SELF-STUDY FOR GRADUATE PROGRAMS IN HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT EDUCATION

Transcription

1 SELF-STUDY FOR GRADUATE PROGRAMS IN HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT EDUCATION Self-Study Year: 9/2014 6/2015 Site Visit Date: October 28-30, 2015 Submitted electronically on September 2, 2015 to: The Commission on Accreditation of Health Management Education in support of an application for re-accreditation by: Portland State University Programs in Health Management and Policy; Division of Public Administration College of Urban & Public Affairs; Mark O. Hatfield School of Government October 20,

2 Contents I.A.1.1. Program's Mission... 1 I.A.1.2. Program's Vision... 5 I.A.1.3. Program's Values... 6 I.A.1.4. Statements of University and College/School mission... 7 I.A.1.5. Relation of Program mission to College/School mission... 9 I.A.2.1. Ongoing evaluation of the program I.A.2.2. Goals, objectives and expected performance outcomes I.A.2.3. Strengths and weaknesses of evaluation process I.A.3.1. Monitoring and review process for health systems & University environments I.A.3.2. Examples from monitoring process I.B.1.1. Special resources available to the Program and barriers to utilization I.B.1.2. Relation of non-accredited activities regarding allocation of resources I.B.1.3. Budgetary allocation administrative procedures I.B.1.4. Program expenditures I.B.1.5. Program revenues I.B.1.6. Administrative support available I.B.1.7. Program's ability to meet objectives as related to current resources I.B.2.1. Authority and responsibilities of Program Director I.B.2.2. Organizational Chart I.B.2.3. Organization of the Program and its relationships I.B.2.4. Suitability of Structural location I.B.3.1. Resources and accommodations associated with large classes I.B.3.2. Additional resources for online or blended instruction I.B.3.3. Policies for TA's and co-teaching I.B.3.4. Majority of instructional time and qualified faculty I.B.4.1. Availability of University wide academic resources I.B.4.2. Barriers to access II.A.1.1. Information available to students II.A.1.2. Information available to other stakeholders II.A.1.3. Publication of student achievement measures II.A.2.1. Target applicant and annual recruitment goals II.A.2.2. Recruitment activity outcomes II.A.2.3. Characteristics of entering students II.A.2.4. Assessment of recruitment and admissions process

3 II.A.2.5. Distribution of enrolled students II.A.2.6. Criteria used in the student selection process II.A.2.7. Policies and procedures for exceptions in the Program's selection criteria II.A.2.8. Recruitment efforts directed at diversity II.A.3.1. Academic and career advising II.A.3.2. Evaluation of advising II.A.3.3. Financial Aid II.A.3.4. Other support services II.A.4.1. Stakeholder involvement in Program decision making II.A.5.1. Career achievement assessment II.A.5.2. Self-assessment II.A.5.3. Completion rates II.A.5.4. Employment rates II.A.5.5. Employment settings and Program goals II.A.5.5. Employment settings and Program goals III.A.1.1. Competencies III.A.1.2. Competency development and review III.A.1.3. Competency Coverage across the Curriculum III.A.1.4. Design of courses and activities relating to competencies III.A.2.1. Curriculum definition of healthcare management III.A.2.2. Identification of essential health system & healthcare mgmt knowledge areas III.A.2.3. Degree s III.A.2.4. Integration for courses outside the Program III.A.2.5. Core course waivers III.A.2.6. Implementation of the competencies III.A Core competencies III.A Core competencies in the curriculum and activities III.B.1.1. Time spent on higher vs. lower teaching and learning methods III.B.1.2. Balance between higher vs. lower teaching and learning methods III.B.2.1. Major team based activities III.B.2.2. Interprofessional activities III.B.2.3. Team building & interprofessional activities for programs with online instruction. 88 III.B.3.1. Exposure to health professionals III.B.3.2. Exposures relating to students learning III.B.3.3. List of health organizations

4 III.B.4.1. Integrative experiences relating to learning objectives III.B.4.2. Primarily integrative activities III.B.4.3. Field based applications relating to Program goals and objectives III.B.4.4. Monitoring field based applications III.B.4.5. Nature of required major paper, thesis or research project III.C.1.1. Percent of student evaluations using higher vs. lower assessment methods III.C.1.2. Balance between higher vs. lower level assessment methods III.C.2.1. Body or Person(s) responsible for ongoing evaluation III.C.2.2. Methods of evaluation III.C.3.1. Measurement tools for student progress toward mastery III.C.3.2. Results of measurements IV.A.1.1. Assessment of Program's ability to meet objectives IV.A.1.2. Faculty - Report/list IV.A.1.3. Faculty teaching responsibilities IV.A.2.1. Faculty Diversity IV.A.2.2. Faculty profile/race/ethnicity IV.A.3.1. Admission decisions procedures IV.A.3.2. Awarding degrees IV.A.3.3. Designing curriculum and defining content IV.A.3.4. Course content and curriculum structure IV.A.4.1. Faculty appointments IV.B.1.1. Listing and Description of Program Research and Scholarship Activity IV.B.1.2. Content and quantity of scholarship/achievement IV.B.1.3. Relationship of achievement activities to Program mission/goals/objectives IV.B.2.1. Plan for faculty scholarship development IV.B.2.2. Individual faculty development IV.C.1.1. Pedagogical Improvement IV.C.1.2. Teaching improvement goals IV.C.1.3. Faculty development activities IV.C.1.4. Pedagogical Development IV.C.2.1. Research and scholarship IV.D.1.1. Community service policies and procedures IV.D.1.2. Current community service projects by faculty IV.D.2.1. Community service activities

5 I.A.1.1. Program's Mission The Program will have statements of mission, vision, and values that guide the Program's design, evaluation and quality improvement efforts. The mission, vision, and value statements should define the focus of the healthcare management program in terms of the target audience to be served and the career field(s) for which students will be prepared. A mission statement defines the purpose and direction and any unique aspects of the Program. A vision for the program is a statement that communicates where the Program aspires to be, and serves to motivate the Program to move towards this ideal state. The Program's values are an abstract generalized principle of behavior to which the Program feels a strong emotionally-toned commitment and which provides a standard for judging specific acts and goals. The mission, vision and values will provide the basis for reviewing the Program and for assessing Program effectiveness. In addition, these statements will provide direction for student selection, curriculum design, and scholarly activity of the faculty and will be considered in relation to the mission of the University regarding graduate education, research and service. Program mission may be encompassed in those of a larger unit, such as department or center, and the program should describe and demonstrate how the Program mission relates to the mission of the University and of the parent College/School. Provide the Program's mission statement. Program Mission: The Program in Health Management and Policy builds upon the mission of the Division of Public Administration, translating the broader domain of public service into the specific context of health management and policy. The Program prepares current and future health leaders with the knowledge, skills and competencies needed for progressively responsible careers in health systems management across a range of institutional settings including hospitals, health systems, government, research, advocacy, and nonprofit community-based organizations. I.A.1.2. Program's Vision The Program will have statements of mission, vision, and values that guide the Program's design, evaluation and quality improvement efforts. The mission, vision, and value statements should define the focus of the healthcare management program in terms of the target audience to be served and the career field(s) for which students will be prepared. A mission statement defines the purpose and direction and any unique aspects of the Program. A vision for the program is a statement that communicates where the Program aspires to be, and serves to motivate the Program to move towards this ideal state. The Program's values are an abstract generalized principle of behavior to which the Program feels a strong emotionally-toned commitment and which provides a standard for judging specific acts and goals. The mission, vision and 5

6 values will provide the basis for reviewing the Program and for assessing Program effectiveness. In addition, these statements will provide direction for student selection, curriculum design, and scholarly activity of the faculty and will be considered in relation to the mission of the University regarding graduate education, research and service. Program mission may be encompassed in those of a larger unit, such as department or center, and the program should describe and demonstrate how the Program mission relates to the mission of the University and of the parent College/School. Provide the Program's vision statement. The vision of the Division of Public Administration s Programs in Health Management and Policy is to be a leader in health management and policy education and be widely recognized for our contributions to the health community though a dynamic, innovative and rigorous curriculum; commitment to excellence in scholarship; and collaborative, inclusive and inspirational leadership among our graduates. I.A.1.3. Program's Values The Program will have statements of mission, vision, and values that guide the Program's design, evaluation and quality improvement efforts. The mission, vision, and value statements should define the focus of the healthcare management program in terms of the target audience to be served and the career field(s) for which students will be prepared. A mission statement defines the purpose and direction and any unique aspects of the Program. A vision for the program is a statement that communicates where the Program aspires to be, and serves to motivate the Program to move towards this ideal state. The Program's values are an abstract generalized principle of behavior to which the Program feels a strong emotionally-toned commitment and which provides a standard for judging specific acts and goals. The mission, vision and values will provide the basis for reviewing the Program and for assessing Program effectiveness. In addition, these statements will provide direction for student selection, curriculum design, and scholarly activity of the faculty and will be considered in relation to the mission of the University regarding graduate education, research and service. Program mission may be encompassed in those of a larger unit, such as department or center, and the program should describe and demonstrate how the Program mission relates to the mission of the University and of the parent College/School. Provide the Program's values statement. We recognize that health management professionals work within a complex set of institutional, sociocultural, clinical, and legal structures. We are guided by the following values which encompass our commitment to integrated, rigorous and relevant teaching, learning, and scholarship, all geared toward the compassionate, effective, and efficient use of resources to address individual and population health issues. 6

7 We believe that the integration of theory and practice is essential for successful management and leadership in health organizations, and that reflective practice enhances this integration. We believe that a health management education that integrates ethics and experience is essential. We seek to model in ourselves and develop in our students values of public service and provide mechanisms through which students can explore potential roles for engaging the communities they serve in their work. We are committed to addressing the life-long learning needs of our graduates and career health service professionals. We value scholarship that is both rigorous and relevant. We value Portland State University s commitment to community-engaged teaching and scholarship. We are committed to collaborating with public and nonprofit health system organizations and communities to create rich learning experiences that both assist those organizations and communities, and prepare graduates for productive health management and policy careers. We believe that health management professionals must understand the ways in which a multiplicity of interests help to shape, and in turn are shaped by, the underlying values of our health system and by our systems of democratic governance. We believe that understanding the dynamic social relationships in diverse communities is essential for health system leaders and managers. I.A.1.4. Statements of University and College/School mission The Program will have statements of mission, vision, and values that guide the Program's design, evaluation and quality improvement efforts. The mission, vision, and value statements should define the focus of the healthcare management program in terms of the target audience to be served and the career field(s) for which students will be prepared. A mission statement defines the purpose and direction and any unique aspects of the Program. A vision for the program is a statement that communicates where the Program aspires to be, and serves to motivate the Program to move towards this ideal state. The Program's values are an abstract generalized principle of behavior to which the Program feels a strong emotionally-toned commitment and which provides a standard for judging specific acts and goals. The mission, vision and values will provide the basis for reviewing the Program and for assessing Program effectiveness. In addition, these statements will provide direction for student selection, curriculum design, and scholarly activity of the faculty and will be considered in relation to the mission of the University regarding graduate education, research and service. Program mission may be encompassed in those of a larger unit, such as department or center, and the program should describe and demonstrate how the Program mission relates to the mission of the University and of the parent College/School. Provide statements of the University and College/School missions and provide the relevant URLs. 7

8 Each of the three academic divisions within the Mark O. Hatfield School of Government (Public Administration, Political Science, and Criminology and Criminal Justice) has established a mission statement that is unique, while the College of Urban and Public Affairs mission and vision statements provide overarching direction for all three schools within the college. Thus the HSOG has not established its own unique statements of mission or vision. PA Division Mission: The Division of Public Administration at Portland State University is dedicated to preparing individuals for ethical, competent and effective public service in a range of roles in policy, management and leadership. We seek to improve practice by facilitating learning through community engagement promoting scholarship, and encouraging reflection as we develop and work with leaders representing diverse communities across all domains of public service. PA Division Vision: The Division of Public Administration s vision is to be an agent of change to develop and enhance public leadership through education, scholarship and service. Building upon Portland State University s commitment to community-engaged scholarship and service, the Division of Public Administration is uniquely placed to prepare current and emergent leaders in local, regional, national and global communities. We recognize that solutions to contemporary problems require innovative approaches and alliances among governments, nonprofits and businesses, and encourage our faculty and students to engage in multidisciplinary and collaborative approaches to advance the public interest. We aim to contribute to the integrity, effectiveness, and transparency of the next generation of trusted public leaders. College of Urban and Public Affairs Mission: The College of Urban and Public Affairs provides students interested in the study of urban problems and processes with the resources of an urban university. The Oregon approach to land-use planning, transportation, environmental aspects of urban growth, community policing, low-income housing, solid waste recycling, and community engagement is a model for the nation and a powerful combination with the college s groundbreaking work on government, health and urban issues. College of Urban and Public Affairs Vision: To remain a major force in shaping the future of cities. Through our research and teaching, we aspire to contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the issues and the challenges facing a rapidly urbanizing world. Portland State University Mission: To enhance the intellectual, social, cultural and economic qualities of urban life by providing access throughout the life span to a quality liberal education for undergraduates and an appropriate array of professional and graduate programs especially relevant to metropolitan areas. The University conducts research and community service that support a high quality educational environment and reflects issues important to the region. It actively promotes the development of a network of educational institutions to serve the community. The University s statements of vision, mission and values may be found at: Portland State University Vision: To be an internationally recognized urban university known for excellence in student learning, innovative research, and community engagement that contributes to the economic vitality, environmental sustainability, and quality of life in the Portland region and beyond. 8

9 I.A.1.5. Relation of Program mission to College/School mission The Program will have statements of mission, vision, and values that guide the Program's design, evaluation and quality improvement efforts. The mission, vision, and value statements should define the focus of the healthcare management program in terms of the target audience to be served and the career field(s) for which students will be prepared. A mission statement defines the purpose and direction and any unique aspects of the Program. A vision for the program is a statement that communicates where the Program aspires to be, and serves to motivate the Program to move towards this ideal state. The Program's values are an abstract generalized principle of behavior to which the Program feels a strong emotionally-toned commitment and which provides a standard for judging specific acts and goals. The mission, vision and values will provide the basis for reviewing the Program and for assessing Program effectiveness. In addition, these statements will provide direction for student selection, curriculum design, and scholarly activity of the faculty and will be considered in relation to the mission of the University regarding graduate education, research and service. Program mission may be encompassed in those of a larger unit, such as department or center, and the program should describe and demonstrate how the Program mission relates to the mission of the University and of the parent College/School. Comment and demonstrate how the Program mission relates to the mission of the University and of the parent College/School. PSU s Programs in Health Management and Policy are administratively housed within the Division of Public Administration. The Division reviewed and updated its mission, vision, and value and belief statements in fall 2011 as part of a strategic planning effort, and to assure consistency with the broader missions of the College and the University, as well as direction from NASPAA, CEPH and CAHME. The Programs' mission, vision and values statements are consistent with the PA Division, College and University statements with regard to student learning that is achieved through community-engaged scholarship, academic and professional integrity, and the application of knowledge to service in the specific context of health. Thus, we ensure that our Program is responsive to these broader missions, while developing skills and knowledge that are relevant to graduate-level academic preparation for positions in health management and policy. The mission, vision and values of the Division of Public Administration are consistent with, and complementary to, the mission, vision and values of both CUPA and PSU. At every level, these statements embody the PSU motto: Let knowledge serve the city. This motto resonates with our students, the majority of whom seek to build careers in nonprofit, health services delivery and public health sectors. Also inherent in this motto is the concept of community engagement, which is further evident in the mission, vision and values of the University, College and Division. PSU s programs in health management and policy are proud of the extensive network and collaborative relationships we have developed with health programs and service providers across all of these sectors. In fact, it is our culture of collaboration and community engagement that attracts many of our students. 9

10 A unique vision statement was developed for the Health Management and Policy Programs in response to a CAHME site visit team recommendation in fall The new vision statement reflects the Program's shared commitment to community engagement, a rigorous curriculum, relevant research and inspirational leadership. In addition, the Program adapted the PA Division Value and Belief statements to further define and clarify Program goals. I.A.2.1. Ongoing evaluation of the program The Program will establish goals, objectives and performance outcomes that are action-based, observable, and measurable. CAHME will seek evidence that specified goals and objectives and expected performance outcomes provide direction and criteria for evaluating ongoing program and curriculum enhancement. Goals must support the mission, vision and values statement by identifying specific areas of emphasis within the Program. Objectives serve to operationalize the goals and should include separate educational, research, service, and other appropriate subcategories of goals and objectives. Prepare a narrative describing how the on-going evaluation of the Program is carried out in light of its mission, goals and objectives. The narrative should demonstrate how the various constituencies of the Program, e.g., students, graduates, faculty, preceptors, and advisory groups, relate to this process. Briefly describe the results of the ongoing evaluations in the last two years and note what improvements, if any, have resulted from the evaluation results. The Program utilizes multiple modes of formal and informal evaluation of its mission, goals and objectives. Stemming from the Program faculty s extensive professional relationships, informal modes include ongoing contact and feedback from the leadership of community-based organizations, including many who are graduates of PSU. The Program also seeks advice about specific strategic and operational issues through periodic interviews, structured reflection sessions and/or focus groups with alumni, field supervisors, local health leaders and other stakeholders. Information gleaned from these efforts regularly results in program changes. Oregon is in the midst of substantial health systems transformation, and it is essential that our students understand the evolving current context of health services delivery. As a result, we have enhanced the content in a number of classes to ensure coverage of examples such as Oregon s Coordinated Care Organizations (CCOs); Patient Centered Primary Care Home Program (PCPCH); and changes in health care reimbursement through Medicare, Medicaid, and the Oregon Health Plan. Based on feedback suggesting an unmet demand for applied health outcomes research, the Program has hired a recent UC Berkeley graduate. The new faculty member has a strong background in quantitative methods and applied population health outcomes research. The Program also seeks informal assessment of strengths and opportunities from students. Division faculty regularly attend informal events hosted by the Public Administration Students Association (PASA), the PSU & OHSU Chapter of the IHI Open School, and other student groups to share information 10

11 about proposed Program enhancements, changes and opportunities. A particular strength of these regularly scheduled meetings, which occur weekly to monthly during most of the academic year, is the opportunity for students to share information about applied projects, internships and field placement projects and receive on-the-spot advice from faculty about these projects. More formal evaluations of the Program are conducted through course evaluations, student surveys, and student representation on standing and ad hoc administrative committees. Student representatives attend monthly faculty meetings during which proposed changes to the curriculum, competency assessment methods and other program planning and evaluation issues are discussed. Student feedback on course evaluations plays an important role in the development of teaching methods that facilitate attainment, retention and integration of knowledge, skills and competencies. In addition, both formal and informal student feedback is used in the evaluation of faculty effectiveness and the identification of situations that warrant further professional development or counseling of faculty. A student is a voting member of every formal faculty tenure and promotion committee, as well as search committees for new faculty. Program alumni also provide a valuable contribution to ongoing Program assessment and improvements. A substantial number of alumni have established careers in health management and policy positions throughout the greater Portland metropolitan area and in Oregon state government, and regularly serve as points of contact for introducing students to a wide variety of practitioner settings, as well as attending classes and student events as guest speakers. Informal feedback and formal surveys of alumni are used to assess curriculum relevance and applicability, as well as information about competencies and professional development needs. The 2015 Alumni Survey found that 72% of graduates remained in the Portland area, most commonly in supervisory/managerial positions (38%), professional/research positions (25%), or clinical positions (11%). Increased interest in applied research and policy among our students reflects the dynamic health system reform environment in Oregon, and was a salient factor in our decision to seek a new faculty member with these skills. Organizational Experience (PAH 509) preceptors also provide an important dimension of the overall assessment of student competencies. Preceptors complete an assessment of the student who has worked with them, and a survey of their satisfaction with the experience of being a preceptor. Survey results are used to identify needed improvements, such as the creation of a Field Supervisor Guidebook that is now provided to all site-based preceptors. Preceptor assessments of professionalism, work quality, and competency attainment are factored into final grades for student s PAH 509 projects and, in the aggregate, also provide useful information about program strengths and areas for improvement. We have had mixed success over the years with a formal external advisory group as a source of input for program assessment. A Division of Public Administration Advisory Council was reactivated in May 2012, and served in an advisory capacity for all four of the Division s master s level programs. However, the Council did not meet formally in AY In lieu of the broad input from the PA Division Advisory Council, the Program utilized the OMPH Advisory Committee. This health-focused group does meet regularly, and we receive feedback relevant to both degree programs from this group. Given the work during on the School of Public Health, as well as evolving plans within the College of Urban and Public Affairs which may affect the structure of the Division and the Hatfield School, our faculty chose not to convene an external advisory group during the self-study year since developments were in process and we wanted to be sure we could present correct information about future directions. Once CUPA solidifies its plans, we will convene our advisors in order to share plans with them and seek their advice on future directions. 11

12 The SPH Initiative convenes its External Advisory Committee (EAC) regularly, and input from that group is offered to the program through SPH Executive Leadership Council (Dr. Gelmon is a member) and the Academic Program and Priorities Committee (Dr. Wallace and Dr. Gelmon are members). The SPH-EAC serves as a source of information about external trends and provides relevant feedback on the broad scope of public health, including health management and policy, issues. It is comprised of approximately 20 public health professionals representing various geographic regions and specific populations of Oregon, and provides a valuable perspective on public health practice to the Program. The EAC will be an important group for providing input to the developing SPH and MPH:HMP degree, and also provides a useful perspective for the MPA:HA program. Attachments: 2015 Student Survey Report 2015 Student Survey Instrument 2015 Alumni Survey Report 2015 Alumni Survey Instrument I.A.2.2. Goals, objectives and expected performance outcomes The Program will establish goals, objectives and performance outcomes that are action-based, observable, and measurable. CAHME will seek evidence that specified goals and objectives and expected performance outcomes provide direction and criteria for evaluating ongoing program and curriculum enhancement. Goals must support the mission, vision and values statement by identifying specific areas of emphasis within the Program. Objectives serve to operationalize the goals and should include separate educational, research, service, and other appropriate subcategories of goals and objectives. Program response is not required for this. An attachment should be uploaded as support. Supporting Material Use attached template to illustrate goals, objectives, benchmarks, and outcome assessments used routinely by the Program. Evaluate the extent to which each Program objective is met. Indicate actual performance against set targets. 12

13 I.A.2.2 Program Goals, Objectives and Performance Measures GOAL 1: EDUCATION: THE PROGRAMS WILL PROVIDE COMPREHENSIVE EDUCATION, PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND EXPERIENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES THAT PREPARE STUDENTS FOR PROGRESSIVELY RESPONSIBLE MANAGEMENT AND POLICY POSITIONS IN A VARIETY OF HEALTH SERVICE SETTINGS. Measurement Recent Benchmark Status Measurement Results Actions Taken Source Assessment Objective 1.1: The programs will admit students who are well-qualified for graduate studies. At least 80% of admitted students will achieve combined quant/verbal score of 299 on the GRE. GRE scores AY and Fall 2015 At least 90% of admitted students have Review of AY minimum undergraduate GPA of 3.0 transcripts and Fall 2015 Met At least 30% of admitted students will have substantive health system Application files AY Met experience. Objective 1.2: The programs will admit students who represent a range of demographics. At least 20% of admitted students will Review of Partially AY be male. admissions files Met At least 20% of admitted students will identify as racial/ethnic minority. Review of admissions files AY Not Met Partially Met MPH: AY15 = 68%; Fall15 = 63% MPA: AY15 = 38%; Fall15 = 64% MPH: AY15 = 91%; Fall15 = 86% MPA: AY15 = 100%; Fall15 = 92% MPH: 90% w/experience MPA: 75% w/experience MPH: 19% male MPA: 25% male MPH: 14% minority MPA: 27% minority Standard met for verbal, not met for quantitative, mixed for analytic. (Conditional admit &/or stats course required.) Continue to monitor. Continue to monitor. Continue to monitor. Continue to monitor. Results discussed with PA Division EDI Committee; developing action plan. Objective 1.3: Students will be able to access multiple sources of information to progress through the programs. At least 60% of newly admitted students will attend new student orientation. Log of Attendance Fall 2014 Met 61% attendance Continue to monitor. At least 80% of students will have at least one advising session each year. Student Survey AY Met 86% met with advisor Continue to monitor. The Program s website will be updated Records of Numerous updates and ongoing AY Met at least twice per year. Updates revision of website. Continue to monitor. At least 80% of students will report that Partially 81% accessed information on the Add satisfaction with website the website provides easy access to Student Survey Spring 2015 Met website; satisfaction not measured. to future student surveys. relevant information. Objective 1.4: The programs will provide students with didactic learning opportunities appropriate to progressively responsible health management and policy positions. At least 90% of overall course evaluations for health courses with scores 3.5 on average. (5-pt scale) 80% of graduating students who are seeking employment will accept positions within 3 months of graduation. Review of course evaluations Alumni survey Each quarter Met Annually Partially (Summer Term) Met Fall14 met for all but one MPA:HA course (not taken by any HA students) Winter15 met for all courses Spring15 met for all courses 2014 = 92%; 4-6 mos = 96% 2013 = 77%; 4-6 most = = 73%; 4-6 mos = 86% Continue to monitor. Continue to monitor; consider effort to increase visibility of and expand career advising 13

14 Measurement Recent Benchmark Status Measurement Results Actions Taken Source Assessment Objective 1.5: Students will achieve competence in health management and policy through didactic and experiential learning experiences. Students competency self-assessment Competency Progression evident; all but scores by number of credits completed Each quarter Partially evaluations competency #8 (6.9 average) meet Continue to monitor. will progress to score of 7+ (9 pt. scale) Met (survey report) or exceed target. upon completion of 48 credits. Total average competency score for all courses will be at least 3.5 (5 pt. scale). Course evaluations Quarterly Unsure Data analysis ongoing; available onsite during site visit. N/A Student ratings of course contributions to competency attainment are aligned with competency/curriculum matrix. Competency attainment surveys Quarterly Unsure Data analysis ongoing; available onsite during site visit. N/A 85% of students program competency self-evaluations score at least 7 (9 pt. scale) on each competency upon completion of PAH 509/512 Total average for PAH 509 preceptors evaluations of student competency scores at least 2.5 (3 point scale) Competency selfassessment Preceptor evaluation of students Each quarter Each quarter Met Met PAH 509 student self-assessments range from ; 90% at 7+. For AY : PADCs 4 & 5 = 2.5 PADCs 1, 2, 3, 8, 9 & 10 = 2.8 PADCs 6 & 7 = 3.0 Continue to monitor. Continue to monitor. 85% of alumni will be report being prepared for careers based on attainment of PA Division competencies. Alumni survey Every three years Met % of alumni reported competency-based career preparation. Continue to monitor. Objective 1.6: The program will engage alumni and key stakeholders in program review and development. The Advisory Board will meet at least once per year. Alumni will be surveyed at least once every three years. Log of board meetings Spring 2015 Not Met The PA Division Advisory Board did not meet during AY Utilized SPH Advisory Group, alumni, and formal/ informal feedback from preceptors and community partners. Alumni survey Winter 2015 Met Alumni Survey Report Continue to monitor. 14

15 GOAL 2: RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP: THE PROGRAMS WILL PROMOTE AND SUPPORT COLLABORATIVE AND APPLIED RESEARCH AND SCHOLARSHIP AMONG FACULTY, STUDENTS, PRACTITIONERS AND COMMUNITIES. Benchmark Measurement Source Recent Assessment Status Measurement Results Actions Taken Objective 2.1: Core faculty will develop, conduct, and communicate an active research and scholarship agenda. 80% of core faculty receive external funding for research/ scholarship related activities each year. 80% of core faculty create and disseminate at least one product of research or scholarship each year (e.g. publications, reports, manuscripts, curricular innovations, or other academic products) 80% of core faculty participate in at least one collaborative or community-engaged scholarship project each year. 80% of core faculty participate in at least one professional development activity each year. Review of faculty CVs AY Met Review of faculty CVs AY Met Review of faculty CVs AY Met Review of faculty CVs AY Met 100% of core faculty received external funding for research activities. 100% of core faculty produced peerreviewed scholarly works. 100% of core faculty engaged in community-based and/or collaborative projects. 100% of core faculty engaged in one or more professional development activities. Continue to monitor. Continue to monitor. Continue to monitor. Continue to monitor. Objective 2.2: Students will develop an appreciation for, and engage in, applied research & scholarship to advance health management & policy. 100% of students will participate in at least three applied health management or policy projects during their program of study. 75% of core/required courses will require students to participate in a collaborative problem-solving project. Review of GO-12 s against inventory of applied projects Inventory of applied projects in courses AY AY Met Met 100% of students participated in three or more course-related applied projects. Percent of courses requiring collaborative problem-solving project Continue to monitor. Continue to monitor 15

16 GOAL 3: SERVICE: THE PROGRAMS WILL PROVIDE, ENHANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICE ACTIVITIES AMONG FACULTY AND STUDENTS. Benchmark Measurement Source Recent Assessment Measurement Results Actions Taken Objective 3.1: Faculty will engage in service activities that benefit the Division, School, College, University, community, and/or profession. 75% of core health faculty participate in two or more service activities within the University each year. 75% of core health faculty participate in two or more community and/or professional service activities each year. Review of faculty CVs AY Met Review of faculty CVs AY Not Met 100% of core faculty engaged in four or more institutional committees, including serving in leadership roles. 75% of core (PSU health program) and 63% of participating (all PSU & OHSU) faculty participated in 2 community/ professional service activities. Objective 3.2: Students will engage in service activities that benefit academic and/or external communities. The Program or affiliated student organizations will offer at least three opportunities for students to participate in a service activity. 50% of students participate in at least one service activity prior to graduation. Review of student service opportunities (PASA, IHI, OMPH) AY Met Student survey AY Met A combined total of five community engagement opportunities were offered. 86% of graduates participated in at least one service activity. Continue to monitor. Continue to monitor; explore support and/or re-consider metric for non-tenured faculty mix. Continue to monitor. Continue to monitor. GOAL 4: LEADERSHIP: THE PROGRAMS WILL PROVIDE LEADERSHIP AND SERVE AS A RESOURCE FOR ADDRESSING HEALTH MANAGEMENT AND POLICY ISSUES. Objective 4.1: Faculty will demonstrate leadership intended to improve the health of communities. 75% of core faculty annually serve on relevant committees, commissions and/or boards. 75% of core faculty conduct two or more seminars, workshops or presentations on health and public managementrelated topics each year. 75% of core faculty provide professional consultation or technical assistance to education, government and health service organizations each year. Review of faculty CVs AY Met Review of faculty CVs AY Met Review of faculty CVs AY Not Met 100% of core PSU health faculty serve in community leadership roles. 75% of core PSU health faculty, 60% of participating PSU faculty, and 75% of all participating faculty presented. 50% of core health faculty provided professional consultation. Objective 4.2: The programs will facilitate student opportunities to develop and demonstrate leadership skills. 50% of students participate in one or more relevant professional activities or student organizations. Inventory of student activities (survey and/or CV/resume) AY Partially Met 76% of alumni reported participation; not asked in student survey Continue to monitor. Consider roles for other participating/junior faculty. Assess level of support for faculty travel; continue to monitor. Continue to monitor; assess allocation of faculty responsibilities. Continue to monitor; add question to student survey. 16

17 I.A.2.3. Strengths and weaknesses of evaluation process The Program will establish goals, objectives and performance outcomes that are action-based, observable, and measurable. CAHME will seek evidence that specified goals and objectives and expected performance outcomes provide direction and criteria for evaluating ongoing program and curriculum enhancement. Goals must support the mission, vision and values statement by identifying specific areas of emphasis within the Program. Objectives serve to operationalize the goals and should include separate educational, research, service, and other appropriate subcategories of goals and objectives. Assess the Program's evaluation process highlighting strengths and/or problems. Suggest desired changes in the process and identify steps and a timeframe for making changes The Program s evaluation process is comprehensive, deriving information through a variety of sources and modes. At the operational and strategic levels, recommendations are incorporated into the Program s design and operations and contribute to their interdisciplinary, cooperative nature. The effectiveness of these efforts is reflected in the growing national reputation of the Programs over the past several years and successful initial CAHME accreditation in At the same time, we have recognized the need to augment and systematize formal data collection efforts. For example, tracking of students job placement and career progression following graduation remains an ongoing challenge due to the number of students who work while attending classes then transition to new roles upon graduation, as well as the fact that the university de-activates psu.edu addresses after graduation. Although the PA Division maintains a detailed longitudinal database to track the career progression of students and graduates that staff have utilize to develop customized reports for the CAHME accreditation self-study, as well as for responding to periodic requests for data from AUPHA, CEPH and NASPAA, these tracking efforts require significant staff time. During the self-study year and ad hoc committee of faculty, students, and administrative support staff reviewed and recommended minor changes to data tracking activities reflected in the Program s Goals and Objectives (See Supporting Materials in I.A.2.2.) The modifications were subsequently accepted by the Program faculty. Changes included establishment of higher benchmarks for several measures, elimination of measures that consistently and substantially exceeded the established benchmark, the addition of measures related to student diversity and satisfaction with the program, and refinement of measures related to faculty scholarship. Because the modifications were made during the course of the self-study year and required new data collections strategies, data analysis for several of the new measures will not be completed in time for inclusion in this self-study report, however the results will be available for review during the site visit. A final point of evaluation and potential modification is related to the evaluation metrics themselves. We have established a rigorous model that varies slightly from the CAHME template, but which addresses all four (teaching, service, research, and engagement) dimensions of our mission. While robust, the data collection and analysis effort to support programmatic evaluation is considerable. Given the resource constraints we face, the data collection and analysis timeline for several measures has been modified from a quarterly to an annual basis. Although the longer interval raises the possibility that issues requiring corrective action will not be identified as quickly, given the program s long history and seasoned faculty, we believe the risk for such an occurrence is relatively low. 17

18 I.A.3.1. Monitoring and review process for health systems & University environments The Program will monitor changes in the health system, the University environment, and management theory and practice and adjust its mission, vision, goals, objectives and competency model as necessary. Utilization of market research of the health system and strategic planning assessment tools will enable the Program to identify the changing needs for essential competencies in graduates. This should include appropriate strategic plans, five year academic plans and evidence of external stakeholder input into the curriculum. Programs will be expected to demonstrate a big picture examination of the market, including population served and demonstrate changes effected in response. Describe the process for monitoring the health system and University environments, such as strategic plans, and the process for incorporating this information into the process of Program review and change. The core Program faculty and collaborating OHSU faculty are an important source of information for monitoring the health system through their various committee and board appointments, and through their research and consulting activities. All faculty are actively involved in the Oregon Health Research and Evaluation Collaborative (OHREC) and work regularly with the Office for Oregon Health Policy and Research (OHPR), both within the Oregon Health Authority, and regularly provide consultation and conduct contracted research on the system-level health services environment and state health policy developments. Core faculty are also actively engaged with professional associations (AUPHA, APHA, AcademyHealth, Oregon Public Health Association, Academy of Management, etc.) at the local, state and/or national levels. All of these activities contribute to the Program s ability to monitor both the University and broader health system environments. Program students also provide valuable insights and information about the University, health system and local environment. Many students work in health service organizations and are astute observers of the factors that affect service delivery, system change, policy, innovation, and the fiscal, social and political factors that contribute to dynamic academic, health, and social service environments. They bring these experiences into class discussions, and frequently identify opportunities for student and/or faculty participation through postings to the program listservs. Adjunct faculty members are also a key source of information about the health services environment. As working professionals, these colleagues bring salient expertise and perspectives to the classroom and the programs. Many adjunct faculty have been affiliated with the Program for a number of years and in some cases are Program alumni, offering a stable and insightful resource for program and curriculum development and evaluation. Finally, we draw frequently upon health system practitioners as guest speakers and preceptors, and invite their input into Program activities where they share information and insights regarding current issues in health services management directly with students and faculty. To complement the extensive informal monitoring, formal mechanisms such as the Advisory Council, alumni surveys, and student and preceptor evaluations are used to solicit feedback about the Program. Because all PAH 509 preceptors are working professionals, their assessments of student competency and professional performance provide useful information for evaluation of course-level competencies and the overall curriculum. The PA Division and OMPH Advisory Councils include members from the health, public, and nonprofit sectors, thus provide a broad perspective on the value that Program graduates bring to the community. All of these efforts highlight the community-engaged culture of the Division, and the continuous 18

19 cycle of informal information-seeking, planning and decision-making that characterize the Program. In turn, these informal and formal sources of information are incorporated into the Program through faculty discussions and votes during monthly meetings, an annual faculty retreat, and through the more formal School, College, and University hierarchies. I.A.3.2. Examples from monitoring process The Program will monitor changes in the health system, the University environment, and management theory and practice and adjust its mission, vision, goals, objectives and competency model as necessary. Utilization of market research of the health system and strategic planning assessment tools will enable the Program to identify the changing needs for essential competencies in graduates. This should include appropriate strategic plans, five year academic plans and evidence of external stakeholder input into the curriculum. Programs will be expected to demonstrate a big picture examination of the market, including population served and demonstrate changes effected in response. Provide examples of findings from the monitoring process, and how these findings have been utilized for planning programmatic changes. We use findings from ongoing engagement with, and monitoring of, the academic and health services delivery environments in all aspects of program improvement, including development of new courses, revision of existing courses, revision of curricular sequencing and requirements, student support, faculty evaluation, program promotion, and external program networking. Several examples are offered below. Student input received through academic advising, student-led organizations and student representation in faculty meetings led to identification of several challenges faced by students. During our initial accreditation self-study, students expressed concern about their ability to plan a two- or three-year program of study when the course schedule was released on a term-by-term basis. The full academic year schedule is now posted on the Division s website and updated each spring. During new student orientation we also provide a two-year projected schedule for health program students in order to guide students' planning for their program of study and faculty advising regarding course selection. The annual schedule is posted on the PA Division website ( along with other academic schedules and calendars. The updating process includes review of enrollment as well as course evaluations and faculty observations, resulting in modifications of the frequency of offerings and hiring of adjunct faculty. A similar concern was expressed by MPH students regarding coordination of core MPH courses, some of which are offered by other PSU divisions or by OHSU. This concern was addressed during the self-study year through planning and coordination of days and times when core courses are now (and will be) offered. More generally, over the past several years, Oregon embarked on an ambitious process of health system transformation. Subsequently, government health officials and community stakeholders began noting the need for additional curricular content in innovation and change management, applied statistical analysis, and evaluation of individual and population health outcomes. This information was utilized to develop the preferred qualifications in the hiring of additional adjunct faculty with expertise in HIT/HIS, updates of existing courses, and the hiring of a new tenure-track assistant professor. More recently, feedback from the alumni and student surveys, as well as student assessments of competency attainment, have confirmed the development 19

20 of student competencies in analytic and critical thinking skills, and the application of management theory to practical situations. PAH 509 Field Supervisors have noted these knowledge, skills, and abilities, stating for example: xx was prepared and professional. She was creative with a project that was fairly open-ended and required thinking outside the box. I appreciated her clear communication and thoughtfulness throughout the project. Another example in which feedback from community stakeholders has led to program enhancement is in the areas of collaboration, community engagement, cultural sensitivity, and professionalism. Noting that knowledge and analytic skills are a given, alumni and practitioners commented on the importance of soft skills such as communication, collaboration, creative thinking/innovation, and overall professionalism. These areas are reflected in the Program s competencies and in Field Supervisor ratings of student competency attainment as part of the PAH 509 Organizational Experience. As one Field Supervisor noted: xx is a remarkable person who exudes professionalism, has excellent, communication, collaboration and organizational skills, and brings new ideas to projects. Our monitoring efforts indicate that the major curricular review and subsequent revisions undertaken just prior to our initial accreditation (2012) have been successful, thus we have made minor modifications to our goals and objectives, but have not made further changes to our mission, vision or competency model. Rather, our efforts over the past three years have been focused on developing systematic data collection and evaluation of the Program's success. I.B.1.1. Special resources available to the Program and barriers to utilization The Program will have sufficient financial and administrative support to ensure that its mission, goals and objectives can be achieved. As guided by the framework of the University's rules and regulations, Program faculty and administration should have sufficient prerogatives to assure the integrity of the Program and facilitate achievement of the Program's mission goal and objectives. Program faculty should have formal opportunities for input in decisions affecting admissions and progress, resource allocation, faculty recruitment and promotion, curriculum design and evaluation, research and service activities, and degree requirements. This criterion requires an assessment of the Program's ability to meet its stated objectives in light of its current resources, identification of the most significant current resources and the most critical resource needs. Included should be the Program's ability to make recommendations for future resource development, identify steps planned to implement these recommendations, and describe the likely timeline for implementation. Identify special resources such as people, facilities, and university support available to the Program and indicate the nature and extent of utilization, as well as any barriers to utilization PSU is a comprehensive urban university offering close proximity to a number of public and nonprofit health and social service providers that are often utilized as settings for course-specific applied projects and for students culminating Organizational Experience (PAH 509). Many students are employed by local health and social service providers when admitted to the Program, or gain such employment during their program of study or upon graduation. Portland is a city that prides itself on its public transportation system (students, 20

21 faculty and staff may purchase discounted transit passes), and the PSU campus is a hub for connections among Portland s rapid transit (Max), the central city streetcar line, and the city bus system. The transit stops adjacent to the Urban Center (where we are housed) are some of the most utilized stops in the entire Portland Metropolitan transportation network, making access to the campus and our programs relatively easy for students and others. The streetcar also runs between PSU and the OHSU South Waterfront campus where the Collaborative Life Sciences Building is located. This remarkable new facility brings students from different health professions together and allows them to mingle in shared spaces, learn alongside each other, and work collaboratively through a variety of interprofessional education courses. Every aspect of the building s design encourages human interaction and collaboration to build collective brain power. It reflects a new approach to health professions education, recognizing 21st century challenges and opportunities in the quickly changing health care field. From the South Waterfront, students in the MPH program have free access to the OHSU Tram for convenient travel to other OHSU facilities (uphill) where they may take courses that are part of the MPH core. Bicycle transportation is another mode of access advocated by PSU, and there are multiple services available to support students, faculty and staff who wish to commute by bike. The Program offices are centrally located on the PSU campus in the Urban Center building, affording students convenient access to the Millar Library and to academic support activities that are housed in adjacent buildings including: the Academic and Student Recreation Center (hosting an array of recreational activities including an indoor pool, fitness classes, exercise equipment and courts, as well as an outdoor equipment rental service, bike service hub, and outdoor social clubs); the Smith Memorial Student Union (site for academic conferences, seminars, food court, campus clubs, student support services, and other university activities); Neuberger Hall (site for registrar, financial aid, etc.); the Market Center Building (housing most of central administration); and other campus buildings. Recognizing that students benefit from a well-rounded academic experience that includes time for nonacademic pursuits, the programs actively work with our student groups to support their efforts to coordinate activities with other formal and informal university-based student groups. The Public Administration Student Association (PASA) is a recognized PSU student organization, often serving as a liaison to broader PSU campus activities and hosting events that engage the public administration community. The PSU/OHSU Chapter of the IHI Open School is similarly active and also a recognized PSU student organization, and focuses more specifically on public health and health service delivery, hosting events on health care improvement and efforts to achieve the Triple Aim through system reform. In spring 2015, the Chapter hosted the inaugural IHI Open School West Coast Conference, which was attended by over 200 health professions students from across the country. I.B.1.2. Relation of non-accredited activities regarding allocation of resources The Program will have sufficient financial and administrative support to ensure that its mission, goals and objectives can be achieved. As guided by the framework of the University's rules and regulations, Program faculty and administration should have sufficient prerogatives to assure the integrity of the Program and facilitate achievement of the Program's mission goal and objectives. Program faculty should have formal opportunities for input in decisions affecting admissions and progress, resource allocation, faculty recruitment and promotion, curriculum design and evaluation, research and service activities, and degree requirements. 21

22 This criterion requires an assessment of the Program's ability to meet its stated objectives in light of its current resources, identification of the most significant current resources and the most critical resource needs. Included should be the Program's ability to make recommendations for future resource development, identify steps planned to implement these recommendations, and describe the likely timeline for implementation. Identify Program activities other than those being reviewed (e.g., undergraduate, other master's, doctoral, extension, management development, etc.), and indicate their relation to the Program with regard to allocation of resources (funds, faculty, space, etc.). The Mark O. Hatfield School of Government (HSOG) is a dynamic public affairs academic unit with a strong national reputation. In total, the School offers 14 graduate and undergraduate degree programs through three academic divisions: Criminology and Criminal Justice, Political Science, and Public Administration. Six institutes and centers contribute to lifelong learning by offering non-degree certificates and supporting community-engaged research projects that enrich the academic, research and service mission of the School. The Hatfield School of Government also offers the PhD in Public Affairs and Policy (PAP), which is jointly administered by the Divisions of Public Administration and Political Science. The Division of Public Administration offers five master s degree programs: the Master of Public Administration (MPA); the Executive Master of Public Administration (EMPA) [1] ; the MPA with a health administration specialty (MPA:HA); the Master of Public Health with a specialty in health management and policy (MPH:HMP), and starting in fall 2015, the Master of Public Policy [2]. The Division does not offer its own undergraduate degree, although it is currently growing an undergraduate minor in civic leadership that may develop into a baccalaureate in public service. In AY , the PA Division was approved to offer a doctoral degree in Health Systems and Policy, and has since graduated three PhD students who transferred from the School s PAP PhD to the Division s new HS&P PhD program. Core Health Management Program faculty may teach courses that are also taken by MPA or other graduate students. For example, Theresa Kaimanu splits her time between the Health Management programs and the general MPA program, and Jill Rissi and Neal Wallace both teach a course that is core in both the PAP and HSP PhD programs. All of the core health faculty regularly advise PAP PhD students on their comprehensive examinations, and sit on or chair dissertation committees. The health faculty are the core of the new HS&P PhD program. Health program faculty regularly serve as Office of Graduate Studies representatives on masters and doctoral committees elsewhere in the university. Over the past several years the number of students enrolled in our health management programs has stabilized; as of spring 2015, approximately half of our 300 students (across the MPA, MPA:HA and MPH:HMP) are health students. Recognizing the imbalance in our faculty allocation (i.e. four core health faculty out of a total complement of 13 full-time faculty), and following a consultative recommendation offered during our 2012 CAHME site visit, we were able to address this situation. During the self-study year, four faculty from OHSU joined the core Program faculty in an affiliated capacity and have assumed some teaching, committee and advising responsibilities. In addition, during the self-study year we undertook a successful faculty search and have hired a new core faculty member who will join the Program in fall Finally, several of our MPA faculty colleagues have backgrounds and interests that complement the health-focused programs, and we occasionally engage them as advisors for the MPA:HA students in order to match students interests and better allocate the advising responsibilities across all of the faculty. [1] The EMPA is awarded by the Division, which is responsible for all academic activities. However, EMPA program operations are managed through the Center for Public Service. 22

23 [2] The MPP is a collaborative degree program that is jointly managed by the Divisions of Public Administration and Political Science within the Hatfield School of Government, which awards the degree. I.B.1.3. Budgetary allocation administrative procedures The Program will have sufficient financial and administrative support to ensure that its mission, goals and objectives can be achieved. As guided by the framework of the University's rules and regulations, Program faculty and administration should have sufficient prerogatives to assure the integrity of the Program and facilitate achievement of the Program's mission goal and objectives. Program faculty should have formal opportunities for input in decisions affecting admissions and progress, resource allocation, faculty recruitment and promotion, curriculum design and evaluation, research and service activities, and degree requirements. This criterion requires an assessment of the Program's ability to meet its stated objectives in light of its current resources, identification of the most significant current resources and the most critical resource needs. Included should be the Program's ability to make recommendations for future resource development, identify steps planned to implement these recommendations, and describe the likely timeline for implementation. Describe the administrative procedures involved in determining budgetary allocation to the Program. The Division of Public Administration has an independent budget adequate to support its stated objectives. The Division prepares an annual budget as a part of the Hatfield School of Government, which is the budgetary unit at the university level (and considered the department according to PSU governance). Preliminary budget requests are developed by the Division Chairs in the spring, in collaboration with the School Director and his staff. These requests are then forwarded to the Dean of the College, and from there to the university administration. Over the past several years the university has transitioned to a more active and discrete budgeting process utilizing Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) and a Revenue and Cost Allocation Tool (RCAT) to provide a more transparent picture of expenditures and revenues at the unit level. The overall effect of these changes has been to increase the level of budgetary discretion among College Deans and, to some degree, Schools. While there is little discretionary funding available at the level of the Division, the School and the College have more discretion and consider requests from the Division on an ongoing basis. Additional funding is generally handled by a request from the Division Chair, most often reflecting support for adjuncts, faculty or student travel, new equipment, and supplies. Oregon Health & Science University and Portland State University are working together to collaboratively establish a School of Public Health that builds on the success of the Oregon Master of Public Health (OMPH) program. By leveraging the unique and shared strengths of both universities, we will be poised to meet the evolving public health needs of Oregon and beyond. The OHSU-PSU School of Public Health builds upon our 22- year track record of collaboration that started with the OMPH program. The OHSU-PSU relationship has been incredibly successful and is now the longest running collaborative accredited MPH program in the country. The MPH:HMP degree program will remain within PSU administratively and financially, while integration within the new SPH will allow for seamless operation and will facilitate student access to resources and opportunities across institutional lines. The MPA:HA degree program will remain within the Public Administration Division of the Hatfield School of Government. Because the joint SPH was established on July 1, 2015, many details remain 23

24 to be worked out. However, the philosophical and financial commitments of both institutions (the PSU and OHSU Provosts' Offices each committed $400,000 to the initial development of the SPH) suggests that ongoing financial support will be sufficient to maintain the integrity of the Program. I.B.1.4. Program expenditures The Program will have sufficient financial and administrative support to ensure that its mission, goals and objectives can be achieved. As guided by the framework of the University's rules and regulations, Program faculty and administration should have sufficient prerogatives to assure the integrity of the Program and facilitate achievement of the Program's mission goal and objectives. Program faculty should have formal opportunities for input in decisions affecting admissions and progress, resource allocation, faculty recruitment and promotion, curriculum design and evaluation, research and service activities, and degree requirements. This criterion requires an assessment of the Program's ability to meet its stated objectives in light of its current resources, identification of the most significant current resources and the most critical resource needs. Included should be the Program's ability to make recommendations for future resource development, identify steps planned to implement these recommendations, and describe the likely timeline for implementation. Program expenditures should be recorded below. The purpose of this figure is to present both the amount of financial support received by the Program being accredited and the form in which this financial support is tendered. Items should be recorded as exactly as possible. If estimates must be used, please indicate this below. Include all items for instruction, community service, research and operations. Data should be presented for the Self-Study year, and one year prior to the Self-Study year. (If the fiscal year is defined differently than the academic year, please indicate below.) Absolute dollar amounts and percent of total budget should be indicated. The first column is for sums that are allocated to the Program as a separate department or unit with its own budget; if the budget of the Program is spread among the budgets of several departments or units, this column should not be used. If activities of the Program are supported by a mixture of separate budget and items on other budgets, then combinations of columns should be used. Thus, if a Program has one person full-time on its faculty and his/her salary is derived entirely from a separate budget for the Program, this salary figure should appear in the first column. If he/she is supported one-third through a separate program budget, onethird from a position in another department, and one-third from a position as an official in a separately organized health facility, the salary should be allocated accordingly among all three columns of the budget. 24

25 Figure 2: Program Expenditures Self Study Year: Prior Year: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) HSOG Funds PA Division PA Division Other PSU Other PSU Grants & Sub-Total % of Total HSOG Funds Grants & Funds Funds Contracts Contracts Sub-Total % of Total Percent of Grand Total 77.3% 3.0% 19.7% 76.2% 0.0% 23.8% Program faculty 1,231,083 1,231, % 1,209,772 1,209, % Joint faculty 80,000 80, % % Adjunct faculty 88,713 88, % 90,397 90, % Secretarial/clerical personnel 41,019 41, % 34,737 34, % Teaching/research assistants 76,800 76, % 82,890 82, % Benefits (all personnel) 565, , % 550, , % Consumable supplies 21,605 21, % 24,633 24, % Faculty travel 29,964 29, % 30,677 30, % Faculty prof. activities 0 0.0% 1,150 1, % Library acquisitions 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Other travel 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Subcontracts and PSC 523, , % 631, , % Totals $ 2,054,350 $ 80,000 $ 523,072 $ 2,657, % $ 2,024,549 $ - $ 631,546 $ 2,656, % I.B.1.5. Program revenues The Program will have sufficient financial and administrative support to ensure that its mission, goals and objectives can be achieved. As guided by the framework of the University's rules and regulations, Program faculty and administration should have sufficient prerogatives to assure the integrity of the Program and facilitate achievement of the Program's mission goal and objectives. Program faculty should have formal opportunities for input in decisions affecting admissions and progress, resource allocation, faculty recruitment and promotion, curriculum design and evaluation, research and service activities, and degree requirements. This criterion requires an assessment of the Program's ability to meet its stated objectives in light of its current resources, identification of the most significant current resources and the most critical resource needs. Included should be the Program's ability to make recommendations for future resource development, identify steps planned to implement these recommendations, and describe the likely timeline for implementation. : Program revenues should be recorded below. Figure 3: Program Revenues Self-Study Year: * Prior Year: $ % $ % Federal grants** 0 0.0% 53, % State Grants & Contracts** * 500, % 578, % Local Government Grants & Contracts 0 0.0% 0 0.0% University Funds 2,134, % 2,024, % Other Grants & Contracts 22, % 0 0.0% TOTAL $ 2,657, % $ 2,656, % **Includes only direct federal funding. ***May include federal funds received as pass-through via research contracts with state agencies. 25

26 I.B.1.6. Administrative support available The Program will have sufficient financial and administrative support to ensure that its mission, goals and objectives can be achieved. As guided by the framework of the University's rules and regulations, Program faculty and administration should have sufficient prerogatives to assure the integrity of the Program and facilitate achievement of the Program's mission goal and objectives. Program faculty should have formal opportunities for input in decisions affecting admissions and progress, resource allocation, faculty recruitment and promotion, curriculum design and evaluation, research and service activities, and degree requirements. This criterion requires an assessment of the Program's ability to meet its stated objectives in light of its current resources, identification of the most significant current resources and the most critical resource needs. Included should be the Program's ability to make recommendations for future resource development, identify steps planned to implement these recommendations, and describe the likely timeline for implementation. Describe the extent and adequacy of administrative support services available to the Program, such as secretarial, clerical and graduate research assistants. Indicate whether these positions are supported by the Program budget, grants or other sources. The HSOG has four full-time staff, one assigned to each of the three divisions and one of whom supports the School as the Assistant to the HSOG Director. All of these positions are supported by institutional funding. A student worker in the HSOG front office (supported by Federal work-study funds) provides administrative support to the full-time administrative staff. Other student workers and graduate assistants are supported through grant funds and contracts. Overall, administrative support for the Program is at an adequate level to meet core needs and respond to critical requests, although this is reflected in a culture where faculty look after themselves and do not expect or have access to administrative staff to support them in personal scheduling, coordination of class activities, copying, communications, or other administrative tasks. Although funding is adequate, the Division, University, and higher education in general have been negatively affected by the ongoing shift from state support to other funding sources, primarily tuition-driven revenue. As a state, Oregon ranks near the bottom of the 50 states, and PSU receives less funding per student than either of the other large public universities in Oregon in terms of governmental support of public higher education. In particular, although able to offer tuition remission to a limited number of graduate assistants if stipends are available through other sources, the Division has suffered the loss of administrative funding for actual graduate research assistant stipends. The Program's participating, and most supporting faculty, have been successful in obtaining external research grants and contracts. This funding represents a substantial portion of the support for our GRAs. 26

27 I.B.1.7. Program's ability to meet objectives as related to current resources The Program will have sufficient financial and administrative support to ensure that its mission, goals and objectives can be achieved. As guided by the framework of the University's rules and regulations, Program faculty and administration should have sufficient prerogatives to assure the integrity of the Program and facilitate achievement of the Program's mission goal and objectives. Program faculty should have formal opportunities for input in decisions affecting admissions and progress, resource allocation, faculty recruitment and promotion, curriculum design and evaluation, research and service activities, and degree requirements. This criterion requires an assessment of the Program's ability to meet its stated objectives in light of its current resources, identification of the most significant current resources and the most critical resource needs. Included should be the Program's ability to make recommendations for future resource development, identify steps planned to implement these recommendations, and describe the likely timeline for implementation. Provide a summary assessment of the Program's ability to meet its stated objectives in light of its current resources and most critical resource needs. Include recommendations for future resource development, identify implementation steps for these recommendations, and describe the likely time line for implementation The MPH:HMP and MPA:HA programs are currently able to meet their objectives with existing resources. The Program s base budget is predicated on enrollment, which has increased slightly over the past several years. With greater enrollment and continued support through research grants and contracts, the Program was able to make the case for new funding to hire a new faculty member who will join the core faculty in fall In addition, funds from the Provost s office related to ongoing plans to develop a joint PSU-OHSU School of Public Health, provided support for three OHSU faculty to teach courses in the health management program in AY We have also been able to retain a stable and committed pool of adjunct faculty. Institutional funding supports the 3.5 full-time core health management and policy faculty, and 9.5 full-time faculty in the overall Division (on PSU tenure-related and fixed term contracts). Institutional funds also support some adjunct faculty, while soft funds are used to support other adjuncts and provide course release time for full-time faculty to conduct research and fulfill extraordinary service commitments. The Division of Public Administration also has sufficient physical resources to support the Program for the immediate future. However, the Division is not without needs. Budget constraints, which are not unique to the Program, present an ongoing challenge to all higher education. As in most state universities, PSU was subject to significant cuts in state funding during the economic recession -- a situation that constrains the latitude of the Program to pursue new opportunities and innovations that are resource-dependent. While some of these cuts have been offset by tuition increases and enrollment growth, the funding reductions have resulted in fewer graduate assistantships, limited faculty travel funds, reduction of core operating budgets, and other cutbacks. The success of some Program faculty in obtaining external funding through research grants and contracts has been instrumental in supporting release time, GRAs, faculty travel to attend and present at national and international conferences, and other supplemental activities. While university-wide initiatives encourage and support innovation and collaboration, entrepreneurial efforts must be balanced with efforts that fulfill our teaching mission and community engagement values. 27

28 PSU also moved to a performance-based budget model during academic years An important element in the new budget model is the generation of student credit hours and the need to strategically manage course enrollment. While our budgets do not allow us the luxury of limiting graduate courses to a 15 person seminar format, faculty have been able to modify their pedagogies in order to ensure that larger core and required/concentration courses continue to embody principles of active, adult learning. As a result, the feedback we obtain from students through course evaluations becomes particularly important in assessing the quality of our offerings, and identifying opportunities for improvement. Given our relatively large overall program enrollment, we must constantly calibrate our resource availability with organizational performance expectations on such measures as student credit hours. Future plans to maintain or expand enrollment in the Program in Health Management and Policy include the implementation of a marketing plan, development of new course offerings that target clinical students and practitioners, and creation of the PSU-OHSU School of Public Health. The Program s growth opportunities are also enhanced by our relationships with the Center for Public Service and the Institute for Nonprofit Management, both of which speak to students interests in public service and community-based nonprofit settings. I.B.2.1. Authority and responsibilities of Program Director Program leadership will have the authority to ensure the integrity of the Program. This criterion evaluates the authority of the personnel responsible for the program. It determines oversight of the Program, and autonomy of the Program Director as opposed to that of the Program Chair or Dean. The Program Director may have delegated authority for program matters. These include (at minimum): evaluation of faculty, admissions, curricular review and modification, schedule development, student advising and placement, leadership of students, residency placements, and academic affairs of students. Provide a description of the extent of authority the Program director has in leading the Program and determining its strategic direction. Your description should cover the following areas: Primary responsibility for curriculum development Admission standards Faculty selection and retention Fiscal planning The coordinator of the graduate programs in health systems management and policy (the MPH:HMP, MPA:HA and PhD in Health Systems and Policy) is considered the Program Director. This is an interim designation pending the creation of formal structures within the new School of Public Health. Dr. Gelmon served as Chair of the Division of Public Administration from , and previously was the Track Coordinator for both the MPA:HA and the MPH:HMP programs. She has had lead responsibility for the development of both masters programs for much of the past 21 years. Dr. Neal Wallace has served as Track Coordinator for both the MPA:HA and the MPH:HMP since 2008, and is responsible for responding to queries from students who are pre-admission, representing the MPH:HMP to the OMPH Academic Program and Policy Committee, and leading the curriculum review process for the health management programs. Collectively, Drs. Gelmon and Wallace consider improvements needed in the health management programs, and consult with the other health-related faculty and/or the entire faculty of the Division of Public Administration as appropriate. Dr. Rissi 28

29 has had lead responsibility for CAHME preparation, and as a result has also been extensively involved in curriculum review and deliberations. Drs. Graven, Rieckmann and Quinones have all participated in discussions in the past year, particularly with regard to Program Goals and Objectives. Drs. Kaimanu and Cooper, as well as other PA Division faculty have participated in these discussions as relevant. Budgetary and personnel authority, including programmatic decisions that have resource implications, rest with the Director of the HSOG, Dr. Ronald Tammen. However, all resource decisions are made through a consultative process between the HSOG Director and the Division Chair, who have a strong and productive collaborative relationship. While she was Division Chair, Dr. Gelmon was a member of the Executive Committee of the Mark O. Hatfield School of Government, and had authority for curricular and programmatic decisions, and student-related queries and activities. In September 2014 Dr. Gelmon stepped down as Chair, and Dr. Doug Morgan assumed the position of Chair. He consults regularly with Drs. Gelmon, Wallace and Rissi about the Programs in Health Management and Policy, and generally makes decisions that will affect the programs after such consultation. The Division faculty are formally involved in recruitment and promotion activities, as well as admissions, curricular review and modification. Search committees are chaired by Division faculty, and make recommendations for approval by the School Director in consultation with the Division Chair. Evaluation of faculty through annual and tenure-related performance assessments begins with the Division Chair, and faculty are involved in all review committees as outlined in Divisional, School and University personnel policies and procedures, and governed by the collective bargaining agreement. However, all decisions regarding personnel evaluations rest with the HSOG Director in his role as the Department Chair -- in particular since he is classified as management personnel and therefore not eligible to be a member of the Union (whereas the Division Chair is eligible to be a union member). The University has clear guidelines on union vs. non-union representation and participation in any personnel decisions. Dr. Tammen consults with the PA Division Chair as required (and permissible by personnel guidelines) regarding all personnel issues involving PA Division faculty (tenure-related, fixed term and adjunct). During when Dr. Rissi was under review for tenure and promotion, Dr. Tammen consulted with Dr. Wallace as the Chair of the tenure review committee. Admissions are reviewed by the Division s Admissions Committees. Dr. Rissi chairs the PA Division committee; Drs. Gelmon, Wallace and Graven are members of the MPH committee. Students are admitted to the Division of PA, and the Division Chair also serves as the Graduate Department Chair. Curriculum proposals (courses and programs) are developed by the PA faculty, approved by the PA curriculum committee, and then move through levels of approval including the CUPA Curriculum Committee, the PSU Graduate Council, and the PSU Faculty Senate. Effective June 30, 2015 the Oregon University System no longer exists; in future, the Higher Education Coordinating Commission will be the final level of program approval, with further review and approval by the NWCCU. Faculty are also involved in schedule development, student advising, field placements, and student life (including leadership opportunities, advising student organizations and representation, and student concerns). Student complaints or concerns are generally brought to the attention of the individual faculty involved or to the Division Chair; there are clear University procedures for how certain kinds of complaints are handled some of which can be conducted by the Division Chair or the HSOG Director, while others must be taken to the University s Office of Equity and Compliance, within the Office of Global Diversity and Inclusion. 29

30 I.B.2.2. Organizational Chart Program leadership will have the authority to ensure the integrity of the Program. This criterion evaluates the authority of the personnel responsible for the program. It determines oversight of the Program, and autonomy of the Program Director as opposed to that of the Program Chair or Dean. The Program Director may have delegated authority for program matters. These include (at minimum): evaluation of faculty, admissions, curricular review and modification, schedule development, student advising and placement, leadership of students, residency placements, and academic affairs of students. Program response is not required for this. Prepare an organizational chart(s) locating the Program within the University and attach file named as Organizational Chart. Please upload attachment. Supporting Material Upload organizational chart(s) locating the Program within the University. Enter a helpful Title and Description for each document. APPENDIX TITLE UPLOADED BY ACTION Appendix I.B Organizational Chart - College of Urban and Public Affairs (CUPA) May2015 Jill Rissi I.B.2.3. Organization of the Program and its relationships Program leadership will have the authority to ensure the integrity of the Program. This criterion evaluates the authority of the personnel responsible for the program. It determines oversight of the Program, and autonomy of the Program Director as opposed to that of the Program Chair or Dean. The Program Director may have delegated authority for program matters. These include (at minimum): evaluation of faculty, admissions, curricular review and modification, schedule development, student advising and placement, leadership of students, residency placements, and academic affairs of students. Describe the organization of the Program and its relationships with the primary academic unit in which it is located. Your description should cover the following areas: The part of the University to which the Program is most closely related The program organization as a separate department or as part of another administrative entity Faculty appointments in the Program or in other elements of the University Any other information relevant to understanding how the Program fits into the University structure. The programs are located in the Division of Public Administration (PA), Mark O. Hatfield School of Government (HSOG), College of Urban and Public Affairs (CUPA). The Hatfield School is one of three schools within the 30

31 College, and the Director reports to the Dean of CUPA. CUPA is one of seven colleges/schools within PSU. Fulltime faculty hold appointments, and are eligible for tenure, within the Division of Public Administration. Fulltime faculty are governed by the PSU-AAUP collective bargaining agreement; union membership is optional but all faculty are represented by the union. A separate union, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), represents adjunct faculty. PA is one of three divisions within the Hatfield School of Government; the other two divisions are Political Science, and Criminology and Criminal Justice. Each Division appoints a Chair who has administrative authority with respect to curriculum and students; the Hatfield School is considered the department by PSU, and thus the Director of the Hatfield School is entrusted with the responsibilities of a department Chair including all administrative authority for budget, personnel, and other operations. The Division Chairs report to the School Director; the current Director gives considerable operating latitude to the Chairs, and as a result, the Division Chairs lead many activities similar to what would be expected of a department Chair, but with ultimate decision-making authority vested in the Director. The Chairs retain authority for scheduling, advising, curriculum review, and day-to-day operations of their respective academic programs. The programs are governed by the PA faculty; the MPH:HMP is also subject to the collaborative governance structure of the Oregon MPH program. The OMPH has a well-developed system of collaborative governance that both respects the autonomy of the individual institutions and promulgates collective decision-making by the two participating universities to ensure the integrity of the OMPH. Students apply, and are admitted, to a specific university and track; faculty advisors are assigned from that track and degrees are awarded by the specific university. Curricula for core MPH and track courses are reviewed at least every two years by the OMPH faculty from the respective institutions teaching those courses, and are revised to meet OMPH and track competencies as well as any requirements from the home academic unit. More information on this program, including operating policies and the most recent CEPH documentation, is available at PSU and OHSU are creating a collaborative School of Public Health, which was launched on July 1, 2015; CEPH has approved the joint school to begin the accreditation process as of June 2015, and an initial site visit is anticipated within the next two years. The MPH:HMP will be included in this accreditation application. Some governance structures will evolve as the SPH develops. I.B.2.4. Suitability of Structural location Program leadership will have the authority to ensure the integrity of the Program. This criterion evaluates the authority of the personnel responsible for the program. It determines oversight of the Program, and autonomy of the Program Director as opposed to that of the Program Chair or Dean. The Program Director may have delegated authority for program matters. These include (at minimum): evaluation of faculty, admissions, curricular review and modification, schedule development, student advising and placement, leadership of students, residency placements, and academic affairs of students. Assess the suitability of the structural location of the Program in the university and in relation to the Program's current and projected development. Include projections of future support and/or problems. Identify any recommendations for desired change in the setting, steps planned to implement these recommendations and the timing of these steps. 31

32 The Program is ideally situated to serve students and has built a strong reputation over many years. We are able to effectively leverage our position within the larger Division of Public Administration where our emphasis on health services complements other areas of emphasis, such as nonprofit, local government, natural resources and environment, and global leadership. Our position within HSOG also offers opportunities for unique collaborations, such as the creation of a new Masters in Public Policy. Finally, our position within CUPA offers the opportunity to collaborate with colleagues in the Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning on issues that address social/environmental determinants of health, and with our colleagues in the School of Community Health with whom we collaborate regularly through the OMPH. The health programs enroll approximately one third of the master s students in the Division, and our MPH track is one of the largest in the OMPH. As a result, we are recognized as a strong and vibrant part of the Division of PA, and are as well-supported as any other graduate program, if not better. We are also recognized for producing academically strong students, and generate some of the top graduates in the Division, School and College each year. There will be changes in the future with the creation of the OHSU and PSU School of Public Health. The MPH:HMP will shift to the SPH, as will responsibility for teaching the health courses (prefix PAH). The core health faculty will move to the SPH and expect to have joint appointments in PA (and HSOG), although a physical move is unlikely for at least two years. We are working with our colleagues in PA to develop joint governance of the MPA:HA. The exact details of these arrangements were not finalized as of the end of the academic year, and will continue to be worked on in Updates will be provided to the site visit team on site. I.B.3.1. Resources and accommodations associated with large classes Program and University leadership will ensure that the resources available to faculty are commensurate with workload. CAHME recognizes that large class sections, blended and online instruction place additional demands on course faculty and requires that the quality of instruction should not be compromised. CAHME will seek evidence that faculty are supported with additional resources and that the majority of instruction is with the faculty of record who is a qualified content expert. Describe the accommodations made for, or resources available to, faculty to handle the additional workload associated with classes of 30 students or more. Other than the fall term sections of two introductory core courses (Organizational Behavior and Health Systems Organization) which may enroll up to 35 students, it is rare for class sizes to exceed 30 students. Both of these courses are foundational courses (OB for health students in our two programs, HSO for MPH students across the tracks as well as MPA:HA students), and there is a large demand for the fall offerings when we admit the most new students. A key learning strategy for both of these courses is the opportunity for students to work in teams. While the group projects in these courses are designed to further student competencies in collaboration, communication, leadership and teamwork, they also serve as a means of accommodating the larger number of enrolled students. Accommodations for situations in which larger class sizes are anticipated 32

33 (even those that do not exceed 30 students) include consideration given to overall teaching load, class scheduling and reduced administrative responsibilities such that the instructional workload is appropriately balanced among faculty over the course of the academic year. Our budgetary situation sometimes requires us to accept up to 35 students in a specialized skill course when it cannot be offered again for another year due to budgetary restrictions this fits with PSU s access mission, and a strong determination to accommodate students as much as possible within a reasonable timeframe. Additional Information Provided to Site Visit Team on Oct 15, 2015: We have an absolute enrollment cap of 35 students for all courses. If an individual faculty member may agree to admit more students to a course, this is a personal choice and rarely occurs in practice. In recent years it has been rare to have courses of over 30 as our overall enrollment numbers have stabilized and we have modified our course schedule to offer multiple sections of high enrollment classes. This has enabled us to both meet student demand and ensure that classes rarely exceed 30. In AY , just three PA Division courses had 30 or more students: PAH 574 Health Systems Organization (F14; PA/Sumner) 31 students (10 program /21 non-program) PAH 577 Health Law/Regulation (W15; PA/Faler) 30 students (27 program /3 non-program) PAH 588 Program Evaluation Health (F14; PA/Einspruch) 33 students (9 program /24 non-program) PAH 574 is often a larger class in the fall due to new students wanting to take it that quarter; it has 25 spaces for PSU students and 10 spaces for OHSU students and is required for all MPH, MPA:HA, and HSP PhD students. The regular Fall section professor (Gelmon) generally tries to encourage some students to move to Winter, Spring or Summer to take advantage of smaller enrollments. In Fall 2014 Dr. Gelmon was on sabbatical, and Prof. Sumner may not have felt comfortable suggesting this, leading to a larger enrollment. PAH 577 Health Law is only offered once per year and usually does not go over 30; the self-study year offering was slightly larger than the norm. PAH 588 Program Evaluation is offered twice per year, but in fall is often heavily subscribed with MPH: Health Promotion students for whom it is a required course. The faculty of record tries to encourage some to move to Winter quarter, but the enrollment is usually The faculty accommodates this by an emphasis on the team-based evaluation design project which Dr. Gelmon implemented in this class, and that usually relieves some of the burden of the size. No special resources (such as TAs) are available in PA due to resource constraints, and since we believe our courses are best taught by the assigned faculty (full-time or adjunct). Senior faculty have experience teaching occasional classes of as this occurred more frequently in the past (e.g. over 5 years ago) when we did not offer multiple sections of core courses. Of the five core courses in the MPH:HMP program, four are taught outside of the Division. Among these courses, one section in each of three courses exceeded 30 students during the self-study year. Enrollment in other sections of all three courses was well under 30 students: PHPM 524 Introduction to Biostatistics (F14; OHSU/Srikanth) - 41 students (7 program /34 nonprogram) PHPM 518 Environmental Health (W15; OHSU/Lambert) 39 students (8 program/31 nonprogram) PHE 512 Principles of Health Behavior (F14; SCH/Wheeler) 49 students (11 program /38 nonprogram) The two PHPM courses are offered at OHSU and generally have a TA assisting the professor. These courses serve many non-program students who are enrolled in other MPH tracks and OHSU graduate programs. The PHE course is offered through the School of Community Health, which also has TAs to assist faculty with grading and other course-related activities. 33

34 Ideally in the future we will have more resources and be able to offer additional sections in order to keep class size limited, but this is difficult in an environment where budgets are dependent upon student enrollment. We encourage the site visit team to explore this with the relevant administrators, and also with the faculty to learn more about how we manage with these class sizes. I.B.3.2. Additional resources for online or blended instruction Program and University leadership will ensure that the resources available to faculty are commensurate with workload. CAHME recognizes that large class sections, blended and online instruction place additional demands on course faculty and requires that the quality of instruction should not be compromised. CAHME will seek evidence that faculty are supported with additional resources and that the majority of instruction is with the faculty of record who is a qualified content expert. For programs with online or blended instruction, describe the additional resources available to faculty. Online and blended instruction currently represent a very small proportion of overall instruction, and Office of Academic Innovation specialists are available to aid in the development of such courses. The Program engages in regular efforts to improve and maintain the quality of teaching. From coaching and instructional support provided by OAI, to course evaluations that are conducted for every course, faculty are regularly evaluated and advised of areas in which instruction may be improved. Teaching assistants are not utilized for any graduatelevel courses. Highly qualified instructors, particularly adjunct faculty who are specifically selected to bring their expertise and practitioner s perspective to the classroom, further the goal of exposing students to a range of health administration professionals and are supported with comprehensive teaching materials and coaching by core Program faculty. Additional information provided to Site Visit Team on Oct 15: In April 2015, support for D2L (our online learning platform) was transitioned from the Integrated Digital Support Center (IDSC) within the Office of Information Technology (OIT) to the new Faculty Support Desk with the Office of Academic Innovation (OAI). OAI also offers support for online and blended instruction, such as Collaboration in Online Classes, Accessibility Events/Teaching with Technology, and Flipping Your Classroom without Flipping Out: A Model for Engaging and Motivating Students. A listing of these and other offerings can be found at: and IDSC continues to provide after-hours phone support, one-on-on software and equipment support and other specialty equipment support. The only online course available to MPH:HMP students is one section of Biostatistics offered by OHSU. No MPA:HA students took the only PA elective course (Ethics) offered online during the self-study year. 34

35 I.B.3.3. Policies for TA's and co-teaching Program and University leadership will ensure that the resources available to faculty are commensurate with workload. CAHME recognizes that large class sections, blended and online instruction place additional demands on course faculty and requires that the quality of instruction should not be compromised. CAHME will seek evidence that faculty are supported with additional resources and that the majority of instruction is with the faculty of record who is a qualified content expert. Describe the policies governing the use of Teaching Assistants (TA's) and co-teaching in the program. The Program makes very limited use of Teaching Assistants and co-teaching. Second-year master s students may occasionally serve as TAs; however their activities are restricted primarily to assisting with test grading in PA 551/552 Analytic Methods I and II, which are courses within the MPA:HA (and MPA). From time to time students in the Health Systems and Policy PhD program may teach a course in the Program; these doctoral students would have earned relevant master s degrees and have extensive experience in their respective fields. Academic support for TAs is provided by the Office of Academic Innovation (OAI), which offers an annual orientation and resource training seminar for both faculty and new Graduate Research/Teaching Assistants each fall. Resources and topics covered include information about the Office of Information Technologies/Online Learning, Millar Library, OAI/GA development programs, Office of Human Resources, Office of Graduate Studies, and general student support services. OAI also provides consultation regarding program and course design, assessment, community-based learning, classroom observations, and other tutorials. These services are available to all faculty and instructors. Additional information provided to Site Visit Team on Oct 15: We do not use TAs in our program. Co-teaching occurs occasionally when there is an adjunct who can add to the content of a course but is not prepared to take on full responsibility for the course (as occurred with PAH 510 Health Policy: Oregon Style offered as a one-time elective in Summer 2015). Doctoral students occasionally teach as adjuncts when they are advanced in their studies, have past experience teaching (usually in other university programs), demonstrate strong competency to teach, and have expertise and interest to teach a specific course. For example, a past doctoral student who taught a section of PAH 588 Program Evaluation for several years had many years of experience as a community-based evaluator before she began teaching (Dr. Foucek Tresidder, who now is a tenure track faculty at the undergraduate health administration program at Eastern Washington University). A past doctoral student initiated a redesign of PAH 579 Health Care Information Systems Management while he was working and studying health IT and has continued to teach that course post-graduation (Dr. Droppers). Any doctoral student teaching is closely mentored by one of the senior faculty, and additional consultation is provided to ensure courses are of high quality. Evaluations are reviewed to identify any opportunities for improvement. The site visit team will have the opportunity to meet Ms. Robin Baker who is a current HS&P PhD student and has taught for us, as well as other former, or current PhD students who have (or are currently) teaching in the Program. 35

36 I.B.3.4. Majority of instructional time and qualified faculty Program and University leadership will ensure that the resources available to faculty are commensurate with workload. CAHME recognizes that large class sections, blended and online instruction place additional demands on course faculty and requires that the quality of instruction should not be compromised. CAHME will seek evidence that faculty are supported with additional resources and that the majority of instruction is with the faculty of record who is a qualified content expert. For programs with online or blended instruction, describe methods the Program uses to ensure that qualified faculty have responsibility for the majority of instructional time. While online and blended instruction currently represent a very small proportion of overall instruction, the Program takes pride in the quality of instruction and engages in regular efforts to improve and maintain the quality of teaching. From coaching and instructional support for the development of blended and online courses provided by OAI, to course evaluations that are conducted for every course, faculty are regularly evaluated and advised of areas in which instruction may be improved. Adjunct and fixed term faculty are evaluated annually, and core faculty are evaluated through the tenure and post-tenure review processes. Highly qualified instructors, particularly adjunct faculty who are specifically selected to bring both their expertise and a practitioner s perspective to the classroom, also further the goal of exposing students to a range of health administration professionals. Many adjunct and fixed term faculty are both academically and professionally qualified for the courses they teach. I.B.4.1. Availability of University wide academic resources The organization of the Program and its relationship to other academic units will enable students to draw broadly on academic resources throughout the University. CAHME recognizes that the educational goals of programs can best be met if students have access to and utilize, to the greatest extent possible, the resources of the entire University for courses, independent study and research Assess the availability of University wide academic resources (e.g. courses, student activities) and describe how they are made available to the student in the Program. Students may take relevant electives in other academic units with prior approval from their faculty advisor if such courses clearly further the student s career goals. A benefit of the MPH:HMP and MPA:HA programs is the opportunity for students to leverage the expertise of faculty in other divisions. Students may also meet their specific learning goals by drawing on courses in other MPA specialty areas, such as nonprofit management, local government, and HR management. Similarly, the Program s location within CUPA facilitates 36

37 students access to the School of Community Health and the Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning. The growing collaboration with OHSU facilitates access to relevant graduate classes offered at OHSU. Students work closely with their advisors to identify courses that may be taken as electives and which further their particular health management and policy interests, as well as to identify faculty who may have unique interests and/or community connections that would be beneficial to the students progress through their programs of study. Students also have access a variety of academic support services, such as the Writing Center ( Career Services ( and an Alumni Mentoring Program ( These resources complement the academic support and career advising that is provided by Program faculty, thus augmenting Program resources. I.B.4.2. Barriers to access The organization of the Program and its relationship to other academic units will enable students to draw broadly on academic resources throughout the University. CAHME recognizes that the educational goals of programs can best be met if students have access to and utilize, to the greatest extent possible, the resources of the entire University for courses, independent study and research Describe any barriers to access for students in the Program and options that have been considered for addressing those barriers. There are no identified barriers to students access to the full range of Program and university resources. II.A.1.1. Information available to students The Program will make available full and accurate information regarding its application process; the competencies that form the basis for its curriculum; the curriculum; teaching, learning and assessment methods; and student achievement. The Program will provide sufficient information to allow prospective students to make informed decisions prior to entering the program, and to allow other interested parties to understand the program and its purpose. This information typically includes recruiting, admissions criteria and practices, academic calendars, grading policies, degree requirements, and student outcomes including completion rate and the percent of students employed within three months of graduation. Since competencies define the nature and content of a program and establish student expectations, information about them should be widely available to students and prospective students. Accredited programs with multiple tracks must clearly differentiate between accredited and non-accredited offerings in their formal and informal communications. 37

38 Describe how students receive information about your program (e.g. website, brochures, etc.) Provide relevant URLs, and brief descriptions of what these pages contain as appropriate. Copies of print materials not available via the Internet should be available for the site visit team during the site visit. Include in this section a description of how information about competencies, teaching, learning and assessment methods are made available to students and prospective students. The University, HSOG and PA Division websites are the primary sources of program information for potential and admitted students; online sources were cited by 80% of respondents to a recent student survey. Information about teaching philosophy, curricula and competencies is found on the PA Division website ( along with information about degree requirements, course planning, registration, competencies, contact information for faculty, and other topics. Program web pages can be accessed through the HSOG, CUPA and PSU home pages, which also provide links to university resources, procedures and financial aid information. The OMPH website provides MPH:HMP students with additional information specific to the OMPH Program ( All websites are structured to answer questions that are frequently asked by prospective and newly admitted students, and highlight information pertaining to career goals and employment opportunities. Discussion of competencies is general on the websites, with detailed information about competencies, curricula, courses, advising, grievance procedures, and other key topics presented in the online OMPH and PA Student handbooks. PA Division and OMPH new student orientation sessions provide an additional avenue for the dissemination of information about competencies, teaching, learning and assessment. II.A.1.2. Information available to other stakeholders The Program will make available full and accurate information regarding its application process; the competencies that form the basis for its curriculum; the curriculum; teaching, learning and assessment methods; and student achievement. The Program will provide sufficient information to allow prospective students to make informed decisions prior to entering the program, and to allow other interested parties to understand the program and its purpose. This information typically includes recruiting, admissions criteria and practices, academic calendars, grading policies, degree requirements, and student outcomes including completion rate and the percent of students employed within three months of graduation. Since competencies define the nature and content of a program and establish student expectations, information about them should be widely available to students and prospective students. Accredited programs with multiple tracks must clearly differentiate between accredited and non-accredited offerings in their formal and informal communications. Describe how other stakeholders (the public, employers, preceptors, and other interested parties as defined by your Program) receive information about the program. Copies of print materials not available via the Internet should be made available to the site visit team during the site visit. 38

39 The PA Division website is the primary source of information for other stakeholders ( Preceptors for the PAH 509 Organizational Experience, many of whom are employed by organizational stakeholders, receive information through online sources, a guidebook, and contact with the 509 faculty. The PA and OMPH Alumni Associations connect alumni to the Program, acting as a two-way communication channel for the growth and development of alumni. Alumni are also networked through the PSU alumni association ( Events are another source of information about the program. For example, the OMPH Student Symposium provides a forum for current students to share their ongoing research, class projects, field experiences, and current public health interests with their peers, faculty and public health practitioners from around the state. Many stakeholders are on the IHI Open School mailing list and attend IHI-OS events. II.A.1.3. Publication of student achievement measures The Program will make available full and accurate information regarding its application process; the competencies that form the basis for its curriculum; the curriculum; teaching, learning and assessment methods; and student achievement. The Program will provide sufficient information to allow prospective students to make informed decisions prior to entering the program, and to allow other interested parties to understand the program and its purpose. This information typically includes recruiting, admissions criteria and practices, academic calendars, grading policies, degree requirements, and student outcomes including completion rate and the percent of students employed within three months of graduation. Since competencies define the nature and content of a program and establish student expectations, information about them should be widely available to students and prospective students. Accredited programs with multiple tracks must clearly differentiate between accredited and non-accredited offerings in their formal and informal communications. Provide the URL from the Program's website that shows the publication of measures of student achievement including, at a minimum: completion rate for the last graduating class; the percent of these students employed within three months of graduation. MPH:HMP - MPA:HA - II.A.2.1. Target applicant and annual recruitment goals The Program will have recruiting practices and well-defined admission criteria designed to admit qualified students and pursue a diverse student population. The program's admission criteria should be derived from its mission and serve as metrics by which the Program monitors its performance. 39

40 Describe the target applicant market, annual recruitment goals, and the activities involved with pursuing those goals. The Program does not have a specific target applicant market, reflecting the University s access mission that encourages a diverse pool of students to apply. Similarly, we do not have specific annual recruitment goals, as the University has an open access policy and we are encouraged to take as many qualified students as apply and are suitable for admission (within reason). We have not yet reached a point where we cannot accommodate all qualified applicants who ultimately enroll. Since most of our students pursue at least some of their studies on a part-time basis, the number of active students varies. We limit class sizes and offer additional sections as necessary; this is the primary strategy we have used in recent years to accommodate an increased number of enrolled students. Two collaborations with OHSU have specifically targeted medical residents who concurrently complete the MPH:HMP at PSU. In the joint Family Medicine/Preventive Medicine residency program at OHSU, residents must complete an MPH in order to seek board certification in Preventive Medicine. Dr. Gelmon serves as the primary advisor for these residents, working closely with OHSU to coordinate how students track through the MPH in conjunction with their residency requirements. Drs. Gelmon, Rissi, and Wallace have all participated in the annual interview sessions, meeting with many of the applicants (up to 40 applicants are interviewed annually for the two positions). A second collaboration was with the Department of Public Health and Preventive Medicine at OHSU as part of a three-year ( ) HRSA grant to train residents in health policy. Up to three residents were recruited each year of this grant which emphasized health policy experiences at the Oregon Health Authority as part of the preventive medicine training; several of these residents elected to complete the MPH:HMP. Currently, one OHSU "straight track" Preventive Medicine resident is completing the MPH:HMP at PSU ( ). Information about the admissions process and related materials are available online at: Students submit an application that includes the application form, a personal essay, undergraduate and any graduate transcripts, GRE scores, three reference letters, and a résumé. International students must also submit evidence of English language proficiency. The personal essay provides information about the student s background, interest in the specific program, career goals, and plans for study (full/part-time and planned duration of study). Persons providing references must be familiar with the applicant's academic and work history, and be able to assess the ability of the applicant to perform graduate level work, as well as their potential for a career in health services management/public health leadership. The résumé facilitates a review of public service and/or health-related work experience, as well as general background. Staff calculate undergraduate cumulative G.P.A and G.P.A. for any graduate work. MPA:HA applicant files are reviewed by the PA Division s Admissions Committee (currently chaired by Dr. Rissi), a recommendation is made, and the Division Chair makes a final determination on admissions. Letters of offer are co-signed by the Division Chair and the Director of the Hatfield School. A similar process is followed for the MPH:HMP, with one small difference. MPH:HMP applicants are reviewed by the MPH Admissions Committee, which is composed of OMPH faculty, including Drs. Wallace and Gelmon. Letters of offer and admission are conditional upon review and approval by the University. The university review is limited to verification that the undergraduate degree is from an accredited college or university and confirming G.P.A. For international students, the university also reviews the TOEFL score and any other international student requirements. 40

41 The Division governs admissions standards for students applying to our graduate degree programs. While standards are established by policy, which is recorded annually in the Portland State University Bulletin, the admission of applicants is a matter of judgment made by Division faculty serving as the Admissions Committees. As a faculty, we have adopted admissions qualifications for both degree programs that are higher than the minimum standard established by the PSU Office of Graduate Studies. II.A.2.2. Recruitment activity outcomes The Program will have recruiting practices and well-defined admission criteria designed to admit qualified students and pursue a diverse student population. The program's admission criteria should be derived from its mission and serve as metrics by which the Program monitors its performance. Describe recruitment activity outcomes below. (% minority not applicable to programs outside the US) 41

42 II.A.2.2 Recruitment Activity Outcomes DEGREE PROGRAM: MPA:HA Self-Study AY PRIOR AY ( ) ( ) Total/Minorities % Minorities Total/Minorities % Minorities 1. Total applications received: 28/10 36% 17/6 35% a) incomplete 0/0 0 0% b) complete 28/10 36% 17/6 35% 2. Total complete applications: 28/10 36% 17/6 a) applicants offered admission 11/4 36% 14/6 43% b) applicants not offered admission 17/6 35% 3/0 0% 3. Total applicants enrolled 11/3 27% 11/3 27% DEGREE PROGRAM: MPH:HMP Self-Study AY PRIOR AY ( ) ( ) Total/Minorities % Minorities Total/Minorities % Minorities 1. Total applications received: 56/20 36% 43/12 28% a) incomplete 0/0 0% 0/0 0% b) complete 56/20 36% 43/12 28% 2. Total complete applications: 56/20 36% 43/12 28% a) applicants offered admission 42/11 26% 30/7 23% b) applicants not offered admission 14/9 64% 13/5 38% 3. Total applicants enrolled 21/3 14% 21/3 14% 42

43 II.A.2.3. Characteristics of entering students The Program will have recruiting practices and well-defined admission criteria designed to admit qualified students and pursue a diverse student population. The program's admission criteria should be derived from its mission and serve as metrics by which the Program monitors its performance. Describe the characteristics of entering students for the self-study year, the year prior to the self-study year and the following the self study year (if available) II.A.2.3 Characteristics of Entering Students CURRENT AY AY SELF-STUDY AY AY PRIOR AY AY MPA:HA N= 13 N = 11 N = 11 1st Quartile Median 3rd Quartile 1st Quartile Median 3rd Quartile 1st Quartile Median 3rd Quartile Entering GPA GRE Verbal GRE Quantitative MPH:HMP N= 14 N = 21 N = 21 1st 3rd 1st 3rd 1st Median Median Median Quartile Quartile Quartile Quartile Quartile 3rd Quartile Entering GPA GRE Verbal GRE Quantitative II.A.2.4. Assessment of recruitment and admissions process The Program will have recruiting practices and well-defined admission criteria designed to admit qualified students and pursue a diverse student population. The program's admission criteria should be derived from its mission and serve as metrics by which the Program monitors its performance. 43

44 Provide an assessment of the recruitment and admissions process with respect to the Program's effectiveness in meeting its goals and objectives. Characteristics of admitted students, particularly with respect to diversity and public service orientation, reflect the missions of the Program and the PA Division. In recent years the Program has attracted an increasing number of foreign applicants. Although a considerable number of these applicants do not meet admissions criteria (hence the disproportionate number of "minority" students who are denied admission), the students who are admitted bring a unique perspective on the US health system to the classroom. In addition, our recruitment and admissions processes consistently yield a student population that is characterized by diverse backgrounds, interests and identities, and expands the definition of diversity beyond racial/ethnic boundaries. Since they enter the Program with a variety of interests, upon graduation they enter careers in a similarly varied range of positions and settings. The diversity of our students' interests, coupled with the Program's commitments to competency-based knowledge and skill development, community-engaged scholarship and service, has enabled us to prepare health services managers and researchers who are prepared to address the challenges of a rapidly evolving health system. This process starts with our recruiting practices and admissions criteria, and enables the Program to help students achieve both their, and our, goals. One challenge with the admissions process was related to the implementation of SOPHAS, which is now required for all OMPH applicants. When SOPHAS was implemented, we made several changes to our website, established new deadlines for MPH:HMP applicants and creating a separate webpage explaining the new processes. Processes and deadlines for MPA:HA applicants, and the list of materials needed, remained unchanged and continued to be clearly indicated. We are moving to a new online application for our MPA:HA applications as required by the PSU Office of Graduate Studies, and facilitating the SOPHAS process by sending reminders and alerts to applicants. We are also working to improve the user interfaces on our website, and will soon be able to download students' official transcripts, saving students from having to reorder transcripts. We will apply what we have learned from the implementation of SOPHAS and our internal process changes as we consider adopting HAMPCAS. (See I.A.2.1 Supporting Materials: Student Survey Report, p. 4-6.) II.A.2.5. Distribution of enrolled students The Program will have recruiting practices and well-defined admission criteria designed to admit qualified students and pursue a diverse student population. The program's admission criteria should be derived from its mission and serve as metrics by which the Program monitors its performance. Provide distribution of enrolled students 44

45 II.A.2.5 FT/PT Distribution of Enrolled Students MPH:HMP MPA:HA AY Total Total AY (as of August 2015) Entering Class Size: 27 (14 MPH/13 MPA) Fulltime Parttime Total AY (Self-Study Year) Entering Class Size: 32 (21 MPH/11 MPA) Fulltime Parttime Total Entering Class Size: 32 (21 MPH/11 MPA) Fulltime Parttime Total Fulltime Parttime Fulltime Parttime Fulltime Parttime Total II.A.2.6. Criteria used in the student selection process The Program will have recruiting practices and well-defined admission criteria designed to admit qualified students and pursue a diverse student population. The program's admission criteria should be derived from its mission and serve as metrics by which the Program monitors its performance. List the criteria used in student selection. Include any specific rules or guidelines concerning previously earned grade point averages, standardized test scores, previously earned degrees, prerequisite courses, prerequisite majors, work experience, career objectives, and/or assessments made by interviewers. While the University standard is a minimum of 2.75 GPA for conditional admission, the PA Division seeks a minimum 3.0 GPA in undergraduate coursework for regular admission for MPA and MPA:HA applicants, and a 3.25 GPA for MPH:HMP applicants (per OMPH guidelines). All students for whom English is not the first language must demonstrate language proficiency by a recent TOEFL score of 550 (paper), 213 (computer), or 80 (internet based with a minimum sub-score of 18 in reading and writing). This can be waived if the applicant has completed a graduate degree at an English language based university. The MPH track also requires completion of an undergraduate course in statistics for admission; this is a core requirement across all tracks in the OMPH program. All PA graduate programs also require GRE scores, with the expectation that applicants offered admission will demonstrate a minimum of a combined verbal and analytic score of 299 (approximately 1100 on the previous scale) and a score of 4.5 on the analytic writing section of the GRE. This has been a requirement for the MPH since that program was established, and was adopted by the PA Division for MPA and MPA:HA applicants in The Admissions Committees place significant weight on letters of reference, especially for mid-career and nontraditional applicants. While we do not require that applicants have work experience, we do recognize the value of relevant work experience, and expect applicants to be able to articulate what they have learned from this experience in their application, as well as describing how the selected program will prepare them for their anticipated career paths. 45

46 II.A.2.7. Policies and procedures for exceptions in the Program's selection criteria The Program will have recruiting practices and well-defined admission criteria designed to admit qualified students and pursue a diverse student population. The program's admission criteria should be derived from its mission and serve as metrics by which the Program monitors its performance. Explain policies and procedures allowing for exceptions in the Program's selection criteria, and describe the extent to which these exceptions are made, including the percentage of students admitted based on exceptions to your criteria. The Division has the ability to admit students in two different status categories. The categories are: regular status (students meeting all University and Division/School requirements), and conditional status (students eligible for University admission, but not completely achieving Division requirements, such as prerequisites, GPA or GRE scores). In recommending admission, the Admissions Committees consider the entirety of the application, and may recommend admission in cases in which the GPA or a score on an individual component of the GRE is slightly lower than the stated guidelines. In all such cases, the rationale for admission is stated in Committee members' comments about strengths that offset a particular, non-material weakness. Conditional status is rarely granted. Students admitted under conditional status are provided with clear guidance on the sequence of courses to be taken, and the requirement that they obtain at least a 3.25 GPA in the first 12 credits of graduate study (with no grade less than a B-). Students are advised that they must maintain contact with their assigned advisor, and at the completion of 12 credits their status is reviewed and a determination is made as to whether to admit them to regular status or to advise the student that they are not academically eligible for continued enrollment. More commonly, students who do not qualify based on GPA, GRE, or other elements of their application are denied admission, but may be encouraged to register as post-baccalaureate students and take relevant graduate courses. Upon successful completion of 12 graded credits of relevant course work (at a B+ or higher), they may re-apply. The University s Office of Graduate Studies considers that the graduate GPA record supersedes the undergraduate record, and will use 12 credits of successful graduate coursework as evidence for admission, regardless of the applicant s previous undergraduate academic performance. Re-application following completion of 12 graduate course credits often results in a favorable admissions decision for inservice students whose undergraduate experience is long past or was less than stellar. The Division and the University require a baccalaureate degree from a regionally accredited institution or equivalent for admission to all degree programs; exceptions are rare. The University has an established process for individuals whose undergraduate records have been lost, destroyed or are unavailable, and for exceptional cases where the student does not have an undergraduate degree. On rare occasions, the Division has supported students taking advantage of this process. In one case the student was a refugee and lacked records. In other cases, transcripts were not available because of constraints in the applicant s country of origin but there was evidence of equivalent degree completion. 46

47 II.A.2.8. Recruitment efforts directed at diversity The Program will have recruiting practices and well-defined admission criteria designed to admit qualified students and pursue a diverse student population. The program's admission criteria should be derived from its mission and serve as metrics by which the Program monitors its performance. Describe recruitment efforts directed at and evaluate the success of the recruitment of a diverse student population, and the commitment to giving full opportunity for admission regardless of minority status. PSU and the Program are committed to the pursuit of a diverse student body and provide full opportunity for admission without regard to race, ethnicity, gender or other factors. Building upon the University s history, our admissions policies seek to provide every possible opportunity for students from non-traditional, disadvantaged and underserved populations to receive a high-quality undergraduate and graduate education. To support this culture, the University invests in student support services that recognize and value diversity in the racial and ethnic composition of the student body, as well as diversity with respect to other individually defined demographic characteristics. The Program faculty have developed extensive relationships with government agencies and community-based organizations that serve low-income, minority, and other marginalized communities. These relationships also increase the visibility of careers in health-related occupations at the undergraduate level and, particularly, among agency staff seeking graduate degrees. We routinely work with groups such as the statewide AHEC, specific pipeline programs, and the Oregon Health Workforce Institute to enhance our outreach efforts to recruit diverse applicants. During the self-study year, Dr. Kaimanu developed plans to enhance recruitment of students who are also members of Pacific Northwest Native American communities. Her effort complement ongoing relationships between other HSOG faculty and Pacific Rim nations such as Viet Nam, Japan, and China. These efforts serve both our growth and diversity strategies. II.A.3.1. Academic and career advising The Program will ensure that students are provided appropriate advising and support services, and that these services are evaluated regularly as a basis for continuous improvement. Program advising and support services will include those provided at the Program level such as mentoring, academic advising, career planning and counseling by faculty and preceptors. University-wide resources may include counseling, dispute resolution, and financial aid advisement. Describe the system of academic and career advising. Upon admission, students in the MPH:HMP and MPA:HA programs normally are assigned one of the core health faculty as their advisor. For graduate students, academic advisors are the most readily accessible role 47

48 models, and positive relationships between graduate students and their advisors can be a major factor in determining successful program outcomes. Faculty advisors are expected to communicate with advisees at least annually (in person or via phone or ), and most meet at least that often, generally during weekly office hours that are convenient for both full and part-time students. 86% of current students met with their advisor during their first year in the program. Faculty advisors assist students with planning a program of study, monitor progress, act as a mentor, and assist with specific questions or programmatic problems/issues. The flexibility of the Program allows students to design a program of study that addresses their particular interests. However, this flexibility also requires that a substantial amount of faculty time be devoted to advising to ensure that all degree requirements are met, while also striving to ensure that the academic experience is relevant to, and supportive of, the student s career goals. Because our students bring a diversity of backgrounds, professional experiences and career aspirations to their studies, faculty advisors assist students with: Exploration and integration of personal, academic and career goals; Identification of options and preferences for a particular focus within health administration; Selection and scheduling of courses; Understanding University policies and regulations; and, Information about, and referral to, University resources and services. Graduate students exercise a great deal of autonomy in their learning and career development, thus the Program also expects that they assume a portion of the responsibility for maintaining a productive relationship with their advisors. The student s academic experience is also enriched through immersion, to the degree possible, in the academic environment. For this reason, students are advised and expected to: Initiate contact with their advisor at least once per quarter; Check regularly for notices and personal communication; Take advantage of special events (e.g. lectures, brown bag lunches) sponsored by the School, Program, and College; Inform their advisor immediately on change of status or potential problems; and, Notify the division administrator of address or other information changes. When the student is ready to begin their PAH 509 Organizational Experience, the amount of advising often increases. In addition to their assigned faculty advisor, students may seek specialized advice from other faculty, as well as PSU Career Services, for assistance with resume writing and job applications. Changes to advising assignments may be initiated by the Division Chair to balance faculty workloads, or upon request of a student. In the case of student-initiated changes, the student must request acceptance by the new advisor and, upon such acceptance, notify the previously assigned advisor. The Division Office Manager is also a valuable resource for students, and frequently handles student questions about administrative processes. A final aspect of faculty advising addresses critical, but rare, instances of academic insufficiency. The Division is notified when students are not making adequate academic progress or are placed on academic probation. The Division notifies the faculty advisor who is then able to assist the student to resolve the issue. Because ongoing communication between students and faculty advisors is the norm, academic probation situations are rare. Among alumni survey respondents, 72% reported being very satisfied/satisfied with their advisor, and 13% were neutral. Further, 29% of respondents noted that they are still in contact with their advisor. Of concern, 15% of respondents indicated they were dissatisfied with their advisor, and suggested that advising meetings be more frequent, required and focused on career development, and that a smaller student to advisor ratio might be helpful. The recent addition of core faculty will address this limitation. Among current students, 63% 48

49 (n=38) are very satisfied/ satisfied with their advisor, and 26% (n=16) are neutral. Less than 11% (n=8) of respondents indicated they were dissatisfied with their advisor. II.A.3.2. Evaluation of advising The Program will ensure that students are provided appropriate advising and support services, and that these services are evaluated regularly as a basis for continuous improvement. Program advising and support services will include those provided at the Program level such as mentoring, academic advising, career planning and counseling by faculty and preceptors. University-wide resources may include counseling, dispute resolution, and financial aid advisement. Describe the mechanisms for evaluating the effectiveness of the Program's approach to advising and how changes are made. The effectiveness of advising is evaluated through the faculty evaluation process and periodic student and alumni surveys. (See Supporting Material in I.A Student and Alumni Survey Reports) Measures include direct questions regarding student satisfaction with advising and satisfaction with the overall Program, as well as the number of students who complete the Program within their self-defined timeline. The majority of respondents (86%, n=56) to the 2015 student survey met with their advisor in the first year. Among those who met with their advisor, 90% (n=53) agreed/strongly agreed that their advisor was accessible, and 87% (n=46) felt that their advisor supported their professional goals. Similarly, 86% (n=50) reported that their advisors were knowledgeable about the program and generally about OHSU and other partner institutions (80%, n=40). In addition to professional and career development, we continually seek to find ways in which we can assist students, many of whom attend classes while also managing employment and family responsibilities. Student responses to this question suggest that the ability of advisors to help balance students' multiple personal demands is more limited; 58% (n=30) agreed/strongly agreed that their advisor was helpful in this regard, but 42% (n=22) disagreed/did not find the help they needed. In addition to the student survey, course evaluations assess the availability of faculty to answer questions outside of class, and the alumni survey includes several questions about the value and effectiveness of advising. Advising assignments for MPA:HA and MPH:HMP students are made by the Track Coordinator, and are allocated primarily among the core health faculty (now including the newly affiliated OHSU faculty), although a few MPA:HA students each year are advised by Drs. Harris and Cooper based on the interests of individual students. Changes to the process itself would be discussed among the faculty, and would include consultation with students, alumni and other stakeholders. II.A.3.3. Financial Aid The Program will ensure that students are provided appropriate advising and support services, and that these services are evaluated regularly as a basis for continuous improvement. 49

50 Program advising and support services will include those provided at the Program level such as mentoring, academic advising, career planning and counseling by faculty and preceptors. University-wide resources may include counseling, dispute resolution, and financial aid advisement. Describe how financial aid information is systematically made available to students in the Program, an assessment of the adequacy of financial resources available, and steps being taken to address any inadequacies. Financial support for students is coordinated through the PSU Office of Student Financial Aid. AY tuition and fees were $10,896 for full-time (9 credit hours) resident students and $16,296 for full-time (9 credit hours) non-resident students. Since many of our students attend school part-time, are employed and have family responsibilities, the availability of financial aid is an important consideration in their decision to pursue a graduate degree. Both PSU and the Program are committed to assisting students in obtaining funding for their graduate health management and policy education. Nearly all admitted students who apply for financial aid and submit the required documents receive some level of support. Financial aid is available primarily for fulltime graduate students, although some loans and grants are available to part-time students. This aid is of three general types: (1) loans and work study through the University s Office of Financial Aid; (2) awards, grants, and scholarships through PSU; and (3) graduate assistantships through the College of Urban and Public Affairs and the Hatfield School of Government. Graduate students may receive consideration for financial assistance through the Federal Perkins Loan, Federal Work Study, and Federal Direct Stafford Loan programs. Several other financial awards, such as the Ron Cease Founder s Award and the Amber Fowler Scholarship, are available through the School and Division. A complete listing of financial aid information, including application materials for students, may be accessed online at: Scholarship information may be accessed at: Graduate assistant (GA) positions provide teaching or research services working with faculty. Levels of appointment are between.15 and.49 FTE, granted on a one-term, nine-month, or 12-month basis. The typical full time assistantship is.15 FTE (equivalent to 7.5 hours per week) or.30 FTE (15 hours per week). Teachingrelated positions are very limited, and generally involve grading papers, monitoring lab sections of courses, and facilitating discussion sessions. More commonly, GA positions involve research support such as literature reviews, data collection (i.e., documents, interviews and surveys), quantitative and qualitative data analysis, and report writing. In all cases, the assistantship is regarded primarily as a contribution to the graduate student's learning experience. Graduate assistants usually receive tuition remission and a stipend, while other student workers receive an hourly wage. In recent years, core funding for GRA/GTA positions has been reduced and, where possible, research grants and contracts have been used to continue to provide these opportunities for students. While we have been fairly successful in maintaining funding, the Program has established restoring these funds as a high priority as soon as fiscal conditions allow. The number of positions varies depending on external grant funding secured by faculty; in recent years, the Dean s office has placed a priority on providing tuition remission when a faculty member can pay the minimum annual stipend for a GRA. The three core health faculty have all been able to support GRAs through research funding in recent years. 50

51 II.A.3.4. Other support services The Program will ensure that students are provided appropriate advising and support services, and that these services are evaluated regularly as a basis for continuous improvement. Program advising and support services will include those provided at the Program level such as mentoring, academic advising, career planning and counseling by faculty and preceptors. University-wide resources may include counseling, dispute resolution, and financial aid advisement. Describe any other programmatic or university-wide support services (e.g. counseling, tutoring) available to Program students. The Learning Center, located in the Millar Library, offers a range of academic support programs, including College Success courses, peer tutoring, supplemental instruction, and content-specific workshops. Counseling and other services are available through the Center for Student Health and Counseling ( The MPA/MPA:HA and MPH programs maintain listservs to which students are automatically subscribed upon acceptance. Through the listservs, students receive current information about Program activities, events, job opportunities, internships, new class offerings, health-related seminars, fellowships, and other items of interest. The listservs are also used by student groups to communicate with other students. The listservs are not used for personal messages, fund-raising or other solicitations, or to disseminate non-program information, but may be used by students seeking informal peer tutoring. PASA and the OMPH program also offer informal peer support programs. II.A.4.1. Stakeholder involvement in Program decision making The Program will involve students, alumni, and practitioners in appropriate areas of Program decision-making and evaluation. Student, alumni and practitioner involvement in such areas as evaluation of courses, instructors, curriculum, career and academic advising, decisions on student recruitment and admission and selection of new faculty is critical to ensuring the ongoing relevance of the Program to the changing needs of the profession, and will be evaluated in the context of overall University policy. Successful programs have used these stakeholders creatively to demonstrate currency and relevancy of their Programs. Some examples include: Advisory Groups, Executive in Residence programs, Annual Program Retreats, students serving on program related committees, and Strategic Planning sessions. Describe how students, alumni and practitioners are involved in appropriate areas of Program decision-making and evaluation, including the frequency of involvement The Program should have substantiating documentation available for onsite review by the site visit team or could upload these as attachments below. Examples include meeting minutes, survey instruments/results etc. 51

52 The involvement of students, alumni and practitioners in program planning occurs through formal processes and structures related to each degree program, albeit with a significant degree of overlap. For the MPH:HMP, the processes and structures of the OMPH program are the primary focus. First and second year students are involved as track representatives who participate in HMP track discussions, monthly track coordinator meetings, and the annual OMPH retreat. The HMP track coordinates with PSU s School of Community Health (home to the MPH:Health Promotion track) to select a student campus representative each year. The OMPH/SPH advisory board includes alumni and practitioners who provide oversight and advice. For the MPA:HA, involvement reflects the processes and structure of the MPA program. The Public Administration Student Association (PASA) is very active and the main avenue for student involvement and advice regarding program planning. PASA board members (including HA students) regularly attend monthly PA Division faculty meetings and provide ongoing, informal input to the Division Chair on programmatic issues. The Public Administration program also has an Advisory Council consisting of alumni and practitioners who provide oversight and advice to the program when convened. Council composition is representative of the Division s specialties, including health sector organizations. While there are separate, formal processes and structures for incorporating students, alumni and practitioner involvement in Program decision-making, the degree programs also inform each other through co-location within the Division, consistent faculty, course/curriculum overlap, and similar sites for culminating experiences and employment. Student and alumni surveys also inform Program decision-making. (See I.A.2.1) Given our Program s focus on students' community-based, public and nonprofit, service delivery and researchoriented careers, we believe that the mix of health and non-health sector advisors provides valuable insights regarding our health administration programs. Input from the Advisory Council has helped to shape the health programs by contributing to a competency model that specifically notes the health sector as a domain, but is broad enough to capture the contributions of other disciplines a synergy that might be missed if we were to establish a separate committee composed solely of representatives from the health care sector. Attached Supporting Materials: Faculty Meeting Minutes AY II.A.5.1. Career achievement assessment The Program will ensure that graduates' career preparedness is monitored, documented and used for continuous improvement. In a Program's efforts to monitor graduate achievement, the career paths of graduates will be tracked for at least three years (two years for programs undergoing initial accreditation). The Program will provide information on program completion rates, employment status, and other indicators such as preparedness for functioning in the workplace and student satisfaction with their education. Describe any assessment techniques or other indicators used to measure graduate's career achievements. 52

53 Given the variety of personal and career aspirations of our graduates, the Program has not determined a single, appropriate metric by which to define and measure achievement. Rather, the Program assesses each graduate across a battery of competencies reflecting both programmatic and self-determined priorities at the time of graduation, and validates career progression through a periodic alumni survey. The primary source of competency assessment at the time of graduation is the PAH 509 Organizational Experience, described in III.C.1, while alumni surveys provide information about career development, including perceptions of preparedness for career path and satisfaction with the Program. The anticipated new competency tracking system (using PebblePad) will provide students with a means for tracking competency attainment throughout the program, with continued access post-graduatioin for tracking competencies during early career development. In the 2015 alumni survey, the majority of respondents were strongly satisfied or satisfied with their career. The highest level of satisfaction (89%) was with overall career direction, while the highest level of dissatisfaction (20%) was with income level. (See earning details in the Alumni Survey Report, appended under I.A.2.1.) Alumni were asked about the curriculum, including core courses, electives, and faculty. Overall, respondents felt positively about program faculty and the coursework. Respondents agreed that faculty were knowledgeable (100%), were skilled facilitators of classroom (95%) and community-based (81%) learning, and that they facilitated academic (84%) and professional (84%) growth. They also indicated that the core coursework aligned with their professional goals (97%), enhanced their academic experience (96%), and prepared them professionally (91%). Similarly, respondents agreed that elective courses enhanced their academic experience (98%) and prepared them professionally (99%). II.A.5.2. Self-assessment The Program will ensure that graduates' career preparedness is monitored, documented and used for continuous improvement. In a Program's efforts to monitor graduate achievement, the career paths of graduates will be tracked for at least three years (two years for programs undergoing initial accreditation). The Program will provide information on program completion rates, employment status, and other indicators such as preparedness for functioning in the workplace and student satisfaction with their education. Provide a self-assessment and present results from any external assessments of the preparedness of graduates to pursue careers consistent with the Program goals. Assessments of graduate's career preparedness include faculty, preceptor, and student self-assessment surveys upon completion of the PAH 509 Organizational Experience, and the alumni survey. Consistency among Program goals, competencies, and career objectives was evident in feedback from preceptors and local employers about knowledge and skills priorities as defined in current workforce recruitment efforts. Evidence for attainment of those competencies among current students is found in ongoing assessments of competency attainment over the program, and culminates with comprehensive assessment of performance on the PAH 509 projects. Preceptor ratings of competency attainment among PAH 509 students were 2.92 for MPH:HMP students and 2.75 for MPA:HA students (3-pt scale; "fully achieved"). All preceptors rated MPH:HMP program 53

54 relevance, students' quality of work, and overall performance "excellent" in all categories. MPA:HA preceptor ratings of program relevance were all "good", while quality of work and student performance both averaged 2.8. Among MPH:HMP students, assessments of program relevance and overall satisfaction were 4.5 and 4.5, respectively (5-pt scale; 5="very relevant/satisfied"). MPA:HA students ratings were 4.8 and 4.1. Among alumni, 88% indicated that their degree was important in obtaining their current job, 90% is satisfied with their graduate degree, and 92% stated that the program curricula were useful to their work. (See Supporting Material) II.A.5.3. Completion rates The Program will ensure that graduates' career preparedness is monitored, documented and used for continuous improvement. In a Program's efforts to monitor graduate achievement, the career paths of graduates will be tracked for at least three years (two years for programs undergoing initial accreditation). The Program will provide information on program completion rates, employment status, and other indicators such as preparedness for functioning in the workplace and student satisfaction with their education. Provide information on completion rates over the past three years. The Program admits students on a year-round basis, many students attend classes part-time, and others may take a leave of absence due to other commitments. We monitor graduation rates for seven years, but do not include students who transfer to another track, withdraw within the first year, or are currently inactive when calculating graduation rates. Inactive students' status is changed to "did not complete" after seven years and rates are re-calculated. Overall degree completion rates within the Program s seven-year deadline exceed the 80% threshold. Graduation rates by AY of admission for MPA:HA students were: AY09-100%; AY10-100%; AY11 100%; AY12 75%; AY13 78%; and AY14 73%. Graduation rates by AY of admission for MPH:HMP students were: AY09-81%; AY10-100%; AY11-96%; AY12-87%; AY13-64%; and AY14-16%. 54

55 II.A Degree Completion Rates and Student Status by AY of Admission MPH:HMP AY AY AY AY AY AY AY AY # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % Applicants Admits 20 74% 51 98% 38 83% 33 87% 41 84% 30 70% 42 75% 34 74% Matriculated % 41 80% 29 76% 26 79% 33 80% 21 70% 21 50% 14 41% Graduated 13 65% 30 73% 24 83% 13 50% 16 48% 3 14% 1 5% 0 0% Active 0 0% 1 2% 1 3% 3 12% 9 27% 16 76% 19 90% % Inactive/WD/Transfer 7 35% 10 24% 4 14% 10 38% 8 24% 2 10% 1 5% 0 0% Denied 7 26% 1 2% 8 17% 5 13% 8 16% 13 30% 15 27% 12 26% Adjusted Grad Rate 100% 97% 96% 81% 64% 16% 5% MPA:HA AY AY AY AY AY AY AY AY # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % Applicants Admits 15 56% 13 81% 12 57% 8 57% 16 67% 14 82% 11 39% 14 70% Matriculated 14 93% 12 92% 11 92% 4 50% 13 81% 11 79% 8 73% 13 93% Graduated 12 86% 10 83% 8 73% 3 75% 7 54% 3 27% 0 0% 0 0% Active 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 25% 2 15% 8 73% 6 75% % Inactive/WD/Transfer 2 14% 2 17% 3 27% 0 0% 4 31% 0 0% 2 25% 0% Denied 12 44% 3 19% 9 43% 6 43% 8 33% 3 18% 17 61% 6 30% Adjusted Grad Rate 100% 100% 100% 75% 78% 27% 0% 55

56 II.A.5.4. Employment rates The Program will ensure that graduates' career preparedness is monitored, documented and used for continuous improvement. In a Program's efforts to monitor graduate achievement, the career paths of graduates will be tracked for at least three years (two years for programs undergoing initial accreditation). The Program will provide information on program completion rates, employment status, and other indicators such as preparedness for functioning in the workplace and student satisfaction with their education. a. Employment Settings of Program Graduates For the past three (for initial accreditation, two) graduating classes, describe by category the employment settings of Program graduates. II.A.5.4 Employment Rates by Year of Graduation* (per Alumni Survey, Spring 2015) 2012 (N=22) 73% employed in health related position within three months, and 86% within six months of graduation. 7 (32%) were in the same position prior to/concurrent with their program of study 4 (18%) accepted a job offer before graduation 5 (23%) accepted a job offer within 3 months of graduation 3 (14%) accepted a job offer within 4 to 6 months of graduation 3 (14%) accepted a job offer within 7 to 12 months of graduation 0 (0%) accepted a job offer more than 12 months after graduation 2013 (N=13) 77% employed in health-related position within three months, and 92% within six months of graduation. 4 (31%) were in the same position prior to/concurrent with their program of study 2 (15%) accepted a job offer before graduation 4 (31%) accepted a job offer within 3 months of graduation 2 (15%) accepted a job offer within 4 to 6 months of graduation 1 (8%) accepted a job offer within 7 to 12 months of graduation 0 (0%) accepted a job offer more than 12 months after graduation 2014 (N=25) 92% employed in health-related position within three months, and 96% within six months of graduation. 9 (36%) were in the same position prior to/concurrent with their program of study 8 (32%) accepted a job offer before graduation 6 (24%) accepted a job offer within 3 months of graduation 1 (4%) accepted a job offer within 4 to 6 months of graduation 1 (4%) accepted a job offer within 7 to 12 months of graduation 0 (0%) accepted a job offer more than 12 months after graduation *Data for AY are incomplete due to self-study report due date that is less than three months following June 15, 2015 graduation date. Data are presented for calendar years so that three full years of graduate employment rates may be presented. 56

57 II.A.5.5. Employment settings and Program goals The Program will ensure that graduates' career preparedness is monitored, documented and used for continuous improvement. In a Program's efforts to monitor graduate achievement, the career paths of graduates will be tracked for at least three years (two years for programs undergoing initial accreditation). The Program will provide information on program completion rates, employment status, and other indicators such as preparedness for functioning in the workplace and student satisfaction with their education. Comment on the relationship between the employment settings/positions of Program graduates listed in II.A.5.4 and the Program's educational goals and objectives. If job placement rates in health care services or related fields for program graduates are less than 80 percent over the last three years, provide an explanation. II.A Employment Settings and Positions Held by Program Graduates, CY * 2014 Graduates Graduates Employment Settings (F/W of Self-Study Year) 2013 Graduates 2012 Graduates MPH:HMP MPA:HA MPH:HMP MPA:HA MPH:HMP MPA:HA Number of Graduates: Hospital or Health System Community health center or other ambulatory setting Educational Institution 3 3 Consultant (Firm or Self-employed) 1 2 Public Health Department (county) Other government agency (local, state or federal) Community-based non-profit health/social service organization Behavioral Health, Oral Health, LTC or Other health services For-profit tech, pharma, other organization 1 Insurance/Health Plan 3 Clinical or postgraduate education Employed outside the healthcare sector/other 3 1 Unknown/missing Total

58 Types of Positions Held by Program Graduates Graduates Positions by Type Number of Graduates: 2014 Graduates (F/W of Self-Study Year) 2013 Graduates 2012 Graduates MPH:HMP MPA:HA MPH:HMP MPA:HA MPH:HMP MPA:HA Executive or Senior Management Unit/Division/Program Management Research/Professional/Technical Analyst Administrative/Staff Support 1 1 Clinician (MD, RN, DDS, PT, Rx, etc.) Education/Fellowship 3 2 Consultant (Analyst/Facilitator) Other Unknown/missing Total *Note: Data for Spring Term 2015 graduates were not available at time of submission. To represent full-year totals, data is reported on a calendar year basis. II.A.5.5. Employment settings and Program goals The Program will ensure that graduates' career preparedness is monitored, documented and used for continuous improvement. In a Program's efforts to monitor graduate achievement, the career paths of graduates will be tracked for at least three years (two years for programs undergoing initial accreditation). The Program will provide information on program completion rates, employment status, and other indicators such as preparedness for functioning in the workplace and student satisfaction with their education. Comment on the relationship between the employment settings/positions of Program graduates listed in II.A.5.4 and the Program's educational goals and objectives. If job placement rates in health care services or related fields for program graduates are less than 80 percent over the last three years, provide an explanation. The diversity of employment settings and positions indicate the successful attainment of the Program s educational goals and objectives relating to the flexibility of the curriculum and our ability to prepare graduates for a range of progressively responsible health management roles. Employment rates for are based on responses to the alumni survey that was conducted in spring Survey results indicate that 92% of 2014 graduates were employed upon, or within three months of graduation, and 96% were employed within six months. In 2013, 77% of graduates employed in health-related position within three months, and 92% within six months of graduation. In 2012, 73% of graduates were employed in health related position within three months, and 86% within six months of graduation. Consistent with the Program's mission to 58

59 prepare graduates for progressively responsible careers in health system administration, alumni noted the alignment between their professional goals and the curriculum; 88% stated that their degree was important in obtaining their current job. Although the three-month placement rate for 2012 and 2013 fell just short of the 80% benchmark established by our Program and CAHME, we believe that hiring during that period may have been affected by a particularly tumultuous time for the Oregon health services environment (where most of our graduates seek jobs) as the state implemented major system transformation programs. While three month placement rates from term-toterm and year-to-year vary, 80% of graduates were employed within three months, and 90% were employed within six months over a three-year rolling average for period ending December The employment settings and positions of our graduates also reflect the Program s values, which emphasize management roles that are community-engaged, and oriented toward the public and nonprofit sectors. Compared to the 2012 survey, a slightly smaller percentage of 2015 respondents indicated that they are currently working in a public setting (e.g. local health department or state, federal or tribal government) or an educational/research setting. A slightly larger percentage (34%) of alumni reported current employment within the acute care, consulting, long-term care and insurance sectors, relative to 2012 respondents (25%). Positions within ambulatory care settings, including community clinics and other community-based health and social service organizations, accounted for 33% of job placements among 2015 survey respondents. Professional, technical and research analyst positions are held by 25% of recent graduates, a 15% difference from 2012 responses. Unit, division, program and staff management positions accounted for 18% of placements, the same as in the 2012 survey. Both the employment settings and types of careers graduates pursue are consistent with Program mission, values, and goals. III.A.1.1. Competencies The Program will adopt a set of competencies that align with the mission and types of jobs graduates enter. The Program will use these competencies as the basis of its curriculum, course content, learning objectives and teaching and assessment methods. Student learning is a central focus of graduate education and is driven by each Program's unique mission and the varied employment settings of its graduates. Therefore, it is important that programs be able to articulate the expected competencies of program graduates. These competencies should be driven by the mission; form the basis of the programs curriculum; serve to link course content in pursuit of competencies; and foster appropriate levels of teaching and methods of assessment. Provide a list of the competencies used by the program, and describe how these competencies align with the program's mission and the types of jobs graduates enter. The 10 competencies for the Program in Health Management and Policy are: 1. Articulate and exemplify the ethics, values, responsibilities, obligations and social roles of a member of the health services administration profession. 2. Identify and apply relevant theories and frameworks to the practice of health services leadership, management and policy. 59

60 3. Respond to and engage collaboratively with diverse local and global cultures and communities to address challenges in the interests of population health. 4. Identify and engage with the key elements of the health policy process. 5. Employ appropriate qualitative and quantitative techniques to investigate, monitor and manage resource use. 6. Create and manage systems and processes to assess and improve organizational performance. 7. Conceptualize, analyze, and develop creative and collaborative solutions to challenges in health services leadership, management, and policy. 8. Assess challenges and explore solutions to advance cross-sectoral and inter-jurisdictional cooperation in health programs and services. 9. Demonstrate verbal and written communication skills as a health services professional and through interpersonal interactions in groups and in society. 10. Think critically and self-reflectively about emerging issues concerning health services leadership, management, and policy. We view the development of competency across the curriculum within two dimensions. The first dimension addresses course-level teaching and learning of a particular knowledge/skill, specifically the amount of course content in that area, referring to whether a given competency is addressed minimally (limited), moderately (moderate) or substantially (extensive) in a given course. The second dimension addresses the expected level of competency attainment, specifically the student s ability to apply knowledge and skills to resolve an actual or simulated situational context. This dimension parallels the model described in the CAHME guidance, and addresses competency attainment as basic, intermediate or advanced. (See supporting material in III.A.1.3) For example, the development of competency in the application of theory to practice is addressed in PAH 541 (Organizational Behavior), PAH 574 (Health Systems Organization), and PAH 576 (Strategic Management). However, the extent of course content and level of competency demonstrate the difference between these dimensions. As introductory courses usually taken early in the program of study, PAH 541 provides extensive theoretical content at a basic applied level, and PAH 574 provides limited instructional content at a similarly basic level. PAH 576 builds on these prerequisite classes (and other courses throughout the program of study), and provides a moderate level of instructional content regarding theory, but carries an expectation that students will develop an advanced level of competency in its application to practice through the use of case analyses and development of a strategic management plan. Similarly, PAH 544 (Leadership and Governance) is taken late in the program of study and builds upon knowledge and skills that are taught in prerequisite courses (PAH 541, 571 and 574), and thus does not repeat or provide a significant amount of additional content, but further develops the identified competencies through their application. By design, competency development culminates with the PAH 509 Organizational Experience, which itself does not provide any didactic content. Rather, the six credits earned are based entirely upon analysis, synthesis, integration and application of knowledge and skills delivered throughout the curriculum. As noted in other sections, the University in general, and our programs in health management and policy in particular, are notable for the level of community engagement and opportunities for applied learning projects they offer. This ethos is evident in the application, analysis, and synthesis of knowledge throughout the curriculum, and culminates with the highly individualized PAH 509 Organizational Experience. While we assess the extent to which any given competency is taught and evaluated within individual courses, the model is also designed to assess attainment through demonstrated ability to apply knowledge and skills at increasing levels of proficiency across each student s program of study. 60

61 In , a group of faculty developed detailed "curriculum maps" for each of the PA Division competencies; we then created a health-specific set of these curriculum maps reflecting competency development on two axes -- from novice to exemplary (using a Dreyfus/Benner typology) and from awareness to leadership (See Appendix III.C ). As part of our competency assessment process during the self-study year of , students were invited to self-assess their progress on each of the ten competency using these maps each quarter. Individualized reports were provided back to each student who responded. We are currently engaged in conversations with PSU's Office of Academic Innovations to adapt a new software called PebblePad which should make the process of self-assessment of competency development less cumbersome, and provide an opportunity for ongoing tracking of competency development post-graduation. This is in development at present, and we will provide an update to the site visit team on site. We believe this expansion of the 10 competencies into more detailed developmental rubrics will be very useful for student professional development, for faculty advising, and for program assessment and improvement. III.A.1.2. Competency development and review The Program will adopt a set of competencies that align with the mission and types of jobs graduates enter. The Program will use these competencies as the basis of its curriculum, course content, learning objectives and teaching and assessment methods. Student learning is a central focus of graduate education and is driven by each Program's unique mission and the varied employment settings of its graduates. Therefore, it is important that programs be able to articulate the expected competencies of program graduates. These competencies should be driven by the mission; form the basis of the programs curriculum; serve to link course content in pursuit of competencies; and foster appropriate levels of teaching and methods of assessment. Describe the process by which the program's competencies are developed and periodically reviewed with faculty for relevance. Include information on any faculty or committee approval needed for changes to program competencies. Program competencies were developed in AY and implemented in in conjunction with our initial CAHME accreditation self-study year. The 10 competencies are based on long-established NASPAA objectives for the MPA and MPA:HA programs, programmatic and track competencies for the MPH:HMP established by CAHME and CEPH respectively, and other competency models such as NCHL, HLI, and ACHE. During AY , the competency model was reviewed by an ad hoc committee of the core health faculty to assure that course-level learning objectives directly and progressively supported the competency development across the curriculum. This review also assured standardization across courses that are taught by more than one faculty member. Changes to the competency model require approval by the PA Division faculty. Based on our initial testing of the competency model during AY , experience with the newly adopted model during the self-study year, need for a common set of competencies for our four masters programs, and feedback from the CAHME candidacy advisory site visit, the set of competencies first approved by the Faculty on January 3, 2011 was slightly modified on March 7, 2011, finalized on October 10,

62 In , we also assessed the degree to which the single set of competencies could: 1) be utilized by faculty, students and preceptors in assessing all students across our four degree programs; 2) provide Program-level insights when aggregated by course, specialization and/or degree; 3) provide the appropriate balance of standardization and flexibility to be applied in the context of each student s background, experience and career goals; and 4) demonstrate consistency with the Program s mission and types of jobs graduates seek. Our initial use of a competency self-assessment tool for students who graduated in June 2011, and a comparable assessment by preceptors of students in their final field placement, indicated that the competencies were robust and relevant to students specific areas of interest while retaining the general language. The competencies were integrated into course-specific and programmatic assessments in AY In AY , we conducted a formal review of the competencies, seeking feedback from students, alumni, and preceptors. Findings from these surveys indicated that the competency model is robust and relevant to the knowledge, skills, and abilities targeted by the Program curriculum, and to the various professional settings and diverse career interests of our graduates. Curriculum mapping is one of our main means for assessing the alignment of our educational process (courses) with our intended educational outcomes (competencies). In AY , we engaged all faculty, with each completing a course to competency matrix for the courses they teach. The mapping process also provided an opportunity for faculty and the Program to reflect on curricular design in three ways: 1) assessing any changes or evolution of courses in terms of their competency focus; 2) assessing whether course ratings in the matrix are reflected in specific course competencies or learning objectives identified in course syllabi, and vice versa; and, 3) how well the overall curriculum reflects the programs stated competencies in terms of breadth and depth. In AY , we have expanded our efforts to assess students' competency attainment across the curriculum, and to link students' self-assessment back to completion of specific courses. This analysis is ongoing and will be available during the site visit. Preliminary data is presented in the Supporting Materials below. Self-Study Supporting Material: Course Contribution to Competency Development (Excel spreadsheet summarizing student responses to competency survey indicates where (e.g. what course) students perceive as the locus of competency development for each of the 10 PA Division competencies.) III.A.1.3. Competency Coverage across the Curriculum The Program will adopt a set of competencies that align with the mission and types of jobs graduates enter. The Program will use these competencies as the basis of its curriculum, course content, learning objectives and teaching and assessment methods. Student learning is a central focus of graduate education and is driven by each Program's unique mission and the varied employment settings of its graduates. Therefore, it is important that programs be able to articulate the expected competencies of program graduates. These competencies should be driven by the mission; form the basis of the programs curriculum; serve to link course content in pursuit of competencies; and foster appropriate levels of teaching and methods of assessment. - Illustrate competency coverage across the required core courses and other required components of the program. 62

63 MPH:HMP - Consolidated: Source of Coverage and Expected Level of Competency Attainment MPH:HMP Course Number Course Name Professional Ethics & Values Application of Theory to Practice Collaboration/Community Engagement Public Policy Process Qualitative & Quantitative Skills Organizational Performance Improvement Analysis/Collaborative Problem Solving Communication Skills Cross-Sectoral Cooperation R PAH 541 Organizational Behavior in Hlth Orgs M/B E/B L/B M/I E/I M/I E/I R PHPM 524 Introduction to Biostatistics (OHSU) M/I E/A L/I M/I R PAH 574 Health Systems Organization M/I L/B M/I M/B L/B M/I M/I M/I L/B R PHE 535 Epidemiology Survey (PSU/SCH) L/B M/I E/A M/I M/I M/I R PHE 512 Principles of Health Behavior (PSU/SCH) L/B M/I M/I M/I M/I L/I R PHE 580 Concepts in Environmental Health (PSU/SCH) M/I M/I M/I L/I M/I L/I L/B R PAH 586 Introduction to Health Economics M/I E/A M/I M/A M/A M/I R PAH 571 Health Policy L/I M/I E/A M/A L/I M/I M/A R PAH 577 Health Care Law and Regulation E/I M/I E/I M/A L/I M/A M/A R PAH 587 Financial Management in Health Services L/I E/A E/A E/A L/B M/A R PAH 573 Values & Ethics in Health E/A E/A L/B M/I M/I E/A R PAH 588 Program Evaluation & Management in Health L/I E/I M/I M/I E/A E/A E/A L/I R PAH 576 Strategic Management in Health Services L/A M/A M/I M/A E/A E/A M/A E/A R = required Intensity of Coverage: L = Limited coverage/incidental to core topic; M = Moderate coverage of topic/competency; E = Extensive development of knowledge/applied skills. Level of Competency Attainment: B = Basic knowledge/comprehension; I = Intermediate ability to analyze/apply; A = Advanced ability to evaluate/synthesize information. Critical Analysis/Reflecti MPH:HMP - INTENSITY OF COVERAGE/COMPETENCY DEVELOPMENT: Limited, Moderate or Extensive MPH:HMP Course Number Course Name Professional Ethics & Values Application of Theory to Practice Collaboration/Community Engagement Public Policy Process Qualitative & Quantitative Skills Organizational Performance Improvement Analysis/Collaborative Problem Solving Cross-Sectoral Cooperation Communication Skills R PAH 541 Organizational Behavior in Hlth Orgs M E L M E M E R PHPM 524 Introduction to Biostatistics (OHSU) M E L M R PAH 574 Health Systems Organization M L M M L M M M L R PHE 535 Epidemiology Survey (PSU/SCH) L M E M M M R PHE 512 Principles of Health Behavior (PSU/SCH) L M M M M L R PHE 580 Concepts in Environmental Health (PSU/SCH) M M M L M L L R PAH 586 Introduction to Health Economics M E M M M M R PAH 571 Health Policy L M E M L M M R PAH 577 Health Care Law and Regulation E M E M L M M R PAH 587 Financial Management in Health Services L E E E L M R PAH 573 Values & Ethics in Health E E L M M E R PAH 588 Program Evaluation & Management in Health L E M M E E E L R PAH 576 Strategic Management in Health Services L M M M E E M E R = required Intensity of Coverage: L = Limited coverage/incidental to core topic; M = Moderate coverage of topic/competency; E = Extensive development of knowledge/applied skills. Critical Analysis/Reflecti MPH:HMP - EXPECTED LEVEL OF COMPETENCY ATTAINMENT: Basic, Intermediate or Advanced MPH:HMP Course Number Course Name Professional Ethics & Values Application of Theory to Practice Collaboration/Community Engagement Public Policy Process Qualitative & Quantitative Skills Organizational Performance Improvement Analysis/Collaborative Problem Solving Cross-Sectoral Cooperation Communication Skills R PAH 541 Organizational Behavior in Hlth Orgs B B B I I I I R PHPM 524 Introduction to Biostatistics (OHSU) I A I I R PAH 574 Health Systems Organization I B I B B I I I B R PHE 535 Epidemiology Survey (PSU/SCH) B I A I I I R PHE 512 Principles of Health Behavior (PSU/SCH) B I I I I I R PHE 580 Concepts in Environmental Health (PSU/SCH) I I I I I I B R PAH 586 Introduction to Health Economics I A I A A I R PAH 571 Health Policy I I A A I I A R PAH 577 Health Care Law and Regulation I I I A I A A R PAH 587 Financial Management in Health Services I A A A B A R PAH 573 Values & Ethics in Health A A B I I A R PAH 588 Program Evaluation & Management in Health I I I I A A A I R PAH 576 Strategic Management in Health Services A A I A A A A A R = required Level of Competency Attainment: B = Basic knowledge/comprehension; I = Intermediate ability to analyze/apply; A = Advanced ability to evaluate/synthesize information. Critical Analysis/Reflecti 63

64 MPA:HA - Consolidated Source of Coverage and Expected Level of Competency Attainment MPA:HA Course Number Course Name Professional Ethics & Values Application of Theory to Practice Collaboration/Community Engagement Public Policy Process Qualitative & Quantitative Skills Analysis/Collaborative Problem Solving Organizational Performance Improvement Cross-Sectoral Cooperation R PA 511 Public Administration E/B M/I E/I M/I M/I M/I Communication Skills R PAH 541 Organizational Behavior in Hlth Orgs M/B E/B L/B M/I E/I M/I E/I R PAH 570 Health Administration M/B L/I L/B L/I M/I R(A) to PAH570 PA 540 Administrative Theory & Behavior E/I L/B L/B M/A E/I M/I E/I R PAH 574 Health Systems Organization M/I L/B M/I M/B L/B M/I M/I M/I L/B R PA 533 Public Policy Origins & Processes M/A E/A L/I M/A M/I M/I R PA 551 Analytic Methods in Public Administration I M/A L/B L/I E/I M/I M/I L/I L/I R PAH 586 Introduction to Health Economics M/I E/A M/I M/A M/A M/I R PA 582 Public Budgeting M/I M/I L/I M/I L/I M/A L/I L/I R PA 552 Analytic Methods in Public Administration II M/A L/B L/I E/I M/I E/A L/I L/I R PAH 571 Health Policy L/I M/I E/A M/A L/I M/I M/A R PAH 573 Values & Ethics in Health E/A E/A L/B M/I M/I E/A R(A) to PAH573 PA 513 Administrative Ethics & Values E/I M/A L/I L/A M/I M/A R PAH 577 Health Care Law and Regulation E/I M/I E/I M/A L/I M/A M/A R(A) to PAH577 PA 534 Administrative Law & Policy M/I E/A E/I E/A L/I M/A M/A R PAH 580 Health Services HR Management M/I M/I L/I M/A M/A L/B R(A) to PAH580 PA 590 Human Resource Management L/B M/I L/I M/A M/A L/B R = required; R(A) = alternative to required course Intensity of Coverage: L = Limited coverage/incidental to core topic; M = Moderate coverage of topic/competency; E = Extensive development of knowledge/applied skills. Level of Competency Attainment: B = Basic knowledge/comprehension; I = Intermediate ability to analyze/apply; A = Advanced ability to evaluate/synthesize information. Critical Analysis/Reflecti MPA:HA - INTENSITY OF COVERAGE /COMPETENCY DEVELOPMENT: Limited, Moderate or Extensive MPA:HA Course Number Course Name Professional Ethics & Values Application of Theory to Practice Collaboration/Community Engagement Public Policy Process Qualitative & Quantitative Skills Organizational Performance Improvement Analysis/Collaborative Problem Solving Cross-Sectoral Cooperation R PA 511 Public Administration E M E M M M Communication Skills R PAH 541 Organizational Behavior in Hlth Orgs M E L M E M E R PAH 570 Health Administration M L L L M R(A) to PAH570 PA 540 Administrative Theory & Behavior E L L M E M E R PAH 574 Health Systems Organization M L M M L M M M L R PA 533 Public Policy Origins & Processes M L E L M M M R PA 551 Analytic Methods in Public Administration I M L E M M L L R PAH 586 Introduction to Health Economics M E M M M M R PA 582 Public Budgeting M M L M L M L L R PA 552 Analytic Methods in Public Administration II M L E M E L L R PAH 571 Health Policy L M E M L M M R PAH 573 Values & Ethics in Health E E L M M E R(A) to PAH573 PA 513 Administrative Ethics & Values E M L L L L M M R PAH 577 Health Care Law and Regulation E M E M L M M R(A) to PAH577 PA 534 Administrative Law & Policy E E L M M R PAH 580 Health Services HR Management M M L M M L R(A) to PAH580 PA 590 Human Resource Management L M L M L M L R = required; R(A) = alternative to required course Intensity of Coverage: L = Limited coverage/incidental to core topic; M = Moderate coverage of topic/competency; E = Extensive development of knowledge/applied skills. Critical Analysis/Reflecti MPA:HA - EXPECTED LEVEL OF COMPETENCY ATTAINMENT: Basic, Intermediate or Advanced MPA:HA Course Number Course Name Professional Ethics & Values Application of Theory to Practice Collaboration/Community Engagement Public Policy Process Qualitative & Quantitative Skills Organizational Performance Improvement Cross-Sectoral Cooperation Analysis/Collaborative Problem Solving R PA 511 Public Administration B I I I I I Communication Skills R PAH 541 Organizational Behavior in Hlth Orgs B B B I I I I R PAH 570 Health Administration B I B I I R(A) to PAH570 PA 540 Administrative Theory & Behavior I B B A I I I R PAH 574 Health Systems Organization I B I B B I I I B R PA 533 Public Policy Origins & Processes A B A I A I I R PA 551 Analytic Methods in Public Administration I A B I I I I I R PAH 586 Introduction to Health Economics I A I A A I R PA 582 Public Budgeting I I I I I A I I R PA 552 Analytic Methods in Public Administration II A B I I A I I R PAH 571 Health Policy I I A A I I A R PAH 573 Values & Ethics in Health A A B I I A R(A) to PAH573 PA 513 Administrative Ethics & Values A A I B B A I A R PAH 577 Health Care Law and Regulation I I I A I A A R(A) to PAH577 PA 534 Administrative Law & Policy A A I A A R PAH 580 Health Services HR Management I I I A A B R(A) to PAH580 PA 590 Human Resource Management B I I A B A B R = required; R(A) = alternative to required course Level of Competency Attainment: B = Basic knowledge/comprehension; I = Intermediate ability to analyze/apply; A = Advanced ability to evaluate/synthesize information. Critical Analysis/Reflecti 64

65 III.A.1.4. Design of courses and activities relating to competencies The Program will adopt a set of competencies that align with the mission and types of jobs graduates enter. The Program will use these competencies as the basis of its curriculum, course content, learning objectives and teaching and assessment methods. Student learning is a central focus of graduate education and is driven by each Program's unique mission and the varied employment settings of its graduates. Therefore, it is important that programs be able to articulate the expected competencies of program graduates. These competencies should be driven by the mission; form the basis of the programs curriculum; serve to link course content in pursuit of competencies; and foster appropriate levels of teaching and methods of assessment. Describe the design, including sequencing, of the program courses including activities beyond the classroom, and their relationship to the competencies. Health care management encompasses a number of disciplines, each of which is associated with multiple theories. The PSU Program has been designed to link conceptual and theoretical understanding to practical applications throughout the curriculum, including both core and elective courses, rather than as isolated topics covered in a single course. While some courses offer more theoretical content (such as organizational behavior or health care law), and there are areas of overlap (such as economics and finance), many of our classes draw upon multiple perspectives in order to expose students to a number of applicable theories/frameworks. Our programs take a broad view of the health system, consistent with the definition of health promulgated by the World Health Organization. For this reason, the knowledge, skills, and abilities reflected in our 10 competencies are also broadly defined. By adopting a broad definition of health and the knowledge areas necessary for successful health system management across a variety of settings and contexts, our programs prepare students for careers that often diverge from more narrowly conceptualized health care delivery. (This is also why our Program refers to health management rather than health care management.) We do not claim to cover all of the possible health service settings, nor all of the applicable management theories, in the curriculum. Rather, our goals are to provide students with sufficient exposure to each domain, and develop their ability to select among and apply various perspectives in unique situational contexts, cognizant of the implications of the choices they are making. The broad definition of health management and flexibility of the curriculum also reflect the Program s mission, which speaks to roles in policy, management and leadership, facilitated by community engagement, scholarship and reflection. The public service orientation of the curriculum is similarly aligned with the types of careers our students seek and the reason that they seek admission to our programs. The curriculum is designed to balance flexibility, the need for specific knowledge within specific topical and practice domains, and development of general core management competencies. Competency in each of the ten domains is developed across the curriculum through the sequencing of courses, and is guided by faculty advising and through the structuring of prerequisites. This strategy creates a flexible framework, addressing both breadth and depth of competency attainment. Students generally begin their program of study with core disciplinary courses in Public Administration (for MPA:HA) and Public Health (for MPH:HMP), along with required courses such as Health Systems Organization (PAH 574) and Organizational Behavior in Health Services (PAH 541) that are taken early in the program of study. Together, the core and concentration core courses form the foundation for courses that fall in the middle of the program of study, 65

66 which deliver specific health management knowledge in cognate areas such as finance (PAH 587), law (PAH 577), health information technology (PAH 579), ethics (PAH 573), economics (PAH 586) and policy (PAH 571). Courses taken later in the program of study, such as strategic management (PAH 576), program evaluation (PAH 588), continuous improvement (PAH 578) and the organizational experience (PAH 509), build across the curriculum and include substantial applied and experiential components. Students also choose from electives that offer greater depth in particular areas according to their individual interests. The curricula are delineated into core, concentration/required and elective categories. Within each degree program, courses in the core domain reflect the essential knowledge of the field (public administration or public health, defined by NASPAA and CEPH respectively, given our multiple accreditation activities). Specific courses within each program s concentration domain reflect the essential health system and management knowledge areas associated with careers in public administration (e.g. public administrator within a health department, policy analyst, health management and budget analyst), and in public health (e.g., public health administrator, health services delivery administrator, policy/research analyst, nonprofit health organization manager, program manager, etc.). There is a significant overlap between the two degree programs pertaining to core and concentration courses, particularly with regard to management knowledge areas covered in PAH 541 (Organizational Behavior), PAH 574 (Health Systems Organization), PAH 571 (Health Policy), PAH 586 (Health Economics), PAH 577 (Health Law and Regulation), and PAH 573 (Values and Ethics in Health). The similarities between the programs curricula are even more evident in the overlap between the concentration and elective domains, principally through courses such as PAH 580 (Health Services Human Resource Management), PAH 587 (Financial Management of Health Services), PAH 588 (Program Evaluation and Management in Health), PAH 578 (Continual Improvement in Health Services), and PAH 544 (Leadership and Governance in Health). Required core and concentration courses are designed and sequenced through the use of prerequisites to provide exposure to, and development of competencies in, the essential health management knowledge and skill areas as defined by the Program s mission. The essential areas are identified primarily through faculty engagement with the health services community, while course-level focus, content and instructional methods are developed through formal and informal faculty research and pedagogy to ensure congruence among competencies, curriculum and course learning objectives. Validation of these relationships is sought through feedback from preceptors, alumni and community stakeholders. Student, preceptor and faculty assessments of competency attainment close the loop and ensure graduates complete the program well-prepared for the careers they seek. During the self-study year we initiated quarterly assessments of student competency attainment. Preliminary results have been compiled (See Supporting Material in III.A.1.2) and comparison of students' identification of course-level contributions to the competency to curriculum matrix is ongoing. III.A.2.1. Curriculum definition of healthcare management The program curriculum will provide students with a depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management aligned with the mission. The program should ensure mastery of the depth and breadth of knowledge required of graduates in the settings reflected by the Program's mission. CAHME anticipates that the equivalent of 40 semester hours is the minimum required to develop the set of competencies, not inclusive of the residency or internship component of the program. If a program is less than 40 semester hours or the equivalent, a detailed 66

67 description of the implementation of the set of competencies is required. Programs must ensure that graduates are receiving an appropriate depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management. Programs should articulate major content areas, describe how the program monitors appropriate content areas for inclusion, and identify how the curriculum design exposes students to these areas. Areas of focus will differ by program dependent on each programs mission and core requirements. Content knowledge may be provided to students through a single course, a field activity, or provided in an integrated manner across a series of courses or activities. During the site visit, faculty should be prepared to discuss the scope and depth of the course offerings, with particular reference to what they consider to be the key concepts and competencies provided by their particular course(s). Course syllabi should include session by session topics, and learning and assessment methods. Describe how the curriculum defines the healthcare management program by delineating the knowledge areas in healthcare management and of the healthcare system. Competencies in management and leadership are defined as the ability to successfully pursue organizational goals that involve getting things done through and in collaboration with others. Collaboration is a critical dimension of this competency, and is emphasized throughout PSU s health management programs. Management and leadership are key elements of the PA Division mission, and these content areas are developed through multiple underlying competencies. Thus, they are reflected in most Program competencies and multiple courses. All core and health management concentration courses, as well as many of the commonly taken electives, include elements of management and leadership. In particular, Organizational Behavior, Health Human Resource Management, Leadership and Governance, Health Administration, Continual Improvement, Strategic Management, and Values and Ethics address the types of competencies that fall into this domain. These competencies are developed through didactic and experiential learning, such as group projects that provide opportunities for students to develop skills in interpersonal communication, project management, and human resource (peer) management. Review of individual course syllabi highlights the emphasis placed on these skills areas. Students' quarterly assessments of competency development include. During the self-study year we implemented a series of quarterly of surveys through which students self-assess their progress on competency attainment and identify specific courses that have contributed to each competency. Over time, this data will provide valuable information about the contribution of specific courses to students' competency attainment and allow us to modify course content, learning and assessment methods, and the curriculum of either or both degree programs if indicated. (See III.A.1.2 Supporting Material) 67

68 III.A.2.2. Identification of essential health system & healthcare management knowledge areas The program curriculum will provide students with a depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management aligned with the mission. The program should ensure mastery of the depth and breadth of knowledge required of graduates in the settings reflected by the Program's mission. CAHME anticipates that the equivalent of 40 semester hours is the minimum required to develop the set of competencies, not inclusive of the residency or internship component of the program. If a program is less than 40 semester hours or the equivalent, a detailed description of the implementation of the set of competencies is required. Programs must ensure that graduates are receiving an appropriate depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management. Programs should articulate major content areas, describe how the program monitors appropriate content areas for inclusion, and identify how the curriculum design exposes students to these areas. Areas of focus will differ by program dependent on each programs mission and core requirements. Content knowledge may be provided to students through a single course, a field activity, or provided in an integrated manner across a series of courses or activities. During the site visit, faculty should be prepared to discuss the scope and depth of the course offerings, with particular reference to what they consider to be the key concepts and competencies provided by their particular course(s). Course syllabi should include session by session topics, and learning and assessment methods. Describe the process by which your program identifies essential healthcare system and healthcare management knowledge areas your curriculum is expected to cover and how the program ensures students are exposed to these areas. The curricula are delineated into core, concentration and elective categories. Within each degree program, courses in the core domain reflect the essential knowledge of the field (public administration or public health, defined by NASPAA and CEPH respectively given our multiple accreditation activities). Specific courses within each program s concentration domain reflect the essential health system and management knowledge areas associated with careers in public administration (e.g. public administrator within a health department, policy analyst, health management and budget analyst), and in public health (e.g., public health administrator, health services delivery administrator, policy/research analyst, nonprofit health organization manager, program manager, etc.). There is a significant overlap between the two degree programs pertaining to core and concentration courses, particularly with regard to management knowledge areas covered in PAH 541 (Organizational Behavior in Health Services Organizations), PAH 574 (Health Systems Organization), PAH 571 (Health Policy), PAH 586 (Health Economics), PAH 577 (Health Law and Regulation), and PAH 573 (Values and Ethics in Health). The similarities between the curricula are even more evident in the overlap among the required, concentration, and elective domains, principally through courses such as PAH 576 (Strategic Management) PAH 580 (Health Services Human Resource Management), PAH 587 (Financial Management of Health Services), PAH 588 (Program Evaluation and Management), PAH 578 (Continual Improvement), and PAH 544 (Leadership and Governance). 68

69 Required core and concentration courses are designed and sequenced through the use of prerequisites to provide exposure to, and development of competencies in, the essential health management knowledge and skill areas as defined by the Program s mission. The essential areas are identified primarily through faculty engagement with the health services community, while course-level focus, content and instructional methods are developed through formal and informal faculty research and pedagogy to ensure congruence among competencies, curriculum and course learning objectives. Validation of these relationships is sought through feedback from preceptors, alumni and community stakeholders. Student, preceptor and faculty assessments of competency attainment close the loop and ensure graduates complete the program well-prepared for the careers they seek. Periodic alumni surveys (See I.A.2.1) are particularly valuable for assessing the relationship between program curricula and graduates' career development - and for identifying areas in which we need to modify the curricula. In addition to ongoing feedback received from Program stakeholders, faculty periodically engage in a comprehensive, systematic review of the curriculum. The curriculum has been stable since the last major revisions in , with no major changes in requirements. The only change of substance has been to make the core MPH course in epidemiology a 4 credit course instead of 3, reflecting an OMPH decision to enhance the course credits to reflect the actual courseload. No other curricula changes have been made, reflecting stability in the programs of study. Based on the 2015 Alumni Survey results, particularly comments about areas in which alumni suggested additional curricular content, we will review course content and the overall curricula, and make changes as indicated. III.A.2.3. Degree s The program curriculum will provide students with a depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management aligned with the mission. The program should ensure mastery of the depth and breadth of knowledge required of graduates in the settings reflected by the Program's mission. CAHME anticipates that the equivalent of 40 semester hours is the minimum required to develop the set of competencies, not inclusive of the residency or internship component of the program. If a program is less than 40 semester hours or the equivalent, a detailed description of the implementation of the set of competencies is required. Programs must ensure that graduates are receiving an appropriate depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management. Programs should articulate major content areas, describe how the program monitors appropriate content areas for inclusion, and identify how the curriculum design exposes students to these areas. Areas of focus will differ by program dependent on each programs mission and core requirements. Content knowledge may be provided to students through a single course, a field activity, or provided in an integrated manner across a series of courses or activities. During the site visit, faculty should be prepared to discuss the scope and depth of the course offerings, with particular reference to what they consider to be the key concepts and competencies provided by their particular course(s). Course syllabi should include session by session topics, and learning and assessment methods. : Provide a complete list of required courses offered in the curriculum. 69

70 Courses Offered (self-study year) MPA:HA Core, Required and Commonly Taken Elective Courses Year in Program Course Number and Title Session Dept. Credits 1 PA 511: Public Administration 1 PA 533: Public Policy Origins/Processes* 1 PA 540: Administrative Theory/Behavior* 1 PA 551: Analytic Methods I 1 PA 552: Analytic Methods II Credit Hours Faculty/Instructors in the self-study year Students Non- Program Pgrm Required MPA:HA Courses F14 PA 3 2 Gelles 1 27 W15 PA 3 2 Kaimanu 3 18 S15 PA 3 2 Corbett 2 9 F14 PA 3 2 Mogren 3 19 W15 PA 3 2 Corbett 4 13 S15 PA 3 2 Mogren 2 9 F14 PA 3 2 Sandberg 0 22 S15 PA 3 2 Harris 0 18 F14 PA 3 2 Jones 7 20 W15 PA 3 2 Jones 2 18 W15 PA 3 2 Einspruch 0 7 W15 PA 3 2 Jones 7 18 S15 PA 3 2 Jones 2 17 S15 PA 3 2 Einspruch PA 582: Public Budgeting W15 PA 3 2 Robinson 2 21 S15 PA 3 2 Robinson PA 590: Human Resource Management* F14 PA 3 2 Harris 1 19 S15 PA 3 2 Harris PAH 541: Organizational Behavior in Health F14 PA 3 2 Rissi 14 5 S15 PA 3 2 Fellows PAH 570: Health Administration W15 PA 3 2 Kaimanu 16 6 F14 PA 3 2 Sumner PAH 574: Health Systems Organization W15 PA 3 2 Rissi 3 17 S15 PA 3 2 Quinones PAH 580: HR Management in Health Systems S15 PA 3 2 Abdellatif PAH 586: Health Economics F14 PA 3 2 Wallace 14 7 S15 PA 3 2 Graven

71 Year in Credit Faculty/Instructors in Course Number and Title Session Dept. Credits Program Hours the self-study year Students 2 PA 513: Administrative Ethics/Values* F14 PA 3 2 Gelles 1 17 W15 PA 3 2 Sandberg PA 534: Administrative Law* W15 PA 3 2 Cooper PAH 571: Health Policy W15 PA 3 2 Wallace 17 4 S15 PA 3 2 Rissi PAH 573: Ethics & Values in Health W15 PA 3 2 Isgrigg S15 PA 3 2 Sumner PAH 577: Health Law & Regulation W15 PA 3 2 Faler PAH 509: Organizational Experience All PA 6 4 Rissi 6 6 Common MPA:HA Electives 2 PAH 544: Leadership & Governance in Health S15 PA 3 2 Gelmon PAH 576: Strategic Mgmt of Health Systems S15 PA 3 2 Rissi PAH 578: Continual Improvement in Health S15 PA 3 2 Gelmon PAH 579: HIT and Systems Management W15 PA 3 2 Droppers PAH 587: Financial Mgmt of Health Services W15 PA 3 2 Wallace 18 0 F14 PA 3 2 Einspruch PAH 588: Program Evaluation in Health Svcs W15 PA 3 2 Sandberg

72 MPH:HMP Core, Required and Commonly Taken Elective Courses Year in Program 1 1 Course Number and Title Session Dept. Credits PHE 530: Epidemiology I PHPM 512: Epidemiology I PHPM 524: Introduction to Biostatistics PHE 510: Introduction to Biostatistics 1 PHE 512: Principles of Health Behavior 1 PAH 541: Organizational Behavior in Health 1 PAH 574: Health Systems Organization Credit Hours Faculty/Instructors in the self-study year Students Non- Program Pgrm Required MPH:HMP Courses F14 SCH Dinno 2 8 F14 PHPM Stull 3 26 W15 SCH Dinno 3 8 S15 SCH Dinno 4 7 F14 PHPM Park 3 10 F14 PHPM Srikanth 7 34 S15 PHPM Lasarev W15 SCH 3 2 Dinno 3 5 F14 SCH 3 2 Wheeler W15 SCH 3 2 Wheeler 4 10 S15 SCH 3 2 Wheeler 3 16 F14 PA 3 2 Rissi 14 5 S15 PA 3 2 Fellows 9 3 F14 PA 3 2 Sumner W15 PA 3 2 Rissi 3 17 S15 PA 3 2 Quinones 3 10 F14 PA 3 2 Wallace PAH 586: Health Economics S15 PA 3 2 Graven PAH 587: Financial Mgmt of Health Services W15 PA 3 2 Wallace PHE 580: Environmental Health PHPM 518: Environmental Health F14 SCH 3 2 Dinno 6 11 W15 PHPM 3 2 Lambert 8 31 S15 SCH 3 2 Dinno 5 2 W15 PA 3 2 Isgrigg PAH 573: Ethics & Values in Health S15 PA 3 2 Sumner PAH 576: Strategic Mgmt of Health Systems S15 PA 3 2 Rissi PAH 577: Health Law & Regulation W15 PA 3 2 Faler 27 3 F14 PA 3 2 Einspruch PAH 588: Program Evaluation in Health Svcs W15 PA 3 2 Sandberg PAH 509: Organizational Experience All PA 6 4 Rissi

73 Common MPH:HMP Electives Year in Course Number and Title Session Dept. Credits Program Credit Hours Faculty/Instructors in the self-study year Students 1 PAH 570: Health Administration W15 PA 3 2 Kaimanu PAH 580: HR Management in Health Systems S15 PA 3 2 Abdellatif PAH 544: Leadership & Governance in Health S15 PA 3 2 Gelmon PAH 578: Continual Improvement in Health S15 PA 3 2 Gelmon PAH 579: HIT and Systems Management W15 PA 3 2 Droppers

74 III.A.2.4. Integration for courses outside the Program The program curriculum will provide students with a depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management aligned with the mission. The program should ensure mastery of the depth and breadth of knowledge required of graduates in the settings reflected by the Program's mission. CAHME anticipates that the equivalent of 40 semester hours is the minimum required to develop the set of competencies, not inclusive of the residency or internship component of the program. If a program is less than 40 semester hours or the equivalent, a detailed description of the implementation of the set of competencies is required. Programs must ensure that graduates are receiving an appropriate depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management. Programs should articulate major content areas, describe how the program monitors appropriate content areas for inclusion, and identify how the curriculum design exposes students to these areas. Areas of focus will differ by program dependent on each programs mission and core requirements. Content knowledge may be provided to students through a single course, a field activity, or provided in an integrated manner across a series of courses or activities. During the site visit, faculty should be prepared to discuss the scope and depth of the course offerings, with particular reference to what they consider to be the key concepts and competencies provided by their particular course(s). Course syllabi should include session by session topics, and learning and assessment methods. If required courses are taught outside of the Program, describe the procedures for incorporating healthcare management content, as appropriate, into those courses and ensuring integration across the curriculum. All required/concentration courses for the Health Management and Policy and Health Administration degree programs are taught within the program. All core courses in the MPA:HA Program are also taught within the PA Division of the Hatfield School of Government. Four core courses in the MPH:HMP degree program (Epidemiology, Biostatistics, Concepts of Environmental Health, and Principles of Health Behavior) are either taught in the School of Community Health, a 'sister' school that is also housed within the College of Urban and Public Affairs, or through OHSU, our partner in the OMPH Program. These courses do not offer health management content, but do provide Health Management and Policy students with domain-specific cognate skills needed to supervise the work of other MPH professionals. Integration across the curriculum is ensured through the OMPH Coordinating Council (Dr. Gelmon is a member and represents the HMP track), which meets regularly to discuss curricular and other administrative issues, and through the OMPH Academic Program and Policy Committee (APPC) of which Dr. Wallace is a member. 74

75 III.A.2.5. Core course waivers The program curriculum will provide students with a depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management aligned with the mission. The program should ensure mastery of the depth and breadth of knowledge required of graduates in the settings reflected by the Program's mission. CAHME anticipates that the equivalent of 40 semester hours is the minimum required to develop the set of competencies, not inclusive of the residency or internship component of the program. If a program is less than 40 semester hours or the equivalent, a detailed description of the implementation of the set of competencies is required. Programs must ensure that graduates are receiving an appropriate depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management. Programs should articulate major content areas, describe how the program monitors appropriate content areas for inclusion, and identify how the curriculum design exposes students to these areas. Areas of focus will differ by program dependent on each programs mission and core requirements. Content knowledge may be provided to students through a single course, a field activity, or provided in an integrated manner across a series of courses or activities. During the site visit, faculty should be prepared to discuss the scope and depth of the course offerings, with particular reference to what they consider to be the key concepts and competencies provided by their particular course(s). Course syllabi should include session by session topics, and learning and assessment methods. Describe the policy on core course waivers, and the frequency of students receiving waivers. Include in your description how this policy assures attainment of the competencies of the waived course(s). All students admitted into each program must take the courses that are core to their discipline and required within their program of study. It is understood that some students may have already completed a graduate course that appears to be duplicative of a required core or required health administration/health management and policy track course. In such cases, students may petition to waive the requirement to take a specific required course. The course instructor is the person responsible for determining the comparability of the previous course with the required course. All waivers must be approved by the program in which the student is enrolled, and all requests for waiver must be accompanied by a copy of the course syllabus, or equivalent official detailed description. For a waiver to be granted, the equivalent course must: (a) be at the graduate or professional level, and must address the learning competencies defined for the required course; (b) be comparable to, or exceed, the credit hours of the required course; and, (c) have been taken within the last seven academic years with a grade of "B" or better. A waiver of a required course applies only to the course requirement; it does not apply to waiver of credit hours to complete the program of study toward the degree. If a waiver is granted, a student takes another elective course to fulfill the degree requirements. It is relatively rare for students to request, or be granted, a waiver for a required course. 75

76 III.A.2.6. Implementation of the competencies The program curriculum will provide students with a depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management aligned with the mission. The program should ensure mastery of the depth and breadth of knowledge required of graduates in the settings reflected by the Program's mission. CAHME anticipates that the equivalent of 40 semester hours is the minimum required to develop the set of competencies, not inclusive of the residency or internship component of the program. If a program is less than 40 semester hours or the equivalent, a detailed description of the implementation of the set of competencies is required. Programs must ensure that graduates are receiving an appropriate depth and breadth of knowledge of the healthcare system and healthcare management. Programs should articulate major content areas, describe how the program monitors appropriate content areas for inclusion, and identify how the curriculum design exposes students to these areas. Areas of focus will differ by program dependent on each programs mission and core requirements. Content knowledge may be provided to students through a single course, a field activity, or provided in an integrated manner across a series of courses or activities. During the site visit, faculty should be prepared to discuss the scope and depth of the course offerings, with particular reference to what they consider to be the key concepts and competencies provided by their particular course(s). Course syllabi should include session by session topics, and learning and assessment methods. For programs less than 40 semester credit hours (or the equivalent quarter or trimester credit hours) not inclusive of the residency or internship component of the program, give a description of the implementation of the set of competencies. Not applicable. III.A Core competencies The program curriculum will develop students' competencies in communications and interpersonal effectiveness. The program curriculum will develop students' competencies in critical thinking, analysis, and problem solving. The program curriculum will develop students' competencies in management and leadership. The program curriculum will develop students' competencies in professionalism and ethics. CAHME recognizes these competencies as 'core' to the profession of healthcare management, and so should be represented in any competency model chosen or developed by the Program. It is anticipated that a Program's competency model will also add other competencies according to its specific mission 76

77 and the positions students take upon graduation. CAHME does not prescribe a maximum number of competencies. The following descriptions are provided to assist program directors in defining how their competencies relate to these domains: Communications and interpersonal effectiveness: 'Communications' should include competencies associated with giving and receiving of information between an individual and other individuals or groups. 'Interpersonal effectiveness' involves competencies associated with developing and maintaining effective working relationships with others. The following are examples of the kinds of competencies that may fall into this domain: Collaboration, Oral Communications, Relationship Building, and Written Communications. Critical thinking, analysis, and problem solving: This domain should include competencies related to the appropriate use of information, data, and judgment to inform sound management decisions. The following are examples of the kinds of competencies that may fall into this domain: Analytical thinking, Financial Management, Information Seeking, Performance Measurement, and Process Management. Management and leadership: This domain should include competencies related to a student's ability to successfully pursue organizational goals that involve getting things done through and in collaboration with others. The following are examples of the kinds of competencies that may fall into this domain: Change leadership, Human Resource Management, Impact & Influence, Initiative, IT Management, Innovative Thinking, Organizational Awareness, Project Management, Strategic Orientation, and Talent Development. Professionalism and ethics : This domain should include competencies that relate to upholding high professional and ethical standards. The following are examples of the kinds of competencies that may fall into this domain: Accountability, Acting with Integrity, Achievement Orientation, Ethical decisionmaking, Professionalism, and Self-Confidence. Describe how the competencies identified in III.A.3-6 are addressed by the program's set of competencies. III.A.3 Competencies in communications and interpersonal effectiveness are addressed in 7 of the 10 PA Division competencies (PADC): PADC 1: Ethics, values, and responsibilities - This Program competency is related to CAHME III.A.3 through the concept of the role of health management and policy professionals. PADC 3: Collaborative engagement with diverse cultures - This Program competency addresses collaboration and relationship-building to further the public interest in individual, community and population health. PADC 4: Health policy - Although III.A.3 does not explicitly address public policy, this Program competency is related to the relationship-building dimension of the criterion, community engagement, and democratic governance. PADC 6: Manage systems and processes to improve organizational performance - Communication, collaboration and relationship-building are key elements of management theory and continuous improvement of organizational performance. 77

78 PADC 7: Conceptualize, analyze, and develop solutions to health system challenges - Oral and written communications and relationship-building are key elements of collaboration, particularly in the context of democratic governance. PADC 8: Advance cooperation in the health system - This Program competency addresses collaboration and relationship-building as key components of effective communication. PADC 9: Demonstrate verbal, written and interpersonal communication skills - This Program competency speaks directly to the oral and written communication skills addressed in III.B.3. Elements of communication and interpersonal effectiveness are also reflected at the course level, where all core/concentration courses and most electives include development of competency in some form of communication. We have high expectations with regard to written communication skills, and expect all students to actively participate in class discussions. A substantial number of courses utilize group projects as a means of developing interpersonal relationship and communication skills, and include peer-assessment as a form of feedback about competency in this domain. Review of individual course syllabi highlights the emphasis placed on these skills areas. III.A.4 Competencies in critical thinking, analysis, and problem solving are mirrored in several Program competencies, and reflect students abilities to appropriately use information, data, and judgment to inform sound management decisions. Related Program competencies include: PADC 2: Identify and apply theories and frameworks - This Program competency addresses critical thinking, analysis and the application of theory within various domains (e.g., economic, financial, legal, organizational, political, social, and ethical) which are addressed in multiple courses across the curriculum. PADC 4: Health policy - The policy process includes multiple areas of analysis including financial, operational and socio-political; thus this Program competency addresses the critical thinking and analysis dimensions of this. PADC 5: Employ appropriate qualitative and quantitative techniques - This Program competency directly addresses the critical thinking and analytic skills, as well as the operational and financial performance measurement dimension, of III.A.4. PADC 7: Conceptualize, analyze, and develop solutions to health system challenges - Analytic thinking and process management are key elements of this Program competency and address similar elements within III.A.4. PADC 8: Advance cooperation in health programs and services. Assessment and appropriate use of data to develop collaborative solutions to health systems issues are critical elements of this Program competency and speak to the critical thinking, analysis and problem-solving competencies. PADC 10: Think critically and self-reflectively - Critical self-reflection is a cornerstone of sound management decisions, as well as problem-solving, and thus are key competencies of both the Program and III.A.4. Critical thinking, analysis and problem solving competencies are also reflected at the course level, where most core, concentration and commonly-taken elective courses include PA competencies #2, #7 and #10 regarding the application of theory to practice, collaborative problem solving, and critical analysis. (PA Competency #10 also incorporates critical self-reflection, a key dimension of the Division s mission.) Courses such as Analytic Methods, Financial Management, Advanced Health Policy, Program Evaluation, and Strategic Management provide significant opportunities for students to develop and apply analytic skills. Review of course syllabi highlights the emphasis placed on these skills areas. III.A.5 Competencies in management and leadership are defined as the ability to successfully pursue organizational goals that involve getting things done through and in collaboration with others. 78

79 Collaboration is a critical dimension of this competency, and of PSU s health management programs. Thus, most of the competencies we have established as necessary areas of knowledge and skill are encompassed by this criterion. Specific competencies include: PADC 1: Ethics, values, and responsibilities - Management and leadership in the health sector includes unique moral dimensions that go beyond routine expectations for ethical behavior in public service or corporate roles. PADC 2: Identify and apply relevant theories and frameworks - This Program competency relates to the use of leadership theory, as well as application of theory within organizational behavior, motivation, innovation, organizational culture and other dimensions of this. PADC 3: Collaborative engagement with diverse cultures - Competencies related to collaboration and cultural competence address management and leadership competencies such as human resource management, diversity and health disparities. PADC 5: Employ appropriate qualitative and quantitative techniques - Project management and strategic management are key competencies addressed in this Program competency. PADC 6: Manage systems and processes to improve organizational performance - This Program competency relates directly to III.A.5 with regard to developing students ability to achieve organizational goals through management roles (authority) as well as leadership skills (vision, shared goals, and cooperation). PADC 7: Conceptualize, analyze, and develop solutions to health system - This Program competency addresses impact, influence, initiative, innovation and strategy, which are facilitated through the development of leadership and management skills. PADC 8: Advance cooperation in health programs and services - This Program competency addresses the cooperative foundation of integrated health system functions, and the ability to assess, influence, negotiate and manage strategically across multiple stakeholders. PADC 9: Demonstrate verbal, written, and interpersonal communication skills - This competency addresses communication as a critical skill for effective management and leadership. PADC 10: Think critically and self-reflectively - This Program competency underscores the need for leaders and managers to engage in critical self-reflection and is related to dimensions of innovative thinking, organizational awareness and human resource management. Management and leadership are key elements of our mission. Thus, they are reflected in most Program competencies and multiple courses. All core and health management concentration courses, and many commonly-taken electives, include elements of management and leadership. In particular, Organizational Behavior, Human Resource Management, Leadership and Governance, Health Administration, Continual Improvement, Strategic Management, and Values and Ethics address competencies within this domain. These competencies are developed through didactic and experiential learning, such as group projects that provide opportunities for students to develop skills in interpersonal communication, project management, and human resource (peer) management. III.A.6 Competencies related to professionalism and ethics include knowledge acquisition and understanding of ethical dilemmas and a commitment to acting with integrity. Given the Program s public service heritage and PSU s commitment to community, we seek to develop students abilities as follows: PADC 1: Ethics, values, and responsibilities - III.A.6 is most directly aligned with this Divisional competency, and speaks to particularly salient dimensions of health system administration. PADC 3: Collaborative engagement with diverse cultures - This Program competency addresses collaboration and relationship-building as knowledge and skill areas that require confidence, sensitivity to diverse perspectives, integrity, and an orientation to achievement. 79

80 PADC 4: Health policy - This Program competency addresses integrity, accountability, and selfconfidence as inherent dimensions of professionalism in the development of health policy. PADC 6: Manage systems and processes to improve organizational performance - This Program competency addresses the need for health services administrators to act with integrity, demonstrate an achievement orientation, and be accountable for organizational performance. PADC 9: Demonstrate verbal, written, and interpersonal communication skills - Communication skills are key elements of professionalism and self-confidence. PADC 10: Think critically and self-reflectively - Professionalism and ethical decision-making are dependent upon critical thinking and self-reflection about one s own actions, and the moral dimension of health services. III.A Core competencies in the curriculum and activities The program curriculum will develop students' competencies in communications and interpersonal effectiveness. The program curriculum will develop students' competencies in critical thinking, analysis, and problem solving. The program curriculum will develop students' competencies in management and leadership. The program curriculum will develop students' competencies in professionalism and ethics. CAHME recognizes these competencies as 'core' to the profession of healthcare management, and so should be represented in any competency model chosen or developed by the Program. It is anticipated that a Program's competency model will also add other competencies according to its specific mission and the positions students take upon graduation. CAHME does not prescribe a maximum number of competencies. The following descriptions are provided to assist program directors in defining how their competencies relate to these domains: Communications and interpersonal effectiveness: 'Communications' should include competencies associated with giving and receiving of information between an individual and other individuals or groups. 'Interpersonal effectiveness' involves competencies associated with developing and maintaining effective working relationships with others. The following are examples of the kinds of competencies that may fall into this domain: Collaboration, Oral Communications, Relationship Building, and Written Communications. Critical thinking, analysis, and problem solving: This domain should include competencies related to the appropriate use of information, data, and judgment to inform sound management decisions. The following are examples of the kinds of competencies that may fall into this domain: Analytical thinking, Financial Management, Information Seeking, Performance Measurement, and Process Management. Management and leadership: This domain should include competencies related to a student's ability to successfully pursue organizational goals that involve getting things done through and in collaboration with others. The following are examples of the kinds of competencies that may fall into this domain: Change leadership, Human Resource Management, Impact & Influence, Initiative, IT Management, Innovative Thinking, Organizational Awareness, Project Management, Strategic Orientation, and Talent 80

81 Development. Professionalism and ethics: This domain should include competencies that relate to upholding high professional and ethical standards. The following are examples of the kinds of competencies that may fall into this domain: Accountability, Acting with Integrity, Achievement Orientation, Ethical decisionmaking, Professionalism, and Self-Confidence. Explain where these competencies are developed in the required curriculum and program activities. The CAHME-defined competencies overlap substantially with our program competencies as outlined previously. Basic to intermediate knowledge and skills are developed primarily through core courses, while concentration courses in health management are designed to assure competency attainment at the intermediate to advanced level, commensurate with graduate education that prepares students for entry to mid-level professional roles. The quarter schedule and 60/62 credit-hour degree requirements of the programs result in a relatively larger number of discrete courses. This situation facilitates a more individualized educational experience, but also precipitates some degree of overlap among courses. The Program's competency to curriculum matrix (See III.A.1.3) provides granular detail about the extent of coverage and level of competency attainment for each PA Division competency at the course level, and course evaluations (See III.C.2.2) and students' competency attainment assessments (See III.A.1.2) tie course-level content and learning objectives to PA Division competencies. These links are also explicated in syllabus cover sheets and course evaluation summaries. III.B.1.1. Time spent on higher vs. lower teaching and learning methods The Program will incorporate a range of teaching and learning methods driven by adult learning principles. The methods will be based on higher education taxonomic levels appropriate to graduate education. Throughout the curriculum, the Program should incorporate a range of teaching and learning methods as appropriate to the course objectives and competencies. This range should be aligned with the curriculum design and should seek to emphasize methods that involve active student participation (i.e. higher-level methods), which tend to be more effective in developing competencies. Examples of lower and higher-level methods are provided in the attached table; benchmark information concerning the balance of these activities in other graduate programs is available in Calhoun et al. (2009). Teaching and learning methods and definitions Teaching and Level Learning Method Definition Lower Readings Students complete assigned readings in textbook, articles, websites, etc. Lecture no media Professor does most of the talking, without any media support Lectures with media Professor does most of the talking, with some sort of media support (e.g. PowerPoint, overheads, video, whiteboards, etc.). Students participate via discussion that is primarily characterized by students asking clarifying questions, etc. 81

82 Guest Speakers Online discussions Class Discussions Web-based modules Higher In-class Presentations Cases Team activities Simulation exercises External Field Experiences Strategic/Consult ing Projects Individual/panel of experts from the field present to student Students actively engage in an online discussion, either synchronous or asynchronous, with the professor and with each other. Students can stimulate or respond to discussion. Students actively engage in open discussion with the professor and with each other. Students can stimulate or respond to discussion. Interactive learning via CD/DVD/Internet that is more than searching for information or reading websites Students formally deliver information to the rest of the class in a wellprepared format that required analysis and preparation Students actively engage in analyzing a case study to determine causes, implications, strategies etc. Case analysis is either shared with the class through open and interactive discussion or debate, or students prepare a written case analysis for review and feedback. Three or more students collaborate as a group to complete one deliverable Interactive learning in which students' actions significantly affect how the learning unfolds and the subsequent outcomes of the learning. Simulations may or may not be computer based (e.g. tabletop simulations). Students are placed in non-academic applied or real-world work settings and allowed to learn from the work experience, including externships and internships. Learning outcomes are shared in the academic environment and evaluated. Students actively engage in completing an actual consulting project for a health organization. Alternatively, students complete an assignment that stimulates a realistic project in a health organization. Reflective learning Students complete structured process (e.g. journaling, one minute response, assessment instruments, weekly reports) to review, understand, analyze, and evaluate their own learning and/or performance. The evaluation should be based on pre-selected criteria. In addition, the assessment could include a comparison of their performance assessment with their peers and/or experts in the field. Adapted from NCHL (2006): Competency Integration in Health Management Education: A Resource Series for Program Directors and Faculty. Used with permission. : Estimate the overall percentage of time a typical student spends on higher vs. lower level teaching and learning methods, according to the level definitions provided. In your analysis of student time associated with the activity, include time spent both inside and outside of class. Lower Level Methods Higher Level Methods 37% 63% 82

83 For IIIB.1.1 Teaching / Learning Methods IIIC.1.1 Assessment Methods Higher Lower Higher Lower Course # PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PHE PHE 530/PHPM PHE 580/PHPM PHPM 524/PHE AVG

84 III.B.1.2. Balance between higher vs. lower teaching and learning methods The Program will incorporate a range of teaching and learning methods driven by adult learning principles. The methods will be based on higher education taxonomic levels appropriate to graduate education. Throughout the curriculum, the Program should incorporate a range of teaching and learning methods as appropriate to the course objectives and competencies. This range should be aligned with the curriculum design and should seek to emphasize methods that involve active student participation (i.e. higher-level methods), which tend to be more effective in developing competencies. Examples of lower and higher-level methods are provided in the attached table; benchmark information concerning the balance of these activities in other graduate programs is available in Calhoun et al. (2009). Teaching and learning methods and definitions Teaching and Learning Level Method Definition Lower Readings Students complete assigned readings in textbook, articles, websites, etc. Lecture no Professor does most of the talking, without any media support media Lectures with media Guest Speakers Online discussions Class Discussions Web-based modules Higher In-class Presentations Cases Team activities Simulation exercises External Field Experiences Professor does most of the talking, with some sort of media support (e.g. PowerPoint, overheads, video, whiteboards, etc.). Students participate via discussion that is primarily characterized by students asking clarifying questions, etc. Individual/panel of experts from the field present to student Students actively engage in an online discussion, either synchronous or asynchronous, with the professor and with each other. Students can stimulate or respond to discussion. Students actively engage in open discussion with the professor and with each other. Students can stimulate or respond to discussion. Interactive learning via CD/DVD/Internet that is more than searching for information or reading websites Students formally deliver information to the rest of the class in a well-prepared format that required analysis and preparation Students actively engage in analyzing a case study to determine causes, implications, strategies etc. Case analysis is either shared with the class through open and interactive discussion or debate, or students prepare a written case analysis for review and feedback. Three or more students collaborate as a group to complete one deliverable Interactive learning in which students' actions significantly affect how the learning unfolds and the subsequent outcomes of the learning. Simulations may or may not be computer based (e.g. tabletop simulations). Students are placed in non-academic applied or real-world work settings and allowed to learn from the work experience, including externships and 84

85 internships. Learning outcomes are shared in the academic environment and evaluated. Strategic/Consul ting Projects Students actively engage in completing an actual consulting project for a health organization. Alternatively, students complete an assignment that stimulates a realistic project in a health organization. Reflective learning Students complete structured process (e.g. journaling, one minute response, assessment instruments, weekly reports) to review, understand, analyze, and evaluate their own learning and/or performance. The evaluation should be based on pre-selected criteria. In addition, the assessment could include a comparison of their performance assessment with their peers and/or experts in the field. Adapted from NCHL (2006): Competency Integration in Health Management Education: A Resource Series for Program Directors and Faculty. Used with permission. Evaluate the extent to which the balance between higher vs. lower level teaching and learning methods is appropriate given the mission and goals of your program, as well as any plans / methods you are pursuing to implement higher level methods. The Program utilizes a wide variety of instructional methods to assure adequate knowledge and skill acquisition, as well as experiential and applied learning opportunities. Teaching methods include traditional lectures, case studies, in-class conceptual studies of key issues, and in-depth reading and research assignments on specific topics. Of particular note for higher level teaching/learning methods is the emphasis placed on community-based learning, applied projects, and team-based work, as well as integrative field experiences. Most courses involve at least one of these first three elements, and many involve two or all three. We sequence courses through advising and the use of prerequisites to structure an overall program of study which emphasizes acquisition and building of core disciplinary (MPH or MPA) knowledge, followed by concentration core knowledge and skill development (health administration/management and policy), and then further specialization through selection of electives. To assure that students attain baseline competency prior to enrolling in concentration and elective courses, prerequisites have been established for courses that are taken later in the program of study, and which require students to apply knowledge and skills gained in core/introductory courses. Thus, as a student progresses through the curriculum, the teaching and learning strategies reflect a transition to higher level methods, which are linked to attainment of higher level competencies. The prerequisites were implemented in and the benefits of increased synchronization of courses across the curricula are now being realized, enabling us to fully adopt the higher-level teaching methods. The newly standardized mix of teaching/learning methods is appropriate to the structure of the curriculum and needs of our students, and provides a logical, sequential program of study that maintains the necessary flexibility to adequately prepare students for the careers they seek. 85

86 III.B.2.1. Major team based activities The Program will provide, throughout the curriculum, opportunities for students to participate in teambased and interprofessional activities. CAHME recognizes that the opportunity for practical collaboration and teamwork serve to develop students' interpersonal skills and prepare them for the workplace. As part of the educational experience students should have opportunities to work in teams, facilitate meetings and practice leadership skills. Students need the opportunity for exposure to other professions, particularly outside of healthcare. It is this cross-discipline collaboration and professional understanding that will lead to the success of students as they enter the field. Opportunities should be provided for students to work with others inside or outside the program and across other disciplines such as: nursing, medicine, allied health professions, public health, information technology, policy, insurance, suppliers, and/or engineering. Describe major team based activities in the curriculum, distinguishing which activities take place in optional elective courses and which activities students are exposed to as a required element of the curriculum. Identify any programmatic or curricular based approach to teaming your program has adopted. The Program utilizes team-based learning activities extensively throughout the curriculum. Team-based projects generally include collaborative research, written report, and/or oral presentation. In addition to the group grade, individual students contributions are assessed in the oral presentation and, in most cases, through peer evaluations that are designed to ascertain the nature, scope and quality of each team member s contribution. Examples of courses that utilize team-based activities include: PAH 541 Organizational Behavior is required in both programs. In this course, students develop an interview protocol as a team, conduct individual interviews of health services leaders, analyze their findings individually, synthesize their findings with those of other group members, and present the concept and its application in practice to the class. PAH 573 Values and Ethics is a required course in both programs. In this course, student teams are assigned a case in which they must collectively analyze the situation, identify the underlying ethical conflict and present alternative means of resolving the situation. PAH 574 Health Systems Organization is a required course in both programs. A required project engages student groups in a comparative analysis of foreign and U.S. health systems around a particular dimension. PAH 576 Strategic Management is a commonly-taken elective in the MPA:HA program, and required in the MPH:HMP program. A course requirement is for students to work in teams to analyze, prepare and present a report based on an assigned case study. Required elements include financial analysis, SWOT analysis, social/political feasibility, and other factors. PAH 588 Program Evaluation is required for MPH:HMP students and a commonly-taken MPA:HA elective. Students work with a local organization to develop an evaluation framework that responds to the organization s needs and assets. 86

87 III.B.2.2. Interprofessional activities The Program will provide, throughout the curriculum, opportunities for students to participate in teambased and interprofessional activities. CAHME recognizes that the opportunity for practical collaboration and teamwork serve to develop students' interpersonal skills and prepare them for the workplace. As part of the educational experience students should have opportunities to work in teams, facilitate meetings and practice leadership skills. Students need the opportunity for exposure to other professions, particularly outside of healthcare. It is this cross-discipline collaboration and professional understanding that will lead to the success of students as they enter the field. Opportunities should be provided for students to work with others inside or outside the program and across other disciplines such as: nursing, medicine, allied health professions, public health, information technology, policy, insurance, suppliers, and/or engineering. Describe the opportunities students have to participate in interprofessional activities. Since the Program attracts students with diverse backgrounds, including medical students and residents, physicians, nurses, pharmacists, allied health, medical facility support staff and program staff employed by local health and social service agencies, students have extensive exposure to various health and health care professions through classroom interaction and group projects. Many classes also include students from other degree programs, such as social work, bioinformatics, medical sociology, and urban planning. Increased collaborations with OHSU suggest opportunities for even more interprofessional learning in the future. More formal opportunities to participate in interprofessional activities are afforded by the high level of community-engaged scholarship and extensive community relationships among Program faculty. Other opportunities include the student-driven Institute for Healthcare Improvement PSU & OHSU Open School chapter that facilitates additional interprofessional activities. This chapter was re-designated in July 2012 as a two-institution chapter, with representation from multiple professional programs (including the MPA:HA) at the two universities. Many formal opportunities for interprofessional activities were noted in the preceding section, while others are found in the extensive array of noncredit internships that are sought independently by students, but often brokered through the Program s listservs. (See Supporting Materials for a list of internships offered during the self-study year.) Managing the numerous opportunities is actually somewhat of a challenge for students, as well as for faculty who seek to ensure that students are exposed to all sectors of the health system. However, we view this challenge as part of our mission, particularly as it reflects the diverse interests and career fields sought by our students. 87

88 III.B.2.3. Team building & interprofessional activities for programs with online instruction The Program will provide, throughout the curriculum, opportunities for students to participate in teambased and interprofessional activities. CAHME recognizes that the opportunity for practical collaboration and teamwork serve to develop students' interpersonal skills and prepare them for the workplace. As part of the educational experience students should have opportunities to work in teams, facilitate meetings and practice leadership skills. Students need the opportunity for exposure to other professions, particularly outside of healthcare. It is this cross-discipline collaboration and professional understanding that will lead to the success of students as they enter the field. Opportunities should be provided for students to work with others inside or outside the program and across other disciplines such as: nursing, medicine, allied health professions, public health, information technology, policy, insurance, suppliers, and/or engineering. For programs with online instruction, describe the team building and interprofessional opportunities that occur within the required face to face instructional time. Online instruction in the Program is very limited and students take few, if any, courses through an online format. III.B.3.1. Exposure to health professionals The Program will provide experiences for students to gain an understanding of, and to interact with, a variety of healthcare professionals and organizations. CAHME recognizes the importance of interdisciplinary exposure to health care professionals in graduate education. Programs are expected to offer students these opportunities in a number of ways as appropriate to the mission of the Program. The Program will have relationships with a variety of healthcare management employers to integrate the field of practice into both teaching and career guidance. Programs have designed formal and informal avenues for such exposure into the total student experience. These include, but are not limited to: site visits; business case competitions; career panels; informational interviews; professional conference attendance; mentoring programs; guest speakers; adjunct and clinical faculty, and classes and workshops taken with students from other health professions. List the experiences students have for exposure to a range of health professionals, during the typical course of study. 88

89 A large number of health system professionals serve as guest lecturers or adjunct faculty and typically are engaged in a variety of activities beyond the classroom. Course assignments in PAH 509, 541, 544, 570, and 588 provide additional opportunities for students to interact with health system leaders and learn about organizational activities and operations. Beyond the classroom, students are able to participate in networking activities sponsored by OMPH and PASA student organizations, the IHI Open School chapter, Oregon Public Health Association, and ACHE/Oregon Society of Health Executives. Finally, many students complete formal internships with local health systems independent or through PAH 504. (See III.B.2.2 Supporting Material.) III.B.3.2. Exposures relating to students learning The Program will provide experiences for students to gain an understanding of, and to interact with, a variety of healthcare professionals and organizations. CAHME recognizes the importance of interdisciplinary exposure to health care professionals in graduate education. Programs are expected to offer students these opportunities in a number of ways as appropriate to the mission of the Program. The Program will have relationships with a variety of healthcare management employers to integrate the field of practice into both teaching and career guidance. Programs have designed formal and informal avenues for such exposure into the total student experience. These include, but are not limited to: site visits; business case competitions; career panels; informational interviews; professional conference attendance; mentoring programs; guest speakers; adjunct and clinical faculty, and classes and workshops taken with students from other health professions. Describe how these experiences are used in their learning. From the earliest history of the PSU public administration program, practitioners have played critical roles in shaping the program, influencing our curriculum and supporting Divisional activities. (Please note: most of the external resources that represent practitioner involvement in our Program are listed in the supporting materials, and include individual names to demonstrate the depth of our relationships with many of these organizations.) We have complete data on all field placement supervisors and adjunct faculty, and have identified most guest speakers, key informants and partners for communitybased learning that were engaged with the Program during the self-study year. The Portland VA Medical Center, Legacy Health System, Oregon Health & Science University, and Cambia Health Solutions periodically offer health management fellowships, and contact us annually to promote these opportunities through our listservs. In collaboration with OMPH and PASA, representatives from these organizations come to campus to meet with interested students. PSU graduates have often been selected as Administrative Fellows, and some of the alumni that have continued in permanent positions provide important referral resources for current students. We also interact with the Oregon chapter of ACHE (Dr. Gelmon is a Fellow of ACHE), participate in the ACHE Higher Education Network, and have begun offering an annual information session for students on the benefits of ACHE membership. 89

90 Local events, particularly in the area of health system reform, are frequently offered by multiple organizations and are promoted to our students, and we seek ways for students to attend as volunteers or with discounted registration in order to facilitate their participation. All of these events expose students to practitioners, and give them an opportunity to learn about potential organizational opportunities to enhance their learning and professional careers. Students receive information about, and participate as feasible in, regular gatherings of the Oregon Society of Healthcare Executives (the ACHE affiliate), Oregon Public Health Association, Oregon chapter of HIMSS, Oregon Public Health Institute, We Can Do Better, public hearings related to health reform and health policy, and other professional development activities where they interact with practitioners. Program alumni are leaders of many of these organizations, and help to ensure student participation in these events. III.B.3.3. List of health organizations The Program will provide experiences for students to gain an understanding of, and to interact with, a variety of healthcare professionals and organizations. CAHME recognizes the importance of interdisciplinary exposure to health care professionals in graduate education. Programs are expected to offer students these opportunities in a number of ways as appropriate to the mission of the Program. The Program will have relationships with a variety of healthcare management employers to integrate the field of practice into both teaching and career guidance. Programs have designed formal and informal avenues for such exposure into the total student experience. These include, but are not limited to: site visits; business case competitions; career panels; informational interviews; professional conference attendance; mentoring programs; guest speakers; adjunct and clinical faculty, and classes and workshops taken with students from other health professions. Provide a listing of Health Organizations engaged by the program during the self-study year. Engagements can include, but are not limited to, preceptors, adjunct and clinical faculty, guest speakers, career advisors and/or mentors. Utilization Key 1 Adjunct Faculty 2 Guest Lecturer 3 Guest Speaker 4 Field Project Supervisor 5 PAH 509 Preceptor 90

91 III.B List of Health Organizations and Individuals Organization Preceptor Name Position/Title Utilized for Frequency # of Students American Hearth Association JoAnne Pineda Senior Program Director; Quality & Sys tems Improvement 5 b c Association of Oregon Community Mental Health Programs Cherryl Ramirez, MPH, MPA Executive Director 5 b c Athletes 4 Cancer Tonia Farman Founder and Executive Director 4 b c Bloom Anew (leadership development/executive coaching) Jay Bloom Independent Consultant 4 a c Cambia Health Solutions Tom Holt Director; Governmental Affairs 2, 4 a b Cambia Health Solutions Lisa Schaffner, PhD Manager; Clinical Research and Member Engagement 5 b c Cambia Health Solutions Torrie Fields Manager; Palliative Care Services Program 5 b c CareOregon Ca thy Merge Organizational Development 2 a a CareOregon Angie Timmins Process Improvement Coordinator 2 a a CareOregon Patrick Curran, MPH CEO 3 a b Center for Inquiry Jon Peters, MD Family Physician; CFI Advisory Board 3 b c Center for Public Service Phil Kiesling Director 4 a c Central City Concern Lynn Smith-Stott Director; Alcohol & Drug Services 5 b c Coalition of Community Health Clinics Sam Chase Executive Director 4 a b FamilyCare Health Plans Jeff Heatherington CEO 2, 4 a b Foundation for Reproductive Health/NARAL Oregon Michele Stranger-Hunter Executive Director 4 a c Greenfield Health System Tom Yackel, MD Chief Health Information Officer 4 a c Hacienda CDC Anna Gordon Program Manager 4 b c Harm Reduction Action Center (Boulder, CO) Lisa Ravile Executive Director 5 b c Kais er Ctr for Hlth Rs rch; OCHIN Practice-bas ed Research Network Rachel Gold, PhD MPH Investigator 2 a b Lane County Public Health Department Marieke Young Prevention Specialist 5 b c Legacy Health System Kim Carter Manager; Patient Access 5 b c Living Cully EcoDistrict Alyssa Kocsis Program Manager, Verde 4 b c Marquis Companies/Consonus Pharmacy Beth Biggs General Managers 4 a c Marquis Companies/Post-Acute Rehab Division April Olum Manager; Marquis/Oregon City 5 b c Multnomah County District Attorney Eric Zimmerman Director; Crime Prevention & Outreach (gun violence pgrm) 5 b c Multnomah County Health Department Vanetta Abdellatif, MPH Director of Integrated Clinical Services 1, 4 a b Northwest Health Foundation Nichole Maher, MPH President and CEO 4 b c OHA Public Health Division Cara Biddlecom Senior Policy Analyst; Public Health Modernization 3 a c OHA, Office for Health Policy and Research Jason Gingerich Senior Policy Analyst 3 a c OHA, Office of Equity and Inclusion Ca rol Cheney Equity Manager 3 a c OHA, Office of Health Analytics Sarah Bartelmann Metrics Coordinator 3 a c OHSU; Human Resources Katie Crocker Employee Benefits 5 b c OHSU; Department of Surgery Dr. Bruce Wolfe Director; Bariatric Surgery 5 b c OHSU, Neuro ICU Beth Liguori Nurse Manager 5 b c OHSU/PSU School of Public Health Elena Andresen, PhD Dean (Acting) 4 a a OHSU; Casey Eye Institute Talitha Dale Director, Preschool Vis ion Program 5 b c OHSU; Center for Evidence-Based Policy Valerie King, MD, MPH Director; Evidence and Policy 2, 4 a b OHSU; Department of Family Medicine Roger Garvin, MD Director; Family Medicine 4 a c OHSU; Department of Maxillofacial Surgery Pam Hughes, MD Division Chief 4 a c OHSU; Human Resources Riikka Salonen Manager; Workforce Equity and Inclusion 5 b c OHSU; Richmond Clinic/Family Medicine Erwin Teuber, PhD Executive Director 4 a c Oregon Area Health Education Center/OHSU Family Medicine Lisa Dodson, MD Program Director/Physician 4 a c Oregon Association of Hospitals & Health Systems Diane Waldo Associate VP of Quality & Clinical Operations 4 a c Oregon Department of Health Services Dana Selover, MD, MPH Manager; Health Care Regulation & Quality Improvement 4 a c Oregon Educators' Benefits Board Heidi Williams Director of Operations 5 b c Oregon Governor's Office Sean Kolmer Health Policy Advisor 2, 4 a c Oregon Health Authority; Department of Human Services Melissa Isavoran Senior Policy Analyst; Common Credentialing Program 5 b c Oregon Health Authority; Human Resources Cathryn Cushing Workforce Policy Lead 3 a c Oregon Health Authority Kelly Ballas Consultant, former CFO 3 a c Oregon Health Authority; Patient-Centered Primary Care Home Pgrm Nicole Merrithew, MPH Director; Patitent-Centered Primary Care Home Program 1, 4 a b Oregon Health Authority Transformation Center Rona l d Stock, MD MA Director of Clinical Innovation 2, 4 a b Oregon Health Authority, Office of Oregon Health Policy & Research Jeanene Smith, MD, MPH Chief Medical Officer and Administrator 2, 4 a c Oregon Health Authority; Office for Health Policy & Research Lisa Angus Director; Research & Policy 2, 4, 5 a b Oregon Health Authority; Transformation Center Chris DeMars Director of System Innovation 3, 4 a c Oregon Health Care Quality Corporation Mylia Christensen Executive Director 4 a c Oregon Health Care Quality Corporation Kate Elliott, MNpS Program Director; Patient-Centered Primary Care Initiative 5 b c Oregon Healthcare Quality Corporation Elissa Adair, Ph.D. Senior Director of Programs 3 b b Oregon Healthcare Workforce Ins titute Jo Isgrigg, Ph.D Executive Director 1, 4, 5 a a Oregon Legislative Assembly Tina Kotek Speaker of the House 4 b c Oregon Medical Association Cassandra Dictus Program Manager, Choosing Wisely 4 b c Oregon Open Notes Consortium Amy Fellows Project Director 1, 2, 4, 5 b a Oregon Patient Safety Commission Bethany Walmsley Executive Director 4, 5 a c Oregon Public Health Institute Liz Baxter, MPH Executive Director 2, 4, 5 a b Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network Melinda Davis, PhD Director; Community-engaged Research 5 b c OSPIRG Jesse O'Brien Health Care Advocate 3 a c Our Community Health Information Network (OCHIN) Jodi Whisman Director; Leadership & Organizational Development 3 b c Our House of Portland; Neighborhood Housing and Care Chris McDonald Volunteer and Development Coordinator 5 b c Outside In John Duke Clinic Manager 4 a c PDX Q Center Barbara McCullum Executive Director (formerly) 4 b c Portland Public Schools Elise Christiansen Sr Pgrm Evaluator, Delayed Expulsion School Counseling Ctr 4 b c Portland Veterans' Administration Health System Roberta Ruimy Operative Care Division 5 b c Portland Veterans' Administration Health System Peter Shore Director; Telemedicine 5 b c Portland Women's Crisis Line Molly Pringle Access Improvement Project Manager 4 b c Providence Health & Services; Administration Jason Faler Director; Business Development 1, 4, 5 a a Providence Health & Services; Cardiovascular Services Ma tt Ducs i k, MPH Program Manager; Cardiovascular Services 5 a c Providence Health & Svcs; Ctr for Outcomes Research & Education Bruce Ba yl ey, PhD Director 4, 5 a c Providence Health & Svcs; ElderPlace Amy Carlton Manager 5 b c Providence Health & Services; Oregon Health Authority Evan Saulino Physician, PCPCH Clinical Advisor 3, 4 a c Raphael House Emmy Ritter Director of Programs and Services 4 b c SNB Consultants Shari Black Consultant, Retired Multnomah County Administrator/PH RN 3 a a SouthCentral Family Health Center (Los Angeles, CA) Genevieve Filmardirossian Chief Operating Officer 5 b c Special Olympics Oregon Jean Hansen Director of Youth Outreach 4 b b Vermont Hills Family Life Center Lauren Hisada Program Manager 4 b c Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center Gi l Munoz, MPA CEO 3, 4 a b Washington County Public Health Department Eri n Mowl ds, MPH Senior Program Coordinator: Health Equity, Planning & Policy 5 b c Washington County Public Health Department Amanda Garcia Snell Health Promotion Supervisor 5 b c Willamette Dental Group Natalie Koury Manager; Learning and Development 5 b c 91

92 III.B.4.1. Integrative experiences relating to learning objectives The Program curriculum will include integrative experiences, including field-based applications that require students to draw upon, apply and synthesize knowledge and skills covered throughout the program of study. Students should participate in integrative experiences, including field based applications, which foster continuous learning through information access, synthesis, and use in critical thinking. Students should draw upon learning and content throughout the program of study in an integrative manner. Examples of integrative experiences include a well-supervised field experience with a didactic component, internship, a thesis or major paper, oral or written comprehensive exams, a well-managed integrative planning or management simulation; a structured group activity; or any other appropriate activities. Field based settings should be consistent with the Program's educational goals and objectives and be appropriate to the needs of the student. Programs should be able describe the opportunities to assess that students can apply these skills if there are no field based assignments or other field based applications. Describe how integrative experiences contribute to the Program's learning objectives, how students are prepared for the integrative experience, and how they are evaluated. Many students in the program are employed either full- or part-time, and thus have the opportunity to apply their didactic learning on a regular basis. Students who are not currently employed, or are employed in areas not related to health services, have the opportunity to apply concepts and critical thinking skills through course-specific projects and through the culminating, integrative Organizational Experience (PAH 509). Course-based group projects and interactions with the health and social services communities serve the goals and objectives of the Program by developing among our students a broad understanding of the health system in the contexts of public management, organizational dynamics, operational management, and leadership. Focused integrative activities in introductory and core courses provide the building blocks that are foundational to preparation for courses that are taken later in the student s program of study, such as Leadership and Governance, Program Evaluation, Continual Improvement, and Strategic Management. All students' programs of study culminate in the PAH 509 Organizational Experience. To complete the project, students must work with a local, statewide, national or international health service provider to identify, define, develop, implement and/or evaluate an applied health management/policy project. Typically, the project involves the student working on a complex administrative, management or policy issue confronting a public, nonprofit or health services organization. Students identification and selection of appropriate projects may be aided by faculty, but remain the responsibility of the student. In some cases, students approach faculty with a project plan and organizational setting identified, while in other cases faculty are able to connect students with interests in a particular sector to organizations in need of assistance with management projects in that sector. 92

93 In order to be deemed an acceptable site, preceptor and/or project, several criteria must be met. First, the organization and preceptor must be willing to support the educational goals and objectives of the Program, as well as the student. Second, the professional qualifications and scope of position of the preceptor must be adequate and appropriate to the oversight of the student for the nature and scope of the project; however, there is no minimum qualification or organizational title since there is so much variation across the range of organizations where our students find placements. Third, the organization must be able to provide necessary resources and support for the student if such items are beyond the normal scope of educational supports (e.g. computing, printing and access to production tools, and resources that are outside the normal support available to graduate students). These elements are defined for each student s Organizational Experience through the development of a learning contract (See Criteria III.B.4.2-5). Finally, the Program seeks to develop long-term relationships with organizations and/or preceptors such that the relationship is mutually beneficial to both parties. Students are introduced to health system organizations and leaders through class projects such as informational interviews in Organizational Behavior, then through applied projects in Continual Improvement and/or Program Evaluation. Skills are further developed through the development of Strategic Management plans in PAH 576 and, finally, through the PAH 509 Organizational Experience. Often, students will select the same, or similar organizations for these integrative field experience projects. MPA:HA students who have at least three years of management or supervisory experience theoretically may take PAH 512 instead of PAH 509, but this is very rare; thus we emphasize and describe the PAH 509 as the integrative experience as this applies to the majority of our students. Illustrations of the PAH 512 can be provided to the site visit team on site if desired, but are rare and therefore not relevant to the majority of our students. MPH:HMP students must take PAH 509. III.B.4.2. Primarily integrative activities The Program curriculum will include integrative experiences, including field-based applications that require students to draw upon, apply and synthesize knowledge and skills covered throughout the program of study. Students should participate in integrative experiences, including field based applications, which foster continuous learning through information access, synthesis, and use in critical thinking. Students should draw upon learning and content throughout the program of study in an integrative manner. Examples of integrative experiences include a well-supervised field experience with a didactic component, internship, a thesis or major paper, oral or written comprehensive exams, a well-managed integrative planning or management simulation; a structured group activity; or any other appropriate activities. Field based settings should be consistent with the Program's educational goals and objectives and be appropriate to the needs of the student. Programs should be able describe the opportunities to assess that students can apply these skills if there are no field based assignments or other field based applications. 93

94 Describe activities that are primarily integrative in nature and how each provides students with opportunities to draw upon and apply material covered throughout the program of study. Students are expected to conduct field-based work that builds upon their educational and professional experience to date and enables them to integrate and apply their academic coursework. Application of content and integration in practice are the core elements of both course-related fieldwork and the Organizational Experience (PAH 509). Field-based applications in core courses, which are generally taken early in the program of study, introduce students to basic skills such as research, interviewing, analysis and presentation, while skill and knowledge development courses and other electives incorporate field work to provide opportunities for students to develop specific competencies in areas such as financial and statistical analysis, organizational assessment and program evaluation. The progressive acquisition of knowledge, development of skills, and opportunities to apply to practical situations in health management culminates with the PAH 509 Organizational Experience. Before students begin PAH 509, they have taken a number of courses (at least 42 credits) which require integration of concepts and skills accumulated across the curriculum, and draw upon and apply material from courses that are sequenced earlier in the curriculum. For example, Strategic Management (PAH 576) requires student to apply concepts and analytic tools developed in Organizational Behavior (PAH 541), Human Resource Management (PAH 580), Health Law and Regulation (PAH 577), Financial Management (PAH 587), statistical analysis (through PA 551/552 or PHPM 524), Health Economics (PAH 586), and Health Policy (PAH 571). Since students in this class are assigned to groups to conduct an indepth case study, they are also exposed to peer-based knowledge gleaned from specialized elective courses that can be applied to further inform their analyses. Similar interactions with peers through group projects in courses that are sequenced later in the curriculum also expose students to content taught in elective courses that they may not have taken themselves. Other specialized electives such as Advanced Health Policy (PAH 575) and Leadership and Governance in Health (PAH 544) are also taken later in the program of study, and similarly build upon knowledge and skills acquired in earlier classes. As a result, by the time a student develops their learning contract for the PAH 509 Organizational Experience, they are able to draw upon integrative experiences from courses already completed. III.B.4.3. Field based applications relating to Program goals and objectives The Program curriculum will include integrative experiences, including field-based applications that require students to draw upon, apply and synthesize knowledge and skills covered throughout the program of study. Students should participate in integrative experiences, including field based applications, which foster continuous learning through information access, synthesis, and use in critical thinking. Students should draw upon learning and content throughout the program of study in an integrative manner. Examples of integrative experiences include a well-supervised field experience with a didactic component, internship, a thesis or major paper, oral or written comprehensive exams, a well-managed integrative planning or management simulation; a structured group activity; or any other appropriate activities. 94

95 Field based settings should be consistent with the Program's educational goals and objectives and be appropriate to the needs of the student. Programs should be able describe the opportunities to assess that students can apply these skills if there are no field based assignments or other field based applications. For field based applications, describe how the field based applications relate to the goals, objectives and designated competencies of the Program and how they are sequenced and integrated into the curriculum. Application of content and integration in practice are core elements of course-related fieldwork and the Organizational Experience. In course-based field applications, student interests may be matched to available opportunities, or may be designed to expose students to areas of the health system with which they are not familiar. In either case, the course instructor generally arranges the initial contact (to save time), clarifies expectations with the students and the field site, and evaluates the final report or presentation. Site-based preceptors are invited to attend final presentations and may also receive a copy of the final report. Applied projects completed as part of a particular course are monitored and evaluated by the instructor, and student performance is reflected in grades for the assignment (often including peer assessment) and the course. PAH 509 projects are identified in three ways. First, employed students may undertake a project within their organization, but outside the scope of their current responsibilities, working with the field preceptor to outline the project scope and deliverables. Other students identify sites based upon their own interests, information from Program listservs, or through conversations with faculty where they explore potential sites that further their career goals. Finally, Program faculty may identify potential sites and preceptors through community-based activities. These contacts are forwarded to the PAH 509 faculty who provide the potential preceptor with information about student, faculty, and preceptor responsibilities and expectations. We do not maintain a list of approved sites since the 509 experience is highly personalized; the selections of site, project, and preceptor reflect the individual student s needs and goals. The high degree of collaboration and longstanding relationships among Program faculty and organizational preceptors provide our students with many opportunities to interact with a variety of professionals and health system settings. We work with many sites on an ongoing basis, but are also continually identifying new sites through student initiative, faculty connections, or contact initiated by the site itself. Attached Supporting Materials: PAH 509 Field Supervisors Guidebook & PAH 509 Student Guideline 95

96 III.B.4.4. Monitoring field based applications The Program curriculum will include integrative experiences, including field-based applications that require students to draw upon, apply and synthesize knowledge and skills covered throughout the program of study. Students should participate in integrative experiences, including field based applications, which foster continuous learning through information access, synthesis, and use in critical thinking. Students should draw upon learning and content throughout the program of study in an integrative manner. Examples of integrative experiences include a well-supervised field experience with a didactic component, internship, a thesis or major paper, oral or written comprehensive exams, a well-managed integrative planning or management simulation; a structured group activity; or any other appropriate activities. Field based settings should be consistent with the Program's educational goals and objectives and be appropriate to the needs of the student. Programs should be able describe the opportunities to assess that students can apply these skills if there are no field based assignments or other field based applications. For field based applications, describe how students' needs for field based applications are determined and decisions made for these applications. Also describe the processes whereby field based applications are monitored and evaluated. Upload an example of a completed form used in these processes. Include methods for informing preceptors about their responsibilities and the objectives of the field experience, faculty/preceptor meetings, preceptor conferences, how preceptors are evaluated and the means by which preceptors are added to or removed from the Program's approved list of preceptors. As noted in the response to III.B.2.1, most courses include group projects. These projects are purposely designed to force integration and synthesis of multiple concepts, as well as cooperation among group members in order to accomplish the assignment. Evaluation of these activities includes instructor and peer-based assessments of student performance on assigned work, and student course evaluations assess the value of instructional materials, course content and degree of individual attainment of learning objectives and associated Program competencies. Course evaluation and PAH 509 Organizational Experience evaluation forms are included in the supporting materials. The PAH 509 is graded similarly to other classes. Project guidelines and expectations are clearly outlined in the Student Guidelines (See III.B.4.3) and during the mandatory 509 Orientation (See Supporting Materials below). The PAH 509 faculty reviews the final submissions to determine the grade (See example in Supporting Materials below). Grades area based on four components, including: Project overview and final report prepared for the field organization and the University that references student learning objectives and documents the work the student has completed for the organization (40%); Reflective paper addressing the value of the field experience including achievement of learning objectives, description of related learning, integration and application of didactic learning to practice, future professional development goals, implications for future career direction, and competency attainment (30%); Professional presentation highlighting key elements of the field experience (20%); Faculty assessment of student s progress (10%). 96

97 In addition to project-specific deliverables, we use multiple forms of evaluation of the experience itself. These include: Preceptor evaluation of student performance and competency; Student satisfaction survey related to PAH 509 experience; and Student self-assessment of overall attainment of program competencies. Evaluation of preceptors and placement sites also occurs through the reflective paper in which students discuss the highlights and challenges of the project; through questions included in the student s final self-assessment of competency attainment; and through informal discussions with Program and PAH 509 faculty. PAH 509 activities are monitored by designated faculty (Dr. Rissi in the self-study year, Dr. Gelmon previously) who also serves as the Program s point of contact for the site. MPA:HA students who have at least three years of full-time administrative or management experience in public, nonprofit or health care organizations may opt to substitute PAH 512 Reflective Practice in lieu of the Organizational Experience. This option must be discussed and approved by the student s faculty advisor. Some students who have sufficient prior experience to waive the PAH 509 requirement in favor of the PAH 512 option nevertheless choose the Organizational Experience as part of a career transition or for other professional development reasons. In practice, it is exceedingly rare for MPA:HA students to substitute PAH 512, and MPH:HMP students may not waive the PAH 509. Attached Supporting Materials: PAH 509 Grading Matrix and PAH 509 Orientation Slides III.B.4.5. Nature of required major paper, thesis or research project The Program curriculum will include integrative experiences, including field-based applications that require students to draw upon, apply and synthesize knowledge and skills covered throughout the program of study. Students should participate in integrative experiences, including field based applications, which foster continuous learning through information access, synthesis, and use in critical thinking. Students should draw upon learning and content throughout the program of study in an integrative manner. Examples of integrative experiences include a well-supervised field experience with a didactic component, internship, a thesis or major paper, oral or written comprehensive exams, a well-managed integrative planning or management simulation; a structured group activity; or any other appropriate activities. Field based settings should be consistent with the Program's educational goals and objectives and be appropriate to the needs of the student. Programs should be able describe the opportunities to assess that students can apply these skills if there are no field based assignments or other field based applications. If a major paper, thesis or research project is required, describe the nature of the requirement and the relationship to Program objectives. Upload a list of projects for the past two years if applicable. 97

98 The final integrative experience provides students with an opportunity to customize a project designed to build their skills for future practice, to integrate theoretical and applied knowledge obtained through coursework, and to develop skills of reflective practice to assist in integration and synthesis of program content and plan for future career directions. In these culminating experiences, students are required to reflect upon course learning objectives and competencies across the curriculum and articulate how these will facilitate the successful completion of the project. In doing so, the student must develop their own learning and career development objectives and identify the necessary competencies for attainment of those objectives. The types of projects that students undertake varies considerably and reflects their diverse interests and career goals. (See Supporting Materials below.) All students are required to attend a one-hour orientation prior to initiating the PAH 509 Organizational Experience and must develop a learning contract that must be signed by the student, the field supervisor, the student s faculty advisor and the PAH 509 faculty. The requirements for the final submissions are described in detail at both the orientation and in the PAH 509 resource materials. (See Student Guidebook in III.B.4.3 and Orientation Slides in III.B.4.4) PAH 509 Student Project Titles, Program Project Title MPH:HMP AARP - You've Earned a Say MPH:HMP Implementation Plan for Oregon Healthiest State Initiative MPH:HMP Friends of Creston Children s Dental Clinic Policy Development and Evaluation MPH:HMP Cascadia Behavioral Healthcare MPH:HMP Strategic Planning and Evaluation of the PAX Good Behavior Game MPH:HMP Improving Regence Member Part D Medicare Experience: QI Intervention MPH:HMP Patient Registration Education and Support Project MPH:HMP Process Evaluation and Development of OHSU Dermatology Clinic Policies & Procedures MPH:HMP PACE at Providence ElderPlace MPH:HMP Meeting Veterans' Access Needs MPH:HMP New Mexico State Cooperative Extension Food and Nutrition Program Evaluation MPH:HMP Evaluation of the Head Start Vision Screening Program MPH:HMP Evaluation of the AHA Worksite Wellness Summit MPH:HMP Evaluation and Development of Therapeutic Garden Management Plan MPH:HMP OHA Patient Centered Primary Care Home Program Operations Project MPH:HMP Oregon Public Health Institute CCO Project MPH:HMP Oregon Association of Hospitals and Health Systems MPH:HMP Evaluation of Marketing Strategies for Alternative Medicine Services MPH:HMP Developing OCHIN's Leaders MPH:HMP Health Management and Coordination of Clinical Research Trials MPH:HMP Washington County Public Health Performance Management and Quality Improvement MPH:HMP Chronic Pain Management MPH:HMP On the Development of Sexual Assault Resource Center's Train the Trainer Curriculum MPH:HMP Jackson County Health Department: Opioid Prescribers Group Pilot MPH:HMP One Key Question Implementation Manual MPH:HMP Baseline Evaluation Survey Project for Early Discussion and Resolution 98

99 MPH:HMP Development of the Quality Management Plan at Health Share of Oregon MPH:HMP Evaluation of Alternate Destination and Transport Pilot MPH:HMP Association of Oregon Community Mental Health Programs MPH:HMP OHSU Department of Pediatrics -- Improvement Curriculum Project MPH:HMP Survivor-Centered Program Evaluation MPH:HMP Creating a Client Advisory Board at Outside In MPH:HMP Hot Sauce Program: Impact Evaluation MPH:HMP Ecotrust Farm to School Program Evaluation MPH:HMP Practice Coaching with the CPCCO PC3 Learning Collaborative MPH:HMP Oregon Rural Practice-Based Research Network MPH:HMP Evaluation of Quality Management Services for VA VISN 20 MPH:HMP Suicide Prevention at Central City Concern MPH:HMP Implementation Plan for Behavioral Health Telemedicine Services MPH:HMP Tuberculosis and HIV Knowledge Among Denver's Intravenous Drug Using Population MPH:HMP OHSU & PSU School of Public Health Library Information Needs Assessment MPA:HA Implementation Plan for Integrated Care; Washington County Health Department MPA:HA Providence Health & Services Integrative Medicine Clinic MPA:HA The Take Heart Program - Evaluating the Barriers to Implementation and Utilization MPA:HA Nurse Clinical Documentation: Quality Improvement Project MPA:HA Analysis of Conditions That Could Have Been Treated with Self-Care MPA:HA OHSU Return-to-Work - Benefits Department Evaluation MPA:HA South Central Family Health Center; Referral Process Evaluation MPA:HA Assembling the 2012 Physician Workforce Survey MPA:HA Adventist Health System: Tuck In Program Evaluation MPA:HA Providence Health & Services: Palliative Care, Heart Failure Clinic & Nurse Navigator MPA:HA Providence Heart & Vascular Institute: Cardiac Rehab/Providence Portland Medical Center MPA:HA Statin Therapy Utilization Initiative MPA:HA Evaluation of the Palliative Care Manager Program III.C.1.1. Percent of student evaluations using higher vs. lower assessment methods The Program will incorporate a range of assessment methods driven by adult learning principles. The methods will be based on higher education taxonomic levels appropriate to graduate education and aligned with defined competencies. Throughout the curriculum, the Program should incorporate a range of assessment methods as appropriate to the course objectives and competencies. These methods should reflect the rigor expected of graduate education and should therefore emphasize methods beyond those associated with knowledge evaluation. Examples of lower and higher-level assessment methods are provided in the attached table Assessment Methods and Definitions 99

100 Level Assessment Method Definition Lower Pre/Post knowledge or skill testing Exams Midterm, Final, Other Papers/reports Higher Observation Checklists Case review and feedback Project review and feedback Team effectiveness assessment Journals Experiential Report/Portfolios Reflective Modeling Class participation Any formal comparative assessment of the student s knowledge or skills both before and after a learning intervention Any formal exam (including essay, short answer, multiple choice etc) to evaluate student learning Student generated written work that is part of the learning process or is the final documentation of learning, including research reports, mid-term and or final papers Faculty or student-generated observational assessment of skills or behaviors; could be completed by self, peers, faculty, or other experts etc. Utilization of a predetermined set of variables/criteria to evaluate case analysis work, and to provide effective suggestions/recommendations for improvement Utilization of a predetermined set of variables/criteria to evaluate case analysis work, and to provide effective suggestions/recommendations for improvement -based observational feedback of student behavior (and possibly work products) in team projects Collection of reflective writings, either structured or free form, about a topic Collection of evidence, prepared by the student and evaluated by the faculty member, to demonstrate mastery, comprehension, application, and synthesis against a standardized assessment rubric Standardized techniques to facilitate awareness and evaluation of one.s behavior and to generate plans for improvement, including self, peer, faculty, preceptor or other expert assessment Active monitoring, assessment, and feedback focused on the frequency, consistency, and quality of the student.s participation during face to face and online discussions Strategic or Consulting Projects Students actively engage in completing an actual consulting project for a health organization. Alternatively, students complete an assignment that simulates a realistic project in a health organization Adapted from NCHL (2006): Competency Integration in Health Management Education: A Resource Series for Program Directors and Faculty. Used with permission. Using the attached worksheet as a guide, estimate the overall percentage of student evaluations that are focused on higher vs. lower level assessment methods, according to the level definitions provided. Lower Level Methods Higher Level Methods 35% 65% 100

101 For IIIB.1.1 Teaching / Learning Methods IIIC.1.1 Assessment Methods Higher Lower Higher Lower Course # PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PA PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PAH PHE PHE 530/PHPM PHE 580/PHPM PHPM 524/PHE AVG

102 III.C.1.2. Balance between higher vs. lower level assessment methods The Program will incorporate a range of assessment methods driven by adult learning principles. The methods will be based on higher education taxonomic levels appropriate to graduate education and aligned with defined competencies. Throughout the curriculum, the Program should incorporate a range of assessment methods as appropriate to the course objectives and competencies. These methods should reflect the rigor expected of graduate education and should therefore emphasize methods beyond those associated with knowledge evaluation. Examples of lower and higher-level assessment methods are provided in the attached table Assessment Methods and Definitions Level Assessment Method Definition Lower Pre/Post knowledge or skill testing Exams Midterm, Final, Other Papers/reports Higher Observation Checklists Case review and feedback Project review and feedback Team effectiveness assessment Journals Experiential Report/Portfolios Reflective Modeling Class participation Strategic or Any formal comparative assessment of the student s knowledge or skills both before and after a learning intervention Any formal exam (including essay, short answer, multiple choice etc) to evaluate student learning Student generated written work that is part of the learning process or is the final documentation of learning, including research reports, mid-term and or final papers Faculty or student-generated observational assessment of skills or behaviors; could be completed by self, peers, faculty, other experts etc. Utilization of a predetermined set of variables/criteria to evaluate case analysis work, and to provide effective suggestions/recommendations for improvement Utilization of a predetermined set of variables/criteria to evaluate case analysis work, and to provide effective suggestions/recommendations for improvement -based observational feedback of student behavior (and possibly work products) in team projects Collection of reflective writings, either structured or free form, about a topic Collection of evidence, prepared by the student and evaluated by the faculty member, to demonstrate mastery, comprehension, application, and synthesis against a standardized assessment rubric Standardized techniques to facilitate awareness and evaluation of one s behavior and to generate plans for improvement, including self, peer, faculty, preceptor or other expert assessment Active monitoring, assessment, and feedback focused on the frequency, consistency, and quality of the student s participation during face to face and online discussions Students actively engage in completing an actual consulting project for a 102

103 Consulting Projects health organization. Alternatively, students complete an assignment that simulates a realistic project in a health organization Adapted from NCHL (2006): Competency Integration in Health Management Education: A Resource Series for Program Directors and Faculty. Used with permission. Evaluate the extent to which the balance between higher vs. lower level assessment methods is appropriate given the mission and goals of your program, as well as any plans / methods you are pursuing to implement higher level methods. The issue of assessment methods is an ongoing discussion among the faculty. For example, several courses require substantial complex, critical analysis and utilize tests, but also require students to demonstrate mastery, comprehension, application, and synthesis against a standardized assessment rubric and thus apply a lower level assessment method to a higher order competency. In addition, the Program places a high priority on community-engaged scholarship, and prepares health management professionals who seek careers that reflect their public service values. Thus, an educational experience that is based on a flexible curriculum and substantive, applied projects is an appropriate and desirable quality of the Program in the context of our mission, students and their career goals. The breadth and depth of the curriculum facilitates student progression from knowledge acquisition to knowledge application, integration and synthesis. The development of competence in the defined areas is augmented by our relationships with the health community; these provide ample opportunities for applied group/team-based projects. Even classes taken relatively early in the program of study include substantial applied and experiential components, and course-level assessments reflect a significant percentage of higher-level methods throughout the curriculum. Required and elective courses taken late in the curriculum may reflect as much as 100% higher level assessment methods as they integrate multiple competencies attained throughout the program of study. Given the variety of students career aspirations, we believe that higher-level assessment of learning objectives and competencies reflects the need to attain knowledge, and also the ability to appropriately apply it. Thus, we believe that the mix of assessment methods is appropriate to the curriculum structure and goals, and serves the interests of our student population. III.C.2.1. Body or Person(s) responsible for ongoing evaluation The Program will evaluate course instruction and the curriculum and use the results to improve the quality of the teaching and learning environment. Evaluating course instruction and a program's curriculum is essential to a process of continual improvement. Programs should demonstrate a plan that outlines specific methods of curricular review taken; evaluation of courses, experiences and environments; and how this information is used for improvement. 103

104 Describe the body or person(s) primarily responsible for ongoing evaluation of the curriculum and course instruction. Drs. Sherril Gelmon and Neal Wallace, as the senior health management and policy faculty have primary responsibility for evaluation of the curriculum and course instruction, and are aided in this work by Dr. Jill Rissi and other members of the core health faculty as appropriate. III.C.2.2. Methods of evaluation The Program will evaluate course instruction and the curriculum and use the results to improve the quality of the teaching and learning environment. Evaluating course instruction and a program's curriculum is essential to a process of continual improvement. Programs should demonstrate a plan that outlines specific methods of curricular review taken; evaluation of courses, experiences and environments; and how this information is used for improvement. List the methods of evaluation for course instruction and the program's curriculum and demonstrate how these results are used for quality improvement. (Programs may use bulleted lists if appropriate). Course evaluations are a primary source of information for designing program improvements. Each course is evaluated by the students at the end of each term in which the course is offered. Evaluations consist of 14 standard questions with a five-point scaled response set. In addition, each course evaluation is tailored to include a student assessment of the value of readings and assignments, and most importantly, of the competencies that were noted in the syllabus in the course learning objectives. Students also have the opportunity to write in open-ended comments. The implementation of coursespecific and Program competencies in AY , subsequent review in AY , and development and implementation of competency rubrics during AY , have validated the competency model and informed efforts to refine course content to ensure student achievement of competencies across the curriculum. Changes stemming from course evaluations include the implementation of graded 'reading response papers' in PAH 541 (Organizational Behavior); modifications to PAH 576 (Strategic Management) to update group-based case studies; and, updated content in PAH 574 (Health Systems Organization). Methods of evaluation of Program curricula include alumni surveys, PAH 509 field supervisor assessments of student performance, and student surveys. Informal feedback also contributes to Program faculty assessments of course instruction and curricula. In addition, faculty periodically engage in a comprehensive, systematic review of the curriculum. A comprehensive Program review in AY resulted in the implementation of several substantive changes to the curricula. During AY , Program faculty reviewed the changes in the context of required courses and competency development across the curriculum. Review of course evaluations indicates high levels of satisfaction, comparable to historic results. 104

105 Attached Supporting Materials: AY Competency Assessment Report Course Evaluation Form Course Evaluation Summary (revised version including Parts A, B & C sent Oct 20) III.C.3.1. Measurement tools for student progress toward mastery The Program will regularly evaluate the extent to which students and graduates attain the competencies and use the evaluation for continuous improvement. Programs will have a process that regularly evaluates the extent to which students and graduates attain the competencies defined in IIIA1. Competencies should be the primary measure against which student achievement is measured and there should be efforts for both direct and indirect measurements. Programs are expected to demonstrate links between industry expectations and alumni feedback to student competencies. Describe how the program measures student progress towards mastery of program competencies. Include a description of the types of evaluation tools (preceptor assessments, student evaluations, course deliverables, etc.) used in these processes We utilize several means to assess student performance and progress toward mastery of the 10 competencies, reflecting our belief in multi-faceted and multi-level assessment. At the course level, we utilize instructors evaluations of student performance on assignments, and students self-evaluation of course-related learning. Many elements of the course evaluation are standardized, while other elements, such as course-specific competencies, reflect unique learning modalities, resource materials, and defined learning objectives that are specific to the course. In addition, each course evaluation is tailored to include a student assessment of the value of readings and assignments, and most importantly, of the competencies that were noted in the syllabus in the course learning objectives. Students also have the opportunity to write in open-ended comments. The current course evaluation form was adopted for all courses during AY , with a few minor modifications since that time. Elements of the course evaluation (See Supporting Materials and III.C.2.2) include: Course content 5-pt. Likert scale assessment of six items; Course instructor 5-pt. Likert scale assessment of eight items; Self-assessment of competency attainment 5-pt. Likert scale for each defined competency; Value of the learning activities 5-pt. Likert scale for each defined activity; and, Value of readings 5-pt. Likert scale for each text, article or other reading material. Individual faculty review their course evaluations and note areas in which students assessment of competency attainment was not consistent with the faculty s intentions and/or expectations. Based on this analysis, faculty may revise course content or identify other courses in which specific content should be covered. In this way, the linkages between competency attainment within individual courses and across the curriculum are explicitly maintained. Because each course is evaluated by the students at the 105

106 end of the term in which the course is given, this process provides a granular assessment of student competency attainment that directly links course-level competencies to the overall curriculum. The process also helps to assure student achievement of competencies across the curriculum, even as students engage in programs of study that are tailored to individual career goals. In addition to course-level evaluations, the Program utilizes students' quarterly self-assessments to evaluate competency attainment across the curriculum. Quarterly surveys implemented during AY examined the level of self-reported achievement for each of the 10 core competencies as students progress through the program of study. The reports back to students allow them to track their own progress, and allows the Program to evaluate the development of competence and to identify and address any issues being experienced by individual students, within specific courses, or at the curricular level. (See Supporting Material below for survey, and report of findings within III.C.2.2) Finally, the Program utilizes PAH 509 Field Supervisors' assessments to validate students' abilities to apply knowledge and skills in practice settings. Attached Supporting Materials: PA Division Health Program Competency Rubrics and Student Competency Development Self-Assessment Survey III.C.3.2. Results of measurements The Program will regularly evaluate the extent to which students and graduates attain the competencies and use the evaluation for continuous improvement. Programs will have a process that regularly evaluates the extent to which students/graduates attain the competencies defined in IIIA1. Competencies should be the primary measure against which student achievement is measured and there should be efforts for both direct and indirect measurements. Programs are expected to demonstrate links between industry expectations and alumni feedback to student competencies. Describe how the results of these measurements are used by the program for continuous improvement. The addition of course- and Program-specific competencies in AY validated the competency model and identified areas for improvement to assure student attainment of competencies across the curriculum. We have continued to monitor competency development at the course level to ensure that all students are exposed to essential knowledge areas and that courses are taken in an appropriate sequence, while maintaining the flexibility that is central to our mission and to the career aspirations of our students. Student evaluations of course-level competencies show a degree of attainment consistent with Program goals for competency development across the curricula. During the self-study year, findings indicate a high degree of association between credits completed and selfassessed competency development. (See III.C Competency Survey Report, p. 5) Overall average competency among students who had completed fewer than 24 credits was 4.7, compared to 7.2 among those who had completed more than 48 credits. While the survey was designed to evaluate core courses, student feedback highlighted the importance, and thus the addition of "Electives" and "Experience" to the assessment 106

107 tool. This change will enable students to note the relevance of electives and field/professional experience, and will enable the program to assess the contribution of those factors to competency development. PAH 509 Field Supervisor assessments indicate a overall high scores and a strong link between industry expectations and student competence. Slightly higher scores were noted for MPH:HMP students (2.87 on 3-pt scale) relative to MPA:HA students (2.45). (See Supporting Material) Ratings of work quality and overall performance for MPH:HMP students were 2.98 and 3.0 (3-pt scale) respectively, and 2.75/2.75 for MPA:HA. Although all scores are high, reasons for the small differences in competency attainment, quality, and overall performance are being explored as a source of Program improvement. Attached Supporting Material: Summary of Field Supervisor Assessments of Student Performance & Competency Attainment. (Expanded version provided to Site Visit Team Oct. 20) IV.A.1.1. Assessment of Program's ability to meet objectives Program and University leadership will ensure that the complement, involvement and qualifications of Program faculty are sufficient to accomplish the mission of the Program. Assess the Program's ability to meet its identified objectives in light of the current size and composition of its faculty. Describe the most significant faculty characteristics and any perceived deficits. Identify steps being taken or planned to make changes to the complement of faculty. If a program has less than three core faculty demonstrate how this complement is able to meet the stated objectives and provide expanded detail regarding how all required material is covered. For core faculty who do not have doctoral degrees, please also describe their professional and academic qualifications as they relate to their roles within the program. Write a brief assessment of the Program's ability to meet its identified objectives in light of the current size and composition of its faculty. Describe the most significant faculty characteristics and any perceived deficits. Identify steps being taken or planned to make changes to the complement of faculty. If a program has less than three core faculty, demonstrate how this complement meets the stated objectives. Program Key distinguishing characteristics of the faculty are the breadth and depth of experience and perspectives they bring to the classroom and their research. In addition to their academic qualifications, three of the core health faculty have extensive practitioner experience, which benefits classroom discussions and other interactions with students. Similarly, the primary disciplinary training (public health and health economics, management, and policy) and research interests (cost/utilization, improvement science, program evaluation, organizational dynamics, and policy) of the core health faculty are complementary, albeit with substantial areas of overlap. The addition of the three OHSU faculty complements the existing core faculty, with added depth in aging health disparities, substance abuse, and mental health. The diverse background and interests of the faculty contribute to the Program s ability to respond to a wide variety of student interests while assuring the necessary expertise to facilitate student learning and competency attainment. A new faculty member, joining us in Fall 2015, will provide further depth in health policy, health economics and health services research methods, as 107

108 well as augmenting our collective expertise in population health. We continue to rely upon adjunct faculty to provide specific expertise in areas such as health information management, health law, and health care human resources management. Faculty composition is closely aligned with the teaching, service and research missions of the Program. Both the MPH:HMP and the MPA:HA seek to balance core administrative, managerial and policy competencies with the reality of a rapidly evolving health system. This perspective is particularly relevant in the context of Oregon, which is engaged in rapid health reform and is reframing its health strategies around the Triple Aim, Coordinated Care Organizations, and the patient-centered primary care home. This environment demands a faculty that can provide a flexible, innovative, future-oriented curriculum, as well as scholarly research capability and capacity to inform and influence system transformation. A review of faculty teaching and scholarship demonstrates our success in meeting these multiple objectives. IV.A.1.2. Faculty - Report/list Program and University leadership will ensure that the complement, involvement and qualifications of Program faculty are sufficient to accomplish the mission of the Program. Assess the Program's ability to meet its identified objectives in light of the current size and composition of its faculty. Describe the most significant faculty characteristics and any perceived deficits. Identify steps being taken or planned to make changes to the complement of faculty. If a program has less than three core faculty demonstrate how this complement is able to meet the stated objectives and provide expanded detail regarding how all required material is covered. For core faculty who do not have doctoral degrees, please also describe their professional and academic qualifications as they relate to their roles within the program. : Summary of Current Program Faculty 108

109 IV.A.1.2 Summary List of Faculty Participating Faculty (LAST, FIRST) Highest degree & year earned Date of appointment Qualified 2 to Program Faculty Role 3 (P)/(S) Program responsibility 4 Professor % Remuneration carried in PA Division budget Courses Taught in Health Management Programs in AY (3 credits unless otherwise noted) Cooper, Phillip PhD, A; T P T= 30% PA 533 Public Policy: Origins and Processes 100% NP= 70% PA 534 Admin Law and Policy Implementation T= 35% PAH 544 Leadership/Governance in Health Care Gelmon, Sherril DrPH, A; T P R= 40% PAH 574 Health Systems Organization 100% S= 10% PAH 578 Continual Improvement in Health Care Ad= 15% PAH 588 Program Eval & Mgmt in Health Svcs McCarty, Dennis PhD, A; T P N/A 0% Teaches only in HS&P PhD Program. Wallace, Neal PhD, A; T P T= 45% R= 40% S= 15% 100% PAH 571 Health Policy PAH 574 Health Systems Organization PAH 575 Advanced Health Policy PAH 586 Health Economics PAH 587 Financial Mgmt in Health Services Associate Professor Kaimanu, Theresa PhD, A; T P Rieckmann, Traci PhD, A; F P Rissi, Jill PhD, A; T P T= 30% R= 10% S= 10% NP= 50% T= 5% R= 85% S= 10% T= 45% R= 30% S= 25% 100% 0% N/A 100% PA 540 Administrative Theory & Behavior PAH 543 Culture and Health PAH 570 Health Administration PAH 572 Health Politics PAH 541 Org Behavior in Health Svc Orgs PAH 571 Health Policy PAH 574 Health Systems Organization PAH 576 Strategic Mgmt of Health Care Orgs 1 Core faculty and adjunct faculty who teach primarily or exclusively in the health programs are noted in bold font. 2 A=Academic or P=Professional; T=Tenured; TT=Tenure Track; F=Fixed Term; E=Emeritus 3 P = Participating Faculty (core faculty, involved in programmatic governance); S = Supporting Faculty (OMPH, PA Division and adjunct faculty who teach a core or required course.) 4 Specify percentage of teaching (T), research (R), Community Service (S) and Administration (Ad) devoted to these two programs; (NP) to specify all other activity not related to these two programs. For adjuncts, % reflects teaching commitment only. 109

110 Assistant Professor Goodman, Julia PhD, A; T P N/A 100% Starting September 2015 Graven, Peter PhD, A; F P Quinones, Ana PhD, A; F P T= 15% R= 75% S= 10% T= 15% R= 85% 0% PAH 586 Introduction to Health Economics 0% PAH 574 Health Systems Organization Supporting Faculty (LAST, FIRST) Dinno, Alexis (Associate Professor, PSU School of Community Health) Wheeler, Claire (Instructor, PSU School of Community Health) Park, Byung (Research Assistant Professor, OHSU School of Medicine) Lambert, Lori (Instructor, OHSU School of Medicine) Highest degree & year earned Date of appointment Qualified 6 to Program Oregon MPH Core Course Faculty Associate Professor (cont d) Faculty Role 7 (P)/(S) Program responsibility 8 % Remuneration carried in PA Division budget ScD, A; T S T=15% 0% Courses Taught in Health Management Programs in AY (3 credits unless otherwise noted) PHE 580 Concepts of Environmental Health PHE 535 Epidemiology Survey PhD, A; F S T=15% 0% PHE 512 Principles of Health Behavior PhD, A; F S T=15% 0% PHPM 524 Introduction to Biostatistics (4 credits) MA, P; F S T=15% 0% PHPM 524 Introduction to Biostatistics (4 credits) 5 Core faculty and adjunct faculty who teach primarily or exclusively in the health programs are noted in bold font. 6 A=Academic or P=Professional; T=Tenured; TT=Tenure Track; F=Fixed Term; E=Emeritus 7 P = Participating Faculty (core faculty, involved in programmatic governance); S = Supporting Faculty (OMPH, PA Division and adjunct faculty who teach a core or required course.) 8 Specify percentage of teaching (T), research (R), Community Service (S) and Administration (Ad) devoted to these two programs; (NP) to specify all other activity not related to these two programs. For adjuncts, % reflects teaching commitment only. 110

111 (LAST, FIRST) Highest degree & year earned Date of appointment to Program PA Division Supporting and Adjunct Faculty Qualified 10 Faculty Role 11 (P)/(S) Corbett, Jack PhD, A; T S Desrochers, Lindsay PhD, A; T S Harris, Georgia PhD, A; T S Shinn, Craig PhD, A; T S Program responsibility 12 Professor T= 45% NP= 55% T= 15% NP= 85% T= 15% NP= 85% T= 10% NP= 90% Associate Professor % Remuneration carried in PA Division budget 100% Courses Taught in Health Management Programs in AY (3 credits unless otherwise noted) PA 511 Public Administration PA 533 Public Policy: Origins and Processes PA 540 Administrative Theory and Behavior 100% PA 582 Public Budgeting 100% 100% PA 590 Human Resource Mgmt in Pub Sector PA 591 Employment Law & Policy PA 511 Public Administration PA 540 Administrative Theory and Behavior Allen, Jennifer PhD, A; T S NP= 100% 0% PA 553 Sustainable Development Pol & Gov Gelles, Erna PhD, A; T S T= 30% PA 511 Public Administration 100% NP= 70% PA 513 Administrative Ethics and Values T=30% Kecskes, Kevin PhD, A; TT S R=30% S=20% 100% PA 523 Nongovernmental Organizations Ad=20% Nishishiba, Masami PhD, A; T S T= 15% NP= 85% 100% PA 594 Enhancing Diversity in the Workplace Sandberg, Billie PhD, A; TT S Sumner, Rita PhD, A; F P Assistant Professor T= 20% R= 15% NP= 65% T= 45% NP = 55% 100% PAH 588 Program Eval and Mgmt in Health 100% PAH 571 Health Policy PAH 573 Values and Ethics in Health PAH 574 Health Systems Organization 9 Core faculty and adjunct faculty who teach primarily or exclusively in the health programs are noted in bold font. 10 A=Academic or P=Professional; T=Tenured; TT=Tenure Track; F=Fixed Term; E=Emeritus 11 P = Participating Faculty (core faculty, involved in programmatic governance); S = Supporting Faculty (adjunct teaching of core courses) 12 Specify percentage of teaching (T), research (R), Community Service (S) and Administration (Ad) devoted to these two programs; (NP) to specify all other activity not related to these two programs. For adjuncts, % reflects teaching commitment only. 111

112 (LAST, FIRST) Droppers, Oliver Highest degree & year earned PhD, 2014; MPH, 2005 Date of appointment to Program Qualified 14 Adjunct Faculty Associate Professor (cont d) Faculty Role 15 (P)/(S) Program responsibility 16 % Remuneration carried in PA Division budget 2007 A S T=15% N/A Einspruch, Eric PhD, A S T=15% N/A Faler, Jason MHA, 2006; MSJ, 2006 Courses Taught in Health Management Programs in AY (3 credits unless otherwise noted) PAH 579 Health Information Technology and Systems Mgmt PA 551/552 Analytic Methods I & II PAH 588 Program Eval and Mgmt in Health 2007 P S T=15% N/A PAH 577 Health Care Law and Regulation Fellows, Amy MPH, P S T=15% N/A PAH 541 Org Behavior in Health Svc Orgs Isgrigg, Jo PhD, A S T=15% N/A PAH 573 Values and Ethics in Health Jones, Matthew PhD, A S T=30% N/A PA 551/552 Analytic Methods I & II Abdellatif, Vanetta MPH, P P T=15% N/A PAH 580 Health Svcs Human Resource Mgmt 13 Core faculty and adjunct faculty who teach primarily or exclusively in the health programs are noted in bold font. 14 A=Academic or P=Professional; T=Tenured; TT=Tenure Track; F=Fixed Term; E=Emeritus 15 P = Participating Faculty (core faculty, involved in programmatic governance); S = Supporting Faculty (OMPH, PA Division and adjunct faculty who teach a core or required course.) 16 Specify percentage of teaching (T), research (R), Community Service (S) and Administration (Ad) devoted to these two programs; (NP) to specify all other activity not related to these two programs. For adjuncts, % reflects teaching commitment only. 112

113 IV.A.1.3. Faculty teaching responsibilities Program and University leadership will ensure that the complement, involvement and qualifications of Program faculty are sufficient to accomplish the mission of the Program. Assess the Program's ability to meet its identified objectives in light of the current size and composition of its faculty. Describe the most significant faculty characteristics and any perceived deficits. Identify steps being taken or planned to make changes to the complement of faculty. If a program has less than three core faculty demonstrate how this complement is able to meet the stated objectives and provide expanded detail regarding how all required material is covered. For core faculty who do not have doctoral degrees, please also describe their professional and academic qualifications as they relate to their roles within the program. Discuss faculty teaching responsibilities, including: (a) normal and minimal teaching loads (class hours/week) (b) how teaching assignments are allocated to the various faculty members (c) procedures whereby a faculty member might be released from teaching obligations for research, community service or administration (d) policy regarding consulting and other activities outside the University. Program The normal annual teaching load for full-time faculty in the PA Division is seven courses spread over the three regular quarters; generally, two courses in each of two quarters, and three courses in the third quarter. Each three-credit course normally meets for three hours per week over the 11-week academic quarter. Teaching assignments are negotiated between each faculty member and the Division Chair, based upon areas of expertise, interests, and needs for course coverage. Drs. Gelmon and Wallace plan the health course schedule, and then consult with the Division Chair on any logistics that must be negotiated for those who teach courses in addition to health (PAH). If PA faculty teach a course in the Public Affairs and Policy PhD program (within HSOG) or a 600 level course in the Health Systems and Policy PhD program, this course is included in their seven-course load. Faculty are on nine-month appointments; contracts for teaching during the summer session are separate. The Division is responsible for selection and scheduling of summer classes and the budget is integrated into the School budget, with teaching contracted directly with faculty. Faculty may be released from selected courses with research funding or for administrative responsibilities. Faculty with research funding may buy-out of courses, but no more than three per year. Faculty may receive a course release for certain administrative responsibilities, such as PhD program director. Many faculty prefer to use research funds as summer salary and maintain a full teaching load during the regular academic year. Junior faculty are generally offered a 1-2 course release in their first, and possibly second, years in order to help them establish their research agendas. Faculty are rarely released for community service, although in special circumstances a release may be negotiated with university administration for special projects. University policy allows faculty one day per week for consulting during the academic year, stipulating that such work must be outside of regular university activities. There are no limitations on service activities as long as these do not interfere with other faculty responsibilities. Faculty are free to conduct any activities during the summer months when they are not on regular contract. 113

114 IV.A.2.1. Faculty Diversity The Program will foster a diverse culture within the faculty and learning environment The expectation is that the Program will prepare students within an environment that enables them to understand the diversity of cultures, values, and behaviors in contemporary healthcare organizations. Describe the Program's efforts towards achieving diversity in its faculty composition and the extent to which guest lecturers and mentors help to achieve diversity in the learning environment. This should also explain the plan for recruiting activities, guest lectures, mentors, preceptors. Program The Division and the Program strive to achieve diversity in the composition of the faculty and provide meaningful exposure to diverse role models for our students. Among the Program faculty (PSU core, OHSU and adjunct HMP, and other MPH faculty), there are seven white males, five white females, four racial/ethnic minority females, and one racial/ethnic minority male (associated with the MPH degree program). Within the PA Division, 64% of the full-time faculty is female and 21% is from a racially or ethnically diverse background. During the self-study year, the PA Division faculty adopted a resolution to ensure students' cultural competence by requiring at least one course specifically addressing issues of culture with regard to communication, equity, diversity, and inclusion. Guest lecturers are utilized in many courses and bring additional diversity to students academic experiences. Such diversity is further augmented through the variety of settings utilized in coursespecific applied projects. University policy on the diversity of faculty clearly states its intent to expand the variety of faculty backgrounds. The PSU Office of Global Diversity and Inclusion is charged to create a positive campus climate that celebrates diversity, builds partnerships, promotes equity, and supports the entire campus community. Diversity and inclusion continue to be dominant goals of the Program and the University, both of which utilize a broad definition of the terms. Policies for recruitment and selection of faculty reflect PSU s operating policies regarding fair and ethical dealings with respect to equal opportunity and affirmative action. The affirmative action policy endorses seeking out those individuals from groups that traditionally have been under-represented in the university community. Through affirmative action, the University confirms its commitment to equal opportunity in all aspects of the employment process, including advertisement, recruitment, selection, promotion, tenure, salary equality, and training. The University promotes equal employment opportunity and prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender, color, ethnic and national origin, sexual orientation, religion, marital status, age, disability, or veteran status. In keeping with this policy, announcements for positions within the programs make clear our commitment to equal opportunity. The Program operates within the PSUdefined policies and does not have its own requirements. These policies may be found at: 114

115 IV.A.2.2. Faculty profile/race/ethnicity The Program will foster a diverse culture within the faculty and learning environment The expectation is that the Program will prepare students within an environment that enables them to understand the diversity of cultures, values, and behaviors in contemporary healthcare organizations. - Faculty Profile Faculty Profile Participating Faculty Supporting Faculty ASIAN/ AFRICAN AMERICAN HISPANIC PACIFIC ISLANDER OTHER WHITE TOTAL MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE Total % of Total Faculty 0% 6.7% 0% 3.3% 3.3% 3.3% 0% 6.7% 40.0% 36.7% 100% IV.A.3.1. Admission decisions procedures The Program faculty will have responsibility for: making recommendations regarding admission of students, specifying healthcare management competencies, evaluating student performance and awarding degrees. CAHME recognizes the responsibility of other organizational units within the University regarding decisions to admit students and award degrees. This criterion will assess the role of Program faculty in Program administration and improvement. Describe procedures for admission decisions including the role of Program faculty. Program The Division governs admissions standards for all students applying to our graduate degree programs. While standards are established by policy and published in University Bulletin, PSU and PA Division websites, the admission of applicants is a matter of judgment made by Divisional faculty serving as the Admissions Committee. Every application for admission is reviewed in detail by the Division s Admissions Committee (chaired by Dr. Rissi), which makes a recommendation to admit or decline based 115

116 upon the totality of the application. As a faculty, we have instituted admissions qualifications that are higher than the minimum standard of the PSU Office of Graduate Studies. Admissions procedures and decisions for MPH:HMP applicants parallel the process for MPA:HA applicants, and are also reviewed by the OMPH Admissions Committee. (A detailed overview of admissions procedures is presented in Criteria II.A.2.6 & 7). IV.A.3.2. Awarding degrees The Program faculty will have responsibility for: making recommendations regarding admission of students, specifying healthcare management competencies, evaluating student performance and awarding degrees. CAHME recognizes the responsibility of other organizational units within the University regarding decisions to admit students and award degrees. This criterion will assess the role of Program faculty in Program administration and improvement. Describe procedures for confirming that students should be awarded degrees, including the role of Program faculty. Program Program faculty establish degree requirements and faculty advising plays a key role in the development of a student s program of study, balancing core, required, and elective courses in order to meet both the requirements and students specific career goals. As they near completion of their degree, usually coinciding with the PAH 509 Organizational Experience, students must complete the Application for Advanced Degree and Approved Graduate Degree Program forms, the latter of which requires the listing of all courses taken to complete the degree. In 2013, the PSU Office of Graduate Studies implemented the Degree Audit Reporting System (DARS) an automated system that compares a student s coursework to the requirements for a degree and produces a report which shows the requirements that have been met, those that are still outstanding, and any course issues that may prevent the student from completing the degree. Because information in DARS is always current, the system has been very helpful to students and faculty for advising, to track student progress, and to confirm that all degree requirements have been met. Program staff verify completion per degree requirements and forward the forms to the faculty advisor for review and approval, to the PA Division Chair for approval, and then to the Office of Graduate Studies. 116

117 IV.A.3.3. Designing curriculum and defining content The Program faculty will have responsibility for: making recommendations regarding admission of students, specifying healthcare management competencies, evaluating student performance and awarding degrees. CAHME recognizes the responsibility of other organizational units within the University regarding decisions to admit students and award degrees. This criterion will assess the role of Program faculty in Program administration and improvement. Describe the role of Program faculty in designing the curriculum and specifying healthcare management content. Program The operating procedures of the Division of PA are to generally act as a committee of the whole for curriculum review (rather than creating a curriculum committee), with lead faculty in the area of interest preparing curriculum proposals and then bringing these to the entire faculty. Historically, Professors Gelmon and Wallace have taken the lead on health management curricular issues, consulting with other PA and MPH faculty as indicated, and then taking any proposed changes to the full PA faculty for review and approval. Professor Rissi has played an increasing role in this process as she has gained experience, and is expected to move into a position of programmatic leadership within the next few years. Other PA faculty who have health interests but who are not directly involved in health management and policy research and do not have substantive teaching responsibilities in health management domains participate as relevant to their interests. During the self-study year, HMP faculty with primary appointments at OHSU were invited to provide feedback on health program administrative issues, including the curriculum and health management content. With regard to both PA and OHSU faculty engagement, the process has been for the core PSU faculty to do the initial work, and then bring suggested changes to OHSU faculty for advisory feedback, and then to the full PA faculty for approval. This process has allowed us to synchronize requirements across all three degree programs (MPH:HMP, MPA:HA, and HS&P PhD). IV.A.3.4. Course content and curriculum structure The Program faculty will have responsibility for: making recommendations regarding admission of students, specifying healthcare management competencies, evaluating student performance and awarding degrees. CAHME recognizes the responsibility of other organizational units within the University regarding decisions to admit students and award degrees. This criterion will assess the role of Program faculty in Program administration and improvement. Describe the process by which course content and curriculum structure is assessed by the faculty as a unit. 117

118 Program During AY , the core health program faculty undertook a comprehensive review and subsequent revision of the curriculum. The modifications were implemented in AY , and coincided with the PA Division s review of our mission, vision, goals, and objectives, and in preparation for our initial CAHME accreditation self-study year in The resulting modifications to the mission statement, adoption of the new competency model, and in-depth review of structure, sequencing and content of all courses, resulted in some modifications to course content and curriculum structure during AYs and All of these elements were undertaken, reviewed, and approved by the full faculty. Since that time, the health program faculty and faculty who lead other specialty tracks have continued to recommend refinements and further minor modifications to the competencies, curriculum and individual courses as we tweaked each in response to accreditation-related recommendations and our own ongoing evaluation efforts. As changes to the curriculum are proposed, each is discussed by the full faculty and accepted or modified at that point. When more substantial curricular modifications are to be made, the recommendations must go through the CUPA Curriculum Committee and, depending on the extent of the revision, to the Graduate Council and PSU Faculty Senate. Our curriculum has remained stable since the last extensive review and no major changes have been made. IV.A.4.1. Faculty appointments Program faculty will participate in defining faculty needs and in recruiting faculty to teach in the Program in accordance with University policy. CAHME will seek evidence of faculty membership on appropriate search committees. Describe the mechanism by which faculty appointments are made in the Program. Include the origin of recommendations to add faculty, recruitment processes, search procedures, membership on search committees and the system of processing and approving appointments. Indicate any differences in procedures for different types of appointment (e.g., tenure-track vs. non-tenure track). Program Policies for recruitment and selection of faculty reflect PSU s operating policies regarding fair and ethical dealings with respect to equal opportunity and affirmative action. PSU s affirmative action policy endorses seeking out individuals from groups that traditionally have been under-represented in the university community, confirms its commitment to equal opportunity in all aspects of the employment process, and promotes equal employment opportunity. Announcements for positions within the Program make clear our commitment to equal opportunity. Division policies regarding composition of search committees, decision-making processes, and negotiation of offers are guided by the Bylaws of the Hatfield School of Government, and by generally accepted operating practices within the College of Urban and Public Affairs. Under this guidance, faculty serve as chairpersons and members of search committees, and all faculty of relevant rank are afforded the opportunity to evaluate tenure-track candidates through a defined process. During , a search was conducted for the new health faculty member. Creation of the new position was initiated by 118

119 health program faculty within the Division, who created the job description and defined the preferred qualifications. The recruitment was reviewed by the HSOG Director, approved by the Dean of CUPA, and then approved and funded by the Provost. The search committee included four health faculty members (including one of the newly appointed OHSU faculty), one other faculty from the PA Division, one faculty from the Political Science Division in the HSOG, one HS&P PhD student, and one adjunct faculty/health community representative. Procedures for selection of non-tenure track faculty vary based on type of appointment. The University has a defined process for multi-year appointments and periodic reviews of fixed term faculty, generally consisting of an annual review by the Division Chair and/or a committee of tenured faculty; procedures for these reviews are guided by the University s policies on review. The review and re-appointment processes are also guided by the collective bargaining agreements for full and part-time faculty. The appointment and review processes for adjunct faculty are less formal; course evaluations are reviewed by the Division Chair, and where there are concerns about the quality of the adjunct faculty s teaching, the Chair meets with them to address any concerns. New adjunct faculty are invited to consult with a faculty member who has already taught the specific class, thus providing ready access to syllabi, teaching materials, and other resources. Fortunately, there have been no concerns with any of the adjunct faculty teaching the health classes in recent years. All formal review committees are appointed by the HSOG Director in consultation with the Division Chair. IV.B.1.1. Listing and Description of Program Research and Scholarship Activity Faculty will demonstrate a record of research, scholarship and /or professional achievement appropriate to their career stage, role and responsibilities associated with the Program, and the Program's mission and goals. CAHME encourages individual, collaborative and multi-disciplinary research and scholarship and/or other relevant professional achievements, including involvement of practitioners and students where appropriate. This should be consistent with university policy on faculty research and scholarship. Research and scholarship may be demonstrated through publications in refereed journals, books, and book chapters, case studies, funded and sponsored projects, presentations at professional meetings and other forms of dissemination. Professional achievements may be demonstrated through accomplishments in the professional practice realm, such as leadership positions held in healthcare organizations or other parts of the health industry. The nature and volume of such achievements should be individually consistent with the stage of the faculty member's career and collectively adequate to support a Program of graduate healthcare management education, consistent with the Program's mission and goals. - Listing and Description of Program Research & Scholarship Activity 119

120 CORE PROGRAM FACULTY COMPETITIVE GRANTS PUBLICATIONS PRESENTATIONS GRANTS AWARDED AS PI (PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR) GRANTS AWARDED WITH OTHER PI GRANTS AS PI NOT FUNDED CONTRACTS AWARDED BOOKS /CHAPTERS PUBLISHED MONOGRAPHS PUBLISHED JOURNAL ARTICLES PUBLISHED REVIEWS PERFORMED PAPER PRESENTATIONS INVITED LECTURES/ PRESENTATIONS # $ # $ # $ # # # # # # # Cooper,Phil Rissi,Jill 3 668, , , Gelmon,Sherril 7 1,002, Wallace,Neal 1 82, , Quinones,Ana 3 290, Kaimanu,Theresa Rieckman,Traci 2 4,500, ,314, ,216, Graven,Peter 4 88, ,097, McCarty,Dennis 5 6,153, ,469, , Sandberg,Billie 1 14, , Allen,Jennifer Gelles,Erna Abdellatif,Vanetta Isgrigg,Jo Faler,Jason Sumner,Rita Fellows,Amy Einspruch,Eric

121 Nishishiba,Masami Corbett,Jack Harris,G.L.A Kecskes,Kevin Dinno,Alexis Wheeler,Claire Park,Byung Lasarev,Michael Srikanth,Priya Stull,John Jones,Matthew Droppers,Oliver Totals

122 IV.B.1.2. Content and quantity of scholarship/achievement Faculty will demonstrate a record of research, scholarship and /or professional achievement appropriate to their career stage, role and responsibilities associated with the Program, and the Program's mission and goals. CAHME encourages individual, collaborative and multi-disciplinary research and scholarship and/or other relevant professional achievements, including involvement of practitioners and students where appropriate. This should be consistent with university policy on faculty research and scholarship. Research and scholarship may be demonstrated through publications in refereed journals, books, and book chapters, case studies, funded and sponsored projects, presentations at professional meetings and other forms of dissemination. Professional achievements may be demonstrated through accomplishments in the professional practice realm, such as leadership positions held in healthcare organizations or other parts of the health industry. The nature and volume of such achievements should be individually consistent with the stage of the faculty member's career and collectively adequate to support a Program of graduate healthcare management education, consistent with the Program's mission and goals. Discuss the content and quantity of current scholarship and/or professional achievement activities of each faculty member, and its relationship to their current stage of career, and their role and responsibilities in the Program. Review of participating faculty CVs provides evidence of a highly productive faculty. Over the past three years, core Program faculty, along with participating colleagues from OHSU, have made numerous professional presentations and published a substantial number of book chapters, articles, monographs and policy briefs. Among the core PSU faculty, Sherril Gelmon s contributions in the areas of workforce development, health reform, improvement science, and community-engaged scholarship are extensive and she is regularly invited to consult and/or present with universities and community organizations. Neal Wallace s economic studies have been widely published and he is frequently sought after by local organizations and state interests as a respected health economist. Theresa Kaimanu remains active with scholarship in the area of diversity and health disparities. Jill Rissi has leveraged relationships with colleagues at PSU and other institutions to develop a research portfolio that complements her extensive community and professional service. Several examples of the collaborative nature of the faculty s research are presented below, followed by additional information about each faculty members recent scholarship, professional contributions, and community service. In spring 2012, Drs. Rissi and Wallace, working collaboratively with colleagues at PSU, OHSU, the Providence Center for Outcomes Research and Education (CORE), and the Office for Oregon Health Policy and Research (OHPR) received funding for a two-year study of CCO implementation and efficacy. This research project was extended for a year, and laid the foundation for additional studies that involve Drs. Rissi and Wallace as coinvestigators, as well as researchers from OHSU, CORE, and other in- and out-of-state institutions. Finding from the initial study have been presented as numerous professional meetings, both within Oregon and nationally. Since 2012, the Oregon Health Authority has contracted with Drs. Rissi, Gelmon and Wallace to conduct a comprehensive, multi-year evaluation of the implementation of Oregon s Patient Centered Primary Care Home model. Dr. Rissi is also contributing to an evaluation of Oregon s Heath Engagement Model as a means of transforming the public employee benefits system to a more prevention-oriented model. These projects provide an opportunity to support graduate research assistants, and offer valuable opportunities for immediately relevant research in the local health policy arena, as well as timely teaching material and access 122

123 to evolving new resources, policies and practices that affect our graduates in practice. Faculty have also conducted research with Multnomah County Health Department, the Veterans Health Administration, Northwest Health Foundation, the Oregon Foundation for Reproductive Health, and the Oregon Primary Care Association, all of which have created collaborations among faculty, students and organizational leaders and practitioners. During the self-study year, initial efforts to integrate and engage HMP faculty from OHSU were undertaken. The scholarly agendas of these new colleagues complement those of the PSU core faculty, and we eagerly anticipate opportunities to work more closely with them as new research opportunities arise. However, there are several key distinctions that maintain PSU as the locus of control for the MPH:HMP and MPH:HA degree programs. First, PSU Program faculty are appointed to tenure/tenure-track positions, which require scholarship as a function of appointment, but are largely supported though hard funding and substantial teaching responsibilities. OHSU faculty are primarily supported by soft funding that is derived from research grants and contracts, with limited support for teaching. Regardless of their institutional affiliation, all Program faculty incorporate their research and professional experience into their roles within the Program, whether through administrative responsibilities, extensive community engagement or through research and consulting contracts which provide opportunities for student engagement with applied research. Students are encouraged to participate in research projects with faculty, and are supported in analyzing and presenting scholarly work via the OMPH Student Symposium, the Oregon Public Health Association annual meeting, and other scholarly meetings. As noted previously, the majority of GRA funding currently comes from faculty research grants and contracts. PSU has a collaborative agreement with the Oregon Health Authority that facilitates contracting with PSU faculty and hiring of PSU graduate students to work on short-term research projects, which may also serve as a student s field experience. Faculty are similarly engaged in collaborative projects that benefit the profession and serve the community. Dr. Sherril Gelmon's research has two major areas of emphasis. The first is on applications of continuous improvement in health services delivery and higher education, with emphasis on the design and evaluation of educational programs for new health services professionals in disciplinary and interdisciplinary formats. The second focus is the study of higher education policy, with specific applications to institutionalization of community engagement and related teaching strategies and institutional policies. She currently leads an ongoing evaluation of the Patient-Centered Primary Care Home for the Oregon Health Authority. With regard to professional service, she has recently served on award committees for AUPHA, as a leader with Community Campus Partnerships for Health, and as an evaluation consultant for the VA Office of Academic Affairs. She chairs PSU's Graduation Program Board. She is extensively engaged with several community-service agencies, including membership on the governing board of the Oregon Foundation for Reproductive Health. Consistent with her status as a full Professor and her long tenure with the Program, Dr. Gelmon is recognized for her leadership and significant engagement with both Program and institutional administration. Although she was on sabbatical during most of the self-study year, she continued to serve on numerous committees that she was previously, and has remained subsequently, engaged with. Dr. Theresa Kaimanu s research interests include tribal management issues, bridging health disparities, health care workforce preparation and health reform. Her research and services activities over the past several years have increasingly focused on tribal health and broader issues of cultural diversity, cultural competency, and community engagement. Professional service activities include participation on institutional and division committees, as a reviewer for conference papers, and as a writer of tribal history for the City of Portland. Dr. Kaimanu is also substantively engaged with tribal communities, with which she serves as an informal liaison. Dr. Jill Rissi s research interests encompass a range of health policy issues, with an emphasis on the nexus of population health, the organization and delivery of health services, and public policy. Her current and recent research activities include funded evaluations of a public benefit Health Engagement Model; Oregon s Patient- 123

124 Centered Primary Care Home Program; Coordinated Care Organizations; and the implementation of health insurance marketplaces in the context of federalism. Professional service activities include work with AcademyHealth, recent appointment to the CAHME Accreditation Council, and service on PSU s Faculty Senate Budget Committee and Research Advisory Committee. She also serves as the Vice-Chair of the Oregon Patient Safety Commission, the Advisory Board of the Oregon Foundation for Reproductive Health, and as a volunteer with Social Venture Partners of Oregon where she is involved with the organization s Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion initiative. Dr. Rissi was granted indefinite tenure and promoted to Associate Professor during the selfstudy year. As noted earlier, she is expected to move into a position of programmatic leadership within the next few years. Dr. Neal Wallace focuses his teaching on health economics, health policy, health services research methods, and health care financial management. Much of his current research addresses issues of financing health services, including the impact of Medicaid and the Oregon Health Plan on access to services. Currently, his primary areas of research include an NIH-funded study to assess the utilization and cost outcomes of CCOs; research on integration of behavioral health and primary care; and evaluation of Oregon s PCPCH program. Dr. Wallace serves on the PSU Human Subjects Research Review Committee, and provides consultation to the Oregon Primary Care Association. Dr. Wallace s long history of research, scholarship, and service focuses on behavioral health and the utilization and cost effects of health system and policy change. As a senior member of the Program faculty, Dr. Wallace also provides significant leadership and serves several administrative roles. Several faculty with primary appointments at OHSU are increasingly engaged with the health program. Although their relationship to the Program stems from the ongoing development of a PSU/OHSU School of Public Health, their involvement is evident in the overall Program, and not limited to MPH:HMP students. They are becoming increasingly involved in teaching, and have been assigned as advisors for several MPH:HMP students. Of note, the OHSU faculty are engaged in many significant research projects, and are engaged in both professional and community service activities. Dr. Peter Graven is a health economist, based at the Center for Health Systems Effectiveness at OHSU. He has participated in both MPH and PhD admissions committees in the past year, is advising MPH:HMP students, and teaches a section of the health economics course. Dr. Graven is involved in local efforts to improve the health care system including as a committee member on Quality Corporation (Q-Corp) Cost of Care Steering Committee which supplies cost and quality data to primary care physicians to help improve their practice. Additionally, Dr. Graven serves on the Medicaid Caseload Forecast Advisory Committee which assists the State of Oregon in planning for enrollment. Dr. Dennis McCarty is the most senior of the OHSU HMP faculty, and is a well-known and respected scholar in the areas of mental health and substance abuse. In 2014 he was honored with the International Award for Excellence in Mentoring by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and in 2012 he received a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drugs Section of the American Public Health Association. His work has been widely published in books, chapters and refereed publications. He also contributes his expertise at the local efforts, consulting with organizations and speaking to audiences in Portland and throughout the Pacific Northwest. Dr. McCarty is not currently engaged directly with the masters Program, but provides broader administrative leadership and indirect support that benefits our students, as well as working with our HS&P PhD students. Dr. Ana Quiñones' research activities include projects to evaluate clinical outcome trends for racial and ethnic minority complex care patients under a combined patient-centered ambulatory care team and health information technology platform care management program; a collaborative, two year project to study patterns of self-reported chronic disease over time in a nationally-representative health interview survey, and assesses the performance of adjudication procedures developed to handle inconsistent patterns of selfreported chronic disease; and a five-year study to investigate the course of disability for ethnically diverse 124

125 older Americans with multi-morbidity, and assesses the role of neighborhood structure and composition as well as the benefits of comprehensive care management models of care delivery for diverse older adults. She is advising MPH:HMP students and teaching in the program. Dr. Traci Rieckmann is extensively involved in numerous research projects, including: a study of the implementation of CCOs in Oregon and their impact on treatment for alcohol and drug use disorders; a fiveyear project to provide training, technical assistance, evaluation of evidence-based practices, and leading systems change efforts for both the addiction workforce and primary care providers, emphasizing quality of care, recovery support, healthcare reform, and health information technology throughout the Pacific Northwest; a four-year study of the extent at which primary health care services are provided to AI/AN individuals who have serious mental illnesses, and who may have co-occurring substance use disorders; and, a three-year evaluation of a new FDA-approved Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) protocol and its efficacy in preventing relapse in recovering opioid addiction patients who have gone through withdrawal and seek treatment within an in-patient addictions clinic. Dr. Rieckmann s expertise also informs her community service efforts, including her work to provide Motivation Interviewing training, feedback, and coaching to workforce members at HIV/AIS organizations within the Northwest Addictions Technology Transfer Center (NWATTC); and a collaborative project working with American Indian/Alaskan Native substance abuse treatment providers and the NIH to analyze trends and new scientific fields to assess the adequacy of research being conducted with diverse communities including American Indians and Alaskan Native s (AI/AN). She is also advising MPH:HMP students, and served on the search committee for the new faculty position. IV.B.1.3. Relationship of achievement activities to Program mission/goals/objectives Faculty will demonstrate a record of research, scholarship and /or professional achievement appropriate to their career stage, role and responsibilities associated with the Program, and the Program's mission and goals. CAHME encourages individual, collaborative and multi-disciplinary research and scholarship and/or other relevant professional achievements, including involvement of practitioners and students where appropriate. This should be consistent with university policy on faculty research and scholarship. Research and scholarship may be demonstrated through publications in refereed journals, books, and book chapters, case studies, funded and sponsored projects, presentations at professional meetings and other forms of dissemination. Professional achievements may be demonstrated through accomplishments in the professional practice realm, such as leadership positions held in healthcare organizations or other parts of the health industry. The nature and volume of such achievements should be individually consistent with the stage of the faculty member's career and collectively adequate to support a Program of graduate healthcare management education, consistent with the Program's mission and goals. Assess the relationship between scholarly and professional achievement activities and the stated Program mission, goals and objectives. Based on this assessment, describe any recommendations for change in the foci and/or composition of faculty, and any steps being taken or planned to implement them, if appropriate. The relationship between faculty scholarship and research and the Program s goals and objectives is clear in the degree to which faculty strive to integrate their teaching, research and service activities. Of note, these activities often involve students in a broad range of applied research. A strategic goal of the University over the past several years has been to significantly increase sponsored research; thus the expectations for increased 125

126 research productivity have been considerable. This expectation has posed a challenge for the Program as faculty as we seek to balance teaching, research, community engagement and professional service expectations. Research is also an integral part of the teaching and service missions of the Program. To support faculty, PSU maintains a research services office that provides administrative support, assures compliance with institutional and funder policies and procedures, and assists faculty in the development and submission of grant and contract proposals. The faculty all have robust scholarly and professional portfolios, and are highly productive, given the heavy teaching load most carry and the other administrative and/or committee responsibilities that several maintain. This is particularly true given the increased workload of the core faculty through their contributions to the multiple committees working to develop the infrastructure for the PSU & OHSU School of Public Health. The overall composition of the Program faculty reflects the mission, goals and objectives through the recruitment of individuals whose backgrounds include considerable management and applied policy research experience. In fact, Portland State University is consistently ranked among the top institutions in the nation by US News and World Report for its community-based learning curricular emphasis, and is internationally recognized as a leader in adoption of faculty promotion and tenure policies that support community-engaged scholarship. During the self-study year, we conducted a successful search and will welcome a new member to the PSU HMP/HA faculty in September The addition of this new faculty member will help us to maintain our focus on community-engaged scholarship in all aspects of the Program. IV.B.2.1. Plan for faculty scholarship development The Program will ensure that there is a systematic plan for, and investment in, individual faculty research and scholarship. The purpose of this criterion is to determine how goals to improve research and scholarly activities are identified, and a plan for meeting those goals, including resource requirements, is developed and implemented. CAHME will seek evidence of continuous development of faculty research and scholarship to support the Program's mission and research goals. It is expected that Programs will develop individual plans that includes all core faculty. Describe the regular faculty development activities within your program. Include a description of programlevel resources available for faculty development. Colloquia, informal mentoring, internal funding, and sabbaticals or other forms of release time are the predominant forms of support for research and scholarship. In , the Dean's Office initiated a series of lunchtime colloquia that allowed faculty throughout CUPA to present and receive feedback on their research. Regularly scheduled lunch meetings hosted by the Associate Dean provide senior leadership and peer mentoring for junior faculty development. At the university level, junior faculty may also participate in a number of development activities sponsored by the Office of Academic Innovation. PSU's Faculty Development Grant Program includes several internally funded grants available to AAUP bargaining unit members (e.g. Portland State faculty and Academic Professionals) and department chairs. 126

127 Program-level resources for faculty development are generally not formalized, but allocated at the Division or School levels. However, while PSU s new budget model has expanded budgetary discretion at the College level, budget reductions over the past several years have resulted in less discretionary funding throughout the university. Thus, the School and Division have limited resources to support release time for faculty to participate in professional development activities, and there are few Program-level resources available for faculty development. Similarly, the Division has limited resources to grant release time for tenured faculty to participate in professional development activities, and the development needs of junior faculty are generally prioritized. One exception to this is that opportunity for tenured faculty members to attend professional conferences. In such cases, faculty who are formally engaged in leadership roles with professional associations, who are presenting academic papers, or who have identified specific scholarly development needs are often able to receive at least partial support. Generally, junior faculty are assisted with one professional development opportunity each year that is supported by Divisional funds. Faculty who have their own research funding are often able to leverage dissemination of their scholarly work, and thus able to participate in more faculty and professional development activities. IV.B.2.2. Individual faculty development The Program will ensure that there is a systematic plan for, and investment in, individual faculty research and scholarship. The purpose of this criterion is to determine how goals to improve research and scholarly activities are identified, and a plan for meeting those goals, including resource requirements, is developed and implemented. CAHME will seek evidence of continuous development of faculty research and scholarship to support the Program's mission and research goals. It is expected that Programs will develop individual plans that includes all core faculty. Describe your program's approach to providing and monitoring individual faculty development in research and scholarship. Include a description of resources available to individuals for their development. PSU s Office of Research and Strategic Partnerships supports faculty development in research and other scholarly activities, and works to promote and facilitate the acquisition of research funding, management of ongoing research projects, and assistance with dissemination. The Office of Research and Sponsored Projects also assists with monitoring of faculty research and scholarly activities, and provides accounting support and assistance with project management, including training seminars for faculty. During the self-study year, an additional research administrator was hired in CUPA, and works closely with faculty on research management. Along with administrative assistance from Division staff, these offices support and assure compliance with institutional and funder policies and procedures and assist faculty in the development and submission of grant and contract proposals. Within the PA Division, annual reviews for tenure-track faculty with the Chair or a tenure review committee are the principal means of support and monitoring. From those discussions, a plan is established to enhance development, and may include funding for necessary activities. In , PSU developed post-tenure review guidelines. Upon ratification by AAUP (scheduled for August 2015), these guidelines will be used to develop specific policies within the Division. Finally, informal Chair-faculty contact occurs throughout the year and may lead to allocation of resources in areas of needed growth. 127

128 IV.C.1.1. Pedagogical Improvement The Program will ensure that there is a systematic plan for, and investment in, individual faculty pedagogical improvement. The purpose of this criterion is to determine how goals to improve teaching are identified, and a plan for meeting those goals, including resource requirements, is developed and implemented. CAHME will seek evidence of continuous development of faculty teaching and assessment methods to support program competency development as well as discipline-based and applied knowledge of healthcare management. It is expected that Programs will develop a systematic plan that includes all core faculty. Describe your program's plan for faculty pedagogical improvement. In your description demonstrate how the plan is aligned with the program competency development and assessment plan. The Program utilizes a wide variety of instructional methods and is supported in its efforts by the Office for Academic Innovation (OAI), CUPA, HSOG and the PA Division. Ongoing assessment of students attainment of Division competencies provides Program faculty with the opportunity to re-evaluate course-level teaching and assessment methods, and to re-assess alignment of courses across the curriculum. Although the competency model is still relatively new, its adoption did not represent a dramatic shift for us. The most significant changes related to faculty pedagogical improvement were the explicit recognition of the Program s emphasis on community-based learning, applied projects, and team-based work, along with inclusion of specific competency attainment measures in course evaluations. During the self-study year, we initiated a series of surveys to examine the level of self-reported achievement for each of the ten competencies at various points in the students academic program. These survey results are one means to assess the programs success. By examining the results of these survey data, we can evaluate the progression of knowledge and developing competency of our students as they complete their coursework. Integrating students self-assessment results with course evaluations will allow faculty review and improve the Program, their courses and identify areas in which they may improve their own pedagogy. Finally, monthly faculty meetings provide an opportunity for faculty to identify pedagogical issues and engage in planning for professional development activities to support the new competency model and the assessment mechanisms that have accompanied its implementation. Responsibility for assessing course-level, curricular-level, and career-level competency attainment is shared by all faculty as individuals, and through formal evaluation mechanisms such as annual and tenure and promotion reviews. IV.C.1.2. Teaching improvement goals The Program will ensure that there is a systematic plan for, and investment in, individual faculty pedagogical improvement. The purpose of this criterion is to determine how goals to improve teaching are identified, and a plan for meeting those goals, including resource requirements, is developed and implemented. CAHME will seek 128

129 evidence of continuous development of faculty teaching and assessment methods to support program competency development as well as discipline-based and applied knowledge of healthcare management. It is expected that Programs will develop a systematic plan that includes all core faculty. Describe how teaching improvement goals are developed and monitored for individual faculty including the frequency of progress evaluation. The Division Chair and Program Director devote considerable effort to monitoring the development and performance of faculty. For tenure-track faculty, formal reviews are conducted at years one and three, informal reviews at years two, four and five, and promotion and tenure reviews (normally) at year six. Tenuretrack faculty are also advised by senior faculty as part of the review process. Pedagogical goals are a salient element of that process. Associate Professors are encouraged to pursue promotion to full Professor, although the timeline is discretionary. Reviews of individual course evaluations for each faculty member are conducted by the Division Chair, and complement the formal and informal review processes. The PA Division Chair also reviews course instruction provided by fixed-term and adjunct faculty as part of an overall evaluation plan, and may facilitate assistance from university resources such as the Office for Academic Innovation when indicated. IV.C.1.3. Faculty development activities The Program will ensure that there is a systematic plan for, and investment in, individual faculty pedagogical improvement. The purpose of this criterion is to determine how goals to improve teaching are identified, and a plan for meeting those goals, including resource requirements, is developed and implemented. CAHME will seek evidence of continuous development of faculty teaching and assessment methods to support program competency development as well as discipline-based and applied knowledge of healthcare management. It is expected that Programs will develop a systematic plan that includes all core faculty. Describe the regular faculty development activities within your program. Examples include seminars, workshops, peer review and/or other means of updating and feedback to improve teaching skills. A primary source of development support for tenure-track faculty is informal mentoring by senior faculty. The Dean and Associate Dean convene all tenure-track faculty each term to discuss progress and challenges, and provide advice and support. The Office for Academic Innovation (OAI) hosts writing workshops, as well as workshops devoted to pedagogical innovation and seminars that focus on teaching, mentoring, and other professional development needs. OAI also offers a series of discussion groups for junior faculty which center on one or more selected texts and provide a forum to identify common challenges and receive both expert and peer-based support and advice. Similar opportunities for developing research and teaching activity exist for all faculty, and many of the faculty participate in these depending upon their availability and interest in the topic. Although travel funds are limited, the Division supports travel for at least one faculty member to the AUPHA Annual meeting. At least one faculty member is also supported to attend the annual meetings of NASPAA and APHA to ensure interactions with health administration education colleagues in these organizations. We have 129

130 used these funds strategically by utilizing grant funds earmarked for dissemination of research findings to support travel for faculty to present at meeting, and are therefore able to allocate limited department funds for other educational/pedagogical seminars and workshops. IV.C.1.4. Pedagogical Development The Program will ensure that there is a systematic plan for, and investment in, individual faculty pedagogical improvement. The purpose of this criterion is to determine how goals to improve teaching are identified, and a plan for meeting those goals, including resource requirements, is developed and implemented. CAHME will seek evidence of continuous development of faculty teaching and assessment methods to support program competency development as well as discipline-based and applied knowledge of healthcare management. It is expected that Programs will develop a systematic plan that includes all core faculty. Describe your program's approach to providing and monitoring individual faculty pedagogical development, including the frequency of progress evaluation. Include a description of program or university-level resources available to individuals for their development. As noted in Criteria IV.C.1.1-3, the Program monitors faculty teaching through review of course evaluations, periodic faculty evaluations, and the promotion and tenure process. Institutional support for faculty teaching is provided by the Office for Academic Innovation, which provides an array of cross-disciplinary and disciplinespecific development activities in support of the educational function of the university. In addition to its mission of enhancing the effectiveness of instruction, OAI is a place of innovation, a gathering place for idea generation and testing, and a place where faculty may turn for individual consultation and professional advice. Increasingly, OAI supports faculty interested in community-engaged research and the development of courses enhanced by online modalities. We have an advantage in that both of the former Associate Vice-Provosts in OAI are now affiliated with us: Leslie McBride was the Associate Vice-Provost for Teaching, Learning and Assessment and is now Professor in the School of Community Health and Interim Associate Dean for Academic Affairs in the proposed PSU/OHSU SPH, and Kevin Kecskes was formerly the Associate Vice-Provost for Engagement and Director, Community-University Partnerships and joined the faculty as a full-time member of the PA Division in AY IV.C.2.1. Research and scholarship The faculty will demonstrate that they draw on their own current and relevant research and scholarship, as well as that of others, in their teaching activities. The purpose of this criterion is to enhance faculty teaching by using research and scholarship to influence the field to provide current and relevant material for the classroom. 130

131 Describe how faculty and other research and scholarship are included as case studies, projects, or other applications in courses and identify where they are reflected in course syllabi. Faculty regularly update instructional materials to reflect emerging research and new developments cited in the professional literature, and to incorporate experiences from their scholarly and other research activities. Because the core faculty conduct a substantial amount of research and evaluation work on health system reform and health policy, the relationships among our research, community engagement activities and teaching often overlap considerably. Faculty s research and scholarly publications are often referenced in class lectures, however such activities may not be explicitly reflected in course syllabi. Drs. Gelmon, Wallace and Rissi are currently engaged in local, state and national research projects to assess short- and long-term effects of health system reform. These efforts provide a rich array of insights that are incorporated into the classroom, often well in advance of professional presentations or public dissemination. In addition to their research and scholarship, Drs. Gelmon, Wallace and Rissi all bring extensive practitioner experience to the classroom. For example, all of our course offerings in Program Evaluation use Dr. Gelmon s manual on program evaluation as one of the core texts, and her experience as a Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award examiner provides multiple illustrations in the continuous improvement, program evaluation and health systems classes. Dr. Wallace uses his multiple projects studying the Oregon Health Plan as examples in his Health Economics and Health Finance classes. Dr. Rissi s research on CCO organizational structures and functions and her evaluation work on the implementation of the PCPCH model are incorporated in her Organizational Behavior, Strategic Management and Health Policy courses. Adjunct faculty similarly draw upon their applied research and professional experience in the classroom. For example, Dr. Droppers draws upon his background in health information technology, dissertation research on CCO governance, and his professional position within OHA when teaching the health IT class; As the Executive Director of the Oregon Health Workforce Institute, Dr. Isgrigg draws upon her experience and the research conducted by OHWI to teach Values and Ethics; Ms. Abdellatif draws upon her career and current position as the Director of Integrated Clinical Services at the Multnomah County Health Department when teaching Human Resource Management; and, Ms. Fellows draws upon her professional experience as an HIT consultant and Executive Director of We Can Do Better (a community-based organization that conducts research and advocates for health system reforms) when teaching Organizational Behavior, Health Policy and other courses. IV.D.1.1. Community service policies and procedures Faculty will participate in health-related community and professional activities outside of the university. The Program should articulate its role and involvement in service to governmental agencies, voluntary and community organizations and health care institutions. Community service can include service to the profession, or the community at large. The purpose of this criterion is to enhance faculty teaching and research activities; serve as a model to students of the role of service in professionalism; and provide faculty with the opportunity to influence the field. While CAHME recognizes that some of these activities may be compensated, e.g., participation in NIH study sections, this criterion will not be fully satisfied by activities that are a part of a faculty member's established consulting business. 131

132 Describe the policies and procedures of the Program and the University regarding faculty participation in community service activities. Describe the relationship between faculty community service activities and program goals. Portland State s motto is Let Knowledge Serve the City and the Program embodies this motto through interactions with relevant community organizations and leaders. Portland is also known as a relatively cohesive community that values engagement and social equity. The Oregon health services communities, and our longstanding relationships through alumni, preceptors and adjunct faculty facilitate ease of engagement such that there is sometimes the potential for confusion in distinguishing between community service and professional consultation roles. Students are socialized into this culture of engagement through faculty and community leaders who serve as role models, and through class-based projects, field placements, networking opportunities, student groups, and alumni networks. These activities contribute to the Program s mission to prepare students who bring a public service orientation to their professional health system management careers. In addition to serving Program goals regarding practical experience opportunities for students, the Program s engagement with the health service and health policy communities also serves the needs of those communities. The Program faculty are key to both of these goals. Service is an expectation of all Program faculty and, in keeping with the university ethos, is a substantive consideration by the School, College and University in promotion and tenure review processes. As noted in IV.D.2.1 and detailed in faculty CVs, the core Program faculty, OSHU HMP faculty, and other PA Division faculty all have extensive records of service to the community, institution, and their professions. Defined as activities undertaken for the benefit of the profession or society that fall outside of normal teaching and research expectations, such service includes: Holding elected/appointed offices and actively serving professional associations through membership on committees and governing boards at the local, regional, national, international levels; actively participating in community health-related organizations as volunteers, consultants, technical advisors, committee members, and board members; reviewing abstracts and manuscripts for professional publications and/or panels; presenting to the lay public at community meetings and events on health-related topics; and, offering non-degree continuing education courses and seminars for health services professionals. Faculty play a large role in supporting the culture of engagement that characterizes the Program and PSU, but also recognizes that the substantial expectation and commitment to community engagement has the potential to detract from teaching and research expectations and activities. Recognizing this challenge (particularly for junior faculty who must spend additional time developing a scholarly research agenda and developing teaching skills), the Division provides formal and informal support and advice to balance these multiple demands. Such support may include course release time and funding to attend pedagogical improvement and research conferences. While the faculty s community service work does reflect both personal and professional interests, it is rarely compensated. Our students are also broadly engaged in service activities that benefit society and/or the profession, both as a function of the curriculum and by virtue of personal motivation. Courses in both the MPH:HMP and MPA:HA programs emphasize community-based learning and frequently rely on partnerships with community-based organizations for students applied projects. For example, students enrolled in the Program Evaluation course work in small groups to develop comprehensive evaluation plans for eight to ten community-based health and social service organizations each year. Although not limited to the nonprofit sector, many students respond to the needs of organizations within this sector by volunteering personal time in addition to participation in community-based service learning activities. 132

133 In addition to their individual activities, HMP and HA students often participate in activities organized by our two student associations. The PSU/OHSU IHI Open School Chapter organizes community service events each year, primarily focusing on health services improvement projects. During the self-study year, these projects included the I-CAN initiative and a Quality Drive, as well as student quality improvement projects. The Public Administration Student Association (PASA) also organizes quarterly service projects for students, although these activities are not specifically oriented to the health system. IV.D.1.2. Current community service projects by faculty Faculty will participate in health-related community and professional activities outside of the university. The Program should articulate its role and involvement in service to governmental agencies, voluntary and community organizations and health care institutions. Community service can include service to the profession, or the community at large. The purpose of this criterion is to enhance faculty teaching and research activities; serve as a model to students of the role of service in professionalism; and provide faculty with the opportunity to influence the field. While CAHME recognizes that some of these activities may be compensated, e.g., participation in NIH study sections, this criterion will not be fully satisfied by activities that are a part of a faculty member's established consulting business. - Description of Faculty Health Related Community Service and Continuing Education Activities Note: This is a large table that is auto-generated by the eaccreditation website. The table summarizes faculty health-related community service and education activities. Content was derived from faculty CVs. IV.D.2.1. Community service activities Faculty will draw upon their community and professional service activities in their teaching. The purpose of this criterion is to enhance faculty teaching by using the role of service and the opportunity to influence the field to provide current and relevant material for the classroom. Describe how community service activities of faculty members are included as case studies, projects, or other applications in courses where they should be reflected in course syllabi. Faculty regularly incorporate experiences from their community service activities with their academic pursuits. Examples drawn from community service and consulting activities often find their way into the classroom as anecdotal examples that serve to link theory to practice during class discussions. More formally, Dr. Gelmon works with community agencies, providers, and graduate students to assess health improvement interventions, and develop program improvement and policy strategies. Her community service and research interests often coincide. Students enrolled in her Continual Improvement in Health Care course design and conduct an independent improvement project in collaboration with local service providers. Dr. Gelmon also 133

134 has a strong commitment to design and implementation of evaluations of community-based health improvement strategies, and draws upon completed projects such as the evaluations of Project Metamorphosis (an alcohol/drug/mental health program for homeless youth) and a Catholic Charities program providing immigration services to victims of domestic violence in her Program Evaluation and Management course. Dr. Kaimanu s relationships with Native American communities, health service providers, and legislators are reflected in her Culture and Health, Health Administration, and Health Politics courses, and OHSU faculty research in mental health and substance abuse provide valuable insights into health system integration. Dr. Rissi s role as Vice-Chair of the Oregon Patient Safety Commission (OPSC) provides timely and relevant knowledge of patient safety practices and health policy developments, such as implementation of the Early Discussion and Resolution program mandated by the state legislature, and utilizes her knowledge of the program to discuss tort reform, patient safety, organizational change and other issues in her classes. Dr. Cooper works with the Leadership Education for Neurodevelopmental and Related Disabilities Program at the OHSU Child Development and Rehabilitation Center and with the Global Health program at OHSU. He actively maintains a website designed not only to serve students but also to assist local governments and nonprofit organizations, and regularly incorporates developments in the ongoing implementation the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in his Public Administration and Administrative Law courses. Although he is not considered one of the core health faculty, Dr. Cooper s extensive background in health service administration and policy provides MPA:HA students with a unique perspective on health management and public affairs. Dr. Wallace often serves as a consultant to local service providers and draws on this experience, as well as extensive experience with the development and implementation of publicly financed managed care systems and other innovative reimbursement and program models, in his Health Economics and Financial Management courses. 134