council on education for public health adopted on october 13
TRANSCRIPT
Council on Education for Public Health Adopted on October 13, 2012
REVIEW FOR ACCREDITATION
OF THE
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
COUNCIL ON EDUCATION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH SITE VISIT DATES: March 21-23, 2012 SITE VISIT TEAM: Ian Lapp, PhD, Chair Marie Diener-West, PhD Sylvia E. Furner, PhD, MPH Penney Reese, MS SITE VISIT COORDINATOR: Mollie Mulvanity, MPH
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1
Characteristics of a School of Public Health ................................................................................................. 2
1.0 THE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH. .................................................................................................... 3
1.1 Mission. ............................................................................................................................................... 3
1.2 Evaluation and Planning ...................................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Institutional Environment ..................................................................................................................... 7
1.4 Organization and Administration ....................................................................................................... 10
1.5 Governance ....................................................................................................................................... 11
1.6 Resources ......................................................................................................................................... 13
2.0 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS. .......................................................................................................... 14
2.1 Master of Public Health Degree ........................................................................................................ 14
2.2 Program Length ................................................................................................................................. 16
2.3 Public Health Core Knowledge .......................................................................................................... 16
2.4 Practical Skills ................................................................................................................................... 18
2.5 Culminating Experience .................................................................................................................... 21
2.6 Required Competencies .................................................................................................................... 22
2.7 Assessment Procedures. .................................................................................................................. 24
2.8 Other Professional Degrees. ............................................................................................................. 25
2.9 Academic Degrees ............................................................................................................................ 26
2.10 Doctoral Degrees ............................................................................................................................. 27
2.11 Joint Degrees .................................................................................................................................. 27
2.12 Distance Education or Executive Degree Programs ....................................................................... 28
3.0 CREATION, APPLICATION AND ADVANCEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE. ............................................. 29
3.1 Research. .......................................................................................................................................... 29
3.2 Service ............................................................................................................................................... 30
3.3 Workforce Development .................................................................................................................... 32
4.0 FACULTY, STAFF AND STUDENTS. .................................................................................................. 34
4.1 Faculty Qualifications ........................................................................................................................ 34
4.2 Faculty Policies and Procedures ....................................................................................................... 34
4.3 Faculty and Staff Diversity ................................................................................................................. 35
4.4 Student Recruitment and Admissions ............................................................................................... 36
4.5 Student Diversity ............................................................................................................................... 38
4.6 Advising and Career Counseling ....................................................................................................... 38
Agenda ........................................................................................................................................................ 40
Introduction
This report presents the findings of the Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) regarding the School
of Public Health at the University of Michigan (UMSPH). The report assesses the school’s compliance with
the Accreditation Criteria for Schools of Public Health, amended June 2005. This accreditation review
included the conduct of a self-study process by school constituents, the preparation of a document
describing the school and its features in relation to the criteria for accreditation, and a visit in March 2012 by
a team of external peer reviewers. During the visit, the team had an opportunity to interview school and
university officials, administrators, teaching faculty, students, alumni and community representatives, and to
verify information in the self-study document by reviewing materials provided on site in a resource file. The
team was afforded full cooperation in its efforts to assess the school/college and verify the self-study
document.
The University of Michigan was one of the first public universities in the United States. It was founded in
1817 and moved to its current location in Ann Arbor in 1837. The university has 19 schools and colleges,
including the School of Public Health and the following: College of Architecture and Urban Planning; College
of Engineering; College of Literature, Science and Arts; College of Pharmacy; Rackham School of Graduate
Studies; School of Art and Design; School of Business Administration; School of Dentistry; School of
Education; School of Information; School of Kinesiology; School of Law; School of Medicine; School of
Music; School of Natural Resources and Environment; School of Nursing; School of Public Policy; and
School of Social Work.
The UMSPH was founded in 1941. It offers a range of academic and professional public health degrees,
including professional and academic master’s degrees and academic doctoral degrees. The academic
degrees are officially conferred by the Rackham School of Graduate Studies, though these degrees, like the
professional degrees, are administered by the school.
The UMSPH has been accredited since 1968. Its last review, in 2005, resulted in a seven-year term of
accreditation with no required interim reporting.
1
Characteristics of a School of Public Health
To be considered eligible for accreditation review by CEPH, a school of public health shall demonstrate the following characteristics:
a. The school shall be a part of an institution of higher education that is accredited by a regional accrediting body recognized by the US Department of Education.
b. The school and its faculty shall have the same rights, privileges and status as other
professional schools that are components of its parent institution. c. The school shall function as a collaboration of disciplines, addressing the health of
populations and the community through instruction, research, and service. Using an ecological perspective, the school of public health should provide a special learning environment that supports interdisciplinary communication, promotes a broad intellectual framework for problem-solving, and fosters the development of professional public health concepts and values.
d. The school of public health shall maintain an organizational culture that embraces
the vision, goals and values common to public health. The school shall maintain this organizational culture through leadership, institutional rewards, and dedication of resources in order to infuse public health values and goals into all aspects of the school’s activities.
e. The school shall have faculty and other human, physical, financial and learning
resources to provide both breadth and depth of educational opportunity in the areas of knowledge basic to public health. As a minimum, the school shall offer the Master of Public Health (MPH) degree in each of the five areas of knowledge basic to public health and a doctoral degree in at least three of the five specified areas of public health knowledge.
f. The school shall plan, develop and evaluate its instructional, research and service
activities in ways that assure sensitivity to the perceptions and needs of its students and that combines educational excellence with applicability to the world of public health practice.
These characteristics are evident in the University of Michigan School of Public Health. The school is
located in a regionally-accredited university, and the faculty have the same rights, privileges and status as
other professional schools. The school’s faculty are trained in a variety of different disciplines, and
collaboration both within the school (between departments) and within the university (with other university
schools and colleges) is evident in the school’s research, teaching and service. This collaboration fosters
interdisciplinary communication. The school has strong ties to the public health workforce in Michigan
and beyond, and these linkages foster the development of professional public health concepts and
values. The school’s policies and procedures align with its public health mission and vision. The school
has resources to support all of its educational offerings, including professional master’s degrees and
academic doctoral degrees in the five core areas of public health knowledge. The school has a well-
developed system of planning and evaluation that is very responsive to student feedback and involves
students at all levels and that responds to current and emerging public health practice needs.
2
1.0 THE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH.
1.1 Mission.
The school shall have a clearly formulated and publicly stated mission with supporting goals and objectives. The school shall foster the development of professional public health values, concepts and ethical practice. This criterion is met with commentary. The school’s mission statement encompasses three major
functions of public health: education, research and service. The mission statement focuses on “health
equity” and disadvantaged populations who suffer disproportionately from illness and disability.
The school’s mission statement is as follows:
The University of Michigan School of Public Health seeks to create and disseminate knowledge with the aim of preventing disease and promoting the health of populations worldwide. We are especially concerned with health equity and thus have a special focus on disadvantaged populations who suffer disproportionately from illness and disability. We serve as a diverse and inclusive crossroads of knowledge and practice, with the goal of solving current and future public health problems.
The school’s vision statement is as follows:
The University of Michigan School of Public Health will be the premier academic institution in public health recognized for the way it integrates research, teaching, service and practice in a diverse environment to develop effective solutions to public health problems.
The goals reflect a commitment to prepare public health leaders, conduct innovative research, partner
with communities and public health organizations, serve as a valued resource and recruit and retain high-
quality faculty and staff to support the mission. The school defines its goals and supporting objectives
within four major functions by which the mission will be attained. These functions and goals follow:
1. Education:
a. Goal: To prepare leaders with the knowledge and skills to effectively prevent disease, assure delivery of health services, promote population health, and solve public health problems worldwide.
2. Research: a. Goal: To conduct innovative research that leads to new approaches, expands basic
knowledge, and leads to effective public health policies, programs, and technologies worldwide.
b. Goal: To partner with public health systems and community stakeholders to design and conduct relevant, collaborative research.
3. Service and Practice: a. Goal: To partner with academic, government, practice, and lay communities to facilitate
reciprocal learning and the application of scholarship that contribute to improving population health.
b. Goal: To serve as a valued resource in supporting the efforts of communities and public health organizations to address their priority health issues and challenges.
3
4. Faculty and Staff: a. Goal: To recruit and retain a diverse, high-quality faculty and staff to support the mission
of the School. b. Goal: To support faculty and staff as they develop their careers as leaders in public
health research, teaching, and service There are sixteen objectives in the self-study that support the above goal statements. These objectives
indicate the intent to increase quality in the functional areas of education, research, service and
faculty/staff.
The first area of commentary, however, relates to the lack of established goals and objectives that
address the school’s concern, articulated in the mission statement, with health equity and the special
focus on disadvantaged populations who suffer disproportionately from illness and disability. When
asked about how the school measures achievement of this component of the mission, school leaders and
faculty stated that it is a guiding principle that is difficult to measure and noted that they struggle with this
challenge. However, they note that health equity is reflected throughout the curriculum, and it was clear
to the site visit team that health equity is well embedded in the curriculum and other school functions. For
example, the school has research centers that are focused on reducing health disparities. Further, the
school’s Center for Research on Ethnicity, Culture, and Health (CRECH) is a mentorship and training
program that is responsible for leading the school’s response to dramatic changes in the racial and ethnic
composition of the United States, and the center draws students and faculty who are specifically
interested in health equity as a primary focus. Additionally, the dean made large investments in global
health. Though the activities noted above do indicate that the school is taking steps to implement this
aspect of the mission, the discrepancy between the mission statement and the defined goals and
objectives that measure attainment of the mission leads to confusion and draws into question how
effectively the goals and objectives measure achievement of the mission.
The second area of commentary relates to quantitative measures associated with some of the goals and
objectives. While metrics are provided in tabular form, the objectives are not measurable in isolation from
the metrics. They are not as specific and measurable as they would be if a model such as the SMART
(Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Timely) model for writing objectives were applied.
Educational and service objectives, for example, use difficult-to-measure terms such as “expose,”
“promote,” “strengthen” and “foster.” Faculty/staff objectives refer to “excellence” without explicitly
defining the term. Overall, the metrics, provided in tabular format, support the objectives. However, a
more systematic method to effectively measure goals could begin with writing objectives that clearly state
the measures. For example, a SMART objective for the school’s Goal 1, Objective 2 could read,
“Increase experiential learning in 2013 by 30% to ensure students have sufficient practice opportunities in
the core areas of public health and in their area of specialization.”
4
In 2011, with the naming of a new dean, the school underwent a rigorous and systematic process to
review and revise the mission, vision and values statements. The process included internal and external
input and guidance. External guidance was provided by the Dean’s Advisory Board and the Alumni
Board of Governors. Internal inputs were provided by a working group of deans and department chairs,
faculty and students.
The school last defined its goals and objectives in 2006. In May 2012, the goals and metrics will be
revised to support the mission. When asked about planned and past processes for establishing metrics
and measuring success, faculty noted that a summit was conducted with 10 faculty and public health
practitioners, and these stakeholders used a previously-defined Innovation Action Plan to define specific
metrics. School leaders also noted that metrics are based on outcomes that can readily be measured
and tied to data that can be feasibly collected.
There school would benefit from sharing its mission, goals, objectives and values more broadly. While
the mission and core values are made public on the schools website, they have not been publicized in
other forms of medium (eg, school brochure) and the school’s goals and objectives for supporting the
mission have not been made publicly available. While faculty indicated to site visitors that they share
these statements amongst the public health community, such as in school departments, in meetings and
emails, the site visit team concluded that opportunities exist to further integrate programmatic mission,
goals, objectives and values in public materials and all aspects of the school’s culture.
The core values were developed concurrently with the mission and vision statements, and they are
published on the school’s website. The self-study states that the core values are integrated into teaching,
research and service activities. Faculty who met with site visitors gave a number of examples of activities
and initiatives that provide evidence of the school’s commitment to various core values. For example, in
May 2012 the school will implement new models for teaching innovation that incorporate an
interdisciplinary focus to support the core value, “excellence in innovation.”
1.2 Evaluation and Planning.
The school shall have an explicit process for evaluating and monitoring its overall efforts against its mission, goals and objectives; for assessing the school’s effectiveness in serving its various constituencies; and for planning to achieve its mission in the future. This criterion is met. The school involves many constituents in the monitoring and evaluation process
relative to the mission, goals and objectives. The school conducts an annual faculty retreat and utilizes
standing and ad hoc committees to engage faculty, students and other stakeholders in the analysis,
monitoring and revisions of the mission, goals and objectives. Faculty stated that it is a benefit that the
school’s departments operate in a very autonomous fashion, but decentralized management makes
monitoring and evaluation more challenging. The school is analyzing and identifying how to more
5
effectively coordinate and centralize evaluation efforts. As a result, the school assigned the evaluation
role to a single individual as a core responsibility, and centralizes a number of monitoring and evaluation
activities through the dean’s office.
The self-study document defines metrics for monitoring the school’s effectiveness in meeting the mission,
goals and objectives. This includes target levels regarding the schools performance for the last three
years. In the self-study, a diagram presents “Inputs,” which illustrate the process for involving
constituents, and “Process,” which illustrates data sources and types. This diagram could be more
effective if an additional column were added to illustrate “Outcomes,” which could indicate how evaluation
results are used to make changes in the school’s operations.
When the site team asked for an example of how the school analyzes and uses evaluation data to
enhance the quality of school programs, the school responded with specific areas they are evaluating,
such as matriculation rates, graduation rates and student-faculty ratios (SFR). In all three cases, when
the school identified data that did not meet targets or that otherwise seemed anomalous, the school
instituted new policies, enhancing recruitment in specific areas and modifying policies on continuous
enrollment, designed to rectify concerns.
The school has a structure for obtaining input and broad-based participation in evaluating and monitoring
the mission, goal and objectives. Constituent groups, including faculty, staff, students, alumni and
community partners, provide inputs on collaborations, establishing research centers, evaluating the
school’s public profile, short and long-term issues, school priorities, promoting interaction among students
and alumni, reviewing and recommending curriculum and degrees and recommendations for research
policy. Also, ad hoc committees developed the strategic plan, report on ethics, a diversity statement and a
school vision. The self-study describes each constituent group’s role and frequency of meetings.
When the site team asked students if they have sufficient opportunities to provide constructive feedback
to the school regarding concerns and suggestions for improvement, they stated that the school queries
them with surveys periodically and that faculty and staff members are very open to receiving feedback
through an open door policy. Students feel comfortable giving informal feedback directly to faculty.
Further, the dean conducts annual town hall meetings with students. If a student prefers to be
anonymous, an online link on the school’s website provides an option for submitting anonymous feedback
to faculty. Students stated that there is a high response rate to course evaluations and that faculty
members do in fact incorporate student feedback into the courses. Overall, faculty members have a
sincere interest in receiving feedback from students and in quality improvement of courses and programs.
6
The school used a systematic process for developing the self-study document, which included
involvement by all relevant stakeholders. The effort began in 2010 when the school developed an
Accreditation Committee comprised of faculty from five school departments, the associate dean for
academic affairs, the assistant dean for finance, master’s and doctoral students, representatives from the
Office of Public Health Practice and a local health department representative. The committee members
were divided into work groups to focus on specific criteria. A cross-cutting fifth group addressed the
practice and service criteria. The accreditation process was managed by a senior research staff member
and a project coordinator. Information was shared via the CTools system. Internal and external
communication was facilitated via the accreditation website, launched in spring 2011. Additionally, 53
students representing eight student organizations reviewed the self-study and provided feedback. Overall
the self-study was well written and well organized.
At the time of the site visit, reviewers identified a concern regarding the need for more developed and
integrated approaches to evaluation and planning. The school has clearly demonstrated a capacity for
data collection and analysis, the connection between evaluation results and implementation of changes in
operations and policy was less apparent. However, in its response to the site draft visit report, the school
thoroughly described their comprehensive approach to the collection and utilization of data to improve the
school and for decision-making. 1.3 Institutional Environment.
The school shall be an integral part of an accredited institution of higher education and shall have the same level of independence and status accorded to professional schools in that institution. This criterion is met. The University of Michigan School of Public Health (UMSPH) is an integral part of
an accredited institution and has the same level of independence and status as all colleges and schools
in the institution.
The University of Michigan, founded in 1817, is one of the first public universities in the United States.
First located in Detroit, the university moved to Ann Arbor in 1837. Currently there are over 42,000
students and 5,700 faculty members on the Ann Arbor campus. The mission of the University of
Michigan is to “serve the people of Michigan and the world through preeminence in creating,
communicating, preserving and applying knowledge, art and academic values, and in developing leaders
and citizens who will challenge the present and enrich the future.” The university has produced many
distinguished graduates and is an impressive institution with many areas of academic strength and a rich
array of resources and opportunities.
The UMSPH, founded in 1941, is one of 19 schools and colleges. There are two additional major
initiatives offering resources and opportunities for the faculty of UMSPH, namely, the Life Sciences
Institute and the Biomedical Research Core Facilities. Figure 1 presents the university’s organization.
7
8
The university is accredited by the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, Higher Learning
Commission, with the next accreditation to occur in 2019-2020. Within the school, there are four specific
programs that are accredited by separate accrediting bodies: Industrial Hygiene (Accreditation Board for
Engineering and Technology, next review 2012); Dietetic Program (American Dietetic Association, next
review 2013); Preventive Medicine Residency Program (Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical
Education, next review 2012); and Masters of Health Services Administration (Commission on
Accreditation for Healthcare Management Education, next review 2014).
The university is governed by a Board of Regents, with eight members elected in a biennial statewide
process. The Regents are charged with “general supervision” of the university along with the control and
direction of all expenditures from the institution’s funds.
The provost, the chief academic officer of the university, is responsible for all academic and budgetary
affairs and reports directly to the president of the university. The deans of all 19 colleges and schools
work with the provost in setting academic priorities and allocating monies for these priorities. The dean of
the UMSPH has the same participatory role and degree of autonomy and responsibility as that of all other
deans. The SPH dean is a member of the Academic Program Group (APG), convened by the provost
and comprised of all deans and senior staff in the provost’s office. Within the APG, issues, such as
budget, planning, facilities and development, are discussed.
University practices are guided by the University of Michigan Standard Practice Guide (SPG). This
document provides information on the university’s general operating policies and procedures. This
document outlines the university’s policies and procedures regarding personnel recruitment, selection and
advancement, establishment of academic standards and information on services and facilities. There is
opportunity for individual units to include sections in the SPG for matters pertinent to their particular
operation.
Figure 1. University of Michigan Organizational Structure
9
1.4 Organization and Administration. The school shall provide an organizational setting conducive to teaching and learning, research and service. The organizational setting shall facilitate interdisciplinary communication, cooperation and collaboration. The organizational structure shall effectively support the work of the school’s constituents. This criterion is met. The UMSPH is organized into five departments: biostatistics (BIOS), environmental
health science (EHS), epidemiology (EPID), health behavior and health education (HBHE) and health
management and policy (HMP). Each department is headed by a chair who reports directly to the dean.
The dean is the chief executive officer of the school and has administrative responsibility for the school, in
concert with the department chairs and the associate and assistant deans. There are four associate
deans (administration, academic affairs, research and practice), an assistant dean (finance and
administration) and seven directors (academic affairs, information technology, government relations,
advancement, marketing and communication, innovation and social entrepreneurship, executive
education and life-long learning and global public health) who carry out administrative functions. The
associate deans are ex-officio members of the UMSPH-elected Executive Committee (six faculty
members plus the dean), and it is here that policy, budget and personnel issues for the school are
handled. Figure 2 presents the school’s organization.
The self study provided several examples of how the school supports interdisciplinary activities. These
include: interdisciplinary programs within the school and/or its 32 research centers, joint faculty
appointments, joint degrees, cross-listed courses, collaborative research, four interdisciplinary certificates
and a biennial Public Health Symposium.
The school is committed to fair and ethical dealings in all its activities, and policies are written and
accessible to all the constituents of the school. All who engage in research at UMSPH must complete the
University’s Program for Education and Evaluation in Responsible Research and Scholarship as well the
appropriate HIPPA training module. Site visitors learned during the discussions with faculty that a
decision has been made to require all students in the school to be trained in the Responsible Conduct of
Research Course.
The importance of ethics is communicated at student orientation and in the Student Handbook and via
emails. Incoming students are required to complete an online academic ethics workshop during their first
semester of enrollment. In 2008, the UMSPH adopted a Diversity Statement that is used to guide the
conduct of all of the members of the school’s community.
There are clear policies for student grievances, and the self study indicated that only two grievances in
the three years reported had gone through a formal process, and each of these was filed through the
Rackham Graduate College, indicating that the student filing each grievance was either an MS or PhD
10
student. The school indicates that student grievances and complaints are more likely to be addressed at
the department level and are typically resolved before getting into the formal process.
Figure 2. University of Michigan School of Public Health Organizational Structure
1.5 Governance.
The school administration and faculty shall have clearly defined rights and responsibilities concerning school governance and academic policies. Students shall, where appropriate, have participatory roles in conduct of school and program evaluation procedures, policy-setting and decision-making. This criterion is met. The administration and faculty of UMSPH have clearly defined rights and
responsibilities regarding the governance and academic policies of the school. The key administrative
and governance structure of the school includes the Office of the Dean, the Executive Committee,
Department Chairs, various faculty committees and the Student Government Association. Governance
policies and procedures are outlined in the Faculty Handbook.
11
The self-study provides descriptions of the school’s governance and committee structure and processes
as they affect general school policy development, planning, budget and resource allocation, student
recruitment, admission and award of degrees, faculty recruitment, retention, promotion and tenure,
academic standards and policies and research and service expectations and policies. The school
governance includes the following standing committees:
• Advisory Committee on Academic Programs (ACAP) • Advisory Committee on Academic Rank (ACAR) • Affirmative Action Committee • Diversity Committee • Executive Committee • Practice Advisory Council • Research Council • Dean’s Advisory Board • Public Health Alumni Society
Policies and procedures for standing committees were made available for review by the site visit team,
and the functions of the standing committees are described in appropriate detail to make an assessment.
Tables in the self-study document list current members on the various committees.
During the site visit, there were many examples given of faculty engagement in governance of the school.
The site visit team observed that the school has appropriate checks and balances between senior
leadership, department chairs and faculty committees. In particular, the site visit team heard faculty, on
multiple occasions, praise the role of school-wide faculty meetings as not merely informational but
discussion-oriented and consultative before policies and actions were implemented. Another key
observation was a governance structure that faculty noted promoted a collective good and
transdisciplinary collaboration with a school-wide orientation, rather than constituent-oriented politics
focused on departments – a stark contrast noted by some UMSPH faculty from their experience at other
SPHs and professional schools. The approach that fostered this orientation was not only structural but
philosophical; the dean referred to school governance as a “matrix model” of leadership, with information
brought to the Executive Committee, departments and other governance components at the same time.
Students play an important role in the structure and function of the governance of UMSPH and are
appropriately represented on school and university committees. It was clear from the site visit that
student input is sought and highly valued. The students’ spoke of UMSPH as a student-centered school
and the faculty and staff echoed this philosophy in both observable actions and words.
12
1.6 Resources.
The school shall have resources adequate to fulfill its stated mission and goals, and its instructional, research and service objectives. This criterion is met. UMSPH documents a strong fiscal position with an outstanding resource base to
carry out its mission. It is financially independent and has authority over its resources, and operating
budget allocations from the university are deemed appropriate and fair. The school has robust and
growing revenue sources from grants, contracts and indirect cost recovery. Table 1 presents the school’s
budget for the past five years. The vast majority of tuition flows to the academic units, which receive 75%
of tuition funds for UMSPH students and 25% for students from other university schools and colleges who
enroll in SPH classes. The indirect cost recovery rate is 54.5%, and the indirect cost recovery follows the
direct costs. The policy on distribution of indirect costs fosters collaboration across departments in the
school as well as cross-school collaborations. The school’s leadership and faculty are proud of this fiscal
framework.
Table 1. Sources of Funds and Expenditures in $000 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 Source of Funds General Fund Appropriation
25,985 28.798 27.548 29,2910 30,802
General Fund Transfers
865 1,663 5,125 5,407 10,796
Grants/Contracts 53,774 56,795 69,825 64,609 90,036Gifts 1,336 2,408 3,007 2,402 2,380Endowment 2,807 2,992 1,392 2,503 3,126Other External Revenue
2,546 6,749 2,047 11,401 1,311
Total 87,313 99,045 109,994 116,232 138,451 Expenditures Compensation 43,384 43,932 47,768 49,825 52,883Student Support 11,038 12,263 12,661 13,952 15,766Operations 13,451 15,882 14,061 15,585 18,170Subcontracts >$25k 3,846 5,310 7,146 6,961 21,197Indirect Cost 12,923 13,214 14,288 16,326 18,959Transfers (1,435) 1,334 5,949 (993) 11,892Total 82,207 91,935 101,873 101,656 138,867
In 2011, the school‘s faculty complement was 115 core and 23 secondary and adjunct faculty. This size
faculty was deemed sufficient to provide an acceptable student faculty ratio of roughly eight to one. The
school exceeds minimum expectations for faculty resources and for student-faculty ratios in core public
health knowledge areas. In addition to an impressive number of high caliber faculty, the school also
maintains an appropriate staff of 423 individuals to support the education, research and service mission
of the school, including 46 post-doctoral fellows. All staff have a specific statement of roles and
responsibilities guiding their activities and assignment.
13
The school maintains impressive space for its activities, and since the last accreditation, has added $70
million in capital projects. Computing and library facilities are substantial. The school’s IT infrastructure is
more than sufficient to support the research mission of the school, and the distance education platform,
and support for it was praised by faculty and staff as superb.
The university has demonstrated a commitment, through its new Third Century Initiative and a recent
provost’s office initiative to hire 100 new faculty across the university, to supporting the current and future
needs of the SPH. The site visit team observed in its conversation with the provost a high regard for the
work of the SPH and a clear commitment to its continued success.
In summary, UMSPH has an excellent base of resources to implement its mission; the strong state of the
program’s resources is notable in particular considering the volatility of the global and US economy and
the dramatic economic changes in the state of Michigan since the last site visit.
2.0 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS.
2.1 Master of Public Health Degree.
The school shall offer instructional programs reflecting its stated mission and goals, leading to the Master of Public Health (MPH) or equivalent professional masters degree in at least the five areas of knowledge basic to public health. The school may offer other degrees, professional and academic, and other areas of specialization, if consistent with its mission and resources. This criterion is met. Each of the school’s five departments offers at least one MPH degree and one PhD
degree. The Department of Environmental Health Sciences offers multiple concentrations for its MPH and
PhD degrees. Four departments (biostatistics, environmental health sciences, epidemiology and health
management and policy) offer academic MS degrees, and the Department of Health Management and
Policy offers a professional MHSA degree, with curricular requirements that are nearly identical to the
department’s MPH. Finally, the school offers a non-public health professional degree, the master of
health informatics, and a number of joint degree programs that allow students to pursue a degree in
another University of Michigan school while pursuing the MPH, MS or MHSA degree. A clearly defined set
of curricular requirements applies to each degree. Table 2 presents the school’s degree offerings.
14
Table 2. Degrees Offered Academic Professional Masters Degrees Biostatistics MS MPH Clinical Research Design & Statistical Analysis MS Environmental Health Sciences MS MPH Environmental Health Sciences—Nutrition MS MPH Environmental Health Sciences—Industrial Health/Hygiene
MS MPH
Environmental Health Sciences—Toxicology MS MPH Environmental Health Sciences—Environmental Quality & Health
MPH
Environmental Health Sciences—Hazardous Substances
MPH
Environmental Health Sciences—Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology
MPH
Environmental Health Sciences—Risk Sciences MPH Epidemiology MPH Clinical Research MS Epidemiology—International Health MPH Epidemiology—Occupational & Environmental Epidemiology
MPH
Hospital & Molecular Epidemiology MPH Health Behavior and Health Education MPH Health Management and Policy MPH*, MHSA* Health Services Research MS Health Informatics MHI Doctoral Degrees Biostatistics PhD Environmental Health Sciences PhD Toxicology PhD Nutritional Sciences PhD Epidemiological Sciences PhD Health Behavior and Health Education PhD Health Services Organization and Policy PhD Joint Degrees Social Work MPH/MSW Medicine MPH/MD Business Administration MHSA/MBA Industrial and Operations Engineering MHSA/MS Law MPH/JD, MHSA/JD Public Policy MPH/MPP,
MHSA/MPP Genetic Counseling MPH/MS Nursing Administration MPH/MNA Microbiology & Immunology MS/PhD *Offered in executive format as well as on-campus (residential) format.
15
2.2 Program Length.
An MPH degree program or equivalent professional master’s degree must be at least 42 semester credit units in length. This criterion is met. All MPH degrees require completion of at least 42 semester credits; many MPH
programs require 48 to 60 semester credits. The university defines one credit as one weekly class contact
hour, with the expectation that each hour of class time will be accompanied by two to three hours spent in
reading and preparation. Laboratory courses may have differing contact hour requirements based on the
nature of the coursework.
2.3 Public Health Core Knowledge.
All professional degree students must demonstrate an understanding of the public health core knowledge. This criterion is met. For each of the professional master’s degree programs, students must take a set of
required courses, called the Breadth, Integration, and Capstone (BIC) courses, which cover the five core
areas of public health knowledge. Students may choose to take the courses designated as “primary” BIC
courses or may choose from a list of “secondary” BIC options that have been designated as appropriate
and equivalent substitutes for the courses on the primary list. Students with strong academic preparation
in biostatistics and epidemiology may qualify to take an exemption exam in one or both areas during the
orientation period. Similarly, site visitors learned about a new self-assessment strategy for identifying
matriculating students with weaker quantitative skills for early identification and remediation of math skills.
There is also a procedure for students to seek approval to take an alternate course, which is not listed as
a primary or secondary BIC option, for each core knowledge area.
The school’s list of primary BIC courses reflect its stated mission and goals in the five core public health
knowledge areas: Introduction to Biostatistics (BIOSTAT 503); Principles of Environmental Health
Sciences (EHS 500); Strategies and Uses of Epidemiology (EPID 503); Survey of the U.S. Health Care
System (HMP 602); and Psychosocial Factors in Health-Related Behavior (HBHE 600). These five
courses total 16 credit hours. The self-study provided a table that mapped the core MPH competencies
to these primary BIC classes, and reviewers verified that the primary BIC courses align well with the
designated MPH core competencies.
Site visitors also reviewed the school’s analysis of competency coverage in the secondary BIC options.
The approved options for biostatistics, health management and policy and social and behavioral sciences
satisfy all core MPH competencies. Site visitors also clarified that one of the listed secondary BIC
options, Applied Statistical Methods (Statistics 400), is an upper-level undergraduate course offered by
the College of Literature, Science and the Arts, but provides an alternative pathway to the exemption
exam in biostatistics and is rarely utilized.
16
At the site visit there was a concern related to the fact that not all of the approved BIC options fully cover
the core competencies in the areas of environmental health sciences and epidemiology. A specific
analysis of the courses and their alignment with core MPH competencies follows. This analysis was
based on the school’s own competency analysis, presented in the self-study appendix, and on site
visitors’ additional review of syllabi for the courses in question.
• Principles of Risk Assessment (EHS 508) satisfies environmental health sciences MPH core competencies one through five and seven, but not six and eight.
• Introduction to Occupational and Environmental Health (EHS 550) satisfies competencies one through seven, but not eight.
Environmental health competency six is “Explain the general mechanism of toxicity in eliciting a toxic
response to various environmental exposures” and competency eight is “Develop a testable model of
environmental insult.” Site visitors noted that the one-credit elective course entitled Topics in
Environmental Health Sciences (EHS 688) satisfies both competencies six and eight; this course could be
added to the options in order to potentially satisfy all of the competencies. However, the school’s
response to the draft site visit report outlined an error in the self-study, accidentally omitting competency
#8 from the set of competencies covered by EHS 550. Thus, this BIC course does cover all
competencies. The school’s response also documented that EHS 508 has been removed as a BIC
option, and a new integrative BIC course (PH 600) is now available (referenced below) that provides
additional EH content.
• Principles and Methods of Epidemiology (EPID 601) satisfies epidemiology MPH core competencies one through four and six through ten, but not competency five.
• Epidemiology majors take EPID 600, which satisfies competencies one through four and six through 10, but not competency five.
Epidemiology competency five is “Comprehend basic ethical and legal principles pertaining to the
collection, maintenance, use and dissemination of epidemiologic data.” Site visitors noted that the new
course in responsible conduct of research and ethics, which the associate dean for research indicated will
be required of all students during the upcoming academic year, would likely address competency five.
The school’s response documents that Responsible Conduct of Research and Scholarship (RCRS)
Certification is a graduation requirement for all SPH students. The mandatory training was initiated in
2011-12 at SPH, and the eight modules provide content that meet or exceed all NIH requirements for
researchers and address epidemiology competency #5.
MPH and MHSA students in the Department of Health Management & Policy address the core area of
social and behavioral sciences through two departmental required courses rather than through the
standard BIC courses. Site visitors verified that the two courses do, in fact, cover all defined MPH core
17
social and behavioral sciences competencies. The Health Services System I (HMP 600) satisfies
competencies one through four, six through seven and nine and 10; Introduction to Public Health Policy
(HMP 615) satisfies competencies two through 10; together, these two courses satisfy all of the social
and behavioral sciences competencies.
An exciting curricular innovation is the development of a new four-credit integrative course entitled Cross-
Disciplinary Approaches to Public Health Challenges (PUBHLTH 600) which aims to address
competencies across the core disciplines of environmental health, health services administration and
social and behavioral sciences. This course emphasizes the added value of integration of core
knowledge and use of case studies for problem solving and communication. The course is being offered
for the first time during the winter semester of 2012, and there will be a two-year pilot phase during which
students can choose to take the integrative course or the three separate core course requirements from
the BIC primary and secondary courses. The mid-term evaluation of this course was highly positive, with
more than two-thirds of students indicating that they learned more or much more than in other classes in
developing skills for multidisciplinary thinking and considering a broader context. Students were also
extremely positive about the course organization, professors’ interactions and the experience with group
work and discussions.
At the time of the site visit, the school had not yet formally analyzed the syllabus for the integrative course
to ensure that all core competencies in the three disciplinary areas are covered, and because of the
complexity of the course, site visitors were not able to independently analyze or verify the coverage. In
order for the integrative course to function as a substitute for three separate classes, the school must
ensure that there are no gaps in competency attainment. Site visitors noted that the pilot phase could
provide an opportunity to evaluate the success of the integrative approach by randomizing students to
take the integrative course versus the primary BIC options. The school’s response documented that
senior faculty have assessed/analyzed PUBHLTH 600 and ensured that it has content that covers all core
competencies for environmental health sciences, health management and policy and social and
behavioral sciences. 2.4 Practical Skills.
All professional degree students must develop skills in basic public health concepts and demonstrate the application of these concepts through a practice experience that is relevant to the students’ areas of specialization. This criterion is partially met. The school’s practicum, called the internship, offers students an opportunity
to apply knowledge and skills learned in coursework to real world experience in local public health
agencies and community-based organizations. The school attempts to place students in appropriate
internships that support the students’ desired skills, knowledge and hands-on experience.
18
The school’s structure for placing students in internships to gain practice skills includes a Practice
Council, which is comprised of representatives from all school departments and from community-based
organizations. The council is charged to advise students on practice activities in the community, to
identify training and competencies needed by community partners and to keep the school updated on skill
needs in the field. The council acts as liaison between faculty members and students and the community,
with a primary focus on local and state health departments.
In EHS, EPID and HBHE, the student is responsible for finding a practicum site and arranging it, and the
school provides resources to guide them in finding and funding their internships. In HMP, students
complete a survey of their interests and are placed with a site by the Residential Master’s Committee.
Students in EHS, EPID, HBHE and HMP are required to have practice experience as a condition of
graduation and are required to work a minimum of 320 hours. Overall, the school does community
outreach annually to secure new internship sites. Each department has a different process for approving
internship sites, and all internships are approved by the student’s academic advisors. Students are
responsible for completing a field placement agreement to define desired learning objectives and
competencies. This form is also used for logistics (eg, contact information).
The first area of concern relates to the fact that there is no required internship/practical experience for
BIOS MPH students. Only five students have enrolled in the BIOS MPH during the past three years.
Since the program is very small, the department has not developed an internship system that differs from
the research-based practicum offered to BIOS MS students. All BIOS MPH students, like BIOS MS
students, are required to complete a project-based course (BIOSTAT 699), which requires students to
write and present reports on final results of case studies.
The internship process is decentralized, and each department is responsible for oversight of internships.
Each employs a different process and criteria for determining whether an internship placement is a good
match for students. The EHS, EPID, HBHE and HMP departments each have a departmental internship
handbook available to students. Each department also has its own database or list of potential
preceptors. A centralized school-wide database to track internships is currently in development. The
school plans to use the database to list internship sites and preceptor information. At this time there are
no plans to add a competency, skill, monitoring and evaluation component to the database (eg, tracking
students’ performance or cataloging students’ work products).
Most departments do not have a formal process for selecting preceptors, for determining if they are
qualified and for evaluating them, though all have more informal means, including personal contacts and
individual vetting by faculty and staff, that they use to make individualized assessments. HMP is the only
department that has a formal evaluation in place to measure preceptor qualifications. In 2012, two
19
additional departments will implement a preceptor evaluation. In all departments, each student’s faculty
advisor serves as a first point of contact if issues arise. Also, the student contacts the departmental
internship coordinator for a resolution if the preceptor is not doing their job or issues arise. In HMP, the
Residential Master’s Committee is responsible for securing the internship site, setting expectations for
preceptors and students and monitoring completion of the practicum. The faculty advisor is responsible
for issues that arise during the internship. The on-site supervision is provided by the preceptor.
To monitor and evaluate internships, academic advisors follow up with students three times (beginning,
mid-point and end) during the internship to identify whether students are meeting their internship
objectives. In EPID, EHS, HBHE and HMP, students are required to write a one page abstract and
present a poster on the internship experience at the school’s annual poster session. In EPID and EHS,
students are required to complete an evaluation of the internship experience. HBHE requires students to
create a reflection document in their e-portfolio on departmental competencies achieved through the
internship experience. HMP requires students and preceptors/supervisors to complete a survey. Survey
results are reported on the department’s intranet site and made available to future students. All
departments (except BIOS) require the student to write a report, write a reflection paper, complete a self-
evaluation and present a poster on the internship experience at the school’s annual poster session.
The overarching concern relates to a lack of systematic processes for measuring and evaluating
practicum learning as it relates to competencies and learning objectives that students are expected to
achieve during their internship experience. This includes a lack of clear statement about who, when and
how the evaluations are reviewed and what is done with the results. While the site team realizes these
processes are decentralized and handled in the departments, a consistent structure is not in place within
departments. There is not a consistent process to ensure that the student’s internship competencies and
learning objectives are achieved and assessed and that all evaluation results are reviewed and
communicated to the student with feedback for improvement.
Additional concern relates to the need for attention to avoiding clinical and research-based placements.
While such placements do sometimes offer the type of applied public health practice experience required
by this criterion, clinical and research placements must be used sparingly and only in cases where the
spirit of the practice requirement is explicitly verified. The self-study states that some students do
research as a practicum, whereas the intent of the practicum is to gain experience outside the school.
The school must ensure that the practicum experience is truly a practice-based, applied learning
opportunity that transcends the academic environment and allows interaction with and mentorship from
practitioners who are not full-time faculty members.
20
The final area of concern relates to the policy of granting waivers to selected students in HMP and EPID.
The school does not require a practicum for HMP students who are concurrently enrolled in an MD
program, or for EPID students who enter with a prior doctoral degree (eg, MD, DDS). Faculty explained
that in both cases, these students’ clinical practice experience serves to ensure that they have experience
applying skills outside the classroom. In the case of HMP, faculty note that requiring a practicum would
force students to remain in the program longer than desired and would make the MPH program
unattractive to those who are concurrently completing an MD. Clinical experience, however, is not an
appropriate basis for a waiver, as it does not uniformly translate to public health practice experience. The
school does not provide evidence of individualized, competency-based criteria for internship waivers for
these students. 2.5 Culminating Experience.
All professional degree programs identified in the instructional matrix shall assure that each student demonstrates skills and integration of knowledge through a culminating experience. This criterion is met. A culminating experience is required for each professional degree program, but the
required experiences vary by department. Each department requires a capstone course associated with
the culminating experience for its professional degree programs. The culminating experiences across the
departments reflect the achievement of students’ skills and integration of knowledge in multifaceted ways.
In particular, the e-portfolio systems utilized by the Departments of Health Behavior and Health Education
and Health Management & Policy are innovative and provide integrative tools not only for a student’s
current degree program but also for their future professional use and development.
The Department of Health Behavior and Health Education utilizes the e-portfolio and students take the
capstone course (HBHE 669) each semester. There is an HBHE MPH Handbook which provides a
detailed overview of curriculum, internship and capstone requirements. With supervision by their
academic advisors, MPH students show that they have achieved competencies, completed coursework
and demonstrated service, practice and professional development via the completed e-portfolio.
Students work incrementally on their e-portfolio throughout their two-year program. In addition, the
MPH/MS dual degree in Health Behavior and Health Education and Genetic Counseling requires a
master’s thesis or paper in addition to the e-portfolio.
MPH students in the Department of Epidemiology are required to take a capstone course in their specialty
area (either EPID 659, EPID 656 or EPI 665), conduct an analysis of epidemiologic data, prepare a
written report and present a poster of their work. Expectations are detailed in the Department of
Epidemiology MPH Student Handbook, and students are supervised by either their academic advisors or
a faculty advisor with expertise in the student’s topic. The analysis is intended to integrate with the
student’s summer internship.
21
For MPH students in the Department of Environmental Health Sciences, the course entitled Professional
Perspectives in Environmental Health (EHS 600) is required and completed during the second semester
of the second year. Students work in small groups to prepare a briefing for a speaker, develop key
questions and lead classroom discussion. The intent is to use and integrate their summer internship
experiences as learning tools in achieving competencies. All students present a poster from their
internships during semester after completion. The EHS Field Experience Handbook outlines internship
requirements. The faculty instructors for the capstone course advise and evaluate student performance in
their course.
The Department of Health Management & Policy requires MPH and MHSA students to complete one of
two possible capstone courses. Students taking Applied Health Policy Analysis (HMP 664) perform policy
analyses and present their findings. Students taking Case Studies in Health Services Administration
(HMP 682) address issues in healthcare delivery and proposed solutions and alternative strategies. In
addition, completion of the m-portfolio throughout the two-year period demonstrates that students have
gained competences. Advisement is by the academic advisor.
MPH students in the Department of Biostatistics take the BIOSTAT 699 course entitled Design and
Analysis of Biostatistical Investigations. In this structured course, students critically review journal articles,
participate in discussion and work on three to four applied data analysis projects for which they prepare
intermediate and final oral and written reports. The projects help the students integrate and demonstrate
competencies achieved throughout their curriculum. The policies for this culminating experience are
described in the course syllabi and the end products are evaluated by the course instructors.
2.6 Required Competencies.
For each degree program and area of specialization within each program identified in the instructional matrix, there shall be clearly stated competencies that guide the development of educational programs. This criterion is partially met. The school identifies 57 core competencies that all MPH students are
expected to attain. The school also identifies specific competencies for each concentration in the MS and
PhD degrees and most, but not all, MPH concentrations. The school has mapped the core competencies
to all core MPH course options discussed in Criterion 2.3. The school also mapped core competencies to
the required coursework for each concentration, though no similar map links the courses required for the
concentration to the specific competencies defined for each concentration.
The concern relates, first, to the need for further implementation of the competency framework as the
guiding force for the school’s curriculum. Most syllabi do not list learning objectives or easily map to
competencies, though some syllabi list “course objectives” that may or may not be stated in measurable
terms. Indeed, while some course syllabi are very well-developed in terms of articulating the relationship
22
between course activities, learning objectives and competencies (eg, EHS 601), syllabi are inconsistent
across departments and, to a lesser extent, within departments. Few syllabi provide evidence that
activities are connected to competency-building, and conversations with faculty during the site visit
support the assertion that competency mapping is less explicit for MPH concentrations than for core MPH
classes and least explicit for the academic degrees. The interpretive language for this criterion states,
“Competencies should guide the curriculum planning process and should be the primary measure against
which student achievement is measured.” Neither the written evidence submitted with the self-study and
appendix nor the on-site conversations with faculty and students supported the assertion that
competencies are central to student curricula in the degree programs offered by the departments of
biostatistics, environmental health sciences or epidemiology.
Additional concern relates to the fact that, while the Department of Epidemiology offers four options for
the MPH, including concentrations in international health, occupational and environmental epidemiology
and hospital and molecular epidemiology (in addition to the general epidemiology MPH), it has not
defined competencies for the concentrations nor has it mapped the required concentration coursework
(typically two to four courses) to competencies.
The HBHE and HMP departments present strong evidence of the centrality of competencies, particularly
for masters degree students. As discussed in Criterion 2.5, both departments require students to
complete electronic portfolios that are framed in terms of the defined competencies, and students and
faculty were well-versed in the competencies and their relationship to the curriculum.
Another concern, however, relates to the definition of competencies in the Department of Health
Management and Policy. The department uses the same set of competencies for all of its master’s
degrees: the MPH, MHSA and MS. While the MPH and MHSA degrees have very similar curricula, the
required coursework for the MS differs from the other degree programs in several areas. MS students are
not required to take coursework in accounting (though they do take a course in health care cost-
effectiveness that is not required for MPH and MHSA students), organizational theory or law, and they
complete courses that MPH and MHSA students do not complete in economics. Examination of the
competency list provided with the self-study suggests that the competencies that guide the MPH and
MHSA curricula do not appear similarly well-matched to the MS degree.
Departments have primary responsibility for competency development and mapping, but the SPH
Accreditation Committee played an advisory and review role, including making suggestions which were
later addressed by the departments. The Accreditation Committee also took the lead in developing and
mapping the MPH core competencies, beginning with the complete list of competencies developed by the
Association of Schools of Public Health.
23
2.7 Assessment Procedures.
There shall be procedures for assessing and documenting the extent to which each student has demonstrated competence in the required areas of performance. This criterion is met. Each department has processes in place, beyond tracking course grades, for
monitoring and evaluating student progress in achieving competencies.
In the Department of Biostatistics, each student meets on an annual basis with the academic advisor.
Together, the student and advisor evaluate the student’s performance on a Likert scale, and the advisor
writes a “progress letter.” Other metrics include performance on qualifying exams and time to achieve
milestones within the curriculum.
In the Department of Environmental Health Sciences, there is a Professional Degree Committee that
reviews student progress. Doctoral students are evaluated with an annual progress report based on
written and oral exams, doctoral student seminars, presentations of proposals, and work in progress. The
department also has implemented an exit competencies survey for all graduates.
In the Department of Epidemiology, MPH students are assessed on their grades and the quality of the
written report of their research projects (culminating experiences). Doctoral students have an annual
review based on their written exams, presentation of proposal and work in progress. Students must
demonstrate mastery of integrated competencies prior to undertaking their summer field placements.
Prior to receiving a data set for analysis, students must demonstrate competencies in data management.
The Department of Health Management & Policy has implemented a comprehensive competency model.
A master’s student first performs a self-assessment and then reviews the model with his advisor. This is
followed by monthly meetings with the advisor to review the student’s competency model progress; the
student starts an e-portfolio in the second semester, which includes a resume and description of goals.
Each semester, the student’s progress is evaluated either by the residential master’s or the executive
master’s committee. The student’s internship is evaluated by the preceptor. HMP doctoral students are
assigned an advisor with whom they regularly meet. Progress for HMP doctoral students is assessed via
competency exams, oral exams and dissertation progress.
Student progress is assessed in the Department of Health Behavior and Health Education using the e-
portfolio, which is organized by competencies. Students are assigned an advisor who monitors progress
and students use the e-portfolio to check their own progress in achieving competencies and add their
resumes, posters and other products to it. During the second semester, students are asked to outline
competencies to achieve during their summer internships. The e-portfolio subsequently is used for
reflection and to add new competencies and is tied into the capstone course. During the last semester,
24
the student uses the e-portfolio as a professional portfolio. Doctoral students are assigned an advisor
with whom they regularly meet and progress is assessed via competency exams, oral exams, and
dissertation progress.
The self-study documents graduation rates exceeding 90% for master’s students and over 75% for
doctoral students in most departments. There are some departments with small numbers of doctoral
students which results in some graduation rates lower than 70%, but overall rates for each degree meet
this criterion’s expectations.
Surveys of employment status at six months post-graduation have high response rates and indicate a
high percentage of graduates with job placements. Over 80% of graduates have jobs by six months after
graduation. Site visitors’ meeting with alumni revealed a very high level of satisfaction with the skills and
knowledge attained during enrollment; they noted that the skills and abilities they attained allowed them to
be hired into gratifying and meaningful positions soon after graduation. Data on employer satisfaction
with graduates’ training is similarly favorable, but the number of employers completing surveys has
declined over the past three years.
2.8 Other Professional Degrees.
If the school offers curricula for professional degrees other than the MPH or equivalent public health degrees, students pursing them must be grounded in basic public health knowledge. This criterion is met. The school lists one degree program as an “other professional degree.” This is a
new program slated to begin in fall 2012 as a joint degree program between the school and the UM
School of Information. The degree is a Master of Health Informatics (MHI).
The site visit team noted that the required curriculum far exceeded this criterion’s expectations of
coverage of general public health knowledge in epidemiology, biostatistics, social and behavioral
sciences, and health policy; however, there was no identifiable content in environmental health sciences
in the degree curriculum. The site visitors learned that the school believed that it was not required to
cover all core public health content areas in this degree program. While the curricular requirements
provide a greater depth of basic public health knowledge in general—students complete MPH core
courses in four of the five core knowledge areas—the lack of exposure to any ideas or themes relating to
environmental health sciences constitutes a deficiency in the school’s ability to ensure that these students
are grounded in basic public health knowledge. The school’s response to the draft site visit report
acknowledged this deficiency and documented that effective immediately, environmental health content
has been incorporated into two courses (all students must take one of the two) in the MHI curriculum.
25
2.9 Academic Degrees.
If the school also offers curricula for academic degrees, students pursuing them shall obtain a broad introduction to public health, as well as an understanding about how their discipline-based specialization contributes to achieving the goals of public health. This criterion is partially met. The concern pertains to the academic degrees in biostatistics and in
environmental health sciences, which do not consistently provide a “broad introduction to public health.”
In biostatistics, where both the MS and the PhD academic degrees are awarded, students are required to
take courses in epidemiology. Students must also select a “cognate area” in which to take classes. The
site visit team learned that epidemiology is often chosen as the cognate area, but, over the years, all core
public health knowledge areas have been selected as cognate areas. Cognate area selection on an
individual basis does not assure a broad introduction to public health for the students. Academic degree
students in EPID may also be exposed to introductory themes from public health areas other than their
own during the weekly departmental seminars. However, the seminars are not required, and their content
has not been systematically planned to ensure that they provide a broad introduction to public health.
In EHS, academic degree seeking students are required to take courses in both epidemiology and
biostatistics. They also take a “Topics in Environmental Health” course, which may cover other areas of
public health, but, as above, the content has not been systematically planned to ensure that it provides a
broad introduction to public health. One of the MS degrees in EHS does require a course in Principles of
Community Air Pollution, which may have public health policy implications and expose students to
additional public health knowledge, but this course is not required for the other academic degrees.
In a discussion of the PhD program in epidemiology, the site team learned that it is rare that the doctoral
program accepts students without a MPH degree, and EPID PhD students are required to take
biostatistics as well as a seminar series which includes many presentations with public health content.
Further, the site team was told that all EPID dissertations must include consideration of the public health
implications of the research, and site visitors verified that this requirement is clear and explicit in
documentation on the website where the dissertation’s written prospectus is defined.
The doctoral program in HBHE requires epidemiology and biostatistics in addition to four doctoral
seminars wherein the students acquire a public health orientation.
In health management and policy (HMP), students in the MS in health services research program take
epidemiology, biostatistics, public health program evaluation and public health policy. HMP PhD degree
students are required to take epidemiology, biostatistics and doctoral seminars in health policy and health
services and systems research. The site team was told that these seminars focus on major
interdisciplinary public health issues.
26
During the site visit, the site team learned that the school is planning to require the Responsible Conduct
of Research eight-module course for all students. The topics covered in these modules may well provide
some exposure to public health content, but the site visit team could not verify that this new requirement
would provide the public health content that is the required by this criterion.
All academic degrees have appropriate culminating experiences – all doctoral students must complete a
dissertation and all MS students, except the MS in biostatistics and the MS in clinical research design,
must complete a thesis. The latter two have a capstone course or seminar.
2.10 Doctoral Degrees.
The school shall offer at least three doctoral degree programs that are relevant to any of the five areas of basic public health knowledge. This criterion is met. The school exceeds the minimum requirement of three doctoral degree programs,
as it offers six doctoral degrees in its five departments. The current doctoral program in industrial hygiene
is no longer being offered, but one student is still enrolled. In fall 2012, a new PhD program in Nutritional
Sciences will begin. All doctoral degrees have appropriately designed curricula with coursework at a
sufficiently advanced level.
The doctoral programs are administratively housed in the university’s Rackham Graduate School. The
Rackham school recently implemented a policy requiring students to be continuously enrolled. This
change in policy has meant that the school admitted a smaller percent of doctoral applicants, due to the
need to provide at least three years continual funding for the students, but this policy may also serve to
strengthen degree completion rates.
2.11 Joint Degrees.
If the school offers joint degree programs, the required curriculum for the professional public health degree shall be equivalent to that required for a separate public health degree. This criterion is met. The school offers 11 dual degree programs, though many have very low
enrollments. Only 16 students were enrolled in dual degrees in 2011-2012, and the majority were in the
MPH/MSW program. The MPH and MHSA program dual degrees with the MBA have also seen steady
enrollment, but the majority of the dual degree offerings have had no students enrolled in the last three
years.
The dual degree programs are all well-defined, and all require that 42 or more credits be completed in the
school. The MPH/MSW, for example, requires 93 total credit hours: 46 in the SPH and 47 in social work,
and the MBA dual degrees require 45 credits in the SPH and 45 in the business school. All of the dual
27
degree plans involve advisors from both schools, and the degree plans generally suggest a sequence of
full-time or shared coursework between the two degree programs for each semester of enrollment.
2.12 Distance Education or Executive Degree Programs.
If the school offers degree programs using formats or methods other than students attending regular on-site course sessions spread over a standard term, these programs must a) be consistent with the mission of the school and within the school’s established areas of expertise; b) be guided by clearly articulated student learning outcomes that are rigorously evaluated; c) be subject to the same quality control processes that other degree programs in the school and university are; and d) provide planned and evaluated learning experiences that take into consideration and are responsive to the characteristics and needs of adult learners. If the school offers distance education or executive degree programs, it must provide needed support for these programs, including administrative, travel, communication, and student services. The school must have an ongoing program to evaluate the academic effectiveness of the format, to assess teaching and learning methodologies and to systematically use this information to stimulate program improvements. This criterion is met. There are two long-standing degree programs with non-residential formats. These
very successful programs have been well-developed and have evolved over time to meet the needs of
adult learners who are not able or do not desire to engage in a full-time program. Both programs have
well-developed student support mechanisms targeted towards the part-time adult learner population.
One is the Master of Science in Clinical Research Design and Statistical Analysis (CRDSA). This
program began in 1985 and has enrolled 30-40 students in each of the two-year cohorts since then. It is
a degree program that is designed for working health care professionals engaged in clinical research.
The program is similar to the MS in Biostatistics but also includes courses in other core areas, seminar
courses on clinical and translational science, clinical research practice experience, and exposure to grant
proposals and the NIH review process. Courses are held on 19, four-day weekends spread over 19-20
months. There have been adjustments made over time in course content to include repeated measures
analysis and more sophisticated usage of the SAS statistical analysis package in order to parallel
changes made in the MS curriculum in Biostatistics, as well as increased utilization of advanced methods
in the workplace. All lectures are audiorecorded. Students are evaluated on coursework, a research
project and the capstone course. The curriculum and faculty are the same as those in the residential
program.
The other program is the Executive Master’s Program in the Department of Health Management & Policy.
This consists of 13, four-day weekend class sessions over 24 months for students who remain employed
and have at least three years of employment in a responsible position prior to matriculation. The format
consists of formal classroom plus web conferencing plus taped lectures. Students are evaluated on
coursework and a capstone course. The curriculum and faculty are the same as those in the residential
MHSA or MPH programs. It is a long-standing successful program that is in the process of admitting its
22nd cohort. In the early 2000s, the program was re-evaluated to identify which courses might be
28
delivered in web or video format so that on-campus time could be best utilized for discussion. This hybrid
model began in Cohort 17, and now all of the courses are hybrid. Feedback from instructors is provided
through virtual office hours with conferencing, email, and Skype. Web conferencing time is provided for
students to interact with each other. Monitoring academic rigor is accomplished by structuring every
month with student deadlines, utilizing instructional design resources from the Center for Research,
Teaching and Learning and maximizing the use of instructional technology via the school’s Office of
Informatics and Computer Services.
The courses for both of these two non-traditional programs are evaluated through student course
evaluations and departmental reviews in a manner identical to the processes for in-person courses.
3.0 CREATION, APPLICATION AND ADVANCEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE.
3.1 Research. The school shall pursue an active research program, consistent with its mission, through which its faculty and students contribute to the knowledge base of the public health disciplines, including research directed at improving the practice of public health.
This criterion is met. UMSPH has a major public health research agenda that is impressive for its
scholarly rigor and its impact on health in the state of Michigan, across the nation and around the world.
A hallmark of a significant amount of the school’s research is its inter- and trans-disciplinarily nature built
on collaborative teams. The school has a diverse portfolio of domains of public health research.
Research expenditures for 2010-2011 totaled $77,367,934, for a research expenditure per faculty FTE of
$581,495.
The site visit team observed in conversations with junior faculty that they received significant formal and
informal mentoring in the development of their research careers. Faculty development in this arena
applies also to responsible conduct of research training and compliance with academic and legal
standards regarding human subjects, privacy and scientific integrity as shown by the recent establishment
of short course modules taught by over 100 faculty and well attended by students.
The school defines an appropriate set of research outcomes, and it has met or exceeded all of its targets
on a consistent basis. A new initiative by the dean focuses on innovation, and the faculty, staff, students,
and alumni see great promise in this major direction in which the school is heading.
UMSPH sustains an impressive portfolio of community-based research, and the school’s community
partners praised the work of individual faculty, the current and former dean and the school as a whole for
their commitments.
29
Students are passionately and deeply engaged in the research process at both the master’s and doctoral
levels. Students highlighted it as a major strength of the school and a major reason why they selected to
attend UMSPH. This was also reflected in significant involvement of both master’s and doctoral students
in research projects in all the departments of the school. The school has made a significant commitment
to supporting students’ involvement in global health research with over $180,000 in support for
international experiences.
In summary, UMSPH, through its research activities. fulfills its missions in service to the people of the
state of Michigan and citizens of the world through a well-organized commitment by its faculty, staff, and
students. 3.2 Service.
The school shall pursue active service activities, consistent with its mission, through which faculty and students contribute to the advancement of public health practice. This criterion is met. The school sees great value in providing service and views service opportunities as
a benefit to both the organization they are serving and the school. The school states that local, state,
national, and international service activities not only enable faculty to assist in ventures that seek to
improve the public’s health directly but also provide faculty with insights from the field of practice that
inform the faculty’s research and teaching.
Faculty members have a long-standing tradition of providing service to public health agencies, private
health organizations and local, state, national and international government organizations.
Faculty members often serve as leaders, members, consultants or in an advisory capacity to achieve the
following types of service: professional, research organizations’ study sections, task forces or advisory
panels for governmental organizations and editorships or editorial boards of professional journals.
Faculty self-report their service activities during an annual merit review process. They input the data into
an online system. However, some data may not be reflected in the system because of discrepancies in
what activities faculty members count as service, and there are many activities that fall under multiple
categories (eg, research and teaching).
The total number of service activities conducted by the school in the past four years follows: 2008-2009 –
488 activities, 2009-2010 – 505 activities and 2010-2011 – 603 activities. The top three faculty service
activities by client over the past three years were as follows: 1) professional (182 - 225 faculty), 2)
community/ advocacy/philanthropy (113 – 155 faculty) and education/research (88 – 121 faculty). The top
three faculty service activities by nature of the service over the past three years were as follows: 1)
30
manuscript or proposal review (238 - 301 faculty), 2) service presentations (79 – 106 faculty) and 3)
policy/program planning (58 – 75 faculty).
The school’s Office of Public Health Practice is responsible for developing and coordinating service and
practice activities engaged in by faculty, students and staff. They maintain a database of community
organizations that desire a partnership with the school and partner with organizations on special
initiatives.
Service is valued in the promotion and tenure process with a weighting of 20%, while research and
teaching are weighted 40% each. The process for evaluation begins with an online self-assessment
completed by faculty. Junior faculty members are evaluated by the School’s Academic Committee on
Rank (ACAR), and service is a mandatory aspect of their portfolio. Ultimately, faculty members are
evaluated by their department chair and the senior associate dean for administration. Faculty report their
service activities achieved within the following groups: internal service to the University of Michigan,
internal service to the School of Public Health, internal service to their department and external service to
the local, state, national and international communities.
While the school encourages community service, the limit is two days per month to prevent activities from
interfering with university duties. The limit can be extended to four days per month with prior permission.
At the end of the academic year, faculty members are required to submit a statement to the dean
detailing the number of consulting days they provided that year.
Students volunteer for a range of service activities that are both internal and external to the university,
including opportunities in local, state, national and international communities. Students have
opportunities to be involved in student organizations, to teach and do research and provide service to
external communities. Practice Plunge and the Public Health Action Support Team (PHAST) are two
student service opportunities facilitated by the school. The Practice Plunge takes place during orientation
week. The morning is devoted to engaging and interacting with a local health department. In the
afternoon, students participate in a service activity with a community-based organization. Involvement in
Practice Plunge over the past three years was decreasing, from 123 students in 2008-2009 to 65
students in 2010-2011, but as of fall 2011, all incoming MPH and MHSA students are expected to
participate in the Practice Plunge, and over 300 students participated in the most recent offering. PHAST
accepts students who wish to gain experience by providing community groups and local and state health
departments with an ”extra set of hands” during public health events. Involvement with local/state health
departments has included the following activities: H1N1 and seasonal flu clinic exercises, mass
prophylaxis exercises, administering surveys of local park usage and development of social media
platforms. Work with community-based organizations has included survey administration and survey data
31
analysis to determine strategic planning and direction, as well as conducting focus groups with key
stakeholders. In PHAST, student participation has also reduced with time. Student participation locally
was 24 in 2008-2009 and dropped to 11 in 2010-2011.
3.3 Workforce Development.
The school shall engage in activities that support the professional development of the public health workforce. This criterion is met. Through the Office of Public Health Practice (OPHP), the school conducts a well-
established array of continuing education opportunities, most of which are provided at no cost to the
public health community. The OPHP’s learning management system currently holds more than 10,000
accounts with each account established by one registrant who will register for one or more online or web-
based courses. Courses are made available to public health practitioners in governmental settings,
community-based organizations and health care systems, all of whom receive continuing education credit
for courses successfully completed.
The school is in its eleventh year of funding by Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) to
provide workforce development through its Public Health Training Center (PHTC). The PHTC is charged
with improving Michigan’s public health system by strengthening the technical, scientific, managerial and
leadership skills of the current and future public health workforce. During the past three years, the PHTC
has developed and delivered the following:
• grand rounds, interactive instructor-led on-site and online sessions in genomics, informatics, communications and epidemiology; and
• distance learning courses on leadership, survey design and methodology, data use and interpretation, program evaluation, health disparities, genomic awareness, environmental contaminants on health and research.
The self-study notes that informal and formal methods were used to gather data to determine training
priorities and needed offerings for continuing education. Inputs are provided at the national, state and
local level through partner organizations, collaborations with academic centers and the OPHP’s Advisory
Committee.
At the state level, a comprehensive systematic needs assessment was conducted in 2007 to determine
the education priorities for state-employed public health workers. The assessment included items related
to the 10 Essential Public Health Services; emergency preparedness and response, as well as training
preferences and barriers to participating in training. Of 779 eligible participants in the survey, 483 (62%)
individuals completed the assessment. Based on the assessment, the state health departments’ needs
were in the areas of:
• Providing opportunities to advance their knowledge. • Increasing accessibility to training courses and training materials.
32
• Focused training on emergency preparedness competencies: define workers' roles in emergency response, provide specialized training for emergency responders and address barriers to participating in emergency response.
The school applies a systematic process for developing the continuing education courses. All OPHP
training courses are competency-based. They are based on the Council on Linkages between Academia
and Public Health Practice and the Core Public Health Worker competencies for Emergency
Preparedness and Response from the Center for Health Policy, Columbia University School of Nursing.
Planning committees are formed for the training courses, conferences and workshops presented by
OPHP. Continuing education course instructors and presenters are experts and school faculty from every
department. Course developers are experienced in instructional design, public health and evaluation, and
they work with planning committee members and instructors to design, develop and evaluate the training
courses.
The school conducts both training and program evaluations. Training evaluations including satisfaction
surveys and pre/post-tests are conducted. The results of course evaluation data are shared with the
course planning committee and instructors and are used to inform future course offerings. Program
evaluations are conducted semi-annually by the OPHP’s internal Curriculum Committee, which is
comprised of local health departments and public health practice organizations.
Through OPHP, the school provided a variety of courses covering all core competency domains and
using a range of instructional strategies. In 2009-2010, OPHP conducted 53 courses with a total
attendance of 10,000 participants. Of the 53 courses, 85% were conducted through distance learning
methods.
Also, since 2008, the school has offered a Certificate in the Foundations of Public Health, which is an
online, 16-credit hour graduate certificate program. It is the only external certificate program offered by
the school. Students are not required to attend sessions on campus, which enables the course to reach a
larger local, national and international audience. In the past three years, 119 students enrolled in this
online certificate program. The certificate program addresses the needs of several types of individuals:
• Public health workers who have not had formal training in the field • Recent college graduates who continue to pursue an MPH at a later time in their career • Interdisciplinary professionals who do not require an MPH degree, but need to develop public
health knowledge and skills
Overall, when community organizations and representatives were asked how they are connected to the
school, they described deep involvement. Community partners commented on workforce development as
it relates to the aging workforce. They stated in consensus that they are seeking creative ways to pool
talent and grow their pipeline in the workforce to prevent skills gaps when senior employees retire.
33
4.0 FACULTY, STAFF AND STUDENTS.
4.1 Faculty Qualifications.
The school shall have a clearly defined faculty which, by virtue of its distribution, multidisciplinary nature, educational preparation, research and teaching competence, and practice experience, is able to fully support the school’s mission, goals and objectives. This criterion is met. At the time of the site visit, there were 116 core faculty with appropriate expertise
for their respective disciplines. Overall, the faculty is highly accomplished and productive, and many of its
members have national and international reputations in their fields. The faculty complement has ebbed
and flowed with retirements and attrition, but the school has been very successful at recruitments both at
the junior and senior levels over the last three years. In 2011, the school successfully completed 12
faculty recruitments, including two senior faculty in strategic areas defined by the school (initiatives in
biostatistics and health informatics). Recruitment of outstanding assistant professors has been assisted
by the 2008 creation of five John Searle assistant professorships, one in each of the five departments.
All faculty members are adequately qualified, in terms of academic preparation and professional
experience, to teach the courses in their respective fields. Faculty members come from many disciplines
and universities and bring a breadth and depth of experience and expertise in all aspects of public health.
The provost spoke very highly of the quality and contributions of UMSPH faculty to the intellectual life of
the university as a whole. The school has set a target that 66% of senior and junior faculty will have
tenure, and for the last three years leading up to the site visit, the school has exceeded this goal with
ratios in the low 70% range.
Through the self-study process, the school identified the need to create more opportunities for clinical
faculty with public health practice experience and the need to enhance the public health experience of its
tenured and tenure-track faculty. During the site visit, there was consistent praise by the practice
community for the school’s commitment to working with them; however, community stakeholders also
identified these as opportunities to strengthen the linkages between school faculty and local and state
practice communities.
4.2 Faculty Policies and Procedures. The school shall have well-defined policies and procedures to recruit, appoint and promote qualified faculty, to evaluate competence and performance of faculty, and to support the professional development and advancement of faculty. This criterion is met. Policies and procedures that govern faculty appointments are contained in the
UMSPH Faculty Handbook, and the site visit team confirmed that there was widespread awareness of the
procedures by the faculty. The faculty handbook details all essential aspects of faculty life at UMSPH and
the university. In particular, the school has a comprehensive policy statement on faculty appointment,
promotion and tenure. A careful review of these materials found them to be well written and user friendly
34
in nature. While defined expectations are high for faculty, these documents provide a helpful guide and
provide the level of specificity about expectations that is essential for faculty success.
Department chairs conduct an annual review of faculty members, in the context of progress toward
criteria for tenure, the next promotion, and/or merit pay. Faculty members are provided with annual
letters from their department chairs, and copies of letters for all assistant professors are forwarded to the
senior associate dean for administration and the school’s Executive Committee for further review. The
merit review process does not fundamentally differ by rank. Reviews are typically weighted based on the
following proportions: 40% teaching, 40% research, and 20% service. Junior faculty members noted a
serious commitment by department chairs as well as by formal and informal mentors, who make
investments in ensuring junior faculty members’ success in both research and teaching.
Faculty of all ranks at the time of the site visit were pleased with faculty development activities in a variety
of areas supporting their success in research and teaching. They described formal programs but all saw
great value in a significant amount of collaborative help they received both within the school and from
other schools of the university. The university’s Center for Research in Learning and Teaching, in
particular, received significant praise with active participation especially noted by faculty who were early
on in their teaching career.
4.3 Faculty and Staff Diversity.
The school shall recruit, retain and promote a diverse faculty and staff, and shall offer equitable opportunities to qualified individuals regardless of age, gender, race, disability, sexual orientation, religion or national origin. This criterion is met with commentary. The proportion of current faculty from under-represented
minorities is 12% of the total faculty complement (15.5% of the core faculty and 5.8% from the non-core
faculty). With respect to gender, 42% of the current faculty members are female (33% of the core faculty
and 61% of the other faculty). The staff are predominantly female (79% female and 21% male); 14.9% of
the staff are from under-represented minorities.
The university has a clearly stated non-discrimination policy, and the UMSPH is an equal
opportunity/affirmative action employer and complies with all applicable federal and state laws regarding
nondiscrimination and affirmative action. There are many activities and policies at the UMSPH and the
university that indicate support of diversity of faculty and staff. The UMSPH has an Affirmative Action
Committee, faculty search committees have an affirmative action liaison and there is a six-step process to
ensure that the UMSPH affirmative action policies are followed in all faculty searches. The ADVANCE
program aims to improve the campus environment for faculty in four areas: 1) recruitment, 2) retention, 3)
climate, and 4) leadership. One of the workshops from the ADVANCE program is Strategies and Tactics
for Recruiting to Improve Diversity and Excellence (STRIDE), which provides members of faculty search
35
committees with knowledge and tools to emphasize development and use of equitable faculty recruitment
strategies. The UMSPH asks that one member of each faculty search committee attends the STRIDE
workshop. In discussions with the provost, it was clear to site visitors that the ADVANCE program and the
STRIDE workshop provide important and critical knowledge about how to move in the desired direction of
a diverse and inclusive faculty and staff.
The Provost’s Faculty Initiatives Program (PFIP) provides supplemental resources to help academic units
hire and retain diverse faculty. The university also has an Office of Institutional Equity (OIE) that helps
colleges determine the pool of applicants for open positions and then sets affirmative action goals. Based
on recent determinations by OIE, the UMSPH has not “had any underutilization of minorities or females in
its faculty and positions.” To the school’s credit, leaders and faculty are still strongly committed to
increasing the number of minority and/or female faculty and staff in all positions.
For recruiting and hiring staff, the UMSPH uses the campus employment services office. This office has
a six-step process for helping to ensure a “diverse and highly engaged staff.”
The faculty and staff diversity outcome measures are targeted towards under-represented minorities and
do not have numerical targets so as to be consistent with applicable legal requirements. A third outcome
measure is to maintain full compliance with affirmative action goals for faculty and staff recruitment, which
the school has done for the three years shown in the self-study.
The commentary relates to the lack of goals to improve the gender equity of the faculty. In a review of the
twenty-four primary faculty hires since 2009, only 21% were female. The site visit team was aware that
the school and the university may sometimes struggle with the legislative constraints imposed on them by
Proposition 2 and recognize the school’s obvious sensitivity to the issues of diversity. To this end their
goals to “maintain or increase” the proportion of under-represented minorities are appropriate, and it
would be possible to develop similar goals for female faculty.
4.4 Student Recruitment and Admissions. The school shall have student recruitment and admissions policies and procedures designed to locate and select qualified individuals capable of taking advantage of the school’s various learning activities, which will enable each of them to develop competence for a career in public health. This criterion is met. All school recruitment activities are jointly conducted by the departments at the
Office of Academic Affairs (OAA), and effective use of technology is a key component of all recruitment
activities. OAA’s designated admissions staff take a lead role in recruitment and coordinate over 45
annual activities, including hosting prospective student visit days; supporting summer enrichment
programs for high school and undergraduate students; presenting information at undergraduate seminars,
36
courses and student organization meetings; and attending national professional and graduate college
fairs and conferences, with a focus on events that target diverse populations and service-oriented
careers. Departments play a central role in encouraging admitted applicants to enroll at the school and
also focus on recruitment at professional conferences relevant to the area of study. The OAA also works
with the Office of Alumni Relations to encourage alumni to participate in recruitment activities.
In general, admission to the school requires a bachelor’s degree or equivalent, an undergraduate GPA of
3.0, standardized test scores in at least the 50th percentile and demonstrated interest in and fit with the
field of public health. Departments are responsible for admissions decisions and may make exceptions to
the admissions requirements listed above based on an individualized review of the candidate.
Departments and degree programs also differ slightly in the standardized test scores that they will accept
(eg, GRE, GMAT, MCAT). Students seeking admissions to the MPH and MHSA programs submit
materials through the SOPHAS system, and students seeking admission to the MS and PhD programs
must complete an online application to the Rackham Graduate School, which includes prompts to submit
additional required documents (letters of recommendation, test scores, etc.) directly to the department.
Departments have admissions committees that review the applications and make recommendations on
admission. For MPH and MHSA degrees, the OAA performs a final review to ensure consistency and
fairness across admissions decisions and then sends official communication to the student. For MS and
PhD degrees, the Rackham Graduate School makes the final admissions decision.
Data on applications, admissions and enrollment for the past three years indicate that, while application
numbers have fluctuated slightly in various ways, enrollments have, for the most part, been steady or
increasing over the three-year period. The school’s overall acceptance rate has been between 50-55%,
and the yield rate has been between 34-41%. The total student enrollment for 2011-2012 is
approximately 930 students. Most students are enrolled in the professional degree programs, and nearly
all students enroll full-time.
The school identifies several outcome measures to gauge its success in enrolling a qualified student
body. The school is extremely close to meeting some measures (eg, average GPA for incoming master’s
students has ranged from 3.44 to 3.49 in the last three years; the target is 3.5) and has exceeded its
targets in other areas, including verbal GRE scores for incoming master’s degree students (target: 65th
percentile; results: 63rd, 67th and 80th percentiles), quantitative GRE scores for incoming doctoral students
(target: 70th percentile; results: 73rd, 71st and 82nd percentiles) and five-year degree completion rates for
master’s students (target: 90%; results: 91%, 93% and 92%).
37
4.5 Student Diversity.
Stated application, admission, and degree-granting requirements and regulations shall be applied equitably to individual applicants and students regardless of age, gender, race, disability, sexual orientation, religion or national origin. This criterion is met. The school’s most recent (2003) strategic plan outlines specific goals and objectives
relating to diversity, and the Diversity Committee is charged with developing specific recommendations to
achieve and maintain a diverse student population. The committee’s recommendations range from
curricular (“All academic departments integrate knowledge and skills relating to diversity throughout their
curriculum”) to admissions-oriented (“UM SPH will continue to put the time and resources into
departmental-level recruitment and retention activities to achieve a diverse student body”). The school
has taken numerous action steps to implement each of the recommendations. For example, the Diversity
Committee analyzed all MPH and MHSA core course syllabi for content relating to diverse populations,
and the school’s recently-developed four-credit core course, “Cross-Disciplinary Approaches to Public
Health Challenges,” integrates social and behavioral sciences, environmental health and health services
administration content in a case-based class focusing on addressing public health problems affecting
vulnerable populations.
The school sponsors or co-sponsors a number of special events, including lectures, film screenings and
trainings, that address issues of diversity. The school also sponsors a Summer Enrichment Program
(SEP) for undergraduate minority students to encourage them to consider public health careers. The SEP
recently held its 25th anniversary conference, and the self-study notes that of the 473 students who have
participated in the SEP throughout its history, 123 have subsequently matriculated at schools of public
health.
The school tracks degree completion by underrepresented minority students as one outcome measure,
and degree completion has been strong. The proportion of underrepresented minority students has
remained constant over the last three years at 11%, but the total proportion of underrepresented minority
students has declined by almost 10% since 2004 in response to changes in the national and state political
and legal climate. The school continues to build new relationships with minority-serving institutions and to
prioritize attending recruitment events that attract students from diverse backgrounds. The school
regularly evaluates admissions data and attempts to respond to trends or concerns in subsequent years’
recruitment plans.
4.6 Advising and Career Counseling. There shall be available a clearly explained and accessible academic advising system for students, as well as readily available career and placement advice. This criterion is met. All new students attend a two-day orientation and are provided with the Student
Handbook. Academic advising takes place at the departmental level, and departmental handbooks are
38
also provided to each student. Each student is assigned a faculty advisor based on academic interests
with whom they plan a general course plan and meet at least once per semester to discuss curriculum,
internship placement, resource referral or other support. Dual degree candidates may have an additional
advisor, and doctoral candidates may have an additional research advisor. Students may switch advisors
as needed. Over the past three years, over 50% of graduates have rated their advising experience as
good or excellent, though site visitors also noted that 16-19% of graduates rated their advising experience
as poor, which warrants further investigation by degree program and department. The site visitors also
noted that the response rates for the surveys were not provided.
Career advising takes place at the level of the department, school and university. Faculty advisors within
departments provide internship guidance and networking as well as individual career advising, and the
department provides opportunities for professional development. School-wide services include a
dedicated full-time career counselor who provides one to one counseling. The school’s career counselor
also facilitates career workshops, alumni panels and workshops on job-searching. The school hosts a
career services website with an electronic job-posting site and electronic career resources and guides.
The Office of Academic Affairs provides additional counseling services. Over the past three years,
approximately 80% of graduates rated their satisfaction with career services as satisfied or very satisfied,
with 4% or less as dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. This satisfaction rate, in conjunction with the high
employment rate six months after graduation, strongly reflects the success of the career counseling
services.
The high level of satisfaction with both academic advising and career advising was evident to the site
visitors in their meetings with current students as well as alumni. They lauded the accessibility and
availability of faculty advisors, staff helpfulness and ample opportunities for career counseling and
opportunities.
39
Agenda
Council on Education for Public Health Accreditation Site Visit
University of Michigan School of Public Health
March 21-23, 2012
Wednesday, March 21, 2012 8:30 am Meeting with Self-Study Chair and Staff to Review Agenda and Resource File Rich Hirth, Professor, Health Management and Policy Susan Morrel-Samuels, Accreditation Manager
Emily Renda, Accreditation Coordinator 8:45 am Meeting with CEPH Self-Study Committee
Rich Hirth, Professor, Health Management and Policy (Chair) Angela Beck, Doctoral Student Representative Cathleen Connell, Professor, Health Behavior and Health Education Rebecca Head, Associate Director, Office of Public Health Practice Nancy Janz. Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Mike Kalasinski. Assistant Dean for Finance, Dean's Office Phyllis Meadows, Director, Office of Public Health Practice Hal Morgenstern, Professor, Epidemiology Susan Morrel-Samuels, Accreditation Manager Jerome Nriagu, Professor, Environmental Health Sciences Emily Renda, Accreditation Coordinator Olushola Samuel, Masters Student Representative Sharon Sheldon. Program Manager, Washtenaw County Health Department Alex Tsodikov, Professor, Biostatistics
9:45 am Break 10:00 am Meeting with SPH Executive Committee
Martin Philbert, Dean Betsy Foxman, Professor, EPID Vic Strecher, Professor, HBHE Mike Boehnke, Professor, BIOSTAT Daniel Lee, Assoc. Professor, HMP Peter Mancuso, Assoc. Professor, EHS Sharon Kardia, Senior Associate Dean for Administration (ex officio) Al Franzblau, Associate Dean for Research (ex officio) Nancy Janz, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (ex officio) Phyllis Meadows, Associate Dean for Practice (ex officio) Mike Kalasinski, Assistant Dean for Finance (ex officio) Dean Smith, Professor, HMP
11:15 am Break 11:30 am Lunch with Students
Angela Beck, HBHE PhD Olushola Samuel, HMP MPH, Public Health Students of African Descent Adam Behroozian, EPID MPH Reva Berman, HBHE MPH, HBHE Student Association Daniel Chavez-Yenter, HBHE MPH, La Salud Meghan Glynn, BIOSTAT MS, Public Health Student Assembly President Mary Ellen Hicks, EHS MPH, Industrial Hygiene Student Association, PHSA Melanie Kappadukunnel, EPID MPH, Epidemiology Student Organization Felice Le, EPID MPH, Association for Asian Public Health Action Allison O’Donnell, HMP MPH, Public Health Student Assembly Jimmy Law, HMP MHSA
12:30 pm Break 12:45 pm Meeting with Executive Masters/ Certificate Programs/Informatics and Nutrition Degree Program Leaders
Scott Roberts, Assoc. Professor, HBHE (Genetics Certificate)
40
Charles Friedman, Professor, HMP/SI (MHI Certificate and Degree) Meghan Genovese, Director, (MHI Certificate and Degree ) Chinyere Neale, Assistant Director, (Global Health Certificate) Betsy Foxman, Professor, EPID, (Health Care Infection and Control Certificate) David Mendez, Assoc. Professor, HMP, (Executive Masters Program) Trivellore Raghunathan, BIOSTAT , (OJOC Program) Peter Mancuso, Assoc. Professor, EHS (Nutritional Sciences PhD Program)
1:45 pm Break 2:00 pm Meeting with ACAP/ BIC Faculty Nancy Janz, Professor, HBHE
Scott Roberts, Assoc. Professor, HBHE Charles Friedman, Professor, HMP/SI Andrew Maynard, Professor, EHS Tim Johnson, Assoc. Professor, BIOSTAT Carl Marrs, Assoc. Professor, EPID Peter Jacobson, Professor, HMP Bhramar Mukerjee, Assoc. Professor, BIOSTAT Jose Bauermeister, Asst. Professor, HBHE Sharon Kardia, Professor, EPID Howard Hu, Professor, EHS Richard Lichtenstein, Assoc. Professor, HMP Shakina Russell, Student Representative
3:00 pm Break 3:15 pm Meeting with Deans and Chairs Committee
Martin Philbert, Dean Sharon Kardia, Senior Associate Dean for Administration Al Franzblau, Associate Dean for Research Nancy Janz, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Phyllis Meadows, Associate Dean for Practice Mike Kalasinski, Assistant Dean for Finance Trivellore Raghunathan, Chair, BIOSTAT Howard Hu, Chair, EHS Ana Diez Roux, Chair, EPID Kyle Grazier, Chair, HMP Marc Zimmerman, Chair, HBHE
4:15 pm Team Review of Resource File and Other Documentation Thursday, March 22, 2012 8:45 am Breakfast – Review Agenda 9:00 am Meeting with Faculty (including capstone faculty) Jerome Nriagu, Professor, EHS
Sara Adar, Asst. Professor, EPID Matt Boulton, Professor, EPID Melissa Valerio, Asst. Professor, HBHE Cleopatra Caldwell, Assoc. Professor, HBHE Zoe McLaren, Asst. Professor, HMP David Hutton, Asst. Professor, HMP John Meeker, Assoc. Professor, EHS Bhramar Mukerjee, Assoc. Professor, BIOSTAT
10:15 am Break 10:30 am Meeting with Practice Office/Internships/Career Services Staff Emily Renda, Student Affairs Program Manager, Academic Affairs
Eden Wells , Clinical Asst. Professor, EPID Phyllis Meadows, Assoc. Dean for Practice Judith Compton, Program Manager, MI Public Health Training Center Dana Thomas, Student Affairs Program Manager, Office of Public Health Practice Chanel DeGuzman, Academic Diversity Initiatives Director, Academic Affairs Shelagh Saenz, Career Services Coordinator, Academic Affairs
41
42
11:45 am Break 12:00 pm Lunch with Alumni
Darla Williams, MPH, 2009 HBHE Ellyn Samuels, MHSA, 2006 HMP Stacy Goldberg, MPH, 1999 EHS Marcy Waldinger, MHSA, HMP Keith McCullough, MS, 1998 BIOSTAT Nicole Adelman, MPH, 1995 HBHE Jenna Bacolor MPH, MSW, 1995 HMP, Social Work William Muerer, MD, MS, BIOSTAT OJOC Program JoLynn Montgomery, PhD, 2000 EPID
1:15 am Meeting with Doctoral Program Leaders/Associate Dean for Research Al Franzblau, Assoc. Dean for Research
Neal Krause, Professor, HBHE Amy Schultz, Professor, HBHE Mike Boehnke, Professor, BIOSTAT Olivier Jolliet, Professor, EHS Daniel Lee, Assoc. Professor, HMP Joseph Eisenberg, Assoc. Professor, EPID
2:30 pm Break 2:45 pm Meeting with Community Representatives/Preceptors/Employers
Jean Chabut, Deputy Director, MI Department of Community Health Ellen Clement, Executive Director, Corner Health Center Loretta Davis, Health Officer, Wayne County Health Department Richard Fleece, Director and Health Officer, Washtenaw County Health Dept. Amy Schulz, Director Prevention and Community Health, Allegiance Health Zachary Rowe, Executive Director, Friends of Parkside Angela Reyes, Executive Director, Detroit Hispanic Development Corporation Suzanne Cupal, Community Health Analyst, Genesee County Health Dept. Jimena Loveluck, President/CEO, HIV/AIDS Resource Center, Ypsilanti, MI
4:00 pm Review Resource File and Other Documentation Friday, March 23, 2012
8:30 am Meeting with Provost
Phillip Hanlon 9:10 pm Document Review/Report Preparation 12:30 pm Exit Interview
Martin Philbert, Dean Sharon Kardia, Senior Associate Dean for Administration Al Franzblau, Associate Dean for Research Nancy Janz, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Phyllis Meadows, Associate Dean for Practice Mike Kalasinski, Assistant Dean for Finance Richard Hirth, Chair, Accreditation Committee