Student-Centered Service to the Community Advancin Knowledge Educating Practitioners Mission-Driven Inn

Transcription

1 Student-Centered Service to the Community Advancin Knowledge Educating Practitioners Mission-Driven Inn ating Open Inquiry Community Participation Integrity 2011 Self-Study Report Student-Centered Service to the Community Advancin Prepared for the Council on Education for Public Health May 2011 Knowledge Educating Practitioners Mission-Driven Inn ating Open Inquiry Community Participation Integrity

2 BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH 2011 SELF-STUDY REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL ON EDUCATION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH MAY 2011

3

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS SELF-STUDY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Appendices iii 1.0 The School of Public Health 1.1 Mission Evaluation and Planning Institutional Environment Organization and Administration Governance Resources Instructional Programs 2.1 Master of Public Health Degree Program Length Public Health Core Knowledge Practical Skills Culminating Experience Required Competencies Assessment Procedures Other Professional Degrees Academic Degrees Doctoral Degrees The Master s and Doctoral Program in Biostatistics Joint Degrees Distance Education or Executive Degree Programs Creation, Application and Advancement of Knowledge 3.1 Research Service Workforce Development Faculty, Staff and Students 4.1 Faculty Qualifications Faculty Policies and Procedures Faculty and Staff Diversity Student Recruitment and Admissions Student Diversity Advising and Career Counseling i

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS ii

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF APPENDICES 1.0 The School of Public Health 1.1 Mission Appendix 1.1.C-1 SPH Strategic Plan Appendix 1.1.E-1 Policy Approval Pathway 1.2 Evaluation and Planning Appendix 1.2.A-1 Alumni Survey Instrument, Fall 2009 Appendix 1.2.A-2 Alumni Survey Fall 2009 Results Appendix 1.2.A-3 Deans Annual Report, Appendix 1.2.A-4 New Graduate Survey 2009 Appendix 1.2.A-5 New Graduate Survey 2009 Results Appendix 1.2.C-1 Strategic Plan Appendix 1.2.C-2 Performance on Strategic Planning Goals for Appendix 1.2.C-3 Strategic Plan Annual Planning Grids for Appendix 1.2.C-4 Strategic Plan Annual Planning Grids for Appendix 1.2.C-5 Strategic Plan Annual Planning Grids for Institutional Environment Appendix 1.3.A-1 Boston University Schools and Accrediting Bodies Appendix 1.3.C.2-1 BUSPH Bylaws Organization and Administration Appendix 1.4.E-1 BUSPH Student Handbook Governance Appendix 1.5.A.5-1. Faculty Appointment and Promotion Guidelines Appendix 1.5.C-1. Standing Committee Membership Instructional Programs 2.1 Master of Public Health Degree Appendix 2.1.A-1 Course Requirements for MPH Degree Candidates Appendix 2.1.A-2 Course Requirements for DrPH Degree Candidates Appendix 2.1.B-1 BUSPH Bulletin Appendix 2.1.B-2 Sample Student Graduation Audit Sheet 2.4 Practical Skills Appendix 2.4.A-1 Appendix 2.4.A-2 Appendix 2.4.B-1 Professional Development and How To Seminar Series Non-Traditional Field Practice Experiences Peace Corps Masters International Program Kenya: Field Practicum in Public Health & the Environment Program in International Health Practice in the Philippines Agencies and Field Supervisors Used for Practice Experience iii

7 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.6 Required Competencies Appendix 2.6.E-1 Appendix 2.6.E-2 Appendix 2.6.E-3 Appendix 2.6.E-4 Appendix 2.6.E-5 Appendix 2.6.E-6 Courses that Directly Relate to Each Core and Cross-Cutting Competency Practice Office Survey of Employers and Practicum Supervisors Focus Group on Job-Related Competencies in Four IH Organizations: Summary Report Maternal and Child Health Training Grant Report Pharmaceutical Assessment, Management and Policy (PAMP) Criteria Infectious Disease and Surveillance HIG Reports 3.0 Creation, Application and Advancement of Knowledge 3.1 Research Appendix 3.1.A-1 Current Research Activity, Appendix 3.1.A-2 Pilot Research Funding and Grant Results, Appendix 3.1.D-1 BUSPH Faculty Book Publications, Appendix 3.1.D-2 Appendix 3.1.E Service Appendix 3.2.A-1 Appendix 3.2.B-1 Appendix 3.2.B-2 Appendix 3.2.B-3 Examples of Research and Scholarly Impact Examples of Student Research Presentations, Awards, and Authorship Public Health Community Partners Faculty Service to Organizations Faculty Editorial Board Membership Faculty Manuscript Reviewers 3.3 Workforce Development Appendix 3.3.A-1 Memberships on Committees Devoted to Workforce Development 4.0 Faculty, Staff and Students 4.1 Faculty Qualifications Appendix 4.1.A-1 Appendix 4.1.B-1 BUSPH Core Faculty who Support Degree Offerings Other Faculty Used to Support BUSPH Teaching Programs 4.2 Faculty Policies and Procedures Appendix 4.2.B-1 BUSPH Faculty Development and Assessment Form Appendix 4.2.D-1 Student Course Evaluation Form 4.4 Student Recruitment and Admissions Appendix 4.4.C-1 BUSPH Viewbook iv

8 CRITERION 1.0: THE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH 1.1 MISSION. The School shall have a clearly formulated and publicly stated mission with supporting goals and objectives. The School shall foster the development of professional public health values, concepts and ethical practice. Required Documentation. The self-study document should include the following: a. A clear and concise mission statement for the School as a whole. b. One or more goal statements for each major function by which the School intends to attain its mission, including instruction, research and service. c. A set of measureable objectives relating to each major function through which the School intends to achieve its goals of instruction, research and service. d. A description of the manner in which mission, goals and objectives are developed, monitored and periodically revised and the manner in which they are made available to the public. e. A statement of values that guide the School, with a description of how the values are determined and operationalized. f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.

9 CRITERION 1.1: MISSION 1.1 MISSION The School shall have a clearly formulated and publicly stated mission, with supporting goals and objectives. The School shall foster the development of professional public health values, concepts and ethical practice. 1.1.a. A clear and concise mission statement for the School as a whole. The mission of the Boston University School of Public Health is to improve the health of local, national, and international populations, particularly the disadvantaged, underserved, and vulnerable, through excellence and innovation in education, research, and service. 1.1.b. One or more goal statements for each major function by which the School intends to attain its mission, including instruction, research, and service. The School has been committed to formal strategic planning since 1993, and recently completed its fourth five-year plan through a comprehensive planning process that is fully described in Criterion 1.2. Each of the School s plans is designed to identify those areas in which the School will invest additional time, effort, and funding to further the School s mission. There are important, ongoing activities that are not part of the School s strategic plan and therefore not listed in the current goals. For example, in its previous strategic plan the School identified practice (including service) and international health as strategic areas in which to invest. Both of these now have robust, successful and ongoing programs, so they are no longer designated as goals in the current plan although they are vitally important to the School. Because of the continued growth in these areas, in the School began to make new investments to meet the three new overarching themes and seven specific goals: Overarching themes that guide the strategic plan: To become a top-tier school of public health; To influence the future of public health; and To lead collaborative efforts on the Medical Campus and across the University. Seven Goals: o Provide leadership for University-wide and Medical Campus initiatives related to public health education, research, and practice. o Grow the master s level education programs while maintaining high admission standards. o Strengthen the research program through focused investment in four areas: community-based participatory research, pharmaceutical policy, healthy aging, and genetics. o Grow and strengthen the School s academic and professional doctoral programs. o Expand school-wide efforts in health system transformation. o Enhance faculty development efforts school-wide. o Build a career services center that enhances employment prospects for the School s students and alumni. 1.1.c. A set of measurable objectives relating to each major function through which the School intends to achieve its goals of instruction, research, and service. The strategic plan establishes a set of measurable objectives that will be used to assess the School s progress toward achieving the major goals in the plan. Each of these objectives also specifies the person(s) responsible and the timeframe in which the objective should be accomplished. 1

10 CRITERION 1.1: MISSION Goal 1: Provide leadership for University-wide and Medical Campus collaborations relating to public health education, research, and practice. Objectives: Expand our current course offerings for undergraduates Expand public health minors Develop new 4+1 (BA/MPH) programs in concert with the Schools of Education and Management Develop new public health educational programs in partnership with Arizona State University (ASU) in concert with University efforts to develop relations with ASU Develop new educational and research collaborations in global health in concert with University efforts to expand into new geographical areas Develop a substance abuse research center in collaboration with the Schools of Medicine and Dental Medicine Goal 2: Grow the master s level education programs while maintaining high admission standards. Objectives: Build an admissions customer relationship management database Increase new MPH admissions by 5% each year Develop new options for offering courses (distance or online courses, hybrid courses, multiple sections) Grow and support faculty teaching commitment in concert with increasing enrollments Expand education and student support services as needed to handle additional enrollments Goal 3: Strengthen the research program through focused investment in four areas: communitybased participatory research, pharmaceutical policy, healthy aging, and genetics. Objectives: Create new centers in these areas: community-based participatory research, pharmaceutical policy, health aging, and genetics Emphasize integration of education, research, and practice in the four new areas Develop a systematic approach to identifying and funding these new research areas Goal 4: Grow and strengthen the School s academic and professional doctoral programs. Objectives: Develop and enhance the school-wide DrPH degree Develop PhD programs in International Health and Community Health Sciences Create teacher training programs for doctoral students Develop and implement a school-wide model for financing doctoral education Participate in University-wide efforts to strengthen doctoral and postdoctoral programs Transfer oversight of PhD programs to the Associate Dean for Research Move the biostatistics graduate programs from the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences to SPH Goal 5: Expand school-wide efforts in health system transformation. Objectives: Recruit new Health Policy and Management department chair/center director Build on existing school-wide expertise (quality assessment, outcomes measurement, pharmaceutical policy, health law, and global health) and expand into new areas as appropriate Work with University leadership to define the School s role in a University-wide program 2

11 CRITERION 1.1: MISSION Goal 6: Enhance faculty development efforts school-wide. Objectives: Identify a School leader for faculty development and diversity Develop and implement a training program for chairs in faculty mentoring Expand faculty mentoring programs Develop programs to enhance faculty scholarly work, teaching and research skills Improve the annual meeting program and annual assessments Goal 7: Build a career services center that enhances employment prospects for the School s students and alumni. Objectives: Hire a leader to oversee expanded career services center Recruit new staff for employment outreach and position cultivation Create and offer new opportunities for career development skills Explicitly coordinate the efforts of employment outreach and practicum development The full strategic plan for , including a more detailed listing of measurable objectives, can be found in Appendix 1.1.c-1, or online at sph.bu.edu/strategicplan. 1.1.d. A description of the manner in which mission, goals, and objectives are developed, monitored, and periodically revised and the manner in which they are made available to the public. Planning is a formal, ongoing activity at the School. The Governing Council is designated as the School s planning and evaluation body, with responsibility for plan development, monitoring, revision, evaluation, and communication. The Associate Dean for Institutional Development and Strategic Planning oversees the planning and evaluation efforts of the Governing Council under the direction of the Dean. These processes are described in detail in Criterion 1.2. The School s mission statement and goals are available to the public on the School website (sph.bu.edu/ataglance), the Dean s welcome page (sph.bu.edu/welcome), the University academic website (bu.edu/academics/sph/), as well as in the School s strategic plan (sph.bu.edu/strategicplan) and in annually published Dean s Reports (sph.bu.edu/deansreport). Additionally, the mission is included in publications targeted to prospective and current students, the Viewbook and the Bulletin, both available as on-site resource files. 1.1.e. A statement of values that guide the School, with a description of how the values are determined and operationalized. The School s mission statement serves as its statement of values. Through its educational, research, service, and practice programs, the School is dedicated to promoting the health of the public, in particular the health and welfare of the most vulnerable populations. Throughout its courses and research efforts, it fosters a population-based approach to improving the health and well-being of people in local, national, and global communities. These activities require and embrace the values that follow. This list is not meant to be exhaustive but provides examples of the values that flow from the School s mission. These examples are largely taken from the feedback to the early draft of this report and represent input from the Faculty Senate. This section of the report was explicitly voted upon and adopted by the School s Management Committee on January 6,

12 CRITERION 1.1: MISSION The School: Is Student-focused. We have built flexibility into the program so that students can go back and forth between full- and part-time status at will. This enables students with jobs and families to adjust their schedules as necessary. Student progress is monitored and students are supported through the registrar, student services, departments, and advisors. The graduating student s exit survey asks for comments on every aspect of the student s experience and changes are regularly made in response to expressed needs or concerns. Is Participatory. The School has created a governance structure and policy-making process that gives voice to all stakeholders and provides opportunities for the School to learn from and make changes based on the ideas and needs that different constituencies raise. Since the last accreditation visit, the School created a Faculty Senate and adopted an explicit and transparent policy-making process (see Appendix 1.1.e-1). Supports Social Justice and Advocacy. Through educational programs, research, workforce training, and service and practice opportunities, the School promotes social change and advocacy as a key element for improving the health and welfare of the disadvantaged. Promotes the Fair and Equitable Treatment of All Members of its Community. Numerous examples throughout this report demonstrate School policies and practices regarding hiring, promotion, and mentoring of faculty and staff, as well as the recruitment and admissions policies and services offered to help students succeed at school and as public health professionals. These policies are designed to ensure fairness and to reflect a dedication to helping all members of the School community thrive. An example of this commitment is the School s reaction to a BU Faculty Council survey. This survey found a perception of faculty inequities at the University and that female faculty members were much more likely to report them. In response, the School created its own gender equity task force run entirely by the faculty, an undertaking that no other School at the University has carried out. The School s administration provided the task force with faculty salary and promotion data, both a complex and sensitive undertaking. The task force found that the salaries of female faculty at the School were, on average, 97% of those for men after adjustments for rank and time at rank. However some salary inequities at the School did exist for specific faculty, both male and female. As a result, funds were made available to reduce salary inequities and processes were put in place to reduce the possibility of future inequities arising. A second round of funding was conducted to address gender inequities because equity was considered a priority value, despite it being a year when the School was financially challenged. Supports freedom of inquiry and diversity of opinion. The School is dedicated to strongly supporting academic freedom and diversity of opinion, as the following controversial examples demonstrate. The Legacy Foundation (a private tobacco control funding entity) has a condition of funding that strikes at the heart of free inquiry. If one faculty member receives funding from the Legacy Foundation, no other faculty member may receive funding from an entity that the Legacy Foundation believes runs counter to its mission. Since research funding is essential to the conduct of research, the Legacy Foundation s condition would give it veto power over School faculty with which it has no relationship. The School does not permit an external funder to limit the scholarly activities in which other faculty members might wish to engage. It is noteworthy that the decision to reject such funding was made by a vote of the faculty with only one dissenting vote. It is also noteworthy that the School would have been eligible for the receipt of Legacy Foundation funding, since it receives no potentially conflicting funding from tobaccorelated organizations and has faculty who were otherwise qualified to apply for Legacy funding. Since the School would not permit any funder to limit freedom of inquiry, it could not, in good conscience, accept such funding from an organization, even when we support its goals. Principle trumped money. 4

13 CRITERION 1.1: MISSION The University expended large sums of money and received federal funding to create the National Emerging Infectious Disease Laboratories (NEIDL) on the Medical Campus. The NEIDL is part of a national network of secure facilities in which to study infectious diseases, both ones occurring naturally and those introduced through bioterrorism. The creation of the NEIDL was a major accomplishment and provided the University with national recognition of both its scientific and administrative capabilities. The School would play an important part in its activities since the NEIDL would deal with deadly infectious diseases that affect people around the world. There was (and remains) some community opposition to the project. Some opponents argued that a facility that conducts research on infectious diseases should not be located in an urban area. Others worried that the facility would be used for military purposes. As important as the facility is to the University and School, several faculty publicly and openly opposed the opening of the facility and even testified against it. Importantly, these faculty members knew they could take a position adverse to the interests of the University and School without being concerned about negative repercussions, and they acknowledged this in public meetings. This is especially significant since School faculty do not have tenure. As stated at the beginning of this section, the values discussed above are directly derived from the School s mission statement, which embodies them all. 1.1.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met. This criterion is met. The School has a clearly formulated mission with supporting goals and objectives that are developed, monitored, and revised through a formal, ongoing process overseen by the Governing Council and the Dean. The School subscribes to values that further its educational, research, and service activities. 5

14 CRITERION 1.1: MISSION 6

15 CRITERION 1.0: THE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH 1.2 EVALUATION AND PLANNING. The School shall have an explicit process for evaluating and monitoring its overall efforts against its mission, goals and objectives; for assessing the School s effectiveness in serving its various constituencies; and for planning to achieve its mission in the future. Required Documentation: The self-study document should include the following: a. Description of the evaluation procedures and planning processes used by the School, including an explanation of how constituent groups are involved in these processes. b. Description of how the results of evaluation and planning are regularly used to enhance the quality of programs and activities. c. Identification of outcome measures that the School uses to monitor its effectiveness in meeting its mission, goals and objectives. Target levels should be defined and data regarding the school s performance must be provided for each of the last three years. d. An analytical self-study document that provides a qualitative and quantitative assessment of how the school achieves its mission, goal and objectives and meets all accreditation criteria, including a candid assessment of strengths and weaknesses in terms of the School s performance against the accreditation criteria. e. An analysis of the School s responses to recommendations in the last accreditation report (if any). f. A description of the manner in which the self-study document was developed, including effective opportunities for input by important school constituents, including institutional officers, administrative staff, teaching faculty, students, alumni and representatives of the public health community. g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met..

16 CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION AND PLANNING 1.2 EVALUATION AND PLANNING The School shall have an explicit process for evaluating and monitoring its overall efforts against its mission, goals, and objectives; for assessing the School s effectiveness in serving its various constituencies; and for planning to achieve its mission in the future. 1.2.a. Description of the evaluation procedures and planning processes used by the School, including an explanation of how constituent groups are involved in these processes. The School has conducted formal planning and evaluation since 1993, which has evolved over the years to increase its effectiveness. Strategic plans have served the School well, both as aspirational documents and as practical guides to priority setting and resource allocation. The School undergoes a strategic planning process every five years, creates detailed yearly implementation plans, and regularly assesses its progress in meeting defined objectives. The Associate Dean for Institutional Development and Strategic Planning oversees and coordinates these planning and evaluation activities in consultation with the Dean and in conjunction with the Governing Council (GC), the School s formal planning body. In 2010, the School concluded the development of its latest five-year strategic plan for the period (See Appendix 1.1.c-1 or sph.bu.edu/strategicplan.) The planning process used the collaborative strategic planning model for the current strategic planning cycle. This model requires participation by stakeholder groups and uses the information and perspectives those groups provide to help build a strategic plan. The rationale of this approach is to ensure input and participation from all stakeholders to create a plan that is truly of the School. The School began this process in February 2009 when the GC approved the approach, outline, and timeline for completion. In April, the School began the extensive data-gathering and engagement phase with a one-and-a-half day retreat for the GC. At this retreat, the GC conducted a number of planning exercises, including: a future scan to help participants think about the issues critical to ensuring a successful future; a SWOT analysis to examine strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats; and an exercise to address a number of strategic questions -- what is required to become a great school of public health; how to create buy-in for the School s vision; and what will be the most interesting and important research opportunities over the next 10 years. As a final exercise, the group created a so-called mindmap with answers to two questions: How can we better promote faculty development and satisfaction? and What should be the School s priorities for this coming planning cycle? This GC retreat was followed up by three faculty planning retreats, three staff planning retreats, three student focus groups, and two alumni retreats. The planning process also used the results of a 2009 survey of more than 1,000 alumni. A copy of the most recent alumni survey and the summary of quantitative responses are available as Appendices 1.2.a-1 and 1.2.a-2. Meetings were held with deans from the School of Medicine, the School of Dental Medicine, the College of Arts and Sciences, the School of Social Work, and the Sargent College of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences to understand the effectiveness of our current collaborations with these schools and to understand what new collaborations might emerge as part of the planning process. From September 2009 through February 2010, the GC met 12 times to review information from the faculty and staff retreats and to consider the broad issues of education, research, and practice, as well as more focused topics, such as career services, external communications, doctoral education, faculty development, student quality, and overall planning themes. The GC then narrowed down a large list of potential issues to 10 areas to discuss at the school-wide planning retreat on February 11,

17 CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION AND PLANNING The school-wide planning retreat assembled 82 representatives from School faculty, staff, students, alumni, and administrators, who discussed the 10 topics under consideration for inclusion in the strategic plan. Participants were provided with a one- to three-page concept paper on each of the topics prior to the planning retreat. After the retreat, the GC narrowed down the topics to seven for which there was strongest support. It then formulated the goals and initiatives that would be the basis for our next five-year strategic plan. Prior to adoption, these goals and initiatives were considered by the Dean s Advisory Board, a voluntary committee of external advisors with broad expertise in public health, medicine, business, and other related fields that assists and provides advisory support to the Dean and the School in long-range planning and resource development. A draft of the plan was submitted to the University President and, after discussion with the University leadership, changes were made to better complement the University s plan. These draft changes were presented to the Governing Council, refined, and the plan was formally adopted by the GC. The strategic plan for sets forth three overarching themes and establishes seven specific goals and a set of objectives for each of those goals. Each goal has an identified person responsible for successful completion of that goal and each objective has a person who is responsible for the overall completion of that objective. The GC developed specific outcome measures for each objective and estimated timelines for their successful completion. These outcome measures will form the basis of yearly implementation plans. The annual implementation plan is used to guide the development of school-wide and departmental budgets during a series of budget meetings held in April and May. To complete the planning-budgetingevaluation cycle, the GC meets in September to review the results of the previous year's activities and determine the extent to which the proposed strategies were implemented and the expected objectives were realized. Each department develops its own strategic plan that is expected to complement the School plan while identifying specific departmental goals that are also appropriate for the success and growth of the individual department. Each department has representation on the GC by its department chair and the chairs provide linkages between School and departmental planning efforts. Evaluation Procedures The GC conducts quarterly reviews of progress toward attaining the goals set forth in the yearly implementation plan, as well as an evaluation of the plan every September. This annual evaluation is also discussed with the Dean s Advisory Board. The Dean submits an annual report to the Medical Campus Provost, the University President, and other senior University officials that is a presentation of the School s activities requiring an overall evaluation of the School s progress. The Dean s Annual Report is in Appendix 1.2.a-3 or online at sph.bu.edu/deansreport. Department chairs submit an annual report to the Dean upon which the School s annual report is based. This requires department chairs and faculty to annually evaluate their activities as a department. Each chair meets individually with the Dean on a regular basis to review the department s overall progress and accomplishments. Faculty evaluations are completed each year using an approach called the Faculty Development and Assessment (FDA) system. This performance assessment system resulted from collaboration between the faculty and the School administration to provide objective information and assessments for each faculty 8

18 CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION AND PLANNING member. An annual meeting between faculty members and their chair combines elements of faculty evaluation and faculty development. Some form of this annual meeting has been operating for 15 years. Students are monitored on an ongoing basis through the Registrar's Office to ensure that they are meeting or exceeding performance standards required for advancement and graduation. Students whose progress is unsatisfactory are required to meet with their faculty advisor and/or with the Associate Dean for Education. Students evaluate every course by completing course/teaching evaluation forms. The School has replaced paper evaluation forms with an online evaluation process that enables students to provide more thorough feedback. For the past 12 years the School has conducted an annual exit survey of graduating students. This survey provides students with a formal opportunity to evaluate and comment on various aspects of their overall experience at the School. These surveys provide vitally important information to the School, resulting in many changes over the years in response to this student feedback. A copy of the most recent graduation survey (2009) and the summary of quantitative responses are available as Appendices 1.2.a-4 and 1.2.a b. Description of how the results of evaluation and planning are regularly used to enhance the quality of programs and activities. The School conducts both long-term strategic planning and annual planning. Both of these processes are informed by the evaluation processes discussed in the previous section. The Governing Council (GC) conducts a formal review of the School s overall progress toward meeting the goals and objectives contained in the strategic plan and the yearly implementation plans. In addition, quarterly evaluations ensure that the School remains on track with specific initiatives. Since the GC is both the planning committee, as well as the School committee directly responsible for approving major policy initiatives, each GC meeting effectively functions as an opportunity for reconciling the strategic goals and objectives with the day-to-day realities of the School s efforts in research, education, and service. The Associate Deans are largely responsible for the successful accomplishment of the School s planning goals. Since they meet regularly as part of the GC and the Management Committee, the Associate Deans have an on-going opportunity to jointly assess the School s progress toward reaching its goals. As chairs of the standing committees, the Associate Deans regularly evaluate their areas of responsibility and initiate changes as needed. Student course evaluations are distributed to the instructors, department chairs, and the Education Committee and are available to the BU community via an online report database (dccweb.bumc.bu.edu/sphcourseevaluation/reports). This student feedback regularly leads to course changes, elimination of courses, and addition of needed courses. It also leads to interventions that are part of the annual faculty assessment process and enable faculty to better meet their teaching goals. The graduate exit survey has led to significant curricular and administrative changes. For example, recent changes in the Career Services Office were a direct response to graduating student feedback. In the broadest terms, the overall effectiveness of the School s planning and evaluation efforts can be measured by the remarkable growth that the institution has experienced since the last accreditation selfstudy. 9

19 CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION AND PLANNING 1.2.c. Identification of outcome measures that the School uses to monitor its effectiveness in meeting its mission, goals, and objectives. Target levels should be defined and data regarding the School s performance must be provided for each of the last three years. As part of the strategic planning process, the School identified key outcome measures and regularly monitored our progress in achieving these goals and objectives (see Appendix 1.2.c-1 for the School s Strategic Plan). The outcome measures were both quantitative and qualitative, depending on the specific objective in question. Key quantitative measures included items such as: grant funding, student enrollment and admissions, school diversity, and school finances. Key qualitative measures included: completion of new faculty appointment and promotion guidelines, partnerships with other schools at the University around a new Global Health Initiative, enhanced internal communications, and a substantially enhanced Practice Office. Table 1.2.c.1 lists the goals and objectives from the School s previous strategic plan as well as the results for these objectives over the last three years of the plan. As the table indicates, the overwhelming majority of objectives from the School plan have been completed successfully. Some objectives that were not pursued include: the development of a pro bono service project; the establishment of distinct MPH degree requirements for students who enter with little or no public health education or experience; and the development of a new model for allocating unrestricted income within the School. In the cases where the School decided not to pursue an objective that had been a part of the strategic plan, it was usually the case that the School was either able to achieve the intent of the objective in another manner, or that the circumstances that had prompted the inclusion of the objective became less relevant as time passed. Partially met objectives fall into two categories: one part of a multi-part objective was met while the other was not pursued or the objective was not fully completed in the five-year period and continues today. The School s decision to not pursue or continue each partially met objective is given in Appendix 1.2.c.-2. Table 1.2.c.1. BUSPH Performance on Strategic Planning Goals for Goal 1: BUSPH will strengthen its focus on improving the health of disadvantaged, underserved, and vulnerable communities. Objective Result Designate or recruit a senior faculty person to coordinate activities in this area Met Increase curriculum content on health issues of disadvantaged populations Met Develop a program of seed grants that will encourage faculty to initiate research on Met improving the health needs of underserved populations Develop innovative opportunities for students, such as special practica, to encourage Met them to pursue careers in improving the health of disadvantaged populations Create new education or research programs that focus on specific disadvantaged Met populations Goal 2: BUSPH will strengthen its partnerships with the public health practice community. Objective Result Substantially strengthen the Office of Public Health Practice Met Provide enhanced opportunities for continuing education and professional Met development to public health practitioners Develop greater capacity in preparedness topics Met Develop greater capacity in health policy Met Establish the School s CDC Prevention Research Center as a campus-wide base for Met community-based prevention research activities Strengthen the required practicum for MPH students Met 10

20 CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION AND PLANNING Goal 3: BUSPH will increase its support for community-oriented service activities. Objective Create a program to provide consultation to local health departments and community-based organizations Create a school-wide pro bono public health service project Develop mechanisms for documenting and communicating community service activities Institute service awards for faculty, staff, and students More clearly recognize service activities in faculty promotion decisions Result Met Partially met Partially met Met Met INTERCONNECTED Goal 4: BUSPH will strengthen the interdisciplinary nature of its education programs to better meet the needs of contemporary students and the demands of the modern world. Objective Result Develop content tracks in the MPH program that will allow students to focus on Met areas of interest in an interdisciplinary manner and that will be responsive to the Institute of Medicine report on public health education Integrate the MPH curriculum, including portions of the core curriculum, to provide Partially met, students with a more interdisciplinary perspective on public health in progress Establish distinct MPH degree requirements for students who enter with little or no Not pursued public health education or experience Grow the DrPH program and interconnect it with additional departments Met Coordinate policies, procedures, and financial aid allocations across all SPH doctoral Met programs Expand efforts in public health education for undergraduates Met Goal 5: BUSPH will enhance collaborative and interdisciplinary research within the School, across the Medical Campus, and between the University s two campuses (Medical Campus, Charles River Campus). Objective Result Participate in campus- and university-wide research planning efforts Met Conduct a regular series of research seminars that emphasize inter-disciplinary Met efforts Focus seed grant program on interdisciplinary proposals Met Obtain funding for new interdisciplinary research centers Met Strengthen linkages between the research program and the School s education, Partially met service, and practice activities Goal 6: BUSPH will emphasize approaches that foster integration between the School and its departments and centers, among its departments, and across the spectrum of its education, research, and service activities. Objective Develop strategic plans for all departments and centers that will complement and extend the School s strategic plan Emphasize management, financial, and communication activities that enhance the integration of the School s operating units Substantially enhance internal communications efforts Result Postponed to Strategic Plan Met Met 11

21 CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION AND PLANNING GLOBAL Goal 7: BUSPH will play a leadership role in the development and implementation of a coordinated Global Health Initiative for the Medical Campus and the University. Objective Result Participate actively in the growth of a university-wide Global Health Initiative Met Create global health education, research, and program links with multiple units on Met the Charles River Campus Obtain funding for SPH global health efforts from new sources Met Focus global health activities on selected countries, NGOs, and educational Met institutions that have the greatest potential for successful partnerships and capacity building Partner with interested BUSM departments to develop campus-wide global health Met activities Goal 8: BUSPH will continue its investment in global health activities with an emphasis on those that foster interconnectedness and involvement. Objective Result Strengthen SPH global health activities that involve multiple departments and that Met integrate education, research, and service activities Increase the global health content of the SPH curriculum Met Increase SPH s capacities in global health policy and global human rights Met Strengthen the international practicum program for students Met Redesign and expand IH certificate programs Revised RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT Goal 9: BUSPH will enhance the quality of its faculty, staff, and students. Objective Clarify and strengthen standards for faculty recruitment and promotion Enhance faculty development activities in education, research, and service Emphasize efforts designed to increase faculty diversity Strengthen admission marketing and recruitment activities Strengthen efforts designed to increase student diversity Increase training and professional development opportunities for staff Implement a formal annual review program for staff Goal 10: BUSPH will strengthen non-academic resources for students. Objective Markedly increase the size of the School s scholarship program Enhance the quality of advising, student services, and student life Emphasize the acquisition or assignment of space for student use Expand skill enhancement and career services for students Goal 11: BUSPH will increase the School s financial and physical resources. Objective Markedly grow the School s income from financial development activities Grow tuition income through modest increases in enrollment that are compatible with quality enhancement objectives Increase the amount of indirect cost return from research activities Result Met Met Met Met Met Met Met Result Met Met Met Partially met Result Met Met Met 12

22 CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION AND PLANNING Design and implement a space plan that will establish a second major location for SPH people and programs Encourage regular information technology upgrades at the school level Met Upgraded as needed Goal 12: BUSPH will develop and implement new management and budgeting approaches that will guide strategic and tactical decisions. Objective Result Create and maintain an independent financial status for SPH within the Medical Met Campus budgeting process Create new reports to track key data at the school and department level Met Develop a new model for allocating unrestricted income within the School Not pursued Appendix 1.2.c-2 contains a detailed assessment of these objectives. Appendices 1.2.c-3 to 1.2.c-5 contain the annual operational planning grids for the last three years. These grids contain more detail on the initiatives and outcome measures that the School used to assess its progress toward achieving our goals on an annual basis. The School s strategic plan, as described in Criteria 1.1.b. and 1.1.c. and Appendix 1.1.c-1, has three overarching themes and seven specific goals. Each goal has a corresponding set of objectives. Each objective has a time frame; a person identified who is responsible for the successful completion of the objective; and a set of outcome measures, which will be used to define progress and success for each objective. Successful completion of each of the goals will be achieved if we are successful at completing all of the outcomes of the objectives for each goal. 1.2.d. An analytical self-study document that provides a qualitative and quantitative assessment of how the School achieves its mission, goals, and objectives and meets all accreditation criteria, including a candid assessment of strengths and weaknesses in terms of the School s performance against the accreditation criteria. This report serves as the School s analytic self-study document. It provides a qualitative and quantitative assessment of how the School achieves its mission, goals and objectives and meets all accreditation criteria, as well as a candid assessment of strengths and weaknesses in terms of the School s performance against the CEPH accreditation criteria. 1.2.e. An analysis of the School s responses to recommendations in the last accreditation report. A number of changes have occurred at the School since the last accreditation review that represent direct and substantive responses to the specific concerns raised in that review. Those concerns and the School s responses may be summarized as follows: 1. There is a need to further expand the functions of both the alumni and development offices to increase the endowment of the School. Certainly the recent creation of positions for a full-time fundraiser and alumni director is an important step in this direction. Since the last accreditation visit, the School has created the position of Associate Dean for Institutional Development and Strategic Planning, hired a professional Director of Development and created the position of Director of Alumni Relations. The School has a development plan outlined to coincide with the University s just-launched Capital Campaign and it has recently received its first $1 million gift to endow scholarships for outstanding students. 13

23 CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION AND PLANNING 2. Instituting a departmental review cycle would be helpful in maintaining academic quality and equity. As part of the School s new strategic planning process all departments will create new strategic plans that reinforce and complement the School s plan. The process of creating these plans will necessarily result in an evaluation of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats facing the research, education, and service activities of the department. The new department plans will be evaluated by the Governing Council to ensure that they are consistent with the mission and goals of the School. 3. Learning objectives for the departments and core courses are in place, but some professors need to develop learning objectives and include them in their course syllabi. The Education Committee created a review process that ensures all course syllabi have specific learning objectives. 4. Continuing education would better serve the community if it were institutionalized with a designated director and if a process of surveying the public health community to accurately determine educational needs that are currently unmet was initiated. The School has institutionalized its programs to train the public health work force. It has also vastly expanded the Practice Office through substantial efforts to further integrate practice into all areas and now has a full-time Associate Dean for Practice. One of the essential functions of this office is to provide the public health work force with educational and training programs to improve its effectiveness. Details are found in Criterion The community would like to see the School increase faculty expertise in the area of disabilities, after the tragic loss of a faculty member who was considered one of the strongest supporters for disabilities issues. The School now has two groups working in the area of disabilities: the Health and Disability Working Group and the Health and Disability Research Institute. Both groups are very successful peer reviewed, grant funded organizations whose works reflect the interests and expertise of Alan Meyers, the faculty member mentioned in the report who tragically passed away at a young age. 6. Because of the School s high tuition, the administration will need to continue increasing scholarship opportunities for students in order to stay competitive in a rapidly growing market. The School fully recognizes this challenge and since the last site visit has significantly increased our financial aid program and doubled the amount of scholarship funds for students. This has resulted in increasing numbers of applicants, a decreasing acceptance rate, and an increasing matriculation rate. 7. The School needs to increase its visibility by marketing the strengths of the School, its faculty, students, and alumni to the national and international community. Since the last site visit, the School has created an Office of Communications staffed by a Director of Communications and five additional staff members who focus on internal and external communications. The School has developed completely new websites for internal and external users and it has integrated communication and marketing strategies in all of its outreach efforts. 8. The School needs to clarify its requirements for the public health core curriculum and culminating experiences. These are currently presented in a variety of ways that are not always clear and may not be consistent across departments, in terms of learning objectives. The Education Committee reviewed the culminating experiences for each concentration and the way the core course requirements were presented to students. The decision was made to allow the culminating experience to vary by concentration in order for students to demonstrate mastery of the skills that are most relevant to each area. Handbooks for each concentration were created that clearly specify all graduation requirements, including core course requirements, core competencies, and culminating experience requirements. 14