New Governance Committee Begins Review of Policies and Procedures

Walter A. Eisenhauer, MMSc, PA-C
Chair, PAEA Governance Committee and Director at Large

Charged by the membership at the 2005 business meeting in Puerto Rico to review the Association’s governance processes, the PAEA Board of Directors recently appointed a standing PAEA Governance Committee, consisting of Tony Miller, Sal Barese, Richard Rahr, Christina Robohm, and me as chair. The newly formed committee met at the PAEA national offices last week to begin the task of reviewing all documents and procedures related to our governance, including the Association’s bylaws, to ensure that these meet the needs of the organization and the membership.

The organizations that guide the PA profession are unique. Each body — AAPA, PAEA, NCCPA, and ARC-PA — is independent; they do not exist under the umbrella of a single professional entity, such as the American Medical Association or American Bar Association. This structure ensures the autonomy of each body to make decisions based on the needs of its constituents.

There are several issues that the committee considered in its initial review. Membership was high on the agenda. With the recent development of an accreditation mechanism for postgraduate PA education and the formation of programs outside the United States, the Association must evaluate its role with these and other educational entities. Also, within PAEA, the members are programs, not individual faculty. Governance procedures therefore need to strike a balance that recognizes the diverse opinions that exist among PA educators while granting organizational authority to member programs — a balance not easily achieved, given the value higher education places on diversity of opinions. The committee will seek to put in place a process that ensures that all opinions are heard and valued while maintaining voting authority in the member programs.

Likewise, the Association’s leadership needs to ascertain that survey instruments and other data gathering methods reflect the opinions of core PA educators. This will require clearly defining who represents the core faculty within programs. We also need to consider how to classify the increasing number of seasoned PA educators who are assuming dean and department chair positions, as well as how to respond to the likely wave of retirements we can expect in the near future of some first-generation PA educators; an emeritus category may be an option.

The committee also discussed changes to the motion vetting sytem that was introduced at the 2005 Education Forum, in which the PAEA consortia played a central role. Information on the revised process will be disseminated via e-mail and in PAEA Networker to all member faculty in the next few weeks as the process is finalized.

Members are reminded that motions are due at the PAEA national office by September 13 in order to be considered at the upcoming meeting. Motions that are not received by this date are subject to a two-thirds majority vote on the floor to be considered.

I strongly encourage my PA educator colleagues to begin discussions in their programs about issues of national concern related to PA education. This will make certain that voting representatives are aware of and consider the diverse opinions of their faculty prior to casting their votes on a given issue.

If you have suggestions for changes in the current PAEA organizational structure or for how this process should evolve, please contact one of the committee members listed above and make your opinion known.