GME Training Verification Made Easy, Secure and Profitable PDF Free Download
1 / 385/385
100%
(1) Submission ID#1831409
GME Training Verification Made Easy, Secure and Profitable
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Nikhil Goyal – Henry Ford Health
Email: ngoyal1@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (313) 443-5455
Cell Phone: (313) 443-5455
Presenter(s)
Nikhil Goyal, MD
Associate DIO
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Renee White, .
Program Coordinator
Henry Ford Hospital
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the importance of timely and accurate primary source verification (PSV) of residency or
fellowship training
2. Enumerate frequently encountered barriers while completing PSV
3. Improve the efficiency and reliability of the PSV process using standardized forms and secure
communication workflows
4.
5.
Session Description
Graduate Medical Education (GME) training programs are required to provide primary source verification
(PSV) of their graduates' training to external agencies such as hospitals or state licensing boards. Typically,
the agency has a specific form that they need the program to complete, with detailed questions about the
graduate's performance during training. Communication is typically via email or fax, which are insecure and
unreliable. Since the process is time consuming, many GME programs will charge a fee to complete such
requests, and check payments can take additional time and effort. To streamline and standardize the PSV
process, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, American Hospital Association, National
Association Medical Staff Services and Organization of Program Director Associations created a standardized
"Verification of Graduate Medical Education Training” (VGMET) form. In our session, we will demonstrate how
the VGMET form and verification website (https://verification.meded.app) can significantly reduce the effort
and risk associated with PSV and create an additional source of income for GME training programs.
Target Audience
Program coordinators, program directors, GME office personnel
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Primary source verification (PSV) of residency or fellowship training is critical for patient safety. Current practice typically
involves a myriad of forms sent via email or fax between external agencies and Graduate Medical Education (GME)
programs, a process that is slow, insecure and error prone. We will demonstrate the use of standardized VGMET forms
and a web service that addresses these barriers to reduce the workload and create an additional source of income for
GME programs.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
1. Completion of VGMET forms for current residents at the time of graduation
2. Completion of VGMET forms for past graduates when their next verification request is received
3. Use of the verification website (https://verification.meded.app) to establish a standardized process to complete PSV
requests and promote VGMET form use
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Completion of VGMETs may be perceived as additional workload - we will illustrate how this will save time down the line
and improve the consistency of program responses (thus reducing risk). Use of the website can be perceived as expensive
or requiring a learning curve, we will illustrate how the design is intuitive and that the service is free for GME programs.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Our presentation consists of a program coordinator and a former program director to share broad perspective on how the
VGMET forms and verification website can be helpful. VGMET forms will be shared and sample scenarios provided in a
tabletop exercise to practice completion. Website link and walkthrough will be provided for the audience to use/experiment.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
30 minutes - presentation to address primary objectives
5 minutes - table activity to complete VGMET form
5 minutes - website demonstration
10 minutes - Q&A
(2) Submission ID#1831535
Mental & Behavioral Health Solutions: Empower Residents to Seek the Treatment They Need.
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Jackson Gleaves – AMA Insurance Agency
Email: jack.gleaves@amainsure.com
Office Phone: (312) 464-5462
Cell Phone: (317) 879-6988
Presenter(s)
Jackson C. Gleaves, n/a
Business Development Executive
AMA Insurance Agency
Role: Presenter
Stuart Gaunt, MA, MFT, CCM
Coordinator of Workplace Possibilities
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the Stay in School and Stay at Work program and how it works to help students and
residents avoid going out on claims and missing their time to learn and train.
2. Understand that this is a proactive disability management - where many coverages work to combat the
issues after they have taken an individual out of their work, this benefit works to ensure they don't miss
time in a safe and effective manner.
3. Understand the process for handling these cases - who is responsible for what and at what time.
4. Hear first-hand testimonial of the positive impact of the program from administrators and
students/residents that we have worked with in the past.
5. Understand the types of cases we have had in the past and how we have worked with
administrators/residency program directors, students/residents, and their healthcare providers to help
keep folks in school and in training.
Session Description
Please join our clinical experts, including Certified Clinical Mental Health counselor, from The Standard who
will provide case studies and information on the program's stay at work services. These services offer support
to residents insured by the AMA-sponsored group LTD plan who experience difficulties that may threaten their
training during residency.
Target Audience
Leaders at teaching hospitals looking to prioritize and protect the mental and behavioral health of their
residents and fellows.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
I wish to address the issues that residents face when it comes to their mental and behavioral health. Residency is difficult -
these folks are overworked and overstressed. This can put a lot of pressure on an individual and, because of that pressure,
there is a need to protect these residents and their overall health.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
I want to change the audiences idea of what a disability insurance package looks like. Not all packages are meant to just
cover the disability once it happens. In this case, we are looking to be proactive in mitigating the impact that a "would-be"
disability would have on these folks in their training.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
I hope that these folks can see that there are real solutions out there for the stress and troubles that their residents go
through. We are looking to show them that support and programs like the Stay at Work program can mitigate burnout
amongst residents and keep them learning. While this issue may be well understood by the residents and program
directors, the solution that we offer is very unique in the disability market and is proven to work.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will provide a powerpoint presentation with slides depicting the program, the roles of the folks involved, real case
examples, and testimonials to inform the audience. We will also open up for Q&A at the end of the powerpoint (10 minutes)
to make sure folks have time to ask what they need to and fully understand the program.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
0-5 minutes: Introduction of the presenters and of the Stay in School/Stay at Work program
5-20 minutes: Overview of Stay in School/Stay at Work Services for Students/Residents
20-30 minutes: Overview of the Roles and Responsibilities
30-40 minutes: Support of the Program and Collaboration with Real Case Examples
40-50 minutes: Questions and Answers
(3) Submission ID#1831635
You Can't Put the Cart before the Horse, Addressing the Gaps from Student to Resident
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Melissa Owens – Spartanburg Regional Healthcare System
Email: melowens@srhs.com
Office Phone: (864) 560-1551
Cell Phone: (864) 921-1611
Presenter(s)
Melissa Owens, C-TAGME
Residency & Fellowship Program Manager
Spartanburg Regional Healthcare System
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. 1. Evaluate gaps for process improvement opportunities.
2. 2. Identify a process to close the gap in the transition from student to resident.
3. 3. Implement a plan to assist in transitioning student to resident.
4. 4. Grow relationships with preceptors to best prepare the students.
5. 5. Cultivate a positive dialog between residents, faculty, preceptors to achieve individualized learning
plan goals.
Session Description
Transitioning from student to resident has been riddled with its various challenges, however over the past five
years, due to unprecedented times, the challenges have been downright unforgiving. Students are learning
virtually with limited or no hands-on experiences and/or by unstructured or modified education are advancing
students into residency programs without the basic tools to meet the demanding expectations. Programs are
being tasked with the responsibility (academically, financially, and morally) to teach basic medicine,
professionalism and life skills which limits actual clinical knowledge teaching and performance. Results of
these things are poor outcomes in advancement, physician and student mental health & wellness and most of
all patient care. Programs and hospitals are working hard to close these gaps and can offer workflow best
practices for residencies which can also be shared with medical schools to close gaps there. Together we can
establish goals to better prepare our students to residents, share best practices, workflows and problem
solving.
Target Audience
Coordinators, Administrators, Program Directors, DIOs, Teaching faculty.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
My session will address the current gap or possible gaps that programs see when students come in as residents. It will
identify the issue, the potential cause and a way to bridge the gap without rushing the outcomes.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
I would like to work with GME personnel alike to help acknowledge the growing gaps, see the implications it has on patient
care and to foster the realness in conversations which will in turn result in better ILP outcomes.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Not all want to address the gap, change the way we teach the "new age", or understand why. My hopes that it provides
insight of addressing and empowering todays learners.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Provide definition, gap causes, provide a survey of what I have used to help bridge that gap, communication shared with
advisors, faculty preceptors, etc. to provide insight on "how" to adapt or reach learners to have better outcomes
(performance, wellness, patient care).
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5 minutes - Welcome & Introduction
30 minutes - Presentation
10 minutes - Q & A Discussion
5 minutes - Closing
(4) Submission ID#1834909
DEIJ In Action: Not Just Another Lecture
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Andrea Williams – Henry Ford Health
Email: awill118@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (810) 449-8990
Presenter(s)
Andrea Williams, MS
Senior Instructional Design Consultant
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Monique Swain, MD, FACOG
Residency Program Director, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Apply techniques for engaging colleagues and trainees in meaningful discourse around DEIJ topics.
2. Employ strategies for overcoming barriers to facilitating inclusive conversations.
3. Implement two DEIJ interactive didactics designed to aid physicians in creating more inclusive medical
education and patient care environments in their home institutions.
4.
5.
Session Description
Diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice (DEIJ) are essential components of medical education and have
become national priorities. While healthcare inequity lectures often present solid content, they frequently lack
guidance for disseminating this content to colleagues and trainees or for facilitating crucial conversations
around DEIJ. This session will equip participants with two ready-to-deliver, interactive DEIJ activities and the
knowledge and skills needed to facilitate the critical discussions they inspire. The activities are designed to aid
physicians in creating more inclusive medical education and patient care environments. Participants will delve
into the components of each activity and engage in interactive experiences to practice their implementation.
Additionally, the session will introduce strategies for engaging learners through facilitated dialogue,
overcoming barriers to inclusive conversations, and enhancing connection to content through discourse.
Participants will practice applying these facilitation strategies in small groups. Curricula and facilitator guides
will be provided for each activity. By the end of this session, participants will be empowered with both the tools
to create more inclusive environments in their own practice and the knowledge and materials to implement
DEIJ activities at their home institutions.
Target Audience
This session will benefit Faculty Physicians; Associate Program Directors; Program Directors; Chiefs of
Departments; Directors, Administrators, and Coordinators of Graduate Medical Education; Chief Academic
Officers; and DIOs by providing them with curricula and facilitator guides for two ready-to-deliver, interactive
DEIJ activities. Participants will also gain skills for facilitating crucial conversations around DEIJ topics.
Through engaging in this session, participants will be empowered to implement effective DEIJ education at
their home institutions.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
DEIJ is a critical aspect of medical education, and the ACGME has even created an Equity Matters initiative dedicated to
drive change. While there are ample opportunities to learn about healthcare inequities, physicians often leave these
sessions with content knowledge but not the understanding of how to disseminate that knowledge or engage colleagues
and trainees in crucial DEIJ conversations. This session addresses critical professional practice gaps in medical education
by equipping participants with the tools and knowledge for implementing effective content and facilitating discussion
around DEIJ topics. Participants will be provided with curricula and facilitator guides for two ready-to-implement interactive
didactics, designed to aid physicians in creating more inclusive patient care. This session will also equip participants with
skills for engaging learners through facilitated dialogue, overcoming barriers to inclusive conversations, and enhancing
understanding through discourse. Content in this session supports Common Program Requirements of the Accreditation
Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and supports growth in the subcompetencies assessed by the ACGME
Clinician Educator Milestones. Participants will leave this session empowered with strategies for facilitating inclusive
conversations and the ability to educate others in DEIJ content without having to recreate activities from scratch.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will equip participants with the knowledge and skills necessary to enhance instruction on DEIJ topics and
facilitate inclusive conversations. Participants will receive curricula and facilitator guides for two ready-to-deliver DEIJ
activities that align with ACGME Common Program Requirements. They will explore the components of these activities
and practice their implementation. Participants will gain skills for facilitating crucial conversations around the content of
these activities, leveraging research that supports facilitated dialogue as an effective, learner-centered strategy for
instruction. Through participating in this session, attendees will develop the skills needed to effectively facilitate
conversations that deepen learners' connection to the content. They will be empowered with both the tools to create more
inclusive environments in their practice and the knowledge and materials to implement DEIJ activities at their home
institutions.
Additionally, participants will show growth in the subcompetencies of the ACGME Clinician Educator Milestones including:
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Learning Environment, Leadership Skills, Educational Theory and Practice, and
Reflective Practice and Commitment to Personal Growth. Ultimately, this session will enable participants to create more
inclusive environments in their own practice and positively impact the medical education received by trainees in their
programs.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
A potential barrier which might prevent participants from achieving the change desired is time. Physicians may find it
challenging to allocate time for implementing new strategies due to their existing workload and responsibilities. To address
the perceived barrier of time, this session will equip participants with curricula and facilitator guides for two ready-to-deliver
DEIJ activities. Participants will have the opportunity to explore components of these activities and practice their
implementation. They will be empowered with the knowledge needed to put these activities into action at their home
institutions. Participants will also develop strategies for engaging learners in facilitated dialogue, overcoming barriers to
inclusive conversations, and enhancing connection to content through discourse. They will have the opportunity to practice
application of these strategies through small group activities and discussion. Finally, participants will establish specific,
actionable goals for the implementation of these strategies. They will leave with a thorough knowledge of how they will
apply strategies and a concrete plan for doing so. This will greatly increase their ability to efficiently utilize what was
learned in the session, even when time is at a premium.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This will be an interactive session comprised of micro-lessons, small group activities, small group discussions, and Q&A. A
brief micro-lesson will introduce learners to facilitated dialogue as an effective, learner-centered instructional strategy for
enhancing engagement and mastery of information. Through small group discussion, participants will explore strategies for
overcoming barriers to facilitating inclusive conversations. They will practice applying these strategies through small group
activities. Additionally, participants will leave with curricula and facilitator guides for two ready-to-implement DEIJ activities
that can be used at their home institutions. Time will be provided for addressing questions related to putting these
educational approaches into practice.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction – 3 minutes
Background and theory – 5 minutes
Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Conversations – 4 minutes
Small group experience – 6 minutes
Activity One: Reducing LGBTQ+ Healthcare Inequities
Overview of facilitator guide – 3 minutes
Small group experience – 10 minutes
Activity Two: Responding to Microaggressions
Overview of facilitator guide – 3 minutes
Small group experience – 10 minutes
Summary – 3 minutes
Question and answer session – 3 minutes
(5) Submission ID#1838525
Mastering the Mentor Role: Empowering Program Directors with Coordinative Coaching Magic
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Sharon Ezzo – Cleveland Clinic
Email: ezzo.sharon@gmail.com
Office Phone: (440) 554-8202
Presenter(s)
Sharon Ezzo, MA, C-TAGME
Administrator
Cleveland Clinic
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify key coaching techniques that enhance the effectiveness and leadership skills of program
directors.
2. Develop and implement practical strategies for fostering a collaborative and supportive working
relationship with program directors.
3. Apply effective communication and problem-solving techniques to address common challenges faced
by program coordinators in their roles as mentors and coaches.
4.
5.
Session Description
In this dynamic and interactive workshop, you'll discover the art and science of coaching program directors as
a program coordinator. We'll delve into practical strategies, share real-world examples, and engage in hands-
on activities designed to enhance your mentorship skills. Learn how to effectively support and empower
program directors, foster a collaborative environment, and navigate the unique challenges of your role.
Whether you're a seasoned coordinator or new to the position, this session will equip you with the tools and
confidence to elevate your program's success through impactful coaching and coordination. Join us for a fun
and insightful journey into the heart of program leadership!
Target Audience
The target audience includes program coordinators working in academic healthcare settings who support
program directors and are interested in enhancing their coaching and mentoring skills to better assist in
program management and development. Whether you're new to the role or an experienced coordinator
looking to refine your skills, this session offers valuable insights and practical tools for all levels.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The professional practice gaps we wish to address include:
Current Practice Gap in Coaching Skills: Many program coordinators lack formal training in coaching and mentoring
techniques, which can limit their ability to effectively support and enhance the leadership skills of program directors.
Communication and Collaboration Challenges: There is often a gap in effective communication and collaboration between
program coordinators and program directors, leading to misunderstandings, inefficiencies, and suboptimal program
outcomes.
Problem-Solving and Conflict Resolution: Program coordinators may struggle with addressing and resolving conflicts or
challenges that arise in their role, impacting the overall functioning and success of the program.
Desired Competence/Practice/Outcome:
Enhanced Coaching Competence: Equip program coordinators with practical coaching techniques and tools to better
mentor and support program directors, ultimately leading to stronger leadership within the program.
Improved Communication and Collaboration: Foster an environment of open communication and effective collaboration
between program coordinators and program directors, resulting in a more cohesive and efficient program management
team.
Effective Problem-Solving and Conflict Resolution: Empower program coordinators with the skills to proactively address
and resolve challenges, ensuring smoother program operations and better outcomes for all stakeholders.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
1. Improvement in Competence:
- Equip program coordinators with advanced coaching and mentoring skills.
- Enhance their ability to provide constructive feedback and guidance to program directors.
- Increase their proficiency in communication, fostering a more collaborative work environment.
2. Enhancement in Performance:
- Enable program coordinators to effectively implement coaching strategies, leading to more capable and confident
program directors.
- Improve the overall efficiency and productivity of the program management team by fostering better teamwork and
communication.
- Equip coordinators with effective problem-solving and conflict resolution skills, resulting in smoother program operations.
3. Positive Educational and Accreditation Outcomes:
- Ensure that program coordinators are well-prepared to meet the accreditation standards and requirements through
effective program management and support.
- Promote continuous professional development for program coordinators, contributing to their ongoing growth and
capability within their roles.
- Support the development of high-quality educational programs that benefit from strong leadership and efficient
management, ultimately leading to better educational outcomes for trainees and improved program accreditation status.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers to achieving the desired change include lack of time, resistance to change, limited support,
communication challenges, and skill gaps. Program coordinators often have demanding workloads and may resist new
coaching methods, feel unsupported, or face communication issues with directors. Additionally, some coordinators may
lack confidence in their coaching abilities.
My workshop addresses these barriers by focusing on practical, easy-to-implement strategies that integrate into daily
routines without requiring extra time or resources. I will provide templates, checklists, and quick-reference guides to
streamline implementation. Interactive activities and role-playing will ensure participants gain practical experience and
confidence. Discussions on the benefits of new coaching methods, real-life success stories, and strategies for overcoming
resistance will be included. Effective communication techniques and tools for better dialogue and collaboration between
coordinators and directors will be taught, along with skill-building exercises in a supportive environment. By addressing
these barriers and equipping attendees with practical tools and strategies, my session aims to ensure successful
implementation of changes and achievement of desired outcomes.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The workshop will include interactive activities and role-playing scenarios to provide hands-on experience and build
confidence in coaching techniques. Practical resources such as templates, checklists, and quick-reference guides will be
provided to streamline the implementation of new strategies. Real-life case studies will illustrate effective practices and
inspire attendees, while group discussions will encourage the sharing of experiences, challenges, and solutions. Skill-
building exercises will enhance specific coaching, communication, and problem-solving skills. Q&A sessions will allow
participants to seek clarification and ensure a thorough understanding of the material. Follow-up resources will be provided
for continued learning and development after the workshop.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction (5 minutes)
• Welcome and Introduction: 1 minute
• Objectives and Overview: 1 minutes
• Quick icebreaker activity to engage participants and set a collaborative tone: 3 minutes
Section 1: Understanding the Role of a Coordinator as a Coach (10 minutes)
• Discuss the importance of coaching in the role of a coordinator: 3 minutes
• Introduce key coaching techniques and their benefits: 3 minutes
• Present a real-life case study to illustrate successful coaching practices: 4 minutes
Section 2: Practical Strategies for Effective Coaching (10 minutes)
• Interactive Activity: Role-Playing Coaching Scenarios: 6 minutes
• Discuss how to provide constructive feedback and guidance: 2 minutes
• Offer practical tips for integrating coaching techniques into daily routines: 2 minutes
Section 3: Enhancing Communication and Collaboration (10 minutes)
• Tools and Techniques for Effective Communication: 3 minutes
• Overcoming Common Communication Barriers: 3 minutes
• Group Discussion: Sharing Experiences and Solutions: 4 minutes
Section 4: Addressing Challenges and Building Confidence (10 minutes)
• Identify common problems faced by coordinators and discuss solutions: 3 minutes
• Teach conflict resolution strategies: 3 minutes
• Conduct a skill-building exercise focused on building confidence in coaching roles: 4 minutes
Conclusion and Q&A (5 minutes)
• Recap of Key Points: 2 minutes
• Open Floor for Questions and Clarifications: 3 minutes
(6) Submission ID#1839445
Wellness at the Core: Collaborating with a Wellness Director to Embed Wellbeing into Milestone Success
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Karen Hamad – FSU SMH Internal Medicine Residency Program
Email: karen-hamad@smh.com
Office Phone: (941) 917-7799
Cell Phone: (941) 586-1313
Presenter(s)
Karen Hamad, MD
Program Director
FSU SMH Internal Medicine Residency Program
Role: Presenter
Jill Scarpellini, PhD
Wellness Director
FSU SMH Internal Medicine Residency Program
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the inherent connections between Wellness, Professionalism, and Resident Success, and
in turn define a vision for creating and implementing a culture that prioritizes wellness in their
Institution or program.
2. Provide participants curricular elements and suggestions for successful integration of a Wellness
Director into the leadership at their own institutions and/or programs.
3. Explain how the relationship between resident wellness and successful attainment of the ACGME
Milestones are intertwined and critical to the overall culture of a graduate medical education program.
4. Describe scenarios where emphasizing overall wellness as a measure of resident success can be
instrumental in remediation processes at their own institution and/or program.
5. Identify resources needed to implement a wellness curriculum and/or opportunities to broaden the
scope of wellness at your institution.
Session Description
Wellness, professionalism and resident success are all intimately linked in the clinical learning and working
environment of any graduate medical education program. In this session, we will outline the highlights of an
innovative Wellness Curriculum that has evolved to encompass all aspects of resident training over the last 7
years. We will illustrate how a Wellness Director can be instrumental to the success of learners at all levels; by
developing and delivering critical curricular elements that instill a healthy culture into a busy residency
program, by guiding leadership through difficult learner remediations and by steering the Clinical Competency
Committee discussions with the intent of making Wellness the focus of Milestone discussions. These
measures in turn will ground Wellness into the heart of the residency program, helping to ensure the success
of even the most challenging learner. Workshop will illustrate how Wellness can be embedded into MIlestone
discussions semi-annually, will include specific challenging scenarios and work through potential solutions,
and will elaborate on different ways to champion Wellness in graduate medical education programs.
Target Audience
Program Directors, Associate Program Directors, Faculty, Chief Residents, Program Managers
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
While a popular buzzword in medical education, Wellness is often merely an afterthought in the development and
implementation of a clinical learning and working environment. We propose that incorporating wellness into all aspects of a
residency program; by utilizing a Wellness Director, incorporating key described curricular elements, focusing Clinical
Competency Committee discussions and remediation policies on the concept of a "well resident" will not only improve the
overall culture of the residency program but ensure the success of more learners in a given institution.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We would like to help more programs embrace an overall culture that sees Wellness as a measure of resident and
therefore program success, giving concrete examples of remediation solutions, professionalism challenges, and curricular
elements in order to achieve this goal. Successful residents reflect a successful residency program, and meeting ACGME
milestones is a strong measure of that success. We hope to demonstrate how using Wellness to meet Milestone goals is a
feasible and accessible path to optimize the clinical learning and working environment in a given residency program.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers may include limited funding to support a Wellness Director to the degree we suggest. Participants will
brainstorm to find ways of engaging stakeholders in the process and identify solutions that include potential roles program
leadership and faculty can play in lieu of a dedicated Wellness Director when necessary.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Our workshop will include a slide- based presentation, followed by case- based scenarios describing challenging
remediation situations and solutions. Small group break out sessions will identify opportunities at their own institutions to
create more robust Wellness curricula, and to work through potential barriers. We will then come together at the end to
share our learned insights with the larger group.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction of the concept of a Wellness Culture and review of importance of wellness to key stakeholders such as
ACGME, AHME, NCICLE, APDIM-5 min
Presentation of multiple key curricular elements developed at our institution and implemented by our Wellness Director- 10
min
Illustrating how to use Wellness as a key lens during Clinical Competency Committee meetings, semi annual reviews and
remediation needs -5 min
Presentation of several challenging remediation scenarios and resolutions where Wellness played major role- 10min
Break out sessions into small groups- 15 min
Group Wrap Up/ Q&A- 5min
(7) Submission ID#1839949
Building Collaborative Relationships
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: toni Holthaus – University of Kansas
Email: aholthaus@kumc.edu
Office Phone: (913) 588-6739
Cell Phone: (913) 787-1715
Presenter(s)
Toni Holthaus, MBA
Senior Coordinator
University of Kansas
Role: Presenter
Marcie Hudson, C-TAGME
Senior GME Fellowship Coordinator
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. gain a comprehensive understanding of the importance of collaborative relationships.
2. become equipped with practical tools to foster and enhance these relationships.
3. leave with actionable strategies to promote a collaborative culture
4. improve communication
5. build a strong professional network
Session Description
In our line of work, fostering collaborative relationships is essential for success. This interactive session will
provide residency coordinators with the tools and strategies needed to build and maintain effective
partnerships within and beyond their institutions. Participants will explore the importance of collaboration in
achieving common goals, enhancing communication, and creating a supportive network that benefits
residents, faculty, and the broader medical community.
Target Audience
Residency coordinators, program directors, faculty members, and administrative staff involved in residency
programs.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The presentation aims to address the following professional practice gaps:
Limited Networking and Collaboration Skills
Ineffective Communication Practices
Lack of a Collaborative Culture
Challenges in Building and Sustaining Partnerships
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
By addressing the practice gaps, we hope to enhance residency coordinators' networking and communication skills,
increase collaborative initiatives and strategic partnerships, foster a collaborative culture within residency programs, and
improve accreditation readiness, ultimately leading to more efficient, integrated, and effective residency programs.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers include lack of time, resistance to change, insufficient resources, and inadequate support from
leadership. The session will address these barriers by providing practical time-management strategies, demonstrating the
benefits of collaboration through case studies, offering resource management tips, and emphasizing the importance of
leadership support in fostering a collaborative culture.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The session will utilize interactive discussions, hands-on workshops, case studies, role-playing exercises, and action
planning activities to facilitate learning and promote practical application of networking, communication, and collaboration
strategies.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. Introduction (5 minutes)
Welcome and session objectives
Brief overview of the importance of collaboration
2. Interactive Discussion: Identifying Barriers (10 minutes)
Group discussion on current challenges and barriers to collaboration
Participants share personal experiences
3. Case Studies and Best Practices (10 minutes)
Presentation of successful collaboration examples
Analysis of key factors and best practices
4. Hands-on Activity: Role-Playing (10 minutes)
Role-playing exercises to practice networking and communication skills
Participants paired for real-life scenario simulations
5. Action Planning (10 minutes)
Participants develop personalized action plans for implementing collaboration strategies
Sharing plans with peers for feedback
6. Q&A and Wrap-Up (5 minutes)
Open floor for questions and discussion
Summary of key takeaways and next steps
(8) Submission ID#1841485
Implementing Wellness and Social Togetherness Programs in GME: Enhancing Team Well-Being and
Community
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Pamela Furneaux – Mayo Clinic Florida
Email: furneaux.pamela@mayo.edu
Office Phone: (678) 633-0946
Presenter(s)
Pamela M. Furneaux, MHA
Education Program Coordinator
Mayo Clinic Florida
Role: Presenter
Ronnesha Rodgers, MS
Education Program Coordinator Manager
Mayo Clinic Florida
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify Key Components of Effective Wellness Programs: Recognize the essential elements that
make up successful wellness and social togetherness initiatives in the GME environment
2. Develop a Plan for Implementing Wellness Programs: Create a practical and tailored plan to introduce
and integrate wellness programs within their own GME institutions, considering specific needs and
constraints
3. Evaluate the Impact of Wellness Programs: Assess the effectiveness of implemented wellness
initiatives by utilizing appropriate metrics and feedback mechanisms to measure improvements in job
satisfaction, burnout rates, and team cohesion
4. Overcome Barriers to Implementation: Apply strategies to address and overcome common barriers
such as resource constraints, cultural resistance, and time limitations that may hinder the adoption of
wellness programs.
5. Advocate for Wellness Initiatives: Articulate the benefits of wellness and social togetherness programs
to stakeholders, including leadership, colleagues, and trainees, to gain support and commitment for
these initiatives.
Session Description
Burnout, low job satisfaction, and poor team cohesion are significant issues affecting Graduate Medical
Education (GME) professionals. This session aims to bridge the gap between current practices and the
desired state of well-being by focusing on the implementation of wellness and social togetherness programs
within GME professional teams. Participants will explore the key components of effective wellness programs,
learn practical strategies for developing and integrating these initiatives, and discover how to measure their
impact. The session will also address common barriers such as resource constraints, cultural resistance, and
time limitations, providing solutions to overcome these challenges. Through interactive presentations, group
discussions, and case studies, attendees will leave equipped with the knowledge and tools to advocate for
and implement wellness initiatives that foster a healthier, more cohesive, and supportive work environment
Target Audience
1. GME Coordinators, DIO, and Program Directors: Professionals who manage the daily operations of GME
programs and are involved in the planning and implementation of wellness initiatives. 2. Hospital
Administrators: Leaders who have the authority to allocate resources and support the implementation of
wellness programs. 3. Human Resources and Wellness Officers: Professionals focused on employee well-
being and organizational health who can provide insights and support for wellness program development. This
diverse audience would benefit from learning about the importance of wellness and social togetherness
programs, practical strategies for implementation, and ways to overcome common barriers in the GME setting.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Graduate Medical Education (GME) programs often overlook the importance of structured wellness and social
togetherness programs for professional teams. This oversight leads to high rates of burnout, low job satisfaction, and weak
team cohesion, adversely impacting the mental health and performance of GME professionals.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
To implement effective wellness and social togetherness programs within GME professional teams, thereby enhancing job
well-being, reducing burnout, and fostering a strong sense of community and relationships among team members.
Specific Changes in Competence, Performance, or Education Outcome
Our session aims to:
• Increase Job Well-Being: Enhance overall job satisfaction and mental health of GME professionals.
• Decrease Burnout Rates: Implement strategies to significantly reduce burnout.
• Increase Sense of Community: Foster a stronger sense of community and support among team members.
• Strengthen Team Relationships: Improve interpersonal relationships and teamwork within GME professional teams.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Barriers:
1. Resource Constraints: Limited funding and personnel for developing and sustaining wellness programs.
2. Cultural Resistance: Skepticism or lack of buy-in from leadership and staff regarding the importance of wellness
initiatives.
3. Time Constraints: The demanding schedules of GME professionals might hinder participation in wellness activities.
Addressing Barriers:
• Resource Constraints: Provide cost-effective strategies and demonstrate potential long-term savings through reduced
burnout and turnover rates.
• Cultural Resistance: Present evidence-based data on the benefits of wellness programs and share success stories from
other institutions to garner support.
• Time Constraints: Highlight flexible and integrative approaches that seamlessly fit into the existing schedules of GME
professionals.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
To facilitate learning and change, we will employ a variety of educational methods, including:
• Interactive Presentations: Engaging lectures with real-world examples and data illustrating the effectiveness of wellness
programs.
• Workshops: Hands-on activities where attendees can develop their own wellness program plans.
• Group Discussions: Facilitated discussions to encourage sharing of experiences, challenges, and solutions.
• Case Studies: Analysis of successful wellness programs from various institutions.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Workshop Outline (50 Minutes)
1. Introduction (5 minutes)
• Overview of the session's objectives and importance of wellness and social togetherness in GME.
2. Presentation on Current Gaps and Desired Outcomes (10 minutes)
• Discussion on the current state of wellness in GME and the desired improvements.
3. Interactive Session on Strategies and Implementation (15 minutes)
• Participants will engage in group activities to brainstorm and develop practical strategies for implementing wellness
programs.
4. Addressing Barriers (10 minutes)
• Identifying potential barriers and discussing solutions through guided discussions and sharing of best practices.
5. Case Studies and Success Stories (5 minutes)
• Presenting examples of successful wellness programs and their positive impacts.
6. Q&A and Wrap-up (5 minutes)
• Open floor for questions, reflections, and summarizing key takeaways.
(9) Submission ID#1842061
The GME Game Show: Applying Game Theory to Didactics Your Teams Will Love
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Caroline Diez – JPS Health Network
Email: cdiez@jpshealth.org
Office Phone: (817) 702-6771
Cell Phone: (843) 478-3637
Presenter(s)
Caroline C. Diez, MBA, C-TAGME
Director, Graduate Medical Education
JPS Health Network
Role: Presenter
Diana Singer, PhD, RN, CCRN, CNE, C-TAGME
Executive Director, Academic Affairs
JPS Health Network
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Learn about educational gaming and how to implement it as an educational tool.
2. Discuss how to measure professional development through game-based learning.
3. Demonstrate multiple learning-based games to engage and excite learners.
4.
5.
Session Description
Disorganized. Dull. Disconnected. What do these words all have in common? They are words that may
describe a typical medical education lecture. Engaging. Enlightening. Educational. What do these words have
in common? These words describe educational sessions when game theory, or “gamification,” is integrated.
Research has shown that gamification is more than a buzzword and offers numerous benefits: increased
teamwork, real-time feedback, and motivation through competition. This workshop will provide the catalyst
needed to revolutionize your current didactic sessions and create an engaging learning session for residents,
fellows, coordinators, and faculty alike! Using the “common language” of Graduate Medical Education to guide
the way, this workshop will be extremely interactive with familiar games, and audience participation will be
highly encouraged. Time will also be allotted throughout the workshop to discuss best practices by presenters
and audience members.
Target Audience
All Conference Attendees
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
We hope to address the professional gap surrounding game theory by addressing the fundamentals. Many administrators
and faculty truly lack a deep understanding of game theory principles and their application in education settings. No one
said that learning can’t be fun! There might also be a gap in effectively incorporating game theory into teaching
methodologies; however, this workshop will empower participants with practical strategies for seamlessly integrating game
theory principles into their didactics approaches, which will enhance engagement and learning outcomes.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Through this session, attendees will be given a new set of tools that can be taken back to their home programs/institutions
in several different ways. First, this workshop aims to translate theoretical knowledge into tangible educational outcomes.
By infusing game theory concepts into their teaching practices, participants will facilitate the development of problem-
solving skills, strategic thinking, and collaboration among their learners. As a result, educational outcomes are expected to
improve significantly. Additionally, the session intends to align with accreditation standards by equipping participants with
innovative teaching approaches grounded in evidence-based practices. By meeting accreditation criteria related to
instructional innovation and engagement, participants can demonstrate their commitment to continuous improvement.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential real and perceived barriers could impede participants from achieving the desired presentation outcomes. First,
there is simply a lack of familiarity with (or limited exposure to) game theory; however, this workshop will provide a
structured introduction with accessible examples and templates to build confidence among participants. Another barrier
could be resistance to change due to fear of disruption or skepticism about the effectiveness of game theory. However, this
workshop will emphasize the evidence-based benefits of educational game theory. A final barrier might be concerns about
resource constraints. However, the presenters will share a toolkit of templates and ways to leverage free or low-cost game
tools. By proactively addressing these potential barriers, this workshop aims to empower participants with ways to
overcome obstacles and successfully implement the desired changes.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This workshop will be a highly interactive session where participants actively engage with game theory concepts through
hands-on activities. The presenters will also leverage technology and interactive multimedia resources to enhance the
“gaming” experience. The presenters will encourage collaboration, critical thinking, and knowledge application in a dynamic
learning environment through interactivity, engagement, and participation. These methods will ensure that participants will
be equipped with the knowledge, skills, and confidence to implement game theory principles effectively within their
programs/institutions.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
After a session introduction and overview, attendees will participate in an interactive activity that will introduce participants
to educational gaming. (10 minutes) Following the activity, the presenters will thoroughly discuss the foundation, concept,
and rules of game theory and how it can be used in Graduate Medical Education didactic sessions. Additionally, the
presenters will share personal best practices and common pitfalls to avoid. (10 minutes) After this discussion, the
presenters will use several games (i.e., Minute to Win It, Family Feud, Jeopardy, etc.) to provide examples of how to
template learning activities and how adaptable “fan favorite” game shows can be. (20 minutes) A final question-and-answer
session will occur, generating a crowd-sourced list of individual points to be emailed post-session. (10 minutes) Attendees
will receive several gaming templates that can easily be modified and utilized to develop their educational games.
(10) Submission ID#1844061
Crafting An Incentive Program to Increase Program Manager Retention and Job Satisfaction
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Ariana Rowe – Nuvance Health
Email: ariana.rowe@nuvancehealth.org
Office Phone: (718) 840-9082
Presenter(s)
Ariana Rowe, BBA
AVP, Medical Education
Nuvance Health
Role: Presenter
Dawn DeSantis, MS
Lead Program Manager
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Describe why an incentive plan is beneficial to an individual as well as the institution.
2. Create a list of goals and a rating scale that are achievable for new and seasoned employees.
3. Develop a business plan to gain leadership buy in.
4.
5.
Session Description
To decrease Program Manager turnover and increase job satisfaction, by creating an incentive plan that will
encourage Program Managers to pursue professional development. By creating a flexible incentive program
that offers new and seasoned Program Managers an opportunity to develop their skills and achieve their
personal goals will lead to a decrease in turnover. The presenters will examine the cost benefit of reduction in
turnover. Deliverables will include a sample incentive plan and cost benefit analysis.
Target Audience
Program Managers, Coordinators, Administrators Institutional Coordinators and Managers Director of Medical
Education DIO Program Directors
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Many institutions do not offer a career ladder for their Program Coordinators/Managers/Administrators. It is often difficult to
attract and retain program staff. The presenters will offer a practical plan that institutions can implement in order to address
these gaps.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Increase retention
Increase job satisfaction
Increase Institutional visibility/name recognition
Create professional development activities
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The financial barriers. The presenters will discuss non-monetary options.
The time to create the incentive plan. We will offer attendees an outline of a plan
Buy in from leadership. We will address this in the workshop.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Discussion
Breakout groups
Deliverables
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
10 minutes – introduction/background – why does this matter
10 minutes – Guidelines to create the incentive: include examples of accomplishments that do not count vs. those that do.
This is your job vs this is an incentive accomplishment
10 minutes – activities and creating the point scale –
10 minute - discussion – monetary vs. non-monetary
10 minutes – Q&A
(11) Submission ID#1852653
Mastering Presentations: How to Create Effective and Impactful Presentations
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Caroline Diez – JPS Health Network
Email: cdiez@jpshealth.org
Office Phone: (817) 702-6771
Cell Phone: (843) 478-3637
Presenter(s)
Caroline C. Diez, MBA, C-TAGME
Director, Graduate Medical Education
JPS Health Network
Role: Presenter
Diana Singer, PhD, RN, CCRN, CNE, C-TAGME
Executive Director, Academic Affairs
JPS Health Network
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Learn about the critical elements involved in creating and submitting a presentation abstract.
2. Develop an understanding of strategies and techniques involved in creating effective presentations.
3. Gain confidence in their ability to deliver a high-quality, engaging presentation.
4.
5.
Session Description
Do you have a best practice or a passion project that needs to be shared but do not know where to start?
Well, you are in luck - this session is for you! This session will give participants the knowledge, skills, and
practical tips to develop abstracts, create professional slide decks, and deliver high-quality, engaging
presentations. We will explore key elements that contribute to a successful presentation: content organization,
visual elements, delivery techniques, and use of technology. Through interactive discussions, we will cover
best practices and discuss strategies to enhance audience engagement, including incorporating interactive
elements and successfully managing a question-and-answer session. Additionally, we will discuss common
challenges, such as stage fright or technology failures, and provide techniques to overcome those. By the end
of this workshop, participants will have gained valuable insight and practical approaches to enhance their
presentation skills.
Target Audience
COPAC, COIL
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
To address the professional practice gaps and enhance the competence of the audience, there are several key areas that
our presentation will focus on. First, we will highlight the importance of structure and organization in both abstract
submissions and the product, ensuring the attendees understand the importance of content clarity and information flow.
Next, the presenters will work with the audience to enhance and influence their delivery skills to ensure engaging and
captivating delivery skills (i.e., body language and vocal tone). Additionally, the presenters will discuss visual aids,
audience engagement, and adaptability. By addressing all these professional practice gaps, our workshop will empower
audience members to deliver more effective, engaging, and memorable presentations.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Our presentation will enhance the presentation skills of audience members and allow them to develop a higher level of
competence in planning, designing, and delivering effective presentations. These skills will not be limited to public
speaking and delivery but will include content structure, audience engagement, and improved visual design. Additionally,
the presentation will provide an exercise that enhances the adaptability and flexibility of the audience so they can tailor
their content to specific audiences and contexts. Overall, this presentation will create measurable and tangible changes in
participants’ competence and performance related to presentations, and they will be empowered to deliver more impactful
and engaging presentations.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Several potential real and perceived barriers might prevent attendees from achieving the desired change through this
workshop. One such barrier is resistance to change; however, we will overcome this barrier by providing real-life examples
and success stories while highlighting positive outcomes and creating a supportive learning environment. A second barrier
may be a fear of public speaking. We will address this fear by providing tips and techniques to manage anxiety and boost
confidence through practice and constructive feedback. A final barrier could be the lack of resources or technology;
however, we will focus on providing practical solutions that work within various resource constraints. By addressing these
potential barriers, the speakers will create an inclusive and supportive learning environment that empowers attendees to
overcome obstacles and achieve the desired changes in their presentation skills.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
A variety of educational methods and tools will be used to facilitate learning. First, this session will be highly interactive with
a hands-on “abstract writing” exercise to give each participant experience in the submission process. Additionally, the
presenters will use visual aids, technology, and multimedia tools to reinforce key points and enhance understanding.
Finally, the presenters will incorporate storytelling to make the content more relatable and memorable.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
We will begin with a brief introduction and overview, quickly followed by an activity reinforcing the importance of a
presentation abstract (10 minutes). Immediately following the activity, there will be an interactive workshop where the
speakers will discuss critical elements that contribute to a successful presentation, including content organization, visual
elements, delivery techniques, and use of technology. (10 minutes) During the third portion of this workshop, the
presenters will use a role-playing activity to demonstrate techniques to enhance audience engagement (20 minutes). The
speakers will share their best practices and ways to overcome common presentation challenges throughout the workshop.
The workshop will conclude with a question and answer section generating a crowd-sourced list of individual points to be
emailed post-session (10 minutes). Participants will leave this workshop with various tools and resources that will allow for
the application of techniques.
(12) Submission ID#1852673
The Empowered GME Coordinator: A Framework to Grow, Thrive, and Succeed
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Diana Singer – JPS Health Network
Email: dsinger@jpshealth.org
Office Phone: (817) 702-3682
Cell Phone: (469) 223-4639
Presenter(s)
Caroline C. Diez, MBA, C-TAGME
Director, Graduate Medical Education
JPS Health Network
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Recognize the common challenges and ambiguity GME Coordinators face due to the variations in job
titles, descriptions, and responsibilities.
2. Leverage resources, tools, and training opportunities to enhance collaboration, pursue professional
development, and promote innovation.
3. Execute best practices to enhance their performance, efficiency, and effectiveness.
4. Demonstrate increased confidence to lead and innovate within their roles.
5.
Session Description
The ACGME describes Coordinators as crucial members of GME leadership teams and recognizes they are
critical to the success of programs and institutions. Coordinators provide invaluable support to trainees,
faculty, and other key stakeholders. However, the role can appear ambiguous, with wide variations in titles,
job descriptions, and responsibilities across Sponsoring Institutions. Coordinators may face limited resources
and training needed to flourish in their positions. Both beginning their GME careers as Program Coordinators,
the speakers recognize this ongoing challenge and will provide a framework focused on empowering GME
Coordinators. Strategies will include but are not limited to advocacy, communication, mentorship and peer
networks, resources and training, stakeholder collaboration, professional development, and promoting
innovation. This session aims to recognize GME Coordinators for their extraordinary contributions to medical
education and to provide a tangible framework and actionable tools to empower Coordinators to grow, thrive,
and succeed as professionals.
Target Audience
All Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
There are a few professional practice gaps/practices that this presentation will remedy. First, GME coordinators are
frequently undervalued/unrecognized within their institutions, which impacts morale and job satisfaction; through this
presentation, we will promote recognition and provide advocacy tools. Additionally, opportunities for professional
development may be limited for GME coordinators, which impacts career growth; however, this presentation will highlight
opportunities for professional development – including budget-friendly opportunities – ensuring GME coordinators are
prepared to excel in their roles.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session aims to empower GME coordinators in several ways. As already noted, one way will be through increased
knowledge of resources and professional development opportunities for GME coordinators. An additional change will be
through improvement in collaboration; this will enhance communication and teamwork throughout the institution/program,
improving efficiency and cohesion. The presenters also aim to ensure that GME coordinators leave the workshop with
easily adoptable best practices, which can be implemented within their institution/program. Finally, this presentation will
enhance the support system of GME coordinators to provide ongoing guidance and support.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Several potential real and perceived barriers might prevent attendees from achieving the desired change through this
workshop. Several of these barriers have already been discussed, but resistance to change and innovation is also worth
mentioning. This resistance could prevent the adoption of best practices. However, this presentation will include strategies
for overcoming this resistance and gaining buy-in from critical stakeholders. Another barrier is that some attendees may
have limited networking/peer support opportunities at their institutions, limiting idea-sharing and isolating them. Still, this
session will ensure peer connection and provide resources beyond just one institution.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This session will be lecture-based; however, there will be at least two opportunities for small group breakouts and personal
reflection. Additionally, the presenters will use visual aids, technology, and multimedia tools to reinforce key points and
enhance understanding. The presenters will incorporate storytelling to make the content more relatable and memorable.
Finally, the presenters will share their established toolkit to ensure participants have a tangible, take-home resource.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
We will begin with a brief introduction and overview, quickly followed by an exercise highlighting the ambiguity in the GME
coordinator due to wide variations in titles, job descriptions, and responsibilities. This exercise is essential in emphasizing
the GME coordinators are not alone and are surrounded by a supportive community. (10 minutes) Following the activity,
the presenters will deliver a lecture introducing their framework, including engagement, mentorship, emotional intelligence,
development, and more. While this section will be lecture-based, the presenters will engage the audience through visual
elements and personal stories, sharing their successes and failures. (25 minutes) After the lecture, the presenters will
facilitate a reflective activity, allowing the participants to have a personal framework for goal setting. (10 minutes) Finally,
the workshop will conclude with a brief video and moment of gratitude, reaffirming GME coordinators' pivotal role within
their institutions/programs. (5 minutes) Participants will leave this workshop with an established toolkit to ensure they have
the tools and resources to grow, thrive, and succeed.
(13) Submission ID#1852676
Discover Your Number: Navigating Culture and Team Dynamics with the Enneagram
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Diana Singer – JPS Health Network
Email: dsinger@jpshealth.org
Office Phone: (817) 702-3682
Cell Phone: (469) 223-4639
Presenter(s)
Diana Singer, PhD, RN, CCRN, CNE, C-TAGME
Executive Director, Academic Affairs
JPS Health Network
Role: Presenter
Caroline C. Diez, MBA, C-TAGME
Director, Graduate Medical Education
JPS Health Network
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Explore the nine Enneagram Types and recognize where they fall on the continuum.
2. Understand the characteristics (values, strengths, weaknesses, and core motivators) of each
Enneagram Type and how they interact in the workplace.
3. Learn how to implement this valuable tool within your home institution or program.
4.
5.
Session Description
Have you ever wondered about the dynamics of your team? Do you know what drives your colleagues,
leaders, or peers? As we navigate evolving hospital landscapes, changes in medical education, and
accreditation requirements, program coordinators/administrators face the challenge of adapting to changing
team dynamics and cultures. Therefore, understanding individual personality differences and communication
preferences has never been more crucial. In our quest for practical tools, we have found the Enneagram to be
our Academic Affairs team's most impactful culture change initiative. Unlike conventional personality
assessments, the Enneagram offers profound insights into predicted behaviors and core motivators while
fostering a culture of openness and empathy, transcending generational gaps. Join us as we share our
Enneagram journey, and let us guide you towards yours by "knowing thyself," enriching your culture, and
strengthening your team dynamics.
Target Audience
All Attendees
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The professional practice gaps the presenters aim to address with this workshop revolve around enhancing self-awareness
interpersonal relationships, improving communication, and stronger collaboration. Currently, many teams struggle with
misunderstandings, miscommunication, and team member conflict, which leads to decreased productivity, innovation, and
morale. The presenters aim to equip participants with a deeper understanding of themselves and their colleagues through
the lens of the Enneagram. By delving into the Enneagram's insights into personality types, motivations, core motivators,
and behavioral patterns, individuals can cultivate empathy, appreciation, and respect for each other's unique strengths and
perspectives. This heightened awareness can foster more effective communication, conflict resolution, and team
collaboration.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
There are a few specific changes we aim to address through this workshop. First, participants will develop a deeper
understanding of their personality types, motivations, and behaviors through the Enneagram. This heightened self-
awareness will enable individuals to recognize their strengths, limitations, and growth areas, enhancing personal
development. Similarly, while gaining this personal insight, attendees will also gain insight into their colleagues, leading to
more effective communication approaches and enhancements in team collaboration. Team dynamics will be optimized by
understanding how team members prefer to communicate and what specific skills they bring to a team. All these areas will
contribute to the creation of a more positive and supportive work environment that is highlighted by trust and respect.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential real and perceived barriers might prevent attendees from achieving the desired change through this proposed
workshop. First, there may be skepticism or resistance to personality "tests." However, this session will address this barrier
by providing a comprehensive overview of the Enneagram, highlighting its depth, complexity, and utility as a tool for self-
awareness while emphasizing its focus on growth and development. Another barrier could be the fear of vulnerability or the
discomfort that comes with personal reflection. The presenters will first overcome this barrier by creating a safe space and
establishing ground rules to encourage dialogue. They will also be vulnerable and share personal stories from their
journey. A final barrier could be the lack of support or resources; however, this will be dissipated through the resources,
accessible tools, and post-session support provided by the presenters. By actively addressing these potential barriers,
attendees will be better equipped to overcome obstacles and achieve the desired change.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
A variety of educational methods and tools will be used to facilitate learning. This session will be highly interactive, and
participants can complete the Eneagram assessment, allowing them to identify their personality type. This assessment will
be the starting point for self-reflection and exploration, offering valuable insight into their strengths, blindspots, and growth
areas. Small group discussions will allow attendees to learn from each other, brainstorm practical solutions, and foster
community. Additionally, the presenters will use visual aids, technology, and multimedia tools to reinforce key points and
enhance understanding. Finally, the presenters will incorporate storytelling to make the content more relatable and
memorable.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
This interactive session will be broken down into four key areas. We will begin with a brief session introduction and
overview, quickly followed by an activity that serves as an icebreaker and introduces the audience to the Enneagram
Personality Assessment. This will ensure each participant is familiar with their Enneagram number. (15 minutes)
Immediately following the activity, there will be an interactive workshop where each of the nine domains of the Enneagram
will be discussed at length. This will include ensuring participants understand their personality domains through their
strengths, weaknesses, and core motivators. Additionally, this discussion will provide an understanding of how the
Enneagram helps relate to others through communication strategies during conflict and ultimately provide a better
understanding of team dynamics. (15 minutes) During the third portion of this workshop, the presenters will share how the
Enneagram has been used in our department and how our team has grown stronger. (10 minutes) The workshop will
conclude with a question and answer section generating a crowd-sourced list of individual points to be emailed post-
session (10 minutes). Participants will leave this workshop with handouts and resources detailing the Enneagram, what it
means for them and their teams, and how to replicate the activity within their home institutions or programs.
(14) Submission ID#1852714
Developing A Professional Enrichment Series for Program Coordinators
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Morgan Farra – South Shore University Hospital
Email: mfarra@northwell.edu
Office Phone: (631) 894-5334
Presenter(s)
Kelly Conlon, MS, C-TAGME
Director, Medical Education, Eastern Region
Northwell Health
Role: Presenter
Morgan Farra, c-TAGME
Training Program Administrator
South Shore University Hospital
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Design a professional development curriculum for program coordinators based on their interests and
needs
2. Employ the skills learned in the session to implement a professional development series in real time
3. Explain the peer-to-peer model of learning and its role in program coordinator development
4. Identify gaps in development opportunities and potential barriers to success when creating program
coordinator development sessions and ways to address these areas of concern
5.
Session Description
The role of the program coordinator is dynamic and multifaceted, continually evolving in response to changes
in policies, regulations, and institutional needs. As the responsibilities of PCs expand, there is a growing need
for training as dynamic as the role itself. Continuous education and professional development are essential for
PCs to continue evolving in their programs, institutions, and careers. Without formal or widely available
training for PCs, high reliance is placed on peer-to-peer education. This session aims to harness the power of
the PC community by moving past simply discussing the need for PC development programs but to create – in
real time – a PC development series. By the end of this session, learners will be able to identify gaps in
current professional development opportunities for PCs, have designed a series based on the needs and
interests of PCs, and will have the opportunity to participate in a development series they have helped create.
Target Audience
This session aims to empower program coordinators to design and participate in their own professional
development activities so our primary focus will be connecting directly with program coordinators. Secondarily,
we hope that institutional leaders and those charged with professional and faculty development programs at
their institutions will join us to learn effective ways to plan development for coordinators and understand how
to overcome common barriers to success.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
In the current GME landscape there are limited opportunities for program coordinators (PCs) to engage in meaningful
professional development activities. Our field focuses a great deal of attention on faculty development and program
director/leadership development, but this content is not always relevant to the ever-changing role of the PC. Our
presentation aims to close this gap by creating a professional development curriculum alongside our PC colleagues. It is
known that the PC is vital to the success of any program so we hope that by empowering PCs to play in active role in their
own development, PCs and therefore their programs, will thrive.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session is a unique opportunity to showcase a successful peer learning program aimed at enhancing program
coordinator (PC) development and to exercise the skills taught in real time. In a one-of-a-kind presentation, the hosts will
explore the steps to create an organic and much needed professional development series exclusively for PCs and then
engage the session’s participants in creating a series on the spot. Learners will be encouraged to participate as
contributors in a virtual series created during the session based on the discussion and feedback provided by the
participants themselves.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Literature suggests that barriers to successful program coordinator (PC) development programs, as identified by PCs, are
time, cost and organizational support. By showcasing our own model that was successful in navigating each of these we
hope to inspire PC colleagues to create their own scalable development programs. However, the purpose of this session
moves beyond that by achieving these goals in real-time. The overall goal of this session is to harness the power of the
national GME PC community and to create in real-time a professional development curriculum that will address each of
these potential barriers resulting in a tangible takeaway.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will utilize a primarily didactic format with interactive group breakouts to facilitate learning and change.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
3 Minutes – Introductions and overview of session objectives
8 Minutes – Explore the need for PC professional development. Presenters will showcase a successful model of peer-to-
peer learning and discuss ways to implement a similar series at other institutions
8 Minutes – Participants will engage in a group activity to identify topics that they would like to see explored in a
professional development series
8 Minutes – Report out on goals for professional development needs and interests. Discuss barriers to implementation and
keys to success
15 Minutes – Based on the interests identified, presenters will develop a series on the spot and participants will be
encouraged to self-select as presenters in this development series being created in real time. All participants will be invited
to this development series at the session conclusion
8 Minutes – Open discussion and questions
(15) Submission ID#1853156
Quality Improvement Isn’t Just for Clinicians: The Role of Coordinators in Process Improvement
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Kelley Whitehurst – ECU Health Medical Center
Email: kelley.whitehurst@ecuhealth.org
Office Phone: (252) 847-8449
Presenter(s)
Kelley E. Whitehurst, MAEd
Program Manager, GME Education
ECU Health Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Alyson Riddick, MHA, C-TAGME
Associate Designated Institutional Official
ECU Health Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Define the importance of Institutional and Program Coordinators recognizing and participating in
quality improvement initiatives
2. Describe key quality improvement concepts and access quality improvement resources
3. Identify tangible ways Institutional and Program Coordinators can engage in quality improvement
4.
5.
Session Description
GME Institutional and Program Coordinators engage in quality improvement activities daily, from evaluating
data to optimizing processes. However, few recognize such activities as quality improvement or develop them
into formal projects, presentations or initiatives. In this workshop, we plan to describe foundational principles
and demystify the “language” surrounding quality improvement, as well as share resources making this work
more approachable for non-clinicians. We also aim to provide tangible examples of quality improvement work
within the Institutional and Program Coordinator role so attendees can capitalize on improvement activities to
develop professionally.
Target Audience
The target audience includes Institutional and Program Coordinators, as well as GME Educators providing
professional development opportunities for Institutional and Program Coordinators.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
GME Institutional and Program Coordinators engage in quality improvement activities daily, from evaluating data to
optimizing processes. However, few recognize such activities as quality improvement or develop them into formal projects,
presentations or initiatives. We realized there is the need for a practical overview of quality improvement principles and
“language” so that Institutional and Program Coordinators can be empowered to further engage in improvement activities
and share their work both locally and with the larger GME community.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We want attendees to possess foundational knowledge of quality improvement principles and to view aspects of their role
through the lens of quality improvement. In doing so, we want them to be empowered to play an active role in process
improvement within their institutions and programs.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers for attendees could include time to engage in quality improvement work more formally and the perception
that quality improvement work doesn’t apply to their GME role. We plan to address these barriers by demonstrating how
their current activities can effectively be translated into more formal projects or presentations and by sharing tangible
resources that can be used in support of further learning in quality improvement.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We plan to utilize small and large group discussion through the session, as well as facilitate the creation of an actionable
list of quality improvement project ideas attendees can pursue upon returning to their institutions.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
• Defining the Importance of Recognition of and Participation in Quality Improvement Initiatives (10 minutes) – The session
will begin with a discussion of the importance of improvement initiatives in GME, including by those at the program and
institutional levels who are non-clinicians. Furthermore, presenters will share how Institutional and Program Coordinators
can formalize daily improvement activities into professional projects and play an active role in process improvement within
their institutions and programs.
• Describing Key Quality Improvement Concepts and Resources (25 minutes) – Presenters will provide a stepwise
overview of key quality improvement terms and principles to familiarize participants with the language and approaches. In
addition, existing resources such as toolkits and examples will be shared with explanation regarding how these resources
can assist Institutional and Program Coordinators in developing current work into more formal quality improvement
projects, presentations or initiatives.
• Tangible Examples of Quality Improvement Initiatives (15 minutes) - The session will conclude with presenters sharing
tangible ways in which Institutional and Program Coordinators can develop more formal quality improvement initiatives
from their current work. Presenters will also ask attendees to generate a list of additional ideas for projects they can pursue
upon return to their home institutions.
(16) Submission ID#1853165
Emotional Intelligence & Resilience "PROGRAM" Improves the Well-Being of Learners
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Ramzan Shahid – Loyola University Medical Center
Email: rshahid@lumc.edu
Office Phone: (708) 327-9125
Presenter(s)
Ramzan Shahid, M.D.
Vice Chair of Education
Loyola University Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Discuss an educational curriculum that teaches Emotional Intelligence (EI) skills & Resilience
strategies in an effort to promote well-being of learners
2. Describe the experience of designing and implementing an EI-Resilience "PROGRAM"
3. Explain the outcome and effectiveness of an EI-Resilience curriculum to improve the well-being of
learners
4.
5.
Session Description
Medical students and residents are at increased for depression, burnout, and suicide. Developing and
implementing a curriculum for learners that teaches them Emotional Intelligence (EI) skills and Resilience
strategies may be an effective way to reduce the risk of burnout and promote their well-being. The goal of this
session is to describe the experience of designing and implementing an EI-Resilience curriculum. Our
curriculum focused on developing EI skills and teaching a Resilience “PROGRAM” (Positive thinking,
Reframing, Optimism, Gratitude, Reflection, Altruism, Meaning). Workshop participants will understand the
educational curriculum utilized to teach these skills to medical students and residents. The curriculum will be
described and examples of worksheets and videos used as part of the curriculum will be shared. The impact
of this “PROGRAM” on students’ EI levels, resilience, and well-being will be discussed by reviewing
curriculum evaluations, comments, and outcomes. We used a validated EI self-assessment survey to
measure EI in our learners. Pre- and post-intervention data showed a significant improvement in the EI and
overall well-being of students who completed the curriculum. This improvement in EI and resilience was
sustained longitudinally, even one year after going through the curriculum. The comments about the
curriculum were extremely positive and learners found the material to be very beneficial. Workshop
participants will be able to use our experience as a framework to develop their own curriculum at their
respective institutions.
Target Audience
Directors and Administrators of Medical Education; Program Director; Medical Director; Director and
Administrator of Undergraduate, Graduate, and Continuing Education; Designated Institutional Official;
Coordinator of Medical Education.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
In general, medical students and residents do not get formal training in Emotional Intelligence skills and Resilience
strategies. This curriculum is designed to teach these skills, which can reduce the risk of burnout.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Participants will be able to use this educational curriculum as a framework to develop their own curriculum focusing on
Emotional Intelligence & Resilience.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Participants might not be able to see the value and benefit offered by an EI-Resilience curriculum. The evaluation of the
curriculum, along with the outcome data showing improved EI and well-being, will demonstrate the importance of this type
of experience.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Examples of worksheets and videos used for the educational curriculum will be shared with participants.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Overview of the EI-Resilience "PROGRAM" Used to Teach Learners = 15 minutes
Discussion of outcomes using pre- and post-intervention surveys = 15 minutes
Review of evaluations and comments about the curriculum from learners = 15 minutes
Questions = 5 minutes
(17) Submission ID#1853313
Advanced Administrative Strategies in Graduate Medical Education: Enhancing the Role of Program
Administrators
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Barbara Gohre – Phoenix Children's
Email: bgohre@phoenixchildrens.com
Office Phone: (602) 933-1604
Cell Phone: (623) 696-8777
Presenter(s)
Barbara D. Gohre, B.S. of Healthcare, TAGME, CAHPM, CSSBB
GME Accreditation Manager
Phoenix Children's
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand Advanced Administrative Strategies: By the end of the session, participants should have a
comprehensive understanding of advanced strategies such as Lean Six Sigma, process
standardization, and Agile Project Management, and how they can be applied in the context of GME
administration.
2. Enhance Process Optimization Skills: Participants should be able to identify inefficiencies in their
current administrative processes and apply the learned strategies to enhance quality, reduce waste,
and improve turnaround times for key administrative tasks.
3. Improve Communication and Collaboration: The session aims to equip participants with effective
methods and digital tools to enhance communication and collaboration within their teams, leading to a
more productive administrative environment.
4. Apply Learned Strategies in Real-World Scenarios: Participants should be able to apply the strategies
and tools discussed in the session to their own GME programs, leading to improved program
management and continuous improvement. They should also be able to share their experiences and
learn from their peers during interactive discussions.
5. Develop a Continuous Improvement Mindset: The session aims to instill a mindset of continuous
improvement among participants. They should be able to regularly evaluate and refine their
administrative processes, communication methods, and collaboration strategies, ensuring their GME
programs are always evolving and improving. This mindset will enable them to adapt to the dynamic
nature of GME and meet the evolving demands of GME administration effectively.
Session Description
This session aims to empower Graduate Medical Education (GME) Program Administrators (PAs) with
advanced strategies to effectively manage and continuously improve residency and fellowship programs. The
session will provide a comprehensive exploration of practical and innovative solutions designed to enhance
the administrative capabilities of PAs. The session is divided into two main sections: 1. Optimizing
Administrative Processes: This section will introduce PAs to methodologies such as Lean Six Sigma for
continuous improvement, process standardization for consistency and reliability, and Agile Project
Management for improved flexibility and collaboration. Real-world applications of these methodologies in GME
administration will be discussed, providing PAs with actionable insights to enhance their administrative
workflows. 2. Enhancing Communication and Collaboration: This section will focus on the importance of
effective communication and collaboration in the success of GME programs. It will present methods and
applications to enhance these aspects, including the use of digital collaboration tools and the organization of
interdepartmental meetings. By the end of the session, PAs will be equipped with advanced strategies to
navigate the complexities of modern GME programs, ensuring their smooth operation and success. They will
also have the opportunity to engage in interactive discussions, share experiences, and learn from their peers.
This session is a must-attend for PAs seeking to elevate their administrative skills and contribute more
effectively to their GME programs.
Target Audience
Program Administrators, Program Coordinators, GME Staff
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The professional practice gaps that this presentation aims to address are as follows:
Inefficient Administrative Processes: Many Graduate Medical Education (GME) Program Administrators (PAs) currently
rely on traditional administrative methods that may not be optimized for efficiency and effectiveness. This can lead to
redundancies, delays, and errors in administrative tasks.
Lack of Standardization: There is often a lack of standardization in administrative processes across different GME
programs. This inconsistency can lead to confusion, inefficiencies, and potential non-compliance with accreditation
standards.
Limited Use of Advanced Management Strategies: While many PAs are adept at using Residency Management Systems
(RMS) for day-to-day tasks, there is a gap in the adoption of advanced management strategies such as Lean Six Sigma,
Agile methodologies, and process standardization that can significantly enhance administrative efficiency.
Inadequate Communication and Collaboration: Effective communication and collaboration are crucial for the smooth
operation of GME programs. However, there is often a gap in the use of effective communication tools and strategies,
leading to potential misunderstandings and inefficiencies.
The desired outcome is to bridge these gaps by equipping PAs with advanced administrative strategies, standardized
processes, and effective communication and collaboration tools. This will enable them to manage their GME programs
more efficiently, ensure compliance with accreditation standards, and contribute to the continuous improvement and
success of their programs. The presentation will provide practical and innovative solutions to these challenges, enhancing
the administrative capabilities of PAs.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Through this session, we aim to create the following specific changes in competence, performance, and
education/accreditation outcomes:
Enhanced Competence in Advanced Administrative Strategies: We aim to enhance the competence of Graduate Medical
Education (GME) Program Administrators (PAs) in advanced administrative strategies such as Lean Six Sigma, process
standardization, and Agile methodologies. This will enable PAs to effectively manage the complexities of modern GME
programs.
Improved Performance through Process Optimization: By applying the strategies learned in the session, PAs should be
able to optimize their administrative processes, leading to improved performance. This includes reducing redundancies,
improving turnaround times for key administrative tasks, and ensuring compliance with accreditation standards.
Effective Communication and Collaboration: The session aims to improve the communication and collaboration skills of
PAs. By utilizing effective communication tools and strategies, PAs can foster a more collaborative and productive
administrative environment.
Positive Impact on Education/Accreditation Outcomes: By enhancing the administrative capabilities of PAs, the session
aims to positively impact education/accreditation outcomes. Efficient and effective administration is crucial for the smooth
operation of GME programs, which in turn contributes to positive education outcomes and successful accreditation.
Development of a Continuous Improvement Mindset: The session aims to instill a mindset of continuous improvement
among PAs. This mindset, coupled with the practical tools and strategies provided in the session, will enable PAs to
continuously evaluate and refine their administrative processes, leading to the ongoing improvement and success of their
GME programs.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers that might prevent attendees from achieving the desired change include:
1. Resistance to Change: People often resist change, especially when it involves adopting new strategies or tools. This
resistance can stem from a lack of understanding, fear of failure, or comfort with existing processes.
2. Lack of Time: Implementing new strategies and tools often requires an investment of time for learning and adaptation.
Busy PAs may perceive this as a barrier.
3. Limited Resources: Some PAs may perceive a lack of resources, such as access to advanced tools or training
materials, as a barrier to implementing the strategies discussed in the session.
4. Technological Challenges: Some PAs may not be comfortable with using digital tools for communication and
collaboration, or they may face technical issues that hinder their effective use.
Our session will address these barriers in the following ways:
1. Overcoming Resistance to Change: The session will provide a clear rationale for the need for advanced administrative
strategies, demonstrating their benefits through practical examples. This will help attendees understand the value of these
strategies and motivate them to embrace change.
2. Efficient Learning: The session will present information in a structured and easy-to-understand manner, facilitating quick
learning. We will also provide resources for further learning and practice after the session.
3. Resource Optimization: The session will discuss how to optimize the use of available resources and provide guidance
on accessing necessary tools and materials. We will also highlight cost-effective and free tools that PAs can use.
4. Technological Support: The session will provide guidance on using digital tools for communication and collaboration.
By addressing these barriers, the session aims to empower PAs to implement the strategies discussed and achieve the
desired changes in their administrative practices.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
1. Interactive Presentations: We'll use presentations with real-world examples and case studies to introduce advanced
administrative strategies.
2. Hands-On Exercises: Attendees will apply the learned strategies through practical exercises, gaining confidence in using
them.
3. Group Discussions: Attendees can share experiences and insights in facilitated group discussions, fostering a
collaborative learning environment.
4. Digital Tools: We'll demonstrate various digital tools that can enhance communication and collaboration in administrative
tasks.
5. Follow-Up Support: After the session, we'll provide Q&A sessions, troubleshooting support, and additional resources for
further learning to help attendees implement the learned strategies in their GME programs.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Session Timeline
Introduction (5 minutes): Brief overview of the session, its objectives, and the importance of advanced administrative
strategies in Graduate Medical Education (GME).
Optimizing Administrative Processes (15 minutes):
Lean Six Sigma Methodology (5 minutes)
Process Standardization (5 minutes)
Agile Project Management (5 minutes)
Hands-On Exercise (10 minutes): Attendees will participate in a practical exercise applying one of the strategies discussed
in the previous section.
Enhancing Communication and Collaboration (10 minutes):
Digital Collaboration Tools (5 minutes)
Interdepartmental Meetings (5 minutes)
Group Discussion (5 minutes): Attendees will share their experiences, challenges, and insights related to GME
administration.
Conclusion and Follow-Up Support (5 minutes): Recap of the session, addressing any questions, and explaining the follow-
up support that will be provided after the session.
(18) Submission ID#1853381
Harnessing Social Media for Residency Programs: Strategies to Enhance Visibility and Attract Top
Candidates
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Natalie Smith – Mountain Area Health Education Center (MAHEC)
Email: Natalie.Smith@mahec.net
Office Phone: (828) 771-4217
Cell Phone: (828) 713-7561
Presenter(s)
Natalie Smith, C-TAGME
Family Medicine Residency Program Adminstrator
Mountain Area Health Education Center (MAHEC)
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Crafting Your Program's Online Presence: Developing a compelling narrative and brand identity that
resonates with potential candidates.
2. Targeted Recruitment Strategies: Utilizing platforms such as LinkedIn, Twitter, and specialty-specific
forums to reach and engage with medical students and potential applicants.
3. Showcasing Program Highlights: Creating impactful content that highlights your program's strengths,
unique features, faculty expertise, and resident success stories.
4. Managing Your Program's Digital Reputation: Techniques for maintaining a positive online image and
addressing candidate inquiries and concerns effectively.
5. Analytics and Performance Metrics: Using data-driven insights to optimize social media campaigns,
measure engagement, and track the effectiveness of recruitment efforts.
Session Description
In the competitive landscape of medical education, residency programs are increasingly turning to social
media to differentiate themselves and attract the best candidates. This session is designed for residency
program administrators and coordinators looking to leverage social media platforms effectively for recruitment
and program promotion.
Target Audience
Residency program administrators and coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The desired outcome of this presentation is to equip residency program administrators and coordinators with the
knowledge and skills necessary to harness social media effectively for recruitment and program promotion. Specifically, we
aim to bridge the gap between the current sporadic or ineffective use of social media and the optimal use that drives
increased visibility, engagement, and ultimately, attracts top-tier candidates to residency programs.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Through this session, we intend to foster a change in competence where program administrators and coordinators can
confidently:
*Develop and implement a strategic social media plan tailored to their residency program's goals.
*Utilize analytics and metrics to measure the impact of social media efforts on recruitment outcomes.
*Maintain a consistent and positive online reputation that aligns with the program's values and strengths.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Barriers to achieving these changes may include:
*Limited understanding or experience with social media platforms among program administrators.
*Concerns about privacy, confidentiality, and professionalism on social media.
*Resistance to change or perceived lack of time and resources to dedicate to social media management.
To address these barriers, the session will provide practical strategies and actionable insights that demonstrate how to
navigate and overcome these challenges. Emphasis will be placed on ethical considerations, best practices in content
creation, and leveraging available tools and resources effectively.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
*Presentation with statistics and examples of successful social media strategies in residency recruitment.
*Interactive discussions and Q&A sessions to address specific concerns and challenges faced by participants.
*Hands-on exercises where participants can begin crafting their social media strategy or refining existing ones.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction (5 minutes)
Overview of the importance of social media in residency program recruitment.
Brief introduction to the session objectives and agenda.
Understanding the Landscape (5 minutes)
Current trends and statistics in social media usage among medical professionals and students.
Common challenges and misconceptions related to social media use in recruitment.
Building Your Program's Online Presence (10 minutes)
Crafting a compelling narrative and brand identity for your residency program.
Identifying key strengths and unique selling points to highlight on social media.
Strategic Recruitment Strategies (10 minutes)
Utilizing Instagram for targeted recruitment.
Case studies of effective recruitment campaigns and engagement strategies.
Managing Your Program's Digital Reputation (5 minutes)
Best practices for maintaining a professional and positive online presence.
Addressing privacy concerns, confidentiality issues, and handling negative feedback.
Analytics and Measuring Impact (5 minutes)
Importance of data-driven decision making in social media strategy.
Tools and metrics to track engagement, reach, and recruitment outcomes.
Q&A and Interactive Discussion (10 minutes)
Open floor for questions, discussion of specific challenges, and sharing of participant experiences.
Guidance on next steps and resources for further learning and implementation.
Through this structured approach, participants will gain practical skills and actionable insights to transform their residency
program's social media presence, enhance recruitment efforts, and ultimately attract top candidates effectively.
(19) Submission ID#1853833
Empowering GME Professionals: Launching the FULGME Journal for Innovation and Collaboration
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Pamela Furneaux – Mayo Clinic Florida
Email: furneaux.pamela@mayo.edu
Office Phone: (678) 633-0946
Presenter(s)
Pamela M. Furneaux, MHA
Education Program Coordinator
Mayo Clinic Florida
Role: Presenter
Barbara D. Gohre, B.S. of Healthcare, TAGME, CAHPM, CSSBB
GME Accreditation Manager
Phoenix Children's
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. 1. Identify the key challenges GME professionals face in publishing in traditional national journals.
2. 2. Discuss the steps taken to create the FULGME journal and establish its editorial board.
3. 3. Explain the importance of practical, experience-based insights and process improvements in GME.
4. 4. Outline the submission guidelines and review process developed for FULGME.
5. 5. Develop strategies for marketing and outreach to promote the journal and engage contributors.
Session Description
This session explores the creation and launch of the FULGME (Forum of United Leaders in Graduate Medical
Education) journal, designed as a dedicated platform for GME professionals to share innovations, professional
insights, and process improvement initiatives. We will discuss the journey from conceptualization to execution,
including the establishment of the editorial board, development of submission guidelines, and the marketing
strategy to engage the GME community.
Target Audience
- Graduate Medical Education (GME) program administrators - Medical educators - GME professionals -
Academic leaders - Medical education researchers
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
GME professionals often struggle to publish their valuable insights, particularly those related to practical process
improvements and administrative innovations, due to the high standards and limited space in traditional journals like JGME
and JAMA.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The FULGME journal aims to provide an accessible platform for GME professionals to publish their work, focusing on
practical, experience-based insights that enhance GME programs' quality and efficiency.
Desired Changes
Competence:
Increase GME professionals' ability to publish their work and share best practices.
Performance:
Facilitate the adoption of innovative ideas and process improvements across GME programs.
Educational/Accreditation Outcome:
Enhance the overall quality and efficiency of GME programs through shared knowledge and collaborative efforts.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Barrier 1: Lack of Awareness: GME professionals may not be aware of the new journal or its benefits.
Barrier 2: Submission Hesitancy: Potential contributors might feel intimidated by the submission process or doubt the value
of their contributions.
Barrier 3: Resource Constraints: Limited time and resources may prevent GME professionals from engaging with the
journal.
Addressing Barriers:
Awareness: Implement a robust marketing strategy to promote the journal through conferences, webinars, and social
media.
Submission Support: Provide clear, user-friendly submission guidelines and offer support to potential contributors.
Resource Optimization: Highlight the journal's focus on practical, actionable insights that can be directly applied to improve
GME programs.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Interactive Presentation: Use case studies and real-world examples to illustrate the journal's impact.
Panel Discussion: Engage editorial board members and early contributors to share their experiences and insights.
Q&A Session: Allow participants to ask questions and discuss how they can contribute to and benefit from the journal.
Workshop Activity: Facilitate a brainstorming session where attendees can propose article ideas and receive feedback
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. **Introduction (5 minutes):**
- Overview of session objectives and agenda.
2. **Presentation (15 minutes):**
- Discuss the creation of the FULGME journal, including challenges and solutions.
- Highlight the importance of practical insights in GME.
3. **Panel Discussion (10 minutes):**
- Editorial board members and contributors share their experiences.
4. **Q&A Session (10 minutes):**
- Address attendees' questions and concerns about the journal.
5. **Workshop Activity (10 minutes):**
- Brainstorm article ideas and receive feedback from peers and facilitators.
6. **Conclusion (5 minutes):**
(20) Submission ID#1854024
For the Love of Learning
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Karen Entrekin – UNC Health
Email: Karen.Entrekin@unchealth.unc.edu
Office Phone: (919) 830-2854
Presenter(s)
Karen Entrekin, MHA
Graduate Medical Education Operations Manager
UNC Health
Role: Presenter
Sarah Clark, MPH
GME Specialist
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. 1. Describe the different models and venues of Program Coordinator training
2. 2. Analyze the patterns and styles of learners and identify areas where we reach the most seasoned
and new members of the Program Coordinator groups
3. 3. Identify tools to invigorate and incorporate them in the Graduate Medical Education office and the
full health system in a meaningful way.
4.
5.
Session Description
This session will focus on how GME trains our new Program Coordinators through Quarterly In-person training
sessions, podcasts, learning models, coordinator council, mentor opportunities, retreats, and open forums. We
plan to showcase the roadmap of where we came from and how we are investing in our Program Coordinators
growth path.
Target Audience
Experience Level: *Beginner and Experienced Coordinators Coordinator Type: Program Coordinators and
Institutional Coordinators Program Directors
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
*Beginner and Experienced Coordinators
Post-pandemic, academic medical centers across the country experienced an erosion of our cultures due to burn-out,
fatigue and years of effort to simply keep our institutions afloat - an extremely challenging time to work in healthcare. Our
GME team created training opportunities to emerge as leaders in the field rebuilding our community through a variety of
learning initiatives and formats for our Program Coordinators, which impacts our GME Administrative team as well. GME
has been able to ignite culture change within our Health System reaching a vast number of departments and teammates
utilizing the techniques efforts, and talents of our experienced team. Movement towards a more collaborative and positive
learning community is evident through the initiation of our Program Coordinator quarterly and continuing training.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
How to create the most meaningful way to train and collaborate between GME and Program Coordinators.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Silos due to hybrid or remote work situations.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
PowerPoint, Videos, Samples of presentations
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5 m- Overview of historical methods of training Program Coordinators pre-pandemic
1 m – Discussion of how our staff felt isolated and disconnected with their learning and requirements.
5 m – Overview of how the new work landscape (hybrid & remote) impacted our training and onboarding of new Program
Coordinators
5 m- How we develop content and offer learning that is time sensitive and most pertinent to the work they are doing
5 m – Overview of best practices and networking opportunities
5 m – Overview and data review of engagement and participation for PC’s across the health system
5 m – Participants discuss challenges and struggles of onboarding new staff in silos and in hybrid work environment
1 m – Overview of tools offered and next steps
5 m – Discussion and questions
(21) Submission ID#1854517
Virtual Vitals: Tomorrow's Physicians in the Digital Realm
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Robert Belcourt – Henry Ford Health
Email: rbelcou1@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (248) 953-6217
Cell Phone: (248) 953-6217
Presenter(s)
Megan Dekker, MD
Senior Staff, Internal Medicine
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Robert G. Belcourt, EdS
Graduate Medical Education Instructional Designer
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the fundamental elements of a comprehensive virtual care training program designed for
trainees.
2. Create a roadmap to develop and implement a standardized virtual care OSCE to evaluate trainee
competency.
3. Apply an effective feedback tool to improve trainee skill sets in virtual care.
4.
5.
Session Description
Join us as we navigate the evolving landscape of medicine, shaped by the unprecedented challenges posed
by the COVID-19 pandemic. As the demand for telehealth grows, we are faced with a paradigm shift in how
we prepare our physicians for the digital age. In this session, we will share a cutting-edge training program
tailored to meet the complexities of virtual care education. From understanding the intricacies of the
curriculum to mastering OSCE development, feedback strategies, and evaluation methods, participants will
explore essential skills needed to thrive in this new era of medicine. At the end of this session, participants will
understand the fundamental elements of a comprehensive virtual care training program designed for trainees,
create a roadmap for developing and implementing a standardized virtual care OSCE to evaluate trainee
competency, and apply an effective feedback tool to enhance trainee skill sets in virtual care. Session Topics:
Competency-based medical education and assessment Resident/fellow development and education Use of
technology in medical education
Target Audience
DIOs, Program Directors, Faculty Members, Residents/Fellows, Institutional Coordinators/Administration
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The optimal or desired outcome is for trainees to receive comprehensive training in virtual care, covering communication,
technology use, physical exam adaptations, and ethical/legal considerations. This training should be competency-based,
ensuring trainees meet specific standards before independently providing virtual care. By addressing this gap, the
presentation aims to bridge the difference between the current practice (variable and potentially inadequate training) and
the desired outcome (standardized, competency-based training leading to proficient virtual care delivery).
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Increased competence in virtual care delivery, standardized assessment of virtual care skills, enhanced faculty feedback
skills
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Implementing a new training program can be resource-intensive, and faculty may perceive a lack of time to develop the
curriculum, OSCE scenarios, and feedback mechanisms. The session offers a well-defined curriculum, OSCE structure,
and feedback tool, saving faculty valuable time and effort in program development.
Faculty might be unsure of how to effectively assess resident competency in virtual care or how to provide meaningful
feedback in this new setting. The session directly addresses assessment concerns by providing detailed guidance on
OSCE development, faculty observer roles, and structured feedback mechanisms.
Additionally, the Q&A and discussion portion of the session allows participants to raise specific concerns and receive
tailored advice from the presenters and peers. This fosters a collaborative environment where participants can share
strategies for overcoming barriers and gain confidence in their ability to implement change.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
In this session, participants will gain a comprehensive understanding of a competency-based virtual care curriculum that
empowers trainees for success in telehealth. Attendees will gain exposure to standardized patient encounters, a structured
feedback tool, and strategies for evaluating the effectiveness of a virtual care program. Participants will leave with an
understanding of how to implement a virtual care curriculum at their home institution.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction: (5 min) Overview of the importance and challenges of virtual healthcare for trainees.
Curriculum Overview: (5 min) Introduce a comprehensive virtual care curriculum emphasizing key competencies and
essential policies.
OSCE Development & Implementation: (10 min) Explore how to create standardized virtual care OSCEs using
standardized patients.
Interactive Activity: (10 min) Participants begin developing a roadmap for virtual care OSCEs.
Formative Feedback & Improvement: (5 min) Introduce a faculty feedback tool to provide real-time feedback during OSCE
encounters.
Interactive Activity: (5 min) Apply the feedback model through interactive exercises.
Evaluation & Dissemination: (5 min) Outline the methodology for conducting pre- and post-surveys to assess participants'
skill sets and comfort levels with virtual care.
Q&A: (5 min) Provide an opportunity for participants to ask questions, share insights, and engage in collaborative
discussion.
(22) Submission ID#1854651
Inclusion Practices in Clinical Learning Environments
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Morgan Passiment – ACGME
Email: mpassiment@acgme.org
Office Phone: (312) 755-5012
Presenter(s)
Morgan Passiment, MSJ
Director, Diversity Initiatives
ACGME
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify terminology describing how bias shows up in learning environments.
2. Describe specific examples of dominant culture.
3. Apply inclusion and mitigation practices.
4. Describe resources available in the ACGME Equity Matters Program.
5.
Session Description
This session is designed for GME administrators, educators and leaders interested in learning skills and
strategies for increasing resident, fellow, and faculty engagement as part of creating inclusive environments.
Participants will understand how trauma manifests in GME practices and learning environments; learn
strategies for developing inclusive cultures while managing resistance; and how to effectively use the ACGME
Equity Matter® Program resources.
Target Audience
GME administrators, educators and leaders
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Individual in GME often express challenges in addressing bias experienced or witnessed in the clinical learning
environment. This session provides a framing to understand the impact of various forms of bias as well as providing a
framework for inclusive practices.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will equip the GME community with an understand and resources to create inclusive learning environments as
part of the ACGME requirements.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Addressing the topic of bias can often raise past trauma for individuals and make others feel blamed. This session takes a
purposeful approach to setting the expectations for the participants, using language that invites engagement, avoids
blame, and encourages participants engagement based on personal comfort level.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The session is facilitator led with peer engagement opportunities. This session will use didactic and small group discussion
to share information and deepen learning. A handout is provided for use after the session to practice approaches.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction and Overview - 5 min
Check-in Poll - 5 min
Culture, Concepts, and Terminology - 20 min
Small Group Case Study - 10 min
Debrief and Close - 10 min
(23) Submission ID#1855551
Ensuring Allyship for Learners: Creating a Faculty Allyship Curriculum
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Ashley Maranich – Uniformed Services University
Email: ashley.maranich@Usuhs.edu
Office Phone: (301) 295-3185
Presenter(s)
Jessica Bunin, MD, MHPE
Associate Dean of Community and Educational Culture
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Role: Presenter
Gayle Haischer-Rollo, MD
Assistant Dean for Faculty Development
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Discuss the concept of using an allyship curriculum to signal safety
2. Identify goals and objectives for a faculty development allyship curriculum
3. Develop a plan for implementing and sustaining an allyship curriculum
4.
5.
Session Description
Medical learners (students and residents) in the U.S. regularly experience racism, homophobia, and
transphobia. For too long, the work of overcoming these phenomena has been left to those underrepresented
in medicine (URiM). A dearth of underrepresented healthcare workers and the minority taxes they suffer make
allyship among majority populations essential to the progress of equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives. An
informal preliminary needs assessment of URiM learners at one of our institutions (Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences (USUHS)) indicated that, due to faculty underrepresentation, learners were
uncertain about which faculty were safe to discuss discrimination and diversity-related issues with. To address
this sense of lack of safety and clear allyship, we created a successful “allyship curriculum,” which addressed
the impacts of discrimination on learners, analyzed how intersecting identities and privilege manifest, and
helped faculty voice a commitment to transformative work. Through this, a community of faculty allies has
developed, working for change across the institution. As such, this workshop will prepare participants to
design, create, implement, and sustain their own allyship programs. We will describe successes, challenges,
and lessons learned in our program, to allow participants to think broadly about what an allyship curriculum in
their context might look like and to troubleshoot such programs before engaging their constituents. As we did
for our program, we will use Freire’s critical pedagogy and Kern’s curriculum development models as guides
for creating a program that could work within each participant’s institution.
Target Audience
program directors, program faculty, institutional leaders
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Providing allyship for URiM and LGBTQIA+ learners. Creating an allyship curriculum for faculty.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Empower faculty with the language, skills, and attitudes necessary to create a successful allyship curriculum at their
institutions.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Resistance to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts, lack of knowledge/expertise on topic - we will discuss ways to
develop a larger team of faculty to contribute to institution efforts and learner support
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Didactics, Small group discussion, Small group problem solving, Think-pair-share
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5 min: Introduction
10 min: Small group breakout to discuss the culture surrounding DEI work and trust at institutions
10 min: Present conceptual frameworks used in the development of the allyship curriculum at USUHS and outcomes of the
curriculum
10 min: Small group breakout for participants to develop goals and objectives for a curriculum
5 min: Discussion of challenges of implementation and sustainment of an allyship curriculum
5 min: Think-pair-share of potential challenges at home institution
5 min: Summary and questions
(24) Submission ID#1856736
Navigating Your Path: Applying for a New Graduate Medical Education (GME) Training Program
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Susan Tovar – BayCare
Email: susan.tovar@baycare.org
Office Phone: (813) 586-6269
Cell Phone: (419) 346-0509
Presenter(s)
Susan Tovar, n/a
Institutional Manager, GME
BayCare
Role: Presenter
Jaymie West, BS, C-TAGME
Program Manager, Internal Medicine
BayCare Health System
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understanding your role as Program Coordinator/Manager in starting a new training program.
2. Utilization of tips and resources for completing an application and site visit for accreditation.
3. Plan institutional and programmatic goals to create a long lasting and successful program with
engaging faculty.
4.
5.
Session Description
Join us for a comprehensive session tailored for program coordinators and administrators who have been
tasked with establishing a new ACGME accredited program. This dynamic session is designed to provide
invaluable guidance and insights into the intricate process of program development and accreditation. This
session will offer an overview into the essential components of building a successful ACGME accredited
program from the ground up. Participants will gain an understanding of the need for a program in the
institution, the financial considerations, application process, site visit, and challenges of applying for a new
ACGME program. Whether you're initiating a new residency or fellowship program or seeking to expand your
institution's graduate medical education offerings. This session provides invaluable insights and resources to
guide you through the complex process of ACGME accreditation.
Target Audience
• Program Coordinators • Program Directors • Institutional Coordinators/Administrators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Better defining the need for a program within the institution and describing in detail the application process. Helping the
attendees understand the intricacies of various program requirements, preparing meticulous application materials,
mastering the electronic application systems, and preparing faculty and other GME stakeholders for the site visit.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Successfully obtaining accreditation from the ACGME for a new program by helping to describe the requirements for a full,
complete, and well written application.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
We will discuss the challenges of applying for a new program, the difficulties faced with building faculty and staff, and
getting investment from the C-Suite at facilities.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Educational methods will be shared through slides and handouts to help attendees prepare for the challenges and needed
information with regard to applying for a new program.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5m – Introduction
5m – Ice Breaker
10m – Need for Program/Financial Considerations
10m - Application
10m – Site Visit
10m - Challenges
Navigating your path through the application process for a new ACGME graduate medical education training program is a
multifaceted journey requiring careful planning and strategic decision-making. This process involves understanding the
intricacies of various program requirements, preparing meticulous application materials, mastering the electronic
application systems, and preparing faculty and other GME stakeholders for the site visit. Moreover, it demands
introspection to align hospital goals with program goals and navigating through a culture shift within the healthcare system.
By navigating this path thoughtfully, you set up the program and sponsoring institution for success.
(25) Submission ID#1856771
Guarding Your Galaxy- Volume 2
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Kimberly Baker-Genaw – HENRY FORD HEALTH
Email: kgenaw1@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (313) 916-1828
Presenter(s)
Kimberly M Baker-Genaw, M.D.
DIO
HENRY FORD HEALTH
Role: Presenter
Katherine McKinney, MD
DIO
University of Kentucky
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Describe the requirements for GMEC oversight of the programs in your Galaxy.
2. Identify opportunities to improve oversight, including Special Review, AIR, and APE
3. Discuss methods and tools that can improve GMEC oversight processes
4. Develop strategies to engage the Guardians of your GME Galaxy
5.
Session Description
The session is a follow up to the 2024 Guardians of your Galaxy presentation. We will discuss additional
responsibilities of GMECs and your role as a GMEC Guardian. We will review the requirements of the
Graduate Medical Education Committee (GMEC) to provide the required oversight to ensure compliance with
the ACGME Institutional, Program, and Recognition Requirements. We will take you on an out of this world
galactic review of how to demonstrate and implement this oversight from Special Reviews, Annual Institutional
Reviews, Annual Program Evaluation and more. The session will include several opportunities to share and
collaborate during facilitated group discussions on case scenarios related to Guarding your GME galaxy and
providing the necessary documentation in the GMEC minutes to ensure program and institutional
accreditation success. Presenters will focus on tangible and easily translatable methods and tools to support
GMEC functioning to allow participants to leave the workshop with practical changes to implement within their
institution and/or GMEC.
Target Audience
DIOs, GMEC, Institutional Coordinators, Program Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
At the Annual Education Conference, the ACGME presents the most common citations given to Sponsoring Institutions by
the IRC. The majority of citations relate to lack of GMEC oversight, process, or required outcomes. We hope to provide
additional education and examples of how to avoid these common citations and tools for enhanced GMEC oversight.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Improved effectiveness of the GMEC to provide the required oversight functions.
Improved program and SI compliance with ACGME requirements
Decreased citations and adverse accreditation decisions for programs and SIs
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Attendees may have local barriers including lack of resources, staff, or technology to provide the required oversight. We
plan to share our learned efficiencies and successful methods employed at our institutions. In addition, we will share
templates from our SIs with attendees.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
didactic presentation with several opportunities to have breakout group discussions. The breakout sessions will include
simulated GMEC activities with group feedback. In addition, we will share templates from our institutions related to these
oversight functions.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Session timeline:
5 minutes Introductions/learning objectives
5 minutes GMEC oversight responsibilities review:
5 minutes Special Review case scenario/small group discussion:
10 minutes Presenter GMEC approaches APE
5 minutes Group discussion: approaches to APE
10 minutes GMEC AIR process/small group discussion:
5 minutes Pair/share GMEC monitoring strategies:
5 minutes Final debrief/discussion/takeaways.
(26) Submission ID#1857609
Collaborative Implementation of Individualized Learning Plans for Resident Success
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Christine Ford – Houston Methodist`
Email: cdford@houstonmethodist.org
Office Phone: (832) 492-6921
Presenter(s)
Christine Ford, EdD
Curriculum Developer
Houston Methodist`
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Describe components of effective ILP development, implementation, and education.
2. Identify barriers and solutions related to ILP development, implementation, and education.
3. Discuss how the tools presented in the workshop could be used in participants’ home institutions.
4.
5.
Session Description
The ACGME requires programs to incorporate individualized learning plans (ILPs) for all learners as they
develop self-directed, lifelong learning. Recently the Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine Learner Handoff
Standards Task Force developed an ILP template with specific learning goals and potential gaps for incoming
interns. Given the emphasis on ILP utilization at both the UME and GME level, educational leaders need a
cohesive approach for ILP development, implementation, and education, which this workshop provides. We
will review the core sections of the ILP. and present the development of our customized ILP template using
ACGME competencies and programmatic vision. We will describe our process of incorporating the ILP form
into the academic calendar as part of a mentorship toolkit and semi-annual assessment while acknowledging
pitfalls and barriers to implementation. We will share our program’s approach to providing faculty and resident
development on ILPs, an evaluation tool for ILP review, and discuss how we have used this data to further
develop our ILP form. Our approach to ILP implementation is unique because it leverages expertise from not
only Internal Medicine leadership but also from educational development staff at our institution. By working
collaboratively, we provide resident and faculty development around ILPs that is informed by adult learning
principles and is also grounded in our local needs and relevant to our audience.
Target Audience
This workshop will be useful for any clerkship, residency, and fellowship program leaders who are tasked with
faculty development and interested in improving the quality of self-directed learning.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Individualized learning plans (ILPs) are tools to help learners self-assess and reflect on their learning and identify areas
where they want to improve. The ACGME requires programs to incorporate ILPs for all learners as they develop self-
directed, lifelong learning. GME programs may struggle with creating and implementing ILPs with their learners because
they are an unfamiliar concept, and there is no set template or process from the ACGME regarding ILPs. Our workshop
provides guidance on ILP development, implementation, and education by leveraging expertise from not only from our
Internal Medicine leadership but also from educational development staff at our institution.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
After attending this workshop, participants will be able to revise (or create) their own ILP templates to address challenges
we have observed learners have in completing ILPs, which include lack of time, poor SMART goal development, and non-
specific form questions about the learner’s future career plans. We will provide a copy of our ILP form as a handout, both
electronically and in paper copy. In addition, participants will recognize the importance of effective faculty development in
generating buy-in from faculty mentors and from learners and will have access to our faculty ILP development presentation
slides upon request.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Revising or creating an ILP template and process for a program can feel like a daunting task and one that is difficult to
know where to begin, which may prevent educators from making necessary changes. Furthermore, GME programs may
face barriers with implementing ILPs such as lack of faculty buy-in, lack of a standardized ILP template, and lack of
administrative support. Our session provides guidance across multiple fronts, including template development, logistical
issues, and learner and faculty mentor education on their role in the ILP process. We will also provide tangible take-home
resources to aid participants once they are back at their home institutions.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Our workshop will use a lecture format to introduce the content and talk through our process. Three speakers will be
presenting, each with their own area of expertise—an Internal Medicine program director, an Assistant Dean, and a
curriculum developer. Participants will break into small groups for discussion questions and opportunities for application.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5 minutes, think pair share: Participants will discuss their current knowledge, experience, and needs regarding ILPs
15 minutes, lecture: Hand out our ILP template, describe how we developed our customized ILP template using ACGME
competencies and programmatic vision and our process of incorporating the ILP form into the academic calendar as part of
a mentorship toolkit and semi-annual assessment while acknowledging pitfalls and barriers to implementation.
5 minutes activity: Participants will work in pairs to revise a SMART goal
10 minutes lecture: Describe our collaborative, interprofessional approach in ILP resident and faculty education, lessons
learned, and future directions
10 minutes: Ask participants what their biggest takeaway is that they plan to use in their setting
5 minutes, wrap up and questions
(27) Submission ID#1859672
Enhancing the Letter of Deficiency: A Roadmap for Effective Remediation
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Robert Belcourt – Henry Ford Health
Email: rbelcou1@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (248) 953-6217
Cell Phone: (248) 953-6217
Presenter(s)
Kimberly M Baker-Genaw, M.D.
DIO
HENRY FORD HEALTH
Role: Presenter
Robert G. Belcourt, EdS
Graduate Medical Education Instructional Designer
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the purpose and best practices associated with Letters of Deficiency (LODs) in medical
education.
2. Learn and apply effective strategies for implementing remediation plans and supporting trainees
through the LOD process.
3. Develop skills to craft, actionable, and supportive LODs through hands-on practice with case-based
scenarios.
4.
5.
Session Description
Letters of Deficiency (LODs) are useful in addressing trainee performance issues, yet their success relies on
clear guidelines, adherence to consistent practices, and collaborative engagement. This interactive workshop
will share invaluable lessons learned from a comprehensive review of a GME program's LOD process. This
session provides participants with tools and hands-on practice for improving LOD utilization to foster a culture
of continuous improvement at their home institution. Participants will leave with a thorough grasp of LODs'
purpose and best practices, along with the ability to implement remediation plans, support trainees, and craft
clear, actionable, and supportive LODs through hands-on case-based practice. Session Topics: Competency-
based medical education and assessment Resident/fellow remediation Faculty development and engagement
Target Audience
DIOs, Program Directors, Faculty Members, Hospital Administration/C-Suite/Leadership, and Institutional
Coordinators/Administration
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The professional practice gaps this presentation addresses are the inconsistency and lack of clarity in issuing and
managing Letters of Deficiency in trainee programs. Currently, there is often a lack of standardized guidelines, leading to
variations in how LODs are written, delivered, and acted upon. This can result in ineffective remediation plans,
misunderstandings between faculty and trainees, and potential legal challenges.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Increased faculty competence in LOD implementation, improved trainee performance, enhanced accreditation compliance,
and strengthened institutional culture.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
This session directly addresses the common barriers encountered in implementing LODs within medical education. It
acknowledges the lack of standardized guidelines, reluctance to use LODs, uncertainties about proper documentation, and
limited resources for remediation, while also recognizing potential resistance to change. The session offers solutions by
providing a comprehensive framework for LOD processes, emphasizing supportive communication strategies, offering
legal guidance on documentation, facilitating brainstorming for remediation plans, and highlighting the benefits of a
standardized approach. By addressing these barriers head-on, the session aims to empower participants with the
knowledge and tools needed to implement effective and fair LOD processes in their own institutions.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
To facilitate change and enhance learning in the LOD workshop, a multi-faceted approach will be employed. Interactive
presentations will establish a foundational understanding of best practices and legal considerations. Case-based learning
will enable participants to apply this knowledge in real-world scenarios, while group discussions and brainstorming will
foster collaboration and diverse perspectives. Templates will provide practical guidance for future implementation.
Dedicated Q&A sessions will ensure all questions are addressed, promoting a comprehensive understanding of the LOD
process.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction (5 minutes): Define LODs and their purpose in trainee education.
The Current Landscape (5 minutes): Share a GME's experience in reviewing and revising their LOD process, highlighting
challenges, inconsistencies, and legal considerations.
Best Practices for LODs (10 minutes): Review guidelines for writing clear, actionable, and supportive LODs. Discuss
effective communication strategies for delivering LODs. Explore ways to tailor LODs to individual learners and specific
deficiencies.
Interactive Discussion (5 minutes): Discuss challenges and solutions related to LOD implementation. Participants share
their own experiences and insights.
Remediation Strategies & Resources (10 minutes): Group discussion on collaborative approaches to developing
remediation plans, sharing successes and lessons learned from the GME’s process. Share examples of successful
remediation plans and resources. Discuss the role of faculty and program leadership in supporting remediation.
Case Studies & Interactive Discussion (10 minutes): Analyze real-world LOD scenarios and discuss optimal approaches.
Facilitate interactive discussion on addressing challenges and ensuring fair processes.
Q&A (5 minutes): Open the floor for questions and further discussion.
(28) Submission ID#1861491
Supporting Clinician Educators: Frameworks for Effective Faculty Development Programming
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Susan Greenwood-Clark
Email: susanclark333@gmail.com
Office Phone: (513) 304-5649
Presenter(s)
Susan Greenwood-Clark, MBA, BSN,RN
Director, Medical Education
Role: Presenter
Kelley E. Whitehurst, MAEd
Program Manager, GME Education
ECU Health Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. 1. Identify the importance of consistent faculty development programming for educational excellence
and continued accreditation
2. 2. Describe foundational components of an effective faculty development framework
3. 3. Utilize an applicable faculty development framework to guide educational programming at their
institutions
4.
5.
Session Description
Consistent faculty development is essential for educational excellence and continued accreditation, however,
institutions often feel ill-quipped to create and deliver educational programming for their local GME
communities. In this session, two frameworks for effective faculty development will be offered, addressing
both community hospital and academic medical center perspectives. The presenters will discuss foundational
components of each framework, such as selecting educational content, developing varied instructional
methods, and evaluating effectiveness, and share practical tips for local implementation.
Target Audience
COIL, CPFD
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Continual faculty development is essential for educational excellence and required by the ACGME, however, sponsoring
institutions often find it difficult to provide GME-specific educational opportunities for their clinician educators. We realized
there is a need for faculty development frameworks to be shared that address the foundational components of
programming from both the community hospital and academic medical center perspectives, so that attendees can be
equipped and empowered to provide effective faculty development at their home institutions.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We want attendees to be equipped and empowered to provide effective faculty development at their home institutions by
providing frameworks for effective faculty development. We also want participants to leave the session being able to clearly
articulate foundational components of an effective faculty development framework and how to apply them to educational
offerings at their home institutions.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers for attendees could include institutional resources, access to funding, knowledge of educational planning
practice and tools, and the availability of local content experts to assist with faculty development. We plan to address these
barriers by sharing from our own experiences with faculty development, including how we faced many of these barriers and
providing suggestions for overcoming them. In addition, we plan to build a discussion of such factors into our workshop,
allowing participants to share challenges, opportunities and suggested solutions with one another.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Didactic and small group discussions among the attendees
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
We will share our experience with planning of faculty development as well as share tools that can be employed by the
attendees. Expect 30 mins of lecture and 20 mins of discussion and sharing.
(29) Submission ID#1865792
Understanding the Importance of Negotiation
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Natasha Brocks – Abrazo Health Network
Email: natasha.brocks@abrazohealth.com
Office Phone: (623) 848-5609
Cell Phone: (314) 941-2091
Presenter(s)
Natasha M. Brocks, BA, C-TAGME, CHPM, LSSBB
GME Program Coordinator
Abrazo Health Network
Role: Presenter
Dora Miller, C-TAGME, CHPM
Manager of Academic Programs
Washington University
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. To comprehend the fundamental principles of negotiation.
2. To understand the significance of negotiation skills in graduate medical education.
3. To learn and apply basic negotiation techniques.
4. To develop strategies for managing common negotiation scenarios in a healthcare setting.
5.
Session Description
Negotiation is a vital skill for Administrators in graduate medical education, influencing areas such as salary,
promotions, and workload management. This session will cover the fundamentals of negotiation, emphasizing
the importance of detailed documentation and efficiency, and allow participants to effectively demonstrate the
value they bring to their program/institution as key team members. Participants will learn to communicate
openly, follow up effectively, and understand the significance of negotiations to manage additional
responsibilities and leverage skills and knowledge while enhancing their professional growth, as well as
discover how to negotiate professionally, directly, and matter-of-factly through practical strategies such as
listing reasons for specific requests while considering the depths of their skills and responsibilities. By
approaching every interaction as a conversation, attendees will gain insights into asking appropriate salary
questions, understanding their worth, and effectively making counter-offers. By the end of this session,
learners will have a greater understanding of negotiations and how to confidently use techniques in this
session to achieve better outcomes and recognition in their careers as graduate medical education
professionals.
Target Audience
Coordinator Type o Program Coordinators o Institutional Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
GME Administrators will gain an understanding of the crucial role negotiation plays in salary discussions, promotions,
workload management, and leveraging skills for professional growth.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This course will equip participants with the skills to negotiate effectively and advocate confidently in their professional roles
as critical leadership team members.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Lack of Confidence: Many administrators may feel intimidated by the negotiation process, particularly when dealing with
senior professionals or in high-stakes situations like salary discussions or workload management negotiations.
Inexperience: Some attendees might not have prior experience in formal negotiation settings. They may be unsure of the
techniques or strategies to employ effectively.
Perceived Power Imbalance: Participants may perceive a significant power differential between themselves and senior
faculty or institutional leaders, which can impact their confidence in negotiation.
Fear of Repercussions: There might be concerns about how assertiveness in negotiation could affect their professional
relationships or future opportunities within the institution.
Cultural or Organizational Norms: Organizational culture or norms within the medical education field might discourage
open negotiation or place constraints on what is considered acceptable negotiation behavior.
To address these barriers effectively in your session on negotiation for GME administrators, you can implement the
following strategies:
1. Building Confidence:
Role-playing Exercises: Provide opportunities for participants to practice negotiation scenarios in a safe environment. This
helps build confidence and familiarity with the negotiation process.
Case Studies: Share real-life examples where effective negotiation led to positive outcomes. Discuss how confidence and
preparation played a crucial role.
2. Providing Practical Skills and Tools:
Technique Demonstration: Demonstrate negotiation techniques such as framing, anchoring, and effective listening through
examples and role-plays.
Toolkits and Templates: Provide participants with templates for preparing for negotiations, including checklists for
documenting achievements and preparing talking points.
3. Addressing Power Dynamics:
Awareness and Strategy: Discuss strategies for navigating power dynamics in negotiations, such as focusing on interests
rather than positions and leveraging collaborative problem-solving.
Mentoring and Peer Support: Encourage networking and mentorship opportunities among participants to share
experiences and strategies for negotiating within the institution.
4. Overcoming Cultural Norms:
Educational Sessions: Highlight the benefits of transparent and respectful negotiation practices within the context of GME.
Institutional Support: Advocate for institutional policies that promote fair and open negotiation practices, ensuring alignment
with organizational values.
5. Long-term Skill Development:
Follow-up and Support: Offer post-session resources, such as webinars or coaching sessions, to reinforce learning and
address specific challenges participants may encounter post-training.
Feedback Mechanisms: Establish feedback loops to continuously improve the training based on participant experiences
and evolving negotiation contexts.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The session will begin with an introduction to the fundamental principles of negotiation, covering key concepts such as
interests and positions, along with Practical techniques emphasizing detailed documentation, organization, value
demonstration, and effective communication.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Time Activity
5 min Introduction & Overview of Goals & Objectives
25 min What is Negotiation?
10 min Why should you Negotiate?
10 min Negotiation Techniques
5 min Overview of next steps
5 min Debrief and Q&A
(30) Submission ID#1866335
From Vision to Reality: Implementing a Comprehensive Faculty Development Program
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Janeane Walker – Northeast Georgia Medical Center
Email: janeane.walker@nghs.com
Office Phone: (770) 219-6158
Cell Phone: (678) 283-4660
Presenter(s)
Janeane Walker, PhD
Director of Faculty Development & Educational Outcomes
Northeast Georgia Medical Center
Role: Presenter
John Delzell, Jr., MD
Designated Institutional Official
Northeast Georgia Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the foundational elements required for a successful faculty development program initiative
in GME.
2. Understand how to measure the impact of faculty development on educational quality and learner
outcomes, leading to continuous improvement in GME programs.
3. Explore effective techniques and strategies for engaging faculty members in ongoing professional
development
4. Understand the process of conducting faculty development needs assessments to tailor programs to
specific institutional requirements
5. Create a roboust faculty development program.
Session Description
Embark on a journey with us as we uncover the essential components of a comprehensive faculty
development program in Graduate Medical Education (GME). Our presentation will unveil the blueprint for
crafting a robust faculty development program designed to empower educators and elevate educational
standards. Through the establishment of a GME Faculty Development Advisory Committee, the creation of a
cutting-edge microlearning video library, and the implementation of faculty development needs assessments,
we aim to revolutionize the way faculty engage in medical education. By attending this session, you will gain
invaluable insights into strategies for fostering faculty growth and enhancing learner outcomes. Discover how
investing in faculty development leads to a ripple effect of excellence throughout your GME program. At the
end of this session, learners will be equipped to initiate and sustain a comprehensive faculty development
initiative tailored to their institution's needs, ultimately driving improvements in medical education quality and
learner success.
Target Audience
DIO, Faculty, GME administrators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The presentation aims to address the existing gaps in faculty development within Graduate Medical Education (GME).
Currently, there is a need for more structured and comprehensive faculty development programs, enhanced support for
continuous education and skill enhancement, and more resources such as microlearning tools tailored to faculty needs.
Additionally, the process for assessing faculty development needs can be improved to effectively identify and address
specific areas for growth.
The desired outcome is to establish a comprehensive and structured faculty development program. This includes creating
a GME Faculty Development Advisory Committee to guide and support faculty development initiatives, developing a state-
of-the-art microlearning video library to provide easily accessible and relevant educational resources for faculty, and
implementing regular and thorough faculty development needs assessments to identify and address specific gaps and
areas for improvement.
Attendees will be equipped with the knowledge and tools needed to implement and sustain effective faculty development
programs, ultimately improving the quality of medical education and learner success.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We seek to equip faculty with the skills and knowledge needed to effectively engage in medical education and enhance
their ability to utilize advanced educational tools and resources, such as microlearning videos. Our goal is to elevate the
overall quality of education provided within GME programs, ensuring that faculty development initiatives meet accreditation
standards and requirements. Ultimately, by achieving these changes, we aim to drive improvements in learner outcomes
and create a ripple effect of excellence throughout GME programs.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers that might prevent attendees from achieving the desired changes in faculty development include time
constraints, as faculty members often have demanding schedules with limited time for additional development activities.
There may also be limited resources, such as insufficient funding or access to high-quality educational tools and materials.
Resistance to change can be another obstacle, with some faculty members hesitant to adopt new teaching methods or
technologies. Additionally, a lack of institutional support from leadership can hinder the implementation of comprehensive
faculty development programs. Our session will address these barriers by offering practical strategies and solutions. To
efficiently use time, we will demonstrate how microlearning and other time-efficient methods can integrate seamlessly into
busy schedules, making development activities more manageable. For resource optimization, we will provide insights into
leveraging existing resources and securing funding or support for new initiatives, ensuring faculty have access to
necessary tools and materials. To encourage adoption, we will share success stories and evidence of the positive impact
of new teaching methods and technologies, motivating faculty to embrace change. To build institutional support, we will
outline strategies for gaining buy-in from leadership, highlighting the long-term benefits of robust faculty development
programs. Finally, we will introduce frameworks for conducting thorough needs assessments and implementing effective
feedback mechanisms to continuously improve faculty development efforts. By addressing these barriers, our session will
empower attendees to overcome obstacles and successfully implement the changes needed to enhance faculty
development and educational outcomes in their institutions.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will use PowerPoint, video, gamification, think pair share educational learning methods.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Welcome/Introduction (5 minutes)
• Explain the importance of faculty development in GME and its impact on learner outcomes.
• Engage participants with a question related to their experiences with faculty development.
Background (5 minutes)
• Provide an overview of GME Faculty Development Advisory Committee, microlearning video library, and needs
assessments.
• Highlight the significance of each component in fostering faculty growth and improving educational quality in GME.
Group Activity (10 minutes)
• Divide participants into small groups.
• Assign each group one of the components of the faculty development program: Advisory Committee, microlearning video
library, or needs assessments.
• Task groups with brainstorming strategies for implementing their assigned component in their own GME programs.
(Encourage groups to consider potential challenges and how they might overcome them)
Discussion (10 minutes)
• Invite each group to share their ideas and insights from the group activity.
• Facilitate a discussion on common themes, challenges, and best practices for implementing faculty development
initiatives.
• Encourage participants to ask questions and share their own experiences related to faculty development.
Implementation Strategies (10 minutes)
• Provide practical tips and strategies for implementing each component of the faculty development program.
• Offer resources and tools that participants can utilize in their own institutions.
• Discuss potential barriers to implementation and how to address them effectively.
Conclusion (5 minutes)
• Summarize key takeaways from the session.
• Reinforce the importance of investing in faculty development for enhancing educational outcomes in GME.
Question and Answer (5 minutes)
• Open the floor for additional questions from participants.
(31) Submission ID#1869536
A Year in the Life of an Institutional Coordinator: Tools for Organization & Prioritization
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Bret Stevens
Email: bret.stevens@mclaren.org
Office Phone: (248) 338-5387
Presenter(s)
Bret Stevens, EdD, MBA, C-TAGME
Associate DIO/Director of Medical Education
McLaren Health Care
Role: Presenter
Sarah Gan, C-TAGME
Graduate Medical Education Manager
Corewell Health – Grand Rapids/MSU
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Review the role of the institutional coordinator and the many hats that may be worn at different
institutions
2. Provide insight into ACGME Institutional Requirements and tools provided by the ACGME and other
organizations to help ensure successful compliance
3. Discuss development of professional skills including organization and prioritization in the role of an
institutional coordinator
4.
5.
Session Description
The role of an institutional coordinator involves wearing many hats to ensure the continued success in
adhering to ACGME Institutional Requirements, being prepared for events such as a CLER Visit, and
providing oversight and coordination of graduate medical education operations. To be successful in the role,
one must not only have intimate knowledge of accreditation policies, processes, and requirements set forth by
the ACGME but develop strong professional skills in the areas of prioritization and organization. Being able to
navigate the complexities and multifaceted role can be difficult, but there are tools out there to help provide
support. At the end of this session, learners will be able to understand the role of the institutional coordinator
in terms of ensuring and overseeing compliance with ACGME Institutional Requirements. Learners will hear
from multiple institutions, sharing challenges and successes in the unique environments each institution
provides. Robust discussion among learners and presenters will focus around these topics, in addition to
diving into professional skill building in the areas of organization and prioritization.
Target Audience
Institutional coordinators (new and experienced), DIOs, program coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
There are a limited number of educational opportunities for the Institutional Coordinator. Additionally, the role of the
Institutional Coordinator is not defined nor acknowledged within the ACGME Institutional Requirements. This gap in
information and clarification can cause ambiguity in the role of those assigned this title. This presentation aims to provide
both insight to three Sponsoring Institution’s role of the Institutional Coordinator, in addition to practical tools and skills to
both improve ACGME compliance and organize and prioritize the many potential aspects of the role.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The changes targeted through our session will yield positively on competence, performance, and accreditation outcomes.
Through development of job knowledge through education and resource sharing for the Institutional Coordinator role,
positive accreditation outcomes at the Sponsoring Institution could be expected. Additionally, as there will also be
development of skills for organization and prioritization, this will improve performance (regardless of role), aiming to
provide better outcomes in the many facets of individuals’ roles.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The only barriers that we believe could be perceived could be based on the individual’s role (in title or in work nature). The
workshop focuses heavily on the work of the institutional coordinator, and various elements that may be encompassed with
that. For some individuals in attendance who have a different role or components belong to another member within their
medical education team, they may not engage as heavily in the material. To help address these barriers, we will illustrate
through content variety and by identifying early on the different in roles and Sponsoring Institution set ups. Additionally,
time is dedicated to soft skill development which will be applicable to every attendee.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Several methods will be utilized to facilitate change and learning. First, formal didactic through PowerPoint presentation.
Next individuals will have a chance to visit resource websites in real time to bookmark and directly apply knowledge
gained. Finally, as with the speakers in attendance, opportunity for comparison and networking through structured peer
time will be included.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5 Minutes- Introduction of three institutions
5 minutes- Overview of the role of an institutional coordinator
15 minutes- Review of a year in the life
5 minutes- Breakout to review ACGME timeline and fill in institutional obligations
10 minutes- Review of practical skills for organization and prioritizing (pulled from literature) & available tools
5 minutes- peer-sharing
5 minutes- Q&A
(32) Submission ID#1869588
Relationship Blueprint: Become an Architect of Strong Professional Relationships
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Sadhvi Khanna – Yale University School of Medicine
Email: sadhvi.khanna@yale.edu
Office Phone: (203) 200-9334
Presenter(s)
Sadhvi Khanna, MBA, MPH
Medical Education Manager
Yale University School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Elaine Danyew, C-TAGME
Senior Residency Program Coordinator
Dartmouth Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Develop a blueprint/plan for how to navigate difficult workplace situations including challenging
conversations and conflict management.
2. Examine different communication styles and their impact on professional relationships.
3. Enhance workplace well-being by promoting a supportive environment
4.
5.
Session Description
This workshop will discuss cultivating healthy work relationships which are essential for a productive and
positive workplace. These relationships can be challenging to work on due to various factors: Communication
styles, conflicting expectations, lack of trust, unintentional bias, past experiences, lack of boundaries, etc. Any
relationship requires ongoing effort, understanding and compromise in order to build and maintain strong,
meaningful connections. Be genuine, truthful and authentic as every relationship needs cultivation. Fostering
productive, positive work relationships leads to better morale, collaboration, productivity, and psychological
safety. As a member of the program leadership team, you will learn techniques to help navigate finding your
voice by articulating different approaches to demonstrate a commitment to creating and maintaining healthy,
productive professional relationships.
Target Audience
Program leadership team including program coordinators, program administrators, program managers.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Ineffective communication in the workplace often leads to conflicts, misunderstandings, burnout and mistrust among
colleagues. This workshop will identify and address these gaps and help improve professional relationships. Cultivating
healthy work relationships are essential for a productive and effective workplace.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
• Develop a blueprint/plan for how to navigate difficult workplace situations including challenging conversations and conflict
management.
• Examine different communication styles and their impact on professional relationships.
• Enhance workplace well-being by promoting a supportive environment
Fostering productive, positive work relationships leads to better morale, collaboration, productivity, and psychological
safety.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The potential barriers to effective communication in the workplace include: lack of clarity, inadequate listening, lack of
transparency, and burnout.
This session is designed to address these barriers by understanding different communication styles and how to approach
workplace situations accordingly.
Attendees will learn techniques to help navigate finding your voice by articulating different approaches to demonstrate a
commitment to creating and maintaining healthy, productive professional relationships.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will start with some fundamentals of professional relationships. We will then administer the True Color personality test
during the workshop. We will end with a discussion surrounding communication and workplace relationships.
Individuals will gain insights into their own preferences leading to a heightened state of self-awareness. Individuals will gain
a better understanding of how to adapt to workplace situations because they are aware of their own and other’s
communication styles. This can lead to improved collaborations, positive workplace relationships, decrease in burnout and
can help with conflict management.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
A. Understanding the importance of building a strong foundation for professional relationships – 10 minutes
B. Administer the True Test (Interactive) – 10 minutes
C. Discuss tools and strategies for building professional relationships -20 minutes
D. Q and A – 10 minutes
(33) Submission ID#1869800
Integrating AI in Medical Education Administration: Work Smart, Not Hard
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Kaytlyn Hope – Boston Children's Hospital
Email: kaytlyn.hope@childrens.harvard.edu
Office Phone: (802) 535-7597
Cell Phone: (802) 535-7597
Presenter(s)
Kaytlyn S. Hope, N/A, MHA, C-TAGME
GME Program Manager
Boston Children's Hospital
Role: Presenter
Natasha M. Brocks, BA, C-TAGME, CHPM, LSSBB
GME Program Coordinator
Abrazo Health Network
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand AI Applications: Learn how to identify and implement AI tools to streamline administrative
tasks and improve data management in medical education administration.
2. Streamline Administrative Processes: Acquire skills to automate routine tasks, manage data efficiently,
and support strategic planning using AI.
3. Build a Strong Professional Brand: Discover how to use AI to develop and maintain a strong
professional brand, ensuring you stand out as a leader in the medical education community.
4.
5.
Session Description
Revolutionize your administrative processes with AI! This workshop is tailored for medical education
administrators looking to integrate AI into their professional lives. Participants will gain practical knowledge
and hands-on experience in using AI to streamline routine tasks, manage data efficiently, and enhance
decision-making. We will explore how AI can automate administrative tasks, improve data management, and
support strategic planning. Furthermore, the session will cover how AI can help build and maintain a strong
professional brand, ensuring you stand out as a leader in the medical education community. Join us for an
engaging session that will equip you with the skills to harness AI, transform your administrative practices, and
elevate your professional success. At the end of this session, learners will be able to implement AI tools to
streamline tasks, manage data, and develop a strong professional brand. Embrace the future of medical
education administration with AI – streamline, innovate, and excel.
Target Audience
Institutional and program administrators.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
1. Medical education administrators may have limited knowledge and understanding of how AI can be applied to streamline
administrative tasks and improve efficiency. By the end of the session participants will gain a comprehensive
understanding of various AI applications in medical education administration, enabling them to identify and implement
relevant AI tools effectively.
2.Medical education administrators are currently relying on manual processes that are time-consuming and prone to errors,
lacking automation and data management capabilities provided by AI. By the end of the session participants will acquire
skills to automate routine tasks, manage data efficiently, and support strategic planning using AI, leading to more
streamlined and error-free administrative processes.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
1. Participants will gain a comprehensive understanding of various AI applications in medical education administration.
2. Participants will acquire skills to automate routine tasks, manage data efficiently, and support strategic planning using
AI.
3. Participants will discover strategies to leverage AI for building and maintaining a strong professional brand.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Resistance to change/Lack of time to implement change
Perceived complexity of AI tools
Hospital regulations
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This session will be a mix of didactic lectures and interactive small group activities using AI tools.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction & Overview of AI in Medicine/Medical Administration (10 min)
• Welcome & Brief Introduction (2 min)
o Quick welcome and overview of session objectives.
• Overview of AI Applications (4 min)
o Explain AI applications in medicine and medical administration.
• Key Benefits & Potential Impact (4 min)
o Highlight key benefits and potential impact on the field.
Streamlining Administrative Processes (25 min)
• Explanation of AI Automation (5 min)
o Discuss how AI can automate routine tasks and manage data.
• Examples of AI-Enhanced Educational Presentations (5 min)
o Share examples of AI-enhanced presentations and curriculum design.
• Demonstration of Specific AI Tools (5 min)
o Live demonstration of user-friendly AI tools for administrative tasks.
• Hands-On Practice with AI Applications (10 min)
o Interactive practice with selected AI applications.
Building a Professional Brand with AI (10 min)
• Strategies for AI-Driven Branding (4 min)
o Quick overview of using AI to develop and maintain a strong professional brand.
• Practical Exercise: Outline AI-Driven Branding Plan (6 min)
o Brief practical exercise where participants outline their branding plan.
(34) Submission ID#1870101
Professional Development for Coordinators - Traditional, Novel, Free or for a Fee - There's a Way for
Everyone
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Camilla Mendell – Phoenix Children's
Email: cmendell@phoenixchildrens.com
Office Phone: (602) 933-5241
Cell Phone: (480) 276-5879
Presenter(s)
Camilla L. Mendell, C-TAGME
GME Sr. Program Administrator
Phoenix Children's
Role: Presenter
Deborah Barrand, AS, C-TAGME
GME Project And Data Administrator
Phoenix Children's Hospital
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Establish cost-free opportunities to enhance professional development at their home institutions.
2. Identify novel methods for pursuing individual professional development.
3. Utilize traditional professional development avenues that may require a fee.
4. Understand how to use professional development to transition into new roles within Graduate Medical
Education (GME).
5. Recognize the importance of continuous professional development for program coordinators.
Session Description
Introduce ways for program coordinators to make the most of professional growth and personal development
opportunities, including budget friendly options.
Target Audience
Program Coordinators and Program Administrators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Program Coordinators are responsible to track professional development for their faculty and trainees, yet they don’t
always recognize the importance of continuous professional development for themselves. This session will introduce many
ways for a program coordinator to gain that development.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We would like all program coordinators understand the importance of professional development and give them the tools to
create it for themselves.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Professional opportunities like attending a national conference are often not in the budget for program coordinators; at this
session we will introduce other ways to gain professional development.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Presentation given by program coordinators who are currently involved in professional development, handouts with
resources, lists and “how to start” instructions.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
0-5 minutes – Introduction of why Professional Development is important for the individual growth of each program
coordinator and address some of the perceived challenges. (time, money, lack of support)
5-15 minutes – Introduce some avenues that are non-traditional and free of charge. (Specifically for groups)
15-25 minutes – Personal development that can be accomplished on an individual basis.
25-35 minutes – Traditional ways to acquire professional development.
35-45 minutes – Using professional development to create or transition to new roles in GME
45-50 minutes – Questions
***This session can be done in 50 minutes, but if the opportunity to split it into two sessions was available, we also have
enough material to do that.
(35) Submission ID#1870241
The Role that Coordinators Can Play to Build More Inclusive Cultures in Their Programs
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: David Kountz – Hackensack Meridian Health
Email: david.kountz@hmhn.org
Office Phone: (732) 776-4226
Cell Phone: (732) 894-1171
Presenter(s)
Jennifer Coppola, n/a
Director of Academic Affairs and Associate DIO
Hackensack Meridian Health
Role: Presenter
David Kountz, MD MBA
Chief Academic Officer
Hackensack Meridian Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Appreciate the importance of creating an inclusive culture in their program
2. Determine where they are in their inclusion journey
3. Describe strategies to increase inclusion and belonging
4.
5.
Session Description
Creating an inclusive culture in residency and fellowship programs do not happen by accident or luck.
Coordinators, in collaboration with their Program Directors, can Play a key role in establishing an environment
in which Residents and Fellows have a sense of belonging. By doing so their trainees will perform better,
make fewer errors, promote the program with more enthusiasm, and be subject to less burnout. In this session
we will define inclusion belongng and, though case studies and tabletop discussions, empower Coordinators
to understand where they are on they and their program are on their inclusion journey and how they can be
change agents.
Target Audience
Program Coordinators and managers
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Unpublished data from the ACGME indicates that, while Black residents account for 5% of all residents, they accounted for
almost 20% of those dismissed. Attrition of women from surgery residencies is much more likely than for male residents.
These are two examples of a little recognized practice gap of the importance of creating and sustaining an inclusive culture
in which all residents and fellows can thrive. Through this presentation attendees will understand the value and importance
of engaging all of their trainees to reduce attrition and increase satisfaction.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Attendees will gain an understanding of the impact of Microaggressions on an inclusive culture, as well as a definition of
unconscious bias and how this can impact various trainees. They will also appreciate steps that programs and individuals
can take to create an inclusive culture and strategies to mitigate unconscious bias.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Changing culture can be difficult. Attendees need to guage what is possible within their programs and identify allies within
and outside of their programs. Through tabletop excercises attendees will be provided with many examples and tools to
achieve success.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Overview of the issue by presenters; tabletop discussion among attendees and report outs.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
10 minutes - Welcome and overview
5 minutes - Discussion of tabletop exercise for attendees to share where they are in their inclusive journey; examples of
steps programs can take to create a more inclusive culture
20 minutes - Tabletop exercise/discussion among attendees
15 minutes - Report outs and wrap up
(36) Submission ID#1870874
Building your PEC as a catalyst for a high-performance program
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Carmela Meyer – Partners in Medical Education
Email: carmela@Partnersinmeded.com
Office Phone: (915) 270-0700
Presenter(s)
Carmela Meyer, EdD
GME Consultant
Partners in Medical Education
Role: Presenter
Jackie Fuller, PhD
Associate DIO
Virginia Commonwealth University
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. The session will offer participants a practical framework that participants can utilize to design a
functional PEC that will improve motivation and engagement among members.
2. Learners will develop strategies for addressing professionalism issues and leveraging the PEC to
enhance program operations, ensuring faculty and residents/fellows benefit maximally.
3. Presenters will discuss a case study highlighting the implementation of a successful PEC.
4.
5.
Session Description
The PEC is an ACGME-required standard, crucial for maintaining and enhancing the quality of residency and
fellowship programs. It must be designed to facilitate continuous improvement and support program directors
in fostering a positive learning environment and promoting high standards in medical education. This session
will address the challenges programs face due to increasing documentation requirements, diminished faculty
time, disengaged faculty, professionalism issues, and turnover in PD and coordinator roles. Participants will
engage in large and small group discussions to address barriers to an effective PEC.
Target Audience
Program Directors and APDs, Program Administrators and Coordinators, DIO, GME professionals
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The PEC is an ACGME-required standard, crucial for maintaining and enhancing the quality of residency and fellowship
programs. However several programs conduct meetings that are announcements only or turn into gripe sessions that
decrease the morale of the program. In addition, Program Directors are being asked to do more than ever before. Faculty
may want to be engaged, but either they don't know how while maintaining rigid clinical responsibilities. Residents/Fellows
use the ACGME Survey as a mechanism to vent frustrations regarding the program because they are not aware of how to
utilize the venues available within their program. The PEC can fulfill all these gaps in residency education.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The participants recognize the untapped value of the PEC to create a culture of innovation and collaboration among faculty
and residents/fellows.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Each institution will have individual barriers unique to its institution. The most common barrier is time. Seeing change as an
additional task is a challenge, but the revitalized PEC tears down old models of committee work and rebuilds a culture of
collaboration. The presentation will focus on this culture change.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will use large group sessions to present new models and ideas, using small group discussion for strategizing and
planning implementation with feedback from the group.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Large Group: 10 min
Introduction of presenters
Requirements for the PEC
Small Group discussion: 5 min
What do you find most helpful, most challenging regarding your PEC?
Report out
Large Group: 30 min
Leadership and membership
Frequency
Agenda items
Task Forces
Small Group: 15 min
What is one change you can implement to address a challenge previously discussed?
Large Group: 10 min
Administration and documentation
Summary: 5 min
(37) Submission ID#1870889
New COCA Standards for GME…Now what?
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Carmela Meyer – Partners in Medical Education
Email: carmela@Partnersinmeded.com
Office Phone: (915) 270-0700
Presenter(s)
Carmela Meyer, EdD
GME Consultant
Partners in Medical Education
Role: Presenter
Cheryl Haynes, BA
GME Consultant
Partners in Medical Education
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Participants will understand the recently revised COCA Standard 10.3: Developing GME
2. Participants will identify barriers to creating a sustainable GME program and create an action plan to
address barriers
3. Participants will identify the components of identifying what GME programs have the greatest
likelihood of sustainability.
4.
5.
Session Description
According to the National Resident Matching Program, there are .85 positions per applicant creating a
shortage of GME positions for medical school graduates (Rebekah Bernard, 2023). The US lags Western
Europe in training new physicians. Between 2000 and 2018, the US increased physicians trained by 14%
while Western Europe training increased by 34% (Rebekah Bernard, 2023). In an attempt to increase
available residency slots for graduates, the Commission on Osteopathic College Accreditation (COCA)
updated its Standards to include specific requirements for the development of new residency slots based on a
percentage of new undergraduate medical school slots. As medical schools continue to grow class sizes and
new medical schools are built, residency growth is not keeping pace. The new COCA Standard is one method
to ensure the availability of residency positions for the newly created medical school positions. Ensuring the
feasibility and sustainability of these positions is critical to maximizing already limited resources. Rebekah
Bernard, M. (2023, March 15). Match Day 2023 is a reminder of the real cause of the physician shortage: not
enough residency positions. Retrieved from Medical Economics:
https://www.medicaleconomics.com/view/match-day-2023-a-reminder-of-the-real-cause-of-the-physician-
shortage-not-enough-residency-positions
Target Audience
Leaders in GME and UME
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Medical school education is growing at a faster rate than GME programs are growing. COCA Standards have evolved in
the hopes of closing that gap. However, the gap of how to fulfill this standard is significant for medical education leaders.
We will provide some guiding questions to help leaders identify future direction and models for moving forward with a
feasibility and sustainability analysis.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Education is always a good place to start when needing to address major changes in accreditation. We will guide medical
education leaders to develop the important questions for their institution and who are the key stakeholders that need to be
a part of this discussion.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Financial resources are always limited. Learning what partnerships may be developed to mediate some of the cost will be
critical for success. This is only one component of a sound feasibility analysis.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Large and small group discussion
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Presenters will lead the participants in discussions regarding best practices to determine GME programming that is
feasible and sustainable. Analyzing the current clinical learning environment is key to successful GME development that
supports other learner groups and the hospital.
Introduction of presenters: 5 minutes
Large Group: 10 minutes
1. Summarizing the new COCA Standards regarding GME development
Small Group: 10 min
1. Discuss barriers to the development of GME at your institution
2. Report out: minutes
Large Group: 30 min
1. The feasibility study: what questions do we need to answer
2. Components
3. Strategic planning
Small Group: 10 min
1. Develop 1 goal to meet in the next year and who do you need to engage
2. Develop action steps and share in your groups
Report out: 5 min
Summary: 5 min
(38) Submission ID#1870909
Back to Basics: Creating Quality Improvement Learning that Benefits Residents and Patients
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Stacy Littlewood
Email: stacy.littlewood@ama-assn.org
Office Phone: (312) 464-4346
Presenter(s)
Stacy Littlewood, MSEd
Learning Design Manager
American Medical Association
Role: Presenter
Jodi Abbott, MD MHCM
Medical Director Educational Strategy & Curriculum
American Medical Association
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Describe the quality improvement (QI) and patient safety educational requirements for residents
2. Explain issues with current QI and patient safety education available for residents
3. Construct a quality improvement patient scenario
4. Develop quality improvement education based on QI tools and newly created patient scenario
5.
Session Description
In order to meet the expectations for physicians to provide both excellence in clinical care and to continually
evaluate their practice to improve the care they deliver; learners require both didactic content and the
opportunity to clinically apply quality improvement (QI) tools when learning from error. Currently both the
ACGME and WHO recommend residents be empowered with the skills, knowledge and expertise to evaluate
the process of care and to participate in improvement projects. To meet these needs, the American Medical
Association (AMA) GME Competency Education Program have developed an asynchronous, online series of
courses. Within this series, the AMA determined that a smaller series of linked activities was needed. We
designed the activities to allow resident learners to move through a clinical case beginning with a medical
error, moving through reporting & investigating error to finally designing, developing and implementing a QI
project to reduce harm. Together, the modules provide the learner with the knowledge and skills needed to
apply them to real-life errors in your home environment. We will present the content in the new quality
improvement and patient safety modules from the AMA GME program. Then we will guide participants in
workshop activities to create their own patient scenario to guide their resident learners through to expand
upon the learnings. We will demonstrate how site-based cases (or specialty specific demo cases) can be used
with the faculty guide in order to provide even preceptors with limited QIPS expertise the tools they need to
facilitate and guide students or resident QI projects. Learners will walk away with both a clear understanding
of the AMA offerings and their own scenarios to educate their residents and health care teams.
Target Audience
Residency Program Directors Residency program coordinators Quality and Safety leaders
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Residents often do not have the knowledge, skills, or background to run their own quality improvement projects. Faculty
may not have the knowledge or resources to teach and/or precept QIPS requirements. Organizations may not have the
resources to meet residents where they are at and train them to be beneficial to quality improvement projects.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Organizations will have a template to create their own foundational quality improvement and patient safety education.
Following the review of the didactic content, session participants will develop their own application of concepts which will
equip individuals with all needed tools to develop their own QI project.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Budget. Lack of faculty with quality improvement and/or patient safety skills. Low learner motivation. Disconnect between
clinicians and QI leaders. This session will provide resources to bridge the educational gap and application to clinical cases
needed to captured residents attention.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
• Didactic overview of AMA’s new Quality Improvement and Patient Safety certificate. This will include demos of the
activities within the certificate
• In groups, learners will workshop developing a site-specific based QI session based on a new patient scenario
demonstrating how to apply the provided QI tools
• Share out to learn from others
• Best practices, lessons learned
• Q&A
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. Introductions (
2. ACGME Quality improvement requirements for residents + Overview of past QIPS experiences (
3. Run through what went into new state – specifically having a single case to focus on throughout 4 micromodules (5
minutes)
4. Set up workshop (
5. Each table to workshop their own idea based on a new patient scenario (~20 minutes)
6. Share out (10 minutes)
7. Q&A (5 minutes)
(39) Submission ID#1871089
Leadership Styles: What's my default and when should I use others?
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Lori Smith – Bayhealth
Email: loraine_smith@bayhealth.org
Office Phone: (302) 744-6835
Cell Phone: (216) 296-3335
Presenter(s)
Lori Smith, EdD, MSL, MBA
Director, GME
Bayhealth
Role: Presenter
Krista Lombardo-Klefos, n/a
GME Administrative Director
Cleveland Clinic
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify individual leadership style and contributing traits
2. Explore all 6 of Goleman's leadership styles and situations in which they are best used
3. Practice using leadership styles situationally
4.
5.
Session Description
Goleman identified 6 leadership styles: authoritative, coaching, affiliative, democratic, pacesetting and
commanding. We all have a default leadership style, a style we use without thinking or default to in times of
stress, do you know what yours is? This workshop will help you identify your default style and will look at the
personality traits that lead to this default style. The session will discuss all 6 styles and when they are useful
and ways. We will practice using various styles in group exercises.
Target Audience
COIL or COPAC members
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
We all have a default leadership style; however, many people are uncertain what their style is. This session will help them
to understand their default leadership style and provide valuable information about other styles and their use.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Every leadership style has a time and a place in which it is appropriate to use them. By learning what our default style is,
and when it is best used, we can further develop our skills, leading to better team engagement.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Learning about the different leadership styles and when they are best used is easy, making changes to the way you lead
situationally takes commitment and practice.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will use an online survey to determine default leadership styles. During the session we will present case studies and
ask the table groups to discuss which style would be best utilized and why. We will also ask them to practice using that
style to resolve the case study.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
In advance of the session- online survey to determine leadership style
15 minutes- intro to leadership styles and traits (presentation)
5 minutes- Table discussion- were you surprised about your leadership style? Why or why not?
10 minutes-Situational use of leadership styles (presentation)
15 minutes- Case study 1 (what leadership style is best used, practice using that style effectively within your group)
5 minutes wrap up/Q & A
(40) Submission ID#1871970
Optimizing Program Management: Empowering Coordinators through Process Enhancement
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Emily Mainwaring – University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine
Email: emilyhorn@med.unr.edu
Office Phone: (775) 432-6578
Presenter(s)
Emily Mainwaring, n/a
Residency Program Administrator
University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Jorge Pulido-Rubio, n/a
GME Operational Manager
University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. By the end of the session, participants will understand the vital role of coordinators in program
leadership and be able to effectively build partnerships and foster collaboration with program directors,
faculty, and fellow coordinators.
2. By the end of the session, participants will grasp the principles and methodologies of process
improvement and be equipped with tools and techniques to identify areas for improvement within
program processes.
3. By the end of the session, participants will recognize the importance of coordinator development in
process improvement, specifically in understanding ACGME requirements, enhancing communication
and interpersonal skills, and strengthening data management and technology proficiency. They will
have access to relevant resources and strategies for their own professional growth in these areas.
4.
5.
Session Description
Join us for an engaging session where we explore the vital role of coordinators in program leadership and the
transformative power of process improvement. In this session, we will delve into the world of process
improvement, highlighting its significance in optimizing program operations and enhancing the overall quality
of education. We will discuss the principles and methodologies of process improvement, equipping you with
tools to identify areas for enhancement and implement successful improvement initiatives. We will emphasize
the importance of coordinator development, particularly in the areas of ACGME requirements, effective
communication, data management, and technology proficiency. You will discover resources and opportunities
for skill enhancement, and we will share success stories and strategies for coordinator involvement in program
development through process improvement. The session will feature interactive discussions, open Q&A
forums, and collaborative problem-solving activities. We encourage you to share your insights, concerns, and
experiences, as this inclusive environment promotes peer-to-peer learning and knowledge sharing. Join us on
this transformative journey as we unlock the magic of process improvement and empower ourselves as
coordinators to drive positive change within our programs. Together, we will learn, collaborate, and create a
pathway to excellence!
Target Audience
Program Coordinators, Program Administrators,
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Limited Role in Program Leadership: Currently, many program coordinators have a limited role in program leadership,
often functioning more as administrative support rather than integral contributors to leadership and strategic decision-
making.
Inefficiencies in Program Processes: There are existing inefficiencies in program processes that hinder the optimal
operation and quality of educational programs. Coordinators may lack the skills and knowledge to identify and drive
process improvements effectively.
Insufficient Professional Development: Coordinators often have insufficient professional development opportunities,
particularly in areas such as understanding accreditation requirements (e.g., ACGME), enhancing communication skills,
and leveraging technology for data management.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Enhanced Leadership Role: The desired outcome is for coordinators to understand and embrace their vital role in program
leadership. They should be able to effectively build partnerships with program directors, faculty, and other coordinators,
fostering a collaborative and communicative team environment.
Proficiency in Process Improvement: Coordinators should be proficient in the principles and methodologies of process
improvement. They should be equipped with the necessary tools and techniques to identify areas for improvement within
program processes, thereby optimizing program operations and enhancing educational quality.
Robust Professional Development: Coordinators should have access to robust professional development opportunities that
enhance their understanding of accreditation requirements, improve their communication and interpersonal skills, and
strengthen their proficiency in data management and technology. This development is crucial for their involvement in
program development and process improvement initiatives.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential Barriers-
Limited Resources:
There may be insufficient time, funding, and personnel dedicated to process improvement initiatives.
Access to necessary technology and tools for effective process improvement might be limited.
Lack of Training and Knowledge:
Coordinators may lack the necessary training and knowledge in process improvement principles and methodologies.
There might be a gap in understanding the accreditation requirements (e.g., ACGME) and how they relate to process
improvement.
Ineffective Communication:
Poor communication between coordinators, program directors, faculty, and other team members can hinder collaboration.
There may be a lack of clear communication channels and strategies for disseminating information about process
improvements.
Data Management Challenges:
Coordinators might face difficulties in accessing and managing data needed for identifying and analyzing areas for
improvement.
There could be a lack of standardized data management systems and processes.
Lack of Professional Development Opportunities:
Coordinators may not have sufficient opportunities for professional development in key areas such as communication,
technology proficiency, and leadership.
There might be a lack of institutional support for ongoing training and development.
Workload and Time Constraints:
High workloads and time constraints can limit the ability of coordinators to focus on process improvement initiatives.
Balancing day-to-day responsibilities with process improvement efforts might be challenging.
Stakeholder Buy-In:
Gaining buy-in from all stakeholders, including program directors, faculty, and administrative staff, can be difficult.
There might be differing priorities and interests among stakeholders that can impede collaborative efforts.
Addressing Barriers:
Offer practical communication tools and techniques, provide hands on examples and tools to identify areas for
improvement, provide practical tips on maximizing existing resources, and technology use, share strategies for continuous
learning and development, emphasizing areas such as understanding ACGME requirements, communication skills, and
technology proficiency.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
DMADV- Define, Measure, Analyze, Design and Verify
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
A. Coordinator's Role in Program Leadership (5 minutes)
- Discuss the vital role of coordinators in program leadership.
- Highlight the significance of building effective partnerships with program directors, faculty, and other coordinators.
- Share strategies for fostering collaboration and effective communication within the team.
B. Driving Process Improvement (15 minutes)
- Introduce the principles and methodologies of process improvement.
- Discuss the importance of process improvement in optimizing program operations and enhancing educational quality.
- Provide tools and techniques for identifying areas for improvement within program processes.
IV. Collaborative Initiatives for Process Improvement (15 minutes)
- Share examples of successful collaborative initiatives that led to process improvements.
- Showcase real-life cases where coordinators played a significant role in driving positive change within their programs.
- Encourage participants to share their own experiences and success stories.
V. Coordinator Development for Process Improvement (15 minutes)
- Identify key areas for coordinator skill enhancement in process improvement:
1. Understanding ACGME requirements and regulations.
2. Developing effective communication and interpersonal skills.
3. Strengthening data management and technology proficiency.
- Introduce available resources and opportunities for coordinator development in these areas.
- Share success stories and effective strategies for coordinator involvement in program development through process
improvement.
- Open the floor for participants to ask questions, share concerns, and discuss their experiences.
VII. Wrap-up and Conclusion (5 minutes)
- Recap the key points covered during the session, emphasizing the importance of process improvement in program
leadership.
- Provide additional resources and references for further exploration.
(41) Submission ID#1872559
Trainee Research Support Strategies
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Lauren Irwin – Houston Methodist Hospital
Email: leirwin@houstonMethodist.org
Office Phone: (281) 222-0922
Presenter(s)
Lauren Irwin, PhD
Educational Research Specialist
Houston Methodist Hospital
Role: Presenter
Ebun Ebunlomo, PhD
Manager
Houston Methodist Hospital
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify different departments within your own institution as potential collaborators for creating a
research curriculum.
2. Identify potential barriers to implementing a research curriculum and how to navigate those barriers.
3. Identify areas of need to include in a research curriculum.
4.
5.
Session Description
In general, health care professionals do not get formal training on how to approach research in a systematic
manner. Most ACGME training programs require their trainees to conduct research projects, but little guidance
is given on how to do so. We created a workshop series (Foundations of Research Methods) in response to
the need for a standardized trainee research education program. In this AHME breakout session, we will
outline the steps we took to create and implement a research curriculum for our hospital, obstacles we faced
and how we overcame them, and tips for participants on how to create their own research curriculum.
Target Audience
This workshop is intended for individuals who work at hospitals that are not attached to medical schools and
do not have a trainee research curriculum in place.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
In general, health care professionals do not get formal training on how to approach research in a systematic manner.
Recent research in medical education has found that many trainees, faculty, and staff do not feel comfortable in many
aspects of conducting research and reviewing literature1. These gap areas include understanding statistics, using research
to inform their practice choices, understanding specific research language, and not feeling supported by their institution in
conducting research2. Educating trainees, faculty, and staff around these concepts improves their understanding and
willingness to participate in research. Improving research literacy—the understanding of how research is conducted and
how to interpret research findings--, has also been shown to improve the safety of care3. Most ACGME training programs
require their trainees to conduct research projects, but little guidance is given on how to do so. We created a workshop
series (Foundations of Research Methods) in response to the need for a standardized trainee research education program.
In this AHME breakout session, we will outline the steps we took to create and implement a research curriculum for our
hospital, obstacles we faced and we overcame them, and tips for participants on how to create their own research
curriculum.
1. Zimmerman, R., Alweis, R., Short, A., Wasser, T., & Donato, A. (2019). Interventions to increase research publications
in graduate medical education trainees: a systematic review. Archives of Medical Science, 15(1), 1-11.
2. Harrison, L. M., Woods, R. J., McCarthy, M. C., & Parikh, P. P. (2020). Development and implementation of a
sustainable research curriculum for general surgery residents: a foundation for developing a research culture. The
American Journal of Surgery, 220(1), 105-108.
3. Gupta, V. S., Meier, J., Nunez, J. H., Abdelfattah, K. R., Balentine, C., Zeh, H. J., ... & Levi, B. (2022). How we did it:
implementing a trainee-focused surgical research curriculum and infrastructure. Journal of Surgical Education, 79(1), 35-
39.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This workshop is intended for individuals who work at hospitals that are not attached to medical schools and therefore,
most trainees have little to no experience in research and do not have a research curriculum in place. This workshop will
give the attendees ideas on how to create and implement their own hospital- wide research curriculum for trainees, with
specific strategies for successful implementation across diverse GME training programs.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Leadership buy-in- one major barrier was the need for a curriculum to begin with. There is a misconception that physicians
know how to conduct research even if they have never been taught how to do it. We found that getting input from different
subject matter experts around the hospital (i.e. librarians, statisticians, senior researchers) for our curriculum made hospital
leadership more agreeable to the curriculum.
Time- finding time to add this research curriculum to trainee education is another obstacle. We found that teaching by
department during their didactic sessions was the easiest way to reach trainees and fit the curriculum into their schedules.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
PowerPoint presentation with opportunities for active learning.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introductions- 5 minutes
Background- 10 minutes
-Gap in structured trainee research support
-No formal research training (generally) for residents and fellows
-Beyond clinical research, need for grounding in how to systematically conduct non-clinical research (QI, socio-behavioral
scientific research, education research, etc.)
-Literature review findings
Where we are/Who we are - 10 minutes
-Context: Academic-adjacent GME programs, expansion to “community hospitals” over the past 2 years and more in the
future
-Office created 8 years to meet this gap
-1:1 support
-Research Methods bootcamp (specific schedule- offered hospital wide, 8-modules/weeks long, high attrition, limited
engagement with trainees due to varying clinical schedules, etc.)
Restructuring/revised strategy (OCED/3 years ago) - 15 minutes
-Revised Research Methods bootcamp – Foundations of Research Methods (FORM)
-Collaboration/alignment with internal resources such as IRB, Center for Health Data Science Analytics (data and
statistics), library, etc. to create new curriculum
-Quarterly check in with internal resources
-New curriculum: Session topics - What is Research/How to Write a Research Question; Approaches to Research; Data
Collection; Data analysis
-Additional trainings for educational research specialist (to cover qualitative and quantitative research needs)
-FORM offered by program based on their didactic schedule/within buy in from GMEC, program director, DIO, etc.
-Quarterly updates to Graduate Medical Education Council
-Coffee with Office of Curriculum and Educational Development to inform program coordinators of course offerings and get
FORM on their schedules
-Inaugural GME trainee research day
What we have accomplished- 5 minutes
-FORM: how many departments people reached, survey data, pre- and post-data
-Updated from 6 to 4 sessions
-Lessons learned/Recommendations- 5 minutes
-Partnership
(42) Submission ID#1872744
It Can't ALL Be Fun and Games... or Can It? Using Gamification to Spruce up Didactics
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Megan Stobart-Gallagher – Jefferson Einstein Montgomery Hospital
Email: meggieann@gmail.com
Office Phone: (610) 368-5825
Presenter(s)
Megan Stobart-Gallagher, DO
Residency Program Director
Jefferson Einstein Montgomery Hospital
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand game mechanics and their application to medical education theory
2. Review 12 tips for the best practice of incorporating gamification
3. Apply these tips and develop your own gamification strategy for your next talk!
4.
5.
Session Description
While learning should not be focused on winning, competitive play, technology, and game mechanics can aide
in the creation of new learning environments, engagement, and experiences for the millennial and generation
X learners. This session will breakdown the scary idea of "gamification" through basic education theory, 12
methods to bring game mechanics into the learning environment and help you develop a new spin on your
next talk by applying these techniques in a group setting.
Target Audience
UME/GME Educators of all practice levels / specialties. These techniques can be utilized for formal didactics,
be thrown into morning report, or even rounds!
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Knowledge of the HOW TO for gamification. Many educators know that it exists, but do not know where to start. This can e
for more than 'educators' though - it can be for anyone looking for a way to engage folks from administrator to coordinators
to residency/hospital leadership.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
As learners focus more on asynchronous options, pod casts, and self directed learning -- we need to find a way to spice up
any of their required/mandatory didactics sessions in the hospital - whether it be focused conference, teaching rounds,
morning report, etc. I want the learners to be able to look forward to these events, knowing that it can be interactive with a
bit of fun to help with retention and engagement moving forward.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Using gamification in educational sessions has sometimes been seen as "an easy way out," and showing that learners do
not actually learn from it -- utilizing the techniques and literature provided, I seek to show naysayers that there is evidence
to support utilizing game mechanics to stimulate other parts of a learner's brain to truly retain! While it's been seen as an
easy way out - its actually quite challenging to create something worthwhile for the learners, so it can be seen as "too
hard," as well. I'm hoping by providing a step by step way to put the mechanics into place, we can overcome that fear!
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The overview of the talk is done through powerpoint, but then the larger audience will be split into smaller groups to help
deploy the mechanics learned to create their own "micro session."
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
10-15 minutes reviewing game mechanics and their relationship to learning theory
5-10 minutes reviewing tips for implementation of game mechanics into learning
5 minutes providing examples
10-15 minutes allowing groups to work through their own challenge
5-10 minutes for reporting out from some of the groups
5 minutes for questions.
(43) Submission ID#1872917
Using Program Dashboards to create transparency in your programs
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Sheri Clarke – Ascension SE Michigan
Email: sheri.clarke@ascension.org
Office Phone: (517) 648-1409
Presenter(s)
Sheri L. Clarke, PhD, C-TAGME
Regional Director of Academic Affairs
Ascension SE Michigan
Role: Presenter
Nicole Abdilla, MBA, C-TAGME
GME Manager
Ascension Macomb Oakland Hospital
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Summarize the benefits of a standardized, graphical program dashboard using evaluation data
completed by residents.
2. Demonstrate the ability to develop standardized questions by category for use in this dashboard
3. Explain the process of dashboard creation
4. Describe the use of these dashboards to drive program transparency and improvements
5.
Session Description
This session will guide attendees in the development of a graphical dashboard with data directly from your
electronic evaluation data system that can change the way you look at your faculty performance and clinical
learning environment. We will share a process for program dashboard development which will increase
communication within your programs and may spark a competition for improvement between your faculty.
Attendees will be provided with the framework of this dashboard and how it can be accomplished with
spreadsheet graphing or analytical software. While we present it as an institutional project, it can be used by
individual programs as well.
Target Audience
The target audience is any program or institutional leadership roles, including Program Manager/Coordinator,
Program Director, GME Manager, GME Specialist, and DIO.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The current Annual Program Evaluation process takes into consideration four specific categories of program performance
(Resident Performance, Faculty Development, Graduate Performance, and Program Quality) using data interpreted by the
Program Evaluation Committee. This APE process is a good exercise for the program to identify needed resources and
report metrics to the Graduate Medical Education Committee (GMEC). Many Sponsoring Institutions (SI) go one step
further with a program comparison process to look for mutual gaps and needs for resources.
Program directors are expected to provide the faculty with feedback and where their performance as a faculty or the
rotation/clinic experience with them can be improved. This is traditionally done by the faculty members pulling their own
reports or being provided a report from an electronic evaluation system. We believe that the development of a program
dashboard, using GME standardized evaluation forms, can help the SI to identify potential areas of improvement across all
programs, improve faculty performance, improve the clinical learning environment, and increase transparency with
residents. We recommend a categorized evaluation process for faculty performance, program director (PD) leadership,
rotations, and continuity clinic experiences. We use standardized questions for all of our programs which are categorized
for reporting, to provide a program level blinded dashboard that is shared with faculty and residents. These dashboards
can assist the programs and the SI with identifying potential areas for improvements strictly from the resident perspective.
It provides the program director(s) and faculty with individual performance comparisons to their peers and shares the
results of hundreds of annual evaluation forms with the residents who completed them originally. This sparks conversation
at a whole new level and has resulted in significant improvement in faculty performance. For the SI, it provides data at an
individualized, but blinded, level to guide oversight decisions such as continuing medical education and faculty
development needs assessments and the allocation of resources.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will guide attendees in the decision process and development of a graphical dashboard with data directly from
your electronic evaluation data system that can change the way you look at your faculty performance and clinical learning
environment. We will share a process for program dashboard development which will increase communication within your
programs and may spark a competition for improvement between your faculty. Attendees will be provided with the
framework of this dashboard and how it can be accomplished with spreadsheet graphing or analytical software.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
In order to successfully administer this dashboard process, we recommend that the SI use an electronic evaluation tool
with category options and you will need staff that can pull the data and create the summary dashboard for each program.
In addition, the DIO or Associate DIO needs to dedicate time to have direct conversations with the PDs to review the
dashboards, in order to implement change from the data. Our DIO meets with the PDs each year to review a blinded
dashboard and a Program Director’s key to the dashboard.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Most of the session will be didactic with an introduction to the dashboard, the benefits of using such a process, and
reviewing options for developing your own dashboard. We will share a sample dashboard, explaining which data populated
which graphs. We will provide the categories that we use and how we redesigned the dashboard when we set it up a
second time in another SI. We will share what we learned and how the categories have evolved through this process. We
will discuss the steps to develop your own dashboard process at your institution or within your program. If time, we will
have attendees discuss the categories they would pick for their institution and brainstorm improvements on our tools.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
This presentation will have the following outline:
-Identifying the need for a individualized comparison tool to spark improvement and increase transparency in the programs
-Introduction to the Dashboard and who sees the blinded/unblinded (key) versions
-Review the Dashboard sample - data used & categorization
-Dashboard in action - review the process used for dashboard discussions and outcomes
-Process for setting up standardized forms
-Developing your own dashboard - we will provide our questions and categories, then discuss tools that can be used for
summarizing the data. We will share our first approach and why we made changes to our current categorization. If time, we
will have attendees discuss the categories they would pick for their institution.
-Questions and Answers
(44) Submission ID#1873393
How to Improve Coordinator Engagement: Making the Working Environment their Happy Place
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Veronica McDowell – Cooper University Health Care
Email: mcdowell-veronica@cooperhealth.edu
Office Phone: (856) 342-2922
Presenter(s)
Veronica L. McDowell, MBA~HCM,LSSGB
Administrative Director,GME
Cooper University Health Care
Role: Presenter
Joy Robinson, MBA
Director of Educational Programs, Internal Medicine
Cooper University Health Care
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the link between engagement and performance.
2. Identify strengths and opportunities to increase coordinator/employee engagement.
3. Overcome the barriers to engagement activities.
4. Develop a plan to improve the work environment and culture.
5.
Session Description
The presentation discusses ways to improve coordinator/employee engagement and provides tools designed
to increase involvement as well as recognition. It will describe the ways leadership raised national survey
engagement scores.
Target Audience
General Audience
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The presentation discusses ways to improve coordinator/employee engagement and provides tools designed to increase
involvement as well as recognition. Engaged employees tend to stay in their roles longer, improve work
environment/culture, have increased productivity and improved overall relationships.
The desired outcome is to improve the working environment, engage the team in proactively addressing issues and
improve processes. These factors will ultimately reduce employee turnover. This gap in professional practice is essential in
moving toward creating sustainable processes and decreases in errors.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This program will meet the competencies to empower coordinators to influence and improve workflow, thereby improving
the working environment. Through transparent and purposely rounding, there is improved alignment and trust with
leadership and transparency with organizational goals and effort.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers for attendees to achieve desired results starts with organizational/leadership ‘buy in’ to the shared
processes. The success of this program is also influenced by staff trust and willingness to participate. There may also be
financial restraints related to salary market adjustments, or support for wellness events.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The presenters will share examples of what are referred to as the Must Have elements and they include: AIDET, leader
rounding, stoplight reports, team huddles, thank you/recognition, monthly meeting model, QGap (Quarterly goal action
plan) and purposeful new employee check in at 30 and 90 days. Objective Data, engagement scores will be shared, as
well as subjective data via direct feedback from the team and examples of team driven initiatives.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
25 Min.-PPT Presentation with photos of coordinators participating in team building activities & Two minute Leader
Rounding Scenario Videos (Round & Huddle) Qty 2
15 Min.- Perform a “Leadership Round” on the Audience -15 min.
10 Min.-Q&A
(45) Submission ID#1873460
TEAMing to Target Your Programs Top Priorities Successfully
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Lauren Petty – UPMC Medical Education
Email: andersonlm2@upmc.edu
Office Phone: (412) 647-5816
Presenter(s)
Lauren Petty, BSBA
Senior Compliance Administrator
UPMC Medical Education
Role: Presenter
Melissa Hildebrand, BS
Project Manager
UPMC Medical Education
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Examine the key roles and responsibilities for both program coordinators and program directors and
explore the successful effects of their dyadic relationship.
2. Discuss the benefits of engaging the C-Suite, hospital leadership, trainees, and GME office when
establishing the program’s priorities.
3. Adopt the TEAM approach to integrate individual contributions necessary to achieve collective goals.
4.
5.
Session Description
You can’t lead alone, and you don’t have to. Join us as we discuss the importance of an effective dyadic
relationship between a program director and program coordinator while integrating the expectations of
additional graduate medical education stakeholders. This collaborative approach acknowledges the program
coordinator as a member of the leadership team thus recognizing their inherent ability to actively participate in
the program’s goals. As we dive into the intricacies of these roles, we will introduce the TEAM approach as a
resource to improve the working relationships between all stakeholders, cultivating program efficiency,
increasing professional satisfaction, and enhancing the overall training experience.
Target Audience
Program directors, program coordinators, GME stakeholders
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Current ACGME requirements state every program must have both a program director and program coordinator. While the
requirements state the program coordinator is a valued member of the leadership team, these individuals are not often
working collaboratively towards the overall program’s priorities.
A lack of effective collaboration amongst the leadership team can cause miscommunication, accreditation struggles, as
well as feelings of disengagement and discontent in their respective roles. This can ultimately lead to program leadership
turnover triggering disruption to the program’s routines, trainee support and guidance.
Upon completion of our workshop, individuals will recognize the importance of a strong program director/program
coordinator dyadic relationship. Along with including the TEAM concept to bring in other GME stakeholders, the program
will function more cohesively in producing a more successful, organized, and effective training environment.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Encourage the program director to capitalize on the value of the program coordinator role as it relates to successful
program management.
Develop a more collaborative and unified approach to program management with the purposeful inclusion of additional key
stakeholders in operational oversight.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The role of the program coordinator has advanced into more of a leadership role, however, systemically the perception of
this role is still often considered one of secretarial, administrative support. Our session aims to align the program
coordinator responsibilities more appropriately to that of program leadership. Focusing on the dyadic relationship between
the program director and program coordinator allowing for a more unified approach to support larger goals and
expectations. Additionally, the reporting structure of GME program leaders often includes those who are not familiar with
ACGME requirements/standards/regulations. Our session aims to use a TEAM approach to identify the priorities of all
stakeholders to make these relationships more interconnected.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Lecture, Interactive Discussion-Polling, Exercises
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Intro/Objectives –2 minutes
Define the dyadic relationship of PD/PC – 10 minutes
Additional GME Stakeholders Roles – 6 minutes
Exercise 1 – 6 minutes
Exercise 2 – 6 minutes
TEAM Concept – 10 minutes
Interactive Discussion (Polling) – 5 minutes
Q&A – 5 minutes
(46) Submission ID#1873557
GME Jeopardy: A Fun Quest to Master the ACGME Program and Institutional Requirements
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: LaToya Wright – UT Southwestern Medical Center
Email: latoya.wright@utsouthwestern.edu
Office Phone: (816) 699-8258
Presenter(s)
Sheik Amin, MHA
Administrative Director of Education, Radiology
Columbia University Medical Center
Role: Presenter
LaToya Wright, BBA, C-TAGME
Manager of Education Programs, Radiology
UT Southwestern Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify and comprehend key components of ACGME Program and Institutional Requirements through
engaging gameplay.
2. Enhance familiarity with ACGME terminology and explore personal knowledge gaps and areas for
professional development within the domain of ACGME requirements.
3. Foster teamwork and collaborate with peers to strategize and exchange best practices for ensuring
program excellence and adherence to ACGME requirements.
4.
5.
Session Description
Join us for an engaging and interactive Jeopardy-style session designed to deepen your understanding of the
ACGME Program and Institutional Requirements in Graduate Medical Education (GME). Whether you're a
seasoned coordinator or new to the field, this session offers a dynamic opportunity to enhance your
knowledge and skills. Delve into the intricacies of ACGME guidelines in a fun and competitive atmosphere,
where you'll test your expertise and learn alongside peers. By the end of the session, you'll walk away with a
comprehensive understanding of the key requirements, ready to apply them effectively in your role. Don't miss
out on this chance to elevate your GME expertise and network with fellow professionals. Bring your
competitive spirit and a desire to expand your knowledge—let's play and learn together! At the end of this
session, learners will be able to navigate the ACGME Institutional and Common Program Requirements
confidently, identify areas for improvement in their institutions and programs, and strategize ways to ensure
compliance and excellence in GME coordination. Please ensure you have access to a fully charged device for
optimal participation.
Target Audience
Program Coordinators, Institutional Coordinators, GME Administrators (Beginner & Experienced)
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Coordinators play a critical role in ensuring programs and institutions adhere to ACGME regulations and meet core
competencies. To effectively support these efforts, coordinators must possess in-depth knowledge of core competencies
and best practices. This presentation aims to address approaches for assisting programs in meeting regulatory
requirements and practical solutions to administrative challenges in achieving program and institutional goals.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
By the end of the session, coordinators will achieve the following outcomes:
1. Gain a deeper understanding of ACGME regulations and core competencies relevant to their roles as coordinators.
2. Acquire actionable approaches to effectively support programs in meeting accreditation and educational requirements.
3. Develop advanced knowledge to serve as mentors and provide guidance to colleagues.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Lack of program and institutional support, resources, and training
Staffing shortages, retention issues
Lack of mentorship and/ or guidance
Our session will tackle these challenges by fostering a community where best practices are shared among coordinators.
Through this collaborative environment, attendees will not only gain practical insights but also build a supportive network
both within and outside their institution. This approach promotes an innovative way of learning and problem-solving,
ensuring that coordinators are empowered to overcome barriers and achieve meaningful change in their roles.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
1. Small group interactive game-based learning activities: This session will encourage active participation and problem-
solving in an interactive setting.
2. Large group discussions: This session will allow for sharing insights, challenges, and best practices and foster
collaboration and mutual learning.
3. Sharing of best practices: By highlighting successful strategies and real-world examples, coordinators will gain practical
insights that can be applied in their own roles and/ or programs.
These methods are designed to create an engaging and interactive learning environment, ensuring that coordinators not
only acquire knowledge but also develop skills and confidence to implement desired changes effectively.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction & Objectives – 5 minutes
Small group interactive game-based learning activity – 30 minutes
Large group discussion, share best practices – 10 minutes
Conclusion and Q&A session – 5 minutes
(47) Submission ID#1873681
Decoding Success: Creating Custom Power BI Dashboards to Assess the Longitudinal Quality and Impact of
Graduate Medical Education Training Programs
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Samantha Nelson – UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine
Email: srnelson@mednet.ucla.edu
Office Phone: (310) 794-9599
Presenter(s)
Samantha R. Nelson, N/A, M.S.
Data Manager, Office of Graduate Medical Education
UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Recognize the importance of accurate data analysis for effective GMEC oversight.
2. Understand an approach to applying the CRISP-DM methodology for the assessment of GME training
program performance.
3. Apply the techniques provided to them in the creation of their institution’s and/or programs’
performance dashboards.
4. Synthesize outcomes from the dashboards into a visualization that institutional leadership can use for
Graduate Medical Education Committee (GMEC) oversight and Annual Institutional Review Sub-
Committee (AIR) goals.
5. Synthesize outcomes from the dashboards into a visualization that program leadership and
administrators can use as a resource when completing their annual WebAds updates and Annual
Program Evaluation (APE) action plans.
Session Description
In this session, participants will be introduced to an approach for developing Power BI dashboards and an
associated visualization/reporting process to more effectively analyze longitudinal trends in ACGME survey
data at both the institutional and programmatic levels. Such an approach will equip GMEC with more effective
oversight, assist the AIR Sub-Committee in identifying pertinent goals, and provide programs with a resource
to use when completing their WebAds annual updates and Annual Program Evaluation (APE) action plans.
Target Audience
-GME Office Administrators/Data Analysts -Program Administrators/Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
I wish to offer an approach for a more efficient dashboard and reporting system that our institution has adopted to analyze
longitudinal trends in ACGME survey data at both the institutional and programmatic levels. Currently the visualizations in
the ACGME survey summaries are aggregated by domain, cover only a 3-year period, and lack a clear visualization of
program compliance compared to institution, specialty, and national compliance. To address this, our Power BI
dashboards include data for these 4 metrics in each ACGME Resident/Fellow and Faculty survey sub-domain, with filters
to partition data by academic year (over the past 4 years) and/or by program (for over 100 ACGME-accredited programs).
Additionally, the dashboards’ structure allows for the incorporation of survey data on an annual basis, extending the
longitudinal analysis period that can be offered. The dashboard data is then used to 1) synthesize it for GME leadership
and the GMEC to assess longitudinal trends at the institutional level and to provide oversight to individual programs, 2) for
the AIR Sub-Committee to use as a resource when planning annual goals and 3) into a letter for program leadership and
administrators to understand their out-of-compliant domains (in alignment with the institution’s special review policy) on the
most recent survey cycle, their “ranking” among other programs at the institution with out-of-compliant domains, and their
longitudinal trends for the past 4 years in each domain with their institution, specialty, and national compliance as
comparable metrics.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
I aim to offer an approach for evaluating longitudinal ACGME survey performance in a more effective and efficient manner
through the utilization of a personalized dashboard tool, as opposed to relying solely on an Excel spreadsheet. By adopting
this approach, instead of burdening the GMEC, the AIR Sub-Committee, and program leadership with the task of gathering
and analyzing their survey data, their time is liberated to concentrate on developing strategies and action plans to tackle
any identified trends.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The most prominent barriers I foresee are a lack of technical knowledge on using Power BI and/or not having access to
this software because of the financial investment involved. To address this a lack of technical knowledge, I can provide
resources on Power BI training opportunities. While unable to address the financial implications, I can provide an example
of the Excel dashboard we have and how, as an alternative to Power BI, one can use formulas and Pivot Tables to achieve
similar results.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
I intend to utilize a mix of screenshots taken from our dashboards, along with summaries and self-produced videos
showcasing different Power BI functions (ranging from data preparation and cleaning, to visualization design on the
dashboards and custom filter setup). Additionally, I aim to develop a Kahoot game that will make references to key points
discussed during the presentation in order to enhance audience engagement. A small prize or swag item will be awarded
to the winner of the Kahoot game at the conclusion of the presentation.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
My outline for my planned workshop will be as follows:
1. Start with emphasizing/reviewing the importance of accurate data analysis for effective GMEC oversight.
2. Explain the CRISP-DM methodology and how it was implemented at our institution during this project.
3. Explain how data was first compiled and cleaned in Excel to prepare it for Power BI (the ETL process- extract,
transform, and load).
4. Loading the cleaned data into Power BI and making any needed adjustments.
5. Dashboard visualization design in Power BI and creating custom filters.
6. Explain the process of synthesizing dashboard data for the GMEC, AIR Sub-Committee, and program leadership
(review the similarities and differences in priorities for these groups and how to determine an appropriate visualization
design to suit their needs; share the template used for program summary letters).
(48) Submission ID#1873844
Training Program Administrator Well-being: Data From a Large Health System
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Kristen Demertzis – Northwell Health
Email: kdemertzis@northwell.edu
Office Phone: (516) 606-0866
Presenter(s)
Kristen Demertzis, PhD, ABPP-CN
Director, GME Well-being
Northwell Health
Role: Presenter
Kelly Conlon, MS, C-TAGME
Director, Medical Education, Eastern Region
Northwell Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Report familiarization of current literature on TPA well-being and the impact of TPA well-being on
GME programs.
2. List the approximate rate of burnout reported by survey respondents and how that compares to the
current literature base.
3. Identify several of the highest ranked drivers of job satisfaction and job stress/dissatisfaction from this
survey study.
4. Understand several drivers of thoughts of resignation and intent to resign among respondents of this
survey study.
5. Describe several actionable items that may contribute to promoting TPA well-being and associated
strategies for implementation.
Session Description
Results will be presented from a survey on Training Program Administrator (TPA) Well-being administered to
all TPAs across a large health system in New York that employs approximately 140 TPAs and over 2000
residents and fellows. Session content will include a brief overview of the literature on TPA well-being and
associated implications on GME, survey goals and content, survey respondent characteristics, and results
including burnout rate, job satisfaction and associated drivers of satisfaction, thoughts of resigning over the
past year, likelihood of resigning in the next year, and suggested changes respondents feel would most
significantly improve their work experience. Actionable items based on survey results will also be discussed
along with associated outcomes.
Target Audience
Training Program Administrators, Program Directors, GME Program and Health System Leadership
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
There is a paucity of literature on TPA well-being and its impact on the GME community. In line with recent efforts to
examine this subject (e.g., by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education), this survey study aimed to
understand TPA well-being within a large health system of over 2000 residents and fellows, including examining TPA
burnout rates, job satisfaction and associated drivers, intent to resign, and other such factors. Comparison of this study's
data to the extant literature will be presented, as well as insights from this study on system- to program-level strategies of
optimizing job satisfaction and well-being of TPAs.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will aim to increase awareness of TPA well-being data, drivers of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction as well
as thoughts of resignation and intent to resign. We will also describe our process of translating our data into actionable
items to optimize TPA well-being and will present associated outcomes with the hope that attendees can carry this work
over or modify it as needed to support their efforts of TPA advocacy at other academic medical institutions.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Buy-in can be difficult to secure in advocacy efforts to support well-being of any group (e.g., GME trainees, faculty, TPAs).
Feasible, actionable items can also be difficult to come up with and implement. Ample time in this session will be dedicated
to low-resource ways to gather data, tips on securing buy-in from key stakeholders, and examples of actionable items
stemming from survey findings along with feasible implementation plans and associated outcomes that can be carried over
and modified as needed for application in other academic medical institutions.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Interactive components will be integrated into this session, such as live poll questions with discussion. If feasible
depending upon the size of this session, small-group activities would be ideal surrounding brainstorming actionable items
and implementation plans to support TPA well-being.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. Provide overview of TPA well-being literature and TPA Well-being Survey objectives (5 min)
2. Review methods including survey design process and content (2 min)
3. Review respondent characteristics (2 min)
4. Review survey results integrating interactive component with live polling questions and discussion to engage attendee
participation (12 min)
5. Present actionable items and associated action plans/outcomes (12 min)
6. Attendee activity to brainstorm carrying this work over to their academic medical institution with discussion surrounding
approach, goals, and potential barriers (e.g., securing buy-in, navigating logistical barriers). If done in small groups,
reserve some time to share with larger group (15 min)
7. Wrap up (2 min)
(49) Submission ID#1873926
Beyond the White Coat: Cultivating Physician Identity in Healthcare
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Ashleigh Larkin – Henry Ford Health
Email: alarkin4@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (313) 916-5403
Cell Phone: (248) 520-5152
Presenter(s)
Ann Woodward, MD
Vice Chair of Education for the Department of Surgery, Senior Staff Surgeon
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Jennifer Newman, EdS
Manager,Graduate Medical Education Instructional Design and Learning Systems & Resources
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Recognize components of physician identity, factors that influence physician identity, and the unique
challenges and opportunities presented during professional practice for encouraging identity growth.
2. Understand the interrelatedness of physician identity and relationships with patients, colleagues,
communities, and oneself.
3. Identify strategies, tools, and resources that will support the implementation of a physician identity
program in your home institution.
4.
5.
Session Description
National research indicates that practitioners frequently exhibit a delayed progression in the formation of their
physician identity. In response to this identified deficiency, Henry Ford Health has developed the Cultivating
Physician Identity (CPI) program. This initiative is designed to empower participants to explore the influences
of personal values, perspectives, and circumstances on their professional evolution. Through the CPI
program, learners engage in a comprehensive exploration of various elements, including identifying their
personal sphere of influence, recontextualizing perspectives, choosing joy in work, refining interpersonal and
intrapersonal interactions, integrating patient narratives into their professional ethos, and cultivating a
collaborative community of practice. This session provides a physician identity program blueprint, as well as
practical methodologies for replication within diverse institutional settings. At the end of this session, learners
will be able to recognize components and influences of physician identity, understand its interrelatedness with
various relationships, and identify strategies and resources for implementing a physician identity program in
their home institutions.
Target Audience
• Faculty members • Program directors • Residents/fellows • DIOs
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
National research indicates that practitioners often experience a delayed development in forming their physician identity,
which affects their professional growth and effectiveness. Additionally, practitioners may not fully recognize how personal
values, perspectives, and circumstances influence their professional evolution and identity as physicians. Finally,
practitioners may lack a collaborative community that supports their professional and personal development in a holistic
manner.
This presentation aims to address these gaps by empowering participants to explore the various influences on their
professional development, refining interpersonal and intrapersonal skills, and providing practical strategies for
implementing similar programs in their own institutions.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Through this session, we aim to achieve specific changes in competence, performance, and education surrounding the
development of a professional identity. Firstly, we seek to enhance learners' competence by enabling them to recognize
the components and influences of physician identity and understand how these factors interact with various personal and
professional relationships. Secondly, we aim to improve performance by empowering participants to integrate patient
narratives into their professional practice, choose joy in their work, and refine both their interpersonal and intrapersonal
interactions. Lastly, in terms of education outcomes, we want learners to identify effective strategies and resources for
implementing a physician identity program within their own institutions, fostering a supportive and collaborative community
of practice.
The ultimate goal of the Cultivating Physician Identity program is to help trainees integrate their personal values, self-
awareness, and professional aspirations into a cohesive identity that reflects their commitment to the practice of medicine.
By cultivating a strong physician identity, trainees are better equipped to provide high quality, patient-centered care.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
During the conference session, it is important to address potential barriers that may hinder conference attendees from
achieving the desired change. Two such barriers are time constraints and recruiting internal physicians who are passionate
about aspects of physician identity to serve as session facilitators. To overcome time constraints, the session will
emphasize the importance of planning in advance. Programs generally have educational didactic time that is protected to a
degree, and this is the ideal time to launch the CPI program. Additionally, by focusing on interns, the program can be
implemented in multiple formats, during orientation or even throughout the year as may best fit a residency program.
Through the coordination of schedules and working closely with program directors and coordinators to facilitate this
process, time can be found to implement the CPI program.
Regarding the recruitment of physicians at participants’ home institutions, it is likely that many teaching institutions have an
existing pool of passionate physicians who would volunteer for this opportunity, especially when packaged correctly. If,
however, participants encounter difficulties in finding internal physicians, our session will discuss alternatives to lead
sessions, such as utilizing outside speakers. During this session, various options for implementation will be discussed,
highlighting potential strategies to navigate challenges upon implementation.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Physician Identity is a concept that can be difficult to teach. In our innovative program, we present information in an open
manner to help trainees see themselves as individuals in the context of the greater world. Our program, grounded in adult
learning theory, was created by a collaborative effort between physician educators and PhD educational leaders to
produce an interactive, discussion-rich format for participants. The concept of physician identity is often discussed and
rarely put into an actionable format where participants can leave with innovative tools to make connections, seek support,
and explore the corners of healthcare that bring them the most joy. This program allows for discussion and actionable
growth for participants. Participants will be introduced to the components of a longitudinal program providing an
educational experience that supports the development of each trainee’s unique physician identity. The educational
methods employed to facilitate change and learning are a mini didactic, small group discussions, and small group
activities. The didactic begins with providing a brief overview of content within the Cultivating Physician Identity program,
including:
Launching Your Physician Identity
• Understand physician identity is always evolving
• Strategies to integrate work and personal life and reframe problems to optimize solutions
Reframing Your Perspective: Choosing Joy in Work
• Discover principles of joy
• Apply tools to develop healthy physician identity
Narrative Medicine
• Examine storied nature of healthcare
• Consider roles narrative plays in physician identity
• Explore how narrative competence contributes to professional satisfaction/effectiveness and enhances ability to advocate
for patients, communities, and oneself.
True Colors: The Power of Integrating Diverse Physician Identities
• Discover qualities and characteristics of individual personalities
• Gain awareness and appreciation of personality differences
• Identify individuals’ strengths, values, joys, needs, and stressors
Evolving Your Physician Identity
• Discover how professional identities can be awakened, strengthened, and supported
• Articulate your medical practice ideal and identify a community of practice
This session will incorporate small group discussion and small group activities throughout our time, and close with a
question-and-answer session. Participants will also leave with an outline of our CPI program and other tools to aid in the
replication of the Cultivating Physician Identity program at their home institutions.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
This session will familiarize attendees with factors that influence the formation of physician identity. Participants will
engage in authentic and interactive experiences facilitated by medical educational leaders to explore the development of
an evolving physician identity. Facilitators will engage participants in small group activities, short didactic bursts, and will
leave them with a blueprint of how to replicate this program at their home institution. Topics include: circle of control,
reframing perspective, choosing joy in work, interpersonal and intrapersonal interactions, the patient narrative, and
cultivating a community of practice.
Introduction
Background and theory
Discussion of program structure, session objectives, and activities
Cultivating Physician Identity presentation
Group work and practice: Participants will be able to practice delivering activities within each of the modules.
Trouble-shooting tips
Discussion: Taking it back to your institution
Summary
Question and answer session
(50) Submission ID#1873956
Wellness Rx: Resilience in the Face of Physician Burnout
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Ashleigh Larkin – Henry Ford Health
Email: alarkin4@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (313) 916-5403
Cell Phone: (248) 520-5152
Presenter(s)
Ashleigh R. Larkin, MA
Instructional Design Consultant
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Lisa MacLean, MD
Chief Clinical Wellness Officer of the Henry Ford Medical Group/ Program Director, Psychiatry
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Explore the implementation of an educational module integrating evidence-based tools for effectively
coping with challenging situations in an ongoing capacity.
2. Apply best practice teaching strategies by actively engaging in collaborative teaching exercises within
small group settings.
3. Equip participants with a comprehensive blueprint for implementing a "Tools for Thriving in Training"
module within their respective home institutions.
4.
5.
Session Description
Join us in tackling the urgent issue of physician burnout head-on! With approximately 50% of practicing
physicians reporting symptoms of burnout, it's clear that action is needed to support our medical community.
The Tools for Thriving in Training module, a dynamic program rooted in the ACGME Common Program
Requirements for Wellness, acknowledges the stress of training, and focuses on self-assessment, healthy
coping, and available support resources. This is about empowering participants to deliver strategies and
practical tools for self-assessment, healthy coping mechanisms, and accessing crucial support resources.
Through interactive discussions and hands-on exercises, we'll delve into strategies for prevention and
resilience-building that can be immediately applied in real-world settings. By the end of this session,
participants will be more equipped to combat burnout with a concrete blueprint for implementing the Tools for
Thriving in Training module within their own institutions.
Target Audience
DIOs, Faculty Members, Program Directors, Residents/Fellows
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The professional practice gaps we wish to address with our presentation are primarily centered around the urgent issue of
physician burnout. With approximately 50% of practicing physicians reporting symptoms of burnout, there is a critical need
to support the medical community. The presentation aims to address this gap by focusing on self-assessment, healthy
coping mechanisms, and the utilization of available support resources, as outlined in the Tools for Thriving in Training
module. This module, rooted in the ACGME Common Program Requirements for Wellness, acknowledges the stress of
training and provides practical strategies and tools for prevention and resilience-building. By empowering participants
through interactive discussions and hands-on exercises, the session seeks to equip them with a concrete blueprint for
implementing these tools within their own institutions, ultimately aiming to reduce burnout and enhance physician well-
being.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Through our session, we aim to create several specific changes in competence and education/accreditation outcomes. We
aim to have participants develop a deeper understanding of self-assessment, healthy coping mechanisms, and support
resources available for managing stress and preventing burnout. The session also provides an opportunity for participants
to implement effective strategies for resilience-building and burnout prevention in their daily practice. Our goal is to provide
participants with a concrete blueprint for integrating the Tools for Thriving in Training module into their institutions, aligning
with the ACGME Common Program Requirements for Wellness, thereby fostering a supportive and sustainable wellness
culture within their training programs.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The potential perceived barrier that attendees may face is lack of time for physicians to facilitate the module that is being
provided in our session. To overcome time constraints, the session will emphasize the importance of planning in advance.
Programs generally have educational didactic time that is protected to a degree, and this is the ideal time to launch the
Tools for Thriving in training module. Additionally, by focusing on interns, the program can be implemented in multiple
formats, during orientation or even throughout the year as may best fit a residency program. Through the coordination of
schedules and working closely with program directors and coordinators to facilitate this process, time can be found to
implement the Tools for Thriving in Training module.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Our module, grounded in adult learning theory, was created by a collaborative effort between physician educators and PhD
educational leaders to produce an interactive, discussion-rich format for participants. The concept of wellness is often
discussed and rarely put into an actionable format where participants can leave with innovative tools to make connections,
seek support, identify actionable goals and name strategies for prioritizing basic needs. This program allows for discussion
and actionable growth for participants.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
In this session, participants will be introduced to a wellness module designed to address physician burnout through
practical strategies. Attendees will delve into evidence-based techniques and discussions aimed at prevention and
fostering resilience. Facilitators will lead small group activities, brief didactic sessions, and provide guidance on
implementing the program within their own institutions. Key topics will cover evidence-based coping strategies, prioritizing
well-being, setting effective goals, and communicating with colleagues in times of need. Participants will learn how to
showcase wellness content and resources in a meaningful way for trainee development.
Introduction- Background and theory: Evidence-based approach to wellness strategies- 5 minutes
Blueprint and didactic discussion of the Tools for Thriving in Training Module- 10 minutes
Small group activities introduction- 5 minutes
Collaborative group work and practice- 10 minutes
Group demonstrations of module activities- 10 minutes
Tips for implementation at home institutions- 5 minutes
Question and answer session- 5 minutes
(51) Submission ID#1873994
Resilient Leadership: Guiding your institution and programs through tragedy
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Erin Reis – McLaren Health Care
Email: erin.reis@mclaren.org
Office Phone: (810) 342-2942
Presenter(s)
Erin Reis, EdD, MBA, FACHE, C-TAGME
Associate Chief Academic Officer
McLaren Health Care
Role: Presenter
Tonya VanOrder, PhD
DIO
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the critical role of Leadership in times of tragedy: Attendees will learn how effective
leadership can significantly impact organizational recovery and faculty/resident well-being after a
tragic event.
2. Develop practical Strategies for Leading with Empathy and Resilience: Attendees will gain practical
tools and techniques for leading their teams through challenging times, focusing on maintaining
morale and fostering resilience, and promoting a supportive environment.
3. Implement a comprehensive Recovery Plan; Attendees will be equipped with the knowledge to create
and execute a structured recovery plan that addresses immediate needs, long-term recovery, and
future preparedness.
4.
5.
Session Description
Despite the best efforts of GME leaders to improve trainee and faculty well-being, tragedies as a result of
burnout during residency continue to happen. Unfortunately, when a tragedy occurs, whether resident suicide,
attempt, or death due to illness or accident, many leaders don't have the tools to lead recovery at the
institution, program, and individual level. In this session, two DIOs who have experienced all of the above will
share their strategies for helping everyone to lead with empathy and resilience before, during, and after a
tragedy.
Target Audience
Designated Institutional Officials, Program Directors, GME Leadership, Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Equip leaders to respond to a tragic event in a way that best supports well-being.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Equip leaders to respond to a tragic event in a way that best supports well-being.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Hospital Leadership Support and Resources. Provide leaders tools to advocate for needed resources and create some
change through GME policy.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Polling, Story Telling, Questions and Answer, Sharing Policies and resources documents,
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. Group Discussions/ Story Telling/ polling. 10 Min
2. Presentation/Strategy- 30 minutes
3. Questions and Answer 10 Minutes
(52) Submission ID#1874076
Measuring what Matters: The Role of an Educational Outcomes Team for GME
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Janeane Walker – Northeast Georgia Medical Center
Email: janeane.walker@nghs.com
Office Phone: (770) 219-6158
Cell Phone: (678) 283-4660
Presenter(s)
Janeane Walker, PhD
Director of Faculty Development & Educational Outcomes
Northeast Georgia Medical Center
Role: Presenter
John Delzell, Jr., MD
Designated Institutional Official
Northeast Georgia Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Explore strategies for developing and implementing metrics to assess educational outcomes at both
program and institutional levels.
2. Identify barriers and challenges faced by Educational Outcomes teams in newly accredited
Sponsoring Institutions (SIs).
3. Evaluate strategies for overcoming resistance to change and fostering buy-in for outcomes-driven
initiatives within GME programs.
4. Develop an action plan for implementing similar roles and initiatives in other GME programs or
institutions based on lessons learned.
5. Examine the impact of outcomes-focused initiatives on programmatic improvements and long-term
educational goals within GME, emphasizing the role of data-driven decision-making and continuous
quality improvement.
Session Description
In this session, we will explore the transformative role of an Educational Outcomes Team in Graduate Medical
Education (GME), focusing on the establishment of key roles: Director of Faculty Development and
Educational Outcomes, and an Educational Outcomes Coordinator. Our discussion will highlight the team's
efforts in developing metrics, aligning educational practices with accreditation standards, and fostering a
culture of accountability and evidence-based practices within a newly accredited Sponsoring Institution (SI).
Through insights into successful initiatives, challenges faced, and lessons learned, attendees will gain
practical strategies for enhancing teaching quality, mentorship, and educational outcomes in GME, ultimately
advancing healthcare education and delivery.
Target Audience
DIO, GME Administrative directors
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Our presentation aims to showcase the transformative impact of establishing dedicated roles like the Director of Faculty
Development and Educational Outcomes and an Educational Outcomes Coordinator. These roles are pivotal in our
initiative to elevate competence and performance within our graduate medical education (GME) programs. By focusing on
faculty development and metrics-driven assessments, we aim to enhance teaching quality, mentorship, and ultimately, the
competence of our residents and fellows. At the institutional level, our Educational Outcomes team is pioneering efforts to
align educational practices with accreditation standards, ensuring robust educational and accreditation outcomes. This
structured approach not only facilitates continuous program improvement but also strengthens our commitment to
evidence-based practices in GME.
Our session will also explore the broader implications of these roles in fostering a culture of accountability on measurable
outcomes. By sharing both successful initiatives and the barriers we've encountered, we hope to provide valuable insights
for other institutions. Ultimately, our goal is to inspire colleagues in GME to embrace outcomes-driven strategies, thereby
advancing educational excellence and the future of healthcare delivery.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The session emphasizes the importance of having an Educational Outcomes Team dedicated to assessing learner
outcomes, highlighting several key changes in competence, performance, and educational/accreditation results. This team
enhances data-driven decision-making by improving the use of data to assess educational outcomes and make informed
decisions, leading to more effective, targeted curriculum development. Having a dedicated Educational Outcomes Team
facilitates targeted curriculum development to address specific learning gaps, ensuring that residents and fellows receive a
comprehensive and relevant education that translates into improved patient care. This initiative also fosters increased
collaboration and support, creating a unified approach to improving educational outcomes through close cooperation
between program directors and the outcomes team. By streamlining data collection and analysis across all GME programs,
the team reduces the burden on individual programs and provides consistent, reliable data for performance assessment.
Enhanced reporting and accountability through comprehensive performance and outcomes reports bring greater
transparency and drive continuous improvement efforts within the GME programs.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The session recognizes several potential barriers that might prevent attendees from achieving the desired changes in their
educational programs. Resource constraints, such as limited financial, human, and technological resources, can hinder the
establishment and functioning of a dedicated Educational Outcomes Team. This may lead to reluctance in adopting the
model due to perceived costs. Resistance to change is another significant barrier, as faculty and staff may be hesitant to
shift from established practices to new approaches in data collection and analysis. Additionally, challenges in data
management, such as handling large volumes of data across multiple programs, and the lack of training and expertise in
data analysis and educational assessment, can impede effective outcomes assessment and use of metrics.
To address these barriers, the session will focus on several strategic solutions. The session will introduce efficient data
management tools and best practices to streamline data collection and analysis, providing attendees with practical training
and demonstrations. These strategies aim to equip attendees with the knowledge and tools needed to overcome
challenges and successfully improve learner outcomes in their GME program.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Flipped classroom approach, PowerPoint/lecture/video
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. Introduction (5 minutes)
• Welcome and introduction of speakers.
• Overview of session objectives and agenda.
• Brief introduction to NGMC and its GME program.
2. Establishing an Educational Outcomes Team (10 minutes)
• Explanation of the roles: Director of Faculty Development and Educational
Outcomes, and Educational Outcomes Coordinator.
• Discussion on the importance of having a dedicated team for assessing
learner outcomes.
• Description of responsibilities and key functions of these roles.
3. Success Stories and Initiatives (10 minutes)
• Presentation of successful initiatives implemented by the Educational Outcomes Team.
• Case studies demonstrating the positive impact on program performance and
learning outcomes.
• Discussion of specific metrics used to measure success
4. Barriers and Challenges (10 minutes)
• Identification of potential barriers (resource constraints, resistance to change, data management challenges, lack of
training).
• Discussion on the real and perceived impact of these barriers on achieving
desired outcomes.
• Interactive Q&A segment to address participants' concerns and experiences.
5. Strategies to Overcome Barriers (10 minutes)
• Presentation of strategies to address resource constraints, change management, data management, and training needs.
• Practical advice on implementing these strategies in attendees' own institutions.
• Examples of tools and technologies that facilitate data management and analysis.
6. Interactive Group Activity (10 minutes)
• Breakout groups to discuss and develop action plans for implementing an
Educational Outcomes Team.
• Each group identifies potential barriers and devises strategies to overcome
them.
• Groups share their plans and receive feedback from facilitators and peers.
7. Conclusion and Q&A (5 minutes)
• Recap of key points and takeaways.
• Final Q&A session for any remaining questions.
• Closing remarks
(53) Submission ID#1874136
Intellectual Property: Protecting Yourself and Avoiding Misconduct
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Bethany Figg – CMU College of Medicine
Email: bethany.figg@cmich.edu
Office Phone: (989) 746-7675
Presenter(s)
Bethany J. Figg, DEdT, MBA, MLIS, AHIP, C-TAGME
Director of Graduate Medical Education
CMU College of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Mary Jo Wagner, MD
DIO/CAO
CMU College of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Discuss the misconduct in science including accidental or deliberate use of others ideas including the
international principles of fair use and plagiarism
2. Describe methods to protect intellectual property including presentations, publications and web-based
educational activities
3. Identify open-source material while reviewing the appropriate use of internet images in local, regional
and national presentations
4. Investigate plagiarism checking programs
5.
Session Description
Medical academicians generously share ideas and opportunities. It is important to get credit for your unique
concepts and any substantial work you do on a scholarly project or publication. Misconduct in science and
medicine can involve unintentional or purposeful use of another’s “creations of the mind” or information.
Plagiarism is more difficult to define now with easy-to-copy online material. With the guidelines for publication
in medical journals becoming more specific, it is important to understand these principles. This interactive
session will help you understand how to protect your intellectual property and how to avoid unintentionally
inappropriately use others’ work.
Target Audience
Program faculty, administrators, and leadership.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Medical academicians may unintentionally or purposefully use others' intellectual property without proper attribution due to
lack of understanding or awareness of proper citation practices. They should have a clear understanding of intellectual
property rights and proper citation practices to avoid plagiarism and ensure credit is given for original work. The gap lies in
the knowledge and application of proper intellectual property and citation practices.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Increase understanding of what constitutes plagiarism and how to avoid it, improve the accuracy and integrity of citations in
scholarly work, and reduce instances of plagiarism and ensure that medical academicians properly attribute intellectual
property in their publications and presentations.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Barrier 1: Lack of awareness or understanding of what constitutes plagiarism, and will be addressed by providing clear
definitions and examples during the session.
Barrier 2: Perceived complexity or inconvenience of proper citation practices, and will be addressed by demonstrating
practical, easy-to-follow steps for proper citation.
Barrier 3: Misconceptions about the severity and consequences of plagiarism, addressed by highlighting real-world
examples and consequences of plagiarism to emphasize its importance.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will engage participants with real-world examples and scenarios through interactive lecture, group discussion to
facilitate exploration of different perspectives and clarify doubts, case studies to illustrate proper and improper citation
practices, and plenty of time for Q&A.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
This session will utilize traditional didactic learning with interactive exercises to help present definitions, examples, and the
importance of proper citation practices and review and analyze real-world examples of intellectual property practices. With
the speakers’ extensive experience and personal involvement in scholarly publishing and presenting, the audience will
learn practical tips. This session will be designed primarily as a presentation with personal examples, with open dialogue
for questions. We plan for an interactive discussion between the presenters, leaving generally 20% of the time for
questions throughout the presentation and at the end.
(54) Submission ID#1874283
The Power of Intent and the Reality of Impact: Effective Strategies for Addressing Microaggressions
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Ashleigh Larkin – Henry Ford Health
Email: alarkin4@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (313) 916-5403
Cell Phone: (248) 520-5152
Presenter(s)
Ashleigh R. Larkin, MA
Instructional Design Consultant
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Richard Bryce, MD
Program Director, Family Medicine Residency & Chief Medical Officer, CHASS
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify instances where the outcome or impact of words and actions differs from the intended goal or
purpose.
2. Apply practical tools and strategies to navigate and resolve situations where impact has caused
unintended harm.
3. Understand the most effective methods for teaching these concepts to individuals at your home
institution.
4.
5.
Session Description
In today's world, effective communication is more critical than ever. Yet, even with the best of intentions, our
words and actions can occasionally miss the mark, unintentionally causing harm. This session explores the
complexities of communication and methods to master the nuances of microaggressions. Equipped with
facilitator guides, you'll learn relevant and timely strategies for discussing impact versus intent and managing
microaggressions. Learners will leave this session with the knowledge to distinguish instances where impact
differs from intention, the ability to apply practical strategies to address unintended harm, and possess a
thorough understanding of effective teaching methodologies for imparting these crucial concepts at their home
institutions.
Target Audience
DIOs Faculty Members Program Directors Residents/Fellows
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The professional practice gaps we wish to address with our presentation are centered on the complexities of
communication and the unintentional harm that can arise from microaggressions. Despite good intentions, words and
actions can sometimes miss the mark, leading to unintended negative impacts. This session aims to tackle these gaps by
providing participants with the knowledge and skills to distinguish between impact and intent, effectively manage
microaggressions, and apply practical strategies to address unintended harm. Additionally, it focuses on equipping
participants with effective teaching methodologies to impart these crucial concepts at their home institutions, fostering
more mindful and inclusive communication practices.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Through our session, we aim to create specific changes in competence, performance, and education/accreditation
outcomes. In terms of competence, we want participants to develop the ability to distinguish between the impact and intent
of their communication and to recognize and manage microaggressions effectively. For performance, we aim to enhance
participants' practical skills in addressing unintended harm, enabling them to apply relevant strategies in real-world
situations. Regarding education and accreditation outcomes, we will provide participants with a blueprint for implementing
this session at their home institutions.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers to achieving the desired change include a lack of awareness or understanding of microaggressions,
limited resources such as time and funding, and gaps in prior training and experience. To overcome these barriers, we will
provide comprehensive educational materials and real-life examples to increase awareness and understanding. In this
session, we share practical tools that facilitators can implement at their home institutions. To address the barriers of time
and funding, we encourage the use of faculty who are passionate about this work to serve as facilitators. By addressing
these barriers with targeted strategies, attendees will be better equipped to implement mindful and inclusive
communication practices within their institutions.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
To facilitate change and learning, we will employ a combination of interactive activities and discussion-based methods.
Participants will engage in case studies that simulate real-life scenarios involving microaggressions, allowing them to
practice and internalize effective communication strategies. Facilitated group discussions will provide a platform for
attendees to share their experiences and insights, fostering a deeper understanding through peer learning. Role-playing
activities will enable participants to explore different perspectives and practice responding to microaggressions in a safe
and supportive environment. Comprehensive facilitator guides will be provided to ensure that participants have access to
relevant strategies and tools for discussing impact versus intent and managing microaggressions. Additionally, participants
will walk away with a blueprint for implementation of this session at their home institutions.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
During this interactive session, participants will delve into instructional best practices geared towards effectively delivering
content on diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice (DEIJ) in both medical education. Engaging activities will aid learners in
navigating the nuances between intent and impact, while also equipping them with strategies to address microaggressions
through hands-on exploration of case scenarios. Participants will enhance their ability to engage faculty members through
an interactive didactic approach, and how to tailor content to suit the unique dynamics of their respective institutions.
Introduction – 5 minutes
Background and theory – 5 minutes
Discussion of structured activities – 5 minutes
Activity One: Intent Versus Impact – 20 minutes
Small group experience
Case study collaborative exercise
Tips for implementation at home institutions- 5 minutes
Question and answer session- 10 minutes
(55) Submission ID#1874560
ACGME AIRE: Unleashing Innovation in Your Program
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CTYPD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Kate Hatlak – Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education
Email: khatlak@acgme.org
Office Phone: (312) 755-7049
Cell Phone: (920) 619-5343
Presenter(s)
Kate Hatlak, EdD
Director, Faculty Development and Special Projects
Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education
Role: Presenter
Jon Webb, MD
Professor and Program Director, Division of Nephrology, Bone and Mineral Metabolism
University of Kentucky
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the goals of the AIRE program, including how they fit into competency-based medical
education
2. Know the process of submitting an AIRE proposal, including where to find more information and who
to contact
3. Recognize how they could implement innovation at their program and/or institution through AIRE
4.
5.
Session Description
Programs wishing to take an innovative approach to graduate medical education can participate in the
Advancing Innovation in Residency Education (AIRE) program, which allows programs relief from certain
requirements that may hinder innovation. In this session, hear firsthand from a current AIRE program on their
experience proposing an innovative approach, including what went well and tips for success. An ACGME staff
member will share information about the AIRE program, including the proposal submission and review
process. Participants will engage in brainstorming sessions to discover opportunities for innovation at their
home institution. At the end of the session, participants should understand the goals of the AIRE program, the
process of submitting an AIRE proposal, and how they could implement innovation at their program and/or
institution through AIRE.
Target Audience
Program directors, faculty members, and designated institutional officials
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The pandemic highlighted antiquated aspects of the current medical education system. Notably, time-in-training is a poor
proxy for measuring competence, as are number of procedures performed and time spent in curricular experiences.
Additionally, the pandemic stressed transitions at all levels of medical education (UME --> GME, GME --> GME, and GME
--> independent practice) and further exposed gaps in assessment.
Moving graduate medical education to a competency-based system shifts the focus to the learner, providing them with
what they need to be competent in all desired outcomes. The current GME and accreditation systems do not always allow
the flexibility needed for programs to function in a truly competency-based, learner-centered model. However, there are
opportunities for programs to design innovative approaches and request relief from certain ACGME program requirements
to move closer to the outcomes-based approach.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Programs wishing to take an innovative approach to competency-based medical education can participate in the
Advancing Innovation in Residency Education (AIRE) program. AIRE allows programs, with Review Committee approval,
to be granted relief from program requirements that may hinder innovative approaches to curriculum, assessment, and/or
learner progression toward mastery. Sharing information about the AIRE program, the process to request relief from
program requirements, and successful innovations through the AIRE program will help programs recognize opportunities
for innovation in their own programs/institutions.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
One of the biggest barriers to innovation in GME is cost: of money, time, and other resources. Program directors and
faculty members are already overburdened, and institutions have limited financial resources, especially in recovering from
losses sustained during the pandemic. Another challenge is working against decades of a current system that favors time-
based education and a teacher-centered, “one size fits all” approach. This session will show participants how to design
innovation, especially around competency-based medical education, within the current accreditation system. The session
will also demonstrate how to request relief from certain program requirements to allow for innovation to occur.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This session will incorporate existing literature in competency-based/outcomes-based education and change management.
Educational formats will include a short didactic to introduce the concept, small group discussion to learn what other
participants are doing in regard to competency-based medical education and innovation, and workshopping to practice
designing innovation in their own programs and/or institutions.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
We will spend 15 minutes giving an overview of innovation at the ACGME and the AIRE program, including examples of a
few successful AIRE pilots. We will allot 25 minutes for discussion and workshopping time in small groups: 5 minutes to
identify opportunities for innovative projects at their home institutions, 15 minutes to explore one or more of these projects,
and 10 minutes to report out to the large group.. The remaining 10 minutes will be a wrap-up and time for a few questions.
(56) Submission ID#1875171
Managing Through Change in a Sponsoring Institution
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Taiwana Daniels – Emory University
Email: taiwana.daniels@emory.edu
Office Phone: (404) 727-4545
Cell Phone: (770) 349-9434
Presenter(s)
Taiwana W. Daniels, MBA
Senior Associate Director; ACGME Institutional Coordinator
Emory University
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify the areas of change that affect the GME Office, the Sponsoring Institutions, and its training
programs.
2. Identify the key stakeholders who will be impacted by change.
3. Develop a strategy to educate new leadership.
4. Have resources and information readily available for leadership changes.
5.
Session Description
This session will discuss areas of change that affect the GME Office and the Sponsoring Institution and
provide recommendations, tips, and resources on how to manage through change. The familiar statement,
"The only thing constant is change" may carry a negative connotation but even through change, we must
continue to manage our programs, to ensure there is no disruption in training and the Sponsoring Institutions
remain in compliance.
Target Audience
DIOs, Institutional Coordinators, Directors, Administrators, Program Directors, and Program Coordinators.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Understanding that change is inevitable, documentation and resources should be readily available to assist with any
transition.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Identify the key change factors that will impact the Sponsoring Institution and its training program and develop a resource
plan for each key change.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers are unpreparedness and nonorganization. This session will help attendees develop a transition plan.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
I will provide examples of the documents and reports that assist me with preparing new leaders transitioning to GME.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
I. Introduction
II. Poll the session
III. Presentation
IV. Questions
V. Distribute Sample Templates
(57) Submission ID#1875272
Building an ACGME Program from the Ground-Up
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Angela Franco – Abrazo Health
Email: Angela.Franco@abrazohealth.com
Office Phone: (623) 561-7980
Presenter(s)
Angela Franco, C-TAGME
GME Admin Director
Abrazo Health
Role: Presenter
Shanna Baker, C-TAGME
GME Institutional Coordinator
Abrazo Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. The process of developing and applying for program accreditation that includes familiarizing yourself
with the ACGME requirements, the specialty specific program application and initial WebAds
information.
2. Organize and establish documents that are required for upload into WebAds upon application
submission.
3. After application submission, prepare for an ACGME site visit for initial accreditation that includes
organizing the required materials and communicating times and schedules with participants, and an
added benefit of conducting a mock visit.
4. Once initial accreditation is established, planning the start of the program that includes advertisement,
recruitment, set-up of the residency management system.
5. Examine and evaluate any improvements that can be made within the next two years in order to
achieve full Continued Accreditation; rectify and respond to any citations received from the initial
accreditation letter.
Session Description
This session will focus on how to build an accredited ACGME program from program application submission,
initial site visit, to the start of the program. Many coordinators or GME Administrators come into programs that
are already established without having the added knowledge of the process and work that was put into
starting a residency or fellowship from scratch and pre-accreditation. Many administrators may ask
themselves "How did we get here?" This session will answer those questions and hopefully expand the
knowledge of many GME coordinators and enhance their professional development on this topic.
Target Audience
The main audience will be GME coordinators and GME administrators that may include program coordinators,
institutional coordinators and GME managers/directors. This will also be beneficial for GME faculty who may
have aspirations to become program directors or new faculty who may not be aware of the initial accreditation
process.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Many administrators and program coordinators come into programs that may have already been established for years.
This session will enhance their professional development in terms of learning how to build a new program. This expanded
knowledge will help if they plan on moving up in GME.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Enhanced knowledge of GME and ACGME requirements and processes through completing a new program application,
the site visit process for a program that has not started, and creating and/or familiarizing yourself of the documentation that
is needed to achieve initial accreditation.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Coordinators or administrators may not have the opportunity to be involved in a new program build-up depending on
position or status of their program. Another barrier is the program not meeting the minimum ACGME requirements to be
able to submit an application or the program being denied initial accreditation. These are still learning experiences for GME
administrators and how to navigate through this.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
A new program application sample, outline of what is required for documentation upload in WebAds, site visit preparation
and organization of materials, sample evaluations, will PLA's be needed for the new program?
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
40 minutes of our presentation will include a PowerPoint of our session topic that will include the following: First, reviewing
the program requirements (do we have any deficiencies). If meet requirements, the start of applying for program
accreditation, what is needed to complete the program application, the opening of WebAds for the new program, list of
documents needed for upload. The session will then move on to site visit preparation. Lastly, we will discuss starting the
new program once initial accreditation is achieved. The last 10 minutes of the presentation will be left for questions or
feedback from the audience.
(58) Submission ID#1875306
Six Strategies to Support Stressed Students
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Jessica Seaman – Creighton University School of Medicine
Email: jessicaseaman@creighton.edu
Office Phone: (602) 812-3134
Cell Phone: (480) 353-8425
Presenter(s)
Jessica W. Seaman, EdD, MAEd
Assistant Dean for Faculty Development
Creighton University School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand what is good about stress, why our UME / GME learners need some stress in order to
practice medicine.
2. Identify and differentiate the cause/origin and symptoms of stress, anxiety, and depression,
specifically for those learning medicine.
3. Use any one (or all) of the six strategies to support all levels of learners in their classroom or clinic
environment....tomorrow.
4. Access multiple resources to extend their knowledge and expand their capacity with learners.
5.
Session Description
Learners at all levels - medical students, physician residents, staff, faculty - experience stress to some degree.
Stress can be a positive motivator. But when learner stress goes unmanaged, it can easily lead to anxiety,
depression, risk of dropping out, harmful physical effects, substance abuse, and even suicide. Faculty can
assist medical learners, including resident learners, in managing their stress as they learn these six support
strategies. We will also dive more specifically into the following: impostor phenomenon stress vs. anxiety
learner stress tolerance signs and symptoms of stress stress as a manageable motivator
Target Audience
Clinical, hospital, classroom faculty and staff Faculty of medical students (UME) and physician residents
(GME) Anyone that works with learners!
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Many faculty are under the false assumption that "If I learned this way, then my students should learn this way." In most
situations, this should not be the case. The gap is widening between how faculty learned decades ago and how our
physicians should be learning now. These gaps are expanded due to technology, social skills, and the way our learners
respond to more knowledge and essentially more responsibility. The gaps are what lead to stress, anxiety, and depression
in learners.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
As faculty recognize the tangible ways that impostor phenomenon presents itself, we can assist learners in feeling more
confident and thereby reducing their stress levels. We need to close the gap between faculty and learners, bring them
closer together through strong teacher/learner/peer relationships. As the gap closes, learners and faculty gain strength
from each other and patients actually receive better care from students, residents, and practitioners, that are less stressed
and psychologically well.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Faculty can't do everything! But they can do some things! There are things we can do to help ease stress and pressure as
we support students in the learning environment. It’s our responsibility to learn these strategies. A potential barrier could be
a faculty that is not willing to try something new or different. It won't take a lot of time, but it does take intention and
motivation to work differently with our learners. The six strategies and multiple resources I will share will address the
barriers of willingness, intention, and motivation, due to the ease of incorporating into everyday teaching.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
I love facilitating with Mentimeter, Poll Everywhere, and Zoom polls, to engage faculty in the real-time learning - especially
with very large groups. They are quick and easy tools that don't take a lot of set-up from the learner. By using them in our
session, faculty can become comfortable using these methods in their own teaching. I will also employ sharing aloud and
in smaller groups, as it is always helpful to learn from other faculty at the session.
A couple of the important six strategies are flexibility (1) and compassion (2). We will use technology (Menti, Poll
Everywhere, etc.) and small groups to gather information around these topics and to assess what is currently happening in
their learning environment. When faculty can see their environment through a different lens - a new perspective - they can
begin to make changes with their own learners.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
10 minutes - start with reflection, intro to me, the topic, and a couple quick assessments of audience's comfort level with
topic (using engagement platforms)
10 minutes - what is good / bad about stress - what does it lead to if unmanaged
20 minutes - intro and practice of all six strategies - expectations, humor, storytelling, flexibility, compassion
10 minutes - use of resources, questions, discussion
(59) Submission ID#1875336
Embracing Your Worth: Confronting Impostor Phenomenon
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Jessica Seaman – Creighton University School of Medicine
Email: jessicaseaman@creighton.edu
Office Phone: (602) 812-3134
Cell Phone: (480) 353-8425
Presenter(s)
Session Objectives
1. Understand the signs and symptoms of impostor phenomenon in yourself and in others
2. Explore the impacts and main types of impostor phenomenon
3. Develop practical coping strategies for yourself and to share with medicine colleagues
4. Foster a supportive, inclusive, empowering environment to assist others with feelings of impostor-ism
5.
Session Description
Impostor phenomenon is usually accompanied by perfectionism, work paralysis, burnout, beliefs of decreased
success, procrastination, and self-doubt – especially in medicine. As we confront these feelings and behaviors
head on, we embrace our individual worth. Self-worth is the internal sense that you are worthy of love and
belonging from others – often confused with self-esteem, which relies on external factors such as successes
and achievements to define worth. Embracing self-worth is a journey that requires patience, self-compassion,
and a willingness to challenge our inner critic. We will also dive more specifically into the following: Five main
types of impostor phenomenon Impostor phenomenon myths In what ways do society or cultures contribute to
impostor phenomenon? Work and family culture that reinforces impostor-ism
Target Audience
Clinical, hospital, classroom faculty, staff, leadership; anyone working in healthcare / medicine
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The medicine community rarely recognizes impostor signs in themselves or in others working around them. These signs
and symptoms of impostor-ism – fear of failure, overworking or self-sabotage to cover self-doubt, perfectionism, denial of
ability, and attributing any success to luck, mistakes, and favoritism - all lead to the Impostor Cycle, including worrying
about performance > working hard to cover up feared fraudulence > being evaluated > seeking approval > and back to
worrying about performance. These cyclical behaviors shed light on the gaps of recognition and failure to embrace who we
are and what strengths we bring to the healthcare system.
These gaps can certainly lead to poor patient outcomes and burned-out physicians as they try to create a version of
themselves they feel is worthy of their calling and career choice.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
As physicians and healthcare practitioners recognize the tangible ways that impostor phenomenon presents itself, name
the types of impostor-ism, and create new confidence strategies, we then embrace our worth and assist others in doing the
same. When colleagues and learners learn how to support one another, they gain strength from each other and patients
actually receive better care from all health practitioners.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
We cannot force someone to feel better about themselves, to take on a new level of self-care, or to embrace their worth.
But as we share and discuss impostor phenomenon signs and symptoms, we can name them and change them in the real
world, in medicine settings. This session will give attendees the tools to embrace their own worth and assist others in their
healthcare realms to do the same.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
I love facilitating with Mentimeter, Poll Everywhere, and Zoom polls, to engage audiences in real-time learning - especially
with very large groups. They are quick and easy tools that don't take a lot of set-up from the learner. By using them in our
session, participants can become comfortable using these methods in their own programs and settings. I will also employ
sharing aloud and in smaller groups, as it is always helpful to learn from other attendees in a session.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
10 minutes – reflection + intro to me, the topic + a few assessments of audience's comfort level with topic (using
engagement platforms) – find out what they already know / believe
10 minutes – signs and symptoms of impostor phenomenon – what does it look like in the field of medicine – what are the
five types we see in healthcare and other settings
20 minutes – practical coping strategies that audience can use for themselves and / or with learners and colleagues
10 minutes – share resources, questions, discussion
(60) Submission ID#1875356
Fostering Psychological Safety in Medical Education
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Jessica Seaman – Creighton University School of Medicine
Email: jessicaseaman@creighton.edu
Office Phone: (602) 812-3134
Cell Phone: (480) 353-8425
Presenter(s)
Session Objectives
1. Understand what psychological safety looks like and discover its impact on clinical outcomes
2. Identify factors that either hinder or support psychological safety within health sciences teams
3. Gain practical strategies to cultivate a culture of psychological safety and accountability in health
sciences teams
4.
5.
Session Description
Psychological safety is a true necessity in healthcare education as we cultivate an environment where all staff
and learners can voice concerns, admit mistakes, and provide critical feedback without fear of retribution.
Psychological safety is not about being nice or lowering expectations. It is that high performance can only
develop in a psychologically safe environment. This kind of safety is actually crucial, especially in
organizations where knowledge is constantly changing – as in healthcare and medicine. All members on a
team need to collaborate and must make quick, but wise decisions without management intervention. These
teams need to believe that their contribution to patient outcomes is important and they need to feel their work
is personally meaningful. Teams need clear goals and defined roles. Team members need to know they can
depend on one another. But, most important, teams need psychological safety. We will also dive more
specifically into the following: Health Sciences education values and excellence when psychological safety is
present Key ingredients for working on a clinical team Empowering teams and individuals to be honest,
candid, sincere
Target Audience
Clinical, hospital, classroom faculty, staff, leadership; anyone working in healthcare / medicine
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
There is much at stake in healthcare settings – patient lives, future career specialties, and team efficiency. Research
shows there is a positive correlation between psychological safety in a healthcare environments and clinical outcomes. In
these high-stake situations, it is common for medical learners at all levels to feel afraid to be themselves, take risks, make
mistakes, draw attention to potential issues, ask questions, or disagree with healthcare team leads. But this is how they
learn best, from showing curiosity and learning from their failures. The gaps present themselves when learners are in a
zone of comfort, apathy, or anxiety, rather than a learning zone. High psychological safety, coupled with high accountability
and expectations puts learners back in the learning zone, where it is possible to give tough, critical feedback, share trust,
and facilitate mutual respect.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Health practitioners must learn ways to increase psychological safety in medical education, while never lowering their
expectations. When in the learning zone, the focus is on collaboration and learning in the service of high-performance
outcomes. This takes the right tools to add to our tool kit. As we expand our tool kit, we have tangible ways to create the
safety for learners to thrive.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The culture of medicine has long included blaming, lack of inclusiveness, unfair treatment of interns and students,
micromanagement, and a lack of trust for different healthcare practitioners. There are built-in hierarchies in medicine –
whether in the learning environment or at the bedside of a patient. This session will assist attendees in acknowledging and
coming to terms with some hierarchies of responsibility, but never accepting hierarchies of respect nor participation.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
I love facilitating with Mentimeter, Poll Everywhere, and Zoom polls, to engage audiences in real-time learning - especially
with very large groups. They are quick and easy tools that don't take a lot of set-up from the learner. By using them in our
session, participants can become comfortable using these methods in their own programs and settings. I will also employ
sharing aloud and in smaller groups, as it is always helpful to learn from other attendees in a session.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
10 minutes – reflection + intro to me, the topic + a few assessments of audience's comfort level with topic (using
engagement platforms) – find out what they already know / believe
10 minutes – signs of non-psychologically safe learning environments in healthcare
20 minutes – expand a practitioner’s tool kit for building psychological safety – simple actions of faculty and leaders, set
the stage, invite participation, respond productively
10 minutes – share resources, questions, discussion
(61) Submission ID#1875593
“That just stings”: Receiving negative feedback
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CTYPD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Ashley Maranich – Uniformed Services University
Email: ashley.maranich@Usuhs.edu
Office Phone: (301) 295-3185
Presenter(s)
Jessica Bunin, MD, MHPE
Associate Dean of Community and Educational Culture
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Role: Presenter
Gayle Haischer-Rollo, MD
Assistant Dean for Faculty Development
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand how personality traits, learning tendencies, emotions, and ego impact their reception of
negative feedback.
2. Practice techniques for mitigating negativity bias, fostering a more balanced feedback perspective.
3. Cultivate effective strategies for a nuanced evaluation of feedback, distinguishing between valid,
useful, and irrelevant content.
4.
5.
Session Description
The ability to receive and navigate negative, hurtful feedback is rarely taught. Our workshop explores the
impact of such feedback - particularly in the context of receiving anonymous feedback from learners. We
discuss the concept of negativity bias and how it impacts how negative feedback is received. We then
introduce a framework for processing negative feedback including how to pause, reflect, dissect the
feedback's nuances, extract pearls, make changes, and move forward with confidence and determination. We
explore solutions to enhance feedback receptivity including feedback partners and peer support. Through role-
playing exercises, attendees practice these strategies and develop actionable plans for navigating hurtful
feedback and using it as a catalyst for growth. Feedback remains a powerful tool for progress. Here, we
empower ourselves to embrace, learn from, and effectively respond to thoughtful and helpful feedback while
also learning to recover from inconsiderate and unhelpful feedback.
Target Audience
All faculty members, program directors, institutional leaders and administrators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Faculty are often taught the art of delivering feedback, but not the importance or intricacies of receiving feedback. We fill
that gap to allow faculty to grow from feedback while not suffering from the impact of harmful feedback.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Faculty will use a 2 x 2 table to effectively assess and process feedback.
Faculty will be able to differentiate meaningful feedback from harmful feedback.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Resistance to negative feedback from trainees - our goal is to provide a framework for processing this feedback to
overcome resistance and find meaningful aspects to impact positive change.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Presentation of material, Large group brainstorming, Role play, Small group discussion
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
· 5 minutes - Introductions and Disclosures
· 5 minutes – Discussion of responses to negative feedback and negativity bias
· 10 minutes – Reflection and Small Group Discussion regarding the challenges of receiving hurtful feedback
· 10 minutes – Introduction of a framework for addressing negative feedback and small group work practicing the
framework
· 5 minutes – Brainstorm solutions for wellness introduce feedback partners and peer support
· 10 minutes – Role play of strategies
· 5 minutes – Summary and questions
(62) Submission ID#1875602
Leaders can have a bad day: Overcoming perfectionism and shame
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Ashley Maranich – Uniformed Services University
Email: ashley.maranich@Usuhs.edu
Office Phone: (301) 295-3185
Presenter(s)
Jessica Bunin, MD, MHPE
Associate Dean of Community and Educational Culture
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Explore personal and cultural influences of perfectionism in medicine.
2. Analyze the impact of leader perfectionism on both leaders and learners, including the role of shame.
3. Identify strategies to reduce the negative effects of perfectionism and shame in medical education.
4.
5.
Session Description
Perfectionism is a trait common among those in the medical field. Both the culture of medicine and society at
large encourage this trait in medical professionals. When leaders, role models and peers all expect
perfectionism in themselves it leads to expecting perfection in others. Unfortunately, this expectation can lead
to feelings of shame and burnout when mistakes inevitably occur. Medical educators have an opportunity to
help learners navigate these feelings productively, but they need the right understanding and tools to do so.
This interactive workshop delves into the complexities of perfectionism in medical education. We'll explore its
personal and cultural influences, and how it impacts leaders and trainees alike. Through facilitated
discussions, interactive activities, and self-reflection, participants will gain valuable tools to address and
combat the negative effects of perfectionism.
Target Audience
Medical educators and anyone who interacts with trainees in a medical setting
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Difficulty with self-reflection on perfectionism. Lack of tools to address the negative impacts of perfectionism
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Increased awareness of both the positive and negative aspects of perfectionism. Equipping medical educators with
practical tools to manage their own perfectionism and create a more supportive learning environment for trainees.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Difficulty with self-reflection or complex emotions about perfectionism
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Engaging discussion, Interactive video, Small group brainstorming, Reflective writing exercises
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction (5 minutes): Warm welcome, workshop overview, objectives, and desired outcomes.
Unpacking Perfectionism (10 minutes): Interactive discussion on the role of perfectionism in medicine. We'll utilize
brainstorming and polling tools to explore personal tendencies and the influence of medical culture.
The Ripple Effect of Shame (10 minutes): A short video highlighting the impact of shame in medical education will be
followed by a guided discussion and a brief (2-minute) reflective writing exercise.
Building Resilience (15 minutes): Small group brainstorming to identify strategies for overcoming leader perfectionism.
We'll reconvene as a large group to share and discuss the merits of these strategies. Tools from the literature will then be
shared to expand the toolbox for participants.
Putting it into Practice (5 minutes): Employing a "Think-Pair-Share" activity to encourage participants to consider how they
can apply the learned strategies in their work.
Summary and Q&A (5 minutes): Recap key takeaways and address lingering questions.
(63) Submission ID#1875604
"Breaking Barriers: Enhancing Inclusion and Equity Through Centralized Remediation in GME
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Melanie Cheng – NYCHHC/Kings County; SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University
Email: melanie.cheng@downstate.edu
Office Phone: (312) 860-1298
Presenter(s)
Melanie Cheng, MD
Associate Chief Academic Officer for GME; Associate Program Director, PHM Fellowship
NYCHHC/Kings County; SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University
Role: Presenter
Teresa Smith, MD, MSEd, FACEP
Interim Chair of Emergency Medicine; Associate Dean of Graduate Medical Education
SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University; NYCHHC/Kings County;
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the background of the "leaky pipeline" for diverse learners brought into unwelcoming
clinical learning environments
2. Identify barriers to inclusion in the clinical learning environment and describe how removing them
impacts the individual learner, the remaining learners as well as patient care.
3. Identify three strategies to utilize centralized holistic remediation practices to optimize inclusion and
equity in the clinical learning environment.
4.
5.
Session Description
While there has been an increasing focus on efforts related to increasing diversity in medical education, the
importance of inclusion is often overlooked. Inclusion is critical to optimal learning, and barriers to inclusion
often disproportionately impact a minority group of learners. This can result in educational inequity by
neglecting the unique needs of the few, leading to disproportionate representation in those requiring
remediation. This session discusses the ways in which a centralized holistic remediation program can be used
as a powerful tool to identify barriers to inclusive learning environments that affect all learners. While these
barriers may appear to affect a small number of learners, we will show how the identification and removal of
them not only affects the individual, but can lead to high impact positive outcomes for all learners. Building
inclusive clinical environments is crucial to optimize educational outcomes, improve trainee well being, and
ultimately improve patient care.
Target Audience
Institutional Leaders, DIOs, Program Directors, Faculty.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
With the growing awareness of the impact that bias medical practice has on patient outcomes, there has been a shift to
educate a more diverse population of physicians to better represent the patients we serve. While there has been an
increasing focus on efforts related to increasing diversity in medical education, the importance of inclusion is often
overlooked. Inclusion is critical to optimal learning, and barriers to inclusion often disproportionately impact a minority
group of learners.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session aims to gain competence in defining inclusive learning environments, understand the importance of them, and
identifying and removing barriers to optimize inclusive learning environments that impact all learners.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
There are a variety of barriers to optimizing learning environments including educational gaps, cultural shifts and time. This
session centers around using holistic centralized remediation programs to identify and remove these barriers.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This session will use a short didactic session, with the remainder including case-based learning and active learning
strategies through idea generation, think-pair-share, and peer teaching methods.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
This session will begin with a brief introduction and background on social determinants of learning, the impact of inclusion
on learner outcomes, and the role of the clinical learning environment (CLE). The audience will work together in an idea
generation exercise to identify barriers in the clinical learning environment. This will be followed by a large group
discussion introducing centralized holistic remediation approaches as a tool to address barriers to inclusion in the clinical
learning environment. Small groups sessions will then discuss salient case based examples, which highlight CLEs where
barriers to inclusion led to the perceived deficiency of a learner. Using these cases, small groups will identify ways in which
holistic remediation approaches can be used to optimize inclusive learning environments for all trainees. Finally a report
back to the larger group and brief summary will conclude the session.
(64) Submission ID#1875678
Empowering Efficiency through Automation: A Journey Worth Taking
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Stephanie Jones – Geisinger
Email: smjones8@geisinger.edu
Office Phone: (717) 242-8118
Presenter(s)
Tracy McFadden, MBA
Education Specialist
Geisinger
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Analyze workflows that would benefit from automation.
2. Identify technology and tools that can be utilized to assist with automation.
3. List common Graduate Medical Education tasks that can benefit from automation.
4.
5.
Session Description
Elevating efficiency through automation has revolutionized the way organizations operate, paving the way for
unprecedented productivity. Program and Institutional Coordinators are often overburdened by the number of
tasks they need to track, coordinate, and/or monitor for not only themselves but for others. Automation can be
used to build efficiency for institutional and program level processes, but not everyone is aware of the tools
available. This session looks to empower coordinators to transform everyday tasks into opportunities for
innovation, share the tool available and showcase our institutions successfully completed with automation. At
the conclusion of this session participants will be able to identify areas of the work that would benefit from
automation and what tools can assist with building the automation.
Target Audience
All coordinators with any experience level
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
We aim to share methods for improving efficiency, accuracy, and productivity. Manual data entry and processing is not
only time-consuming but is also error prone. Through variability in processes, data can become inefficient and inconsistent.
Additional practice gaps can also include lack of real-time data aces and repetitive administrative tasks. By identify these
gaps and implementing appropriate automation solutions, GME can enhance operational efficiencies, reduce errors, and
improve overall productivity.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Through this session, we aim to share our experience with automation and the tools and technology used will give
coordinators an introduction required for them to automate and build more efficient methods of completing tasks and
procedures. We also will highlight one of our completed automated processes to demonstrate to coordinators how it works
and where we were able to improve our efficiency.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
With any process changes, there is always the potential barrier of time. In GME, extra time can be hard to come by due to
continuous yearly activities - onboarding, orientation, graduation, license renewals, etc. Developing an effective process
and procedure to transforming from manual to automation, training and development as well as marketing and education
users all take time. By sharing our experience with automation and the tools used will provide an introductory insight on the
methods we used to be successful.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We look to engage the audience through a hands-on activity of collaborating to develop a list of tasks and processes that
they would like to automate for their programs/within their GME office, share the technology and tools your institution uses
to automate processes. At the end of the session, we will share the comprehensive list.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5 minutes – Presenter and Institution introductions and overview of the goals and objectives.
5 minutes – Review a list of procedures and practices we have successfully automated at our institution.
10 minutes – Highlight one of our completed automated process to demonstrate to coordinators how it works and where
we were able to improve our efficiency. Review the pitfalls to automation.
5 minutes – Review the tools and technology our institution used to create more efficient processes.
10 minutes – Hands on activity: Create a list of tasks and processes you would like to automate for your program, Share
the technology and tools your institution uses to automate processes (List to be emailed out to all participants at the end of
the session)
5 minutes – Review a list of programs and institutional procedures and practices that can be automated.
10 minutes – Closing remarks and Q&A
(65) Submission ID#1875704
Targeted Clinical Reasoning Coaching for Struggling Learners: A Faculty Development Workshop for Medical
Educators
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Andrew Parsons – University of Virginia School of Medicine
Email: ASP5C@uvahealth.org
Office Phone: (423) 620-1398
Presenter(s)
Andrew S. Parsons, MD, MPH
Associate Professor of Medicine and Associate Dean for Clinical Competency
University of Virginia School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Karen M. Warburton, MD
Associate Professor of Medicine and Director of GME Advancement
University of Virginia School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Utilizing a microskill-based assessment, participants will describe common clinical reasoning deficits
observed in medical learners.
2. Utilizing a phenotypic approach, participants will describe how these clinical reasoning deficits
manifest in the clinical environment.
3. Participants will design individualized coaching plans using exercises targeted to specific clinical
reasoning deficits.
4.
5.
Session Description
This workshop offers medical educators a systematic approach to the identification, assessment, and
coaching of the medical learner struggling with clinical reasoning. Participants will learn how to identify specific
types of clinical reasoning deficits in trainees and apply individualized coaching plans effectively. Participants
will leave this highly interactive session with practical, actionable tools and strategies they can apply
immediately in their educational practice.
Target Audience
Medical educators who work with struggling learners directly or design educational programs focused on
remediation and/or coaching.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Clinical reasoning is essential for practice and is often identified by remediation experts as a deficiency in struggling
medical learners. Yet, clinical reasoning deficits can be difficult to recognize, and remediation outcomes are less clearly
understood. The difference between current and desired practice is the lack of a framework to identify specific clinical
reasoning deficits and a standardized, individualized remediation process to support these struggling learners. This
workshop aims to bridge this gap by introducing a microskill and phenotypic approach to assessment and coaching that
addresses specific clinical reasoning deficits.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
• Utilizing a microskill-based assessment, participants will describe common clinical reasoning deficits observed in medical
learners.
• Utilizing a phenotypic approach, participants will describe how these clinical reasoning deficits manifest in the clinical
environment.
• Participants will design individualized coaching plans using exercises targeted to specific clinical reasoning deficits.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
• Lack of awareness or understanding of specific clinical reasoning deficits and how these deficits commonly present in the
clinical environment.
• Time constraints for individualized coaching.
• Resistance to coaching and remediation from trainees.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
• Provide detailed training on identifying and categorizing clinical reasoning deficits.
• Offer practical, efficient coaching tools and strategies.
• Emphasize the importance of a supportive and developmental approach to remediation to reduce stigma.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. Introduction and Objectives (5 minutes):
o Overview of clinical reasoning coaching, including discussion of prevalence.
2. Identifying Clinical Reasoning Deficits (10 minutes):
o Presentation on common clinical reasoning deficits by microskill (hypothesis generation, data gathering, problem
representation, etc.).
o Demonstration of the think-aloud assessment method.
3. Case-Based Discussions by Phenotype (20 minutes):
o Small-group analysis of real-life cases to identify reasoning deficiencies.
o Interactive discussion on how these deficits present in the clinical environment.
4. Developing Coaching Plans (10 minutes):
o Tips on creation of individualized coaching plans.
o Role-playing exercises to implement these plans.
5. Q&A and Wrap-Up (5 minutes):
o Addressing participant questions and concerns.
o Summary of key takeaways and resources for further learning.
(66) Submission ID#1875773
It's a Wonderful DIO Life: Strategies for Managing AND Leading Well
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: James Orlando – St Luke's University Health Network
Email: james.orlando@sluhn.org
Office Phone: (610) 587-4684
Presenter(s)
James P. Orlando, Ed.D
Chief Medical Education Officer/DIO
St Luke's University Health Network
Role: Presenter
Katherine McKinney, MD
DIO
University of Kentucky
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify GME leadership and management challenges.
2. Apply the concept of Power Systems to GME leader responsibilities.
3. Implement a SMARTIE action item to function more effectively in the DIO and other GME institutional
roles.
4.
5.
Session Description
In today’s fast-changing healthcare environment, continual leadership development is essential. The
healthcare landscape is leading to a transformation of the DIO role from “system integrator” to “system
shaper” as talent and workforce development becomes more of a key business objective in sponsoring
institutions. DIOs and other GME Institutional leaders are not just overseers of accredited programs; they are
transformers who are reshaping organizational capabilities and culture. Participants will be given a framework
for managing these multiple responsibilities of the ACGME Designated Institutional Official (DIO) and the GME
office while simultaneously leading at both the institutional level and through oversight of GME programs.
Presenters will outline a year the life of a DIO using the GME academic year calendar overlaid with relevant
accreditation timelines. Participants will conduct a self-assessment of participant ‘current’ state strengths and
opportunities with regard to DIO management and leadership responsibilities. Presenters will guide
participants through prioritization of opportunities and development of a SMART action item that can be
implemented after the session. Presenters will share key literature references/resources relevant to working
with power systems within their organizations and balancing management and leadership throughout the
session. Topics will include organizational dynamics and behavior, power systems, partnership, and strategies
for when to lead vs manage. Through facilitated discussion, participants will also crowd source strategies for
the most common DIO management and leadership challenges identified by the group. The session will be
facilitated by DIOs from both large and single program sponsoring institutions in order to provide the audience
with practical examples of how to succeed in diverse environments. The session will split participants into
groups to work through a simulated case and provide time for group work, demonstration, and collaborative
learning.
Target Audience
DIOs and other GME Institutional leaders
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The environments of healthcare and GME continue to evolve rapidly. More than ever, today’s GME leader must maintain
an expanded sphere of influence and high level of integration with other strategic and operational leaders.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
In this environment, GME leaders mustdemonstrate the ability to "partner" and to be a change catalyst witin their
institutions. GME leaders must also demonstrate the ability to be a persuasive communicator in order to lead and manage
well. GME leaders must influence and empower others. GME leaders must balance multiple missions and institutional
goals while ensuring the education and well-being of learners in the environment.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barrier may be participants coming in late. We have the simulated activity in the middle of the session and will
also provide a simple handout with instructions and overview of the Organizational Dynamics and Power System
framework.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This will be an interactive workshop that will include an organizational challenge simulation case, leadership self-
assessment, small group activities with some didactics.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Problem and Background (5 min)
Management vs Leadership Self-assessment (5 min)
Organizational Challenge Simulation case/Table Top exercise and debrief (20 min)
Organizational behavior and power systems (10 min)
SMARTIE action plan (5 min)
Takeaways and conclusion (5 min)
(67) Submission ID#1875815
GME Advocacy: Engaging With Political Entities, Institutional Leadership, Diverse Stakeholders, and Grass
Roots Efforts for Program Success
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Andrew Champine – McLaren Health Care
Email: andrew.champine@mclaren.org
Office Phone: (586) 493-8647
Cell Phone: (989) 450-5496
Presenter(s)
Andrew Champine, PsyD MSHM
Director of Medical Education / ADIO
McLaren Health Care
Role: Presenter
Erin Reis, EdD, MBA, FACHE, C-TAGME
Associate Chief Academic Officer
McLaren Health Care
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Introduce and define the different levels and characteristics of advocacy work in GME.
2. Discuss essential leadership skills and qualities needed for effective advocacy.
3. GME leaders will be able to identify strategies to build collations to amplify advocacy efforts.
4. Audience members will be able to articulate and apply a grassroots approach to advocacy through a
stepwise playbook of problem identification and engagement with stakeholder groups.
5.
Session Description
Exploring advocacy strategies to help fund and sustain high quality training programs.
Target Audience
GME Leadership, DIO/ADIOs, Program Directors, C-Suite
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Empowering GME leadership to understand GME funding, resources, and collaborative strategies to advance advocacy
efforts.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Increase knowledge, skill, and abilities around advocacy for GME Leaders.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Institutional resources, variability, State law, leadership time constraints.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Incorporation of Kotter's model of change management and the development of urgency to support advocacy efforts.
Provision of a repository of resources to better support advocacy initiatives. Outlining examples of organizations and
consortia to accelerate GME advocacy.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Engagement through the audience via sharing of advocacy experiences, and conclusion with a robust question and
answer session to tailor resources and approaches to audience examples.
(68) Submission ID#1875917
Transitioning Residents from UME to GME- what areas of clinical competency require additional training
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CTYPD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Karen Jamison
Email: jamison.karen@scrippshealth.org
Presenter(s)
Karen H. Jamison, n/a
Transitional Year Program Director
Scripps Mercy Hospital San Diego
Role: Presenter
Bradley Minter, n/a
Transitional Year Program Director
Mather Hospital of Northwell
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Recognize residents have varying levels of competency in some areas upon matriculation to
residency, and that lower levels of competency can require a residency to adjust its curriculum
2. Identify 1-3 areas of competencies that their residents may require additional training in before being
ready to start their intern year
3. Come up with ways to assess their own residents for competency upon matriculation
4. Come up with ways to adjust curriculums to improve competency in those who require additional
training to be able to start as an intern
5.
Session Description
A subcommittee of CTYPD will be sending out a pilot survey to multiple Transitional Year Residency programs
throughout the nation in September to assess the residents' level of perceived competency in areas of clinical
competency based on training from medical school. Our aim of this survey is to identify areas of competency
that may lack training in medical schools to help better inform Program Directors of potential needs of
incoming interns. Additionally, we hope to inform medical schools of the perceived need for increased training.
Our goal for this session would be to review the results of our survey, discuss each area of competency that
was considered an area residents were undertrained, and to help facilitate conversation abouts TY PDs on
how to address those areas. We have broken our survey questions down into Transitional Year Milestones to
help us better qualify the training they have received.
Target Audience
TY Program Directors, TY Coordinators, and Medical School representatives.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Many residency programs assume that medical students have some foundation in most of the main competencies. Often
this can lead to frustrated residents and ill prepared programs for residents who may not have sufficient training.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We want to create awareness of the different levels of training, educate directors on we set about trying to ascertain what
competencies we should be aware are commonly an issue, and to help program directors strategize how to assess their
own residents to be better prepared to fill in those gaps
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
It is possible we may not have our study fully analyzed by the time of the AHME conference (it is due to be launched to
residents in September)
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will have a panel of three different programs and how each program tackled these issues. We will have break out
sessions for PDs to discuss common areas of competencies that they have noticed are issues for their incoming interns
and then break up again to discuss ways to provide that training early in their start as an intern
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
- 15 minutes- describe background of why this study was started and how we developed the questions and linked them to
milestones
-5 minutes to review the results of the study and its implications
-5 minutes- break out groups to discuss what results they think their own program would have
-10 minutes to review out each of our panelists handled the results in their program (or plan to address it)
-5 minutes- break out groups to discuss how they may want to address those deficiencies in their program
-5 minutes- wrap ideas from the other programs and share strategies
-5 minute buffer
(69) Submission ID#1875918
Leveraging Graduate Medical Education Structures to Promote Sustainability Practices at Your Medical
Center
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: BENJAMIN HOUSEMAN – Memorial Healthcare System
Email: bthouseman@gmail.com
Office Phone: (312) 420-5406
Presenter(s)
Benjamin T. Houseman, MD, PhD, FASA
Director, Anesthesiology Residency Program
Memorial Healthcare System
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. List ways in which care delivery impacts the environment
2. Describe best practices in healthcare sustainability
3. Understand methods to leverage learner drive to improve sustainability education
4. Identify actionable sustainability goals at your institution
5. Develop a preliminary sustainability action plan and business plan
Session Description
Sustainability practices have become increasingly important in healthcare. Both learners seasoned healthcare
workers have tremendous passion to improve sustainability, but most institutions do not provide formal
education in this area. Furthermore, most learners and educational leaders do not have experience in
obtaining executive support for efforts to improve sustainability. This workshop has three goals. First, it will
provide education on best practices in sustainability. Second, it will provide a framework for leveraging
learners to educate others in this area. Finally, the workshop will provide participants with a foundation for
gaining executive support for change management at their institution.
Target Audience
All members of the hospital community will benefit, but this workshop will be of particular benefit to clinicians
and educational leaders who wish to implement sustainablity projects at their institution.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Currently, most clinicians receive little formal training in sustainability practices and even less training in how to improve
practices at their institution. This workshop will address gaps in education regarding sustainability, explain how learner
interest in this area can be leveraged for education, help participants define actionable goals for change, and provide a
roadmap for developing a business plan / reporting system for these efforts.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
1. Educate participants regarding known system-based sustainability practice improvements, including the role a
sustainability leader.
2. Help participants understand how residents can drive change with the support of education and operational leadership.
3. Provide participants with the ability to prepare a sustainability business plan.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
1. Time to educate clinicians and staff - provide toolkit that can be easily provided in person or asynchronously
2. Interest in receiving education - peer to peer coaching, local champions
3. Ability to track and report out on efforts - provide examples of metrics and sample dashboard
3. Executive support of sustainability leader and sustainability efforts (least likely) - create robust business plan to show
financial and branding impact
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
1. Sustainability education module
2. Sustainability tookit
3. Generic business plan
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
10 min - didactic session reviewing best practices for sustainability in healthcare delivery
15 min - small group brainstorming session and report out: defining sustainability goals at your facility
20 min - small group exercise and report out: develop your project map and business plan
5 min - wrap up and next steps
(70) Submission ID#1875919
Resident Remediation Workshop Part 1: Individualized Learning Plans
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Suzanne Minor – Memorial Healthcare System
Email: sminor@mhs.net
Office Phone: (354) 844-4465
Presenter(s)
Suzanne Minor, MD
Assistant DIO
Memorial Healthcare System
Role: Presenter
Kerice Pinkney, MD
Pediatrics Program Director
Memorial Healthcare System
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify strategies for supporting a struggling trainee
2. Appraise an individualized learning plan
3.
4.
5.
Session Description
This workshop strives to empower participants with the skill of Individual Learning Plan (ILP) development.
Struggling trainees may require a formal ILP during their training program. As such, GME leaders must
develop the skills of developing and implementing an appropriate ILP. This workshop is Part 1 of a workshop
given at our institution. Participants will learn about strategies for supporting a struggling trainee and evaluate
an Individualized Learning Plan (ILP). This interactive workshop uses case-based discussion, small group
activity, and large group discussion.
Target Audience
This session is for anyone involved in the trainee remediation process, from Program Administrators to
Associate Program Directors or Program Directors to Institutional and GME Officers.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Struggling trainees may require a formal ILP during their training program. As such, GME leaders must develop the skills of
developing and implementing an appropriate ILP. This is not a skill that is taught regularly to those in need of applying this
skill.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This workshop strives to empower participants with the skill of Individual Learning Plan (ILP) development. Struggling
trainees may require a formal ILP during their training program. As such, GME leaders must develop the skills of
developing and implementing an appropriate ILP. This workshop is Part 1 of a workshop given at our institution.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers that might prevent attendees from achieving desired changes include time for learning new information
and applying it and skill in learning applying new information. This workshop will help attendees overcome possible barriers
by delivering content to attendees on the process of remediation from ILP to reporting to grievance.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Educational methods for this workshop include a brief didactic discussing ILP principles followed by participant appraisal of
an ILP in small groups and discussion of an ILP in small group and large group.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Participants will learn about strategies for supporting a struggling trainee and evaluate an Individualized Learning Plan
(ILP). This interactive workshop uses case-based discussion, small group activity, and large group discussion.
• Introduction – 5 minutes
• Principles of the remediation process – 15 minutes
• Remediation process small group evaluation a completed ILP for a trainee with report back – 15 minutes
• Final discussion, summary, questions – 10 minutes
(71) Submission ID#1875920
Be an MVP! Create Meaningful, Valuable, & Persuasive GME value propositions to the C-Suite
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: James Orlando – St Luke's University Health Network
Email: james.orlando@sluhn.org
Office Phone: (610) 587-4684
Presenter(s)
James P. Orlando, Ed.D
Chief Medical Education Officer/DIO
St Luke's University Health Network
Role: Presenter
Jennifer L. LeTourneau, DO, MCR, FACP, FCCM
Clinical Vice President, Medical Education/DIO
Legacy Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. 1. Craft a compelling GME value proposition relative to strategic workforce planning
2. 2. Identify high yield communication approaches to persuade your C-suite
3. 3. Implement a SMARTIE action item to function more effectively in the DIO and other GME
leadership roles
4.
5.
Session Description
Physician vacancies cost health systems millions of dollars each year. Graduate medical education (GME)
provides a cost-effective pathway for recruiting highly qualified physicians who understand the health system,
reducing inefficiencies and burdens on recruiters. Yet some health systems struggle to see the value of
investing in residency and fellowship programs. What does GME value mean to the C-Suite and how can that
knowledge be leveraged to effectively communicate the vision? Value propositions are a useful and strategic
tool to craft and communicate GME benefits. Crafting and communicating a compelling value proposition to
the c-suite is like be leveraged to effectively communicate the vision? Value propositions are a useful and
strategic tool to craft and communicate GME benefits. Crafting and communicating a compelling value
proposition to the c-suite is like building a bridge. Just as a bridge connects two different sides of a river, a
value proposition must connect two different worlds - the medical education space and the business world. By
building a strong bridge that connects the two worlds, DIO’s can create a win-win situation that benefits
current and future demands of the organization. Without an explicit planning of what value means to the C-
Suite, investments in GME can be subject to ambiguity and vagueness. At the end of this session, learners
will be able to: (1) craft a GME value proposition using the MVP framework, (2) identify the needs, priorities,
and language of the C-suite, and (3) create a communication plan to demonstrate value to the C-suite in a
way that resonates with both organizational and GME interests and goals.
Target Audience
GME institutional leaders
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The environments of healthcare and GME continue to evolve rapidly. More than ever, today’s GME leader must maintain
an expanded sphere of influence and high level of integration with other strategic and operational leaders.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
In this environment, GME leaders must demonstrate the ability to "partner" and to be a change catalyst within their
institutions. GME leaders must also demonstrate the ability to be a persuasive communicator in order to lead and manage
well. GME leaders must influence and empower others. GME leaders must balance multiple missions and institutional
goals while ensuring the education and well-being of learners in the environment.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barrier may be participants coming in late. We have the simulated activity in the middle of the session and will
also provide a simple handout with instructions and overview of the MVP framework.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This will be an interactive workshop that will include table top activties based on the MVP framework, small group activities
with some didactics.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Problem and Common Challenges (5 min)
Intro to MVP framework (10 min)
MVP table top activities and debrief (25 min)
SMARTIE action plan (5 min)
Takeaways and conclusion (5 min)
(72) Submission ID#1875994
Teaching Professionalism-Unveiling the hidden curriculum. -structured multimodal approach to teach one of
the six core ACGME competencies.
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Sudhagar Thangarasu – Texas Tech University HSC El Paso
Email: drTgme@gmail.com
Office Phone: (915) 207-3048
Cell Phone: (915) 207-3048
Presenter(s)
Sudhagar Thangarasu, MD
Assistant Dean of GME
Texas Tech University HSC El Paso
Role: Presenter
Lela ruck, MD
Assistant Professor, Associate Program Director
Texas Tech University HSC El Paso
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Program directors and coordinators implement this curriculum or something similar to it from the
onboarding and orientation of new interns in their programs.
2. The Office of GME shall monitor the incidence of disciplinary actions taken for professionalism
deficiency and compare whether this curriculum had an impact on programs that adopted it versus
those that did not.
3. Creates an opportunity for interdisciplinary staff to participate actively in GME trainee teaching and
feedback.
4.
5.
Session Description
GME policies and punitive measures exist to remedy professionalism deficiencies. It is imperative to transition
from the hidden to the explicit teaching of professionalism. A structured curriculum teaches and evaluates
professionalism as a skill and cultivates a culture among GME programs that fosters ethical, patient-centered
care and lifelong learning among trainees, thereby upholding the fundamental values of medicine. During this
session, the presenters will share and showcase the elements of the structured curriculum and the
experiences of having implemented it in one academic university's GME programs: 1. Professionalism policy
discussion and orientation to expectations during Intern Onboarding. 2. Multimodal approach to teaching
longitudinal curriculum: a) Case-based discussion and resident workshop b) Role-play scenarios,
Interdisciplinary staff participation in teaching, and feedback c) Faculty development sessions regarding
Objective assessment and periodic feedback d) Measure and report GME-wide impact.
Target Audience
Designated Institutional Officials, Program Directors, Program Coordinators, and Core faculty.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Many sponsoring institutions' offices of GME report a perceived increase in struggling learners, mainly due to a deficiency
in the core ACGME competency—Professionalism.
Professionalism, a foundational competency, is crucial for patient care, interprofessional collaboration, and public trust.
Teaching professionalism often remains implicit and ingrained as the hidden curriculum.
Professionalism, a highly modifiable behavior, can be learned and developed over time by a multimodal approach
curriculum.
GME policies and punitive measures exist to remedy professionalism deficiencies. It is imperative to transition from the
hidden to the explicit teaching of professionalism. A structured curriculum teaches and evaluates professionalism as a skill
and cultivates a culture among GME programs that fosters ethical, patient-centered care and lifelong learning among
trainees, thereby upholding the fundamental values of medicine.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The goal is to make the attendees (PD, PC, DIO, and core faculty) feel the need for a structured curriculum and encourage
them to use these elements and modules in their programs.
As an outcome of that, to see a measurable decrease in the number of GME trainees needing remediation for
professionalism deficiency.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Attendees (PD, PC, DIO, and core faculty) might feel they are already stretched thin for time and resources and may not
be initially motivated to engage in the implementation plan.
My co-presenter and I hope to demonstrate how this curriculum is a worthwhile investment of time and effort that will save
them later problems of investing more time in remediation measures for struggling learners.
This curriculum shall provide the added benefit of Interdisciplinary education and collaborative work, which are increasingly
expected from both LCME and ACGME program evaluations.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will use a combination of lecture delivery, case-based discussion, and role-play scenario in front of the audience, with
tools such as a PowerPoint presentation, printed handout materials, and QR code to further access our resource materials.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
First 20 minutes -PowerPoint slide presentation explaining the curriculum and implementation project.
The next 10 minutes will be a role-play scenario in front of the audience, followed by 5 minutes for feedback and audience
interaction.
The next 10 minutes will include audience small group discussion for the case example in their handouts, followed by 5
minutes of feedback and discussion moderated by the presenters.
(73) Submission ID#1876078
State of the Transitional Year: What does Transitional Year Curriculum Look Like in 2024
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CTYPD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: John Christensen – Intermountain Health
Email: john.christensen@imail.org
Office Phone: (801) 507-3750
Presenter(s)
John C. Christensen, MD, FACP, FHM
Program Director
Intermountain Health
Role: Presenter
Sydney Leguyader, MD
Associate Program Director
Intermountain Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Audience members will understand how the average transitional year program delivers the required
and elective rotations
2. Audience members will understand how the average transitional year program delivers the ACGME
required curriculum
3.
4.
5.
Session Description
The ACGME Transitional Year Program Requirements allow for innovations in structure, design, and delivery
of required curriculum. To better understand the depth and breadth of curriculum innovation we administered
a nationwide survey of transitional programs in the hope to better collaborate and to be able to share best
practices.
Target Audience
Transitional Year Program Directors, Transitional Year Program Coordinators, Transitional Year Core Faculty,
and DIOs
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Transitional year residencies vary from one residency to the next. However, how they vary and how much is not well
understood. Our survey results will help to define these variances and help program identify if they are outliers in their
required rotations.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We hope to help transitional year program leadership better understand the transitional year residency curriculum across
the country to inform decisions about curriculum design and requirements. We also hope to share best practices in
educational methods when it comes to delivery of required curriculum.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
We will discuss some of the barriers that we, the Intermountain Transitional Year Residency, experienced as we adjusted
our curriculum from a “service” focused curriculum to an “education” focused curriculum. This will be an interactive “pair
and share” portion of our breakout session where we will break into small groups and provide each group with a sample
“barrier” scenario for the small group to work through.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Please see the “pair and share” comment above.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
We will begin by sharing the conundrum that we faced as transitional year leadership when wanting to “revamp” our
curriculum. We were not aware if there was a “norm” for TY curricula across the country, besides what is outlined as
ACGME requirements. We will discuss the problems we had with recruiting and concerns raised on our ACGME Annual
Resident Survey and how this provided an impetus for change.
We will then the survey design process and how we distributed the survey and increased response rates
We will then share the survey results in general followed by interesting insights that can be gleaned from the answers.
Next, we will break into small groups to pair and share one educational innovation that each program is doing that they find
unique. If discussion lags, we will have discussion prompts at each small group location/table to facilitate the discussion.
We will have a second pair and share activity where we distribute barriers to curricular change in a program and the small
group will discuss how to overcome this barrier.
(74) Submission ID#1876238
Dynamic Leadership in Medical Education: Exploring Diverse Styles for Lasting Impact
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Mara Hoffert – Henry Ford Health
Email: mhoffer1@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (248) 866-8686
Cell Phone: (248) 866-8686
Presenter(s)
Mara M. Hoffert, Phd
Director, GME Medical Education Instructional Design and Learning Systems & Resources
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Odaliz Abreu-Lanfranco, MD
Internal Medicine Program Director, Infectious Disease Sr Staff
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Evaluate diverse leadership styles and understand how each uniquely facilitates and motivates learner
growth.
2. Develop strategies for optimizing leadership modalities to suit diverse learning contexts effectively.
3. Apply techniques for assessing learners’ needs and choose suitable leadership styles to support their
professional development and goal achievement.
4.
5.
Session Description
Effective leadership is pivotal for professional growth and essential for supporting learner development. This
session will guide you through understanding and implementing various leadership methods, including
directing, supporting, coaching, and empowering. Participants will explore strategies for effectively utilizing
each leadership modality and learn techniques to assess learner needs to select the appropriate approach for
fostering individualized growth. By the end of this session, participants will be able to evaluate diverse
leadership styles and understand their unique roles in facilitating and motivating learner growth; develop
strategies for optimizing leadership modalities to suit diverse learning contexts effectively; and apply
techniques for assessing learners’ needs and selecting suitable leadership styles to support professional
development and goal achievement.
Target Audience
This session will benefit Faculty Physicians; Associate Program Directors; Program Directors; Chiefs of
Departments; Directors, Administrators, and Coordinators of Graduate Medical Education; Chief Academic
Officers; and DIOs by providing them with a comprehensive understanding of various leadership styles and
how to apply them effectively. Participants will be empowered to adapt their approach to meet the needs of
diverse individuals and situations. Through engaging in this session, participants will be better able to ensure
alignment of their leadership style to create a more supportive and growth-oriented educational environment.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
This session addresses critical professional practice gaps in medical education by equipping leaders with the skills and
knowledge to navigate and optimize diverse leadership styles. While leaders in medical education embody many effective
qualities that serve them in their roles, there is often a gap in understanding how to tailor leadership approaches to meet
the varying needs of medical learners. This discrepancy can create barriers to professional development and growth. By
guiding participants in understanding and implementing various leadership methods—such as directing, supporting,
coaching, and empowering—this session provides practical strategies for utilizing each modality. Developed with the input
of educational leaders and grounded in adult learning theory, this session provides faculty development that will hone
physicians’ leadership skills to substantially impact educational outcomes. Content in this session supports Common
Program Requirements of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and supports growth in the
subcompetencies assessed by the ACGME Clinician Educator Milestones. Participants will leave equipped with the
knowledge and skills to assess learner needs accurately, allowing for the selection of the most appropriate leadership
approach to foster individualized growth. Ultimately, this session enables participants to evaluate and apply diverse
leadership styles, develop context-specific strategies, and support professional development and goal achievement
effectively. This comprehensive approach ensures that medical education leaders are well-prepared to create supportive
and motivating learning environments that cater to the unique needs of their learners.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will provide participants with the knowledge and skills for enhancing competence in leadership styles,
optimizing leadership modalities, and improving educational outcomes for learners. Participants in this session will gain a
comprehensive understanding of various leadership approaches and their unique roles in facilitating and motivating learner
growth. This session will equip participants with techniques for assessing leaners’ needs and selecting suitable leadership
styles to support professional development and goal achievement. By using the appropriate leadership style tailored to
individual learner needs, participants will foster a more conducive learning environment. Participants will be empowered to
contribute to the overall improvement of medical educational practices within their home institutions.
Additionally, participants will show growth in the subcompetencies of the ACGME Clinician Educator Milestones including:
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Learning Environment, Leadership Skills, Educational Theory and Practice, and
Reflective Practice and Commitment to Personal Growth. Ultimately, this session will enable participants to become more
effective leaders who can adapt their leadership styles to meet diverse learner needs, promoting professional growth and
achieving educational goals.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Physicians may find it challenging to allocate time for implementing new strategies due to their existing workload and
responsibilities. To be successful in making changes in their leadership approach, participants will need time to thoughtfully
consider how they will shift their practice prior to interacting with a learner. They will also need time to reflect on
encounters, assess the effectiveness of strategies used, and set goals for further refinement. However, with dedicated time
or thoughtful reflection participants can move toward their goals at their own pace.
To address the perceived barrier of time, this session will equip participants with practical and efficient strategies which can
be easily implemented. Participants will have the opportunity to practice application of these strategies through small group
activities and case scenarios. During the session, participants will also establish specific, actionable goals for the
implementation of these strategies. They will leave with a thorough knowledge of how they will apply strategies and a
concrete plan for doing so. This will greatly increase their ability to efficiently utilize what was learned in the session, even
when time is at a premium.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This will be an interactive session comprised of micro-lessons, small group activities, small group discussions, and Q&A. A
brief micro-lesson will introduce learners to directing, supporting, coaching, and empowering as leadership styles.
Participants will engage in small group activities to highlight strategies for utilizing these leadership approaches with
learners. Additionally, participants will be provided with techniques for assessing learner needs and tailoring their
leadership to address these. Participants will have the opportunity to practice implementing these techniques through
application in case scenarios. Time will be provided for addressing questions related to putting these leadership
approaches into practice.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
In this session, participants will explore diverse leadership styles aimed at facilitating and motivating learner growth.
Various leadership methods will be discussed, including directing, supporting, coaching, and empowering. Participants will
engage in strategies for effectively leveraging each of these leadership modalities. Attendees will learn techniques for
assessing learner needs and selecting appropriate leadership styles to foster professional development. This session will
empower physicians with knowledge to apply suitable leadership approaches in medical education, helping learners
achieve their goals.
Introduction Background and theory – 5 minute Didactic
Directing Leadership Style: didactic, scenario and group discussion and practice- 10 minutes
Supporting Leadership Style: didactic, scenario and group discussion and practice- 10 minutes
Coaching Leadership Style: didactic, scenario and group discussion and practice- 10 minutes
Empowering Leadership Style: didactic, scenario and group discussion and practice- 10 minutes
Closing - 5 min
Question and answer session – 5 minutes
(75) Submission ID#1876257
Is your APE the best it can be?
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Martha Wilkie – University of Connecticut School of Medicine
Email: mhwilkie@uchc.edu
Office Phone: (860) 679-4458
Cell Phone: (860) 466-9716
Presenter(s)
Martha Wilkie, BS
GME Director
University of Connecticut School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Steven Angus, MD, FACP
DIO/Assistant Dean for GME
University of Connecticut School of Medicinie
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify relevant information from the examples provided to create a comprehensive, data driven,
action oriented Annual Program Evaluation
2. Develop a plan for program improvement projects that have SMART goals (specific, measurable,
achievable, relevant, and have a defined timeline) using the information provided in the APE
3. Illustrate how a separate Annual Program Report compiled by the GME Office and GMEC offers
useful feedback to program leadership
4.
5.
Session Description
Residency and Fellowship programs are required by the ACGME to complete an Annual Program Evaluation
(APE). The ACGME outlines relevant data for the program to consider when developing the APE for their
program. Since the content of the APEs can vary from program to program and can sometimes miss important
metrics for program improvement, this session will discuss other potential metrics to review when completing
the Annual Program Evaluation. Attendees will be provided with a thorough overview of a standardized
electronic Annual Program Evaluation completed by all programs at one institution. An Annual Program
Report (APR) completed by the GME Office in conjunction with GMEC subcommittee members, using the
APE provided by the programs, will also be discussed. The APR is designed to provide Program Directors and
Program Coordinators with meaningful feedback that can be used to help improve their program.
Target Audience
DIOs, Program Directors, Institutional Coordinators, Program Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Residency and Fellowship programs are required by the ACGME to complete an Annual Program Evaluation (APE). The
ACGME outlines relevant data for the program to consider when developing the APE for their program. Since the content
of the APEs can vary from program to program and can sometimes miss important metrics for program improvement, this
session will discuss other potential metrics to review when completing the Annual Program Evaluation.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Attendees will be provided with a thorough overview of a standardized electronic Annual Program Evaluation completed by
all programs at one institution. An Annual Program Report (APR) completed by the GME Office in conjunction with GMEC
subcommittee members, using the APE provided by the programs, will also be discussed. The APR is designed to provide
Program Directors and Program Coordinators with meaningful feedback that can be used to help improve their program.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
This session is presented from the GME Office perspective, and attendees may find it difficult to change an institutional
approach to the APE process at their institution.
Although the institution may not change their APE process based on this session, Program Directors and Program
Coordinators might find it useful to use the tools provided to help monitor strengths and weaknesses in their program.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
1. PowerPoint
2. Annual Program Evaluation Template
3. Annual Program Report Template
4. Small group breakouts
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
15 mins PowerPoint
10 mins Breakout
10 mins Discussion
10 mins Wrap-up and questions
5 mins TBD – for additional time for discussion or questions
(76) Submission ID#1876264
Welcome to the Team: An Institutional Model for New Program Coordinator Orientation
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Rachel Tutterow – ECU Health Medical Center
Email: rachel.tutterow@ecuhealth.org
Office Phone: (252) 847-2659
Presenter(s)
Rachel W. Tutterow, MBA
Program Manager, Graduate Medical Education
ECU Health Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Kelley E. Whitehurst, MAEd
Program Manager, GME Education
ECU Health Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Detail the impact of an institutional orientation on the confidence, competence, and well-being of new
program coordinators
2. Assess the current system for orienting new program coordinators at their institution
3. Identify areas within the orientation process where strategies for improvement may be needed
4. Develop their own proactive plan for new coordinator orientation based on institutional and program
goals
5.
Session Description
The role of the program coordinator is vital to the success of residency and fellowship programs. As such,
turnover among program coordinators poses unique challenges to programs and institutions. Institutional
offices should collaborate with programs to identify the topics, support, and resources most important for early
and continued success of a new coordinator. This session will address the benefits of having a proactive plan
for orientation of a new program coordinator, with presenters outlining a model for new program coordinator
orientation and providing attendees with tools for implementation at their institution.
Target Audience
Administrators, Program Coordinators, Institutional Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Depending on when a new program coordinator begins their role in GME within the academic year, they may face
challenges finding resources for success. Creating a uniform process for orienting a new program coordinator helps
programs and institutions ensure that critical information is being conveyed to all new coordinators and provides targeted
intentional support as he or she adapts to their new role.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We aim to equip attendees with resources to implement a new program coordinator orientation model at their institution.
Through shared guidance and active discussion, attendees will be able to identify the gaps in education provided to new
program coordinators as well as solutions to close those gaps. Turnover often occurs suddenly; we will encourage
attendees to be prepared for sudden turnover by identifying orientation materials in advance that can be provided with
minimal notice or at a busy time of year.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Resources available will vary depending on the size, location, and availability of staff of each institution. Additional
challenges may be the timing within the academic year that a new coordinator begins in their role as well as the physical
distance/location between the new coordinator and other coordinators/GME staff. We will address these potential barriers
by providing a variety of solutions that could meet unique needs.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Presenters will facilitate small group discussion and provide resources for attendees to consider and outline their own
program coordinator orientation model. Presenters will elicit feedback from attendees on their personal experiences with
new program coordinator orientation at their institution.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Detail the impact of an institutional orientation on the confidence, competence, and well-being of new program coordinators
(5 minutes): Presenters will provide an overview of the benefits of investing in an orientation process based on the
literature and institutional experience
Assess the Current System for Orienting New Program Coordinators at their Institution (10 minutes): Presenters will share
their experiences prior to implementing an institutional new program coordinator orientation model and ask attendees to
share in small groups what may be in place at their institution. Attendees will be asked to share personal experiences with
orienting in this capacity.
Identify Areas Within the Orientation Process Where Strategies for Improvement May Be Needed (10 minutes): Presenters
will share their process for identifying needs for program coordinator orientation and gathering resources. Presenters will
also share ideas for assessing orientation session(s), eliciting collaboration from other program coordinators, and
implementing continual process improvement over time.
Develop their Own Proactive Plan for New Coordinator Orientation Based on a Collaborative Model (15 minutes):
Through small-group discussion as well as information shared by presenters, attendees will identify critical information to
share with new coordinators as well as a method for implementation at their institution.
Concluding Small Group Discussion (5 minutes): Attendees will have the opportunity to generate ideas for implementation
at their own institution based on the information presented.
Time for questions (5 minutes)
(77) Submission ID#1876374
Precision in Resident Scheduling & IRIS Reporting: Common Pitfalls, Best Practices, & Their Financial Impact
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Susan Hearn – Germane Solutions
Email: shearn@germane-solutions.com
Office Phone: (336) 266-8627
Presenter(s)
Kyle Knepper, n/a
Manager, Operations & Innovation
Germane Solutions
Role: Presenter
Kari Roberts, 223140
VP of Education & Associate CMO for GME & Academic Dean, Tufts Medicine & Associate Prof. Tufts SOM
Tufts Medicine & Tufts University School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. A Basic Understanding of Resident Scheduling and IRIS Reporting: • At the conclusion of this session,
an attendee should be able to explain the basic principles of resident scheduling and how these
details are configured and translated within the RMS platform into IRIS reporting.
2. Identify Common Pitfalls & Where to Look for Errors in Resident Reporting: • At the conclusion of this
session, an attendee should be able to look for common errors in their own institution’s or program’s
scheduling and reporting processes that often times lead to under or over-reporting. They should also
be able to demonstrate an understanding of common pitfalls covered during the presentation,
including issues related to primary and secondary rotations, elective rotations, and inbound rotators.
3. Demonstrate an Understanding of the Best Practices for Accurate Reporting: • At the conclusion of
this session, the attendee should be able to relay their understanding of the best practices provided by
Germane to their own team and begin to implement these practices for accurately reporting resident
rotations to ensure compliance and optimize funding.
4.
5.
Session Description
This will be an informative session presented by Germane Solutions and Tufts Medicine, in which the
presenters will explore key aspects of resident scheduling, RMS utilization, IRIS reporting, and their financial
impact on their institutions and clinical learning environments. Germane will explain the fundamentals of
resident scheduling, detailing how this information is configured and translated into IRIS reporting within the
RMS platform, ultimately justifying federal and state GME funding amounts. Tufts Medicine will share the
challenges they faced prior to collaborating with Germane, highlighting key gaps identified in their RMS
platform and the successful implementation of recommended changes. The session will delve into common
pitfalls in resident reporting that often lead to under or over-reporting. Germane will discuss frequent mistakes,
such as the importance of primary and secondary rotations and their impact on IRIS reporting, inaccuracies
related to elective rotations, and the variability of inbound rotators and how to accurately capture and report
their FTEs. Germane will also cover best practices for accurately reporting resident rotations to ensure
compliance and maximize funding. The session will conclude with an open forum discussion, providing
attendees the opportunity to ask questions and engage with the presenters.
Target Audience
This session will be directed towards representatives that work directly with resident schedules, RMS
Platforms, and IRIS Reporting, such as Institutional Administrators & Coordinators, and Finance
Representatives. However, we believe this session will be informative and valuable to Institutional and
Program leadership, such as DIO’s & Program Directors.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The creation of a complete and accurate IRIS report is a strategic priority for GME organizations, but a challenge to
achieve due to highly variable and complex trainee schedules. Using Tufts Medicine as a case study, we will review
resident and fellow schedule data collection and oversight challenges and identify opportunities for organizations to
improve their Residency Management system’s output to their IRIS report.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The goal of this session will be to reinforce the importance of accurate scheduling detail within their respective Resident
Management Software as well as provide GME administrators with tips and tricks to better monitor and optimize their
scheduling and reporting practices to ultimately maximize GME funding opportunities and improve compliance with CMS
requirements.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Barriers to success include inadequate in RMS platform education and training, high turnover rate within the program
administrator position, and a lack of program leadership understanding of importance of schedule data integrity. This
session offers an example of how a large GME organization that faced common scheduling and reporting challenges
implemented educational and administrative procedures to transition their schedule management approach and establish
procedures that will maintain the accuracy and integrity of its IRIS reporting moving forward.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
A collaborative presentation from Germane Solutions and Tufts Medicine
• We will utilize a PowerPoint deck to organize and deliver the presentation.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
o (3 Min) Introduction of Presenters: Germane Solutions & Tufts Medicine
o (12 Min) Overview of Resident Scheduling, RMS Utilization, IRIS Reporting, & Financial Impact to the Parent Institution
and Clinical Learning Environments
a) Germane will cover the basics of resident scheduling, how that detail is configured and translated into IRIS reporting
within the RMS platform, and ultimately how this detail leads to justification of federal and state GME funding amounts.
b) Tufts will describe the challenges the organization was facing prior to their relationship with Germane Solutions. Tufts
will provide examples of key gaps identified within their RMS platform and how they overcame them by implementing
changes that Germane will be recommending throughout the presentation.
o (15 Min) Common Pitfalls in Resident Reporting that lead to under/over reporting residents. Germane will outline the
mistakes we most commonly see organizations making within the scheduling and reporting process, focusing on high yield
topics including:
a) Primary & Secondary Rotations – the importance of getting this ‘right’
b) Management of “Elective” Rotations
c) Accurate capture and reporting of Inbound Rotator data
o (15 min) Best Practices for Accurately Reporting Resident Rotations
o (5 min) Open Forum Discussion / Questions & Answers
(78) Submission ID#1876418
Jurassic Gripes: Surviving the Grievance and Due Process Era
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Saima Chaudhry – Memorial Healthcare System
Email: sachaudhry@mhs.net
Office Phone: (954) 844-4464
Presenter(s)
Saima Chaudhry, MD MSHS
Chief Academic Officer and DIO
Memorial Healthcare System
Role: Presenter
Stephanie Ogando, MBA
Senior Director GME and CME
Memorial Healthcare System
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. List common adverse actions that fall under grievance and due process at the program and
Institutional level
2. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of common grievance and due process procedures
3. Appreciate the need for transparency and congruence when the reporting evaluative data to the
ACGME and ABMS for trainees with an adverse action
4. Review common errors in documentation during remediation, grievance, and due process
5. Render a decision regarding a trainee who is grieving an adverse action
Session Description
This workshop strives to review best practices in GME grievance and due process procedures through the use
of a small group, case-based, and large group discussion. Advantages and disadvantages of different
grievance policies and procedures will be discussed. In addition, emphasis will be placed on documenting
semiannual evaluations, ACGME milestones and the implications of reporting evaluative data to ABMS.
Participants will practice serving as a "grievance and due process" committee charged with rendering a
decision for a trainee who is grieving an adverse action taken by their training program.
Target Audience
DIOs, program directors, program coordinators/administrators, managers, supervisors, Human Resources
personnel, department chairs.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The current state of competence and performance among DIOs, program directors, and program administrative staff
shows 1) deficiencies in recognizing the need for congruence and transparency in reporting trainee performance on
semiannual evaluations, ACGME milestones, and ABMS online systems. Other gaps include 2) overly complex and difficult
to follow grievance and due process policies and procedures, and 3) lack of understanding of the importance of
documentation in said procedures. We aim to close gaps in 1-3.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
1. Improve the recognition of the need for congruence and transparency when reporting trainee performance on
semiannual evaluations, ACGME milestones, and ABMS online systems.
2. Increase the ability for learners to simplify their current GME grievance policies and procedures if they so choose.
3. Increase learners ability to appraise documentation through the lens of the grievance committee
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers that might prevent attendees from achieving desired changes include time for learning new information
and applying it at their home insitutions. This workshop will help attendees overcome possible barriers by delivering
content in a format that is interactive, case based, and provides hands on practice
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Educational methods for this workshop include a brief didactic followed by participant review of implications for reporting to
ACGME and ABMS and analyze the quality of the training program’s documentation after a grievance is filed through small
group, case-based, and large group discussion.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Participants will evaluate remediation documentation (including semiannual evaluations, milestones, and ABMS reporting)
and discuss remediation timelines taking into account possible grievance. This interactive workshop uses case-based
discussion, small group activity, and large group discussion.
• Introduction – 5 minutes
• Semiannual evaluations, milestones, and ABMS reporting – 10 minutes
• Small group review of grievance documentation, vote on grievance outcome, report back – 20 minutes
• Final discussion, summary, and questions – 10 minutes
(79) Submission ID#1876419
Building Successful Relationships Across Medical Education: Developing Effective Communication &
Navigating Conflicts with Ease
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Bret Stevens
Email: bret.stevens@mclaren.org
Office Phone: (248) 338-5387
Presenter(s)
Bret Stevens, EdD, MBA, C-TAGME
Associate DIO/Director of Medical Education
McLaren Health Care
Role: Presenter
LaToya Wright, BBA, C-TAGME
Manager of Education Programs, Radiology
UT Southwestern Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify communication styles within themselves and others
2. Review methods for effective communication across communication styles
3. Recognize the impact of organizational hierarchy in relationship development
4. Develop skills to both prevent conflict and properly resolve if it does occur
5.
Session Description
In the hierarchical and high-stakes world of healthcare, maintaining healthy and mutually beneficial
relationships can often be difficult. The seemingly ever-lasting tug of war between finances, patient care, and
education can lead to conflicting priorities for individuals within the medical education continuum. Hear three
different perspectives (from the program, institutional, and c-suite levels) and about tools pulled from the
literature on experiences in nurturing successful relationships to gain buy-in, build trust, keep stakeholders
engaged, and resolve conflicts that emerge.
Target Audience
All; session will be applicable to both clinicians and non-clinicians regardless of role
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Communication breakdown is often the cause of many problems within the healthcare sector, and medical education is no
exception. Within the hierarchical setting, navigating relationships between coordinators, residents, program directors, and
leadership members can be tricky, with different approaches needed to ensure success. This is often a professional gap
for many as being able to pivot between styles and market needs effectively does not always come easy. By the end of the
presentation, participants will have a better understanding of how to do this, and what to do when things go awry.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Through this session, participants will improve competence in being able to have constructive communication skills leading
to improved performance. Often job performance is dependent on the construct the individual works within, so by
improving communication and conflict remediation, a positive personal/programmatic outcome can be expected.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
There should be no real nor perceived barriers that might prevent an attendee from achieving the change desired. As the
workshop will encompass clinician and non-clinician interactions, in addition to individual, programmatic, institutional, and
executive examples, it aims to be an inclusive workshop with applicability to all participants. A perceived barrier would only
be to those who decide to not engage in the material or are resistant to change in self-practice.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Several educational methods will be used in this session including formal didactic, literature review, audience participation
through self-reflection, and opportunities for implementation of prescribed methods. Additionally, participants will hear from
three different “levels” of individuals within the medical education sector, allowing for a more holistic review of
communication and conflict.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5 minutes- introduction
10 minutes- communication style inventory/assessment
5 minutes- program level communication
5 minutes- institutional level communication
5 minutes- c-suite communication
10 minutes- conflict management techniques
5 minutes- having a difficult conversation
5 minutes- Q&A
(80) Submission ID#1876462
Building a Stronger GME Community: The Benefits of a Program Coordinator Professional Development
Community
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Odinae Sullivan – Emory University School of Medicine
Email: oasulli@emory.edu
Office Phone: (404) 452-3366
Presenter(s)
Odinae Sullivan, B.S.
GME Program Coordinator
Emory University School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Articulate the benefits of creating a professional development community for GME program
coordinators and administrators. Describe strategies for building and engaging supportive actions and
opportunities within their GME community. Communicate the positive impact that implementing a
professional development community can have on the well-being of GME program coordinators.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Session Description
This session explores the power of a dedicated professional development community for Graduate Medical
Education (GME) program coordinators. Join us to discover the benefits of connecting with colleagues,
sharing best practices, and fostering a supportive network within the GME landscape. This session is ideal for
GME program coordinators, Program directors, GME leadership seeking to support their coordinators, and all
those interested in fostering collaboration and professional development within GME. We'll focus on the
importance of a professional development community and building a thriving GME community. Participants
will leave this session feeling empowered and connected, ready to build a stronger GME community through
shared knowledge and collaboration!
Target Audience
This workshop is designed for the GME community at larger; but specifically for GME leadership, GME
Administrators, GME Program Coordinators/Mangers, Program Directors and anyone involved in overseeing
program coordinators.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The role of a Program Coordinator, Administrators and Program Manger involved various responsibilities, duties and
expectations. This presentation will address professional practice base gaps, knowledge base gaps and communal
relational barriers faced by program coordinators and their training institutions and how the impact of creating professional
development engagement opportunities for program coordinators, managers and administrators, in Graduate Medical
Education, can significantly affect those trainings gaps. It is important to share and illustrate innovative ways and
opportunities that training institutions can implement resources to some of their most intricate personnel; residency and
fellowship program coordinators and managers. This presentation will outline the significant advantages of creating a
professional development community for program coordinators and the noteworthy value and benefits for both coordinators
and the institution. By identifying practice and knowledge base gaps, institutions can develop targeted training programs
and provide resources to ensure their program coordinators have the necessary knowledge and skills to excel in their
roles.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
While the session doesn't directly impact accreditation, the improved competence and performance of program
coordinators can indirectly contribute to positive other accreditation outcomes. This session aims to raise specific changes
in the competence and performance of GME program coordinators. As it relates to competence, this session aims to
increase knowledge and awareness of resources, plus enhance critical thinking. By understanding the benefits of a
professional development community, GME program coordinators and administrators will be more aware of the resources
available to them for continuous learning and skill development. By engaging in enhanced critical thinking, this session will
encourage participants to reflect on their current practices and identify areas where they could leverage a community for
improvement. As it pertains to desired performance outcome, this session will highlight how by leveraging the knowledge
and support of a community, program coordinators can potentially improve their performance in areas like problem-solving,
staying current with regulations, and program management. Also, exposure to a broader GME landscape through the
community can motivate program coordinators to pursue further education or accreditation opportunities to enhance their
skills and career prospects. Increased confidence and self-efficacy are also positive outcomes to performance. When
program coordinators feel connected to a supportive network of peers, they can significantly boost a program coordinator's
confidence in their abilities. Sharing successes and challenges can lessen feelings of isolation and empower them to tackle
complex tasks. Active participation in the community allows program coordinators to hone their communication and
collaboration skills. This strengthens their ability to build relationships with colleagues and stakeholders, leading to more
effective program execution. The focus of this session is to equip program coordinators with the knowledge and tools to
access a professional development community. While not directly measured in this session, the increased competence in
navigating these communities can lead to the desired improvements in performance and future education/accreditation
pursuits.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Institutions face several barriers when it involves investing in professional development training community for their GME
program coordinators, administrators and managers. Here are some of the most common constraints and barriers to
creating a unified and effective PCPD Task/Force or Committee: Budgetary Barriers, Institutional Constrains and Logistical
Concerns.
Budgetary barriers arise since training programs can be expensive, especially if they involve external providers, travel, or
extended leave for coordinators. Tight budgets might force institutions to prioritize other areas or postpone professional
development initiatives. Regarding institutional constraints there can be a lack of perceived value or awareness to the
instilling professional development community for gme program coordinators. Lastly, some logistical concern will be
planning and execution, limitation n schedules/ time an technology and staff turnover.
In this session, I hope to highlight initiatives and ideas that institutions can use to overcome these barriers to investing in
professional development opportunities for their GME program coordinators:
(1) Cost-Effective Options: Highlight online training modules, webinars, or local workshops that offer good value for the
investment. One way to do this is by collaborating with other institutions to share training costs.
(2) Focus on Long-Term Benefits: Highlight the long-term benefits of training, such as improved program quality, reduced
errors, and staff development.
(3) Develop In-House Opportunities/ Workshops/Trainings: Highlight ways institutions can develop internal training
programs or workshops led by experienced staff members. This can be a cost-effective way to address specific program
needs.
(4)Flexible Training Options: Highlight the variety of training options, including online modules, blended learning formats,
and after-hours workshops, to accommodate busy schedules.
(5) Prioritize Staff Development: Highlight the importance and the benefits to fostering a culture of learning and
development within gme training institutions for program coordinators and administrators. Highlight the potential impact on
wellness and retention.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The session will utilize a variety of educational methods, formats, and tools to facilitate change and learning. This session
will first lead with an interactive activity opening an Icebreaker. An Icebreaker is a quick and engaging activity to break the
ice and encourage participants to interact with each other.
Method:
(1) Interactive presentation: The session will be delivered through an engaging presentation that incorporates visuals, case
studies, and real-world examples relevant to GME program coordinators.
(2)Case studies and storytelling: Sharing real-world examples of how other program coordinators benefitted from a
professional development community.
(3) Group discussions: Facilitated discussions will allow participants to share their own experiences and brainstorm
solutions to common challenges, fostering a sense of community and collaboration.
(4) Q&A session: Q&A session allows attendees to ask questions, clarify doubts, and share their experiences.
Format:
(1) Short lecture with breaks: The information will be presented in digestible chunks with opportunities for questions and
discussion throughout the session to maintain focus and engagement.
Tools:
(1) Presentation slides: Visually appealing slides will be used to present key information, statistics, and benefits of
professional development communities.
(2) Handouts: participants will receive digital materials summarizing the key takeaways of the session, including resources
for finding relevant professional development communities.
Additional Approaches:
(1) Live Polling / Q&A Platform: For this session, a live polling tool (online Q&A platform) will be use to encourage audience
participation during the presentation. This will allows for real-time interaction, feedback and interaction. This will also help
gauge the attendees interests and understanding of the subject matter.
(2) Pre-session survey: May conduct a brief survey beforehand to identify the specific challenges and interests of the
attendees. This can help tailor the session content and discussions to resonate with their needs.
(3) Post-session resources: Share additional resources after the session, including links to online communities, articles, or
upcoming events related to GME program coordinator development.
By combining these methods, format, and tools, this session will create a dynamic and interactive learning environment
that fosters active participation, knowledge sharing, and a sense of community among GME program coordinators. This
multi-faceted approach will increase the likelihood that attendees will retain the information, overcome potential barriers,
and ultimately take the first steps towards engaging with a professional development community.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Workshop Title: Building a Stronger GME Community: The Benefits of a Program Coordinator Professional Development
Community
Target Audience: This workshop is designed for program directors, GME administrators, and anyone involved in
overseeing program coordinators.
Workshop Duration: 50 minutes
Overall Goal: Convince participants of the value in creating a professional development community for their program
coordinators and outline the benefits for both coordinators and the institution.
Workshop Outline:
Phase1: Introduction (10 minutes): Welcome participants and introduce the workshop facilitator and presentation topic
-Highlight the critical role of program coordinators in GME success.
-Introduce the increasing complexity of the role and the need for ongoing support and professional development
opportunities.
Phase II: Address Challenges Faced by Program Coordinators and Institutions around implementing professional
development initiatives for program coordinators and administrators (10 minutes):
-Present common challenges faced by program coordinators (e.g., process base training, workload management, limited
professional development opportunities).
-Use polls or a word cloud activity to gather real-time input from participants about their coordinators' challenges.
Phase III: Review the Value, Importance and Benefits of creating a Professional Development Community for GME
Program Coordinators and Administrators (20 minutes):
-Introduce the concept, design and implementation of creating a program coordinator professional development community
-Share how Emory University SOM GME PCPD Task Force was created and it's impacted on professional development,
trainings, knowledge base, wellness and networks opportunities for their program coordinators and administrators.
Highlight capabilities by showcasing the following benefits:
-Shared Knowledge and Best Practices: This session will explain how a community forum allows coordinators to learn from
each other's experiences and share effective strategies.
- Peer Support and Networking: This session will discuss the impact of Peer Support, Mentorship and Networking: this
session will highlight the value of networking, mentorship and social engagements' can connect, build relationships,
provide encouragement and aid in balancing health and wellness.
- Enhanced Job Satisfaction and Retention: This session will discuss how a supportive community can contribute to
increased morale and reduce staff turnover.
-- Improved Program Quality: This session will explain how a more knowledgeable and skilled coordinator workforce
translates to better program management and resident experiences.
-- Cost-Effectiveness: This session will present ways that a community can leverage free or low-cost resources and reduce
reliance on expensive external training programs.
Phase IV: Building and maintaining a community (10 minutes):
- Briefly discuss different ways to establish a community (online forum, social media group, in-person meetings).
- Emphasize the importance of clear guidelines and ongoing promotion to maintain engagement.
- Offer suggestions for fostering a positive and supportive online environment.
Phase V: Wrap-up and Action Planning (5 minutes):
- Briefly summarize the key takeaways from the workshop.
- Encourage participants to explore the concept of creating a program coordinator professional development community for
their institution.
- Provide a handout with resources and best practices for building and maintaining an online community.
Additional Considerations: Allocated time for Q&A to address any concerns or questions from participants.
This presentation will showcase the benefits to building and sustaining a professional development community. The hope
for this session is to help assure program coordinators and mangers, gme administrators, program directors and
institutional leadership of the value of investing in their program coordinators' professional growth, development and well-
being.
(81) Submission ID#1876525
When Residents Organize: The Evolving Role of the GME Office in a Unionized Environment
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Lisa Payne – David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA
Email: llpayne@mednet.ucla.edu
Office Phone: (310) 206-6550
Cell Phone: (310) 710-6794
Presenter(s)
Lisa L. Payne, n/a
Director, Graduate Medical Education
David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA
Role: Presenter
Anthony Sali, MPA
Director, Graduate Medical Education
UCSF - Fresno
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Have an understanding of bargaining including pre-bargaining preparations
2. Identify the current GME Office practices that will be impacted by the bargaining agreement
3. Discuss change management implications of managing a represented population
4.
5.
Session Description
The GME Directors at the University of California (UC Davis, UCLA, UCSF, and UCSF-Fresno) will share their
experiences in the realm of resident unionization as novices in the process. Reflecting on the process of
ratifying and implementing multiple contracts, we will cover topics that would have been helpful to understand
at the start. The audience will learn about bargaining, collective bargaining agreements, operationalizing the
agreement, stakeholders and resources, and coming out on the other side with lessons learned.
Target Audience
This session will be valuable for all institutional GME Office teams, including staff, Directors, and DIOs at
institutions entering into the process of unionization with their housestaff. Program Directors and Program
Coordinators would glean pearls as well.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The GME Directors at the University of California will share their experiences in the realm of resident unionization as
novices in the process. Reflecting on the process of ratifying and implementing multiple contracts, we will cover topics that
would have been helpful to understand at the start of the process.
The audience will learn about the bargaining process, CBA operationalizing, stakeholders and resources, and coming out
on the other side with lessons learned.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The audience will understand the process of unionization and the role of GME.
No secrets will be spilled, but attendees will leave this session better equipped for involvement on the institution side of the
negotiation table.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
1. Unique populations – medical education is unique with responsibility to the ACGME, individual specialty boards, state
medical boards, etc.
2. Labor Relations – institutions may or may not have access to an experienced team of labor relations
3. Personal cost – “after hours” negotiations (negotiated timing will be for hours convenient for the residents)
4. Apprehension of the “unknown”
This team of UC GME Directors will give insight into unionizing so attendees can be better prepared and manage
expectations around negotiating a contract.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This session will include presentation of the topics, polls, and interactive discussion/table talks and question and answer.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
0-5 Introductions
5-20 Discussion of bargaining preparation, best practices
20-35 Operationalizing the contract including educating stakeholders, updating systems
35-40 Takeaways (where we are at now)
40-50 Q&A
(82) Submission ID#1876594
Hail to the Chief: The Partnership Between the Program Coordinator and the Chief Resident
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Theresa Marcus – Corewell Health East
Email: theresa.marcus@corewellhealth.org
Office Phone: (248) 898-0833
Presenter(s)
Theresa Marcus, C-TAGME
Program Manager
Corewell Health East
Role: Presenter
Rachel Coy, N/A
Program Manager
Corewell Health East
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the differences between the role of the program coordinator and the chief resident/fellow
2. Identify the importance of the two roles working together for the success of the program
3. Identify gaps and areas of improvement for each role
4. Identify tools and techniques to help improve the partnership between the two roles
5. Share / network tools and techniques with other coordinators/managers/administrators and take those
tools and techniques back to their home program(s) to implement positive change and improvements
Session Description
In this session, we will describe differences between the role of the program coordinator and the chief
resident/fellow and identify the importance of the two roles working together for the success of the program.
We will identify gaps and areas of improvement for each role and identify tools and techniques to help improve
the partnership between the two roles
Target Audience
Experienced or new Program Managers / Program Coordinators / Program Administrators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Professional gaps to be addressed are:
1. Confusion and crossing over of duties between the program coordinators/managers/administrators and chief
residents/fellows
2. When to handle issues and/or when to involve Program Director
3. Confusion how both positions work together in harmony for the betterment of the program
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Learners can network together best practices as well as get valuable resources and tools to set up specific job descriptions
for both roles and clarification of duties for both job positions
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Perceived barrier is not enough time or authority to accomplish these goals. This session will address practical ways to
meet and work together
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Networking with others, distributed job descriptions for both roles, case studies
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Slide presentation, audience participation of best practices, discussion in groups of three case studies/examples
(83) Submission ID#1876862
Thriving as a New Program Director
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CTYPD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Miriam Bar-on – Jefferson Health Medical Education
Email: miriam.bar-on@jefferson.edu
Office Phone: (215) 456-2563
Cell Phone: (702) 358-9030
Presenter(s)
Miriam E. Bar-on, MD
AVP for Graduate Medical Education and DIO
Jefferson Health Medical Education
Role: Presenter
Lyuba Konopasek, MD
Executive Director
Faimer
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify six specific strategies for thriving as a new program director.
2. Describe resources for new program directors within one's institution and beyond.
3. Use the collaborative wisdom of the small group expand approaches to the six strategies.
4.
5.
Session Description
Becoming the Program Director is a big transition whether the program is well established, brand new or in its
initial formation. The goal is not to merely survive in this new role, but to excel and thrive. There are six
concrete, practical strategies to implement to help ensure success. These strategies include: • Learn your
program requirements and any areas of vulnerability • Understand your organizational GME infrastructure and
culture • Know the GME academic calendar and employ it. • Identify your resources within your institution and
beyond and use them. • Assemble a team to support you on your journey. • Develop effective communication
skills for challenging conversations including giving feedback and influencing management. This interactive
workshop will begin with an expanded description of these six strategies through a variety of real-life
scenarios. In small groups, participants will then have the opportunity to tap into the collective wisdom of their
small group to enhance the approach to their assigned scenario. Large group discussion will follow to share
ideas from the small groups on their enhancements of the different strategies. The workshop leaders will
collect the information and integrate into completed templates to post on the AHME meeting site for
participants to access. Attendees will be provided with concrete, practical information to take home and
implement immediately.
Target Audience
New program directors, those aspiring to become program directors
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Becoming a new program director is a big undertaking. Many times, individuals in their new role do not get guidance as to
has to proceed and thrive. This workshop will provide concrete strategies to not merely survive but to thrive as a new
program director.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
By attending this session, participants will have strategies to implement immediately to increase their success as program
directors and hopefully decrease turnover because they are overwhelmed.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
There is always the support or lack there of that one receives from one's home institution. The information presented
should help new program directors become more efficient and knowledgeable of what needs to be done and how to
organize themselves that will over come many barriers.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Educational methods/formats/tools will include:
1. Large group learning and discussion
2. Small group learning and tapping into the wisdom of their peers
3. Specific scenarios will be used to illustrate the strategies and become the focus of the small group activity.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Session Outline
25 minutes description of the six steps using scenario methodology to set up the concepts
10-15 minutes small group work using templates to add to information presented and personalize
5-10 minutes report out new ideas and how steps can be personalized
5 minutes wrap up and questions/answers
(84) Submission ID#1876874
Enhancing Resident Satisfaction and ACGME Compliance through Resident-Led Task Forces
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Emma Ferguson – McGovern Medical School at UTHealth Houston (UT-Houston)
Email: Emma.C.Ferguson@uth.tmc.edu
Office Phone: (713) 500-7640
Cell Phone: (713) 628-9218
Presenter(s)
Emma C. Ferguson, MD
Professor and Program Director, Diagnostic Radiology Residency
McGovern Medical School at UTHealth Houston (UT-Houston)
Role: Presenter
Pam Promecene, MD, FACOG
ACGME DIO, Associate Dean for GME, Professor
McGovern Medical School at UTHealth (UT-Houston_
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Effectively Engage Residents in Program Improvement: At the conclusion of this session, the learner
should be able to implement successful strategies to involve residents in program improvement
efforts, including the creation and management of resident-led task forces, and the effective analysis
of feedback in collaboration with program leadership.
2. Create a Safe and Supportive Feedback Environment: At the conclusion of this session, the learner
should be able to establish and maintain a safe and secure environment that encourages residents to
share their ideas and feedback openly, ensuring their protection and providing anonymity when
necessary.
3. Evaluate and Enhance Resident Satisfaction: At the conclusion of this session, the learner should be
able to assess the impact of resident-led initiatives on resident satisfaction and ACGME Resident
Survey scores, and apply this knowledge to strengthen the educational environment of their residency
programs.
4.
5.
Session Description
The annual ACGME Resident Survey is crucial for assessing resident satisfaction and ensuring compliance
with ACGME accreditation requirements, as non-compliance can result in Citations, Areas for Improvement, or
a Site Visit. During the COVID-19 pandemic, our Diagnostic Radiology program observed a consecutive three-
year decline in resident satisfaction. To address this, we established resident-led task forces focusing on low-
scoring areas identified in the survey. These task forces analyzed feedback, reviewed literature, proposed
solutions, and collaborated with program leadership, including the Program Director, Program Coordinator,
and faculty, to implement improvements. Regular meetings facilitated by the Program Director ensured
continuous progress and a supportive environment for residents to share their feedback. This approach
fostered a safe and secure atmosphere, encouraging open communication without fear of reprisal. By
involving residents in the improvement process, we saw enhancements across all survey categories. This
session will investigate effective methods to engage residents in program improvement, explore strategies to
foster open and secure feedback, and assess the impact of resident-led initiatives on enhancing resident
satisfaction and survey metrics. Participants will learn how to implement positive changes in their residency
programs, ultimately improving resident satisfaction through active engagement and collaboration.
Target Audience
This presentation will target leaders in residency and fellowship programs, including Program Directors,
Associate Program Directors, Program Coordinators, and faculty in various specialties.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The professional practice gaps addressed in this presentation are the decline in resident satisfaction and the suboptimal
scores on the ACGME Resident Survey in our Diagnostic Radiology program. Residents may not be adequately involved
in the program improvement process, resulting in low scores in areas such as confidential problem resolution,
interprofessional teamwork, teaching adequacy, and faculty feedback. The desired outcome is to achieve higher levels of
resident satisfaction and compliance with ACGME accreditation requirements by actively involving residents in the
improvement process, creating a supportive environment for open feedback, and implementing resident-led initiatives. This
presentation aims to bridge the gap between current practice, where resident feedback and involvement are limited, and
the optimal practice, where residents are integral to the continuous improvement and success of the residency program.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
1. Equip residency program leaders with effective strategies to actively involve residents in the program improvement
process, increasing their competence in managing and facilitating resident-led task forces and focus groups.
2. Enable program leaders and faculty to establish and maintain a safe and supportive environment for residents to share
their feedback openly, thereby improving their performance in fostering open communication and ensuring residents feel
secure.
3. Achieve higher ACGME Resident Survey scores and improved overall resident satisfaction by implementing resident-led
initiatives and continuous quality improvement processes, ultimately leading to better education and accreditation
outcomes for the residency program.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers to achieving the desired changes include resistance from established practices, lack of institutional
support for resident-led initiatives, lack of faculty engagement, and concerns over the time and resources needed to
implement new strategies. Our session will address these barriers by providing concrete examples of successful resident
engagement strategies and practical tools for overcoming resistance. We will emphasize the importance of leadership buy-
in and support, offering guidance on how to garner institutional and departmental backing for resident-led efforts.
Additionally, by showcasing the positive outcomes of resident involvement in program improvement and emphasizing the
potential for enhanced resident satisfaction and survey scores, our session will motivate attendees to overcome initial
hesitations and actively pursue change within their residency programs. By addressing these potential barriers and
providing actionable solutions, the session will equip attendees with the tools and strategies needed to successfully
implement changes that enhance resident satisfaction and improve ACGME Resident Survey scores.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
To facilitate effective learning and promote change, the session will employ a combination of interactive methods and
practical tools. Case studies and real-life examples of successful resident-led initiatives will illustrate the impact of resident
involvement on program improvement. Small group discussions will focus on practice strategies for engaging residents and
fostering open communication. Practical tools such as template frameworks for forming resident-led task forces, sample
agendas for meetings, and guidelines for creating a supportive feedback environment will be provided. Interactive Q&A
sessions will allow participants to share challenges and brainstorm solutions collaboratively.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction (5 minutes):
• Overview of the importance of resident satisfaction and ACGME compliance in residency programs.
• Importance of engaging residents, faculty, and program leadership in improvement initiatives
Understanding the Professional Practice Gaps (10 minutes):
• Discuss current challenges in resident satisfaction based on ACGME survey data.
• Identify specific areas of improvement such as confidential problem resolution, teamwork, teaching adequacy, and faculty
feedback.
Strategies for Resident Engagement (15 minutes):
• Present effective strategies for involving residents in program improvement, including the formation of resident-led task
forces and focus groups.
• Highlight examples of successful resident-led initiatives from other programs.
• Discuss methods for creating a safe and supportive environment for resident feedback.
Overcoming Barriers to Change (10 minutes):
• Address potential barriers to implementing resident-led initiatives, such as resistance to change, increased workload, and
resource constraints.
• Provide practical tips and tools for gaining institutional support and leadership buy-in.
Case Studies and Q&A (10 minutes):
• Share case studies or scenarios illustrating successful implementation of resident-led initiatives.
• Open the floor for questions and answers to clarify concepts and address specific concerns from participants.
Conclusion and Wrap-Up (5 minutes):
• Summarize key takeaways and actionable steps for attendees.
• Encourage participants to apply workshop insights to their residency programs.
• Provide resources and follow-up opportunities for further support and guidance.
Description: This 50-minute workshop will guide participants through understanding the current professional practice gaps
in resident satisfaction and ACGME compliance, offering practical strategies for enhancing resident engagement and
overcoming barriers to change within residency programs. Through interactive discussions, case studies, and Q&A
sessions, attendees will gain insights into effective resident involvement techniques and learn how to foster a supportive
environment for resident feedback. By the end of the workshop, participants will be equipped with actionable steps to
implement resident-led initiatives that improve overall program satisfaction and accreditation outcomes.
(85) Submission ID#1876963
Leading Program Administrators to Lead: The evolution from manager to leader
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Elyse Wieszczecinski – Prisma Health
Email: elyse.wieszczecinski@prismahealth.org
Office Phone: (989) 439-4847
Presenter(s)
Elyse Wieszczecinski, MHA
Director, GME Administration & Credentialing
Prisma Health
Role: Presenter
Renee Connolly, PhD
Director, GME Learning & Development
Prisma Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Communicate steps to implement change to support PA perception of their role within a large
academic health institution
2. Implement a theoretical approach to direct action to support PA transition from manager to leader
3. Discuss outcomes in PA transition and the impact of those on GME operations
4. Communicate with institutional leaders about steps to elevate and support PAs in their roles
5. Set long term goals for the PA position within their health system
Session Description
Program Administrators continue to be a vital part of a program’s leadership team, but how often do they see
themselves as key leaders in thier programs? As a followup to the PA Curriculum session presented at the
2023 AHME conference, this session builds on those efforts and outlines the evolution of the PA role. The
journey has included a structured curriculum, job description updates, targeted, intentional support from the
GME Office, and data to support the shift from manager-oriented to leader-oriented. The work is grounded in
theory and built around a qualitative approach to tell the ‘story’ of the developing PA.
Target Audience
GME Leaders Program Directors Program Administrators GME Educators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Program Administrators may often find themselves in constant overload with the responsibilities they have and the
requirements they must meet. Over time and without adequate acknowledgement or support from institutional leaders, this
can lead to burn out and frustration. GME and institutional leaders may do well to understand more thoroughly how better
to set PAs up for success. The session will explore this gap by exploring how to create a successful space for PAs to move
from managing too much to leading with success.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will expand leadership’s confidence in how to promote an environment of accountability and leadership
among PAs. In addition, the session will provide all those involved in GME with action items to implement and verbiage
and work philosophies to use to support PAs.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers may include existing formal reporting structures and processes and attendees’ institutions. The session
will address role expectations that are present, regardless of how an institution defines reporting lines and leadership. In
addition, the session will include examples of supportive actions the GME Office can take to empower PAs without
disrupting program functions.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Session presenters will begin with a didactic approach to establish the context of the PA role, what theoretical approaches
apply to this role, and how those can be translated to real action. Attendees will have an opportunity to share their own
experiences related to PA leader development and explore how to mitigate barriers to job structure and and expectations.
Questions and answers will be entertained throughout the session, so attendees can direct content as needed and to
encourage collaboration those in the room.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5 Minutes- Opening and overview of the health system, previous curriculum related to job role and how the PA job role has
developed at our health system in line with the national mindset.
15 minutes- Overview of Cognitive Evaluation Theory and Job-Demands Resource Theory were integrated into the action
plan of the leadership transition.
10 Minutes- Overview of Program Administrator feedback on process and plans for continued support.
10 Minutes- Recommendations for improvements to process and scalability for various GME office types and sizes.
10 Minutes- Questions
(86) Submission ID#1876991
Addressing Physician Workforce Shortages: Expanding GME Programs for a Sustainable Future - A Key
Strategy in Sutter Health’s "Destination 2030"
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Lindsay Mazotti – Sutter Health Network
Email: lindsay.mazotti@sutterhealth.org
Office Phone: (510) 913-2504
Presenter(s)
Lindsay Mazotti, MD, FACP
Chief Medical Officer, Medical Education & Science
Sutter Health Network
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand Workforce Trends: Attendees will be able to identify current physician workforce trends
and the specific factors contributing to shortages, enabling them to better anticipate and address these
challenges within their own institutions.
2. Implement GME Expansion Strategies: Participants will learn actionable strategies for expanding
Graduate Medical Education (GME) programs, including best practices for increasing capacity,
enhancing training quality, and improving physician retention rates.
3. Leverage Collaborative Opportunities: Attendees will explore collaborative opportunities between
healthcare systems and GME stakeholders, understanding how Sutter Health’s initiatives can serve as
a model for joint efforts to build a sustainable and resilient physician workforce for the future.
4.
5.
Session Description
The healthcare industry is facing a significant challenge with physician workforce shortages, impacting patient
care and operational efficiency. In alignment with Sutter Health's "Destination 2030" strategy, this talk will
explore the critical need for expanding Graduate Medical Education (GME) programs to ensure a sustainable
and resilient healthcare system. We will examine current workforce trends, identify gaps, and present
actionable solutions to enhance physician training and retention. By investing in GME expansion and
quintupling our GME footprint by 2030, Sutter Health aims to build a robust pipeline of skilled physicians,
ready to meet the evolving healthcare needs of our communities. This presentation will provide valuable
insights for GME stakeholders, highlighting innovative strategies and collaborative opportunities to address
workforce shortages. Attendees will gain a deeper understanding of how Sutter Health’s initiatives can serve
as a model for other institutions, fostering a collective effort to strengthen the future of healthcare.
Target Audience
The target audience will be general, including all those involved in building and sustaining graduate medical
education programs from institutional leaders, to program directors, to program staff.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Professional Practice Gaps:
Current Practice: There is a significant shortage of physicians, leading to increased workloads, longer wait times for
patients, and potential declines in the quality of care. Additionally, existing GME programs are often limited in capacity and
resources, failing to meet the growing demand for trained physicians.
Desired Practice: An optimal practice would involve a well-distributed and adequately trained physician workforce that can
meet the healthcare needs of the population. Expanding GME programs to increase the number of trained physicians and
improving the quality of training would bridge this gap.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Competence: Enhance stakeholders' understanding of the critical role GME expansion plays in addressing physician
workforce shortages.
Performance: Encourage the adoption of innovative strategies and best practices for expanding GME programs within their
institutions.
Outcome: Improve the capacity and effectiveness of GME programs, resulting in a more robust and adequately staffed
physician workforce.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential Barriers:
Resource Limitations: Limited funding and resources for expanding GME programs.
Regulatory Challenges: Complex regulations and accreditation requirements that can impede program expansion.
Institutional Resistance: Resistance to change within institutions and reluctance to adopt new strategies.
Addressing Barriers:
Resource Limitations: Highlight potential funding sources, partnerships, and cost-effective strategies for program
expansion.
Regulatory Challenges: Provide guidance on navigating regulatory requirements and share successful case studies.
Institutional Resistance: Demonstrate the long-term benefits of GME expansion and share testimonials from institutions
that have successfully implemented these changes.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Educational Methods:
• Interactive Presentation: Oral slide presentation including case studies from Sutter Heath- real-world examples of
successful GME program expansions to illustrate best practices.
• Resource Materials: Provide attendees with handouts and digital resources that outline strategies and offer practical tools
for implementation.
• Q&A Session: Allocate time for attendees to ask questions and discuss challenges and solutions.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Workshop Outline:
1. Introduction (5 minutes):
Welcome and overview of session objectives
Brief introduction to the current physician workforce crisis
2. Presentation (20 minutes):
Current workforce trends and gaps
Importance of GME program expansion
Key strategies for expanding GME programs
3. Case Studies (10 minutes):
Examples of successful GME expansions
Discussion of best practices and lessons learned
4. Q&A Session (10 minutes):
Open floor for questions from the audience
5. Conclusion (5 minutes):
Recap of key points
Call to action for stakeholders
Distribution of resource materials and contact information for follow-up
(87) Submission ID#1877004
Capacity Building at an Affiliated Teaching Hospital Through a Multiprofessional, Longitudinal Faculty
Development Program
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Kamilla Guinn – Houston Methodist
Email: knguinn@houstonmethodist.org
Office Phone: (346) 238-4631
Presenter(s)
Kamilla Guinn, M.Ed.
Curriculum Developer
Houston Methodist
Role: Presenter
Ebun Ebunlomo, PhD
Manager
Houston Methodist Hospital
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Describe steps that can be taken to assess the professional development needs of their health
professions educators and/or institution.
2. Describe challenges to integrating a longitudinal professional development program and support into
the key areas of medical education in an affiliated teaching hospital.
3. Generate ideas, opportunities and strategies for success in implementing a multiprofessional health
professions educator professional development program at the learner's own institution.
4.
5.
Session Description
Health professions educators (HPEds) “must educate learners while simultaneously caring for patients”
(Stoddard & Brownfield, 2016, p. 921). This dual role requires them to have extensive knowledge in two
demanding professional fields: medicine and education. Unfortunately, throughout their training for their
careers as healthcare practitioners, HPEds receive little to no formal coursework in education, much less the
field of adult education. Faculty development (FD) in medical education is defined as planning and
undertaking activities to improve the teaching skills of medical faculty (McLean, et al., 2008. Though the focus
of FD is to improve teaching effectiveness, FD programs in the health professions have also been shown to
“foster learning communities that provide medical educators with networking, mentorship, and social
support…” (Merriam, et al., 2020, p. 275). According to Leslie et al. (2013) “faculty development (FD) is
recognized by many medical education organizations as an essential support framework provided to faculty
members to assist them in responding to the challenges of their multiple roles and evolving responsibilities” (p.
1038). Sloan and Valvona (1986) created a hierarchy of teaching hospitals based on their involvement in
education and training. Al Kuwaiti et al. (2021) expanded the initial list to come up with this final list, moving
down in descending order of teaching status: university hospitals, flagship teaching hospitals, academic
medical centers, council of teaching hospitals (COTH), affiliated teaching hospitals, community hospitals, and
residency program hospitals. The commitment to education is demonstrated in the infrastructure of each
respective type of hospital. The level of institutional educator support varies according to teaching status. For
example, the level of commitment to the educational mission of a university hospital that is owned and
managed by a university or medical school, is demonstrated by the existence of offices of that support
education and the employment of education professionals whose primary purpose is to support the
professional development of clinician-educators within the organization (e.g., via an Office of Medical
Education (Harvard), Office of Curriculum, Assessment and Teaching Transformation (Stanford University), or
Office of Continuous Professional Development (Vanderbilt)). In contrast, an affiliated teaching hospital, where
the expectations and responsibilities regarding education may not be as established, may not have the
infrastructure that is needed to effectively support the professional development of clinician-educators.
Recognizing that faculty development for health professions educators is essential, we undertook the
development of a multiprofessional, longitudinal faculty development program, entitled Clinician Education
Pathway, for novice educators at our affiliated teaching hospital. References Al Kuwaiti, A., Alkhamis, A. A.,
Alshahrani, M. S., Alkhayal, E. A., & Al Muhanna, F. A. (2021). A critical appraisal study on how medical
schools differ from teaching hospitals. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 20(Special Issue 2), 1-10.
Leslie, K., Baker, L., Egan-Lee, E., Esdaile, M., & Reeves, S. (2013). Advancing faculty development in
medical education: a systematic review. Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical
Colleges, 88(7), 1038–1045. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e318294fd29 McLean, M., Cilliers, F., & Van
Wyk, J. M. (2008). Faculty development: yesterday, today and tomorrow. Medical teacher, 30(6), 555–584.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590802109834 Merriam, S. B., Vanderberg, R., McNeil, M. A., Nikiforova, T., &
Spagnoletti, C. L. (2020). A Robust Faculty Development Program for Medical Educators: A Decade of
Experience. Southern medical journal, 113(6), 275–280. https://doi.org/10.14423/SMJ.0000000000001103
Sloan, F. A., & Valvona, J. (1986). Uncovering the high costs of teaching hospitals. Health affairs (Project
Hope), 5(3), 68–85. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.5.3.68 Stoddard, H. & Brownfield, E. (2016). Clinician–
Educators as Dual Professionals: A Contemporary Reappraisal. Academic Medicine, 91 (7), 921-924. doi:
10.1097/ACM.0000000000001210.
Target Audience
Leadership, administrators, and educators who are affiliated with community hospitals or work in institutions
that are not owned or managed by a medical school who recognizes the need to help faculty advance their
teaching skills but are not quite sure of how to start the process or what type of development is needed.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Sloan and Valvona (1986) created a hierarchy of teaching hospitals based on their involvement in education and training.
Al Kuwaiti et al. (2021) expanded the initial list to come up with this final list, moving down in descending order of teaching
status: university hospitals, flagship teaching hospitals, academic medical centers, council of teaching hospitals (COTH),
affiliated teaching hospitals, community hospitals, and residency program hospitals.
The commitment to education is demonstrated in the infrastructure of each respective type of hospital. The level of
institutional educator support varies according to teaching status. For example, the level of commitment to the educational
mission of a university hospital that is owned and managed by a university or medical school, is demonstrated by the
existence of offices of that support education and the employment of education professionals whose primary purpose is to
support the professional development of clinician-educators within the organization (e.g., via an Office of Medical
Education (Harvard), Office of Curriculum, Assessment and Teaching Transformation (Stanford University), or Office of
Continuous Professional Development (Vanderbilt)).
In contrast, an affiliated teaching hospital, where the expectations and responsibilities regarding education may not be as
established, may not have the infrastructure that is needed to effectively support the professional development of clinician-
educators.
We want to share how our affiliated teaching hospital, which is not owned or managed by a medical school, is providing
novice clinician-teachers with a fundamental understanding of adult teaching and learning theory and practice through our
longitudinal faculty development program and the steps we took to get our institution to support this initiative.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
By the end of this session, participants should be able to:
1. Describe steps that can be taken to assess the professional development needs of their health professions educators
and/or institution.
2. Describe challenges to integrating a longitudinal professional development program and support into the key areas of
medical education in an affiliated teaching hospital.
3. Generate ideas, opportunities and strategies for success in implementing a multiprofessional health professions
educator professional development program at the learner's own institution.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Despite the importance of FD programs, institution education professionals and health professions educators face many
barriers to the development, implementation, and participation of longitudinal in-house FD programs, including lack of
protected time for attendees, lack of financial resources, competing responsibilities, and other logistical factors. We will
share how our office went about mitigating these barriers.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Our session will be underpinned by Knowles’ adult learning theory. Knowles states that motivation to learn in adults comes
from perceived relevance of what is learned. We will develop our session so that it is relevant to our learners. We hope our
experience can assist other organizations in developing similar programs.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
• Lecture – Presentation covering what we do at our institution (20 mins)
o Needs assessment
o 5-year strategic plan showing integration across the continuum of medical education
o Focused description of OCED: History, current state, challenges, programming, future state
o Description of the Clinician Educator Pathway curriculum
• Small group activity - Think, pair, share: What are the challenges for collaboration across the continuum of medical
education? (10 mins to think, pair and share)
• Large Group discussion: 1 min report out from Think, pair, share; vote or rank the challenges based on frequency (10
mins)
• Guided Discussion/Wrap up - Reflections: Where or how could integration address any/or some the challenges above?
(10 mins)
(88) Submission ID#1877033
Leveraging the GMEC Policy for Committee Optimization and Member Engagement
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Leslie Pfeiffer – Henry Ford Health
Email: lpfeiff1@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (313) 916-2523
Presenter(s)
Leslie Pfeiffer, MHA
Accreditation Manager
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Kimberly M Baker-Genaw, M.D.
DIO
HENRY FORD HEALTH
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the Institutional Requirements of the GMEC
2. Implement plans for GMEC Policy Modification and demonstrate methods for ensuring an equitable
voting membership.
3. Discuss common barriers to a high performing GMEC and ways to overcome them.
4.
5.
Session Description
In an era of health system mergers and acquisitions, medical education governance is often impacted. In an
environment of continuous change, it is essential to have a streamlined and high functioning GMEC. In large
Sponsoring Institutions (SIs) it can become a challenge to ensure a representative membership structure that
is equitable of programs and primary sites, while also maintaining a high functioning environment of decision
making. Having a clear and concise GMEC Policy that reflects the vision of the SI and clearly defined
membership responsibilities promotes a culture of active engagement and accountability. The purpose of this
session will be to discuss approaches to policy modification, determining equitable voting membership and
responsibilities and to review metrics of attendance outcomes, GMEC member feedback and other insights
one year post GMEC Policy implementation. At the end of this session participants will leave with a sound
understanding of what is required, but also several ideas to modify their own GMEC Policy and Structure.
Target Audience
DIOs, GME Administrators, Institutional Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Maintaining a high functioning GMEC can be overwhelming. Having a disproportionate membership structure or lack of
engagement can minimize the impact of the GMEC at the Sponsoring Institution level. By evaluating the GMEC Policy, it
allows for institutions to conduct a needs-based assessment on the optimal GMEC membership structure and defined
responsibilities. This session will also dive into the ACGME Institutional Requirements to ensure the updated Policy reflects
the needs and required duties. This workshop will enable attendees to develop and improve their own GMEC Policy and
structure.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Creating a streamlined and highly functioning GMEC allows for comprehensive institutional oversight while also
maintaining continuous improvement mindset for the institution. Modification and structured implementation of the GMEC
Policy allows the GMEC to be empowered to perform effective and comprehensive oversight of the SI. Through this
session, attendees will learn ways to streamline and improve the GMEC while also reflecting on their own institution’s
needs.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
A potential barrier to implementing a new GMEC Policy would be buy in from their own Sponsoring Institution and current
GMEC. Even if an attendee is not able to implement the entire process change at the institutional level, attendees can still
utilize certain aspects for their program or institution. The process described in this session represents experiences from a
large Sponsoring Institutions with more than 70 ACGME-accredited programs. However, the process can easily be
modified to be utilized by a smaller Sponsoring Institution.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Attendees will be presented with the institutional requirements of the Graduate Medical education Committee (GMEC).
This will facilitate a deeper discussion in the benefits of promoting a culture of active engagement and equitable GMEC
representation. Speakers will then dive deeper into the overall policy modification process and working to define
engagement. The process of determining equitable voting membership representation and responsibilities will be
discussed. Speakers will also present one year post Policy implementation outcomes including attendance data and
member feedback that have altered the GMEC further. The session will incorporate presentation, table discussion and
Q&A aspects. Attendees will also be provided with a copy of the GMEC Policy to bring back to their institution that can be
adapted to their specific needs.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Attendees will be presented with the foundational institutional requirements of the Graduate Medical education Committee
(GMEC). This will facilitate a deeper discussion in the benefits of promoting a culture of active engagement and equitable
GMEC representation. Which ultimately leads to increased effectiveness and optimization of the GMEC. The session will
incorporate presentation, table discussion and Q&A aspects.
Introduction & Foundation of ACGME GMEC Institutional Requirements - 10 minutes
Presentation
Policy modification process and defining engagement 5 minutes
Determining equitable voting membership representation and responsibilities - 10 minutes
Sharing outcomes: attendance data, feedback and other modifications one year post GMEC Policy implementation – 10
minutes
Small Group Discussions and Report out on own GMEC Policy & Engagement Best Practices-- 10 minutes
Closing
Question and Answer – 5 min
(89) Submission ID#1877037
The Dynamic Duo – Team Development: The Relationship between the Institutional Coordinator & Program
Coordinator
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Kristelle Grant Deterville – The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
Email: kristelle.grant@uth.tmc.edu
Office Phone: (713) 500-5152
Presenter(s)
Kristelle Grant Deterville, MSML
Program Manager and Institutional Coordinator
The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
Role: Presenter
Tanja Calixto, C-TAGME
Program Manager
The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify the needs and challenges that limit the roles of Program Coordinator (PC).
2. Analyze the Program Coordinator (PC) and Institutional Coordinator (IC) dynamic and identify the
areas for improving a team relationship.
3. Discuss systems and initiatives to support program success.
4. Develop an action plan to maintain Coordinator (IC & PC) relationships to help support programs
through effective communication.
5.
Session Description
The goal of this presentation is to discuss the working/ team relationship between Program and Institutional
Coordinators and to highlight the needs and challenges both parties. By identifying the needs of Program
Coordinators and bringing forth initiatives to combat the challenges faced, relatable experiences and
perspective of an Institutional Coordinator can help support the Program Coordinator institutionally. Overall,
the solution in accomplishing goals and requirements of training programs is through the two-way street of
effective communication.
Target Audience
Institutional Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The goal of this presentation is to empower program coordinators (PC) in their role through the use of effective
communication and relationship building with the institutional coordinator (IC). By enabling a collaborative dynamic
between the PC and IC, PCs will be able to take ownership of their role and improve the overall quality of their respective
program(s) with the guidance of the IC.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Based on an institution’s structure, PCs and ICs work in siloed environments with occasional communications between
each other about common program requirements. Optimizing the PC and IC relationship/communication should help to
break these silos and promote a more conducive and productive working relationship. This session should spark initiative
in other institutions to analyze and adopt best practices in working collaboratively with their GME office.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The main barrier is potentially having a non-existing bond between PCs and ICs due to GME structure or roles. To address
this barrier, this presentation is aimed at suggesting steps to create relationships through communication which will include
resources and directions that the institution can adopt into their practice. As part of the discussion the audience will be
provided with a quiz to identify their own communication style to address having self-awareness and EQ as part of their
role.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
For initial discussions a poll will be utilized as an icebreaker to engage the audience based on the “superhero” theme of the
presentation, also to highlight the challenges they currently experience in their roles. Time will also be allotted for a mini
group discussion amongst the audience to share their understanding of their role in relation to the topic. At the conclusion
of the presentation, the audience will be presented actionable items to help build their synergistic relationship between
program(s) and the GME by identifying their communication styles. Also to motivate the GME team in considering an
adjustment in their current work dynamic and understanding the benefits of these established relationships.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
OBJECTIVE: #1
PRESENTER: KGD, BK, TC
TIME: 15 MINUTES
DETAILS/ ACTIVITY:
Introductions – Presenter name; # of years in role; chosen superhero character; how the superhero’s power relates to
current role.
PRESENTER: BK
POLL AUDIENCE
Q1: You all are superheroes; what is your superhero strength?
Q2: What are some superhero challenges you experienced as a coordinator?
DEFINITION OF PC
ACGME’s definition of a PC.
GROUP DISCUSSION
Q1: What are some requirements coordinators need to be knowledgeable about? (ACGME, GME, Hospital)
Provide response/ data from the institution’s coordinators (UTHealth) and highlight the challenges experienced.
Provide data from the ACGME on stressors of coordinators.
Discuss the functions of a coordinator and how information is received to perform their duties.
COORDINATOR ENGAGEMENT
Provide data/ attendance record from the institution’s (UTHealth) coordinator related events highlighting the
participation, engagement and feedback, hosted by GME.
OBJECTIVE: #2
PRESENTER: KDG
TIME: 10 MINUTES
DETAILS/ ACTIVITY:
STRUCTURE OF GME OFFICE
Discuss the role of the GME office in relation to coordinators.
Highlight the structure of the institution’s (UTHealth) GME Office and the challenges experienced.
Discuss the new mission and goal of the GME Office, highlighting the evolution of the office and heightened awareness
of areas for improvement.
Provide response/ data from the institution’s programs (UTHealth) on the perception of the GME office initiatives.
DEFINITION OF IC
ACGME’s definition of an IC.
Discuss the purpose and focus of an IC.
Highlight the commonalities of a PC and IC.
RECOGNIZING THE NEEDS OF PCS
How are the PC needs identified?
Highlighting obstacles of PCs
Framing the mind for success (EQ)/ self-awareness
OBJECTIVE: #3
PRESENTER: KGD
TIME: 10 MINUTES
DETAILS/ ACTIVITY:
THE IC APPROACH
Identify and address the Need with data & feedback
Revision of current methodology
Need for improvement
Gaining support from GME Leadership
Prioritize the Need
Launched initiatives (new, preexisting & future) and provide examples.
OBJECTIVE: #4
PRESENTER: TC
TIME: 10 MINUTES
DETAILS/ ACTIVITY:
SUGGESTIONS & ACTION PLAN
The key to building relationships is effective communication.
Highlight the types of communication, communication styles and personality traits.
Examples of actionable items by both PC & IC for success.
List available resources to support both parties.
THE IMPACT & PERSPECTIVE
The panel’s response based on the actions undertaken at the institution.
EQ quiz results
Q1: Has there been a change in perspective and impact based on the relationship between PC and IC for the success in
your role?
CLOSING
Q&A
TIME: 5 MINUTES
(90) Submission ID#1877063
The Dynamic Duo – Team Development: The Relationship between the Institutional Coordinator & Program
Coordinator.
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Kristelle Grant Deterville – The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
Email: kristelle.grant@uth.tmc.edu
Office Phone: (713) 500-5152
Presenter(s)
Kristelle Grant Deterville, MSML
Program Manager and Institutional Coordinator
The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
Role: Presenter
Tanja Calixto, C-TAGME
Program Manager
The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify the needs and challenges that limit the roles of Program Coordinator (PC).
2. Analyze the Program Coordinator (PC) and Institutional Coordinator (IC) dynamic and identify the
areas for improving a team relationship.
3. Discuss systems and initiatives to support program success.
4. Develop an action plan to maintain Coordinator (IC & PC) relationships to help support programs
through effective communication.
5.
Session Description
The goal of this presentation is to discuss the working/ team relationship between Program and Institutional
Coordinators and to highlight the needs and challenges both parties. By identifying the needs of Program
Coordinators and bringing forth initiatives to combat the challenges faced, relatable experiences and
perspective of an Institutional Coordinator can help support the Program Coordinator institutionally. Overall,
the solution in accomplishing goals and requirements of training programs is through the two-way street of
effective communication.
Target Audience
Program Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The goal of this presentation is to empower program coordinators (PC) in their role through the use of effective
communication and relationship building with the institutional coordinator (IC). By enabling a collaborative dynamic
between the PC and IC, PCs will be able to take ownership of their role and improve the overall quality of their respective
program(s) with the guidance of the IC.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Based on an institution’s structure, PCs and ICs work in siloed environments with occasional communications between
each other about common program requirements. Optimizing the PC and IC relationship/communication should help to
break these silos and promote a more conducive and productive working relationship. This session should spark initiative
in other institutions to analyze and adopt best practices in working collaboratively with their GME office.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The main barrier is potentially having a non-existing bond between PCs and ICs due to GME structure or roles. To address
this barrier, this presentation is aimed at suggesting steps to create relationships through communication which will include
resources and directions that the institution can adopt into their practice. As part of the discussion the audience will be
provided with a quiz to identify their own communication style to address having self-awareness and EQ as part of their
role.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
For initial discussions a poll will be utilized as an icebreaker to engage the audience based on the “superhero” theme of the
presentation, also to highlight the challenges they currently experience in their roles. Time will also be allotted for a mini
group discussion amongst the audience to share their understanding of their role in relation to the topic. At the conclusion
of the presentation, the audience will be presented actionable items to help build their synergistic relationship between
program(s) and the GME by identifying their communication styles. Also to motivate the GME team in considering an
adjustment in their current work dynamic and understanding the benefits of these established relationships.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
OUTLINE:
OBJECTIVE: #1
PRESENTER: KGD, BK, TC
TIME: 15 MINUTES
DETAILS/ ACTIVITY:
Introductions – Presenter name; # of years in role; chosen superhero character; how the superhero’s power relates to
current role.
PRESENTER: BK
POLL AUDIENCE
Q1: You all are superheroes; what is your superhero strength?
Q2: What are some superhero challenges you experienced as a coordinator?
DEFINITION OF PC
ACGME’s definition of a PC.
GROUP DISCUSSION
Q1: What are some requirements coordinators need to be knowledgeable about? (ACGME, GME, Hospital)
Provide response/ data from the institution’s coordinators (UTHealth) and highlight the challenges experienced.
Provide data from the ACGME on stressors of coordinators.
Discuss the functions of a coordinator and how information is received to perform their duties.
COORDINATOR ENGAGEMENT
Provide data/ attendance record from the institution’s (UTHealth) coordinator related events highlighting the
participation, engagement and feedback, hosted by GME.
OBJECTIVE: #2
PRESENTER: KDG
TIME: 10 MINUTES
DETAILS/ ACTIVITY:
STRUCTURE OF GME OFFICE
Discuss the role of the GME office in relation to coordinators.
Highlight the structure of the institution’s (UTHealth) GME Office and the challenges experienced.
Discuss the new mission and goal of the GME Office, highlighting the evolution of the office and heightened awareness
of areas for improvement.
Provide response/ data from the institution’s programs (UTHealth) on the perception of the GME office initiatives.
DEFINITION OF IC
ACGME’s definition of an IC.
Discuss the purpose and focus of an IC.
Highlight the commonalities of a PC and IC.
RECOGNIZING THE NEEDS OF PCS
How are the PC needs identified?
Highlighting obstacles of PCs
Framing the mind for success (EQ)/ self-awareness
OBJECTIVE: #3
PRESENTER: KGD
TIME: 10 MINUTES
DETAILS/ ACTIVITY:
THE IC APPROACH
Identify and address the Need with data & feedback
Revision of current methodology
Need for improvement
Gaining support from GME Leadership
Prioritize the Need
Launched initiatives (new, preexisting & future) and provide examples.
OBJECTIVE: #4
PRESENTER: TC
TIME: 10 MINUTES
DETAILS/ ACTIVITY:
SUGGESTIONS & ACTION PLAN
The key to building relationships is effective communication.
Highlight the types of communication, communication styles and personality traits
Examples of actionable items by both PC & IC for success.
List available resources to support both parties.
THE IMPACT & PERSPECTIVE
The panel’s response based on the actions undertaken at the institution.
EQ quiz results
Q1: Has there been a change in perspective and impact based on the relationship between PC and IC for the success in
your role?
CLOSING
Q&A
TIME: 5 MINUTES
(91) Submission ID#1877064
"The Senior Coordinator: Withstanding the Test of Time"
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Nora Gilgallon-Keele – Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Email: nora.m.gilgallon-keele@vumc.org
Office Phone: (615) 343-4578
Cell Phone: (615) 403-8954
Presenter(s)
Nora M. Gilgallon-Keele, n/a
Fellowship Program Manager
Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Deborah Cini, n/a
Residency Program Manager II
The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Describe and identify ways that coordinator position has evolved over the years.
2. Recognize the importance of program coordinator resilience and adaptability in order to sustain career
longevity and fulfillment.
3. Discuss strategies coordinators will need to effectively advocate for themselves, both personally and
professionally.
4.
5.
Session Description
The role of the Program Coordinator has changed significantly over the years. In the senior coordinator's
experience what was once a clerical position has evolved to more of a managerial/leadership role. While the
position has changed, the clerical stigma, title and job requirements have not. This immersive session will
focus on ways in which to develop career fulfillment and satisfaction within this status quo environment.
Target Audience
Seasoned Coordinators, but beneficial to all levels of coordinators.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
1. Role Education - starting with job descriptions that realistically describe what this role is, which would lead to better
retention
2. Training - appropriately training people hired in this role and continued opportunities for education/training/professional
development
3. Role Perception - from other leaders within the department and institution
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
1. Coordinators being included more in GME/related PD meetings (to be more inclusive) so that the coordinators are aware
of what is going on - real time updates communicated in real time.
2. Changing the language for our profession - how we refer to ourselves, educating faculty and others in the institution as
to what role we play in these programs.
3. Changing the guidelines for how we address boundaries - how to set them regarding after hour communication and
expectations.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
1. Institution rules and regulations - no consistency across the spectrum for our titles, our job descriptions, our roles.
2. PD/APD and department variability on what their expectations are for the coordinator.
3. How to speak up and advocate for yourselves in your role. Learning where to find connections and resources to
advocate for yourselves and your positions.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
1. Steps to take to survive and thrive - out of office messages, not answering emails/texts while out of office - boundaries.
2. Recognizing the uniqueness of this role and using the connections that you make along that way, to help foster your
professional growth.
3. Connecting with your specialty specific groups, national groups and using AHME and ACGME resources that are readily
available.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. We plan to use the first portion of the time to share our PowerPoint presentation.
2. We would like to make the session interactive and hope to use a polling system to gauge our audience
3. Based on our audience, we would like to have an interactive conversation with the group and get their thoughts, ideas,
etc
(92) Submission ID#1877089
Substitute Teacher, Ace the Procedure: A Flipped Classroom Model for Procedural Training
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Hanan Atia – Memorial Healthcare System
Email: hananatia@gmail.com
Office Phone: (914) 391-6446
Presenter(s)
Hanan C. Atia, MD
Assistant Program Director, Emergency Medicine Residency
Memorial Healthcare System
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Describe the idea behind flipped classroom procedural simulation and explore its utility within their
training program.
2. Design a procedural model for their institution where buy more senior learners get the chance to act
as preceptors prior to graduating residency
3. Have some fun watching emergency medicine residents correcting seasoned attending physicians
performing invasive procedures!
4.
5.
Session Description
Seasoned educators know that procedural competence comes from experience. True procedural mastery,
however is the level of competence whereby the instructor can troubleshoot a learner’s procedural skills
verbally, without intervening or taking over. Taking this one step further, true experts in procedural education
and supervision often develop an innate ability to predict errors and missteps before occur. Predicting and
correcting mistakes before they occur, allow the learner to continue the procedure safely, without handing it off
to a more seasoned operator. The session explores the idea of integration of a flipped classroom task training
simulation whereby learners observe an attending physician performing a critical procedure. The attending
physician will intentionally make several small and large missteps while performing the procedure, which
should prompt the learner to calmly and specifically address the problems before they have the potential to
cause patient harm. Specifically, the procedure explored in the session will be a simple triple lumen central
catheter insertion. I will go over the flipped classroom model setup we explored within our residency program.
Those who attend the session will be able to see (either in real-time or via video review of our flipped
classroom model) PGY2 and PGY3 residents chaperone me performing a central line and monitoring every
aspect of the procedure as if they are an attending physician at a teaching institution. As the performer of the
procedure, I will make several errors including: Breaking sterile technique, confusing the orientation of my
ultrasound probe, failing to anchor my hand during syringe-wire exchange, advancing the wire too deep,
dilating at an incorrect angle, creating a skin bridge with the scalpel, handling the wiring inappropriately, etc.
With a combination of slides, video review, discussion, and potentially live simulation, we will explore this
learning model that is intended to allow newer physicians a chance to act as preceptors in a controlled and
safe environment before graduating residency. In a fun and interactive way we will review qualitative feedback
from our emergency medicine residents on how they perceive this experience might've helped them become
better teachers in emergency medicine.
Target Audience
Program directors, assistant program directors, faculty, program administrators, residents, fellows, nursing
educators.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
I believe that medical training often has a hard transition between learner and educator. With flipped classroom task
training simulation I believe we can start training providers in becoming preceptors earlier in their career.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The intention is to improve the ability of learners to precept procedures in a safe and controlled manner.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Some barriers might include access to simulation/task trainers, lack of staffing to organize an initiative such as this
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Fun and interactive discussion with some slides, video clips, and potentially a live demonstration.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
As an emergency physician, I will describe briefly several cases in which I had to "take over "a procedure from a learner in
the department. I will discuss how I have learned to avoid taking over procedures, by properly instructing and predicting
errors/omissions that might occur during procedures. I will briefly describe the initiative that I started in our residency
program. I will go over some points that I think are important and discuss how I believe this will change
competence/performance. Either by live demonstration or video review I will show some examples of flipped classroom
model. I will discuss the feedback and impact it had on our learners within the Memorial system. This will be educational
yet fun and entertaining! Session expected to be 40 mins with 10 minutes of questions and feedback!
(93) Submission ID#1877152
An 80 Year-Old is Not a 40 Year-Old: Inpatient Abbreviated Geriatric Assessment (i-AGA) for all Specialties
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Meredith Mucha – Mount Carmel Health
Email: meredith.mucha@mchs.com
Office Phone: (614) 216-0215
Presenter(s)
Meredith Mucha, MD, MHA
Geriatrics Fellowship Program Director, Director of Medical Education, Associate DIO
Mount Carmel Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Know how to perform an inpatient, abbreviated geriatric assessment (i-AGA), including review of
problematic but frequently prescribed medications.
2. Understand how an inpatient geriatric assessment impacts outcomes, including length of stay, hospital
readmission, quality of life, morbidity and mortality.
3. Dispel myth that a useful geriatric assessment is too time-consuming to be performed in the hospital
setting.
4. Understand how geriatric domains covered in the i-AGA impact the plan of care.
5. How an i-ACA can prompt and mobilize healthcare resources beneficial to the patient, short and long-
term.
Session Description
Regardless of the admitting diagnosis or primary service, a geriatric patient can receive an inpatient
Abbreviated Geriatric Assessment (i-ACA) from any provider in the hospital. The i-ACA, that I have developed
as an inpatient and outpatient geriatrician of 17 years, is as follows: 1. Initial FRAIL Screening (fatigue,
resistance (unable to climb stairs), ambulation (1 block or more), illnesses (chronic, 5 or more), loss of weight
(5% over last 6 months)) with score 3+ being positive. We will discuss outcomes associated with frailty, and
further interventions that can be mobilized to prevent rapid decline. Develop an understanding that frailty is a
tipping point in the overall trajectory of a senior's health. 2. Medication Review: scrutinize any sedating, anti-
cholinergic, or dehydrating medications (we will review most frequently prescribed medications in these
categories). This is a distinct approach from the BEERs list, which can be too cumbersome and overarching.
3. Executive ADLs and Basic ADLS dependence or independence: this is an effective social and cognitive
needs assessment that elucidates their dependence on outside help and ability to care for self. 4. Cognition:
basic capacity assessment with several focused questions based on orientation, comprehension, insight, and
appreciation of consequences (this is different from MOCA/MMSE/SLUMS screening tools which are time-
consuming, and unreliable in the hospital setting). 5. Nutrition: Mini-Nutrional Assessment or simple question,
"Are you losing weight?" 6. Prognosis: advocating for aggressive interventions due to good quality of life,
palliative appropriateness due to significant symptom burden of illness(es), or comfort care due to severe
morbidity (not necessarily hospice). This greatly influences appropriate discharge planning, in addition to
starting the conversation around advanced directives.
Target Audience
Any provider in the hospital, but significantly Hospitalist Medicine specialists due to their prevalence of being
the primary admitting team
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Often when geriatric patients are admitted to the hospital, the only focus is on the admitting diagnosis. However, by
performing an abbreviated geriatric assessment, providers can uncover contributing, but less obvious factors to the current
problem. Often the treatment in the hospital is a band-aid to a condition that will resurface at a later time unless root or
contributing causes are not addressed.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
A 40-year-old typically does not have the confounding physiologic morbidity of an 80 year-old, and therefore a more
focused, disease specific approach is warranted in the hospital setting. However, for a geriatric patient, most presenting
conditions are syndromes, which are etiologically multi-factorial requiring a broader approach. The goal of this workshop is
to teach that multi-factorial approach in a new, systematic, condensed format.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Admitting and primary team providers in the hospital are time-constrained, with the length of stay metric as a strong
influencer. Geriatric patients with multiple comorbidities are complex and time-consuming. Additionally, most providers are
not trained in geriatric assessment and may have preconceived notions of the feasibility and value (or lack thereof) of such
inpatient assessments. Traditional, outpatient geriatric assessment is a lengthy endeavor. However, the i-AGA is not; this
can be completed in about 10 minutes with proficiency.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Power Point, provider self-assessment, group discussion and interaction, feedback on current practices, barriers and
perceptions, as well as references to research articles illustrating the value of such assessments. Smart phrases and best
practices alerts in the EMR will also be discussed as another way to easily incorporate and disseminate this assessment.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
10 min: Introduction to traditional Geriatric Assessment, including domains and common syndromes
10: Self-assessment (by the attendees) of current hospital practices involving geriatric patients, barriers and
preconceptions of elderly health (unconscious ageist biases, for example) with discussion. For example, "Do you know
how to prognosticate a life expectancy for a patient with dementia?" or "Do you know what conditions predict poor rehab
capacity in a geriatric patient?"
20 min: Education regarding the Inpatient Abbreviated Geriatric Assessment (i-AGA), review of each step and strategies to
incorporate use
10 min: Evidence-based practice: how geriatric assessment impacts metrics and outcomes, both short and long-term
(94) Submission ID#1877227
Development of a Graduate Medical Education Training Curriculum in Disclosure, Communication, Apology
and Resolution Modeled After a National Collaborative
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Arthur Riba – Corewell Health East
Email: Arthur.Riba@corewellhealth.org
Office Phone: (313) 878-6955
Cell Phone: (313) 878-6955
Presenter(s)
Arthur L. Riba, MD
Corewell Health East GME Director of QI/PS; CDI Physician Advisor
Corewell Health East
Role: Presenter
Joel Bradley, MD
Dir. GME Quality and Safety Program; Adult and Pediatric Hospital Medcine
Dartmouth Health; Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Appreciate how disclosure of medical errors and patient harm related to healthcare is foundational for
patient safety, effective communication, and public health, while attenuating emotional impact on
patents, families, and healthcare providers
2. Describe the gaps in communication and resolution curricula in the GME clinical learning environment,
with a focus on acute care.
3. Create a measurable and sustainable approach to implementing CR training across GME programs
4. Invite collaboration and innovation to advance implementation strategies across institutions.
5.
Session Description
Graduate Medical Education (GME) programs do not consistently provide education, training, and experience
in disclosure of medical error, despite its prevalence, requirements by the ACGME and AAMC, and the ethical
responsibility required for professional practice across medical specialties. The rationale for and relevance of
this training, as well as barriers to implementation in clinical learning environments have been well
summarized in the literature. There is a major need and opportunity to develop a reliable, consistent,
standardized, and sustainable education and training program to teach medical trainees how to communicate
after harm and work with patients and families toward resolution. Though some institutions are in various
stages of adopting communication and resolution programs (CRPs), relatively little emphasis has been placed
on GME training as an opportunity to accelerate these efforts. Developing highly reliable CRPs is a critical
element of a modern patient safety program and communicating effectively with patients and families after
harm is a core professional and ethical responsibility. Being open with patients and families after harm events
is central to the clinical mission and public trust, and its absence exacerbates suffering in the direction of both
patient and clinical teams. These conversations are difficult, but with training and supervision, GME trainees
can approach patients and families with disciplined transparency, incorporate these dialogues into daily work
and reflective practice, and set a template for future practice and life-long learning. The purpose and goal of
this session is to provide background and introduce a comprehensive curricular framework for GME that can
be used across specialties to advance how trainees communicate with patients and families after harm. This
model is aligned with The Pathway to Accountability, Compassion, and Transparency (PACT) Collaborative, a
national partnership of ARIADNE Labs (Massachusetts General-Brigham), Collaborative for Accountability
and Improvement, and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement. The goal of this collaborative is to support
health systems to achieve highly reliable Communication and Resolution Programs (CRPs) benefitting the
patients, families, and clinicians involved in harm events via shared learning sessions, implementation of best
practices, and providing expert counseling and mentoring. This curriculum is intended to help institutions
invested in CRP practice accelerate those efforts through implementation in their GME training programs. It is
expected that by the time of the 2025 AHME Institute Sessions, we will be on track to present the results of
our pilot project implementing the curriculum and evaluating its impact at several receptive GME training
programs, aligned with healthcare organizations participating in the upcoming cycle of the PACT
Collaborative.
Target Audience
Target Audience: 1. GME Program Directors, Faculty, Managers, Specialists, and Coordinators 2. Quality,
Patient Safety and Clinical Risk Directors and Leaders 3. Residents and Fellows 4. Administrative Leaders
responsible for implementing and monitoring CRPs 5. Patient Advocates GME leaders should come away
from this curriculum presentation convinced that this practice is directly tied to patient safety and meets an
ACGME recommendation
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Graduate Medical Education (GME) residents do not receive adequate education, training, and experiential learning
opportunities in CR of patient harm related to applied healthcare, despite specific recommendations by the ACGME and
the inherent moral and ethical responsibility. The rationale for and relevance of this training and barriers and challenges
have been well summarized in the literature.
Many patients are harmed by medical care but are unaware. Nearly 40% of patients report errors/breakdowns in their
medical care (communication breakdowns and adverse events), but few share their concerns with their healthcare team or
organization. Many errors go undetected or reported: up to 2/3 of errors and one in every 4 harmful events are disclosed.
The minority of patients receive a full and truthful explanation when errors occur in their care and/or bad outcomes occur.
There is marked variation in the reported frequency of disclosure of patient safety events by medical professionals. GME
trainees are often unaware of what to report or disclose. The majority of faculty (88%) and trainees (62%) do report making
mistakes and support error disclosure (> 90%), but few physicians inform and when they do so, more often for minor errors
and more likely to conduct partial rather than full disclosure.
A minority of physicians receive formal training and few GME programs offer formal instruction in CR. Most GME trainees
report personal involvement in medical errors, with up to 45% involved in a serious error. One third and two thirds
disclosed a serious or minor errors, respectively. Only one third of residents report receiving training in error disclosure and
the training is not consistent or standardized. As a result, compliance with the ACGME recommendations around CR has
been shown to be limited. The current situation defines the targets for improvement and forms the basis for developing,
implementing, applying, and disseminating this curricular training.
Despite many efforts within our own healthcare system, including setting up site CR teams and providing education and
training, active participation in the first PACT Collaborative Initiative, and developing a pilot GME didactic intended for
educating resident programs, there have been very few requests for the latter and residents are not included in actual
disclosure events. It is uncertain whether the goals of achieving high reliability with regards to the PACT deliverables were
achieved. An opportunity has now presented itself since a few of the hospitals on the west side within our newly integrated
Corewell Healthcare System will be joining the next cycle of the PACT Collaborative and there is renewed interest and
high-level support in developing a companion GME curriculum in CR.
Given the current situation and opportunities, there is a real and compelling need to develop a reliable, consistent,
standardized, and evidence-based comprehensive GME curriculum that addresses the highlighted gaps and deficiencies,
is achievable and proves to be very effective in educating, training, engaging and providing experiences with actual or
simulated disclosure and is sustainable for lifelong practice and application.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
1. GME Program leaders, directors and representatives attending this session see the value of a standardized curriculum
in CR for residents and trainees, are motivated to apply the learnings to develop and implement similar training programs
modeled after ours and reach out to us to assist with implementation at their respective training sites.
2. Residents receive standardized education, training, and experiential learning in CR that complies with ACGME
recommendations, meets moral, ethical, and professional obligations, and is applied reliably and consistently in future
practice.
2. The PACT Collaborative officially endorses the GME curriculum and recommends to the academic medical centers
participating in PACT that this training is incorporated in their common requirements.
3. GME training programs and clinical, administrative, and risk leadership embrace the critical need for this training
4. Motivates interactive discussion and brainstorming around innovative ways to train residents and fellows and fosters
collaboration, networking, and research
5. Increases resident reporting of adverse patient safety events and promotes participation in event investigation and in
actual or simulated disclosures
5. Documentation that review of events and discussions around disclosure is occurring and incorporated in teaching
rounds and clinical workflow
6. Desired process and outcome metrics of success are achieved
7. Highly favorable ratings of learner evaluation regarding satisfaction with the training program, knowledge, skill and
competency gained and inspires lifelong learning and reliable application in future practice
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
1. Competing priorities
2. Lack of resources, personnel and bandwidth to develop, implement, apply, and sustain at respective program sites
3. Lack of organizational culture and institutional support; lack of engaged clinical, administrative, and GME leadership
support.
4. Limited number of faculty mentors, coaches and trainers knowledgeable and skilled in CRP
5. Concern that a highly reliable CRP leads to legal actions, transparency is an admission of guilt and fear of loss of
relationship with patients and breakdown in trust.
6. Difficulty on the part of residents, faculty and medical staff, in admitting to personal failure and concern re:
embarrassment, disciplinary action, career advancement, harm to reputation, and emotional distress
7. Unfamiliarity with types of adverse events and medical errors to report and what to disclose
8. Uncertainty among clinicians about what patients/family members require re: CR
9. Lack of formal training in communication skills and disclosing adverse events
Based on lessons learned from implementing and applying the curriculum at pilot sites, formative and summative program
and learner evaluation, and impact and measures of success desired of the training curriculum, we will review how we
specifically overcame barriers to achieve desired outcomes. During the session, we will also review updates from the
second cycle of PACT Collaborative regarding what it takes to be successful, overcoming barriers and challenges, and
achieving highly reliable process and outcomes measures. It is also expected that during the Q&A portion of the session,
ideas and discussion regarding addressing these barriers to implementation and sustainability will be generated along with
supporting motivation to change and performance improvement collectively.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The following educational methods, format and venue, tools and resources will be utilized in the development and
application of the GME training curriculum in CR:
1. Faculty Guide to support the development, implementation and application of the curriculum; review of PACT
Collaborative deliverables, learnings, tools and resources; review of best practices of CRPs
2. Didactic, evidence-based slide presentation and complementary methods of training as the key interventions to educate
and train residents at respective sites (site decides methods, format and venue of presentation) Topics to be reviewed:
- Introduction, Background, and Rationale of CRPs
- Principles and best practices of CR with interactive discussion
- Primer on event reporting: why, what, when and how to report; compliance with the ACGME recommendations
- Harm classification
- Criteria for disclosure of patient harm and adverse patient safety events
- Discussion of the conceptual basis for the harm communication curriculum and teaching skills associated with delivering
this content effectively
- Review common challenges in teaching harm communication skills and implement potential solutions
3. Case-Based Examples – self learning and practice followed by subsequent moderated review and discussion
4. Video exemplars with moderated review and discussion:
- Introduction, Rationale, Summary, Testimonials
- Examples of patient harm events
- Provider and patient perspective to harm events
- Demonstration of Best Practices, effective communication, and compassionate apology
5. Observations of actual disclosures
6. Coaching of faculty and residents by trained staff
7. Review of barriers to overcome
8. Application of Video Communication Assessment – will request approval to use
9. Simulations/Role Playing; Disclosing case scenarios to Standardized Patients/residents in the role of patients harmed;
feedback and debriefing; turn-to-your-neighbor enactment of sample case
10. Debriefing/Feedback after Simulated or actual Patient Disclosure: ask the resident what that was like for them; if they
felt they were prepared adequately. Ask the simulated patient or real patient what that was like for them? What did they
especially like about what the resident said or did? Feedback from the audience and peers for what the resident did well;
did not do well; Choices the resident made where they might have taken a different approach
11. Learner and Program Evaluation: standardized tool assessing: knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence and competency
to do; satisfaction with the training, intention to apply in future practice. Consider using the standardized “Error Disclosure
Performance Rating Scale”
12. Apply the tools, resources, learnings, and Webinars from PACT and incorporate into the GME curriculum and daily
care/rounds
13. Deploy, track and respond to CRP Metrics – modeled after PACT but customized and scoped to be relevant to
residents
14. CRP standard work: ensure high reliable interventions are applied reliably
15. Apply performance, process and quality improvement principles and practices to achieve results
16. Structure and mapping process to align with the ACGME/CLER recommendation
17. Dedicated faculty from academic centers participating in PACT to customize and apply the GME curriculum at
respective sites; serve as mentors and coaches to residents
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction, Background, Evolution, Rationale and Barriers for CRPs and a GME Curriculum; ACGME/CLER requirements
– 10 minutes
Review of the PACT Collaborative; Learnings, Resources, and Tools to apply for GME Training – 10 minutes
Adverse Event Reporting and Investigation – Key linkage to CR – 5 minutes
Review of Principles, Guidelines and Best Practices – 10 minutes
Review of the comprehensive education, training, and experiential learning curriculum – 10 minutes
Summary and Conclusion- 5 minutes
Q&A - 5 minutes
(95) Submission ID#1877244
That was so 365 days ago! Supporting our program administrators across the academic calendar.
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Amy Bialas – Sanford Health
Email: amy.bialas@sanfordhealth.org
Office Phone: (605) 312-9229
Cell Phone: (605) 321-7873
Presenter(s)
Amy K. Bialas, EdD
Executive Director
Sanford Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify effective tools and resources for program administrators' continuous on-boarding.
2. Implement accreditation topics, independent competence, and logistical oversight into a successful
continuous on-boarding program.
3. Recognize that an effective continuous on-boarding program has impact beyond individual skills; it
builds relationships, credibility and trust.
4.
5.
Session Description
Through our Continuous On-Boarding (COB) program, we are equipping our program administrators to be
confident and successful as they navigate the logistics of annual GME events, oversight of annual GME
responsibilities, and ensure compliance with ACGME accreditation standards. Attendees of this session will
hear the details of our COB program and how we manage the 12-month academic year cycle, as well as the
unintended, beneficial outcomes of our COB program.
Target Audience
Program Administrators (Coordinators) GME Office Staff
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Our academic year is 12 months. This creates a long span of time when a program administrator (PA) navigates key
elements of his/her residency/fellowship. This is the practice gap. For newly hired PAs seeking to be successful in their first
years of program oversight, it can be difficult to master all the tasks. Our continuous on-boarding (COB) program seeks to
address this professional practice gap.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
By sharing our continuous on-boarding (COB) program, program administrator (PA) performance improvement is sought
around the logistics of annual graduate medical education (GME) responsibilities. Our case study example is: annual food
allowance on name badges.
By sharing our COB program, PAs confidence in their independent oversight of annual GME responsibilities will be
created. Our case study example is: entering program data into WebADS.
By sharing our COB program, ensuring accreditation outcomes will be possible. Our case study example is: COB covers
the ACGME common program requirement "the PEC must be comprised of at least 2 program faculty members , at least
one of whom is a core faculty member, and at least one resident."
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
A potential barrier is time to develop a COB program with an already busy workload. To address this potential barrier,
attendees will be encouraged to seek out subject matter experts for specific topics and to share responsibilities as to not
make creating a COB program a burden.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Case studies will be used to facilitate the change in learning. By using real, case-based examples from my organization
and by our COB meetings, attendees will recognize the opportunities for implementation at their own GME programs.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. Establishing COB
a. Deploy needs assessment survey
b. Consideration for current month
c. List of topics
2. COB Rules
a. Flexibility
b. Use of subject matter experts
c. Timeliness
3. Unexpected value of COB
a. Relationship building
b. Credibility and trust
c. Evaluation of PA skills and comprehension
4. COB Outcomes
a. Lower turnover
b. Limit/reduce burnout
c. Increased productivity
The presentation will be 40 minutes and allow 10 minutes for questions and answers.
(96) Submission ID#1877260
1-2 Punch – Real World Resident Wellness Improvements through Work Hours Monitoring
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Jaclyn Lockhart – UPMC
Email: lockhartj@upmc.edu
Office Phone: (724) 448-3269
Presenter(s)
Jaclyn Lockhart, MBA
Sr. Compliance Administrator, GME
UPMC
Role: Presenter
Tania Silva, MS
Director, GME Compliance & Institutional Certification
UPMC
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Employ a “wellness first” approach that uses work hours requirement violations as a tool to create
opportunities for positive change.
2. Implement an effective and cooperative work hours oversight process that is educational in nature for
all stakeholders.
3. Analyze submitted work hours on a weekly/rotation/quarterly basis to identify data trends that show
opportunities for intervention that can improve wellness for the residents and fellows.
4. Identify individual, program-level, and institution-level wellness challenges that can be tied directly to
work hours.
5.
Session Description
Work hours violations aren’t bad! They are a gift of opportunity to improve wellness. ACGME requires
collecting and monitoring resident and fellow work hours at program and institution levels. What if you could
use that data to do more than check that compliance box? Learn how we can take simple steps to analyze the
information already known and identify real world opportunities to improve the working environment for our
trainees. Participants will examine case examples of work hours trends in existing reporting that revealed
struggling learners, problematic shift changes, at home call concerns, and opportunities to provide institutional
support for all learners. This session will provide “action ready” steps to be implemented in as little as 15
minutes a week at both the program level and institutional level.
Target Audience
Program Coordinators, Institutional Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Current work hours practices focus on compliance – compliance in submission and violations with ACGME work hours
requirements. The goal of this session is to move beyond work hours compliance to analyze and utilize work hours data as
an avenue to create opportunities for wellness.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Creation of an environment that encourages accurate and timely work hours submissions to allow programs and
institutions to collect data to better identify opportunities for change.
Flipping the script on work hours violations – violations aren’t bad, they’re gifts of opportunity for support and improvement.
Engaging a data-driven approach to identify concerns such as:
• Pinch points in rotations that need additional support to decrease the non-physician obligation tasks
• Individual trainees that may need more assistance in time management, charting, and efficiency
• Hospital-wide gaps in coverage that are creating an undue burden
• At home call volume impacting adequate opportunities for rest and personal time
• Opportunities for additional support during targeted “busy” rotations.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Time Commitment– this session will share monitoring and analysis tools that can be integrated into weekly workflows
without excessive burden. Small changes in monitoring can lead to big changes in wellness.
Data accuracy – this session will discuss methods that can create and enhance a culture surrounding work hours that will
encourage accurate and timely submissions
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This session will use a lecture format to introduce processes, benefits, and practical applications. Additionally, interactive
case-studies will allow participants to look at sample data to practice identifying potential areas for focus.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Foundation:
Introduction and Background – 5 minutes
Answering the why – 5 minutes
Process Improvement and Application:
Demonstrating successes – 10 minutes
Interactive analysis – 10 minutes
Applying Today’s Learning:
Tools individual programs can use – 7 minutes
Approaches institutional teams can take – 7 minutes
Closing and Q&A – 5 minutes
(97) Submission ID#1877284
Transitional Year Residency Boot Camp
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CTYPD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Mary Warden – WVU
Email: mwarden@hsc.wvu.edu
Office Phone: (304) 685-1361
Presenter(s)
Mary Warden, MD
Associate Professor Department of Medicine Transitional Year Program Director
WVU
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the duties of the Transitional Year Program Director
2. Know the basic program requirements in order develop and maintain a successful program
3. Define the purpose of the Program Evaluation Committee and the Clinical Competency committee
4.
5.
Session Description
The session will provide a comprehensive overview of the Transitional Year residency and highlight important
information for program directors and program coordinators. The ACGME Program requirements will be
emphasized including information on curriculum, faculty, evaluations, and annual data requirements. The
duties of the Program Evaluation Committee and Clinical Competency Committee will be defined. Key
resources for a successful residency program will be shared with the audience.
Target Audience
Transitional year program directors and program coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Becoming a new program directors can be challenging job. The job requires understanding the ACGME program
requirements, developing and overseeing the residency program, and knowing how to effectively communicating with
residents and faculty in your institution as well as effectively communicate with the ACGME . A new program director must
have knowledge of the accreditation process and know how to maintain accreditation in order to have a successful
residency program.
This session will hope to emphasize important information that new program directors and coordinators should know in
order to succeed.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The session will highlight the ACGME program requirements and provide resources to help new program directors and
coordinators develop and oversee a successful transitional year residency.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
ACGME has several TY residency programs that are located at military sites across the country. As a nonmilitary program
director I would not be able to address issues related to TY programs in the military, such as the military's recruitment
process.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The presentation will be a didactic lecture. It may incorporate audience response questions if possible.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Basic program information and ACGME website
Curriculum Requirements
Committees
Recruitment
Annual ACGME requirements
Questions and answers
(98) Submission ID#1877313
COPAC/COIL Series
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Krista Lombardo-Klefos
Email: lombark@ccf.org
Presenter(s)
Krista Lombardo-Klefos, n/a
GME Administrative Director
Cleveland Clinic
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Unknown right now
2. Unknown right now
3. Unknown right now
4.
5.
Session Description
Email I sent to Melissa and Kim: For the upcoming 2025 AHME Institute I think COPAC and COIL should get
together and formalized a session on Institutional Coordinators / Advanced Program Coordinators…so really
building off the bootcamp that you have been so successful in doing in the past, but more of a 201 version if
you will. I know we have talked about this for a few years now as we do have some of the same audience. I
will go ahead and put a submission in the system as a placeholder, but what do you all think on collaborating
on this. Not saying we need to present, we can select others, but on the idea overall? To do a COPAC Part 1
and COIL Part 2 to get the audience to attend both as a series that we would together to plan?
Target Audience
COPAC and COIL Members
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
COPAC / COIL combined session; COPAC for years has been very successful with the bootcamp and like to branch off
that to have a part 1 and part 2 series that all PCs and GME PCs would feel is valuable. One more focused on COPAC
and the other on COIL but transferable and growth opportunity.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
n/a
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
n/a
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
unsure, would let the presenters determine that
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
At this time, I just wanted to submit the idea for a placeholder so the larger committee can discuss. I sent this email to the
COPAC leaders and Ashley: For the upcoming 2025 AHME Institute I think COPAC and COIL should get together and
formalized a session on Institutional Coordinators / Advanced Program Coordinators…so really building off the bootcamp
that you have been so successful in doing in the past, but more of a 201 version if you will. I know we have talked about
this for a few years now as we do have some of the same audience. I will go ahead and put a submission in the system as
a placeholder, but what do you all think on collaborating on this. Not saying we need to present, we can select others, but
on the idea overall? To do a COPAC Part 1 and COIL Part 2 to get the audience to attend both as a series that we would
together to plan?
(99) Submission ID#1877336
Helping GME survive and thrive in the Academic Health Ecosystem
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: John Ballentine – Prisma Health
Email: john.ballentine@prismahealth.org
Office Phone: (803) 386-4104
Presenter(s)
Eboni Martez, MBA, MSW,CMPE
Chief Operating Officer, Academics
Prisma Health
Role: Presenter
John Ballentine, MBA
Executive Director for Academics Finance Administration
Prisma Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the role that GME plays in the larger area of academics in a health system.
2. Identify the elements that make up their own academic ecosystem.
3. Leave with knowledge of how to integrate GME to a greater extent into the larger academic system.
4.
5.
Session Description
This session delves into the critical role of Graduate Medical Education in the larger academic ecosystem of
health systems. GME is usually a large, important part of the overall academic environment in a hospital.
However, there are other stakeholders that interact, collaborate, and can enhance the learning environment.
In this session we will identify those stakeholders, share stories of successful integration of various academic
units and discuss how to elevate and communicate academics to the C-Suite and other executive leaders. At
the end of this session, learners will be able to understand the role that GME plays in the larger area of
academics in a health system, identify the elements that make up their own academic ecosystem, and leave
with knowledge of how to integrate GME to a greater extent into the larger academic system.
Target Audience
Health System Administrators, DIOs, Institutional Coordinators, Program Directors, Faculty
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The gap in practice or knowledge that this session will cover is how GME aligns with the strategic goals of the overall
system. Also, it will cover the importance of interprofessional collaboration. The desired outcome is that the participant will
be able to identify activities that will encourage interprofessional collaboration and meet the goals of the system.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will produce a change in understanding around the value of GME in a larger academic system. Attendees will
understand how to evaluate the level of integration their GME programs have with the rest of their health system.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
A barrier is a lack of understating about how our health system and others are structured and the associated success
stories. One way to mitigate this is to share successes we or others have seen in integrating different areas of practice.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This session will use a mix of didactic and “pair & share” audience participation to discuss this topic. This is one of the best
ways for attendees to learn about as many different models as possible.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. Introduction of topic (~3 mins)
2. Description of topic (~7mins)
3. Didactic session (~8 mins)
4. Discussion of areas in a pair and share (~6 mins)
5. Description of challenges (~8 mins)
6. Discussion of challenges in a pair and share (~6 mins)
7. Discussion of the future (~6 mins)
8. Q&A (~6 mins)
(100) Submission ID#1877347
Simulation design for effective interdisciplinary collaboration during high acuity patient encounters.
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Leon Melnitsky – Memorial Healthcare System
Email: lmelnitsky@gmail.com
Office Phone: (954) 494-5687
Presenter(s)
Leon Melnitsky, DO
Program Director
Memorial Healthcare System
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify the significance of interdisciplinary collaboration in high-acuity settings.
2. Explain the key principles of designing effective simulation scenarios.
3. Examine how tribalism and miscommunication contribute to errors in high-stakes environments.
4. Develop and outline a brief simulation scenario focusing on a high-acuity patient encounter and
assess and critique the effectiveness of simulation scenarios in fostering teamwork and high-quality
patient care.
5. Design debriefing techniques that enhance learning outcomes and train advocates for interdisciplinary
communication.
Session Description
The session is designed to equip medical educators from different specialties with the essentials for
developing and implementing simulation scenarios that promote effective interdisciplinary collaboration during
high-acuity patient encounters. The session also addresses the issues of tribalism and miscommunication,
which often contribute to errors in high-stakes patient care environments.
Target Audience
Medical Educators Role: Design and implement educational programs, including simulations. Focus: Learn
effective simulation design principles and debriefing techniques to improve interdisciplinary collaboration
among learners. Hospital Administrators Role: Oversee hospital operations, policies, and programs. Focus:
Understand the value of interdisciplinary simulations in enhancing patient care and reducing errors due to
miscommunication and tribalism. Quality Assurance Professionals Role: Ensure healthcare services meet
quality standards. Focus: Learn how simulations can be used as a tool for quality improvement and error
reduction in high-acuity situations. Risk Managers Role: Identify and mitigate risks within the healthcare
setting. Focus: Explore how simulation-based training can minimize risks associated with miscommunication
and lack of collaboration during critical patient encounters. Chief Residents Role: Lead and supervise
residents, often coordinating training activities. Focus: Gain skills in designing and facilitating simulations that
promote teamwork and effective communication among residents. Core Faculty Role: Provide clinical
education and mentorship to residents. Focus: Enhance their ability to create realistic and educational
simulation scenarios that emphasize interdisciplinary collaboration. Educators Role: Teach and train
healthcare professionals. Focus: Develop comprehensive simulation scenarios and effective debriefing
strategies to improve learning outcomes and patient care quality.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Current Competence/Practice/Outcome:
Limited Interdisciplinary Collaboration:
Current practice often exhibits inadequate interdisciplinary communication and collaboration during high-acuity patient
encounters.
Medical professionals may work in silos, leading to fragmented care and increased likelihood of errors.
Tribalism and Miscommunication:
There is a prevalence of tribalism within medical teams, where each specialty operates independently without fully
integrating the expertise of other disciplines.
Miscommunication is common, particularly in high-stakes environments, contributing to critical errors and compromised
patient safety.
Insufficient Training in Simulation Design:
Many medical educators lack comprehensive training in designing and implementing effective simulation scenarios that
promote teamwork and interdisciplinary collaboration.
Debriefing techniques are often underutilized or improperly executed, leading to missed learning opportunities.
Desired Competence/Practice/Outcome:
Enhanced Interdisciplinary Collaboration:
Optimal practice involves seamless communication and collaboration between different medical specialties during high-
acuity patient encounters.
Medical teams should function cohesively, integrating diverse expertise to provide comprehensive patient care.
Reduction of Tribalism and Improved Communication:
The desired outcome is a reduction in tribalism, fostering a culture where interdisciplinary communication is prioritized and
valued.
Effective communication strategies should be employed consistently, particularly in high-stakes situations, to minimize
errors and enhance patient safety.
Proficient Simulation Design and Debriefing:
Medical educators should be proficient in designing and implementing simulation scenarios that accurately reflect real-
world challenges and promote interdisciplinary collaboration.
Debriefing sessions should be structured and effective, utilizing proven techniques to maximize learning outcomes and
improve practice.
Professional Practice Gaps to Address:
Training in Effective Interdisciplinary Collaboration:
This presentation aims to train medical educators and healthcare leaders to recognize the importance of and implement
effective interdisciplinary collaboration during high-acuity patient encounters.
Addressing Tribalism and Miscommunication:
The session will address the impact of tribalism and miscommunication, providing strategies to overcome these challenges
and enhance teamwork and communication in high-stakes environments.
Simulation Design and Debriefing Techniques:
The presentation will provide essential knowledge and practical skills in designing simulation scenarios and conducting
debriefing sessions that foster interdisciplinary teamwork and high-quality patient care.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Competence
Improved Understanding of Interdisciplinary Collaboration:
Medical educators and healthcare leaders will gain a deeper understanding of the principles and importance of
interdisciplinary collaboration in high-acuity settings.
Participants will be able to identify and articulate the benefits of integrated teamwork and the pitfalls of tribalism and
miscommunication.
Proficiency in Simulation Design:
Attendees will develop competence in designing effective simulation scenarios that accurately reflect the complexities of
high-acuity patient care.
Participants will learn to create scenarios with clear learning objectives, well-defined roles, and realistic patient cases.
Enhanced Debriefing Skills:
Educators will acquire skills in conducting effective debriefing sessions using structured techniques such as Debriefing with
Good Judgment, Plus-Delta, and Advocacy-Inquiry.
Participants will be able to facilitate reflective discussions that reinforce learning and promote continuous improvement.
Performance
Implementation of Interdisciplinary Simulations:
Participants will apply their knowledge by developing and implementing interdisciplinary simulation training in their
institutions.
Educators will lead simulation sessions that encourage collaboration and communication among diverse medical teams.
Reduction of Errors through Better Communication:
By addressing tribalism and improving communication, participants will contribute to a reduction in errors and adverse
events in high-stakes environments.
Medical teams will demonstrate improved performance in real-world patient care scenarios, reflecting the skills and
strategies learned in simulations.
Fostering a Culture of Teamwork:
Educators will foster a culture of teamwork and mutual respect among different medical specialties.
Participants will become advocates for interdisciplinary communication and collaboration, influencing their peers and
institutions to adopt these practices.
Education/Accreditation Outcome
Enhanced Training Programs:
The session will contribute to the development and enhancement of training programs that prioritize interdisciplinary
collaboration and high-quality patient care.
Institutions will integrate these simulation-based training modules into their curricula, aligning with accreditation standards
and improving educational outcomes.
Accreditation Standards Compliance:
By implementing the strategies and techniques learned in the session, participants' institutions will meet or exceed
accreditation standards related to teamwork, communication, and patient safety.
Enhanced training programs will prepare institutions for successful accreditation reviews and continuous quality
improvement.
Long-term Impact on Patient Care:
Ultimately, the session aims to have a long-term positive impact on patient care by equipping educators with the tools to
train competent, collaborative, and communication-savvy healthcare professionals.
The skills and knowledge gained will translate into better patient outcomes, higher satisfaction rates, and a safer
healthcare environment.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Resistance to Change:
Real or perceived resistance from staff or institutions accustomed to traditional practices and hierarchies.
Fear of the unknown or discomfort with new methods of interdisciplinary collaboration and simulation-based training.
Lack of Resources:
Limited access to simulation equipment and technology.
Insufficient funding or budget constraints for implementing comprehensive simulation programs.
Time Constraints:
Busy schedules of medical educators, residents, and healthcare staff, making it challenging to allocate time for simulation
training and debriefing sessions.
Competing priorities that may limit the focus on interdisciplinary training.
Knowledge and Skill Gaps:
Educators may lack the necessary skills and knowledge to design and facilitate effective simulation scenarios and
debriefings.
Inadequate training in the use of simulation technology and debriefing techniques.
Institutional Support:
Lack of support from institutional leadership for interdisciplinary training programs.
Organizational culture that may not prioritize or value interdisciplinary collaboration.
Strategies to Address Barriers
Addressing Resistance to Change:
Engage Stakeholders: Involve key stakeholders early in the process to gain buy-in and demonstrate the benefits of
interdisciplinary collaboration and simulation training.
Show Evidence: Present evidence and case studies highlighting the positive impact of interdisciplinary training on patient
outcomes and safety.
Create a Safe Learning Environment: Foster an environment where staff feel comfortable experimenting with new methods
and making mistakes during simulations.
Overcoming Resource Limitations:
Resource Sharing: Encourage collaboration between departments to share simulation resources and equipment.
Seek Funding: Provide guidance on how to seek grants and funding opportunities for simulation programs.
Utilize Low-Cost Alternatives: Introduce low-cost or no-cost simulation alternatives, such as role-playing and tabletop
exercises, to complement high-fidelity simulations.
Managing Time Constraints:
Integrate Training: Suggest ways to integrate simulation training into existing schedules, such as during regular team
meetings or as part of mandatory training sessions.
Time Management: Provide tips on effective time management to ensure dedicated time for simulation and debriefing
without compromising other responsibilities.
Highlight Efficiency: Emphasize how efficient and targeted simulation training can be in improving skills and reducing long-
term errors, ultimately saving time.
Bridging Knowledge and Skill Gaps:
Hands-On Training: Include practical, hands-on activities in the session to help attendees gain confidence in designing and
facilitating simulations.
Continuous Learning: Encourage continuous professional development through workshops, online courses, and
mentorship programs focused on simulation-based education.
Provide Resources: Offer resources such as templates, guidelines, and access to online communities for ongoing support
and knowledge sharing.
Securing Institutional Support:
Advocacy: Equip attendees with strategies to advocate for interdisciplinary training within their institutions, emphasizing its
alignment with accreditation standards and quality improvement goals.
Leadership Engagement: Provide examples of how to engage institutional leaders and demonstrate the ROI (Return on
Investment) of interdisciplinary training programs.
Policy Integration: Suggest ways to integrate interdisciplinary collaboration into institutional policies and training
requirements.
Session Design to Address Barriers
Interactive Elements:
Stakeholder Engagement Exercises: Role-playing activities to practice engaging and persuading stakeholders.
Resource Management Workshops: Discussions and group activities focused on finding and managing resources for
simulation training.
Evidence-Based Presentations:
Present case studies and data demonstrating the effectiveness of interdisciplinary training in improving patient care and
reducing errors.
Practical Hands-On Activities:
Scenario development and debriefing practice to build confidence and competence in simulation design and facilitation.
Networking and Support:
Provide opportunities for attendees to network and form support groups for ongoing collaboration and resource sharing.
Advocacy Training:
Sessions on how to advocate for interdisciplinary training within their institutions, including tips on presenting to leadership
and writing proposals for funding.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Short, focused presentation.
Best Practices Sharing.
Small groups interactive learning
Simulation Demonstration and Interdisciplinary Scenario
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Interactive Session Outline: "Simulation Design for Effective Interdisciplinary Collaboration During High Acuity Patient
Encounters"
Session Overview
This condensed 40-minute session is designed to equip medical educators and healthcare leaders with the essentials for
developing and implementing simulation scenarios that promote effective interdisciplinary collaboration during high-acuity
patient encounters. The session addresses issues of tribalism and miscommunication, contributing to errors in high-stakes
environments.
Session Objectives (Utilizing Bloom's Taxonomy)
Remembering: Identify the significance of interdisciplinary collaboration in high-acuity settings.
Understanding: Explain the key principles of designing effective simulation scenarios.
Applying: Develop and outline a brief simulation scenario focusing on a high-acuity patient encounter.
Analyzing: Examine how tribalism and miscommunication contribute to errors in high-stakes environments.
Evaluating: Assess and critique the effectiveness of simulation scenarios in fostering teamwork and high-quality patient
care.
Creating: Design debriefing techniques that enhance learning outcomes and train advocates for interdisciplinary
communication.
Session Agenda (40 minutes)
1. Introduction and Objectives (5 minutes)
Welcome and introductions
Overview of session objectives
2. Importance of Interdisciplinary Collaboration (5 minutes)
Brief presentation on the benefits and challenges of interdisciplinary collaboration in high-acuity patient care
Discuss how tribalism and miscommunication can lead to errors
Interactive Q&A session
3. Principles of Simulation Design (10 minutes)
Overview of essential components of effective simulation design:
Learning objectives
Scenario development
Role assignments
Simulation environment setup
Quick group discussion on best practices
4. Scenario Development Activity (10 minutes)
Hands-on activity: In small groups, outline a brief simulation scenario focusing on a high-acuity patient encounter
Define learning objectives
Create a patient case
Outline roles and responsibilities
Quick presentations of scenarios and brief feedback
5. Debriefing Techniques (5 minutes)
Presentation on key debriefing techniques:
Debriefing with Good Judgment
Plus-Delta
Advocacy-Inquiry
Quick role-playing exercise: Practice a debriefing technique
6. Wrap-Up (5 minutes)
Summary of key takeaways
Q&A and closing remarks
Target Audience
Medical Educators: Focus on improving interdisciplinary collaboration and simulation design principles.
Hospital Administrators: Understand the value of interdisciplinary simulations in enhancing patient care and reducing
errors.
Quality Assurance Professionals: Learn how simulations can improve quality and reduce errors.
Risk Managers: Explore simulation-based training to minimize risks associated with miscommunication.
Chief Residents: Gain skills in designing and facilitating simulations for residents.
Core Faculty: Enhance the ability to create educational simulation scenarios.
Educators: Develop comprehensive simulation scenarios and debriefing strategies.
Potential Barriers and Strategies
Resistance to Change: Engage stakeholders, show evidence, create a safe learning environment.
Lack of Resources: Encourage resource sharing, seek funding, use low-cost alternatives.
Time Constraints: Integrate training into existing schedules, emphasize efficiency.
Knowledge and Skill Gaps: Hands-on training, continuous learning, provide resources.
Institutional Support: Advocacy, leadership engagement, policy integration.
Educational Methods, Formats, Tools, and Approaches
Interactive Lectures: Short presentations, Q&A sessions.
Hands-On Workshops: Scenario development, debriefing practice.
Group Discussions and Breakout Sessions: Best practices sharing, problem-solving exercises.
Live Demonstrations: Simulation demonstrations, video analysis.
Role-Playing: Stakeholder engagement, interdisciplinary scenarios.
Simulation Equipment and Technology: High-fidelity simulators, simulation software.
Educational Resources: Templates, guidelines, resource lists.
Feedback Mechanisms: Peer and instructor feedback.
Continuous Learning Support: Follow-up sessions, online communities.
Advocacy and Implementation Strategies: Advocacy training, implementation plans.
(101) Submission ID#1877357
The Paradox of the Depressed Resident: Reducing Stigma for Help-Seeking
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Gregory Guldner – HCA Healthcare
Email: gregory.guldner@hcahealthcare.com
Office Phone: (951) 847-8091
Presenter(s)
Gregory Guldner, MD, MS
Vice President of Academic Affairs
HCA Healthcare
Role: Presenter
Jason Siegel, PhD
Professor of Psychology
Claremont Graduate University
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. identify the typical barriers that residents and fellows face in obtaining mental health services
2. implement at their institutions several highly practical interventions found to reduce stigma and
increase mental health services use
3. identify current well-meaning practices that may be causing unintended harm to depressed residents
4.
5.
Session Description
The evidence for resident distress is abundant and undisputed. Yet studies of resident use of mental health
services demonstrate an extremely low utilization, even when depression rates are high. Typically, institutions
provide mental health services or “safety net” programs, either through on-site psychologists or employee
assistance programs. Residents are then encouraged to attend “if you need help;” an approach often called
“opt-in.” Although institutions have built these programs, residents by and large do not come to use them. This
session combines the decades long research of psychologists from Claremont Graduate University, who
specialize in reducing stigma and improving mental health help-seeking, and the results of a bundle of
practical interventions that increased resident use of mental health services by 350% compared to the typical
“opt-in” approach. Participants of this session will leave with several practical interventions they can employ
today designed to increase resident help-seeking and reduce stigma around mental health services.
Target Audience
Program Directors, Designated Institutional Officials, Human Resources Administration, GME administrators,
Wellness Champions
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Research has shown very low rates of utilization of mental health services by residents despite high rates of psychological
distress. These barriers to help-seeking have not been effectively addressed in the GME community even as the
knowledge behind help-seeking behavior and stigma reduction has grown.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We would like to see institutions implement specific strategies to help reduce barriers to help-seeking and minimize stigma
associated with mental health help-seeking among residents and fellows. Ultimately resulting in increased use of pre-
existing mental health options at institutions.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The typical barrier to improving mental health help-seeking is a lack of understanding of both the barriers that exist for
residents/fellows to self-initiate mental health care and the current state of the science around help-seeking optimization.
Understanding specific actionable (and inexpensive) ways of increasing help-seeking will improve overall well-being of the
residents and minimize the risk of catastrophic outcomes such as resident/fellow suicide.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The speakers will begin with a discussion of the state of resident wellbeing followed by research on the rate of mental
health services use among trainees. We will then discuss the general population and resident specific barriers to seeking
help. A bundle of interventions that reduce stigma and improve help-seeking will be discussed, including how to implement
these in your institution. This will lead to a review of the results of our mental health initiative that employed several
elements of this bundle resulting in a 350% increase in use of mental health services. We will end with a question and
answer session.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction - 2 minutes
Presentation - Resident distress and use of mental health services – 5 min
Audience Response System – Audience to suggest resident barriers to help-seeking – 3 min
Discussion of barriers to resident use of mental health services. – 10 min
Audience Participation – Think & Pair – what does your institution do to promote use of mental health services? – 5 min
Discussion of interventions that can reduce stigma Opt-out vs opt-in – 5 min
Personalizing through introductions – 3 min
Pro-social impact (mis-targeting) – helping team members / helping patients - 5 min
Education on licensure / credentialing issues – therapy as curriculum – 5 min
Virtual vs in person therapy – 5 min
Using nearby clinical psych programs - 2 min
Results of our intervention bundle – 5 min
Summary – 5 min
Question and Answer – 15 min(Times can be adjusted based on allotted time slot)
(102) Submission ID#1877362
Developing a sustainable approach to workplace well-being: Lessons from an award-winning program.
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Gregory Guldner – HCA Healthcare
Email: gregory.guldner@hcahealthcare.com
Office Phone: (951) 847-8091
Presenter(s)
Gregory Guldner, MD, MS
Vice President of Academic Affairs
HCA Healthcare
Role: Presenter
Jason An, MD
Program Director and DIO
Riverside Community Hospital
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. apply job-demands-resource theory and self-determination theory to analyze and understand what
actions in the teaching hospital and clinics will improve or impair the work and learning environment
for residents and faculty.
2. initiate specific actions at their home institutions and programs that will create optimal work and
learning environments that support well-being.
3. instill a unified language, shared beliefs, values, and social practices to create a culture of well-being
that is sustainable beyond ice cream socials and wellness lectures.
4.
5.
Session Description
Multiple interventions have been studied for improving resident and faculty well-being, but many have limited
impact and sustainability over time. This session reviews the specific well-being interventions that led to the
highly successful development and maintenance of a "culture of wellness" at the teaching hospital that won
the American College of Emergency Physician's National EM Wellness Center of Excellence Award in2022.
Prior to the matching their first resident class, this program paired with psychologists from Claremont
Graduate University, one of the founding sites for positive psychology, and built on scientific principles in the
organizational psychology literature to create a program which ultimately showed five years of near perfect
ACGME resident surveys, very high faculty retention, and recruiting of residents from top medical schools.
This session will review the scientific underpinnings that inform this approach - Job-Demands-Resource
Theory and Self-Determination Theory - then discuss specific implementation actions that align with the
science and have demonstrated efficacy in both the general workforce and specifically with residents and
fellows. At the end of this session, learners will be able to use insights from two highly researched theories of
workplace well-being to develop specific actions at their own institutions to create sustained changes in the
work and learning environment and improve resident and faculty well-being.
Target Audience
Directors, Program Coordinators, Designated Institutional Officials, Institutional Coordinators, Wellness
Champions
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Currently the majority of efforts at improving well-being for the GME team revolve around social event planning and
psychological skills building efforts (resiliency training, meditation, grit, coaching, etc.). However, these have made little if
any progress on measures of well-being in residents and fellows. The National Academy of Medicine has proposed that
organizations need to focus on organizational efforts at improving well-being rather than those focused on the individuals.
Organizational psychologists have evidence-based approaches implement these efforts though they are not well known in
the GME world.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Those leaders within organizations implement specific approaches to optimizing the work and learning environment rather
than solely focusing on psychological skills building and social event planning.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Change is predicted by Motivation, Ability, and Prompting (BJ Fogg). We believe the motivation exists to improve well-
being but the ability and prompting is often absent. Organizations want to optimize their work and learning environment but
do not know how to do so. By sharing specific actionable interventions that have worked at this award winning program
organizations can overcome the "ability" hurdle. We will also address ways of "prompting" that help prevent stagnation that
can occur when motivated and able organizations still fail to implement change.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The speakers will begin with a motivational story describing the success of a deliberate well-being approach on creating
positive learning environments for residents and faculty. The speakers will then teach the underlying theories used to build
this successful culture. With each aspect of the theory the speakers will discuss practical implementation and demonstrate
how these techniques work. We will touch on our efforts to implement this approach at 69 other teaching hospitals and
then close with an audience question and answer session.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction - 2 minutes Story of the pilot program – 3 minutesWhat does “culture” mean? – 2 minutesIntroduction to Job-
Demands-Resources (JDR) theory – 3 minutesIntroduction to Self-Determination Theory (SDT) – 5 minutesEvidence for
the role of SDT in well-being – 5 minutes Presentation - Implementing JDR in the workplace (5 min)Promoting Autonomy
(10 min)Presentation – strategies that support autonomyDemonstration of thwarting and supporting autonomy Promoting
Belonging (5 min)Presentation – strategies that support belonging
(103) Submission ID#1877388
From Boomers to Zoomers: Engaging Every Generation in Medical Learning
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Mara Hoffert – Henry Ford Health
Email: mhoffer1@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (248) 866-8686
Cell Phone: (248) 866-8686
Presenter(s)
Mara M. Hoffert, Phd
Director, GME Medical Education Instructional Design and Learning Systems & Resources
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Christie Morgan, MD
Sr. Staff Surgeon, Dept Otolaryngology & Dir. GME QI/PS
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the distinct traits of different generations and their influence on teaching and learning
preferences.
2. Explore best instructional practices, grounded in adult learning theory, to maximize learning outcomes
across generational cohorts.
3. 3. Gain skills to leverage active engagement, technology integration, and reflective methods to
enhance instructional effectiveness in both the procedural and didactic learning environments.
4.
5.
Session Description
Discover the essential elements of effective medical education across generations in this insightful session.
Facilitators will discuss the nuanced learning styles, preferences, and expectations of diverse generational
cohorts, crucial for optimizing instructional outcomes. In this session, we will unravel stereotypes and gain a
deeper understanding of learners’ unique needs across generations. Participants will explore best instructional
practices, grounded in adult learning theory, to enhance education for all learners. Through interactive
experiences, participants will acquire skills for maximizing active engagement, integrating technology, and
employing reflective techniques in both procedural and didactic settings. Participants will leave this session
with actionable strategies to bridge generational divides, engaging all learners in a transformative medical
education experience for all.
Target Audience
This session will benefit Faculty Physicians; Associate Program Directors; Program Directors; Chiefs of
Departments; Directors, Administrators, and Coordinators of Graduate Medical Education; Chief Academic
Officers; and DIOs by providing them with a comprehensive understanding of generational learning styles and
learning preferences across Baby Boomers, Gen Xers, Millennials, and Generation Z. Participants will be
empowered to apply best instructional practices for adult learners from all generations. Through engaging in
this session, participants will be better able to maximize learning outcomes for all learners.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Faculty physicians in graduate medical education are a critical component in the development of clinical skills and
knowledge for residents and fellows. Yet even for skilled medical educators, generational differences between faculty and
trainees can lead to a mismatch between instructional delivery and learning preferences. Variations in expectations,
communication styles, and preferred learning modalities between faculty and learners can hinder the effectiveness of
medical education. This session addresses critical professional practice gaps in medical education that can arise when
these generational differences are encountered. Developed with the input of educational leaders, this session will explore
best instructional practices, grounded in adult learning theory, that will maximize learning outcomes across generational
cohorts. Content in this session supports Common Program Requirements of the Accreditation Council for Graduate
Medical Education (ACGME) and supports growth in the subcompetencies assessed by the ACGME Clinician Educator
Milestones. Participants will leave equipped with a comprehensive understanding of the distinct traits of different
generational cohorts and their influence on teaching and learning preferences. The session will empower participants with
strategies for leveraging active engagement, technology integration, and reflective methods to enhance instructional
effectiveness in both the procedural and didactic learning environments. Armed with this knowledge, participants will leave
with the ability to apply instructional strategies that will optimize learning for individuals from all generational cohorts.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will provide participants with knowledge and skills for optimizing learning across generational cohorts.
Participants will gain a deeper understanding of how generational context can influence teaching and learning preferences.
They will gain understanding of how differences in communication styles, expectations, and preferred learning modalities
can lead to a mismatch between instructional delivery and engagement. Participants will explore instructional strategies
designed to maximize learning outcomes across generational cohorts. This session will equip participants with skills for
leveraging active engagement, technology integration, and reflective techniques in procedural and didactic instruction.
Participants will leave empowered with concrete active learning resources and strategies for bridging the gap across
generations.
Additionally, participants will show growth in the subcompetencies of the ACGME Clinician Educator Milestones including:
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Learning Environment, Leadership Skills, Educational Theory and Practice, and
Reflective Practice and Commitment to Personal Growth. Ultimately, this session will enable participants to become more
effective educators, leading to improved educational outcomes and more effective clinical and procedural teaching within
their home institutions.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
A potential barrier which might prevent participants from achieving the change desired is time. Physicians may find it
challenging to allocate time for implementing new educational strategies due to their existing workload and responsibilities.
To be successful in making changes in their educational approach, participants will need to thoughtfully consider how they
will shift their educational practice, to reflect on encounters, to assess the effectiveness of strategies they currently use,
and set goals for further refinement.
To address the perceived barrier of time, this session will equip participants with practical and efficient strategies and
resources which can be easily implemented. Participants will have the opportunity to practice application of these
strategies through small group activities and discussion. During the session, participants will establish specific, actionable
goals for the implementation of these strategies and leave with a concrete plan for doing so. They will also leave with
resources to easily modify existing lessons. This will greatly increase their ability to efficiently utilize what was learned in
the session, even when time is at a premium.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This will be an interactive session comprised of micro-lessons, small group activities, small group discussions, and Q&A. A
brief micro-lesson will introduce learners to the learning styles, preferences, and expectations of diverse generational
cohorts. Participants will engage in small group discussion to consider generational stereotypes and gain a deeper
understanding of learner’s needs across generations. Additionally, participants will be provided with strategies for
enhancing instructional practices and engagement of all learners. Through interactive experiences, participants will
practice implementing skills for maximizing active engagement, integrating technology, and employing reflective
techniques in both procedural and didactic settings. Time will be provided for addressing questions related to putting these
educational strategies into practice.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction –4 minutes
Background and theory – 5 minutes
Discussion of generational context and impact on learning styles – 5 minutes
Promoting active learning – 4 minutes
Group work and practice- 8 minutes
Integrating technology – 4 minutes
Group work and practice – 8 minutes
Reflective techniques – 4 minutes
Group work and practice – 8 minutes
Summary- 2 minutes
Question and answer session – 3 minutes
(104) Submission ID#1877452
Safety in Numbers - Partnerships Needed to Develop a Remediation Plan for Progression
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Samantha Cascone
Email: comarnitskys@upmc.edu
Presenter(s)
Samantha Cascone, MPA
Vice President, Medical Education
UPMC
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Be able to articulate to the necessary entities within their organization why a relationship with GME,
Human Resources, and Legal Counsel can vastly improve the remediation process.
2. Modify the provided formula for a transparent remediation process to develop a method applicable to
their home institution.
3. Create a template to utilize for documenting remediation needs that can be easily modified for
individual learners.
4.
5.
Session Description
Remediation conversations continue to vex Program Leaders because, for many, the need occurs infrequent
enough to feel comfortable in a method for providing a strong remediation discussion. Through a partnership
with Medical Education Leadership, Human Resources, and Legal Counsel, UPMC has developed a formula
that has led to increased confidence and success in implementing remediations plans. In standardizing the
formula while focusing on the concerning behaviors, the trainee is able to clearly understand the deficit, the
need for the remediation, and the required outcomes needed to continue on a trajectory of success within the
training program. Additionally, the Program Director's partnership with these institutional entities establishes
consistency in approach allowing the Program Director to maintain the supportive relationship with the trainee.
This method has decreased the resistance to remediation plans, increased the documentation process, and
reduced the preparation required by the clinical leadership.
Target Audience
This session will provide resources to any individual engaged in the remediation process - Program Leaders,
Institutional Leaders, and Core Faculty.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Remediation continues to be an annual topic because often we are focusing on the work the Program Director needs to
accomplish (training faculty, providing feedback, developing plans, etc.). To place all the burden on the Program Director is
unrealistic and the creation of the plan/delivery of the conversation is extremely dependent (frankly) on the Program
Director's opinions and personality. This presentation will focus on how to make these conversations about the facts and
observations to help the trainee truly understand the need but also minimize the additional paperwork to help gain the buy-
in of the Program Leadership.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
If I can encourage institutional leaders to cultivate the relationship between Human Resources and Legal Counsel to
develop a stronger process for supporting the Program Director for remediation plans, I will have provided a springboard
for changing a culture of remediation.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Many are resistant to this concept because of the concern that trainees are intimidated by including individuals outside of
the Program Leadership in the remediation process. The detriment, though, is to the trainee. For many, not including these
additional groups create barriers to trainees' success: unclear expectations, lack of knowledge of the potential outcomes,
abrupt change in tone if success is not met, etc.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Most of this presentation will be provided through narrative of trail and errors (which one person's error may be another
person's treasure) to outline the need and provide resources to develop their own plan.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
The workshop will include the background of implementing the current plan (including failures/change in
partnerships/lessons learned). This will lead into the current outline of how we create a remediation plan from the initial
meeting with GME Leadership, review of the documentation, creation of the notification letter/plan, and meeting with the
trainee. The group will then work through exercises to adjust the template provided to their institution in order to have a
draft document upon completion. Finally we will walk through a few larger scale needs that this process supports
consistently with all plans (mental health support, patient safety risks, documentation for legal action).
(105) Submission ID#1877461
Visual Diagnosis Education - A Trip to the Art Museum
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Nathaniel Minnick – Riverside Regional Medical Center
Email: nathaniel.minnick@rivhs.com
Office Phone: (757) 594-3945
Presenter(s)
Sydney Keever, n/a
Program Coordinator - Transitional Year
Riverside Regional Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Meredith Hays, DO
Program Director - Internal Medicine
Riverside Regional Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand why art can develop visual literacy
2. Recognize how improved visual literacy can improve interpersonal dynamics
3. Consider steps toward implementing a curriculum
4. Think about tricks for success and things to avoid
5.
Session Description
We took residents to an art museum to teach visual literacy. Plenty of papers discuss the use of art for
teaching medical students, fewer papers exist for residents. Visual literacy can aid residents in diagnosis as
well as interactions with patients and their families. This session explains how to think about incorporating
structured sessions utilizing art, putting together a curriculum, tips for success, and pitfalls to avoid.
Target Audience
Program Directors, program coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
This presentation presents a novel curriculum that teaches an important skill in a non-clinical environment.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session introduces visual literacy education for residents, with the intent that it will improve their professional
interactions.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The biggest barrier is getting art specialists on board. The session discusses how we engaged museum administration to
bring their expertise to our residents.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
In addition to a slide show, we will provide examples of what the residents had to experience - one group and one
individual example
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Flipping from standard presentations, the first section would include a work of art with the intent for the audience to
individually interpret, with specific prompts. This will open the audience up to understand the intent of the session. Then
the presenters discuss what they did to engage art museum administration, develop the curriculum, what worked and what
needed change. They will end with another work of art, this time with a group-engaging aspect.
(106) Submission ID#1877479
Admin is always saying "Agile", but what do they mean? How to bring "Agile" to Your Program, Department,
and Role
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Nathaniel Minnick – Riverside Regional Medical Center
Email: nathaniel.minnick@rivhs.com
Office Phone: (757) 594-3945
Presenter(s)
Nathaniel Minnick, DO
Associate Director of Medical Education
Riverside Regional Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Heather Riordan, MBA
GME Institutional Manager
Riverside Regional Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand how Agile fits in a GME context
2. Understand what "Scrum" and "Kanban" mean, how they are already in place within their health
system, and how Scrum contrasts with "Waterfall" task management
3. Create "User Stories" for an initiative they want to see move forward, whether personal or
departmental
4. Ask questions differently in their next conflict that can change the approach for resolution in a more
collaborative manner
5.
Session Description
The business framework of "being agile" is often confused with cliches like, "Move fast and break things."
Agile methodologies use values, principles, and practices that are an alternative to command-and-control-
style of management. "Agile" means more than being quick, and learning the tenants can make your
coordinator job easier, your program direction more flexible, and your department administration more
efficient. This session explains Agile Methodology, explains how to implement its practices in a GME world,
and offers impactful ways to bring them to your job role.
Target Audience
Anyone who ever watched a project or initiative go nowhere fast or those who are tired of thinking, "Why can't
we get this idea off the ground?" Professionals who want additional tools to their management toolkit,
including coordinators who need to manage their residents and faculty.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
This presentation brings clarity and definition to the term "Agile." This can upskill the audience by bringing managerial
techniques infrequently taught outside of MBA classes. The session can provide some simple examples that can make
addressing complicated GME problems more grounded.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will improve the managerial toolbox of the audience, especially those who don't have experience with Agile, or
those who don't have access to professional development opportunities for management development.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
One person will fight an uphill battle to change their organizational mindset toward Agile. The biggest barrier is established
culture. This session will provide a small chisel for the learner to start chipping away at that monolith, and maybe
encourage them to learn more so that they develop a bigger chisel. The hope is that the easily imparted ideas from the
session can start a change.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Powerpoint mostly. Individuals will have to create three small "user stories" using "Gherkin syntax" that will be defined. We
will have self-written tasks for the audience, and a work sheet that they can track parallel processes of our information and
their department. If the room layout allows easy group discussion, we would utilize it. The break out tasks are designed to
allow group or individual work, depending on the room.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Powerpoint defining Agile, Scrum, Kanban. Examples of how common software, with screenshots (for us, Microsoft
Teams), allows for the creation of a Kanban board or Scrum board, and how it can improve individual or team organization
on complex tasks. After we introduce Scrum, individuals will be asked to create "User stories" that can be shared out loud
with the rest of the audience. This will help formalize how common tasks can integrate with Scrum. We will show some of
the ways that Agile and Scrum improved our work flow - common things such as GME website overhaul, complex QI
projects, and more. We will also explain ways to avoid disorganization that can occur with Scrum methods. We will end
with individuals practicing a weighting method for their "User Stories" as a way to help them understand how to prioritize
their work tasks. Our goal is to break up the session and not have long tracks of us talking.
(107) Submission ID#1877529
The Missing Link: Define Your Role as Director in GME
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Tery Noseworthy – Boston Children's Hospital
Email: tery.noseworthy@childrens.harvard.edu
Office Phone: (617) 355-6000
Cell Phone: (978) 290-9208
Presenter(s)
Tery Noseworthy, C-TAGME
Director, Graduate Medical Education
Boston Children's Hospital
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Define the key responsibilities of a GME Director.
2. Describe ways to define your identity as a director.
3. Employ strategies to establish your role.
4. Assess ways to ensure professional growth and development in your role.
5. Connect with other GME Directors.
Session Description
The ACGME recognizes many roles in GME - but not the director. You're not the DIO, but you're not the
institutional coordinator either. There are no institutional requirements telling you or anyone else what your job
is supposed to be, yet your role is critical in ensuring that the institution's training programs meet accreditation
standards and provide high-quality education to the trainees at your institution. Learn how to establish your
role as a key member of the institutional GME leadership team.
Target Audience
Directors of GME in institutional GME Offices
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The lack of recognition by the ACGME and some institutions of the importance of the role of the GME director. I want to
help people identify ways to define their role and be successful in their role.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Identifying ways to establish their role as director and as part of the GME leadership team, ensuring the best oversight of
the institution's training programs and support of their trainees
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Buy in from institutional leadership, faculty, regulatory bodies. My presentation will discuss ways to overcome these
barriers, address concerns and demonstrate competence.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
didactics, small group discussion, brief activity
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Icebreaker and Introduction: 5 minutes
Overview of roles and responsibilities in GME: 5 minutes
Where does the director fit in: 10 minutes
Activity: discuss with neighbors how you see yourself as director: 5 minutes
How to work with DIO to establish your role/responsibilities: 10 minutes
Activity: Identify one thing you will discuss with DIO/other leadership to demonstrate your role: 5 minutes
Dealing with pushback and lack of support and questions: 10 minutes
(108) Submission ID#1877533
Leveraging the power of peer influence: Houston Methodist Association of Coordinators
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Gabriela Echevarria – Houston Methodist
Email: gechevarria@houstonmethodist.org
Office Phone: (713) 441-8236
Cell Phone: (929) 208-5467
Presenter(s)
Gabriela Echevarria, MPA
Manager
Houston Methodist
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify the benefits of a program coordinator/administrator group
2. Describe the basic structure of a program coordinator/administrator group
3. Identify the common goals that GME and program coordinators/administrators can work together on
for the success of GME programs.
4. Identify the frequency of GME office and Program Coordinator/administrator group check-ins to foster
and environment of collaboration
5.
Session Description
Fostering an effective working relationship between program coordinators and GME office.
Target Audience
Coordinators, administrators, and GME leadership
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
I would like to share how GME offices can benefit from strong program coordinator/administrator leadership to further the
institutional educational agenda
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
I would like to show how including program coordinators/administrators as part of the operations of GME can benefit
program administration
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Leadership may oppose the creation of this type of group. Showing an organized plan for ownership and oversight
provides a structure that leadership can get behind.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Goal setting tools and a basic document to structure an organized group.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. 2 minutes of introduction houston methodist GME
2. 2 minutes of how the program coordinator group started
3. 5 minutes of the evolution of the group from start to present day. How the administration has changed.
4. 20 minutes discussing Steps to change the group to benefit programs and further the institutional mission.
5. 10 minutes Presenting tools to establish common goals and a structure for the group.
6. 7 minutes of discussions to identify the of your institution in terms of professional development and/or accreditation
needs. And drafting a structure for the group's oversight and mission.
(109) Submission ID#1877550
How To Effectively Navigate Process Change
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: amy mcCormick – HCA
Email: AMY.MCCORMICK@HCAHEALTHCARE.COM
Office Phone: (352) 540-1592
Presenter(s)
Amy McCormick, MBA
Division Director of GME
HCA
Role: Presenter
Sam Baker, JD
Assistant Vice President of GME
HCA
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. 1. Our presentation will focus on major process change and how to comfortably navigate that using an
example of a major process change we have recently executed (overhauling contract process) at our
institution. It will address the following key areas of professional practice: standardized processes, risk
management, efficiency, follow-through, and communication.
2. 2. Our session will empower attendees to feel confident in navigating change and taking ownership of
the entire process from start to finish.
3.
4.
5.
Session Description
The presentation will focus on major process change and how to comfortably navigate that using an example
of a major process change we have recently executed (overhauling contract process) at our institution. It will
address the following key areas of professional practice: standardized processes, risk management,
efficiency, follow-through, and communication.
Target Audience
COPAC, Directors, Program Administrators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
1. Our presentation will focus on major process change and how to comfortably navigate that using an example of a major
process change we have recently executed (overhauling contract process) at our institution. It will address the following
key areas of professional practice: standardized processes, risk management, efficiency, follow-through, and
communication.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
2. Our session will empower attendees to feel confident in navigating change and taking ownership of the entire process
from start to finish.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
3. Potential barriers, whether real or perceived, that could hinder attendees from achieving the desired change include
stakeholder buy-in and the availability of resources. To overcome these challenges, our session will emphasize effective
and transparent communication methods. Additionally, we will discuss strategies for championing your ideas with
individuals before presenting them to a larger group, recognizing that it is often easier to persuade people one-on-one than
in a group setting.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
4. Our presentation will employ several methods to facilitate learning and drive change, including PowerPoint slides, Slido
and group discussion that dissects a real-life example using our process change roadmap.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5. Presentation outline:
• Setting Goals/Intentions: Effectively Drive Change in Your Role (2 minutes)
• Using Slido for Audience Engagement: Background Questions (5 minutes)
• Roadmap of Change (30 minutes)
o Identifying the Problem:
Illustrating Process Change with Our Contract Example
o Identifying Stakeholders and Obstacles:
Using Our Contract Example to Highlight Stakeholders and Challenges
o Overcoming Obstacles:
Addressing Political Challenges
Discussing Specific Obstacles Overcome in Our Process Creation
• Group Discussion: Silly Example Exercise with Debrief (13 minutes)
• Question and Answer Session (5 minutes)
(110) Submission ID#1877565
Teaming with Tinkertoy (TM)
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Robert Flora – McLaren Health Care
Email: robert.flora@mclaren.org
Office Phone: (810) 342-1147
Cell Phone: (330) 283-4957
Presenter(s)
Robert Flora, MD, MBA, MPH
Chief Academic Officer/ VP of Academic Affairs
McLaren Health Care
Role: Presenter
Juliet Kamidoi, TAGME
Manager Medical Education
McLaren Health Care/ McLaren Flint
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. introduce interns and new fellows to the concepts of teams during intern orientation.
2. introduce the interactions between primary and consultant teams and their interaction
3. introduce the TeamSTEPPS framework
4. develop a team mindset
5. help contribute to the CLER Teaming focus area
Session Description
As a follow up to an AHME poster session presentation in 2024, we would like to perform the activity exercise
and demonstrate how it contributes to the "Teaming" focus are of the CLER program. There was interest from
attendees on how to perform it. The first use of Tinkertoy(TM) in 1982 by Lezak was to evaluate cognitive
function. It has been adapted for use in grade schools, business schools, assessments of group/
management/ leadership skills and quality management. Over ten years it has been started at Ascension
Providence and then refined at McLaren Health Care. It introduces teaming techniques, teamwork mindset,
and simulation of a care team in the hospital. An integration of the TeamSTEPPS model also occurs.It occurs
at intern and fellow orientation every year.
Target Audience
DIOs, PDs, Faculty, Psychologists, GME Managers, Residency Coordinators, Others
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Develop a teaming mindset and meeting the CLER Teaming focus area.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Performance as high reliability teams. Contributing to teaming, quality, professionalism and patient safety CLER focus
areas.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
No barriers other than finding and purchasing Tinkertoys.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Simulation of exercise
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1) Will ship in 20 tinkertoy sets
2) Perform exercise
3) Debrief with observers
4) Quick introduction on TeamSTEPPS framework
(111) Submission ID#1877582
Communication that Counts: How to Hear and Be Heard
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Kimberly Ranagan
Email: kranagan@northwell.edu
Presenter(s)
Kimberly Ranagan, C-TAGME
Lead Medical Education Specialist
Northwell Health
Role: Presenter
Kristina Wertheimer, n/a
Medical Education Specialist
Northwell Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. In this session, participants will explore the four communication styles identified by Mark Murphy. By
reviewing and understanding these styles, participants will be equipped with the knowledge to identify
and recognize the characteristics associated with each style.
2. Gain insight into the importance of trust as the foundation of strong working relationships and its
impact on collaboration, productivity, and job satisfaction
3. Develop skills required to navigate challenging conversations and conflicts in a constructive and
proactive manner.
4.
5.
Session Description
Effective communication plays a pivotal role in fostering strong relationships, building trust, and establishing
healthy boundaries. In this session, we will explore the art of communication and its impact on professional
success. According to Mark Murphy, the founder of leadership IQ and New York Times bestselling author,
there are four communication styles. Through practical strategies, insightful discussions, and engaging
activities, participants will learn how to not only be heard, but how to actively hear others. During this session,
we will delve into the importance of trust as a foundation for effective collaboration and discuss strategies to
cultivate trust within working relationships. We will explore the four communication styles identified by Murphy;
analytical communicator, intuitive communicator, functional communicator and personal communicator.
Through the education and exploration of these communication styles, we will work to enhance clarity, active
listening, and assertiveness in interactions. Join us for this dynamic session to sharpen your communication
skills and build a strong rapport within your working relationships. Discover how effective communication truly
counts when it comes to fostering trust and nurturing a productive working relationship.
Target Audience
The target audience is junior and senior coordinators at the program and institutional level.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The professional practice gaps that we wish to address with our presentation are lack of awareness of communication
styles, limited skills in adapting communication styles and inadequate conflict resolution strategies. Many program
coordinators may not have a comprehensive understanding of different communication styles and their impact on
professional relationships. This gap can lead to miscommunication, misunderstandings, and ineffective collaboration. Our
presentation aims to bridge this gap by exploring different communication styles and introducing recommendations on how
to approach conversations and interactions to create more meaningful connections. By addressing these professional
practice gaps, our presentation seeks to empower participants to develop a deeper understanding of communication
styles, establish and communicate boundaries effectively, adapt their communication approaches, and navigate conflicts in
a constructive manner. Ultimately, the goal is to enhance participants' competence and outcomes in their interactions,
fostering trust, collaboration, and professional growth.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Through our session we aim to create specific changes in participants competence by enhancing their communication
competence, providing them the ability to strengthen their skills in relationship building and trust and increase their conflict
resolution abilities. By focusing on these specific changes, our session aims to aid participants in increased well-being, job
satisfaction, and positive outcomes. Ultimately, the goal is to create a positive and productive working environment that
fosters collaboration, growth, and mutual success.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
There can be several potential barriers, both real and perceived, that might prevent attendees from achieving the desired
changes. Some of these barriers are lack of comprehensive understanding of different communication styles, resistance to
change and fear of vulnerability. The reluctance or discomfort of a program coordinator in having vulnerable conversations
can be a barrier to achieving effective communication and building trust in their professional relationship. This barrier can
stem from various factors, such as fear of repercussions, a power dynamic, concerns about judgment, or a lack of
psychological safety. To address this barrier, this session will prioritize creating a safe space for participants to share their
concerns and vulnerabilities, normalize vulnerability by emphasizing that vulnerability is a natural part of human interaction
and is essential for establishing genuine connections, and equip participants with practical tools and techniques for
navigating vulnerable conversations. This can include strategies for setting the right tone, active listening, empathy, and
framing difficult conversations constructively. By providing participants with actionable guidance, they will gain confidence
and a sense of preparedness to engage in such conversations.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
To facilitate change and learning during the session we will employ a variety of educational methods. To enhance the
interactive presentations, we will utilize worksheets to aid us in providing education and comprehensive understanding of
the four communication styles. We will also encourage attendees to actively participate in group discussions and sharing
sessions. This will allow them to reflect on their experiences, share challenges and successes, and learn from one
another's perspectives. These discussions provide a platform for peer learning. By actively participating in these activities,
participants gain practical skills and build confidence.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
The 50 minutes will be used in portion to review didactic content to provide education to the audience on the four
communication styles. In addition to the didactic content, the audience will be provided the opportunity to complete an
education worksheet to learn their primary communication style, as well as a group discussion opportunity to explore how
to approach specific scenarios/ conversations dependent on the other person's communication style.
(112) Submission ID#1877596
Healthy Habits Hub - A Map to Resident Wellness
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Amanda Auer-Porch
Email: aueral@upmc.edu
Office Phone: (412) 595-4841
Presenter(s)
Amanda L. Auer-Porch, n/a
Academic Manager
Role: Presenter
Kelsey Labishak, MS
Academic Manager
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Discuss the importance and need of resident wellness in every program
2. Demonstrate methods to prevent resident burnout using educational, social, mental, financial, lifestyle,
and physical wellness.
3. Using an open forum, allow the audience to provide techniques that work for their program
4.
5.
Session Description
In recent years, we have witnessed an alarming increase in burnout, depression, and illness during residency
training. This data has primarily come from the ACGME survey results regarding wellbeing. During our
session, learners will be engaged directly to become familiar with several techniques on improving the
Wellness of Residents during their training. The purpose of our session is to share our methods and open the
floor for the audience to share strategies they use at their program. This session will workshop in which we all
learn from each other and walk away with ideas on how to improve the wellness of our trainees.
Target Audience
New and experienced program managers and coordinators will be our target audience.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Our current ACGME Survey shows a high number of resident burnout, not only with our program, but nationally. Our
desired outcome would be to improve these numbers across the country and to provide better health and minds to our
trainees.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We would like every audience member to walk away from our session wanting to implement ways to prevent resident
burnout and prove wellness.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
With all the other tasks on our plates, and problems we deal with on a daily basis, coordinators may feel like they just don't
have time to add anything new. We want to present ways that can benefit our residents while still being timely and efficient
for the coordinators.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
During our session, we plan to use a group discussion lead most of the presentation. Although we will be sharing our best
practices, we also want to hear from the audience.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction - Who we are - 5 minutes
Resident Burnout - 10 minutes
Open Discussion Sharing Ideas and Techniques - 30 minutes
Wrap Up - 5 minutes
(113) Submission ID#1877602
Emotional Intelligence -Recognize in yourself and others to develop extraordinary relationships
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Laura Solt – Novant Health New Hanover Regional Medical Center
Email: laura.solt@novanthealth.org
Office Phone: (910) 667-4418
Cell Phone: (910) 742-8737
Presenter(s)
Laura E. Solt, MA
Psychiatry Residency Program Coordinator
Novant Health New Hanover Regional Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Ryan Barclay, MS
Director of Graduate Medical Education
Novant Health New Hanover Regional Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Define emotional intelligence.
2. Identify their range of emotional intelligence and opportunities for enhancement.
3. Recognize and interpret the emotions of others to establish stronger and more meaningful
relationships.
4.
5.
Session Description
Comedian Craig Ferguson once said "there are three things you must always ask yourself before saying
anything: Is it necessary to say? Is it necessary for me to say? and Is it necessary for me to say it, now?" How
many times in life (personal and professional) do we say something (written or spoken) and then immediately
regret what we said? Emotional Intelligence is the ability to perceive, use, understand, manage, and handle
emotions. Being able to recognize and monitor our own feelings and others' feelings and discern true meaning
will help us build self-confidence and better relationships. We will use an emotional intelligence measurement
tool to determine our areas of strength and areas that could be enhanced. We will also learn several
emotional intelligence techniques and how to implement them in our daily lives. The purpose of the session is
not to change who we are, we are all unique, but to appreciate how to navigate complex social situations with
ease and maintain composure under pressure.
Target Audience
The target audience would be anyone who interacts with others and who wants to improve their own
emotional intelligence. Program administrators deal with varying personalities every day and it would benefit
them to learn about emotional intelligence.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
We work in very fast paced environments where immediate responses are the expectation. Often times we can be
overwhelmed with multitasking and respond in regretful ways during high stress times. Knowing how to manage our
emotions and interpret the emotions of others can help us develop better more meaningful relationships.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The goal of our session is to impart confidence in attendees, to help them feel empowered to understand how their
emotions and the emotions of others affect our relationships.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
We all come with a bias on how one should behave and react toward others. We need to be willing to accept our pitfalls
and implement real change. We need to have the desire to improve.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We are going to implement several educational methods in our session: individual learning, group learning, and
expeditionary learning (case-based learning).
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction - who we are and why are we here
Learning Objectives - review what learners will learn
Define Emotional Intelligence
Take Emotional Intelligence Assessment - individual assessment that will help gain a better understanding for learners
Discuss results - depending on group size we could do this in small groups or as one large group. Anything surprise you?
Anything you already knew?
How to recognize emotional intelligence in others - non-verbal and verbal queues
Case-based Practice - use real life cases and develop solution on how you would handle these situations
Now what? - Tools for moving forward
Review learning objectives one final time
(114) Submission ID#1877610
Interviewing 101: How to Set Your Program(s) Up for Success
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Ashley Hagood – HCA
Email: AshleyMHagood@gmail.com
Office Phone: (304) 685-6767
Presenter(s)
Ashley M. Hagood, MBA, C-TAGME
Administrative Director of GME
HCA Florida
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understanding Interview Basics: Equip attendees with foundational knowledge of interview basics,
including MATCH calendars, selecting interview dates, ERAS, interview invitations, organization, and
professionalism.
2. Navigate Virtual vs. In-Person Interviews: Provide key considerations and strategies for successfully
setting up and managing both virtual and in-person interview day.
3. Manage Post-Interview Processes: Offer a comprehensive overview of the post-interview process,
including reviewing NRMP ranking and preparing for MATCH Day.
4.
5.
Session Description
“Interviewing 101: How to Set Your Program Up for Success” is an essential session for Program
Coordinators in Graduate Medical Education. Mastering the interview process is crucial for selecting the best
candidate and ensuring program success. This session will provide a comprehensive overview of interview
basics, explore key differences between virtual and in-person interviews, and offer insights into managing the
post-interview process effectively. Learn practical strategies for scheduling interviews, handling technological
challenges, and navigating unexpected situations. By the end of the session, participants will be equipped to
confidently manage every aspect of the interviewing season, from initial invitations to final candidate rankings
with enhanced skills to optimize your program’s recruitment efforts in GME.
Target Audience
Residency & Fellowship Program Coordinators/Administrators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The professional practice gaps I wish to address with my "Interviewing 101: How to Set Your Program(s) Up for Success"
presentation for GME program coordinators include:
Lack of Standardized Interviewing Practices: Many program coordinators have varying levels of experience and differing
approaches to interviewing. This presentation aims to provide a standardized framework and best practices to ensure
consistency and professionalism across all interviews.
Unfamiliarity with Virtual & In-Person Interviewing: With the rise of virtual interviewing, some coordinators may not be fully
equipped to handle the technical and logistical challenges it presents. My presentation will cover key considerations for
setting up and managing virtual & in-person interviews effectively.
Incomplete Understanding of Post-Interview Processes: There is often confusion about what happens after the interviews
are completed, including the ranking process and MATCH Day procedures. This presentation will provide a comprehensive
overview to ensure coordinators are fully prepared to manage these crucial steps.
By addressing these gaps, the desired outcome is to enhance the competence and confidence of GME program
coordinators in conducting interviews, ultimately leading to better candidate matches and a more streamlined, efficient
process.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Through my "Interviewing 101: How to Set Your Program Up for Success" session, I aim to create the following specific
changes in competence, performance, and education/accreditation outcomes:
Improved Competence in Interviewing Techniques: Equip program coordinators with a standardized framework and best
practices for conducting both virtual and in-person interviews, ensuring consistency, professionalism, and thorough
evaluation of candidates.
Enhanced Performance in Interview Setup and Execution: Enable coordinators to effectively manage the logistical and
technical aspects of interviews, including scheduling, handling no-shows, managing last-minute changes, and resolving
technical issues, leading to smoother and more efficient interview days.
Clear Understanding of Post-Interview Processes: Provide a comprehensive overview of the steps following the interviews,
including the ranking process and MATCH Day procedures, to ensure coordinators are fully prepared and can manage
these stages seamlessly.
Increased Compliance with Accreditation Standards: Ensure that all interviewing practices align with institutional,
accreditation, and specialty board requirements, thereby maintaining high standards of educational quality and compliance.
Strengthened Communication and Collaboration: Foster a collaborative environment where coordinators can share tips,
tricks, and experiences, enhancing their ability to handle challenging situations and improving overall program outcomes.
By achieving these changes, the session aims to enhance the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the GME interviewing
process, leading to better candidate matches, improved program quality, and increased satisfaction for both coordinators
and applicants.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The potential barriers that might prevent attendees from achieving the desired changes in competence, performance, or
outcomes include:
Lack of Resources and Support:
Barrier: Attendees may lack access to necessary resources, such as technology for virtual interviews, or administrative
support for managing logistics.
Solution: The session will provide practical tips for resource optimization and suggest cost-effective solutions. Additionally,
it will highlight the importance of seeking support from institutional resources and collaborating with colleagues to share the
workload.
Resistance to Change:
Barrier: Some coordinators may be resistant to adopting new methods or technologies due to comfort with their current
practices or fear of change.
Solution: The session will emphasize the benefits of adopting best practices through case studies and success stories. It
will also offer a step-by-step guide to implementing changes gradually, making the transition smoother and less daunting.
Technical Challenges:
Barrier: Coordinators might face technical difficulties, particularly with virtual interviews, such as unreliable internet
connections or unfamiliarity with interview platforms.
Solution: The session will include a detailed walkthrough of popular interview platforms, troubleshooting tips, and a
checklist to ensure technical readiness. It will also encourage attendees to conduct mock interviews to practice and identify
potential issues beforehand.
Time Constraints:
Barrier: Coordinators may feel overwhelmed by their existing responsibilities and perceive the implementation of new
practices as time-consuming.
Solution: The session will present time management strategies and prioritize critical tasks to help coordinators integrate
new practices without adding significant burdens. It will also highlight how improved interview processes can ultimately
save time by reducing inefficiencies.
Lack of Confidence or Experience:
Barrier: Some coordinators, especially those new to their roles, may lack confidence or experience in managing the
interviewing process.
Solution: The session will provide foundational knowledge and practical tools to build confidence. Interactive activities and
role-playing scenarios will allow attendees to practice and gain experience in a supportive environment.
Institutional Constraints:
Barrier: Institutional policies or bureaucratic hurdles may hinder coordinators from implementing changes.
Solution: The session will offer strategies for effectively communicating the value of proposed changes to leadership and
gaining buy-in. It will also suggest ways to work within existing constraints and advocate for necessary adjustments.
By addressing these potential barriers through practical advice, interactive learning, and supportive resources, the session
aims to empower attendees to overcome challenges and achieve the desired changes in their interview processes.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
To facilitate change and learning in the "Interviewing 101: How to Set Your Program(s) Up for Success" session, I will use:
-Interactive Presentations: Engaging slides and storytelling.
-Case Studies: Real-world examples and success stories.
-Q&A Sessions: Dedicated time for questions and discussions.
-Resource Sharing: Handouts, checklists, and templates.
-Group Discussions: Peer-to-peer learning and brainstorming sessions.
-Follow-Up Support: Additional resources and community forums post-session.
These methods ensure an engaging and effective learning experience to enhance the competence of GME program
coordinators.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction (5 minutes)
-Welcome and presenter introduction
-Overview of the session objectives and agenda
Section 1: Interviewing Basics (10 minutes)
-MATCH calendars and timelines
-Selecting interview dates
-ERAS overview
-Sending interview invitations
-Organization and professionalism tips
Section 2: Virtual vs. In-Person Interviewing (10 minutes)
-Key considerations for virtual interviews
-Key considerations for in-person interviews
-Setting up your interview day
-Managing logistics and technology
Section 3: Post-Interview Process (10 minutes)
-Reviewing NRMP ranking
-Preparing for MATCH Day
-Communicating with candidates
-Follow-up and feedback
Group Activity: Problem-Solving Scenarios (10 minutes)
-Explanation of group activity
-Breakout into small groups to discuss scenarios:
-Faculty no call/no show day of interview
-Applicant no call/no show day of interview
-PD unable to make interview last minute
-Zoom tech issues day of interview
Moderated Review and Discussion (10 minutes)
-Groups present their solutions and tips
-Discussion and sharing of best practices
-Q&A session to address any remaining questions
Wrap-Up (5 minutes)
-Summary of key points
-Distribution of resources and handouts
-Final Q&A and closing remarks
(115) Submission ID#1877614
Continuous Site Visit Readiness
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Susan Greenwood-Clark
Email: susanclark333@gmail.com
Office Phone: (513) 304-5649
Presenter(s)
Susan Greenwood-Clark, MBA, BSN,RN
Director, Medical Education
Role: Presenter
Michelle Valdez, MA
GME Administrative Director
SAUSHEC
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Define continuous site visit readiness.
2. Review current ACGME site visit timelines and required documentation
3. Describe methods to continuously assess institution and program compliance with accreditation
requirements.
4. Develop an institutional strategy/approach to continuous site visit readiness
5. Create a tool kit that can be employed during preparation for a site visit
Session Description
The ACGME has fundamentally changed the routine accreditation site visit process, moving away from the
10-year site visit to a random site visit for programs greater than 10 years since their last site visit. This new
accreditation process comes with a relatively short notice window in which to prepare and some existing
continuously accredited programs haven’t had a site visit in nearly two decades. Moreover, these accreditation
visits will occur during the busiest time of the academic year. With the long period of time between site visits,
personnel turnover, and changing requirements, this has led to a need to set up a system for continuous site
visit readiness to ensure compliance and continued accreditation.
Target Audience
COIL, COPAC, CTYPD
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The ACGME has significantly changed the routine accreditation site visit process, moving away from the 10-year site visit
to a random site visit for programs greater than 10 years since their last site visit. This change requires organizations to
move swiftly to prepare for the visit and since some programs may not having had a site visit in nearly 2 decades and GME
personnel who may never have even experienced a site visit, the short time frame to prepare for accreditation visit can be
daunting. We believe there is a need to set up a system for continuous site visit readiness. This workshop aims to discuss
steps in preparing programs for accreditation site visits by setting up a system where documents, processes, etc.. are
periodically assessed and feedback given to ensure site visit readiness.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Attendees will gain an understanding of the tools to develop an institutional strategic approach for periodic oversight of
physician post-graduate education programs to ensure site visit readiness. Attendees will identify existing and new
procedures to ensure program compliance with requirements and construct a system of continuous readiness. Moreover,
this workshop aims to explore additional ways to assist institutions and programs with oversight and compliance by
creating a toolkit consisting of mock site visit checklists, program administrative compliance audit, policy assessments, etc
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
• Lack of institutional structure to conduct continuous program site visit readiness.
• Lack of resources such as time and personnel to review and provide feedback to programs.
• Historical silos and lack of opportunities to engage with non-physician post-graduate education programs
The workshop will address these barriers to change by providing learners with sample tools and systems needed to
implement improved oversight and preparation. Additionally, the workshop will help learners look for opportunities to
increase collaboration and awareness by sharing of resources and best practices.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
• Didactic, Small group discussions
• Worksheets and handouts via toolkit
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Anticipate sharing information and materials to the group for 35 mins and provide time for small group conversations and
sharing for 15 mins.
(116) Submission ID#1877629
Resident Remediation: A Paradigm for Implementing Clinical Competency Committee Resident
Recommendations Before the 'R Word' Needs to be Considered...
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Marko Jachtorowycz – Ascension Illinois Saint Alexius Medical Center
Email: marko.jachtorowycz@ascension.org
Office Phone: (224) 299-4300
Cell Phone: (847) 867-2001
Presenter(s)
Marko J. Jachtorowycz, MD
Director Obstetric and Gynecologic Residency Training Program
Ascension Illinois Saint Alexius Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Farheen Syeda, Manager
Manager Graduate Medical Education
Ascension Saint Francis Hospital and Saint Alexius Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Recognize the strateigc training value of the clinical competency committee's (CCC) individual
learning plan for each resident trainee
2. Identify the critical areas for growth in trainees indicated by the CCC
3. In collaboration with faculty and trianing director assemble a list of habits, skills, behaviors for trainees
in need of growt in critical areas
4. Generate a list of measurable and reportable habits and behvaiors for faculty to observe
5.
Session Description
The clinical competency committee (CCC) of each residency has a mandate and responsibility to provide
individual recommendations to each residency. Remediation of a trainee is a challenge both for the trainee
and the program director, residency faculty, and residency leadership staff. Part of the CCC and general
faculty mission is to identify residents who have specific areas for growth and to address them in a manner
which promotes professional growth and appropriate development of clinical skills in line with the milestones
of training. Development of specific learning plans and monitoring of resident trainee progress can be a
challenge. However, a well targeted and focused learning plan can facilitate skill development and progress in
the milestones of training and can prevent the need for remediation (the 'R' word). This presentation will
outline a paradigm which harnesses the use of technology and web based performance data collection which
can be individualized and implemented to optimize faculty effort, maximize resident benefit, and keep resident
trainees on track as they address their areas for growth.
Target Audience
Residency program directors. program coordinators, DIOs, GME managers
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Resident remediation is a dauting, difficult, and challenging issue for any faculty member in any residency training
program. Remediation resides at the bottom end of a cascade of indicator events which often go without an appropriate
intervention leading to the perpetuation of a downward performance slide of the trainee who may have specific need for
growth in key areas. The approach to it can be 'Darwinian' for the trainee without guidance and correct assessment.
Remediatoin is best avoided through focused, pragmatic early intervention. In its review of a trainee's performance an
effective CCC can recognize these points along the continuum of indicator events on the road to remediation and can
identify the resident trainee early in the struggle for proficiency. The CCC is uniqely empowered to facilitate support and
guidance prior to the deterioration of such a trainee situation into one where remediation becomes necessary. Avoiding the
'R' word and delivering to the trainee what is needed provides optimal support for growth and improvment in training and
can obviate the need for (remediation) the 'R' word by supplanting it with earlier intervention focused and directed based
on the determinatons of the CCC. There are striaghtforward, effective, and faculty (and program director) friendly tools
which can be implemented to gather data and assess resident trainee performance in areas where growth can be fostered
long before remediation becomes the only option.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The recommendations and individualized learning plan of each program CCC are in effect the 'eforcement arm' of the
committee which has the mandate to direct the training process to address specific individual gaps in resident performance
and avoid remediation. Early intervention can vanquish the challenges a trainee may be facing and can save valuable
energy which would othewise be expended on remediation
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
(1) barrier 1: indentifying the necessary habits, skills, or behaviors a trainee needs to manifest in order to attain progress
and success in training--the presentation will share several examples of common issues encountered with trainees and will
provide resources for addressing those issues
(2) barrier 2: measuring success in fostering skills and behaviors charateristic of success--the presentation will outline
methodology to facilitate faculty observation and reporting of a trainee's progress in evolving the skills, habits, and
behaviors refelcive of growth and success
(3) barrier 3: documenting progress--the presentation will present methodology for reporting, and data collection of the
trainee in need of support and guidance
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The presentation wil focus on harnessing the already available tools in any residency evauation management system to
robustly collect the necessary data on focused areaas of resident performance in the field by mentoring faculty. Through
didactic presentaion with intermittment audience participation the skills of assessment toolbuilding will demonstrated and
immediate feedback from the group present with the group present will be shared
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
(1) Review of the role and mandate of the CCC and interpretatioj of the language of the CCC consensus and
recommendations
(2) identfication of the trainee in need and providing that trainee with the requiaite guidance and support: the individual
learning plan
(3) Listing the desired habits and behaviors which would reflect progress and improvement for the trainee (aka 'what would
it look like is this problems were addressed--what does success look like?')
(4) Identification of the indicators (behaviors, habits, skills) which would reflect progress toward proficiency in the area in
question
(5) Creation of methods for assessing and measuring in the field the progress of a trainee and the effect of focused
mentoring
(6) Enabling reporting by mentoring faculty using the tools available in the residency evaluation management system
(6) Guidance on reporting and interpretation of the collected data to affirm success in cnferring the targeted skills, habits,
and behvaiors
(7) Providing formative real time as well as summative feedback to the trainee and to recognize success when it is attained
(117) Submission ID#1877636
Streamlining Administrative Processes: Leveraging Online Tools for Efficient Onboarding and Daily
Operations in Academic Medical Administration
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Hannah Ware – University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine
Email: hannahf@usf.edu
Office Phone: (813) 250-2319
Presenter(s)
Hannah Ware, MBA
Academic Services Administrator
University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Ashley Sanford, MA, PMP
Academic Program Manager
University of South Florida Department of Dermatology & Cutaneous Surgery
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify and evaluate relevant online tools and resources for streamlining administrative processes in
academic medical administration.
2. Implement practical strategies and best practices to enhance daily tasks and effectively manage the
demanding onboarding season within a central GME or residency/fellowship program context.
3. Adapt the principles and techniques discussed in the session to their own educational disciplines,
demonstrating the versatility of the presented tools and methods for improving administrative
efficiency in various contexts.
4.
5.
Session Description
In the era of digital innovation, we are presented with a plethora of online tools promising streamlined
administrative systems, but the true challenge lies in unlocking their transformative potential for daily
operations. This session, tailored to central GME administrators and residency/fellowship program
administrators, provides a roadmap for working smarter, not harder. We will delve into a diverse array of tools
and share our journey toward an efficient organizational system that optimizes day-to-day tasks and the
frenetic onboarding season. While our primary focus centers on medical education, the insights unveiled
transcend disciplinary boundaries, offering a blueprint that can seamlessly enhance administrative excellence
in various educational contexts. Join us to explore the digital landscape's potential to redefine administrative
practices and invigorate your approach to academic medical administration.
Target Audience
Institutional GME administrators and residency/fellowship program administrators. Target audience is also for
both new administrators (0-3 years of experience) and experienced administrators (4+ years experience).
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
We want to educate attendees on how to work smarter not harder. Administrators are often overwhelmed with tasks and
they may not know there are resources out there to help them streamline duties and enhance administrative excellence.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Through educating attendees on various digital tools available that we (presenters) use in our daily tasks, we hope to
provide resources on how to increase efficiency and organization.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
There may be a learning curve to using some of the digital tools presented in this session because they are new and
unfamiliar. However, to address this barrier, we will provide detailed how-to guides/screenshots during our session on how
to use these tools, we will provide a copy of our presentation to attendees for reference, and we will provide our contact
information for further communication after the session.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will be using Microsoft Powerpoint to present the information as well as demo various platforms.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
The first 20 minutes Hannah Ware will present on how our topic applies to a broader GME perspective then the
next 20 minutes Ashley Sanford will present on how our topic applies on a specific program level from her
perspective, leaving the last 10 minutes for questions.
(118) Submission ID#1877644
Fostering a Safe Learning Climate: Taking Personal Action for Microaggressions & Managing Conflict with
Nonviolent Communication
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Juliet Schaub – McLaren Flint
Email: juliet.schaub@mclaren.org
Office Phone: (810) 342-2416
Cell Phone: (810) 444-3777
Presenter(s)
Juliet Schaub, AS, C-TAGME
GME Manager
McLaren Flint
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Recognize microaggressions
2. Know how to take personal action for microaggressions
3. Understand the concepts and techniques of conflict management via Nonviolent Communication
(NVC)
4. Gain resources & tools for administrators to develop workshops on microaggressions and NVC conflict
management for their learners and educators
5.
Session Description
As an administrator in medical education, I have a deep passion for ensuring our learners have a safe
environment in which to train and care for our patients/community. One way an administrator can make an
impact/promote a secure learning environment is by offering a workshop to learners and educators on
identifying microaggressions, taking proactive steps to tackle them in healthcare and educational settings, and
grasping the principles and strategies of conflict resolution through nonviolent communication. I created
workshops which were effectively delivered to two Internal Medicine residency programs and a cohort of
practicum students in health psychology, utilizing resources from the Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA,
Stanford University Pediatric Residency’s Faculty Development, The Center for Nonviolent Communication,
and more. Therefore, this workshop aims to empower individuals in medical education to address
interpersonal communication barriers related to microaggressions and conflict management resulting in a
safer learning climate within their environment.
Target Audience
COPAC or anyone involved in medical education who wants to make a difference by addressing
microaggressions and managing conflict in a safe way.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
After I successfully presented workshops on microaggressions and nonviolent communication (NVC) to manage conflict in
two Internal Medicine residency programs within our health system and a cohort of practicum students in health
psychology, I learned there were truly gaps in the understanding of microaggressions and how to safely address them
within the healthcare environment. I also learned not everyone takes ownership of self in conflict resolution, and NVC
concepts and techniques helped them recognize the importance of their role in managing conflict. I also learned how
myself as an administrator was able to make a difference by offering these workshops. I have seen increased vulnerability
and trust, specifically in the Internal Medicine residencies, which are known to be key in a safe climate.
As an administrator in medical education, I do have a responsibility to not only provide a safe environment for our learners
and educators yet also teach them in the areas of administration and the subcompetencies of professionalism and
interpesronal communication skills, of which this workshop is a way to address all of the above.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Empower individuals in medical education to address interpersonal communication barriers related to microaggressions
and conflict management resulting in a safer learning climate within their environments.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
The biggest barrier may be those who do not feel or understand the importance of their role or ability to make change and
ensure a safe learning climate. This workshop will focus on their role and how they can be empowered to make a
difference. I will use my own experiences as an administrator getting the support and resources to develop my own
workshop. Not everyone has the same passion as me, so I will incorporate activities within the session to help motivate
them gaining or furthering their desire to address these practice gaps within their own institutions.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This workshop will include videos, breakouts, self-reflection exercises, polls, references to literature, and links to resources
and other tools available to grasp the concepts and empower them to develop workshops at their own institutions.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5 minutes – Introduction & overview of microaggressions
10 minutes – Breakout and discussion
5 minutes – Importance of addressing microaggressions
5 minutes – Overview of conflict (good vs. bad) & nonviolent communication (NVC)
10 minutes – Self-reflection exercise
5 minutes – Importance of utilizing NVC to manage conflict
10 minutes – Putting it all together: Designing the workshops (includes review of resources & tools pulled from literature +
an outline of workshops)
(119) Submission ID#1877694
The current state of residency well-being: National data on key drivers and opportunities for improvement
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Andrea Garza – American Medical Association
Email: andrea.garza@ama-assn.org
Office Phone: (312) 464-4439
Presenter(s)
Nancy Nankivil, n/a
Director of Organizational Well-being
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Come away with a baseline understanding of the system drivers behind resident physician burnout.
2. Gain knowledge from tools and curriculum designed to implement evidence-based, actionable
strategies for improving residency well-being and professional experience.
3. Connect to available no-cost resources, including communities for shared learning, that focus on data-
driven solutions and best practices for residency programs and organizations committed to well-being.
4.
5.
Session Description
The American Medical Association (AMA) will present data on the current state of residency well-being; share
a validated instrument and approach for measuring residency well-being; and provide evidence-based,
actionable strategies and resources for organizational improvement of residency well-being.
Target Audience
Residency program directors, managers, administrators, and coordinators DIOs GME chairs Deans, vice
deans, associate deans Wellness/well-being leadership
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
• Many resident programs do not currently measure burnout using a validated instrument
• The system drivers of trainee burnout are not always clear to residency leaders due to a lack of data and/or ability to
directly impact issues with evidence-based interventions
• Health systems are facing growing recruitment and retention challenges with their physician workforce, highlighting the
need to focus on well-being strategies that resonate with residents
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Following our session, we anticipate participants will:
• Come away with a baseline understanding of the system drivers behind resident physician burnout
• Gain knowledge from tools and curriculum designed to implement evidence-based, actionable strategies for improving
residency well-being and professional experience
• Connect to available no-cost resources, including communities for shared learning, that focus on data-driven solutions
and best practices for residency programs and organizations committed to well-being
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
• Limited data on resident well-being
Our session is designed to provide timely and relevant findings from a national residency comparison report used for
research and improvement purposes.
• Current thinking on individual resilience
Our session is designed to address the system-level drivers of resident well-being, including the impact of organizational
culture, workflow and workload efficiency, peer support, training and recognition from faculty.
• Lack of funding
Our session is designed to share no-cost resources, including a validated measurement instrument to assess residency
well-being and a portfolio of tools, resources and curriculum providing evidence-based interventions.
• Silos within organizations
Our session is designed to support collaboration opportunities between residency leaders and leaders of organizational
well-being within an entity using the AMA Joy in Medicine framework.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Session participants will have the opportunity to learn about national trends on residency well-being according to the
AMA’s most recent national benchmark data. This data is comprised of responses to a validated assessment tool deployed
by health systems and residency programs from around the country.
National insights will be shared to highlight the current state of burnout and well-being in residency with a particular lens on
how residency programs can better support their trainees and alleviate system-level pressures that contribute to burnout.
Highlighted findings will be supported by evidence-based resources and best practices being deployed by residency
programs to improve residency well-being related to areas such as practice efficiency, peer support, leadership
development and coaching, and feeling valued.
Importantly, the AMA will also share information on how residency programs can work with the AMA to measure residency
well-being, adopt solutions for change and be part of a growing network of residency programs leading systemic change.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. Level Setting (10 minutes): What is organizational well-being and why is it critical to the residency experience
2. National Residency Comparison Data (15 minutes): What are key 2023/2024 findings and emerging trends in residency
well-being based on national data and in comparison to physician well-being findings
3. Best Practice Interventions (15 minutes): How are residency programs acting on evidence-based findings to improve
residency well-being and to support organizational recruitment strategies (of residents)
4. Question and Answer (10 minutes)
(120) Submission ID#1877703
The Blend > The Balance: An Interactive Session to Determine Your Best Strategy for a multi-hyphenate life
in and outside of GME (TBD)
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Marie Hugley
Email: mhugley@mednet.ucla.edu
Presenter(s)
Marie Hugley, B.A.
GME Assistant Director
UCLA
Role: Presenter
Tanya Martinez, B.A.
California Region GME Director
Common Spirit Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify the various roles you hold (e.g., professional, personal, family, community) and their
significance.
2. Determine the times of day when your energy levels are highest so you can be most productive in
your key roles.
3. Identify your core values and anti-values, then evaluate how well they align with the responsibilities of
your identified roles.
4. Establish boundaries and identify tasks that can be delegated to others.
5. Ensure that your priorities are guided by your core values and that these values are being fulfilled in
your roles during your peak productivity times.
Session Description
Modern employees require strategies that help them to blend career and individualized interests, hobbies, and
home life. Well-rounded professionals bring more adaptability, flexibility, creativity, and joy to their work.
Balance is out and Blend is in - Work-Life Blend is a lifestyle design that provides an opportunity for a healthy
alignment of multiple roles in life. GME professionals are multi-faceted individuals and teams and this session
will address strategies to incorporate various aspects of life including home, family and personal interests and
hobbies as they advance and flourish in their GME careers.
Target Audience
All GME Professionals.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Balance is out and Blend is in - Work-Life Blend is a lifestyle design that provides an opportunity for a healthy alignment of
multiple roles in life. GME professionals are multi-faceted individuals and teams and this session will address strategies to
incorporate various aspects of life including home, family and personal interests and hobbies as they advance in their GME
careers.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Attendees will learn more about themselves through two interactive exercises conducted during the interactive session.
The exercises and session will serve as a guide for constructing their time in a way that in a way that allows them to
flourish and enjoy being successful at work and also well-rounded outside of their chosen professional career. Exercises
will include a break down of the "blend formula" for each individual, which pinpoints roles, role priority, times of optimum
energy levels, prioritized values and boundaries. The Circle of Life diagram will allow attendees to identify current gaps in
various aspects of life and allow for reflection for future changes to create enhancements to their blend.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
It seems the only barrier would be if attendees came to our session without an interest in studying themselves and their
habits in an honest and patient way.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will utlize an interactive approach including a presentation from each speaker to describe their own approach,
individual worksheet exercises, facilitated small group discussion and a large group debrief. The worksheet will be
available for attendees ahead of the session and to take home for each attendee to leave with heightened self-awareness
and understanding of the various aspects of their lives and others' that happen simultaneously.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
I. Welcome, Introductions& Session Overview: 5 minutes
II. Presentation of approaches to work-life blend: 15 minutes
III. Roles & Energy Activity: 10 minutes
A. Define your roles in life. For example: parent, sister, leader, dance mom, pta volunteer, tennis player, triathlete, writer,
etc.
i. How does each role make you feel?
ii. What is the significance or why is it important to you?
iii. Rank your roles based on level of importance to you.
B. Determine your natural energy patterns (morning person, night owl, etc.)
i. When do you find yourself at your highest energy level?
ii. Be sure to focus on your most important roles during peak energy level.
IV. Core Values Activity: 10 minutes
A. In order to be satisfied, you need to live in a way that aligns with your values. They will guide your priorities.
i. To help unravel this a bit, here are some questions:
1. When have you been proud of yourself?
2. When have you performed best?
3. What do you admire in others?
4. What’s important in life? (character traits?)
B. Also take a little time to pinpoint your “anti-values” so you know what to steer clear of.
i. Filter anti-values out of your life. Lead with the values you identify most with. When in doubt about decisions, come back
to this.
V. Small Group Report Outs & Best Practices: 5 minutes
VI. Next Steps & Question & Answers: 5 minutes
(121) Submission ID#1877704
Practical Rotation Design
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CTYPD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Mary Louise LeGuyader – Edwards Internal Medicine Clinic
Email: sydney.leguyader@imail.org
Office Phone: (801) 507-3310
Presenter(s)
Sydney Leguyader, MD
Associate Program Director
Intermountain Health
Role: Presenter
John C. Christensen, MD, FACP, FHM
Program Director
Intermountain Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Audience members will understand how to identify ACGME required resident education topics for their
respective residency programs.
2. Audience members will understand how they can draw on the resources of their health care facility or
system to enhance resident education and deliver required educational components.
3.
4.
5.
Session Description
The ACGME has certain requirements each residency program must fulfill, specific to the specialty. For
Transitional Year Residency, the ACGME requires resident education in the topics of social determinants of
health, quality improvement, fatigue mitigation, and substance use disorders, and requires that residents
participate in scholarly activities. We designed a multifaceted rotation to deliver experiential learning for our
residents for multiple ACGME required educational domains. We will share how we utilized resources in our
muti-state health care system to develop this rotation.
Target Audience
ACGME Residency Program Directors, Program Coordinators, Core Faculty, and DIOs
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
ACGME required educational topics are often delivered to residents using online modules or lectures, which are not
interactive and engaging for residents. Our session will help program directors and other program staff think “outside of the
box” to design experiential learning experiences to deliver this required education.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We want to help program directors and faculty understand resources in the community and within healthcare
facilities/systems that can help residents have a more engaging learning environment for required learning topics, and
enhance resident understanding of required learning topics.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
We will discuss the barriers we experienced when designing an experiential learning rotation (Community Health rotation)
to address multiple ACGME required educational topics. We will outline how we partnered with community originations and
other departments within our muti-state health care organization to overcome these barriers and design a rotation that
helped residents learn about social determinants of health, quality improvement and participate in scholarly activity.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will lead a workshop style session where we break into small groups and brainstorm designing a rotation for residents
that address required ACGME educational topics, using Transitional Year, General Surgery and Internal Medicine
Residency requirements as examples.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
a. Describe challenge faced by our TY program with regards to delivering ACGME educational requirements via modules
and lectures, tying back to our ACGME resident survey results.
b. Describe the rotation we designed to address multiple required curricula, and how we partnered with community groups
and other departments within our healthcare system to create this “Community Health” Rotation.
c. We will share examples of quality improvement projects our residents participated in, as well as how our ACGME survey
results changed after implantation of this rotation.
d. We will then break into small groups, with each assigned an ACGME residency (TY, General Surgery or IM) to
brainstorm how participants could utilize resources in their communities and healthcare organizations/facilities to create
experiential learning opportunities for their residents.
(122) Submission ID#1877735
Strategic Planning: From new programs to new hospitals -The tools you will need to grow your GME footprint
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Erin Reis – McLaren Health Care
Email: erin.reis@mclaren.org
Office Phone: (810) 342-2942
Presenter(s)
Erin Reis, EdD, MBA, FACHE, C-TAGME
Associate Chief Academic Officer
McLaren Health Care
Role: Presenter
Bethany J. Figg, DEdT, MBA, MLIS, AHIP, C-TAGME
Director of Graduate Medical Education
CMU College of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand how to identify growth opportunities for GME program expansion or new program growth
using tools that are available to GME leaders.
2. Understand basic funding opportunities along with strategic tools to assist in creating value proposition
for new or expanding programs.
3. Understand how to assemble a strategic planning group with key stakeholders to create meaningful
timelines and execution of goals.
4.
5.
Session Description
This session will dive into the strategic planning necessary for expanding or developing new GME programs
along with reviewing the ability to launch GME naive hospitals as training locations as options to meet the
needs of an evolving healthcare system and community it serves. Attendees will gain actionable insights and
practical strategies that will empower you to lead your organization through successful GME expansion,
ultimately enhancing your institutional impact on medical education and patient care.
Target Audience
DIO, GME Finance support, Program Directors, GME administrators, C-Suite
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Expanding or growing new programs can be a daunting task. The gap we hope to address is to provide understanding of
the tools available to assist while giving leaders confidence in speaking not only about the why it is needed, but also the
how it can happen effectively to stakeholders that may not understand the world of GME.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Enhancing knowledge of planning, stakeholder development, tools, and processes to obtain approvals and to execute
plans effectively.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Resources, Stakeholder engagement, timing of ask, bandwitsht of project leader.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Think-Pair-share
Lecture with reference material
Online access to tools.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Think pair Share 10 Minutes
Lecture- 20
Tool tutorial - 10 Minutes
Questions- 10 Minutes
(123) Submission ID#1877749
The AACOM UME-GME Task Force and Its Approach on the Transition to Residency
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Madhumita Napa – American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine
Email: mnapa@aacom.org
Office Phone: (301) 968-4185
Presenter(s)
Madhumita Napa, n/a
Project Manager
American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine
Role: Presenter
Alegneta Long, MPP
Vice President, GME Initiatives
American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the goals and approach of AACOM’s UME-GME Task Force, a multi-year concerted effort
to address critical issues in osteopathic medical education
2. Describe the elements of the residency readiness bootcamp framework developed by the transition to
residency working group
3. Discuss the tools and resources, and national conversations taking place on the transition to residency
related to interview format, data availability and unmatched students
4.
5.
Session Description
The AACOM UME-GME Task Force, officially launched in 2022, seeks to address critical topics in osteopathic
medical education including the transition to residency, graduate level osteopathic training and strengthening
the model of osteopathic education. The task force established a Transition to Residency Working Group to
provide leadership and innovative solutions on the transition to residency. These include devising a national
framework for readiness for residency bootcamps, an overview of data on the transition to residency and
strategy to fill gaps of critical data, and resources for unmatched medical students. This session will include
include a discussion on the group’s current efforts, feedback received from learners and gathering feedback
from the community to inform their future work.
Target Audience
All individuals involved in the transition to residency for osteopathic medical students (advisors, students,
faculty, program directors, etc.) as well as those in the broader medical education community.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Challenge/Issue: The American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM) UME-GME Task Force through
its Transition to Residency Working Group seeks to provide innovative solutions in the transition to residency space.
Through the Councils and Assemblies at AACOM, we have heard anecdotally that there are deficiencies in resources
available to assist students with navigating the transition from medical school to residency. Additionally, as part of the
overall considerations in the transition to residency, the UME-GME Task Force sought to address some of the
recommendations released by the Coalition for Physician Accountability’s Undergraduate to Graduate Medical Education
Committee. AACOM seeks to support the colleges of osteopathic medicine (COMs) by developing a repertoire of tools and
resources to prepare osteopathic medical students for this transition.
Approach: The Transition to Residency Working Group established sub-groups focused on the three key areas: readiness
for residency, data collection and utilization, and resources for unmatched students. In addition, the working group issued
recommendations on interview format for residency and entry into medical school, sponsored research to understand the
impact of interview format on the transition to residency, conducted focus group interviews of third- and fourth-year
osteopathic medical students as well as first year residents to understand resource and information needs on the transition
to residency, and sponsored a pilot in partnership with Better Together Physician Coaching to support fourth year
osteopathic medical students’ wellness during their transition to residency.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will be an opportunity to demonstrate the benefits and value of the tools the Transition to Residency Working
Group and its subgroups have developed. It is critical for the groups’ work to receive feedback from the community and
understand how to structure and refine its resources to ensure that they are intuitive, user-friendly, widely accessible and
are consistently used by the intended target audience.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Institutions can be reluctant to adopt new practices or materials with the notion that they will also require more manpower
to operate. We want to highlight how these resources can save institutions time, benefit our students and increase
efficiency. The transition to residency can be an overwhelming time for students and advisors alike, but these tools will
help streamline the process and allow users to focus on achieving successful Match outcomes. These resources are free
to use, publicly available and designed to assist our COMs and their students. We have shared these with assemblies and
councils within AACOM as well as with external organizations at other national conferences. We consistently hear
anecdotal support for how innovative and beneficial these resources have been to overcoming barriers to the transition.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
The Transition to Residency Working Group and its subgroups have developed a series of tools for COMs and students,
these can be viewed at https://www.aacom.org/gme/ume-gme-task-force/transition-to-residency-t2r:
Readiness for Residency Bootcamp Implementation Playbook
A national framework designed to guide COMs on how to develop a residency readiness bootcamp at their institution to
prepare fourth year osteopathic medical students for day 1 of residency.
Pilot Bootcamp RFP
A grant opportunity offered to COMs to incentivize piloting the above national framework at their institution.
Residency Application Data Guide
A guide comprised of several key data resources for the transition to residency. This guide provides an overview of each
resource, including pros and cons, to help students navigate available tools for their residency application process.
Specialty Specific Data Resources
A series of PowerPoint presentations that COMs can download and edit to advise students in a variety of specialties.
These presentations include an overview, key data and other helpful information on applying to the corresponding
specialty.
Toolkit to Support Students Re-entering the Residency Application & Match Process
Recommendations to advise COMs on how to support unmatched students, including those that are partially matched.
Better Together Physician Coaching Pilot Program
A partnership between AACOM and Better Together Physician Coaching to offer a pilot program for osteopathic medical
students as a mentorship program to improve wellness. The first year of the pilot concluded in 2024 and was offered to all
unmatched osteopathic medical students. The second year of the pilot will commence in 2024 and will be open to all
osteopathic medical students.
AACOM Recommendations on Interview Format for Entry into Residency and Medical School
AACOM’s official recommendation on which interview format is optimal for entry into residency and entry into medical
school.
Residency Interview Research Grants
Three awardees received a grant to study the impact of interview format on the transition to residency.
Panel Discussion on Pros & Cons of Virtual, Hybrid and In-Person Interviewing
A panel discussion from national experts to give perspectives on the pros and cons of each interview format and how to
best prepare for interviews of any format.
Webinar: How to Use Data to Inform the Residency Selection & Match Process
A webinar hosted by advisors to help inform how to take advantage of existing data resources (NRMP data, FREIDA, etc.)
to navigate the transition to residency process.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
35 minutes of presentation on the resources developed, 15 minutes on a discussion with the audience about opportunities
to develop additional resources or refine those already created. This outline follows a similar template to past presentations
that have received positive feedback from attendees for the content's value.
(124) Submission ID#1877780
Mastering Project Management for GME Success
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Brooke Moore – Thalamus
Email: bmoore.gme@gmail.com
Office Phone: (281) 630-4711
Presenter(s)
Brooke Moore, MBA, PMP, C-TAGME
Director of Strategic Partnerships
Thalamus
Role: Presenter
Nicolle Castaneda, MBA, MPH, LSSBB, C-TAGME
Senior Manager, Financial and Business Operations
University of Miami Miller School of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand Key Project Management Principles: Comprehend the foundational concepts and
terminology of project management and their relevance to GME program coordination.
2. Utilize Project Management Tools: Effectively use project management tools and software to plan,
execute, and monitor GME-related projects, ensuring efficient and timely completion.
3. Apply Practical Techniques: Implement practical project management techniques, such as risk
management, time management, and stakeholder communication, to improve daily operations and
overall program performance.
4. Develop and Execute Project Plans: Create and execute comprehensive project plans for common
GME tasks, such as organizing residency interview days or coordinating curriculum updates, with
improved organization and resource allocation.
5.
Session Description
Join us for an engaging and practical workshop designed specifically for GME program coordinators! Led by
two experienced PMP-certified GME managers, this session will equip you with essential project management
skills to streamline your daily operations and elevate your program’s efficiency. Through interactive lectures,
hands-on activities, and real-life examples, you’ll learn to harness the power of project management tools and
techniques tailored to the unique challenges of medical education. Don’t miss this opportunity to enhance your
skills, improve your program’s performance, and connect with peers facing similar challenges.
Target Audience
GME Program Coordinators Residency and Fellowship Program Administrators Medical Education Office Staff
GME Office Managers Healthcare Administrators involved in GME operations
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The professional practice gaps we aim to address are:
Lack of Formal Project Management Training: Many GME program coordinators lack formal training in project
management, leading to inefficiencies in handling complex administrative tasks and projects.
Inconsistent Application of Project Management Principles: Even those with some project management knowledge often
apply principles inconsistently, resulting in suboptimal outcomes.
Limited Use of Project Management Tools: There is a gap in the effective utilization of project management tools and
software, which can streamline processes and improve productivity.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We aim to achieve the following changes:
Enhanced Competence: Equip GME program coordinators with foundational project management skills tailored to their
specific roles.
Improved Performance: Enable coordinators to manage projects more efficiently, leading to timely completion and better
resource management.
Optimized Educational Outcomes: Better project management will lead to smoother program operations, benefiting
residents and faculty by providing a more organized and supportive educational environment.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers include:
Time Constraints: Coordinators often have demanding schedules, limiting their ability to attend training sessions.
Solution: Offer concise, focused training sessions and provide materials for self-paced learning.
Resistance to Change: Some coordinators may be resistant to adopting new methods and tools.
Solution: Highlight the tangible benefits of project management skills and tools, and provide hands-on demonstrations to
show ease of use.
Varied Levels of Prior Knowledge: Attendees may have varying levels of prior project management experience.
Solution: Start with a foundational overview and then offer advanced tips and strategies for those with more experience.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
To facilitate change and learning, we will use:
Interactive Lectures: Engaging lectures with real-life examples to introduce key project management concepts.
Hands-on Activities: Practical exercises where attendees can apply project management tools and techniques.
Group Discussions: Facilitated discussions to share best practices and address specific challenges faced by coordinators.
Q&A Sessions: Time allocated for questions and answers to address individual concerns and clarify doubts.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1. Introduction and Objectives (5 minutes)
Welcome and Speaker Introduction: Brief introduction of the two PMP-certified GME managers presenting the workshop.
Overview of Workshop Objectives and Agenda: Outline the goals of the session and what participants can expect to learn.
2. Foundational Project Management Concepts (10 minutes)
Importance of Project Management in GME: Discuss the relevance and benefits of project management in the context of
GME.
Key Principles and Terminology: Introduce essential project management concepts and terminology, such as project
lifecycle, scope, time, and cost management.
3. Tools and Techniques (10 minutes)
Introduction to Popular Project Management Tools: Overview of tools like Trello, Asana, and others.
Demonstration of Tool Usage with GME-Specific Examples: Show practical applications of these tools in GME settings,
such as managing residency interview schedules and coordinating curriculum updates.
Tips for Effective Tool Integration: Provide tips on how to seamlessly integrate these tools into daily workflows.
4. Practical Application (10 minutes)
Hands-on Activity: Attendees will work in small groups to create a project plan for a common GME task (e.g., organizing a
residency interview day).
Group Discussions and Feedback: Facilitated discussion to share insights and feedback from the hands-on activity.
5. Advanced Strategies (5 minutes)
Risk Management and Contingency Planning: Teach methods for identifying risks and creating contingency plans.
Time Management and Prioritization Techniques: Provide strategies for managing time effectively and prioritizing tasks.
Communication and Stakeholder Management: Discuss the importance of clear communication and managing
relationships with stakeholders.
6. Q&A and Discussion (5 minutes)
Open Floor for Questions and Answers: Address individual concerns, clarify doubts, and provide tailored advice.
Addressing Specific Challenges and Solutions: Discuss specific challenges faced by attendees and potential solutions.
7. Conclusion and Wrap-Up (5 minutes)
Recap of Key Takeaways: Summarize the main points covered in the workshop.
Providing Additional Resources and Next Steps: Share resources for further learning and outline next steps for applying
the skills learned.
Thank You and Contact Information: Express gratitude to attendees and provide contact information for follow-up
questions.
(125) Submission ID#1877782
Empowering the Rural Program Administrator: How to Build a Challenge-Proof Culture
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Shawnette Alford – Dr. Kiran C. Patel Institute for GME
Email: salford@kpigme.com
Office Phone: (484) 620-3326
Cell Phone: (484) 620-3326
Presenter(s)
Shawnette E. Alford, AA, C-TAGME
Assistant Director of GME
Dr. Kiran C. Patel Institute for GME
Role: Presenter
Jennifer Crubel, BS
Rural GME Development Manager
Wisconsin Collaborative for Rural GME
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify the key challenges faced by program administrators of rural programs.
2. Explore collaborative, team-friendly tools and frameworks that provide structured approaches to
understanding and addressing challenges.
3. Develop solutions that impact the core areas of sustained program development.
4.
5.
Session Description
Interactive Workshop In rural, small, and underserved programs, program administrators face unique and
significant challenges that require innovative solutions and resilient strategies. This session is essential for
those looking to overcome these obstacles and foster a challenge-proof, adaptive team culture. Participants
will engage in a highly interactive session featuring experienced GME professionals, facilitated table
discussions, and collaborative group activities. Attendees will delve into identifying key challenges, exploring
team-friendly tools, and developing sustainable solutions. At the end of this session, learners will be able to
identify the key challenges faced by program administrators of rural programs, explore collaborative tools and
frameworks for addressing these challenges, and develop impactful solutions for sustained program
development. The audience will participate in a live session that will request audience participation
throughout. The speakers will review the objectives and present the supporting content using a PowerPoint
presentation. Speaker(s) will go over the instructions for the table activity. The room will be asked to add 2
challenges they have experienced in their programs using Slido. Activity will ask the audience at each table to
choose two challenges from the screen table and use the provided Framework Handout/Questionnaire to
discuss, develop, and report their table’s plan to address the challenge.
Target Audience
Experienced Program Coordinators and Administrators Beginner Program Coordinators and Administrators
Coordinators and Administrators of rural, small, and underserved programs with limited resources
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Currently new and in some case experienced Program Administrators face unique challenges with developing a new rural
programs. such as Stakeholder Buy in, Lack of GME knowledge in the health system, community culture, faculty
recruitment, and lack of resources.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
We would like attendees to have the tools to help the GME Leadership team rollout their residency program to the entire
organization. There will be challenges with getting affiliation agreements, PLAs, and finance agreements with community
preceptors that larger organizations who employ their physicians do not face, so the attendees will be able to take the
information their learn and utilize it when completing these tasks.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Funding sources for sustainability, encourage them to understand how residency programs are funded (DGME/IME/State
Funding/etc.) and be able to work closely with the company CFO when setting the PRA and encouraging their finance
team to train the billing/coding department on how to audit and code with the GC Modifier. (This can be done by attending
other sessions on GME finance)
Encourage education sessions to the entire health system on what a teaching institution is and how everyone has an
important role in developing residency programs. This can be done through Townhall meetings or lunch webinars.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Share collaborative tools and frameworks for addressing these challenges, and develop impactful solutions for sustained
program development.
1. Lessons learned from speakers and the ways we addressed the challenges.
2. Breakout sessions to promote collaboration to challenges rural and underserved communities face in GME
development.
3. Provide suggestions to implement changes after attending this presentation.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5 Minute - Introductions/Background
20 Minute - PowerPoint with Audience Polling expanding on the Culture, Challenges and Strategies Used
by the Program Administrator in Rural/Underserved or Small Programs.
5 Minute - Discuss Activity and Review Instructions using Live Polling
10 Minute - Table Activity
5 Minute - Activity Report Out
5 Minute - Wrap up and Q & A
(126) Submission ID#1877807
Standardized Patients Reimagined: Enhancing Clinical Training and Faculty Development
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Andrea Williams – Henry Ford Health
Email: awill118@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (810) 449-8990
Presenter(s)
Andrea Williams, MS
Senior Instructional Design Consultant
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Alexis Haftka-George, MD
Associate Program Director, Internal Medicine Residency
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify essential components of effective medical education that maximize the benefits of using
standardized patients.
2. Employ methods for enhancing faculty development and trainee instruction through innovative
approaches to integrate standardized patients into curricula.
3. Identify strategies, tools, and resources for the implementation of faculty development and trainee
instruction using standardized patients at their home institution.
4.
5.
Session Description
The use of standardized patients (SPs) to enhance medical education has a history that spans over fifty years.
SPs provide a realistic and controlled environment for honing clinical skills and patient interactions, increasing
the efficacy of training. This session takes a fresh look at the use of SPs and explores opportunities for
revitalizing this tried-and-true instructional strategy. Participants will identify essential components for
maximizing the educational benefits of SPs and explore novel approaches for incorporating them in training.
During this session, participants will explore how SPs can be incorporated into both trainee instruction and
faculty development. They will engage in interactive SP-based simulations designed to improve
communication skills, enhance error disclosure conversations, bolster feedback discussions, and provide
support for the struggling learner. This session will equip participants with the skills and knowledge to create
effective case scenarios for use in SP-based training. Time will be provided for participants to explore
strategies for integrating SPs into curricula and identify practical resources for implementation within their
home institutions.
Target Audience
This session will benefit Faculty Physicians; Associate Program Directors; Program Directors; Chiefs of
Departments; Directors, Administrators, and Coordinators of Graduate Medical Education; Chief Academic
Officers; and DIOs by providing them with novel approaches to the use of SPs in both trainee instruction and
faculty development. Participants will gain a comprehensive understanding of the essential components for
maximizing the educational benefits of SPs, skills for creating effective case scenarios, and strategies for
revitalizing SP-based instruction. By engaging in this session, participants will be empowered to incorporate
SPs through innovative methods that will enhance medical education and faculty development in their home
institutions.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Despite the longstanding use of SPs in medical education, there remain significant gaps in the optimal utilization of this
instructional strategy. Many educational programs underutilize SPs, missing opportunities to fully leverage their potential in
enhancing both trainee instruction and faculty development. This session addresses critical professional practice gaps in
medical education by equipping participants with a deeper understanding of the essential components for maximizing SP-
based training. Participants will gain insights into novel approaches for the use of SPs in simulations designed to improve
communication skills, error disclosure conversations, feedback discussions, and support for the struggling learner. Content
in this session supports Common Program Requirements of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education
(ACGME) and supports growth in the subcompetencies assessed by the ACGME Clinician Educator Milestones.
Participants will leave equipped with skills to create effective case scenarios and practical strategies for implementing SP-
based curricula. This comprehensive approach will empower participants to bridge the gap between traditional SP usage
and innovative, impactful medical education practices.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will provide participants with the knowledge and skills for enhancing trainee instruction and faculty
development through innovative approaches to SP-based training. Participants will gain a comprehensive understanding of
the necessary components for effective use of SPs in instruction. They will leave equipped with the knowledge for
integrating SPs into training that enhances communication skills in a variety of clinical settings, improves feedback
conversations, and targets support for struggling learners. Participants will be provided with strategies for creating robust
case scenarios for use in SP-based training. They will also identify strategies, tools, and resources for the implementation
of faculty development and trainee instruction using standardized patients.
Additionally, participants will show growth in the subcompetencies of the ACGME Clinician Educator Milestones including:
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Learning Environment, Leadership Skills, Educational Theory and Practice, and
Reflective Practice and Commitment to Personal Growth. Ultimately, this session will enable participants to revitalize the
use of SP-based instruction and enhance medical education at their home institutions.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers which might prevent participants from achieving the change desired are time and resources. Physicians
may find it challenging to allocate time for implementing SP-based instruction due to their existing workload and
responsibilities. To address the perceived barrier of time, this session will equip participants with practical and efficient
strategies for maximizing the benefits of SP-based instruction which can be easily implemented. Participants will have the
opportunity to practice application of these strategies through small group activities and discussion. During the session,
participants will also establish specific, actionable goals for the implementation of these strategies. They will leave with a
thorough knowledge of how they will apply strategies and a concrete plan for doing so. This will greatly increase their
ability to efficiently utilize what was learned in the session, even when time is at a premium.
Additionally, this session will address the resource concern by providing participants with strategies and tools for
implementing SP-based instruction and allow time for participants to explore ways to leverage resources. Innovative
approaches for obtaining SPs will also be explored. These components will provide participants with a solid base for
developing SP-based educational experiences, thus increasing the likelihood of implementation in their home institutions.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This will be an interactive session comprised of micro-lessons, small group activities, small group discussions, and Q&A. A
brief micro-lesson will introduce learners to the essential elements for maximizing the educational benefits of SP-based
trainee instruction and faculty development. Participants will engage in small group activities to explore novel approaches
to utilizing SPs in simulations designed to enhance communication skills, improve error disclosure conversations, bolster
feedback discussions, and provide support to the struggling learner. They will also have the opportunity in small groups to
discuss resources for SP-based instruction at their home institutions. Time will be provided for addressing questions
related to putting these innovative approaches into practice.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introduction –3 minutes
Background and theory – 4 minutes
Discussion of best practices for maximizing benefits of SP-based instruction – 5 minutes
Novel approaches to the use of SPs in trainee instruction – 3 minutes
Group work and practice- 8 minutes
Novel approaches to the use of SPs in faculty development – 3 minutes
Group work and practice – 8 minutes
Strategies for developing robust case scenarios and SP encounters – 3 minutes
Group work and practice – 5 minutes
Identifying resources – 3 minutes
Group work and practice – 5 minutes
Summary – 2 minutes
Question and answer session – 3 minutes
(127) Submission ID#1877818
Learning to Navigate the ERAS and Thalamus Systems
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Richard Peng – Association of American Medical Colleges
Email: rpeng@aamc.org
Office Phone: (202) 540-5404
Presenter(s)
Jason Reminick, MD, MBA, MS
CEO
Thalamus
Role: Presenter
Richard Peng, n/a
ERAS Outreach and Engagement Manager
AAMC
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Master essential skills and improve proficiency in utilizing ERAS and Thalamus.
2. Customize the platforms to meet program specific needs and to improve recruitment outcome.
3. Streamline administrative tasks in candidates' selection and communication and reduce redundancy.
4. Leverage institution and program data to aid in better understanding the application pool and match
outcome.
5.
Session Description
The integration of the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) and Thalamus presents a streamlined
solution for residency recruitment process, enhancing both administrative efficiency and precision in
candidates' selection. This presentation will focus on helping improve the proficiency in using these two
systems among Program Directors, Program Coordinators, and other recruitment staff members. Key
strategies for proficient use include: 1. Streamlined Workflow: Integrate ERAS and Thalamus to eliminate
redundant tasks, reducing administrative burdens and allowing more focus on candidate evaluation. 2.
Enhanced Candidate Engagement: Utilize Thalamus’s automated scheduling and real-time updates to
improve candidate experience and minimize scheduling conflicts. 3. Data-Driven Decisions: Leverage
analytics from both platforms to make informed decisions, using comprehensive data on applicant
demographics and interview performance. 4. Improved Communication: Ensure timely notifications and
updates between applicants and programs, fostering transparency and efficiency. 5. Customization: Tailor
Thalamus’s features to meet specific program needs, optimizing the management of unique scheduling
requirements. By mastering the use of ERAS and Thalamus, residency programs can achieve greater
efficiency, improve candidate satisfaction, and effectively select top candidates for each unique program.
Target Audience
Program Directors, Program Coordinators (including Transitional Year Programs) and other administrative
staff members who support the recruitment efforts.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Incomplete understanding of the ERAS and Thalamus integration; the ability to tailor the platforms to program specific
needs; and the gap in knowledge for data collection, analysis, and utilization.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Improve each attendee's understanding, proficiency, and confidence in utilizing the ERAS and Thalamus systems.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
New technology, resistance to change, and lack of access to supportive network. To overcome these barriers, the
speakers will present content that will provide more context on the systems' API, impactful data available, and helpful tools
in the system to customize a program's residency application review process.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Power point slides, screenshot examples, and Q&A
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Overview of ERAS and Thalamus collaboration, and data/system update (20 minutes)
Illustrate different ways to customize the platforms and meet program needs (20 minutes)
Q&A (10 minutes)
(128) Submission ID#1877832
Osteopathic Recognition Grant: A Concurrent Mixed Methods Approach
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Madhumita Napa – American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine
Email: mnapa@aacom.org
Office Phone: (301) 968-4185
Presenter(s)
Madhumita Napa, n/a
Project Manager
American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine
Role: Presenter
Alegneta Long, MPP
Vice President, GME Initiatives
American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand what the barriers are to applying to Osteopathic Recognition
2. Learn why programs withdraw from OR
3. Explore how changes in program leadership impact program adoption, maintenance, and formalized
Osteopathic Principles and Practices (OPP) development
4. Provide feedback on actionable items AACOM can take following the results of the study
5.
Session Description
In 2022, AACOM received a grant from the Osteopathic Heritage Foundations (OHF) to engage in a study of
Osteopathic Recognition including understanding interest and barriers to apply and maintain Osteopathic
Recognition. The Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences (USUHS) research team led this 18-
month research project and will present its findings to the community as it concludes its study in July 2024.
Target Audience
Those involved in the graduate medical education (GME) space, both osteopathic and allopathic. Particularly
those involved in developing GME programs or are interested in supporting graduate level osteopathic
education.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Context: With the advent of the ACGME Single Accreditation System in 2015 came the Osteopathic Recognition (OR)
designation. As of today, 259 residency programs have achieved OR, and 12 currently have submitted applications for OR
(ACGME ADS). Given the 81% increase in the number of DO and osteopathic medical schools over the last 10 years
(AOA Osteopathic Medical Profession Report 2023) we would expect a similar proportion increase in the number of
residency programs with OR as a means to provide graduate level osteopathic training. This has not been the case and as
such, has warranted a reflection study on what could be slowing this growth.
In 2022, The American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM) received a grant from the Osteopathic
Heritage Foundations (OHF) to engage in a study of Osteopathic Recognition including understanding interest and barriers
to apply for and maintain OR. The Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences (USUHS) research team led this 18-
month research project and will present its findings to the community as it concludes its study in July 2024.
Objective: This session seeks to share the findings of the first-of-its kind study sponsored by AACOM and funded by the
OHF on Osteopathic Recognition. The goals of this session are to help the osteopathic medical education community
understand why this study was conducted and to hear directly from researchers about their methods and findings. A
discussion about the barriers to applying for Osteopathic Recognition and why programs withdraw their recognition will be
encouraged among the audience. This session aims to share the study’s findings, providing insights into the challenges
and barriers to OR. Further, the session will engage the audience to understand these findings and discuss potential next
steps.
Conclusion: The Osteopathic Recognition assessment will provide unbiased analysis from a nationally renowned
quantitative and qualitative research team at USUHS about the challenges, barriers and benefits of Osteopathic
Recognition. The study will provide program leadership perspectives from a mixed methods study lasting 18-months. The
study will shine a light on the experiences of programs as they consider osteopathic recognition and point to the future
direction of osteopathic recognition and graduate level osteopathic training.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session aims to engage in thought leadership to generate discussion and suggestions on how to improve graduate
level osteopathic training. The study acknowledges several barriers to achieving Osteopathic Recognition, so this
workshop will serve as an open platform to hear from those who have their “boots on the ground” and provide a forum for
productive discussion.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Residency programs may have preconceived notions of what barriers exist to applying for OR and providing graduate level
osteopathic training. The results of the study outline and summarize a relatively comprehensive look at what these barriers
are and provide recommendations for how to overcome them. The session will be conducted to ensure a collaborative
approach with the audience towards positive change and actionable steps.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Methods: The national large-scale survey study was supplemented by focus group interviews. The survey was designed
for the program directors of those residency programs that have not applied for OR or have decided to withdraw from OR.
Additionally, semi-structured interviews (deliberately designed with unconditional positive questions to encourage
affirmative dialogue and create vitality) and focus groups to help provide a robust and comprehensive understanding.
Presentation: The presentation will be provided through PowerPoint and will employ polling tools to gather real-time
feedback during the presentation. During the open discussion portion, feedback will be collected verbally and will be
logged to reference in the future. Any additional feedback from the audience can be directed to AACOM’s Graduate
Medical Education Initiatives team's inbox that is reviewed regularly (gme-initiatives@aacom.org).
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
There will be 35 minutes of presentation with interactive questions throughout, followed by a 15 minute Q&A open
discussion with the audience to solicit their recommendations on steps AACOM can take following the study results. This
follows a similar template to presentations provided in the past that received positive feedback on the presentation’s value.
(129) Submission ID#1877837
Coming back from the brink, how to respond to an adverse accreditation status
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Amy Allen – HCA Healthcare / USF Morsani College of Medicine
Email: amy.allen@hcahealthcare.com
Office Phone: (727) 204-2315
Presenter(s)
Amy Allen, MBA-HM, MS, RHIA
Administrative Director of GME
HCA Florida Healthcare / USF Morsani College of Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand Citations and responses
2. Understand Areas for Improvement (AFIs) and how to prevent them from becoming citations
3. How to change the culture of a program and implement deep rooted change.
4. How to track action plans and progress made toward those plans.
5.
Session Description
This session will provide insight into how a program in probationary status achieved continued accreditation in
a 12-14 month period. The session will discuss how to face some typical citations, how to understand and
interpret them, and take action to improve the citations and program overall. It will review a particular program
on probation with 12 citations, and provide an overview of the action plan and steps taken to improve the
program clinically, as well as change the ingrained culture of the program and institution.
Target Audience
Program Administrators, Program Directors, Institutions
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The program utilized as an example in this presentation moved from probationary accreditation with 12 citations to
continued accreditation with 4 citations. The gap would be achieving continued accreditation with no citations.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Helping the audience to better understand how to track citations and action, to continually assess progress made and
know how to implement continuous process improvement for deep rooted change.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Barriers could include no experience in site visits or no experience with citations. My presentation will provide examples of
actual citations, verbiage and real life responses.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Power Point, excel templates and real-world examples.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Overview of accreditation status'
Which status' are considered adverse
When accreditation status' change
How to understand citations
How to elicit feedback to effect change
How to implement that change
How to maintain continuous process improvement to sustain that change
(130) Submission ID#1877839
Building Trust through Radical Candor: A Framework for Feedback and Communication in Graduate Medical
Education
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Mary Margaret Populo – UPMC
Email: populomm@upmc.edu
Office Phone: (412) 692-4942
Presenter(s)
Mary Margaret Populo, MEd
Director, Medical Education, Department of Medicine
UPMC
Role: Presenter
Jennifer Corbelli, MD. MS
Vice-Chair for Education, Department of Medicine
UPMC
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Provide a framework to create a culture of feedback that optimizes both excellence and wellness
2. Define the four quadrants on the Care Personally vs Challenge Directly Spectrum for Radical Candor
in communication
3. List key strategies to overcome barriers to achieving Radical Candor
4. Provide an Action Plan to move the Radial Candor conversations into actions and results.
5.
Session Description
While the importance of effective communication and feedback is not a novel challenge, many rapidly
changing aspects of medical education make this more difficult than ever. Ever- growing generational
differences exist as medical trainees have aged out of the Millennial era and are now Gen Z. Educators and
GME administrators need to adapt to this new generation who are less amenable to hierarchy and whose
norms of communication have been shaped by growing up in a digital world. Since Covid19 pandemic with the
increase in virtual learning, it is more imperative than ever that medical education programs inspire and
support trainees, while also facilitating growth and excellence throughout their training trajectory. Support and
accountability can feel directly opposed, but Radical Candor offers a structure that elucidates how they can be
directly aligned. In this workshop, we will outline the principles of Radical Candor. We will review the evidence
behind them and highlight importance differences relevant to optimal education of Gen Z vs prior generations,
to support medical educators of all types in the fundamentals of our work in training the next generation of
physicians.
Target Audience
This workshop is relevant to all audiences as no matter the role, career focus, program size or type. We are all
driven to optimally communicate, support and lead, and to create cultures where those around us are both
happy and successful at work.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Providing effective feedback is not an option, rather an important tool to facilitate the learning and growth of the medical
trainee. Despite the importance of feedback for the improvement of both clinical skills and professional development, there
are many challenges. The medical training environment is uniquely complex space for providing quality feedback and
leads to dissatisfaction from medical trainees regarding the amount and quality of feedback received from their medicine
faculty.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Our workshop will explore the reasons why feedback can be a challenge and provide a framework for delivery of feedback
that is inline with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestones domains that high-quality
feedback should include timeliness, specificity, balance, recipient feedback/reflection, and an action plan.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Understanding the barriers to feedback are real is important. The first barrier to overcome is the awareness that providing
effective feedback is a learnt skill that required knowledge and practice. Our workshop will address common barriers and
how to achieve a higher level of skill in the delivery of feedback.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will review case studies on feedback given to medicine learners and discuss clear sets of strategies to apply the
Radical Candor framework to their interactions and communication. In In addition, we will include a reading list of
resources for feedback and communication from both the business and education literature.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Introductions of Speakers: 2 minutes
Introduction of Topic: 5 minutes
Radical Candor Framework: Details of the concept of what is Radical Candor and what is not Radical Canfor: 5 minutes
Radical Canfor Framework: 10 minutes
Applying Radical Candor to Feedback: 15 minutes
Case Studies Providing Feedback Do's and Don'ts: 10 minutes
Wrap Up and Q&A: 10 minutes
(131) Submission ID#1877844
The First 365 Days: An Effective Strategy to Streamline Program Director Transitions
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Sydney VanSlembrouck – Henry Ford Health System
Email: svansle1@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (586) 651-7380
Presenter(s)
Sydney VanSlembrouck, BA
Accreditation Coordinator
Henry Ford Health System
Role: Presenter
Taylor Stanley, B.S.
Accreditation Coordinator
Henry Ford Health System
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Outline the New Program Director Onboarding timeline and process
2. Discuss and identify key areas essential to a successful program director transition
3. Be able to modify and utilize the New Program Director resources to meet individual institutional
needs
4. Share best practices across programs and institutions
5.
Session Description
Program Director (PD) turnover is inevitable within residency and fellowship programs. New PDs can often
feel overwhelmed with the transition into their new role. Oftentimes they are unfamiliar with the responsibilities
and expectations of the role, including having a sound understanding of the ACGME Program Requirements.
Having an established multi-step process to aid in PD transition ensures all incoming PDs have a
comprehensive understanding of the program and can minimize potential adverse effects on resident
education. Additionally, by leveraging an interdisciplinary team and identifying a set framework; the Program
Director is provided with resources to build a strong foundation and foster an environment of continuous
improvement. Speakers will detail a Four-step process that includes notification letters to the department,
distribution of a GME Checklist, attendance at a formal education session, and the completion of a New
Program Director Review. Attendees will leave this session with best practices and a framework for the new
program director onboarding process to utilize at their own institution.
Target Audience
DIOs, GME Administrators, Program Directors, Program Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The ACGME’s Accreditation Program Requirements can be overwhelming for anyone, but especially for new program
directors. Program Director turnover can cause potential adverse effects on training programs. By establishing a New
Program Director Review process based on major accreditation requirements and collaboration amongst an
interdisciplinary team, programs can minimize the potential impact on resident education and set the program up for
continued success. This workshop will enable attendees from both the program and institutional levels to develop and
improve the process of program director transitions.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Creating a standard new program director onboarding process can lead to successful hand-offs that aim to maintain
successful accreditation status, decrease potential citations, and minimize the impact on resident education. Through this
session, attendees will learn ways to streamline and improve the program director transition processes while also reflecting
on their own institution’s needs.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
A potential barrier to implementing the new program director process would be buy in from their own institution and/or
GMEC. Even if an attendee is not able to implement the entire process at the institutional level, attendees can still utilize
aspects of the framework to improve the program director transition. This process is also developed based on the
presence of a central GME office. However, the process can easily be modified to be utilized at the individual program
level.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Attendees will be presented with the overall framework of the PD onboarding process. This will facilitate a deeper
discussion in the benefits of having a streamlined approach. Speakers will then dive deeper into the individual steps of
onboarding and detail its relationship to program requirement compliance. Speakers will also present feedback from PDs
that have gone through the process and highlight its benefits. The session will incorporate a presentation, table discussion,
and Q&A aspects. Attendees will also be provided with a copy of all resources mentioned to bring back to their institution
that can be adapted to their specific needs.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
5 Minutes- Introduction & and Defining Roles in the Process
30 minutes- Detailing the 4 steps of the process: Notification Letters, GME Checklist, Formal Training Session, New
Program Director Review
10 minutes- Breakout & Discussion
5 minutes- Summary & Q&A
(132) Submission ID#1877866
From Scratch: Building a GME Program by Aligning Private Practice, Community, and Institutional Objectives
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Kristen Edgerton – McLaren Port Huron
Email: kristen.edgerton@mclaren.org
Office Phone: (810) 441-3420
Presenter(s)
Kristen Edgerton, MSA
GME Manager
McLaren Port Huron
Role: Presenter
Sivateja Mandava, MD
Program Director, Internal Medicine
McLaren Port Huron
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Identify common themes that align private practice physicians' incentives with resident education
2. List strategies to overcome institutional barriers to GME
3. Identify areas of need in a community that can be addressed by a residency program
4.
5.
Session Description
This is the story of developing a Graduate Medical Education (GME) program in a community-based hospital
that was GME naïve. We address the challenges involved with fostering an academic and learning
environment while incorporating into workflows of private practitioners. We explore the common set of
conditions seen among many rural and suburban communities that has set forth the need to bring a residency
program into our community. Lastly, we discuss the nuances of balancing institutional objectives for patient
access and decreased labor cost with the "education over service" mentality of our program.
Target Audience
GME administrators, DIOs/ADIOs, program directors, program coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Relationships between private practice physicians, health care institutions, and Graduate Medical Education are the
backbone of creating programs that meet multiple, often competing, objectives. Some institutions are able to use financial
means to bridge and bolster these relationships, however, this is not always the case. We wish to explore some of the
other means and techniques that we have employed to engage our stakeholders in creating a successful residency
program.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
The audience should leave our session with tangible examples and ideas to take back to their existing institutions in a way
that would better reframe/reinvent the existing relationships between various stakeholders. These lessons may reduce
friction and optimize residency learning environments, while aligning institutional, community, and provider incentives.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Financial barriers and time/productivity restraints are often considered barriers to incorporating a residency program into
community practice. Our session will provide suggestions on both financial offsets as well as non-financial strategies to
bridge this gap.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Content will predominantly be delivered in PowerPoint format, with a 1-2 page handout provided as a high level summary
of our topic. During the 35 minute content delivery (see below), there will be portions that are interactive with the audience
to improve engagement in our topic.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
We will provide a 35 minute interactive lecture and 15 minute Q&A.
(133) Submission ID#1877868
Helping Programs to Create Meaningful Evaluations
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Lori Smith – Bayhealth
Email: loraine_smith@bayhealth.org
Office Phone: (302) 744-6835
Cell Phone: (216) 296-3335
Presenter(s)
Lori Smith, EdD, MSL, MBA
Director, GME
Bayhealth
Role: Presenter
Jennifer Burich, MA
Institutional Coordinator/Program Manager
Cleveland Clinic
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Analyze evaluation questions to determine value in continuous improvement efforts
2. Compose meaningful questions which aid in continuous improvement efforts
3. Identify ways in which a "train the trainer" approach can be used to facilitate evaluation review/creation
at your institution
4.
5.
Session Description
Every program is expected to have many evaluations (faculty of resident, resident of faculty, peer, 360, semi-
annual, rotation, etc.), but are your evaluations providing you with the information you need for continuous
improvement or are they merely checking a box? Do you review annually? Are they linked to competencies,
milestones and goals and objectives? Are the questions ambiguous? Do the questions provide the data
needed in a quantifiable way? This session will discuss how to create assess current evaluations and create
valid questions to get you the data needed for improvement. Ways inj which you can train others to assess
and evaluate will be highlighted as well.
Target Audience
Target audience is GME Institutional leaders who are interested in providing assistance to their programs, or
experienced coordinators who mentor other programs.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Although all programs have the necessary evaluations, many do not have quality evaluations that are useful in continuous
improvement. This session will provide information about appraising evaluations to determine if they are meeting the
program's needs and constructing questions that are valid and useful. The session will also discuss ways in which to use
this information to successfully train our coordinators and program directors in evaluation creation to assure we are
effectively measuring if we are meeting our goals and objectives.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
GME is about continuous improvement, but if our evaluations are ambiguous and do not provide useful information, we
often do not know what improvements are needed. It is hoped that this session facilitates review of the evaluation forms to
assure they are meaningful and provide quality data.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
This is only one brief session; attendees will need to take what they have learned back to their own institution and
implement. It will also be important to employ proper change management processes when doing so, as not to alienate our
PC's and PD's who have created the existent instruments.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This session will utilize didactic learning to teach appraisal skills and the creation of effective questions. Group tablework
will be done to practice evaluation appraisal and question creation.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
15 minutes- creating impactful evaluations (presentation)
15 minutes- Review/discussion of evaluation instruments provided at table (group work)
5 minutes- discussion of instruments
10 minutes- Discuss methods for appraising institutionally
5 minutes Q & A and closing remarks
(134) Submission ID#1877870
Current State of GME Finance
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Horace Jenkins – Forvis Mazars LLP
Email: horace.jenkins@us.forvismazars.com
Office Phone: (404) 391-4515
Presenter(s)
Horace L. Jenkins, MHA
Senior Manager
Forvis Mazars LLP
Role: Presenter
Scott Bezjak, CPA, MBA, CGMA
Managing Director
Forvis Mazars LLP
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand operational decisions that impact GME funding
2. Identify available GME funding opportunities to help your organization
3. Work with leadership to develop strategies to optimize GME funding
4.
5.
Session Description
If you make decisions on the financial viability of GME at your organization, this session is for you. Don't let
resident FTE caps and per resident amounts (PRAs) keep your organization from expanding existing
programs and implementing new programs. This session is for teaching hospital organizations that are
seeking GME funding opportunities to address patient and physician needs through medical residency
programs. You will gain a better understanding of the financial value residents and fellows provide to your
organization. You will also obtain knowledge on leveraging current regulations to create GME funding
opportunities.
Target Audience
The intended audience for this session is GME decision makers including Designated Institutional Officials,
Chief Financial Officers, Program Directors, Program Administrators, Program Managers, Program
Coordinators, Vice Presidents of GME, Directors of GME, Chief Academic Officers, and Deans
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
In the National Reimbursement Practice at Forvis Mazars, we work with diverse types of teaching hospitals. We often
conduct GME educational and strategy sessions with organizations. The audience for these sessions’ ranges from
executive and financial leadership to GME administration. Common themes discussed during these sessions are how to
obtain funding for our programs and how to optimize payment based on our current status. We want to address these
themes by providing industry insight and solutions that may have a direct positive impact on GME finances.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will help both Financial/Reimbursement Leadership and the GME Office understand how the current financial
environment impacts decisions regarding medical residency programs. We want teaching hospital organizations to self-
assess to determine what current practices they can change and/or implement that will help GME funding. We will leave
with decision makers with a general understanding of what GME funding opportunities are available to them and how to
leverage existing regulations to help finances.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
There are no potential barriers as this is an introductory session intended for all GME educators that want to know more
about the finance component. A key takeaway for the audience will be to include a leader from Finance and/or
Reimbursement in regular meetings.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will use a PowerPoint slide deck to share the content and facilitate learning during the session. We will ask questions
to engage the audience.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
The presentation will begin with a recap of the financial challenges facing hospitals and health systems. We will shift to
general education on GME funding and GME payment drivers. We will give examples of what organizations can do to
analyze the financial position of GME. We will discuss the value of residents/fellows. Then we will discuss recent funding
opportunities made available through regulatory changes. And we will close with strategies to optimize GME payments.
(135) Submission ID#1877878
Mastering Dialogue: Coaching as Communication for Physician Leaders
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Jennifer Newman – Henry Ford Health System
Email: jnewman5@hfhs.org
Office Phone: (313) 971-1229
Presenter(s)
Jennifer Newman, EdS
Manager,Graduate Medical Education Instructional Design and Learning Systems & Resources
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Odaliz Abreu-Lanfranco, MD
Internal Medicine Program Director, Infectious Disease Sr Staff
Henry Ford Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Explore the advantages of coaching in GME and understand its potential to enhance faculty
communication, promote trainee success, and cultivate a positive program culture.
2. Apply key communication techniques to adopt a "Coach Approach" and foster a supportive and
growth-oriented environment.
3. Learn and practice a practical framework for effective coaching conversations to integrate into daily
conversations with trainees.
4.
5.
Session Description
Unleash the potential of coaching in Graduate Medical Education (GME)! Join us for a hands-on workshop
exploring how effective communication, infused with a coach-approach, can shape the future of medical
training. In this session, you will discover the power of coaching to instill resourcefulness, reflection, and a
growth mindset in trainees, crucial for their professional development and well-being. We will introduce
practical strategies and a high-yield coaching model to integrate the 'coach approach' into your daily
interactions. At the end of this session, you will leave equipped with the knowledge and skills to leverage
coaching in GME, integrate effective coaching conversations, and promote a positive program culture.
Target Audience
• Faculty members • Program directors • Residents/fellows • DIOs
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Addressing professional practice gaps in coaching as communication for physician faculty to use with their trainees can
focus on several key areas:
• Building Rapport and Trust: Developing strong relationships between faculty and trainees is crucial for effective
communication and learning. Coaching can emphasize techniques to build rapport, active listening, and empathetic
communication.
• Promoting Self-Reflection: Encouraging trainees to reflect on their own performance and learning experiences is essential
for continuous improvement. Coaching can introduce strategies for facilitating self-reflection and goal-setting.
• Managing Challenging Conversations: Physicians often encounter difficult conversations with patients, families, and
colleagues. Coaching can equip faculty with communication strategies to navigate challenging situations effectively, which
they can then model for trainees.
• Enhancing Communication Skills: Effective communication is fundamental to patient care and teamwork. Coaching can
focus on improving communication skills such as clarity, empathy, and assertiveness among faculty and trainees alike.
• Aligning Expectations and Goals: Misalignment between faculty expectations and trainee goals can hinder learning and
professional development. Coaching can help clarify expectations, set achievable goals, and ensure mutual understanding.
• Cultural Sensitivity and Diversity: In healthcare settings, understanding and respecting cultural differences are critical.
Coaching can address cultural competence, diversity awareness, and inclusive communication practices.
By addressing these professional practice gaps through coaching as communication, physician faculty can better support
the development of their trainees, ultimately improving patient care outcomes and fostering a positive learning
environment.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Our Coaching as Communication session aims to significantly enhance both competence and performance through the
strategic use of coaching as a powerful communication tool. Participants will experience a transformation in their ability to
foster strong relationships with trainees and peers alike. By mastering high-yield coaching questions, they will gain the
confidence to navigate crucial conversations around feedback, evaluation, and supporting struggling learners effectively.
The session is designed to equip physician leaders with additional tools beyond traditional advising and mentoring. This
approach not only enriches their toolkit but also encourages a profound shift in thinking and practice. Our goal is to
cultivate a culture where reflection, growth, and decisive action are prioritized. Ultimately, this will lead to improved
competence in handling complex interpersonal dynamics and enhanced performance in leadership roles.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
• Time to practice the skill
• Time to reflect
• Time to hold the conversations
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
This interactive workshop explores the transformative power of coaching within the Graduate Medical Education (GME)
environment. Effective communication between medical faculty and trainees is essential for nurturing the next generation
of physicians. Communicating through a coaching process empowers trainees to be resourceful and reflective and helps
them cultivate a growth-mindset—traits that are essential for healthy professional development and for avoiding burnout.
This session further highlights how a "coach approach" offers a powerful communication tool for interactions with peers,
trainees, and patients. This session introduces a high-yield coaching model and provides participants with hands-on
practice in utilizing it. Participants will leave with tools to implement a "coach approach" in their daily practice and a
coaching framework for more effective communication.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
• 8min Intro Didactic & Discussion
o Benefits of coaching in GME
o Explore the coach-approach
• 8min Introduce Coaching Tool and Scenarios
• 4min Demo
• 13min Small Group Activity
o Practice using the tool with partner(s); peers observe & give feedback
• 8min Interactive Group Discussion
• 10min Action Planning Template Activity
• 4min Q&A
(136) Submission ID#1877883
“It Takes Two to Tango. Fostering a Healthy TY PD/PC Relationship.”
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CTYPD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Rosa Gomez – Wellstar Kennestone Regional Medical Center
Email: rosa.gomez@wellstar.org
Office Phone: (770) 793-7742
Cell Phone: (646) 539-0297
Presenter(s)
Rosa Gomez, BS
Residency Coordinator
Wellstar Kennestone Regional Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Joanne Zhu, MD, MSc, FACP, FHM
Program Director, Transitional Year
Wellstar Kennestone Regional Medical Center
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Aim at enhancing the communications skills to effectively collaborate with their TY PD/PC, along with
setting in place strategies that foster a healthy working relationship.
2. Promote dynamic conflict resolution skills between the TY PD/PC to address and resolve issues in a
more constructive manner.
3. Have a better understanding on how to improve on defining the PD/PC roles and responsibilities,
which will help improve collaborations to maximize efficiency.
4.
5.
Session Description
The Program Director and Program Coordinator is a dyad in the GME Department that is crucial for the
effective functioning of a residency program. While the goal for the TY PD/PC is to have a healthy
relationship, this does not always happen. Our team will be discussing the best practices in combating such
challenges, and ultimately fostering a healthy TY PD/PC relationship.
Target Audience
TY Program Directors and TY Program Coordinators.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Gaps we will address are:
• Role confusion and overlap: TY PDs and PCs often face unclear definition of roles, leading to confusion.
• Ineffective communication: Poor communication or lack of communication often results in misunderstanding or delayed
decision-making, which in turn negatively impacts the program’s leadership.
• Lack of trust and mutual respect: Failure to recognize each other’s contributions and unique attributes lead to inefficiency,
high burnout risk and unhealthy team dynamics.
• Lack of conflict resolution skills: Conflicts are often handled inappropriately or disregarded, leading to prolonged
discontent and strain in work relationships.
• Inadequate professional knowledge and skills: Few opportunities for joint professional development opportunities limit the
understanding of each other’s roles and lead to lack of desire to collaborate.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Our team will target the following changes and their outcomes:
• Improve role understanding: TY PDs/PCs need a clear understanding of each other’s roles and responsibilities, minimize
overlap to avoid unnecessary workload and improve collaborations to maximize efficiency.
• Enhance communication skills: TY PD/PC jointly develop effective communication strategies to establish a clear and
timely exchange of information and shared expectations.
• Improve Efficiency in Program Management: Effective delegation of tasks between the TY PD and PC, more streamlined
workflow, and better utilization of available resources.
• Improve Conflict Resolution: Promoting dynamic conflict resolution skills, allowing PDs/PCs to address and resolve
issues in a more constructive manner.
• Enhance Collaboration: Fostering a culture of collaboration between the PD and PC to achieve common program goals.
• Achieve Education and Common Outcomes: A more improved PD/PC relationship will lead to better program
management, successful accreditation, which in turn will help optimize educational experience and support for the
residents.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Potential barriers:
• Lack of communications skills between PD/PC will hinder improvement in relationship building.
• The panel and any role-playing scenarios may not cover all types of challenges faced by the PD/PC.
• Persistent lack of engagement by either the PD or PC.
• Lack of local leadership support. This can come from either the PD, GME or overall institution may not be supportive of
these practices presented by the PC.
• Failure of either party to recognize the existence of issues in their work relationship.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
• Panel discussion including PDs/PCs, and GME administration staff to share their positive experience on the subject
matter.
• Role play in challenging real-world scenarios.
• Audience engagement to brainstorm strategies to help rectify/repair the broken relationships.
• Open discussion to allow the audience to share their perspectives and winning strategies.
• Generate a tipsheet, a list of resources to share with the audience.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
• Opening with a PowerPoint presentation with 6-10 slides on general principles in fostering a healthy team dynamic and
common pitfalls. (5-10 minutes)
• Panel discussion involving 2-3 pairs of PDs/PCs who will share their success stories in their current work relationships.
(10 minutes)
• Role playing, we will analyze two real-life scenarios in which PD/PC relationships are challenging. (10 minutes)
• Brainstorming with audience for improvement strategies. (10 minutes)
• Open discussion with audience engagement on the topics presented. (10 minutes)
(137) Submission ID#1877885
The IMG Journey to U.S. GME
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Christine Shiffer – ECFMG/Intealth
Email: cshiffer@ecfmg.org
Office Phone: (215) 764-6625
Cell Phone: (267) 240-0720
Presenter(s)
Christine Shiffer, MBA, MSL
Director, Regulatory Services
Intealth
Role: Presenter
Danielle Tinder, MS
Director, Domestic Services
ECFMG
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Describe the required steps for an international medical graduate (IMG) to enter U.S. graduate
medical education (GME).
2. Explain the latest policy developments and key trends as pertains to IMG trainees.
3. Discuss the various initiatives underway by Intealth and other organizations to support IMG well-being
and transition to U.S. GME.
4.
5.
Session Description
Approximately 25% of active U.S. physicians and 23% of trainees in U.S. graduate medical education (GME)
are international medical graduates (IMGs). Join representatives from Intealth and its division ECFMG for an
interactive session covering the process through which IMGs enter U.S. GME. Topics will include the ECFMG
Certification process and requirements; the Electronic Residency Application (ERAS) and Match process for
IMGs; and J-1 Visa Sponsorship. Timely updates on these topics will also be provided, as well as discussion
of the unique challenges and needs of IMGs as relates to such issues as immigration, well-being, and
adaption to the U.S. health care system.
Target Audience
DIOs, GME administrators, program directors, program coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Our presentation seeks to enhance understanding of the steps needed for an international medical graduate to enter U.S.
GME, and increase awareness of key policies and requirements that impact this process.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
GME administrators and others are often unclear as to policies/procedures surrounding the recruitment and onboarding of
IMG trainees -- this presentation is designed to clarify these areas (e.g., ERAS, Match, visas, credentialing, etc.).
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
We recognize that some of this information may be brand new to the audience and therefore a bit daunting - we will seek
to break down the journey into clear, discrete steps and also engage the audience so that we can learn from each other.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Presentation, interactive discussion / information-sharing, collaborative Q & A
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
- Audience Q & A - who are they and what are they seeking to learn today (10 min)
- Presentation with breaks for questions/discussion (25 min)
- Further Q & A and information-sharing (15 min)
(138) Submission ID#1877904
Developing and Growing GME in Underserved and Community-based Settings: AACOM's Initiatives and
Programs to Support U.S. Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine in their GME Development Efforts
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Austin Wetmore – American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine
Email: awetmore@aacom.org
Office Phone: (301) 968-4147
Presenter(s)
Austin Wetmore, MS
Program Manager, GME Initiatives
American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine
Role: Presenter
Alegneta Long, MPP
Vice President, GME Initiatives
American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Describe strategies to develop and sustain GME programs in underserved and community-based
settings
2. Understand the main challenges in GME development faced by colleges of osteopathic medicine
3. Discuss and identify resources, tools and strategies to overcome common barriers to GME
development, including local and institutional challenges
4. Explore educational programming and activities focused on enhancing GME development
5.
Session Description
The Assembly of Osteopathic Graduate Medical Educators (AOGME), the American Association of Colleges
of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), which is the parent organization of AOGME, and the GME Growth Action
Group of AACOM’s UME-GME Task Force have engaged in focused initiatives and programming to provide
resources and assistance to our nation’s colleges of osteopathic medicine (COMs) for their GME development
efforts over the past year, and this presentation will highlight these efforts and share them with the broader
medical education community.
Target Audience
Medical school leadership, faculty and staff involved in GME development (e.g., deans, clinical deans, GME
deans, GME directors, residency development managers, etc.), GME program leadership and faculty
(designated institutional officials, program directors, directors of osteopathic education, etc.), clinical executive
leaders, hospital finance leaders and others interested in GME development.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The Assembly of Osteopathic Graduate Medical Educators (AOGME), the American Association of Colleges of
Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), which is the parent organization of AOGME, and the GME Growth Action Group of
AACOM’s UME-GME Task Force, seek to provide GME development resources and tools to our nation’s colleges of
osteopathic medicine (COMs).
A benchmarking survey that AOGME’s Council of GME Leaders conducted in April 2023 to understand the activities and
needs for GME development at COMs revealed that COMs face several challenges in their GME development efforts, with
funding maintenance and a lack of support for consortia models ranking as the most challenging factors. Other challenges
revealed in the survey results include faculty and program director recruitment, program staff management, equipment and
facility availability, grant writing support and meeting Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)
requirements.
Therefore, AACOM and AOGME have engaged in focused efforts to provide resources and assistance to COMs in GME
development over the past year, and this presentation will highlight these efforts and share them with the broader medical
education community.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
This session will highlight the resources and tools that AOGME and AACOM, through its UME-GME Task Force working
groups and GME Growth Action Group, have developed to assist COMs in their GME development efforts. The input and
discussion of successes and areas for improvement with other medical education professionals during this session,
specifically those engaged in hospital-based medical education, will help inform and guide our GME development efforts to
better support our COMs going forward.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
As revealed in the results of the benchmarking survey conducted by AOGME’s Council of GME Leaders in April 2023, our
COMs face various challenges related to GME development. It is anticipated that the attendees may face similar
challenges at their institutions and/or in their communities, so the interactive portion of the session featuring group
discussion with the attendees will facilitate the sharing of solutions and ideas to overcome these barriers. Additionally,
many barriers exist that are not only situational to the COM's current phase in GME development but also based on local
provisions and restrictions, which we plan to address with forthcoming program planning.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
AOGME, AOGME’s Council of GME Leaders and the GME Growth Action Group of AACOM’s UME-GME Task Force have
collaborated to develop and deliver virtual and in-person workshops, events, educational sessions, activities and other
resources to help support our nation’s COMs in their GME development efforts. We also want to express the long-term
value of GME to medical colleges to help them understand the multifactorial benefits and outcomes that result from
introducing and growing GME by identifying the means to start and consistently sustain GME in their communities. Our
resources offer guidance, tools and best practices covering various areas such as GME finance, state-based initiatives,
GME development in rural and medically underserved areas, physician workforce and faculty development and more. Our
resources are frequently updated by AACOM and the partners mentioned to provide the most value based on recent
trends identified through research and audience needs. COMs can utilize these resources for training, reference,
customization to their needs, and collaboration with other institutions, ultimately enhancing the quality and effectiveness of
their GME development efforts and GME programs in their service area. Examples of these resources and activities
include:
AACOM’s GME Development Clearinghouse Webpage
AACOM’s UME-GME Task Force and AOGME have collaborated to develop a clearinghouse webpage featuring resources
for COMs to utilize and reference as they navigate GME development requirements and opportunities. Webpage link:
https://www.aacom.org/gme/gme-development-clearinghouse
AOGME GME Development Webinar Series
AOGME has hosted a series of webinars on GME development topics and featuring GME experts and national leaders to
assist COMs in their GME development efforts (with the recordings available to view online:
https://www.aacom.org/gme/assembly-of-osteopathic-graduate-medical-educators/professional-development/aogme-
webinar-series/on-demand-webinars):
• Osteopathic Recognition Study: A Concurrent Mixed Methods Approach
• Best Practices for Developing Osteopathic Neuromusculoskeletal Medicine (ONMM) Residency Programs
• Strategies to Develop OB/GYN Residency Programs in Rural and Underserved Settings
• VA-Funded GME Expansion Opportunities
• Strategies to Launch Rural Residency Programs in Critical Access Hospitals
• Rural Psychiatry Residency Program Development
• Rural GME Development, HRSA Funding for Developing Residencies & THCGME Program Status Updates
• Identification of Prime Hospitals for Rural Residency Development: Tools and Resources to Support New Program
Development
• GME Funding & Hospital Issues
Issue Brief: Expanding Clinical Education Opportunities: A Strategic Approach for Health Workforce Goals and Physician
Recruitment and Retention (April 2024)
This issue brief explores the imperative for expanding clinical training opportunities (including training sites) to address the
growing demands of the health workforce by examining the benefits of expanding clinical education opportunities. The
document aims to provide a comprehensive overview for policymakers, educational institutions and healthcare
stakeholders. Link: https://www.aacom.org/docs/default-source/residency-gme/expanding-clinical-education-
opptys_050424.pdf?sfvrsn=48aa26a0_1
2024 AACOM/AOGME Pre-Conference Workshop: GME Development Strategies in Underserved and Community-Based
Settings
On April 16, 2024 in Kansas City, Missouri, at AACOM’s annual conference, Educating Leaders 2024, AACOM and
AOGME hosted a full-day in-person/live pre-conference workshop where experts and stakeholders convened to delve into
the intricacies of GME development strategies tailored for underserved and community-based settings. The
comprehensive event covered vital aspects of GME development, including GME funding at the federal and state levels,
recruitment of faculty, mechanisms to sustain programs and meet accreditation requirements, Osteopathic Recognition
and more. Link: https://www.aacom.org/news-reports/news/2024/05/23/exploring-gme-development-strategies-in-
underserved-and-community-based-settings
AACOM/AOGME GME Development Institute Virtual Program
This three-hour virtual program held on June 20, 2023, was specifically designed for stakeholders involved in advancing
GME growth in medically underserved rural and urban areas. The goal of this event was to provide the latest information,
resources and technical assistance on GME growth from national experts in the field. Best practices on developing and
expanding GME as well as challenges were highlighted. The session recordings are available on the AOGME webpage.
Link: https://www.aacom.org/programs-events/event-and-meeting-calendar/event/2023/06/20/default-calendar/aogme-
gme-development-institute-strategies-to-advance-gme-growth-in-medically-underserved-rural-and-urban-areas
AACOM/AIAMC Virtual Half-Day Program on Evolving Landscape of Medical Education: Where do IAMCs and
Community-Based Teaching Hospitals Fit in this Ever-Changing Space?
In June 2023, AACOM collaborated with the Alliance of Independent Academic Medical Centers (AIAMC) to present a joint
three-hour virtual half-day program on articulating the value of community-based education and healthcare. This
informative and interactive program included learning about trends in community-based hospitals, articulating the value of
the AIAMC’s mission and sharing of experiences and identifying new opportunities for community-based education
programs. The program concluded with a shared value proposition and elevator pitch for attendees to communicate to their
C-suites and other leaders. Link: https://www.aacom.org/programs-events/event-and-meeting-
calendar/event/2023/06/13/default-calendar/june-2023-aacom-aiamc-virtual-half-day-program-on-evolving-landscape-of-
medical-education
Forums on GME Growth & Development
The AOGME Council of GME Leaders hosted a series of forums to support GME growth and development among COMs
and other GME leaders and to highlight strategies to develop and grow GME programs/positions. In the forums, GME
leaders across our nation's COMs shared best practices, strategies, challenges and solutions to support GME growth in
medically underserved urban and rural settings.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
A 30-minute presentation with an overview of the GME development initiatives and resources developed to support COMs,
followed by a 20-minute interactive discussion with the audience members on barriers to GME development that they have
faced, such as funding, regulatory, accreditation or other challenges preventing them from growing GME at their
institutions or in their communities, and strategies to overcome these barriers.
(139) Submission ID#1877987
Onboarding House Officers for Success
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Maya Severson – OHSU
Email: seversom@ohsu.edu
Office Phone: (541) 908-2411
Presenter(s)
Maya Severson, MPH
Director of Operations, Graduate Medical Education
OHSU
Role: Presenter
Sydni Whitley, BS
Project Coordinator, Graduate Medical Education
OHSU
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand the processes and timeline that go into planning an annual onboarding event for 315
incoming residents and fellows.
2. Identify potential barriers and how to overcome them when hiring residents and fellows such as first
day access to benefits and PTO as well as ensuring all incoming residents and fellows receive the
appropriate education and resources in order to function efficiently within OHSU.
3. Apply OHSU's onboarding template and plan to their own institution (and scale for size).
4. Collaborate with other institutions about best practices for hiring and onboarding residents and fellows.
5. Understand onboarding processes and how to work with resident/fellow unions and other
organizations to optimize the hiring experience for residents and fellows.
Session Description
This session is aimed at discussing and shedding light on the onboarding and hiring processes that our GME
office goes through in order to hire and onboard our cohort of ~315 new residents and fellows each year. We
highlight how we offer a seamless onboarding by working in tandem with our internal and external
stakeholders. We grapple with concerns including increasing costs and limited resources while working to
continuously improve our processes and communication. We are interested in sharing our onboarding
methods and also hearing the experiences of other institutions and individuals so that together we may
brainstorm a more efficient standardized workflow to then share that out with institutions that continue to
expand.
Target Audience
GME office employees, programs directors and coordinators, C-suite and institutional representatives.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
We want to discuss the logistical challenges and opportunities that arise when hiring large groups of residents and fellows
and how we can streamline the process.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
I would like to collaborate and share best practices with other institutions and put together a community around how to
think about operational processes like onboarding, offboarding, reappointing, etc.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
We will discuss how to overcome barriers within the institution or offices that can make it difficult to effectively hire large
groups of people.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We will work with a Change Management framework (prepare for change, create vision, implement changes, embed and
solidify changes, review and analyze changes)
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
We will present the following:
1. Detailed timeline for institution and programs
2. How GME works (imperfectly) with a change management lens to
3. Onboarding template of what we offer our incoming residents/fellows, the resources we provide for them and
educational tools.
4. A platform for other institutions to collaborate and share their onboarding and hiring experiences and best practices.
(140) Submission ID#1877990
I Have This Crazy Idea…How to Bring Your Innovative Ideas to Life as a Program Coordinator
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COPAC
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Morgan Farra – South Shore University Hospital
Email: mfarra@northwell.edu
Office Phone: (631) 894-5334
Presenter(s)
Morgan Farra, c-TAGME
Training Program Administrator
South Shore University Hospital
Role: Presenter
Kelly Conlon, MS, C-TAGME
Director, Medical Education, Eastern Region
Northwell Health
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Understand their role in project development and program innovation
2. Identify and prioritize opportunities at their own programs and institutions
3. Implement tools to successfully bring their own innovative ideas to implementation
4. Navigate potential obstacles in the implementation process
5.
Session Description
“We could be doing this better than we are right now,” or “I wish we could do something like that here.” These
are thoughts we’ve all had working in medical education; some of us are even brave enough to say these
things out loud. But identifying opportunities is the easy part – how do we take that feeling of knowing it could
be better or wishing for an idea to be brought to life to being the leader who does something about it? The
purpose of this session is to empower program coordinators to be the innovators in their programs and at their
institutions. We aim to equip participants with the tools needed to go from talking about ways to improve to
being change leaders. Following this hands-on session participants will feel empowered to identify areas of
opportunity, be equipped with the tools to bring innovative solutions to fruition and understand how to
successfully navigate the obstacles that come with innovation in medical education.
Target Audience
Both new and seasoned Program Coordinators
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Drawing on our own experiences developing innovative programs and curricula at every level of our institution, we aim to
empower program coordinators (PCs) as innovators and encourage participants to explore their loftiest goals, teaching
them how to bring those ideas to life. This session will engage participants in a discussion that explores the road to
implementing innovative ideas and equip learners with the tools needed to successfully navigate the pathway to
implementation no matter the scope or scale. We hope that at the conclusion of our session PCs will be empowered to
create programs and develop other innovative programs that close gaps at their own institutions.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
With our session we aim to have program coordinators take lead roles in project implementation at their institutions and
hospitals. Our session aims to give participants the tools to become stakeholders in innovative projects that impact GME in
a realistic yet scalable way in their home sites.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Each institution and program does not have access to the same resources. Opportunities will vary based on the type of
institution (university-based, community-based, large teaching hospitals, small teaching hospitals, etc). Our session will
provide a variety of innovative ideas that are reproducible at all types of academic institutions.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Using minimal didactic techniques and instead engaging participants in guided group discussion, we will be able to achieve
each of our session aims.
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
3 minutes – Introductions and overview of session objectives
6 minutes – Overview of the impact of PCs in program development & innovation
10 minutes – Identify goals that the group has for their own programs & institutions. Highlight our own innovations as
examples from a large institution, at a regional level & program specific to ensure all participant needs are met in the
session discussion
8 minutes – Engage participants in an activity showcasing ways to prioritize projects & identify first steps in program
implementation
6 minutes – Explore advanced needs when bringing innovative ideas to fruition with a focused discussion on obstacles to
consider
6 minutes – Engage participants in an activity exploring the potential obstacles to their own innovations and identify the
appropriate tools to use to overcome
6 minutes – Review steps and best practices when introducing and implementing innovative programs
5 minutes – Open discussion and questions
(141) Submission ID#1878046
Engaging a Large GME team Through Communication and Recognition
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: COIL
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Colleen Stevens – HCA Healthcare
Email: colleen.stevens@hcahealthcare.com
Office Phone: (813) 244-7374
Presenter(s)
Colleen Stevens, MBA, C-TAGME
Division Director, GME
HCA Healthcare
Role: Presenter
Pam Demers, n/a
AVP, GME
HCA Healthcare
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. Reflect on communication challenges within their own institutions.
2. Identify methods to help increase communication within their teams.
3. Engage their program leaders through intentional communication tools and recognition activities.
4.
5.
Session Description
Communication can be cumbersome and problematic to institutions small and large. At the HCA Healthcare
West Florida Division, we have 10 facilities and more than 50 programs. Information can get lost as it is
cascaded down through our corporate structure. We have found that communication is often misconstrued or
not shared well. Through this session, we aim to provide an overview of the measures we have taken to
increase modalities of communication to engage our program leaders differently along with providing a more
robust way to recognize them.
Target Audience
This session is targeted towards institutional leaders.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Through this presentation, we plan to share how we have made strides and changes to address communication gaps
across our 10 facilities and a way to increase our levels of recognition.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
- Improve the consistency of communication, while ensuring everyone receives the same communication in a timely
manner.
- Create an environment to allow GME Staff to feel comfortable with asking questions and escalating issues sooner.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
- Personality character traits that my limit staff from speaking up.
- Staff understanding of the chain of command within the organization.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
We would discuss the following approaches that we have taken/implemented.
1. Actions taken to address communication, through
• Newsletters
• Lunch and Learns
• ADME Meetings and Development Day
• Breakfast Rounds
2. Actions taken to increase recognition, by doing
• End of the Year Thank you
• GME Professional of the Month
• GME Professionals Day Celebration
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
- Overview of the West Florida Division Structure – Leadership and Facilities and Corporate – 5 minutes
- Overview of the concerns received and Glint Survey Feedback – 10 minutes
- Discussion of actions taken to address communication – 15 minutes
- Discussion of actions taken to increase recognition – 15 minutes
- Q&A – 5 minutes
(142) Submission ID#1878051
Applied Quality Improvement and Patient Safety - a Root Cause Analysis Simulation
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: CPFD
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Robert Flora – McLaren Health Care
Email: robert.flora@mclaren.org
Office Phone: (810) 342-1147
Cell Phone: (330) 283-4957
Presenter(s)
Robert Flora, MD, MBA, MPH
Chief Academic Officer/ VP of Academic Affairs
McLaren Health Care
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. state the types of safety events
2. describe the process of root cause analysis
3. know the indications for convening an RCA such as sentinel events
4. utilize a fishbone diagram and 5-Whys as tools in patient safety event investigation
5.
Session Description
A teach-the-teacher format is proposed to introduce a program that fulfills parts of the CLER focus areas of
patient safety and quality improvement. Patient safety (PS) investigation and quality improvement(QI)
activities for process change are intertwined. Development of action plans and monitoring of improvement are
the beginning steps of the QI process. The main exposure to patient safety investigations for the residents are
root cause analysis that occur for real safety events. However, few hospitals have enough safety events to
provide education and experience to the residents. A RCA simulation was developed and implemented. It
utilizes OB cases and videos. Two short videos are first shown. Then a didactic presentation on types of
safety events, sentinel events, and steps of an RCA is given. Two tools are introduced which are the fishbone
diagram and 5-Whys. The attendees are divided into three groups. One group analyzes the office setting,
another the OB triage and labor delivery unit, and the last group the operating room. After watching a 20
minute video based on a true case, the groups perform a root cause analysis on their assigned venue. LAstly
a debriefing is performed. The intent is to share the resources with attribution to the author and sources of the
video.
Target Audience
DIOs, program and fellowship directors, core faculty, GME managers, residency coordinators, and quality/
safety professionals.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
The gap is the education of all residents and fellows in root cause analysis. The gap exist due to few actual root cause
analysis in institutions. An RCA simulation was developed to address this gap.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Meeting components of the CLER focus areas of patient safety and quality improvement.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
Do not anticipate barriers. The tools will be provided to all attendees after the workshop.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Didactic, videos, performance of a simulated RCA
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
1) Two short videos as introduction
2) Didactic on root cause analysis and safety events
3) Introduce fishbone diagram and 5-Why templates
4) Watch video of OB case
5) Perform assigned RCA based on video
6) Debriefing
7) Access to tools
(143) Submission ID#1878070
A Health Disparities and Structural/ Social Determinants of Health Workshop on Fulfilling CLER HQ PAthway
6.
Submission Type: Breakout Session
Submission Category: General
Submission Status: Complete / Locked
Submitter: Robert Flora – McLaren Health Care
Email: robert.flora@mclaren.org
Office Phone: (810) 342-1147
Cell Phone: (330) 283-4957
Presenter(s)
Aubin Whitmer, C-TAGME
GME Manager
McLaren Health Care/ McLAren OAkland
Role: Presenter
Session Objectives
1. explain health, health disparities, healthcare vs health care, structural and social determinants of
health, DE&I, and cultural competency and humility
2. use the analogies introduced to teach others
3. understand how to integrate addressing health disparities in resident and faculty QI projects
4. learn how to refer to community resources when an SDOH risk is identified on admission
5.
Session Description
A teach-the-teacher workshop is proposed for a workshop on health disparities and structural/social
determinants of health (S/SDOH). CLER HQ Pathway 6 goal is to engage in initiatives to eliminate health care
disparities and inequities in the care they provide. A CLER report in 2021 stated that only 8.5% of resident QI
projects took health disparities into account. Part of the issue is understanding and educating health
disparities for both faculty and residents. With the CMS introduction of 5 mandatory SDOH screening question
on inpatient admissions in 2024 and the expectation of addressing them, it is of paramount importance to
improve this education. A novel approach using analogies has been developed on HD, S/SDOH, and
population health education. Definitions of terms will be introduced including social medicine, healthcare vs.
health care, DE&I, and cultural competency and humility. A tree analogy, a lake flowing into a river, a ladder
and apple tree, and a team doctor analogies will be used. The teaching set will be shared with the attendees
and may be used with attrubution to the authors and sources.
Target Audience
DIOs, program and fellowship directors, core faculty, GME managers, residency coordinators, DE&I staff.
Additional Questions
What is/are the professional practice gaps that you wish to address with your presentation? OR…what is the difference
between the current competence/practice/outcome and the optimal or desired competence/practice/outcome that you wish
to remedy with your presentation?
Understanding health disparities, structural and social determinants of health and other concepts using analogies.
What specific change(s) in competence, performance or education/accreditation outcome do you want to create through
your session?
Assessing and addressing health disparities in resident and faculty QI projects. Addressing CLER Health Quality PAthway
6.
What are the potential barriers (real or perceived) that might prevent our attendees from achieving the change you desire?
How will/can your session address those barriers to change as well?
No barriers expected. Tools will be provided to teach others with attribution to authors and sources.
What educational methods, formats, tools or approaches will you employ to facilitate the change and learning?
Didactic format introducing analogies
Please provide an outline of your planned workshop and a description of how you will use the allotted 50 minutes of time.
Presentation, discussion, pair-pair interaction, possible survey and ARS system
