1. CIQA Annual Report Luca Rossi Marcel Wanner Marc Gogny

2. M OST FREQUENT C ATEGORY 1 DEFICIENCIES FOUND IN 9 VISITED / REVISITED F ACULTIES ( BETWEEN GA 2010 AND GA 2011) Description of the deficiencyN Deficient clinical teaching5 Lack of/inadequate isolation facilities4 Insufficient clinical case load4 Inadequate clinical facilities/equipment4 Insufficient number of necropsies3 Scarce hygienic conditions and student security 3

3. MISCELLANEA OF OTHER “CATEGORY 1” DEFICIENCIES (N) between GA 2010 and GA 2011 Inadequate necropsy room (2) Insufficient teaching/support staff (2) No/inadequate hospitalization (1) Limited “hands-on” training (1) Long-term clinical teaching activity (1) Deficient handling standard of drugs (1) Deficient propaedeutical instructions on live animals (1) No evaluation system of teachers (1) Animal welfare issues (1) Lack of 24 hrs emergency (1)

4. M OST FREQUENT C ATEGORY 1 DEFICIENCIES FOUND IN 19 VISITED / REVISITED F ACULTIES ( LAST 2 YEARS ) Description of the deficiencyN Lack of/inadequate isolation facilities 10 Insufficient clinical case load 9 Deficient clinical teaching 6 Inadequate clinical facilities/equipment 5 Insufficient number of necropsies 4 Scarce hygienic conditions and student security 4 Lack of/inadequate mobile clinic 3 Animal welfare issues 3 Inadequate necropsy room 3 Insufficient teaching/support staff 3 Lack of 24 hrs emergency 3

5. QUESTIONNAIRES FROM THE DEAN OFFICE OF VISITED FACULTIES (between GA 2010 and GA 2011) 8 questionnaires received out of 21 (38.1%) of these, 2 questionnaires from approved Faculties and 6 from not approved or conditionally approved Faculties no questionnaire received after ECOVE decision FeelingTeamChairmanOther team members Professional manner Positive 8778 ± 1100 Negative 0000 No comment 0010

6. QUESTIONNAIRES FROM THE DEAN OFFICE OF VISITED FACULTIES (between GA 2009 and GA 2011) 16 questionnaires received out of 33 (48.5%) of these, 4 questionnaires from approved Faculties and 12 from not approved or conditionally approved Faculties one questionnaire received after ECOVE decision FeelingTeamChairmanOther team members Professional manner Positive 14 1115 ± 2231 Negative 0000 No comment 0020

7. Not all team members able to communicate with all kinds of staff (in 2 questionaires) Chairman sometimes stressing “details” Feeling of “suspicius” team members Insufficient knowledge of academic milieu by a team member Insufficient knowledge of the organization of the local educational system by some team members REASONS FOR DISSATISFACTION (2 years) (N = 15 questionnaires received before ECOVE decision)

8. Working with a university is like working in a graveyard –

9. Working with a university is like working in a graveyard – you don’t get any help from below