The GeorgeWashingtonUniversitySchool of Medicine and Health Sciences

Graduate Medical Education Committee

2010-2011 ANNUAL RESIDENCY PROGRAM EVALUATION REPORT

Please complete and email to Penny Schwartz or Mary Tucker by Oct. 15, 2011

I

Program:

Date(s) of Program Evaluation Meeting(s):

Participants (Names and Titles):

Program Director(s) and Faculty and Coordinator(s)

Residents

Others

Documentation Reviewed

II

Previous RC Result Letter

Previous Internal Review Report

III

Curriculum

Resident Performance

Program Outcome Measures

The Learning and Working Environment

Moonlighting Activities

IV

Faculty Development

Scholarly Activities

V

Program Strengths

Program Deficiencies

Performance Improvement Plan

Resources Needed

from ACGME Common Program Requirements

Program Evaluation and Improvement The program must document formal, systematic evaluation of the curriculum at least annually. The program must monitor and track each of the following areas:

1. resident performance; 2. faculty development; 3. graduate performance, including performance of program graduates on the certification examination; and, 4. program quality.

Specifically; a) Residents and faculty must have the opportunity to evaluate the program confidentially and in writing at least annually; and, b) The program must use the results of residents’ assessments of the program together with other program evaluation results to improve the program.

If deficiencies are found, the program should prepare a written plan of action to document initiatives to improve performance in the areas listed in section V.C.1. The action plan should be reviewed and approved by the teaching faculty and documented in meeting minutes.

The GeorgeWashingtonUniversitySchool of Medicine and Health Sciences

Graduate Medical Education Committee

2009-2010ANNUAL RESIDENCY PROGRAM EVALUATION REPORT

Program Title:

Date(s) of Program Evaluation Meeting(s):

Participants (Names and Titles):

Program Director(s) and Faculty

Residents

Coordinator(s)

Others

Documentation Reviewed

Example of material to include: correspondence with RC; reports of internal review reports; summaries of evaluations of residents, faculty, curriculum, and conferences; results of RC Resident Survey, of any internal surveys such as of residents, alumni or patients, and of in-service examinations and board examinations; and tabulations of patient safety/ patient care quality indicators.

List of Documents
Previous RRC Result Letter

Suggested questions to be answered: What was the effective date and accreditation status of last RC review, and what is the status of corrections to critical, substantive RC citations?

Date of LetterDate of Progress Report

Accreditation Status

Citations

Corrective Action

Previous Internal Review Report

Questions: What was the date of the last internal review and what progress has been made to correct any concerns and any GMEC recommendations?

Date of Review to GMEC
Concerns/Recommendations

Progress toward Improvements

Previous ACGME Resident Survey Result

Questions: What was the date of the most recent ACGME Resident Survey, what percentage of program Residents responded, what were the areas of non-compliance, and how have these areas been corrected.

Date of Survey and Percentage Participation

Areas of “Non-Compliant”

Progress toward Corrections

Curriculum

Issues to be considered: Based on a review of the documents listed above plus written competency-based educational objectives and other input from faculty and residents, is the program’s competency-based curriculum (educational objectives and teaching methodologies) still valid and appropriate for meeting RC Specific Education Requirements (usually Section V of the Requirements) and for preparing residents to demonstrate sufficient competency to enter independent practice in your specialty in your specialty?

If not, what changes are planned? What are notable strengths of the curriculum?

Validity of Objectives:

Areas for Improvements:

Strengths

Resident Performance

Questions: What competencies-based resident evaluation methodologies are in place; are they valid and effective in terms of determining progression toward demonstrating that residents have sufficient competence to enter independent practice?

Which evaluation tools have proved most valid? What, if any, new evaluation tools are being planned?

How are the General Competencies as integrated into the evaluation processes used to improve resident progression?

Based on a review of trends in end-of-rotation and summative evaluations of residents by faculty, what if any changes in clinical and didactic teaching were made to improve teaching effectiveness or to remediate poor-performing residents?

What have been notable highlights in resident evaluation results?

For procedure-oriented programs, are there adequate numbers of cases, equally distributed among residents?

Evaluation Methodologies

Validity:

Additional Methodologies

Highlights:

Program Outcome Measures

Questions: What program quality indices does your program consider important, and how has your program performed against these indices?

What are other program highlights (positive and negative) based on various outcome or quality measures (such as in-service examinations, board performance over the past three years and various survey)?

What program changes were made in the past year or planned for the coming year, to correct any negatives or to build upon the positives?

Indices
Highlights

Changes

The Learning and Working Environment

Describe activities or program changes made over the past year to address:

Handoffs

Supervision

Duty Hours

Moonlighting Activities

Questions: Do you permit your residents/fellows to moonlight?

How do you monitor duty hours for residents/fellows who moonlight?

If you do not permit your residents/fellows to moonlight, attach a copy of your program policy prohibiting moonlighting for all residents/fellows in the program.

If moonlighting is permitted, attach a summary of the moonlighting activity of all residents/fellows in the program.

Faculty Development

Questions: How are evaluations of the faculty reported back to individual faculty members, and how are any improvements implemented?

What program activities are in place to support faculty teaching effectiveness? What non-clinical CME course have faculty taken?

Evaluations

Development

Scholarly Activities

Questions: What notable achievements were made regarding research projects, publications, presentations and other scholarly activities, both among the faculty and the residents?

What additional activities are planned?

Faculty

Residents

New Activities

Program Strengths / Deficiencies

Questions: What are the critical resident educational and professional development strengths and weakness of your program?

Strengths

Weaknesses

Performance Improvement Plan/Resources Needed

Issues: Finally, what additional resources or support should the hospital and its Graduate Medical Education Committee consider to assist your program in making any changes to capitalize on your strengths or to address any of your deficiencies?

Improvement Plan

Needed Additional Resources