Www.usask.ca/medicine FACULTY COUNCIL and GENERAL ACADEMIC ASSEMBLY College of Medicine Dean’s Report May 19, 2010

www.usask.ca/medicine

FACULTY COUNCIL and

GENERAL ACADEMIC ASSEMBLY

College of Medicine

Dean’s Report

May 19, 2010


Accreditation Cycle Cycle

• 2010 Undergraduate MD Program (LCME/CACMS)

January 2011 – CACMS Secretary Visit

• 2010 Postgraduate Residency Programs(RCPSC/CFPC)Provisional Approval with External

Reviews: Medicine, Pediatrics, Pathology, Family Medicine (Surgery ER from before)


Accreditation Cycle Cycle

• 2010 CME Program

- Survey April12-13

Report due Fall of 2010

• 2010 School of Physical Therapy

- Survey February 2008

Partially compliant until 2015


University of Saskatchewan

2nd Integrated Plan

“Towards an Engaged University”

www.usask.ca/ip/inst_planning/docs/Final_Summary.pdf

(2008-2012)



D wing – Campus Drive


E wing – Wiggins Corner




ALIGNMENT


ALIGNMENT


College of Medicine

and

School of Physical Therapy

Integrated Plan

2008-2012www.usask.ca/medicine/dean/integrated-plan

(October 15, 2007)


Strategic Initiatives Initiatives 2008-20122008-2012

a) College-specific initiatives:

1. Medical Education Initiatives2. Biomedical Education Initiatives3. Physical Therapy/Rehabilitation Initiatives4. Research Initiatives5. Finance/Administration Initiatives

6. Advancement Initiatives7. Faculty Development Initiatives8. Community Engagement and Clinical

Service








Comments

• It is unreasonable to ask faculty to provide “ a great deal of effort” beyond normal expectations.

• One problem is that faculty does not have a strong identity.

• I used to strongly agree, but time and non-appreciation wear you down.

• I do and will continue to do so.



Comments

• Yes, with the limited resources available, we have done exceedingly well.

• Not with the incumbent dean.• I have great respect for the current

administration of the College, yet I find myself talking about my commitment to my department.

• The working relationship between the College of Medicine and the Saskatoon Health Region is completely dysfunctional.



Comments

• There seems at times to be an adversarial relationship between the administration of the college and the clinical faculty.

• Loyalty to the College results from my gratitude for the opportunities provided.

• I dislike loyalty statements.



Comments

• I would readily and gladly accept any duties which I can perform competently. I would hesitate a bit about duties for which I am not trained.

• Totally depends on if I am asked or if the assignment is done in a dictatorial way.

• Are you kidding? Let’s hope things don’t come to this.



Comments

• Yes, the chemistry is very much there. Values match is crucial.

• There are a few rotten eggs, but administrative decisions tend to be general rather than dealing with the spoilage.

• In general, the statement is accurate. However, my concern is that the CoM does not put enough emphasis on research.



Comments

• I used to be. I am not proud anymore. I am too disappointed in the College’s administration, especially the Dean.

• People frequently ask me where I work and I proudly refer to the College of Medicine and the U of S.

• On a national committee I was asked how to be acknowledged. I said Royal University Hospital.

• The administration leads a College that is concerned about social justice in its broadest sense, and I am very proud to be part of that.



Comments

• Integration of SHR and the College has resulted in loss of our identification, our democratic process, and our philosophical identification with the College.

• We have to think back and owe our responsibility to the people of the Province and not take more than we deserve.

• One develops a sense of loyalty to the institution one is situated in…This is certainly true for me here. But precisely, one develops attachments to the people in the institution.



Comments

• I am inspired by the College, but I think that we all have to accept responsibility for our own attitudes and actions.

• The students and patients inspire me.• I feel supported, encouraged and challenged (in

a positive way) by the College of Medicine senior leadership. The same is sometimes not true at other levels of leadership.

• I no longer want to contribute to the college, the faculty have been disenfranchised.



Comments

• Great things are happening here. • I would only leave if obliged to.• A great amount of change is needed for

me to want to stay in the college. I hear similar comments from my colleagues.

• I have found a fit of values, career advancement opportunities and a sense that I can make a difference.



Comments

• Coming to the College of Medicine, U of S was the worst decision of my professional life.

• I had numerous other opportunities but considered working here in the College as an important commitment to the people of Saskatchewan. It has not been easy, but the rewards are considerable.

• I am glad I am here.



Comments

• Why would anybody want to leave when we are on the threshold of growth and positive developments.

• There is tremendous potential to build a remarkable medical school at our current crossroads. A lot of work and networking will need to be invested but the opportunity is unique.



Comments

• No one agrees with any institution’s policies all the time.

• It depends on the issue.• It is not the policies so much as the

processes that are problematic.• Mostly, I am on board. I am

completely on board with the mission, vision and strategy.



Comments

• The CoM is key to the University’s success and to the quality of life in Saskatchewan.

• Used to. Gave up. It seems administration does not care about people.

• Caring is a two way street. I hope the CoM cares about its faculty and their fate. The CoM needs to be faculty-centered.



Comments

• The best place at the U of S or any other university.

• SHR is much better, open and transparent.

• I am completely satisfied.• There are going to be issues

anywhere – but I feel supported here.



Comments

• No. This has been a good move for me and my family.

• Simply not true for me.• Even on bad days, working for the

College would be difficult to view as a mistake.

• Regrets are unscientific. One can never know how things would have gone if different choices had been made.





Faculty Council Committees

• Budget, Planning & Priorities Committee

• College Review Committee


Incremental Positions Funding

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

Undergraduate Positions 16 0 0

Residency Positions 24 24 12

Undergraduate Program $ 2,560K 4,773K 8,436K

Residency Program $ 1,435K 3,068K 5,365K

TOTAL 3,995K 7,841K 13,801K

Anticipated 16 additional UG positions (Class Size 100) in 2011-12


Faculty Recruitment Priority 2009-2010Department Specialty Tier Position

Allocated

1 Micro & Imm Immunologist 1 Yes

2 PM&R Physiatrist interest in Stroke & Geriatric 1 Yes

3 C H & E Epidemiology 1 Pending

4 SPT Primary Health Care 1 Yes

5 Path & Lab Med

Anatomic or General Pathologist (Regina) 1 No

6 O G & R Sc Generalist – Obstetrics and Gynecology 1 No

7 Biochemistry Nucleic Acid-Structural Biochemistry 1 Yes

8 Family Med Pre-Clerkship Coordinator 2 Yes

9 Pediatrics Gen Peds/Palliative specialist (.6 FTE) 2 Yes

10 Physiology Respiratory Physiology 2 No


Faculty Recruitment• Total hires since 2002 – 144• Total Resignations since 2002 – 36• Pre-BPP process – 22• BPP process – 64• Non-BPP recruitment:

VIDO/InterVacBioTech/Biomolecular (University Academic

Priority Fund)Neuropsychiatric Research UnitCRC ChairsClinical service requirements


Salary Review Recommendations:

Total Basic Sc Clinical

• Total Faculty considered by CRC for a Special Salary Increase = 124

• Special Increases awarded by CRC 75 23 (31%) 52 (69%)• Of the 68 Awards made:

Full CDI = 15 6 (40%) 9 (60%)

Half CDI = 60 17 (28%) 43 (72%)

College of Medicine/Departmental Standards:


Recommendations under Consideration by CRC

• Establishing additional annual College awards for faculty in each of the University Standards’ categories (Research, Practice of Professional Skills, Administration)

• Evaluations or Performance Benchmarks for Program Directors, Graduate Chairs, etc.

• Implementation of Dossiers for documentation of Administrative Duties, Research, Professional Practice


Communications, Alumni Relations &

Development

Advancement:


Four-person team in place as of October 2009,

strengthening our ability to: Build Connections,

Encourage Investment & Celebrate Success.

Advancement:


Communications

• Celebration Wall (highlighting successes of students, faculty and staff)

• FMEC National Launch (January 28th, 2010)

• Media and Public Relations (5 major announcements since January 2010)

• Communiqué (targeted for late summer 2010)

• Website re-design (collaboration with ITU, targeted for summer 2010)


Alumni Relations• Highlights in Medicine Conference

(June 23rd to June 26th, 2010 with 200 alumni)

• Homecoming Weekend (September 24th – 26th, 2010)

• Chapter Development and Alumni visits (Vancouver, Victoria, Edmonton, Calgary with over 200 alumni)

• CoM Alumni Association Strategic Plan• Annual Fund Giving

(>$500K since 2005 for College priorities)


Spring 2010 connective issue

delivered to 2700 College of Medicine Alumni this May


Development• Student Awards

(scholarships, bursaries, prizes)

• Research (on-going)

• Global Health initiatives (CoM is a national leader)

• $12M Capital Campaign (through the Council of Health Sciences Deans)

• >$1.3M in new gifts (since June 2009)


FMEC Recommendations for MD Education Dean

1. Address Individual and Community Needs Dr Tom Smith-Windsor

2. Enhance Admissions Processes Dr Barry Ziola

3. Build on the Scientific Basis of Medicine Dr Nick Ovsenek

4. Promote Prevention and Public Health Dr Nazeem Muhajarine

5. Address the Hidden Curriculum Dr Penny Davis

6. Diversify Learning Contexts Dr Bill Albritton

7. Value Generalism Dr Gill White

8. Advance Inter- and Intra-professional Practice Dr Liz Harrison

9. Adopt a Competency-Based and Flexible Approach Dr Gary Linassi

10. Foster Medical Leadership Dr Anurag Saxena


FMEC Enabling Recommendations Dean

a. Realign Accreditation Standards Dr Sheila Harding

b. Build Capacity for Change Dr Marcel D’Eon

c. Increase National Collaboration Dr Sheila Harding

d. Improve the Use of Technology Dr Grant Stoneham

e. Enhance Faculty Development Dr Femi Olatunbosun


QUESTIONS

Documents

Www.usask.ca/medicine FACULTY COUNCIL and GENERAL ACADEMIC ASSEMBLY College of Medicine Dean’s Report May 19, 2010