Interprofessional Continuing Education Partnership (ICEP) Leadership Committee

Interprofessional collaboration and team‐based care are becoming increasingly important. Embracing an interprofessional, team‐based care philosophy requires a framework for delivering education that is designed by the health care team for the health care team. Joint Accreditation for Interprofessional Continuing EducationTM, is a collaborative effort by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC), and the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) to provide a structure for approving continuing education (CE) which aligns with this interprofessional, team‐based care philosophy. ICEP submitted a Joint Accreditation Intent to Apply in October 2015. We anticipate approval of our Joint Accreditation award by December 2016. In addition to realizing significant efficiencies through the streamlining of our three accredited programs into one unified accreditation process, the schools will expand collaborative program opportunities increasing the depth and breadth of our catalog of offerings and widening our income base.

The process of securing credit separately for interprofessional CE from the UW‐Madison Schools of Medicine and Public Health, Nursing and Pharmacy is onerous and expensive. The historically siloed process requires significant duplication of effort for the accreditation team as well as the CE activity planners. The current model of accreditation does not support the growing interest and need for interprofessional CE in the health professions.

The purpose of the Interprofessional Continuing Education Partnership (ICEP) is to develop and manage a streamlined interprofessional CE accreditation infrastructure, while ensuring compliance with Joint Accreditation for Interprofessional Continuing EducationTM criteria, including a common mission statement and a consistent methodology for planning, needs analysis, interprofessional competency assessment and performance in practice evaluation in addition to the criteria unique to the separate accrediting bodies.

The purpose of the Leadership Committee is to establish a sustainable organizational structure for oversight, administration, and evaluation of ICEP including preparing the Joint accreditation self‐study and writing a five year strategic plan which prioritizes achievement of the ICEP purpose, vision, mission and goals in addition to maintaining compliance with JAICE criteria.

The ICEP Leadership Committee will be responsible for developing the infrastructure required to support meeting JAICE requirements and for ongoing oversight of ICEP activities. Activities include:

• Establishing the ICEP vision, mission and goals
• Establishing ICEP policies/procedures
• Defining leader and member roles/job descriptions, terms of service, orientation procedures, succession procedures for the Chair and members
• Developing and approving policies and procedures to ensure compliance with JAICE Criteria
• Serving as liaison to respective Deans
• Approving and monitoring financials.
• Educating activity directors, planners and staff on attributes of interprofessional continuing education and practice
• Provide oversight to ensure JAICE timeline and requirements are achieved
• Centralize documentation needed for accreditation and re‐accreditation processes
• Establish an advisory committee representing key stakeholders to guide the leadership team’s decision making regarding the overall vision, mission and goals. The committee should include equal representatives from: Medicine, Nursing and Pharmacy faculty. Additional committee members may include Health Sciences Simulation Programs; Social Work; UW Health Nursing, Pharmacy and Physician CE programs; UW Health satellite hospitals such as Swedish American; community partners.

• Infrastructure: ICEP Leadership Committee and ICEP Activity Planning Committee, ICEP Advisory Committee, and ad hoc workgroup(s) as needed
• Timeline
  • JA Application Process + deliverable timelines o Leadership Team, workgroup meetings
  • Establish Advisory Committee
  • Initiate strategic planning process
  • Complete 5 year strategic plan
• Communication Plan
• Education Plan
• Coordinate Tools and Templates (Activity Planning Committee)
  • Planning Process (checklist)
  • Pre‐Planning Intake
  • Planning Document
  • Activity fees and budget
  • Credit review and approval process
  • COI, Content validation oversight
  • Marketing Plan
  • Activity assessment
  • Activity evaluation tool
  • Attendance documentation
  • Post follow‐up evaluation tool
  • Close‐out and reporting template
• Policy/Procedure (Activity Planning/Policy Workgroup)
  • Policy on Commercial Support (JA 9A‐D/SCS 3‐6)
  • Honorarium Policy (JA 9b, SCS 3.7‐3.8)
  • Policy on Disclosure of Financial Relationships (JA 9a, SCS 2.1‐2.2, 6.1‐6.5)
  • Identification and Resolution of Conflicts of Interest (JA 9A‐D, SCS 2.1 – 2.2, 2.3; 6.1‐6.2, 6.3 – 6.4) o Social Events Policy (JA 9b, SCS 3.11)
  • Joint Sponsorship Policy (JA 9a, SCS 1.1, 1.2)
  • Presenter communication guidelines
  • Documentation, Record‐keeping
  • Interprofessional Advisory Committee structure and function, member accountabilities
  • Enduring material, Internet
  • RSS
• 5 Year Strategic Plan (Administration/structure; Activity Planning, etc.)

The Joint Accreditation application process is as follows:

Milestone (Cycle 2)

Determination of eligibility (October 1)

• Intent to apply
• Eligibility Review Fee ($1,500.00)

Provider informed of eligibility decision (November 1)

• Provider deadline to submit: (January 1)
  Activity list of educational activities
• Application Fee ($22,000.00)

Provider informed which activity files, at a minimum, will be reviewed. (February 1)

Providers contacted to establish interview date (April/May)

Provider deadline to submit (July 1)

• Self‐Study Report
• Activity files

I. Introduction
A. Intent to Apply form B. CE Activity List C. Self‐Study Report Prologue
1. Describe a brief history of the organization’s CE Program.
2. Describe the leadership and structure of the organization’s CE Program.

II. Criteria
Criterion 1: The provider has a continuing education (CE) mission statement that highlights education for the healthcare team with expected results articulated in terms of changes in skills/strategy, or performance of the healthcare team, or patient Guide to the Joint Accreditation Process outcomes.
Criterion 2: The provider gathers data or information and conducts a program‐based analysis on the degree to which its CE mission has been met through the conduct of CE activities/educational interventions.
Criterion 3: The provider identifies, plans and implements the needed or desired changes in the overall program (e.g., planners, teachers, infrastructure, methods, resources, facilities, interventions) that are required to improve on its ability to meet the CE mission.
Criterion 4: The provider incorporates into CE activities the educational needs (knowledge, skills/strategy, or performance) that underlie the practice gaps of the healthcare team and/or the individual members of the healthcare team.
Criterion 5: The provider generates activities/educational interventions that are designed to change the knowledge, skills/strategy, or performance of the healthcare team, or patient outcomes as described in its mission statement.
Criterion 6: The provider generates activities/educational interventions around valid content that matches the healthcare team’s current or potential scope of practice.
Criterion 7: The provider chooses educational formats for activities/interventions that are appropriate for the setting, objectives and desired results of the activity.
Criterion 8: The provider develops activities/educational interventions in the context of desirable attributes of the healthcare team (e.g., Institute of Medicine competencies, professional competencies, healthcare team competencies: values/ethics, roles and responsibilities, interprofessional communication, teams and teamwork).
Criterion 9: The provider develops activities/educational interventions that are independent of the influence or control of commercial interests.
Criterion 10: The provider utilizes support strategies to enhance change as an adjunct to its educational interventions (e.g., reminders, patient feedback).
Criterion 11: The provider identifies factors outside the provider’s control that impact on patient outcomes.
Criterion 12: The provider implements educational strategies to remove, overcome, or address barriers to change for the healthcare team.
Criterion 13: The provider analyzes changes in the healthcare team (knowledge, skills/strategy, or performance) achieved as a result of the overall program’s activities/educational interventions.