Transcript Council On Chiropractic Education (CCE)

Council On
Chiropractic
Education (CCE)
FCLB Annual Meeting
March 2008
Council on Chiropractic Education
Welcome/Intro
Kathleen Galligan, D.C.
Chair
Commission on Accreditation
Marc Gammerman, DC
Commissioner
OVERVIEW OF CCE

Three separate, distinct components
Members
Board
of Directors
Commission
on Accreditation (COA)
COMMISSION ON
ACCREDITATION
Certify
the quality and integrity of the
DCPs, using the Standards, through the
process of accreditation
Development
members
and training of site team
HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMISSION
PROCESS

Confidentiality

Conflict of Interest

Consensus based approach
HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMISSION
PROCESS

Composition of the COA

Assignment of reviewers

Role of the Chair
ACCREDITATION CYCLE
Four year cycle (Initial)
 Eight year cycle (Reaffirmation)


Interim Reporting
 PCBR
 Progress
Reports
 Other Reports (if necessary)
ACCREDITATION CYCLE

Full site visit

Interim Visit

Focused Visit

USDE Timeline regarding concerns
SITE VISIT

Purpose of Site Visit
 Confirmation
by the site team of the
information presented by the DCP in the Self
Study
 Creation
of a report to the Commission for the
purpose of an accreditation decision

Group of trained individuals that serve as
the eyes and ears of the COA
Site Team Academy
ANATOMY OF A SITE VISIT




Validation of self study
information by the site team
Creation of the site team report
Response to report by the
DCP
Decision by COA
COA Decision
DCP response
Site Team Report
Self Study completed by DCP
SITE VISIT CONTINUED

Full site visit team
 Chair,
Administrative Expert
 Finance Expert
 Basic Science/Research Expert
 Clinical Science Expert
 Clinical Management Expert
 Practicing DC
SITE VISIT CONTINUED
Job of the site team is to evaluate the
content of the self study and the evidence
presented by the DCP in comparison to
the actual Standards
 Evaluate documents, do chart reviews,
interview faculty, administrators and
students
 Produce a report outlining their findings

THE STANDARDS



Actual Standards
cover close to 40
pages
25 pages of clinical
standards
Up until the past year
or so, they have
changed yearly
CLINICAL EDUCATION

Majority of Concerns (almost ½)

Quantitative vs Qualitative

25 pages of Standards to be met
AREAS OF CONCERN

July 2005-January 2008 (3 yrs)
 Total
of 62 concerns identified
 20 concerns currently open
COA 2008 SITE TEAM VISIT
BUD SMITH CHIROPRACTIC COLLEGE
AKA
“BS”CC
BSCC
COA DECISION MAKING
PROCESS

Thorough read of self study and site team
report by all commissioners

Overview of the highlights of the site team
report (possible concerns/commendations)

Possible appearance by the DCP
COA DECISION MAKING
PROCESS

Open discussion until consensus is
reached regarding
What concerns remain
 What reporting is required
 Timeline for reporting
 Need for future visits
 Affect on accreditation status

BSCC FOCUSED SITE VISIT

Clinical Education
 5.



Required Clinical Competencies
f. Diagnosis
g. Case Management
These two standards actually have 36 parts and
cover three full pages in the Standards Manual
BSCC CLINIC
Evaluation by Site Team

Interview with Clinic Director

Review of Diagnosis and Case
Management work done in the didactic
setting

Chart Audit
Form Syndrome
ICD.9 1234.5

If a problem exists, develop a form

Better yet, develop two forms

Develop a form to track the previously
mentioned forms

Clinical Education
 5.


Required Clinical Competencies
f. Diagnosis
g. Case Management
GED
General
Diagnosis
Overall Part II
Exam
After Change
Students
Before Change
Students
88
45
Pass %
95%
71%
Ave Score
510
401
Pass
72
37
77%
59%
Pass
Pass %
Examples
t-test
(* sig at p=.05)
4.67*
Example

Clinical Education
 5.


Required Clinical Competencies
f. Diagnosis
g. Case Management
Audit Indicator
6/06
10/06
Spring
07
Appropriate outcome measurement tools were
used.
74.8%
82.8%
84%
Objective, measurable, short-term treatment
goals are recorded.
8.7%
68.7%
82%
Objective, measurable, long-term treatment
goals are recorded.
7.8%
66.7%
83%
The plan of management is appropriate for the
diagnosis listed.
93.9%
92.9%
97%
Example
SUMMARY
Collegial, cooperative process between
the programs and the CCE
 Goal is high quality chiropractic education
 Evaluation strives to be fair and thorough
 Evaluation of the programs is ongoing
 Continuous self assessment by both the
programs and the CCE

Standards Revision Task Force





Established in 2006
Members bring experience from academics, professional
practice, higher education and regulation
Charged with making recommedations for change to the
Standards
Largest overhaul of the Standards in years, goal is to
establish an ongoing five year review of the Standards
Task Force members work on a total of 10
subcommittees
Standards Revision (cont’d)

Information Gathering Stage
 Meetings
attended around the country
(academic, regulatory, professional)
 Surveys of various constituents and
organizations
 Information gathered from the Commission
Standards Revision (cont’d)


All areas of the Standards have been reviewed with
suggested revisions being generated
Four areas generate the most conversation and likely the
greatest revision





Curriculum requirements
Clinical competencies
Admissions requirements
Research
Much discussion regarding how best to incorporate
ethics and professionalism
Standards Revision (cont’d)
First draft expected to be ready by midJune for Task Force review and edits
 Goal to gain approval from the CCE BOD
by October 2008
 Draft then circulated to stakeholders for
comment, with further drafts to follow

Standards Revision Summary




New Standards written with significant input from many
facets of the profession
Less prescriptive than current Standards, allowing
programs to meet the Standards in the manner that best
fits their mission
Focus on accountability for demonstrating outcomes of
the program
More user friendly with examples of evidence needed to
demonstrate compliance