So I have a quick question for those who have interviewed or been to the school. (Or current students for that matter).
What steps are being taken by SJB to ensure they keep their accreditation? This is obviously a concern, and I'll be sure to ask when I interview, but any info is helpful.
Thanks
Reese
An excellent question. From what I've been told by the staff and other students, the LCME listed just four criteria that were areas of "noncompliance" after their visit in February 2012, which prevented them from restoring full accreditation without reservations (i.e. taking us off "Full Accreditation - On Probation"). You can read more about that in some of my other posts on last year's application thread, but in a nutshell:
1. Financial resources. The school had a verbal agreement with the Department of Health regarding their financial support for the school; however, by the time of the LCME's visit, an actually written contract had not yet been signed. Since then, this has already been completed.
2. One of the contracts that the school had with a hospital for clinical rotations did not include explicit mention of coverage or liability for safety issues such as needlesticks. This was (I believe) an oversight of reporting, and has already been amended and completed.
3. Insufficient research publications from the faculty. Supposedly, this is an ongoing source of concern at all of the PR medical schools, because historically they were all "teaching" institutions, first and foremost. Until recently, research has been a secondary priority (if that) at most PR medical schools, with most research on the island being "extramural"--that is, performed through collaborations with labs in the US or through the CDC branch in San Juan. To my knowledge, the sole exception to this was UPR-Rio Piedras, which recently opened a sparkling new research campus, and which receives millions of dollars in funding from the PR government as the only public medical school on the Island. In response to this, SJBSM has made a new collaboration agreement with a neurological research center where many research opportunities and rotations will be available to both faculty and students, as well as the ability to publish.
4. One of the clinical rotations in Pediatrics was not aware that they were also being evaluated by the students for feedback/enhancement purposes. Because of this misunderstanding, they reported this to the LCME, who noted that all rotations clinics must be evaluated by students, in order for it to satisfy the requirements of an approved clinical rotation. The school has since re-oriented this clinical rotation and re-submitted to them the manual explaining these procedures, as well as updated forms for student rotational evaluations, and informed the LCME of the miscommunication.
That's pretty much it, in regards to what the USMLE listed as areas of "non-compliance." You'll note that USMLE pass rates were not mentioned--in large part because the data on USMLE scores was "incomplete," and still being collected. This was because some of the MS-IIs hadn't taken the USMLE/received their scores by the time the LCME had visited, since many had their test dates cancelled when the LCME revoked their accreditation. The ones who had taken it already had all passed--briefly giving SJB an enviable "100%" first-time pass rate as of February.
Regardless, LCME said this was not a factor in deciding whether or not to restore accreditation without reservations, and they were willing to wait for more data to come in, as the remaining few students took the exam.
(Since then, I believe the "actual/final" first-time pass rate came in somewhere around 80-89%. Second-time pass rate is, I believe, 100%.)
