Clinical
Cardiology Electrophysiology Fellowship Training
Evaluation
Policy
1. All CCEP residents will be evaluated
quarterly by all the faculty, on-line (E*Value).
Housestaff are evaluated on all the 6 Core Competencies. Other
assessment methods include an Evaluation Committee made up of the faculty,
review of the resident’s procedure log, and review of the resident’s ability to
present and participate in conferences.
Peer, student, nurse, social worker, and other evaluations may be
obtained at the program director's discretion (360 degree assessments).
These evaluations will remain anonymous, and can be reviewed by the resident
only in aggregate.
2. Residents are expected to complete
evaluations of their attendings, rotations, and program. In some cases,
peer evaluations may be requested.
Program evaluation is done on a biannual basis, and faculty
are evaluated three times yearly. Evaluations are done on the E*Value system
and must be done in a timely fashion. The oldest evaluation must be done
first. These evaluations are a mandatory
part of training, and failure to complete them is considered unprofessional
behavior.
3. Residents can review their evaluations at
any time via online resources. This includes raw evaluation data and
comparative norms.
4. Housestaff will meet with the Program
Director (or Associate Program Director) every six months to review their
evaluations. A summary of this review will be placed in the resident's
file.
5. An unsatisfactory evaluation is defined as
any evaluation that contains any one score of 3 on a 9-point scale or language
in the comment section stating that the resident's performance was marginal,
concerning, or otherwise not equal to the academic standards of the program.
a. All unsatisfactory evaluations will
trigger a meeting between the resident and the
Program Director
(or Associate Program Director) to review the evaluation.
The Program
Director, at their discretion, may also interview the attending,
peers, nurses, or others connected with the
rotation to obtain further details
about the resident's performance.
b. After reviewing the available information, if
in the Program Director's opinion
the
resident's performance was satisfactory, a note stating the results of the
review
will be filed in the resident's file and no further action will be
required. Otherwise, a defined period of
remedial training (probation) may be necessary.
6. A "Critical Incident" is defined
as any substantiated report to the Program Director or staff of: 1) clinical
care resulting in sub-standard care or patient harm/near-harm, 2) complaints of
unprofessional behavior from patients, family, or hospital staff, 3) absences
from work or failure to complete duties without excuse, 4) suspicion of being
under the influence of alcohol and/or recreational drugs while on duty OR
dependence on alcohol or recreational drugs, 5) conference attendance of < 60%,
6) or any event of similar concern or magnitude (at the Program Director's
discretion). All critical incidents will trigger the consequences of an
Unsatisfactory evaluation plus the following:
a. The details of the critical incident will
be explored within 48 hours of report to the Program Director's office.
b. At the Program Director's discretion, the
resident may be removed from Direct Patient Care until the incident has been
fully evaluated. The Housestaff QA committee will review the incident and
recommend further action.
7. Attending evaluation completion data will
be followed by the Program Director and his/her staff. Attendings that do not complete evaluations
in a timely manner will be contacted, a letter written to their section chief,
or a letter of concern filed with the department in their academic / promotions
file if not addressed to the Program Director's satisfaction.
8. The Program Assistant maintains the
E-Value system and is responsible for adding all new house- staff to the data base.
Once your name has been entered, E-value will create your user name and
password.
9.2006