1. DATA ON FACULTY DEVELOPMENT FOR COMMUNITY-BASED INTERNAL MEDICINE FACULTY
David E. Kern, MD, MPH
Jeanne M. Clark, MD, MPH
Thomas K. Houston, MD, MPH

2. NATIONAL SURVEY 2000 Departments of Medicine
386 U.S. teaching hospitals
Response rate 277/386 or 72%
Respondents: person most responsible for FD (Program Director  DOM Chair  others)

3. % OF INTERNAL MEDICINE FACULTY WHO ARE COMMUNITY-BASED (N = 277)
None: 12%
1-10%: 18%
11-25%: 18%
26-50%: 17%
51-75% 20%
76-100% 16%

4. % of DOM Faculty Who Are Community Based (N=277)

5. % OF COMMUNITY-BASED FACULTY WHO RECEIVE SALARY SUPPORT (N = 277)
0%: 22%
1-10%: 37%
11-25%: 10%
26-50%: 7%
51-75%: 6%
76-100%: 17%

6. % of CBF Receiving Salary Support (N=277)

7. PREVALENCE OF FACULTY DEVELOPMENT (N = 277)
None: 26%
Occasional: 35%
Ongoing: 39%, N = 108

8. (For cutoff off of 25% C-B Faculty, P = 0.12)
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HAVING ONGOING FD AND % OF FACULTY WHO ARE COMMUNITY-BASED
% of Faculty % of Teach Hosp
Who are C-B with Ongoing FD
> 50% 26%
 50% 45%
P = 0.002
(For cutoff off of 25% C-B Faculty, P = 0.12)

9. # OF DOM FACULTY WHO PARTICIPATED IN FD IN 1998-99
Total: mean # about 22 , median 10-19, per teaching hospital, with a wide range
% Community-Based:
0-10%: 31%
11-25%: 24%
26-50%: 25%
51-75%: 11%
76-100%: 10%

10. FD Participants 1998-99: % C-B vs H-B

11. % OF DOM FACULTY WHO EVER PARTICIPATED
Average of about 50% of hospital-based faculty (wide range)
Average of about 25% of community-based faculty (wide range)

12. % OF DOM FACULTY WHO EVER PARTICIPATED

13. PROMOTORS AND INHIBITORS FOR COMMUNITY-BASED FACULTY (1)
More likely to promote than inhibit:
supervisor’s attitudes
promotion considerations
More likely to inhibit than promote:
productivity concerns
distance

14. PROMOTORS AND INHIBITORS FOR COMMUNITY-BASED FACULTY (2)
As likely to promote as inhibit
timing
Neither promote nor inhibit
computer access

15. CHANGES PAST 2 YEARS
# of C-B participants were more likely to have increased than decreased
But # of C-B participants more likely to have stayed the same or to have increased less than did the total number of participants.

16. Changes in the Past 2 Years

17. GIMGEL PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS Tampa, Denver, San Diego
% C-B Faculty Leaders: 7%, 19%, 19%
% Community-Based: 37%, 37%, 33%

18. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN C-B AND H-B PARTICIPANTS IN PREVIOUS F-D TRAINING

19. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

20. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN C-B AND H-B PARTICIPANTS IN PREFERRED CONTENT AREAS FOR FUTURE CONFERENCES

21. * *

22. SUMMARY - NATIONAL (1) C-B faculty make up about 1/3 of DOM faculty
Hospitals with more C-B faculty are less likely to have ongoing FD
C-B are 1/2 as likely as H-B faculty to have participated in ongoing FD programs at the teaching hospitals with which they are affiliated

23. SUMMARY - NATIONAL (2)
During the past 2 years C-B participation in most ongoing FD programs is reported to have stayed the same or increased a little
Productivity concerns and distance were identified as the major barriers to participation
Supervisors’ attitudes were identified as a major facilitator

24. SUMMARY - GIMGEL About 1/3 of participants are C-B
C-B are less likely that H-B participants to have had previous training in educational skills
C-B and H-B have similar interests content areas for future faculty development conferences