Know Your Candidates: Responses to Committee Questions

The PAEA Nominations and Awards Committee poses questions to the candidates for PAEA office as one way of helping faculty become acquainted with the candidates and their views about PA education. This year's candidates, Frank Acevedo and Justine Strand for president elect and Connie Goldgar for director at large, have submitted their answers — each limited to 250 words — to three questions. The first appears in this issue; the remaining two will be published in the October issue of the Networker.

Candidates' platform statements and CVs were published in the August Networker. A Candidates Forum is planned for Tucson on Thursday, October 25, from 4:15-5:00 p.m., and all faculty are encouraged to attend. This forum will provide an opportunity for the candidates to present their statements in person and for faculty to ask the candidates some questions of their own.

Candidates

President Elect

Frank A. Acevedo, PA-C, MS, Academic Coordinator/Associate Director
New York Institute of Technology Department of PA Studies
Old Westbury, New York

Justine Strand, MPH, PA-C, Chief
Duke University Medical Center Physician Assistant Division
Durham, North Carolina

Director at Large

Constance T. Goldgar, MS, PA-C, Associate Program Director
University of Utah Physician Assistant Program
Salt Lake City, Utah

Committee Questions and Candidate Responses

Frank Acevedo, President Elect

1. Please identify three partnerships (excluding the AAPA, NCCPA, and ARC-PA) that you believe are key to the success of the Association and explain the rationale for your choices.

Our educational process can be summarized as a series of inputs, throughputs, and outputs that lead to the production of quality physician assistants. Throughout this process we partner with physicians, nurses, social workers, and other health care professionals to deliver our curricula. In order to enhance each component I envision key partnerships with organizations that will strengthen our programs as well as enhance our strategic plan as outlined in the July Networker. These key organizations are:

• National Association of Advisors for the Health Professions (NAAHP) — Through strengthening our relationship with NAAHP we can make sure that their advisors have the most up to date information so as to facilitate entry into the profession by as many qualified individuals as possible.

• American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA) — As biomedical and health informatics become integral to the practice of medicine we need to approach the experts for assistance in developing tools that will enhance these skills in our students throughout their didactic and clinical training. Knowledge in informatics will be crucial to the future success of our programs and graduates.

• American Public Health Association (APHA) — In order to effect change in our health care system we need to partner with organizations that have this same mission at the very core of what they do. The APHA agenda of rebuilding the public health infrastructure, ensuring access to health care, and eliminating health disparities is in line with what we want our graduates to be involved in when they graduate.

Justine Strand, President Elect

1. Please identify three partnerships (excluding the AAPA, NCCPA, and ARC-PA) that you believe are key to the success of the Association and explain the rationale for your choices.

Our partnerships with the three PA organizations are vital to the future of the profession, as are our existing partnerships with other health professions educators, such as the National Association of Advisors for the Health Professions, National Association of Medical Minority Educators, and the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine, to highlight a few. I will focus on three organizations with whom PAEA does not yet have formal partnerships (per liaison organizations on our Web site, www.paeaonline.org/links.html):  

• The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC, www.aamc.org), which represents allopathic medical schools in the United States and Canada. As members of physician-led teams, PAs have a vital interest in the education of physicians, and physicians have a vital interest in learning to supervise PAs. PAEA has had exploratory conversations with AAMC in recent years, and it is significant that AAMC chair Dick Krugman, MD, is our keynote speaker in Tucson.

• The Health Professions and Nursing Education Coalition (HPNEC, www.aamc.org/advocacy/hpnec/start.htm), which advocates for funding for health professions education at the federal level. AAPA ably represents PAs in this collaborative effort and enlists the assistance of PA educators in advocacy days in Congress (I have served in this role), but PAEA should be formally involved as member.

• The Association for Prevention Teaching and Research (www.aptrweb.org). PAEA could benefit from “cross-pollination” and share what we have learned about teaching in a rapid education cycle, and APTR’s emphasis on population and public health will be increasingly important as health care shifts to a more prospective model.

Constance Goldgar, Director at Large

1. Please identify three partnerships (excluding the AAPA, NCCPA, and ARC-PA) that you believe are key to the success of the Association and explain the rationale for your choices.

1. The AAMC's Institute for Improving Medical Education (IIME)
The IIME is a subgroup of the AAMC that “seeks to achieve wide-ranging goals across the continuum of medical education.” Many of the most recent documents advocating change in curricula of medical schools and residency programs posit midlevel providers as part of the solution for use (and overuse) of residents in hospitals, or to fill patient care needs due to decreased numbers in specialty residencies. PA education has also been regarded as a possible alternative model of curricular “efficiency” for medical school education. We need to be at this table.

2. Society of Teachers of Family Medicine (STFM)
STFM is the educational arm of AAFP (American Academy of Family Physicians). Although PAEA currently has a relationship with STFM by supporting a PAEA liaison, this linkage needs to be further strengthened, with the eventual goal of a board-to-board relationship. Some aspects of STFM’s organizational structure could serve as a model to better accommodate PAEA’s growing constituency. Their “Group Ons” offer opportunities for networking amongst like-interest educators and serve to enrich various academic arenas. The groups function during their annual meetings, but also continue their communication and sharing throughout the year, enhancing faculty development.

3. The Institute of Medicine (IOM)

The IOM is a non-profit organization that “provides independent, objective, evidence-based advice to policymakers, health professionals, the private sector, and the public.” The IOM’s work is far-ranging and encompasses all health professionals, as it addresses health care needs of the United States. Their Board on Health Care Services has MD, nursing, pharmacy, and other representation, but no PAs are participating in key roles in this or other important board work.