How on God's green earth do we stop Rocky Vista??

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

medstud2ndyr

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
.....

Members don't see this ad.
 
You are NOT going to stop Rocky Vista. For one thing, no one I know if going to the August 25th meeting. Written comment is going to be ignored if there is no one representing it.

Good luck.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Found this on http://www.osteopathic.org/index.cfm?PageID=acc_predoc :

The next meeting of the AOA Commission on Osteopathic College Accreditation (COCA) will be held on Saturday, August 25, and Sunday, August 26, 2007, at the O'Hare Hilton Hotel in Chicago, IL. Review of accreditation activities will begin on August 25th at 9:00am (CDT).

Two initial provisional accreditation site visit reports will be reviewed: Rocky Vista University College of Osteopathic Medicine (Parker, CO); and, Pacific Northwest University of Health Sciences, College of Osteopathic Medicine (Yakima, WA). The COCA is expected to make a decision on whether to grant initial provisional accreditation to these two colleges.
...
For more information about this meeting, including a request to present written third-party testimony, please contact the Secretary to the Commission: Konrad C. Miskowicz-Retz, PhD, CAE; Director, Department of Accreditation; American Osteopathic Association; 142 East Ontario Street; Chicago, IL 60611; phone 312.202.8048; fax 312.202.8202; e-mail [email protected].

Unfortunately, it sounds like the deadline has already passed to give notice that you will make a third party ocmment, but perhaps it would still be useful to be present at the meeting?
 
My colleagues:
A group of students at one of our colleges has organized an online petition to COCA/AOA voicing disapproval of for-profit medical education and asking them to do the same. You can access the petition at: http://www.petitiononline.com/not4pro/

If you are interested, please take a moment to look this over and add your signature if you are in agreement.
George Mychaskiw II, DO, FAAP
 
I just am impressed with how ridiculous this is. Of course I am against Rocky Vista and i will sign that petition --

However, isn't it more important and more of an outrage that the health care industry is really run by for-profit insurance companies?
 
However, isn't it more important and more of an outrage that the health care industry is really run by for-profit insurance companies?

True, but it won't change in the near future. The medical community let it happen to itself and it will be an increadible uphill battle to stop them.
 
My colleagues:
A group of students at one of our colleges has organized an online petition to COCA/AOA voicing disapproval of for-profit medical education and asking them to do the same. You can access the petition at: http://www.petitiononline.com/not4pro/

If you are interested, please take a moment to look this over and add your signature if you are in agreement.
George Mychaskiw II, DO, FAAP

This may deserve its own thread if you want more people to see it.
 
Online petitions are worthless-you can't verify the signatures.
 
Petitions, in of themselves, can't compel anyone to do anything, but they are an expression to the leadership of the volume of discontent with an issue. Have you signed?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
My intention is not to start an argument, I'm saying that the petition website is for entertainment purposes at best. If you want an organization to take you seriously that's not the best way to do it. For all they know it could be 20 people with too much time on their hands signing and resigning. Do we have any lawyers here?
 
I'll be attending the AOA convention in San Diego in September. I plan on discussing the issue with the leadership of the AOA (Ajluni) about the issue. We have to let the AOA know how STRONGLY we feel about this.
 
Profit or Non-Profit - these schools are all BUSINESSES. Do you look into the expenses of each of the non-profit schools? Do you know where the ($37,000x200 students each class) x 4 classes = $29 million a year goes each YEAR in the "non-profit" schools? I'd imagine there are some HUGE salaries involved. Stay focused on your tasks at hand like graduating medical school instead of wasting time on a school that has filed for "profit" vs. "non-profit" status. Just my 2 1/2 pennies.
 
You can bury your head in the sand and not worry about what is going on, but you may find yourself having spent a great deal of time and money to enter a defunct profession. The for-profit school has the potential to be used as a lever to end this profession. Alarmist? Maybe, but the stakes are too high not to be.
 
You can bury your head in the sand and not worry about what is going on, but you may find yourself having spent a great deal of time and money to enter a defunct profession. The for-profit school has the potential to be used as a lever to end this profession. Alarmist? Maybe, but the stakes are too high not to be.

I'm sorry but I don't believe the creation of a for-profit school is that great of a lever. There are bigger levers that can be used to end the profession:

- The lower GPA and MCAT admission standards across the board for all DO schools compared to the lower tier MD schools.

- The consistently lower USMLE Step 1 pass rates of those DO students that choose to take it.

- The lack of enough osteopathic residencies for all DO graduates, and the lack of a geographically-diverse residency pool for DO graduates to choose from.

- The ever-decreasing number of osteopathic hospitals in the US.

Any of those above reasons could've been used to "end the profession." All the AMA and ACGME have to do is say that all residency programs that are ACGME accredited will no longer accept osteopathic applicants due to the above.

I hardly believe this single event will spell death for the profession. There are many for-profit allopathic schools operating a few miles away from the coast of Florida, and their graduates are enjoying quite a degree of success as physicians in the US. There are other things I worry about as a future osteopathic physician. Rocky Vista is not even on my "worry list."

I wish you all good luck in your quest to try and end the opening of RVU, but in the grand scheme of things, it's my opinion that the opening of this school is being blown a bit out of proportion.
 
I'm sorry but I don't believe the creation of a for-profit school is that great of a lever. There are bigger levers that can be used to end the profession:

- The lower GPA and MCAT admission standards across the board for all DO schools compared to the lower tier MD schools.

Not an issue as long as osteopathic medicine graduates continue to practice medicine at the level of their allopathic counterparts with the same or lesser percentage of malpractice actions against them.

- The consistently lower USMLE Step 1 pass rates of those DO students that choose to take it.

The previous reply applies here too.

- The lack of enough osteopathic residencies for all DO graduates, and the lack of a geographically-diverse residency pool for DO graduates to choose from.

This is certainly an area that needs improvement, however, not a deal breaker by any means.

- The ever-decreasing number of osteopathic hospitals in the US.

There haven't been osteopathic hospitals in the U.S. for a while, they are just hospitals now.


Any of those above reasons could've been used to "end the profession." All the AMA and ACGME have to do is say that all residency programs that are ACGME accredited will no longer accept osteopathic applicants due to the above.

Then many of their residency slots will go unfilled, they will have to be closed [even if you factor in IMGs] and those funds will no longer be allocated to those hospitals. Short version = VERY unlikely.

I hardly believe this single event will spell death for the profession. There are many for-profit allopathic schools operating a few miles away from the coast of Florida, and their graduates are enjoying quite a degree of success as physicians in the US. There are other things I worry about as a future osteopathic physician. Rocky Vista is not even on my "worry list."


DO ANES makes some good points as to why this is not a good venture for osteopathic medicine.



I wish you all good luck in your quest to try and end the opening of RVU, but in the grand scheme of things, it's my opinion that the opening of this school is being blown a bit out of proportion.[/QUOTE]
 
Last I heard, the founder of LECOM (a NON-PROFIT school) was flying between his campuses in Lake Erie and Bradenton in a private corporate jet... I guess expenses like that will make it "non-profit". Why are you so threatened by Rocky Vista running their school as for-profit?
 
By the way, if the defense that this should not be for profit because the people of U.S. cannot afford healthcare - it probably has more to do with this and you can spend time writing letters and such regarding the bigger issues such as those in the article.
 
Not an issue as long as osteopathic medicine graduates continue to practice medicine at the level of their allopathic counterparts with the same or lesser percentage of malpractice actions against them.

This same reply applies to future graduates of Rocky Vista, no?
 
This same reply applies to future graduates of Rocky Vista, no?

Sure, the students are not the culprits of any wrongdoing here. The heat is directed towards the school and the accrediting agencies.
 
i think you should really take a step back here and analyze this. yeah, a for-profit situation sounds pretty bad from the administrative and business level...but how different is that from a private practice? how different is that from a physician group? how different is that from some hospitals? every business venture is in some form "for profit". they have to make money to survive. they have to make money to pay people. they have to make money to take care of their overhead. im not all that excited about RVU, but i mean...you cant just stop people from doing this thing after millions of dollars have been put into it. Some people, like with any new med school, have a large stake in this and want to see it succeed. Your voices may be heard and recognized, but are not remotely as powerful as the investors money. This is a business at its heart, and money drives business. If the AOA says things are good, and the school is providing a quality education - what issue do you truly have? if they churn out sucky docs, well thats a problem to address. if they produce some of the finest competent physicians around, then its an invaluable venture. we need to focus on bigger problems and quit worrying about all this. SDN is like high school man...all this dang drama.
 
i think you should really take a step back here and analyze this. yeah, a for-profit situation sounds pretty bad from the administrative and business level...but how different is that from a private practice? how different is that from a physician group? how different is that from some hospitals? every business venture is in some form "for profit".

The problem is, medical education should not be a business. Abraham Flexner recommended that in 1910 and US medical education thrived because of his suggestions. Obviously, you can do whatever the hell you want in your practice when you are done, that is your perogative. However, I would hate to see medical education tainted by the outside influences of all powerful money. "Guess what I learned in pharm today!? Lipitor is the ONLY drug that is effective in treating hyperlipidemia, all others are rubbish! Oh and BTW, Pfizer gave me this cool hat!"

you cant just stop people from doing this thing after millions of dollars have been put into it.

Yeah, lets just keep on doing what we're doing because time and money have been invested in it despite whatever concerns may be raised. <sarcasm>That isn't a logic fallacy or anything.</sarcasm>

If the AOA says things are good, and the school is providing a quality education - what issue do you truly have? if they churn out sucky docs, well thats a problem to address. if they produce some of the finest competent physicians around, then its an invaluable venture.

If they churn out sucky docs, it's already too late. Although I seriously doubt that is an issue. From a business stand point they will have a vested interest in churning out quality doctors, otherwise they will be a self-limiting entity.

Either way, that isn't the point. The point is that medical education should not be a business. I know all you proponents of this are out there crying "but its no different than a not-for-profit institution", and in some ways that is true. However, they differ in one very big way, and that is cash flow in a not-for-profit institution goes back into the institution, not disproportionately into some business person's pocket.

Besides, medical education (especially at the majority of osteopathic schools) is already too expensive. Having to make big profits for investors to gawk at during quarterly earnings reports is -probably- just going to drive the tuition at RVU up even further.

we need to focus on bigger problems and quit worrying about all this.

Like what?
 
Profit provides too much opportunity for influence.
 
SDN is like high school man...all this dang drama.

Exactly. I think I would've supported this effort to stop RVU if it wasn't for all the hyperbole involved. "The end of osteopathic medicine!" "The demise of the profession!" "Cats and dogs living together!" Geez.
 
This is how you do it:

1) Contact Dr. Richard Jadick, DO (Remember Hero MD?) or another "top gun" who has had substantial media exposure. Convert him to your cause.

2) Make professional video with him in it objecting to the accreditation of this school.

3) Post it on Youtube

4) Spread it all over the web ( I mean all over: blogs, google, usenet, forums)

5) Send it to as many DOs and MDs as possible. Send it to state osteopathic associations, send it to undergrad premed clubs and the like.


This would be an affordable, easy and possibly fruitful campaign in getting as much attention and raising the heat on the powers that be. This would prove the cause is serious and has clout.

My 2 revolutionary cents...
(modify and elaborate it as you wish)
 


Try to visualize how could such a campaign prove to be serious and/or have clout.

It's analogous to making a campaign to have 1000s of members of a given constituency contact their congress representative via letters, faxes, etc.
 
Try to visualize how could such a campaign prove to be serious and/or have clout.

It's analogous to making a campaign to have 1000s of members of a given constituency contact their congress representative via letters, faxes, etc.

OK, I see your point.

Unfortunately the analogy doesn't quite work with the AOA, since apparently the AOA membership has little say in who the AOA leaders are. A congressman depends on the support of his/her constituents but the president of the AOA -unfortunately- has no such constraint (unfortunate for us, fortunate for him). Or at least the constraint is not that apparent since it seems that the AOA does things that sometimes go against what the majority of the AOA membership wants.
 
OK, I see your point.

Unfortunately the analogy doesn't quite work with the AOA, since apparently the AOA membership has little say in who the AOA leaders are. A congressman depends on the support of his/her constituents but the president of the AOA -unfortunately- has no such constraint (unfortunate for us, fortunate for him). Or at least the constraint is not that apparent since it seems that the AOA does things that sometimes go against what the majority of the AOA membership wants.

yeah, sure

That's why if anything is going to work is getting media attention, so that if they do get accredited, at least it will remain well seen that we did all we could to avoid it - even getting the support of a physician nationally regarded as a hero.

Anyway, there's that idea, if anyone has a better one, please bring it forward.
 
Although I don't agree with the obvious, I think some of you need to wake up and face the coffee pot. Almost all medical schools are for profit, despite their accounting catagorization. Just take a look at the numbers. If a school has 120 students per class with 4 classes in attendance and tuition of $25000 per year that is $20,000,000 dollars a year. Now if the school has 50 paid faculty members (that would be basicly 6-10 full time faculty in each of the major disciplines - and don't forget that the physicians teaching at a school usually dont count as full time faculty) each making $150,000 (and trust me they are not!) that would be a cost of about $12,000,000. That leaves $8,000,000 for those nasty electric and phone bills. Hmmmmm Looks like no profit at all!
 
Although I don't agree with the obvious, I think some of you need to wake up and face the coffee pot. Almost all medical schools are for profit, despite their accounting catagorization. Just take a look at the numbers. If a school has 120 students per class with 4 classes in attendance and tuition of $25000 per year that is $20,000,000 dollars a year. Now if the school has 50 paid faculty members (that would be basicly 6-10 full time faculty in each of the major disciplines - and don't forget that the physicians teaching at a school usually dont count as full time faculty) each making $150,000 (and trust me they are not!) that would be a cost of about $12,000,000. That leaves $8,000,000 for those nasty electric and phone bills. Hmmmmm Looks like no profit at all!

...And then money that goes to the research departments for equipment and supplies, the library, staff members, construction projects, special programs...not so much profit anymore
 
The difference between non-profits and for-profits is that the 'profit' in a nonprofit school goes back to the school whereas a nonprofit would give the money to their investors to do whatever they want with it.

I don't feel antsy about a for-profit school because of some sort of delusion that medicine is a sacred calling, I just feel this could dilute the quality of medical education in general. But I guess we won't know until the school starts churning out graduates, will we?
 
Should we also ban any caribbean island grad from being allowed to participate in the match as well?

All of those programs are for-profit. What difference does it make? Their graduates have been practicing medicine in the United States for decades.

If Rocky Vista starts to compromise their instruction and produces underqualified students that can't pass their boards (extremely unlikely), they'll be penalized with a loss of accreditation. There you go.

Anyhow, I've been disenchanted with the AOA for quite some time now. I'm convinced they're more concerned that the James Gandolfini's and Newsweek's in the world are able to spell "DO" correctly than they are with Rocky Vista's for-profit status. The AOA has completely lost their sense of priority. On a personal note, I'm more annoyed at their unwillingness to mandate a nation-wide removal of osteopathic transitional years (Pennsylvania is a place that I'd really like to match in someday).
 
Should we also ban any caribbean island grad from being allowed to participate in the match as well?

What exactly does match have to do with the COCA giving accreditation to this school?

All of those programs are for-profit. What difference does it make? Their graduates have been practicing medicine in the United States for decades.

To us, none, but if we want to bring in their track record for passing boards, then that might be an issue. Even Osteopaths have an average of what, mid to upper 70% pass rate of USMLE, while the Caribbean schools have what? 58% in 2004.

If Rocky Vista starts to compromise their instruction and produces underqualified students that can't pass their boards (extremely unlikely), they'll be penalized with a loss of accreditation. There you go.

after multiple warnings and probation periods no doubt.

I'm sorry, but tuition has become too high and we are hurting ourselves in the future if we continue to not only do nothing but encourage high tuition in the name of profit.

On a personal note, I'm more annoyed at their unwillingness to mandate a nation-wide removal of osteopathic transitional years (Pennsylvania is a place that I'd really like to match in someday).

Isn't it the 5 states who maintain the DO osteopathic intern year?
 
I fully understand the position of the AOA and Board of Trustees. I think the fundamental problem is Dr. Ajluni and I disagree on whether or not a medical school should be a for-profit organization. I believe that medical students are not commodities to be exploited and that the fiscal challenges of operating a quality medical school leave no room to take a profit. I believe that our profession should not be the one to break a nearly 80 year standard of US non-profit medical education. I believe that a for-profit school will sacrifice educational quality, research and public service in order to generate a fiscal return to their investors. I believe that this may potentially threaten the scope of authority of COCA and will diminish the credibility of my profession. In the gravest extreme, it may be fatal to the profession as the American health care system encounters a "perfect storm" of retiring baby boomers, decreasing fiscal resources and expanding medical technology. It is for these reasons that I have publicly and repeatedly stated my disapproval of RVU and for-profit medical education. I have urged Dr. Ajluni to use his bully pulpit to also do so, as RVU cannot succeed if we, as a profession, simply decline to support it as students, faculty and administrators. Clearly Dr. Ajluni and I disagree, as do enough of my colleagues who are working for RVU to get this off the ground. I suppose everyone has their price. So be it. I became a physician, however, to care for those in need and I practice academic medcine to pass on this sacred duty to other generations, not to facilitate the business ambitions of "investors". I DISAPPROVE!, and won't "let it go."
 
What exactly does match have to do with the COCA giving accreditation to this school?

Well, thats the bottom line, isn't it? What better way to determine the quality of a school than to evaluate their ability to produce quality physicians. Now the question is, does a school's for-profit status compromise their ability to produce quality physicians? In today's atmosphere of tightly controlled medical jurispudence and licensing regulation, I don't believe so.

As for any philosophical reasons against for-profit status... the Flexner Report is over 90 years old. You need to consider the context from which it was written. At the time, there were chop shop programs pumping out "doctors" after only 1-2 years of education. And don't forget, the Flexner Report was openly critical of osteopathic medicine as well. Needless to say, a lot has changed since 1910.

...if we want to bring in their track record for passing boards, then that might be an issue. Even Osteopaths have an average of what, mid to upper 70% pass rate of USMLE, while the Caribbean schools have what? 58% in 2004.

St. George's University: 5 year average of 90% first time pass rate.
Ross University: 92% first time pass rate from 2001-03.

Unlike most osteopathic schools, there is a pretty big range of diversity with respect to quality of education among the Caribbean medical schools. I'm not arguing against that. But I'm betting that a for-profit medical school that is located within the states would be among the better ones because they'd have better resources to utilize (most importantly, being able to recruit instructors in the states).

I'm sorry, but tuition has become too high and we are hurting ourselves in the future if we continue to not only do nothing but encourage high tuition in the name of profit.

And banning Rocky Vista would solve that how exactly? Those are two separate issues. But theoretically, having another medical school would foster lowering tuition in order to compete for 1st year entrants. In reality, it won't make any difference. They charge more because they can. Like any other desired educational institution in the country.

Isn't it the 5 states who maintain the DO osteopathic intern year?

Yep, and the AOA could put a stop to it if they wanted to. But they don't. And those five states have been forced to pick from a smaller sample of osteopathic medical graduates as a result.
 
Well, thats the bottom line, isn't it? What better way to determine the quality of a school than to evaluate their ability to produce quality physicians. Now the question is, does a school's for-profit status compromise their ability to produce quality physicians?.


And banning Rocky Vista would solve that how exactly?

It would solve nothing, but by allowing it, you are promoting the exploitation of students simply to make a profit. This is completely counter to the need of trying to lower tuition.

But theoretically, having another medical school would foster lowering tuition in order to compete for 1st year entrants.

Completely wrong. There are what 2 to 3 applicants for every seat in all the medical schools in the US? Supply and demand, the demand is high and the supply is low, there will be no competition to lower tuition to keep their school full.

And those five states have been forced to pick from a smaller sample of osteopathic medical graduates as a result.

Can you substantiate this claim? I'm not aware of any data which supports this theory, and it certainly did not appear to be true in Oklahoma.
 
I fear that in order to send a message that will be really **HEARD** by the AOA, it may require not renewing my membership in the organization. Smoke and mirrors aside, if the BOT wanted to exert influence on COCA and RVU it could do it through a variety of mechanisms.

The AOA has done a fantastic job as a membership organization in growing its ranks, and I hate to see it suffer substantial revenue loss as a consequence of its decision to support for-profit medical education in the US vis-a-vis COCA's accreditation standards. I was beginning to believe that things were "turning the corner" with the AOA with a younger, more progressive leadership, at the helm.

Nevertheless, if the profession cannot exert the influence on RVU required to change its corporate structure from a for-profit to non-profit entity, and if the AOA can not take the steps required to reform its accreditation standards so no future for-profit DO schools will go forward, then I do not think that I can ethically continue my membership in the AOA.

Ultimately, members will vote with their boots.
 
Top