College of
Human
Medicine

2019 College Advisory Council (CAC) Minutes

December 16

Voting Members Present: F. Abbasi, J. Alan, M. Awonuga, A. Bernstein, S. Bray, L. Cabrera, H. Chen, J. Cole, E. Frost, S. Kavuturu, J. MacKeigan, R. Malinowski, M. Morishita, M. Petroff, J. Reynolds, E. Shapiro, A. Vanderziel, A. Weber

Ex-Officio Members Present: S. Barman, M. DeLano, K. Elisevich, R. Folberg, B. Forney, N. Jones, K. Kelly-Blake, S. Lin, A. Mansour, A. Sousa, D. Wagner

Gustes and Staff: F. Peterson, G. Kelley

Approval of Minutes

Minutes of the November meeting were approved as written.

Briefing from the Interim Dean

Interim Dean Sousa provided the following updates.

  • Continues to conduct quality and safety rounds in a clinical setting each week. Focusing on staff and what they know about quality and safety in a clinical setting, as they are a key source of information for improvement. Staff dedication is impressive.
  • Recently announced the creation of two divisions through the college’s partnership with Ascension Providence 1) Neurosurgery (based in Southfield) and 2) Otolaryngology (aka, Ear, Nose, and Throat or ENT; based in Novi). These divisions will benefit students by providing leadership and sought-after residencies; they will benefit research faculty, as they have a large amount of data.
  • State budget information was provided from the provost. The university is expecting a 1% total increase in funding. About 25% of the university’s overall budget comes from the state.
  • In collaboration with Sparrow and McLaren, the college is hiring surgeons and pediatricians, as well as expanding the Department of Medicine. Family Medicine is collaborating with Family and Community Medicine (COM). Overall, the college is creating a core set of strengths with which to work.
  • Department chairs are talking to architects about a new clinical building south of campus. Although no decision has been made, if the current Clinical Center is vacated, a suggestion has been made to re-purpose it for research, as the infrastructure in great shape.
  • MSU Street Medicine, a program in East Lansing where students are collaborating with and adding on to a program COM started, is going strong, with 93 CHM students signed up for training. It is modeled after a program started in Pittsburgh, and the idea is to try to get people to clinics. The college committed resources and will work to create a similar program in Grand Rapids.
  • Dr. Wanda Lipscomb was chosen as the recipient of the 2020 MSU Excellence in Diversity Lifetime Achievement Award through the Office of Inclusion and Intercultural Initiatives. Carol Parker was thanked for her efforts in shepherding the application through the process.
  • Discussion took place regarding the possible conflict of interest (COI) that could happen with Dr. Sousa’s teaching. Dr. Sousa has a COI plan set up—anything involving the interim dean will be dealt with by the executive vice president.
Academic Affairs Update

Dr. Wagner gave the following updates.

  • The Student Competence Committee will recommend grades for 800+ students.
  • The Shared Discovery Curriculum (SDC) puts clinical experiences early and basic and social science late with the goal of having great day-one residents. SDC has matriculated the fourth class and the pioneers will graduate this spring. The ECE is on its fourth round and going smoothly. Ask Five is the last implementation.
  • Outcomes: students are doing better on Step 1 than in the past and are holding steady in terms of shelf exam scores. There have been about 100 presentations on shared discovery work and about 10 publications with more in process. Consultations have been done both informally and formally.

Dr. Wagner asked CAC members about bringing a team member to CAC meetings to introduce and field questions. Members indicated they would welcome that.

Professionalism Policy and Faculty Affairs Update

  • R. Folberg updated the CAC members on the implementation of the CHM professionalism policy. In the past, each department has assessed professionalism differently, with some departments assessing professionalism as a narrative, other departments using checklists, and some need to better incorporate professionalism into the annual reviews. Dr. Folberg put out a call asking chairs how they intend to assess professionalism. There is a Chair Collaboration Meeting in the spring to talk in detail about what works and what does not. An assessment tool may be created based on the outcome of discussions about best practices that might work in one department and not in another. The assessment of professionalism is not quantitative.
  • It is necessary to train chairs to recognize exemplary professionalism and identify areas that need to be addressed (below expectations). If a faculty member believes they cannot trust their chair to give an honest assessment, the Faculty Affairs office needs to work with the department to improve trust.
  • He intends to follow up with a note to each chair with things he outlined at the meeting about formative and summative evaluations and asked for CAC member input about other things he should be thinking about and include. A copy of an email note to chairs will be forwarded to the CAC, so members know what he is communicating to chairs.
  • When asked how professionalism will work in the RPT process, Dr. Folberg noted that, although more discussion is needed, he believes the sum of summative assessments over the years would be presented to the RPT Committee.
  • A. Sousa added that the provost is expecting a professionalism policy from every college. Associate Provost and Associate Vice President for Academic Human Resources Terry Curry said that annual review letters would be made available to department and college RPT Committees.
  • CAC members were encouraged to discuss the instrument for professionalism assessment in their departments. They were also encouraged to contact Dr. Folberg with concerns.
Proposed Changes to Awards
  • A. Weber explained that there were three award items on the original list needing CAC input. However, the third one regarding the Excellence-in-Teaching Award (for graduate students) has been dropped.
  • CAC members were asked to consider a modification to the 1) Outstanding Curriculum Contribution Award to make it permanent that there are two recipients to cover the diversity of the new curriculum and 2) Early Career Research Excellence Award to indicate that two recipients are chosen – one award designated to a clinician and one to a basic scientist. After discussion, it was proposed to add up to three recipients – one award designated to a clinician (physician-scientist) and two to basic scientists. A motion was made and accepted to approve the latter. It was also decided that the award solicitation be sent in February, and a reminder sent in March without changing the April 15 due date.
Interim Dean Selection—Request Update to Bylaws for Academic Governance
  • Members brought up the issue of “shared responsibility” in the selection of the dean and interim dean, as indicated in the MSU Bylaws for Academic Governance (BAG).  Some CAC members felt that during the selection process for Dr. Sousa as interim dean, they were not involved in the selection or determining procedures. The goal is to request to amend the BAG in order to provide more detail about procedures for selecting a dean and interim dean.
  • Discussion took place regarding 1) drafting a memo to Interim Provost Sullivan about the CAC’s desire to be involved (shared responsibility) in determining procedures for the selection of the dean and 2) about overall clarification of the CAC’s role. Some people who were on the CAC when the search for Dean Beauchamp took place offered information about the process at that time (e.g. deciding representation on the search committee, suggesting appropriate representatives, etc.). It was decided that a working group be formed to write a memo to the interim provost. Allison Bernstein and Laura Cabrera agreed to be part of the group, and it was suggested that Vicki Johnson-Lawrence, the college representative to the University Committee on Faculty Affairs, be asked to join. Others who were interested in joining should contact F. Peterson.

Criteria for CAC Membership and Service as Chair or Vice Chair

Discussion took place regarding the appropriate percent of administrative responsibility that should be allowed a CAC member or member of the CAC Steering Committee to minimize conflict of interest. Revisions to the BAG currently going through Faculty Senate and University Council propose that anyone with greater than 25% administrative responsibilities would not be eligible to serve as chair or vice-chair. Possible changes to the college bylaws to be brought to spring faculty meeting are 1) keep bylaws as is – no restrictions; 2) restrict to 25% admin. responsibility, 3) restrict to an additional %. It was decided that a working group to review bylaws in totality be formed.

Updated College Administrator’s Information

The list of college deans and their responsibilities was compiled by B. Forney, as requested by council members, and distributed to CAC members before the meeting. The list will be put on the website. The list provided for CAC members included the percent effort for each position.

Spring Faculty Meeting

J. MacKeigan proposed May 7, 2020 from 3:00 - 5:00 pm. The change in time from the evening is being made to accommodate working parents. The fall meeting will be held in the evening; the spring meeting will be held in the late afternoon.

Comments and Announcements

None

November 18

Voting Members Present: M. Awonuga, S. Bray, L. Cabrera, H. Chen, J. Cole, S. Khalil, J. MacKeigan, R. Malinowski, M. Morishita, M. Petroff, E. Shapiro

Ex-Officio Members Present: S. Barman, M. DeLano, K. Elisevich, R. Folberg, V. Johnson-Lawrence, N. Jones, K. Kelly-Blake, W. Lipscomb, A. Sousa

Guests and Staff:  S. Counts (for A. Bernstein), F. Peterson, D. Temple, M. Thompson

Approval of Minutes
Minutes of the October meeting were approved as written once a quorum was reached.

Briefing from the Interim Dean

Interim Dean Sousa provided the following updates.

  • The recent gift from the Meijer family for a theranostics clinic is the largest charitable gift given to the college. The clinic will be housed in the new Doug Meijer Medical Innovation Building, which will be built with no direct MSU cost for financing of the building.
  • Traveled to Xavier University, which is a historically black university, to discuss opportunities for expanding the pipeline and encouraging graduate students to come to MSU. The college has an Early Assurance Program in place for the MD program, and a formal celebration of the signing of the agreement took place during the visit. Conversations regarding a summer program are ongoing. The main hindrance to having a vibrant connection to students is the cost of out-of-state tuition.
  • Visiting MSU clinics, departments, department chairs and directors. Visiting one clinic operated by MSU each week. Starting departments visits. Continuing regular meetings with chairs and directors. Visiting with hospital partners and met with the director of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. Attended the recent AAMC meeting.
  • A CAC member asked about the timeline for starting the search for the dean. A. Sousa responded that a timeline has not yet been established. Figuring out what the dean’s job will be in this new structure is the first step. At some other institutions with an executive vice president who is not the dean, the dean is more focused on education and has less to do with the clinical operation.

    W. Lipscomb offered information about the standard process for selecting a dean for those CAC members who have not been through it. The process for any college is under the purview of the provost. The current dean will not be setting the timeline or making decisions. The search will be controlled at a level higher than the college. The same way Interim Provost Sullivan met with CAC regarding the interim dean, members can expect a conversation about the process of selecting a dean. The last time a dean was chosen, a search committee was established with input by the CAC. The provost made the final selection.

    There are bylaws in place that clearly state that the process for selection involves the provost. The process for selection of a dean is outlined in the Bylaws for Academic Governance. CAC members will be used as advisors – note item 2.1.3.2. The voting faculty of each college, as represented by the faculty members of the College Advisory Committee, shall have shared responsibility with the Provost to determine procedures for the nomination of that college’s deans.

Discussion shifted to discussion of the selection of the interim dean. It was thought that the process was unclear. It could be that the CAC doesn’t have a role in the selection, but members would like to see more transparency. It was recognized that the appointment of interim dean was handled informally possibly due to the short timeframe and the role of interim--not permanent. The CAC Steering Committee will make a point to reach out to the provost and search committee, when formed, that the CAC does want shared responsibility. It was pointed out that the university bylaws may need to be updated to include the process for selection of an interim dean. The topic will be discussed at the December meeting.

Innovation Park Update

Dick Temple, college architect, provided an update on the Grand Rapids Innovation Park. The official groundbreaking for the Doug Meijer Medical Innovation Building (the second building being built in the park) took place the day of this CAC meeting. Mr. Temple stressed that the Innovation Park is not a Grand Rapids initiative but a college initiative with connections to the East Lansing and Flint campuses and with research across the College of Human Medicine and other colleges. His presentation highlighted the following:

  • There are several centers for excellence across the Medical Mile. The Doug Meijer Medical Innovation Building, opening late 2021, will be part of that group. It will be 210,000 square feet and adjacent to a 600-space parking deck.
  • The GR Innovation Park consists of four parcels: 1) Doug Meijer Medical Innovation Building 2) Parking Deck, 3) Land Bank (for additional growth), and 4) Grand Rapids Research Center.
  • The Doug Meijer Medical Innovation Building will bring commercial and industry healthcare partners to the site to help commercialize intellectual property (IP).
  • The Doug Meijer Medical Innovation Building and parking deck are the first major Public, Private, Partnership (P3) facility projects for the university. Another P3 is the solar array on campus. MSU has given the developer a 75-year ground lease, which will provide an income stream for the university.
  • CHM will have two leases in the multi-tenant building. The $19.5 M gift from Doug Meijer will fund a radiopharmacy in the building, which will bring theranostics to this country (from Germany).
  • Many leases are set or in the works. Jerry Kooiman is the contact for the leasing component.

Review and Approval of Family Medicine Bylaws

The following summary regarding changes to the bylaws was distributed before the meeting.

  • Restructure and rename the Department Executive Committee to become the Department Leadership Council. This change is proposed to eliminate the redundancy between Executive Committee and Association Chairs meetings and responsibilities. The Leadership Council will include four faculty members elected at large. Changes include when the Leadership Council shall and may be consulted by the Chair, including annual review of faculty, appointment of adjunct faculty, filling of vacancies on department committees, and appointment of Associate Chairpersons
  • Updates the types of Department meetings allowed to only one type (those open to the entire Department)

There were no specific questions regarding the proposed changes. A motion to approve the bylaws was made and approved. The vote to approve they bylaws was unanimous.

Review CHM Bylaws

It was brought to the member’s attention that there is no language in the CHM Bylaws that speaks to what to do if the current CAC chair has what could be considered a conflict of interest (e.g. also serves in an administrative role). Since J. MacKeigan has recently been named assistant dean for research, committee members need to decide if they want to propose language for future situations or vote to elect a new chair. Current bylaws indicate that The College Advisory Council shall elect its own chairperson, vice-chairperson, and secretary, and shall fill vacancies on the Council for any part of a term until the next regular election. Each Council officer shall be elected for one year and may be reelected. The chairperson shall not serve more than two consecutive terms. The chairperson automatically serves as a member of the Faculty Senate. (3.1.2.3.). Bylaws currently do allow for someone with administrative responsibilities to assume a position on the committee and also serve as chair or vice chair. Revisions to the Bylaws for Academic Governance currently going through Faculty Senate and University Council propose that anyone with greater than 25% administrative responsibilities should not serve as chair or vice chair. J. MacKeigan’s appointment as assistant dean for research does not exceed 15% of his effort. Committee members need to decide if it makes sense to update the bylaws to codify the criteria for committee membership and service on the Steering Committee. The path forward would be to amend the CHM Bylaws at the spring faculty meeting. There was no motion made to vote in a new chair at this time. The item will be on the agenda of upcoming meetings for further discussion.  

Information on Administrators

Concern was raised about the number of administrators within the college. A request was made to update administrators’ titles, descriptions and responsibilities on the college website. B. Forney, associate dean for administration, will work with her team on the updates. Committee members feel that faculty should be informed of promotions to administrative positions instead of finding out by informal means or forwarded emails from chairs and directors. 

Comments and Announcements

None.

Next meeting: December 16, 2019

October 21

Voting Members Present: F. Abbasi, S. Bray, J. MacKeigan, J. Alan, L. Cabrera, R. Malinowski,  E. Shapiro, M. Awongua, S. Kavuturu, M. Morishita, A. Vanderziel, J. Cole, S. Khalil

Ex-Officio Members Present: S. Barman,  R. Folberg, K. Kelly-Blake, N. Beauchamp, W. Lipscomb, K. Elisevich, N. Jones, B. Forney, V. Johnson-Lawrence, A. Mansour

Guests and Staff:  G. Kelley, F. Peterson, Dianne Wagner

Approval of Minutes
Minutes of the September meeting were approved as written.

Briefing from the Dean

Dean Beauchamp provided the following updates.

  • President Stanley met with faculty at the Meet & Greet on October 16. President Stanley greatly values the college and is impressed with the college’s impact in so many domains. President Stanley is a faculty member in the Department of Medicine.
  • The interim provost, Teresa Sullivan, is an insightful partner and very enthusiastic about health. She is supportive of the recent structural change (which was discussed later in the meeting).
  • The college announced a partnership (pipeline) with Grand Rapids Community College (GRCC). It is an important way to recruit talented and diverse students. Twenty medical students come from early assurance programs. The programs favor students who come from diverse backgrounds, are Pell eligible, etc. Two students who had come through GRCC spoke at the partnership announcement. The early assurance program helped them see that becoming a doctor could be possible.
  • Important discussions with hospital partners have been taking place. The dean and President Stanley met with the president and the chair of the board of Sparrow Hospital to discuss building on successes of the past. They emphasized that it is possible to work with all hospitals while focusing on education, research missions, and the needs of the community.
  • President Stanley will be coming to West Michigan on October 28 to learn about the work happening there. There will be a alumni welcome event at Meijer Gardens.
  • A gift announcement will be presented to the MSU Board of Trustees for approval on October 25, 2019. The $19.5 M gift is the largest for the college. The gift will fund the creation of a therapy and diagnostics center, and allow the establishment of a center in the Innovation Building coming to the GR campus.
  • The position of Executive Vice President for Health Sciences was created with the structure of the three deans (colleges of CHM, COM, and NUR) and the practice plan reporting to the individual. It is the structure at a number of universities. The individual serving as EVP must be a fair broker to all three health colleges.
  • A CAC member asked about encouraging engagement within the three colleges. The dean answered with a resounding “yes.” He noted that the pre-awards office has been working across all three colleges and that CHM greatly increased the number of grant submissions. That effectiveness can be brought to the other two colleges. Coming together to find synergies and do science together will help research. The EVP office will focus on bringing together the strengths of the colleges for the research, education, and clinical missions, while allowing some of the unique things that exist in each curriculum. Engaging nurses, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants in the delivery of care is key. The reorganization is all about how we do more as a university together to improve the health of the community of the state of Michigan.
  • A CAC member asked whether meetings with Sparrow administration have included discussions about connecting Sparrow researchers with MSU researchers. He explained that meetings include representatives from CHM, COM, and the practice plan with discussions across multiple domains including, recruiting faculty, the education mission, and collaborative research. Discussion continues on how to connect on clinical collaborations and also the value MSU could bring to Sparrow in terms of recruitment, retention, and market share if we could align some of our work in research to what they are doing at Sparrow. President Stanley is a big proponent of connecting that way.
  • The college has worked on culture – Five Dysfunctions, Covey, Culture of Safety, and more. The focus will continue across all three colleges. Culture, how we support each other, and faculty development has to be a major focus. A better clinical environment that supports faculty (overcome burnout) is needed. Aligning across basic science departments will strengthen translational work.
  • Sousa has been serving as executive associate dean, which involved leading some meetings previously led by him. When considering how to maintain momentum and stability in the college, he recognized that as someone with expertise, Dr. Sousa would be a wonderful person to serve in the role of interim dean. In putting that in place, the provost meets with CAC. He noted that the provost will be joining the meeting to talk about the process. The EVP office will want input from leaders in the university, as well as the perspectives of the CAC.
  • A CAC member asked for an update on the open position of director of the Center for Ethics and whether the center might expand within the three colleges to improve sustainability. He responded that he would have a sense soon about the candidate he has been negotiating with. If not, the search will be re-opened. The idea of having the center bridge across colleges is a terrific idea, as the work of the center is relevant to all three health colleges and others. He noted that he has been in discussion with other deans who see that there could be some connection. The previous provost made an agreement for some funding for individuals to have percent efforts from other colleges.

Support for Students in Crisis Surrounding Violence in the US and Abroa

Abbasi presented The Ripple Affect: teaching thorough trauma and turmoil. The slides are provided with these minutes. She feels there is a lot of action in a crisis and then it is forgotten about. The college needs to put preventive processes in place to protect our medical students. When helping students cope with stress and mental health, the college can never be doing enough. She noted that it is not only students who are affected; instructors are also impacted by the things happening in our communities and in the world. A few takeaways:

  • If instructors approach trauma and turmoil with an attitude apathy – too much going on that we need to just focus on the curriculum, grades, showing up, etc., students are being taught avoidance – unhealthy coping. These are moments to guide students to what is healthy. If it’s too much for administration, it is way too much for students.
  • Grief that is not acknowledged is disenfranchised grief. Silence leads to shame and shame leads to stigma.
  • Educators can play a major role and should not shy away or walk away from it. Need to have processes in place (visibility, validity, viability).
  • Students need the “Cs” (clarity, calmness, comfort, community efficacy, connectedness, communication, continuity).
  • There is an on-campus template for setting up processes. John Taylor, PsyD, COM director of Wellness & Counseling, has put in place a mental health support system, which offers an open space for students.

Discussion took place regarding ongoing efforts to support students, including a mental health peer program and a student survey. It was suggested that the CAC take on the task of connecting the many important efforts going on throughout the college.

Appointment of Interim Dean

Interim Provost Sullivan joined the meeting to discuss the appointment of an interim dean, as consultation with the College Advisory Council is a requirement for the appointment. After discussions with Dr. Beauchamp and with the aspiration of stability, it is her recommendation that Dr. Aron Sousa assume the role of interim dean. After some discussion about the role of the executive vice president for health sciences, the choice to appoint Dr. Sousa as interim dean, and the search for a new dean, Provost Sullivan indicated that she would appreciate a motion on the interim dean appointment.

After the provost left the meeting, discussion regarding the process took place. The CAC has the chance to advise the dean and provost regarding the current candidate and to inform the process for next time this might happen. Members were encouraged to reach out to Dean Beauchamp or Provost Sullivan with significant concerns or to suggest guidance to be given to Dr. Sousa in serving. Dr. Sousa’s experience, credentials, and likability were discussed.

A motion to approve Dr. Sousa as interim dean was made by F. Abbasi, and seconded. A quorum was present, and the motion passed unanimously with those present.

Faculty Affairs Update

Folberg provided updates on the following items.

  • Regarding the Professionalism Task Force report compiled by Dr. Barry, it has been decided to put something in place ad-hoc this year. R. Folberg has asked chairs and directors to submit a template for how they intend to access professionalism this academic year. That will be reviewed and put in place. At the Chair Collaboration meeting in the spring, a look at what the best practices were and what could be implemented across the college will be discussed. Also, coffee conversations deal with a larger program coming out of Vanderbilt on professionalism. A two-day course is being offered in December.
  • The office of Faculty Affairs is auditioning an online repository system that would track faculty data and automate workflow.
  • Faculty development is needed everywhere in the college. The FA office is working with OMERAD to provide that. It is intended that online modules will be developed and may be expanded. Details forthcoming.
  • The college is working to engage faculty on regional campuses. In some locations, there is an excess of faculty members to the number of students present. R. Folberg is talking to community assistant deans about ways faculty can engage in something meaningful with CHM in addition to teaching students. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) is strict on residency programs and faculty scholarship. The college will define scholarship to include working with the community, as well as the regular scholarship. He is engaged with the MSU University Outreach and Engagement to see how the college can use the university model for community engagement for the faculty, residents, and medical students.

Next meeting: November 18, 2019

September 16

Voting Members Present: M. Awonuga, J. Reynolds, H. Chen, A. Vanderziel, A. Bernstein, L. Cabrera, J. Cole, S. Kavuturu, S. Khalil, J. MacKeigan, M. Morishita, E. Shapiro, A. Weber
Ex-Officio Members Present:
 S. Barman, K. Kelly-Blake, A. Sousa, N. Beauchamp, W. Lipscomb, K. Elisevich, N. Jones, S. Bray, B. Forney, V. Johnson-Lawrence, S. Lin, A. Mansour.
Guests and Staff
: G. Kelley, J. Johnson, J. Roy, C. Vincent

Approval of Minutes

Minutes of the August meeting were approved as written.

Briefing from the Dean

Dean Beauchamp provided the following updates.

  • New leaders:
    • June Youatt stepped down as provost, and the president is speaking with several individuals about filling the role of interim provost. [Since the meeting, Teresa Sullivan was appointed as interim provost.]
    • Rob McCurdy is stepping down as chief information officer. Melissa Woo from Stony Brook will be taking over that role.
    • Seth Ciabotti from the Mount Sinai Health System has started as the new Health Care CEO.
    • Norm Hubbard from the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance will serve as senior advisor to the dean.
  • Dean Beauchamp meets with President Stanley frequently; this is positive for our health care mission.
  • MSU Health Care is working with Chartis, an external consultant, on a plan to grow the MSU practice in a way that will support clinicians, be patient and family-centered, be an ideal place for students to train, and generate revenue and resources to help support the education and research mission. He will update CAC members when the report is completed.
  • Members are reminded to stay connected to and build new connections with colleagues in the communities. Individual actions can help those in our communities be more engaged.
  • MacKeigan is working with G. Kelley’s team to create a website framework for organizing faculty involved in cancer research. He will bring an update to this group in the future.
  • GRRC will host an open house on September 23. Researchers will summarize their work and updates on the new Innovation Park will be provided. All are invited to attend.

Academic Affairs Update

Sousa provided updates on the following items.

  • The Graduate School is collecting stories of notable grads from professional and graduate degrees (MD/PhD/MS). Faculty with stories of notable grads should send those to Aron Sousa to be passed along.
  • Community Assistant Dean search for Flint continues and will be open until filled.
  • Scheduling first meeting of the Counsel on Diversity Education (CODE). It is a group of faculty and students in the MD program who meet to discuss how the curriculum can support diversity. Last year’s committee was particularly fruitful. A. Thompson-Busch put together a lot of changes in the curriculum to try to improve the student experience as they go through the ECE.
  • The Curriculum Committee held its first meeting of the academic year. The charge for the year is the work on vertical and horizontal integration, which is an LCME standard.
  • Several people will be participating in the AMA ChangeMedEd in Chicago this week with several presentations and posters.
  • The recent White Coat Ceremony was one of the most successful. Thanks to all faculty who showed up to “coat” students.
  • It is expected that the LCME accrediting body will visit in October 2022 based on previous timelines. As this is the year of “fixing” things before collecting data, the LCME-CQI group has held three retreats to review standards. Another is scheduled for November. The announcement of the creation of a CQI office, which is a requirement, will be made soon.

Awards Modifications

Weber, on behalf of the awards subcommittee, made the following recommendations to refine the description/requirements for two awards put in place last year.

  • Early Career Research Excellence Award

It has become evident that it is very difficult for a faculty member with clinical responsibilities to be eligible for this award due to time and effort constraints. The suggestion is to create two separate designations within this category: 1) one for a clinician scientist and 2) one for a non-clinician scientist. Discussion took place regarding the need for research faculty awards. This award was created to offer two awards and it was suggested that this change would allow only one award for non-clinician research faculty. It was agreed that more discussion and clarity is needed.

  • Outstanding Curriculum Contribution Award Recommendation:

Due to the diversity of the curriculum (e.g. administrative, academic, off-campus, on campus, etc.), the suggestion is to offer two awards in this category each year.

Weber informed members that a new award is being considered at the college level.

  • The Excellence in Teaching Citation, which has a corresponding university award is offered in CNS and has been awarded to teaching assistants who excel at teaching an undergraduate CNS class. CHM has faculty in Vet Med, COM, CNS as well as in CHM labs (Class #431 or 432, etc.) who may have eligible students for this category. While CHM students may not be eligible at the university level, recognition could be given at the college level. Discussion is still needed within the subcommittee regarding restrictions, etc. If this award isn’t the right fit, some kind of student instruction award could be offered at the college level.

The Awards Subcommittee will give an update about all three awards at an upcoming meeting.

Faculty Voting List Approval

The proposed voting list with instructions and explanations was sent to CAC members for review before the meeting. B. Forney recapped the makeup of voting faculty. Faculty without automatic voting rights whom departments are requesting voting rights for the first time are highlighted in yellow on the list. In all, departments are requesting 135 individuals to be eligible to vote at the college level. They have departmental voting rights and devote a significant amount of time to the education of students, committee work, clerkships, etc. 

MacKeigan made a motion to vote to approve the Voting List as submitted and it was seconded. However, due to an oversight, no formal vote was taken. Formal voting took place via email after the meeting. All 13 voting members who responded (quorum is 10), voted to approve.

CHM’s Trauma-Informed Community Efforts

Johnson explained that a workgroup was formed to support the college mission of addressing the needs of vulnerable populations in Michigan and gave background on trauma-informed principles (in handout). An approach to clinical care is “trauma-informed” care. The idea is to make a system that promotes wellness in all its interactions and doesn’t cause further harm to people who have asked for help. It is part of creating a culture of caring. She noted that members of the group are available to provide information sessions to departments or other groups. Upcoming events are:

  • Culture of Caring Speaker Series – upcoming sessions on October 22 and December 3.
  • Small Group Reflection – safe spaces to talk about issues

She informed members that 1) suggestion boxes have been put in place and are being monitored and 2) an effort is underway to find places for members of the MSU community who have experienced relationship violence or sexual abuse to participate in ongoing university decision making. Members were encouraged to share the information in the handout, participate and engage. The dean asked that members engage those they represent.

Fall Faculty Meeting

  • Fall Faculty Meeting tentative dates are October 22, November 14/15/26. It was suggested that President Stanley be invited [since that time, Dr. Stanley invited CHM faculty and staff to a Meet & Greet on October 16, 3:45 – 4:45 pm, A133 Life Sciences Building.] Suggested topics included:
  • a focus on strengths and strategic planning within the college
  • professionalism
  • trauma-informed culture
  • diversity and inclusion
  • Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs Robert Folberg
  • financial and philanthropic updates
  • Flint initiates update, including a public health presentation
  • Any other powerful, relevant or impactful ideas, please contact J. MacKeigan or F. Peterson

Faculty Concerns/Issues

None

Next meeting: October 21, 2019

August 19

Voting Members Present: F. Abbasi, J. Alan, M. Awonuga, A. Bernstein, L. Cabrera, J. Cole, J. He, S. Kavuturu, S. Khalil, J. MacKeigan, R. Malinowski, M. Morishita, E. Shapiro, A. Weber
Ex-Officio Members Present:
 S. Barman, N. Beauchamp, S. Bray, R. Folberg, B. Forney, V. Johnson-Lawrence, K. Kelly-Blake, S. Lin, A. Mansour, A. Sousa
Guests and Staff
:  H. Barry, G. Kelley, and F. Peterson

New Business

Introduction/Purpose of CAC

Council members introduced themselves per Dean Beauchamp’s request. They were then welcomed by the dean, who offered his vision that the council adopt a mindset of fellowship. There are many opportunities to realize and also challenges to overcome together with people we trust and who have a shared commitment. Taking time to get to know the people you sit with is really important. He wants to make sure the college is focusing on the most important things. Some of those things will be identified by conversations at CAC meetings. The dean and others will provide updates and get reflections from members. Topics will be brought to the table to go out to constituents for their input. CAC members are expected to take information out and cascade it—creating an environment of transparency and community. Trust is important to the success of organization, as it is necessary to talk about difficult things. Shared governance fosters trust, facilitates conversations, and helps us commit.

The dean asked members to think about a legacy for the year—how to make the college better. Last year, the council recognized the excellence of faculty and ways to identify scholarship opportunities for students. Dean Beauchamp noted that he will ask for help on 1) how to come together better and bring strengths across the college and 2) the strategic planning process.

Previous members noted that 1) restructuring of faculty meetings to encourage faculty to ask the dean questions about things the faculty care about was a good change, 2) dialog about diversity and inclusion was started and meaningful work was done—hoping to continue to build on it, and 3) more collaboration will be necessary as department structures are changed to be organized by research groups in different buildings. Must be cognizant of how to fit those pieces together for efficient and successful relationships.

Dean Beauchamp remarked on “professionalism” and the need to make sure CHM is a supportive environment. Diversity, equity and inclusion is important, and reports will be provided regarding some of the work that has been done in the college in part due to discussions at CAC meetings. Discussions have been helpful in thinking about how the college communicates and supports students, staff, and faculty around tragic events. He also informed members that a Staff Advisory Committee has been created.

Approval of Minutes
Minutes of the May meeting were approved as corrected. 

Introduction of New Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs Robert Folberg

Dean Beauchamp acknowledged and thanked Henry Barry for the many college initiatives he helped organize and guide in support of the mission of the college. Those include the mentorship program, the five-year chair/director review process, and the annual faculty review process. Dr. Barry noted with appreciation that his thirty years in CHM offered him a place to grow, find joy, and make a difference.

Dr. Robert Folberg was recruited for Faculty Affairs to build on momentum H. Barry brought. Dean Beauchamp noted that Dr. Barry worked on development for tenure system faculty, clinician educators, fixed-term faculty, and across the seven communities and also fostered connections in basic science, translational science, education, and clinical work. In searching for someone who can do that, the college looked for someone with experience in the basic sciences, clinical medicine, academic medicine, and leadership. Also, someone with a commitment to trust and integrity who saw their work as helping others be successful. Dean Beauchamp saw that in Robert Folberg. Dr. Folberg served as the founding dean of Beaumont’s Medical School for ten years where he brought people together and helped faculty be successful in their missions. His is boarded in anatomic pathology and ophthalmology and has served as faculty in ophthalmology as a named professor. What has defined him is his commitment to students and faculty, and the dean expressed his delight of having him on board. Dr. Folberg thanked the dean for the invitation to participate and work on his behalf.

Election of Officers

Position duties of the officer positions were reviewed. Officers for the 2019-20 academic year were elected as follows:

  • Chair: J. MacKeigan
  • Vice Chair: F. Abbasi
  • Secretary: M. Morishita

Appoint Awards Subcommittee

The Awards subcommittee receives nominations and deliberates to bring forward a recommendation for award recipients for CAC approval. New this year, the associate dean for faculty affairs will coordinate the committee. In addition to R. Folberg, the following CAC members will serve on the subcommittee: S. Bray, J. Cole, J. Reynolds, A. Weber.

Briefing from the Dean

Dean Beauchamp thanked the officers for agreeing to serve and informed them that a meeting will be held to lay out the path forward. He touched on the following items.

  • New president of the university. Dr. Stanley will be a great leader. He was president of Stony Brook and vice chancellor for research at Washington University and understands scholarship and its role. He is very committed to connecting the university to health. As an internal medicine physician, he has an appointment in CHM. Dr. Ellen Li, Dr. Stanley’s wife, is also an internal medicine physician and is passionate about diversity, equity, and inclusion. She is interested in mentoring medical students from underrepresented medicine backgrounds.
  • Completion and opening of the Interdisciplinary Science and Technology Building (ISTB) on the south biomedical campus. Many CHM faculty will occupy the building, primarily those involved in research in precision health, neuroscience, and reproductive biology.
  • New curriculum. Dr. Sousa will talk about new curriculum in the near future. The dean is delighted about how it is going for CHM students.
  • Connecting to hospital partners. There are opportunities and challenges. The college is forming strong collaborations and making good progress on funding for clinical work, research, and education.
  • Big data, predictive analytics. Working with health systems on sharing data to use for all kinds of efforts in scholarship. It is a way to help the health systems to see the value academics can bring to them. Clinical practice environment is largely based in EL but practitioners don’t have an environment that is enabling of the work they want to do. As associate provost and assistant vice president for health affairs, Dr. Beauchamp chairs the board for the practice plan and the CEO of the practice plan reports to him. He can help create better priorities and focus. The new CEO started today, comes from the Mt. Sinai Health System in New York, and is a terrific addition. MSU Health Care is the name of the new practice plan entity, a 501(c)(3) that allows MSU Health Care to form partnerships with physician practices within the community. This will allow for transforming health, better opportunities for students and research, and ushering in a pay-for-value future. The strategy will bring value and will garner interest philanthropically and with industry partners. MSU HealthTeam will sunset over the next year.
  • Diversification of funding and resources for faculty. Working on that through 1) philanthropy (building the CHM Advancement team, focusing on student scholarship and working with people who want to invest resources in supporting the mission); and 2) Pitching to the country and the world that CHM is unique and worth investing in (new building is phase two of the GR Innovation Park). Part of the work has been to leverage great things we do to bring in resources to support the faculty, students, and staff.

Agenda Items for Upcoming Year

Recommendations listed below were made last year. B. Forney read through them to determine if there is continued interested and to get updates.

  • Visits from college representatives to university committees who will report on their university committee’s activities. Members keep up on college committee activity via meeting minutes.
  • Update on what is being done to address issues of mental health for medical students and ensure the college is creating a safe environment.
  • What the college is doing to address student debt—need task force report.
  • Overall college financial update from Chief Financial Officer Karen Crosby.
  • Fundraising and philanthropy status and planning from Director of Advancement.
  • Updates on relationships with Sparrow, Spectrum and McLaren (including new CEO’s and the new hospital near campus). A suggestion was also made to hear from speakers from the hospitals.

Members were asked to provide suggestions for topics or people they would like to hear from to better enable them to fulfill their advisory role to the dean. Suggestions included:

  • An update on changes in diversity and inclusion office.
  • Theme – basic science integration to translational to clinical.
  • Work happening in Flint in Public Health.
  • Hearing from each of the communities (geographical integration theme).

Members were instructed to contact Dr. MacKeigan with other suggestions. The dean suggested that the topics be mapped out so committee members could get input or questions from their departments to bring back to meetings for discussion.

Voting List

B. Forney was tasked with making sure committee members get the information needed for approval of the college voting list, which will take place at the September CAC meeting. She explained that the university decides who gets to vote on university matters; departments decide who gets to vote on department matters; and the CAC decides who, in addition to those who automatically have voting rights as outlined in the bylaws, gets to vote on college matters. Requests for college voting rights may be for academic specialists, emeriti faculty, non-prefix faculty, etc.

As a community-based medical school, CHM relies on faculty in communities to train students. Those faculty are not employed by MSU, but they have faculty appointments and usually have the prefix “adjunct” or “clinical” in front of their rank (they are referred to as “prefix” faculty within the college). This includes a lot of people in clinical departments--approximately 4,500 people around the state. A small subset of the prefix faculty devotes a very significant amount of time and effort to working with CHM students, including community assistant deans who are usually practicing physicians in their outlying communities. They are generally paid by MSU indirectly through a contract with their community employer rather than being employed directly by MSU. These individuals are eligible to apply to have the “adjunct” or “clinical” prefix dropped from their MSU rank; if they meet the eligibility criteria, they are granted the privilege of dropping the prefix and are then referred to as “non-prefix” faculty within the college. That privilege is awarded to those who meet specific criteria, and comes with specific expectations, including that if they seek promotion, they must meet the same criteria as employed faculty. Further, they may only retain the non-prefix rank as long as they remain in the position that made them eligible for same.

Departments often grant department voting rights to “non-prefix” faculty, but they do not automatically have voting rights at the college level. If departments want those individuals to also have voting rights at the college level, they must request that they be added to the college faculty voting list.

CAC members will get a list of all faculty for whom college voting rights are requested. The faculty who automatically have voting rights will be indicated. Those who do not automatically have voting rights but who the department is requesting be given voting rights will also be identified. There is a column on the list where departments will provide the reason why each was granted department voting rights. More information forthcoming.

Academic Affairs Update

A. Sousa provided the following updates.
  • A new class of first years (Early Clinical Experience) starts Monday; the Whitecoat Ceremony is Sunday in Grand Rapids. They are 30% underrepresented in medicine, 50% minority, and about 63% are women.
  • MCE students have been taking Step I this summer. Data looks to be as good or better than last year.
  • Unfortunately, the college lost a student, Annie Yang, in a car accident. CHM is deeply saddened by her loss and has provided support for her small group. Academic Affairs is working through systems of supporting student in general.
  • A new student advisory group has been established for the Shared Discovery Curriculum.

The dean noted that the commitment and excellence that the leaders of the medical school curriculum portrayed at the student welcome session was inspiring.

Faculty Affairs and Development Update

H. Barry thanked his colleagues for their support and the things they do before providing the following updates.

Educator Mentor Program
The last cohort of the program is complete, and they are reviewing the process and structure. Faculty Affairs, in collaboration with OMERAD, will be retooling the program and broadening it to a larger audience of medical educators. 

Five-Year Review of Department Chairs
The new process involves a review team and the use of central data collection and surveys. Additionally, departments ask faculty to provide information. Depending on the unique circumstances of the department, review committees may ask for additional information. Faculty Affairs is finishing reviews for the departments of psychiatry, surgery and obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive medicine, and is about to launch reviews of the departments of medicine and family medicine. The FAD website has samples of some instruments being used. Refining the survey instruments is an ongoing process.

RPT Report

  • Tenure System: two faculty members were promoted to professor, three to associate professor with tenure, one reappointment, one extension
  • Health Programs System: one faculty member promoted to professor, one to associate professor
  • Fixed Term System: three faculty members promoted to associate professor
  • Non-prefix Faculty: two faculty members promoted to professor; four to associate professor

New Process for HP Reappointment
The HP system came about as a tenure-like system for clinicians. There are high expectations for advancement and specific criteria for reappointment. The handout distributed outlines a proposed new process. The proposed pilot is an addendum to HP form (third page), which asks the department to provide a bit more information. 

Professionalism Task Force Report
The draft report was distributed to CAC members before the meeting. H. Barry explained that the task force, which included people from multiple departments, RPT Committee, department chairs, etc., was charged to make recommendations about policies and procedures related to including professionalism and unprofessional behavior in the annual review and the reappointment, promotion, and tenure review processes.

The process started with The Virtuous Professional document. While the college has many aspirational processes, there have been issues ranging from egregious to annoying. The task force reviewed a variety of documents and tools being used by others. They came up with a definition of unprofessional behavior and provided examples. It was noted that, based on formal reviews by students, most faculty behave in an exemplarity fashion. The task force tried to create a mechanism for understanding the range of activities and a set of expectations (e.g. that departments incorporate an explicit mechanism to evaluate unprofessional behaviors during the annual review and document it in the annual review letter and that they address professionalism or unprofessional behaviors during the promotion process). Going forward there are training issues—working with department chairs and staff on processes, procedures, and implementation. The report acknowledges that there are some things beyond what be done at the department level, such as bystander training. Things need to be done at multiple levels. The task force wants departments and the college to adequately address things that erode the fabric of the culture. The report is a good starting point to revisit, revise, and refine going forward.

R. Folberg thanked H. Barry for the path for Faculty Affairs for the future. He appreciates the opportunity to study the documents and come back with some reflections from other climates and cultures in medical schools, as well as from people on campus. Dean Beauchamp sees the report as a foundation to build on. The conversation around professionalism is difficult, and people don’t talk about it unless it’s defined and built in. It is essential to the work that we need to do. He feels this is a key tool in the college’s effort to have an environment we are proud of

A. Sousa reported July 2019 data on student reporting on professionalism. From over 10,000 ratings on professionalism, 6,541 are 3 (above expectations), 3,500 are 2 (met expectations), and 61 are 1 (below expectations). Each of the “below expectations” report is investigated.

Old Business

Support for Students in Crisis Surrounding Violence in the US and Abroad
The item was tabled until the October meeting. 

Faculty Issues
An update on the search for the director of the Center for Ethics was requested. The dean reported that he is in discussions with the identified candidate and has been in touch with Len Fleck, interim director of the center. It is hoped that a decision will be made in the very near future.

Next meeting: September 16, 2019

May 20

Voting Members Present: A. Bernstein, A. Bozoki, A. Chamdin, H. Chen, R. Malinowski, M. Petroff, J. Reynolds, A. Weber
Ex-Officio Members Present: H. Barry, N. Beauchamp, M. DeLano, L. Fleck, B. Forney
Guests and Staff: M. Brown, G. Kelley, S. Kavuturu (for J. Kepros), and F. Peterson

Approval of Minutes
Minutes of the April meeting were approved as written.

New Business

Seeking CAC Endorsement for Establishment of a Department of Cardiovascular Medicine

N. Beauchamp provided an introduction highlighting the value of bringing discovery to hospital partners. Strengthening partnerships with Spectrum in GR and bringing value, while not injuring what the college is creating in EL, is achievable. CHM has established relationships in one community or another. When the medical school expanded, the college made a commitment to establish departments in GR, which is seen as central to the strategy of sustainability, translation, and synergy. The MSU-Spectrum Alliance meets every 6 weeks to explore what can be best leveraged by working together to ensure success. It is vital to the college that we grow in multiple areas.

The dean introduced Chris Chambers, MD, PhD, vice president for research at Spectrum Health. Dr. Chambers, exemplifying the Covey principle of finding the win-win, has worked diligently to further the Spectrum-MSU partnership, including the sharing of IP. He has helped to expedite getting studies approved and has a link with Van Andel Institute. Dr. Chambers will explain how the establishment of a Department of Cardiovascular Medicine will bring value to CHM and not be a threat. It’s not the goal to be an MSU clinical practice.

C. Chambers related the Spectrum Health philosophy. He explained that Spectrum attempted to create departments, labs, etc., and it didn’t make a lot of sense when CHM is conducting basic science in GR and EL. Their focus is on being good clinicians, conducting clinical research, and being excellent at collaborating. Collaboration is a key component and attracts a different type of physician—one interested in research and integrated care. Spectrum understands that fostering collaborations with scientists is what clinicians want and need.

Spectrum will bring clinical data and expertise to help scientists in the Department of Cardiovascular Medicine and other units, who will be part of Spectrum Health. It will help students and residents and enhance the ability to recruit and train. They are looking for a symbiotic relationship.

There is a research arm of the cardiovascular group at Spectrum, which is good at clinical research and has been involved with most major national trials for devices in cardiovascular surgery (last 2-3 in New England Journal). The goal is to grow collaborations on the basic science side.

Individuals will be able to have dual appointments – faculty will not be taken from another department. Funding will be provided through philanthropy and Spectrum Heath.

Discussion took place regarding the interdisciplinary nature of the proposed department, innovation, access to clinical data, impact on other departments, other roles of an academic department (e.g. RPT and annual reviews, mentoring), etc.

A motion to endorse the proposal to establish a Department of Cardiovascular Medicine was made and passed.

Approval of Changes to the Bylaws of the Department of Medicine

S. Kavuturu explained that most proposed changes are grammatical. The most substantial changes had to do with the reappointment, promotion, and tenure procedure.

A motion to approve the revisions to the bylaws of the Department of Medicine was made and unanimously approved.

Award Recipients

A list of award recipients was distributed with the caveat that they were confidential, as award recipients had not been notified. A. Weber said that down the road adding an extra award that focuses on clinical research is likely. He proposed that the CHM Outstanding Curriculum Contribution Award be expanded to include two recipients. With such a varied curriculum, faculty excel in different areas. CAC members agreed there should be two awards given in the category.

Old Business

Proposed Clarifications to Voting Rights Procedure

M. Petroff, A. Bernstein, and M. Morishita have been working on ways to make the process of granting voting rights easier to understand. CAC members are not sure what they are being asked to vote on. The subcommittee proposes that the list of proposed voting faculty be distributed to CAC members earlier in the year so the voting can take place at the September meeting or tabled until the October meeting if necessary, to have questions answered. In addition, they would like the following information to be distributed to CAC along with list: 1) relevant excerpts from bylaws stating who can vote, 2) an explanation of non-prefix faculty and the criteria they must meet for the designation, 3) changes to spreadsheet indicating who is being voted on and their role in the college, 4) What faculty vote on.

B. Forney indicated that the changes will be made to the process. The subcommittee was thanked for their efforts on the project.

Next meeting: August 2019

MARCH 18

Attendees: F. Abbasi, J. Alan, A. Bernstein, A. Bozoki, L. Cabrera, H. Chen, M. Franco, J. Kepros, H. Kim, R. Malinowski, C. Matisoff, M. Morishita, M. Petroff, K. Racicot, J. Reynolds, A. Weber
Ex-Officio Attendees: H. Barry, N. Beauchamp, K. Elisevich, L. Fleck, B. Forney, V. Johnson-Lawrence, S. Lin, W. Lipscomb, A. Mansour, A. Sousa
Guests and Staff:  G. Kelley, A. Paganini, F. Peterson

Approval of Minutes
Minutes of the February meeting were approved as written.

Briefing from the Dean

  • Regular meetings with Sparrow leadership continue. Joe Ruth is the interim CEO of Sparrow. If E.W. Tibbs does not return, it is hoped that his approach to openness, cooperation and better understanding will continue. (Tibbs in no longer with Sparrow as of this writing).
  • Continuing to work on joint ventures; growth of the practice is essential in order to be impactful across all missions. Training students and engaging industry partners while bringing new sources of funding to support the mission are the desired outcomes. A joint venture with Advanced Radiology Services to be called Spartan Radiology will be announced soon. It will offer many benefits and allow MSU to build on imaging sciences. Joint ventures in peds, ortho, and behavioral health are also being investigated to better position MSU Health Care across the state.
  • Three college leadership searches are underway. The Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences Director Search Committee has advanced two candidates for final consideration. The Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics Chair Search Committee has invited two candidates to campus. A third candidate is being considered. The Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs Search Committee is bringing in two candidates.
  • The search for the CEO of MSU Health Care is underway. The search firm has identified terrific candidates. The current interim CEO, Mike Herbert, would like to be finished by June.
  • Progress is being made with the P3 in Grand Rapids (Public Private Partnership). The college is in conversation with a number of organizations about occupying the building.
  • We continue to focus on wellness and resilience of the faculty. The college will continue with the work Henry Barry has done to be more supportive of our faculty and help them feel confident in their journey.
  • A primary focus of the role as associate provost, as well as dean of college, is on getting the clinical environment right so every patient, every time gets the quality of care they deserve. There has often been malalignment among the three health colleges. There will be greater effort toward becoming a true multi-specialty group practice with a baseline level of support that ensures quality, safe, and assessible care.
  • We are also focusing more on how to connect clinicians to basic scientists.
  • A commencement speaker has been identified. Richard Veith, MD, is a board-certified psychiatrist and chief of psychiatric services at UW Medical Center. He is also a UW professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, a Richard D. and Bernice E. Tutt Endowed Professor in the Neurosciences and adjunct professor of Global Health.

Academic Affairs Update (Dr. Aron Sousa)

  • The residency match was very successful. Ninety-five percent of CHM students matched. A handful of students who did not match are being helped in a supplemental match. Notable match data: All campuses produced people going into surgery, two campuses produced people going into ophthalmology and two campuses produced a radiologist. Students will complete a national survey about the match, which will provide answers to questions that individual schools are not allowed to survey.
  • The Hunt Lecture will be given by Norman Beauchamp on April 17.
  • Early clinical experience students participated in a poster session (186 posters) with help from members of the academy. One half were in East Lansing in Radiology, and one half were in Grand Rapids in Secchia. It was successful and inspiring.
  • The college is hosting a group from AAMC, the Central Group on Educational Affairs (CGEA), March 27-29. Faculty are encouraged to attend.
  • CAC members were asked to take a thank you back to clinical departments for providing the necessary letters for students’ supplemental application process, as each student needed chairs letter for their specialty. The college appreciates faculty who set aside time to work with students. The places where CHM students match is phenomenal.
  • It takes only a look at places students match to understand how the work we do is helping the country. The college needs ways to keep in touch with graduates to encourage them to think about coming home to practice. Only three students matched in Lansing. There is work to be done with partnering institutions.

University Committee for Graduate Studies Update

  • A. Paganini, CHM representative to the UCGS, provided a handout with topics being discussed at UCGS meetings.
  • It was suggested that the annual call for university committee nominations include the time of day and day of week of university committee meetings.
  • While participation in university committee meetings in person is not a requirement per university bylaws, some committees have not yet embraced teleconferencing. Plans to participate remotely must be made in advance, and it may be necessary to push the issue.

Old Business

Next Steps for Diversity and Inclusion over the Course of the Year

It was suggested that the CAC create a subcommittee to discuss what to do on MLK Day and other days of service. Three to four faculty volunteers and students (one from each year identified by DSAC) are needed. The university is participating in the Global Day of Service on April 13. It is directed at students, faculty, staff and alumni. It is thought that CHM students and faculty do not interact enough. Questions to be answered are: 1) Are faculty and students interested in Day of Service? 2) If so, a single event or several throughout the year? 3) Should events be aligned with existing days such as MLK or unrelated? A. Bozoki will bring back info at next meeting.

College Voting Rights

The Voting Rights Subcommittee met and reported back to the CAC. Each fall, the CAC is asked to grant voting rights to faculty not automatically granted rights (including non-prefix faculty who currently make up 40% of the voting faculty). The concern is whether voting rights are being granted to faculty who are not affected by the outcome. The recommendation is that instead of changing the bylaws, the CAC:  1) get in-depth justification for each person about why voting rights are being requested, and 2) get information with enough lead time to review and have a meaningful discussion at the meeting before being asked to approve. Members were reminded that non-prefix faculty have already had to meet specific criteria in order to have non-prefix status. The CAC would need to identify what additional information it would want for each non-prefix faculty member in addition to knowing they have met criteria for non-prefix status. Discussion took place regarding the reasons units request voting rights for non-prefix faculty. Discussion included the importance of non-prefix faculty to the educational mission. Further, faculty must have voting rights in order to serve on college committees including the Curriculum Committee, the Admissions Committee, Student Grievance Hearing panels and others. It is often difficult to get enough employed faculty willing to serve on these committees and non-prefix faculty help to fill that void as well as offering needed expertise and time. A question was asked regarding what types of issues the voting faculty of the college vote on. Votes of the full college faculty are fairly uncommon but include approval of revisions to college bylaws, elections to college and university committees, changes to RPT criteria (by relevant group – e.g., only tenured faculty vote on revisions to tenure system criteria, only HP faculty vote on changes to HP criteria). Historically there is a very small response rate to college votes (<25%).

New Business

Spring College Faculty Meeting

CAC members decided to schedule the Spring College Faculty Meeting for May 7, 2019. Several topics for discussion were vetted based on which might be a draw for faculty.

  • Walt Esselman—new initiatives in research and impact
  • Claudia Finkelstein—wellness and faculty burnout
  • Board made up of leaders of all three colleges to discuss the future of MSU Health Care and including clinician/scientist collaboration
  • Debra Furr-Holden—public health
  • Wanda Lipscomb—diversity, inclusion and intentionally
  • Anna Moore—precision health (L. Fleck will reach out to A. Moore)
  • Q&A--faculty asking questions to the dean (collected in advance)

Faculty Concerns/Issues

Prompted by recent shooting incidents in mosques in New Zealand, discussion took place regarding a college response and support for students to such events. While it is difficult for the college to have a response to each event, there may be ways to better connect to students feeling vulnerable. The subject will be further discussed at an upcoming meeting.

Next meeting: April 15, 2019

February 18

Attendees: F. Abbasi, J. Alan, A. Bozoki, L. Cabrera, H. Chen, M. Franco, J. Kepros, H. Kim, R. Malinowski, C. Matisoff, M. Morishita, M. Petroff, K. Racicot, J. Reynolds, A. Weber
Ex-Officio Attendees: H. Barry, N. Beauchamp, K. Elisevich, L. Fleck, B. Forney, V. Johnson-Lawrence, S. Lin, W. Lipscomb, A. Mansour
Guests:  G. Kelley, F. Peterson

Approval of Minutes

Minutes of the January meeting were approved as written.

Diversity and Inclusion Update

W. Lipscomb provided a perspective of how the college is thinking about diversity and inclusion through a presentation using the attached slides. Some highlights are listed below.

  • The process of creating of a roadmap to get the college to a different place is ongoing. CAC members should reflect on how they, as representatives of their academic units, can become a part of vibrant voices informing vision.
  • The college is looking for external and institutional alignment and has already started working on the next accreditation visit, which is conducted by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME). The LCME has several standards that impact how to think about diversity from a medical education standpoint, including faculty diversity, pipeline and partnerships. Also, there have been changes to Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) core values.
  • Because the college has a very diverse student body, it needs to be concerned about what the learning environment is and what experiences students actually have. There are expectations that the curriculum will have elements that address societal problems, such as healthcare disparities.
  • The college is preparing students become residents. ACGME Core Competencies state: “respect & responsiveness to diverse patient populations, including but not limited to diversity in gender, age, culture, race, religion, disabilities, national origin, socioeconomic status, and sexual orientation” (IV,B1.a).(1).(e).
  • The diversity of current faculty is not representative of the diversity of the current student enrollment. There is still work to do with both race/ethnicity and gender.
  • The challenge for diversity and inclusion is to be intentional. The college is currently looking at an organizational structure change, diversity and inclusion initiatives, has re-initiated the Council on Diversity Education (CODE), and would like to create a College Diversity and Inclusion Advisory Council, which would include individuals from the community. Conducting an institutional assessment is also being considered.
  • CAC representatives are asked to have a conversation within their unit about what it would mean for their unit to increase diversity.
  • The college has a phenomenal opportunity to find and fill the holes in the curriculum and make diversity and inclusion part of the college culture.

Briefing from the Dean

  • CHM students hosted more than 100 elementary-aged students at the Secchia Center for the 5th annual Reach Out to Youth (ROTY) ROTY is a program for young children of color and from challenged backgrounds, and their parents. The students participated in a variety of hands-on workshops while their parents participated in healthy lifestyle sessions. This is another example of how our college extends our mission for the greater good.
  • The February MSU Board of Trustees meeting, with Interim President Satish Udpa, had a different tone. It was one of healing and compassion.
  • Regular meetings with the new hospital leaders are ongoing. Andrea Amalfitano was named dean of COM.
  • The 10-year lease for the Public Private Partnerships (P3) for the third building in Grand Rapids was presented to the Board of Trustees.
  • The dean is appreciative of CAC and efforts to take information back to faculty in their units. The Dean’s Student Advisory Council is also terrific. However, as a college, we could do better at university level academic governance, in getting faculty to serve and then in honoring the commitment to serve. It has been very painstaking and difficult to get nominees for university-level standing committees and Faculty Senate/University Council. We were recently informed that two faculty elected to represent college faculty for the current year are being dismissed for lack of participation. University committee participation is a place where CHM can be transformative and college representation is really important. Kindred spirits can create a shift – real things happening and real agendas. Go back to the faculty you represent and discuss how you can identify good people willing to serve.
  • Susan Barman from PharmTox was awarded the Beal Outstanding Faculty Award and is very deserving. CHM has many folks doing amazing work and should be brought forward to be celebrated. Academic Analytics has a new feature where faculty names and characteristics can be entered into a database, and possible awards outside the university will be suggested. Individuals identifying faculty to be recognized and making nominations further fosters a cultural of excellence.

University Committee on Faculty Tenure Report

L. Fleck, UCFT chair, reported on two committee efforts: 1) revising the policy for dismissal of tenured faculty for cause, and 2) university-level tenure review. There has been a protracted process for dismissing a tenured faculty member for cause. Throughout the process, faculty have been encouraged to retire (though they continued to be paid as the process played out). It was possible that they could retire at the last minute before a final decision by the BOT, thereby preserving their retirement benefits. Due to recent high-profile cases, the Board of Trustees changed the policy, which was outrageous from a community point of view because the university was continuing to pay individuals who had behaved egregiously. From now on, per the new policy from the BOT, it would be up to the president to decide if an accused faculty member would continue to be paid during the dismissal process. If an individual chose to pursue the process, they would lose the option of retiring with health benefits. The BOT acted contrary to the UCFT process for making such policy decisions. While the UCFT understands the rationale of the BOT, committee members believe a fairer, more nuanced policy is necessary. They have created a working group. The group did agree that the president alone shouldn’t be able to decide whether an accused faculty member continues to be paid during the dismissal process. A three-member committee could be put in place to make the decision. UCFT members and ten faculty (former UCFT members) would be available for that part of the dismissal process. They could judge whether a charge represented a seriously egregious act that justified denial of pay should the accused faculty member go forward with the dismissal process. Not everyone is on board about telling someone they can’t choose the retirement option once the dismissal process itself is initiated. That point is still being debated.

The committee is charged with revising the Academic Governance bylaws as they pertain to the process of university–level tenure review. In 2013 the provost identified ten university distinguished faculty or Beal Outstanding Faculty Award recipients to serve 2-year terms to review the promotion and tenure materials. For 90% of the cases, there is no problem. For 10% there is a split between the recommendation of the department committee, the dean or the college committee. Those 10% get careful review by UDPs/Beal recipients. UCFT members agreed that they didn’t see the need to set up a separate process and that the one is place is now is okay as long as it is overseen by the UCFT. They have endorsed a recommendation that makes the provost’s procedure formal. Len was asked to take back that diversity training should be essential for those conducting tenure review.

Consensual Amorous and Sexual Relationship Policy Update

V. Johnson-Lawrence provided an overview of the discussion regarding the Consensual Amorous and Sexual Relationship Policy that took place at the last University Committee on Faculty Affairs meeting. The committee is looking at how to amend the policy (remove and add segments). The current revision of the policy is working to protect students by addressing power dynamic issues if faculty are in romantic relationships with students, and minimizing misinterpretation of the language. The UCFA is concerned about who the policy is protecting and whether undergraduate students are different than graduate students. The policy addresses romantic relationships, but committee members are wondering what about other kind of relationships may need to be addressed. The UCFA will revisit all of those and figure out what an improved policy might look like. The current policy is from 1996. Previous reviews initiated the same concerns, but the policy was not changed. Discussion took place regarding relationship progression and current policies on reporting working relationships. The UCFA is looking at a U of M policy as an example.

Feedback to the Dean

At the January CAC meeting, the dean asked for feedback on the following topics.

How to better get the word out and keep Communications informed of the great things going on in the college.

  • G. Kelley would like to see CHM faculty and staff internet browsers set to the college home page, which is updated every day.
  • The master list for MSU Med News requires manual entry of new hires; communications office relies on departments to add new people to the list. Of the 6,000 Issue #1 newsletter sent via email, 25% were opened.
  • MSU Med News has a new format, which includes more photos and videos, “bringing the college to life.” Users will click on a picture for more information (photo gallery, video, etc.). CAC members were encouraged to take a look at MSU Med News Issue #2 and come back with suggestions on what can be done better.
  • Submitting information about things going on in the college via a Qualtrics survey keeps things from getting lost. The communications office sends reminders to unit communicators to find out information from department faculty and enter the information into the survey. The survey link is https://msu.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_2rgWzdCjzYzyYwB.

Identifying Inspirational People to Give a Commencement Address.

Several individuals were identified and the list forwarded to the dean. CAC members are encouraged to send names and contact information of inspiration people to the dean as they run across them.

Should the college be doing more on MLK Day?

Several ideas were presented on holding active, engaged activities on that day, including: small groups of students and faculty in a conscience-raising activity on some aspect of diversity and inclusion, providing a set of scenarios, classic social psychology experiments that have a racial bias, and a study-in. It could be possible for the CAC and the DSAC to partner to plan a series of activities. It was noted that some students leave campus for a 3-day weekend, which makes attendance difficult.

A suggestion was presented about the combined lecture sponsored by CHM/COM/CVM/CON prior to MLK Day. The suggestion was to shift the time so students can participate. After a long day of class, it was too much to attend the event in the evening.

Another idea was to hold activities relevant to medical students, faculty and staff throughout the year. Representatives from the CAC and the DSAC could set aside time to brainstorm what is possible. V. Johnson-Lawrence would help something like that live in the college.

Faculty Concerns/Issues

Members were asked to send any concerns/issues to F. Peterson, so they can put on agenda for next month.

Next meeting
March 18, 2019

January 21

Attendees: L. Cabrera, A. Bozoki, A. Chamdin, J. Reynolds, H. Chen, J. Kepros, H. Kim, R. Malinowski, M. Morishita, M. Petroff, K. Racicot, A. Weber
Ex-Officio Attendees: H. Barry, N. Beauchamp, L. Fleck, B. Forney, V. Johnson-Lawrence, A. Mansour, A. Sousa
Guests:  G. Kelley, F. Peterson

Approval of Minutes

Minutes of the December meeting were approved as written.

Briefing from the Dean

  • Satish Udpa has been named the interim president for MSU.
  • Deans of all colleges needed to take a strong position about reinstating the healing fund for survivors and sent a consensus request encouraging the board to do so.
  • The new CEO at Sparrow, E.W. Tibbs, wanted to meet with the dean within four days of securing his new position. Sparrow is a key partner to CHM. Frequent meetings will be held as they have committed to work closely together going forward. The MSU/Sparrow relationship is built on a history of trust, and there are opportunities to grow and do something of significance together.
    • Discussion took place regarding Sparrow’s robust marketing and the lack of mentioning MSU contributions at times. The dean encouraged faculty to reach out to G. Kelley about the great things being done in CHM. [The best way to do that is to leave details on the data collection site for MSU Med News.] She can keep up with PR people at other institutions. He and G. Kelley will also meet with Sparrow marketing. Co-branding is the goal.
    • Establishing relationships with clinicians for clinical translational research samples was also a topic of discussion. MSU brings advances to care because of collaboration with basic scientists, etc. The dean agrees that this is an important relationship and has recently been working with the Office of Research Innovation in conjunction with COM and CON. There is a willingness to work on the problems with navigating each other’s processes (MSU and Sparrow). Communication about value-added collaborative research programs is necessary to help physician partners see the value of the lab bridge. Collaboration with other partners is also being strengthened.
  • Five-year reviews have been completed for a number of departments. Redacted summaries of conversations have been provided to chairs with encouragement to share with their faculty. Most comments went out uncensored -- names were removed on a small number.
  • The search for the CEO of MSU Health Care has been launched. It is hoped to have the CEO in place June 2019.
  • The opening of Flint registry took place on January 18. This is an incredible effort in Flint that will connect people who face injustice to resources in the community, as well as early detection of disease. It is expected that they will register 150,000 people. It is a great opportunity to improve the health of people in Flint and across the nation.
  • The four health colleges (CVM/COM/CHM/CON) sponsored a program related to health disparities and social justice in conjunction with MLK Day. Mona Hanna-Attisha was the keynote speaker. There were four panelists – one from each college. All colleges are committed to working together every year.

Academic Affairs Update

A. Sousa provided an update based on five months of experience with the new curriculum. The number of honors is up, and the number of non-pass, fails, and shelf failures are down. Anecdotal data from community clerkship directors is that students are better prepared, present better and are much more comfortable around patients and at the beginning of a rotation. Students in LCE take an equivalent to Step Two, and based on those scores, sixty percent of LCE students would be predicted to pass if they took the exam last fall, about 8 months early. This is almost certainly because 1) Step One and Step Two are much closer together in content than the used to be, and 2) the first two years are so clinically integrated. In the Middle Clinical Experience, there has been two progress suites for current second year students and the medical knowledge scores are a couple points above the first cohort. The slope is similar and there is reason for optimism. From the Progress Clinical Skills Exam components of physical exam, history, safety, and post-encounter note, analysts can distinguish between first, second, third year students.

The Curriculum Committee is looking at a three-year curriculum. Teaching assignment requests have gone out. The college is working on new ways of counting teaching effort. Working on cultural issues in Academic Affairs – many faculty leaders have gone through the Covey sequence.

In GME there is an on-going collaboration of thirteen different institutions submitting for the AMA Reimaging GME Grant.

Work on collaboration with Sparrow is ongoing. Internal medicine is well into efforts around having the resident clinic based in the Sparrow Professional Building. Surgery went through what appears to have been a successful site visit, and a closer to collaboration with Sparrow and the department is in the works. Maintaining faculty support and access to GME work in return for transferring sponsorship of residencies to Sparrow is on schedule.

There are a large number of visits to Just-in-Time Medicine. CHM is providing curriculum around the world.

Old Business

Voting on Additions to Award Categories and Name Change

A. Bozoki presented two proposals for CAC approval. In addition to details about the proposals being provided and discussed at the November and December meetings, information was sent via email.

Proposal One
The CAC Awards Subcommittee proposed the addition of the following awards beginning with the 2019-20 awards cycle: 1) Junior Faculty Mentoring Award, 2) Early Career Research Excellence Award, 3) Research Excellence Award, and 4) Outstanding Curriculum Contribution Award. Discussion took place regarding eligibility for awards. A motion to add the awards was made and approved.

Proposal Two
The CAC Awards Subcommittee proposed changing the name of the “Distinguished Faculty Award” to the “Outstanding Faculty Award” to align with the change at the university level. A motion to change the name of the award was made and approved. 

New Business

Request for Name Change – Department of Translational Science and Molecular Medicine
The Department of Translational Science and Molecular Medicine is requesting a name change to the Department of Translational Neuroscience. A document outlining the department background, problems with the current name, and constituencies affected was distributed. L. Cabrera highlighted advantages and fielded questions. She put forth the following proposal on behalf of TSMM and requested the endorsement of the CAC.

The Department of Translational Science and Molecular Medicine proposes changing the department name to the Department of Translational Neuroscience.

A motion to endorse the proposal was made and passed with one abstention. The dean would have preferred to see statement of endorsement from every unit mentioned in the document.

Faculty Concerns/Issues
When asked if he had any tasks for the CAC, the dean listed the following:

  • Every month think about what is awesome that is happening and let G. Kelley know about it through the data collection site for MSU Med News. Provide thoughts on how to better get the word out and keep Communications informed.
  • Provide names of inspirational people who may be able to give a commencement address. He would like to reach out to them.
  • Reflect on whether the college should be doing something different on MLK day. Teaching and lessons from Dr. King resonate with why we exist. Should the college do more?

Next meeting
February 18, 2019