research; others had only begun to think about common data elements that might be collected to describe their faculty’s practice. Some were struggling with fiscal viability issues once grant support would end; others were participants in managed care, fee for service, and other contractual means for support. All shared challenges in the integration of research and practice, and recognition of the place of scholarly practice in faculty promotion and tenure processes.
Each school made marked progress toward meeting their goals. This was facilitated through frank presentations during the institute, open channels of communication and consultation during the program, and, once back on the job, via the listserv, two subsequent meetings, and a Senior Fellows Exchange held just before the following year’s institute. There were several common goals among the schools: for example, to develop strategic plans for academic practice; modify appointment, promotion, and tenure (APT) criteria; create a minimum dataset for faculty practices; launch new research initiatives; develop new practice opportunities; and create a business plan.
The Penn School of Nursing delivered approximately 120 hours of consultation services to the 21 schools that participated in the two Penn Macy Initiatives. Consultations were provided during each institute and within the year after the institute. Each school requested consultation according to their individual needs. Topics included:
financial, practice budgeting, financial analysis, and reporting, program grant proposal review, business advisor group considerations;
organizational, structure and governance issues, faculty practice plans;
research, establishment of research center structure, comparisons among local and national datasets, establishing centers of excellence, quality-of-life indicators for frail elders;
clinical, partnering with elementary schools for behavioral health services, quality improvement models for academic nursing practice, credentialing for advanced practice nurses in mental health, site visits to PNN practices and infrastructure services, preparing for accreditation visit, information technology for Clinical Management Information System and outcomes reporting.
For the week-long institute, daily evaluations of specific content, speakers, and methods, as well as a postconference evaluation, were conducted with participating fellows and, more informally, with staff and speakers. Conference evaluation feedback was used extensively in planning and refining the second institute held in June 2000. During a
Author’s final copy prior to publication. See J Prof Nurs 18(2):63-69, March-April 2002, for the copy of record. Copyright 2002, Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.