The Department of Medicine

Pulmonary Disease Fellowship Program

Evaluations

FACULTY EVALUATIONS OF FELLOWS

The program director has the primary responsibility for monitoring fellow competence, for recommending promotion and certification, and for recommending remedial or adverse action.

Fellows are evaluated with regard to their adherence to pulmonary fellowship policies and their progress toward meeting the curriculum goals and objectives. Additionally, fellows are expected to comply with UHS/GME policies including but not limited to: personnel policies (including sexual harassment), Code of Conduct policies, infection control, completion of medical records, and federal health care program compliance policies.

Portfolio

A portfolio is maintained for each fellow. It includes copies of faculty formative and summative evaluations, faculty chart review and MiniCEX evaluations, self-evaluations, scores from any in-training examinations, presentation materials (such as handouts or slides) created by the fellow for his/her presentations, evidence of fellow PI and scholarly activity, fellow conference attendance summaries (updated semi-annually), procedure log summaries (updated semi-annually), and any other materials on which the fellow would like to be evaluated (such as an interesting case file or file of articles).

Rotations

fellows are evaluated by their supervising faculty physicians using a global evaluation that is based in part on focused observation and evaluation of fellow performance of required procedures/skills and is also based in part on the degree to which the goals and objectives for the rotation have been satisfied. A copy of the global evaluation is forwarded to the GME office.

Biannual Evaluation

• Faculty supervising physicians in continuity clinic solicit input from other faculty regarding fellow performance in pulmonary staff clinic and complete a global evaluation of fellow clinic performance. The evaluation is based in part on the following fellow evaluations: MiniCEX, chart review, clinic nurse evaluation, and clinic patient evaluations.
• Each fellow is evaluated using a modified 360-degree evaluation, with feedback from peers, nurses, and patients. The fellow also completes a self-evaluation.
• The program director solicits feedback on fellow performance from other faculty, reviews the fellow's portfolio and file (including the procedure log and conference attendance log), evaluates the fellow in writing, reviews with the fellow his/her performance summary, make recommendations to the fellow for improvement, initiates any required corrective action plans, and recommends and initiates the process of making necessary or desired program changes based on fellow feedback.
• If, taking into account faculty input and acting in accordance with program and institutional policies (including the institutional policy regarding Academic Due Process), the program director decides not to renew a fellow’s Letter of Agreement, the program director must provide the fellow with a written notice of intent not to renew the Letter of Agreement with as much advanced notice as circumstances reasonably allow (if possible 4 months prior to the end of the Letter of Agreement).

Annual Evaluations

With faculty input, the program director makes a formal recommendation regarding fellow promotion, graduation, remediation, or non-renewal. The program director records her recommendation in writing on the semiannual fellow evaluation form, a copy of which is forwarded to the GME office.

During the training program, the fellow takes the APCCMPD In-Service Examination.

Program Completion

At the end of the fellowship, the program director completes a verification and reference form and forwards a copy of that form to the GME office.

Files

Upon requests, fellows may review their files, including faculty evaluations of the fellows but excluding peer and nurse evaluations of the fellows. Peer and nurse evaluations are kept confidential from the fellows being evaluated. All evaluations completed by the fellows are kept confidential as well.

Committees

The Pulmonary Faculty have weekly office meeting and the discuss issues regarding the fellowship program and evaluate the fellows. Those fellows identified by the program director and faculty as possibly requiring performance remediation or adverse actions are referred to the Clinical Competency Committee for follow through. The Clinical Competency Committee may also meet on an ad-hoc basis if a fellow receives an unsatisfactory (or "does not meet expectations") evaluation relating to any of the competencies or if a fellow is referred to the committee by the program director because of marginal or poor performance. The purpose of the CCC is to review a fellow's record, discuss the fellow's performance, and make a recommendation to the program director regarding the fellow. The program director is ultimately responsibility for determining any performance remediation or adverse actions.