper division credit hours are contained in the required core curriculum of the Program.
Undergraduates must comply with the state-wide common prerequisites (courses in Managerial Accounting, Micro-economics and microcomputer skills). These courses must be taken at the beginning of a student's program if they were not completed prior to admission.
The sequencing and prerequisites are included in the catalog copy for the Program as follows:
Bachelor of Health Services Administration CORE REQUIRED COURSES - 48 Credit Hours Group 1
HSA 3103 Health and Social Service Delivery Systems HSA 3180 Management for Health Professions
HSC 4510 Statistical Applications
URS 3438 Communication Skills for Policy Management Group 2
HSA 4700 Fundamentals of Health Services Research HSC 4500 Principles of Applied Epidemiology HSA 4110 Health Organizational Behavior HSA 4990 Health Economics
Group 3
HSA 4170 Health Care Financial Management HSA 4184 Human Resource Management
HSA 4421 Legal Aspects & Legislation in Health Care HSA 4141 Program Planning & Evaluation
Group 4
IHS 4111 Values, Ethics and Conflict Resolution HSA 4150 People, Power, & Politics in Health Care HSA 4192 Health Management Systems Engineering HSA 4113 Issues & Trends in Health Care
ELECTIVES – 12 Credit Hours
Master of Health Services Administration Program Prerequisites
Microcomputer skills (not required to be coursework) Group 1
HSA 5125 Introduction to Health Services
HSA 6415 Managerial Applications of the Social Determinants of Health HSA 6185 Health Care Management Theory and Practice
IHS 6508 Public Health Statistics Group 2
HSA 6176 Financing and Reimbursement of Health Systems HSA 6186 Organizational Behavior and Leadership in Health Care HSA 6155 Health Policy and Economics
Group 3
HSA 6187 Managing Human Resources and Health Professionals HSA 6426 Health Law and Legal Aspects of Health Care
HSA 6197 Design and Management of Health Information Systems HSA 6756 Program Development & Evaluation
Group 4
PHC 6500 Foundations of Public Health
HSA 6930 Professional Seminar *one credit hour HSA 6149 Strategic Planning and Marketing of Health Care Services HSA 6717 Advanced Health Services Management and Research Seminar Integrative Electives (Select One: 2-6 credit hours):
HSA 6875 Administrative Residency HSA 6977 Masters Research Project
Currency and Relevance
There are several mechanisms that we actively use in guiding and informing the continuous improvement of our curriculum with the objective of maintaining currency and relevancy. Given that the vast majority of our students are working in the field, they often bring current issues to the forefront in classroom discussions. The faculty must remain current in order to assure that class topics maintain relevance to their current as well as their future positions. Both working students and alumni are regularly consulted by the faculty for applications of our course content to “today’s” operations of healthcare service delivery. The Program’s Advisory Group, now in formation, will also be a significant resource for updating our curriculum.
Through research, community service and assistance in healthcare policy formation the faculty assure that they individually remain current with healthcare issues and bring these issues into the classroom. Dr. Guo is active in policy and management research, Dr. Suh in strategic planning and Dr. Newman in mental health and substance abuse services, outcome assessment, and information system design. Dr. Deckard served on the Miami-Dade Mayor’s Healthcare Task Force and is currently serving on the Evaluation
Committee for Miami-Dade Community Access Program. She brings the information and experience garnered on these committees into the classroom. Dr. Newman has served on national committees in the development of psychological and psychiatric services that impact mental health policy. Faculty also remain current by reading current healthcare journals, special healthcare reports and attending professional conferences. The faculty also involve professionals active in the healthcare industry in the
Program Review Measures
Department Planning Indicators
The data on Department Planning Indicators are consistent with our previous discussions. The Program experienced decreases that may be traced to the postulated causes and that may be regained with directed effort on the part of the Program, School and College. The Programs’ direct discipline cost per SCH is below the SUS average. Increasing student headcounts and FTEs will result in even higher cost-efficiency,
Florida International University
2002-2004 Departmental Indicators: College of Health & Urban Affairs Department Name: Health Services Administration
I. Fall Headcount Enrollment
Program Fall 2002* Fall 2003 Fall 2004 3 - Year
Average 1202 BHSA Health Services
Admin. 51.0701
161 169 143 157.7
Baccalaureate Total 161 169 143 157.7
0012 MHSA Health Services Admin. 51.0701
82 88 56 75.3
Masters Total 82 88 56 75.3
Doctoral Total n.a. 0 0 0
Department Total 243 257 199 233.0
SOURCE: Student Data Course File
*Includes degree seeking lower division students not yet fully admitted into the College (Formerly referred to as Advising Center & University College Students)
Advising Center/University College* 1202 BHSA Health Services
Admin. – Advising
3 n.a. n.a. n.a.
1202 BHSA Health Services Admin. – Univ. Coll.
21 n.a. n.a. n.a.
SOURCE: Web/FINAL Student DATACOURSE/Student Database *Not Included in Departmental Totals
II. Degrees Awarded Data
Program 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 3 -Year
Average 1202 BHSA Health Services
Admin. 51.0701
53 53 69 58.3
Baccalaureate Total 53 53 69 58.3
0012 MHSA Health Services Admin. 51.0701
27 18 31 25.3
Masters Total 27 18 31 25.3
Doctoral Total 0 0 0 n.a.
Department Total 80 71 100 83.7
III. Student FTE Data
Annual FTE Enrollment by Level: Fundable FTE's
Course Level 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 3 -Year
Average Lower 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Upper 69.1 83.5 80.5 77.7 Graduate I1 41.8 41.4 36.4 39.9 Graduate II1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total 111 125.1 117.0 117.7
Source: Student Data Course File
1
Prior to 2004-2005 Graduate Classroom and T/D were used
IV. Actual SCH vs. Planned SCH (Target): Fundable SCH Only
Actual Student Credit Hours vs. Planned Student Credit Hours
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05* Lower Actual 0 0 0 0 Planned 0 0 0 0 Upper Actual 2,762 3,338 3,219 3,685 Planned 2,440 2,817 3,347 3,786 Graduate I1 Actual 1,339 1,326 1,165 858 Planned2 1,270 1,369 1,369 1,232 Graduate II1 Actual 3 6 3 7 Planned2 0 0 0 0
Source: Student Data Course File *Preliminary 1
Prior to 2004-2005 Graduate Classroom and T/D were used
2
2004-05 Reflects Board Goal
V. Direct Discipline Instructional Cost
2003-04 Direct Discipline Cost per Student Credit Hour
Category of Program Lower Upper Graduate
I
Graduate II
FIU (Health Professions & Related Sciences: CIP 51.0000 )
56.46 100.51 265.36 649.22
SUS (Health Professions & Related Sciences: CIP 51.0000)
55.26 146.87 238.00 535.26
Source: SUS of Florida Expenditure Analysis 2003-04 Note: Cost Figures are the 2 digit CIP code
VI. Departmental Graduating Survey Results: "I am satisfied with how well my major department has met its goals & objectives""."
Graduating Satisfaction Rating: Spring 2004 Level /
Respondent(s)
Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Not Sure
Baccalaureate / 8 50% 25% 25% 0% 0%
Masters & Doctoral / n.a.
Source: Graduating Student Survey
VII. Accreditation Status
Accreditation Available
Accredited
Program Yes No Yes No
Baccalaureate P P
Masters P P 2007*
Doctoral (n.a.)
*Date current accreditation expires
VIII. Instructional Effort by Faculty Category
Percent of Fundable Student Credit Hours Taught by Faculty Category
Level 2001-02 2002-03 2003-041 3 Year -Average Undergraduate Faculty 47.2% 48.4% 11.9% 35.9% Adjuncts 18.3% 17.5% 45.5% 27.1% Graduate Assistants 0.0% 2.1% 0.0% 0.7% Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% n.a. Graduate Faculty 21.7% 19.8% 19.3% 20.3% Adjuncts 12.8% 12.2% 23.3% 16.1% Graduate Assistants 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Source: IRDF
12003-04 reflects fall semester only
IX. Educational & General (E&G) Research
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 3 Year
Average
E & G Research Expenditures $0 $0 $0 $0
Source: IRDF
X. Contract and Grant Funds
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 3 Year
Average
C & G Award Totals $355,227 $419,622 $173,731 $316,193
Program Review Measures
These measures have been presented in other sections and tables in this report. The Appendices also provide required measures.
Resources and Support Services
The Miami community is a major resource and should become a stronger resource for the program. The rich diversity of health facilities and organizations provides multiple opportunities for our students and faculty. In addition, community resources are linked to the Program through our students who are working full time in a wide variety of sectors of the health delivery system. Placing our students in field experiences is facilitated by these linkages. Yearly, approximately 15-20 students are placed in residency experiences in South Florida, and another 9-10 students begin or complete managerial projects for departments within their own organizations, but outside their normal working experience, as a required integrative experience.
The Program receives sufficient support across the College and University to ensure Program quality and success. The strength of this philosophical support is evidenced by the placement of health as the first priority in the University’s strategic plan and the commitment to pursue further health care programs via the Medical and Health Initiative.
Opportunities and Barriers
Opportunities
o The founding and development of the Stempel School of Public Health provides new opportunities for collaborative research and curriculum development.
o The College of Business Administration is receptive to joint curriculum development at both the undergraduate and the graduate levels.
The recent CAHME accreditation report stated “The students and the program could benefit by increased collaboration with the business school and/or business school faculty who have expertise relevant to the program.”
o Florida Department of Higher Education has identified Health Services Administration as a high priority area.
o South Florida’s healthcare industry is expanding.
o Potential to expand our WebCT offerings into on-line program offerings. o Linkages with the developing FIU Medical School
o Expanding linkages with the South Florida Healthcare Executive Forum and those alumni active in the Regional Area Council of the ACHE to
• Barriers
o The small number of faculty to cover existing courses has prevented the faculty from being more involved in collaborations with the local healthcare industry.
As stated in our recent CAHME report, “Given the need of the program faculty to develop relationships with the health care community and increase research activities, the program is encouraged to find resources to maintain a 2/2 course load for faculty.”
o Lack of staff assigned specifically to the Programs.
o Lack of external research funding resources specifically in health services administration.
o Lack of targeted marketing and “name” recognition
o Difficulty in recruiting faculty who are qualified to receive tenure at a Research University (high research activity). Over the past several years we have lost candidates to competition that typically offer a smaller teaching load and higher salaries.
Unit Recommendations
• Maintain accreditation with CAHME
• Develop collaborative programs with the College of Business Administration, particularly a combined MHSA and MBA
• Provide mentorship and assistance for HSA faculty to obtain external funding for research as Principal Investigators
• Encourage the College and the University to adopt teaching load policies that align more closely with Research Universities (high research activity)
• Strengthen ties with the community, including an active Alumni Association and an Advisory Board
• Develop annual alumni surveys and monitor the career paths of graduates
• Provide support for a coordinated set of services including counseling, advising, residency placement and other support services fundamental to future success of the Program as recommended in our recent CAHME site visit report.
• Lack of secretarial support and student assistantships to assist faculty in both research and administrative areas.
Some of the recommendations above are based on concerns and recommendations provided to the Program in the CAHME Site Visit Report. The criteria, concerns and recommendations of this report are provided in the Appendices. A full copy of the report is available through the Program, College or Institutional Effectiveness.
Our first year Progress Report to CAHME was submitted on September 1, 2005. The next site visit will be in Fall 2006 provided the Program responds to all concerns sufficiently in the Progress Report.
Budget and Resource Estimates
The budget of the Programs in Health Services is not currently distinct from that of the School. While previously located within the School of Policy and Management, the school-wide budget was provided for support staff, supplies, and part of the student support. Though we attempted to distinguish costs specific to the Program when
transferred to the Stempel School of Public Health, all costs could not be distributed and we did not receive any funds for secretarial support. As a Department in the SSPH, we will be receiving a separate budget in the future.
The CAHME requested a budget in the 2003 self-study and the budget provided on the following page was provided.
Following the Program integration into the Stempel School of Public Health, the Program budget remained in control of the School and secretaries, supplies and travel are
dependent on School budget and approval. The Program retained two graduate assistantships in 2003-2004 but no dollars were provided to the Program for graduate student assistantships in 2004-2005. The Program retained control of some research dollars that provided two graduate assistants for 10 hours per week during the 2004-2005 Academic Year.
The salary dollars for five faculty positions in 2003-2004 was $540,932. One position was not filled during this year and remains open. A search for a health care economist remains open.
PROGRAM EXPENDITURES
2002-2003 AND ______2001-2002_____ (Self-Study FY) (Prior FY)
_____2002-2003_________ ___2001-2002____ (Self-Study Year) (Prior FY)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Dollar amounts Dollar amounts Dollar amounts Dollar amounts Dollar amounts Dollar amounts in budget of in other Univ. in other budgets in budget of in other Univ. in other budgets primary unit budgets (specify) primary unit budgets (specify)
% o % of % of % of % of % of Grand Total Grand Total Grand Total Grand Total Grand Total Grand Total Program faculty 428,160 465,665 Adjunct faculty 38,640 34,297 34,028 14,247 Secretarial and clerical personnel 13,376 10,766 6,680 Teaching/research Assistants 10,159 13,841 8,001 23,999 Consumable supplies 827 37,636 1,592 54,258 Faculty travel 3,699 8,193 1,000 6,860 Prof. activities of faculty Library acquisitions Other major items (list):
_computers, printers_ 5,821 Totals: 481,485 93,967 521,052 111,865
GRAND TOTAL $___575,452______ (100%) GRAND TOTAL $ ____632,917____________ (100%) (col. a + col. b + col. c) (col. d + col. e + col. f)
Cost-to-Continue
The projections presented below are best estimates and will be dependent upon the budget resources allocated by the CHUA and the SSPH.
Estimated Budget and Cost to Continue Budget Item 2001- 20021 2002- 20031 2003- 2004 3 Year projection 2006-2007 6 Year Projection 2009-2010 10 Year Projection 2013-2014 SALARIES Secretarial and clerical support 17,446 13,376 0 23,000 25,415 26,089 Faculty Salaries 465,665 428,160 540,932 579,460 608,433 672,318 Subtotal Salaries OPS Student assistants
& work study 32,000 24,000 32,000 * * *
Adjuncts 48,275 72,9372 77,183 79,884 88,272 97,541 Faculty/A & P Overload 5,000 5,000 5,000 Subtotal OPS EXPENSE 63,710 50,353 n/a2
OCO (over $1,000) n/a
TOTAL ALL COSTS3
1
These numbers represent the combined School and Program expenses as reported to CAHME and provided in the previous table.
2
In School budget.
3
Unable to determine due to shared costs across School
*Dependent on ability of program to generate research dollars or other innovative funding for student assistants
Aspirational Investments
The Program’s ten year vision can be reached through two methods: The first is investment in a minimum of two additional faculty with research experience and
willingness to mentor junior faculty. When joining the Stempel School of Public Health, the Program expected two additional faculty members, bringing our total to seven. (This total would still be two-three faculty members fewer than in past years.) However, we lost faculty and had not been successful in recruiting until the past year. With the loss of
