!!Residency Programs That Recquire Supplementals

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

Shimmmy

Full Member
Lifetime Donor
7+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2016
Messages
39
Reaction score
13
I thought I might start a thread on programs that require a supplemental along with ERAS this year. I'm only aware of a few programs doing this thus far. If ya'll know of any others, please post below and I'll keep the list updated.

1) UCSF: link on their website sends you to a google form with 2 free response questions.
2) University of Chicago - on ERAS when you click on the program for more info, instructed to add response to PS
3) University of Washington - form on their website (under Application -> PGY-1)
4) Prisma/University of South Carolina Greenville - Emailed directly to ERAS mailbox
5) University of Maryland Sheppard Pratt - Emailed directly to ERAS mailbox
6) UCLA Olive View: survey link sent through ERAS
7) Carolinas Medical Center Program: 1-4 paragraph “why our program?” essay requested through ERAS. Email essay to program by Oct 28.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
University of Chicago - on ERAS when you click on the program for more info, instructed to add response to PS
University of Washington - form on their website (under Application -> PGY-1)
 
Members don't see this ad :)
UCLA Olive View: survey link sent through ERAS

Carolinas Medical Center Program: 1-4 paragraph “why our program?” essay requested through ERAS. Email essay to program by Oct 28.
 
UCLA Olive View: survey link sent through ERAS

Carolinas Medical Center Program: 1-4 paragraph “why our program?” essay requested through ERAS. Email essay to program by Oct 28.
I haven't gotten one from Carolinas... 🙁
 
These extras pull down the beauty of a single ERAS system. More bureaucracy. More Scat. This exceptionalism should be red flag for folks. Stay away, don't apply.
I have to disagree with this. This application season is unlike any other before it, and many programs fear that the thousands of dollars that applicants will be saving on interview travel and accommodations this year may potentially be channeled into applying to many more programs indiscriminately. It is a lot of work for programs, especially psychiatry programs that often try to look at applications as a whole, to review these massive amounts of applications. It's not unreasonable to assume that taking the time to answer two brief questions specific to the program/area/etc may be indicative of interest in the program and may be a way to help weed through those extra applications in order to find the best match for both parties. A lot of very good programs started doing it this year, I don't think it's fair to say that this is a red flag.
 
I don't think programs should ask every single applicant to submit secondaries if they are not even going to consider some of them. For example, if there's a minimum requirement for step 1 or step 2 score, then those below the cut-off will just be wasting time writing these secondaries.
 
University of Utah via ERAS:
  1. 4-8 lines about why them
  2. Whether you're interested in any of their tracks.
 
If I get an interview from those places I will be ranking them very low on my list. I think it's pretty lame to ask for even more stuff at this point of the game.
 
Are we clear if these 'secondaries' are being universally sent out? I received Olive-View, UW, and Utah. I'm naturally skeptical as a DO student lol

I got UW, Utah and Maryland so far. I am an IMG, so I am sure they are sending to everybody lol
 
Those who applied to Utah, are you replying to the message that you got in ERAS or are you replying via email? I'm unsure where to send my response.
 
Those who applied to Utah, are you replying to the message that you got in ERAS or are you replying via email? I'm unsure where to send my response.
I responded in ERAS. It says “reply to this email,” and since technically you can’t respond to the actual email itself, I thought that was the most direct way.
 
If I were a PD I would be doing anything I could think of to reduce the number of applications I had to read through and potentially filter out people who weren’t really interested in my program.

This is a systems problem that requires systems solutions. I read an interesting proposal a while back:
"Tokens" is the solution. You can only hand out "gold tokens" to the top 25 programs. That way the program knows you are genuinely interested in them. You can still flood the market with your app so no anti-competitive law suits against the NRMP, ERAS will still make cash money on your bajillion apps, and programs will be able to sort by who is actually interested in them.

Secondary applications (i.e. something else for PDs to read) will disappear when they create more work rather than reduce work.
 
If I were a PD I would be doing anything I could think of to reduce the number of applications I had to read through and potentially filter out people who weren’t really interested in my program.

This is a systems problem that requires systems solutions. I read an interesting proposal a while back:


Secondary applications (i.e. something else for PDs to read) will disappear when they create more work rather than reduce work.
Yes, that's a great idea. It's a systemic issue via the ERAS platform and the AAMC clearly has no intention of solving it given they only profit from the hysteria.
 
Top