Self-Study Report

Prepared for the Council on Education for Public Health March 2015

…promoting healthier tomorrows through education and research today SELF-STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS

SELF-STUDY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Exhibits ...... ii Glossary of Abbreviations ...... iii

Preface ...... vii

1.0 The School of Public Health 1.1 Mission ...... 1 1.2 Evaluation ...... 7 1.3 Institutional Environment ...... 19 1.4 Organization and Administration ...... 25 1.5 Governance ...... 31 1.6 Fiscal Resources ...... 43 1.7 Faculty and Other Resources ...... 49 1.8 Diversity ...... 59

2.0 Instructional Programs 2.1 Degree Offerings ...... 69 2.2 Program Length ...... 71 2.3 Public Health Core Knowledge ...... 73 2.4 Practical Skills ...... 75 2.5 Culminating Experience ...... 81 2.6 Required Competencies ...... 85 2.7 Assessment Procedures ...... 105 2.8 Other Graduate Professional Degrees...... 123 2.9 Bachelor’s Degrees in Public Health ...... 125 2.10 Other Bachelor’s Degrees ...... 126 2.11 Academic Degrees ...... 127 2.12 Doctoral Degrees ...... 133 2.13 Joint Degrees ...... 139 2.14 Distance Education or Executive Degree Programs ...... 143

3.0 Creation, Application and Advancement of Knowledge 3.1 Research ...... 145 3.2 Service ...... 167 3.3 Workforce Development ...... 179

4.0 Faculty, Staff and Students 4.1 Faculty Qualifications ...... 189 4.2 Faculty Policies and Procedures ...... 213 4.3 Student Recruitment and Admissions ...... 217 4.4 Advising and Career Counseling ...... 227

INDEX ...... 233

S ELF-STUDY List of Exhibits List of Exhibits

Exhibit 1.2.a Mechanisms for Evaluation of Performance ...... 7 Exhibit 1.2.c Outcome Measures for Fiscal Years 2012-2014 ...... 11 Exhibit 1.3.b OUHSC Organization Chart ...... 20 Exhibit 1.4.a College of Public Health Organizational Chart ...... 25 Exhibit 1.5.a Standing and Important Ad Hoc Committees and Members ...... Resource File Exhibit 1.5.d College Faculty Holding Membership on University Committees ...... 39 Exhibit 1.6.1 Sources of Funds and Expenditures by Major Category, FY 2007 to FY 2014 ...... 46 Exhibit 1.6.d Outcome Measures for Fiscal Resources ...... 47 Exhibit 1.7.1 Headcount of Primary Faculty ...... 49 Exhibit 1.7.2 Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Ratios by Department or Specialty Area ...... 51 Exhibit 1.7.3 Headcount (FTE) of Administration and Staff ...... 53 Exhibit 1.7.4 Allocation of Space ...... 53 Exhibit 1.7.5 Outcome Measures for Faculty and Other Resources ...... 56 Exhibit 1.8.b. Progress toward Achieving Goals for Diversity and Cultural Competence Contained in the College’s 2011-2015 Strategic Plan ...... 63 Exhibit 1.8.1 Diversity Outcomes Summary Data for Faculty, Students and Staff ...... 67 Exhibit 2.1.1 Instructional Matrix – Degrees & Specializations ...... 69 Exhibit 2.3.1(a) Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for MPH Degree ...... 73 Exhibit 2.3.1(b) Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for MS Degree in Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences ...... 73 Exhibit 2.3.1(c) Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for DrPH Degree ...... 74 Exhibit 2.4.b(i) MPH Preceptors by Practice Site for 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 ...... Resource File Exhibit 2.4.b(ii) MS IH/EHS Preceptors by Practice Site for 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 .. Resource File Exhibit 2.4.d Physicians, Residents, and Medical Students Completing the Academic Program, 2011-2014 ...... 79 Exhibit 2.6.1 Courses and Activities through which Competencies Are Met ...... Resource File Exhibit 2.7.1 Completion Outcomes by Degree Type ...... Resource File Exhibit 2.7.a Reasons for Attrition from MPH Programs, by Entry Cohort ...... 109 Exhibit 2.7.2.a Destination of Graduates by Employment Type FY 2011...... 111 Exhibit 2.7.2.b Destination of Graduates by Employment Type FY 2012...... 112 Exhibit 2.7.2.c Destination of Graduates by Employment Type FY 2013...... 114 Exhibit 2.7.b Additional Outcome Measures for 2.7.b ...... 117 Exhibit 2.10.1 Doctoral Student Data ...... 134 Exhibit 3.1.d Outcome Measures for Research ...... 150 Exhibit 3.1.1 Research Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2015 (as of 10-31-2014) ...... 154 Exhibit 3.2.1 Faculty Service for the Last 3 Years ...... Resource File Exhibit 3.2.d Outcome Measures for Faculty Service ...... 169 Exhibit 3.2.d.1 Number of Primary Faculty Participating in Service ...... 169 Exhibit 3.2.e Examples of Student Service Activities...... 170 Exhibit 3.2.2 Funded Service Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014 ...... 172 Exhibit 3.3.b Continuing Education Programs Offered 2011-2014 ...... Resource File Exhibit 3.3.b.1 Summary Statistics on Continuing Education Programs Offered 2011-2013 ...... 179 Exhibit 3.3.c Certificate in Public Health Completions and Enrollments...... 181 Exhibit 3.3.1 Funded Training/Continuing Education Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014 ...... 184 Exhibit 4.1.1 Primary Faculty who Support Degree Offerings of the School ...... 190 Exhibit 4.1.2 Current Other Faculty Used to Support Teaching Program (Adjunct, Part-Time, Secondary, etc.) ...... 203 Exhibit 4.1.c Significant Full-Time Professional Practice Experience of Primary Faculty ...... 209 Exhibit 4.1.d Outcome Measures for Faculty Qualifications ...... 211 Exhibit 4.3.1 Quantitative Information on Applicants, Acceptances, and Enrollments ...... 222 Exhibit 4.3.2 Student Enrollment Data from Fall 2011 to Fall 2014 ...... 223 Exhibit 4.3.3 Outcome Measures for Evaluating Success in Enrolling Qualified Students ...... 225

S ELF-STUDY Glossary of Abbreviations

Glossary of Abbreviations

AAA Admissions and Academic Advisement [Committee] AALAS American Association for Laboratory Animal Science AAP Affirmative Action Plan ABET Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (officially known only by the acronym) ABIH American Board of Industrial Hygiene ACF Administration for Children and Families AHRQ Agency for Health Research & Quality AIDPC American Indian Diabetes Prevention Center ASAC Applied Science Accreditation Commission [of ABET] ASGE American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy ASPH, ASPPH Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health AUGS American Urogynecologic Society

BERD Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Research Design [component of OSCTR] BS Bachelor of Science BSE [Department of] Biostatistics and Epidemiology BSESA Biostatistics and Epidemiology Student Association BSW Bachelor of Social Work

CAHME Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Management Education CAIHR Center for American Indian Health Research CBR Center for Biosecurity Research CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CEO Chief Executive Officer CFO Chief Financial Officer CFR Code of Federal Regulations CHB College of Health Building CHES Certified Health Education Specialist CHMM Certified Hazardous Materials Manager CIH Certified Industrial Hygienist CMDA Christian Medical and Dental Association COM [University of Oklahoma] College of Medicine COPH [University of Oklahoma] College of Public Health COPHSA College of Public Health Student Association CPH Certified in Public Health [credential]; also a designator for non-departmental courses developed for MPH students and administered by the College of Public Health CSP Certified Safety Professional CY Calendar year

DE Distance education DHHS U.S. Department of Health and Human Services DO Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine DoD U.S. Department of Defense DOE U.S. Department of Education DrPH Doctor of Public Health

EdD Doctor of Education EMR Electronic medical record EMSA Exploring Math and Science Academy [program] EO Equal Opportunity EPIC [training] Empowering Patients through Interprofessional Collaboration

iii

S ELF-STUDY Glossary of Abbreviations

FAA Federal Aviation Administration FDA U.S. Food and Drug Administration FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FERPA Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act FIC Fogarty International Center FTE Full-time equivalent FY Fiscal year [ending]

GMAT Graduate Management Admission Test GPA Grade point average GRA Graduate research assistant GRE Graduate Record Examination

HAP [Department of] Health Administration and Policy HBCU Historically Black College or University HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 HPS [Department of] Health Promotion Sciences HRSA Health Resources and Services Administration HSC [University of Oklahoma] Health Sciences Center

IACUC Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee IBC Institutional Biosafety Committee ICAP International Credential Advantage Package [from WES] IDC Indirect cost IH/EHS Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Science IHART Indigenous HIV/AIDS Research Training program IHCC Industrial Hygiene Constituent Committee IHI Institute for Healthcare Improvement IHKS Industrial Hygiene Knowledge Survey IHS Indian Health Service IPA Intergovernmental Personnel Agreement IPEDS Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System IT Information Technology group

JD Juris Doctor (Doctor of Law)

LEND Leadership and Education in Neurodevelopmental and Related Disabilities LGBT Lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender

M million [dollars] MCHB Maternal and Child Health Bureau [of HRSA] MD Doctor of Medicine MHA Master of Health Administration MOU Memorandum of Understanding MPH Master of Public Health MS Master of Science MSW Master of Social Work

NBPHE National Board of Public Health Examiners NCE No cost extension NCHEC National Commission for Health Education Credentialing, Inc. NCI National Cancer Institute NCMHD National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities NCRR National Center for Research Resources NHLBI National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute

S ELF-STUDY Glossary of Abbreviations

NIAID National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease NICDR National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research NICHD Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development NICOA National Indian Council on Aging NIDDK National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases NIEHS National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences NIGMS National Institute of General Medical Sciences NIH National Institutes of Health NINDS National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

OCAST Oklahoma Center for the Advancement of Science & Technology OCCHD Oklahoma City-County Health Department ODHS Oklahoma Department of Human Services ODMH Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services OEH [Department of] Occupational and Environmental Health OHA Oklahoma Hospital Association OHCA Oklahoma Health Care Authority OHIET Oklahoma Health Information Exchange Trust OHIP Oklahoma Health Improvement Plan OICA Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy OK [State of] Oklahoma OKC Oklahoma City OMRF Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation OPHTC Oklahoma Public Health Training Center ORA Office of Research Administration OSCTR Oklahoma Shared Clinical and Translational Resources OSDH Oklahoma State Department of Health OSU Oklahoma State University OU University of Oklahoma OUHSC University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center

PC Personal computer PH Public health PhD Doctor of Philosophy PHPTR Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response [MPH track] PHTC Public Health Training Center PI Principal investigator PPP Professional Practice Plan

QSE Quantitative Skills Examination

RDAC Research and Design Analysis Center

SAMHSA Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration SCBHA Social, Community, and Behavioral Health Students Association SCC Stephenson Cancer Center [affiliate of OU Medicine] SFR Student/faculty ratio SOPHAS Schools of Public Health Application Service SQ State question (ballot referendum) SWOT Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats [analysis] SWPERLC Southwest Preparedness and Emergency Response Learning Center

TA Graduate teaching assistant TCCHD Tulsa City-County Health Department

S ELF-STUDY Glossary of Abbreviations

TOEFL Test of English as a Foreign Language TSET Oklahoma Tobacco Settlement Endowment Trust

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USPHS U.S. Public Health Service UW University of Washington

VA Veterans Administration VP Vice President

WES World Education Services

S ELF-STUDY Preface

Preface

“We know we belong to the land…” -Rodgers and Hammerstein, “Oklahoma!”

The purpose of this preface is to provide some background and context surrounding the University of Oklahoma College of Public Health, beyond what is presented in response to each criterion in the body of this Self-Study Report.

In 1965, the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education recommended the establishment of a school of public health, expanding upon capabilities then existing within the Department of Preventative Medicine and Public Health in the University of Oklahoma College of Medicine. The school of public health was founded and received preliminary accreditation from the American Public Health Association in 1967. Full accreditation was achieved in 1969 and has been maintained ever since. The school was renamed the “College of Health” in 1972 and merged with the College of Allied Health in 1973. In 1981, Public Health and Allied Health again become separate colleges; since then the College of Public Health has remained an independent unit of the Health Sciences Center. Dr. Gary Raskob has been Dean of the College of Public Health since 2002.

The College of Public Health is one of seven colleges at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, an urban campus in central Oklahoma City. The main campus of the University of Oklahoma is located in Norman, about 20 miles south of the Health Sciences Center. The University of Oklahoma also has a campus in Tulsa at the Schusterman Center, which is about 100 miles northeast of Oklahoma City. The College of Public Health offers the Interdisciplinary MPH degree at the Tulsa campus.

The Oklahoma public higher education system, governed by the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, consists of two research universities (University of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State University), 10 regional universities, one public liberal arts university, and 12 community colleges. Collectively, the public higher education system supports 49 separate campuses and branches in 37 different cities. The state’s resources for higher education are thus spread rather thin.

Oklahoma currently has a population of about 3.88 million. Nearly two-thirds of the state’s population resides in either the greater Oklahoma City metropolitan area (1.45 million) or the greater Tulsa metropolitan area (1.13 million). The remaining population is largely rural, spread over a diverse landscape from the forested hills of eastern Oklahoma to the plains of western Oklahoma and the Panhandle. The state is ethnically diverse, with 12.9% identifying as American Indian, 8.7% identifying as Black or African American, and 8.9% identifying as Hispanic or Latino.

Oklahoma faces serious public health challenges. According to the United Health Foundation, over the past decade Oklahoma has ranked between 44th and 49th in overall health in the United States. In 2014 Oklahoma ranked 45th or worse for 3 of the 8 health outcomes (cardiovascular death, cancer death, and premature death). The behaviors and risk factors driving the poor state of health of Oklahoma are a high (albeit declining) prevalence of smoking (23.7%), physical inactivity (31.1%) and poor diet resulting in a high prevalence of obesity (32.5%), and a high proportion of the population (18%) without health insurance. The College of Public Health works closely with agency partners to apply evidence-based approaches to improve public health in the state. These partners include the Oklahoma State Department of Health, which exercises statewide leadership in public health as well as jurisdiction over county health departments outside of Oklahoma City and Tulsa; the Oklahoma City-County and Tulsa City-County Health Departments; the Oklahoma Health Care Authority, which administers the SoonerCare (Medicaid) and Insure Oklahoma programs; and various tribal and inter-tribal health agencies.

The College of Public Health operates within structures of accountability. We are accountable to our institution, and through the institution to the state and federal governments, for responsible stewardship of financial resources and for fair and ethical behavior as well as compliance with policies, rules, and regulations. We are accountable to our sponsors and partners in research, training, and service for competent performance of these activities. Through our accreditation by CEPH, we are also accountable

vii

S ELF-STUDY Preface

to ourselves, our students, our graduates, our peers, and the public health profession as a whole for an ongoing pursuit of academic excellence.

viii

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.1: MISSION

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.

1.1.a. A clear and concise mission statement for the School as a whole.

Mission The mission of the College of Public Health of the University of Oklahoma is to protect and improve the health of the people of Oklahoma, the United States, and other nations through: (1) education, public health workforce development, and cutting-edge research; (2) translating research and scholarship into public health practice and service; and (3) development and advocacy of evidence-based health management and policy.

Vision The College will be nationally recognized for providing excellent education for public health practice professionals and for public health research scientists, for innovative research on contemporary issues in public health, and for translating research and scholarship into evidence-based practice, management, and public health policy.

1.1.b. A statement of values that guides the school.

Core Values

Excellence - The College of Public Health strives to achieve excellence in all of its endeavors.

Integrity - The College of Public Health adheres to the highest standards of honesty, objectivity, transparency, fairness, and ethical conduct at all times.

Public service - The College of Public Health exists to serve the citizens of Oklahoma and the United States through efforts to protect and improve their health, and to contribute to international efforts to improve the health of other nations.

Health equity - The College of Public Health advocates the principle that all individuals have a right to the opportunity for a healthy life. The College is committed to reducing and eliminating health disparities among populations.

Responsibility - The College of Public Health strives to make the most effective use of all resources it receives, to use responsibly all state, federal, and private funding, and to leverage its resources into additional resources for the College, University, and State of Oklahoma.

Partnership -The College of Public Health is committed to fostering collegial productive partnerships with all stakeholders who share the vision of protecting and improving the public’s health.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.1: MISSION

1.1.c. One or more goal statements for each major function through which the school intends to attain its mission, including at a minimum, instruction, research and service.

Goal 1: Provide excellent education and life-long learning opportunities for public health practice professionals, public health research scientists, and health service organization leaders.

Goal 2: Achieve enhanced national recognition for research and scholarship in public health and for the translation of this research and scholarship into evidence-based public health practice with an emphasis on population based preventive approaches. These efforts will be aligned with the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center (OUHSC) strategic priorities in research related to diabetes, cancer, and infectious disease.

Goal 3: Contribute to resolving health disparities in Oklahoma including those due to socioeconomic status, ethnicity, race, and gender, particularly in the American Indian population.

Goal 4: Sustain and enhance cultural diversity among students, faculty, and staff.

Goal 5: Contribute to education, training, and research in Global Public Health.

These goals represent activities currently included in the 2011–2015 Strategic Plan. Progress against goal statements is monitored and evaluated through regular administrative means such as Executive Committee and Faculty meetings. The Plan is updated approximately every six months. Progress is regularly reported to the Dean of the College of Public Health. Goals 2 and 3 include service as well as research.

1.1.d. A set of measurable objectives with quantifiable indicators related to each goal statement as provided in Criterion 1.1.c. In some cases, qualitative indicators may be used as appropriate.

Each goal of the College’s 2011-2015 Strategic Plan has specific objectives with a mix of quantifiable and qualitative indicators. The qualitative indicators track progress in developing and sustaining high-priority projects and structures.

Objectives for Goal 1 –Excellent Education and Life-Long Learning

1.1 Achieve re-accreditation of the College for 7 years by the Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) at the time of re-accreditation in Spring 2015. (Reaccreditation Team) 1.2 Achieve re-accreditation of the MHA degree program by CAHME for the maximum time period at the time of re-accreditation in 2013. (S. Mattachione) (completed Spring 2014) 1.3 Achieve re-accreditation of the MS program in Industrial Hygiene by ABET for the maximum time period at the time of re-accreditation in 2012. (R. Lynch) (completed Summer 2012) 1.4 Develop and begin implementation of an Alternative Format for the Core Courses and the Certificate Program incorporating appropriate roles for weekend and on-line courses by Spring 2015. (D. Johnson) 1.5 Develop and implement an online elective course in American Indian Health by Summer 2014 (cross-cutting with College Strategic Plan Goal 3). (D. Boatright) 1.6 Develop and implement a class in Public Health Leadership in collaboration with the Oklahoma State Department of Health and the City-County Health Departments utilizing the HRSA PHTC grant. (D. Boatright) (taught in Summer 2014) 1.7 Ensure that all MPH degree programs include the CEPH required competencies by Fall 2011. (M. Phillips) (although this objective was first completed in 2012, as course content is updated and faculty teaching assignments are changed we will continue to monitor and review this objective each semester as part of our continuous quality improvement effort)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.1: MISSION

1.8 Obtain commitments for 10 new scholarships with funding for each one between $25,000 and $50,000 by Summer 2015. (G. Raskob) 1.9 Revise the DrPH Program to focus on leadership and management training for existing senior public health professionals by Fall 2012. (S. Walston) (completed Spring 2012) 1.10 Maintain a database for ongoing documentation of career outcomes of recent graduates and alumni. (D. Gates) 1.11 Recruit a minimum of five FTE resident faculty in Tulsa, one representing each core discipline to support offering College programs. (G. Raskob) 1.12 Conduct at least one strategic fund-raising event each year. (G. Raskob) 1.13 Modernize a teaching laboratory to meet the curriculum needs of the specialty degree programs in OEH. (R. Lynch) 1.14 In partnership with the Oklahoma State Department of Health, increase the diversity of that agency’s workforce to represent the demographics of the state (cross-cutting with College Strategic Plan Goal 4). (G. Raskob)

Objectives for Goal 2 – Research and Scholarship

2.1 Recruit a sufficient number of new full-time faculty to attain the minimum of 50 as recommended by ASPH. (G. Raskob) 2.2 Increase the College annual extramural fund expenditures, as defined by ASPH/CEPH, by 20% from the FY10 level of approximately $7 million. (Faculty) 2.3 Continue the participation by College faculty on national study sections, grant review committees, and/or national or international boards or committees so that each Department averages two of these activities per FTE faculty each academic year. (Department Chairs) 2.4 Increase the number of peer-reviewed publications from the College and the number of presentations at professional conferences by faculty and their students by 20% from the 2010 levels (123 and 116, respectively), by Summer 2015. (Department Chairs) 2.5 Reduce salary compression through strategic budgeting at the department level and from increased funding so that senior faculty base salaries are maintained at the ASPH median for public Schools of Public Health. Review with each annual budget. (G. Raskob and Department Chairs) 2.6 Current public health issues relevant to the State of Oklahoma will be addressed in concert with the Oklahoma Health Improvement Plan (OHIP). The College will respond, as necessary, to any requests by the legislators. (G. Raskob) 2.7 Continue current communication campaign on College initiatives including regular submission of op- ed pieces to local and national print media, OU Public Health magazine, and e-mail communication to alumni and friends of the College. (D. Bratzler)

Objectives for Goal 3 – Health Disparities

3.1 Maintain three partnership agreements with tribal partners on one or more topics of public health workforce development, prevention research, and/or translation of research into practice. (D. Boatright) 3.2 Develop and implement on online elective course in American Indian Health by Summer 2014 (cross-cutting with College Strategic Plan Goal 1). (D. Boatright) 3.3 Maintain a partnership agreement with a Historically Black College or University and/or African American community organization on one or more aspects of public health workforce development, prevention research, and/or translation of research into practice. (D. Boatright) 3.4 Establish a partnership agreement with a Hispanic community organization and/or a Hispanic serving university on one or more aspects of public health workforce development, prevention research, and/or translation of research into practice by Summer 2014. (D. Boatright)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.1: MISSION

Objectives for Goal 4 - Diversity

4.1 Increase the proportion of American Indian students within the College to 15% or more of the student population by Summer 2015. (R. Howell) 4.2 Increase and maintain the proportion of other qualified minority students within the student population to equal or exceed the respective proportions within the demographics of Oklahoma by Summer 2015. (R. Howell) 4.3 Maintain the proportion of international students within the College at 10% to 15% of the student population (cross-cutting with College Strategic Plan Goal 5). (R. Howell) 4.4 Identify and implement, by Summer 2015, strategies to increase the number of qualified minority applicants for faculty within the College. (Department Chairs) 4.5 Identify and implement strategies, by Summer 2015, to increase the number of qualified minority applicants for staff within the College. (D. Debus) 4.6 Develop and submit a plan to the Oklahoma State Department of Health to increase the diversity of the agency’s workforce (cross-cutting with College Strategic Plan Goal 1). (G. Raskob) (completed Summer 2012)

Objectives for Goal 5 – Global Public Health

5.1 Maintain the proportion of international students within the College at 10% to 15% of the student population (cross-cutting with College Strategic Plan Goal 4). (R. Howell) 5.2 Maintain two to three extramurally-funded projects in global public health within the College by June, 2015. The projects may include one or more of the following: training, capacity-building, and/or research in a global location. (J. Regens) 5.3 Include at least one Public Health Grand Rounds on a Global Health topic each year. (G. Raskob) 5.4 Sustain opportunities for students to undertake the Public Health practicum in international locations on contemporary Global Health issues. (R. Howell) 5.5 Sustain an elective course in Global Public Health. (J. Regens)

1.1.e. Description of the manner through which the mission, values, goals and objectives were developed, including a description of how various specific stakeholder groups were involved in their development.

The College’s mission, vision, and values, are considered to have some permanency, however they are subject to review, evaluation, assessment and modification during each five year cycle when we engage in the recurring strategic planning process and the preparation of forward looking goals and objectives. The goals and objectives developed during each planning cycle include extensive consultation with a broad range of stakeholders. For example, the 2011-2015 Strategic Plan was developed as follows:

1. A College “self-study” process was initiated in May, 2010 with the appointment of a self-study coordinator and the start of a self-study work group. 2. A town hall meeting was convened by the College Faculty Board in August, 2010 to discuss current issues in the life of the College. 3. In November, 2010, the College self-study work group reviewed and revised the previous strategic plan in preparation for the CEPH site visit in 2013. 4. A series of briefings with senior University administrative leaders, community health partners, all College faculty, staff, students, alumni, and the College advisory board began in December, 2010 and continued through spring, 2011. The first briefing was with the State Health Commissioner and Oklahoma City/County Health Director to obtain their perspectives and suggestions concerning the public health workforce, College graduates, and collaboration.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.1: MISSION

5. A meeting was held with the OUHSC Senior Vice President and Provost and OUHSC Vice Provost for Health Sciences in December, 2010 to discuss goals for the College and the strategic planning process and to solicit input. 6. A strategic planning meeting of the College Executive Committee was held in January, 2011 to discuss the strategic plan, including a SWOT analysis, and to seek advisory review and comments. 7. A strategic planning meeting, including a SWOT analysis, for all College Faculty was held in January, 2011 to provide opportunity for discussion and input. 8. Based on the prior meetings, the draft of the strategic plan was redistributed to the College Faculty with opportunity for input and separate follow-up meetings with the Faculty of each Department in January, 2011 and continued as needed. 9. A draft of the strategic plan was distributed to the College of Public Health Student Association (COPHSA) elected officers, and to all College students, with opportunity for input, followed by a meeting that included a SWOT analysis with the COPHSA in February, 2011. 10. A one-half day meeting with the external College Advisory Board was held in March, 2011, followed by meetings with selected members of the Advisory Board for additional input, comment, and recommendations. 11. A draft of the strategic plan was distributed to College staff, with opportunity for input followed by a meeting that included a SWOT analysis with the staff in March, 2011. 12. A draft of the strategic plan was distributed to the OKC Area Intertribal Health Board, Indian Health Services, and Tribal Partners, with opportunity for input. 13. A draft of the strategic plan was distributed to the College Alumni Association Board, with opportunity for input, followed by a meeting in April, 2011. 14. Final review and input of the strategic plan was conducted by the College Executive Committee in May, 2011. 15. The Strategic Plan was updated and published on the College website in June, 2011 to achieve widespread distribution and to solicit public comments.

The new planning cycle began during the summer 2014, one year prior to the conclusion of the current strategic plan. The new plan will be implemented on July 1, 2015 for the 5 year period ending June 30, 2020. The planning process included multiple iterations of the draft of a plan document based on input from various internal and external stakeholders and constituencies. The plan has received multiple review steps and modifications consistent with meetings with faculty, students, external partners and the College leadership team.

1.1.f. Description of how the mission, values, goals and objectives are made available to the school’s constituent groups, including the general public, and how they are routinely reviewed and revised to ensure relevance.

The mission, vision, and values are distributed in written form to all faculty, staff, and students via the College of Public Health Student Bulletin (Resource File). The core values are displayed in a continuous broadcast on the two plasma screens that provide communication to the College community and are disseminated to attendees at the University Public Health Grand Rounds. The values are also discussed at student orientation and in meetings with the College of Public Health Student Association leadership. The Strategic Plan, including mission, values, goals and objectives, is provided to the general public on the College web site (http://coph.ouhsc.edu/about/values.aspx). The values are also included in each edition of the College’s magazine “OU Public Health” (Resource File), which is distributed to all College faculty, staff, advisory board, and alumni. Monitoring of the strategic plan’s goals and objectives occurs regularly at several levels. First, each objective has specific individuals designated to lead the implementation and completion of the objective by the target date. Second, the College of Public Health Executive Committee monitors progress toward achieving the objectives and goals. Third, the College of Public Health Advisory Board monitors progress towards the objectives and goals through its annual meeting. Fourth, monitoring of progress toward

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.1: MISSION

selected objectives and goals occurs at the departmental level through departmental meetings. Finally, additional monitoring of selected objectives and goals may also occur through the standing committees of the Faculty Board (see also Section 1.5 Governance).

Periodic revision of the goals and objectives occurs through the evaluation procedures and planning processes outlined in Section 1.2 Evaluation. The Associate Dean for Planning and Evaluation takes primary responsibility for leading the process. Extensive consultation with a broad range of stakeholders occurs in a manner similar to that outlined above.

1.1.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The College has defined core values that guide the school in fostering professional public health values, concepts and ethical principles and these values have been articulated to faculty, staff, students, and external stakeholders. The College has implemented a highly structured and broadly inclusive strategic planning process that repeatedly involves faculty, staff, students, community partners, alumni, and other stakeholders in the planning process. Goals and objectives have been explicitly stated, with measurable outcomes, identified leaders, target dates, and a system for evaluating progress toward the College's goals and objectives.

Weaknesses/challenges: The new, expansive, and widely inclusive process of developing, preparing and finalizing a strategic plan for the college presents us with several challenges. As we redirect the College culture to self-assessment and continuous quality improvement, we must candidly identify areas requiring improvement based on a comparison of our recent performance to the objectives in the existing strategic plan. We have already identified items in the existing plan that were not achieved, not clearly articulated, or not appropriately measurable. One example, monitoring and measuring faculty service, will be better described and quantified in the new plan. This introspective process is occurring among all stakeholder groups as we collect information and observations from various constituencies about the proposed content of the 2016-2020 plan.

Plans: The College is deeply engaged in the strategic planning process for the next five-year cycle beginning July 1, 2015 and concluding on June 30, 2020. Goals and objectives for the 2016 – 2020 strategic plan will address opportunities for improvement identified in this self-study.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

1.2 EVALUATION

The school shall have an explicit process for monitoring and evaluating its overall efforts against its mission, goals and objectives; for assessing the school’s effectiveness in serving its various constituencies; and for using evaluation results in ongoing planning and decision making to achieve its mission. As part of the evaluation process, the school must conduct an analytical self- study that analyzes performance against the accreditation criteria defined in this document.

1.2.a Description of the evaluation processes used to monitor progress against objectives defined in Criterion 1.1.d, including identification of the data systems and responsible parties associated with each objective and with the evaluation process as a whole. If these are common across all objectives, they need be described only once. If systems and responsible parties vary by objective or topic area, sufficient information must be provided to identify the systems and responsible party for each.

The College uses a variety of procedures, methods and processes in monitoring and evaluating its progress against its defined objectives as shown in Exhibit 1.2.a and discussed in detail in the subsections below. Sources of information used in the process of evaluation and assessment include faculty, current students, student leaders, recent graduates, employers of recent graduates, alumni association members, local and national external reviewers, and community partners.

Exhibit 1.2.a Mechanisms for Evaluation of Performance Related Objectives as listed in Section 1.1 (d) Student Each didactic course is anonymously evaluated Objectives 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, Electronic electronically by enrolled students at the mid-point and 1.6 Course at the end of the semester. De-identified evaluation Evaluations comments are reviewed by the instructor, department chair, and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. Department Chairs discuss the evaluations with faculty when and as appropriate. Meeting with The elected Executive Committee of the College of Objectives 1.6, 5.2, 5.3, elected Student Public Health Student Association (COPHSA) meets Association monthly with the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Officers Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs, and Assistant Dean for Student Services, COPHSA Each year immediately prior to graduation the Associate Objectives 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 5.1, Annual SWOT Dean for Planning and Evaluation facilitates a meeting 5.4, 5.5 Analysis of COPHSA leaders and students for the purpose of conducting a SWOT analysis related to student experiences, perceptions and observations of the academic year just completed. The results of the analysis are compiled by the students and submitted to the Dean for discussion and review at an Executive Committee meeting.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

Exhibit 1.2.a Mechanisms for Evaluation of Performance Related Objectives as listed in Section 1.1 (d) Graduating Each graduating student is asked to complete an exit Objectives 1.6, 1.7 student exit survey regarding their educational experience. This is surveys requested at the successful completion of the practicum presentation. Results of the surveys are viewed by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Assistant Dean for Student Services, and are maintained in a database. Alumni Focus The College has conducted alumni focus groups to Objectives 1.6, 1.10 Groups obtain information from recent graduates regarding competencies, perceptions about the program of study, and preparedness for a career in public health. See section 2.7.e. Prospective In 2013 the College initiated a prospective follow-up of Objectives 1.6, 1.10 Follow-up of all all graduates to document their career outcomes. This is Graduates done by a telephone and/or email survey which asks several questions and collects information about the graduate’s career, and employment. These surveys are continuous and include attempting to contact the graduate at 3,6,12,18,24,30 and 36 months after graduation. Employer, Employers of recent graduates are asked to participate Objectives 1.6, 1.10, 1.14, external in structured interviews and/or surveys regarding how 2.6, 2.7, 3.1, 3.3, 3.4, 4.4, stakeholder well the graduates were prepared to perform their work. 4.5, 4.6 and public health agency partner interviews College of The COPH Advisory Board meets once a year and is Objectives 1.8, 2.6, 3.1, 3.3, Public Health comprised of representatives of alumni, public health 4.4, 4.6 Advisory Board agencies and boards, health care organizations and associations, community groups, business, philanthropic organizations, the media, and other stakeholder groups. Faculty Annual Faculty are required to submit an annual report every Objectives 2.3, 2.4 Reports January summarizing their accomplishments in the previous calendar year. Aggregated performance data are used to evaluate progress toward completion of College and departmental objectives. Other COPH Committees, Boards, and Mechanisms for Evaluation Executive The COPH Executive Committee is comprised of the Objectives 1.5, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, Committee dean, associate deans, assistant deans, department 1.12, 2.1, 2.2, 2.5, 4.1, 4.2, chairs, the Chair of the Faculty Board, and two elected 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6 student representatives. The Committee meets monthly to discuss progress of the College in meeting its strategic goals and objectives.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

Exhibit 1.2.a Mechanisms for Evaluation of Performance Related Objectives as listed in Section 1.1 (d) Strategic Plan Twice each year the College collects and updates the Objectives 1.9, 2.1, 2.4, 3.1, updates strategic planning document with progress reports, 4.6 status updates and modifications or revisions of the original document. Annual State of The Faculty meets annually with the Dean to review the Objectives 2.1, 2.3, 2.4 the College state of the College and the status of the strategic plan. Meetings This meeting provides an opportunity for faculty and administration to jointly form a common vision for the direction of the College. These meetings include a presentation by the Dean regarding the progress and status of the strategic plan’s goals. The faculty has a forum to provide input and comment, and suggest modifications and alternatives as appropriate based on circumstances and recent developments. Department- The Dean regularly attends department faculty meetings Objectives 1.4, 1.5, 1.8, 1.9, Dean Strategic to discuss the topics of interest to the faculty including 1.11, 1.13, 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.5, Planning the status of the strategic plan. 3.2 Discussions Faculty Board The Faculty Board advises on policies and procedures Objectives 2.1, 2.3, 2.4 related to academic matters, e.g. curricular content and faculty governance. Associate Dean In a continuing effort to prioritize the evaluation process, Responsible for the for Planning the Dean appointed an Associate Dean to coordinate development, preparation and Evaluation the strategic planning, measurement of goals, and and monitoring of the continuous evaluation of the College’s programs and strategic plan and the initiatives. planning process Strategic Since the current College strategic plan concludes in Objectives 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, planning June 2015, a strategic planning process began in Fall 2.5 process 2014 to collect input from stakeholders, inform interested constituencies and develop a strategic plan for academic years 2016-2020.

1.2.b. Description of how the results of the evaluation processes described in Criterion 1.2.a are monitored, analyzed, communicated and regularly used by managers responsible for enhancing the quality of programs and activities

1.2.b(i) Student Electronic Course Evaluations. These mid-point and end of semester anonymous electronic evaluations are reviewed by the course instructor, the department chair, and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, and are used to obtain feedback from students on course strengths and opportunities for improvement. Such comments may lead to course-specific changes by the instructor. The Associate and Assistant Deans for Academic Affairs review the evaluations to identify challenges that may span all academic programs, such as infrastructure limitations that may be affecting teaching effectiveness.

1.2.b(ii) Meetings with elected Student Association Officers. These monthly meetings provide the dean and/or senior administrative faculty and staff with feedback from the elected student leadership

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

regarding the College’s academic programs and student support services. The meetings are informal, with no established agenda, and minutes are not kept. Rather, they are intended to provide an opportunity for free discussion of recent and upcoming events and initiatives and of student leadership concerns if any. This information is factored into both short term operational planning and longer-term strategic planning, particularly regarding curriculum design and student support. A recent initiative based on such discussion was a change to the Faculty Bylaws to assign the College Awards Committee responsibility to summarize student scholarship and awards information, including associated policies and procedures, and make these more conveniently available to students (at http://coph.ouhsc.edu/current/scholarships.aspx ).

1.2.b(iii) COPHSA Annual SWOT Analysis. Each year the Associate Dean for Planning and Evaluation facilitates a meeting with the students to obtain their comments and observations in a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats session which is later reported to the Executive Committee, the Department Chairs and the faculty.

1.2.b(iv) Graduating Student Exit Surveys. Results of the exit surveys are viewed annually by the Associate and Assistant Deans for Academic Affairs, and the Assistant Dean for Student Services. Results may be discussed with the department chairs or with individual chairs as appropriate. Written comments and annotations from graduating students are used to inform College leadership about issues important to students and which merit attention and implementation as feasible and appropriate.

1.2.b(v) Alumni Focus Groups. Focus groups represent yet another method recently initiated by the College leadership to obtain useful and meaningful information from recent graduates about their professional performance and thereby measure and assess the performance of the College in preparing them for a professional career path in public health. Initial groups were led by a graduate who serves as facilitator. Information obtained during these meetings was recorded on an anonymous basis. For example, responses received from these groups indicated the usefulness of certain courses in the curriculum, suggestions of areas to improve, and curricular design recommendations for added emphasis in certain subject areas. These results were reported to the Executive Committee and thereby distributed to the Department Chairs for consideration and appropriate action. On the advice of Health Promotion Sciences faculty, a more rigorous focus group methodology will be undertaken in subsequent data collection.

1.2.b(vi) Prospective Follow-up of Graduates. Historically the college conducted surveys of alumni approximately one to two years after graduation to obtain information about how successful they were in obtaining employment directly related to their professional training and on how well they feel their degree program prepared them for the work they were required to do. This information, in combination with input from external advisors, provided either a validation of current programs or identified areas of possible improvement. In past years the departments performed their own surveys and utilized the related information internally, but several years ago the college leadership decided to transition to a centralized prospective follow-up that involves surveys of graduates at 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 and 36 months after graduation. This has resulted in a much improved response rate.

Currently the College uses a prospective follow-up telephone survey to accurately and comprehensively collect timely information on graduates. A copy of the survey instrument is provided in the Resource File. It serves as the tool used to collect longitudinal career and personal information from recent graduates at various intervals after they complete their studies at the College. This information is used to inform the Dean, the Associate Deans, the Chairs and the faculty about the experiences of our graduates as they pursue their professional careers in public health. It is also used to inform the College leadership and the faculty regarding any modifications, adjustments or enhancements that may be appropriate for the curriculum or teaching and learning methods used in the College. See also section 2.7.c.

1.2.b(vii) Employers, External Stakeholders and Public Health Agency Partners. Through the College’s strong and long-term working relationships with state and local public health agencies, the

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

leadership of the College is afforded access to input and advice from public health leaders and decision- makers. Examples include the Commissioner of Public Health of the State of Oklahoma, the Directors of the City/County Health Departments for both Oklahoma City and the City of Tulsa, the leadership at the Oklahoma Health Care Authority, senior leaders at local agencies such as Variety Care, and state and local legislators. These sources of information have led to workforce planning initiatives, curriculum review and modification, and changes in the College’s teaching and learning methods. Additionally, as a result of the self-study process, the College has begun conducting periodic surveys of supervisors of recent graduates, which together with structured interviews with middle managers representing employers. will provide more specific information on the performance of our graduates in the workplace.

1.2.b(viii) The College Advisory Board and Departmental External Advisory Committees. Input from employers, departmental external advisory committees and the College’s advisory board receive close consideration in the College and departmental strategic planning processes. Group membership (Resource File) is structured to provide the broadest range of representation from stakeholders in public health practice, state and tribal government, education, charitable and research foundations, the media, alumni, and others. The College’s Advisory Board provides comment on the strategic plan and the initiatives and proposals by the College to interact with the local communities and statewide to address public health issues and concerns. As a recent example, in August 2014, the members of the Advisory Board participated in a SWOT analysis as part of the college’s strategic planning process related to the preparation and development of the strategic plan for 2016-2020.

1.2.b(ix) Faculty Annual Reports. In addition to providing departmental chairs data on the progress of faculty toward completion of their individual goals for the previous year, aggregated data from the reports are used to measure progress on College-wide objectives. For instance, measures of research and service productivity in reported in sections 3.1 and 3.2, respectively, were based on data extracted from faculty annual reports.

1.2.b(x) Other College Mechanisms for Evaluation. The College actively engages other committees, boards and work groups to address and consider the evaluation of progress related to the strategic plan and the strategic planning process. These include the review by the College’s leadership in the Executive Committee where there are discussions about the strategic plan, the planning process, any updates to the plan, progress regarding the goals and objectives and other related topics for consideration by the leadership group. There are also strategic planning discussions at the Faculty Board, in meetings held by the Dean with the Associate Deans and the Department Chairs, and in annual “State of the College” meetings conducted by the Dean with the entire faculty.

1.2.c. Data regarding the school’s performance on each measurable objective described in Criterion 1.1.d must be provided for each of the last three years. To the extent that these data duplicate those required under other criteria (e.g., 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 2.7, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1 and 4.3), the school should parenthetically identify the criteria where the data also appear. See CEPH Outcome Measures Exhibit.

Condensed data tracking performance on the College’s Strategic Plan objectives are presented in Exhibit 1.2.c. The complete Strategic Plan progress report, with extended narrative for each year, is provided in the Resource File.

Exhibit 1.2.c Outcome Measures for Fiscal Years 2012-2014 Outcome Measure Target FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 1.1: Achieve re-accreditation of 7 years In progress. In progress. In progress. the College for 7 years by the (2015-2022) Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) at the time of reaccreditation.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

Exhibit 1.2.c Outcome Measures for Fiscal Years 2012-2014 Outcome Measure Target FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 1.2: Achieve re-accreditation of 6 years In progress. Site visit Reaccredited the M.H.A. degree program by (2014-2020) scheduled for for 3 years. CAHME for the maximum time Fall 2013. period at the time of reaccreditation. 1.3: Achieve re-accreditation of 6 years In progress. Re-accredited Completed the M.S. program in Industrial (2012-2018) for 6 years. Hygiene by ABET for the maximum time period. 1.4: Develop and begin Begin to Developed and Revised OEH piloted implementation of an Alternative implement by began to objective and online core Format for the Core Courses and Spring 2011 implement plan plan to offer course taught the Certificate Program for original core courses fall 2013. incorporating appropriate roles for objective online once a weekend and on-line courses. (Alternative year. Adopted Format for GoToMeeting General MPH). as distance software. 1.5: Develop and implement an Complete In progress. Completed Alternative online elective course in American and through a new delivery format Indian Health (cross-cutting with implement by course under College Strategic Plan Goal 3) June 2014 developed by discussion. Carson Henderson. 1.6: Develop and implement a Complete Class was Course in Course in Class in Public Health Leadership and incorporated. public health public health in collaboration with the Oklahoma implement by leadership was leadership was State Department of Health and December presented to presented to the City-County Health 2011 OCCHD. OSDH. Departments utilizing the HRSA Outreach to PHTC grant. THD. 1.7: Ensure that all M.P.H. degree 100% by Incorporated Amended Streamlined programs include the CEPH June 2012 competencies competencies. competencies required competencies. Gap analysis in Gap analysis in 100% (see progress progress. section 2.6.d) 1.8: Obtain commitments for 10 Offer 22 18 scholarships 19 scholarships 22 new scholarships with funding for scholarships offered offered scholarships each one between $25,000 and by 2015 offered $50,000. (See also Criterion 1.6) 1.9: Revise the DrPH Program to Complete by Approved by Admitted 3 Completed focus on leadership and December Regents 2012. students under management training for existing 2011 the new senior public health professionals. program in Fall 2012.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

Exhibit 1.2.c Outcome Measures for Fiscal Years 2012-2014 Outcome Measure Target FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 1.10: Maintain a database for Maintain Maintained by Continuous Reached 50- ongoing documentation of career R. Howell phone survey 87% of outcomes of recent graduates and of graduates graduates from alumni. through 36 Fall 2010 to months post- Summer 2013. graduation implemented in January 2013. 1.11: Recruit a minimum of five 5 FTE by 3.5 FTE 3.5 FTE 3 FTE FTE resident faculty in Tulsa, one June 2013 representing each core discipline to support offering college programs. (See also Criterion 1.7) 1.12: Conduct at least one 1 per year Deferred 2 meetings with 2 events/efforts strategic fund-raising event each HAP Alumni in (annual ACHE year. the Dallas area. Alumni reception and grass-roots phone calling). 1.13: Modernize a teaching Complete by OEH allowed to Updated Capital laboratory to meet the curriculum June 2013 retain state equipment improvement needs of the specialty degree funds for purchased. requests programs in OEH. equipment. ongoing 1.14: Increase the diversity of the Implement Agreement 8 students Updated agency’s workforce to represent agreement signed in were admitted contract with the demographics of the state. with OSDH September into the college OSDH stating (cross-cutting with College by June 2013 2011 to recruit and hired by socio- Strategic Plan Goal 4) Native OSDH under economic American and this program in status as the Hispanic Fall 2012. SQ criteria for students into 759 has admission. MPH or resulted in a Program had. Certificate temporary hold 4 graduates, 2 program. to this program. dropouts, 9 continuing. 2.1: Recruit a sufficient number of 50 full time 42 full-time 43 full-time 41 full-time new full-time faculty to attain the primary primary faculty primary faculty primary faculty minimum of 50 as recommended faculty by as of fall 2012 as of fall 2013 as of fall 2014 by ASPH. (See also Criterion 1.7) June 2015 2.2: Increase the College annual $8,350,000 $7,358,019 $7,048,521 $6,216,195 extramural fund expenditures, as by June 2015 defined by ASPH/CEPH, by 20% from the FY10 level of approximately $7 million. (See also Criterion 1.6)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

Exhibit 1.2.c Outcome Measures for Fiscal Years 2012-2014 Outcome Measure Target FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 2.3: Continue the participation by 2 activities BSE 3.4 BSE 2.8 BSE 2.8 College faculty on national study per FTE HAP 2.0 HAP 2.7 HAP 3.7 sections, grant review committees, HPS 4.1 HPS 4.6 HPS 6.8 and/or national or international OEH 7.2 OEH 5.4 OEH 3.9 boards or committees, so that each (CY 2012) (CY2013) (CY 2014) Department averages two of these activities per FTE faculty each academic year. (See also Criteria 3.2 and 4.1) 2.4: Increase the number of peer- 148 116 120 126 reviewed publications from the publications, publications + publications + publications + College and the number of 139 137 108 119 presentations at professional presentations presentations presentations presentations conferences by faculty and their by June 2015 (CY 2012) (CY 2013) (CY 2014) students by 20% from the 2010 levels (123 and 116, respectively) (See also Criteria 3.1 and 4.1) 2.5: Reduce salary compression Review each Central funding Department Department through strategic budgeting at the budget period requested. level use where level use department level and from feasible of "Y" where feasible increased funding so that senior component and of "Y" faculty base salaries are salary freed by component maintained at the ASPH median retirements. No and salary for public schools of Public Health. central funding freed by Review with each annual budget. available. retirements. No (See also Criterion 1.6) central funding available. 2.6: Current public health issues Ongoing as Briefing of Tabled Objective relevant to the State of Oklahoma requested President Pro revised will be addressed in concert with Tem the Oklahoma Health Improvement Plan (OHIP). The college will respond, as necessary, to any requests by the legislators. 2.7: Continue current Maintain Changed the Added plasma Used communication campaign on responsible screens on the Facebook as a College initiatives including regular party to D. first floor that communication submission of op-ed pieces to local Bratzler have streaming method. and national print media, OU Public Health Represented at Public Health magazine or e-mail content the OHA communication to alumni and convention. friends of the College. Published college magazine 3.1: Maintain three partnership 3 agreements 3 agreements 4 agreements 4 agreements agreements with tribal partners on each year one or more topics of public health workforce development, prevention research, and/or translation of research into practice. (See also Criterion 1.8.b.)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

Exhibit 1.2.c Outcome Measures for Fiscal Years 2012-2014 Outcome Measure Target FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 3.2: Develop and implement an Complete In progress Completed Alternative online elective course in American and through a new delivery format Indian Health. (cross-cutting with implement by course under College Strategic Plan Goal 1) June 2014 developed by discussion. Carson Henderson. 3.3: Maintain a partnership Complete by Maintained Maintained Maintained agreement with a Historically Black 2011 and College or University and/or maintain African American community organization on one or more aspects of public health workforce development, prevention research, and/or translation of research into practice. 3.4: Establish a partnership Complete by In progress Partly Worked with agreement with a Hispanic June 2014 addressed by OCCHD to hire community organization and/or a the OSDH an experienced Hispanic serving university on one Diversity faculty member or more aspects of public health program. to work part- workforce development, prevention time in the research, and/or translation of Hispanic research into practice. community. 4.1: Increase the proportion of American Indian students within the College to 15% or more of the 15.0% 8.9% 9.0% 8.8% student population. (See also Criterion 1.8) 4.2: Increase and maintain the proportion of other qualified Asian 1.9% 7.1% 9.7% 12.4% minority students within the student population to equal or exceed the respective proportions within the Black 7.6% 12.4% 12.4% 13.1% demographics of Oklahoma. (See also Criterion 1.8) Hispanic 4.6% 5.7% 4.0% 9.3% 4.3: Maintain the proportion of international students within the College at 10% to 15% of the student population.(cross-cutting 10-15% 10.3% 10.7% 10.4% with College Strategic Plan Goal 5.1) (See also Criterion 1.8) 4.4: Identify and implement >1.75 per 8 minority 6 minority 4 minority strategies to increase the number search (FY applicants / applicants / applicants / of qualified minority applicants for 2011 7 searches 14 searches 5 searches faculty within the College. baseline) (1.14 minority (0.43 minority (0.8 minority (See also Criterion 1.8) applicants per applicants per applicants per search) search) search)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

Exhibit 1.2.c Outcome Measures for Fiscal Years 2012-2014 Outcome Measure Target FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 4.5: Identify and implement No baseline Deferred 3 minority 3 minority strategies to increase the number data applicants of 8 applicants of 6 of qualified minority applicants for available on new staff hired new staff hired staff within the College. staff in CY12 in CY13 (See also Criterion 1.8) applicants 4.6: Develop and submit a plan to Implement Agreement 8 students Updated the Oklahoma State Department of agreement signed in were admitted contract with Health to increase the diversity of with OSDH September into the college OSDH stating the agency's workforce. (cross- by June 2013 2011 to recruit and hired by socio- cutting with College Strategic Plan Native OSDH under economic Goal 1) American and this program in status as the Hispanic Fall 2012. SQ criteria for students into 759 resulted in admission. MPH or a temporary Program had. Certificate hold to this 4 graduates, 2 program. program. dropouts, 9 continuing. 5.1: Maintain the proportion of international students with the College at 10% to 15% of the 10-15% 10.3% 10.7% 10.4% student population. (cross-cutting with College Strategic Plan Goal 4) (See also Criterion 1.8) 5.2: Maintain two to three extramurally-funded projects in global public health within the College. The projects may include 2 each year 2 2 2 one or more of the following: training, capacity-building, and/or research in a global location. 5.3: Include at least one Public 1 each year O. Ray Kling Deferred There were Health Grand Rounds on a Global Lecture two Public Health topic each year. cancelled due Health Grand to weather Rounds on a Global Health topic this year. 5.4: Sustain opportunities for Plan Option Option Option students to undertake the Public completed available available available Health practicum in international 2011; locations on contemporary Global changed to Health issues. “Sustain” 5.5: Sustain an elective course in Sustain Course Offered in fall Offered in fall Global Public Health. approved; 2012. 2014. changed objective from “implement” to “sustain”.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

1.2.d. Description of the manner in which the self-study document was developed, including effective opportunities for input by important school constituents, including institutional officers, administrative staff, faculty, students, alumni and representatives of the public health community.

The College self-study document was prepared with input solicited from all faculty of the College. A Self- Study Committee was structured in 2010 to take the lead in interpreting the new accreditation criteria, inculcating competency based education into the College’s curriculum, assembling the necessary data, and developing the initial draft sections for faculty review and comment. The approach was for one or two writers with a depth of experience in particular topic areas to develop drafts of the individual report sections, with subsequent review and completion of sections by small groups of faculty identified as having knowledge and interest in those particular areas. The final level of development was review of the entire document by all faculty members and incorporation of their recommended additions, changes, and deletions. The entire process was open and all faculty members were repeatedly invited to participate in any aspect and stage of the draft development in which they were interested.

The initial stage of development was completed in 2014 with preparation of the initial draft. The draft was sent to CEPH for preliminary review prior to a courtesy consultation visit in September 2014. The draft was revised based on comments received during the consultation visit, with participation by the department chairs. The revised draft was circulated to College faculty, students, and staff for two rounds of review and comments, which were used in preparation of the final draft. The final draft was circulated to the College’s Advisory Board, which represents a broad range of external stakeholders, in October 2014 for their feedback. The final Preliminary Self Study for CEPH review was submitted to CEPH. Hard copies of the submitted Preliminary Self Study report were sent to each member of the College’s Advisory Board and other stakeholders. Electronic copies were sent to all faculty and advisory board members, and an electronic copy was posted on the College’s web site for ongoing review and comment by faculty and the general public. The Dean conducted one-to-one meetings about the self-study with the Oklahoma Commissioner of Health and the two City-County Health Department Directors. The self-study process was aggressively inclusive in that all faculty, as well as external stakeholders, had multiple opportunities to contribute to the document as it was being developed.

This final self-study report incorporates the most recent available data as well as additional narrative information prompted by comments received from CEPH, external stakeholders, and internal parties.

1.2.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The College has undertaken and documented in this self-study the various methods and processes 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. The processes are continually reviewed and refined as the College adapts to a model based on objective outcome measures and continuous quality improvement to planning and evaluation. This approach has been embedded in our school consciousness and is a routine part of our regular process related to education, research and service. The targets for most of the specific objectives and outcome measures defined in the plan have been met.

Weaknesses/challenges: We are committed to utilizing quantitative and qualitative metrics that will guide our work and measure our progress. These changes take time and will require leadership and coordination; this will be a challenging time of change and self-assessment, and may include modifications and corrections to our goals and objectives. Some targets for a few outcome measures defined in Exhibit 1.2.e were not met (specifically outcome measures 1.11, 1.13, 2.1, and 2.2). The targets for these outcome measures were recognized to be “stretch targets”. The reason for not

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.2: EVALUATION

achieving the target was primarily due to resources in terms of state/university funds for faculty recruitment (1.11, 2.1), and capital improvements (measure 1.13). The challenge to achieving the target for outcome measure 2.2 was reduced extramural funding, primarily federal, and heavily influenced by the “sequester” implemented by Congress.

Plans: Our plan is to sustain a culture of continuous quality improvement. Several years ago the Dean initiated the development and implementation of a different approach to reaccreditation and our preparation of the self-study document. This included changing the planning process and the evaluation of the college. The strategic plan and the planning process are now continuously under review, unlike the prior approach of intermittent review and in depth scrutiny only prior to reaccreditation. As part of that change, the organization’s culture has become more focused on continuous improvement, which includes regular and recurring evaluation of progress related to the strategic plan. As examples, this change is evidenced in the discussions at the Executive Committee, the biannual progress report on each objective in the strategic plan, the appointment of an Associate Dean for Planning and Evaluation, and the recently developed data gathering tools designed to inform the organization about how and where to seek improvement. The College’s method of evaluation has also been changed, and it now includes more alumni data, information about current student performance, competency-based educational guidelines, and ongoing discussion about how the teaching, research and service activities can be improved.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.3: INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT

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.

1.3.a. A brief description of the institution in which the school is located, and the names of accrediting bodies (other than CEPH) to which the institution responds.

The University of Oklahoma (OU) is accredited by the Commission on Institutions of Higher Education of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools. It has three campuses: Norman, the Health Sciences Center (OUHSC) in Oklahoma City, and the OU Schusterman Center in Tulsa.

The OU Health Sciences Center is the cornerstone of the 300-acre Oklahoma Health Center, a complex of 28 public and private health care institutions, including the Oklahoma State Department of Health (OSDH). There are seven colleges on the OUHSC campus with a total of approximately 3,500 students and approximately 1,100 full-time and 300 part-time faculty. The seven colleges are Public Health, Medicine, Nursing, Pharmacy, Allied Health, Dentistry, and the Graduate College The Chief Academic Officer of the OUHSC campus is the Senior Vice President and Provost. The College of Public Health is an integral part of the OUHSC and has the same level of independence and status accorded to other colleges in the University of Oklahoma. Students and residents receive clinical training at on-site institutions including the OU Medical Center, Children’s Hospital at OU Medical Center and the Veterans’ Administration Medical Center.

Five of the seven health sciences colleges offer programs in Tulsa including the Colleges of Medicine, Nursing, Allied Health, Public Health and the Graduate College. The College of Public Health has offices at the Schusterman Center with full-time faculty and staff in residence, and our faculty, staff, and students based in Tulsa are integral to the College. Approximately 15% of the College student population is geographically based at the Tulsa Schusterman Center. All students in the College have the same rights and privileges, and all courses in Oklahoma City are open to enrollment by students based in Tulsa who may wish to make the 1.5 hour drive.

The complete list of accrediting bodies for the Health Science Center is provided in the Resource File. In addition to CEPH, some programs of the college have earned accreditation within their specialties. The Master of Health Administration degree program received a 3 year accreditation decision in May of 2014 from the Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Management Education (CAHME). The MS degree programs in Industrial Hygiene and Industrial Hygiene/Environmental Health Sciences have been accredited by the Applied Science Accreditation Commission (ASAC) of ABET. This reaccreditation was received in August of 2012 and is applicable until September 2018. A copy of the most recent ABET self- study report is included in the Resource File.

1.3.b One or more organizational charts of the university indicating the school’s relationship to the other components of the institution, including reporting lines.

Exhibit 1.3.b gives the organizational structure of the OUHSC. The Senior Vice President and Provost, Dr. Dewayne Andrews, is the Chief Academic Officer who reports directly to the President of the university, who in turn reports to the University of Oklahoma Board of Regents. The OU Regents are appointed by the governor of the state. The activities of the OU Board of Regents and university administration are guided by the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education (one of whom is a member of the College of Public Health Advisory Board).

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.3: INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT

The coordinating forum for administrators at the OUHSC is the Deans' Council, convened monthly and conducted and chaired by the Provost. The Dean's Council is comprised of the Provost, Vice President for Planning and Administrative Affairs, Vice President for Research, Vice President for Administration and Finance, Vice Provost for Health Sciences, Vice Provost for Academic Affairs and Faculty Development, and the deans of the seven colleges. The deans report directly to the Provost and are responsible for all administrative and academic activities in the colleges. In addition, through the Deans' Council, the deans serve in advisory, strategic planning, and decision-making capacities. The health sciences programs in Tulsa are also under the administration of the deans of their respective colleges.

Exhibit 1.3.b OUHSC Organization Chart

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.3: INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT

1.3.c. Description of the school’s level of autonomy and authority regarding the following:

– Budgetary authority and decisions relating to resource allocation

– Lines of accountability, including access to higher-level university officials

– Personnel recruitment, selection and advancement, including faculty and staff

– Academic standards and policies, including establishment and oversight of curricula

1.3.c(1) Budgeting and Resource Allocation

For budgetary purposes, the OUHSC is independent of the Norman campus. Budgetary decisions across the Health Sciences Center are made by the Provost in consultation with the senior administrative officers, with the Deans' Council serving the Provost in advisory and decision-making capacities.

The Dean, in consultation with the department Chairs, is responsible for administering the College's budget. The College shares many centralized functions/services provided by the OUHSC including maintenance, security, and development. The process for budget allocation from the university to the College and the internal College process for allocation to the departments are provided in section 1.5.

1.3.c(i) Lines of Accountability

The College is an independent unit of the OUHSC and has prerogatives with respect to self-governance including budgeting and resource allocation; personnel recruitment and advancement; and establishment of academic standards and policies. The Dean reports directly to the Provost; he does not report through any intermediate administrator. The Dean is a member of the Deans' Council and has the same status as the deans of other colleges in the university. The structure of the College within the OUHSC provides certain essential advantages. The chain of command and limited span of control permits rapid review and decision making. The geographic location maximizes opportunities for collaboration and cooperation with other professional agencies, the Oklahoma State Department of Health, and the offices of the state government. Collaboration with other colleges and institutions is ongoing in research and teaching. The College maintains a productive collegial relationship with all colleges, with the collaborations being particularly strong with the Colleges of Medicine, Allied Health, and the Graduate College.

1.3.c(ii) Recruitment, Selection, and Advancement of Faculty and Staff

The university follows all the laws and regulations regarding affirmative action, as well as all of the laws of the State of Oklahoma. Recruitment, appointment, and advancement of faculty and staff in the college are initiated at the department/office level in accordance with policies established in the Faculty Handbook and the Staff Handbook (Resource File), respectively. Faculty recruitment and appointment in the College are initiated by the academic unit through the Dean to the Provost and to the President who presents recommendations to the Board of Regents for final approval. Staff appointment, and recommendations for re-classification, promotion, and/or transfer of staff are initiated by the department/office and first approved by the Dean and then reviewed and approved by Personnel Services, an office under the Vice President for Administrative Affairs.

Criteria for faculty tenure and promotion are described in the Faculty Handbook (Resource File). The College has established its tenure and promotion requirements within the guidelines provided by the university. Tenure and promotion actions originate in the departments/academic units, according to OUHSC procedures. Recommendations regarding faculty promotion are made by the Department, through the Department Chair, to the Dean who refers each department's recommendation to the College Promotion and Tenure Committee. When the Dean receives a recommendation from the College Promotion and Tenure Committee for actions regarding promotion, the Dean forwards a recommendation and the complete dossier to the Provost. For tenure cases, the Dean submits his recommendation and

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.3: INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT

the complete dossier to the OUHSC Campus Tenure Committee which forwards its recommendation to the Provost. The Provost then forwards his recommendation to the President who then makes a recommendation to the Board of Regents for final approval.

1.3.c(iii) Academic Standards and Policies

Academic standards and policies are determined by the departments with approval of the College's Academic Program Committee, Faculty Board, and the Dean. College faculty, department chairs, the Assistant Dean for Student Services, the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, the Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs, the Dean, and (regarding MS and PhD programs only) the Graduate College Dean are responsible for determining and monitoring general academic standards and policies for the college. While new degree programs must be approved by both the University of Oklahoma Board of Regents and the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, the College determines curricula, admissions policy, academic program content, and the awarding of degrees.

The College faculty also are fully involved in campus-wide academic affairs including membership on the Graduate Council, Faculty Senate (a College faculty member was Chair for 2009-10), Academic Programs Council, and other campus-wide committees (see section 1.5.d).

1.3.d. Identification of any of the above processes that are different for the school of public health than for other professional schools, with an explanation.

There are no differences from other professional schools on the campus. The College of Public Health has the same level of organizational status and independence as the other colleges of the Health Sciences Center. Since 2003 the College has had complete control of its professional degree programs (MPH, MHA, and DrPH), including policy development, admissions, enrollment, student management, and curriculum. The MS and PhD graduate programs remain under the policy oversight of the Graduate Dean; however, day-to-day operational oversight of the academic degree programs is provided by the College of Public Health Associate Dean for Academic Affairs.

1.3.e. If a collaborative school, descriptions of all participating institutions and delineation of their relationships to the school.

Not applicable. The College is not a collaborative school.

1.3.f. If a collaborative school, a copy of the formal written agreement that establishes the rights and obligations of the participating universities in regard to the school’s operation.

Not applicable. The College is not a collaborative school.

1.3.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: Independence and high status are accorded the College by the Provost. The OUHSC campus provides a strongly supportive and stimulating environment for public health education, research and service. The University of Oklahoma is fortunate to be one of only four universities nationwide to have at least six professional colleges on one campus (Allied Health, Dentistry, Medicine, Nursing, Pharmacy, and Public Health). The proximity of these other colleges and the Oklahoma State Department of Health

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.3: INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT

is a strength that benefits both students and faculty, and especially provides considerable opportunities for collaboration.

Weaknesses/challenges: The presence of six professional colleges can also be considered a challenge, because it has the potential to diffuse scarce state and university resources.

Plans: Continue to work within the University to maintain accreditation, achieve the College’s primary mission of teaching, research, and scholarship, and advance the College’s regional and national stature.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.3: INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT

[This page intentionally left blank]

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.4: ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION

1.4 ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION

The school shall provide an organizational setting conducive to public health learning, research and service. The organizational setting shall facilitate interdisciplinary communication, cooperation and collaboration that contribute to achieving the school’s public health mission. The organizational structure shall effectively support the work of the school’s constituents.

1.4.a. One or more organizational charts showing the administrative organization of the school, indicating relationships among its component offices, departments, divisions or other administrative units. The College of Public Health organizational chart is shown in Exhibit 1.4.a. The College is organized into four departments: Health Administration and Policy (HAP), Biostatistics and Epidemiology (BSE), Occupational and Environmental Health (OEH), and Health Promotion Sciences (HPS). Each department has a chairperson who reports to the Dean of the College. Four research centers and two training centers provide the structural support for an expanded emphasis on applied public health research and training. Most centers are operationally housed within departments, as shown in Exhibit 1.4.a, with the exception of one which has a funding source requirement of reporting directly to the Dean.

Exhibit 1.4.a. College of Public Health Organizational Chart

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.4: ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION

1.4.b. Description of the roles and responsibilities of major units in the organizational chart.

The following are brief descriptions of the positions shown in Exhibit 1.4.a.

1.4.b(i) Administration

Dean (Gary Raskob) The Dean reports to the Provost of the OUHSC and serves on the Deans’ Council of the Health Sciences Center. He oversees all activities and operations of the College. His responsibilities include: promoting excellence in education, research, and service; promoting the mission of the College with university officials and external constituents; shaping the vision of the College through strategic planning and organizational development; facilitating faculty and staff development; providing leadership in resource acquisition and management; and College development and private fundraising. The Dean is assisted in these endeavors by associate and assistant deans.

Senior Associate Dean (Daniel Boatright) The Senior Associate Dean works directly with community partners to learn how the College may assist in meeting their needs and identifying opportunities for partnerships. He plays a major role in representing the service and community practice interests and concerns of the College.

Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (David Johnson) The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs has primary oversight of the academic policies and procedures of the College. He assists the Dean in the educational and curricular development of the College and oversees the Office of Student Services. He also serves as initial academic advisor to new MPH students.

Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs (Sara Vesely) The Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs assists the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs in oversight of the College’s academic policies and procedures and in advising new MPH students.

Associate Dean for Research (James L. Regens) The Associate Dean for Research is responsible for oversight of policies and procedures associated with the College’s research enterprise and with strengthening the research mission of the College.

Associate Dean for Planning and Evaluation (Steven Mattachione) The Associate Dean for Planning and Evaluation has primary oversight of the College’s strategic planning process and the regular and recurring effort to monitor and measure the organization’s performance. He assists the Dean with the work related to the College’s strong commitment to continuous quality improvement, and to using evaluation results in the ongoing strategic planning and decision-making process to achieve excellence in each of the College’s missions.

Associate Dean for Inter-Professional Collaboration (Dale Bratzler) The Associate Dean for Inter-Professional Collaboration has a joint appointment with the College of Medicine and as the Chief Quality Officer for OU Physicians. He also has a leadership role with the Health Sciences Center Inter-Professional Education and Practice Collaboration to foster the role of public health professionals within the collaboration, and to integrate public health education into the program of the other health professional colleges.

Associate Dean for Finance and Administration (Deanna Debus) The Associate Dean for Finance and Administration is a professional staff member who oversees the financial management and general administration of the College. Within the Office of Finance and Administration there are staff members that focus on human resources, pre and post grants and contracts management, and day-to-day fiscal management. She also oversees computer technology and financial planning and budgeting.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.4: ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION

Assistant Dean for Student Services (Robin Howell) The Assistant Dean for Student Services is also a professional staff position. She is responsible for management of all aspects of student recruitment, admissions, enrollment, records management and performance monitoring. She also interfaces with the Graduate College on graduate programs and graduation processing. The Assistant Dean for Student Services directs two professional staff and reports to the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs.

1.4.b(ii) Departments

Each department is administered by a chairperson appointed by the Dean. The chairs, in conjunction with departmental faculty, are responsible for planning, conducting, and evaluating departmental teaching, research, and service programs, and make recommendations to the Dean on faculty appointments, retention, promotion and tenure. The chairs administer their departmental budgets and request additional resources from the Dean on behalf of their respective departments. The chairs exercise autonomy in managing the budgets, and teaching/research/service activities of the respective departments, within the established policies and procedures of the College and the university. Current department chairs are shown in Exhibit 1.4.a. A national search for a new chair of the Department of Health Promotion Sciences recently concluded with the appointment of Dr. Thomas Teasdale as chair, effective April 1, 2015. During the interim, the Dean has served as acting chair of Health Promotion Sciences.

1.4.b(iii) Centers

The American Indian Diabetes Prevention Center (AIDPC), directed by Joseph N. Henderson, PhD, has several research, education, and tribal outreach projects designed to reduce the unjust health disparity of diabetes and its multiple co-morbidities in American Indian Nations. Experts from the Colleges of Public Health, Nursing, and Medicine are brought together in an interdisciplinary intellectual, research, and practice environment to reach the goal of a diabetes-free native world. Many key leadership positions are held by American Indian researchers including the Principal Investigator who is Oklahoma Choctaw. The AIDPC reaches all Oklahoma Indian Nations via their partnership with the Oklahoma Area Inter-tribal Health Board as well as intensive collaborations with the Chickasaw Nation and the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. The AIDPC is funded by the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities which is a vital part of the National Institutes of Health. This Center reports directly to the Dean (a requirement of NIH for this program fund).

The Center for American Indian Health Research (CAIHR), directed by Elisa Lee, PhD, is a multidisciplinary research organization and conducts health-related studies with American Indian groups. The focus of the research at CAIHR is to improve the health status of the American Indian population. CAIHR conducts epidemiological and clinical studies of health problems among these populations, with emphasis on diabetes and its many complications including heart disease, retinopathy, renal disease, leg vessel disease, and cerebral vascular disease. CAIHR also conducts studies focusing on health promotion and disease prevention. This is a research center under the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology.

The Biostatistics and Epidemiology Research Design and Analysis Center (BSE RDAC), in the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, provides biostatistical and epidemiological expertise and collaborative support for research initiated by OUHSC investigator and community partners. Faculty, staff, and graduate research assistants in the BSE RDAC provide expertise in areas ranging from formulation of research questions, research design, study implementation and monitoring, data collection and management, data analysis, and dissemination of findings. The Center Director is Julie Stoner, PhD, Department Chair of Biostatistics and Epidemiology.

The Center for Biosecurity Research (CBR), directed by Associate Dean James L. Regens, PhD, is dedicated to conducting interdisciplinary, cross-cutting research focused on key questions in biodefense

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.4: ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION

and emerging infectious diseases to enhance U.S. military force protection and homeland security. CBR scientists have broad expertise in microbiology, aerosol science, modeling and simulation, decision analysis, emergency medicine, and behavioral sciences. CBR capabilities encompass the full spectrum of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosives threats. The Center is funded by a variety of Federal agencies including the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, the Air Force Research Laboratory, and the Air Force Office of Scientific Research. This center is administratively placed under the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health and has a close collaborative relationship with the College of Medicine on both the Oklahoma City and Tulsa campuses.

The Oklahoma Public Health Training Center (OPHTC) is housed within the Department of Health Promotion Sciences and the director is Vicki Tall Chief, EdD. The OPHTC is dedicated to defining and closing gaps in public health education and training among the public health workforce in Oklahoma. This is accomplished through multiple objectives, including developing an academic and practice collaborative to promote workforce development, and assessing the training needs of workers and their organizations in relation to public health core competencies. Training resources are designed to enhance workers’ knowledge, skills, and abilities in order to provide essential public health services. The impact of the OPHTC’s efforts are evaluated and used to further the goal of workforce development. The OPHTC partners with state, local, and tribal health agencies, public health organizations, and other groups to reach as many individuals as possible.

The Southwest Preparedness and Emergency Response Learning Center (SWPERLC) is housed within the Department of Health Promotion Sciences and is directed by Vicki Tall Chief, EdD. The SWPERLC provides public health preparedness education and training to the public health workforce in Oklahoma, Colorado, New Mexico, and northern Texas.

1.4.c. Description of the manner in which interdisciplinary coordination, cooperation and collaboration occur and support public health learning, research and service.

Numerous mechanisms assure coordination, cooperation and collaboration within the College, across the OUHSC, the university, and the community. Some examples follow:

• The College has an active Public Health Grand Rounds program that hosts presentations on a variety of public health related topics, with speakers from the campus, other universities, professional organizations, and state, national, and international public health agencies. Grand Rounds presentations are open to the public and attendance is encouraged for faculty, staff, and students. The multiple co-sponsors of Public Health Grand Rounds include the Oklahoma State Board of Health, the State and City-County health departments, the College of Medicine, and numerous State agencies. • A number of dual degree programs between the College of Public Health and the College of Medicine, College of Law, and School of Social Work provide opportunities for students to receive interdisciplinary instruction and research training. • Students from the Colleges of Pharmacy, Allied Health, Dentistry, Nursing, and Medicine take Public Health courses for application toward their degree programs. • The entire faculty participates in evaluating presentations of potential new faculty members who have been invited to make presentations to the entire College in their areas of research. Search committees are frequently multi-disciplinary with members selected from the College, OUHSC, alumni, students, and practicing professionals. • The Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology (BSE) regularly provides statistical and other study design and quantitative assistance across the OUHSC campus through its Research and Design Analysis Center (RDAC). The BSE RDAC’s mission includes serving the Health Sciences Center, along with public, community, and private health entities by providing biostatistical and epidemiological support for projects and programs that involve clinical or health data; collaborating with University personnel to explore and develop joint research projects; developing research and

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.4: ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION

training grants in the areas of biostatistics, epidemiology, data management, or informatics; and developing a research program specific to the BSE RDAC. Graduate research assistants, who are enrolled in the Department's Ph.D., MS, and MPH programs in Biostatistics or Epidemiology, are employed through the RDAC. The graduate research assistants are trained by faculty or the BSE RDAC’s permanent staff to work on projects that the BSE RDAC undertakes through contracts or grant arrangements. One such grant that funds multiple faculty, staff, and student research assistants is the Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Research Design (BERD) key component activity of the NIH-funded Oklahoma Shared Clinical and Translational Resources (OSCTR). The overall OSCTR mission is to serve as a catalyst for clinical research which improves health for underserved and underrepresented populations living in rural areas, to improve patient outcomes of these individuals, and to provide these resources to launch new independent investigator careers in Oklahoma and other Institutional Development Award (IDeA) states. Faculty, staff and student who are funded through the BERD provide consultative and collaborative research design and data analysis support for various research and evaluation projects initiated by investigators at academic and health organizations across the region. • Associate Dean Bratzler works closely with the OUHSC IHI Open School chapter to bring students from different health professions programs together through a shared interest in learning about quality improvement and improving care for patients. This student organization has leadership from all seven Colleges on the HSC campus (Public Health, Medicine, Nursing, Allied Health, Dentistry, Pharmacy, and Graduate College). In addition to participation from students in all disciplines on the HSC campus, they have also included undergraduate students from the Norman campus who are interested in pursuing careers in one of the health sciences. The chapter meets monthly during the Fall and Spring semesters and routinely includes group exercises on facilitating inter-professional care of patients, including formal presentations and activities related to population health. • The College’s research and training centers (see section 1.4.b) regularly execute projects involving professional contributions by faculty across the departments and in other colleges, public health agencies, and tribal organizations. • A new course HAP 7403 “Experiencing Public Health Law”, which is cross-listed with the OU College of Law effective in Spring 2015, focuses on providing law and public health students a practice learning experience with public health law. The course is taught by Christina Bennett, JD, Assistant Professor of Health Administration and Policy. Students work in law-public health pairs to complete projects for practitioners at the Oklahoma Health Care Authority, the Oklahoma Policy Institute, the Oklahoma State Department of Health, the Oklahoma Statement Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. • The College has 16 Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) with the other health professional colleges and with external stakeholders such as the Oklahoma State Department of Health and the Oklahoma City-County Health Department which bring fiscal resources and learning, research, and service opportunities to our College.

1.4.d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The College, with its emphasis on the health of populations, is an essential unit of the OUHSC. The organization of the OUHSC provides the structure to ensure both external and internal support to programs and special initiatives. The College has a well-established organizational structure which is conducive to teaching and learning, research and service. It provides the autonomy to encourage scholastic creativity while facilitating communication, cooperation, and enterprise among faculty, students and staff. The status of the College in the OUHSC facilitates interdisciplinary communication, cooperation and collaboration with other Colleges on campus, the State Department of Health, the Indian Health Service, the Oklahoma City-County and Tulsa City-County health departments, and community organizations.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.4: ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION

Weaknesses/challenges: A weakness identified in our preliminary self-study was the absence of a full time Department Chair for the Department of Health Promotion Sciences. This weakness has been removed. Dr. Thomas Teasdale has been appointed Chair of the Department effective April 1, 2015.

Plans: The Dean has worked with the Vice Provost for Health Sciences to obtain the commitment of a tenure-track salary for the Chair of Health Promotion Sciences and one additional junior faculty recruitment. Additional funding sources to support additional faculty salaries as part of the recruitment package are being pursued.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

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 the conduct of school and program evaluation procedures, policy setting and decision making.

1.5.a. A list of school standing and important ad hoc committees, with a statement of charge, composition and current membership for each.

1.5.a(i) Primary Governance Committees

Current membership of the committees described below is provided in Exhibit 1.5.a Standing and Important Ad Hoc Committees and Members (Resource File).

Executive Committee. The Executive Committee is comprised of the Dean, Associate Deans, Assistant Deans, department chairs, chair of the Faculty Board, and two student representatives, who are the presidents of the College of Public Health Student Association (COPHSA) from both campuses. The Executive Committee considers and develops policy that addresses all operational matters of the college. The Committee meets once per month. Decisions and actions of the Committee are shared with the faculty through both the department chairs and the Faculty Board. Minutes of the meeting (Resource File) are available to all faculty and COPHSA. The members of the Executive Committee are: • Gary Raskob, Dean • Daniel Boatright, Sr. Associate Dean • Dale Bratzler, Associate Dean for Inter-professional Collaboration • Steve Carrillo, COPHSA President – OKC • Deanna Debus, Associate Dean for Finance and Administration (non-voting) • Sharayah Farrell, COPHSA President – Tulsa • Robin Howell, Assistant Dean for Student Services (non-voting) • David Johnson, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs • Robert Lynch, Chair, Occupational and Environmental Health • Steven Mattachione, Associate Dean for Planning and Evaluation and Chair, Health Administration and Policy • Margaret Phillips, CEPH Co-Director and Faculty Accreditation Representative • James L. Regens, Associate Dean for Research • Julie Stoner, Chair, Biostatistics and Epidemiology • Thomas Teasdale, Chair, Health Promotion Sciences • Eleni Tolma, Chair, Faculty Board • Sara Vesely, Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs • Judy Rendeluk, Secretary (non-voting)

College of Public Health Student Association. The College of Public Health Student Association (COPHSA) is the primary student governing body of the College. It serves as the focus for student activities and presents the views of the student body to the administration and the faculty. There are branches in both Oklahoma City and Tulsa. All degree program students are members of the association while unclassified or special students are members without voting privileges. Legislative representation consists of at least two members elected annually from each department. The elected Executive Officers of the Student Association consist of the president, vice-president, treasurer and secretary. The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs serves as the faculty sponsor, and he or the Assistant Dean for Student Services attends COPHSA meetings. The Dean also meets and communicates regularly with the COPHSA officers. Representatives to the Graduate Student Association and the OUHSC Student

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

Association are selected from COPHSA representatives. COPHSA also serves in an advisory capacity to the Dean and recommends representatives to the standing committees of the College, in which they participate in defining issues and developing policy. Students also serve on a variety of committees, including faculty search committees and the committee that prepares the self-study.

The COPHSA officers in Oklahoma City are: • Steve Carrillo, President • Amy Schultheiss, Vice President • Maria “Veronica” Andrade, Secretary • Jade Owen, Treasurer • Chelsea Lyon, Community Service Chair • Elissa Caswell and Amanda Watson, Events Coordinator Chair • Whitney Richardson, Blood Drive Chair • Breanca Thomas, Justin Green, and Doga Karyaldiz, Senators • Ashley Sword-Buster, Senator Proxy • Shipra Bhanot, First Year Executive Student Chair

The COPHSA officers in Tulsa are: • Sharayah Farrell, President • Saquiba Khan, Vice President • April Hastings, Secretary • Sandra Braun, Treasurer

Faculty Board. The Faculty Board is comprised of all full-time faculty members, including (as of 2013) those with the modified title of “Research” faculty. Title designations and voting membership are specified in the Faculty Bylaws (Resource File). Elected officers of the Faculty Board are the Chair, Vice-Chair and Secretary. The board is required to meet at least twice annually, but typically meets every month. The 2014-2015 officers are: • Eleni Tolma, Chair • Margaret Phillips, Vice Chair • Christina Bennett, Secretary

The primary responsibilities of the Faculty Board are to:

• assist in the orderly conduct and governance of the affairs of the college, • facilitate the faculty’s performance of all duties and obligations within the university and the college, • protect the rights and privileges of the faculty as specified by the policies, rules and regulations established by the Board of Regents, and • determine curriculum content.

The Faculty Board is responsible for its governance, the election of representatives to the committees or councils of the university and college, and the performance of other functions that are specific to college or departmental committees. The standing committees of the Faculty Board and their functions are summarized below. The detailed functions and responsibilities of the standing committees are described in the Faculty Bylaws that appear in the Resource File. The Faculty Board or the Dean of the College may appoint an Ad Hoc Committee as necessary. The membership of each of the six standing committees is elected by members of the Faculty Board and consists of one non-administrative faculty member from each department. Students are represented on the Academic Appeals Committee and the Academic Program Committee. The Dean appoints student members, usually one from the Oklahoma City campus and one from the Tulsa campus, upon the recommendations of COPHSA. The term of each faculty member is two years, with the exception of the Academic Appeals Board for which the term is three years in accordance with campus policy, and no member is permitted to serve more than two consecutive terms. With the exception of the Academic Appeals Board, two new members are elected

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

annually to each of the standing committees; a committee's chair is elected by its members when the committee is initially convened. The Chair of an Academic Appeals hearing panel is appointed by the Dean from among the membership of the Academic Appeals Board and serves as chair with voting privileges.

The Dean is a frequent contributor to Faculty Board meeting discussions, during which faculty can express opinions or ask questions as desired. In addition to these encounters, the Dean meets informally with each faculty of the College over lunch at least once per year as a means for facilitating faculty input through one-to-one communication between faculty and the Dean. The Dean also meets with the faculty members of an academic department as a group each quarter to provide another avenue for direct communication.

The standing committees of Faculty Board are:

Academic Appeals Board. The Academic Appeals Board meets at the call of the Dean to review cases of alleged prejudiced or capricious evaluation of students by faculty members. The committee is comprised of a faculty member from each of the four departments, with six additional faculty members elected provisionally, and ten or more students appointed by COPHSA. The Academic Appeals Board serves as a pool from which the members of Academic Appeals Hearing Panels are drawn as needed. The members of the Academic Appeals Board during 2014-2015 are: • Neil Henderson, HPS faculty • Margaret Phillips, OEH faculty • Sharyl Kinney, HAP faculty • Nasir Mushtaq, BSE faculty • Laura Beebe, BSE faculty (provisional member) • Kai Ding, BSE faculty (provisional member) • Jennifer Peck, BSE faculty (provisional member) • Vicki Tall Chief, HPS faculty (provisional member) • David Thompson, BSE faculty (provisional member) • Daniel Zhao, BSE faculty (provisional member) • Sara Clevenger, student • Lindsay Denson, student • Tyler Dougherty, student • Justin Dvorak, student • Robert Early, student • Kendi Hansen, student • Brandt Higley, student • Doga Karyaldiz, student • Whitney Richardson, student • Matthew Smith, student • Amanda Watson, student • Lori Yearout, student

Promotion and Tenure Committee. The Promotion and Tenure Committee reviews applications for promotion and tenure submitted by department chairs. The committee serves in an advisory capacity and submits recommendations to the Dean. It is comprised of four tenured faculty members, one representing each of the four departments in the College. The members during 2014-2015 are: • Jennifer Peck, BSE faculty (chair) • Ann Chou, HAP faculty • Margaret Phillips, OEH faculty • Eleni Tolma, HPS faculty

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

Academic Program Committee. The Academic Program Committee reviews all matters that relate to the academic programs of the college. The committee also reviews policies or procedures and makes recommendations that are designed to improve the effective use of teaching resources and ensure the quality of academic programs. The committee is comprised of four elected faculty members, with each member representing one of the four departments, and two students. The members during 2014-2015 are: • Christina Bennett, HAP faculty (chair) • Roy Oman, HPS faculty • Margaret Phillips, OEH faculty • David Thompson, BSE faculty • Saqiba Khan, Tulsa student • Ashley Sword-Buster, HSC student

Bylaws Committee. The Bylaws Committee reviews the Faculty Bylaws and recommends changes in policies and procedures of the board. The committee consists of four elected faculty members, each representing a department of the College. The members during 2014-2015 are: • Evan Floyd, OEH faculty (chair) • Michael Anderson, BSE faculty • Christina Bennett, HAP faculty • Valarie Jernigan, HPS faculty

Elections Committee. The Elections Committee supervises and conducts all elections that occur in the college. The committee is comprised of four elected faculty members, each representing a department of the College. The members during 2014-2015 are: • Ann Chou, HAP faculty • Kai Ding, BSE faculty • Evan Floyd, OEH faculty • Neil Henderson, HPS faculty

College Awards Committee. The College Awards Committee is charged with developing written selection criteria and procedures for college-wide scholarships and awards administered by the Dean’s Office, reviewing applications by students for scholarships administered by the Dean’s Office and making recommendations to the Dean, and reviewing nominations for faculty or staff awards administered by the Dean’s office and making recommendations to the Dean. The committee is comprised of four elected faculty members, each representing a department of the College. The members during 2014-2015 are: • Jun Wang, OEH faculty (chair) • Christina Bennett, HAP faculty • Valarie Jernigan, HPS faculty • Dee Terrell, BSE faculty

1.5.a(ii) Other Committees

Admissions and Academic Advisement Committee (AAA). The AAA Committee is comprised of representatives from the five disciplines and is chaired by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. The membership of the committee is approved by the Dean, upon the recommendation of department chairs and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. The committee is responsible for reviewing applicants for the MPH programs and making admissions recommendations, and for recommending remedial actions including program termination for MPH students who are not meeting academic performance standards. The members during 2014-2015 are: • David Johnson, OEH faculty, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (Chair) • Sara Vesely, BSE faculty, Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs • Daniel Boatright, OEH faculty • Hélène Carabin, Epidemiology faculty

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

• Ann Chou, HAP faculty • Elisa Lee, Biostatistics faculty • Vicki Tall Chief, HPS faculty

DrPH Academic Admissions and Advisement Committee (DrPH AAA). The DrPH AAA Committee is chaired by the DrPH Program Director, with membership representing each of the academic departments but with at least three members from the Department of Health Administration and Policy as described in the College of Public Health Student Bulletin (Resource File). The committee has two roles: (1) consider applicants for the DrPH program and make admissions recommendations, and (2) advise individual DrPH students and structure and administer their General Examination in collaboration with the student’s faculty mentor / planned dissertation committee chair as an ad hoc member. There are currently six members: • Ann Chou, HAP faculty, DrPH Program Director (chair) • Daniel Boatright, OEH faculty • Janis Campbell, BSE faculty • Valarie Jernigan, HPS faculty • Amir Khaliq, HAP faculty • Sharyl Kinney, HAP faculty

Faculty Mentoring Committee. This ad hoc committee is charged by Faculty Board with developing a College-wide, structured program for training senior faculty in effective mentoring and establishing mentoring relationships between senior and junior faculty. • Valarie Jernigan, HPS faculty (chair) • James George, BSE faculty • David Johnson, OEH faculty • Robert Roswell, HAP faculty • Alicia Salvatore, OEH faculty • Valerie Williams, Vice Provost for Academic Affairs

Diversity Committee. This ad hoc committee of faculty, students, and staff has been charged by the Dean with studying issues of diversity and inclusion and making recommendations for the 2016-2020 Strategic Plan. This includes addressing not only outcomes, in terms of a faculty, staff, and student body that are representative of the communities served by the public health workforce, but also considering processes and infrastructure that might be valuable in ensuring an atmosphere of inclusion and respect for all. The members of the committee are: • Neil Henderson, HPS faculty (co-chair) • Valarie Jernigan, HPS faculty (co-chair) • Jun Wang, OEH faculty • Fawn Yeh, CAIHR research faculty • Janis Cravatt, student • Jennifer Moore, student • Sarah Parks, student • Susan Rick, student • Breanca Thomas, student • Venus Uttchin, student • Barbara Grayson, BSE staff • Jennifer Reeder, AIDPC staff • Ram Poudel, alumnus • Deanna Debus, Associate Dean for Finance and Administration

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

1.5.b. Description of the school’s governance and committee structure’s roles and responsibilities relating to the following:

– general school policy development

– planning and evaluation

– budget and resource allocation

– student recruitment, admission and award of degrees

– faculty recruitment, retention, promotion and tenure

– academic standards and policies, including curriculum development

– research and service expectations and policies

1.5.b(i) Overview. Within the framework of the university rules and regulations, the faculty of the College exercise self-governance, with formal opportunities for input in decisions affecting general school policy; strategic planning; budget and resource allocation; student recruitment; admission and awarding of degrees; faculty recruitment, retention, promotion and tenure; academic standards and policies; curriculum and course content; and research and service expectations and policies.

College governance occurs primarily through two committees: the Executive Committee and the Faculty Board. The Executive Committee is the principal operational committee for the day-to-day administration of the College, and it meets monthly. The Faculty Board serves as the primary forum for faculty input into college governance, and also meets monthly. The Executive Committee is chaired by the Dean, and is comprised of the associate and assistant deans, the department chairs, the Chair of the Faculty Board, and the two student representatives (COPHSA Presidents). The Faculty Board is comprised of all full-time faculty members with non-modified titles (i.e. “Professor”, “Associate Professor” and “Assistant Professor”) and all full-time faculty members with modified titles “of Research”. This board has elected officers and an established committee structure as outlined in section 1.5.a(i). The elected Chair of the Faculty Board is a full-voting member of the Executive Committee and represents the interests of the faculty to the Executive Committee. Thus, faculty have two formal pathways for input into all aspects of college governance. Faculty participate directly in meetings of the Faculty Board. Faculty may have input to the Executive Committee either through the Faculty Board Chair and/or other elected Faculty Board officers, or through their department chair.

1.5.b(ii) Policy Development. The development and implementation of policies that govern the College resides with the Executive Committee and with the Faculty Board. All members of either committee may initiate a proposal for new policy or for modification to an existing college policy. As discussed above, there is extensive overlap between these committees. The focus of the Executive Committee is primarily on matters relating to the management and administration of the College, including financial and budget management, infrastructure and support services, and the implementation and compliance with university-wide policies and state and federal regulations. The Faculty Board, either through its standing committees or its regular meetings of the full faculty, focuses mainly on policy related to academic curriculum and degree requirements, and on faculty matters including faculty compensation, promotion, and tenure.

1.5.b(iii) Strategic Planning. The strategic plan development process used by the College is described in detail in section 1.1.e. Faculty have multiple opportunities to participate in strategic plan development and the establishment of goals and objectives. In addition to the college planning process, departments also hold retreats for the purpose of developing and evaluating departmental strategic plans within the framework of the College's overall goals and objectives.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

1.5.b(iv) Budget and Resource Allocation. The process of preparing the annual budget involves the Provost, the Dean, OUHSC financial officers, the departmental chairs, and the Associate Dean for Administration and Finance. The Provost in consultation with the Dean and the financial officers of the OUHSC determines the amount that is allocated to the College annually.

The annual budget allocation to the College from the university consists of a composite of funds from state appropriations, university funds, and tuition and fees. The college allocation is then disbursed to five organizational units, consisting of each of the four departments and the Dean’s Office (refer to the organization chart provided as Exhibit 1.4.a above). The department chairs have discretion over their departmental budget. Annual increases in the college budget allocation, if available, are provided as a fixed percentage increase over the previous year’s base amount. When increases are available, each department and the Dean’s Office receive the same fixed percentage increase over their previous years’ base amount.

1.5.b(v) Student Recruitment, the Admission Process and the Award of Degrees. The College controls all aspects of the student recruitment, admissions, and awarding of degrees for its professional degree programs (MPH, MHA, DrPH). The governance of the admissions process and awarding of the MS and PhD degrees is done in collaboration with the Graduate College.

The responsibility for processing applications for admission resides with the College of Public Health Office of Student Services. Student Services monitors each application until it is complete and contacts the applicant if additional information is required. Currently the qualifications of MPH program applicants are reviewed by the Admissions and Academic Advisement (AAA) Committee, where the application decision is made. The OUHSC Office of Admissions and Records and the Dean in separate letters inform the applicant of the decision. Due to slightly different admission criteria, completed applications for admission to the MHA Program are reviewed by the MHA Admissions Committee. This consists of four Department of Health Administration and Policy faculty members who act in advisory capacity to the Chair of that department. The MHA Admissions Committee forwards a recommendation regarding the acceptability of each applicant to the Chair, Department of Health Administration and Policy, who then makes the final determination to accept or reject.

Beginning Fall 2015 the College will have transitioned to a process in which the departments make acceptance decisions for applicants to their degree programs. Applicants (through SOPHAS) will specify interest in up to two degree programs, and admissions committees within the departments hosting those programs will review the application packets and make the admission recommendation. If both programs offer acceptance, the applicant makes the choice. If neither offers acceptance, the application is denied and the individual is not admitted.

The Office of Student Services, in coordination with the student’s faculty advisor and with the approval of the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, admits students to candidacy and arranges the Culminating Experience (see section 2.5). Following completion of the Culminating Experience, the Office of Student Services and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs certify that the student has completed all degree requirements and qualifies for graduation.

1.5.b(vi) Faculty Recruitment, Retention, Promotion and Tenure. With the approval of the Dean and the Provost, the primary responsibility for recruiting new faculty resides with the department. Usual practice is for a search committee to be formed by the department chair and a national search initiated for qualified candidates. Members of the search committee review the qualifications of each candidate according to affirmative action guidelines. A minimum of three candidates are selected from the applicant pool and each is interviewed by faculty and students during a two day visit. The faculty and students evaluate each candidate and submit their ratings to the chair of the department. After consultation with the search committee, the chair submits a recommendation to the Dean. In some cases, when promising or highly qualified faculty, including individuals from under-represented minorities, become temporarily available during a period when no faculty search is underway, faculty may be hired with a waiver of the

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

national search process in accordance with University policy. This has been done with prior approval of the Provost and the Equal Employment Opportunity office. In these cases the faculty candidate’s qualifications are reviewed by the relevant department faculty, who may also interview the candidate and observe a presentation by candidate. In all recruitments the final offer of appointment is issued by the Provost upon recommendation of the Dean. All new appointments are contingent on the approval of the President and the OU Board of Regents.

The retention of faculty is influenced, in part, by the information contained in the annual faculty report. The report, which is prepared by the faculty member and submitted to his/her chair, summarizes the faculty member’s contribution to teaching, research and service activities during the past year (see also section 4.2.c). Following review of this report, the chair provides all faculty members with a written evaluation of their performance. If a faculty member’s performance fails to satisfy expectations, the department chair provides a written evaluation that identifies areas requiring improvement. A copy of the Annual Faculty Report is presented in the Resource File. All new appointments are provided with an Appointment Letter that describes expectations concerning teaching, research and service. New faculty members also are provided with copies of the guidelines for performance evaluation, tenure and promotion contained within the OUHSC Faculty Handbook (Resource File).

Applications for promotion and/or tenure are initiated at the departmental level and reviewed by the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee and by the College Promotion and Tenure Committee. Tenure and promotion applications may be made separately. The recommendations of both committees and the results of an independent evaluation by the Chair are forwarded to the Dean for review and consideration. The Dean forwards promotion recommendations to the Provost, but applications for tenure must be further evaluated by the OUHSC campus Tenure Committee, which makes its own recommendation regarding tenure to the Provost.

1.5.b(vii) Academic Standards and Policies. Departmental faculty determine the curricular design of each program of study and degree requirements with oversight by the College’s Academic Program Committee, a standing committee of the Faculty Board. Departmental faculty also determine admission requirements, graduation requirements and the content of each course.

For the professional degree programs, approved new curricula or approved changes to existing curricula are forwarded by the College’s Academic Programs Committee for final approval by the OUHSC campus- wide Academic Programs Council. For graduate degree programs (MS, PhD), approved new curricula or changes to existing curricula are forwarded by the Academic Programs Committee to the OUHSC Graduate Council and then to the OUHSC Academic Programs Council for final approval. The College’s faculty participate on the Graduate Council and on the OUHSC Academic Programs Council (see section 1.5.d).

1.5.b(viii) Research, Service and Teaching Expectations. Faculty of the College are expected to assume instructional responsibilities, maintain an active scholarship/research agenda, and provide service to the departments, the College, the university, the community and the profession, as indicated in the Faculty Handbook (Resource File). The expectations for growth in the areas of research, teaching and service were also part of the College’s strategic planning process. Within the guidelines of the OUHSC Faculty Handbook, specific expectations and activities of faculty are determined at the department level, and faculty have the opportunity for input through departmental meetings, as well as individual consultation with their department chair. The expectations of faculty as outlined in the OUHSC Faculty Handbook serve as the college-wide criteria for promotion and tenure.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

1.5.c. A copy of the school’s bylaws or other policy documents that determine the rights and obligations of administrators, faculty and students in governance of the school.

Copies of the College of Public Health Faculty Bylaws, College of Public Health Student Bulletin, Graduate Bulletin, and OUHSC Faculty Handbook are provided in the Resource File.

1.5.d. Identification of school faculty who hold membership on university committees, through which faculty contribute to the activities of the university.

College faculty holding university committee memberships are shown in Exhibit 1.5.d. The charge for each committee listed below is located in the Resource File.

Exhibit 1.5.d College Faculty Holding Membership on University Committees Committee COPH Faculty Committee Chair Member(s) Faculty Senate L. Stephens, D. Bratzler, M. Nihira (Medicine) J. Stoner, S. Vesely(Alt), D. Zhao (Alt) Faculty Senate Committee on Committees D. Bratzler M. Hanigan (Medicine) Faculty Senate Faculty Compensation J. Eichner No Chair Committee Faculty Senate Green Initiatives C. Bennett J. Berry (Allied Health) Committee Faculty Senate Information Technology C. Bennett R. Wild (Medicine) Advisory Committee HSC Academic Programs Council D. Zhao F Weatherby (Nursing) HSC Campus Tenure Committee A. Chou, J. Eichner F. Currier (Dentistry) HSC Discrimination and Harassment R. John No Chair Committee HSC Faculty Appeals Board R. John, M. Phillips, No Chair S. Vesely, E. Tolma HSC Library Advisory Committee S. Kinney S. Clifton (Library Director) HSC Research Council J. Regens J. Regens (Public Health) OU Physicians Peer Review Committee D. Bratzler L. Mitchell (Medicine) OU Physicians Credentialing Committee D. Bratzler C. Mantor (Medicine) OU Physicians Ethics Committee D. Bratzler T Blalock (Medicine) OU Physicians EMR Initiatives Committee D. Bratzler M. Nihira (Medicine) OU Medicine Excel Steering Committee D. Bratzler D. Andrews (Medicine) OU Medicine Quality and Safety D. Bratzler C Steinhart (HCA) and Leadership Council L. Mitchell (Medicine) OU Athletics Council J. Regens F. Weatherby (Nursing) OU Multicultural Advisory Committee L. Stephens M. Williams (Medicine) Graduate Council J. Peck, L. Beebe A. Pereira (Graduate College) Graduate Council Curriculum Review E. Tolma S. Anderson (Allied Health) Committee Graduate Faculty Appointments Committee J. Eichner K. Farmer (Pharmacy) Graduate Council Research Committee T. Garwe T. Obara (Medicine) Graduate Student Appeals Board D. Johnson, J. Peck C Ciro (Allied Health) Graduate Council on Preparing Future R. Roswell M. Medina (Pharmacy) Faculty

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

Exhibit 1.5.d College Faculty Holding Membership on University Committees Institutional Animal Care and Use D. Thompson E. Howard (Medicine) Committee Emergency Preparedness Committee A. Wendelboe E. Billingsly (OCCHD)

1.5.e. Description of student roles in governance, including any formal student organizations.

1.5.e(i) The College of Public Health Student Association (COPHSA). COPHSA, as the primary student governing body of the college, serves in an advisory capacity to the Dean and recommends representatives to be appointed by the Dean to serve on the College’s Academic Program Committee, Academic Appeals Board, and Academic Misconduct hearing panels. Representatives to the Graduate Student Association and the OUHSC Student Association are selected from COPHSA representatives. See also section 1.5.a(i) above.

1.5.e(ii) Biostatistics and Epidemiology Student Association (BSESA). The BSESA supports extra- curricular development and activities for OUHSC students and others interested in biostatistics and epidemiology. The goal of BSESA is to offer faculty and students opportunities to exchange biostatistics and epidemiologic information through discussions of current research articles (Journal Club), statistical programming including SAS topics, and presentations from professional epidemiologists and biostatisticians.

1.5.e(iii) Social, Community, and Behavioral Health Students Association (SCBHA). The SCBHA promotes awareness of the importance of health promotion, behavioral health, and community health- related issues on the OUHSC campus and in the Oklahoma City community; provides a forum for the exchange of information and discussion of current developments in the fields of Health Promotion Sciences and Social and Behavioral Health; conducts regular meetings for the discussion of current issues in the literature and in practical community-health issues; promotes advancement in the field of health promotion, community health, and behavioral health; and provides students with career interests in community and behavioral health with more research and practical experience, especially for community health-related careers, and opportunities to partner with community organizations to address community health needs in Oklahoma.

1.5.e(iv) Other Associations, Committees, and Task Forces. Students enrolled in the College also participate in the OUHSC Graduate Student Association, the OUHSC Student Association, the Crimson Club, and the OU Tulsa Student Association. In addition, students are appointed as members of faculty search committees and the committee that prepared the self-study.

1.5.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: Faculty have numerous opportunities to have meaningful input into the college governance, including through departmental faculty meetings, the Faculty Board, the College’s Executive Committee, or direct communication with the Dean. The modest size of the faculty is a strength of our governance process because it is small enough to allow meetings of the entire faculty for discussion and input, personal input to the efforts of standing committees, and small group and one-on-one meetings with the Dean. Student representatives are included in College committees to the extent appropriate and permissible under FERPA.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

Weaknesses/challenges: The modest size of the College faculty is also a challenge, because the demands on faculty of teaching, research, and service, and particularly the need to generate extramural funding, limits the time available for some faculty to take on new initiatives related to faculty governance.

Plans: There are no current plans to change the College’s governance structure. However, increasing the number of faculty is a Strategic Goal and the College is making progress toward a faculty complement of 50.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.5: GOVERNANCE

[This page intentionally left blank]

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.6: FISCAL RESOURCES

1.6 FISCAL RESOURCES

The school shall have financial resources adequate to fulfill its stated mission and goals, and its instructional, research and service objectives.

1.6.a. Description of the budgetary and allocation processes, including all sources of funding supportive of the instruction, research and service activities. This description should include, as appropriate, discussion about legislative appropriations, formula for funds distribution, tuition generation and retention, gifts, grants and contracts, indirect cost recovery, taxes or levies imposed by the university or other entity within the university, and other policies that impact the fiscal resources available to the school.

In Oklahoma, the State Legislature informs the State Regents of the budget amount. The State Regents allocate the funds to the State Universities and the University Regents allocate to the applicable campuses within their university system. Budgetary decisions across the Health Sciences Center are made by the Provost in consultation with the senior administrative officers and with the Deans’ Council serving the Provost in advisory and decision-making capacities.

The process of preparing the annual budget involves the Provost, the Dean, OUHSC financial officers, the departmental chairs, and the Associate Dean for Finance and Administration. The Provost in consultation with the financial officers of the OUHSC determines the amount that is allocated to the College annually. The College in turn allocates proportionately to the departments. Financial services are centralized in the Dean’s office.

The college allocation is then disbursed to six organizational units, consisting of each of the four departments, the Dean’s Office, and the Tulsa campus. Annual increases/decreases in the college budget allocation are provided as a fixed percentage increase or decrease over the previous year’s base amount. Each department and the Dean’s Office, which includes the Tulsa campus, receive the same fixed percentage increase/decrease over their previous years’ base amount.

The fiscal resources to achieve the goals and objectives for the College come from a variety of sources including 1) state appropriation/university funds; 2) Special University Funds; 3) Grants/Contracts; 4) Indirect Cost Recovery; 5) Investment Revenue/Gifts; 6) Other Revenue. In addition, partnering agencies work with the College to jointly fund faculty positions.

Since our last reaccreditation the College’s allocation from the university has received 2 modest increases (2.3% and 1.6%), 2 flat budgets, and 3 major budget cuts (3%, 6.5%, and 4%). The College met its budget requirement during these difficult years without the loss of faculty positions, and without reduction in faculty compensation. This was achieved through some staff reductions and reducing operational expenses. Each department and the Dean’s Office now fund their operating expenses primarily from extramural funding generated, indirect cost returns, or account reserves.

The College expects a significant budget cut for the next fiscal year (FY 2016) due to a large decrease in state revenue caused by the decline in oil and gas prices.

Tuition & Fees These funds are the funds generated from our students by the tuition and fees. The funds are not kept by the College but are part of the state appropriation/university funds. Through central administration the College is able to determine the amount that is generated.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.6: FISCAL RESOURCES

State Appropriation/University Funds The annual budget allocation to the College from the university consists of a composite of funds from state appropriations, university funds, and tuition and fees. There is very little discretion in the use of these funds since approximately 95% of the funds are currently utilized for faculty and staff salaries. Each department and the Dean’s Office fund their operating expenses primarily from extramural funding generated, indirect cost recovery, or account reserves, which are under the control of the department chair.

In FY2009 through FY2011 there were cuts in the College’s allocation from the university due to significant state budget deficits. The College met its budget during these difficult years through budget reallocation as faculty retired and staff left the university.

During FY2008 through FY2010 the College received additional funds from the Provost Office to relieve salary inequities. This was a major initiative of the Dean and Provost to bring faculty salaries in line with the ASPH median salaries. The College also received four new faculty positions with the recruitment package of a new departmental chair in Biostatistics and Epidemiology during FY2010 through FY2012.

State appropriated funds that remain unexpended at the end of the fiscal year (1 July – 30 June) were previously recaptured by the university administration, but current policy is for these funds to remain in the College for use in the next fiscal year. However, the College makes every effort to expend all appropriated funds in a responsible manner within the fiscal year budgeted.

Grants/Contracts Research and service grants and contracts continue to provide approximately 60% of the College’s total budget. Funding includes federal sources (e.g. NIH, CDC, HRSA, DoD, etc.), state/local sources (e.g. Oklahoma State Health Department [OSDH], Oklahoma City-County Health Department [OCCHD]) and Foundations (e.g. Susan G. Komen, George Kaiser Family Foundation). A listing of all awards for the last three years can be found in section 3.1.

Indirect Cost Recovery The current federally negotiated on-campus rate for sponsored organized research activities is 48% (26% for off-campus projects). The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Vice President for Administration returns 12% of the indirect costs recovered to the College. Of this amount 5% is returned to the Principal Investigator’s department and used at the discretion of the department chair. The remaining 7% remains with the Dean’s office.

Investment Revenue/Gifts The College of Public Health works with the University of Oklahoma Foundation (OU Foundation), which is the formal channel for private gifts to the University. The College currently maintains a fund balance of over $121,254 in restricted gifts and $1,449,426 in endowed gifts (6/30/14 cash value). This does not include an Endowed Chair in Biostatistics and Epidemiology that was created in January of 2010. The Chair is being held by the donor and will be converted to the James N. George Chair in Biostatistics and Epidemiology upon his retirement. Student scholarships continue to be the primary focus for fundraising activities. The College has been able to grow the amount of scholarships awarded annually from $2,000 in FY2007 (6 endowments in the amount of $330,940) to $49,500 in FY2014 (15 endowments in the amount of $850,729).

In 2014, the University initiated a major fund raising effort to mark its 125th Anniversary. The College has a goal of raising $500,000 in endowed scholarships and $10 million for endowed doctoral student stipends.

Other Revenue The College has a number of revenue streams that do not fit one of the above categories. These include some revenue from conference registrations and professional services provided by faculty and staff. All

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.6: FISCAL RESOURCES

professional services are governed by the College’s Professional Practice Plan (PPP), which can be found in the Resource File. Some of the faculty take the funds as supplemental salary through the PPP mechanisms stated in the plan, but a number of faculty use the funds to offset their salary or place the funds in discretionary accounts for use towards conferences, subscriptions, or memberships. Under the PPP, the College levies a tax of 5% on the gross generated income; 4% is allocated to the department and 1% is retained by the Dean’s office. The central administration levies a further tax of 3% on PPP income.

The primary source of Other Revenue is salary support from sources that are not within the College. Many faculty work in conjunction with other colleges on campus. During FY2014 more than $1,250,000 returned to the college from awards to outside departments for College faculty and staff in leadership, support, or co-investigator roles. In addition to this source of funds the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology has Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with the College of Dentistry, the College of Allied Health, the School of Community Medicine in Tulsa, and the College of Medicine, including the Harold Hamm Diabetes Center, Stephenson Cancer Center, Department of Surgery, Department of Urology, Dean McGee Eye Institute, Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Department of Neurology, and Department of Pediatrics.

1.6.b. A clearly formulated school budget statement, showing sources of all available funds and expenditures by major categories, since the last accreditation visit or for the last five years, whichever is longer. This information must be presented in a table format as appropriate to the school. See CEPH Data Exhibit 1.6.1.

Exhibit 1.6.1 Sources of Funds and Expenditures by Major Category, FY 2007 to FY 2014 is provided in the Resource File and below.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.6: FISCAL RESOURCES

Exhibit 1.6.1 Sources of Funds and Expenditures by Major Category, FY 2007 to FY 2014 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Source of Funds Tuition & Fees 1,201,663 1,336,122 1,564,502 1,364,107 1,758,012 1,714,626 1,919,335 2,049,855 State Appropriation/ University Funds 3,648,404 4,118,305 4,128,558 4,314,949 4,076,483 4,307,243 4,097,806 4,033,466 Grants/Contracts 8,580,039 8,975,583 8,615,656 6,956,149 6,556,558 7,358,019 7,048,521 6,216,195 Indirect Cost Recovery 209,024 272,992 301,297 279,317 210,197 240,275 182,473 169,693 Investment Revenue 68,704 100,859 98,956 70,956 44,752 78,070 80,672 82,735 Gifts 49,368 69,547 84,294 72,690 72,910 8,512 18,585 35,581 Other - Revenue 635,799 638,422 356,945 297,833 587,684 750,467 1,866,639 1,719,404 Total 14,393,001 15,511,830 15,150,208 13,356,001 13,306,596 14,457,212 15,214,031 14,306,929

Expenditures Faculty Salaries 5,404,284 5,402,428 5,674,691 5,517,498 5,444,736 5,982,002 5,541,744 5,575,528 Staff Salaries 2,723,713 2,445,636 2,344,931 2,077,660 1,893,224 1,638,290 1,620,476 1,630,252 Fringe Benefits 2,470,301 2,459,069 2,594,623 2,513,106 2,517,683 2,704,514 2,406,838 2,281,140 Operations 3,353,055 3,981,841 3,485,993 2,564,918 1,924,880 2,190,646 1,945,282 1,639,732 Travel 390,699 314,383 245,694 167,433 254,518 232,644 233,573 214,931 Student Support 763,562 599,290 579,808 442,228 471,334 511,579 644,363 710,094 University Tax 21,019 18,188 9,871 5,961 8,251 6,497 11,744 8,073 Total 15,126,633 15,220,835 14,935,611 13,288,804 12,514,626 13,266,172 12,404,020 12,059,750

Source of Funds Detail: 1. Tuition & Fees: Separately accounted for here but part of the allocation from the university. 2. State Appropriations/University Funds: Allocated funds from the legislature and institution supporting instructional activities. 3. Grants/Contracts: Funds received (based on expenditure data) from federal, state, or local agencies through grants and contracts. 4. Indirect Cost Recovery: The 12% of indirect funds that are distributed to the college. 5. Investment Revenue/Gifts: Gifts and interest on restricted gifts. 6. Other Revenue: Professional service income, MOU’s with other colleges, and salary support from sources that are not based in the College.

Expenditures Detail: 1. Faculty Salaries: OUHSC faculty include all tenure, tenure-track, consecutive term, and modified title faculty. This category also includes all PPP and incentive income. The reduction in FY 2013 and FY 2014 relative to FY 2012 were due to reduced incentive income as a result of the reduction in grant and contract revenue. 2. Staff Salaries: Category includes all staff salaries, including staff on research projects. The larger amount spent on staff salaries coincide with a larger amount of research funding. 3. Fringe Benefits: Refers to the amount set by the university for all faculty, staff, and student employees for all benefits provided to employees. 4. Operations: Administrative, instructional, and research related operating costs. 5. Travel: Administrative, instructional, and research related travel costs. 6. Student Support: Refers to all stipends, salary amounts related to graduate/teaching assistants, travel, tuition and fees, scholarships, books, and traineeship expenses. 7. University Tax: Central Administration imposes a 3% tax on all professional service income.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.6: FISCAL RESOURCES

1.6.c. If the school is a collaborative one sponsored by two or more universities, the budget statement must make clear the financial contributions of each sponsoring university to the overall school budget. This should be accompanied by a description of how tuition and other income is shared, including indirect cost returns for research generated by school of public health faculty who may have their primary appointment elsewhere.

Not applicable. The College is not a collaborative school.

1.6.d. Identification of measurable objectives by which the school assesses the adequacy of its fiscal resources, along with data regarding the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years. See CEPH Outcome Measures Exhibit.

Exhibit 1.6.d Outcome Measures for Fiscal Resources Target FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 Commitments for new scholarships with funding for each one between $25,000 and 10 6 7 10 $50,000. (Strategic Plan Objective 1.8) (cumulative number of new commitments) Increase the College annual extramural fund expenditures by 20% from the FY10 level of $8,350,000 $7,358,019 $7,048,521 $6,216,195 approximately $7M (Strategic Plan Objective 2.2) Reduce salary compression so that senior faculty base salaries are maintained at the ASPH 2 Target FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 median for public Schools of Public Health. (Strategic Plan Objective 2.5)1 Professors $162,482 $131,125 $138,497 $140,750 Associate Professors $111,830 $94,547 $100,457 $103,454 Assistant Professors $92,889 $90,390 $89,063 $87,583

Other Measurable Objectives Target FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 Average % of faculty salaries 50% 43% 48% 47% off-set from grants/contracts Percentage (number) of faculty 95% 93% (39) 88% (38) 95% (39) on funded research/service Research dollars per FTE 3 $150,000 $175,191 $163,919 $151,615 primary faculty Student support per FTE 4 $2,500 $2,066 $2,452 $3,134 student 1 Faculty salaries for each of the years and grades indicated are the average salaries, less administrative supplements of all faculty represented in template 1.7.1 with the exception of modified title faculty. 2 Target for salary compression is the 2013 ASPPH median salary for a School of Public Health for non-MD faculty. 3Research dollars per primary faculty is calculated by dividing the grants and contracts income (Exhibit 1.6.1) by FTE faculty (Table 1.7.2). 4Student support per FTE student is calculated by dividing the student support expenses (Exhibit 1.6.1) by the FTE student (Table 1.7.2)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.6: FISCAL RESOURCES

Strategic Plan Objective 2.2 has proven to be a challenge with the reduction in available federal funding. The College has attempted to shift its focus to other sources of funding and to work with junior faculty to help develop their potential for research funding success.

As seen in Exhibit 1.6.d the base salaries within the College are below the ASPPH median salaries for public Schools of Public Health. The college received a compression adjustment from the central administration during FY 2008 – FY 2010 that brought all faculty salary levels to within 80% (Professors) or 90% (Associate and Assistant Professors) of the 75th percentile of the 2006 ASPH faculty salary data. Although the salaries are below the median the College has a very generous incentive plan that allows all regular faculty (tenure, tenure-track, and consecutive term) to receive, in the form of additional salary, 50% of any salary savings they can provide their department. This generous incentive plan has helped with the salary inequities within the faculty ranks.

Also seen in Exhibit 1.6.d, the average salary offset is a little below our target, but this is mainly due to junior faculty coming on board; the expectation is that they will have 50% offset within 3 years. Even with the influx of junior faculty, the percentage of faculty participating in funded research/service and the research dollars per FTE faculty meet the targets.

1.6.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The College operates with a centralized finance and administrative office. Student scholarships and support continue to grow. Departments are working inter-professionally to create funded collaborations. Partnering agencies work with the College to jointly fund faculty positions. A growing program in Tulsa allows us to grow the tuition and fees revenue.

Weaknesses/challenges: The university has faced budget cuts or flat budgets for the last 5 years. Both the State budget allocation to higher education and the federal climate for extramural funds remain challenges. Salary compression for faculty is a continual issue that is addressed periodically by the central administration, but with funding challenges the senior faculty fall well behind the ASPPH median salaries.

Plans: The College will continue to explore opportunities to diversify the school’s funding base. The Dean will continue to work with the Provost to secure additional funding for new faculty positions and continue to work towards salary equity.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.7: FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES

1.7 FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES

The school shall have personnel and other resources adequate to fulfill its stated mission and goals, and its instructional, research and service objectives.

1.7.a. A concise statement or chart defining the number (headcount) of primary faculty in each of the five core public health knowledge areas employed by the school for each of the last three years. If the school is a collaborative one, sponsored by two or more institutions, the statement or chart must include the number of faculty from each of the participating institutions. See CEPH Data Exhibit 1.7.1.

Exhibit 1.7.1 Headcount of Primary Faculty Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 Biostatistics 10 9 9 Epidemiology 12 11 10 Health Administration & Policy 7 7 6 Health Promotion Sciences 7 9 8 Occupational & Environmental Health 6 7 8

Note: Primary Faculty Headcount is counted from the beginning of the fall semester for each year noted. Counts include primary faculty housed at both the Oklahoma City and Tulsa campuses. The Tulsa campus is geographically approximately 100 miles from Oklahoma City. The Tulsa campus is not a separate program and some faculty from Oklahoma City travel to Tulsa to provide classes, adjuncts are used as appropriate, and there are 3 part-time faculty geographically located in Tulsa. Only the Interdisciplinary MPH degree program is offered on site in Tulsa with the degree requirements being exactly the same as for students completing this program in Oklahoma City. Currently there are 2 primary faculty in Tulsa (1 in Epidemiology and 1 in Health Promotion Sciences). A few primary faculty housed in Oklahoma City routinely travel to Tulsa to teach or provide advisement. Selected courses taught by primary faculty housed in Oklahoma City are taught in online or hybrid formats that are fully accessible to Tulsa students.

1.7.b. A table delineating the number of faculty, students and SFRs, organized by department or specialty area, or other organizational unit as appropriate to the school, for each of the last three years (calendar years or academic years) prior to the site visit. Data must be presented in a table format (see CEPH Data Exhibit 1.7.2) and include at least the following information: a) headcount of primary faculty (primary faculty are those with primary appointment in the school of public health), b) FTE conversion of faculty based on % time appointment to the school, c) headcount of other faculty (adjunct, part-time, secondary appointments, etc.), d) FTE conversion of other faculty based on estimate of % time commitment, e) total headcount of primary faculty plus other (non-primary) faculty, f) total FTE of primary and other (non-primary) faculty, g) headcount of students by department or program area, h) FTE conversion of students, based on definition of full-time as nine or more credits per semester, i) student FTE divided by primary faculty FTE and j) student FTE divided by total faculty FTE, including other faculty. All schools must provide data for a), b) and i) and may provide data for c), d) and j) depending on whether the school intends to include the contributions of other faculty in its FTE calculations. Note: CEPH does not specify the manner in which FTE faculty must be calculated, so the school should explain its method in a footnote to this table. In addition, FTE data in this table must match FTE data presented in Criteria 4.1.a (Exhibit 4.1.1) and 4.1.b (Exhibit 4.1.2).

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.7: FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES

See Exhibit 1.7.2 below. Counts are combined across the Oklahoma City and Tulsa campuses. In addition to student and faculty counts in each of the five disciplines, Exhibit 1.7.2 includes line entries for the Interdisciplinary MPH track, the MPH in Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response, and the DrPH. Given the interdisciplinary nature of these programs, their faculty counts represent the combined faculty across all disciplines. Even if the student/faculty ratio (SFR) in interdisciplinary programs is added to the SFR in each discipline, the SFR in each program is well below 10:1.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.7: FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES

Exhibit 1.7.2 Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Ratios by Department or Specialty Area (for Fall 2012) SFR by SFR by HC FTE HC FTE HC FTE FTE HC Primary Total Primary Primary Other Other Total Total Students Students Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty** Faculty Faculty *** FTE FTE Biostatistics 10 10.00 1 0.10 11 10.10 9 7.32 0.73 0.72 Epidemiology 12 12.00 4 1.05 16 13.05 27 23.89 1.99 1.83 Health Administration & Policy 7 7.00 8 1.10 15 8.10 42 55.89 7.98 6.90 Health Promotion Sciences 7 7.00 3 0.20 10 7.20 21 12.44 1.78 1.73 Occupational & Environmental Health 6 6.00 5 0.30 11 6.30 21 16.89 2.82 2.68 Interdisciplinary MPH* 42 42.00 21 2.75 63 44.75 132 122.67 2.92 2.74 Public Health Preparedness MPH* 42 42.00 21 2.75 63 44.75 3 3.00 0.07 0.07 DrPH* 42 42.00 21 2.75 63 44.75 9 5.56 0.13 0.12

Exhibit 1.7.2 Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Ratios by Department or Specialty Area (for Fall 2013) SFR by SFR by HC FTE HC FTE HC FTE FTE HC Primary Total Primary Primary Other Other Total Total Students Students Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty** Faculty Faculty *** FTE FTE Biostatistics 9 9.00 1 0.10 10 9.10 14 13.00 1.44 1.43 Epidemiology 11 11.00 6 1.15 17 12.15 31 27.89 2.54 2.30 Health Administration & Policy 7 7.00 10 1.25 17 8.25 35 49.01 7.00 5.94 Health Promotion Sciences 9 9.00 1 0.20 10 9.20 15 10.34 1.15 1.12 Occupational & Environmental Health 7 7.00 3 0.20 10 7.20 25 20.33 2.90 2.82 Interdisciplinary MPH* 43 43.00 21 2.90 64 45.90 137 133.88 3.11 2.92 Public Health Preparedness MPH* 43 43.00 21 2.90 64 45.90 1 0.78 0.02 0.02 DrPH* 43 43.00 21 2.90 64 45.90 13 7.56 0.18 0.16

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.7: FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES

Exhibit 1.7.2 Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Ratios by Department or Specialty Area (for Fall 2014) SFR by SFR by HC FTE HC FTE HC FTE FTE HC Primary Total Primary Primary Other Other Total Total Students Students Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty** Faculty Faculty *** FTE FTE Biostatistics 9 9.00 1 0.15 10 9.15 14 12.34 1.37 1.35 Epidemiology 10 10.00 7 1.90 17 11.90 41 36.67 3.67 3.08 Health Administration & Policy 6 6.00 12 1.30 18 7.30 37 45.34 7.56 6.21 Health Promotion Sciences 8 8.00 3 0.65 11 8.65 27 24.56 3.07 2.84 Occupational & Environmental Health 8 8.00 4 0.25 12 8.25 23 19.67 2.46 2.38 Interdisciplinary MPH* 41 41.00 27 4.25 68 45.25 85 79.67 1.94 1.76 Public Health Preparedness MPH* 41 41.00 27 4.25 68 45.25 1 1.11 0.03 0.02 DrPH* 41 41.00 27 4.25 68 45.25 13 7.22 0.18 0.16 *Interdisciplinary MPH, Public Health Preparedness MPH, and DrPH programs are interdisciplinary; therefore the faculty counts reflect combined faculty across all disciplines. **For Other Faculty, FTE is counted as actual appointment FTE if the faculty member holds an appointment with the college and as 0.05 FTE if they teach one class per year. ***For students, 1 FTE is defined as 9 credit hours of enrollment. A student enrolled in 12 credit hours, e.g., would represent 1.33 FTE

Key to Exhibit 1.7.2: HC = Head Count Primary = Full-time faculty who support the teaching programs—see CEPH Technical Assistance Paper on Required Faculty Resources for definition FTE = Full-time-equivalent Other = Adjunct, part-time and secondary faculty Total = Primary + Other SFR = Student/Faculty Ratio

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.7: FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES

1.7.c. A concise statement or chart defining the headcount and FTE of non-faculty, non-student personnel (administration and staff).

Exhibit 1.7.3 Headcount (FTE) of Administration and Staff Administration Research Dean’s Office 1 (1.00) Student Services 3 (3.00) Information Technology 1 (1.00) Administration/Financial Services 8 (7.50) Biostatistics & Epidemiology 1 (1.00) 13 (12.75) Health Administration & Policy 1 (1.00) 0 (0.00) Health Promotion Sciences 1 (1.00) 13 (12.10) Occupational & Environmental Health 1 (0.50) 1 (1.00)

Note: Headcount (FTE) as of March 1, 2015.

A number of organizational functions were consolidated into the Dean’s Office after the last accreditation and following an internal audit. It was determined that consolidating some functions allowed for more consistent processes and a better use of personnel. Currently the staff numbers are adequate, but as the college continues to grow the number of administrative staff will need to increase.

1.7.d. Description of the space available to the school for various purposes (offices, classrooms, common space for student use, etc.), by location.

The College is located in the five-story College of Health Building (CHB) on the Health Sciences Center campus. Over 65,376 square feet of usable space of this building is dedicated to offices, classrooms, conference rooms, laboratories, computer labs, student space, and storage. The College also occupies 1,853 square feet of office space in the nearby Presbyterian Health Foundation Research Park. This space is utilized by the College’s Center for Biosecurity Research. Available classroom space in the CHB totals 10,166 square feet and varies from rooms with 15-seat capacity to two 64-seat lecture halls and a large 365-seat auditorium. Classroom space is shared among the departments. Exhibit 1.7.4 details space allocations by unit and purpose.

Exhibit 1.7.4 Allocation of Space (Square Footage) by Usage Dean’s Office BSE HAP HPS OEH Total Classrooms 10,166 Offices 5,902 10,075 2,775 4,886 4,503 28,141 Conference Rooms 1,045 481 362 128 599 2,615 Laboratory Space 3,274 3,274 Computer Labs 612 1,068 1,680 Student Space 2,553 1,210 1,682 1,146 800 7,391 Storage 2,273 2,317 254 458 580 5,882 Vacant1 6,247 0 197 749 887 8,080 TOTALS 18,632 15,151 5,270 7,367 10,643 67,229 1 Most of this space is unusable unless remodeled

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.7: FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES

In response to student requests for additional study and meeting space, in Spring 2015 the College opened additional rooms, including the Ed Brandt Reading Room and the COPHSA lounge, for non- programmed use by students.

Availability of convenient parking is a perennial concern for students in the College. To alleviate this problem, the Dean has secured permission for student parking permit holders to park in a large lot across the street from the College of Health Building and in a small lot two blocks north of the building.

1.7.e. A concise description of the laboratory space and description of the kind, quantity and special features or special equipment.

Laboratories are housed on two floors within the College. The Department of Occupational and Environmental Health manages the aerosols laboratory, nanomaterials laboratory, chromatography laboratory, teaching laboratory (all on the fourth floor), and microbiology laboratory (second floor). The updating of the laboratories has been on the College’s capital improvement list for the last 3 years.

Aerosols Laboratory. This research laboratory specializes in the study of airborne particle behavior. It is equipped with a variety of equipment for generating and characterizing aerosols and bioaerosols, including an ultraviolet time-of-flight aerosol spectrometry system, a scanning mobility particle spectrometry system, state-of-the-art portable optical aerosol spectrometers, and various bioaerosol sampling devices and instruments. The laboratory occupies approximately 470 square feet.

Teaching Laboratory. The teaching laboratory is equipped to provide hands-on experience with environmental and industrial hygiene sampling equipment. It contains a full range of instruments and devices used for sampling and measuring contaminants in air, water, and soil, as well as instruments for measuring exposures to ionizing radiation, non-ionizing radiation, noise, and heat and cold stress. The laboratory occupies 295 square feet.

Nanomaterials Laboratory. This laboratory is dedicated to the preparation and study of nanomaterials, including metal fumes and carbon nanotubule-based products. The laboratory occupies approximately 470 square feet.

Chromatography Laboratory. This laboratory supports teaching and research in both the occupational and environmental health areas. Analytical capability includes thermal desorption gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) and ion chromatograph (IC). The laboratory occupies approximately 587 square feet.

Microbiology Laboratory. This laboratory suite includes a controlled environment sample preparation chamber, autoclave, chemical fume hood, biological safety cabinet, walk-in refrigerator, aerobic and anaerobic incubators, walk-in incubator, large sample oven, laboratory dishwasher, and ultra-pure water purification system. The laboratory includes three rooms occupying approximately 1000 square feet.

1.7.f. A concise statement concerning the amount, location and types of computer facilities and resources for students, faculty, administration and staff.

College of Public Health

The College provides Pentium class personal computers to all full-time and most part-time faculty and staff. All students are required to purchase a computer for their academic needs. There are 2 computer labs, equipped with printers, one on the first floor for all students and one on the second floor for Biostatistics and Epidemiology students. All computers are connected via an in-house Ethernet network. The building is also equipped with WiFi throughout. The Information Technology Group (IT) offers a total information and communication solution, integrating networking, telecommunications, the Internet and

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.7: FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES

intranet, organizational and desktop database technology and applications, which bring institutional and collegiate information from central servers to the individual desktop of the faculty, researcher, clinician, student, staff, and administrator.

The University provides Microsoft Office Suite and other specialized software for which the University holds licenses, including SAS and SPSS. The BERD (component of the OSCTR) and the Dean’s Office provide JMP software. IT provides integrated and comprehensive support solutions, from the desktop, via the network and Web, to University data servers. Other computer resources include printers, plotters, and scanners.

Robert M. Bird Health Sciences Library

Microcomputers. PCs are available for OUHSC library patrons during library hours. The PC Lab contains 21 machines with Windows operating systems and Microsoft Office applications for word processing, spreadsheet, database, presentation, and Internet applications. Each PC is equipped with a CD burner and zip drive.

Laptops. Laptops are available for student check-out for use in the Library. Each laptop can be used on the hard or wireless networks and has an external mouse. The laptops can also be reserved to create small classroom settings in Rm. 489 or the Auditorium.

Wireless Network. A wireless network is available throughout the library building. Students may access the network from a personal laptop if the laptop is set up for wireless access.

PC Teaching Lab. A PC Teaching Lab is available for faculty and staff to conduct hands-on training. The room is equipped with an instructor's workstation, projector, screen, small whiteboard and 12 student workstations. Web browsers, telnet, word processing, Excel, Access, and PowerPoint are standard software on all machines. The lab can be reserved for classroom instruction by calling 271-2285, x48756 or by sending email to the PCLAB in Outlook. The availability can be checked by using meeting maker in Outlook.

Instructor Software. A separate group of five PCs are installed with software requested by faculty to enhance instruction for specific courses.

Computer Related Equipment. Available equipment includes 2 flatbed scanners, 1 X-Ray scanner, 2 slide scanners , 2 digital film recorders (DFR), 2 Sony digital cameras, 1 Cannon digital movie camera, external zip drives, super disk drives (MAC), and a laser disc player. The DFR allows slides produced in PowerPoint or Corel presentations to be captured to 35MM film. Electronic 100 or regular 200 speed film is used.

Student Center

The OUHSC Student Center is equipped with both Pentium and Macintosh computers with standard applications software. A laser printer is available for use.

1.7.g. A concise description of library/information resources available for school use, including a description of library capacity to provide digital (electronic) content, access mechanisms, training opportunities and document-delivery services.

The OUHSC Robert M. Bird Health Sciences Library collection contains over 100,000 books, journals and audiovisuals, as well as, access to unlimited electronic resources. The University of Oklahoma library in Norman houses over 4.7 million books, journals and audiovisuals and the OU-Tulsa Schusterman Library has nearly 70,000 volumes of bound material. The University employs an electronic catalogue of all its

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.7: FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES

holdings. The libraries provide Internet access to a number of online databases capable of reaching extensive additional literature sources.

The library offers access to specialized health databases, including MEDLINE, TOXLINE, Web of Knowledge, Lexis Nexis Academic Universe, Academic Search Elite, and Business Source Elite among others. Access is also available to commercially offered databases such as Biological Abstracts and Chemical Abstracts. The Library currently has access to 83 databases. Document delivery from library holdings or interlibrary loan may be requested through the library website. Interlibrary loan materials are generally delivered within 7 to 10 working days. Information about using the library and accessing databases can be located at http://library.ouhsc.edu.

The reference librarians offer one-on-one and group instruction on a variety of topics. Instructional requests can be submitted online.

1.7.h. A concise statement of any other resources not mentioned above, if applicable.

The College is uniquely situated within a large medical complex of 12 public and private health care institutions. Faculty and students may use the clinical, laboratory and teaching facilities of the OU Medical Center, the Veterans Affairs Medical Center, the Children's Hospital of Oklahoma, the Dean A. McGee Eye Institute, the Oklahoma State Department of Health, and the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation as field work sites.

1.7.i. Identification of measurable objectives through which the school assesses the adequacy of its resources, along with data regarding the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years. See CEPH Outcome Measures Exhibit.

Exhibit 1.7.5 Outcome Measures for Faculty and Other Resources

Exhibit 1.7.5(a) Non-Space Related Measures Indicator Target FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Increase the resident faculty in Tulsa (Objective 1 5 3.5 3.5 3.0 1.11) Recruit a sufficient number of new full-time faculty to attain the ASPH recommended minimum 50 42 43 41 (Objective 2.1)2 Number of scholarships available for students 22 18 19 22 (Objective 1.8) Student/Faculty Ratio 6:1 6.3:1 6.3:1 5.9:1 Available administrative and classroom space Double See Exhibit 1.7.5(b) 1 Funding for Tulsa resident faculty has been a challenge. The College had planned to provide one FTE per core teaching area, but has been unable to secure the necessary funding. Courses in Tulsa are taught by two full-time faculty members and several part-time and adjunct professors. The 3 FTEs are currently 1 Epidemiologist, 1.5 Health Promotion Sciences, 0.25 Health Administration and Policy, and 0.25 General Public Health. 2 The full-time faculty are reported as of Fall 2012, Fall 2013, and Fall 2014 to match Exhibit 1.7.1.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.7: FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES

Exhibit 1.7.5(b) Administrative and Classroom Space3 Functional Area FY 2007 FY 2014 Dean's Office Administration 5,754 15,467 Student Space 3,501 7,391 Classroom Space (unshared by other colleges) 1,928 10,166 Computer Labs 779 1,680 Biostatistics and Epidemiology 9,865 12,873 Health Administration and Policy 2,687 3,588 Health Promotion Sciences 2,756 6,221 Occupational and Environmental Health 6,474 9,843 3The College of Allied Health moved out of the College of Health Building in the fall of 2009 leaving the College of Public Health with the entire building for our offices, classes, student space, and computer labs. The College has been updating its space, including a recently initiated program of classroom improvements. The College is also working with the upper administration to secure funding for a major renovation of the building’s large auditorium.

Strategic Plan Objectives 1.11 and 2.1 have been a challenge due to the lack of State funding. The College of Public Health is working with other colleges to fund a portion of various positions to allow us to reach our goals.

1.7.j. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: The College has adequate space available for offices, classrooms, and students. The computer and library resources available for students, staff, and faculty are extensive. The student faculty ratio is excellent in all programs. There are multiple opportunities for collaboration with other colleges, clinics, hospitals, research facilities, and agencies on the same campus.

Weaknesses/challenges: The commentary has to do with the number of faculty in the College overall and housed in Tulsa, which are below expectations. Staff numbers are adequate, but leave no room for special projects. Although ample and well-equipped laboratory space is available, some updates are needed. Funding to address these weaknesses/challenges must come from either State or extramural funds. With the ongoing austere State funding situation, new State funds are very unlikely to be forthcoming.

Plans: The Dean and senior administrative staff are working to find creative ways to fund faculty and laboratory improvements. While this has proved challenging, these efforts will continue to be a priority for the College.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.7: FACULTY AND OTHER RESOURCES

[This page intentionally left blank]

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.8: DIVERSITY

1.8 DIVERSITY

The school shall demonstrate a commitment to diversity and shall evidence an ongoing practice of cultural competence in learning, research and service practices.

1.8.a. A written plan and/or policies demonstrating systematic incorporation of diversity within the school. Required elements include the following:

i. Description of the school’s under-represented populations, including a rationale for the designation.

ii. A list of goals for achieving diversity and cultural competence within the school, and a description of how diversity-related goals are consistent with the university’s mission, strategic plan and other initiatives on diversity, as applicable.

iii. Policies that support a climate free of harassment and discrimination and that value the contributions of all forms of diversity; the school should also document its commitment to maintaining/using these policies.

iv. Policies that support a climate for working and learning in a diverse setting.

v. Policies and plans to develop, review and maintain curricula and other opportunities including service learning that address and build competency in diversity and cultural considerations.

vi. Policies and plans to recruit, develop, promote and retain a diverse faculty.

vii. Policies and plans to recruit, develop, promote and retain a diverse staff.

viii. Policies and plans to recruit, admit, retain and graduate a diverse student body.

ix. Regular evaluation of the effectiveness of the above-listed measures.

The College’s commitment to diversity is incorporated into its strategic plan and supported by institutional policies and procedures ensuring equal opportunity in employment and education.

1.8.a(i) Description of the school’s under-represented populations, including a rationale for the designation. The College designates American Indians, African Americans, and Hispanic Americans as under-represented populations. These groups are considered under-represented relative to the needs of the state, the nation, and the 38 federally-recognized Oklahoma tribes for a public health workforce with heightened cultural competence to work on reducing and eliminating health disparities affecting minority communities. Furthermore, relative to the demographics of the state, Hispanic Americans are under- represented among students enrolled Oklahoma public universities, the institution, and the College, and all three groups are under-represented among faculty at the institution.

1.8.a(ii) A list of goals for achieving diversity and cultural competence within the school, and a description of how diversity-related goals are consistent with the university’s mission, strategic plan and other initiatives on diversity, as applicable. The College’s goals and objectives for diversity and cultural competence are contained in its 2011-2015 Strategic Plan. Among the five goals in the Strategic Plan (see 1.1.c), two are directed at diversity and cultural competence. Goal 3 is focused on “resolving health disparities in Oklahoma including those due to socioeconomic status, ethnicity, race, and gender, particularly in the American Indian population.” Goal 4 is to “sustain and enhance cultural diversity among students, faculty, and staff.” Among the Strategic Plan objectives listed in Section 1.1.d, objectives 3.1, 3.3, and 3.4 explicitly aim at establishing partnerships with organizations serving under- represented minorities, objective 3.2 aims to develop and implement a course on American Indian health,

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.8: DIVERSITY

objectives 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 address diversity in the student body, objective 4.4 addresses diversity in the faculty, objective 4.5 addresses diversity in College staff, and objective 4.6 aims to help the Oklahoma State Department of Health to increase the diversity of its workforce.

These goals and objectives reflect the University’s mission “to provide the best possible educational experience for our students” and its stated commitment “to the continuation and expansion of positive programs which reinforce and strengthen its affirmative action policies [which] stems not only from compliance with federal and state equal opportunity laws but from a desire to ensure social justice and promote campus diversity”. The goals are moreover expressive of the College’s mission and its core values, particularly the values of health equity and partnership with stakeholders.

1.8.a(iii) Policies that support a climate free of harassment and discrimination and that value the contributions of all forms of diversity; the school should also document its commitment to maintaining/using these policies. The College of Public Health follows all policies of the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center. The University has a written policy prohibiting discrimination, including harassment, by any unit or member of its community against any individual based on race, color, religion, political beliefs, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, genetic information, disability, or veteran status in matters of admissions, employment, financial aid, housing or services in educational programs or activities (Resource File).

The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center has developed an Affirmative Action Program (AAP) to ensure implementation of its Equal Opportunity Policy). The AAP includes employment policies and procedures for hiring of staff, faculty, and administrators and analysis of representation of minorities and women in hiring, promotion, job incumbency, and termination.

Under the AAP, the Office of Human Resources, working with the Office of Equal Opportunity, maintains a system for internal reporting of the process and progress of the administration of the Affirmative Action Program. Periodic reports of recruitment results regarding minority and women employees in the colleges of the Health Sciences Center are provided by the Office of Equal Opportunity. The reporting system identifies areas of underutilization, which exists when the percentage of females or minorities in the job group is less than the percentage of females or minorities available to be employed in that job group. An evaluation of affirmative action efforts based primarily on recruitment efforts and applicant data for each faculty search is made by the university Equal Opportunity Office, and is reported to the search committee as approved or with recommendations for further action.

The College’s commitment to equal opportunity is documented by a statement in its Bulletin and is communicated to the public by statements in student and faculty recruiting materials and by the “Equal Opportunity Employer” link on the College webpages.

(Note: The policies and statements hyperlinked in this section can be accessed through http://www.ou.edu/content/eoo/policies-procedures.html.)

1.8.a(iv) Policies that support a climate for working and learning in a diverse setting. The University requires all employees to complete periodic online training on discrimination and sexual misconduct. Students are also required to take online training on sexual misconduct. Additional training and information are provided campus-wide by the Division of Student Affairs.

The University’s policy on disabilities states that it “will reasonably accommodate otherwise qualified individuals with a disability unless such accommodation would pose an undue hardship or would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the service, program or activity or would result in undue financial or administrative burdens.”

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.8: DIVERSITY

1.8.a(v) Policies and plans to develop, review and maintain curricula and other opportunities including service learning that address and build competency in diversity and cultural considerations. Competency in diversity and cultural considerations is built into the core competencies for the public health professional degrees (see section 2.6.a). It is a focus of the core course in Health Promotion Sciences, HPS 5213. A primary emphasis of HPS 5213 is to provide students with a framework for understanding how health disparities are created and maintained through social and physical structures within society. Diversity and cultural competency is also imparted in numerous other courses, including CPH 7003 (required for all MPH students), BSE 5111, BSE 5333, HAP 5203, HAP 5483, HAP 5563, HPS 5453, HPS 5463, HPS 5563, HPS 5803, and HPS 5853. HPS 5853, Health and the American Indian, was developed in fulfillment of Objective 3.2 of the 2011-2015 Strategic Plan.

The practicum experience affords many students the opportunity to work in cultural diverse settings. These include the Indian Health Service, Oklahoma City Indian Clinic, Oklahoma City Area Inter-Tribal Health Board, and various tribal government agencies.

1.8.a(vi) Policies and plans to recruit, develop, promote and retain a diverse faculty. It is the policy of the Health Sciences Center to search for diversified pools of candidates as much as possible. At the operational level of the College, equal employment opportunity is assured through rigorous adherence to faculty and staff hiring procedures as established by the Office of Equal Opportunity. Position descriptions, advertisements, and interview question sheets are approved in advance to ensure compliance with applicable policies.

In accordance with the Health Sciences Center policy, national searches are conducted for executive officers, academic and administrative officers, and faculty with tenured, tenure-eligible or consecutive- term appointments. Written job descriptions must be publicized widely enough that a representative number of applicants are reached. For academic and administrative officer job openings, national advertising is typically required. Advertising may include publication in professional journals, especially journals that are oriented toward minority and women candidates. The College has established a policy to advertise in at least two diversity job recruitment websites. Under university policy, applicants are typically screened using an evaluation instrument, with finalists invited for an interview. Equal opportunity is always a consideration in the interviewing and decision making process. If a panel is used, the panel should include women and minority group faculty members as participants. Minority and female interviewees are provided an opportunity to visit with other minorities and women during their campus visit. The decision to hire or not to hire is based solely upon job related qualities of the individual.

Promotion of tenure-eligible faculty is based upon specific criteria, and is not based upon race, color, national origin, gender, age, religion, political affiliation, disability, status as a veteran, or sexual orientation. The College actively seeks to develop and retain minority and female faculty by encouraging them to participate in the campus-wide Faculty Leadership Program (see section 4.2.b). Additionally, the faculty mentoring program currently under development by an ad hoc committee of Faculty Board (see section 1.5.a(ii)) addresses elements of diversity inclusion.

1.8.a(vii) Policies and plans to recruit, develop, promote and retain a diverse staff. As described above [section 1.8.a(vi)], the University and College adhere strictly to policies regarding equal employment opportunity. This ensures that advertisements reach a broad audience, and that all applicants receive equal consideration in a structured manner by committees of reviewers drawn from within and outside the College. The College does not utilize any type of quota or preference system in hiring.

Recruitment for staff personnel is vigorous and broad-based. It includes personal contacts with minority groups and women’s groups both on campus and in the community, and advertising in ways likely to draw the job opening to the attention of minorities and women. Vacancies for staff positions are publicized through the OUHSC Human Resources employment website. Vacancy information and application

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.8: DIVERSITY

procedures are also posted on the university’s Human Resources, Workforce Oklahoma, and Oklahoma Employment Security Commission web sites. Search committees are encouraged to list the vacancies with appropriate women’s and minority groups of professional societies. The Office of Human Resources publicizes staff employee vacancies in order that eligible employees may be informed of opportunities for promotion. Employers consider all candidates recommended by Human Resources. No applicant is selected for employment in preference to a more qualified candidate on the basis of racial background or gender.

The College actively seeks to retain both minority and female staff. The university encourages the upward mobility of staff employees to positions for which they are qualified and which meet their career interests and objectives. Staff promotions are made without consideration of race, color, national origin, gender, age, religion, political affiliation, disability, status as a veteran, or sexual orientation.

1.8.a(viii) Policies and plans to recruit, admit, retain and graduate a diverse student body. OUHSC and the College of Public Health are committed to a policy of nondiscrimination in the admission and education of students. The Equal Opportunity Office monitors policies, procedures and programs to ensure they are developed and carried out in a manner which does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability. Among areas monitored are student admission and retention, financial aid policies and the provision of support services.

Oklahoma is home to 38 federally recognized American Indian tribes that account for 9% of the state’s population. There are 17,800 Native American students enrolled in Oklahoma public institutions of higher education. The College has fostered a relationship with advisement and student services departments in seven Oklahoma institutions of higher education that have a high percentage of the state's American Indian student population. These seven institutions are the University of Oklahoma main campus in Norman, the Oklahoma State University main campus in Stillwater, the University of Central Oklahoma, East Central Oklahoma University in Ada (headquarters of the Chickasaw Nation), Northeastern Oklahoma State University in Tahlequah (capital of the Cherokee Nation), Southwestern Oklahoma State University, and Southeastern Oklahoma State University in Durant (capital of the Choctaw Nation).

Direct recruitment efforts have also targeted the African-American population. For example, presentations on public health careers are made at Langston University, which is a Historically Black College or University (HBCU) and has primarily an African American student population. The College has joined with Langston University to develop a cooperative agreement whereby seniors in the Health Administration Program at Langston University may enroll in one of the basic core courses offered in the College of Public Health. Students are selected by Health Administration faculty at Langston based on their interest in professional/graduate education in Public Health and must have demonstrated high academic achievement with a cumulative GPA of 3.0 or higher. Credit earned may be applied to an OUHSC professional/graduate degree. Once enrolled, the student is provided an offsetting tuition waiver so that the student is charged the Langston University upper division credit hour rate.

Institutional support services are a key component in the retention of students with diverse needs and backgrounds. Accommodations on the basis of disability are available by contacting the University’s Disability Resource Center. Students requesting disability-related services or accommodations are required to submit appropriate documentation to substantiate the disability. Multicultural Student Services exists within the Division of Student Affairs to create and maintain a culturally diverse student environment and provide educational opportunities on the varying cultures on campus, optimal recruitment, advisement, and support services to prospective and current students. Additionally, minority and international students in the College are active in campus-wide multicultural student organizations as well as in COPHSA, often in leadership positions.

1.8.a(ix) Regular evaluation of the effectiveness of the above-listed measures. The College’s progress toward achieving its goals on diversity and cultural competence are evaluated regularly through the mechanism of the semi-annual review of the 2011-2015 Strategic Plan by the College’s Executive

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.8: DIVERSITY

Committee. The most recent Strategic Plan Progress Report, a cumulative record of actions, completions, modifications, and deferrals of specific objectives, is provided in the Resource File. Additionally, the Office of Equal Opportunity reports to the College annually on its utilization of women and minorities relative to their availability for employment.

1.8.b. Evidence that shows the plan or policies are being implemented. Examples may include mission/goals/objectives that reference diversity or cultural competence, syllabi and other course materials, lists of student experiences demonstrating diverse settings, records and statistics on faculty, staff and student recruitment, admission and retention.

The current status of the College’s progress toward achieving the 10 objectives on diversity and cultural competence in its 2011-2015 Strategic Plan is summarized in Exhibit 1.8.b.

Exhibit 1.8.b. Progress toward Achieving Goals for Diversity and Cultural Competence Contained in the College’s 2011-2015 Strategic Plan

Goal/Objective Progress as of 7/5/2014 Goal 3: Contribute to resolving health disparities in Oklahoma including those due to ethnicity, race, and gender, particularly in the American Indian population. 3.1 Establish three new partnership agreements with There are new and ongoing partnerships tribal partners on one or more topics of public with the Association of American Indian health workforce development, prevention Physicians, the Oklahoma City Area research, and/or translation of research into Inter-Tribal Health Board, the Oklahoma practice by June, 2014. City Indian Clinic, the Indian Health Service, and the Chickasaw, Choctaw, and Absentee Shawnee Tribes. 13 other federally-recognized tribes have taken part in prevention research projects conducted by College faculty in collaboration with the Oklahoma City Indian Clinic and other partners. 3.2 Develop and implement on online elective New course has been developed; course in American Indian Health by June, 2014 alternative delivery method is under (cross-cutting with College Strategic Plan Goal discussion 1). 3.3 Establish a partnership agreement with a We have an MOU with Langston Historically Black College or University and/or University, a traditionally African African American community organization on American undergraduate school, to allow one or more aspects of public health workforce their students to take our classes during development, prevention research, and/or their senior year. Continue this goal as translation of research into practice by June, “Maintain” partnership agreement and 2014. evaluate annually.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.8: DIVERSITY

Exhibit 1.8.b. Progress toward Achieving Goals for Diversity and Cultural Competence Contained in the College’s 2011-2015 Strategic Plan

Goal/Objective Progress as of 7/5/2014 3.4 Establish a partnership agreement with a This goal is a challenge considering the Hispanic community organization and/or a fact that only 4% or less of all students Hispanic serving university on one or more enrolled at 4 year programs are Hispanic. aspects of public health workforce development, Partly addressed by the OSDH Diversity prevention research, and/or translation of program. Consider changing this goal to research into practice by June, 2014. recruiting more Hispanic students instead of entering into an agreement. Look for scholarship opportunities to help achieve this goal. We have worked with the Oklahoma City-County Health Department to hire a faculty member that will work part-time in the Hispanic Community. Goal 4: Sustain and enhance cultural diversity among students, faculty, staff, and the state and local public health workforce. 4.1 Increase the proportion of American Indian See Exhibit 1.8.1. In Spring 2014 8.8% of students within the College to 15% or more of the students reported they were the student population by June, 2015. American Indian. 4.2 Increase and maintain the proportion of other See Exhibit 1.8.1. In Spring 2014 we had qualified minority students within the student the following: 13.1% Black; 4.0% population to equal or exceed the respective Hispanic; 13.1% Asian; 10.4% proportions within the demographics of International; and 64.1% White Oklahoma by June, 2015. 4.3 Maintain the proportion of international students See Exhibit 1.8.1. International students within the College at 10% to 15% of the student are about 10-11% of the student population (cross-cutting with College Strategic population. Plan Goal 5). 4.4 Identify and implement strategies to increase the See Exhibit 1.8.1. In CY12 we hired 4 number of qualified minority applicants for faculty new full and part-time faculty and of within the College by June, 2015. those hired none were minority. In CY13 we hired 10 new full and part-time faculty and of those hired 3 were minority. 4.5 Identify and implement strategies to increase the In CY12 we hired 8 new staff members number of qualified minority applicants for staff and of those hired 3 were minority. In within the College by June, 2015. CY13 we hired 6 new staff members and of those hired 3 were minority. 4.6 Develop and submit a plan to the Oklahoma We entered into a contract with the State Department of Health by June, 2012 to Oklahoma State Department of Health increase the diversity of the agency’s workforce (OSDH) for $1.5 million to recruit Native (cross-cutting with College Strategic Plan Goal American tribal members into our MPH 1). or Certificate program. We currently have 15 students in the program.

The performance of the College relative to its goals for enrollment of under-represented minority students and recruitment/retention of under-represented faculty and staff is summarized in Exhibit 1.8.1 below. The College of Public Health strives to recruit and enroll a very diverse student population, and continues to make this a priority in all recruitment efforts. The percentage of under-represented minority students has remained fairly consistent over the years at approximately 19-22%. More female than male students are

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.8: DIVERSITY

enrolled (approximately 65% female), which is consistent with national trends across accredited schools of public health. International students comprise about 10% of the student population.

Retention of minority students was included an analysis of MPH degree completion data conducted in 2012 on students admitted to the MPH degree from July 1, 2003 through July 1, 2007 (n = 376). Within this cohort, 213 students completed the degree, 129 discontinued the program, and 34 were dismissed from the program. Degree completion rates differed significantly by race/ethnicity (Chi-square test, p = 0.019), but in multivariate analysis, after adjusting for age and undergraduate grade point average, there was no significant association (p = 0.11) between race/ethnicity and the odds of not completing the MPH degree. These findings suggest that disparate outcomes on degree completion by some minorities can be addressed by (1) better advisement and nontraditional course delivery options that meet the needs of older students, and (2) changes to the admissions process, as described in section 2.7.b(1), that ensure more rigorous evaluation of marginally qualified applicants.

1.8.c. Description of how the diversity plan or policies were developed, including an explanation of the constituent groups involved.

The 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, including the goals on diversity and cultural competence, was developed through a process of extensive consultation with a broad range of stakeholders as described in Section 1.1.e.

The College has appointed an ad hoc committee of faculty, students, and staff to further study issues of diversity and inclusion and make recommendations for the 2016-2020 Strategic Plan. The committee was charged to address not only outcomes, in terms of a faculty, staff, and student body that are representative of the communities served by the public health workforce, but also to consider processes and infrastructure that might be valuable in ensuring an atmosphere of inclusion and respect for all. The committee has made suggestions such as development and implementation of a training module on cross-cultural relations of College faculty, staff, and students; inclusion of gender and ethnicity in the College’s nondiscrimination policy; and assurance that minority and international students have awareness and access to institutional support and resources.

1.8.d. Description of how the plan or policies are monitored, how the plan is used by the school and how often the plan is reviewed.

The College’s Strategic Plan is the focal point of its efforts on diversity and cultural competence, among other goals. As noted in section 1.8.a(ix), the College’s progress toward achieving its goals is evaluated regularly through the mechanism of the semi-annual review of the 2011-2015 Strategic Plan by the College’s Executive Committee.

1.8.e. Identification of measurable objectives by which the school may evaluate its success in achieving a diverse complement of faculty, staff and students, along with data regarding the performance of the program against those measures for each of the last three years. See CEPH Data Exhibit 1.8.1. At a minimum, the school must include four objectives, at least two of which relate to race/ethnicity. For non- US-based institutions of higher education, matters regarding the feasibility of race/ethnicity reporting will be handled on a case-by-case basis. Measurable objectives must align with the school’s definition of under-represented populations in Criterion 1.8.a.

The performance of the College relative to its objectives for enrollment of under-represented minority students and recruitment/retention of under-represented faculty and staff is summarized in Exhibit 1.8.1. Objective 4.5, increasing minority applications for staff positions, could not be directly measured due to lack of demographic information collected by the Equal Opportunity Office on staff applicants. As a

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.8: DIVERSITY

substitute metric, the College has included the proportion of under-represented minorities among incumbents in staff positions.

1.8.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: The University, the Health Sciences Center, and the College are strongly committed to equal opportunity in employment and education. Diversity is well supported by the institutional infrastructure. Minority students are active in campus-wide minority student organizations and are well represented in the leadership of the College of Public Health Student Association.

Diversity in students, faculty, staff, and academic pursuits are a major focus of College’s strategic plan. Representation of American Indians and African Americans among staff, faculty, and students equals or exceeds institution-wide proportions and approaches or exceeds the demographics of the state.

Weaknesses/Challenges: Hispanic Americans are under-represented among students, faculty and staff relative to the demographics of the state. This is true in higher education statewide, creating a challenge for the College to grow its applicant pool among undergraduate Hispanic students.

The College recruits for faculty and staff positions among a diverse pool of candidates, as described in sections 1.8.a(vi) and 1.8.a(vii). However, the number of minority applicants for faculty positions, though robust, fell short of targets.

The College’s efforts on diversity have been focused on race/ethnicity. Further attention may be needed to ensure that other potentially under-represented groups are included fully in the life of the College. These groups may include people with disabilities, LGBT people, foreign-born people, older students, and students from rural areas.

Plans: The College’s 2016-2020 Strategic Plan currently under development will reaffirm commitment to a faculty, staff, and student body that are representative of the demographics of the state. Additional efforts at diversity inclusion and cross-cultural awareness have been proposed and are under consideration.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.8: DIVERSITY

Exhibit 1.8.1. Diversity Outcomes Summary Data for Faculty, Students and Staff

Method of Category/Definition Data Source Target FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Collection Students Admission 8.9% (primary); 9.0% (primary); 8.8% (primary); American Indian or Alaska Native Self-Report 15.0% c c c Forms 6.4% (IPEDS) 6.0% (IPEDS) 6.0 (IPEDS) Admission Asian Self-Report 1.9% 7.1% 9.7% 12.4% Forms Admission Black or African American Self-Report 7.6% 12.4% 12.4% 13.1% Forms Admission Hispanic or Latino Self-Report 9.3% 4.6% 5.7% 4.0% Forms Admission White Self-Report 67.9% 66.7% 65.1% 64.1% Forms Admission International Self-Report 10.0% - 15.0% 10.3% 10.7% 10.4% Forms

Faculty – Incumbents– Primary Human American Indian or Alaska Native Self-Report 9.0% 4.76% 7.50% 6.98% Resources Human Asian Self-Report 1.9% 16.67% 15.00% 18.60% Resources Human Black or African American Self-Report 7.6% 4.76% 7.50% 4.65% Resources Human White Self-Report 67.9% 71.43% 67.50% 69.77% Resources

Faculty Applicants – All Positionsa 8 minority 6 minority 4 minority applicants / applicants / applicants / Under-represented minority Human >1.75 per 7 searches 14 searches 5 searches (0.8 b Self-Report applicants Resources search (1.14 minority (0.43 minority minority applicants per applicants per applicants per search) search) search)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 1.8: DIVERSITY

Exhibit 1.8.1. Diversity Outcomes Summary Data for Faculty, Students and Staff

Method of Category/Definition Data Source Target FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Collection Faculty Applicants – Tenure a Eligible Positions 4 minority 3 minority 6 minority applicants / applicants / Under-represented minority Human >2.35 per applicants / b Self-Report 3 searches 4 searches applicants Resources search 3 searches (2 (1.33 per (0.75 per per search) search) search) Staff – Incumbents Self-Report Human American Indian or Alaska Native Self-Report 9.0% 21.62% 18.92% 23.08% Resources Human Asian Self-Report 1.9% 8.11% 5.41% 5.13% Resources Human Black or African American Self-Report 7.6% 10.81% 10.81% 7.69% Resources Human White Self-Report 67.9% 59.46% 64.86% 64.10% Resources

a Demographic information available only if the search committee sent the name and address of each qualified applicant to EO office during the search process, and only if the applicant returned an Applicant Confidential Data Form to EO office. bAfrican American, American Indian, or Hispanic c”Primary” indicates primary racial/ethnic self-identification as Native American; “IPEDS” statistics (reported to Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System using expanded federal categories for race/ethnicity) omit individuals from the count of Native American students if they identify as more than one race.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.1: DEGREE OFFERINGS

2.0 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS

2.1 DEGREE OFFERINGS

The school shall offer instructional programs reflecting its stated mission and goals, leading to the Master of Public Health (MPH) or equivalent professional master’s 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.

2.1.a. An instructional matrix presenting all of the school’s degree programs and areas of specialization. If multiple areas of specialization are available within departments or academic units shown on the matrix, these should be included. The matrix should distinguish between public health professional degrees, other professional degrees and academic degrees at the graduate level, and should distinguish baccalaureate public health degrees from other baccalaureate degrees. The matrix must identify any programs that are offered in distance learning or other formats. Non-degree programs, such as certificates or continuing education, should not be included in the matrix. See CEPH Data Exhibit 2.1.1.

Exhibit 2.1.1. Instructional Matrix – Degrees & Specializations Academic Professional Master’s Degrees Biostatistics MS MPH Epidemiology MS MPH Health Administration and Policy MPH, MHA* Health Promotion Sciences MS MPH Occupational & Environmental Health MPH, MS** Interdisciplinary MPH Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response MPH

Doctoral Degrees Biostatistics PhD Epidemiology PhD Health Promotion Sciences PhD Occupational and Environmental Health PhD Health Administration and Policy (lead department for DrPH College-wide degree)

Joint Degrees BS Mathematics/MS Biostatistics BS/MS MPH Health Administration & Policy/Juris Doctor Law MPH/JD MPH Health Administration & Policy/Doctor of Medicine MPH/MD MPH Health Promotion Sciences/Masters Social Work MPH/MSW *The MHA is considered an “other professional degree” rather than a public health professional degree. **The MS in Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences (IH/EHS) is considered an equivalent public health professional degree by CEPH and an academic degree by the institution. Two other equivalent public health professional degrees in the OEH Department, the MS in Industrial Hygiene and the MS in Environmental Health Sciences, were closed to new enrollments in Fall 2011. The last MS EHS student graduated in Fall 2012 and the last MS IH student graduated in Summer 2013.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.1: DEGREE OFFERINGS

2.1.b. The school bulletin or other official publication, which describes all degree programs identified in the instructional matrix, including a list of required courses and their course descriptions. The school bulletin or other official publication may be online, with appropriate links noted.

The College of Public Health Student Bulletin is provided in the Resource File and online at http://coph.ouhsc.edu/current/docs/studentbulletin2014-2015.pdf . Curricula for each of the programs offered by the College may be found in the Bulletin as well as online at http://coph.ouhsc.edu/degreeprograms/default.aspx .

2.1.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The College offers professional masters degrees and academic or professional doctoral degree programs in all five of the core public health disciplines, as well as an interdisciplinary MPH, academic master’s degrees, and a number of dual-degree program options. This spectrum of professional programs provides public health educational opportunities at all practice levels.

Weaknesses/challenges: None.

Plans: The College plans to maintain the current graduate degree offerings. Formalization of a dual MHA/JD degree is in progress [See section 2.13.a(iv)].

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.2: PROGRAM LENGTH

2.2 PROGRAM LENGTH

An MPH degree program or equivalent professional public health master’s degree must be at least 42 semester-credit units in length.

2.2.a. Definition of a credit with regard to classroom/contact hours.

In accordance with the policies of the Board of Regents, a semester is a minimum of 16 weeks excluding vacations and orientation but including examinations. One credit hour of instruction is expected to represent 16 weeks times 50 minutes of instruction per week per credit hour, for a total of 800 instructional minutes (including examinations) per semester per credit hour. Laboratories and similar work do not carry the same weight as instruction; it takes twice as much laboratory time to equal one credit hour.

2.2.b. Information about the minimum degree requirements for all professional public health master’s degree curricula shown in the instructional matrix. If the school or university uses a unit of academic credit or an academic term different from the standard semester or quarter, this difference should be explained and an equivalency presented in a table or narrative.

All MPH degrees offered by the College of Public Health require a minimum of 42 semester credit hours, comprised of at least 40 hours of didactic study, 1 hour of practicum preparation seminar, and 1 hour of Practicum (240 contact hours as discussed in section 2.4.a). The MS degree in IH/EHS requires 48 semester credit hours.

2.2.c. Information about the number of professional public health master’s degrees awarded for fewer than 42 semester credit units, or equivalent, over each of the last three years. A summary of the reasons should be included.

No MPH degrees comprised of less than 42 semester credit hours have been awarded in the past three years. The College’s MPH program curricula range from 42 to 45 credit hours. The curricula for equivalent public health professional masters (MS) degrees awarded in the past three years were no less than 48 credit hours.

2.2.d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: No MPH or equivalent professional degree offered by the College of Public Health may be earned with less than 42 semester credit hours, all but one require at least 44 credit hours. This is a firm and long-standing policy, to which no exceptions are allowed.

Weaknesses/challenges: None.

Plans: This policy will be continued.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.2: PROGRAM LENGTH

[This page intentionally left blank]

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.3: PUBLIC HEALTH CORE KNOWLEDGE

2.3 PUBLIC HEALTH CORE KNOWLEDGE

All graduate professional degree public health students must complete sufficient coursework to attain depth and breadth in the five core areas of public health knowledge.

2.3.a. Identification of the means by which the school assures that all graduate professional degree students have fundamental competence in the areas of knowledge basic to public health. If this means is common across the school, it need be described only once. If it varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each program. See CEPH Data Exhibit 2.3.1.

2.3.a(i) Master of Public Health. All MPH students are required to complete the 18 semester hour Certificate core knowledge curriculum comprised of one 3-hour course in each of the 5 core areas plus a 3-hour case-based course intended to integrate the core concepts, as shown in Exhibit 2.3.1 (a) of Exhibit 2.3.1 Core Public Health Knowledge. The CPH 7003 Integrated Public Health Practice course is jointly taught by the Director of the Oklahoma City-County Health Department, the Director of the Tulsa City- County Health Department, and Dr. Sharyl Kinney of the College of Public Health. Dr. Kinney is a former Director of the Cleveland County, Oklahoma, Health Department. Detailed syllabi for these courses may be viewed in the Resource File, and the associated competencies and their evaluations are discussed in sections 2.6 Required Competencies and 2.7 Assessment Procedures below.

Exhibit 2.3.1 Core Public Health Knowledge

Exhibit 2.3.1(a) Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for MPH Degree Core Knowledge Area Course Number & Title Credits Biostatistics BSE 5163 Biostatistics Methods 1 3 Epidemiology BSE 5113 Principles of Epidemiology 3 Health Administration and Policy HAP 5453 U.S. Health Care Systems 3 Health Promotion Sciences HPS 5213 Social & Behavioral Sciences in PH 3 Occupational & Environmental Health OEH 5013 Environmental Health 3 Integrated Public Health CPH 7003 Integrated Public Health Practice 3

2.3.a(ii) MS in Industrial Hygiene & Environmental Health Sciences. In addition to the MPH and MHA professional master’s degrees, the College also offers the MS in Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences degree (MS IH/EHS), which is considered an Equivalent Professional Degree for purposes of this criterion. The MS IH/EHS is administered by the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health. Students in this program are required to complete core courses in the five public health disciplines [see Exhibit 2.3.1(b)].

Exhibit 2.3.1(b) Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for MS Degree in Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences Core Knowledge Area Course Number and Title Credits Biostatistics BSE 5163 Biostatistics Methods 1 3 Epidemiology BSE 5113 Principles of Epidemiology 3 Health Administration and Policy HAP 5453 U.S. Health Care Systems 3 Health Promotion Sciences HPS 5213 Social & Behavioral Sciences in PH 3 Occupational & Environmental Health OEH 5013 Environmental Health 3

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.3: PUBLIC HEALTH CORE KNOWLEDGE

2.3.a(iii) DrPH. Admission to the DrPH program requires an applicant to hold an MPH or closely related degree. Core public health knowledge for those without the MPH is assured by requiring that those students complete all five of the College’s core courses in biostatistics, epidemiology, health administration and policy, health promotion, and environmental health. Refer to Section 2.12.d(5). The core public health content of the DrPH curriculum is further summarized in Exhibit 2.3.1(c).

Exhibit 2.3.1(c) Required Courses Addressing Public Health Core Knowledge Areas for DrPH Degree

Core Knowledge Area Course Number & Title Credits

Prerequisite of BSE 5163, BSE 5113, HAP MPH Core Classes 5453, HPS 5213, and OEH 5013 or 15 equivalent HAP 6983 (sub for HAP 5543)1, HPS 6933, Research Methods & HPS 6943, BSE 5193, HAP 5213 (sub for 15 Analytical Skills 2 HAP 6773) Leadership & HAP 6783, HAP 6953, HAP 5863, HAP 12 Management 5563 Select among BSE 5173, BSE 5663, BSE 5643, BSE 5303, BSE 5363, OEH 6252, Electives 9 HPS 6633, HPS 6643, HPS 6833, HPS 6923 1 The DrPH AAA committee has determined that HAP 6983 is more relevant to most DrPH students than HAP 5543. 2HAP 6773 is no longer offered due to changes in department faculty. The subject matter is addressed in other courses within this core knowledge area.

2.3.b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

The criterion is met.

Strengths: Core courses in all five public health core knowledge areas are required for all Certificate, MPH, MS in IH/EHS and DrPH students. Integration of core concepts is promoted through our added requirement for a sixth case-based course, CPH 7003 Integrated Public Health Practice, for all Certificate and MPH students. Core area knowledge is integrated into the equivalent professional degree programs through completion of the core courses in the five public health areas and reinforced by application in discipline-specific courses and the master’s thesis. Further integration of core concepts is promoted by the requirement that all MPH students take the NBPHE CPH examination, as discussed in section 2.7.a(ii).

Weaknesses/challenges: None.

Plans: The content of the MPH core curriculum will continue to be revised and updated as part of the continuous improvement process tied to assessment of student competencies, as discussed further in section 2.7.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.4: PRACTICAL SKILLS

2.4 PRACTICAL SKILLS

All graduate professional public health 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 students’ areas of specialization.

2.4.a. Description of the school’s policies and procedures regarding practice experiences, including the following:

– selection of sites

– methods for approving preceptors

– opportunities for orientation and support for preceptors

– approaches for faculty supervision of students

– means of evaluating student performance

– means of evaluating practice placement sites and preceptor qualifications

– criteria for waiving, altering or reducing the experience, if applicable

2.4.a(i) Practice Experiences.

MPH. The Public Health Practicum Policies and Procedures are outlined in Guidelines for Public Health Practicum and the syllabi for CPH 7941 Practicum Preparation Seminar and CPH 7950 Public Health Practicum (Resource File). All students completing an MPH degree are required to complete a planned, supervised and evaluated public health practicum experience. Under the supervision of a qualified preceptor and practicum faculty advisor, the student will:

• Apply classroom theory, knowledge, skills and techniques to a professional work setting. • Enhance and develop new skills needed to function as a professional in a public health setting. • Assess MPH competencies demonstrated through the practicum experience. • Build a personal network of professional leaders in public health. • Develop a personal definition of professional practice by engaging in professional self- assessment and personal reflection.

Each student must complete a minimum of 240 practicum contact hours at a host site (exclusive of the research, preparation and delivery of the MPH Master’s Paper and Oral Presentation). The practicum is part of the Culminating Experience (see the Bulletin), representing the synthesis and integration of knowledge acquired in coursework and other learning experiences and application of theory and principles in a situation that approximates some aspect of professional practice.

The MPH Master’s Paper will be a report of the student’s practicum experience that includes an integrated discussion of the contributions of the five core disciplines to their specific public health learning objectives and practice goals and assesses the extent to which the practicum demonstrated the University of Oklahoma College of Public Health MPH competencies. Information on the expected content of the MPH Master’s Paper and Oral Presentation is online in D2L course CPH 7941 Practicum Preparation Seminar as well as on the College’s website at http://coph.ouhsc.edu/current/practicum.aspx.

MS IH/EHS. A field practice experience is also required for students in the MS in Industrial Hygiene/Environmental Health Sciences (MS IH/EHS) program. MS IH/EHS students should have

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.4: PRACTICAL SKILLS

completed half the didactic course requirements (at least 22 hours) before starting their field practice. The purpose of the field practice requirement is for the student to gain practical experience in industrial hygiene and/or environmental health in an actual workplace setting. The field practice experience supports the program competencies of understanding the impact of occupational/environmental health solutions within an organization, understanding business and managerial practices, and functioning on multi-disciplinary teams. The MS IH/EHS field practice is a zero-credit-hour requirement that involves less administrative paperwork than the MPH practicum because it is not part of the culminating experience for that program. However, as a result of the self-study process, the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health recognized the need for additional documentation to demonstrate appropriate supervision of the field practice. Forms and enhanced guidelines for the field practice are available in the Resource File and at http://coph.ouhsc.edu/current/oehfieldpractice.aspx.

To meet the field practice requirements, the MS IH/EHS student must:

1. Work at least 240 hours in the field setting. This work should be primarily focused on specific professional goals agreed upon in advance (in writing) between the student and the preceptor (supervisor). Note: OUHSC policy requires a Memorandum of Agreement with the organization sponsoring the field practice. 2. Obtain a written performance evaluation from the field practice supervisor. Either the COPH evaluation form or the company’s evaluation form may be used. 3. Evaluate the field practice site using the “OEH Student Evaluation of Field Practice Host Site” form. 4. Submit a formal paper reporting on the field practice. This paper should include: • an overview of the internship setting, with an explanation of its function within the organization and a description of the team or unit in which the student served; • a summary of the student’s activities, with their known or anticipated impact in the organization and public health; • conclusions or lessons learned. • This paper should contain a minimum of 1500 words.

The paper and performance evaluation must be submitted to the student’s academic advisor and placed in the student’s official file.

DrPH. Doctor of Public Health students have substantial experience in public health practice, since admission to the DrPH degree program is limited to individuals who have a minimum three years of work experience in a public health related field. The acceptability of the experience is determined by the DrPH Admissions and Academic Advisement (DrPH AAA) Committee (see section 1.5.a) based on the applicant’s submitted work history and letter from a current or recent work supervisor (see also the College of Public Health Student Bulletin pg. 34) (Resource File). Complementary to their classroom learning, DrPH students obtain additional field experience through multiple channels. First, in a number of courses the higher level learning assignments require that students engage in projects with organizations within the community. For example, in HPS 6943 Advanced Program Evaluation, the students complete all steps in the process of program evaluation within a community. Similarly, in HAP 6783 Advanced Public Organizations and Decision Making, the seminar-style discussions involve students applying various decision-making frameworks to assess effectiveness of programs, practices, or interventions in health care. Second, as part of their degree requirements, the students must complete a prospectus outlining their planned practice-based dissertation work. In this process, the students work closely with health care or professional organizations to identify a topic and/or dataset through which they translate their classroom knowledge to analyses and problem-solving in real world scenarios. Third, the dissertation must be practice-based, including actionable recommendations for practice, programs, and policies.

2.4.a(ii) Selection of Sites. MPH and MS IH/EHS practice sites are selected based on the learning needs and objectives of the student. Each practice site must have a properly executed Memorandum of

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.4: PRACTICAL SKILLS

Agreement with the Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma on behalf of the College of Public Health prior to the initiation of a student practicum with that agency. MPH practicum sites include traditional public health organizations such as the Oklahoma State Department of Health and local county health departments, but also include organizations that are part of the public health system such as the Oklahoma Department of Mental Health, the Oklahoma City Area Inter-Tribal Health Board and the City of Oklahoma City. MS IH/EHS practice sites include both public agencies and private companies that are representative of the job market for industrial hygienists and environmental health scientists. In recent years, field practice sites have included Phillips 66, Chesapeake Energy, BP America, WPX Energy, Enercon Services, Marshall Environmental Management, AdvancePierre Foods, Lexmark, and the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality.

Sites for practice-based DrPH dissertations are highly individualized choices. They are selected based on needs defined the dissertation topic, and may include more than one agency or organization, or more than one element within a given agency or organization.

A complete list of practice sites is provided in the Resource File.

2.4.a(iii) Methods of approving preceptors. Preceptors are not required to hold a specific type or level of degree. For MPH practica, the preceptor is an employee of the practicum host site and is approved by the Practicum Coordinator and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and has the following qualifications:

• knowledge and practical experience in the practice areas assigned to the student; • substantial professional experience at the host site; • an interest in and commitment to helping student.

The MS IH/EHS program has longstanding relationships with many practice sites. Organizations and preceptors seeking an intern typically approach the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health and are screened by the faculty.

The programmatic practice experience of DrPH students is centered on their practice-based dissertation project as described above. In executing the project the DrPH candidate will interact with senior practitioners with intimate knowledge of the organization(s) with which the project is associated. These individuals are not formally designated as preceptors; rather, they act as partners in the project.

2.4.a(iv) Opportunities for orientation and support of preceptors. Each semester, preceptors are invited, but not required, to participate in a Preceptor Orientation/Preceptor Roundtable in conjunction with CPH 7941 Practicum Preparation Seminar. The preceptor orientation includes the Guidelines for Public Health Practicum which includes the Qualifications of the Preceptor and the Responsibilities of the Preceptor. Preceptors are also provided copies of the MPH Competencies, Practicum Agreement form, Practicum Time and Activities Log, Mid-Course Evaluation, Preceptor Evaluation of Student Practicum Performance and an outline for the MPH Paper and Presentation (practicum associated forms are provided in the Resource File and online at http://coph.ouhsc.edu/current/practicum.aspx . They are also provided contact information for the Practicum Coordinator.

2.4.a(v) Approaches for faculty supervision of students. The student’s faculty advisor is responsible for facilitating the MPH practicum, by assisting the student in the development of their practicum agreement, including contacting host sites, development of goals and objectives and competencies to be addressed through the practicum. The faculty advisor approves and signs student’s MPH practicum agreement. The faculty advisor continues to meet with the student during the course of their practicum including a mid-course review and providing direction in the development of the practicum paper and presentation.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.4: PRACTICAL SKILLS

2.4.a(vi) Means of evaluating student performance. Student performance is evaluated at the midcourse review and at the completion of the MPH practicum with the Preceptor Evaluation of Student Practicum Performance, Practicum Time and Activities Log, practicum paper, and practicum paper presentation. Samples of these documents are provided in the Resource File.

MS IH/EHS student performance is evaluated by the preceptor at the end of practice experience. Additionally, the faculty advisor reviews the student’s field practice report. As a further indication of student performance, internships often lead to full-time employment at graduation, or even before graduation.

2.4.a(vii) Means of evaluating practice placement sites and preceptor qualifications. Each MPH student completes a Student Evaluation of Practicum Host Site form at the end of their practicum. Preceptors’ qualifications are evaluated by the Practicum Coordinator and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs based on the preceptor resume. For MS IH/EHS students, the student completes the form “MS Student Evaluation of MS Field Practice Host Site” (see Resource File). The field practice report also provides the faculty advisor with information useful for evaluating the host site.

2.4.a(viii) Criteria for waiving, altering or reducing the experience, if applicable. The MPH practicum cannot be waived, altered or reduced.

Students who enter the MS program in IH/EHS with two years or more of full-time professional experience in occupational or environmental health or safety are deemed to have satisfied the field practice requirement if they provide the following documentation, which shall be placed in the student’s official file:

• A narrative description of their professional work experience in the field. • A written performance evaluation or letter of support from their employer, dated in the most recent year of employment, which shall be no more than 5 years before the student’s planned date of graduation.

This documentation must be examined by the department to ensure that the professional experience met the program competencies of understanding the impact of occupational/environmental health solutions within an organization, understanding business and managerial practices, and functioning on multidisciplinary teams.

Students with 2 or fewer years of experience who wish to complete their field practice within their current place of employment must, in consultation with their academic advisor and preceptor, develop a field practice assignment that extends beyond their regular work duties that allows application of knowledge and skills being learned in the OEH MS program.

2.4.b. Identification of agencies and preceptors used for practice experiences for students, by program area, for the last two academic years.

Agencies and preceptors sponsoring practicum experiences during the past two academic years are presented in Exhibit 2.4.b(i) MPH Preceptors by Practice Site for 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 and Exhibit 2.4.b(ii) MS IH/EHS Preceptors by Practice Site for 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 in the Resource File. The range of agency types is broad, including state and city-county health departments, corporations, healthcare facilities, medical associations, regulatory agencies, universities, nonprofit organizations, advocacy groups, schools, and Native American tribal healthcare and administrative facilities.

2.4.c. Data on the number of students receiving a waiver of the practice experience for each of the last three years.

Not applicable. No students have received a waiver of the practice experience during the last three years.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.4: PRACTICAL SKILLS

2.4.d. Data on the number of preventive medicine, occupational medicine, aerospace medicine and general preventive medicine and public health residents completing the academic program for each of the last three years, along with information on their practicum rotations.

Although no medical residents have completed an MPH degree program in the past three years, a number of medical students, MDs awaiting a residency program, and practicing MDs have done so as shown in Exhibit 2.4.d Physicians, Residents, and Medical Students Completing the Academic Program, 2011-2014.

Exhibit 2.4.d Physicians, Residents, and Medical Students Completing the Academic Program, 2011-2014

Student MPH Degree Program Hosting Agency/Organization Fall 2011 - Summer 2012 Physician awaiting Residency MPH-Epidemiology OU College of Public Health Physician MPH-Interdisciplinary PH University of Oklahoma Fall 2012 - Summer 2013 Physician awaiting Residency MPH-Health Admin & Policy University of Oklahoma Fall 2013 - Summer 2014 Health Outreach Prevention 4th yr. COM student MPH-Interdisciplinary PH (Tulsa) Education, Inc. (HOPE) Oklahoma City-County Health 3rd yr. COM student MPH-Health Admin & Policy Department 3rd yr. COM student MPH-Interdisciplinary PH University of Oklahoma Physician MPH-Health Admin & Policy Oklahoma State Dept. of Health 4th yr. COM student MPH-Interdisciplinary PH (Tulsa) OU College of Public Health Tulsa County Medical Society 2nd yr. DO student MPH-Interdisciplinary PH (Tulsa) Foundation COM: College of Medicine DO: Osteopath

2.4.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: The College has a robust and comprehensive system in place for developing and sustaining practicum sites in the public health workforce community across the state of Oklahoma and the region. International practicum placements can be supported when appropriate to the needs of the student. Detailed documentation accompanies the process of MPH practicum development from conception, through site and preceptor selection, practicum learning objectives and outcome identification to execution of the practicum and the final product and report. Measurable learning objectives and appropriate core and discipline-specific competencies are integrated into the MPH practicum agreement. The MPH practicum is clearly understood to be a highly emphasized facet of the public health student experience in the College.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.4: PRACTICAL SKILLS

Students in MS IH/EHS receive a practice experience that is tailored to the job market and to a subset of identified competencies for that program. The program has longstanding relationships with many of its practice sites, and these placements often result in an offer of permanent employment.

Weaknesses/challenges: The requirement of 240 contact hours in the MPH practicum might be considered by some to be shorter than desired for professional training, especially for those students who have no significant public health work experience prior to matriculation. On the other hand, given the number of students who pursue their degrees while working full time, the College has found it challenging to expand the requirement beyond 240 contact hours, at least for the present.

As a result of this self-study, the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health recognized the need for additional documentation to demonstrate appropriate supervision of the MS IH/EHS field practice experience.

Plans: The plans of the College with regard to the MPH practicum are fundamentally linked to the Strategic Plan and to the well-established and successful working relationship between the College and its partnering organizations. The College will continue to centralize a significant fraction of the practicum program oversight to take maximum advantage of the expertise of key administrators, faculty, and staff who guide and primarily direct the practicum effort. The Department of Occupational and Environmental Health is extending its use of this existing system to facilitate documentation of preceptor qualifications, practice agreements and evaluation of the preceptor and host sites for the MS IH/EHS practice experience.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.5: CULMINATING EXPERIENCE

2.5 CULMINATING EXPERIENCE

All graduate professional degree programs, both professional public health and other professional degree programs, identified in the instructional matrix shall assure that each student demonstrates skills and integration of knowledge through a culminating experience.

2.5.a. Identification of the culminating experience required for each professional public health and other professional degree program. If this is common across the school’s professional degree programs, it need be described only once. If it varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each.

2.5.a(i) Master of Public Health. All MPH students must complete a Culminating Experience that includes:

• Completion of CPH 7003 Integrated Public Health Practice. This course requires the student to synthesize and integrate knowledge acquired in coursework and other learning experiences and to apply theory and principles in a situation that approximates aspects of professional practice. The course includes applied practice projects that allow the student to demonstrate selected core competencies and interdisciplinary/cross-cutting competencies.

• Completion of CPH 7941 Practicum Preparation Seminar. Students must complete this preparatory course before enrolling in CPH 7950 Public Health Practicum. The student is expected to identify and secure a practicum host site and preceptor; complete the necessary prerequisites specific to the student's practicum experience; complete the Application for Practicum; and complete the Practicum Agreement.

• Completion of CPH 7950 Public Health Practicum. All MPH programs require a 240 contact hour practicum experience for which one academic credit hour is awarded. Upon completion of the practicum the student self-assesses their command of core and programmatic competencies using a competency evaluation “check-off sheet” form specific to their degree program. The practicum preceptor also assesses the student’s demonstrated command of competencies using the same form, providing a second perspective.

• The completion of a Practicum Paper with associated oral defense and comprehensive oral examination. The MPH Practicum Paper is a report of the student’s practicum experience that includes an integrated discussion of the contributions of the five core disciplines to their specific public health learning objectives and practice goals and assesses the extent to which the practicum demonstrated the MPH Competencies.

o The Culminating Experience Committee (Committee) is assembled by the student’s faculty advisor in consultation with the student and has a minimum of two faculty members from the degree department and a faculty member or professional from outside the degree department. All members of the Committee must have contributing knowledge and experience appropriate to the student’s Practicum Paper project. The faculty advisor forwards the recommended committee to the department chair for review and approval. Once approved, the Committee makeup is forwarded to the Office of Student Services and becomes part of the student’s academic file. o The Committee has the responsibility to assist and guide the student through the selection of the practicum and writing of the Practicum Paper. The Committee reviews the completed paper and determines if it is acceptable. o The student, working with the Committee Chair, arranges a time for the oral defense of the Practicum Paper and comprehensive oral examination. The defense and examination

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.5: CULMINATING EXPERIENCE

assess: (i) the student’s knowledge and understanding of the five core disciplines of public health; and (ii) the student’s knowledge and understanding of the content and context of the Practicum Paper and the programmatic competencies of their specialization. Command of competencies is evaluated with the same competencies listing as in the “check-off sheets” used by the student and preceptor, re-formatted slightly to provide space for recording questions asked, providing a third perspective of the student’s command of core and programmatic competencies.

The Practicum is expected to be completed as near to the end of a student’s program as practicable. If it is completed before the student’s last semester of study the paper should be submitted during the semester of enrollment in CPH 7950 Public Health Practicum; however, the oral presentation of the paper and associated comprehensive oral examination do not occur until the student’s last term of enrollment. Although the oral comprehensive examination component of the Culminating Experience occurs in conjunction with the practicum paper presentation, the examining committee’s questions are not limited to the scope of the practicum experience. Students are cautioned, both in the Bulletin and on the College website (http://coph.ouhsc.edu/current/culminatingexperience.aspx) that they should be prepared to respond to questions on any aspect of their MPH studies.

2.5.a(ii) Master of Science in IH/EHS. The Culminating Experience for the MS IH/EHS (considered an Equivalent Professional Degree program) is the preparation and defense of a research-based master’s thesis. The master’s thesis defense is combined with a comprehensive oral examination. It is administered by a committee of at least three faculty, a majority of whom must be from the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health. The master’s thesis includes not only data collection and analysis to answer a narrowly defined research question, but also a literature review and discussion that integrate public health knowledge to explain the significance of the research question and findings.

The Quantitative Skills Examination [see sections 2.7.a(ii) and 2.7.a(v) below] is considered the written part of the comprehensive examination and hence may also be considered part of the culminating experience. The student’s field practice is not considered part of the culminating experience, but the field practice report is available to the Thesis Committee members during the thesis defense and oral examination and may serve as a framework for some oral examination questions.

2.5.a(iii) Doctor of Public Health. The DrPH Culminating Experience is the preparation and defense of a practice-based doctoral dissertation. The dissertation defense is combined with a comprehensive oral examination.

2.5.a(iv) Master of Health Administration. The MHA Culminating Experience is the completion of the Internship Report and Presentation, and the completion of the course HAP 5973 MHA Capstone: Seminar in Health Administration.

2.5.b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: Strengths are that the Culminating Experience has been standardized across all MPH degree programs in the College and the scholarly rigor of the experience has been increased. All MPH students perform a Practicum and prepare an associated paper that includes a scholarly discussion of how concepts from each of the five core public health areas bear on their project. A platform presentation and oral defense of the paper is presented during the Culminating Experience final examination. The examining committee also presents questions on core topics that may be drawn from a growing compendium of questions recommended by the departments. Command of core and programmatic competencies is documented. The culminating experiences for the MHA and for the MS in IH/EHS meet the requirements of the CAHME and ABET accreditation, respectively, as well as the relevant CEPH

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.5: CULMINATING EXPERIENCE

requirements.

Weaknesses/challenges: A short-lived experiment in 2013 resulted in a small cohort of students who did their practicum before entry into their major department. This created a logistical challenge regarding the integration of discipline-specific competencies into the Culminating Experience for these students. In response, the College has reaffirmed the role of the comprehensive oral examination in the MPH Culminating Experience and has clarified a requirement that students be accepted into a major before doing their practicum.

Plans: The Culminating Experience will continue to evolve as the College focuses on how best to (1) effectively integrate the didactic and practice elements of competency-based public health education and training and (2) effectively assess and evaluate students’ ability to synthesize and integrate knowledge. The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Senior Associate Dean, Associate Dean for Planning and Evaluation, Public Health Practicum Coordinator, The Office of Student Services, and the Dean of Public Health will continue to work in concert to review the Culminating Experience in terms of overall College goals and objectives.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.5: CULMINATING EXPERIENCE

[This page intentionally left blank]

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

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 degree programs. The school must identify competencies for graduate professional public health, other professional and academic degree programs and specializations at all levels (bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral).

2.6.a. Identification of a set of competencies that all graduate professional public health degree students and baccalaureate public health degree students, regardless of concentration, major or specialty area, must attain. There should be one set for each graduate professional public health degree and baccalaureate public health degree offered by the school (eg, one set each for BSPH, MPH and DrPH).

The College has assigned a unique identifier to each competency to facilitate tracking. Unless otherwise noted, the cross-references in parentheses refer to the competency designations in the ASPH MPH Core Competency Model, Version 2.3, May 2007, from which many of our competencies were adapted.

2.6.a(i) MPH Core Competencies. All MPH students, regardless of major, must meet the following competencies.

Core 1 Describe the roles biostatistics serves in the discipline of public health (A.1) Core 2 Apply and interpret results from descriptive and inferential methodologies according to the type of study design, measurement scale, and available data for answering a particular research question (modification of A.4 and A.7) Core 3 Describe the direct and indirect human, ecological and safety effects of major environmental and occupational agents (modification of B.1) Core 4 Explain the importance of epidemiology, and aspects of a public health problem in terms of magnitude, person, time and place, for informing scientific, ethical, economic and political discussion of health issues (modification of C.3. and C.4) Core 5 Calculate basic epidemiology measures and draw appropriate inference from epidemiologic data (modification of C.7 and C.9) Core 6 Identify the main components and issues of the organization, financing and delivery of health services and public health systems in the US (D.1) Core 7 Discuss the policy process for improving the health status of populations (D4) Core 8 Identify basic theories, concepts and models from a range of social and behavioral disciplines that are used in public health research and practice (E.1) Core 9 Demonstrate effective written and oral skills for communicating with different audiences in the context of professional public health activities (F.7) Core 10 Describe the roles of history, power, privilege and structural inequality in producing health disparities (G.1) Core 11 Promote high standards of personal and organizational integrity, compassion, honesty and respect for all people (J.5) Core 12 Describe how social, behavioral, environmental, and biological factors contribute to specific individual and community health concerns (K.1)

2.6.a(ii) DrPH Competencies. The College offers only one DrPH program, which has a focus on public health leadership. The competencies for this program were developed without distinction between DrPH core and specialized areas. Cross-references to the ASPH DrPH Core Competency Model (Version 1.3, November 2009) are included in parentheses.

DrPH-ACO 1 Present positions on health issues and policy (modification A1)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

DrPH-ACO 2 Influence health policy and program decision-making based on scientific evidence, stakeholder input, and available data (modification of A2) DrPH-ACO 3 Establish goals, timelines, funding alternatives, and strategies for influencing policy initiatives (A5) DrPH-ACO 4 Use consensus-building and negotiation techniques and develop strategies to build public and political support for programs and policies (modification of A3 and A6) DrPH-ACO 5 Conduct community-based participatory intervention and research projects (C3) DrPH-PC 1 Create informational and persuasive communications (B5) DrPH-PC 2 Propose recommendations for improving communication process (B9) DrPH-PC 3 Differentiate among the administration, ethical, and quality assurance dimensions of research and practice (modification of G2) DrPH-PC 4 Demonstrate cultural sensitivity when engaged in discourse and research with communities (modification of G7) DrPH-CA 1 Apply theoretical and conceptual frameworks from multiple disciplines in the design and implementation of programs, policies, and systems (modification of D1) DrPH-CA 2 Interpret quantitative and qualitative data following current scientific standards (D2) DrPH-CA 3 Design needs and resource assessments for organizations, communities, and populations (modification of D4) DrPH-CA 4 Synthesize information from multiple sources for research and practice (D5) DrPH-CA 5 Evaluate the performance and impact of health programs, policies, and systems (D6) DrPH-LM 1 Communicate an organization’s missions, shared vision, and values to stakeholders (E1) DrPH-LM 2 Develop teams for implementing health initiatives (E2) DrPH-LM 3 Collaborate with diverse groups (E3) DrPH-LM 4 Influence others to achieve high standards of performance and accountability (E4) DrPH-LM 5 Guide and lead organizational decision-making and planning based on internal and external evaluation and research (modification of E5) DrPH-LM 6 Implement strategic planning processes (F1) DrPH-LM 7 Deploy quality improvement methods (F5) DrPH-LM 8 Establish a network of relationships, including internal and external collaborators (F8) DrPH-LM 9 Evaluate organizational performance in relation to strategic and defined goals (F9)

2.6.b. Identification of a set of competencies for each concentration, major or specialization (depending on the terminology used by the school) identified in the instructional matrix. The school must identify competencies for all degrees, including graduate public health professional degrees, graduate academic degrees, graduate other professional degrees, as well as baccalaureate public health degrees and other bachelor’s degrees.

Unless otherwise noted, the cross-references in parentheses refer to the competency designations in the ASPH MPH Core Competency Model, Version 2.3, May 2007, from which many of our competencies were adapted.

2.6.b(i) DrPH Competencies. The competencies for this program, which has a single concentration, are listed above in section 2.6.a(ii).

2.6.b(ii) MPH in Interdisciplinary Public Health Competencies. In addition to the MPH core competencies, students in the Interdisciplinary major are expected to meet the following competencies:

Inter 1 Competently present through different information technologies and media channels to different audiences that strategically exchange information to achieve specific objectives (modification of F.7, F.8, F.9, and F.10) Inter 2 Understand and apply concepts of cultural diversity in its context of public healthcare practice (modification of G.5 and G.6) Inter 3 Demonstrate team building, negotiation, and conflict management skills (H.5)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

Inter 4 Demonstrate ethics, values, and social justice to public health practice (modification of J.2, J.5, and J.8) Inter 5 Demonstrate skills in qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods (modification of K.7) Inter 6 Be able to demonstrate system thinking among human and social systems (modification of L.8)

2.6.b(iii) MPH in Biostatistics Competencies. In addition to the MPH core competencies, MPH students majoring in Biostatistics are expected to meet the following competencies:

Biostat 1 Use computer software for data entry and database management and use computer programs for summarizing, analyzing and displaying public health or biomedical research results (modification of A.8) Biostat 2 Determine the most appropriate method of statistical analysis reflecting a given question of interest, the implemented study design and the available data, implementing preferred methodological alternatives to commonly used statistical methods when their assumptions are not met (modification of A.3 and A.7) Biostat 3 Read the statistical methods reported in public health and medical literature and comment on their appropriateness to the study design and research questions (modification of A.9) Biostat 4 Compare and contrast advantages and disadvantages in the use of nonparametric or parametric statistical procedures, and in the use of univariate, bivariate and multivariable procedures (modification of A.3 and A.6) Epi 1 Identify, access, and integrate sources of health data such as vital statistics records, disease registries, national surveys, and medical records in order to address epidemiologic questions (modification of C.1) Epi 3 Given an epidemiological investigation, compare and contrast strengths, limitations, and inference that may be drawn from data collected through the use of epidemiological research designs including cohort, case-control, ecologic, and cross-sectional studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Epi 4 Assess and explain strategies to summarize and report the impact of effect modification and to control for or minimize bias, including selection, information, and confounding bias on inference from epidemiologic studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Prof Biostat: Become an integral team member, as a junior analyst or research assistant, actively participating in Identifying and formulating public health or biomedical questions, selecting appropriate study designs, identifying appropriate data collection and management methods, and selecting appropriate statistical analysis methods (modification of A.1, J.3, J.10)

2.6.b(iv) MS in Biostatistics Competencies

Core 1M Communicates the roles biostatistics serves in the discipline of public health and biomedical research (modification of A.1) Core 2 Apply and interpret results from descriptive and inferential methodologies according to the type of study design, measurement scale, and available data for answering a particular research question (modification of A.4 and A.7) Biostat 1MP: Use computer software for data entry and database management and use computer programs and/or computer programming languages for processing, summarizing, analyzing and displaying complex public health or biomedical data and research results (modification of A.8) Biostat 2: Determine the most appropriate method of statistical analysis reflecting a given question of interest, the implemented study design and the available data, implementing preferred methodological alternatives to commonly used statistical methods when their assumptions are not met (modification of A.3 and A.7)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

Biostat 3: Read the statistical methods reported in public health and medical literature and comment on their appropriateness to the study design and research questions (modification of A.9) Biostat 4: Compare and contrast advantages and disadvantages in the use of nonparametric or parametric statistical procedures, and in the use of univariate, bivariate and multivariable procedures (modification of A.3 and A.6) Biostat 5M: Explain the theoretical background of commonly used statistical procedures Core 4 Explain the importance of epidemiology, and aspects of a public health problem in terms of magnitude, person, time and place, for informing scientific, ethical, economic and political discussion of health issues (modification of C.3 and C.4) Epi 1 Identify, access, and integrate sources of health data such as vital statistics records, disease registries, national surveys, and medical records in order to address epidemiologic questions. (modification of C.1) Core 5 Calculate basic epidemiology measures and draw appropriate inference from epidemiologic data (modification of C.7 and C.9) Epi 3: Given an epidemiological investigation, compare and contrast strengths, limitations, and inference that may be drawn from data collected through the use of epidemiological research designs including cohort, case-control, ecologic, and cross-sectional studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Epi 4: Assess and explain strategies to summarize and report the impact of effect modification and to control for or minimize bias, including selection, information, and confounding bias when drawing inference from epidemiologic studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Core 9 MP Demonstrate effective written and oral skills for communicating with different audiences in the context of professional public health or biomedical research activities (modification of F.7) Com Biostat M: Design and implement a critical review of applied public health, biomedical, and statistical research literature related to a specific topic or question of interest, critique the reported methods, and synthesize the findings Prof Biostat: Become an integral team member, as a junior analyst or research assistant, actively participating in Identifying and formulating public health or biomedical questions, selecting appropriate study designs, identifying appropriate data collection and management methods, and selecting appropriate statistical analysis methods (modification of A.1, J.3, J.10) Prof Ethics: Demonstrate responsible conduct of research practices related to data acquisition and sharing, collaborative research, ethical research with human subjects, disclosure and management of conflicts of interest, avoidance of research misconduct, and responsible publication and authorship practices

2.6.b(v) PhD in Biostatistics Competencies

Core 1P Demonstrates and advocates for the roles biostatistics serves in the discipline of public health and biomedical research(modification of A.1) Core 2 Apply and interpret results from descriptive and inferential methodologies according to the type of study design, measurement scale, and available data for answering a particular research question (modification of A.4 and A.7) Biostat 1MP: Use computer software for data entry and database management and use computer programs and/or computer programming languages for processing, summarizing, analyzing and displaying complex public health or biomedical data and research results (modification of A.8) Biostat 2P: Determine the most appropriate method of statistical analysis, for a broad range of complex studies, reflecting a given question of interest, the implemented study design and the available data, implementing preferred methodological alternatives to commonly used statistical methods when their assumptions are not met (modification of A.3 and A.7)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

Biostat 3: Read the statistical methods reported in public health and medical literature and comment on their appropriateness to the study design and research questions (modification of A.9) Biostat 4: Compare and contrast advantages and disadvantages in the use of nonparametric or parametric statistical procedures, and in the use of univariate, bivariate and multivariable procedures (modification of A.3 and A.6) Biostat 5P: Explain and derive the theoretical background of a broad class of statistical procedures including theoretical knowledge of the student’s doctoral research area of interest in biostatistical methods Biostat 6: Independently develop statistical research questions of interest concerning the properties of tests or estimators and the application of existing statistical methods in novel ways, or develop new statistical methods Biostat.7: Use computer software and/or programming languages for data simulation to evaluate the properties of statistical methods Core 4 Explain the importance of epidemiology, and aspects of a public health problem in terms of magnitude, person, time and place, for informing scientific, ethical, economic and political discussion of health issues (modification of C.3 and C.4) Epi 1: Identify, access, and integrate sources of health data such as vital statistics records, disease registries, national surveys, and medical records in order to address epidemiologic questions. (modification of C.1) Core 5 Calculate basic epidemiology measures and draw appropriate inference from epidemiologic data (modification of C.7 and C.9) Epi 3: Given an epidemiological investigation, compare and contrast strengths, limitations, and inference that may be drawn from data collected through the use of epidemiological research designs including cohort, case-control, ecologic, and cross-sectional studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Epi 4MP: Assess and implement strategies to summarize and report the impact of effect modification and to control for or minimize bias, including selection, information, and confounding bias when drawing inference from epidemiologic studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Core 9 MP Demonstrate effective written and oral skills for communicating with different audiences in the context of professional public health or biomedical research activities (modification of F.7) Com Biostat P: Design and implement a critical review of applied public health, biomedical, and statistical research literature in a specialty area, critique the reported methods, and synthesize the findings Prof Biostat P: Become an integral team member actively participating in, or as a team leader directing personnel in, Identifying and formulating public health or biomedical questions, selecting appropriate study designs, identifying appropriate data collection and management methods, and selecting appropriate statistical analysis methods (modification of A.1, J.3, J.10) Prof Ethics: Demonstrate responsible conduct of research practices related to data acquisition and sharing, collaborative research, ethical research with human subjects, disclosure and management of conflicts of interest, avoidance of research misconduct, and responsible publication and authorship practices Teach Biostat 1: Assist a faculty member in teaching graduate level courses in biostatistics by developing course material, delivering lectures, leading review and discussion sections, or writing and grading homework assignments and exams Teach Biostat 2: Train others in the design of research studies and analysis of data, including students in the fields of biostatistics, epidemiology, public health, and biomedical sciences

2.6.b(vi) MPH in Epidemiology Competencies. In addition to the MPH core competencies, MPH students majoring in Epidemiology are expected to meet the following competencies:

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

Biostat 1 Use computer software for data entry and database management and use computer programs for summarizing, analyzing and displaying public health or biomedical research results (modification of A.8) Biostat 2 Determine the most appropriate method of statistical analysis reflecting a given question of interest, the implemented study design and the available data, implementing preferred methodological alternatives to commonly used statistical methods when their assumptions are not met (modification of A.3 and A.7) Biostat 3 Read the statistical methods reported in public health and medical literature and comment on their appropriateness to the study design and research questions (modification of A.9) Epi 1 Identify, access, and integrate sources of health data such as vital statistics records, disease registries, national surveys, and medical records in order to address epidemiologic questions (modification of C.1) Epi 2 Describe the pathophysiology, natural history, and relative frequencies of health conditions that are major causes of morbidity and mortality Epi 3 Given an epidemiological investigation, compare and contrast strengths, limitations, and inference that may be drawn from data collected through the use of epidemiological research designs including cohort, case-control, ecologic, and cross-sectional studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Epi 4 Assess and explain strategies to summarize and report the impact of effect modification and to control for or minimize bias, including selection, information, and confounding bias on inference from epidemiologic studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Prof Epi: Become an integral team member, as a junior epidemiologist or research assistant, actively participating in identifying public health or biomedical questions, selecting appropriate study designs, identifying appropriate data collection and management methods, and selecting appropriate statistical analysis methods to address the questions of interest (modification of A.1, J.3, J.10)

2.6.b(vii) MS in Epidemiology Competencies

Core 1 Describe the roles biostatistics serves in the discipline of public health (A.1) Core 2 Apply and interpret results from descriptive and inferential methodologies according to the type of study design, measurement scale, and available data for answering a particular research question (modification of A.4 and A.7) Biostat 1: Use computer software for data entry and database management and use computer programs for summarizing, analyzing and displaying public health or biomedical research results (modification of A.8) Biostat 2: Determine the most appropriate method of statistical analysis reflecting a given question of interest, the implemented study design and the available data, implementing preferred methodological alternatives to commonly used statistical methods when their assumptions are not met (modification of A.3 and A.7) Biostat 3: Read the statistical methods reported in public health and medical literature and comment on their appropriateness to the study design and research questions (modification of A.9) Core 4 Explain the importance of epidemiology, and aspects of a public health problem in terms of magnitude, person, time and place, for informing scientific, ethical, economic and political discussion of health issues (modification of C.3 and C.4) Core 5 Calculate basic epidemiology measures and draw appropriate inference from epidemiologic data (modification of C.7 and C.9) Epi 1: Identify, access, and integrate sources of health data such as vital statistics records, disease registries, national surveys, and medical records in order to address epidemiologic questions. (modification of C.1)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

Epi 2M: Communicates the pathophysiology, natural history, and relative frequencies of health conditions that are major causes of morbidity and mortality Epi 3: Given an epidemiological investigation, compare and contrast strengths, limitations, and inference that may be drawn from data collected through the use of epidemiological research designs including cohort, case-control, ecologic, and cross-sectional studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Epi 4MP: Assess and implement strategies to summarize and report the impact of effect modification and to control for or minimize bias, including selection, information, and confounding bias when drawing inference from epidemiologic studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Epi 5: Discuss, from knowledge of the literature, the pathophysiology, natural history, and epidemiology in their chosen area of concentration (e.g., cardiovascular diseases, cancer, pediatric epidemiology, infectious diseases). Core 9 MP Demonstrate effective written and oral skills for communicating with different audiences in the context of professional public health or biomedical research activities (modification of F.7) Comm Epi M: Design and implement a critical review of applied public health, biomedical, and epidemiological research literature related to a specific topic or question, critique the reported methods, and synthesize the findings Prof Epi: Become an integral team member, as a junior epidemiologist or research assistant, actively participating in identifying public health or biomedical questions, selecting appropriate study designs, identifying appropriate data collection and management methods, and selecting appropriate statistical analysis methods to address the questions of interest (modification of A.1, J.3, J.10) Prof Ethics: Demonstrate responsible conduct of research practices related to data acquisition and sharing, collaborative research, ethical research with human subjects, disclosure and management of conflicts of interest, avoidance of research misconduct, and responsible publication and authorship practices

2.6.b(viii) PhD Epidemiology Competencies

Core 1 Describe the roles biostatistics serves in the discipline of public health (A.1) Core 2 Apply and interpret results from descriptive and inferential methodologies according to the type of study design, measurement scale, and available data for answering a particular research question (modification of A.4 and A.7) Biostat 1: Use computer software for data entry and database management and use computer programs for summarizing, analyzing and displaying public health or biomedical research results (modification of A.8) Biostat 2P: Determine the most appropriate method of statistical analysis, for a broad range of complex studies, reflecting a given question of interest, the implemented study design and the available data, implementing preferred methodological alternatives to commonly used statistical methods when their assumptions are not met (modification of A.3 and A.7) Biostat 3: Read the statistical methods reported in public health and medical literature and comment on their appropriateness to the study design and research questions (modification of A.9) Core 4P Advocates for and demonstrates the importance of epidemiology, and evaluates aspects of a public health problem in terms of magnitude, person, time and place, for informing scientific, ethical, economic and political discussion of health issues (modification of C.3 and C.4) Core 5 Calculate basic epidemiology measures and draw appropriate inference from epidemiologic data (modification of C.7 and C.9)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

Epi 1: Identify, access, and integrate sources of health data such as vital statistics records, disease registries, national surveys, and medical records in order to address epidemiologic questions. (modification of C.1) Epi 2P: Critically appraise and synthesize information related to the pathophysiology, natural history, and relative frequencies of health conditions that are major causes of morbidity and mortality Epi 3: Given an epidemiological investigation, compare and contrast strengths, limitations, and inference that may be drawn from data collected through the use of epidemiological research designs including cohort, case-control, ecologic, and cross-sectional studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Epi 4MP: Assess and implement strategies to summarize and report the impact of effect modification and to control for or minimize bias, including selection, information, and confounding bias when drawing inference from epidemiologic studies (modification of C.9 and C.10) Epi 5: Discuss, from knowledge of the literature, the pathophysiology, natural history, and epidemiology in their chosen area of concentration (e.g., cardiovascular diseases, cancer, pediatric epidemiology, infectious diseases). Epi 6: Generate relevant epidemiological research questions that contribute new knowledge to the field Epi 7: Independently design and implement epidemiologic studies to answer specific research questions using a variety of designs, interpret study results and relate findings to the relevant scientific literature Core 9 MP Demonstrate effective written and oral skills for communicating with different audiences in the context of professional public health or biomedical research activities (modification of F.7) Comm Epi P: Design and implement a critical review of applied public health, biomedical, and epidemiological research literature in a specialty area, critique the reported methods, and synthesize the findings Prof Epi P: Become an integral team member actively participating in, or as a team leader directing personnel in, actively participating in identifying public health or biomedical questions, selecting appropriate study designs, identifying appropriate data collection and management methods, and selecting appropriate statistical analysis methods to address the questions of interest (modification of A.1, J.3, J.10) Prof Ethics: Demonstrate responsible conduct of research practices related to data acquisition and sharing, collaborative research, ethical research with human subjects, disclosure and management of conflicts of interest, avoidance of research misconduct, and responsible publication and authorship practices Teach Epi 1: Assist a faculty member in teaching graduate level courses in epidemiology by developing course material, delivering lectures, leading review and discussion sections, or writing and grading homework assignments and exams Teach Epi 2: Train others in the design of research studies and analysis of data, including students in the fields of biostatistics, epidemiology, public health, and biomedical sciences

2.6.b(ix) MPH in Health Administration and Policy Competencies. In addition to the MPH core competencies, MPH students majoring in Health Administration and Policy are expected to meet the following competencies:

HAP 1 Describe the legal and ethical bases for public health and health services (D.2) HAP 2 Apply the principles of program planning, development, budgeting, management and evaluation in organizational and community initiatives (D.5) HAP 3 Apply principles of strategic planning and marketing to public health (D.6) HAP 4 Apply quality and performance improvement concepts to address organizational performance issues (D.7) HAP 5 Apply "systems thinking" for resolving organizational problems (D.8)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

2.6.b(x) MHA in Health Administration and Policy Competencies. MHA students will have the ability to demonstrate:

MHA A. Synthesis and evaluation of the healthcare system, healthcare management, and issues related to: 1. healthcare organizations, 2. access to care, 3. financing healthcare, 4. human resources, 5. financial management, 6. strategic planning and thinking, 7. quality improvement, and 8. legal and regulatory matters.

MHA B. Communication skills including: 1. Characterizing and utilizing appropriate forms and standards of communication methods applicable in professional healthcare settings; 2. Establishing best practices of communication skills; and 3. Effectively identifying and responding to the audience and its wants, needs, interests, and beliefs.

MHA C. Critical thinking, analytical skills, and problem-solving abilities including: 1. Using quantitative, statistical and financial analyses to solve problems; 2. Creating and using strategic planning and strategic thinking to discern among alternatives and make recommendations; and 3. Applying quality improvement techniques to analyze and change organizational outcomes.

MHA D. Leadership, Professionalism, and Ethics including: 1. Engaging people, organizations, and key stakeholders when developing goals and executing plans; 2. Mobilizing teams, using negotiating skills, and accounting for individual and organizational pressures and needs; 3. Demonstrating integrity in personal and organizational practices, respecting diverse opinions, and holding themselves and others accountable for their actions; and 4. Using a corporate ethical decision-making process in a healthcare setting and apply ethical principles and policy statements to resolve ethical issues.

2.6.b(xi) MPH in Health Promotion Sciences Competencies. In addition to the MPH core competencies, MPH students majoring in Health Promotion Sciences are expected to meet the following competencies:

HPS 1 Apply theories, concepts, and models from a range of social and behavioral disciplines that are used in public health research and practice (modification of E.1) HPS 2 Analyze individual, organizational, and community concerns, assets, resources and deficits for social and behavioral science interventions (modification of E.3)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

HPS 3 Apply ethical principles to public health program planning, implementation and evaluation (E.9) HPS 4 Evaluate multiple targets and develop multiple levels of intervention for social and behavioral science programs and/or policies (modification of E.10) HPS 5 Apply basic concepts and skills involved in culturally appropriate community engagement and empowerment with diverse communities (modification of G.5) HPS 6 Demonstrate principles of community-based participatory research to improve health in diverse populations (modification of G.6) HPS 7 Differentiate among goals, measureable objectives, related activities, and expected outcomes for a public health program (K.5) HPS 8 Differentiate the purposes of formative, process, and outcome evaluation (K.6)

2.6.b(xii) MS in Health Promotion Sciences Competencies

HPS 1 Apply theories, concepts, and models from a range of social and behavioral disciplines that are used in public health research and practice. HPS 2 Analyze individual, organizational, and community concerns, assets, resources and deficits for social and behavioral science interventions. HPS 3 Apply ethical principles to public health program planning, implementation and evaluation. HPS 4 Evaluate multiple targets and develop multiple levels of intervention for social and behavioral science programs and/or policies. HPS 5 Apply basic concepts and skills involved in culturally appropriate community engagement and empowerment with diverse communities. HPS 6 Demonstrate principles of community-based participatory research to improve health in diverse populations. HPS 7 Differentiate among goals, measureable objectives, related activities, and expected outcomes for a public health program. HPS 8 Differentiate the purposes of formative, process and outcome evaluation. HPS MS 1 Understand and implement qualitative or quantitative research techniques including methodological conceptualization, technique selection, analysis types, limits of techniques, computer assisted coding, and selected techniques such as focus group research, social marketing, complex participant-observation, rapid appraisal methods, use of computer assisted statistical packages, and selected statistical methods such as regression analysis, non-parametric methods, linear models, and analysis of multivariate data. HPS MS 2 Apply knowledge of a significant public health problem in a substantive content area germane to research related to areas such as minority, adolescent, aging, maternal and child, international, and gender health.

2.6.b(xiii) PhD in Health Promotion Sciences Competencies

HPSDoc 1 Critique and apply the theoretical foundations of health promotion sciences from the perspective of all levels of the ecological model including individuals, small groups, communities, organizations, government, and social policy. HPSDoc 2 Apply the array of health promotion intervention strategies from the most current research, theoretical, methodological, and practice models. HPSDoc 3 Understand and implement qualitative research techniques including methodological conceptualization, technique selection, analysis types, limits of techniques, computer assisted coding, and selected techniques such as focus group research, social marketing, complex participant-observation, and rapid appraisal methods. HPSDoc 4 Understand and implement quantitative research techniques including methodological conceptualization, technique selection, analysis types, limits of techniques, use of computer assisted statistical packages, and selected statistical methods such as regression analysis, non-parametric methods, linear models, and analysis of multivariate data.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

HPSDoc 5 Understand and implement program evaluation types and strategies, selection criteria for use of specific evaluation types, advanced principles of program evaluation implementation, and methods associated with each program evaluation type. HPSDoc 6 Apply the principles of social and behavioral science disciplines relevant to public health, such as anthropology, communication, political science, psychology, sociology, and social work. HPSDoc 7 Apply knowledge of a significant public health problem in a substantive content area germane to research related to areas such as, minority, adolescent, aging, maternal and child, international, and gender health.

2.6.b(xiv) MPH in Environmental Health Competencies. In addition to the MPH core competencies, MPH students majoring in Environmental Health are expected to meet the following competencies:

OEH 1 Explain genetic, physiologic, and psychosocial factors that affect susceptibility to adverse health outcomes following exposure to environmental hazards (modification of B.2) OEH 2 Interpret federal and state regulatory programs, guidelines, and authorities that control environmental health issues (modification of B.3) OEH 3 Utilize and apply methods and tools for assessing environmental risks (modification of B.4) OEH 4 Apply methods for assessing, preventing and controlling environmental hazards that pose risks to human health and safety (modification of B.5) OEH 5 Explain the general mechanisms of toxicology in eliciting a toxic response to various environmental exposures (B.6) OEH 6 Design risk management and risk communication approaches in relation to issues of environmental justice and equity (modification of B.7) OEH 7 Apply theory and strategy-based communication principles across different settings and audiences (F.4) OEH 8 Evaluate how biological, chemical and physical agents might affect human health (modification of I.7) OEH 9 Apply biological principles to development and implementation of disease prevention, control, or management programs (I.8)

2.6.b(xv) MS in Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences Competencies. Upon graduation, students will demonstrate an ability to:

IHGen A Apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and applied sciences IHGen B Design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data IHGen C Formulate or design a system, process, or program to meet desired needs IHGen D Function on multi-disciplinary teams IHGen E Identify and solve applied science problems IHGen F Understand professional and ethical responsibility IHGen G1 Communicate effectively in the field with people at all levels of an organization and with the public concerning health and safety IHGen G2 Communicate effectively with professional peers IHGen H Demonstrate the broad education necessary to understand the impact of public health solutions in a global and societal context IHGen I Recognize the need for and ability to engage in life-long learning IHGen J Demonstrate knowledge of contemporary and historical issues regarding the health of populations with an understanding of the role of culture, power, privilege, and structural inequality in producing health disparities IHGen L Demonstrate understanding of the impact of solutions within an organization, based in part on field experience IHSpec A Identify agents, factors, and stressors generated by and/or associated with defined sources, unit operations, and/or processes

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

IHSpec B Describe qualitative and quantitative aspects of generation of agents, factors, and stressors IHSpec C Demonstrate understanding of physiological and/or toxicological interactions of physical, chemical, biological, and ergonomic agents, factors, and/or stressors with the human body IHSpec D Assess qualitative and quantitative aspects of exposure assessment, dose-response, and risk characterization based on applicable pathways and modes of entry IHSpec E Calculate, interpret, and apply statistical and epidemiological data IHSpec F Recommend and evaluate engineering, administrative, and personal protective equipment controls and/or other interventions to reduce or eliminate hazards IHSpec G Understand applicable business and managerial practices, based in part on field experience IHSpec H Interpret and apply applicable occupational and environmental regulations IHSpec I Understand fundamental aspects of safety and environmental health IHSpec J Attain recognized professional certification

2.6.b(xvi) PhD in Occupational and Environmental Health Competencies

OEH D1 Exhaustively search and critically review the scientific literature in a chosen area of occupational and environmental health OEH D2 Formulate testable scientific hypotheses OEH D3 Design studies to test scientific hypotheses or otherwise produce meaningful findings OEH D4 Use, and if appropriate, develop valid tools to collect and interpret data OEH D5 Demonstrate understanding of the chosen area of specialization within occupational and environmental health OEH D6 Recognize the limits of one’s own knowledge, and demonstrate the ability to seek and implement advice or collaboration as necessary OEH D7 Understand the responsible conduct of research, including data acquisition, management, sharing and ownership; mentor/student responsibilities; publication practices and responsible authorship; peer review; collaborative science; research misconduct; conflict of interest, and protection of human subjects and of animals in research OEH D8 Communicate research to scientific peers accurately and in a professional manner OEH D9 Convey broad knowledge of occupational and environmental health in an educational setting

2.6.b(xvii) MPH in Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response Competencies. In addition to the MPH core competencies, MPH students majoring in Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response are expected to meet the following competencies. Cross-references to the ASPH Public Health Preparedness and Response Core Competency Model (Version 1.0, December 2010) are included in parentheses.

PHPTR 1 Solve problems under emergency conditions (1.1) PHPTR 2 Facilitate collaboration with internal and external emergency response partners (1.3) PHPTR 3 Use principles of crisis and risk communication (2.2) PHPTR 4 Report information potentially relevant to the identification and control of an emergency through the chain of command (2.3) PHPTR 5 Contribute expertise to a community hazard vulnerability analysis (HVA) (3.1) PHPTR 6 Contribute expertise to the development of emergency plans (3.2) PHPTR 7 Employ protective behaviors according to changing conditions, personal limitations, and threats (4.2)

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

2.6.c. A matrix that identifies the learning experiences (e.g., specific course or activity within a course, practicum, culminating experience or other degree requirement) by which the competencies defined in Criteria 2.6.a. and 2.6.b are met. If these are common across the school, a single matrix for each degree will suffice. If they vary, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each degree and concentration. See CEPH Data Exhibit 2.6.1.

A matrix (Exhibit 2.6.1 Courses and Activities through which Competencies Are Met)) has been prepared for each degree and major indicating the courses and activities through which competencies are met (Resource File). In each matrix, “P” is used to indicate that the competency is a primary focus in the learning experience and/or the learning experience is a primary means of imparting that competency. “R” is used to indicate that a competency is reinforced in the learning experience, but is not a primary focus of the learning experience.

The entry for each course in Exhibit 2.6.1 for master’s degrees reflects the competencies explicitly identified by the course instructor in the course syllabus. The College requires instructors to include a matrix colloquially called the “syllabus grid” in each syllabus to identify the competencies imparted or reinforced in the course and indicate where the competencies are taught and evaluated (e.g. lecture, homework, group project, final). Generally, departments include their doctoral competencies in the syllabus grids for their own doctoral courses. Doctoral competencies imparted by courses outside the student’s major department were verified by mapping to the learning objectives and/or competencies documented in the course syllabus.

The matrices for the following degrees and/or major are provided as separate spreadsheets in the Excel file “Exhibit 2 6 1 Courses and Activities through which Competencies Are Met - all programs” in the Resource File:

• MPH core competencies for all MPH students

• DrPH

• Interdisciplinary MPH

• MPH Biostatistics majors

• MS Biostatistics majors

• PhD Biostatistics majors

• MPH Epidemiology majors

• MS Epidemiology majors

• PhD Epidemiology majors

• MPH Health Administration and Policy majors

• MHA Health Administration and Policy majors

• MPH Health Promotion Sciences majors

• MS Health Promotion Sciences majors

• PhD Health Promotion Sciences majors

• MPH Environmental Health majors

• MS Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

• PhD Occupational and Environmental Health majors

• MPH Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response majors. Students often enter the MPH in Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response with prior training that imparted a partial set of competencies in this area. The curriculum therefore includes individualized courses (CPH 7113 Advanced Topics in All-Hazards Preparedness and OEH 5960 Directed Reading – FEMA Independent Study Program) in which the specific topics and associated competencies are determined for each student to ensure coverage of competencies and enhance the student’s skill set. It should be noted that in late 2014 oversight of this degree track was transferred to the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, which plans to revise the program competencies in consultation with key stakeholders, and then to redesign the curriculum to impart the revised competencies.

2.6.d. An analysis of the completed matrix included in Criterion 2.6.c. If changes have been made in the curricula as a result of the observations and analysis, such changes should be described.

2.6.d(i) MPH Core Competencies Analysis. The core competencies that must be met by all MPH students are imparted primarily through the five core courses (BSE 5113, BSE 5163, HAP 5453, HPS 5213, OEH 5013), which are required for all MPH students. The core courses are structured to cover all 12 core competencies. Some of the core competencies are further developed or reinforced later in the various curricula.

2.6.d(ii) DrPH Competencies Analysis. For most DrPH competencies, at least one required course serves as a primary means of imparting the competency. The other DrPH competencies are reinforced across multiple courses and/or are specifically demonstrated in the DrPH general examination, the dissertation prospectus, or the dissertation. The one exception is the competency DrPH-ACO 5, “Conduct community-based participatory interventions and research projects”, which is touched upon in the curriculum but is not emphasized or broadly reinforced. The necessity of this specialized competency for all DrPH graduates is currently being re-evaluated by the College in light of the overall public health leadership needs in the state and region and of the recent (November 2014) ASPPH report “DrPH for the 21st Century”.

2.6.d(iii) Interdisciplinary MPH Competencies Analysis. The MPH in Interdisciplinary Public Health (formerly the General MPH) currently has an individualized curriculum consisting of one course from each of the five disciplines (selective courses) and three elective courses based on interest and desired emphasis. In the absence of a set of prescribed courses beyond those required of all MPH students, the Interdisciplinary MPH competencies must be met by selecting courses and a practicum experience that develop cross-cutting skills and abilities in communications and informatics, diversity and culture, leadership, professionalism, program planning, and systems thinking. Across the five disciplines, courses are available that address these competencies. A spreadsheet of available elective courses imparting the Interdisciplinary competencies is provided in the Resource File. As a result of this self-study, the College is in the process of re-examining the Interdisciplinary competencies and curricular offerings to ensure that the competencies in this track are aligned with graduates’ career goals and employer needs and that selective/elective courses imparting those competencies are specified in the Interdisciplinary track curriculum.

2.6.d(iv) MPH Biostatistics Competencies Analysis. As a result of a preliminary analysis of the matrix of competencies and learning experiences for the MPH in Biostatistics, the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology implemented the following enhancements:

• To reinforce Biostat 3 in all applied biostatistics courses, faculty were encouraged to expand the use of published manuscripts as examples, case studies, and discussion problems in all applied biostatistics courses.

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

• To reinforce Biostat 4, in addition to the coverage of this competency in biostatistics elective courses, students are required to make analysis decisions during the practicum project and provide a rationale for the analysis approaches within the written practicum paper and during the oral defense and oral exam.

2.6.d(v) MS Biostatistics Competencies Analysis. As a result of a preliminary analysis of the matrix of competencies and learning experiences for the MS in Biostatistics, the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology has implemented the following enhancements:

• To reinforce Biostat 1MP, in addition to coverage in biostatistics elective courses, such as BSE 5653 Nonparametric Statistics, programming is required for processing, summarizing, analyzing or displaying data in the thesis. • To reinforce Biostat 3 in all applied biostatistics courses, faculty were encouraged to expand the use of published manuscripts as examples, case studies, and discussion problems in all applied biostatistics courses. • To reinforce Biostat 4, in addition to the coverage of this competency in biostatistics elective courses, students are required to make analysis decisions during the thesis research project and provide a rationale for the analysis approaches within the written thesis and during the oral defense and oral exam.

Additionally, to reinforce Prof Biostat, which is primarily imparted to MS Biostatistics students through the master’s theses, the department has formed a committee to develop further opportunities for MS and PhD students to develop professional practice skills. The committee’s work is still in progress; options under consideration include a course on BSE consulting, a workshop series, and involvement in consulting projects such as those through the OSCTR.

2.6.d(vi) PhD Biostatistics Competencies Analysis. As a result of a preliminary analysis of the matrix of competencies and learning experiences for the PhD in Biostatistics, the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology implemented the following enhancements:

• To reinforce Biostat 7, in addition to coverage in BSE 6553 Linear Models and biostatistics elective courses, data simulation is required in the dissertation. • To ensure Teach Biostat 1 and Teach Biostat 2 are imparted, the department has developed a written policy that formalizes and expands the teaching requirements beyond the current expectations that doctoral students serve as TAs and/or course instructors. Subject to approval by the University Regents, the policy is anticipated to go into effect in Fall 2015. Students are also encouraged to participate in the campus-wide Preparing Future Faculty program.

Additionally, Prof Biostat P, which is primarily imparted to PhD Biostatistics students through the dissertation, will be reinforced by the opportunities to be developed by the committee on professional practice skills, as described in Section 2.6.d(v).

2.6.d(vii) MPH Epidemiology Competencies Analysis. As a result of a preliminary analysis of the matrix of competencies and learning experiences for the MPH in Epidemiology, the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology implemented the following enhancement:

2.6.d(viii) MS Epidemiology Competencies Analysis. As a result of a preliminary analysis of the matrix of competencies and learning experiences for the MPH in Epidemiology, the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology will reinforce Prof Epi, which is primarily imparted to MS Epidemiology students through the master’s thesis, through the opportunities to be developed by the committee on professional practice skills, as described in Section 2.6.d(v).

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

2.6.d(ix) PhD Epidemiology Competencies Analysis. As a result of a preliminary analysis of the matrix of competencies and learning experiences for the MPH in Epidemiology, the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology is implemented the following enhancement:

• To ensure Teach Epi 1 and Teach Epi 2 are imparted, the department has developed a written policy that formalizes and expands the teaching requirements beyond the current expectations that doctoral students serve as TAs and/or course instructors. Subject to approval by the University Regents, the policy is anticipated to go into effect in Fall 2015. Students are also encouraged to participate in the campus-wide Preparing Future Faculty program.

2.6.d(x) MPH Health Administration and Policy Competencies Analysis. For each Health and Administration Policy MPH competency, at least one required course has been identified to serve as a primary means of imparting the competency.

2.6.d(xi) MHA Health Administration and Policy Competencies Analysis. The MHA curriculum is structured so that for all but two competencies (MHA D.3 and MHA D.4), at least one required course serves as a primary means of imparting the competency. MHA D.3 and MHA D.4 are addressed in several required courses as a secondary focus.

2.6.d(xii) MPH Health Promotion Sciences Competencies Analysis. For each HPS MPH competency, at least one required course serves as a primary means of imparting the competency. Most competencies are reinforced in other courses.

2.6.d(xiii) MS Health Promotion Sciences Competencies Analysis. The HPS MS competencies include all of the HPS MPH competencies, which are imparted primarily through the required courses. HPS MS 1 and HPS MS 2 are imparted primarily through the master’s thesis process.

2.6.d(xiv) PhD Health Promotion Competencies Analysis. The HPS PhD competencies are imparted through a combination of required doctoral level courses within the department, depth of courses in a related area of public health or social/behavioral science discipline, depth of courses in a substantive area of health, written comprehensive examinations, and the dissertation process.

2.6.d(xv) MPH Environmental Health Competencies Analysis. For each Environmental Health MPH competency, at least one required course serves as a primary means of imparting the competency. Some competencies are reinforced in other courses.

2.6.d(xvi) MS Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences Competencies Analysis. The MS curriculum for Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences is structured so that for each competency except IH Gen D and IH Spec J, at least one required course serves as a primary means of imparting the competency. IH Gen D (“an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams”) is typically a part of the field practice experience. Other courses may include team assignments at the discretion of the instructor. The experience of taking the public health core courses with students from the other public health disciplines also reinforces IH Gen D. However, it would be beneficial to all public health students if more multidisciplinary team-based experiences are offered by the College. IH Spec J (“an ability to attain recognized professional certification”) is supported collectively by the entire curriculum, which addresses the rubrics of the certification examination of the American Board of Industrial Hygiene (ABIH).

2.6.d(xvii) PhD Occupational and Environmental Health Competencies Analysis. The competencies for the OEH PhD emphasize autodidactic and research abilities, which are primarily imparted through the process of preparing for the doctoral general examination, developing the dissertation prospectus, and conducting the dissertation research, writing, and defense. The program previously used an individualized curriculum of didactic courses that served a “reinforcing” function for these competencies by providing the doctoral student the necessary knowledge base in his or her chosen area of specialization. As a result of the analysis of the matrix of competencies and learning experiences for this program, the department has

100

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

added a teaching requirement to impart competency OEH D9 (“convey broad knowledge of occupational and environmental health in an educational setting”) and revised its PhD curriculum to be more prescriptive.

2.6.d(xviii) MPH Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response Competencies Analysis. The connection between some required courses in the curriculum and the PHPTR competencies is not explicitly indicated in the matrix of competencies and learning experiences for this major. However, documentation of the curriculum revision in 2012 demonstrates that the College of Public Health conducted a systematic evaluation of the course requirements necessary for MPH students to acquire the core competencies and the full set of competencies in identified by the ASPH Public Health Preparedness and Response Core Competency Model (Version 1.0, December 2010). The curriculum therefore includes courses that complement but do not necessarily directly impart the seven PHPTR competencies listed in section 2.6.b, which were selected from the full set. Most of the PHPTR competencies are imparted through online FEMA courses taken in the framework of the tutorial course OEH 5960. As an immediate result of preliminary analysis of the matrix, the syllabus for this course was revised to clarify that FEMA courses are selected as necessary to impart competencies not previously developed by the student, or to expand the skills of students who had already acquired PHPTR competencies through prior experience or study. More importantly, at the recommendation of the self-study team and the Academic Program Committee of Faculty Board, the College has transferred oversight of the PHPTR track to the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, which will revise the competencies and then redesign the curriculum to efficiently impart these competencies.

2.6.e. Description of the manner in which competencies are developed, used and made available to students.

The College’s development of competencies has been informed by its mission, by the professional expertise of its faculty, by formal and informal guidance from its stakeholders, and by the evolving guidelines provided by ASPPH and CEPH. The College originally adopted the ASPH MPH Core Competency Model in its entirety as the core competencies for all MPH students. These competencies were incorporated into course syllabuses, often with mapping to the relevant course learning objectives, and used in the analysis of curricular content to ensure each competency was addressed. The ASPH MPH Core Competency Model was made available to all students through the College of Public Health Student Bulletin.

In Fall 2013, the College received guidance from CEPH on the evolving approach to competencies which favored identifying a moderate number of competencies for each degree and concentration, which could then be more thoroughly imparted, reinforced, and evaluated. The College embraced this approach and developed the sets of degree-wide competencies and program-specific competencies described in sections 2.6.a and 2.6.b, respectively, during Fall 2013 and Spring 2014. As the process evolved, a unique identifier was created for each competency to facilitate tracking and referencing.

The competencies have been incorporated into syllabuses and into various evaluation instruments, as described in Criterion 2.7.a, included in the College of Public Health Student Bulletin (Resource File), and also prominently posted on the College’s website at http://coph.ouhsc.edu/current/competencies.aspx .

The Dean took the lead in suggesting the set of MPH core competencies. The selection and modification of competencies from the ASPH MPH Core Competency Model was informed by the ASPPH report “Public Health Trends and Redesigned Education” (September 6, 2013), a summary and synthesis of interviews with the Blue Ribbon Public Health Employers’ Advisory Board.

The DrPH competencies were adapted from the ASPH DrPH Core Competency Model, Version 1.3, by the DrPH program director (Dr. Ann Chou) and the previous Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (Dr. Stephen Walston). The competencies were selected to convey the program’s focus on leadership as well

101

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

as the core competencies expected for a DrPH graduate. Revisions to the DrPH competencies are planned shortly based on the 2014 ASPPH report “DrPH for the 21st Century” and on a re-evaluation of the needs of the state and regional public health workforce.

The process by which each department or program developed program-specific competencies is described below.

MPH in Interdisciplinary Public Health. Because of the cross-cutting nature of the Interdisciplinary major, the program-specific competencies were selected and adapted by the previous Associate Dean for Academic Affairs from the “cross-cutting” competencies in the ASPH MPH Core Competency Model.

As described in sections 2.7.b(i) and 4.3.b, as a result of this self-study the College is making changes in the MPH admissions process such that the Interdisciplinary MPH will no longer serve as a “default” degree for students who were unable to gain admission to their preferred discipline. In concert with these changes, the College is examining the intended and likely career trajectories of Interdisciplinary MPH graduates and consulting with prospective employers to determine whether the set of program-specific competencies should be modified to better meet the needs of these stakeholders.

Biostatistics and Epidemiology. The BSE Department adapted and extensively revised the competencies that had been established for its MPH, MS, and PhD degrees prior to the College’s 2006 self-study. The department chair took the lead in this process, assisted by selected faculty members from each discipline. The competencies were guided by a clearly articulated description of the expected function of graduates of each degree program. The sets of competencies were thoroughly discussed, refined, and approved in departmental faculty meetings. The department intentionally nested MS program competencies within a broader and deeper set of competencies for its PhD programs.

Health Administration and Policy. For the MPH in Health Administration and Policy, the HAP Department selected competencies from the ASPH MPH Core Competency Model that best represented the purpose and orientation of this program.

The department developed its current set of MHA competencies in a comprehensive process following its CAHME site visit in September 2013. After reaching consensus on a new statement of mission, vision, and values, the faculty prepared and revised draft competencies addressing each of the four content areas required by CAHME. The draft competencies and mission, vision, and values statement were reviewed by program alumni and by the MHA Advisory Board. After thorough consideration of stakeholder input, the department formally adopted the set of MHA competencies in December 2013.

Health Promotion Sciences. The HPS Department faculty selected competencies from the ASPH MPH Core Competency Model that best represented the purpose and orientation of its MPH and MS programs. The competencies were modified where appropriate to reflect higher level cognitive domains using Bloom’s taxonomy. Additional competencies were developed for the MS to reflect the research focus of this degree.

The HPS PhD competencies were originally developed by the department prior to the College’s 2006 self- study. The department faculty reaffirmed these competencies with minor changes in 2014.

Occupational and Environmental Health. The OEH Department faculty selected competencies from the ASPH MPH Core Competency Model that best represented the purpose and orientation of its MPH program in Environmental Health. The competencies were modified where appropriate to reflect higher level cognitive domains using Bloom’s taxonomy.

The competencies for the MS in Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences were established by the department in 2004. The competencies (or “outcomes”) were derived nearly verbatim from the ASAC-ABET general criteria and Industrial Hygiene program specific criteria, with additional competencies based on the recommendations of the department’s External Advisory Board. The competencies were formally reaffirmed by the program’s Industrial Hygiene Constituent Committee

102

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

(IHCC) in 2006 and 2012. The competencies were used to guide curricular revisions in 2008 and 2011. As a result of the CEPH self-study, the department and the IHCC made revisions to several of the MS IH/EHS competencies in Fall 2014 to better reflect the public health orientation of the program.

The OEH PhD competencies were originally developed by the department prior to the College’s 2006 self-study. The department faculty reaffirmed these competencies in 2014.

MPH in Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response. The PHPTR program director selected competencies from the ASPH Public Health Preparedness and Response Core Competency Model (Version 1.0, December 2010) that best reflected the purpose of this program. Effective in Spring 2015, oversight of the MPH in PHPTR was moved into the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health. The OEH Department plans to seek input from employers of program graduates to guide anticipated revisions of the competencies.

2.6.f. Description of the manner in which the school periodically assesses changing practice or research needs and uses this information to establish the competencies for its educational programs.

Having now streamlined and focused its core and discipline-specific competencies, the College through its Executive Committee has developed and begun implementing a consistent and systematic continuous improvement process for periodic assessment of changing practice and/or research needs. Annually, at the June Executive Committee meeting, the “Evaluation and Planning” portion of the agenda will include a discussion item on assessment of competencies relative to practice and research needs. Discussion will address needs assessment data collected during the Summer/Fall and Spring semesters, respectively. When competencies are modified, departments will be responsible for implementing necessary adjustments to syllabi and curricula.

A number of existing and developing data sources are used in the needs assessment. With regard to practice competencies, the College will continue to utilize the ASPPH report “Public Health Trends and Redesigned Education” as a resource for informing competencies based on changing practice and research needs. Focus groups, key stakeholder interviews and surveys of recent graduates also help to provide the contextual framework for changes in the public health field. For needs assessment among local stakeholders, the College has in the past worked through the Oklahoma Public Health Training Center and its ongoing efforts to meet education and training needs as defined by the constellation of workforce partners. With the sharp reduction in funding by HRSA for the OPHTC, plans to sustain and continue to strategically engage employers will be key elements of the strategic plan currently in development. Annual surveys and/or structured interviews with employers will provide important information on what competencies employers seek and value in their public health workforce. Attendance at local, state and national conferences serves as the primary method for departments to assess changes to the research needs of the public health sector. For example, the Health Promotion Science department utilizes this approach to inform doctoral competencies. Market research could also include analysis of advertisements for doctoral level positions in both traditional and online media. Candidate attributes listed in job postings are a good indicator of competencies desired by employers of doctoral-level graduates.

Additionally, the MHA and MS in Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Science programs will continue to use established mechanisms for review and updating of competencies in consultation with the stakeholders for those programs. The MHA program has an ongoing comprehensive process to review the program competencies in a systematic and continuous fashion, to obtain suggestions and recommendations of the various stakeholders, and to seek continuous improvement with input from faculty, students, local employers, board members, and alumni. Similarly, the MS in Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Science has a formal ongoing process for collecting input on practice needs through its constituent committee and its triennial alumni and employer surveys.

103

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.6: REQUIRED COMPETENCIES

2.6.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: Each degree and program has a manageable number of competencies that can be tracked easily within the content of each syllabus and integrated into evaluation instruments. The competencies have been explicitly integrated in course syllabi, practicum agreements, and various assessment instruments (as discussed under Criterion 2.7). The College faculty have been highly engaged in assuring that appropriate competencies have been integrated into their course syllabi and are tied to specific learning and assessment activities within the course. Each program has been designed to impart the specific competencies for that program. Enhancements have been made in some programs to strengthen or formalize the development of specific competencies. The MPH core competencies are addressed within the MPH core curriculum. Additionally, MPH core competencies are reinforced and extended in various higher level courses. The development of the competencies was informed by national consensus models such as the ASPH Core Competency models, the CAHME competency model, and the ASAC- ABET general and discipline-specific criteria. Some sets of competencies have been reviewed by stakeholders from outside the College as part of an ongoing continuous improvement process. The sets of competencies established in 2013-2014 for each program and major have been incorporated into the College of Public Health Student Bulletin for the current academic year.

Weaknesses/challenges: The process for periodic updating of competencies has only recently been formalized on a College-wide basis.

The ASPPH report “Public Health Trends and Redesigned Education” identified management and teamwork as an essential element of public health education. More opportunities in our curricula for multidisciplinary team-based experiences are desirable to reinforce teamwork related competencies in several programs.

Plans: The College has begun to implement a formal plan for assessing practice and research needs on an annual basis and using this assessment to add, modify, or retire competencies as appropriate. As competencies are updated in response to practice and research needs, the revised competencies will be posted on the College’s website and included in the Bulletin as it is revised annually. This will insure that the competencies are readily available to current students, prospective students, and potential employers.

The College’s 2016-2020 Strategic Plan will include the incorporation of inter-professional education into the curriculum under the leadership of the Associate Dean for Inter-Professional Relations. Public Health students will participate in the inter-professional team-based EPIC course, which will be piloted campus- wide beginning in Fall 2015.

104

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

2.7 ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

There shall be procedures for assessing and documenting the extent to which each professional public health, other professional and academic degree student has demonstrated achievement of the competencies defined for his or her degree program and area of concentration.

2.7.a. Description of the procedures used for monitoring and evaluating student progress in achieving the expected competencies, including procedures for identifying competency attainment in practice or research, as applicable, and in culminating experiences.

The College has established procedures for monitoring and evaluating progress in achieving competencies on both an individual and aggregate level. The College uses multiple assessment methods to evaluate the extent to which each student has attained the competencies. The formal integration of competencies into existing evaluation instruments was facilitated when, as described in Section 2.6.e, the College established a streamlined set of competencies for each degree and concentration in 2013-2014.

2.7.a(i) Monitoring Progress

Within each course syllabus, one or more graded assessment methods, such as homework, papers, presentations, or examinations, are identified for each competency that is primarily imparted or reinforced by the course. Therefore satisfactory progress of a student through the curriculum is one valid indicator of progress in achieving the expected competencies.

The College’s standards of performance state that all students admitted Fall 2005 and thereafter into professional and academic degree programs are expected to receive a letter grade of A or B in all courses. A student in a professional degree program (MPH, MHA, and DrPH) receives a written warning from the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs for the first and second grade of C. If a student in a professional degree program receives a third C, or any failing grade of D, F, or U, the student may be required to meet with a subcommittee of the Admissions and Academic Advisement Committee appointed by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs to show cause for why they should not be dismissed from the degree program. The subcommittee may recommend continuation on academic probation. The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs acts upon the subcommittee recommendation for dismissal or probation. The Bulletin specifically informs students of this policy and procedure. Academic standards for graduate students are enforced by both the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and the Graduate College.

Failure to maintain an overall grade point average of 3.0, receiving a grade of U in a non-letter grade course such as thesis or dissertation research, or failure to maintain satisfactory progress as determined by the student’s academic advisor in their annual student evaluation will also result in probation. Students in professional degree programs are subject to probation administered by the College of Public Health, while students in academic degree programs are subject to probation administered by Graduate College. All probationary students, whether professional or graduate, are monitored by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs.

Another measure of progress toward achieving competencies is provided in the online end-of-course evaluations completed by students for all didactic courses. The evaluations include Likert scale questions asking students how well they feel the course prepared and enabled the student to perform each competency that was listed as a primary focus in the course syllabus. Because the end-of-course evaluations are anonymous, the results serve solely as an aggregate measure of student perception of the course’s effectiveness at imparting the competencies. A consistent pattern of unfavorable ratings regarding a competency can serve to alert the instructor and the department chair that improvement may be needed in the course content or delivery to more effectively impart the competency.

105

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

2.7.a(ii) Evaluating Achievement of MPH Competencies

The methods for assessing achievement of MPH competencies are:

• Course grades. • Performance in the Certified in Public Health (CPH) examination administered by the National Board of Public Health Examiners (NBPHE). Effective Fall 2013, all new MPH students were required to take the CPH examination after completing 21 credit hours, including all five of the core courses. The CPH exam is intended to serve as a key individual and aggregate metric for attainment of the MPH core competencies. Students who fail the CPH examination are required to make a second attempt after remedial tutoring and advising. However, passing the examination is not a graduation requirement. As a result of this self-study, the College developed a CPH preparation seminar that will be offered three times a year to assist students in reviewing the content areas prior to taking or re-taking the CPH examination. Students needing further tutoring will be given assistance by the College in finding a tutor. • Preceptor’s evaluation of the student’s achievement of core and discipline-specific competencies specified in the practicum agreement. • Student’s self-evaluation of the student’s achievement of core and discipline-specific competencies specified in the practicum agreement. • Assessment by the student’s Culminating Experience committee that the student has satisfactorily demonstrated discipline-specific and relevant core competencies in the practicum paper and practicum defense/oral examination.

The Culminating Experience, consisting of the integrated public health practice course, practicum preparation seminar, practicum, practicum paper, and practicum defense and oral examination, is where MPH students are expected to demonstrate mastery of the program-specific competencies established for their area of concentration. Beginning in Spring 2014 the competencies were explicitly listed as items for evaluation in the documentation used for the Culminating Experience. In CPH 7941 Practicum Preparation Seminar students were required to complete a written MPH Practicum Agreement with the host site that explicitly incorporates relevant core and program-specific competencies. These competencies were then included in the Preceptor Evaluation of Student’s MPH Practicum Performance form and the Student Evaluation of Practicum Host Site form. Beginning Fall 2014 the complete set of core and programmatic competencies for each MPH degree program have been provided to the student, the practicum preceptor, and the Culminating Experience Committee for parallel assessment of competency attainment from the different perspectives. This provides a more robust assessment, and also provides data for future analysis to compare these perceptions. Results of the student competency self-evaluation, the preceptor evaluation, and the committee member Culminating Experience are extracted to a summary sheet that is included in the student’s official file in the Office of Student Services. Examples of these “check-off sheet” forms and summary forms are provided in the Resource File. The forms used by the Culminating Experience Committee at the practicum defense/oral examination are also available online at http://coph.ouhsc.edu/current/culminatingexperience.aspx.

Additionally, the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health requires MPH students in Environmental Health to pass the Quantitative Skills Examination, which assesses mastery of quantitative aspects of competencies OEH 3 and OEH 4. Students are allowed two attempts, and passing the examination is a condition of graduation.

MPH students are expected to explicitly address the relevant competencies in their practicum paper and practicum defense presentation. Because it is recognized that no practicum is likely to address the entire set of program-specific competencies, the practicum defense serves as the venue for the Culminating Experience committee to probe the student’s mastery of program-specific competencies that were not addressed in the practicum. The committee may also probe the student’s mastery of the MPH core competencies if necessary. The committee may take into consideration the strength of the student’s course transcript when determining which competencies to probe in the oral examination. The evaluation

106

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

form used by the members of the committee to take notes during the practicum defense has been revised to include a listing of all core and program-specific competencies to facilitate documentation that attainment was assessed. The College faculty has continued to refine the Culminating Experience Competency Evaluation Form, establishing written guidelines in the Student Bulletin to ensure consistency in the rigor of the practicum defense across disciplines and majors, and building a “question bank” of sample questions for each competency. The question bank serves as a resource for faculty members serving on Culminating Experience committees and for students preparing for the practicum defense.

2.7.a(iii) Evaluating Achievement of DrPH Competencies

The methods for assessing achievement of DrPH competencies are:

• Course grades • The DrPH General Examination, administered by the DrPH Advisory Committee • Review and oral defense of the dissertation prospectus, administered by the DrPH Doctoral Dissertation Committee • Review of the dissertation by the DrPH Doctoral Dissertation Committee • Dissertation defense and Final Oral Examination, administered by the DrPH Doctoral Dissertation Committee

As is the case for the other doctoral degree programs, the Culminating Experience for the DrPH involves the dissertation defense as well oral examination on any topic relevant to the program. These are not necessarily distinct. The dissertation defense phase is open to the public, whereas the subsequent oral examination is restricted to only the examining committee.

Procedures for these assessments are provided in the College of Public Health Student Bulletin (Resource File).

2.7.a(iv) Evaluating Achievement of MHA Competencies

The methods for assessing achievement of MHA competencies are:

• A letter grade of A or B in each class, including the MHA capstone course HAP 5973 • Performance rating of good or excellent in a written evaluation by the internship preceptor • Satisfactory performance in an oral presentation which defends the validity of their internship experience and which focuses on the competencies. This report should successfully demonstrate the application of the didactic learning to the field experience.

2.7.a(v) Evaluating Achievement of MS Competencies

The methods for assessing achievement of MS competencies are:

• Course grades • Review and oral defense of the thesis prospectus, administered by the master’s thesis committee • Review of the thesis by the master’s thesis committee • Thesis defense and comprehensive oral examination, administered by the master’s thesis committee

Additionally, MS students in Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences are required to pass the Quantitative Skills Examination as described above.

107

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

2.7.a(vi) Evaluating Achievement of PhD Competencies

The methods for assessing achievement of PhD competencies are:

• Course grades • One or more qualifying examinations, administered by the doctoral advisory committee • Review and oral defense of the dissertation prospectus or proposal, administered by the doctoral dissertation committee • Review of the dissertation by the doctoral dissertation committee • Oral defense of the dissertation, administered by the doctoral dissertation committee

Specific procedures for PhD qualifying examinations, which vary by department and major, are provided in the College of Public Health Student Bulletin (Resource File).

2.7.b. Identification of outcomes that serve as measures by which the school will evaluate student achievement in each program, and presentation of data assessing the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years. Outcome measures must include degree completion and job placement rates for all degrees (including bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees) for each of the last three years. See CEPH Data Exhibits 2.7.1 and 2.7.2. If degree completion rates in the maximum time period allowed for degree completion are less than the thresholds defined in this criterion’s interpretive language, an explanation must be provided. If job placement (including pursuit of additional education), within 12 months following award of the degree, includes fewer than 80% of the graduates at any level who can be located, an explanation must be provided. See CEPH Outcome Measures Exhibit.

The College uses several outcomes as aggregate measures of student achievement. Measurement of two outcomes, degree completion and job placement, has been fully implemented. An additional outcome measure, the pass rate of MPH students taking the CPH examination, was adopted in 2013-2014 and outcome data have been collected since that time.

2.7.b(i) Degree Completion

The degree completion rates during the past three years are provided in Exhibit 2.7.1 Completion Outcomes by Degree Type in the Resource File. The allowable time to graduation is 6 years for all master’s degrees and the DrPH, and 6-9 years for the PhD, depending on when the general examination is taken. Because students may enter a degree program in Spring, Summer, or Fall, the graduation window for each entry cohort encompasses 7 academic years. For example, a student entering a master’s degree program in Spring of the 2005-2006 academic year would have until Fall of the 2011- 2012 academic year to graduate.

Although the OUHSC Office of Admissions and Records maintains the official enrollment and graduation records for all students, the College of Public Health Office of Student Affairs Student Tracking Database was the primary source of enrollment and graduation data used in Exhibit 2.7.1. This is an Excel spreadsheet with a line entry for each student that includes semester and year of first enrollment, initial degree track, current degree track, status (active, graduated, withdrawn, leave of absence, etc.), and last term enrolled among other items. The reason for withdrawal, dismissal, or discontinuation of degree program is also noted. The Office of Student Services updates this spreadsheet essentially continuously. Using these data rather than the Office of Admissions and Records data allowed individuals who matriculated but postponed attendance or never attended, or who were admitted to degree programs but decided to enroll as non-degree students (Certificate students), to be excluded from the cohort completion analysis. However, students who enrolled as MPH students, completed sufficient coursework to receive the Certificate, but then withdrew before completing the MPH were not excluded since they would correctly be considered non-completers.

108

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

The overall pattern indicates graduation rates for MPH students have been below 70% in each cohort entering 2005-2006, 2006-2007, and 2007-2008. Students in these cohorts should have graduated before the end of 2011-2012, 2012-2013, and 2013-2014, respectively. The College’s Office of Student Services attempts to ascertain the reason why each student left the program. As shown in Exhibit 2.7.a Reasons for Attrition from MPH Programs, by Entry Cohort, attrition was attributable more to students withdrawing for personal or job reasons, or to transfer to a health-related degree program, than to poor academic performance. About 7-16% of the students each MPH entry cohort were dismissed for academic reasons or dropped out while on academic probation.

The College has examined the admissions process for MPH students and made changes to ensure that a consistent standard is used to evaluate each applicant’s potential to successfully complete their degree program of interest. Before 2014 all MPH applicants were initially admitted to the General (now Interdisciplinary) track and had to complete at least three of the five core courses before they could request a change of major to a departmental MPH track. If the department denied a student’s request, the student remained in the General/Interdisciplinary track. The College now recognizes that because a “default” track was available for students who might not meet the admissions standards of their program of interest after completing the initial coursework, the Admissions and Academic Advisement (AAA) Committee may have been too liberal in giving marginally qualified students a chance to prove themselves via the core courses. Starting in 2014, prospective students were allowed to apply for direct admission to a departmental MPH major, as described in section 4.3.b, so that applicants with a strong preference for a specific major could know before they matriculated whether they were admissible to their preferred department. Qualified MPH applicants who had not chosen a major or were not initially granted admission to a requested major were matriculated in the Interdisciplinary Public Health track, with the option of applying for a different program after completing nine hours of core courses. Beginning in Fall 2015, however, the College will complete transition to all direct admissions to discipline-specific MPH programs. An applicant will be required to specify up to two MPH programs of interest in their SOPHAS application. The application will be evaluated by each program’s departmental faculty, or by the AAA Committee if the Interdisciplinary track is requested, and those faculty will make the decision of acceptance to the program or denial. If both programs offer acceptance the applicant may choose between them; if both deny acceptance the applicant is rejected and must reapply should they wish to pursue another program option. Although the graduation rate of post-2014 entry cohorts will be the ultimate indicator that these changes in admissions policies and procedures are effective, the College plans to use attrition rates in the first 2-3 years of entry as an early metric of improvement.

Exhibit 2.7.a Reasons for Attrition from MPH Programs, by Entry Cohort 2005-06 Entry 2006-07 Entry 2007-08 Entry Reason Number of Students (% of Cohort) Dismissed for academic reasons 11 (11.8%) 5 (6.3%) 9 (9.9%) Withdrew/dropped out on probation 4 (4.3%) 1 (1.2%) 2 (2.2%) Transferred to other health schools/programs 4 (4.3%) 3 (3.8%) 7 (7.7%) Moved out of state/area 3 (3.2%) 2 (2.5%) - Withdrew for personal/financial/work reasons 6 (6.5%) 9 (11.5%) 2 (2.2%) Received certificate – did not continue with degree 1 (1.1%) 2 (2.5%) - Unknown/did not respond 8 (8.6%) 5 (6.3%) 9 (9.9%) Total Attrition 37 (39.8%) 27 (33.8%) 29 (31.9%) Cohort sizes in the other degrees were small, especially in the doctoral degrees, causing considerable variability in cohort graduation rates, but overall patterns are discernible. Students in the MHA degree typically graduated within 4 years of entry, and at least 90% of the MHA students in cohorts entering in 2005-2006, 2006-2007, and 2007-2008 graduated within 6 years. Graduation rates in the MS were above 90% in the 2005-2006, 2006-2007, and 2007-2008 cohorts. Across doctoral cohorts entering in 2005- 2006, 2006-2007, and 2007-2008, the DrPH graduation rate was 100%, whereas the PhD graduation rate was 57% (8/14), with two PhD students from those cohorts still in progress.

109

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

2.7.b(ii) Job Placement

As shown in Exhibit 2.7.2 Graduates’ Employment by Degree Type, more than 80% of students graduating in each of the past three years found employment or were engaged in continuing education within 12 months of graduation. The high level of employment or continued education was consistent across all majors, exceeding 90% of graduates in each major for whom employment information was available. The College’s system of recurrent follow-up telephone interviews of graduates, which is described in section 2.7.c below, has greatly enhanced our ability to ascertain graduates’ employment status. In addition to follow-up at 12 months, Exhibit 2.7.2.a includes follow-up at 24 and 36 months for 2010-2011 graduates and Exhibit 2.7.2.b includes follow-up at 24 months for 2011-2012 graduates.

110

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

Exhibit 2.7.2 Destination of Graduates by Employment Type

Exhibit 2.7.2.a Destination of Graduates by Employment Type FY 2011 Graduates Employment – MPH graduating 2010-2011 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years Employed 16 33% 18 37% 34 69% Continuing education/training (not employed) 14 29% 11 22% 9 18% Actively seeking employment 5 10% 4 8% 2 4% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% 2 4% 2 4% Unknown 14 29% 14 29% 2 4% Total 49 100% 49 100% 49 100%

Graduates Employment – MHA graduating 2010-2011 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years Employed 0 0% 0 0% 8 89% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Unknown 9 100% 9 100% 1 11% Total 9 100% 9 100% 9 100%

Graduates Employment – MS graduating 2010-2011 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years Employed 0 0% 0 0% 8 67% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Unknown 12 100% 12 100% 4 33% Total 12 100% 12 100% 12 100%

111

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

Graduates Employment – PhD graduating 2010-2011 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years Employed 0 0% 0 0% 3 100% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Unknown 3 100% 3 100% 0 0% Total 3 100% 3 100% 3 100%

Graduates Employment – DrPH graduating 2010-2011 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years Employed 0 0% 0 0% 2 100% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% Unknown 2 100% 2 100% 0 0% Total 2 100% 2 100% 2 100%

Exhibit 2.7.2.b Destination of Graduates by Employment Type FY 2012 Graduates Employment – MPH graduating 2011-2012 1 Year 2 Years Employed 39 74% 45 85% Continuing education/training (not employed) 7 13% 3 6% Actively seeking employment 2 4% 3 6% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 1 2% 0 0% Unknown 4 8% 2 4% Total 53 100% 53 100%

112

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

Graduates Employment – MHA graduating 2011-2012 1 Year 2 Years Employed 5 100% 5 100% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% 0 0% Unknown 0 0% 0 0% Total 5 100% 5 100%

Graduates Employment - MPH/MSW graduating 2011-2012 1 Year 2 Years Employed 0 0% 0 0% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% 0 0% Unknown 1 100% 1 100% Total 1 100% 1 100%

Graduates Employment – MS graduating 2011-2012 1 Year 2 Years Employed 3 43% 7 100% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% 0 0% Unknown 4 57% 0 0% Total 7 100% 7 100%

113

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

Graduates Employment – DrPH graduating 2011-2012 1 Year 2 Years Employed 1 50% 2 100% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% 0 0% Unknown 1 50% 0 0% Total 2 100% 2 100%

Exhibit 2.7.2.c Destination of Graduates by Employment Type FY 2013 Graduates Employment – MPH graduating 2012-2013 1 Year Employed 39 76% Continuing education/training (not employed) 5 10% Actively seeking employment 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 2 4% Unknown 5 10% Total 51 100%

Graduates Employment – MHA graduating 2012-2013 1 Year Employed 9 75% Continuing education/training (not employed) 2 17% Actively seeking employment 1 8% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% Unknown 0 0% Total 12 100%

114

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

Graduates Employment - MPH/MSW graduating 2012-2013 1 Year Employed 4 100% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% Unknown 0 0% Total 4 100%

Graduates Employment – MS graduating 2012-2013 1 Year Employed 7 88% Continuing education/training (not employed) 1 13% Actively seeking employment 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% Unknown 0 0% Total 8 100%

Graduates Employment - MHA/JD graduating 2012-2013 1 Year Employed 1 100% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% Unknown 0 0% Total 1 100%

115

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

Graduates Employment – PhD graduating 2012-2013 1 Year Employed 3 100% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% Unknown 0 0% Total 3 100%

Graduates Employment – DrPH graduating 2012-2013 1 Year Employed 1 100% Continuing education/training (not employed) 0 0% Actively seeking employment 0 0% Not seeking employment (not employed and not continuing education/training, by choice) 0 0% Unknown 0 0% Total 1 100%

116

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

2.7.b(iii) Performance on CPH Examination As stated above, effective Fall 2013, all new MPH students were required to take the CPH examination after completing 21 credit hours including all five core courses. Performance on the CPH is thus a developing metric. Outcomes for 2013-2014 are presented in Exhibit 2.7.b. Results for 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 are not presented because only alumni and no students took the examination. The results for 2013-2014 include 6 students who were required to take the CPH examination and 14 students who voluntarily took the examination.

The initial target for the College is that the aggregate performance of MPH students will be equal to or above the national average pass rate and national average scores in each content area. As shown in Exhibit 2.7.b, the 2013-2014 aggregate scores in each core areas were within +5% of the national averages. The pass rate was below the national average, but due to the small number of our students taking the exam this measure is considered to be somewhat volatile; monitoring of the cumulative pass rate over several years should provide a more informative measure. The College will re-examine the core courses in content areas where aggregate annual performance fell short of the target; this will be done annually after the results for each academic year are aggregated.

Exhibit 2.7.b. Additional Outcome Measures for 2.7.b Outcome Measure Target Year 1 (2011-12) Year 2 (2012-13) Year 3 (2013-14) Pass rate of College National average 70% students on the CPH n/a n/a (~ 78%) (n= 20) examination Biostat:98% Performance of EnvSci: 95% College students on Epid:104% 100% of national each core content n/a n/a HPM: 100% average score area of the CPH BehavSci: 97% examination CrossCutting: 96% 85% average on each section 1: 90% 1: 75% 1: 92% 1: units 2: 100% 2: 92% 2: 94% Performance of MS in 2: power & logs 3: 98% 3: 96% 3: 93% IH/EHS students on 3: geometry 4: 100% 4: 90% 4: 85% Quantitative Skills 4: manipulations 5: 87% 5: 88% 5: 73% Exam 5: ppm 6: 94% 6: 94% 6: 95% 6: weighted (n=4) (n=9) (n=12) averages

2.7.b(iv) Performance on the Industrial Hygiene Knowledge Survey and Quantitative Skills Examination

The Department of Occupational and Environmental Health uses two tests as aggregated measures of student achievement of competencies in the MS program in IH/EHS: the Quantitative Skills Examination (QSE) and the Industrial Hygiene Knowledge Survey (IHKS).

The Quantitative Skills Exam (QSE) consists of 50 applied math problems, written by the department faculty and typical of calculations that industrial hygienists and other environmental professionals have to perform. Students must choose 30 of these 50 problems; this is done so that the same test can be administered to IH/EHS majors and MPH Environmental Health majors. The passing score for individuals

117

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

is 70%. IH/EHS majors are required to answer a certain number of problems in each of six sections of the exam: unit conversions; powers and logarithmic formulas; geometry; manipulations, proportions, and extrapolations; air contaminant concentrations; and weighted averages. Aggregated data on selection of problems and performance on individual problems, exam sections, and overall QSE score are updated by the Industrial Hygiene Program Director every Fall and Spring after the QSE is administered. The target level of attainment is an aggregated score of 85% or higher on each skill-based section of the QSE. The aggregated section scores in the past three academic years are provided in Exhibit 2.7.b. A pattern of weakness in aggregated performance on particular types of calculations triggers increased emphasis on the relevant quantitative methods in specific courses.

Because the thesis defense and comprehensive oral examination does not lend itself to aggregation of data, the IHKS was implemented in 2010 to serve as one aggregate measure of student achievement of competencies in qualitative knowledge necessary to the practice of industrial hygiene. The IHKS is a test consisting of about 100 short answer or multiple choice questions, assembled using questions contributed by the faculty together with questions licensed from commercial test preparation software for the Certified Industrial Hygienist examination. The questions are organized into sections by competency. Unlike the QSE, the IHKS is not individually scored and individual performance does not affect the student’s ability to graduate. Rather, this test is intended to help the department identify potential areas of weakness in imparting of competencies. The initial intent was that if aggregated scores for any competency or any particular content area (e.g., noise) were found to be below about 80%, both the relevant curricular content and the test questions would be scrutinized by the department and its advisory committee. It took four years to accumulate a sufficient number of tests (n~30) to support a robust analysis of the results. The average overall score was 69% and the average scores for particular competencies ranged from 42% to 82%. The two competencies (IH Gen C and IH Gen H) with the lowest aggregate score of 42% were addressed by only one or two questions; additional questions are needed to provide a better sampling of knowledge in these areas. Otherwise the aggregated scores for each competency were above 59%. Though below the desired target of 80%, this performance is similar to passing scores in nationally normed examinations such those for the CPH, CIH, and CSP. The Department of Occupational and Environmental Health is continuing to refine the IHKS and monitor the scores.

2.7.c. An explanation of the methods used to collect job placement data and of graduates’ response rates to these data collection efforts. The school must list the number of graduates from each degree program and the number of respondents to the graduate survey or other means of collecting employment data.

All graduates are given the “College of Public Health Graduate Information” form to complete at the time of graduation, preferably as part of the exit interview by the Office of Student Services. This form is used to collect permanent contact address, phone and email as well as information on employment status and type of employment and plans for continued education, professional certification, and future employment.

In achievement of Objective 1.10 of the 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, follow-up interviews of recent graduates are conducted by phone every three months during the first year after graduation and every 6 months thereafter. This process was begun in 2013, encompassing MPH graduates from Fall 2010 onward and MS, MHA, PhD, and DrPH graduates from Spring 2012 onward for whom current contact information was available. Information collected includes current employment and/or continued education status, and type of employment. Graduates who report they are not currently employed are asked whether they are seeking employment and in what area.

The number of graduates and number of respondents to the exit interview and/or follow-up interviews are given in Exhibit 2.7.2 for each degree. Overall, employment status within 12 months of graduation could be determined for approximately 70% of graduates between Fall 2010 and Spring 2013.

118

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

2.7.d. In fields for which there is certification of professional competence and data are available from the certifying agency, data on the performance of the school’s graduates on these national examinations for each of the last three years.

A small number of College alumni have voluntarily attempted the CPH examination in recent years. The pass rate was 80% (8/10) in 2013-14 and 100% (1/1) in 2011-12. No alumni attempted the CPH examination in 2012-13. Alumni pass rates met or exceeded the national pass rate of about 78%.

The National Commission for Health Education Credentialing, Inc., (NCHEC) administers the Certified Health Education Specialist (CHES) examination as a test of entry-level competencies delineated in the report A Competency-Based Framework for Health Education Specialists 2010. Applicants for the examination must have completed at least 27 semester hours of coursework specifically addressing the areas of responsibilities and competencies for health educators. The examination is offered twice a year, in April and October. Participation in the CHES examination is voluntary for students in the College. Four students took the CHES in calendar year 2011, five in 2012, two in 2013, and 8 in 2014. The pass rate each year was 100%, compared to the national pass rate of about 70-75%.

The American Board of Industrial Hygiene (ABIH) requires a minimum of four years of relevant professional work experience before graduates of ABET-accredited Industrial Hygiene programs can take its national examination for the Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH) credential. To be eligible to sit for the CIH examination in the past three years, most graduates of the MS in Industrial Hygiene would need to have graduated in 2008, 2009, or 2010. Several more recent graduates who were already employed as industrial hygienists at the time of graduation would also potentially qualify to sit for the examination. Among the 27 alumni of the program who graduated between calendar years 2008 and 2014, approximately half had enough years of relevant experience to qualify. ABIH records as of mid-June 2014 indicated that five graduates from these graduation cohorts had applied and been approved to take the examination; two of these five had passed the examination, two had attempted once and failed, and one had not yet attempted the examination. Nationally, the eventual pass rate in two attempts is about 60%. Thus, the performance of our recent graduates on the CIH examination appears to be consistent with national averages.

2.7.e. Data and analysis regarding the ability of the school’s graduates to perform competencies in an employment setting, including information from periodic assessments of alumni, employers and other relevant stakeholders. Methods for such assessments may include key informant interviews, surveys, focus groups and documented discussions.

As described in 2.7.c, the College has implemented a robust system of follow-up interviews to track the professional progress of recent graduates in terms of employment, continued education, and professional certification. The next step will be to build upon this successful tracking effort by developing a formal, systematic assessment of how well graduates were prepared to perform competencies in their employment.

An initial, limited assessment was conducted in March-April 2014. Approximately 30 alumni who graduated in 2010-2013 and were employed in the Oklahoma City area were invited to take part in roundtable discussions of their programs. In preparation for the roundtable discussions, these alumni were invited to complete a brief online survey that addressed four cross-cutting competencies as well as how their work situation changed after graduation. The evaluation of competencies was rated on 5-point Likert scale (1= poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = very good, 5 = excellent). Seventeen alumni (57%) responded to the survey. All respondents gave favorable ratings, with a central tendency around “very good", for the level of instruction in Core 11 (“personal and organizational integrity, compassion, honesty and respect for all people” and Core 12 (“the social, behavioral, environmental, and biological factors that contribute to specific individual and community health concerns”). Ratings for Core 9 (“written and oral skills for communicating with different audiences”) ranged from “fair” to “very good”, with a central tendency between “good” and “very good”. Ratings for Inter 5 (“skills in qualitative and quantitative

119

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

evaluation methods”) ranged from “fair” to “excellent”, with a central tendency between “good” and “very good”. Subsequently, four of the alumni were able to participate in a roundtable discussion of three questions: “What did you learn in the program that is the most useful?”, “What could you have used that would help you in your current job?”, and “What items were not helpful or could be changed?” These questions were intended to elicit comments that would shed light on the appropriateness of the core competencies, but did not necessarily assess graduates’ ability to perform the competencies.

Employer perceptions of our graduates’ preparation for the public health workforce are important and valuable to continuous improvement of our programs. However, efforts to obtain this information have historically had only limited success, in part because alumni and employer contact information has been somewhat limited. The current system of alumni tracking, with phone contact every 3 to 6 months for the first 3 years after graduation, has greatly improved our ability to conduct such surveys. A new anonymous survey was recently structured and mailed to approximately 100 alumni who graduated within past two years, with a request, if they were agreeable, to pass it on to their immediate supervisor along with a return envelope. The Office of Student Services is presently compiling data from the returned instruments for assessment led the Associate Dean for Planning and Evaluation.

The external advisory board for the College, as well as the external advisory committees for the MHA and MS IH/EHS programs, serves as another source of feedback on graduates’ performance, as these bodies include senior managers from organizations that employ graduates of the College.

Additionally, the MHA program and the MS IH/EHS program conduct regular periodic assessments of graduates’ performance in their jobs. The MHA program uses annual alumni focus groups and interviews to assess the strengths and weaknesses in how the program prepares its graduates. The responses collected in 2013-2014 have been aggregated and used by the department to refine didactic approaches.

The MS program in Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences conducts an alumni survey and employer survey every three years, with the purpose of evaluating the performance of alumni 2-5 years after graduation. The most recent survey, conducted in early 2013, was sent to alumni who had graduated in calendar years 2007-2010. The alumni were requested to mail back an anonymous alumni survey, and to give an anonymous employer survey to their supervisors to complete. Fifty-four percent (7/13) of alumni returned a completed alumni survey. Only one employer survey was returned; this employer rated all aspects of the graduate’s preparation as adequate or higher, and gave highly positive ratings to technical aspects, ethics, knowledge of regulations, and ability to function on multidisciplinary teams. In the alumni surveys, graduates gave highly positive ratings to their preparation to perform technical aspects of their jobs. Preparation related to communications skills, ethics, team work, and control of hazards was consistently judged adequate or better. However, preparation in business and managerial practices was rated as less than adequate by 43% (3/7) of respondents. This was a disappointing change from the previous alumni survey in 2010, in which alumni who graduated in 2004- 2007 rated their preparation in business practices to be at least adequate. In 2010, the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health added content on program management, a key business practice for industrial hygienists, to several existing courses. The effect of this enhancement will be assessed in the next alumni/employer survey, measuring the competencies of alumni who graduated in 2010-2013, which is planned for early 2016. Additionally, advice on how to better develop nontechnical as well as technical competencies is solicited on a regular basis from the program’s Industrial Hygiene Constituent Committee.

2.7.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

The criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths. The streamlined competencies have been formally integrated into various evaluation instruments. Multiple assessment methods are used to evaluate each student’s achievement of competencies; these methods include course grades, which are explicitly related to competencies, and a

120

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

culminating experience that includes a written paper and oral defense administered by a suitably constituted committee. Additional assessment methods may include a written evaluation by the preceptor (applicable in programs that require a practice experience) and written examinations such as the CPH examination for MPH students, the Quantitative Skills Examination in the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, and doctoral general examinations. The College has also implemented a robust system for tracking the career progress of graduates.

Weaknesses/Challenges. Graduation rates in many MPH entry cohorts have been below the 70% benchmark. The College continues to work on the balance between rigorously assessing the potential for prospective students to successfully complete the degree and providing the opportunity for promising applicants with valuable cultural competencies to prove themselves in the program. The College should build upon its robust tracking of recent graduates’ employment status by further developing an ongoing, systematic assessment of graduates’ performance of competencies in the work setting.

Plans. The streamlining of the MPH competencies in 2013-2014 will facilitate explicit tracking and assessment of competency achievement both on the individual level and in aggregate for each specialty. The CPH examination is another developing measure of both individual and aggregate performance of the core competencies. On the individual level, insufficient performance of particular competencies will be identified through measures such as course grades, CPH examination content area scores, and preceptor’s evaluation. Students showing substandard performance will be counselled to reinforce those competencies in preparation for the practicum defense, which is the final stage of the culminating experience. The departments, program directors, and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs will share a leading role in clarifying and enforcing individual performance standards. On the aggregate level, consistent patterns of weakness in particular competencies should trigger a review of didactic course content and other curricular approaches. The departments will have the primary responsibility to respond to aggregate performance indicators.

The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs will take the lead in developing the plan for post-graduation assessment of graduates’ ability to perform competencies in the employment setting. Attrition rates in new entry cohorts will be carefully monitored by the Office of Student Services and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs as an early indicator of the success of changes to our admissions policies and procedures in improving degree completion rates.

121

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.7: ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

[This page intentionally left blank]

122

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.8: OTHER GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL DEGREES

2.8 OTHER GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL DEGREES

If the school offers curricula for graduate professional degrees other than the MPH or equivalent public health degrees, students pursing them must be grounded in basic public health knowledge.

2.8.a. Identification of professional degree curricula offered by the school, other than those preparing primarily for public health careers, and a description of the requirements for each.

The only professional degree, other than the MPH or equivalent public health degree (MS IH/EHS), is the Master of Health Administration (MHA). The MHA program is offered in the Department of Health Administration and Policy (HAP).

The MHA degree is awarded to full- and part-time students who complete a course sequence of 60 credit hours and an internship for which no credit hours are awarded. Students receive academic and career advising from a designated faculty advisor, the program director, the Office of Student Services, alumni, and visiting practitioners from local hospitals and health care systems.

Students are usually admitted directly into the MHA program, but may transfer into the MHA program from the MPH program. Students are accepted from various academic and professional backgrounds; MHA students may have undergraduate degrees in business, science, and other fields, and include clinicians, physicians, and nurses, as well as medical students, pharmacy students, and students from other colleges on the Health Sciences Center campus. The program strives to achieve a diverse student body to promote intellectual achievement and sensitivity.

2.8.b. Identification of the manner in which these curricula assure that students acquire a public health orientation. If this means is common across these other professional degree programs, it need be described only once. If it varies by program, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each program.

All MHA students receive a basic broad introduction to public health through the required three credit hour course HAP 5453 U.S. Health Care Systems (which is one of the MPH core courses). The public health learning objectives in the course include defining and characterizing the core functions of public health, the responsibilities of the public health sector and the public health code of ethics. The three core functions are discussed as to how they relate to the ten essential services and how these are provided by public health organizations. The course also includes case studies in public health ethics, the public health workforce, public health provisions of the Affordable Care Act, and research in public health. Required reading in the Bernard Turnock textbook, “Public health – What it is and how it works” provides the student with a broad perspective of public health and its place in the health system. This course is taught by a pair of instructors, one of whom is a former public health agency senior administrator. The MHA students also receive instruction in epidemiology through HAP 7103 Managerial Epidemiology. Additional courses that address public health areas are HAP 5873 Health Information Systems, HAP 5883 Healthcare Quality Management, and HAP 5303 Health Policy and Politics. In total, there are 5 courses that overlap between the MHA curriculum and the MPH curriculum for students on the Health Administration and Policy track.

2.8.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

123

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.8: OTHER GRADUATE PROFESSIONAL DEGREES

Strengths: The faculty in the MHA program are a blend of research scientists, health care system practitioners and other professionals who bring a meaningful teaching and learning experience to the classroom.

Weaknesses/challenges: The program is currently experiencing several changes. It is implementing a new set of competencies while it is also changing the teaching and learning methods used by the faculty. There are also several new initiatives in place regarding self-assessment of the program and measurement of student attainment of the competencies. The HAP Department also has two searches in progress for faculty vacancies.

Plans: It is the intention of the program’s leadership to continually review and assess the program’s performance, how well it prepares graduates for careers in healthcare administration, and how effectively the program provides a meaningful teaching and learning experience for students.

124

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.9: BACHELOR’S DEGREES IN PUBLIC HEALTH

2.9 BACHELOR’S DEGREES IN PUBLIC HEALTH

Not applicable. The College of Public Health does not currently offer a bachelor’s degree.

125

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.10: OTHER BACHELOR’S DEGREES

2.10 OTHER BACHELOR’S DEGREES

If the school offers baccalaureate degrees in fields other than public health, students pursuing them must be grounded in basic public health knowledge.

Not applicable.

126

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.11: ACADEMIC DEGREES

2.11 ACADEMIC DEGREES

If the school also offers curricula for graduate 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.

2.11.a. Identification of all academic degree programs, by degree and area of specialization. The instructional matrix in Criterion 2.1.a may be referenced for this purpose.

The academic degree programs are identified in Exhibit 2.1.1 Instructional Matrix. Three of the four departments (BSE, HPS, OEH) offer both MS and PhD programs. The Department of Health Administration and Policy was previously approved for a PhD program but this was discontinued in favor of taking over administration of the revised DrPH degree program. The PhD programs that were active in the past three years include the PhD in Biostatistics, PhD in Epidemiology, PhD in Health Promotion Sciences, and PhD in Occupational and Environmental Health. Additionally, the MS in Industrial Hygiene and Environmental Health Sciences (IH/EHS) is considered by the institution to be an academic degree.

2.11.b. Identification of the means by which the school assures that students in academic curricula acquire a public health orientation. If this means is common across the school, it need be described only once. If it varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each.

The majority of faculty in these programs have a public health background through academic degrees in public health and/or years of experience in schools of public health. All academic program students receive a firm grounding in the breadth of public health concepts as described below.

2.11.b(i) Graduate degrees in Biostatistics

Students receiving either the MS or PhD in Biostatistics are required to take Principles of Epidemiology and one of the following: U.S. Health Care Systems, Environmental Health, or Social & Behavioral Sciences in Public Health. Students enrolled in the PhD program are required to take, in addition, Intermediate Epidemiologic Methods and Advanced Epidemiologic Methods.

In addition, students are exposed to broad public health concepts through the following activities:

• Attendance at Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology Fall and Spring Seminar Series

Students are required to attend the Department seminar series. There are typically five to six seminars per semester. Speakers include faculty from the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, the College of Public Health, other colleges at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center and the main OU-Norman campus, and public health agencies in the region. Each seminar focuses on a particular public health topic area.

• Attendance at College of Public Health Grand Rounds

Students are required to attend the Public Health Grand Rounds series. There are typically two to three presentations per semester. Speakers typically include public health experts from across the United States. Each session focuses on a particular public health topic area.

127

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.11: ACADEMIC DEGREES

• Discussion of case studies and interaction with guest lecturers from the Oklahoma State Department of Health in BSE 5001 Problems in Biostatistics and Epidemiology

In this laboratory-based course, students address problems in epidemiologic study design, measurement of disease occurrence, and data presentation and interpretation by applying the principles of epidemiology and biostatistics to public health problems including an outbreak investigation of a foodborne illness, health disparities in breast cancer between Caucasian and African American women, and smoking-related morbidity and mortality. Each session is led by a faculty member in Epidemiology, a faculty member in Biostatistics, and a practitioner from the Oklahoma State Department of Health.

• Completion of the online Public Health Overview Training module that was developed for the Oklahoma State Department of Health

Beginning in Fall 2015, students admitted into the MS and PhD programs in Biostatistics will be required to complete an online video module that provides an overview of public health core functions that was created by faculty in the OUHSC College of Public Health for new employee training at the Oklahoma State Department of Health.

• Involvement in public health research and evaluation projects – thesis research projects or graduate research assistantship projects

Masters theses and doctoral dissertations, even theoretical ones, are based on a question related to health or disease. In addition, students tend to work as Graduate Research Assistants on public health and biomedical research or program evaluation projects.

After consultation with the academic committee, students may also be required to take additional epidemiologic or public health courses depending on the area of concentration. These courses emphasize areas of research related to public health and medical sciences. Most students in the PhD program previously earned an MS or MPH in biostatistics.

2.11.b(ii) Graduate degrees in Epidemiology

Students in either the MS or PhD in Epidemiology program are required to take Biostatistics Methods I and one of the following: U.S. Health Care System, Environmental Health, or Social & Behavioral Sciences in Public Health. Students must also successfully complete a number of courses in epidemiology, two of which are methodological, and a number of others which are substantive. The substantive courses deal with public health issues, such as overviews of infectious and chronic disease and more in-depth courses, such as the epidemiologic and public health issues related to cancer, diabetes, obesity, maternal and child health, or cardiovascular disease. PhD students are also expected to take Advanced Epidemiologic Methods, Methods in Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Molecular and Genetic Epidemiology as well as nine additional credits of biostatistics methods. Courses in the epidemiology curriculum are open to all students in the school who meet the course’s prerequisites, whether they are taken at the master's level or in a doctoral program.

In addition to the required coursework, students in MS and PhD programs in Epidemiology are exposed to broad public health concepts through their involvement in the following activities:

• Attendance at Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology Fall and Spring Seminar Series

128

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.11: ACADEMIC DEGREES

Sciences Center and the main OU-Norman campus, and public health agencies in the region. Each seminar focuses on a particular public health topic area.

• Attendance at College of Public Health Grand Rounds

• Discussion of case studies and interaction with guest lecturers from the Oklahoma State Department of Health in BSE 5001 Problems in Biostatistics and Epidemiology

• Completion of the online Public Health Overview Training module that was developed for the Oklahoma State Department of Health

Beginning in Fall 2015, students admitted into the MS and PhD programs in Epidemiology will be required to complete an online video module that provides an overview of public health core functions that was created by faculty in the OUHSC College of Public Health for new employee training at the Oklahoma State Department of Health.

• Involvement in public health research and evaluation projects – thesis research projects or graduate research assistantship projects

After consultation with the academic committee, students may also be required to take additional public health courses depending on the area of concentration. These courses emphasize areas of research related to public health and medical sciences. Most students in the PhD program previously earned an MS or MPH in epidemiology.

2.11.b(iii) Graduate degrees in Health Promotion Sciences

Students receiving an MS in Health Promotion Sciences are required to complete Biostatistics Methods I and Principles of Epidemiology and either U.S. Health Care Systems or Environmental Health. In addition, they are required to complete 4 courses related to theory, planning, and evaluation of public health programming. HPS MS students are also required to complete a cultural diversity and public health course and 5 to 8 hours of substantive electives that focus on public health areas such as chronic disease or more focused courses such as physical activity and public health. Students’ master’s theses also typically focus on central public health topics such as chronic disease prevention and maternal health.

PhD students admitted into HPS must have an MPH or a related master’s degree and have completed the 5 core public health courses. PhD students take Biostatistics Methods II or Analysis of Frequency Data, as well as Principles of Epidemiology if they did not complete the course in their master’s degree program. HPS PhD students must complete a 3-course sequence of theory and evaluation classes that

129

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.11: ACADEMIC DEGREES

present public health problems and their solutions from an ecological perspective. PhD students are also required to complete two courses that cover qualitative as well as quantitative research methods in public health and two additional courses in either area to provide specialization in their chosen methodological approach. In addition, PhD students complete 3 courses in a minor area and 5 courses in a substantive area that focus on public health issues such as health disparities, policy and inequality, minority health, and social determinants of health. Finally, the students’ dissertations typically focus on public health topics such as minority health, chronic disease prevention, and adolescent health.

2.11.b(iv) Graduate degrees in Occupational and Environmental Health

The MS in IH/EHS is considered an Equivalent Professional Degree program because its graduates more often become practitioners rather than researchers. The College and university nevertheless consider it to be an academic degree program as well. Graduates of the MS IH/EHS program may pursue doctoral study as PhD or DrPH students, or may pursue a teaching or research career. Students receiving an MS in IH/EHS are required to take all five core courses in the core disciplines of public health.

PhD students are typically required to take additional biostatistics courses including Applications of Microcomputers in Data Analysis, Biostatistics Methods II, and Regression Analysis. The public health orientation of the PhD is imparted primarily through the nature of the department’s research program, which emphasizes applied science related to public health practice. To develop the breadth of knowledge in occupational and environmental health as well as the necessary perspective and depth of knowledge to produce a dissertation in the chosen area of specialization, doctoral students must have an understanding of core public health concepts and be competent in public health areas such as biostatistics and epidemiology. Public health knowledge is included in the General Examination for the PhD. Doctoral candidates are also expected to articulate the public health significance of their dissertation research project in their prospectus and dissertation.

2.11.c. Identification of the culminating experience required for each academic degree program. If this is common across the school’s academic degree programs, it need be described only once. If it varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be provided to assess compliance by each.

The Culminating Experience for the MS and PhD programs is the thesis or dissertation and its defense. The three member committee for the master's degree and the five member committee for the doctoral degree provide oversight and guidance for the research area. These committees evaluate the thesis or dissertation prospectus and the potential for the research to contribute to the body of knowledge in the area. The committee is the deciding authority regarding the acceptability of the completed thesis or dissertation and its successful defense by the academic degree candidate. The committee’s vote of “Satisfactory” or “Unsatisfactory” is recorded on the “Authority for the Defense” form and returned to the Graduate College within 72 hours after the defense. If two members of the doctoral committee dissent, or if the master’s thesis committee consists of more than three members and two members dissent, a minority report must be filed and the Graduate Dean will investigate and make the final decision.

2.11.d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The College offers academic degree programs in four of the five core areas (biostatistics, epidemiology, health promotion sciences, and environmental health), with opportunities to pursue doctoral level study in each area. All of the academic degree programs require completion of core courses in biostatistics and epidemiology and one (MS IH/EHS) requires all five core courses.

130

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.11: ACADEMIC DEGREES

Weaknesses/challenges: There are no identified weaknesses or challenges in the delivery of our academic degree programs.

Plans: The College plans to continue offering academic degree programs at both the masters and doctoral levels in the four core areas indicated. There are no plans to offer either the MS or PhD in the area of Health Administration and Policy.

131

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.11: ACADEMIC DEGREES

[This page intentionally left blank]

132

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.12: DOCTORAL DEGREES

2.12 DOCTORAL DEGREES

The school shall offer at least three doctoral degree programs that are relevant to three of the five areas of basic public health knowledge.

2.12.a. Identification of all doctoral programs offered by the school, by degree and area of specialization. The instructional matrix in Criterion 2.1.a may be referenced for this purpose. If the school is a new applicant and has graduates from only one doctoral program, a description of plans and a timetable for graduating students from the other two doctoral programs must be presented, with university documentation supporting the school’s projections.

Doctoral degree programs offered by the College are shown in the Instructional Matrix (Exhibit 2.1.1). Discipline-specific PhD programs are offered through three of the four departments: Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Occupational and Environmental Health, and Health Promotion Sciences. The PhD is offered in four disciplines: Biostatistics, Epidemiology, Occupational and Environmental Health, and Health Promotion Sciences. Each program is supported by at least five full-time faculty qualified in the appropriate discipline (Exhibit 4.1.1). These programs are also supported by active research in each of the disciplines.

The DrPH is an advanced professional practice terminal degree for individuals intending to pursue a professional public health practice career. The DrPH degree program requires a minimum of 51 credit hours above the Master degree. Although the DrPH is a college-wide program, the Department of Health Administration and Policy has the primary responsibility for managing and administering this doctoral program. The DrPH program focuses on developing leadership, management, and critical analytical skills with sufficient flexibility to accommodate discipline-specific interests of candidates. The overarching theme is the development of requisite competencies for a leadership role in public health.

PhD programs are governed by Graduate College policies, but academic and administrative oversight of these programs resides with the College of Public Health through the Associate and Assistant Deans for Academic Affairs and the Assistant Dean for Student Services, respectively. In contrast, academic and administrative policies related to the Doctor of Public Health (DrPH) program are controlled entirely by the College of Public Health.

2.12.b. Description of specific support and resources available to doctoral students including traineeships, mentorship opportunities, etc.

There are multiple sources of support for doctoral students in the College of Public Health. PhD and DrPH students currently receive a tuition waiver of three credit hours per semester through the College of Public Health and the Graduate College (subject to availability of funds). The student must be in good academic standing, i.e. not on probation, and the support is limited to six years for PhD students and four years for DrPH students.

Doctoral students typically work as Graduate Research Assistants (GRAs) on grants and contracts that are secured by their faculty mentors. In the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, GRAs may also work in the Biostatistics and Epidemiology Research Design and Analysis Center or as Graduate Teaching Assistants (TA) for the Department’s core courses in Biostatistics and Epidemiology. Doctoral students may also teach courses under the mentorship and supervision of an experienced faculty, as is the case in the Department of Health Promotion Sciences. There is no college-wide policy on stipends for doctoral students; rather, the college allows the departments to establish their own policies. In one department stipends begin at $20,000 per year for 20 hours of work per week with salary increases of

133

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.12: DOCTORAL DEGREES

$1000 each year pending a satisfactory performance review. Stipend levels vary slightly by department, as do policies for annual stipend increases. For non-residents, the non-resident portion of the tuition is waived for those students who hold at least a 10 hour per week assistantship, per Graduate College policy.

There are also campus-level training and mentorship opportunities for doctoral students. The Preparing Future Faculty program is a two-semester program (4 total hours) within the Graduate College that is designed for graduate students and postdoctoral research fellows interested in gaining the basic theory and skills necessary to be an effective communicator and educator (http://graduate.ouhsc.edu/specialprograms/preparing-future-faculty.html). Preparing Future Faculty students have mentored teaching experiences, prepare a teaching portfolio, and develop a personal teaching philosophy. As another example, the Oklahoma LEND Interdisciplinary Leadership Education Program prepares graduate students in health professions to assume leadership roles in interdisciplinary, culturally-competent, client and family-centered service for individuals with developmental disabilities (http://www.ah.ouhsc.edu/csd/lend.asp). Coursework and hands-on opportunities to learn in community settings are offered during this 12-month program for a select group of students, nominated and supported by participating faculty.

2.12.c. Data on student progression through each of the school’s doctoral programs, to include the total number of students enrolled, number of students completing coursework and number of students in candidacy for each doctoral program. See CEPH Exhibit 2.10.1.

Data on the total number of doctoral students enrolled, number of students completing coursework and number of students in candidacy are shown in Exhibit 2.10.1. Students are admitted to candidacy for the doctorate upon successful completion of the general examination.

In recent years the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health did not recruit actively for its PhD program, as it sought additional faculty to strengthen its research capacity. Following successful faculty searches in 2013-2014, the department has admitted doctoral students for 2014-2015.

Exhibit 2.10.1: Doctoral Student Data for year 2013-2014 Health Occupational & Biostatistics Epidemiology Promotion Environmental DrPH PhD PhD Sciences Health PhD PhD # newly admitted in 5 2 3 2 0 2013-2014 # currently enrolled 13 4 11 7 0 (total) # completed coursework during 0 1 2 1 0 2013-2014 # advanced to candidacy 1 1 2 1 0 (cumulative) during 2013-2014 # graduated in 2013- 1 1 1 1 0 2014

134

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.12: DOCTORAL DEGREES

2.12.d. Identification of specific coursework, for each degree, that is aimed at doctoral-level education.

Doctoral program curricula and individual course descriptions are provided in the College of Public Health Student Bulletin (online at http://coph.ouhsc.edu/current/docs/studentbulletin2014-2015.pdf or in the Resource File) or in individual course syllabi (Resource File).

2.12.d(i) PhD in Biostatistics. Students applying to the PhD in Biostatistics must have completed a master’s degree program (MPH or MS) in biostatistics or a related field. With approval of the department and the Graduate Dean, up to 40 credit hours from the master’s program may be counted toward the PhD. The student must earn at least 30 credit hours in coursework at the University of Oklahoma after admission to the PhD program. Doctoral-level coursework in Epidemiology includes BSE 6192 Grant Writing (2 credit hours). Upper-level graduate coursework in Epidemiology includes BSE 5153 Clinical Trials (3 credits hours) and BSE 6194 Advanced Epidemiologic Methods (4 credits hours). Doctoral-level coursework in mathematical statistics and modeling include BSE 5733 Principles of Mathematical Statistics II (3 credits hours) and BSE 6553 Linear Models (3 credit hours). In addition, students are required to complete BSE 5653 Non-parametric Methods, BSE 6563 Longitudinal Data Analysis, BSE 6643 Survival Analysis, and BSE 6663 Multivariate Biostatistics Methods, which are upper-level graduate courses in applied biostatistics. The applied biostatistics courses may have been completed during the master’s degree program.

2.12.d(ii) PhD in Epidemiology. Students applying to the PhD in Epidemiology must have completed a master’s degree program (MPH or MS) in epidemiology or equivalent, BSE 5013 Applications of Microcomputers to Data Analysis (SAS programming) or equivalent, and BSE 5363 Epidemiology and Prevention of Chronic Diseases or equivalent. With approval of the department and the Graduate Dean, up to 40 credit hours from the master’s program may be counted toward the PhD. The student must earn at least 28 credit hours in coursework at the University of Oklahoma after admission to the PhD program. Doctoral-level coursework in Epidemiology includes BSE 6192 Grant Writing (2 credit hours). Upper-level graduate coursework in Epidemiology includes BSE 6194 Advanced Epidemiologic Methods (4 credits hours), BSE 5343 Methods in Infectious Disease Epidemiology (3 credit hours), and BSE 6323 Molecular and Genetic Epidemiology (3 credit hours). In addition, students are required to complete three upper- level graduate courses in applied biostatistics including BSE 5173 Biostatistics Methods II, BSE 5663 Analysis of Frequency Data, BSE 6563 Longitudinal Data Analysis, BSE 6643 Survival Analysis, and BSE 6663 Multivariate Biostatistics Methods.

2.12.d(iii) PhD in Health Promotion Sciences. Admission requirements for students applying to the PhD in Health Promotion Sciences must have completed an MPH or other relevant master’s degree and completion of the core public health courses. A minimum of 60 credit hours post-master’s is required for the degree, including the following doctoral level courses: HPS 6633 Health Promotion Theory I: Individuals and Small Groups, HPS 6643 Health Promotion Theory II: Communities, Organizations and Government, HPS 6943 Advanced Program Evaluation, HPS 6933 Qualitative Research Methods in Public Health, HPS 6953 Advanced Research Methods in Social and Behavioral Sciences. In addition, HPS 6853 Measurement in Health Education, HPS 6453 Focus Group Research, and HPS 6833 Social Marketing are offered as electives. Other 6000-level courses are available from selective elective lists in communications, political science, psychology, sociology, occupational and environmental health, and biostatistics and epidemiology.

2.12.d(iv) PhD in Occupational and Environmental Health. Applicants to the PhD program in Occupational and Environmental Health must hold a master’s degree from an accredited institution in a related field and display a clear research orientation and firm knowledge of research techniques. The minimum required number of semester hours for the degree, combining both formal courses and hours of research is 90 post-baccalaureate hours including up to 6 hours of thesis research but excluding hours for research tools. At least 20 hours but no more than 25 hours are allowed for Dissertation. The PhD in Occupational and Environmental Health curriculum was revised in Fall 2014 to be more prescriptive in course work requirements than was previously the case. Required doctoral courses include OEH 6103

135

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.12: DOCTORAL DEGREES

Research Methods in Occupational and Environmental Health, OEH 6793 Aerosol Science, and BSE 6192 Grant Writing in Epidemiology. Two new required doctoral level courses, OEH 6473 Risk Assessment and OEH 6683 Applied Modeling in Occupational and Environmental Health, are presently in the process of being approved. These are complemented by upper level biostatistics and epidemiology courses as either requirements (BSE 5013 Applications of Microcomputers to Data Analysis, BSE 5173 Biostatistics Methods II) and selective electives chosen by the student in consultation with the Doctoral Advisory Committee.

2.12.d(v) DrPH. As noted in 2.12.a above, the DrPH degree program requires a minimum of 51 credit hours above the Master’s degree, consisting of a minimum of 36 credit hours of course work and 15 dissertation credit hours. The curriculum requires doctoral students to take 27 prescribed credit hours in 9 required courses, of which 5 are 6000-level: HAP 6773 Quantitative Issues in Healthcare Quality, HPS 6933 Qualitative Research Methods in Public Health, HPS 6943 Advanced Program Evaluation, HAP 6783 Advanced Public Organizations and Decision-making, and HAP 6953 Advanced Healthcare Quality. An additional 9 credit hours are chosen from among a list of acceptable electives that includes five 6000- level courses: OEH 6252 Occupational and Environmental Risk Communication, HPS 6633 Health Promotion Theory I: Individuals and Small Groups, HPS 6643 Health Promotion Theory II: Communities, Organizations, and Government, HPS 6833 Social Marketing, and HPS 6923 Social Determinants of Health. Changeover in HAP faculty and the desire to frame the DrPH curriculum in terms of specific competencies have prompted a review and possible revision of the DrPH curriculum that is not expected to be completed until Fall 2015 at the earliest. Students who do not hold an MPH degree are required to complete the five core courses in epidemiology, biostatistics, health administration and policy, health promotion sciences, and environmental health in addition to the courses described above, i.e. they are not counted toward the 51 credit hours.

2.12.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: The College maintains doctoral study programs leading to both discipline-specific Doctor of Philosophy degrees in four of the five core areas and the interdisciplinary practice-based Doctor of Public Health degree with a primary focus in the fifth core area. The college has been successful in recruiting highly qualified students to these programs, and the students are generally successful in completing them. Additionally, the growing number of faculty, essentially all of whom are actively engaged in research, provides increasingly diverse research mentoring expertise and opportunities to our students.

Weaknesses/challenges: The inability to fully support all doctoral students financially limits the college’s ability to recruit the most highly qualified applicants. The previous absence of a prescribed core of course requirements in the PhD OEH curriculum posed the potential for a lack of balance between flexibility and rigor. The new DrPH curriculum, though more structured, focused, and rigorous than its predecessor, is still evolving and will require additional evaluation and “tweaking”. There is presently no national consensus model for the DrPH, so what form these changes should take is not yet clear.

Plans: The 2011-2015 Strategic Plan included goals of increasing the number of new full-time faculty (objective 2.1) and extramural funding (objective 2.2), which should increase support and research training opportunities for doctoral (as well as masters) students. It also included a goal of increasing scholarship support for students (objective 1.8). Similar goals are envisioned in the 2016-2020 Strategic Plan that is currently under development. Endowment support for doctoral student stipends is a major fundraising goal of the College as part of the University of Oklahoma’s 125th anniversary “Live On, University” campaign. The Department of Occupational and Environmental Health also plans to request permission from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) to apply funds from its Training Project Grant to the support of one OEH doctoral student, contingent on receipt of the approved

136

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.12: DOCTORAL DEGREES

increase in funding level. The OEH Department is in the process of implementing its revised PhD curriculum. The College plans to engage actively in the current ASPPH effort to achieve a national consensus on DrPH program competencies, which we expect to inform (along with alumni and employer survey information and other data) our future DrPH curriculum changes and program assessment strategies.

137

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.12: DOCTORAL DEGREES

[This page intentionally left blank]

138

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.13: JOINT DEGREES

2.13 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.

2.13.a Identification of joint degree programs offered by the school. The instructional matrix in Criterion 2.1.a may be referenced for this purpose.

The College of Public Health currently offers formal dual degree programs (with their own degree codes) leading to the Doctor of Medicine/MPH (MD/MPH), MPH/Master of Social Work (MPH/MSW), Bachelor of Science in Mathematics/Master of Science in Biostatistics (BS/MS), and MPH/Juris Doctorate (MPH/JD) (refer to the Instructional Matrix, Exhibit 2.1.1). A formal MHA/Juris Doctorate program (MHA/JD) is under development. Additional dual degree programs are also formulated under the university’s policy allowing two degrees to be completed simultaneously provided the second starts no more than 12 credit hours after the first and both finish at the same time. Several dual MHA/JD programs have been completed in this manner or are underway. The MPH or MHA portion of these dual-degree programs is essentially identical to the stand-alone MPH or MHA, the only difference being in the allowance of relevant electives from outside the College.

2.13.a(i) MD/MPH

The College of Public Health, College of Medicine, and Graduate College jointly offer an innovative degree program that reflects students' interdisciplinary interests. Individuals pursuing the dual degrees would be prepared to practice medicine and complement that practice with health administration and policy expertise. Applicants must be accepted to both the MD degree program and the MPH degree program. For example, Dr. Christina Shay, who recently departed from the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, collaborated with Dr. Chris Chandler to develop a plan of study for the MD/MPH in Epidemiology.

The MD is a traditional four-year program with two years of basic sciences, two years of clinical education and a longitudinal focus on physician - patient relationships. The MPH degree in Health Administration and Policy is a 44 semester credit hour program that is typically completed during a one-year period between the second and third years of medical school studies, though some of the course work may be completed before beginning the first year of medical school. The MD/MPH differs from the College’s other dual programs in that completion of the MD and the MPH are coordinated in time but do not involve any sharing of course credit across programs.

2.13.a(ii) MPH/MSW

The MPH/MSW is offered by the College of Public Health Department of Health Promotion Sciences located in Oklahoma City and the School of Social Work located on the OU Norman campus. This dual degree program prepares students to work in a public health setting with an emphasis in community practice and health promotion. Students must meet the admission standards for both colleges. The MPH/MSW requires a total of 84 hours over a three year period. Of the 84 credit hours, 36 are completed in the College of Public Health and 48 are completed in the School of Social Work.

The goal of the program is two-fold. The first is to prepare public health/social work professionals to work with public health, social welfare and other health care organizations in the development of health promotion programs with community-based populations. The second is to provide students with cutting edge educational opportunities that prepare them to think critically and design, implement, and evaluate innovative public health programs that address the social and health needs of diverse communities.

139

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.13: JOINT DEGREES

MPH/MSW students are required to take the NBPHE CPH Examination. Students who have completed 21 credit hours including the core courses are required to take the examination, with the examination costs paid by the College of Public Health. Students who fail the examination receive remedial tutoring and are required to take the exam a second time, though passing the exam is not a criterion for graduation.

2.13.a(iii) BS Mathematics/MS Biostatistics

This program permits a student entering the University of Oklahoma as a freshman to earn both a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics and a Master of Science in Biostatistics within four to five years. Students are eligible for admission once they have completed a minimum of 100 hours of course work in the bachelor’s program and completed at least 9 credit hours in upper division courses with a 3.00 grade point average or better. The overall grade point average must also be at least a 3.00. International students must submit a TOEFL score of at least 570.

The 136 credit hours submitted to satisfy the requirements of the program may not include more than 8 credit hours with a grade of C. Moreover, the 136 credit hours submitted to satisfy the requirements of the program may not include any credit hours in courses numbered 4000 or higher for which a grade lower than a C was given.

During the first three years the students will take a variety of courses in humanities, in the sciences that relate to biomedical science, and in mathematics. The 12 required courses in mathematics include calculus, linear algebra, probability theory, and other subjects that provide a foundation for the understanding and use of statistics. Approximately one and a half years of the program will be spent at the Health Sciences Center where the student will take specialized courses involving methods and applications of statistical analysis, data analysis, principles of epidemiology, and public health issues. A research project will culminate in a thesis.

The program will prepare students for careers in health agencies and paramedical institutions, for consultation in the biomedical fields, and for biomedical research. Students may seek to continue their studies by applying to the Doctor of Philosophy program in Biostatistics.

2.13.a(iv) MPH/JD and MHA/JD

The MPH in Health Administration and Policy/Juris Doctor (MPH/JD) dual degree program is offered by the College of Public Health and the College of Law, located on the Norman campus. The program is designed for students who plan to practice law in the public health arena or plan to enter the public health field directly. It is not unusual for individuals with legal training to occupy top administrative and policy positions in a variety of public health and governmental settings. The objective of the program is to combine the 3-year JD and the 2-year MPH into 4 years of study, and offer a thorough academic grounding in both law and public health while emphasizing the increasing convergence of these professional areas.

The Health Administration and Policy Department also coordinates with the College of Law to offer a joint curriculum leading to the MHA and JD degrees. This is not yet a formally coded dual degree program and is therefore not listed in Exhibit 2.1.1; however, formalization of this joint degree program is in progress.

All students in either the MPH/JD program or the MHA/JD program are advised by faculty member Christina Juris Bennett, who is a licensed attorney and who taught at, and remains active with, the College of Law. A new course in public health law taught by Professor Bennett will be cross-listed at the College of Public Health and the College of Law. Professor Bennett meets regularly with the dual degree students, and together they map out the students’ entire curriculum plan.

140

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.13: JOINT DEGREES

The MPH/JD program requires that a student complete 44 credit hours towards the MPH and 90 credit hours towards the JD. The MHA/JD program requires that a student complete 60 credit hours towards the MHA and 90 credit hours towards the JD. For both programs the College of Public Health gives dual credit for 9 hours of law courses that include Administrative Law, Environmental Law, and Health Law, while the College of Law gives dual credit for 9 hours of public health courses that include U.S. Health Care Systems, Policy and Politics, and Organizational Theory and Behavior. A student in either of these dual degree programs must complete an internship, and the student and his or her advisor at the College of Public Health work together to identify and pursue appropriate opportunities.

The MPH/JD and MHA/JD degree programs are growing in strength. We recently graduated one MHA/JD, and we currently have two MPH/JD students and three MHA/JD students. The students’ employment records are strengths of this program. The recent MHA/JD graduate completed her internship at the prestigious Intermountain Health Systems in Salt Lake City, and had secured permanent post-graduation employment with the largest healthcare organization in the state before she graduated. The two MPH/JD students already have post-graduation employment secured; one has been accepted into the Judge Advocate General (JAG) program, and the other has a position in a law firm in Nashville, Tennessee. They completed their practica at the Oklahoma State Department of Health and Boehringer Pharmaceutical. The three current MHA/JD students are still in the beginning of the program, but already one student has an offer for permanent employment post-graduation at a large healthcare organization because of her impressive internship performance. Additionally, a second MHA/JD student has participated in the national health care law moot court competition, and submitted an entry for the MHA essay competition hosted by the American College of Healthcare Executives.

2.13.b. A list and description of how each joint degree program differs from the standard degree program. The school must explain the rationale for any credit sharing or substitution as well as the process for validating that the joint degree curriculum is equivalent.

2.13.b(i) MD/MPH

The MD/MPH is a joint program only in the sense that both degrees are pursued at the same time. There is no course overlap, i.e. the MPH curriculum is identical to what is required for the MPH in Health Administration and Policy.

2.13.b(ii) MPH/MSW

The MPH/MSW requires a total of 84 hours over a three-year period, whereas separate programs would be expected to require two years each. Of the 84 hours, 36 are for didactic courses in the MPH HPS curriculum and 48 hours are in Social Work. Students who have completed a BSW degree from an accredited Social Work program are eligible for the 63-hour MPH/MSW Advanced Standing program. This program requires the same 36-hour Public Health curriculum along with 27 hours in Social Work. Both degree plans require an approved 240-hour Public Health practicum experience that is completed through School of Social Work enrollment as partial fulfillment of Social Work requirements. While most of the curriculum is composed of required courses, both dual degree options include an elective course from both Public Health and Social Work. The Social Work program determines what is considered an acceptable elective to complete the social work component. Similar to the MPH degree, any Health Promotion Science elective can be taken to complete the public health component. Students interested in either of these programs must submit two applications and obtain separate admission to Public Health and Social Work.

2.13.b(iii) BS Mathematics/MS Biostatistics

The BS/MS program is designed so that 24 credit hours can be applied to both degree programs. The program was designed so that students take all of the course work required for the MS in Biostatistics.

141

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.13: JOINT DEGREES

The differences between the BS/MS and the MS in Biostatistics are: (i) The elective courses ("six hours in applied biostatistics" and "six additional hours in epidemiology") are more restricted in the BS/MS; (ii) In most cases in which the same content is taught under a MATH number and under a BSE number, the student may choose which number to take. For example, "Nonparametric Methods" may be taken as MATH 5773 or as BSE 5653. In the BS/MS, the MS thesis double counts as the senior capstone project; and (iii) all students are required to maintain a minimum grade point average of 3.00 in all course work completed.

2.13.b(iv) MPH/JD and MHA/JD

Under the joint MPH in Health Administration and Policy / Juris Doctor program, the student is allowed to apply 9 hours of credit to the MPH for courses taken at the College of Law. The intention is for the student to acquire a much greater depth of knowledge in law as it relates to public health and healthcare. The law courses available to MPH students through this joint curriculum include Administrative Law, Environmental Law, and Health Law. The first two are substituted for the two electives included in the MPH curriculum, and the third course is substituted for Public Health Law. The substitutions provide the dual degree candidate a broad base of knowledge in legal topics relevant to public health and public health practice. The substituted courses are reviewed regularly to evaluate the continuing relevance of the subject matter. In all other respects it is equivalent to the MPH in Health Administration and Policy.

2.13.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: A range of dual-degree opportunities is available to College of Public Health students through collaboration with the colleges/schools of Medicine (MD/MPH), Law (MPH/JD, MHA/JD), Social Work (MPH/MSW), and Arts and Sciences (BS Mathematics/MS Biostatistics). Additionally, a general dual- degree policy is in place that allows structuring of other programs as needed. Relationships with the other colleges are collegial, with good lines of communication.

Weaknesses/Challenges: Coordination of course is a challenge in dual degree programs. The scheduling and availability of courses is not always guaranteed and this can lead to confusion, so that coordination between colleges must be continual. Promoting dual programs and helping students navigate through both tracks are also challenges, but these have been successfully addressed in the past.

Plans: We will continue to work with our academic partners to (i) structure our joint degree offerings so that program requirements may completed in an integrated manner with time savings compared to completing the degrees sequentially, (ii) make dual-degree opportunities known to students in our respective colleges, and (iii) assign specific faculty to dual-degree students to maximize the effectiveness of academic advising. We will also formalize our MHA/JD program as a unique dual-degree with its own degree code.

142

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.14: DISTANCE EDUCATION OR EXECUTIVE DEGREE PROGRAMS

2.14 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 learning methods and to systematically use this information to stimulate program improvements. The school must have processes in place through which it establishes that the student who registers in a distance education or correspondence education course or degree is the same student who participates in and completes the course or degree and receives the academic credit.

2.14.a. Identification of all degree programs that are offered in a format other than regular, on-site course sessions spread over a standard term, including those offered in full or in part through distance education in which the instructor and student are separated in time or place or both. The instructional matrix in Criterion 2.1.a may be referenced for this purpose.

Not applicable. The College does not offer full programs through distance education or other non- traditional formats.

2.14.b. Description of the distance education or executive degree programs, including an explanation of the model or methods used, the school’s rationale for offering these programs, the manner in which it provides necessary administrative and student support services, the manner in which it monitors the academic rigor of the programs and their equivalence (or comparability) to other degree programs offered by the school, and the manner in which it evaluates the educational outcomes, as well as the format and methods.

Not applicable. The College does not offer degree program by DE or other non-traditional formats.

2.14.c. Description of the processes that the school uses to verify that the student who registers in a distance education or correspondence education course or degree is the same student who participates in and completes the course or degree and receives the academic credit.

Not applicable. The College does not offer degree program by DE or other non-traditional formats.

2.14.d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

Not applicable. The College does not offer degree program by DE or other non-traditional formats.

143

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 2.14: DISTANCE EDUCATION OR EXECUTIVE DEGREE PROGRAMS

[This page intentionally left blank]

144

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

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.

3.1.a. Description of the school’s research activities, including policies, procedures and practices that support research and scholarly activities.

The level of research activity by College of Public Health faculty has substantially increased since the last reaccreditation period. The current Dean of Public Health was appointed in 2002 and increasing extramural funding became a major priority of the College. A substantial amount of the epidemiologic and community-based prevention efforts centers on American Indians, an ethnic minority with a large population in Oklahoma. In addition, there are projects focusing on residents in rural areas, teenagers, the elderly, patient groups, and workers. The College also has major research projects in the areas of biosecurity and infectious diseases, including global health.

3.1.a(i) Faculty

Research is a fundamental component of a graduate school of public health, and the commitment to research is demonstrated in the policies and practices of the College. All faculty members are expected to engage in scholarly activity in their respective areas of expertise. All new faculty members are expected to devote a significant proportion of their time to research. The nature of creative achievement tends to vary by department with multi-disciplinary research efforts occurring more frequently. Faculty who have significant research commitments may have the opportunity, on a case-by-case basis, to buy out of teaching elective courses.

3.1.a(ii) Departments and Centers

The following describes research activities according to discipline. Exhibit 3.1.1 provides specific details regarding research undertaken by each academic department.

Biostatistics and Epidemiology. Research efforts by BSE faculty include epidemiologic studies of a variety of health issues in the American Indian population, including – but not limited to - cardiovascular disease; diabetes and its complications; adverse reproductive outcomes; international studies of infectious diseases; and implementation and assessment of tobacco and smoking cessation programs. Biostatistics faculty members are actively involved in statistical methods research related to the analysis of longitudinal or cluster correlated data, time-to-event data, and high dimensional data.

Health Administration and Policy. HAP faculty members focus their research and scholarly activities on practical applications of knowledge to health policy making and hospital administration. Research efforts by the faculty include issues of health care and community access, managed care issues, and hospital productivity.

Health Promotion Sciences (HPS). Research efforts by HPS faculty members include women’s health, diabetes especially in American Indian populations, dementia, and adolescents.

Occupational and Environmental Health (OEH). OEH faculty members conduct research in a variety of areas including occupational exposure assessment, environmental health and countering terrorism.

145

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

In addition to the individual departments, several interdisciplinary, self-contained centers operate within the College.

American Indian Diabetes Prevention Center (AIDPC). The AIDPC works to reduce the excess mortality and morbidity from diabetes so that quality of life and cultural vitality is secure. The Center is funded by the National Institutes of Health’s National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities, and currently has eight projects involving Principal Investigators from the Colleges of Medicine, Nursing, and Public Health. In addition, these interdisciplinary teams have partnered with the Choctaw Nation, the Chickasaw Nation, the Oklahoma City Area Inter-Tribal Health Board and the Southern Plains Epidemiology Center.

Biostatistics and Epidemiology Research Design and Analysis Center (BSE RDAC). The RDAC provides biostatistics and epidemiology expertise and collaborative support for research initiated by OUHSC investigators and community partners. Faculty, staff, and graduate research assistants in the BSE RDAC provide expertise in areas ranging from formulation of research questions, research design, study implementation and monitoring, data collection and management, data analysis, and dissemination of findings.

Center for Biosecurity Research (CBR). Founded in 2004, the CBR is dedicated to conducting interdisciplinary, cross-cutting research focused on key questions in biodefense and emerging infectious diseases to enhance U.S. military force protection and homeland security. CBR scientists have broad expertise in microbiology, aerosol science, modeling and simulation, decision analysis, emergency medicine, and behavioral sciences. CBR capabilities encompass the full spectrum of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosives threats. Projects have been funded by a variety of Federal agencies including the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Air Force Research Laboratory, Air Force Office of Scientific Research, US Department of Homeland Security, and CDC. Laboratory experiments and computational modeling studies concentrate on cytotoxicity mechanisms and immunological consequences, bioaerosol dispersion and deposition, physiological and psychological responses to exposures, and behavioral dynamics of terrorism. Faculty members from the Colleges of Public Health and Medicine on the Health Sciences Center campus in Oklahoma City and the OU-Tulsa College of Medicine in Tulsa participate in CBR activities. The Center has active partnerships throughout the nation and world with a network of scientists who share a common vision. CBR collaborators include researchers at a number of institutions including the Medical University of South Carolina, Virginia Tech, the University of California – Santa Barbara, Kettering University, University of Mississippi, Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism, and the Israel National Center for Trauma and Emergency Medicine Research.

Center for American Indian Health Research (CAIHR). Founded in 1991, CAIHR is a multidisciplinary research organization and conducts health-related studies with American Indian groups. The focus of CAIHR research is to improve the health status of the American Indian population. CAIHR conducts epidemiological and clinical studies of health problems among these populations, with emphasis on diabetes and its many complications including heart disease, retinopathy, renal disease, leg vessel disease, and cerebral vascular disease. CAIHR also conducts studies focusing on health promotion and disease prevention. CAIHR has developed a productive relationship with American Indian tribes in Oklahoma including the Apache, Caddo, Comanche, Delaware, Fort Sill Apache, Kiowa, and the Wichita and Affiliated tribes located in southwestern Oklahoma, the Cherokee Nation in northeastern Oklahoma, and other tribes across the nation.

3.1.a(iii) Finances

Newly appointed tenured and tenure-track faculty are expected to support 25% to 50% of their salary through research grants and contracts after an initial start-up period negotiated at the time of appointment (typically 2-3 years). Merit salary increases have been given based on successful research funding

146

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

efforts. One incentive for research involves the use of salary off-set from grants and contracts: 50% of the faculty member’s salary covered by sponsored research is paid to the faculty in addition to his/her salary for all departments with the exception of HPS, which is currently giving 60%. Faculty may take this “incentive pay” as salary or have it deposited in an account (a “CLNOP” account) to support travel, research, student assistants, or other purposes of the faculty’s choosing. This program was initiated in 1999.

3.1.a(iv) Facilities

Office facilities in the College of Health Building, in which the College of Public Health is located, are generally adequate. The growth of research projects continues, however, straining the available space within the building. Additional space is available in research buildings near the campus. The lack of state- of-the-art laboratory facilities has limited the ability of faculty, particularly OEH faculty, to obtain funding for large-scale laboratory-based research.

3.1.a(v) Policies

All research activity involving human participants at the College of Public Health is guided by the ethical principles set forth in “The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects Research of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research”, the Declaration of Helsinki, and the Nuremberg Code. In addition, the University of Oklahoma adheres to the Office for Human Research Protection (OHRP) requirements, as set forth in 45 CFR 46 and its subparts A, B, C, and D, and the FDA in 21 CFR 50 and 56. This basic commitment to the protection of human participants applies to all College of Public Health research projects involving human participants regardless of the source of funding or the location of the research.

Additionally, all College of Public Health faculty and staff who are engaged in research involving human participants, as defined in 45 CFR 46.102 (f) and/or 21 CFR 56.102(e), that is managed, funded, or taking place in an entity under the jurisdiction of the Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma are required to receive initial and continuing education regarding the responsible review and oversight of research. Principal Investigators (PIs) and key study personnel must complete annual online human research participant protection refresher training. Grant proposals may not be submitted unless such training for all Key Personnel is up to date. Before the commencement of any recruitment of human participants or research involving human participants, a research protocol must be submitted and approved by the OUHSC Institutional Review Board.

In order to meet the requirement of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), all College of Public Health faculty are required to complete an online course regarding Privacy Training and are tested on their retained knowledge. Annually, all College of Public Health faculty and staff are required to complete an online course in Data Security Training and are tested on their retained knowledge. The results of the tests are maintained on file.

OUHSC complies with all federal regulations involving the use of vertebrate animals in research. The OUHSC Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) requires PIs and research staff to complete the annual training required by the Animal Welfare Act and the Public Health Service Policy. This training makes use of an online training website developed by AALAS. It consists of two general training modules, one for all investigators and one of special interest to IACUC members, and individual training modules for a number of research animal species related to the species of animals used in their research.

OUHSC also complies with all federal regulations involving biosafety in research. The OUHSC Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC) reviews and approves the biological safety of all OUHSC and OU- Tulsa basic and clinical research activities involving recombinant DNA, gene transfer including transfer to humans, microorganisms, viruses, and biological toxins. Consistent with the NIH Guidelines for Research

147

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules (NIH Guidelines), OUHSC provides appropriate training for PIs and laboratory staff regarding laboratory biosafety and implementation of the NIH Guidelines. OUHSC also complies with the CDC training requirement for persons working with infectious materials and toxins. The IBC requires that all personnel identified on any submitted IBC protocol be current for biosafety training.

The Associate Dean for Research has responsibility for the oversight of policies and procedures for research activities. The Associate Dean for Research also has the lead for working with the faculty to develop initiatives to strengthen the research mission of the College and represents College interest as Liaison to the OUHSC Vice President for Research.

3.1.a(vi) Procedures

The College has implemented a procedure for the submission of grants and proposals that includes documented areas of responsibility and deadlines. Consistent with the campus’s Office of Research Administration (ORA) guidelines and policies for submitting applications for extramural funding, faculty members are encouraged to plan early communication with the College’s Proposal Services staff, and to meet with them to discuss support for proposal development and provide the announcement number. Faculty are asked to begin the proposal development consultation process 4-6 weeks before the application deadline. Because typically multiple proposals are being submitted at peak times such as NIH deadlines, faculty are strongly encouraged to turn their proposal in early to ensure it has enough time to get through Proposal Services and be approved for submission by ORA before the sponsor’s deadline.

It is the faculty member’s responsibility to confirm that all significant contributors on the project are in compliance with human subjects training and conflict of interest requirements. Faculty members also are responsible for obtaining collaboration letters, identifying any subcontractors or consultants, developing their scope of work, and providing contact information to College Proposal Services.

Proposal Services assists in preparing budgets and justifications, in assembling biosketches, information on other support, facilities, etc., and in arranging for OUHSC support letters if required. Proposal Services prepares the ORA routing form and handles routing. The College’s Proposal Services staff also review the proposal announcement for any special instructions or requirements such as indirect cost (IDC) waivers and/or limitation to single submission from the OUHSC as an organization. The Associate Dean for Research signs proposals on behalf of the Dean.

At least 10 business days before the proposal submission deadline, faculty are to meet with Proposal Services staff and provide all necessary materials (proposal abstract, budget, justification, IDC waiver if required) to begin the routing process within the College. This lead time is necessary to complete internal reviews and obtain routing signatures, including the faculty member’s department chair certifying level of effort and the Associate Dean for Research on behalf of the College. It also allows the College to meet ORA’s requirement for having 3 business days to process OUHSC approval to submit applications to the funding agency.

At least 5 business days before the proposal submission deadline, the PI meets with College Proposal Services and provides a final version of the completed proposal with all supporting materials in proper format for submission to the funding agency. This is necessary to meet ORA’s deadline for processing applications. Proposal Services then submits the application package and routing form to ORA for review, identification of any necessary changes, approvals, and submission to the funding agency.

Exceptions to the College’s procedures require approval by the Dean or the Associate Dean for Research. However, in those cases, the College cannot guarantee that proposals provided to Proposal Services will be reviewed, routing signatures obtained, and approved by ORA for submission prior to the funding agency’s deadline because exception forms also need to be signed and approved by the OUHSC Vice President of Research and Vice President of Financial Services.

148

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

3.1.a(vii) Practices

The incentive pay program described above strongly encourages faculty to seek extramural salary offset funding support. Another practice that stimulates departments to encourage research is a 5% return of indirect costs to the department from which the grant derived.

3.1.b. Description of current research undertaken in collaboration with local, state, national or international health agencies and community-based organizations. Formal research agreements with such agencies should be identified.

The College of Public Health has a demonstrated commitment to conducting community-based research activities. Fifty-one of the 74 projects conducted between 2012 and 2015 were community-based (69%) (see Exhibit 3.1.1). Moreover, the College has an exceptional history of working with various American Indian tribal communities, as well as agencies such as the State of Oklahoma, the state’s county health departments, and the Indian Health Service (IHS). Exhibit 3.1.1 lists this type of activity among other grants and is identified by a checkmark in the column titled “Community-Based.” Examples of community- based research activities include “Native Healthy Lifestyle: A Return to Balance,” “OK Center American Indian Diabetes Health Disparities,” “American Indian Diabetes Prevention Center,” “Training for American Indian Caregivers,” “Dementia Among American Indians,” and “Tribal Health and Resilience in Vulnerable Environments”. As seen in Exhibit 3.1.1, formal research agreements have been established with the following health agencies: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality, Health Resources and Services Administration, and the Department of Health and Human Services.

3.1.c. A list of current research activity of all primary faculty identified in Criterion 4.1.a., including amount and source of funds, for each of the last three years. These data must be presented in table format and include at least the following information organized by department, specialty area or other organizational unit as appropriate to the school: a) principal investigator, b) project name, c) period of funding, d) source of funding, e) amount of total award, f) amount of current year’s award, g) whether research is community based and h) whether research provides for student involvement. See CEPH Data Exhibit 3.1.1; only research funding should be reported here. Extramural funding for service or training/continuing education grants should be reported in Exhibit 3.2.2 (funded service) or Exhibit 3.3.1 (funded training/workforce development), respectively.

Exhibit 3.1.1 Research Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014, presented at the end of Criterion 3.1 and also in the Resource File, includes basic, applied and clinical research activities for all departments and centers.

Research was classified as “Community-Based” if any the project involved any of the following: • Active recruitment of subjects from a community • Active engagement with a community for participant recruitment and/or data collection • Collaboration with a community organization, including local or tribal governments Research was classified as involving student participation if the project included any of the following: • GRA positions filled by College of Public Health students • College of Public Health student theses, dissertations, practicum papers, or presentations arising from the research • Incorporation of research project activities into didactic courses or directed readings

149

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

3.1.d. Identification of measures by which the school may evaluate the success of its research activities, along with data regarding the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years. For example, schools may track dollar amounts of research funding, significance of findings (eg, citation references), extent of research translation (eg, adoption by policy or statute), dissemination (eg, publications in peer-reviewed publications, presentations at professional meetings) and other indicators. See CEPH Outcome Measures Exhibit.

Exhibit 3.1.d Outcome Measures for Research FY 2015 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 Target Increase the College annual extramural fund expenditures by 20% from the FY10 level of $8,350,000 $7,358,019 $7,048,521 $6,216,195 approximately $7M (Strategic Plan Objective 2.2) Increase the number of peer- reviewed publications from the 148 116 120 126 College and the number of publications publications publications publications presentations at professional + + + + conferences by faculty and 139 137 108 119 their students by 20% from the presentations presentations presentations presentations 2010 levels (123 and 116, by June 2015 (CY 2012) (CY 2013) (CY 2014) respectively) (Strategic Plan Objective 2.4) Average % of faculty salaries 50% 43% 48% 47% off-set from grants/contracts Percentage (number) of faculty 95% 93% (39) 88% (38) 95% (39) on funded research/service Research dollars per FTE 1 $150,000 $175,191 $163,919 $151,615 primary faculty 1Research dollars per primary faculty is calculated by dividing the grants and contracts income (Exhibit 1.6.1) by FTE faculty (Table 1.7.2).

The College uses the following metrics tied to individual faculty member performance to evaluate the success of its research activities on an annual basis: (1) dollars of research funding, (2) number of publications, (3) number of conference presentations, and (4) grant submission as a PI and/or key personnel. In terms of publications, a general expectation is that each faculty member publish 1-2 first- author or senior-author manuscripts per year with an additional 2-3 co-authored publications. Similar expectations apply to abstracts submitted for oral or poster presentations at professional meetings. In general, faculty are expected to submit 1-2 grants or contracts per year as the principal investigator and 2-3 grant or contract applications per year as a co-investigator.

These metrics of research activity are used by Department Chairs and the Dean to evaluate faculty annually on an individual basis. Faculty prepare an annual report prior to the evaluation which includes documentation of research activities during the previous calendar year for each of the outcome measures enumerated above. Faculty also provide a self-appraisal of research accomplishments and narrative outlining research goals for the next calendar year. The performance evaluation is used to identify strengths and weakness of each faculty member and develop a strategy for sustaining strengths and/or remediating weaknesses. These metrics of research activity are discussed with members of the faculty in the department and discussed each year by the faculty in the annual review with the department chair.

150

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Faculty with administrative appointments (Associate/Assistant Deans, Chairs) are evaluated individually by the Dean using the same faculty annual report system.

The College also tracks these metrics as part of its ongoing strategic planning process. This makes it possible to assess success in meeting goals including the development of action plans to reinforce strengths and address weakness going forward.

The College offers the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology (BSE) as an example to elucidate in detail the way in which desired outcomes are measured with respect to faculty performance. Research efforts by the faculty include epidemiologic studies of a variety of health issues in the Native American population, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes and its complications; cancer studies; investigations of environmental risk factors for adverse reproductive outcomes; international studies of infectious diseases and their chronic sequelae; and implementation and assessment of tobacco and smoking cessation programs. The focus of other epidemiologic research is clinical trials, youth assets, hematology, emergency medicine and injury epidemiology, disease surveillance, and exercise/physical activity studies. Biostatistics faculty are actively involved in statistical methods research related to the analysis of longitudinal or cluster correlated data, time-to-event data, high dimensional data, and adaptive clinical trial design. In addition to areas of independent research as principal investigators, BSE faculty members are heavily involved in collaborative research projects, serving as co-investigators and methodologists. For the initial 3 years of a tenure-track appointment, faculty responsibilities include research (70% effort), teaching and student mentoring (20% effort), and service (10% effort). The Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology protects up to 20% of a faculty member’s time during the first three years of the faculty appointment for independent research. Faculty are expected to teach or co-teach one graduate course each spring and fall semester and contribute to co-taught summer courses. A general expectation of the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology is that tenure-track faculty generate sufficient extramural funding to offset at least one-half of their salary; faculty are expected to achieve this level of salary offset by the end of their third year of the initial faculty appointment.

In 2013, BSE faculty were involved in 91 grants or contracts, of which 73 were focused on research with 18 additional grants or contracts associated with training alone or a combination of training and research. In addition, they provided epidemiologic or biostatistical expertise to more than 50 other projects, primarily with OUHSC colleges and departments. In addition, departmental faculty submitted 63 new applications for research or training support during 2013. A total of 102 peer-reviewed manuscripts were either published or in press. Most of these manuscripts appeared in the top journals in their disciplines. An additional 52 papers were submitted to peer-reviewed journals for consideration. Departmental faculty, staff and students also generated more than 30 technical and evaluations reports. Research results were also shared at national meetings with the presentation of 46 scholarly talks or posters and 128 meeting abstracts.

3.1.e. Description of student involvement in research.

The College also actively engages its graduate and professional students in research activities ranging from extramurally sponsored research projects to student conducted research to fulfill MS thesis or PhD/DrPH dissertation requirements. The College uses multiple measures of student involvement in the research enterprise to evaluate success in achieving this outcome: (1) involvement in sponsored research, (2) involvement in MS thesis or PhD dissertation research, (3) co-authorship of publications, and (4) co-authorship of presentations. Student involvement in research includes participation as research assistants on extramurally funded projects and fieldwork practice. Forty-three of the 74 projects funded between 2012 and 2015 included student participation (58%). In many cases, these experiences have culminated in authorship of a published manuscript or conference presentation. Master’s and doctoral students have presented original research at national and international meetings. Doctoral students conduct original research and write a

151

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

dissertation as part of the degree requirements. The College actively involves students in publishing either through doctoral research and/or sharing co-authorship by contributing to faculty research projects.

3.1.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: Although expanding research space is always a challenge in academic settings, the faculty have adequate space to conduct sponsored research and compete successfully for new awards including laboratory-based studies. The College has written policies and procedures for its research enterprise. The College has a support staff to assist in proposal submission and post-award services. The College traditionally has conducted research activities with a diverse array of health organizations, including American Indian tribes, and has formal agreements in place with those entities. The College actively engages students in all aspects of the research experience including co-authorship of presentations and publications. The College uses multiple, empirical measures of research outcomes to evaluate the status, strengths and weaknesses of its research activities. The outcome measures are assessed annually and used to evaluate individual faculty member performance and the College’s progress towards achieving its strategic goals.

The ability to sustain funding despite decreases in federal funding is a demonstrated strength. Extramural awards in FY02 totaled $4,021,667. During the intervening decade, College extramural awards increased dramatically to $19,195,427 in FY13 while extramural awards in FY14 were $14,806,723 despite sequestration. Current active awards have total budgets of $ 58,856,558 (25 PIs) with 103 proposals submitted FY14 (65 College PI, 38 collaborative).

Additional strengths include expanding staffing for research proposal support services and broadening of the funding base. The College has strong research relationships with the community addressing significant health issues, especially concerns of the American Indian population such as diabetes. Students have the opportunity to gain meaningful research experiences as part of their degree programs equipping them with professional skills at the early career stage. The College has an expanding faculty of young investigators with outstanding research promise.

The College has a strong record of funding students in the research enterprise. Currently, 69 Public Health students have GRA/Trainee positions on campus that are supported by extramural funding.

A number of senior faculty continue to receive competitive funding, are actively publishing, and have national or international recognition. The research infrastructure is continually improving though startup funding for new research faculty and through departmental investment. As noted, the College has dedicated resources for proposal development, routing, and submission.

Weaknesses/challenges: The major challenges are the reduction in state support for the college, the decline nationally in federal funding for research, and the need for continuing to recruit and retain faculty with strong research credentials, training, and track records. Since FY03, the College has experienced 5 budget cuts; 5 budget increases; and 3 flat budgets. At the same time, the College has faced the challenge of sustaining federal funding for its research enterprise in an uncertain political climate.

College also recognizes the need for updated laboratory facilities and increased startup funding to attract new faculty. The College also appreciates the need to implement a more organized mentoring and individual career development program.

Plans: We are developing a junior faculty development and senior faculty mentoring training program to be rolled out by Fall 2015. This program is currently being developed by an ad hoc committee of the

152

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Faculty Board, led by a junior faculty member with participation by both junior and senior faculty. The purpose is to develop a more structured and formalized program to provide guidance, mentoring, and assistance to junior faculty. This initiative will aid junior faculty in developing as independent investigators under the mentorship of successful senior faculty who will serve as role models and resources for career development planning.

The College has gained approval from the Provost’s Office for inclusion of laboratory renovation on the Capital Improvements List for one teaching laboratory that will be used to provide students with hands-on learning opportunities in research skills.

As part of the University of Oklahoma’s “Live On, University” fundraising campaign commemorating the 125th anniversary of University, the College coordinating with OU Development has set goals to raise $10,000,000 for endowed doctoral stipends and $ 500,000 for endowed scholarships to enhance the research experience of its students.

The College is in the process of developing a new strategic plan and the Associate Dean for Research held a meeting in June 2014 to kick-off getting faculty input for the research component.

153

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Anderson, M (BSE) Beebe, L (BSE) Boeckman, L (BSE) Oklahoma Carabin, H (BSE) Shared Peck, J (BSE) Clinical and Raskob, G (BSE) NIGMS 09/01/2013 - 19,277,064 4,300,000 3,744,266 Y Y Translational Shay, C (BSE) (NIH) 06/30/2018 Research Stephens, L (HPS) Center Stoner, J (BSE) Terrell, D (BSE) Thompson, D (BSE) Tolma, E (HPS) Vesely, S (BSE) Zhang, Y (BSE) Zhao, D (BSE)

Beebe, Laura - PI Oklahoma Evaluating the (BSE) Tobacco Oklahoma Settlement 07/01/2007 - 3,330,863 480,700 Y Y Smokers Endowment 06/30/2012 Helpline Trust

Oklahoma Evaluating Beebe, Laura - PI Tobacco 07/01/2012 - TSET Funded (BSE) 4,363,247 563,247 995,000 935,000 Y Y Settlement 06/30/2017 Programs Boeckman, L (BSE) Endowment

154

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Beebe, Laura - PI Oklahoma Oklahoma (BSE) Tobacco Tobacco 07/01/2007 - Settlement 3,999,966 955,345 Y Y Research Campbell, J (BSE) 06/30/2012 Endowment Center Kim, Y (BSE) Vesely, S (BSE) Trust McCaffree, D - PI (SCC) Oklahoma Oklahoma Tobacco Tobacco 07/01/2012 - Beebe, L (BSE) Settlement 6,424,875 1,090,580 1,233,558 1,309,512 Y Y Research 06/30/2017 Floyd, E (OEH) Endowment Center Oman, R (HPS) Trust Stephens, L (HPS)

Culturally- Beebe, Laura - PI Tailored (BSE) Univ of Smoking 09/01/2009 - Kansas 1,261,339 272,228 217,000 253,424 NCE Y Y Cessation for 01/31/2015 NIH (NCI) American Campbell, J (BSE) Indians Nonsmokers Beebe, Laura - PI Univ of and Tobacco (BSE) California Control 08/18/2011 - at San 320,950 66,106 64,258 62,072 64,257 Y Y Norms: 07/31/2016 Diego Population Boeckman, L (BSE) NIH (NCI) Survey Beebe, Laura - PI Univ of Countering (BSE) California Young Adult 08/01/2012 - at San 60,000 30,000 30,000 Y Y Tobacco 07/31/2014 Francisco Marketing NIH (NCI)

155

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

(BSE) Tobacco Tulsa Healthy Settlement 07/01/2010 - 76,998 27,000 Y Y Lifestyles Endowment 12/31/2011 Trust

Child Care Sisson, Susan - PI Influence on Health (Nutritional Sciences) 02/01/2012 - GSC NUTR 49,998 49,998 Y Y Outcomes in 01/31/2013 Campbell, J (BSE) American Indians Stoner, J (BSE)

Oklahoma Eschiti, Valerie - PI Oklahoma Tobacco (Nursing) Tobacco 07/01/2013 - Research Settlement 55,395 25,013 30,382 Y N Campbell, J (BSE) 06/30/2015 Center (Seed Mushtaq, N (BSE) Endowment Grant) Stephens, L (HPS) Trust EFECAB: Carabin, Helene - PI NINDS Improving pig (BSE) management 05/01/2010 - 2,257,999 440,973 493,518 443,187 379,164 Y Y to prevent 04/30/2015 epilepsy in Magzamen, S (BSE) (NIH) Burkina Faso Understanding Carabin, Helene - PI NINDS the (BSE) inflammatory 09/30/2011 - 393,624 194,630 198,994 NCE NCE Y Y processes of 08/31/2015 neurocysticerc Anderson, M (BSE) (NIH) osis HIV-CNS Carabin, Helene - PI Diseases and FIC (BSE) 05/24/2009 - parasitic 251,428 168,383 Y Y 04/30/2012 zoonoses-S (NIH) Africa

156

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Exhibit 3.1.1. Research Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2015 Commu Funding Amount Student Principal Investigator Funding Amount Amount Amount Amount nity- Project Name Period Total Participat & Department Source FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Based Start/End Award ion Y/N Y/N Learning Early Jones, Maria - PI Travel Skills: Education 01/01/2010 - (Tolbert Center) 898,996 449,498 Y Y Effects of 12/31/2012 Power Mobility Ding, K (BSE) (DOE) Substance Eichner, June - PI Abuse ODMH (BSE) 07/01/2012 - Prevention 800,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Y N 06/30/2014 Block Grant (SAMHSA) Evaluation Tobacco Univ of Kim, Yoonsang - PI Control in a Illinois at (BSE) Rapidly Chicago 10/01/2011 - 24,481 24,481 Y N Changing 07/31/2012 Media NIH (NCI) Environment Cerebrovascul Ali, Tauqeer - PI Univ of ar Disease (CAIHR) Washington and its 07/01/2009 - 1,215,594 312,140 323,894 147,193 NCE Y N Consequences Lee, E (BSE) NIH 05/31/2015 in the Strong Zhang, Y (BSE) (NHLBI) Study Cohort Strong Heart Lee, Elisa - PI (BSE) NHLBI 01/01/2010 Study, Phase 2,772,549 1,922,549 850,000 Y N 03/31/2013 V (NIH) CVD in American Lee, Elisa - PI (BSE) NHLBI Indians Study 06/01/2013 - 2,614,137 642,121 493,004 Y N and Data 05/31/2018 Management Zhang, Y (BSE) (NIH) Center Native Healthy Lee, Elisa - PI (BSE) NHLBI Lifestyle: A 09/30/2009 - 2,897,789 706,518 Y N Return to (NIH) 06/30/2012 Balance

157

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Oklahoma Akins, Darrin - PI IDeA Network (Microbiology) NCRR 04/01/2011 - of Biomedical 293,000 58,600 117,200 117,200 N Y Peck, J (BSE) (NIH) 03/31/2014 Research Excellence Stoner, J (BSE) Oklahoma Peck, Jennifer - PI Oklahoma Tobacco Tobacco (BSE) 07/01/2014 - Research Settlement 54,993 54,993 N N 06/30/2015 Center (Seed Anderson, M (BSE) Endowment Grant) Carabin, H (BSE) Trust Longitudinal Shay, Christina - PI 04/01/2012 - Vanderbilt 64,392 44,609 19,783 N N Changes in (BSE) 03/31/2014

158

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Exhibit 3.1.1. Research Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2015 Commu Funding Amount Student Principal Investigator Funding Amount Amount Amount Amount nity- Project Name Period Total Participat & Department Source FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Based Start/End Award ion Y/N Y/N Pericardial Adiposity and NIH Subclinical (NHLBI) Atherosclerosi s Examining Stoner, Julie - PI Multilevel NIDCR (BSE) 07/01/2010 - Associations in 308,342 154,171 154,171 N N 06/30/2013 Dental Thompson, D (BSE) (NIH) Research Lipoproteins Lyons, Tim - PI and Pigment NIDDK 07/01/2010 - (Diabetes Center) 806,146 403,073 N Y Epithelial 06/30/2012 Derived Factor Stoner, J (BSE) (NIH) Prone Kolobe, Hiapang - PI Locomotion in NICHD (Tolbert Center) 08/05/2010 - Infants with or 422,469 211,235 Y Y 07/31/2012 at Risk for Stoner, J (BSE) (NIH) Disabilities Diabetes in Azar, Madona - PI Minority OCAST (Diabetes Center) 08/01/2010 - Pregnancy: 134,997 44,999 44,999 44,999 Y N 10/31/2013 Epidemiology Stoner, J (BSE) and Diagnosis 3-D Quiroz, Lieschen - PI AUGS Ultrasound of (OBGYN) the Pelvic 01/01/2012 - 25,000 25,000 NCE NCE NCE Y N Floor in 01/31/2015 Primiparous Stoner, J (BSE) Women Lyons, Tim - PI ADA Lipoproteins (Diabetes Center) and PEDF and 07/01/2012 - 188,508 188,508 NCE N Y the Vascular Stoner, J (BSE) 06/30/2013

Complications Zhang, Y (BSE)

159

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Terrell, Deirdra - PI Oklahoma-UT NHLBI Southwestern (BSE) Hemostasis 09/01/2009 - 497,681 79,681 121,360 97,118 N N Consortium 08/31/2014 (Minority (NIH) Supplement)

Secondary Gillaspy, Stephen - PI

Data Analysis (Geriatrics) 02/01/2011 - of PRAMS and HRSA 88,657 88,657 NCE NCE Y Y 01/31/2014 Postpartum Thompson, D (BSE) Depression O'Neil, Kathleen - PI Progression of NIAID (Pediatrics) Autoimmunity 09/27/2011 - 328,723 328,723 Y Y During Puberty 08/31/2012 in SLE Thompson, D (BSE) (NIH)

Darden, Paul - PI Interventions MCHB to Promote (Pediatrics) 02/01/2011 - 689,796 234,837 255,639 199,320 NCE Y Y Adolescent 01/31/2014 Immunizations Thompson, D (BSE) (HRSA)

A Longitudinal Vesely, Sara - PI NICHD Multi-Level (BSE) Analysis of 09/18/2009 - Health 402,875 181,294 N Y 01/31/2012 Disparities Oman, R (HPS) (NIH) among Adolescents

160

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Lyons, Tim - PI Modified LDL: SKB Effects on (Diabetes Center) 11/10/2003 - 560,451 NCE N N signaling in 10/31/2013 retinal capillary Zhang, Y (BSE)

Genetic Zhao, Jinying - PI NHLBI Variations in (BSE) the HPA Axis and 09/30/2009 - 402,875 219,750 183,125 N Y Comorbidity of Lee, E (BSE) 06/30/2013 (NIH) Depression Zhang, Y (BSE) and Cardiovascular Telomere Zhao, Jinying - PI Attrition and NIDDK (BSE) 09/01/2011 - Diabetes Risk 1,093,562 279,051 N Y 07/02/2012 in American (NIH) Indians Biological Zhao, Jinying - PI Aging NIA (BSE) 09/15/2009 - Mitochondrial 525,481 131,549 N N 07/02/2012 Variants & (NIH) CAD Tanaka, Takemi - PI NCI Anti-Migration (Cancer Center) Therapy for 01/23/2014 - 1,704,117 568,039 568,039 N N Prevention 03/31/2017 and Treatment Zhao, Y (BSE) (NIH)

161

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Akins, Darrin - PI Oklahoma NIGMS (Microbiology) IDeA Network 05/02/2014 - of Biomedical 1,127,350 225,470 Y N 04/30/2019 Research Zhao, Y (BSE) (NIH) Excellence

Rural County- Nagykaldi, Zsolt - PI Based Primary AHRQ 07/01/2014 - 99,981 Y N (Family Medicine) 399,923 Health Care 06/30/2018 Zhao, Y (BSE) Model Health Administration & Policy (HAP) Children's Improving Hospital of Bratzler, Dale - PI 05/01/2011 - Process Philadelphi 25,140 12,570 12,570 Y N (HAP) 04/30/2013 Measurement a (DHHS)

Oklahoma Chou, Ann - PI Health (HAP) Information 10/01/2012 - GAP Analysis 151,844 151,844 Y Y Wendelboe, A (BSE) Exchange 12/31/2013 Zhang, Y (BSE) Trust

Heartland Univ of Chou, Ann - PI 01/01/2014 - Genetics Arkansas 9,863 9,863 N N (HAP) 05/31/2014 Project HRSA

162

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Hughes, Danny - PI Oklahoma (HAP) Health Bennett, C (HAP) Information 10/26/2011 - GAP Analysis 195,039 195,039 Y Y Broyles, R (HAP) Exchange 04/25/2012 Khaliq, A (HAP) Trust Mwachofi, A (HAP)

Khaliq, Amir - PI OHIET (HAP) 10/01/2012 - GAP Analysis 247,335 247,335 Y Y Bennett, C (HAP) 12/31/2013

Mwachofi, A (HAP) The Scope, Khaliq, Amir - PI ACRADIOL Variation, and (HAP) OG 08/22/2013 - Cost of 64,692 39,692 25,000 N Y 08/22/2015 Imaging Services Health Promotion Sciences (HPS) Leyva, Misti - PI OCAST Omega-3 and (HPS) Cardiovascular 07/01/2013 - 90,000 45,000 45,000 Y N Function in 06/30/2015 Pre-Diabetes (ACF)

Oman, Roy - PI OICA 10/01/2010 - OK Power (HPS) 613,954 132,228 107,367 75,961 166,170 Y N 09/29/2016 Vesely, S (BSE) (ACF) OK Center Henderson, Neil - PI 09/30/2007 - NCMHD 6,336,701 1,226,485 Y Y American (HPS) 07/15/2012

163

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Henderson, Neil - PI NCMHD (HPS)

American Indian Henderson, L (HPS) 07/16/2012 - Diabetes Leyva, M (HPS) 6,087,221 1,236,793 1,217,371 1,212,791 Y Y Oman, R (HPS) 05/31/2017 Prevention (NIH) Center Raskob, G (BSE) Stephens, L (HPS) Thompson, D (BSE)

Henderson, Neil, - PI Training for NICOA American (HPS) 08/01/2010 - 85,187 42,494 Y Y Indian 07/31/2012 Caregivers Henderson, L (HPS) (ADAGING)

Henderson, Neil, - PI Dementia Among (HPS) ALZHEIME 10/01/2006 - 239,995 24,871 Y N American R 09/30/2012 Indians Henderson, L (HPS)

Jernigan, Valarie - Tribal Health NHLBI and Resilience PI (HPS) 08/15/2013 - 3,163,520 634,052 618,629 Y Y in Vulnerable 05/31/2018 Environments Salvatore, A (OEH) (NIH)

Jernigan, Valarie - CINCO UW 05/01/2012 - PI (HPS) 103,313 16,287 54,475 32,551 Y N Training Core 04/30/2014 (NIH)

164

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Occupational & Environmental Health (OEH) Univ of A Novel Floyd, Evan - PI Alabama - Desorption (OEH) Birmingha 09/01/2013 - Technique for 86,809 49,285 37,524 N m 08/31/2015 Y Improved CDC Sensitivity (NIOSH)

Oklahoma Floyd, Evan - PI Oklahoma Tobacco (OEH) Tobacco 11/01/2013 - Research Settlement 50,600 50,600 Y Y 06/30/2014 Center (Seed Endowment Grant) Trust

Determining Univ of Absolute Floyd, Evan - PI Alabama - 07/01/2014 - 20,000 20,000 N N Sampling (OEH) Birmingha 06/30/2015 Efficiencies for m

165

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.1: RESEARCH

Fish (NIEHS) Consumption in Rural OK

Regens, James - PI Advances in Biotechnology (OEH) 06/09/2005 - DoD 6,984,438 200,000 N Y and Biological Occupational & 07/31/2011

Sciences Environmental Health Mental Models Regens, James - PI UMARYLA of Intelligence (OEH) ND Collectors and 07/01/2012 - Analysis for 489,401 244,268 245,133 N Y (Homeland 12/31/2014 Characterizing Adversarial Security) Threats Center for Regens, James - PI Intelligence DOD 09/08/2014 - (OEH) 1,808,903 396,114 N Y and National 09/07/2019 Security Totals 94,231,011 11,450,279 7,583,466 12,709,818 10,969,076

166

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

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.

3.2.a. Description of the school’s service activities, including policies, procedures and practices that support service. If the school has formal contracts or agreements with external agencies, these should be noted.

The College of Public Health takes special pride in the level of service it provides as a public health partner and leader in the state of Oklahoma, in the region, and at the national and international levels. The College has a faculty with demonstrated practice-based service experience and robust connections across the range of critical linkages. This capacity has resulted in the College emerging as a leader among its peer institutions with regard to the role played in public health practice. As part of its 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, specifically Objectives 3.1 and 3.4 (see section 1.1.d), the College has established and maintained partnerships with the Association of American Indian Physicians, the Oklahoma City Area Inter-Tribal Health Board, and various tribal agencies, and partnered with the Oklahoma City-County Health Department to hire a new faculty member to work with the Latino community. The College has developed a culture emphasizing the obligation as public health professionals that the College of Public Health must effectively meet the needs of the community, state, region, nation, and world. Embodying this perspective, the College is dedicated to being present in and participating across all venues where skilled public health professionals from an academic setting can contribute to advancing the goals and objectives of public health practice. Specifically: • All activities related to professional service and activities undertaken by the individual faculty member for external compensation are guided by the Professional Practice Plan; • Service to professional organizations, boards, committees, panels, editorial boards, and similar activities are undertaken with the understanding by the individual faculty member that contributions of time and effort to advancing the goals and objectives of public health education, training and research are expected as an integral element of the faculty member’s responsibility to the university, College, community, and nation and beyond. • Faculty members and students are strongly encouraged to participate in service at multiple levels outside the university. Faculty are provided a generous time allotment for external professional practice activities that include: presentations to organizations and societies; service in professional societies and on commissions, councils, and advisory boards at local, state, national and international levels; professional consultations; and health services delivery. In addition, specific service contracts support a variety of training and planning activities for state, tribal and other organizations. • Faculty members report their service activities annually to both their department chair and the Dean, noting the type of activities performed and the associated percent level of effort. Individual faculty members, in consultation with the department chair, identify a target percent level of effort to be dedicated to service each year. • Service activities are considered as a key element of professional contribution to the university and field of endeavor. Along with research and teaching accomplishments, service is a significant point in tenure and promotion decisions at the department, College, and university levels. • Student service is a key consideration in selection decisions for such special recognition awards as the Joan K. Leavitt Award, the College of Public Health Outstanding Student Award, and the four departmental Outstanding Student awards presented each year.

167

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

3.2.b. Description of the emphasis given to community and professional service activities in the promotion and tenure process.

As noted in section 3.2.a, all faculty members report their service activities annually to both their department chair and the Dean, noting the type of activities performed and the associated percent level of effort. Individual faculty members, in consultation with the department chair, identify a target percent level of effort to be dedicated to service each year. For faculty members at the Assistant and/or Associate Professor ranks, service activities are considered as a key element of professional contribution to the university and field of endeavor and along with research and teaching accomplishments, service is a significant point in tenure and promotion decisions at the department, College, and university levels.

3.2.c. A list of the school’s current service activities, including identification of the community, organization, agency or body for which the service was provided and the nature of the activity, over the last three years. See CEPH Data Exhibit 3.2.1. Projects presented in Criterion 3.1 should not be replicated here without distinction. Funded service activities may be reported in a separate table; see CEPH Data Exhibit 3.2.2. Extramural funding for research or training/continuing education grants should be reported in Exhibits 3.1.1 (research) and 3.3.1 (funded workforce development), respectively.

Service activities by College faculty are listed in Exhibit 3.2.1 Faculty Service for the Last 3 Years or in Exhibit 3.2.2 Funded Service Activity for each of the Past Three Years, both of which can be found in the Resource File. Exhibit 3.2.1 lists services that are provided either pro bono, for a nominal honorarium (for example, service on NIH study sections), or as paid private consulting through the College’s Professional Practice Plan (PPP). The PPP can be found in the Resource File. Paid private consulting services constitute only about 10% of the service activities listed in Exhibit 3.2.1. Service activities funded through grants or contracts are presented separately in Exhibit 3.2.2, which also appears at the end of Criterion 3.2. The College had 21 funded service grants or contracts in FY 2012, 32 in FY 2013, and 36 in FY 2014.

3.2.d. Identification of the measures by which the school may evaluate the success of its service efforts, along with data regarding the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years. See CEPH Outcome Measures Exhibit.

Outcome measures relevant to the College's service activities include the range, number, and types of service rendered, including service on committees of professional organizations, peer-review and editorial board service for journals and books, service-related publications and presentations, consultative services, presentation of workshops and seminars, and continuing education and outreach courses and conferences. These have been discussed in the sections above, and demonstrate the College's extensive commitment to the service component of its mission. The fundamental measure of success relative to service is the degree to which the College of Public Health builds and sustains collaborative linkages and partnerships with the community, public health agencies, and employers. Additionally, the College seeks stakeholders whose interaction with the College leads collaboratively to improved health status of the state, regional and national population. To that end, the College has robust and extensive collaborative relationships through which highly regarded service activities at the local, state, regional and national level are undertaken.

The performance of the College relative to the targets established in the 2011-2015 Strategic Plan is presented in Exhibit 3.2.d. The measurable objectives relating to service are stated in Objective 2.3 of the Strategic Plan (see section 1.1.d). The expected level of participation for each department was a minimum of 2 activities per FTE faculty each year on national or international boards, committees, study sections, or grant review panels. These targets were met or exceeded in nearly all instances.

168

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

* Exhibit 3.2.d. Outcome Measures for Faculty Service in the Past Three Years Outcome Measure Target 2012 2013 2014

Service by each department's faculty on national or international boards/committees/study sections/review panels (Strategic Plan Objective 2.3): 2 activities BSE Primary Faculty 3.4 2.8 2.8 per FTE 2 activities HAP Primary Faculty 2.0 2.7 3.7 per FTE 2 activities HPS Primary Faculty 4.1 4.6 6.8 per FTE

2 activities OEH Primary Faculty 7.2 5.4 3.9 per FTE

*Calendar years were used because this information is captured primarily from faculty annual reports, which cover activities by calendar year.

The faculty of the College are also encouraged to engage in a wide range of professional service activities, both funded and unfunded, as summarized by level in Exhibit 3.2.d.1 and by type in the subsequent text. Even in the absence of established targets, the College’s faculty are broadly involved in service to local communities and the state, as well as to national or international organizations. The overall service commitment and establishment of targets and goals for community-based service, in addition to service to government agencies and professional organizations, is in review and will be addressed with more specificity and improved performance metrics in the 2016-2020 strategic plan.

Exhibit 3.2.d.1 Number of Primary Faculty Participating in Service* for 2012-2014 Level of Service 2012 % of faculty 2013 % of faculty 2014 % of faculty Activity Community/State 20 47 16 40 21 51 National 31 72 30 75 36 88 International 18 42 14 35 14 34 Any 37 86 35 88 39 95 * Paid consulting through the College’s Professional Practice Plan (PPP) is not counted in this exhibit

A detailed tabulation of College faculty service activities in 2011-2014 is provided in Exhibit 3.2.1 in the Resource File. The following types of activities were reported in 2011-2013:

• 38 faculty participated as members of professional organization committees, boards, councils, and similar functions. • 29 faculty served as reviewers for peer-reviewed manuscripts • 8 faculty served as members of editorial boards for peer-reviewed journals. • 30 faculty served on national panels • 15 faculty served on international panels or similar organizations • In excess of 240 professional presentations were provided at local, state, regional, national and international venues

(Detailed analysis of the types of service activities performed by primary faculty in CY 2014 could not be completed prior to submission of this final self-study report.)

Additionally, the College provides a frequently used venue for grand rounds, meetings, partner training activities, and other functions in the auditorium, which is one of the largest on the Health Sciences Center campus. A variety of agencies and collaborating partners participate in and sponsor the grand rounds series, including the Oklahoma State Department of Health; Oklahoma City-County Health Department;

169

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

Tulsa City-County Health Department; Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse; Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality; Oklahoma Hospital Association, Oklahoma City Area Inter-Tribal Health Board, among others. The Oklahoma Public Health Training Center, the Southwest Preparedness and Emergency Response Learning Center, COPHSA, and other campus organizations are provided access to the facilities for meetings and are provided additional support as necessary to facilitate opportunities using the building and resources of the College.

3.2.e. Description of student involvement in service, outside of those activities associated with the required practice experience and previously described in Criterion 2.4.

Students at the College may participate in service through student organizations, course-based service learning activities, and funded service and service-related research projects. Although student volunteerism is not required to complete degree programs, voluntary participation in community service activities is a key consideration in annual special recognition awards presented during College convocation exercises.

Students are involved in student-initiated service through membership in local and national professional and student organizations and participation in services and service-related research. Organizations established by and for students include:

• College of Public Health Student Association • Graduate Student Association • Biostatistics and Epidemiology Student Association • American College of Healthcare Executives Student Chapter • Social, Community, and Behavioral Health Association • Christian Medical and Dental Association (CMDA) • Global Health Interest Group, College of Medicine

Some recent student-led service activities (2013-2014) are shown in Exhibit 3.2.e.

Exhibit 3.2.e Examples of Student-Led Service Activities CMDA Medical mission trips (2) to Central and South America Reason to Believe Therapeutic Riding Center – preparing for All Family Funfest Komen Race for the Cure – volunteering at booths or roving AIDS Walk Oklahoma City (2) – volunteer Blood Drives (3) – hosted by COPHSA Safety Blitz Fair – set up, guides Student Global Health Alliance fundraisers (4) for the Northern Uganda Clinic, Northern Uganda Laboratory, and schools in Africa Health Dash fundraiser for Mid-Del Community Health Clinic The Big Event (2) – volunteer community activity Endeavor Games – volunteer community activity Regional Food Bank – hosted by SCHBA Adopt-a-Patient for Christmas (annually) - BSESA Let's Get Midwest City Moving Free Family Fun 5k - SCHBA

170

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

Exhibit 3.2.e Examples of Student-Led Service Activities Open Streets OKC 2014 (2) - SCHBA The Salvation Army Red Shield Diner - serve meal and help with cleanup

Service learning is a key part of CPH 7003 Integrated Public Health Practice and Preparedness, a required course for all MPH students. For example, in Fall 2014 student teams in this course engaged with the cities of Oklahoma City and Tulsa to perform community park surveys.

Opportunities for student participation in funded service and service-related research are extensive, as shown in Exhibit 3.1.1 and Exhibit 3.2.2. For example, graduate research assistants participate in virtually all projects conducted through the research centers and the departments, with such participation often adapted to provide a thesis research opportunity.

3.2.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: A demonstrated strength is that given its relatively small faculty the College is well represented in professional organizations at the local, state, and national levels. The faculty is well represented on the editorial review boards and committees of professional journals, and is actively involved in shaping the direction of public health education and scholarship through its participation on national selection and oversight panels.

Weaknesses/challenges: The major challenge is the modest faculty size, and available time, given the needs of the other two College missions of education and research.

Plans: We plan to continue to take our service responsibility seriously and participate in the application of public health practice principles at all levels of the community while actively advancing the science of public health practice (Strategic Plan sub-goal 2.3). The Self-Study process illuminated the fact that although the College faculty provide outstanding service over a wide range of levels and activities, specific strategic targets and performance outcome measures are not well articulated; consequently, the College is incorporating service as a component of the strategic planning process moving forward under the auspices of the Dean in collaboration with the Chairs and College Executive Committee. We anticipate that the 2016-2020 Strategic Plan will also include specific goals for enhancing and increasing opportunities for student participation in professional service activities of the faculty and College.

171

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

Exhibit 3.2.2. Funded Service Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014

Principal Funding Amount Student 3 Amount Amount Amount Amount Community- Project Name Investigator Funding Source Period Total Participation FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Based Y/N & Department Start/End Award Y/N

Biostatistics & Epidemiology (BSE) Anderson, M (BSE) MOU with Dept 07/01/2011 - Biostatistical Support 335,661 78,134 80,406 88,586 88,535 Y Y Thompson, of Pediatrics 06/30/2015 D (BSE) Student Mentoring and Anderson, M MOU with Allied 07/01/2011 - 45,870 11,101 9,398 11,537 13,834 Y Y Collaborative Support (BSE) Health 06/30/2015 Contract with Analysis and Statistical Anderson, M The Society for 09/01/2013- 12,000 6,000 6,000 Y N Support (BSE) Pediatric 06/30/2015 Sedation Analysis and Statistical Beebe, L Contract with 07/01/2010 - 162,500 32,500 32,500 32,500 32,500 Y Y Support (BSE) OSDH 06/30/2015

Tobacco-related Beebe, L Contract with 07/01/2010 - 372,229 32,229 32,500 102,500 Y Y consulting (TUPS Data) (BSE) OSDH 06/30/2015

Beebe, L Contract with 12/01/2010 - MPOWER Evaluation 312,500 32,500 67,500 90,000 90,000 Y Y (BSE) OSDH 06/30/2015

Tribal Liaison, Community Beebe, L Contract with 07/01/2012 - 248,250 69,000 69,000 36,750 Y Y Development Services (BSE) OSDH 06/30/2017

Data collection concerning questions on Beebe, L Contract with 07/01/2011 - the Behavioral Risk 8,500 8,500 Y Y (BSE) OSDH 06/30/2012 Factor Surveillance System MOU with the Deputy Director for Beebe, L 07/01/2014 - Stephenson 14,927 14,927 Y N Tobacco Research (BSE) 06/30/2015 Cancer Center

172

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

Exhibit 3.2.2. Funded Service Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014

Technical Assistance/Consultation Boeckman, Contract with 07/01/2012 - 30,000 10,000 10,000 5,000 Y N concerning Children First L (BSE) OSDH 06/30/2016 Program

Evaluation of the Traditional Food Program, Contract with American Indian Pre- Campbell, J Indian Health 10/01/2011 - 46,900 21,250 14,400 11,250 Y Y Diabetes and Obesity (BSE) Care Resource 09/30/2014 HP/DP Program, and Center of Tulsa Tulsa Health Pathways

Evaluate program Contract with components regarding the Campbell, J Oklahoma City 09/01/2011 - partnership with the 80,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Y Y (BSE) Area Inter-Tribal 08/31/2015 Oklahoma State Health Board Department of Health

Collaborate regarding: Healthy, Active Native Communities Resource American Assoc Guide Project; Data into Campbell, J 07/01/2013 - of Indian 52,000 52,000 Y Y Action Workshop Project; (BSE) 06/30/2014 Practitioners and National Public Improvement Initiative Project

Provide Outreach and State of Education for the Low- Campbell, J Oklahoma Dept 04/01/2014 - 48,910 48,910 Y Y Income Medicare (BSE) of Human 06/30/2015 Population of Oklahoma Services

MOU with Dean Collaborate with faculty, Ding, K 08/01/2012 - McGee Eye 54,038 10,585 20,790 22,663 Y N fellows, and residents (BSE) 06/30/2015 Institute

173

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

Exhibit 3.2.2. Funded Service Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014

Assistance with SEER- Ding, K MOU with Dept 04/01/2013 - Medicare and H-CUPS 97,614 32,538 32,538 32,538 Y Y (BSE) of Urology 06/30/2015 databases Ding, K 10/01/2013 - Statistical Consulting IPA with the VA 4,694 2,346 2,348 Y N (BSE) 09/30/2015 Research Support in Collaboration with Garwe, T MOU with Dept 10/01/2010 - 50% 55,373 56,653 56,701 56,658 Y Y Surgery faculty, fellows (BSE) of Surgery current FTE and residents MOU with Dept Collaborate with faculty, 10/01/2011 - Kim, Y (BSE) of 8,467 8,467 Y N fellows, and residents 06/30/2012 Ophthalmology Magzamen, 11/01/2011 - Statistical Consulting IPA with the VA 26,200 10,480 15,720 Y N S (BSE) 06/30/2013 MOU with Dept Collaborate with faculty, Mushtaq, N 06/01/2014 - of Emergency 12,063 12,063 Y N fellows, and residents (BSE) 06/30/2015 Medicine

Scientific Advisor to Peck, J ILSI North 09/09/2013 - 20,000 10,000 10,000 Y N Caffeine Working Group (BSE) America 09/08/2015 Raskob, Gary - PI Activity Surveillance of (BSE) Venous Bratzler, D 04/01/2012 - Thromboembolism in a (HAP) CDC 750,000 300,000 300,000 150,000 Y Y 03/31/2015 Racially Diverse Campbell, J

Population (BSE) Ding, K (BSE) Wendelboe, A (BSE)

174

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

Exhibit 3.2.2. Funded Service Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014

Shay, C (BSE) MOU with Improving the 11/01/2011 - Ding, K Harold Hamm 82,652 22,956 29,615 30,081 Y Y Effectiveness of Research 06/30/2014 (BSE) Diabetes Center Kim, Y (BSE)

Collaborate with faculty, Shay, C MOU with Dept 03/01/2013 - 18,824 18,824 Y Y fellows, and residents (BSE) of Orthodontics 06/30/2014

Stoner, J 10/01/2010 - Statistical Consulting IPA with the VA 37,371 8,131 8,410 8,746 4,552 Y N (BSE) 03/31/2015 Stoner, J (BSE) Anderson, M (BSE) Beebe, L (BSE) Boeckman, L (BSE) Liaison for the Clinical MOU with Dept Mushtaq, N 07/01/2011 - and Translational of Medical 360,000 80,000 80,000 100,000 100,000 Y Y (BSE) 06/30/2015 Sciences degree program Education Peck, J (BSE) Thompson, D (BSE) Zhang, Y (BSE) Zhao, Y (BSE) Consultation Services for Health Agency Training, Stoner, J Contract with 08/30/2011 - 14,185 2,850 1,335 5,500 2,500 Y Y Climate Project, and (BSE) OSDH 06/30/2015 Public Opinion Surveys

175

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

Exhibit 3.2.2. Funded Service Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014

MOU with Dept Provide Research Stoner, J of Orthopedic 08/01/2012 - 59,478 19,826 19,826 19,826 Y Y Support for faculty (BSE) Surgery and 06/30/2015 Rehabilitation Consultation Services for Contract with the Hand Surgery Thompson, 03/01/2008 - Integris Baptist 42,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 Y Y Program and the D (BSE) 02/28/2015 Medical Center Residency Programs

Provide Research Thompson, MOU with Dept 08/01/2012 - 76,951 25,901 25,525 25,525 Y Y Support for faculty D (BSE) of Neurology 06/30/2015

Collaborate with faculty, Thompson, MOU with Dept 07/01/2014 - 19,388 19,388 Y Y fellows, and residents D (BSE) of Orthodontics 06/30/2015 Vesely, S (BSE) MOU with the Provide Research Ding, K 07/01/2012 - Stephenson 315,583 103,143 106,220 106,220 Y Y Support for faculty (BSE) 06/30/2015 Cancer Center Zhao, Y (BSE) Consultation Services Contract with Vesely, S 06/01/2013 - focused on Clinical Nationwide 12,650 2,000 5,650 5,000 Y N (BSE) 05/31/2015 Problems in Hematology Hospital Wendelboe, 09/01/2010 - Statistical Consulting IPA with the VA 253,963 34,726 34,726 37,453 37,453 Y N A (BSE) 09/31/2017 MOU with Improving the Zhang, Y 07/01/2014 - Harold Hamm 26,681 26,681 Y N Effectiveness of Research (BSE 06/30/2015 Diabetes Center MOU with Improving the Zhao, Y Psychiatry and 12/01/2012 - 17,005 17,005 Y N Effectiveness of Research (BSE) Behavioral 06/30/2013 Sciences

176

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

Exhibit 3.2.2. Funded Service Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014

Zhao, Y Contract with 07/01/2013 - Statistical Consulting 14,313 Y N (BSE) OMRF 12/31/2013 Health Administration & Policy (HAP) Consultation Services related to Inpatient, Bratzler, D Contract with 11/07/2011 - Outpatient and 305,100 82,500 82,500 82,500 28,800 Y N (HAP) OFMQ 09/30/2016 Ambulatory Surgical Quality Measures Consultation Services Bratzler, D Contract with 07/01/2013 - related to Health 151,250 46,667 48,917 Y N (HAP) Telligen 07/31/2019 Management Program Consultation Services related to strengthening Bratzler, D IPA with the 06/16/2014 - the collaboration between 46,933 46,933 Y N (HAP) CDC 06/15/2015 public health and health care Consultation Services for Chou, A 10/01/2014 - Collaborative Project to IPA with the VA 247,500 19,700 Y N (HAP) 09/30/2015 promote patient safety

Consultation Services Contract with regarding an integrated Kinney, S Oklahoma City 01/09/2014 - 33,716 33,716 Y N public health clinical (HAP) County Health 12/31/2014 services model Dept

King Faisal Specialist Provide Administrative Walston, S 09/01/2012 - Hospital and 63,000 63,000 Y N Consultancy Services (HAP) 02/28/2013 Research Centre

177

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.2: SERVICE

Exhibit 3.2.2. Funded Service Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014

Health Promotion Sciences (HPS) Consultation Services Jernigan, V Indian Family 04/01/2013 - related to Community 25,000 25,000 Y N (HPS) Health Clinic 09/29/2013 Wellness Program Consultation Services MOU with Stephens, L 02/13/2013 - related to American Indian Stephenson 32,425 19,752 6,227 6,446 Y N (HPS) 06/30/2015 Projects Cancer Center Occupational & Environmental Health (OEH)

Contract with Provide Indoor Air Quality Johnson, D 07/01/2011 - Solitaire 20,000 5,000 5,000 10,000 Y N Inspections (OEH) 06/30/2014 Holdings

Contract with Provide Air Quality State of Johnson, D 09/01/2011 - Inspections and Oklahoma Dept 95,000 40,000 40,000 5,000 5,000 Y N (OEH) 08/31/2016 Environmental Surveys of Human Services Written report detailing and assessing the Johnson, D Contract with 03/14/2011 - 27,998 27,998 NCE Y Y outcome of the directed (OEH) NIOSH 08/31/2013 work Contract with Provide Indoor Air Quality Johnson, D Law Offices of 06/01/2012 - 5,000 5,000 Y N Inspections (OEH) Steven R. 05/31/2013 Andrews, P.A.

178

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.3: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

3.3 WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

The school shall engage in activities other than its offering of degree programs that support the professional development of the public health workforce.

3.3.a. Description of the ways in which the school periodically assesses the continuing education needs of the community or communities it intends to serve. The assessment may include primary or secondary data collection or data sources.

The close working relationship between the key public health agencies and integration of senior administrative leaders from the agencies and College into Executive Committees and other bodies that guide the respective organizations provide the basis for an ongoing and continuous assessment of how the College can best act and react to the needs associated with sustaining and promoting work force development. The College of Public Health Dean is an appointed member of the Oklahoma City-County Health Department Board of Health. The state and local health agency leaders are fully aware of and actively engaged in responding to the fact that by the year 2018, approximately 45% of the public health workforce in Oklahoma will become eligible to retire, and that the fraction of current employees formally trained in public health is less than 20%. Consequently, the need is clearly established and the collaborative nature of the working relationship of the College with the agencies is the basis for the steadily improving success in this area. The Oklahoma Public Health Training Center (OPHTC) is unique in that from its inception the mission was to provide funding to meet education and training needs pursuant to the approved HRSA grant guidelines. Collaborating partners identify annual training in concert with the OPHTC, prepare and submit proposed requests for support and once approved are provided the necessary funding. The continuing education efforts are a fully integrated and needs-based process beginning with the workforce partners.

A note of concern within the College and the public health workforce partner organizations is the means by which the College will be able to remain as directly and intimately involved with workforce development as it has been over the life of the OPHTC. Efforts to replace funding and sustain educational and training opportunities for the public health workforce are fundamental elements of the next phase of strategic planning for the College.

3.3.b. A list of the continuing education programs, other than certificate programs, offered by the school, including number of participants served, for each of the last three years. Those programs offered in a distance-learning format should be identified. Funded training/continuing education activities may be reported in a separate table. See CEPH Exhibit 3.3.1 (Optional Exhibit for funded workforce development activities). Only funded training/continuing education should be reported in Exhibit 3.3.1. Extramural funding for research or service education grants should be reported in Exhibits 3.1.1 (research) or 3.2.2 (funded service), respectively.

A listing of continuing education programs offered by the College, including number of students served, for the last three years is shown in Exhibit 3.3.b, provided in the Resource File. None were offered in a distance education format. Summary statistics on continuing education programs are provided in Exhibit 3.3.b.1.

Exhibit 3.3.b.1 Summary Statistics on Continuing Education Programs Offered 2011-2013 CY 2011 CY 2012 CY 2013 Courses/Programs 72 31 31 Number Trained 1,194 3,220 2,941

179

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.3: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

All grants for training and/or continuing education are listed in Exhibit 3.3.1, which appears at the end of this section. However, the NIOSH training grant supported only students pursuing a graduate degree, not continuing education.

The short courses and training provided under auspices of the Oklahoma Public Health Training Center (OPHTC) and Southwest Preparedness and Emergency Response Learning Center (SWPERLC) are not directed toward or designed for College of Public Health faculty, staff, or students. Specifically, all courses developed or supported through these funded centers were designed and delivered to public health workforce members. However, employees of public health agencies who are also enrolled as students in the College do participate in these continuing education programs in their capacity as agency employees.

3.3.c. Description of certificate programs or other non-degree offerings of the school, including enrollment data for each of the last three years.

The graduate Certificate in Public Health, implemented in 2003, is comprised of the core courses for each of the five core public health areas (biostatistics, epidemiology, health administration & policy, health promotion sciences, and environmental health). This 15-credit hour program also makes up the initial core taken by all MPH students. Students completing the 15 hours with a grade point average (GPA) no less than 3.00 in the courses are eligible to receive the Certificate. All course work from the Certificate may also be applied to any of the College’s MPH programs. The Certificate is intended to provide a foundation of broad public health education and is particularly appropriate for public health agency professionals, nurses, and physicians.

The graduate Certificate offers an early recognition of success and accomplishment for mid-career students as well as a near mid-point stopping point for those who hold a desire for formal public health education but are unable or unwilling to commit to undertaking the complete degree. The Certificate in Public Health has encouraged individuals who are uncertain about their skills as a student after decades away from an academic setting to investigate a return to school, providing an initial goal that is achievable after only 15 credit hours, and if successful, may be counted toward the MPH should they decide to remain in school by applying to and being accepted by the College to pursue the degree. Students must sustain a minimum grade point average of 3.00 to complete the Certificate in Public Health and are then eligible to receive a special commemorative medallion awarded at an annual College awards ceremony, regardless of whether they are continuing in the MPH program or terminating their graduate experience with the Certificate. The competencies achieved in the Certificate program are the same core competencies achieved by MPH graduates, as presented in section 2.6.a.

Methodology

Students in the Certificate in Public Health program take each of the five College core courses alongside matriculated graduate and professional students; all homework assignments, examinations, associated papers and other requirements are undifferentiated between the various students in the class. This approach lends itself well to providing a means by which Certificate students can judge their own performance in classes in comparison with friends and colleagues who are matriculated students in a degree program, and is a primary means of self-realization that each has the ability to be successful should they decide to continue in pursuit of a degree.

Graduate Certificate in Public Health Enrollment Data

The number of students enrolled or completing the Certificate in Public Health program for the last three academic years is shown in Exhibit 3.3.c. Those completing the program include individuals formally admitted to the Certificate program as well as those who were admitted to the MPH program and

180

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.3: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

petitioned to receive the Certificate after completing all of their required core course work with an acceptable grade point average.

Exhibit 3.3.c Certificate in Public Health Completions and Enrollments Self-Study Years Academic Year Academic Year Academic Year 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 Number of Individuals Completing the Certificate* 39 35 30 Number Enrolled in Certificate Only** 4 2 0

* Includes students receiving certificate while enrolled in an MPH Program ** Based on Fall enrollment only

3.3.d. Description of the school’s practices, policies, procedures and evaluation that support continuing education and workforce development strategies.

3.3.d(i) Continuing Education Policy, Strategy, and Practices

The College recognizes and is demonstrably committed to the role it plays in enhancing public health workforce development in the State of Oklahoma, the region, and beyond. Key strategic elements in the College’s continuing education effort are to:

• Enhance and sustain high quality working relationship with public health practice agencies and partners; • Design continuing education programs predicated on assessed needs and reiterative processes providing feedback on courses and activities delivered to guide continuous improvement; • Sustain a practice-based approach that leads to not only individual but organizational competencies enhancement; and • Evaluate efforts and sustain feedback loops to assure training goals and objectives are updated and met as required by the practice community.

Continuing education is considered to be an integral element of the College strategic planning and operational process. Continuing education efforts are coordinated through the Office of the Dean and operationalized through the office of the Senior Associate Dean. These efforts, though conducted under the auspices of the College as well as its subordinate centers, are all subject to the oversight of the College administration to assure continuity and consistency of quality and effort. They are conducted with a focus on maximizing access by those seeking training and educational opportunities through the optimal use of the College distance education and related technological support systems.

3.3.d(ii) Procedures

To meet the broadest possible need and to supplement the established Certificate of Public Health offered by the College, the College offers a range of continuing education and training programs through departmental as well as center efforts. The basic procedural elements for these efforts include cooperative identification of workforce development needs through linkages with the Commissioner and Executive Committee of the Oklahoma State Department of Health; Directors of the Oklahoma City- County and Tulsa City-County Health Departments; the College of Public Health Advisory Board; and other individual and collective partnering activities in which the administration and faculty of the College are engaged. Fundamental translation of identified needs occurs through the Office of the Dean, and depending on the nature of the workforce development issue in question, further coordinated though the Senior Associate Dean, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, and Assistant Dean for Student Services.

181

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.3: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

3.3.d(iii) Evaluation

Continuing educational efforts related to work force development are evaluated at the individual course/activity level through classical means such as pre- and post-tests and other conventional means. In addition, the established working relationship of the College with the partnering agencies whose employees comprise the predominant fraction of course participants provide frequent feedback and insight to the College relative to the value added.

3.3.e. A list of other educational institutions or public health practice organizations, if any, with which the school collaborates to offer continuing education.

The College of Public Health collaborates extensively with the Oklahoma State Department of Health; Tulsa City-County Health Department; Oklahoma City-County Health Department; Northeastern Oklahoma University; East Central University; Eastern Oklahoma State College; the Choctaw Nation, the Cherokee Nation, the Indian Health Service, and a variety of other entities to offer continuing and professional education through technology based approaches related to distance education.

3.3.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The College maintains a graduate Certificate in Public Health. A strength has been markedly expanded access to public health education, with a substantial increase in the number of Oklahoma public health workforce members who have formal graduate level public health education. The OSDH Apprenticeship Program, funded by the Oklahoma State Department of Health, is designed to further enhance the ranks of professionally educated public health professionals. Additionally, throughout the study period, the HRSA funded Oklahoma Public Health Training Center and the Southwest Preparedness and Emergency Response Learning Center have contributed significantly to continuing educational efforts throughout Oklahoma in concert with the College public health partners. Short course continuing education programs have enhanced the knowledge, skills, and abilities of public health practitioners in disaster and terrorism preparedness, environmental assessment, and health care quality management and leadership, among numerous other areas. The College is committed to sustaining its efforts to expand statewide access to both formal public health education and training as well as short course continuing education opportunities.

Weaknesses/challenges: The significant recent reductions in funding for the national network of public health training centers as well as the preparedness and emergency response learning centers will impact tremendously the ability of the College to sustain the level of outreach and workforce development it has been able to provide over the study period. Although the College leadership is working diligently to secure alternative sources of funding to maintain a presence in the area of workforce development training, the challenges are real and of concern.

Plans: The College administration is supportive of sustaining the workforce development efforts of the College, and is working with our partners to maintain focus on key areas of workforce training and education so that priorities may be set and available resources dedicated accordingly. The reduced level of federal funding clearly demands frequent and vigilant attention being paid to doing the most with what is available. The Senior Associate Dean and practice-based leaders will work with OSDH, OCCHD,

182

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.3: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

TCCHD and other key public health workforce partners to meet as much of continuing education and workforce needs as possible.

183

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.3: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

Exhibit 3.3.1. Funded Training/Continuing Education Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014

Principal Funding Amount Student 4 Funding Amount Amount Amount Amount Community- Project Name Investigator & Period Total Participation Source FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Based Y/N Department Start/End Award Y/N Biostatistics and Epidemiology (BSE) Rubenstein, Laurence - PI Oklahoma Aging 01/01/2011 - (Geriatrics) DWRF 532,251 532,251 Y N Initiative 12/31/2011 Campbell, J (BSE) Rubenstein, Laurence - PI (Geriatrics) Oklahoma Health Aging 01/01/2012 - DWRF 4,341,732 1,055,716 1,562,923 1,723,093 Y N Initiative Campbell, J 12/31/2014 (BSE) Stephens, L (HPS) Teasdale, Tom - PI (Geriatrics) Campbell, J Oklahoma Geriatric 07/01/2011 - (BSE) HRSA 1,757,187 403,874 402,605 478,686 472,022 Y Y Education Center Henderson, J 06/30/2015 (HPS) Henderson, L (HPS) Woolraich, Mark HRSA Oklahoma LEND - PI (Pediatrics) 07/01/2011 - Leadership Education in 2,870,193 595,000 595,000 560,193 560,000 Y Y 06/30/2016 Neurodevelopment Neas, B (BSE) Kinney, S (HAP) Raskob, Gary - Minority Students in PI (BSE) 10/07/2011 - OSDH 1,500,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 Y Y Public Health Boatright, D 06/30/2019 (OEH)

184

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.3: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

Exhibit 3.3.1. Funded Training/Continuing Education Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014

Principal Funding Amount Student 4 Funding Amount Amount Amount Amount Community- Project Name Investigator & Period Total Participation Source FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Based Y/N Department Start/End Award Y/N Williams, Valerie - PI (Ctr University Center of for Learning & 07/01/2006 - ACF 3,305,385 661,077 Y Y Excellence Leadership) 06/30/2011 Terrell, D (BSE) Williams, Valerie - PI (Ctr University Center of for Learning & 07/01/2012 - ACF 2,694,860 554,000 535,215 Y Y Excellence Leadership) 06/30/2017 Terrell, D (BSE) Health Promotion Sciences (HPS)

Indigenous HIV/AIDS Jernigan, 12/01/2011 - Research Training Valarie - PI IHART 31,522 9,922 21,600 Y N 12/31/2013 Program (HPS)

Oklahoma Nutrition Information and John, Robert - Education Social ODHS 10/01/2011 - PI (HPS) 4,426,474 1,036,954 779,172 1,292,746 1,317,602 Y Y Marketing Project 09/30/2015 Oman, R (HPS) Overcoming Barriers of Food Stamp (USDA) Darden, Paul - PI (Pediatrics) Faculty Development in 09/30/2011 - Stephens, L HRSA 1,025,240 141,303 241,156 211,931 215,425 N N Primary Care 09/29/2016 (HPS) Thompson, D (BSE)

185

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.3: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

Exhibit 3.3.1. Funded Training/Continuing Education Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014

Tall Chief, Affordable Care Act Vicki - PI (HPS) Tulane 09/01/2014 - Public Health Training 600,000 150,000 Y Y Boatright, D (HRSA) 08/31/2018 Center (OEH)

Occupational & Environmental Health (OEH) Boatright, Daniel - PI (OEH) Campbell, J (BSE) Bennett, C (HAP) Mattachione, S The Southwest Public 09/01/2010 - (HAP) Peck, J HRSA 2,110,543 699,709 649,755 111,329 Y Y Health Training Center (BSE) 08/31/2014 Raskob, G (BSE) Tall Chief, V (HPS) Walston, S (HAP) Wendelboe, A (BSE) Elledge, Southwest Center Brenda - PI Preparedness and (OEH) 09/30/2010 - CDC 2,515,321 772,248 277,746 250,000 277,670 Y Y Emergency Response Boatright, 09/29/2015 Center Daniel - PI (OEH)

186

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.3: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

Exhibit 3.3.1. Funded Training/Continuing Education Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014

Principal Funding Amount Student 4 Funding Amount Amount Amount Amount Community- Project Name Investigator & Period Total Participation Source FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Based Y/N Department Start/End Award Y/N Campbell, J (BSE) Chou, A (HAP Raskob, G (BSE) Regens, J (OEH) TallChief, V (HPS) Walston, S (HAP) Wendelboe, A (BSE) Phillips, Margaret - PI NIOSH Industrial Hygiene 07/01/2009 - (OEH) 376,804 77,021 74,672 71,069 Y Y Training 06/30/2014 (CDC)

Phillips, Margaret - PI NIOSH Industrial Hygiene 07/01/2014 - (OEH) 346,345 69,269 Y Y Training 06/30/2019 (CDC)

187

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 3.3: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

[This page intentionally left blank]

188

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

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, practice experience and research and instructional competence, is able to fully support the school’s mission, goals and objectives.

4.1.a. A table showing primary faculty who support the degree programs offered by the school. It should present data effective at the beginning of the academic year in which the self-study is submitted to CEPH and should be updated at the beginning of the site visit. This information must be presented in table format, organized by department, specialty area or other organizational unit as appropriate to the school and must include at least the following: a) name, b) title/academic rank, c) FTE or % time, d) tenure status or classification*, g) graduate degrees earned, h) discipline in which degrees were earned, i) institutions from which degrees were earned, j) current instructional areas and k) current research interests. See CEPH Data Exhibit 4.1.1. *Note: classification refers to alternative appointment categories that may be used at the institution.

Information on the primary faculty supporting the college’s degree programs is shown in Exhibit 4.1.1 Primary Faculty who Support Degree Offerings of the School. All but one of the 41 core faculty hold an earned doctoral degree (PhD, DrPH, or EdD), medical degree, and/or law degree.

189

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Lee, Elisa Professor Tenured 1.0 PhD New York Operations Survival data Biostatistics; Biostatistics University Research and analysis; Epidemiology of Statistics Epidemiology diabetes and and prevention of cardiovascular MA University of Statistics diabetes California- Berkeley Stoner, Julie Professor Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Biostatistics Biostatistics Clinical Trials; Biostatistics Washington Methods I; Statistical Methods Clinical Trials; in the Analysis of MS University of Biostatistics Regression Correlated Data Washington Analysis

190

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Exhibit 4.1.1 Primary Faculty who Support Degree Offerings of the School Name and Title/ Tenure Status FTE Graduate Institution where Discipline in Teaching Area Research Interest Discipline Academic or or % Degrees degrees were which degrees Rank Classification* Time Earned earned were earned to the school Thompson, Associate Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Biostatistics Biostatistical Latent class David Professor Oklahoma computer analysis; longitudinal Biostatistics methods; linear data analysis MS University of Biostatistics models; mixed Oklahoma models; longitudinal data M Ed University of Educational analysis Hawaii Foundations Vesely, Sara Professor Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Biostatistics Basic TTP-HUS; ITP; Biostatistics Oklahoma biostatistics; Youth assets; Clinical trials; Logistic regression; Problem solving Sample size issues; MPH University of Biostatistics in biostatistics Therapeutic Oklahoma and equivalence; epidemiology; Teaching methods Analysis of frequency data Zhang, Ying Assistant Non-tenure- 1.0 PhD West China Health Biostatistics, Longitudinal data Biostatistics Professor track University Statistics Categorical data analysis; Multilevel Research analysis modeling; MS West China Health Application of University Statistics statistical methods in clinical and epidemiological MD West China Preventive studies; Genetic University Medicine epidemiology and prevention of chronic disease

191

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Exhibit 4.1.1 Primary Faculty who Support Degree Offerings of the School Name and Title/ Tenure Status FTE Graduate Institution where Discipline in Teaching Area Research Interest Discipline Academic or or % Degrees degrees were which degrees Rank Classification* Time Earned earned were earned to the school Zhao, Yan Associate Tenure-track 1.0 PhD Iowa State Statistics Biostatistics Multiple testing; Daniel Professor University methods; sample size Biostatistics l regression, calculations; clinical MS Iowa State Statistics multivariate data trials University analysis Beebe, Laura Professor Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Epidemiology Epidemiology Tobacco abuse Epidemiology Oklahoma principles & prevention & control; methods; grant cancer health MPH University of Social Science writing; tobacco disparities Oklahoma & Health control strategies Behavior Campbell, Assistant Non-tenure- 1.0 PhD University of Anthropology Epidemiology Native American Janis Professor track Oklahoma principles & health disparities; Epidemiology Research methods; Cancer heart disease; MA University of Anthropology Epidemiology. cancer; diabetes Oklahoma Carabin, Professor Tenured 1.0 PhD McGill Epidemiology Infectious Tropical and Hélène University disease zoonotic infections Epidemiology Veterinary epidemiology; epidemiology and MSc Université de clinical Transmission Applied Bayesian Montréal sciences dynamics of statistics; Health infectious Economics; Disease DVM Université de Veterinary diseases; burden assessment Montréal Medicine Advanced epidemiological methods, Applied Bayesian statistics

192

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Garwe, Tabitha Assistant Non-tenure- 1.0 PhD University of Epidemiology Intermediate Trauma outcomes; Epidemiology Professor track Oklahoma Epidemiology Critical care; Research Quantitative MPH University of Epidemiology epidemiologic Oklahoma methods

Mushtaq, Nasir Assistant Tenure-track 1.0 PhD University of Epidemiology Basic Tobacco control and Epidemiology Professor Oklahoma epidemiology; cessation, both Prevention of locally and MPH University of Epidemiology Chronic Disease internationally; Oklahoma Tobacco addiction; Smokeless tobacco MBBS Rawalpindi Medical Medical College Doctor Peck, Jennifer Associate Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Epidemiology Epidemiologic Reproductive, Epidemiology Professor North Carolina Methods; perinatal and at Chapel Hill Reproductive and pediatric Perinatal epidemiology; Texas A&M Epidemiology Environmental MS University Epidemiology / epidemiology Sociology

193

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Wendelboe, Assistant Tenure-track 1.0 PhD University of Epidemiology Epidemiologic Infectious disease; Aaron Professor North Carolina methods; specifically, Epidemiology Infectious infectious diseases University of disease affecting pediatric MS Utah Public Health epidemiology populations and infectious diseases of the respiratory tract

Bennett, Assistant Tenure-track 1.0 J.D. Washington Law Communications; Intersection of law Christina Juris Professor University in St. Public Health and health policy Health Louis Law Administration & Policy

194

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

195

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

MSc University of London Community Health MBBS University of the Punjab Doctor of Medicine and Surgery Kinney, Sharyl Assistant Tenure-track 1.0 Dr PH University of Public Health US Health Health policy; Public Health Professor Oklahoma Systems; Public health systems and Administration Health services & Policy MPH University of Health Genomics; Public Oklahoma Administration Health Practice and Policy MS University of Oklahoma Nursing Mattachione, Associate Non-tenure- 1.0 JD Loyola Law Law Financing Healthcare Steve Professor track School, healthcare, information Health Los Angeles Managed Care, technology, measuri Administration Healthcare ng financial & Policy Administration performance Henderson, Professor Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Medical Basic health Cultural diversity Joseph Neil Florida Anthropology promotion; health and health behavior; Health and the American aging and dementia; Promotion MS Florida State Psychological Indian; American Indian Sciences University Anthropology community health health

196

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Exhibit 4.1.1 Primary Faculty who Support Degree Offerings of the School Name and Title/ Tenure Status FTE Graduate Institution where Discipline in Teaching Area Research Interest Discipline Academic or or % Degrees degrees were which degrees Rank Classification* Time Earned earned were earned to the school Jernigan, Associate Tenure-track 1.0 DrPH University of Public Health Social & Community-based Valarie Professor California- behavioral research with tribal Health Berkeley sciences in public communities Promotion health Sciences MPH University of Media and Oklahoma Health Communicatio n John, Kenneth Professor Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Sociology Social Nutrition among low Robert Kansas Determinants of income individuals; Health Health; Social Social Marketing Promotion MAT University of History Marketing; Social Interventions; Social Sciences Florida & Behavioral Determinants of Theory Health Leyva, Misti Assistant Non-tenure- 1.0 PhD Oklahoma State Nutritional Nutrition Diabetic Health Professor track University Sciences Complications Promotion of Sciences Research MS University of Nutrition Oklahoma Oman, Roy Professor Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Health Health education Youth Development; Health Oregon Promotion and health Program Evaluation; Promotion promotion; Promotion of Sciences MS University of Physical theories of physical activity Oregon Education human behavior; health promotion Stephens, Assistant Non-tenure- 1.0 PhD University of Health American Indian Health Literacy; Lancer Professor track Oklahoma Administration Health; Cross- Disease Prevention Health of / Public Policy Cultural Promotion Research Research Sciences MS Northeastern Biology/ State University Education

197

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Exhibit 4.1.1 Primary Faculty who Support Degree Offerings of the School Name and Title/ Tenure Status FTE Graduate Institution where Discipline in Teaching Area Research Interest Discipline Academic or or % Degrees degrees were which degrees Rank Classification* Time Earned earned were earned to the school Tall Chief, Vicki Associate Tenured 1.0 EdD West Virginia Curriculum Prevention of Public Health Health Professor University and chronic disease; Workforce Promotion Instruction/ Social & Development; Sciences Health behavioral Tobacco use Education sciences in public prevention and health; Public control; Public MS Eastern Illinois Health Health practice Health University Education preparedness Tolma, Eleni Associate Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Health Evaluation of Breast cancer Health Professor South Carolina Promotion, health promotion prevention; youth Promotion Education and programs; development; Sciences Behavior Community women’s health assessment and issues; program MPH University of Health organization; evaluation; South Carolina Promotion, Focus group international health Education and research Behavior Boatright, Professor Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Environmental Environmental Environmental risk; Daniel Oklahoma Management management; assessment and Occupational Integrated public management & MS University of Environmental health practice; teaching and Environmental Oklahoma Health Risk practice; risk Health (OEH) Communication; communication Public Health Preparedness and Response; Occupational and Environmental Health Law

198

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

199

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Exhibit 4.1.1 Primary Faculty who Support Degree Offerings of the School Name and Title/ Tenure Status FTE Graduate Institution where Discipline in Teaching Area Research Interest Discipline Academic or or % Degrees degrees were which degrees Rank Classification* Time Earned earned were earned to the school Lynch, Robert Associate Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Environmental Environmental Environmental OEH Professor Oklahoma Science sanitation; exposure Environmental assessment; MPH University of Environmental toxicology; ecological risk Oklahoma Health Measurements assessment Environmental MS University of Botany Health Oklahoma Phillips, Associate Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Physical Radiation Occupational and Margaret Professor Illinois Chemistry hazards; environmental OEH Technical exposure MHS John Hopkins Industrial communication; assessment University Hygiene Ergonomics Regens, James Professor Tenured 1.0 PhD University of Decision Terrorism; Global Modeling and L. Oklahoma Analysis health simulation; risk OEH assessment; MS University of Policy decision analysis Arizona Analysis Salvatore, Assistant Tenure-Track 1.0 DrPH University of Public Health Community Risk Alicia Professor California, engagement and Communication; OEH Berkeley community-based Community-based participatory Participatory MPH University of Health research; social Research in North Carolina, Behavior and and Occupational & Chapel Hill Health environmental Environmental Education determinants of Health; health; impact of Environmental work on health health promotion and well-being; immigrant health; community-based interventions;

200

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

201

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

4.1.b. If the school uses other faculty (adjunct, part-time, secondary appointments, etc.), summary data on their qualifications should be provided in table format, organized by department, specialty area or other organizational unit as appropriate to the school and must include at least the following: a) name, b) title/academic rank, c) title and current employment, d) FTE or % time allocated to the school, e) highest degree earned (optional: schools may also list all graduate degrees earned to more accurately reflect faculty expertise), f) disciplines in which listed degrees were earned and g) contributions to the school. See CEPH Data Exhibit 4.1.2.

Summary data on the qualifications of adjunct teaching faculty are provided in Exhibit 4.1.2. The data are organized by core area. Nearly all adjunct teaching faculty members hold earned doctoral degrees or law degrees. Those who hold masters degrees are highly experienced practitioners as illustrated by their Title & Current Employer information. The field perspective of these individuals greatly enhances the teaching experience and provides students an opportunity to interact with active practitioners, many of whom are in senior public health leadership positions.

202

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Exhibit 4.1.2. Current Other Faculty Used to Support Teaching Program (Adjunct, Part-Time, Secondary, etc.) Department Name Title/Academic Title & Current FTE or Gender Race or Graduate Discipline for Teaching Areas (school)/Specialty Rank Employer % Time Ethnicity Degrees earned graduate Area (program) Earned degrees Biostatistics Bell, Tyler Adjunct Teacher; 0.15 M White MBA Business Introductory Lecturer Bishop Kelley Administration Biostatistics & High School Computer Applications Epidemiology Adrianto, Adjunct Associate Staff 0.05 M Asian PhD Industrial Genetic Indra Assistant Scientist; Engineering Epidemiology Professor Oklahoma Medical MS Industrial Research Engineering Foundation Allen, Adjunct Professor; 0.05 M White DO Medicine Infectious Thomas Professor University of Disease Oklahoma, MPH Preparedness Epidemiology Tulsa and Terrorism Response Lowry, Jon Instructor Director: 0.05 M White MPH Epidemiology Social Chronic Epidemiology Disease Service at the Oklahoma State Department of Health Mills, Adjunct Research 0.10 M White MD Medicine Introductory William Assistant Medical Epidemiology Professor Officer; FAA PhD Epidemiology Civil Aerospace Medical Institute

203

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

MS Exercise Physiology Williams, Adjunct Epidemiologist; 0.05 F White MPH Epidemiology Introductory Jean Lecturer Oklahoma Epidemiology State Department of Health Williams, Senior University of 0.75 F White PhD Epidemiology Introductory Mary Research Oklahoma Epidemiology Epidemiologist MS Epidemiology Chronic Disease Epidemiology Health Cox, Gary Visiting Director; 0.25 M White JD Law Public Health Administration Associate Oklahoma Law & Policy Professor City-County Health Department Dart, Visiting Director; Tulsa 0.25 M White PhD Health Health Policy Bruce Associate City-County Services and Politics Professor Health MS Administration, Department specializing in Health Services Hamilton, Lecturer Vice-President 0.05 M Black Marketing Ed INTEGRIS Health, Inc.

204

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Exhibit 4.1.2. Current Other Faculty Used to Support Teaching Program (Adjunct, Part-Time, Secondary, etc.) Department Name Title/Academic Title & Current FTE or Gender Race or Graduate Discipline for Teaching Areas (school)/Specialty Rank Employer % Time Ethnicity Degrees earned graduate Area (program) Earned degrees Health Henley, Adjunct Self-employed 0.05 M White JD Law Health Law & Administration Scott Professor Regulation & Policy PhD Health (cont’d) Administration Jones, Visiting President and 0.05 M White MHA Health Health Craig Associate CEO; Services Administration Professor Oklahoma Administration Hospital Association Kim, Sue Adjunct Instructor, 0.05 F Asian PhD Health Health Assistant University of Economics Economics Professor California, Berkeley Lepard, Lecturer Tobacco Use 0.05 F White DrPH Health Policy Topics in Jennifer and Prevention Healthcare Manager; Policy Oklahoma State Department of Health Pauchnik, Lecturer Managing 0.05 F White JD Law Healthcare Beth Director, Law and General Ethics Counsel and Chief Administrative Officer; INTEGRIS Health, Inc. Pryor, Dan Lecturer VP of Finance; 0.10 M White BBA Business Managerial OU Medical Administration Accounting Center and Financial Management

205

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Exhibit 4.1.2. Current Other Faculty Used to Support Teaching Program (Adjunct, Part-Time, Secondary, etc.) Department Name Title/Academic Title & Current FTE or Gender Race or Graduate Discipline for Teaching Areas (school)/Specialty Rank Employer % Time Ethnicity Degrees earned graduate Area (program) Earned degrees Health Robertson, Adjunct VP of Human 0.05 F White MA Organizational Human Administration Jaye Lynn Assistant Resources and Dynamics Resources & Policy Professor Interim Chief; Management (cont’d) OU Medical MS Management System Roswell, Professor Professor; 0.10 M White MD Medicine Health Robert College of Information Medicine, Systems Univ. of Oklahoma Shaw, Lecturer Attorney; 0.25 M Black JD Law Health Care Dwain Riggs Abney Systems Law Firm MPH Health Services Administration Health Cheney, Adjunct Assistant 0.05 F White PhD Health Health Promotion Marshall Assistant Professor; Promotion Promotion Sciences Professor Health and Sciences Sciences Exercise, University of Oklahoma Finnell, Adjunct Research 0.10 F White MPH Health Karla Instructor Assistant II; Promotion University of Sciences Oklahoma Wetherill, Assistant Assistant 0.50 F White PhD Health Health Marianne Professor of Professor of Promotion Promotion Research Research; Sciences Sciences University of MPH Health Admin. Oklahoma & Policy Occupational & Clyde, Adjunct Limnologist; 0.05 M White PhD Biology Environmental Environmental Gerard Assistant U.S. Army Health Health Professor Corps of Engineers

206

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

207

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

4.1.c. Description of the manner in which the faculty complement integrates perspectives from the field of practice, including information on appointment tracks for practitioners, if used by the school. Faculty with significant practice experience outside of that which is typically associated with an academic career should also be identified.

The College makes an effort to recruit faculty with practice experience and has been successful in doing so. The College selects new faculty based on needs determined by the departmental faculty. The qualifications of candidates are carefully reviewed and evaluated by the search committee, departmental faculty and faculty from other departments in the College and in many cases faculty of other colleges. Selection criteria include excellent achievement or potential in teaching, research, service, and the ability to direct field work and provide the students an excellent learning environment by translating knowledge and experience into public health practice.

A majority of the College’s primary faculty had significant nonacademic professional experience as full- time practitioners in their teaching area prior to their academic appointment. These faculty members and their relevant practice experience are listed in Exhibit 4.1.c. Additionally, the College’s Professional Practice Plan (Resource File) provides a mechanism for primary faculty to remain current as practitioners by engaging in consulting and/or extramural educational activities. Faculty are thus well equipped to draw from their past and/or ongoing practice experiences in teaching the application of theory through case studies, illustrative examples, and problem sets.

Part-time and adjunct faculty are also selected to enhance the opportunity for students to be exposed to public health practice. These individuals bring a wealth of current experience to their teaching, and may be appointed as Adjunct Instructor, Adjunct or Visiting Professor (Assistant, Associate, or Professor level), or Executive in Residence. The College has been highly successful in attracting adjunct faculty from among the senior public health practitioners in the state. The Directors of both the Oklahoma City-County and Tulsa City-County health departments serve as part-time faculty and regularly teach in our MPH program every fall and spring semester (see Exhibit 4.1.2).

208

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Exhibit 4.1.c Significant Full-Time Professional Practice Experience of Primary Faculty in their Public Health Teaching Area

Faculty Nonacademic professional position(s) Nonacademic Employer(s) Years

Biostatistics Associate, Statistical Methods & Research Lee, Elisa Dept. Bell Telephone Laboratories Inc. 6 Sr Research Scientist/Res Scientist/Sr Zhao, Yan Daniel Statistician Lilly Research Labs 8 Epidemiology

Beebe, Laura PH Research Supervisor Oklahoma State Department of Health 1 Campbell, Janis Surveillance Coordinator/Analyst Oklahoma State Department of Health 13.5

Garwe, Tabitha Lead Epidemiologist/Epidemiologist Oklahoma State Department of Health 9.5

Raskob, Gary Scientific Associate, Medical Staff Calgary General Hospital 3 Terrell-Schnorrenberg, Epidemiologist/Evaluation Lead Oklahoma State Department of Health 1 Deirdra US Public Health Service, Commissioned Wendelboe, Aaron Lieutenant 2 Corps Health Administration and Policy Internist/President/CEO/Medical Oklahoma Foundation for Medical Bratzler, Dale 22.5 Director/Principal Clinical Coordinator Quality/private medical practice Chou, Ann Research Analyst Kaiser Permanente 2 Shore Health System/Kent County Health Community Health Specialist/Deputy Health Khaliq, Amir Department/Mercy Catholic Medical 5.5 Officer/Project Director/Director Center/Aga Khan Health Service Cleveland County Health Dept./Oklahoma Administrator/Director/Chief/Assistant Kinney, Shari State Dept of Health/Children's Hospital of 21.5 Chief/Clinical Nursing Program Manager Oklahoma Price Waterhouse/US Medical Mattachione, Steve Sr Manager/Vice President/CFO Enterprises/Orthopaedic Hospital/Mercy 28 Health System

209

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Exhibit 4.1.c Significant Full-Time Professional Practice Experience of Primary Faculty in their Public Health Teaching Area

Faculty Nonacademic professional position(s) Nonacademic Employer(s) Years

Health Promotion Sciences

Oman, Roy Research Scientist VA Medical Center, Palo Alto 1

Stephens, Lancer Director, Student Program Association of American Indian Physicians 3

Tall Chief, Vicki Public School Teacher Neoga High School 3 Cyprus Family Planning Association/Cyprus Tolma, Eleni Health Educator/Consultant 3 Ministry of Health Occupational and Environmental Health USPHS Indian Health Service/Department of Boatright, Daniel Consultant/Contractor Defense/private environmental consulting 14 Guardian Systems Inc./Battelle Memorial Floyd, Evan Project Manager/Analytical Chemist Institute 5

Johnson, David Sanitary Engineer/Industrial Hygienist U.S. Army 20 Chief of Laboratory Oklahoma City-County Health Services/Director/Limnologist/Technical Lynch, Robert Department/Oklahoma Conservation Writer/Asst Secretary of the Env, Off of Sec of Commission/State of Oklahoma Env. 7

Phillips, Margaret Industrial Hygienist USX/Mobil 7 Sr Tech Advisor/Senior Policy Regens, James US Environmental Protection Agency Analyst/Assistant Director for Science Policy 3 US Peace Corps/PLAN International/DARE Salvatore, Alicia Rural Health Extensionist/Program Associate International, CA 4

210

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

4.1.d. Identification of measurable objectives by which the school assesses the qualifications of its faculty complement, along with data regarding the performance of the school against those measures for each of the last three years. See CEPH Outcome Measures Exhibit.

Exhibit 4.1.d. Outcome Measures for Faculty Qualifications Outcome Measure Target FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Number of national study sections, grant review committees, and/or national or 2.0 international boards or 2.84 3.8 3.51 committees per faculty member (Objective 2.3) Student rating of 85% rate their class 79% 84% 85% classroom instruction as Excellent or Good Number of peer reviewed publications 3.0 2.5 2.9 2.8 per faculty member (Objective 2.4) Number of faculty with at least one 3.0 1.0 3.0 4.0 competitively won university award Proportion of faculty involved in service 100% 98% 98% 98% activities

Measures of success in judging faculty qualifications include the following: (1) diversity of faculty education by degree numbers, types, granting institutions and program areas; (2) range of public health disciplines represented by faculty interests in teaching and research; and (3) practice experience of faculty.

Data in Exhibits 4.1.1, 4.1.2, and 4.1.c demonstrate diversity in faculty education, background, teaching, research interests, and experience. Their expertise covers a wide range of areas within public health, which allows the college to offer an up-to-date curriculum and provide an excellent environment for student research.

During the study period, a number of faculty in the college have received prestigious university honors and awards for excellence in teaching and research. The honors include two Regents’ Awards for Superior Teaching; one Provost’s Research Award for Junior Faculty; two Regents’ Professorships; and three Presidential Professorships.

4.1.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The College has been highly successful in recruiting and retaining qualified and experienced faculty, and has achieved a strong faculty complement in each of the five core areas. Strengths include an increase in the number of full-time faculty, and consistent success in achieving tenure and promotion and in receiving prestigious university-wide competitive awards.

211

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.1: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS

Weaknesses/challenges: A challenge, as discussed multiple times previously, is to increase our full-time faculty by at least 10 and to ensure continued recruitment of faculty with strong research credentials and experience.

Plans: The College will continue to seek additional resources to support hiring of additional highly qualified faculty. This may include state appropriated funds, shared positions with other colleges, and grant/contract salary support.

212

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.2: FACULTY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

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.

4.2.a. A faculty handbook or other written document that outlines faculty rules and regulations.

A copy of the Faculty Handbook is provided in the Resource File. The handbook outlines the Health Sciences Center rules and regulations applicable to all faculty of the campus, including policies and procedures related to recruitment, appointment, and promotion of qualified faculty.

4.2.b. Description of provisions for faculty development, including identification of support for faculty categories other than regular full-time appointments.

The College and university, placing an emphasis on faculty expertise and experience, have made several provisions for faculty development opportunities. It is the responsibility of each faculty member to establish his/her academic goals by planning teaching, research, and service activities.

Sabbatical Leave. A sabbatical leave of absence may be granted after a full-time service of six years. Sabbatical leaves provide faculty members with the opportunity for continued professional growth and new or renewed intellectual development through study, research, writing, and travel. Sabbatical eligibility and procedures are described in the Faculty Handbook (Resource File). Faculty Leadership Program. Newly hired Assistant Professor faculty members are strongly encouraged to participate in the Faculty Leadership Program, an interdisciplinary collaborative effort among colleges of the Health Sciences Center. It is designed to provide junior and senior faculty with an opportunity to enhance individual leadership skills in teaching, research, and resource management. The program is comprised of 128 hours of continuing professional education symposia, seminars, and workshops which focus on the following areas: education, research, communication and negotiation, collaboration, administration, professional academic skills, and leadership. Several College of Public Health senior faculty have served as faculty in this leadership program. The program is available to both full-time and part-time faculty. Twenty-four faculty have completed the program, of whom one received additional recognition as one of the two Faculty Leadership Program - Oklahoma Shared Clinical and Translational Resources (OSCTR) scholars. Additional information about the Faculty Leadership Program may be found in the Resource File. Professional Meetings. Another dimension of faculty development is participation in professional meetings. College faculty are frequently involved in such meetings as presenters/discussants. Faculty members regularly attend meetings of professional organizations. Continuing Education. Faculty are encouraged to attend continuing education programs, seminars, and workshops conducted/sponsored by the College, other colleges in the university, and other institutions. The College has an active and productive Public Health Grand Rounds program that hosts presentations on a variety of public health related topics, with speakers from the campus, other universities, professional organizations, and state and national public health agencies. Grand Rounds presentations are open to the public as well as the full- and part-time faculty. Professional Practice Plan. Faculty have the opportunity to engage in private consulting work under the guidelines of the College of Public Health Professional Practice Plan (PPP). This type of work helps faculty to maintain and enhance their practice skills and provides case-based teaching material for their classes. The amount of time allowed for PPP activities is negotiated between the faculty and the

213

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.2: FACULTY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

department chair. The PPP applies to all faculty holding at least a 50% appointment, including non- tenure-track faculty; faculty on 9-month appointment are excluded during the three months hiatus, but there is only one such faculty in the college. The Professional Practice Plan is provided in the Resource File. Faculty Incentive Program. The college has a generous faculty incentive program under which 50% of the salary off-set from grants and for contracts is returned to the faculty member. The funds can be used at the discretion of the faculty, and may be taken as salary or placed in an account for the faculty’s use for professional travel, course or conference registration, book or equipment purchases, and other professional purposes. This program provides a significant opportunity for faculty development. “Soft money” modified-title non-tenure-track faculty such as Assistant Research Professors are expected to support their salary through grants and contracts, and are therefore not eligible for the Incentive Program. XYZ Faculty Compensation Plan. In addition to the PPP and Incentive Programs, faculty may also benefit from a new compensation program approved in 2005. The college received university approval to structure faculty compensation in a three-tiered manner as base salary (X), a salary supplement negotiated annually between the individual faculty and his/her chair (Y), and shared salary savings from the Incentive Program (Z). These funds provide additional opportunities for faculty development. The plan applies to all full- and part-time faculty except that the modified-title faculty are not eligible for the Z component. The XYZ Compensation Plan document may be viewed in the Resource File. Junior Faculty Mentoring and Development Program. Although a number of faculty development opportunities are available through the programs discussed above, the College has recognized a need to formalize the teaching and research development of junior faculty through a more structured program within the College. The College is currently developing a junior faculty development and senior faculty mentoring training program to be rolled out by Fall 2015. This program under development by an ad hoc committee of the Faculty Board, led by a junior faculty (Dr. Valarie Jernigan, HPS) with participation by both junior faculty (Dr. Alicia Salvatore, OEH) and senior faculty from within (Dr. David Johnson, OEH; James George, BSE; Dr. Robert Roswell, HAP) and outside the College of Public Health (Dr. Valerie Williams, Vice Provost for Academic Affairs). The purpose is to develop a more structured and formalized program to provide guidance, mentoring, and assistance to junior faculty. This initiative will aid junior faculty in developing as independent investigators under the mentorship of successful senior faculty who will serve as role models and resources for career development planning.

4.2.c. Description of formal procedures for evaluating faculty competence and performance.

Policies and procedures for faculty evaluation can be found in the Faculty Handbook (Resource File). The annual evaluation of faculty and staff takes place between January 1 and March 31. Each faculty submits an annual faculty activity report to the department chair which includes all teaching, research, service, and administrative activities that occurred in the previous calendar year, as well as a discussion of work objectives for the following year. The department chair prepares a written evaluation on each faculty based on the report and the faculty’s student course evaluation results. The written evaluation is reviewed with the faculty member, signed by both the chair and faculty, and then submitted to the Dean.

Faculty performance in teaching is based primarily on the course evaluations by students and other comments the chair might have received. Research performance is evaluated through various measures including the number and type of proposals submitted, the number of proposals funded, and the role of the individual in developing proposals. The submission and publication of articles, books, monographs, or reports, and the presentation of research at major professional and scientific meetings, are equally important criteria in evaluating research performance, as is the mentoring of student research training through participation in thesis and dissertation committees. Evaluation of service is based on the services provided to the department, college, university, local, national, and international communities and professional organizations.

214

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.2: FACULTY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

4.2.d. Description of the processes used for student course evaluation and evaluation of instructional effectiveness.

As discussed in section 1.2.a, individual students provide comments on the quality of instruction in each of their courses through mid-course and end-of-course evaluations that are voluntary and anonymous. At present the Office of Student Services uses electronic evaluations. The current approach involves surveys that are administered online at the middle and at the end of the term. Faculty are asked to set aside class time for completion of course evaluations. The College has used other systems in the past, with varying degrees of success. Paper-based end-of-course evaluations had high return rates but did not allow much time for student reflection and comment, had to be manually extracted to maintain anonymity, and were cumbersome to analyze in aggregate. Online surveys using Survey Monkey were easier to analyze and were anonymous, but had very low response rates (typically 10-15%). The present approach has advantages of both methods, providing reasonably good response rates with reasonable effort required for analysis. A summary document is produced for review. Faculty review the summary of ratings and comments for their classes. The department chair reviews the evaluations to determine the faculty member's performance as judged by the students. Performance in teaching is discussed with each faculty member annually. The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs also reviews all course evaluations each semester to identify broader issues related to teaching effectiveness, such as teleconferencing connectivity issues and course scheduling.

4.2.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met with commentary.

Strengths: Information faculty need regarding the rules and regulations governing their conduct and responsibilities is published in the Faculty Handbook which is provided at the time of appointment. Strengths include the numerous opportunities available for faculty development, and the impressive number of the College's faculty who have been recipients of honors and awards in recent years. The generous financial incentive program and the new XYZ Compensation Plan are particular strengths in that they are helpful in recruiting and retention, and also provide financial resources to support faculty development training, research, and participation in professional meetings. Policies and procedures are in place for annual evaluations, tenure and promotion evaluations, and student evaluations of College faculty. The quality of each component (teaching, research, and service) is reviewed on an annual basis with each faculty member. These reviews are both self-evaluative as well as administrative. Further, these reviews must include a written document which addresses quality, quantity, and progress in the areas of teaching, research, and service. Weaknesses/challenges: The commentary relates to the weakness that while all faculty have many opportunities for development, the College does not presently have a formal mentoring and development program for junior faculty. Plans: The Faculty Board is actively working with its ad hoc committee on faculty mentoring to finalize a proposal for a structured research mentoring program for junior faculty before the end of the Spring 2015 semester. The College has a target date of Fall 2015 to begin implementation of a mentoring program. This program is expected to improve support of junior faculty as they develop independent research programs and refine their course development and teaching skills, provide timely feedback on areas of strength and need, and prepare them for a successful tenure and promotion experience.

215

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.2: FACULTY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

[This page intentionally left blank]

216

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.3: STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS

4.3 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.

4.3.a. Description of the school’s recruitment policies and procedures. If these differ by degree (eg, bachelor’s vs. graduate degrees), a description should be provided for each.

The College serves the graduate public health training needs for the Great Plains region as well as meeting the needs of international students. The school seeks the most qualified individuals interested in a public health career and also attracts qualified graduates of related disciplines by introducing them to the many career paths in public health. The College continues its commitment to recruiting and training recent College graduates and young professionals as well as experienced health service professionals. Recruitment is conducted primarily through on-site visits to colleges and universities in the region, online virtual recruitment, and an informative website.

Undergraduate Classroom Presentations. A representative from the Office of Student Services gives class lectures during fall and spring semesters to undergraduate students enrolled in career exploration classes at several undergraduate institutions within the state. During an academic year approximately 1500 undergraduates receive information about public health careers, academic public health programs available within the College, and application procedures to the College through a one-hour PowerPoint presentation and distribution of printed materials including College brochures and ASPPH publications.

Career Fairs. Representatives from the Office of Student Services attend career day functions held at private and public colleges within the state. Undergraduate students attending these events have the opportunity to ask questions concerning public health professional careers and academic programs within the College. Printed materials specific to the College as well as general public health educational material by ASPPH are distributed.

OUHSC Recruitment Events. The Office of Student Services participates in all OUHSC recruitment events, including:

• Advisors’ Symposium (academic advisors from two- and four-year institutions throughout the state visit the OUHSC campus and collect information from all seven Colleges) • Campus Connections (undergraduates from OU-Norman tour the OUHSC campus and tour the college of their choice) • See OUHSC (undergraduates from Oklahoma institutions are invited to attend an open house at the OUHSC campus. Campus tours, meetings with College advisors and students, and opportunity to visit with faculty from the various programs are offered) • Individually scheduled meetings between a prospective student, a member of the Office of Student Services, and a faculty member. Students with an interest in the College are given tours of the campus by the OUHSC Office of Student Affairs. The Office of Student Services then meets with the student to discuss any general questions the student may have (application, tuition cost, etc.) If the student would like to meet with a faculty member in a particular discipline or program, the Office of Student Services coordinates that meeting.

Enrichment Activities. The College of Public Health participates in OUHSC-coordinated enrichment activities for secondary-level students. Faculty, students, and staff have served as speakers and have led activities for the Exploring Math and Science Academy (EMSA) program. This enrichment program operates throughout the year in the College of Health Building. Secondary and middle-school students

217

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.3: STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS

are brought to the OUHSC campus and provided enrichment activities to increase skills and interest in math and science. In addition to the presentations and activities focused on public health, students were provided with College and ASPPH publications for their reference when making career decisions in the future.

Targeted Events for Undergraduate Students. The Office of Student Services also coordinates special events for undergraduate students with relevant majors. For instance, the Biology Club from Southeastern Oklahoma State University (Durant, Oklahoma) brought their members to the OUHSC campus for a guided tour. The College’s Office of Student Services coordinated a discussion of our programs and an informal meeting with a faculty member from the Biostatistics and Epidemiology Department. Students were encouraged to ask questions. Our student recruiter has developed relationships with faculty from state undergraduate institutions and routinely travels to those campuses to present lectures about public health programs of particular interest to targeted groups such as microbiology majors at Oklahoma State University in Stillwater, biology majors at Northwestern Oklahoma State University in Alva, and pre-health majors at Southwestern Oklahoma State University in Weatherford, OU-Norman and OSU, Stillwater. Faculty have also given recruiting presentations to multicultural student groups at OU-Norman and OSU-Stillwater.

Public Health Professional Meetings. The College sponsors a promotional booth at the annual Oklahoma Public Health Association meeting and similarly supports other related meetings such as the Southwest Conference of Epidemiologists and the Oklahoma Hospital Association Convention meeting.

Public Health Workforce Recruitment. Significant recruitment efforts focused on the state’s public health workforce include informational meetings held on site at the Oklahoma State Department of Health, the Oklahoma City-County Health Department, and the Tulsa City-County Health Department. Opportunities to enhance and improve the public health curriculum to make workforce recruitment even more attractive are routinely discussed at the weekly meetings of the Oklahoma State Health Department Executive Committee on which the Associate Dean for Public Health Practice sits as a regular member. Additionally, health department and state health agency personnel are invited to attend events at the College, including Public Health Grand Rounds, which has further increased this group’s awareness of the College and the programs offered.

Since Fall 2012, the College developed a program with the Oklahoma State Department of Health to recruit, train, and retain public health professionals. Students accepted into the program are provided free tuition, fees, and textbooks through their contract with the Oklahoma State Department of Health. In addition, they are provided part time positions (20 hours per week) to work in various positions at the agency. Upon graduation, those admitted into this apprentice program are contractually obligated to remain as full-time employees for an agreed-upon time frame (one year for every 14 credit hours of tuition paid).

African American Student Recruitment. Recruitment targeted toward African American students includes a cooperative agreement between the College and Langston University, which is a distinguished Historically Black College or University (HBCU) with a high percentage of African American student enrollments. Langston students with a GPA of 3.0 or higher in their senior year may enroll in MPH Core courses. Credit earned may be applied to an OUHSC professional/graduate degree provided the student is admitted to an OUHSC professional/graduate program after the undergraduate degree has been received.

4.3.b. Statement of admissions policies and procedures. If these differ by degree (eg, bachelor’s vs. graduate degrees), a description should be provided for each.

Admission Requirements for All Degree Programs. The University of Oklahoma uses the 4.00 scale to calculate grade point averages (GPA), with an "A" equal to 4.0. An applicant must have a baccalaureate

218

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.3: STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS

or entry level first professional degree from an accredited university or college and a 3.0 GPA (4.0 scale) in the last 60 hours of course work applied to the degree. The applicant must be in good standing with the college or university where currently enrolled or last attended in order to be considered for admission in full standing to a degree program. If the applicant's transcript does not identify the last 60 hours, the GPA for the entire transcript will be evaluated for admission. An applicant who has completed twelve hours or more of graded graduate level course work in an area related to the degree program of interest may be considered for admission based on the graduate GPA. The applicant must have completed the course work at an accredited college or university with a minimum GPA of 3.0 in all graduate work attempted and be in good standing with the college or university where currently enrolled or last attended. A complete application to the College of Public Health must include a Schools of Public Health Application Service (SOPHAS) application and a completed College of Public Health supplemental application.

All international students are required to have transcripts/marksheets processed through World Education Services-Foreign Academic Credential Evaluation International (WES, http://www.wes.org/) for a course- by-course or ICAP evaluation of all international coursework. Permanent resident and naturalized citizen applicants must submit scores from the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). This requirement may be waived for applicants with a U.S. high school diploma or U.S. baccalaureate degree. The minimum acceptable score for the internet-based test is 88, though departments may have higher score requirements for certain degree programs. The GRE or GMAT are also currently required in some programs, but beginning Fall 2015 all applicants must submit scores for the GRE taken within the previous 5 years. A career goals statement, curriculum vitae or resume, and three letters of reference from individuals who are familiar with the prior academic and/or professional performance of the applicant must also be submitted with the application.

A complete application to the OU College of Public Health will include:

• SOPHAS application at www.sophas.org • College supplemental application at https://apps.ouhsc.edu/admissions/ • Three letters of reference • Career Goal Statement or Personal Essay • Curriculum Vitae or Resume • US applicants: official transcript from all institutions attended • International applicants: WES course-by-course evaluation or ICAP evaluation of all international coursework • International applicants: TOEFL score of 88 on the internet based test • GRE taken within the previous 5 years (selected programs now, as described below, but all programs beginning Fall 2015)

Additional Admission Requirements for Master of Public Health and Certificate Program. No additional requirements.

Additional Admission Requirements for Master of Health Administration. Requirements for admission to the MHA are the same as those above except that the GRE or GMAT score is required for all applicants, applicants may be required to participate in an interview, and the minimum acceptable TOEFL score for international applicants is 100.

Additional Admissions Requirements for the Master of Science. Requirements for admission to MS degree programs are the same as those above, except that GRE scores and certain undergraduate course prerequisites are required for acceptance into some of the MS programs. Details regarding these requirements may be viewed in the College of Public Health Student Bulletin (Resource File) and on the web at http://coph.ouhsc.edu/admissions/requirements.aspx.

219

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.3: STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS

Additional Admissions Requirements for the Doctor of Public Health. Requirements for DrPH admission are the same as those above, except that in addition the applicant must have demonstrated 3 years’ work experience in a public health-related field and three letters of recommendation, of which at least one must be from a current or recent (within the past two years) work supervisor. Also required is an official transcript showing award of an MPH degree from a CEPH-accredited school of public health or MPH program. Applicants who possess other master’s degrees from accredited schools of public health will be considered on a case by case basis. Such students will be required to take additional courses that guarantee competency in the MPH core. DrPH applicants with a graduate level grade point average less than 3.5 are generally non-competitive. The DrPH Admissions and Academic Advisement Committee may also consider the applicant’s work, educational experience, personal recommendations, and other data in making recommendations for admissions.

Additional Admission Requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy. Requirements for PhD admission are the same as those above, except that GRE scores are required for all PhD programs. Applicants to the PhD in Biostatistics are required to have a completed master’s degree in biostatistics or a related field. Applicants to the PhD in Epidemiology are required to have a completed master’s degree in epidemiology or equivalent. Applicants to the PhD program in Health Promotion Sciences must have a master’s degree in Public Health or a relevant master’s degree and completion of the five core public health courses, a 3.50 grade point average, a suitable GRE score such as 1100 and a writing sample that provides evidence of research ability. Applicants to the PhD in Occupational and Environmental Health must hold a master’s degree from an accredited institution in a related field, have a graduate GPA of 3.30, and display a clear research orientation and firm knowledge of research techniques.

Selection of Applicants. All application materials are collected by SOPHAS and released to the College of Public Health through an electronic portal and to the OUHSC Office of Admissions and Records for placement in the campus records system (PeopleSoft) via electronic record transfer. The Office of Student Services monitors the application until it is completed and contacts the applicant if additional information is needed, when their application is sent to committee for review, and when a decision can be expected. Applicants to the MS, MHA and PhD programs are forwarded to the specific departments for review and consideration. Applications to the DrPH committee are released to a separate DrPH Admissions and Academic Advisement Committee comprised of the DrPH program director and faculty representing each of the departments, with preference given to faculty holding DrPH degrees. Admission committees use WebAdmit, an electronic portal provided by SOPHAS, to view applications and to register their decisions. All final decisions are approved by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. All graduate applicants are also reviewed and approved by the Dean of the Graduate College.

In past years, applicants to the Certificate and MPH programs were reviewed by the Admissions and Academic Advisement (AAA) Committee. The AAA Committee membership is recommended by the department chairs and approved by the Dean. If the applicant had identified a specific discipline of interest, the application was then reviewed by the hosting department’s admission committee and the department chair, who then communicated to the AAA Committee whether the applicant would be acceptable for direct admission to the degree program. If a favorable report was not received or if the applicant did not specify a preferred MPH program, a student who met the MPH admission requirements would be offered admission to the MPH in Interdisciplinary Public Health. A student admitted to the MPH in Interdisciplinary Public Health retained the option of requesting a change of major to their initial program of interest or any other discipline-specific MPH program after completing at least nine credit hours of core coursework. This process provided students who were initially rejected for direct admission to a discipline-specific MPH program the opportunity to demonstrate their abilities in graduate level public health coursework, and apply for re-consideration by the department. Many subsequently were granted a change of major, but many were not and were forced to remain in the Interdisciplinary program. As of 2014 roughly half of all MPH students were in the MPH in Interdisciplinary Public Health program, and reviews of program completion rates revealed this program to have the lowest completion rate. This observation prompted a revision in the admissions process.

220

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.3: STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS

The College has elected to transition to admission directly to the MPH degree programs in Biostatistics, Epidemiology, Health Promotion Sciences, Health Administration and Policy, Environmental Health, Interdisciplinary Public Health, or Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response. Beginning Fall 2015, an MPH program applicant will be required to apply for a specific MPH program but may also specify an alternate program, if desired. The application will be reviewed by committees of faculty from the departments hosting each of the degree programs, and these committees will make the admission recommendation. If an applicant specifies a primary and alternate program choice and both committees recommend acceptance, the applicant may choose between them. If no favorable recommendation is received the applicant is denied admission to the College. Applicants will have the option to reapply should they decide to pursue one of the remaining program choices. Applications to the Certificate and MPH in Interdisciplinary Public Health programs will continue to be reviewed by the AAA Committee.

4.3.c. Examples of recruitment materials and other publications and advertising that describe, at a minimum, academic calendars, grading and the academic offerings of the school. If a school does not have a printed bulletin/catalog, it must provide a printed web page that indicates the degree requirements as the official representation of the school. In addition, references to website addresses may be included.

OUHSC College of Public Health Web Site. The College developed a web site that is a user-friendly, comprehensive source of information for prospective students. Prospective students are able to download documents that detail information that includes degree and program course requirements, tuition and fee estimates, housing, and financial aid. A mathematics self-test is also available through which prospective students are able to gauge their proficiency in basic math skills required by the curriculum (http://coph.ouhsc.edu/current/docs/biostat_assess.pdf ). By clicking on Prospective Student the potential applicant is able to access information which details requirements for admission and includes information concerning deadlines, application procedures, and addresses. Links to the SOPHAS application and to the university online application can be found at http://www.coph.ouhsc.edu/admissions/howtoapply.aspx. Information specific to prospective international students is detailed, including a link to the World Education Services web site for convenience in submitting transcripts for WES evaluation.

Inquiries. The Office of Student Services telephone number and email address are posted on the web site. Prospective students use these points of contact to receive answers to specific questions. Since 2011, nearly 1600 email inquiries have been received, with telephone inquiries averaging approximately 10 per day.

Promotional Material. The College produces an annual Bulletin (Resource File) which provides extensive details regarding admission and degree requirements as well as course offerings. In addition, the College produces a yearly magazine which promotes activities, events and individuals in the College. This magazine provides an opportunity for alumni to keep informed about what our College has accomplished and to showcase to our prospective students the exciting events happening in the College of Public Health. Pamphlets specific to the programs of the Occupational and Environmental Health department, the Master of Health Administration degree program, the MPH/JD joint degree program and the MPH program in Health Administration and Policy have also been developed, printed and distributed. Materials which focus on the many career possibilities of public health developed by the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health (ASPPH) are distributed to undergraduates. The College has also advertised regionally in Time magazine and annually places advertisements in the Oklahoma Public Health Association convention program.

221

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.3: STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS

4.3.d. Quantitative information on the number of applicants, acceptances and enrollment, by concentration, for each degree, for each of the last three years. Data must be presented in table format. See CEPH Data Exhibit 4.3.1.

Quantitative information on the number of applicants, acceptances, and enrollment, by program area, for each of the last three years are shown in Exhibit 4.3.1.

Exhibit 4.3.1 Quantitative Information on Applicants, Acceptances, and Enrollments, FY2012 to FY2014 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 Applied 11 14 13 Biostatistics Accepted 4 2 6 MS Enrolled 1 1 4 Applied 8 7 8 Biostatistics Accepted 1 0 1 PhD Enrolled 1 0 1 Applied 7 9 8 Epidemiology Accepted 2 2 4 MS Enrolled 0 2 2 Applied 16 14 12 Epidemiology Accepted 1 3 2 PhD Enrolled 1 2 2 Applied 33 33 30 Health Administration & Policy Accepted 13 11 17 MHA Enrolled 10 7 10 Applied 0 1 0 Health Administration & Policy Accepted 0 1 0 MPH Enrolled 0 1 0 Applied 0 1 1 Health Administration & Policy Accepted 0 1 1 MPH/JD Enrolled 0 1 0 Applied 0 0 1 Health Administration & Policy Accepted 0 0 1 MPH/MD Enrolled 0 0 0 Applied 5 1 0 Health Promotion Sciences Accepted 1 0 0 MS Enrolled 1 0 0 Applied 2 7 1 Health Promotion Sciences Accepted 2 5 0 MPH/MSW Enrolled 2 2 0 Applied 12 7 8 Health Promotion Sciences Accepted 3 0 1 PhD Enrolled 3 0 0 Applied 6 4 6 Occupational & Environmental Health Accepted 1 3 3 MS Enrolled 0 3 2 Applied 0 1 0 Occupational & Environmental Health Accepted 0 1 0 MPH Enrolled 0 1 0 Occupational & Environmental Health Applied 2 4 1

222

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.3: STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS

Exhibit 4.3.1 Quantitative Information on Applicants, Acceptances, and Enrollments, FY2012 to FY2014 PhD Accepted 1 1 0 Enrolled 0 0 0 Applied 204 233 223 Other MPH (Applicants generally were admitted Accepted 99 154 132 initially into the Interdisciplinary track) Enrolled 64 79 59 Applied 8 11 11 DrPH Accepted 2 2 3 Enrolled 1 1 3

Applied = number of completed applications Accepted = number to whom the school/program offered admissions in the designated year Enrolled = number of first-time enrollees in the designated year

4.3.e. Quantitative information on the number of students enrolled in each specialty area identified in the instructional matrix, including headcounts of full- and part-time students and a full-time-equivalent conversion, by concentration, for each degree, for each of the last three years. Non-degree students, such as those enrolled in continuing education or certificate programs, should not be included. Explain any important trends or patterns, including a persistent absence of students in any degree or specialization. Data must be presented in table format. See CEPH Data Exhibit 4.3.2.

Quantitative information on the number of students enrolled in each specialty area identified in the instructional matrix, including headcounts of full- and part-time students and a full-time-equivalent conversion, for each of the last three years is shown in Exhibit 4.3.2. Non-degree students, such as those enrolled in continuing education or certificate programs, are not included. The Exhibit shows that some programs have very low enrollments; these include the MS in Health Promotion Sciences, MPH in Environmental Health, MPH in Public Health Preparedness, PhD in Occupational and Environmental Health, and the dual degree programs. In Health Promotion Sciences the MPH is the degree taken unless a student has definite plans to pursue the PhD. In Occupational and Environmental Health the MPH is designed primarily to prepare graduates to function as Sanitarians in health departments, and there is relatively little demand for the major. The MS and BS/MS in Biostatistics, the MPH in Biostatistics, the MS in Epidemiology, the MS in Health Promotion Sciences, and the MPH in Environmental Health require only minimal increments in departmental resources above what is needed to support the more populous programs, and the students in these programs typically contribute to their faculty’s research efforts. In recent years the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health did not recruit actively for its PhD program, as it was engaged in an ultimately successful search for additional faculty to strengthen its research capacity.

Exhibit 4.3.2 Student Enrollment Data from Fall 2011 to Fall 2014 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 HC FTE* HC FTE* HC FTE* HC FTE* Biostatistics – MS 2 1.89 2 2.33 5 4.78 6 5.89 Biostatistics – BS/MS 1 0.33 1 0.33 0 0.00 0 0.00 Biostatistics - MPH 1 0.44 3 2.33 4 3.89 4 3.67 Biostatistics – PhD 3 2.44 3 2.33 5 4.33 4 2.78 Epidemiology – MS 2 0.67 3 2.89 4 4.44 9 8.11 Epidemiology - MPH 19 14.78 12 11.89 15 14.89 21 21.56 Epidemiology – PhD 9 7.89 12 9.11 12 8.56 11 7.00 Health Administration & Policy – MHA 26 32.56 28 39.11 27 33.00 25 35.11 Health Administration & Policy – MPH 15 15.11 12 14.11 7 6.67 11 9.56

223

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.3: STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS

Exhibit 4.3.2 Student Enrollment Data from Fall 2011 to Fall 2014 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 HC FTE* HC FTE* HC FTE* HC FTE* Health Administration & Policy – 1 1.00 2 2.67 1 0.78 1 0.67 MPH/JD Health Administration & Policy – 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 MPH/MD Health Promotion Sciences – MS 3 1.89 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Health Promotion Sciences – MPH 15 12.78 6 4.11 5 5.56 17 17.56 Health Promotion Sciences – 7 5.67 9 5.00 3 1.67 3 3.00 MPH/MSW Health Promotion Sciences – PhD 7 3.44 6 3.33 7 3.11 7 4.00 Occupational & Environmental Health 15 15.00 18 14.78 21 17.22 19 15.11 - MS Occupational & Environmental Health 3 2.22 3 2.11 4 3.11 3 3.56 - MPH Occupational & Environmental Health 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 1.00 - PhD Interdisciplinary – MPH 116 102.33 132 122.67 137 133.88 85 79.67 PH Preparedness and Terrorism 2 2.00 3 3.00 1 0.78 1 1.11 Response - MPH Other - DrPH 10 4.77 9 5.56 13 7.56 13 7.22 * FTE is defined as 9 credit hours of enrollment. A student enrolled in 12 credit hours, e.g., would represent 1.33 FTE.

4.3.f. Identification of measurable objectives by which the school may evaluate its success in enrolling a qualified student body, along with data regarding the performance of the school against those measures for each of the last three years. See CEPH Outcome Measures Exhibit.

The ultimate measure of success in enrolling a qualified student body is the degree program completion rate for students who do not discontinue their programs for non-academic reasons. Overall completion rates for all degree programs are presented in Exhibit 2.7.1, but these data include students who were unable or unwilling to complete due to life events, changes in career trajectory, or other factors unrelated to their academic preparation and capabilities as assessed during the admissions process. Using its Student Tracking Database, the Office of Student Services tracks each student term-by-term through his/her period of study and documents the eventual program outcome, whether as graduated, withdrawn, or dismissed. Measurable objectives that may be predictive of the potential for completion include admissions criteria for grade point average during previous study (upper division undergraduate or graduate), TOEFL score (international only), and standardized examination scores, which are documented in student records, the Student Tracking Database, and/or the university’s PeopleSoft student data system.

The outcome measures and targets in Exhibit 4.3.3 reflect the College’s philosophy that promising applicants should be given a chance to prove themselves in graduate-level study. The philosophy stems from the College’s role in a public university serving a state and region with diverse populations and public health needs. Therefore, although a 10% academic failure rate might appear unacceptably high to some institutions, it is reasonable for this College given its inclusiveness toward under-served populations and toward nontraditional students on the one hand and its rigorous academic standards on the other hand.

224

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.3: STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS

Exhibit 4.3.3. Outcome Measures for Evaluating Success in Enrolling Qualified Students 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 Outcome Measure Target Entry Cohort Entry Cohort Entry Cohort % (Number Dismissed/Number Entered) DrPH students dismissed for academic reasons <10% 0% (0/3) 0% (0/2) 0% (0/2) MHA students dismissed for academic reasons <10% 0% (0/12) 0% (0/12) 10% (1/10) MPH students dismissed for academic reasons <10% 12% (11/93) 6.3% (5/80) 9.9% (9/91) MS students dismissed for academic reasons <10% 0% (0/13) 0% (0/9) 10% (1/10) PhD students dismissed for academic reasons <10% 20% (1/5) 0% (0/5) 0% (0/3) 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 Entry Cohort Entry Cohort Entry Cohort

% (Number < Benchmark GPA/Number Entered) Masters students entered with GPA < 3.0 (last 5.5% 9.7% <5% 3.6% (3/83) 60 hours) (6/108) (10/103) Doctoral students entered with GPA < 3.5 <10% 44% (4/9) 25% (1/4) 0% (0/7)

In 2012 the College conducted an initial statistical analysis of potential demographic and academic performance indicators as predictors of MPH degree completion success, including age at application, race/ethnicity, and grade point average. GPA less than 3.0 was shown to be a negative predictor of MPH completion, especially for students over 30 years of age at entry, validating this criterion as a useful tool in evaluating student qualifications. We plan to repeat the analysis again in 2018 to assess the value of the new program-wide GRE application requirement, and perhaps use those results to establish GRE score admissions criteria. TOEFL score was not included in the 2012 analysis, but the high completion rates for international students suggest that the minimum TOEFL score criteria used by the College are also useful in assessing applicant qualifications.

As previously discussed, the College is transitioning to an admissions process in which students apply (through SOPHAS) to specific degree programs and majors (up to two), and the acceptance decision is made by departmental admissions committees rather than the centralized AAA committee previously used. We expect that the application of department-specific evaluation criteria will improve assessment of applicant qualifications for their programs of interest and support more rigorous application of the minimum GPA requirement.

4.3.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The College has clearly identified admissions criteria designed to insure a qualified student body, but also has the flexibility to accept applicants with less than impressive GPA provided they have subsequent strong practice experience. The 3.0 minimum GPA and TOEFL score admissions criteria have been shown to be useful in assessing applicant qualifications. The transition to department-based acceptance decision-making will further improve the assessment process. Local and state laws prevent preferential treatment of minority students in the selection process; however, the College has demonstrated a commitment to targeted recruitment and development of formal relationships with academic institutions with a significant proportion of minority students.

Weaknesses/Challenges: The College believes that additional acceptance criteria may be needed to assure a highly qualified student body. To this end the College has adopted a GRE requirement for all degree programs. However, the actual utility of GRE scores as admissions criteria will not be known until

225

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.3: STUDENT RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS

several years of degree program outcome data have been acquired. Similarly, the impact of transitioning to department-based acceptance decision-making will also be unknown for several years.

Plans: The College will continue close monitoring of the acceptance process and documentation of student demographics and academic performance. Future statistical analyses of program outcomes data will be conducted as the data become available, and decisions regarding retention or modification of admissions criteria will be made at that time.

226

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.4: ADVISING AND CAREER COUNSELING

4.4 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.

4.4.a. Description of the school’s advising services for students in all degree programs, including sample materials such as student handbooks. Include an explanation of how faculty are selected for and oriented to their advising responsibilities.

Orientation is provided for all new students. A college-wide orientation is held at the beginning of each fall and spring semester to acquaint new students with the structure of the College and its academic programs, College and university policies, campus agencies and services, etc. A separate orientation for MS and PhD students is provided by the Graduate College. Orientation of Oklahoma City and Tulsa- based students are held separately in order to allow on-site presentation and provide campus-specific information.

Student handbooks, specifically the College of Public Health Student Bulletin and the Graduate College Bulletin, are readily available to students and faculty online under the “Current Students” tab of the College’s home page. These handbooks are provided in the Resource File.

Each student is assigned an advisor upon matriculation. The advisor serves as the student's guide through the educational experience and helps determine the plan of study and course sequencing. The advisor assists the student in completing the Outline of Graduate Work form that is submitted to the Graduate College for MS and PhD programs or to the College of Public Health Office of Student Services for MPH, MHA, and DrPH programs. Some faculty members hold specific office hours for student contact, while others schedule meetings with students on an as-needed basis. Some faculty also use e-mail to interact with their students on less urgent questions or issues that may arise and do not require a formal meeting. Each year, an annual report is conducted on each student, and the advisor meets with the students to discuss their progress.

Assignment of the initial academic advisor depends upon the type of academic program:

MS. MS students are generally accepted directly into discipline-specific graduate degree programs in the individual departments (except Health Administration and Policy, which has no MS program), and the academic advisor is an appropriately qualified faculty member assigned by the department. Should a student be approved for a Change of Degree Program from the MPH to MS, he/she is assigned a new advisor in the receiving department.

PhD. PhD students are taken on by a primary academic advisor / mentor when they enter the doctoral program. This individual is also a member of their Advisory Committee, and chairs the committee in some departments during the period prior to their General Examination. The faculty advisor / mentor will chair the Doctoral Dissertation Committee during the dissertation research phase.

MHA. Professional students in the MHA program are typically admitted directly into the Department of Health Administration and Policy, and are advised throughout their studies by Professor Steven Mattachione, Director of the MHA program.

MPH. As described in 4.3.b above, in recent years all MPH professional students were initially placed in the MPH in Interdisciplinary Public Health program, previously termed the MPH in General Public Health or the “General Track”. All new Oklahoma City campus MPH students were advised by either the Associate Dean or Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs, while new Schusterman campus students in Tulsa were often advised by the Dean. The student was guided in selecting the most efficient order in

227

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.4: ADVISING AND CAREER COUNSELING

which to complete the core courses and guided in his/her selection of a career path. At any time after completing a minimum of three core courses, an MPH student could petition a department for acceptance into a discipline-specific program in biostatistics, epidemiology, health administration & policy, health promotion sciences, or environmental health, or petition the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs for acceptance into the college-wide MPH in Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response. If accepted into a discipline-specific program in a department, the student was assigned a new academic advisor by the department. If the student was accepted into the MPH in Public Health Preparedness and Terrorism Response he/she was advised by Dr. Raskob if in Tulsa or by Dr. Boatright if in Oklahoma City. If the student elected to remain in the MPH in Interdisciplinary (General) Public Health, he/she continued to be advised by the initial advisor. This approach proved highly effective in insuring that students completed their core course work in a timely manner, providing consistent and up-to-date academic advisement in the initial phase of study, and avoiding wasted time, effort, and money when students selected a degree program before gaining a broad understanding of public health practice opportunities. However, poor completion rates for the MPH in Interdisciplinary Public Health led to a review of this process and the decision to transition to admission directly to the individual MPH programs. Beginning Fall 2015, new MPH students will be advised by faculty from the department hosting the degree program. Current plans are for new students in the MPH in Interdisciplinary Public Health program to continue to be initially advised by the Associate and Assistant Deans for Academic Affairs, then handed off to advisors in the departments as each student’s primary areas of interest become apparent.

DrPH. DrPH students are taken on by a primary academic advisor when they enter a doctoral program. In previous years the academic advisor chaired a DrPH Advisory Committee structured specifically for the individual student. Currently, however, the DrPH Advisory Committee has a fixed membership and advises all DrPH students through the General Examination. The advisor serves as an ad hoc member of the DrPH Advisory Committee, and subsequently serves as the chair of the Doctoral Dissertation Committee, which is structured by the advisor and student jointly.

Beginning with the initial orientation, students are encouraged to meet regularly with the academic advisor to discuss their course sequencing, program requirements, career goals, practicum interests, etc. They are required to obtain their advisor’s approval and signature for each semester’s enrollment and for their practicum or field practice plan. Most faculty do not have restricted office hours, but rather practice an open door policy. With a student-faculty ratio of approximately 5:1 and all regular faculty housed in the College of Health Building, students generally have ready access to their advisor without an appointment. The Dean is usually available on the Schusterman campus once a week to meet with Tulsa students for advisement.

The College recognizes the challenge of keeping faculty up-to-date on information important to effective academic advising, including College and university academic policies, administrative procedures bearing on student enrollment, course of study planning and documentation, preparation for the Culminating Experience and graduation, etc. These topics are discussed in Executive Committee meetings with Chairs being charged to communicate information to their faculty, in departmental faculty meetings, in Faculty Board meetings, and in emails direct to faculty from the Office of Student Services and/or the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. Faculty are also provided copies of the College of Public Health Student Bulletin, in which these policies are described, at the beginning of each academic year. Beginning in 2014 a series of Faculty and Staff Lunch and Learn events have been conducted to better assure communication of this important information.

4.4.b. Description of the school’s career counseling services for students in all degree programs. Include an explanation of efforts to tailor services to specific needs in the school’s student population.

Career advisement begins with the student’s first semester when they meet initially with their academic advisor. Students are typically unsure about what job opportunities might be available in each public health discipline, so these discussions help the students refine their career focus early in their studies.

228

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.4: ADVISING AND CAREER COUNSELING

Additional counseling tailored to the individual needs of MPH students occurs during enrollment in CPH 7941 Public Health Practicum Seminar, taught by the Practicum Coordinator, Dr. Shari Kinney. In this course students develop professional goals and objectives and a practicum plan to address those goals and objectives in consultation with the Practicum Coordinator, Academic Advisor, and a preceptor from the practicum host organization. One session of this course includes representatives from public health practice organizations that are invited to a “Preceptor Roundtable” to discuss opportunities for practicum and employment. Organizations are invited to this event based on the expressed interest of the students and also based on positive past practicum experiences and opportunities for employment. Professor Christina Bennett also lectures in CPH 7941, providing guidance on preparing resumes and cover letters and on effective interviewing. Students in the MHA program do not take CPH 7941, but receive the same information from Professor Bennett in her position as Fellowship Application Coordinator for the MHA program. In coordination with the Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, employers such as Phillips 66, BP America, and the US Navy periodically conduct on-campus career presentations and recruitment of MS IH/EHS and other Public Health students for both internships and permanent employment.

The college does not have a formal placement service. Each department maintains job announcements for their disciplines. Jobs are typically posted, and may also be maintained in a file or binder within the departments which students can access upon request. Students may request a copy of any specific job announcement at no charge. Some departments also post listings of job opportunities accessed via the Internet. Faculty and student advisors actively assist students in obtaining jobs and discuss opportunities during regular office hours. Assistance in identifying possible employment, advising on job alternatives, and recommendations are available to students through faculty and through an extensive network of alumni who are working in public health agencies, healthcare organizations, and private industry.

Agencies such as the Oklahoma State Department of Health, Oklahoma City-County Health Department, Tulsa City-County Health Department and other state and tribal agencies have included the College in their distribution lists for job postings. The Office of Student Services conducts an annual career fair event to give students an opportunity to learn about employment opportunities. The Office of Student Services also maintains a board posting job opportunities. Copies of job opportunities are available at no charge to students of the college. When alumni inform the College of positions within the various institutions in which they are employed, this information is routed to the appropriate office for posting. A particularly valuable service is the Office of Student Services’ weekly Opportunities e-newsletter prepared and distributed by Ms. Kathryn Adkins. The newsletter is emailed to all faculty, students, and staff each week and lists career, scholarship, and internship opportunities. Copies of the Opportunities newsletter are available in the Resource File.

4.4.c. Information about student satisfaction with advising and career counseling services.

As discussed in Section 1.2.a, each graduating student is asked to complete an exit survey regarding their educational experience. This survey includes a question on “Mentoring and Preparation for Career Choice”, in which the student ranks their opinion of quality in this area from 1 = Excellent to 5 = Very Poor. The survey also includes a request for additional comments entered as free text, in which graduating students can comment in detail on this or other aspects of their program. On surveys conducted between Fall 2012 and Summer 2014, we received 166 responses to this question, with a mean score of 2.05, indicating strong student satisfaction with this service. The exit survey was changed in Fall 2014 to separately assess satisfaction with academic advising and mentoring for career choice.

Another new process was initiated in Fall 2014 to periodically survey current students. The intent is to assess their satisfaction in a number of areas including facilities infrastructure, student services support, course offerings, information technology infrastructure and support, governance and service opportunities, the College website, career counseling, and academic advisement. These data will provide actionable information that can improve the current students’ educational experience as well as guide strategic planning to optimize the experience of future students. Annual surveys are planned, with the first

229

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.4: ADVISING AND CAREER COUNSELING

being conducted in the Fall 2014 term.

4.4.d. Description of the procedures by which students may communicate their concerns to school officials, including information about how these procedures are publicized and about the aggregate number of complaints and/or student grievances submitted for each of the last three years.

One-on-One Discussions. Students are encouraged to discuss concerns with college officials including their academic advisors, professors, department chairs, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, other Dean’s office representatives, and the Dean. During orientation the Dean encourages students to provide feedback to him and other Dean’s Office staff if they have difficulties or concerns. The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs maintains an open door policy and encourages students during the new student orientation and during advising sessions to visit him whenever they have a problem or concern. There is an open-door policy throughout the College, with all faculty maintaining open office hours during which advisees and other students can communicate their concerns.

Student Association. The College of Public Health Student Association holds regular meetings, and these are attended by the Associate or Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs or by the Assistant Dean for Student Services. The Dean, Associate and Assistant Deans for Academic Affairs, and Assistant Dean for Student Affairs also meet periodically with the Executive Committee of the Student Association, and issues of concern to the student body are a particular topic of discussion at these meetings. COPHSA meetings are publicized by email to all students and faculty. COPHSA also has a bulletin board on the first floor of the College of Health Building.

Student Participation in College Committees. Students are represented at various College committees and meetings. For example, the presidents of the student associations from Oklahoma City and Tulsa attend the College’s Executive Committee. Students also serve on the Academic Program Committee and may be invited to attend departmental faculty meetings when appropriate.

Mid-Semester Evaluations. All courses are required to perform student evaluations approximately mid- semester. The mid-course evaluation window is publicized directly to students by the Office of Student Services, and faculty are told to set aside class time for completion of this instrument. Faculty are encouraged to share summary results with students and use the feedback to improve their pedagogy and address student concerns.

End-of-Course Evaluations. End-of-course evaluations are also required for all classes. Students have the opportunity to express concerns about individual courses during the anonymous end-of-course critiques administered for each didactic course at the end of every semester it is offered. The end-of- course evaluation window is publicized directly to students by the Office of Student Services, and faculty are told to set aside class time for completion of this instrument.

Exit Surveys. At the end of their academic programs, graduating students are asked to complete an exit survey conducted by the Office of Student Services This anonymous survey provides an opportunity for students to comment on the quality of their educational experience through both Likert-scale responses and free text responses. Results of the survey are reviewed by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Department Chairs/Program Directors. A compilation of all of the exit survey results from Fall 2012- Summer 2014 is provided in the Resource File.

Academic Appeals. Student complaints of unfair academic evaluation in any numbered graduate course may be filed with the Dean, who will then refer it to the College’s Academic Appeals Board in accordance with the policies defined in the College of Public Health and Graduate College Bulletins (Resource File). For a complaint related to evaluation of a comprehensive examination, research for master’s thesis, or research for dissertation, the complaint is directed to the Dean of the Graduate College for consideration by the Graduate College Appeals Board. The College of Public Health has an established Academic

230

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.4: ADVISING AND CAREER COUNSELING

Appeals Board consisting of an equal number of students and faculty. Faculty members of the board are chosen by the faculty of the college, and student members are appointed for a term of one year by the Dean upon recommendations from the College’s Student Association President. The College of Public Health follows the Academic Appeals policy and procedures of the campus, as defined in the Health Sciences Center Faculty Handbook (Resource File). During the past three years, 9 academic appeals were received in the College. Appeals are considered confidential matters and are not publicized in the college.

Sexual, Racial and Ethnic Harassment. Student complaints of sexual harassment may be filed with the Health Science Center’s Equal Opportunity Office. This process is discussed in detail in the Sexual Misconduct, Discrimination and Harassment Policy (Resource File). The University has a policy of internal adjudication in matters relating to alleged discrimination. Any faculty member, staff member, or student, including those on temporary or part-time status, who believes that he or she has been discriminated against because of race, color, national origin, sex, age, religion, disability, or status as a veteran may file a complaint under the Grievance Procedure for Complaints Based Upon Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Consensual Sexual Relationships or Racial and Ethnic Harassment. The complaint is filed with the University’s Institutional Equity Office. During the past three years no complaints of sexual, racial, or ethnic harassment related to the College were received. If received these would also be considered confidential matters and would not be publicized.

Other than the clearly defined academic appeal and harassment complaints identified above, it is difficult to quantify the aggregate number of complaints submitted by students each year. This is because the College does not have a formal system through which a student’s comment may be “submitted” and thus identified as a Complaint. For example, there is no Complaint Form that a student can complete and submit in a Complaint Box. Comments received in individual course evaluations are seen by the appropriate instructor, his/her department chair, and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs; however, these comments are not made public to other faculty or to the student body. Comments received during one-on-one discussions between students, faculty, staff are held in confidence to promote free communication.

4.4.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses and plans relating to this criterion.

This criterion is met.

Strengths: The College demonstrates a commitment to advising students through degree-specific customization of advisors and a clear orientation process when students enter their selected degree track. There are clearly defined policies and procedures in place for students to communicate concerns, questions and grievances to College administration. Student orientation and advising in the college have always been ongoing and effective processes. Student satisfaction with these processes has been good to excellent as indicated by graduating student exit interviews.

Weaknesses/challenges: Keeping faculty up-to-date on policies, procedures, and administrative requirements bearing on their students’ program of study is an ongoing challenge to which the College is effectively responding.

Plans: Current advising and counseling processes and procedures will be retained, and the College’s administrative staff will continue to provide academic advisors with up-to-date information needed for effective advising. Mechanisms for facilitating this through electronic records management will be explored.

231

S ELF-STUDY CRITERION 4.4: ADVISING AND CAREER COUNSELING

[This page intentionally left blank]

232

S ELF-STUDY Index

INDEX

ABET reaccreditation self-study report 2012 19 Core public health knowledge, required courses Academic standards and policies 22, 38 addressing See Exhibit 2.3.1 Accrediting bodies for the Health Science Center 19 Course evaluations 7, 9, 230 Additional outcome measures for 2.7.b See Exhibit Course syllabi 63, 73, 75, 103, 104, 135 2.7.b CPH Examination 117, 140 Agencies and preceptors sponsoring practicum Crimson Club 40 experiences 78 Culminating Experience, DrPH 82 Allocation of space See Exhibit 1.7.4 Culminating Experience, MHA 82 Alumni focus groups 8, 10 Culminating Experience, MPH 81 Annual Faculty Report format 38 Culminating Experience, MS IH/EHS 82 Anti-discrimination policy 59, 60, 231 Degree completion 108 Biostatistics and Epidemiology Student Association Departmental external advisory committees (BSESA) 40 membership 11 Budget and resource allocation 37 Diversity outcomes summary data for faculty, Budget statement See Exhibit 1.6.1 students and staff See Exhibit 1.8.1 Budgeting and resource allocation 21 Doctoral degree programs 133 Building competency in diversity and cultural Doctoral student data See Exhibit 2.10.1 considerations 61 Employers, external stakeholders and public health Certificate completions and enrollments See Exhibit agency partners 10 3.3.c Evaluating practice placement sites and preceptor College Advisory Board 11 qualifications 75, 78 College of Public Health Bulletin 5, 35, 39, 70, 101, Evaluating student performance 78 104, 219, 228 Examples of Student Service Activities See Exhibit College of Public Health organizational chart See 3.2.e Exhibit 1.4.a Executive Committee meeting minutes 31 College of Public Health Student Association Exhibit 1.2.a Mechanisms for Evaluation of (COPHSA) 5, 7, 31, 40 Performance 7 College service activities listing See Exhibit 3.2.1 Exhibit 1.2.c Outcome Measures for Fiscal Years Competencies analysis 98, 99, 100, 101 2012-2014 11 Competencies development 101 Exhibit 1.3.b OUHSC Organization Chart 20 Competencies, Biostatistics MPH 87 Exhibit 1.4.a. College of Public Health organizational Competencies, Biostatistics MS 87 chart 25 Competencies, Biostatistics PhD 88 Exhibit 1.5.a Standing and Important Ad Hoc Competencies, EH MPH 95 Committees and Members 31 Competencies, Epidemiology MPH 89 Exhibit 1.5.d College Faculty Holding Membership on Competencies, Epidemiology MS 90 University Committees 39 Competencies, Epidemiology PhD 91 Exhibit 1.6.1 Sources of Funds and Expenditures by Competencies, HAP MPH 92 Major Category, FY 2007 to FY 2014 45 Competencies, HPS MPH 93 Exhibit 1.6.d Outcome Measures for Fiscal Resources Competencies, HPS MS 94 47 Competencies, HPS PhD 94 Exhibit 1.7.1 Headcount of Primary Faculty 49 Competencies, Interdisciplinary MPH 86 Exhibit 1.7.2 Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Competencies, MHA 93 Ratios by Department or Specialty Area 51 Competencies, MS IH/EHS 95 Exhibit 1.7.3 Headcount (FTE) of Administration and Competencies, OEH PhD 96 Staff 53 Competencies, PHPTR MPH 96 Exhibit 1.7.4 Allocation of Space (Square Footage) Competency assessment forms 81, 106 by Usage 53 Completion outcomes by degree type See Exhibit Exhibit 1.7.5 Outcome Measures for Faculty and 2.7.1 Other Resources 56 Continuing education programs 179, 181, 182, 213 Exhibit 1.8.1. Diversity Outcomes Summary Data for COPHSA Annual SWOT Analysis 7, 10 Faculty, Students and Staff 67 Core Competencies, DrPH 85 Exhibit 1.8.b. Progress toward Achieving Goals for Core Competencies, MPH 85 Diversity and Cultural Competence Contained in the College’s 2011-2015 Strategic Plan 63

233

S ELF-STUDY Index

Exhibit 2.1.1. Instructional Matrix – Degrees & Faculty Incentive Program 214 Specializations 69 Faculty Leadership Program 61, 213 Exhibit 2.10.1: Doctoral Student Data for year 2013- Faculty recruitment, retention, promotion and tenure 2014 134 37 Exhibit 2.3.1 Core Public Health Knowledge 73 Faculty service See Exhibit 3.2.1 Exhibit 2.4.b MPH Preceptors by Practice Site for Faculty supervision of students 77 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 78 Faculty, students and student/faculty ratios See Exhbit Exhibit 2.4.d Physicians, Residents, and Medical 1.7.2 Students Completing the Academic Program, Funded service activity See Exhibit 3.2.2 2012-2014 79 Goals for achieving diversity and cultural competence Exhibit 2.6.1 Courses and Activities through which 59 Competencies Are Met 97 Governance Committees See Exhibit 1.5.a Exhibit 2.7.1 Completion Outcomes by Degree Type Graduate College Bulletin 39 108 Graduate degrees 127, 128, 129, 130 Exhibit 2.7.2 Graduates’ Employment by Degree Type Graduate Student Association 31, 40, 170 110 Graduates’ employment by degree type See Exhibit Exhibit 2.7.a Reasons for Attrition from MPH 2.7.2 Programs, by Entry Cohort 109 Grants/contracts 43, 44, 46 Exhibit 2.7.b. Additional Outcome Measures for 2.7.b Guidelines for Public Health Practicum 75, 77 117 Headcount of administration and staff See Exhibit Exhibit 3.1.1. Research Activity from FY 2012 to FY 1.7.3 2015 154 Indirect cost recovery 44 Exhibit 3.1.d Outcome Measures for Research 150 Instructional matrix See Exhibit 2.1.1 Exhibit 3.2.1 Faculty Service for the Last 3 Years 168 Investment revenue/gifts 44 Exhibit 3.2.2 Funded Service Activity for each of the Job placement 110 Past Three Years 168 Joint degree programs 139 Exhibit 3.2.d. Outcome Measures for Faculty Service Junior Faculty Mentoring and Development Program in the Past Three Years 169 214 Exhibit 3.2.d1. Number of Primary Faculty Lines of accountability 21 Participating in Service* for 2012-2014 169 Matrices identifying learning experiences See Exhibit Exhibit 3.2.e Examples of student service activities 2.6.1 170 Mechanisms for evaluation of performanceSee Exhibit Exhibit 3.3.1. Funded Training/Continuing Education 1.2.a Activity from FY 2012 to FY 2014 184 Meetings with elected student association officers 9 Exhibit 3.3.b Continuing Education Programs Offered Methods of approving preceptors 77 2011-2014 179 Number of primary faculty participating in service See Exhibit 3.3.b.1 Summary Statistics on Continuing Exhibit 3.2.d1 Education Programs Offered 2011-2013 179 Opportunities newsletter 229 Exhibit 3.3.c Certificate in Public Health Completions Orientation and support of preceptors 77 and Enrollments Self-Study Years 181 OU Public Health magazine 3, 5, 14 Exhibit 4.1.1 Primary Faculty who Support Degree OU Tulsa Student Association 40 Offerings of the School 190 OUHSC organization chart See Exhibit 1.3.b Exhibit 4.1.2. Current Other Faculty Used to Support OUHSC Student Association 32, 40 Teaching Program (Adjunct, Part-Time, Secondary, Outcome measures for evaluating success in etc.) 203 enrolling qualified students See Exhibit 4.3.3 Exhibit 4.1.c Significant Full-Time Professional Outcome measures for faculty and other resources Practice Experience of Primary Faculty in their See Exhibit 1.7.5 Public Health Teaching Area 209 Outcome Measures for Faculty Qualifications See Exhibit 4.3.1 Quantitative Information on Applicants, Exhibit 4.1.d Acceptances, and Enrollments, FY2012 to FY2014 Outcome measures for faculty service See Exhibit 222 3.2.d Exhibit 4.3.2 Student Enrollment Data from Fall 2011 Outcome measures for fiscal resources See Exhibit to Fall 2014 223 1.6.d Exhibit 4.3.3. Outcome Measures for Evaluating Outcome Measures for Research See Exhibit 3.1.d Success in Enrolling Qualified Students 225 Physicians, residents, and medical students Exit survey results summary 230 completing the academic program See Exhibit 2.4.d Exit surveys 10 Policies and plans for recruiting, developing, Faculty annual reports 11 promoting and retaining a diverse faculty 61 Faculty Bylaws 10, 32, 34, 39 Policies and plans to recruit, admit, retain and Faculty Handbook, OUHSC 21, 38, 39, 213, 214, 215 graduate a diverse student body 62

234

S ELF-STUDY Index

Policies and plans to recruit, develop, promote and Quantitative information on applicants, acceptances, retain a diverse staff 61 and enrollments See Exhibit 4.3.1 Policies that support a climate for working and Quantitative Skills Examination 82, 106, 107, 117, 121 learning in a diverse setting 60 Reasons for attrition from MPH programs See Exhibit Policies that support a climate free of harassment and 2.7.a discrimination 60 Recruitment, selection, and advancement of faculty Policy development 36 and staff 21 Practice experiences 75 Research, service and teaching expectations 38 Practice sites listing 76, 77, 80 Selection of practice sites 76 Practicum associated forms 77 Sexual, racial and ethnic harassment policy 231 Preceptors by practice site See Exhibit 2.4.b Social, Community, and Behavioral Health Students Primary faculty See Exhibit 1.7.1 Association (SCBHA) 40 Primary faculty supporting the college’s degree Staff Handbook, OUHSC 21 programs See Exhibit 4.1.1 State appropriation/University funds 44 Primary governance committees 31 Strategic Plan 2011-2015 2, 4, 59, 61, 62, 65, 118, Professional practice experience of primary faculty 167, 168, See Exhibit 1.8.b See Exhibit 4.1.c Strategic Plan progress report 11 Professional Practice Plan (PPP) 45, 167, 168, 169, Strategic planning 9, 36 208, 213, 214 Student recruitment, the admission process and the Progress toward diversity and cultural competence award of degrees 37 strategic goals See Exhibit 1.8.b Telephone surveys 10 Prospective follow-up of graduates 10 Tuition and fees 43, 46 Prospective Follow-up Telephone Surveys instrument Under-represented populations 59 10 Waiving, altering or reducing the practice experience Qualifications of adjunct teaching faculty See Exhibit 75, 78 4.1.2, See Exhibit 4.1.2 XYZ Faculty Compensation Plan 214, 215

235