CAHME Phase II: International Healthcare Management Education · The project team submitted an...

Phase II: International Healthcare

Management Education

Daniel J. West, Jr., PhD, FACHE, FACMPE

Professor and Chairman Department of Health Administration & Human Resources

Panuska College of Professional Studies University of Scranton

Gary Filerman, PhD Atlas Health Foundation

Bernardo Ramirez, MD, MBA

Assistant Professor College of Health and Public Affairs

Department of Health Management and Informatics University of Central Florida

Jill Steinkogler, MHSA

Senior Consultant

CAHME

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The PHASE II study was made possible through a grant from the ARAMARK Charitable Fund at the

Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program. Additional contributions were received from the

University of Scranton, Department of Health Administration and Human Resources and Atlas

Health Foundation. Technical support was received from Mr. Neel Pathak and Ms. Lauren Majeski

both serving as Graduate Assistants at The University of Scranton. A special acknowledgement to

Dr. Robert Spinelli for conducting telephone interviews with CAHME Accredited Program Directors

as part of this study.

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................. 2

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 4

OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................ 7

Domestic Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 8

International Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 9

Accrediting Organizations Research ...................................................................................................... 10

SURVEY FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS .............................................................................. 18

Domestic Survey ......................................................................................................................................... 18

International ................................................................................................................................................ 27

The International Programs: An Overview .......................................................................................... 28

Accrediting Organization Profiles .......................................................................................................... 31

Limitations .................................................................................................................................................... 33

CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................ 33

Domestic ....................................................................................................................................................... 33

International ................................................................................................................................................ 34

RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................. 37

APPENDIX A: DOMESTIC SURVEY .......................................................................................... 39

APPENDIX B: CAHME TELEPHONE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ............................................... 41

APPENDIX C: INTERNATIONAL DATABASE ........................................................................... 48

APPENDIX D: COUNTRY PROFILES AND PROGRAM TEMPLATES ......................................... 49

Colombia ..................................................................................................................................................... 49

Colombia Programs ................................................................................................................................ 54

Czech Republic ........................................................................................................................................... 59

Czech Republic Programs ...................................................................................................................... 64

Germany...................................................................................................................................................... 68

Germany Programs ................................................................................................................................. 72

Ireland .......................................................................................................................................................... 86

Ireland Programs .................................................................................................................................... 90

Netherlands ................................................................................................................................................. 95

Dutch Programs .................................................................................................................................... 100

South Korea.............................................................................................................................................. 105

South Korea Programs ........................................................................................................................ 110

APPENDIX E: ACCREDITING AGENCY PROFILES .................................................................. 120

APPENDIX F: CAHME PROGRAMS AND FACULTY CONTACTS ............................................ 216

APPENDIX G: BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................... 225

4

INTRODUCTION

The initial PHASE I study for CAHME was conducted during 2010-2011 and results were reported

to the CAHME Board and approved in May 2011. The first phase examined 16 countries along

with 66 CAHME accredited programs. PHASE I showed that the health administration education

system is closely articulated with the recognized needs of the healthcare delivery system in

several countries and appears to provide a sufficient number of graduates. Furthermore, the

PHASE I study provided detailed information on CAHME accredited programs relative to

international involvement, international courses and curriculum, alumni and ideas on global

healthcare management.

Phase II study for CAHME was conducted September 1, 2011 – May 31, 2012. The PHASE II

study utilized findings from the PHASE I study to examine four main areas. First, six additional

countries (Germany, Ireland, Czech Republic, South Korea, Netherlands and Colombia) were

added to the existing 16 countries bringing the total to 22 countries that are analyzed.

Comprehensive contact information for key institutions was added to country-specific profiles.

Second, in-depth telephone discussions were held with CAHME accredited Program Directors (PDs)

to gather additional information on global centers, courses, international research, partnerships,

and faculty. Third, other accreditation programs in business, medicine, and public health were

surveyed to identify domains that pertain to health services administration sponsorship, processes

and memberships. Fourth, a strategy and plan of action to implement international demonstration

site visits in different countries using the 2013 CAHME Accreditation Criteria was developed. This

included identifying relevant CAHME criteria that can be used outside of the USA under some

type of external review such as certification.

On May 16, 2012 CAHME conducted a 2012 corporate member meeting at the Feinstein Institute

for Medical Research, North Shore-LIJ Health System, Manhasset, New York. The program

“Healthcare Reform: Positioning Graduate Healthcare Management Education for the Future” had

several objectives:

1) Develop a shared understanding of the leadership challenge to our profession in

transforming the future.

2) Reconfirm the compact between practitioners and the academic community about “what

comes next” in graduate healthcare management education.

3) Collectively determine what skills and attributes will be required of future leaders.

Develop a shared understanding of what steps need to be taken in the next decade to

better prepare future leaders.

4) There has been a transformative change in graduate education in the past decade

leading to competency-based education and more sophisticated assessment. Do

practitioners feel academic programs are meeting their needs?

6

A final report is forthcoming; however, lectures, presentations and group discussions suggested

that future leaders need to understand the impact of globalization and associated competencies

when considering future innovations. In looking at CAHME and the future, the “2012 CAHME

Survey of Program Directors and Faculty” presents information that could help to frame further

thinking around international accreditation/certification with respect to value, quality, potential

difficulties, advantages of accreditation, and disadvantages/drawbacks of accreditation.

Although USA responses cannot be generalized to other countries and faculties, the survey

responses raised areas worthy of discussion within an international context.

Globalization has impacted graduate education in the USA. The number of international students

enrolled in graduate education in the USA is significant. Career opportunities for graduates with

multi-national corporations, NGOs and international organizations appear to be increasing. The

global competencies needed by future students are constantly changing placing pressure on

graduate programs in health management education to re-examine the importance of

accreditation, competency models and specific competencies, demonstrated knowledge and skills

and placement following graduation. Dr. Stephen F. Lobes, Professor Emeritus, the Ohio State

University was commissioned by The National Center for Healthcare Leadership to examine the

“status of university based graduate education in health management.” As presented at the

AUPHA Leaders Conference (March 20, 2012), the “Report on Graduate Health Management

Education in the United States 2001-2011” provides a critical examination of prior

accomplishments; but more importantly, challenges and recommendations for improvement. The

future direction of CAHME accreditation and AUPHA membership offers opportunities for national

dialogue regarding global health management, and how to engage global health systems.

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has issued a report “USAID Policy

Framework 2011-2015” that provides an agenda for change and development. This plan also

suggests a strategic framework for international development and promoting U.S. national

interests (USAID, 2011). It also addresses principles consistent with the Presidential Policy Directive

on Global Development (PPD-6), the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR),

and the U.S. Government Strategy for Meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The

opportunities for graduate education programs to prepare future leaders to meet the new

challenges and opportunities is immense. In a global economy, graduate programs in health

management education can have an impact on research, partnership development, service

opportunities for students and faculty, outcomes assessment, leadership preparation, improving

quality, access to care and promoting public-private sector development.

In a very interesting article “Lost in Translation: Degree Definition and Quality in a Globalized

World”, Madeleine Green (2011) examines quality, the need for diversity and innovation in

universities and organizations across borders. Green thoughtfully offers the following:

“As if it weren’t difficult enough to compare quality and to define degrees within

a country, the problem is exponentially greater globally. Intensified globalization

7

has resulted in increased academic and employee mobility, a growth in the

number of academic programs offered across borders, and the multiplication of

institutional partnerships. The need to understand institutional quality, however it is

defined, and to compare learning outcomes across borders is even greater in this

new environment, with practical and serious implications for mobile students and

faculty, globally engaged institutions, and employers and organizations with

global reach.” (p. 19)

This article challenges current thinking about accreditation and suggests other approaches may be

needed to address teaching methods, quality and outcome measurement of specific competencies

that have global application.

OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY

This survey research is an initiative of the Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Management

Education (CAHME), implemented by the University of Scranton and The Atlas Health Foundation.

It is supported primarily by the ARAMARK Charitable Fund with contributions from the University

of Scranton and Atlas Research, LLC. The project team included:

Daniel J. West, Jr., PhD, FACHE Principal Investigator

The University of Scranton

Gary L. Filerman, PhD, MHA President

Atlas Health Foundation

Bernardo Ramirez, MD, MBA Assistant Professor & Consultant

University of Central Florida

Jill Steinkogler, MHSA Senior Consultant

Neel Pathak Graduate Assistant, MHA Program


The Phase II study was designed to expand and elaborate findings from the Phase I study as well

as to provide future direction.

8

The grant award had a domestic initiative/methodology and an international

initiative/methodology. Specifically the study was structured to:

1) Examine the supply of professionally trained health care administrators in six countries. A

country profile template was created. Within each country program profiles were created

that provide available information on universities, degrees awarded, and other

information.

2) Provide a summary of the health systems of the six countries.

3) Use an expert panel to provide opinions, advice, and access to information.

4) Assess the extent of international health care management education activities of CAHME

accredited programs and their faculties and describe involvement in international health

administration education.

5) Survey accreditation programs in business, medicine and/or public health to identify their

domains, sponsorship, processes and memberships.

As part of the study progress reports were prepared and submitted to CAHME. Continuous input

and contact was maintained with Mr. John Lloyd providing clarification and utilizing appropriate

feedback. The expert panel was used throughout the study by Dr. Gary Filerman and his staff.

The University of Scranton provided marketing and publicity associated with the study.

Suggestions have continuously been sought from a variety of sources on presenting results of the

study in journals and at professional meetings/conferences, both in the USA and to international

audiences.

DOMESTIC METHODOLOGY

The study required a survey of CAHME accredited programs and their faculties focusing on

global centers, research grants, partnerships, courses and study abroad opportunities. Based on

the results from PHASE I, 40 graduate programs were identified for inclusion in the PHASE II

study.

In the design of the survey instrument, specific information and points of interest to CAHME were

considered (Appendix A). Authorization to conduct the study was secured and articulated in a

letter of engagement dated August 12, 2011. The study was initiated on September 1, 2011.

The project team analyzed results from the PHASE I study and decided to conduct in-depth

telephone interviews with CAHME graduate PDs. A survey instrument was designed to capture

detailed information (Appendix B). Research Assistants were trained to conduct telephone

interviews using the survey instrument. The telephone survey consisted of 40 questions. In advance

of making telephone contacts, an e-mail was sent to all PDs with a copy of the survey instrument

asking for their cooperation in the survey.

9

The project team submitted an IRB/DRB Application Form B on March 8, 2012 at the University of

Scranton. IRB approval for a period of one year was received on April 13, 2012. The approved

survey had 40 questions in five sections that focused on global centers, international research,

study abroad, global health courses, and partnerships.

The CAHME website and office was contacted to secure a current listing of all CAHME accredited

programs in the United States and Canada. Updated PD names and telephone numbers were

secured for 40 programs that participated in the PHASE I study.

The telephone survey was titled “CAHME PHASE II Study: International Health Education Survey”

and was composed of 40 questions with specific instructions. The entire survey was designed to

take 15-20 minutes to administer and complete using a telephone interview. Participation in the

study was voluntary, could be discontinued at any time, all responses were treated with

confidentiality, and results reported in aggregate.

Telephone surveys were initiated on April 16, 2012 by two trained Research Assistants. Forty (40)

PDs were contacted. Several PDs responded immediately, others were contacted multiple times.

One program declined to participate. There were no withdrawals from the study. Efforts were

made to reach all 40 identified graduate programs. Twenty-six out of 40 PDs (65%) responded

to the telephone survey. Interviews were conducted from April 16, 2012 to May 11, 2012 (4

weeks). Data analysis was done using Microsoft Excel.

INTERNATIONAL METHODOLOGY

The study team had the benefit of counsel from an advisory committee that reviewed the design

and suggested sources of information about programs. The members of the committee were:

Gilles Dussault, PhD Professor, National Institute of Hygiene and Medicine, Portugal

Alex Preker, MD, PhD, Lead Health Economist, The World Bank

Bernardo Ramirez, MD, MBA, Assistant Professor and Director, Global Health Initiatives,


Anne Rooney, RN, MS, MPH, Vice President, Consulting and Education Services, Joint

Commission International

Jorge Talavera, PhD Rector, Universidad Esan and Executive Director, CLADEA, Peru

The intent of the study was to identify university and other providers of programs that lead to a

credential that is recognized by the health services delivery system/community as attesting to the

successful completion of a course of study that is appropriate preparation for management

practice.

10

The education provider section of the summary paper was developed based upon the information

provided by various organizations, program files, personal contacts, and journal articles. The

result is that our inventory of the twenty-two countries is the most comprehensive database for

them that has been developed since the publication of the AUPHA directories in the 1970’s and

1980’s.

We identified, researched, and contacted many potential sources of information about specific

health care management education programs. As there is no international directory or guide to

programs in health services administration, it was necessary to contact many sources directly

regarding specific components of the field. A web search was conducted on each education

provider. A profile of each was then developed. The profile and the project description were then

sent to each program for which we found an email contact with a request that it be checked for

accuracy and completeness and be returned. Appendix C, a separate document is an Excel

spreadsheet providing in-depth information on each program. Appendix D provides an in-depth

list of the country profiles and program templates filled out for each country.

ACCREDITING ORGANIZATIONS RESEARCH

The third area included in the second phase of the CAHME study consisted of identifying

accreditation organizations in business, public health and medicine that may have an interest in

accreditation/certification in the sphere of influence of health services administration. An analysis

was made to identify the domains that pertain to the mission and aims of each organization

related to health services administration; sponsorship, membership composition and international

reach; accreditation/certification process, criteria, requisites and cost; and contact information.

Information was gathered from 21 accrediting or quality improvement organizations in the

following areas: Health Services Administration (2 organizations); Business Administration (10

organizations); Public Health (2 organizations) and; Medicine (7 organizations). All of these

organizations are either accrediting agencies, or have relations/support mission and activities

related to accreditation/certification/education/quality improvement. The area that is most

developed, and has advanced international reach was in the area of business, followed by public

health and medicine. The following table enumerates these organizations by areas of study.

11

ACCREDITING AGENCIES IDENTIFIED

Name Organization Web Page

Country where

organization is

based

Primary Service

Area

Health Services Administration

EHMA/FIBAA European Health

Management

Association/ The

Foundation for

International Business

Administration

Accreditation

http://www.e

hma.org/

http://www.fi

baa.org/en/fi

baa.html

Brussels/Germany

EHMA does not

accredit programs,

only through FIBAA

SHAPE/ACHSM Society for Health

Administration

Programs in

Education/

Australasian College

of Health Services

Management

http://www.sh

ape.org.au/

http://www.a

chse.org.au/

New South

Wales, Australia

ACHSM does the

accreditation

process for the

SHAPE programs

Business Administration

AACSB Association to Advance

Collegiate Schools of

Business

http://www.a

acsb.edu/

Tampa, Florida,

U.S.A.

International Asia

Headquarters in

Singapore

Accreditation of

schools and

business/accounting

undergraduate and

graduate programs.

Accredited

members in 41

countries

ACBSP Accreditation council

for Business Schools &

Programs

http://www.a

cbsp.org/

Kansas City,

Kansas, U.S.A.

Office in Europe

located in

Brussels, Belgium

Accreditation of

business schools and

programs.

Accredited

members in 44

countries.

EFMD The Management

Development Network

http://www.e

fmd.org/

Brussels, Belgium Accreditation of

business schools,

programs,

corporate

universities and

technology-

enhanced learning

http://www.ehma.org/


http://www.fibaa.org/en/fibaa.html



http://www.shape.org.au/


http://www.achse.org.au/


http://www.aacsb.edu/


http://www.acbsp.org/


http://www.efmd.org/


12


programs.

Accredited

members in 81

countries

AMBA Association of MBAs http://www.

mbaworld.co

m/

London, England Accredits MBA, DBA

and MBM programs

Accredited

members in 75

countries (70% in

Europe)

FIBAA The Foundation for

International Business

Administration

Accreditation

http://www.fi

baa.org/en/f

ibaa.html

Bonn, Germany Accreditation,

certification and

consulting of

business, law and

social economical

sciences programs.

Accredited

members in 20

countries, most of

them in Europe.

ECBE European Council for

Business Education

http://www.e

cbe.eu

Chamby,

Switzerland

Accredits business

related programs

and off-campus

worked based

training programs.

37 accredited

members.

CEEMAN IQA International

Management

Development

Association

http://www.c

eeman.org/

Bled, Slovenia Accredits business

schools and

programs. Started

in Central and

Easter Europe and

has expanded to

the rest of Europe.

AABS Association of African

Business Schools

http://www.a

abschools.com

/

Kenya, Africa Does not provide

accreditation, but in

order to join schools

have to be

accredited by other

recognized

http://www.mbaworld.com/






http://www.ecbe.eu/

http://www.ecbe.eu/

http://www.ceeman.org/


http://www.aabschools.com/



13


accreditation body.

26 business schools

members in Africa.

CLADEA The Latin American

Council of

Management Schools

www.cladea.

org

Lima, Peru Does not provide

accreditation.

Strategic

arrangements with

AACSB, ACBSP and

EFMD. 180 schools

mainly in Latin

America, but also in

North America,

Europe and

Oceania.

AAPBS Association of Asia-

Pacific Business Schools

http://www.a

apbs.org/

Seoul, South

Korea

Does not provide

accreditation.

Strategic

arrangements with

AACSB and EFMD.

147 schools in 22

countries

Public Health

CEPH Council on Education of

Public Health

http://www.c

eph.org/

Washington, D.C.,

U.S.A.

Accredits schools of

public health and

MPH programs. 44

schools and 83

programs with only

1 International

School & 2 MPH

programs

ASPHER The Association of

Schools of Public

Health in the European

Region

http://www.a

spher.org/

Brussels, Belgium Accredits schools

and MPH programs

in the European

Region.

Medicine

LCMA Liaison committee on

Medical Education

http://www.lc

me.org/

Chicago, Illinois,

U.S.A. (CMEAMA)

& Washington,

D.C., U.S.A.

Accredits medical

education programs

leading to an M.D.

degree in the USA

http://www.cladea.org/


http://www.aapbs.org/


http://www.ceph.org/


http://www.aspher.org/


http://www.lcme.org/


14


(AAMC) (137 accredited

programs) and in

Canada (17

accredited

programs).

IAOMC International

Association of Medical

Colleges

http://www.i

aomc.org/

Stonington,

Connecticut, U.S.A.

Accredits

International

medical schools.

Does not appear to

have any current

members.

ACCM The Accreditation

Commission on Colleges

of Medicine

http://www.a

ccredmed.org

/

Wicklow, Ireland Accredits medical

schools in 4

countries of the

Caribbean Region.

WFME World Federation for

Medical Education

http://www.

wfme.org/

Copenhagen,

Denmark

Supports

accreditation for

medical education

with the 6 Regional

Associations and

with an official

relation with WHO.

ACGME Accreditation Council

for Graduate Medical

Education

http://www.a

cgme.org/

Chicago, Illinois,

U.S.A.

Accredits and

evaluates residency

programs in the

U.S.A.

NCFMEA National Committee on

Foreign Medical

Education and

Accreditation

http://www2.

ed.gov/about

/bdscomm/lis

t/ncfmea.html

Washington, D.

C., U.S.A.

Reviews the

standards that

foreign countries

use to accredit

medical schools to

determine whether

those standards are

comparable to the

ones used in the

U.S.A.

ECFMG Educational Commission

for Foreign Medical

Graduates

http://www.e

cfmg.org/

Philadelphia, PA,

U.S.A.

Standards for

international

medical graduates

to enter residency

http://www.iaomc.org/


http://www.accredmed.org/



http://www.wfme.org/


http://www.acgme.org/


http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/ncfmea.html




http://www.ecfmg.org/


15


program or to

practice in the

U.S.A.

In the health administration area we have complete and firsthand information of CAHME and

AUPHA, so profiles were not created for those two organizations. Both of them have well-

developed accreditation and certification processes, but no institutional international formal

experience. There are several individuals that have experience working with quality standards of

health care management education and have applied their experience with international

programs.

There are two other organizations involved with health care management education. EHMA (The

European Health Management Association) started associating health administration education

programs in Europe and in recent years expanded their membership to include all types of

healthcare organizations. The university-based programs of EHMA are no longer the majority of

the membership and prime focus. Currently they associate 160 academic and health services

members in 37 countries, the majority of them are in the European Union with the exception of

organizations in Egypt, Georgia, Turkey & Kazakhstan. EHMA offers accreditation through FIBAA

(The Foundation for International Business Administration Accreditation). FIBAA is a German

organization that started in 1994 with 850 accredited programs that includes 18 health services

administration master programs in several European countries (14 in Germany, 2 in Austria, 1 in

the Netherlands and 1 in Switzerland).

Finally, the ACHSM (Australian College of Health Services Management) accredits programs in

Australasia in association with SHAPE (The Society for Health Administration Programs in

Education). SHAPE started in 1985 with a Kellogg Foundation grant modeled after AUPHA and

currently has 15 members in Australia and two in New Zealand. In recent years SHAPE has

become a forum for cooperative research activity among member programs and the ACHSM.

Since 2011 they have been undertaking an Accreditation Review which will streamline the

processes and give clarity to the role of the university undertaking the accreditation as well as the

role of the National Office and the local ACHSM Branch in the relevant jurisdiction. This will

reduce lag times from request for accreditation to finalizing report and notifying the university. It

will also reflect the desire to build on the relationships that exist between the College and the

university sector, which will go beyond the one accreditation review visit.

The business administration area is by far the more prolific and well developed. The main

organization in the US is the AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business) that

started global accreditation in 2002. In 1988, a second organization, the ACBSP (Accreditation

Council for Business Schools and Programs) was started in the US by programs that were not part

of AACSB. In 2005 ACBSP started affiliating Canadian programs, and in 2009 ACBSP initiated a

regional organization for Latin America. Now they have accredited members in nine regions and

44 countries.

16

In Europe, under the impulse of the Bologna Declaration, there are four main organizations that

conduct accreditation: 1) EFMD (European Foundation for Management Development) that

includes EQUIS (the European Quality Improvement System) and EPAS (EFMD Program

Accreditation System) accreditation systems; 2) AMBA (The Association for MBAs based in London

that accredits 189 schools in 70 countries; 3) FIBAA (The Foundation for International Business

Administration Accreditation; and 4) ECBE (The European Council for Business Education) that

works in close cooperation with ACBSP. EFMD, AMBA and AACSB also work in close collaboration

and have created what is called the Triple Crown that has been awarded to 57 business schools

worldwide. These three accreditations are considered the most prestigious ones. CEEMAN IQA,

started in 1998 for business schools in Central and Eastern Europe and later expanded their

accreditation to all of Europe creating the International Management Development Association.

Finally in the business administration area, three organizations are developing in other regions of

the world: 1) AABS (Association of African Business Schools) that does not provide accreditation,

but requires accreditation from a recognized accreditation body for membership in AABS. This is

a model that points into possible alternatives to a full accreditation alternative and is worth

considering. 2) CLADEA (The Latin American Council of Management Schools) that has expanded

its membership beyond Latin-America and currently has 180 affiliated organizations including

members from the U.S., Europe, and Australasia, also does not provide accreditation directly, but

has strategic partnerships with several accreditation organizations such as: AACSB International,

ACBSP and EFMD and is considering the feasibility of accreditation/benchmarking for education

quality improvement; and 3) AAPBS (Association of Asia-Pacific Business Schools) that started in

2001 and currently has 130 members in 21 countries, but does not offer accreditation.

In Public Health there were three organizations identified. One of them is the WFPHA (World

Federation of Public Health Associations) that groups the main public health associations in the

world, does not provide accreditation or specific guidance/resources in this area and a profile is

not included in this study. The other two are: the CEPH (Council on Education of Public Health) the

oldest and most important one, that started in 1946 with 8 U.S. members and currently has 44

schools and 83 MPH programs accredited, with one accredited international school (National

School of Public Health Mexico) and two MPH programs (American University of Beirut and St.

Georges University in Granada). Currently there are four schools and 29 MPH programs in the

pipeline, one of them international, The École de Hautes Études en Santé Public in France.

Accreditation is a long and costly process for international programs with 18 to 24 months of self-

study and 10 to 14 months for review and accreditation that typically will cost between 15 to 20

thousand USD plus traveling expenses.

The other public health organization is ASPHER (The Association of Schools of Public Health in the

European Region) that has 80 members in the European region. ASPHER currently does not

provide accreditation but has been working for several years developing a viable European

process. Programs and schools of public health are now accredited by their national bodies, but

since 2001 ASHPHER founded the Open Society Institute, the PEER review system and the

Leonardo da Vinci Project to advance this initiative. In 2008/09 ASPHER conducted a strategic

planning process through a Delphi study where one of the highest priorities that emerged was the

17

establishment of the European accreditation system for MPH programs. ASPHER has now joined

forces with EUPHA (European Public Health Association) to conclude this process that will (1)

Improve the quality of the PH workforce in Europe and its competitiveness globally; (2) Contribute

to the development and harmonization of PH education in Europe; (3) Provide an added value

with regard to national QA and accreditation; and (4) Reinforce ASPHER and EUPHA visibility

globally. The total estimated cost of accreditation is 18,000 EUR plus traveling expenses of the

peer review team; and the average length of the process is estimated between 14 to 20 months.

In Medicine accreditation is granted by national organizations. In the case of the USA,

accreditation is done by the LCME (Liaison Committee on Medical Education) and does not offer

international accreditation. The LCME is sponsored by the Association of American Medical

Colleges and the American Medical Association. The LCME's scope is limited to the accreditation

of complete and independent medical education programs where students are geographically

located in the United States or Canada for their education and that are operated by universities

or medical schools that are chartered in the United States or Canada. Currently, there are 137

LCME-accredited MD programs in the U.S. and 17 CACMS/LCME-accredited MD programs in

Canada. We also reviewed three organizations that play an important role in supporting quality

of medical education, but do not accredit schools or MD programs. They are the ACGME (The

Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education) a private nonprofit organization that

evaluates and accredits residency programs and graduate medical education in the U.S.;

NCFMW (National Committee on Foreign Medical Education and Accreditation) an entity of the

U.S. Department of Education in charge of reviewing the standards that foreign countries use to

accredit medical schools to determine whether those standards are comparable to the standards

used to accredit medical schools in the U.S.; and the ECFMG (Educational Commission for Foreign

Medical Graduates) that provides the standards for evaluating the qualifications of physicians

before they enter the U.S. graduate medical education or required to obtain an unrestricted

license to practice medicine in the U.S.

There are three organizations that are involved in international accreditation of medical

programs. One of them, the WFME (World Federation for Medical Education) does not offer

accreditation directly. It is a non-governmental organization in official relation to WHO that

works in association with the World Medical Association, the International Federation of Medical

Students’ Associations, and an umbrella for the six regional associations for medical education.

The other two organizations that offer international accreditation are: the ACCM (The

Accreditation Commission on Colleges of Medicine) a non-profit organization based in Ireland

that offers accreditation for 4 countries in the Caribbean that do not have a national entity to

provide it (Cayman Islands, Saint Maarten, Nevis and Saba). The second one is the IAOMC

(International Association of Medical Colleges) that has worked with some irregularities, with low

impact. It has a range of fees that go from $600 to $20,000 for similar products depending on

the income of countries and nature of the medical school requesting accreditation.

Detailed information on each one of these organizations is provided in the inventory, including

mission, goals and objectives; sponsorship and leadership; type and characteristics of

memberships; accreditation criteria, process and fees; and additional information such as benefits

18

of accreditation, research projects, strategies to advance accreditation, quality of education,

sharing of information and partnerships.

SURVEY FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS

DOMESTIC SURVEY

The CAHME PHASE II International Health Education Survey consisted of 40 questions placed in

five sections: global center, research, study abroad, courses and partnerships. Trained research

assistants were used to conduct telephone interviews, record responses and tabulate results. The

survey was administered to 40 graduate PDs and 26 PDs responded giving a response rate of

65%.

The results of the PHASE I study set the foundation for the PHASE II study. Work on PHASE II

began September 1, 2011. A thorough analysis of CAHME PHASE I results were used to identify

universities with specific international involvement. The initial study in 2010-2011 showed that of

the 72 CAHME accredited programs, of which 66 PDs participated giving a response rate of

91.67%, less than half of the graduate programs were involved in international health

management activities. The follow-up survey was developed to obtain more in depth information

on CAHME accredited programs in specific areas of international involvement. The telephone

survey had 40 questions designed to answer the following questions:

1) Does your college/university have a global center through which healthcare management

education is delivered?

2) Do program faculties have grants with international focus?

3) Are any of your graduate faculties involved in international research studies?

4) Does your graduate program have any international healthcare management partnerships

(i.e., a formal working relationship with a program in another country)?

5) Does your program teach any courses at foreign universities?

6) Please list courses that your program teaches only internationally.

7) Does your program offer a track or concentration in international health management

education?

Demographic information was collected and additional faculty identified who have an interest in

international health education. An initial e-mail was sent notifying the PD of the telephone survey.

This was followed by telephone contacts to administer the survey.

Global Center

19

Does your department, college, or university have a global center through which healthcare

management education activities/initiatives are delivered?

2/26 universities (7.7%) reported that they have a global center through which healthcare

management education activities are delivered.

One was housed in the college and the other one was housed in the school of public health.

In terms of activities and focus of the global center, most activities were directed towards

global health initiatives and delivery of courses such as epidemiology and public health.

Two universities had a center for global health housed in their public health department, but

they did not have a global center per say.

Research

Are any of your faculties involved in international research studies?

18/26 universities (69.2%) had their faculties involved in international research.

A majority of the respondents focused their research on quality, education, clinical and

management aspects of healthcare delivery. Others included telehealth, HIV, political

economics, patient satisfaction, public health, and accreditation.

2

24

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Yes(7.7%)

No(92.3%)

Glo

bal

Cen

ter

n=

26

18

8

0 5 10 15 20

Yes(69.2%)

No(26.9%)

Fac

ult

y I

nv

olv

ed in

Inte

rnat

ion

al R

esea

rch

(n=

26

)

20

What countries are involved?

A majority of the research was done in Africa, China, France, Taiwan, India and South

America.

Other countries included:

Saudi Arabia

Indonesia

Thailand

Italy

Sweden

Kazakhstan

Turkey

Scotland

Haiti

Ecuador

Slovakia

Georgia

Cuba

Switzerland

Bangladesh

Greece

Are other universities involved?

11/26 (42.3%) programs involved other universities in research.

The universities involved are:

Fudan University, China Shandong University, China

10

6

4

3

2

2

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Africa

China

France

Taiwan

India

South America

International Research: Country & Frequency Rate

11

15

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Yes(42.3%)

No(57.7%)

Un

iver

siti

tes

inv

olv

ed in

Inte

rnat

ion

al R

esea

rch

(n=

26

)

21

University of Costa Rica

University of Aberdeen

Florida International University

University of Scranton

University of Leone

France University of Political Science


University of Nnetz, France

FGV, ORT- Uruguay, Brazil

University of Bayruth

12/26 (46.1 %%) universities reported they received some form of funding. A majority of the

groups utilized the department and the university funding along with the students' tuition.

Other sources included NIH, CDC, USAID, host country government, Hitachi Corporation & King

Bander Foundation.

9/26 (34.6%) programs reported on the number of international research studies in their

program. The average research studies came out to be 10 for most of the programs that

responded.

Study Abroad

Do you offer study abroad opportunities to graduate students in your program?

11/26 (42.3%) programs reported that they offered study abroad opportunities to graduate

students.

Is study abroad offered as an elective course?

11

15

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Yes(42.3%)

No(57.7%)

Stu

dy

Ab

road

Op

po

rtu

nit

es f

or

Gra

du

ate

Pro

gram

s(n

=2

6)

22

9 out of the 11 programs that offer study abroad programs offered it as an elective course.

5 programs offered study abroad as a part of other courses. The other courses included

interdisciplinary approaches and summer internships.

What countries do graduate students visit?

The countries graduate students visited the most for study abroad included China (Response

rate-4) and Germany (response rate-4) followed by other countries. Other countries include

(response rate 1):

Italy

Costa Rica

India

Ghana

Swaziland

South Africa

Sub Saharan

Haiti

Laos

Cuba

Vietnam

Thailand

9

2

0 2 4 6 8 10

Yes

No

Stu

dy

Ab

road

as

anel

ecti

ve

cou

rse(

n=

11

/26

)

4

4

0 1 2 3 4 5

China

Germany

CountriesFrequency Rate

23

Slovakia

Abu Dhabi

France

Belgium

What is the length of time for study abroad?

The length of study abroad varied from up to 2 weeks to 14 weeks. A majority of the

programs (Response rate-5) offered study abroad programs for the length of up to 2 weeks.

Global Health Courses:

Do you offer a course on global health management?

10/ 26 (38.4%) universities offered courses in global health management.

Of the 10 universities who do offer global health courses, the following are the type of

courses offered:

Global Health Management

Comparative Health Systems

International Health Systems

International Healthcare Delivery

International Health Policy

51

32

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Upto 2 Weeks

Upto 8 Weeks

Length of Study Abroad:

Frequency(n=11/26)

10

16

0 5 10 15 20

Yes(38.4%)

No(61.6%)

Co

urs

es in

Glo

bal

Hea

lth

Man

agem

ent(

n=

26

)

24

A majority of the responses focused on public health being the main focus of the course.

Only one university noted that they offered other international courses along with the global

health management.

Types of teaching models used in the classroom were reported as guest lectures, site visits,

projects, interactive methods and the standard classroom model.

How are the international courses offered?

8/11 programs reported that classes are taught in the classroom only. 3/11 programs

reported there is a blended style of how the courses were taught. None of the programs

offered only online classes for global health management.

Where are the international courses offered?

7 programs offered global health management courses only in the US. 3 programs offered

the international courses in and outside of the US. None of the programs offered global

health management courses only outside the US.

Partnerships:

8

0

3

0 2 4 6 8 10

In Class Only

Online Only

Blended

Ho

w a

re i

nt'

lco

urs

eso

ffer

ed(n

=1

0/

26

)

7

0

3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Only in the US

Outside the US

Both

Wh

ere

are

the

Int'

l co

urs

es o

ffer

ed?

(n=

10

/26

)

25

Does your program have any international healthcare management partnerships? (i.e a

formal working relationship with a program/university in another country)

12/26 universities (46.1%) reported that they do have an international healthcare

management partnership and 14/26 (53.9%) reported that they do not have any formal

working relationships with other another country. The types of partnership included:

Mutual Agreement

Teaching Partnership

Memorandum of Understanding

Strategic Agreement

State Department Partnerships

Dual Degree program

A majority of responses reported that activities occurring within the partnerships were

research and teaching related. The rest of the activities reported were student exchange,

educationally related, and faculty learning related.

What countries are involved?

12

14

11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5

Yes(46.1%)

No(53.9%)

int'

l HC

M p

artn

ersh

ips

(fo

rmal

)

Do

es y

ou

r p

rogr

am h

ave

any

32

52

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

China

Others

Countries Involved in Int'l Partnerships(n=12/26)

Frequency

26

Programs had maximum international relationships with China (Response rate-3) and

Germany. (Response rate-2) The other countries involved are:

Costa Rica

France

Taiwan

Korea

Eurasian Countries

Funding for such partnerships was mainly secured through student tuitions. Other sources of

funds include university funds, program funds, host government funds and state department

funds.

Are other universities involved?

6/12 programs reported that had some involvement with other universities/ The universities

include:

Fudan University, China

Shandong University, China

Ganju University, China

France National School of Public Health

University of Michigan

King Fahad Medical City

Other:

6

6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Yes

No

Are

oth

er u

niv

ersi

ties

inv

olv

ed in

int'

l par

tner

ship

s (n

=1

2/2

6)

27

Does anyone on your graduate faculty participate in AUPHA Global Healthcare Management

Education Faculty Network?

10/26 (38.4%) universities reported their faculties are involved in AUPHA’s GHMEFN

Are there any new international initiatives in your program?

6/26 programs reported they had new international initiatives in place. Such initiatives include:

Health care Management Program in Taiwan

International Executive Healthcare Management Program

MBA in Healthcare and Global Health Initiatives

Administrative Internships in Germany and Latin America

Dual Degree: MBA in Health Services Management and Global Health Management

Study Abroad to China

INTERNATIONAL

10

16

0 5 10 15 20

Yes(38.4%)

No(61.6%)

AU

PH

A G

HM

EF

N P

arti

cip

atio

n(n

=2

6)

6

20

0 5 10 15 20 25

Yes(23%)

No(77%)

An

y n

ew I

nte

rnat

ion

alIn

itia

tiv

es(n

=2

6)

28

THE INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS: AN OVERVIEW

Table 1 provides key health data for each of the six countries studied. Appendix D provides a

detailed chart for each country with specific information regarding the economy, political status,

and brief description of the health care environment in the country. For those countries that do not

have data on the specific number of hospitals, we have made an effort to include data on what

proportion of beds available are provided through either public or private hospital facilities.

Table 1. Country Overview

COUNTRY POPULATION

GDP PER

CAPITA

($)

HEALTH

CARE

SPENDING

AS A % OF

GDP

PUBLIC

HOSPITALS

NUMBER

OF BEDS

PRIVATE

HOSPITALS

NUMBER

OF BEDS

ASIA

CHINA 1,330,141,29

5

6,600 5.8 14,000 - 5,736 -

INDIA 1,173,108,01

8

3,100 5.0 2,129 469,672 3,327 265,137

PHILIPPINES 99,900,177 3,300 3.9 700 - 1180 85,000

SINGAPORE 4,701,069 50,300 3.1 13 - 16 -

SOUTH KOREA 48,754,657 30,000 6.5 - - 92.6% 87.4%

EUROPE

CZECH

REPUBLIC

10,190,213 25,600 7.6 119 - 73 -

FRANCE 64,768,389 32,800 11.2 1,000a - 3,000b -

GERMANY 81,471,834 25,700 10.5 34% 8.17/1,000 28.8%

NFP, 38%

FP

-

29

IRELAND 4,670,976 37,300 7.6 51c .17/1,000 125d 23,000

NETHERLANDS 16,847,007 40,300 10.8 95 4.7/1,000 - -

SPAIN 40,548,753 33,700 8.5 319 - 800 160,000

SWEDENE 9,075,055 36,800 9.1 - - - -

UNITED

KINGDOM

61,284,806 35,200 8.4 851 - 270 -

LATIN AMERICA

BRAZIL 201,103,330 10,200 8.4 2,600 140,000 4,800 330,000

CHILE 16,746,491 14,700 6.2 207 - 179 -

COLOMBIA 44,725,543 43,500 5.6 899 1.1/1,000 - -

MEXICO 112,468,855 13,500 5.9 1,107f - 3,082 33,931

MIDDLE EAST

ISRAEL G,H 7,233,701 28,400 8.7 46 % - 34 %

SAUDI ARABIA 29,207,277 20,400 3.4 220 - 87 -

TURKEY 77,804,122 11,200 5.7 850 - 260 -

OTHER

AUSTRALIA 21,515,754 40,000 9.0 750 50,915 290 26,589

SOUTH

AFRICA

49,109,107 10,100 8.6 400 - 205 28,361

a Public hospitals provide 62% of all hospital beds b 18% of private beds not for profit, 20% for profit c Health Service Executive (HSE) operates these hospitals d Includes teaching, not-for-profit, for-profit e 21,000 total beds provided through public and private hospitals f 13% of a total 216 facilities g includes social security hospitals h 47 total hospitals provide 66% of all hospital beds

Table 2 summarizes our findings of Master’s degree programs in the study countries. It includes

those programs that are designated by the degree granting institution to be at the Master’s level.

Master’s degrees vary in length within and among countries so it is necessary to track each one to

determine to what extent it approximates the North American model. Table 2 summarizes

30

Master’s data from the total report spread sheet. It does not include the programs that are

designated as diplomas, which are included on the spreadsheet, along with certificates,

specializations, Bachelor’s degrees and doctoral degrees. The interpretation of diplomas presents

a complicated challenge. In some countries some diplomas in health administration (or related

title) are considered to be equivalent to a Master’s degree, while in some of the same countries

diplomas are also awarded in recognition of two-month courses. In some countries, diplomas

represent a post-graduate clinical specialization. There has been an effort to standardize such

titles in Europe, but it has not had any influence on other parts of the world.

Appendix C provides a comprehensive spreadsheet that displays information specific to

programs in each of the countries. This includes the name of the institution, and to the extent

available, degrees offered, duration of each program, language in which courses are taught, the

number of graduates per year, year each program started, and key contact information including

name, title, address, phone number, and email information.

Table 2. Master’s Programs

COUNTRY UNIVERSITIES:

ACTIVE IN THE FIELD

OFFER MASTER’S

DEGREE

OFFER MULTIPLE

MASTER’S DEGREES

ASIA

CHINA 6 3 1

INDIA 20 10 1

PHILIPPINES 4 2 -

SINGAPORE 5 4 -

SOUTH KOREA 13 13 1

EUROPE

CZECH REPUBLIC 6 6 -

FRANCE 8 5 3

GERMANY 19 19 2

IRELAND 4 4 2

NETHERLANDS 5 5 1

SPAIN 5 5

SWEDEN 2 1 -

31

UNITED

KINGDOM

54 41 8

LATIN AMERICA

BRAZIL 6 5 1

CHILE 3 4 -

COLOMBIA 5 5 3

MEXICO 10 9 2

MIDDLE EAST

ISRAEL 4 2 -

SAUDI ARABIA 2 2 -

TURKEY 4 2 -

OTHER

AUSTRALIA 16 15 5

SOUTH AFRICA 7 2 -

ACCREDITING ORGANIZATION PROFILES

The following accrediting agencies and related organizations are detailed in the individual

organization profiles attached. They are organized following the four pre-determined categories:

Health Services Administration (2 organizations); Business Administration (10 organizations); Public

Health (2 organizations) and; Medicine (7 organizations). Total profiles included: 21

Health Services Administration

CAHME. Health Administration Accreditation (USA & Canada) Graduate Programs.

www.cahme.org

AUPHA. Health Administration Certification (USA & Canada) Undergraduate Programs.

www.aupha.org

Note: No profile made for AUPHA and CAHME since they are the “home” organizations for

this study.

1. EHMA. European Health Management Association. http://www.ehma.org/. Offers

accreditation of Master Programs with FIBAA (The Foundation for International Business

http://www.cahme.org/

http://www.aupha.org/


32

Administration Accreditation) detailed in separate profile under business administration

section.

2. SHAPE (Society for Health Administration Programs in Education)

http://www.shape.org.au/ provides accreditation in association with ACHSM.

Australasian College of Health Services Management. http://www.achse.org.au/

Business Administration

1. AACSB. Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business. http://www.aacsb.edu/

2. ACBSP. Accreditation Council for Business Schools & Programs. http://www.acbsp.org/

3. EFMD, including EQUIS accreditation, EPAS accreditation and CEL accreditation. The most

important global business accreditation system. EFMD - The Management Development

Network http://www.efmd.org/

4. AMBA. Association of MBAs. http://www.mbaworld.com/ Accreditation of MBA, DBA &

MBM programs worldwide. http://www.mbaworld.com/worldwideaccreditation

5. FIBAA. The Foundation for International Business Administration Accreditation.

http://www.fibaa.org/en/welcome-page.html

6. ECBE. European Council for Business Education. http://www.ecbe.eu

7. CEEMAN IQA. Started in 1998 for business schools in Central and Eastern Europe. Later

expanded to all of Europe. International Management Development Association.


8. AABS. Association of African Business Schools http://www.aabschools.com/

9. CLADEA. The Latin American Council of Management Schools. www.cladea.org

10. AAPBS. Association of Asia-Pacific Business Schools. http://www.aapbs.org/

Public Health

1) CEPH. Council on Education of Public Health. http://www.ceph.org/

2) ASPHER. The Association of Schools of Public Health in the European Region.


Note: WFPHA. World Federation of Public Health Associations http://www.wfpha.org/.

This organization was reviewed but does not provide accreditation or any related

services. Not included in the report.

Medicine

1. LCME. Liaison Committee on Medical Education. http://www.lcme.org/

2. IAOMC. International Association of Medical Colleges. http://www.iaomc.org/

3. ACCM. The Accreditation Commission on Colleges of Medicine.

http://www.accredmed.org/ based in Ireland for the Caribbean Countries that do not

have national accreditation bodies [St. Maarten, Cayman Islands, Nevis & Saba].

Other related organizations that support the accreditation process:







http://www.mbaworld.com/worldwideaccreditation


http://www.ecbe.eu/







http://www.wfpha.org/




33

4. WFME. World Federation for Medical Education http://www.wfme.org/

5. ACGME. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education http://www.acgme.org/

6. NCFMEA. National Committee on Foreign Medical Education and Accreditation.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/ncfmea.html Department of Education.

7. ECFMG. Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates. http://www.ecfmg.org/

LIMITATIONS

This study had several limitations. Only 26 of 40 selected CAHME accredited PDs (65%)

responded to the telephone survey. Although the PHASE II results correlated with earlier findings

in the PHASE I study, response rates suggest variability and the possibility that additional

information on programs was not captured.

Based on the responses, it is not possible to know why some PDs elected not to respond to follow-

up calls to complete the survey. The telephone survey method was used to secure more detailed

program specific information, and to isolate additional faculty interested in global health

management. The PHASE I study had higher response rates using Survey Monkey online rather

than individual discussion responses. The telephone survey was administered in April/May 2012

and the ability to contact PDs may have been compromised at this time of year. Working through

PDs to access other faculty interested in global health management and secure additional contact

information on other faculty was not productive. CAHME contact information was not always

accurate or complete in terms of who was the PD, e-mail addresses and telephone numbers. This

made follow-up difficult in administering the telephone survey. Finally, there may have been new

efforts on the part of other CAHME accredited programs, in addition to the 40 selected programs

with international activities that were not selected to participate in PHASE II study.

CONCLUSIONS

DOMESTIC

The PHASE II International Health Management Education Survey used a telephone survey method

consisting of 40 items. Using the results from the PHASE I CAHME survey, 40 CAHME accredited

PDs were identified and contacted via e-mail, given a copy of the survey instrument, and then

contacted by telephone. The response rate was 65% with 26 of 40 PDs responding to the

telephone survey. Several attempts were made over the course of one month to re-contact PDs

who did not return telephone calls. The PHASE I studied provided outcome data to construct the

PHASE II CAHME survey instrument. The current survey focused on specific international health

management areas: global centers, research, courses, study abroad and partnerships.





34

All contacted programs had some type of international activity. The areas of involvement and

intensity of activity varied across all programs. 92% (N=26) of programs do not have a global

center, and in those instances where a center existed, most activities focused on providing courses.

In the area of research, 69% of programs had faculty involved with some type of international

research, and this research was focused in specific areas of quality, education and clinical aspects

of healthcare delivery. At present, 10 of 26 programs are involved in Africa followed by China,

France, Taiwan, India and South America. 11 of 26 (42%) programs conduct research with other

universities, and 12 of 26 (46%) programs receive external funding for conducting research from

grant sources.

Of the 40 programs studied, with 26 programs responding, 11 of 26 programs (42%) reported

offering study abroad. The majority of programs (82%) use elective courses to offer study

abroad. This survey showed that most study abroad occurs in Asian countries (China, Vietnam,

Thailand, India) followed by Western Europe (Germany, Italy, France), Eastern Europe (Slovakia),

Middle East and Africa. On the average, most graduate programs offered study abroad for the

length of 2 weeks.

Global health management courses were offered by 38% of the CAHME programs (10 out of

26). These type of courses were focused on comparative health systems, delivery of care, general

management with the majority focused on public health. Only a few had courses specific to global

health management. Most courses are offered in the USA and three of 26 programs (12%)

offered global health management courses outside of the USA. 73% of programs teach these

courses in the classroom and 27% of programs use a blended style in teaching courses (In class

and Online). The dominant teaching method is lecture with projects.

46% of programs (11 of 26) reported having international partnerships with another country.

The majority of partnerships focus on research and teaching. The location of these partnerships

are in China, Germany, Costa Rica, France, Taiwan, Korea, Slovakia and other Eurasian countries.

50% of these partnerships involve other universities and occur because of specific faculty

international interests in a country.

An interesting finding, consistent with the PHASE I study, is that only 38% of programs (10 out of

26) reported faculty who are involved in the Global Health Management Faculty Network

(GHMFN) of the Association of University Programs in Health Administration. Twenty-three percent

of programs reported new international activities focusing on teaching and research.

INTERNATIONAL

This report supplements the earlier survey of health services administration education in sixteen

countries, adding six. It generally follows the same methodology and report process. This study

did not undertake a survey of influential individuals in the field because of resource constraints

and the low number of responses to the earlier effort.

35

This study reinforced our earlier conclusion that the level of academic enterprise development is a

direct response to the status of the management function in the health services of each country,

which in turn reflects the role and status of professional management in the public and private

sectors.

Based upon our observations of the twenty-two study countries, we conclude that it is helpful to

visualize the status of the education system for health administration and the place of health

administration careerists in the service delivery system in terms of the degree of alignment

(congruence) between the two. The situation analysis of the countries can be arranged from those

that are highly aligned to the less aligned. In the highly aligned situation most, if not all, of the

senior positions in the public and private health services delivery systems are either occupied by

individuals with recognized credentials in the field, and/or the credential is a distinct advantage

for appointment or promotion.

In the highly aligned situation, the health systems administration education system is closely

articulated with the recognized competency needs of the system and is producing a sufficient

number of graduates to meet a substantial portion of the demand. There is a high degree of

professional identity and credential holders are likely to remain in the field. The only country that

comes close to this ideal model is Israel where the law requires that senior managers in the

provider systems have recognized health administration credentials. The requirement provides the

demand that drives the educational system to respond.

At the other end of the spectrum the degree of alignment is low, often reflecting low recognition

of management degrees/credentials in other sectors. Overall recognition of the value of the

credential is limited, usually to a few large government hospitals in capital cities and large

private providers. The credential is rarely cited in position qualifications, there is little professional

identity among administrators, there is not a career path associated with the credential and

individuals with the credential often move to other kinds of higher paying organizations. There

are few programs and usually there are a small number of students, reflecting the limited market.

The six countries may be categorized as highly industrialized (Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland,

Holland), industrialized (South Korea) and emerging (Colombia). The size and complexity of the

healthcare management market breaks out the same way. Colombia may be characterized as

exhibiting a developed system and market in large urban areas that is distinct from the low level

of rural health service development.

Of the six countries studied, South Korea appears to be the most robust in terms of healthcare

administration as a field and the health care institution sector in general. There is a relatively high

level of financial access to services, high level of providers by number and training, information

systems development and quality improvement efforts. Korea has more hospitals, more beds and

longer lengths-of-stay than most other industrialized countries. The field has strong professional

organizations, particularly the Korean Hospital Association. KHA’s partnership with JCI reflects

the national preoccupation with quality and competitiveness, with 26 accredited hospitals and the

number increasing.

36

The academic side of the field is as robust as the health service system. Several of the most

prestigious universities are in the field, with Master’s, PhDs, and research centers. There are many

programs distributed across the country that have large full and part-time enrollments. We did

find not any evidence of collaboration among the programs.

Germany is the other large and robust environment in this group. Health service delivery is a

prosperous sector in a prosperous country. It is all relative of course as Germany struggles with

cost containment. There are strong not-for-profit and for-profit components of the hospital sector.

Recent pressures for consolidation are similar to the U.S. experience, as are developments in

information systems, reimbursement, and quality improvement. Management as a profession is

highly regarded and we assume that applies to the health sector. There are many physicians in

management positions. Many of the German programs, at both the BA and Master’s level are

relatively new, reflecting a strong market for credentials that may be marketable in all levels in a

wide variety of commercial and service organizations.

Ireland, Holland, and the Czech Republic are relatively small industrialized countries. Ireland’s

delivery and educational infrastructures reflect the influence of the UK. Ireland does have mixed

hospital ownership, somewhat along the U.S. pattern. It is interesting to note that observers agree

that quality of care is very uneven and that the medical profession has not provided much

leadership. JCI accreditations have recently increased, which appears to reflect an effort by

quality leaders to differentiate them. Two institutions dominate credentialing for the field. The

Institute of Public Administration programs are more than fifty years old. The other is the Royal

College of Surgeons that oversees four related Master’s programs.

The situation in the Czech Republic is encouraging on the education side but not on the practice

side. Universities that are widely admired are in the field with both teaching and research.

Several faculty members are European leaders in health services research. Higher education is

participating in the broad European Community educational reform. These factors appear to

bode well for the vitality of the field. However, the hospital sector in particular is considered to

be poorly managed. Most hospitals are quasi-public and led by physicians who lack appropriate

competencies. Also important is the poor level of organization and management functions, along

with instability, which do not make health care management an attractive career.

All Dutch hospitals are public. They have an unusual management structure that makes it very

difficult to adapt to changing conditions, improve financial and medical performance, and to

attract qualified professional managers. The educational system, which includes leading

universities, prepares many individuals for mid-level administrative jobs in all aspects of the

system.

Colombia’s health care system is much like that other Latin American countries that have been

surveyed, particularly Mexico and Brazil. The systems provide extensive insurance coverage but

services are concentrated in the large cities. The differences between what services are available

in the cities and what is available a short distance away is the difference of two worlds.

Colombia has some model legislation, several world-class medical centers, strong medical

37

education, some research and a long tradition of education for hospital and health administration.

The health insurance program is widely considered to be one of the best designed in the

emerging world. There are substantial differences among the departments (states) in application.

It is struggling with immense corruption, underpayment to providers, and information system

failures.

The field of hospital and health services administration is very well developed. Efforts by the

Kellogg Foundation, AUPHA, and PAHO in the l960’s and 1970 have brought the leading

universities into the field and they continue to have strong graduate programs. They have strong

faculties that enjoy wide respect among practitioners, many of whom are program graduates.

The outlook for growth in the field is good. The political situation is stable and improving. The

government is reorganizing the health insurance plans, putting more money into the delivery

system, and professional education.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Phase II study for CAHME required that a strategy and plan of action be developed to

implement international demonstration site visits using the newly adopted 2013 CAHME

Accreditation Criteria. It is anticipated that funding as part of a PHASE III study would allow for

the implementation of the strategy and plan of action by CAHME.

Globalization of health management education continues to mature in response to the need to

assure access to healthcare services in every country, addressing the demand for cost effective

care, and improving quality of care. The issues of cost, access and quality are global and are

driving the need for trained leaders and managers who can improve the performance of health

systems and in particular effectively manage care across public and private sectors.

The notion that CAHME accreditation would be embraced by other countries is not realistic. There

is no evidence to suggest a market demand for external health care management accreditation.

Most countries have their own accrediting structures and systems for university education, and the

process in most is authorized and mandated by national governments. With the exception of some

activity in general business administration that is driven by unique circumstances, the concept of

voluntary, peer review as embodied in accreditation is not utilized in other regions of the world.

However, a market could develop if and when international programs embrace the concept of

benchmarking, centers of excellence and evidence based practices as a way of improving

outcomes. It might also change as “universities and education” continues to become more global

and there is more exchange and interaction of students, faculty and courses across countries and

regions.

It is important to recognize that the growth of the field in the next decade and beyond will be in

the cities of the emerging economies. Most of these countries are either engaged now in universal

health coverage or are moving in that direction. There is an opportunity to contribute to their

efforts to improve health system performance through strengthening managerial competencies

38

and professionalism. The success of such a contribution is dependent upon recognition of the need

for maximum country ownership, or at least participation in improvement efforts and their

resistance to the perceived imposition of foreign behavioral expectations. Accreditation by an

American organization is likely to encounter resistance by all but a few institutions. There is a very

limited market among such institutions. Their agenda is usually to build internal or international

prestige and private market development. However, to improve the health of the public, the

emphasis has to be on the broad indigenous base of health administration education.

Our recommendation is that a well-conceived and developed process for external recognition/

certification based on broadly applicable criteria may have traction if focused on global health

management, leadership development, quality and improved outcomes across the continuum of

care. Such certification can focus on professionalism, competencies, teaching methods and

processes within higher education. Certification can be used to promote assessment of student

outcomes, impact on managerial practices, as well as promoting program resource and faculty

development. In other words, it may accomplish the same objectives as accreditation, without all

of the administrative and regulatory complexity. If it is properly designed to have international

legitimacy certification is likely to be widely accepted.

The certification process approach could be implemented in several ways: 1) CAHME

International Certification, 2) Certification by The Association of University Programs in Health

Administration (AUPHA) as the recognized educational organization that has some international

recognition; or 3) a hybrid CAHME and AUPHA collaboration model. The latter strategy combines

professional identity with a form of external peer review employing appropriately modified

2013 CAHME Accreditation Criteria in a joint effort. To implement this approach it will be

essential for AUPHA to considerably strengthen its international membership base and to expand

international faculty participation. We suggest that the strategy be further elaborated by a joint

committee of CAHME and AUPHA that should include some international faculty members.

Combining both cultures and practices in support of international certification shares risk,

investment capital and maximizes human resources to implement a new model of global health

management certification. The development, implementation and evaluation of such a hybrid

model would be managed under the PHASE III study.

The strategy requires a plan of action with specific steps under a PHASE III study approach.

Suggested steps include the following:

1) Award Phase III study to independent

contractor

September 2012

2) CAHME Board and AUPHA Board appoints

three international fellows to review and revise

strategy/plan of action

September 2012

3) Select two demonstration sites and teams October 2012

4) Develop a team of five international experts November 2012

39

familiar with accreditation/certification to work

with each demonstration site

5) 2013 CAHME Criteria reviewed and revised to

create certification criteria, use international

experts and international fellows

January 2013

6) AUPHA and CAHME joint committee established

to develop an organizational structure and

process

February 2013

7) Assessment and evaluation criteria determined

and developed prior to conducting

demonstration site visits

March 2013

8) Site visit #1 conducted April 2013

9) Site visit #2 conducted May 2013

10) Assessment and evaluation of process and

criteria

June 2013

11) Certification model and criteria approved July 2013

12) New AUPHA/CAHME effort initiated August 2013

Dr. West has chaired and conducted 3 separate international site visits using a team of evaluators

from Austria, England, USA, Italy, and Hungry. International observers have also been part of the

process. CAHME criteria were modified and used in these accreditation site visits along with other

European criteria. A 3/4-day site visit was conducted with a formal report being issued by the

site visit team. This has been done over the last 10 years with two universities in the Slovak

Republic (CEE Region). The project was initiated under a USAID/AIHA grant. Survey

recommendations have been issued and follow-up site visits conducted to determine compliance

with criteria related and consultative recommendations. The current 2013 CAHME Criteria and

Standards were successfully used on an international site survey visit at St. Elizabeth University in

Bratislava, Slovak Republic in April 2012. It was determined that the majority of CAHME criteria

could be applied outside of the USA and used in another country.

APPENDIX A: DOMESTIC SURVEY

International Health Education Survey

Introduction

40

This survey research is an initiative of the Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Management

Education (CAHME), implemented by the University of Scranton and Atlas Health Foundation. It is

supported primarily by the ARAMARK Charitable Fund with contributions from the University of

Scranton and Atlas Health Foundation. The project team includes:

Daniel J. West, Jr., PhD, FACHE Principal Investigator


Gary L. Filerman, PhD, MHA President

Atlas Health Foundation

Bernardo Ramirez, MD, MBA Assistant Professor & Consultant


Purpose of Survey

We are interested in assessing the extent of international healthcare management education

activities of CAHME accredited programs; more specifically, involvement in international health

administration courses, partnerships, research, study abroad, and global centers.

Program Directors

Graduate PDs are requested to complete this survey by telephone interview. Survey results will

be shared with all CAHME accredited programs in the future. Your participation is important so

we can develop a profile of CAHME programs with global involvement.

Directions for Completing this Telephone Survey

Your input and participation is very important.

We are interested in obtaining information on international research, partnerships, courses taught,

global centers and study abroad.

Please respond to the following 40 items as they pertain to graduate healthcare management

education. The entire survey should take between 15–20 minutes to complete.

Participation in this study is voluntary and may be discontinued at any time. Completion of the

survey implies informed consent. All responses will be treated confidentially and results will be

reported in aggregate.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding the survey research, you may contact Daniel J.

West, Jr., PhD, the survey administrator, at [email protected] or (570) 941-4126.

mailto:[email protected]

41

If you have questions concerning your rights as a research participant, contact Tabbi Miller-

Scandel, Research Compliance coordinator, IMBM 203, University of Scranton, Scranton, PA

18510, phone (570) 941-6190.

We appreciate your time, involvement, and willingness to contribute to a better understanding of

international healthcare management education for CAHME accredited programs.

APPENDIX B: CAHME TELEPHONE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

Section One – Voluntary Informed Consent

Please answer the following two questions.

1. We are conducting a 15-20 minute telephone survey for CAHME focusing on international

healthcare management education initiatives. These initiates include partnerships, global

centers, courses, research and study abroad. Are you willing to voluntarily participate in this

telephone survey?

____ Yes

____ No

2. You can discontinue your participation in this study at any time. Completion of this telephone

interview implies informed consent. Are you giving your informed consent to participate?

____ Yes

____ No

Section Two – Demographic Information

Please provide the following information.

42

3. Contact Information (Program Director)

Name

Position

E-mail Address

Telephone #

FAX #

4. University Information

Program Name

University Name

Address

City/Town

State

Zip Code

Country

Section Three – Global Center

Please provide information on your program.

5. Does your department, college, or university have a global center through which healthcare

management education initiatives/activities are delivered?

____ Yes

____ No

6. If yes, what is the name of the center and where is it located?

6.1 Name: ___________________________________________________________

6.2 Location:__________________________________________________________

43

In the Department? ____ Yes ____ No

Within the College? ____ Yes ____ No

At the University level? ____ Yes ____ No

Outside the University? ____ Yes ____ No

8. What is the focus/vision of the global center?

Section Four – Research


9. Are any of your faculty involved in international research studies.

____ Yes

____ No

10. What is the focus of the research (i.e., clinical, quality, education, management, etc.)?

11. What is the source of funding (i.e., USAID, DOD, NIH, CDC, etc.)?

12. What countries are involved (please list)?

13. Are other universities involved (please list)?

14. Total number of research studies in your program?

44

15. Are there specific faculty members who should be contacted to further discuss international

research?

Name E-mail Telephone

Section Five – Study Abroad


16. Do you offer study abroad opportunities for graduate students in your program?

____ Yes

____ No

17. Is study abroad offered as an elective course?

____ Yes

____ No

18. Is study abroad offered as part of other courses in your program (Please list)?

____ Yes

____ No

If yes, what courses?

19. What countries do graduate students visit?

20. What is the length of time for study abroad?

21. Are there specific faculty members who should be contacted about study abroad?

45


Section Six – Courses


22. Do you offer a course on global health management?

____ Yes

____ No

Title of the Course: ____________________________________________________

23. What is the focus of the course (public health, policy, epidemiology, etc.)?

24. Do you offer other international courses in your program?

____ Yes

____ No

Name of Course Credits Required/Elective

How many of your faculty teach international courses? _____

25. Describe the type of teaching methods used in these courses.

26. How are international courses offered?

46

On line ____ Yes ____ No

In class (Face-to-Face) ____ Yes ____ No

Blended ____ Yes ____ No

27. Where are these international courses (for credit) taught?

Only in the USA (Domestic) ____ Yes ____ No

Outside of the USA ____ Yes ____ No

Both Locations ____ Yes ____ No

28. Are there specific faculty members who should be contacted about specific courses?


Section Seven – Partnerships


29. Does your program have any international healthcare management partnerships (i.e.

a formal working relationship with a program/university in another country)?

____ Yes

____ No

30. What type of partnership and focus?

31. What activities occur within the partnership?

32. How long has this partnership existed?

33. What countries are involved?

47

34. How is the partnership funded?

35. Are other Universities involved?

____ Yes

____ No

Names of these Universities (Please list)?

36. Are there specific faculty members who should be contacted to discuss the partnership?


Section Eight – Other


37. Does anyone on your graduate faculty participate in the AUPHA Global Healthcare

Management Education Network (GHMEFN)?

____ Yes

____ No

38. How many faculty participate?

39. Are there specific faculty members who should be contacted about participating in the

Global Faculty Network?


48

40. Are there any new international initiatives in your program?

APPENDIX C: INTERNATIONAL DATABASE

The database can be found in the accompanying Excel spreadsheet. This file provides specific

information (to the extent that we could find it) for each program in each country including the

institution name, program offered, qualification obtained, program affiliations, language in which

the program is taught, duration of the program, number of graduates, year the program was

established and contact information including website, address, phone number, key contact name

and title, and email address when available.

49

APPENDIX D: COUNTRY PROFILES AND PROGRAM TEMPLATES

COLOMBIA

POPULATION

Age Structure

0-14 years: 26.7% (male 6,109,495/female 5,834,273)


65 years and over: 6.1% (male 1,159,691/female 1,587,277) (2011 est.)

Population 44,725,543

HEALTH STATUS

Infant Mortality

Rate

Total: 16.39 deaths/1,000 live births

Male: 19.92/1,000 live births

Female: 12.65/1,000 live births (2011 est.)

Life Expectancy

at Birth

Total Population: 74.55 years

Male: 71.27 years

Female: 78.03 years (2011 est.)

50

CHARACTERISTICS

Religions Roman Catholic 90%, other 10%

Languages Spanish (official)

Geographic

Size

Total: 1,138,910 sq. km

Land: 1,038,700 sq. km

Water: 100,210 sq. km

ECONOMY

Economy

Due to the international financial crisis and lessening demand for Colombia’s

exports, the country’s economy grew 2.7% in 2008, and .8% in 2009, but

rebounded to around 4.4% in 2010. Near the end of 2010, Colombia

experienced massive flooding, with damages exceeding $6 billion. The

government encouraged exporters to diversify their customer base beyond the US

and Venezuela, and continues to pursue free trade agreements with Asian and

South American partners, trade accord with Canada was expected to go into

effect in 2011. Improved relations with Venezuela have eased tensions about

restrictions regarding trade, but the business sector remains concerned.

GDP Per Capita $435.4 billion

GOVERNMENT

Type Republic; executive branch dominates government structure

Components 32 departments (states)

Form

Executive Branch:

Chief of State: President Juan Manual Santos Calderon (since 2010);

Legislative Branch:

Bicameral Congress

Judicial Branch:

Four roughly coequal, supreme judicial organs; Supreme Court of Justice (highest

court of criminal law; judges are selected by their peers from the nominees of the

Superior Judicial Council for eight-year terms).

51

Government

Departments

Involved In

Health Care

System for the Selection of Beneficiaries of Social Programs (El Sistema de

Seleccion de Beneficiarios para Programas Sociales), national system of

identification of beneficiaries for social subsidy.

The National Health Superintendent (Superintendencia de Salud) defines which

organizations may qualify for EPS (health promoting entities). The function of EPS

is to sell health service packages to the public.

HEALTH CARE SPENDING

% of GDP 5.6% in 2005

Government Spending on health accounted for 20.5% of total government expenditures and

for 84.1% of total health expenditures in 2003.

Private N/A

FACILITIES

Hospitals 4,458 health institutions

Public 899; 15 public medical schools with their own hospitals

Private 38 private medical schools with agreements with local hospitals

THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM

Description

It is unusual to point out that the recent decrease in health expenditures as a

percentage of GNP is good news. It does not reflect a decrease in health sending,

but rather Colombia’s economic growth. However, the total cost of the health

system has risen to the point that the financial stability of the insurance system is

threatened.

On August 12, 2011 President Juan Manuel Santos announced that the Colombian

health sector will be restructured over the next two years. This announcement

came in response to deep public dissatisfaction, large-scale insurance scandals,

Supreme Court mandated system corrections and growing disillusion with the last

system reform. The Supreme Court in 2008 took the unusual step of issuing a

detailed Bill of Health Rights and established dates by which the government must

submit plans and progress reports addressing system failures. The promised

changes are to include an infusion of federal money, coverage expansion, closing

40-45insurance companies and placing the survivors under more rigorous

supervision. In October, the head of the powerful Colombian Association of

Hospitals and Clinics said that basis of the crisis is “that the health sector has lost

the vision that it must have as a true health system.”

52

The President’s message also included “Healthcare is not a business and should not

be approached as a business.” This viewpoint has appeared in many recent

statements by health and policy leaders, some of whom compare the

commercialization of Colombian health care with the United States in unfavorable

terms. The focus of a September 2011 visit by the minister of health to the World

Bank was on approaches to increasing regulation of the private sector. It is clear

that the restructuring will address the role of the private sector in provision and

insurance.

The complex Colombian health system is based on four schemes, three of which

are insurance systems. They are: 1) the contributory regime (CR) covering the

formal labor sector 2) the subsidized regime (SR) for informal workers and 3) the

partially subsidized regime (PSR) for low income families that are not in the

formal labor market The fourth is the supply side coverage scheme (SSCS) that is

not insurance-based. CR is financed by employer and employee payroll

deductions. The others are funded primarily from general federal, state and

municipal taxes, with some transfers from the CR fund and user fees. The PSR

provides a smaller service package and requires deductibles and co-payments.

Both of the insurance schemes provide a defined mandatory health package.

Individuals without any coverage have access to ambulatory and inpatient

services through the municipal public hospital network.

This system was essentially established by the famous 1993 Law 100 that was

widely recognized as one of the most innovative reforms in the region in many

years. Based on managed competition, it has been successful in raising coverage

rates from 58% in 1997 to 95% in 2010. Out-of-pocket is very low compared to

Brazil and Mexico, indicating that the system is successfully helping to reduce the

impact of catastrophic illnesses. But it is clear that there are coverage gaps and

particularly geographic inequalities. The existing system is not keeping up with the

rapid demographic and epidemiological transition to non-communicable disease.

Thus the President’s promise to bring all minors and people over 60 into coverage

in 2011 and everyone else in 2015.

The insured enroll in one of the about 70 Health Promotion Companies (EPS) which

are either public or private. EPSs are capitated, compete for enrollees and

contract with providers for services. Inpatient care is frequently reimbursed on a

negotiated fee-for-service or services packages. Many of the EPSs are under

investigation for fraud. Some of the problems of the EPSs have been attributed to

their being supervised by health as opposed to financial authorities, which has

been changed by the President. The situation is so bad that public opinion may be

moving to support a single purchaser (government) system.

The Supreme Court found that quality of care is a national problem and

53

mandated the government to develop an action plan. Many public hospitals have

been shown to have poor management and poor health outcomes. The situation

has been attributed to low managerial competence and a lack of incentives to

improve performance. In an effort to drive improvement recently some provider

payments have been tied to measures such as post-discharge follow up capacity.

Most importantly the President has committed new resources to the public

hospitals, polices to improve clinical and financial management and policies to

improve health professions education.

It has proven difficult to obtain comprehensive information on Colombian

hospitals. It is estimated that there are about 5500 “health institutions,” including

about 900 public hospitals/medical centers. There is a classification system that

places 170 hospitals as second or third-level. There is a large and growing for-

profit hospital sector and some medical tourism from the region. The total number

of acute beds was estimated in 2010 to be 24,800. It is interesting to note that

there are only 324 members of the Colombian Association of Hospitals and

Clinics.

There are extreme contrasts in hospital quality, from the very poor in rural areas

to world-class medical centers, including a Johns Hopkins affiliate, Fundacion

Santa Fe de Bogota. It was the second of the two JSI accredited hospitals.

Twenty-one hospitals are accredited by the Colombian Institute of Technical

Standards and Certification–ICCNTEC, an internationally recognized general

standards organization, which is accredited by ISQua. The September, 2011 issue

of International America Economia, a popular hemisphere-wide magazine,

included 14 Colombian hospitals among the 45 “Best in Latin America.”

There are 38 private and 15 public medical schools. Fifteen of the schools own

teaching hospitals. The others contract with local hospitals, which is a continuing

source of conflict between them.

Abstracted from:

Central Intelligence Agency. (2011, November 12). The World Factbook.

Retrieved November 12, 2011, from Central Intelligence Agency:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

Bogota, B. E. (April 2009). General Summary of the Health Care Market in

Colombia.

Colombia Reports. (2011, August 12). Universal Healthcare for Colombians by

2012: Major Changes Announced by President of Colombia Juan Manuel Santos.

Colombia Reports.

Escobar, M.-L. (2005). Health Sector Reform in Colombia. World Bank Institute,

54

COLOMBIA PROGRAMS

Country Colombia

Institution Universidad de los Andes - School of Government and Faculty of

Medicine

Program(s) Master of Public Health (MPH)

Website www.uniandes.edu.co

Address Cra 1 Nº 18A- 12 Bogotá, (Colombia)

Telephone/Fax +571 3394949 - +571 3394999

Affiliations N/A

University Contact(s)

Name and Title

Oscar Bernal, PhD –

Email [email protected]

Language(s) Spanish

Duration of Each

Program

60 credits, four elective courses in school of government, three in

medical school, and four in other faculties. Students may take

electives from Yale, Hopkins, Emory, Tulane, University College

London, and Foundation Cruz in Brazil. Concentrations in policy and

Development Outreach, 6-22.

Medici, A. (2009, May 10). Colombia: The Sinuous Path to the Universal Health

Care. Retrieved 2011, from Health Care Global Monitor: blogspot.com

The World Bank. (2011). Colombia Health Insurance System Background

Information and Objectives. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

World News. (2011, September). Colombia's Poorest Could Lose Healthcare.

Retrieved September 2011, from AmericaEconomia: www.upi.com

http://www.uniandes.edu.co/


55

epidemiology.

Number of Graduates

Per Year

20

Year Program(s)

Started

2012

Country Colombia

Institution Universidad de Antioquia - Facultad Nacional de Salud Publica

Program(s) 1) Public Health

2) Specialization in Health Services Administration

Website www.udea.edu.co/portal/page/portal/SedesDependencias/Salud

Address Calle 70 52-27

Telephone/Fax + (57-1) 3208320 ext. 5426

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

1) Prof. Blanca Miriam Chavez – Coordinadora de Posgrados

Facultad

2) Glima Estella Vargas Pena – Coordinator

3) Gladys Arboleda Posada – Coordinator of Health Services

Program

4) Prof. Luis Lopez – Specialization Coordinator

5) Monica Maria Lopera Medina – Coordinator of MPH Program

Telephone/Fax +57 (2) 3.2121


Language(s) Spanish

Duration of Each

Program

8 semesters, residential, students coming from the Technology (TASS)

and Environmental Sanitation (TESA) programs can take a four

semester semi-residential program.

Number of Graduates

Per Year N/A

Year Program(s) N/A

http://www.udea.edu.co/portal/page/portal/SedesDependencias/Salud


56

Started

Country Colombia

Institution

Universided Javeriana - Facultad de Ciencias Eonomia -

Collaboration with the faculties of Nursing, Medicine, Dentistry and

CENDEX

Program(s)

1) Maestria en Salud Publica (MPH)

2) Specialization in Health Administration with Emphasis on Social

Security

3) Specialization in Quality Management of Health Services

4) Specialization in Hospital Management (sponsored by Colombian

Association of Hospitals and Clinics)

Website

http://puj-

portal.javeriana.edu.co/portal/page/portal/Facultad%20de%20Cie

ncias%20Economicas%20y%20Administrativas/pos_ger_hospit_prese

ntacion

Address Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences - Calle 40 No. 6-23

Piso 7 Building Gabriel Giraldo, SJ

Telephone/Fax +57 1320 8320 ext. 5124

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

1) Dr. Francisco Jose Yepes Lujan – Management Director Health

Postgraduate

2) Astrid Rodriguez Cajiao – Director Management Specialization

Telephone (571) 320 8320


Language(s) Spanish

Duration of Each

Program

1) 444 classroom hours, 276 hours of field work (720 hours), 4

semesters

2) 600 classroom hours, 32 credits, 3 semesters

3) 592 classroom hours, 37 credits, 3 cycles plus practicum

4) 512 hours, 32 credits, 2 semesters

Number of Graduates N/A


57

Per Year

Year Program(s)

Started N/A

Country Colombia

Institution Universidad del Norte-Barranquilla

Program(s)

1) Specialization in Health Services Management

2) Specialization in Quality and Health Auditing Management

3) Master of Public Health (MPH)

Website http://www.uninorte.edu.co/English/Graduate/Health_Sciences_progr

ams.html#5

Address Km.5 Vía Puerto Colombia

Telephone/Fax Tel: + 57 (5) 3509509

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title Rodrigo Barbosa Correa - Professor


Language(s) Spanish

Duration of Each

Program

1) N/A

2) 2 semesters

3) 4 semesters, 2 years

Number of Graduates

Per Year N/A

Year Program(s)

Started 1993

Country Colombia

Institution Universidad del Valle - Escuela de Salud Publica (School of Public

Health)


58

Program(s) Specialization in Health Administration

Website http://salud.univalle.edu.co

Address

Headquarters

City University - Melendez

Street 13 No 100-00

Cali, Colombia

Telephone/Fax Tel: +57 (2) 3.2121

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

1) Harold Aldana Granobles – Director of MHA Program

2) General Contact

Email 1) [email protected]

2) [email protected]

Language(s) Spanish

Duration of Each

Program 2 years

Number of Graduates

Per Year N/A

Year Program(s)

Started N/A



59

CZECH REPUBLIC

POPULATION

Age Structure

0-14 years: 13.5% (male 704,495/female 666,191)


65 years and over: 16.3% (male 663,982/female 1,001,613) (2011 est.)

Population 10,190,213 (July 2011 est.)

HEALTH STATUS

Infant Mortality

Rate


Male: 4.06 deaths/1,000 live births

Female: 3.38 deaths/1,000 live births (2011 est.)

Life Expectancy

at Birth

Total population: 77.19 years

Male: 73.93 years


CHARACTERISTICS

Religions Roman Catholic 26.8%, Protestant 2.1%, other 3.3%, unspecified 8.8%,

unaffiliated 59% (2001 census)

Languages Czech 94.9%, Slovak 2%, other 2.3%, unidentified 0.8% (2001 census)

Geographic

Size

Total: 78,867 sq km

Land: 77,247 sq km

Water: 1,620 sq km

60

ECONOMY

Economy

The Czech Republic has one of the most developed and industrialized economies

in Central and Eastern Europe. Its strong industrial tradition dates to the 19th

century, when Bohemia and Moravia were the industrial heartland of the Austro-

Hungarian Empire. The Czech Republic has a well-educated population and a

well-developed infrastructure.

The principal industries are motor vehicles, machine-building, iron and steel

production, metalworking, chemicals, electronics, transportation equipment,

textiles, glass, brewing, china, ceramics, and pharmaceuticals. The main

agricultural products are sugar beets, fodder roots, potatoes, wheat, and hops.

As a small, open economy in the heart of Europe, economic growth is strongly

influenced by demand for Czech exports and flows of foreign direct investment

(FDI).

Challenges include transforming the economy from a strong reliance on

manufacturing (especially the auto sector) toward a more diversified knowledge-

based economy, reforming public procurement, increasing transparency, and

reforming the pension and health care systems.

GDP Per Capita $25,600

GOVERNMENT

Components 13 regions

Form

Legal System:

Civil law system based on former Austro-Hungarian civil codes and socialist

theory; note - legislation is actively modernizing the legal system.

Executive Branch:

Chief of State: President Vaclav Klaus (since 2003)

Head of Government: Prime Minister Petr Necas (since June 2010);

Cabinet: Cabinet appointed by the president on the recommendation of the Prime

Minister.

Legislative Branch:

Bicameral Parliament consists of the Senate (81 seats; members elected by

popular vote to serve six-year terms; one-third elected every two years).

61

Judicial Branch:

Supreme Court; judges are appointed by the president for an unlimited term;

Constitutional Court; 15 judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by

the Senate for a ten-year term.

Government

Departments

Involved In

Health Care

Ministry of Health (changed 11 times since 1989)


% of GDP 7.6 %

Government N/A

Private N/A

FACILITIES

Hospitals 7.18 beds/1,000 population (2008) total beds 63,622

Public 119

Private 73


Description

The Czech health care system is based upon universal compulsory insurance

through health insurance funds. The funds (ten in 2009) are quasi-public, not-for-

profit autonomous payers and purchasers. The system is financed primarily by

wage-based contributions. Less financing comes from general taxes and co-

payments (for doctor visits, drugs, hospital days and after-hours care). The co-

payments are a recurring political issue, with the new right government doubling

the hospital payment effective June 2011 and reducing the national hospital

budget for 2011 below the level of 2010.

The benefit package is unusually broad, including spa treatments and over-the-

counter drugs if prescribed. There is some control on benefits through: a) implicitly

and explicitly excluded procedures such as cosmetic surgery and some dental

procedures, b) formularies of approved drugs and devices and c) the

Reimbursement Directive that is produced by the annual negotiation process

between the funds and the providers. It is a guide for defining specific conditions

of reimbursement as amendments to the existing contracts. The plan does not

62

cover maternity benefits, which are covered by social security.

Patient access to secondary care is not restricted by a gatekeeper system.

Patients may go directly to any specialist and they do so frequently. Patients must

have a physician referral to be admitted to a hospital.

The General Health Insurance Fund (VZP) is the largest, covering 63% of the

population (2007). VZP manages a central pool that is used to redistribute

insurance funds according to a risk-adjustment scheme. The other funds cover the

employees of large companies or categories of employers such as mines and

banks. Primary care payment is chiefly by risk-adjusted capitation but preventive

services and home visits are on a fee-for-service basis. The total number of

patients per physician is subject to a limit, after which the capitation is reduced.

In-patient hospital payment contracts are typically a combination of DRGs,

individual contacts and global budgets (56% of hospital revenue in 2009). The

trend is to increase the proportion of services covered by DRGs. Hospital

physicians are employees. The funds increasingly negotiate with individual

providers for specific services such as hip replacements, defibrillator implantation,

pacemakers and cataract treatment. Out-patient care and community-based

specialists are reimbursed by a capped fee-for-service system in which the fee

schedule is reduced if the doctor exceeds a set number of patents. The funds and

providers have five to eight year contracts.

It is important to note that capital costs are generally excluded from the

reimbursement system. Therefore the many government related hospitals are

dependent upon general tax funds for capital investments.

The regional authorities have a key role in the system. They oversee and supervise

all health care facilities other than the teaching hospitals and Specialized Care

Centers. The Ministry of Health directly administers the large teaching hospitals

and the highly Specialized Care Centers. The SCCs have been established in an

effort to improve the quality of care and patient safety in specific fields, create

nationally accessible networks, concentrate qualified staff and avoid duplication

of expensive technologies. The fields include traumatology, oncology and

cardiology. The development of the Centers is having a significant impact on all

other hospitals by drawing away “profitable” services and forcing them to close

wards. Another impact is the requirement that any hospital must accept any

patient that presents for follow-up care, which does not usually generate much

margin.

In 2008 there were 192 acute-care hospitals with 63,622 beds, 10.3% of which

were allocated to long-term care. Of the 192, 25 were owned by the State (30%

of beds), 66 by the regions (46% of the beds) and 28 by municipalities (7.5% of

63

the beds). Many hospitals that were owned by governments have been

privatized. Some regions have outsourced hospital management. There are 73

private hospitals, including 24 joint stock companies, 44 limited companies and 3

churches. The legal form and ownership structure of hospitals has long been a

controversial political issue. The hospitals that are owned by the 14 self-governing

regions are generally organized as joint stock companies

The eleven teaching hospitals are direct dependencies of the Ministry of Health.

However, the Ministry of Education has authority over their educational functions.

The dual policy reporting is the source of much managerial complexity. Long

length-of-stay in acute hospitals has been a continuing problem in the Czech

system. The primary cause is the shortage of alternative facilities which creates a

bottleneck in the hospitals. The problem differs very significantly across the

regions. Quality of care is the focus of political, public and professional attention.

The creation of the SCCs is seen as a direct effort to improve quality. Four

hospitals are accredited by Joint Commission International. Many hospitals use

patient satisfaction surveys, some of which are provided by venders.

In spite of a relatively high ratio of physicians to population, there is serious

concern about a looming shortage due to emigration and aging of the workforce.

There has been a steady decrease in the number of general practitioners and an

increase in hospital openings. The profession attributes the problem to low salaries

and a resultant marked decrease in the immigration of doctors from Eastern

Europe. Health care administration in general and hospital administration

specifically is complicated by the continually changing political and pubic policy

environment. Hospitals have a board of directors and a supervisory board. The

former represents the “owner” but is voluntary, lacks legal definition and does not

have responsibility for the management of the hospital. Appointees are often

political. It is alleged that some boards are deeply involved in conflict-of-interest

situations such as directing outsourcing to favored companies. The director has

total authority for operations and is responsible directly to the owner-typically the

government unit.

Abstracted from:

Bryndova, L., Pavlokova, K., Roubal, T., Rokosova, M., & Gaskins, M. (2009). The

Czech Republic Health System Review. Health Systems in Transition, Vol. II No. 1,

1-119.

Central Intelligence Agency. (2011, November 8). The World Factbook. Retrieved

November 8, 2011, from Central Intelligence Agency:


European Hospital and Healthcare. (2011). Country Analysis, Czech Republic.

64

CZECH REPUBLIC PROGRAMS

Country Czech Republic

Institution Charles University, 2nd Faculty of Medicine Department of Public

Health and Preventive Medicine

Program(s) Public Health

Website http://www.cuni.cz/UKENG-1.html

Address Charles University in Prague

2nd Faculty of Medicine

V Úvalu 84

150 06 Praha 5 - Motol

Telephone/Fax Tel: +420-22443 5800

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

1) MUDr. Karel Dohnal



Language(s) Czech

Duration of Each

Program

N/A


Institution Charles University, 3rd Faculty of Medicine Division of Public Health

European Hospital and Healthcare Federation.

Frankova, R. (2008, October 10). Current Affairs - Will the Lack of Doctor and

Nurses Affect the Quality of Health Care in Czech Hospitals? Czech Radio 7.

Czech Republic: Radio Prague.

Roubal, T., & Hrobon, P. (2011). Czech Republic. In R. Saltman, A. Duran, & H.

Dubois, Governing Public Hospitals (pp. 99-111). European Observatory on Health

Systems and Policies.

http://www.cuni.cz/UKENG-1.html



65

Program(s) Public Health

Website http://www.lf3.cuni.cz/en/studium/division/

Address Ruská 87

100 00 Prague 10

Czech Republic

Telephone/Fax Tel: +420 267 102 111

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

2) MUDr. David Marx, PhD – 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Vice-Dean for

Undergraduate Education and Student Affairs


Language(s) Czech

Duration of Each

Program

N/A


Institution CMC Graduate School of Business - Academy of Health

Program(s) MBA in Health Care Management

Website http://www.cmc.cz/management-in-health-care/

Address CMC Graduate School of Business o.p.s.,

náměstí 5. května 2, Čelákovice

Telephone/Fax +420 326 999 138, +420 602 386 754

Affiliations Netherlands-Czech Chamber of Commerce


Name and Title

Jan Macke


Language(s) Czech

Duration of Each

Program

Weekend program, 18 months

http://www.lf3.cuni.cz/en/studium/division/


http://www.cmc.cz/management-in-health-care/


66

Number of Graduates

Per Year

76 students in 3 cohorts

Year Program(s)

Started

1991


Institution Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education – School of Public Health

Program(s) Medical ethics, health and pension insurance, communications, law,

economics and management of health care.

Website http://www.ipvz.cz/

Address Prague 4-Budějovická, 15, Hotel ILF


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Andrea Little - Instructor

Telephone/Fax N/A


Language(s) Czech

Duration of Each

Program

April 2 - March 2, 2012 (30 days)

Number of Graduates

Per Year

100


Institution University of Economics Prague

Program(s) Master in Healthcare Management

Website http://www.vse.cz/english/basic_information_fm.php


http://www.vse.cz/english/basic_information_fm.php

67

Address University of Economics, Prague

W. Churchill Sq. 4

130 67 Prague 3

Czech Republic

Telephone/Fax +420 224 095 111

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Mgr. Václav Urban


Language(s) Czech

Duration of Each

Program

N/A

Number of Graduates

Per Year

1,100 students enrolled, one third in the program of combined studies

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A


68

GERMANY

POPULATION

Age Structure 0-14 years: 13.3% (male 5,569,390/female 5,282,245)




HEALTH STATUS

Infant Mortality

Rate




Life Expectancy

at Birth


Male: 77.82 years


CHARACTERISTICS

Religions Protestant 34%, Roman Catholic 34%, Muslim 3.7%, unaffiliated or other 28.3%

Languages German

Geographic

Size

Total: 357,022 sq. km

Country comparison to the world: 63

Land: 348,672 sq. km

Water: 8,350 sq. km

ECONOMY

Economy The German economy - the fifth largest economy in the world in PPP terms and

Europe's largest - is a leading exporter of machinery, vehicles, chemicals, and

household equipment and benefits from a highly skilled labor force. In its annual

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2147rank.html?countryName=Germany&countryCode=gm&regionCode=eur&rank=63#gm

69

projection for 2011, the Federal Government expects the upswing to continue,

with GDP forecast to grow this year at a real rate of 2.3%. The recovery was

attributable primarily to rebounding manufacturing orders and exports -

increasingly outside the Euro Zone. Stimulus and stabilization efforts initiated in

2008 and 2009 and tax cuts introduced in Chancellor Angela Merkel's second

term increased Germany's budget deficit to 3.3% in 2010. The Bundesbank

expects the deficit to drop to about 2.5% in 2011, below the EU's 3% limit. A

constitutional amendment approved in 2009 likewise limits the federal

government to structural deficits of no more than 0.35% of GDP per annum as of

2016.


GOVERNMENT

Type Federal Republic

Components 16 states

Form Legal System:

Civil Law System

Executive Branch:

Chief of State: President Christian Wulff (since 30 June 2010)

Head of Government: Chancellor Angela Merkel (since 22 November 2005)

Cabinet: Cabinet or Bundesminister (Federal Ministers) appointed by the president

on the recommendation of the chancellor.

Legislative Branch:

bicameral legislature consists of the Federal Council or Bundesrat (69 votes; state

governments sit in the Council; each has three to six votes in proportion to

population and is required to vote as a block).

Judicial Branch:

Federal Constitutional Court (half the judges are elected by the Bundestag and

half by the Bundesrat); Federal Court of Justice; Federal Administrative Court.

Government

Departments

Involved In

Health Care

Federal Joint Committee

70


% of GDP German health care spending in 2008 was 10.5% of GDP (US 16.0) and $3737

per capita (US$7538)

Government N/A

Private N/A

FACILITIES

Hospitals 8.17 beds/1,000 population (2008) 510.767 (2006)

Public 34%

Private 28.8% not-for-profit, 38 % for-profit


Description It is important to note that in Germany the government role in health service

provision is very limited. Most university hospitals are owned by the state

governments. Regional governments and municipalities may own hospitals. The

government sets a general policy framework for healthcare but does not become

involved in operational regulation or details. The most important source of

regulation is the independent Federal Joint Committee that is representative of

the associations of the professions (physicians, hospitals, and dentists) and the

association of sick funds.

About 88% of the population is covered by statutory health insurance (SHI). Civil

servants and the self-employed, about 10%, are covered by private insurance.

The rest are covered by small special group plans. SHI covers everyone earning

up to $69,492 (2011) and their dependents. Individuals with higher incomes can

elect to stay with SHI (75% do) or obtain private insurance. SHI coverage is

comprehensive, including almost all prescription drugs and preventive services.

The government has specified very general benefits, with the details controlled by

the industry-controlled Federal Joint Committee.

There are a number of relatively inexpensive cost-sharing provisions with SHI.

They include about $12 per hospital day up to 28 days, ambulatory office visits,

out-patient drugs, and some medical aids. Children under 18 are exempt from the

charges and cost-sharing is limited to 2% of household income. For the chronically

ill the limit is 1%.

There is also a universal long-term care insurance program. Participation is

dependent upon approval by a board that reviews each case and determines the

level of care needed. Beneficiaries choose between cash or services. The benefit

71

level usually falls below the cost of the service, so most people purchase a private

supplemental plan.

SHI is operated by 154 (2011) not-for-profit independent sick funds. The funds

come from contributions on the first $62,542 of income in addition to a transfer of

general tax funds (about 8% of the total) and transfers from unemployment

funds. The employee share is 8.2% of gross wages and the employer match is

7.3%, for a total of about $807 per month. In 2009 the rate was reduced by

0.6% to reduce the burden on both.

Private insurance is important for the civil servants, the self-employed and high

earners who opt out of SHI. The premiums are risk adjusted when they enroll and

are based on lifetime underwriting. Each dependent has his own policy. The

insurance companies are required to set up a reserve slow the increase of

premiums with age.

Community based private physicians belong to regional associations that

negotiate fee-for-service contracts with the sick funds. About 60% are in solo

practice. There has been a recent move toward employment in multi-specialty

groups and the indications are that most solo practitioners will be in the groups in

a few years. Patients are not required to register with a primary care doctor and

there is no gatekeeper function.

The hospital sector is undergoing substantial consolidation and reorganization,

with many considering mergers, acquisitions and cooperative agreements. This is

largely due to reductions in reimbursement. In the past decade a significant

number of municipal hospitals have been sold to private for and non-profit

organizations. The total number of hospital beds declined from 594,000 in 1996

to 510,767 in 2006 and the length of stay from 11.4 to 8.6 days. Hospitals are

owned by regional and local governments (34.1%), private not-for-profit

organizations (28.8% of hospitals, about 50% of beds, mainly religious) and

private for-profit (38.2% of hospitals and 18% of beds). It is estimated that by

2015 45% of hospitals will be private for-profit and 30% will be private not-for-

profit.

Hospitals are staffed by employed doctors who are usually not permitted to treat

outpatients unless the needed care cannot be provided in an office setting.

Inpatient care is reimbursed by DRGs. There are currently 1,194 categories

(2011), with the system revised annually.

Germany is a leader in quality improvement and patient safety initiatives, which

is interesting in that there is no national quality assessment agency. Before the

2003/04 introduction of DRGs there was a national benchmarking exercise

based on 206 quality indicators. The Joint Committee specifies what quality

measures must be implemented by all providers. One requirement is that all

72

GERMANY PROGRAMS

Country Germany

Institution Duale Hochschule Baden-Wuerttemberg

Baden-Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University (Eleven sites in

Baden-Wuerttemberg)

Baden-Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University Loerrach

Program(s) Business Management - Health Care Management

Website http://www.dhbw-loerrach.de/

Address Hangstr. 46-50

79539 Lörrach

providers have a quality management system, CME and technology assessment.

Another sets minimum volume s for complex procedures. There is also a mandatory

quality reporting system that covers over 150 indicators for 30 conditions that

account for about one-sixth of patients. Hospitals must publish results of 27

indicators to facilitate comparisons. Hospital accreditation is voluntary. Four

hospitals are accredited by Joint Commission International.

Abstracted from:

Busse, R., & Blumel, M. (2011). The German Health Care System 2011: International

Profiles of Health Care Systems. 57-64: The Commonwealth Fund.




International Finance Corporation. (2011). 2010 Client Meeting Presentations.

HOPE-European Hospital and Healthcare Federation, Country Analysis , 69-70.

Joint Commission International. (2010). Country Status Report. Joint Commission

International.

Tiemann, O., Schreyogg, J., & Busse, R. (2010). Which Type of Hospital

Owndership has the Best Performance? Evidence and Implications from Germany.

Eurohealth , Vol. 17 No. 2-3, 31-33.

73

Telephone/Fax Tel: +49 7621 / 2071323


Name and Title

Prof. Dr. Frank Andreas Krone


Language(s) German and English

Duration of Each

Program

6 semesters (Bachelor of Arts)

4 semesters (Masters in Business Management)

Number of Graduates

Per Year

40 – Bachelor of Arts

Year Program(s)

Started

2007 – Bachelor Program

2012 – Master Program

Country Germany

Institution Berlin School of Economics and Law

Program(s) Health Care Management

Website http://www.mba-berlin.de/

Address Badensche Str. 50-51, 10825 Berlin

Telephone/Fax Tel: +49 30 85789-406

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Prof. Dr. Jochen Breinlinger-O´Reilly


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

24 months, part-time

Number of Graduates

Per Year

18

http://www.mba-berlin.de/


74

Year Program(s)

Started

2001

Country Germany

Institution Bielefeld University

Program(s) Health Administration

Website http://www.uni-

bielefeld.de/gesundhw/studienangebote/mha/index.html

Address Postfach 100 131, 33501 Bielefeld

Telephone/Fax Tel: +49 0521 / 106-00

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Dr. Andrea Frank


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

4 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution Catholic University of Applied Sciences Freiburg

Program(s) Management in the Health System (BA)

Website http://www.kh-freiburg.de/=

Address Karlstraße 63, 79104 Freiburg

http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/gesundhw/studienangebote/mha/index.html

http://www.uni-bielefeld.de/gesundhw/studienangebote/mha/index.html


http://www.kh-freiburg.de/

75


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Matthias Linnenschmidt


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

Full-time: 7 semesters Part-time: 9 semesters.

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution Deggendorf University of Applied Sciences

Program(s) Master of Health Care Management

Website https://www.hdu-

deggendorf.de/de/weiterbildung/masterstudiengaenge/hcm-m

Address Edlmairstraße 6, 8, 94469 Deggendorf


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Alexandra Niewohner, Prof., Dr. Thomas Bartscher




76

Language(s) German and English

Duration of Each

Program

3 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution European Business School International University

Program(s) Executive MBA Health Care Management , Master of Science

Website http://www.ebs.edu/index.php?id=contact&L=0\

Address Rheingaustraße 1, 65375 Oestrich-Winkel

Telephone/Fax 0611 / 7102 1875

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Claudia Hirning


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

4 semesters, two study levels: Study block I - 10 months certificate

'Health Economist (EBS)’; II - 14 months with final examination MBA

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution Fachhochschule of Koblenz

http://www.ebs.edu/index.php?id=contact&L=0


77

Program(s) 1) Bachelor - Health and Social Economy/Business Administration

with specialization in Health and Social Economy

2) Master - Health and Social Economy/Business Administration with

specialization in Health and Social Economy

Website http://www.rheinahrcampus.de/Betriebswirtschaftslehre-M-

A.809.0.html

Address Südallee 2, 53424 Remagen


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

General Contact Information


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

1) 6 semesters

2) 4 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution Frankfurt School of Finance and Management

Program(s) Masters of Business Administration in International Hospital and

Healthcare Management. Two concentrations: Supplier or

Payer/Provider

Website http://www.frankfurt-school.de/content/en

Address Frankfurt School of

Finance & Management

Sonnemannstraße 9-11

60314 Frankfurt am Main

http://www.rheinahrcampus.de/Betriebswirtschaftslehre-M-A.809.0.html

http://www.rheinahrcampus.de/Betriebswirtschaftslehre-M-A.809.0.html


78

Telephone/Fax +49 (069) 154008-0

Affiliations EPAS Accredited


Name and Title

Dr. Christina Heiss


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

18-20 months part-time, nine residential modules (two are industry

specific) and two e-based modules plus thesis.

Number of Graduates

Per Year

25

Year Program(s)

Started

2001

Country Germany

Institution Friedrich-Alexander Universitat Erlangen-Nurnberg

Program(s) Master of Health Business Administration (MHBA)

Website http://www.mhba.de/mhba/

Address Department of health management

Lange Gasse 20

90403 Nuremberg

Telephone/Fax 0911 / 5302-313

Affiliations ACQUIN


Name and Title

Prof. Dr. Oliver Schöeffski, MPH


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

Part-time distance learning, four semesters


http://www.mhba.de/mhba/


79

Number of Graduates

per Year

160-190; 8090 hospital physicians

Year Program(s)

Started

2007

Country Germany

Institution Fulda

Program(s) Public Health Management (Health Care Management) – Bachelor of

Arts (BA)

Website http://www.hs-fulda.de/index.php?id=1733&L=1

Address Marquardstraße 35, 36039 Fulda

Telephone/Fax Tel: +49 661 9640-146; -101

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Heß, Karin


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

6 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution GmbH

Program(s) Health & Management for Health Treatment and Caring Professions

(BS)

Website http://www.hs-fresenius.de/

http://www.hs-fulda.de/index.php?id=1733&L=1


http://www.hs-fresenius.de/

80

Address Limburger Straße 2, 65510 Idstein

Telephone/Fax +49 6126 9352-0

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title



Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

4 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution Hamburg University - Department of Health Care Management

Program(s) Master of Business Administration (MSc)

Website http://www.uni-hamburg.de/fachbereiche-

einrichtungen/fb03/oew/perso/MasterI_e.html

Address Fakultät Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften

Professur für Personalwirtschaft

Von-Melle-Park 5

20146 Hamburg

Telephone/Fax +49 40 428 38-5563

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Prof. Dr. Dorothea Alewell

Telephone/Fax 040 / 42838 - 4101



http://www.uni-hamburg.de/fachbereiche-einrichtungen/fb03/oew/perso/MasterI_e.html

http://www.uni-hamburg.de/fachbereiche-einrichtungen/fb03/oew/perso/MasterI_e.html


81

Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

120 credit points in two-year master's program four semester length.

Number of Graduates

Per Year

The MSc Business Administration

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution Niderrhein

Program(s) 1) Bachelor – Health Care Management

2) Masters – Health Care Management

Website http://www.hs-niederrhein.de/fb10/studium/mbm000/

Address Op der Eyck-Straße 3-5, 47805 Krefeld

Telephone/Fax +49 02151 / 822-6611

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Prof. Dr. Dagmar Ackermann – Professor


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

1) 6 semesters full-time, 8 semesters part-time

2) 4 semesters full-time, 6 semesters part-time

Number of Graduates

Per Year

1) Semester 1 - 225, Semester 2 – 135, Semester 3 – 85. E-Health

Bachelors – 50

2) 30

Year Program(s)

Started

1) 2006 – Bachelors of E-Health – 2011

2) 2008

Country Germany

http://www.hs-niederrhein.de/fb10/studium/mbm000/

82

Institution SRH Berlin

Program(s) Master's in Health Care Management

Website http://www.srh-hochschule-berlin.de/de/

Address Ernst-Reuter-Platz 10, 10587 Berlin


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Juliane Richter

Email hochschule-berlin.de

Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

4 semesters, dual system; part-time

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution Technische Universitat Dresden

Program(s) MBA in Health Care Management

Website http://tu-dresden.de/

Address TU Dresden

TUD-Information

Helmholtzstraße 10

D-01069 Dresden

Telephone/Fax phone: +49 351 463-37044

Affiliations N/A

University Contact(s) General Contact Information

http://www.srh-hochschule-berlin.de/de/


83

Name and Title


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

4 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution University of Applied Sciences Kempten

Program(s) Bachelor - Health Care Management

Website http://www.hochschule-kempten.de/index.php?id=9&L=1

Address Hochschule für angewandte Wissenschaften - Kempten

Bahnhofstraße 61

D - 87435 Kempten

Telephone/Fax Tel: +49 (0) 831 2523-0

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title



Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

7 semesters including practical semester - Guest studies abroad are

possible

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A


http://www.hochschule-kempten.de/index.php?id=9&L=1

84

Country Germany

Institution University of Bayreuth

Program(s) Health Care Management, Master of Business Administration (MBA)

Website http://www.campus-akademie.uni-

bayreuth.de/de/studiengaenge/mba-health-care-management/

Address Universitätsstraße 30, 95447 Bayreuth


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Dr. Gisela Gerstberger


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

4 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution University of Duisburg-Essen

Program(s) Business Administration - Health Economics and Health Care

Management

Website http://www.uni-

due.de/studienangebote/studienangebote_08451.shtml

Address Universität Duisburg-Essen

45117 Essen

Telephone/Fax +420 201/183-2196

http://www.campus-akademie.uni-bayreuth.de/de/studiengaenge/mba-health-care-management/

http://www.campus-akademie.uni-bayreuth.de/de/studiengaenge/mba-health-care-management/


http://www.uni-due.de/studienangebote/studienangebote_08451.shtml

http://www.uni-due.de/studienangebote/studienangebote_08451.shtml

85

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Thomas Mayrhofer


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

4 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution University of Greifswald

Program(s) Health Care Management (MSc)

Website http://www.uni-greifswald.de/

Address Ernst-Moritz-Arndt University Greifswald

Rubenowstraße 2

17487 Greifswald


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Timm Laslo


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

4 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A


http://www.uni-greifswald.de/


86

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Germany

Institution West Saxon University of Applied Sciences of Zwickau

Program(s) 1) Bachelor - Health Management/Health Sciences

2) Masters – Health Management/Health Sciences (MSc)

Website http://www.fh-zwickau.de/

Address Post Office Box, POB 201037, 08012 Zwickau


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Annelore Spranger


Language(s) German

Duration of Each

Program

1) 6 semesters

2) 4 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

IRELAND

POPULATION

% Urban %


87

% Rural %

Age Structure 0-14 years: 21.1% (male 503,921/female 483,454)


65 years and over: 11.6% (male 246,212/female 295,192) (2011)


HEALTH STATUS

Infant Mortality

Rate




Life Expectancy

at Birth


Male: 77.96 years


CHARACTERISTICS

Religions Roman Catholic 87.4%, Church of Ireland 2.9%, other Christian 1.9%, other

2.1%, unspecified 1.5%, none 4.2% (2006 census)

Languages English (official, the language generally used), Irish (Gaelic or Gaeilge) (official,

spoken mainly in areas along the western coast)

Geographic

Size


Land: 68,883 sq. km

Water: 1,390 sq. km

ECONOMY

Economy In 2010, the budget deficit reached 32.4% of GDP - the world's largest deficit,

as a percentage of GDP In late 2010, the Government agreed to a $112 billion

loan package from the EU and IMF to help Dublin further increase the

capitalization of its banking sector and avoid defaulting on its sovereign debt.

The government also initiated a four-year austerity plan to cut an additional $20

billion from its budget. A return to modest growth is expected in 2011.


88

GOVERNMENT

Type Republic, parliamentary democracy

Components 29 counties and 5 cities

Form Legal System:

Common law system based on the English model but substantially modified by

customary law; judicial review of legislative acts in Supreme Court

Executive Branch:

Chief of state: President Michael D. Higgins (since 2011)

Head of government: Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Enda Kenny (since 2011)

Cabinet: Cabinet appointed by the president with previous nomination by the

prime minister and approval of the House of Representatives.

Legislative Branch:

Bicameral Parliament or Oireachtas consists of the Senate (60 seats; 49 members

elected by the universities and from candidates put forward by five vocational

panels, 11 are nominated by the prime minister; members serve five-year terms).

Judicial Branch:

Supreme Court (judges appointed by the president on the advice of the prime

minister and cabinet); Courts of First Instance (includes High Court).

Government

Departments

Involved In

Health Care

Health Service Executive (HSE)


% of GDP 7.6% (2009)

Government N/A

Private N/A

FACILITIES

Hospitals .17 beds/1,000 population (2007)

89

Public N/A

Private N/A


Description The health care system is managed by the Health Service Executive (HSE). All Irish

citizens are covered by the general tax funded public health care system. For

people under 70, the system is means-tested, based on income, age, illness or

disability. The system consists of three parts that are based on income. Part 1 is

the Medical Card which provides free medical and dental comprehensive

coverage, held by about 32% of the population. All people over 70 qualify. Part

2 is the GP Visit Card, good for free GP visits, for those with higher (by 50%)

incomes than for the Medical Card. Part 3 includes most of the population (about

68%), including those with the GP card. They must pay limited fees including; E

50-75 for a visit to a doctor, E100 for ED visits without a physician’s referral and

E100 a hospital day (in public wards) up to E1000 per year.

Out-patient treatment and maternity care are free in public hospitals. Children’s

benefits are an interesting feature of the system. Up to age 14, all children are

entitled to eyeglasses every two years and all dentistry including orthodonture.

About half of the population is also covered by private health insurance. There

are three insurance companies, one of which is owned by the government.

Premiums are community-rated, so they are the same for everyone regardless of

age or health status and coverage cannot be denied for pre-existing conditions.

Private insurance is protection against waiting for services in the public hospitals.

It also provides a semi-private or private room and consultant fees.

With 67,000 direct and 40,000 indirect employees the HSE is the country’s

largest employer. The HSE owns and operates 51 hospitals using a centralized

budget system. HSE is promoting clinical standardization to improve quality of

care. There are 125 other hospitals, including university teaching hospitals, not-

for-profit and for-profit hospitals for a total of about 23,000 beds. Public

hospitals provide both public and private care. Public patients do not have choice

of physician or have a private room.

There is an extensive network of HSE health centers that provide GP primary care

and other health services and a broad range of social services. The center system

reflects the policy of reducing hospital use. The services are provided free or at

a subsidized rate. Other GPs are generally in solo practice. They charge those

without Medical or GP Visit Cards up to E60 a visit. Those with private insurance

are reimbursed. The centers and the private GPs are generally the gatekeepers

to specialists and hospitals.

90

IRELAND PROGRAMS

Waiting lists for procedures in public hospitals have been an issue for years.

“Free it may be, but you are also free to wait.” The National Treatment Purchase

Fund was established in 2002 to address the problem. The Fund pays for public

patients to be treated in private hospitals or in other countries and is an important

source of private hospital income. The Fund cannot spend over 10% of its funds in

public hospitals. The Fund negotiates discounts based upon volume. Thus 2010

procedure specific prices were 8% below 2009. The Fund managed over 33,000

patients in 2010. Understandably, recent decreases in the waiting lists are of

some concern to the private hospitals.

The Independent Health Information and Quality Authority was established in

2007 to drive continuous improvement in health and social services. The Authority

is responsible for; developing health information systems, promoting and

implementing quality assurance programs, reviewing and reporting on selected

services, overseeing accreditation and technology assessment. In 2008 all

hospitals were required to develop quality plans and to implement improvements.

The Authority is conducting randomized unannounced monitoring assessments that

lead to publicly available reports. Twenty-three hospitals are accredited by Joint

Commission International.

Abstracted from:

Central Intelligence Agency. (2011, December 2). The World Factbook. Retrieved

December 2, 2011, from Central Intelligence Agency:


The Government of Ireland. (2010). The National Treatment Purchase Fund, Annual

Report. Dublin: Government of Ireland.

The Government of Ireland, Department of health and Children. (2007). Health

Insurance Market Reforms. Dublin: The Government of Ireland.

The Government of Ireland, Department of Health and Children. (2007). The

Health Information and Quality Authority, "About Us". Dublin: The Government of

Ireland.

Wikipedia. (2011, November). Healthcare in the Republic of Ireland. Retrieved

December 2011, from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland

91

Country Ireland

Institution Institute of Public Administration - Whitaker School of Government

and Management

Program(s) 1) Healthcare Management – MA

2) Healthcare Management – BA

Website http://www.ipa.ie/index.php?lang=en&p=page&id=131

Address 57-61 Lansdowne Road, Ballsbridge, Dublin 4


Affiliations EMHA, Accredited by National University of Ireland


Name and Title

Dearbhla Casey - Leadership and Management Specialist


Language(s) English

Duration of Each

Program

1) Two years. In the first year six public management subjects to

receive a Higher Diploma in Public Management. The second year

is divided into semesters. In the first of these, students study three

healthcare management subjects. In the second, they write a minor

dissertation. The MA is delivered through distance education.

Students attend some weekend seminars at the IPA in Dublin.

2) Four academic years, with two interim awards (certificate and

diploma), delivered in three ways: evening classes in Dublin,

evening classes at regional centers and by distance education. All

students attend several weekend seminars and tutorials at IPA.

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Ireland

Institution RCSI - Institute of Leadership and Healthcare Management

Program(s) 1) Health Care Management – MSc (including Postgraduate

http://www.ipa.ie/index.php?lang=en&p=page&id=131


92

Certificate)

2) Leadership and Management Development – MSc

3) Healthcare Management – Pharmacists – MSC (including

Postgraduate Certificate)

4) Leadership and Management Development - Researchers &

Technologists – MSc

Website 1) http://www.rcsileadership.org/index.jsp?p=594&n=602

2) http://www.rcsileadership.org/index.jsp?p=594&n=604

3) http://www.rcsileadership.org/index.jsp?p=594&n=603

4) http://www.rcsileadership.org/index.jsp?p=594&n=605&a=1093

Address Institute of Leadership

Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland

Reservoir House

Ballymoss Road

Sandyford

Dublin 18, Ireland.

Telephone/Fax + 353 (0)1 402 2378

Affiliations Accreditation – National University of Ireland (NUI)


Name and Title

1) Sibeal Carolan – Program Head

2) General Contact

3) Ciarán O'Boyle




Language(s) English

Duration of Each

Program

1) 4 semesters, a dissertation, and six learning modules undertaken in

the Postgraduate Diploma and requires six contact days.

2) Two years (4 semesters). The first year requires 12 days

attendance and the second year requires six days attendance.

3) The Postgraduate Diploma requires completion of six learning

modules each requiring three contact days.

The MSc Degree requires a Dissertation, six learning modules, and

six contact days. Most participants complete the Postgraduate

Diploma in just over one academic year and the MSc Degree in

two academic years.

4) The program is a combination of classroom days, online learning

http://www.rcsileadership.org/index.jsp?p=594&n=602



http://www.rcsileadership.org/index.jsp?p=594&n=605&a=1093




93

and tutorials. Each module is delivered as a combination of web-

based instruction and three days of class contact. The MSC

requires the Postgraduate Diploma, a dissertation, and four

classroom training days.

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Ireland

Institution Trinity College Dublin - School of Medicine

Program(s) Health Services Management – MSc

Website www.medicine.tcd.ie/health_policy_management/postgraduate/msc/ind

ex.php

Address Trinity College Dublin, College Green, Dublin 2

Telephone/Fax +353-1-896 2665/3986

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Professor Charles Normand – Program Head


Language(s) English

Duration of Each

Program

Two years, part-time

Number of

Graduates Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Ireland

http://www.medicine.tcd.ie/health_policy_management/postgraduate/msc/index.php

http://www.medicine.tcd.ie/health_policy_management/postgraduate/msc/index.php


94

Institution University College Cork

Program(s) Health Services Management – MBS

Website http://www.ucc.ie/calendar/postgraduate

Address University College Cork, College Road, Cork, Ireland

Telephone/Fax +353 (021) 4902395

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Professor Neil Collins – Dean, Faculty of Commerce


Language(s) English

Duration of Each

Program

Part-time program, 24 months, 120 credits

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Ireland

Institution University of Limerick - Kemmy Business School

Program(s) 1) Health Services Management – BA (Hons)

2) Health Services Management – Diploma

3) Health Services Management – Certificate

Website 1) http://www2.ul.ie/

2) http://www2.ul.ie/pdf/485902918.pdf

3) http://www2.ul.ie/pdf/817541918.pdf

Address University of Limerick

Limerick

Ireland

Telephone/Fax +353-61-202915

Affiliations EPAS


http://www2.ul.ie/

http://www2.ul.ie/pdf/485902918.pdf

http://www2.ul.ie/pdf/817541918.pdf

95


Name and Title

Breda Ahern - Management Development Unit


Language(s) English

Duration of Each

Program

1) 4 years, 8 semesters

2) 2 semesters

3) 2 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

NETHERLANDS

POPULATION

Age Structure 0-14 years: 17% (male 1,466,218/female 1,398,463)




HEALTH STATUS

Infant Mortality

Rate




Life Expectancy

at Birth


Male: 77.06 years


96


CHARACTERISTICS

Religions Roman Catholic 30%, Protestant 20% (Dutch Reformed 11%, Calvinist 6%, other

Protestant 3%), Muslim 5.8%, other 2.2%, none 42% (2006)

Languages Dutch (official), Frisian (official)

Geographic

Size


Land: 33,893 sq. km

Water: 7,650 sq. km

ECONOMY

Economy The Netherlands economy is noted for stable industrial relations, moderate

unemployment and inflation, a sizable current account surplus, and an important

role as a European transportation hub. Industrial activity is predominantly in food

processing, chemicals, petroleum refining, and electrical machinery. In response to

turmoil in financial markets, the government nationalized two banks and injected

billions of dollars into a third, to prevent further systemic risk. The government also

sought to boost the domestic economy by accelerating infrastructure programs,

offering corporate tax breaks for employers to retain workers, and expanding

export credit facilities. The stimulus programs and bank bailouts, however,

resulted in a government budget deficit of nearly 4.6% of GDP in 2009 and

5.3% in 2010 that contrasts sharply with a surplus of 0.7% of GDP in 2008. With

unemployment weighing on private-sector consumption, the government of Prime

Minister Mark RUTTE is likely to come under increased pressure to keep the

budget deficit in check while promoting economic recovery.

GDP Per Capita $40,300 (2010 est.)

GOVERNMENT

Type Constitutional Monarchy

Components 12 provinces

Form Legal System:

Civil law system based on the French system; constitution does not permit judicial

review of acts of the States General

Executive Branch:

97

Chief of State: Queen Beatrix (since 30 April 1980); Heir Apparent Willem-

Alexander, son of the monarch

Head of Government: Prime Minister Mark RUTTE (since 2010);

Cabinet: Council of Ministers appointed by the monarch

Legislative Branch:

Bicameral States General or Staten Generaal consists of the First Chamber or

Eerste Kamer (75 seats; members indirectly elected by the country's 12 provincial

councils to serve four-year terms) and the Second Chamber or Tweede Kamer

(150 seats; members elected by popular vote to serve four-year terms).

Judicial Branch:

Supreme Court or Hoge Raad (justices are nominated for life by the monarch)

Government

Departments

Involved In

Health Care

Dutch Health Care Authority


% of GDP 10.8%

Government

Private

FACILITIES

Hospitals 4.25 beds/1,000 population (2008) 42,350 (2008)

Public 95

Private


Description The government is responsible for overseeing quality, accessibility and

affordability of care. The Dutch Health Care Authority, an independent

administrative body supervises the system. It can regulate rates and performance.

The government provides a substantial amount of information to the public through

the Internet on waiting lists, quality and prices of care. Hospitals are required to

publish annual financial and quality of care reports. Private providers are

98

responsible for most of the provisions of services but the government is directly

involved in planning facilities for highly complicated procedures. Traditionally,

self-regulation has been important.

Holland has a single compulsory insurance system through competitive private

insurers that is essentially managed competition. The system gives the patient the

tools to make independent decisions about insurance plans and some providers,

has a transparent and uniform pricing system for GPs and hospitals, selective

contracting and relatively free negotiation between insurers and providers. The

insurers can negotiate with providers on price, volume and quality of care. They

may be for-profit and pay dividends. However, the market is dominated (88%)

by four large plans, three of which are not-for-profit. The plans must accept all

applicants and cannot differentiate premiums based on risk. The system is

composed of three “compartments”: 1) compulsory insurance for long-term care

(SHI) 2) Basic insurance covering everyone and 3) complimentary voluntary health

insurance (VHI).

SHI, long-term care insurance provides care for expensive chronic conditions that

are expensive. It is financed through income-dependent contributions.

Beneficiaries have a complicated cost-sharing that is based on a needs

assessment. Their care is organized by care offices that operate independently

but are related to the health insurers. Interestingly, the patient can opt to take

cash and organize their own care.

Basic health insurance covers essential curative care including hospitalization,

medical care, dental care up to the age of 22, drugs, mental health services, etc.

There is a defined basic package, but plans compete on the basis of price and

quality and they may offer complimentary voluntary plans. The plans are free to

select what providers they will contract with. Individuals may choose any plan.

All citizens pay a flat-rate premium to their health insurer. There is also a payroll

deduction that goes to a central health insurance fund. The fund allocates funds to

the insurers according to a risk-adjustment system. Children under 18 are covered

free of charge.

Voluntary insurance covers services that are not covered by the other systems,

some co-payments and provides either services or cash. In 2009 91% of the

insured added voluntary coverage. The plans are not obligated to accept any

applicants.

All citizens are registered with a GP for basic health insurance coverage.

General practitioners are paid by a mix of capitation and fee-for-service. Rates

are negotiated by GP association committees. There is a trend toward group

practice. They function as gatekeepers who must sign referrals for hospital or

specialist care. Almost all GPs use an electronic record system, from which data

99

are extracted to monitor the quality of care.

In principle patients can choose any hospital, but insurers may impose some

limitations on choice. Specialists work only in hospitals and most are self-employed

now but there is a trend toward direct employment. Most in hospitals (75%) are in

specialty specific partnerships (groups) with which the hospitals contract. There is

also a trend toward comprehensive payments that is encouraging more integrated

care. All physicians in the eight academic hospitals are salaried.

Hospitals, specialists and mental care are paid by an elaborate DRG-type system

called Diagnosis and Treatment Combinations (DBCs). It is considered to be an

improvement because it provides for treatment combinations (thus more than one

DBC per patient is possible). The DBC system is managed by an independent

foundation. The treatment options and costs for each diagnosis are developed

collaboratively by the government, specialists, hospitals and insurers. The rates

are designed to include all direct and indirect costs.

Institutions that provide in-patient care are not allowed to make a profit, however

consideration is being given to opening the field to private investment.

Independent treatment centers that are affiliated with hospitals can make a

profit. The centers, some employing specialists, offer selected non-urgent

treatments that require less than 24 hospitalizations. Due to a number of mergers

in recent years many hospitals operate in more than one location. The number of

hospitals declined from 172 in 1982 to 95 in 2009, including the eight academic

hospitals. The number of beds fell from about 60,000 in 1980 to 42,350 in 2008.

Larger hospital organizations enjoy financing advantages and more leverage

relative to the insurers.

Dutch hospitals have a complicated and interesting management structure. Most

are foundations that do not have members. Each hospital is managed by a

supervisory board and an executive board. There is no government involvement in

appointments. Because of questions about board and executive remuneration and

other financial and quality problems, the government is considering modifying the

mandated structure, but the form and timing of change is not clear. There is a

requirement that the remuneration of supervisory and executive board members

be made public. The supervisory board is akin to a self-perpetuating community

board (with limited terms), accountable to no one. It appoints and oversees the

executive board that has the authority to manage the hospital. There is an

unofficial “Health Care Governance Code,” developed by the provider’s

associations, that details the functions of the boards. The code was developed to

head-off government involvement but is not enforced.

The executive boards have from one to three members. There is much interest in

increasing the managerial competence of the members and a trend to hire

100

DUTCH PROGRAMS

professional administrators. There is wide recognition that they serve at the

pleasure of the medical staff. All appointees are subject to review by the

employee’s and the client’s councils and the medical staff board is usually

consulted. The board is responsible for strategic and operational governance,

administrative structure, financial management, medical services and quality of

care. By law, certain decisions must be approved by either by the medical staff

or the employee’s council. In fact, the executive board needs medical staff

support for all strategic decisions, a situation that greatly complicates governance.

The employee’s council, which serves as a vehicle for union actions, can block

executive board actions, which leads to resolution in court.

There is a trend toward “duel management” of large operating units within the

hospital. Management is shared by a full-time general manager and a part-time

medical manager.

Quality of care and safety are overseen by the Health Care Inspectorate which

applies quality tools that are provided by providers and institutions. Facilities are

required to collect certain information, to set up a quality assurance system and

produce publically available annual quality of care reports. Providers are

required to report serious events.

Long-term care providers are paid according to an assessment of the care

intensity need of each patient.

Abstracted from:




Maarse, H., & Lodewick, L. (2011). Netherlands. In R. Saltman, A. Duran, & H.

Dubois, Governing Public Hospitals and European Observatory on Health Systems

and Policies. 179-199.

Schafer, W., Kroneman, M., Boerma, W., van den Berg, M., Westert, G., Deville,

W., et al. (2010). The Netherlands Health System Review. . Health Systems in

Transition, (12); 1-229.

Wynand, P., van de Ven, M., & Schut, F. T. (May/June 2008). Universal

Mandatory Health Insurance in the Netherlands: A Model for the United States?

Health Affairs, (27): 3.

101

Country Netherlands

Institution Erasmus University

Program(s) 1) MSc in Health Economics, Policy & Law

2) MSc in Health Care Management

Website http://www.bmg.eur.nl

Address J-building-Woudestein Campus

Mayor Oudlaan 50

3062 PA Rotterdam

Telephone/Fax +31 010-408 8575

Affiliations NVAO 0 Dutch/Flemish


Name and Title

Job van Exel – Program Director of the Master Health Economics, Policy

& Law


Language(s) 1) Dutch and English

2) Dutch

Duration of Each

Program

1) Full-time: one year, 60 credits, 6 compulsory courses, 3 elective

courses, individual master-thesis / Part-time: 2 years.

2) Full-time: one year, 60 credits / Part-time 2 years

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Netherlands

Institution Maastricht University, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences,

CAPHRI School of Public Health

Program(s) Master of Healthcare, Innovation and Management – MSc

Website http://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl

http://www.bmg.eur.nl/


102

Address Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences

Maastricht University

PO Box 616

6200 MD Maastricht

The Netherlands


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

1) Jouke van der Zee – Chair, Primary Health Care Research

2) General Information

3) Professor Helmut Brand




Language(s) English

Duration of Each

Program

One year full-time, two-year part-time. 42 credits for 7 courses plus

18 credits thesis and internship.

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Netherlands

Institution Netherlands Institute for Health Sciences (Nihes)

Program(s) Master in Health Sciences/Master in Economics and Business, Health

Economics Specialization

Website www.nihes.nl

Address Netherlands Institute for Health Sciences

Educational Support Center (DCO) Room Ee308

PO Box 2040

3000 CA Rotterdam

The Netherlands

Telephone/Fax +31 (0)10 703 8450




http://www.nihes.nl/

103

Affiliations Joint venture of the Erasmus School of Economics and the Institute of

Health Policy & Management


Name and Title

Dr. T.G.M van Ourti - Professor


Language(s) English

Duration of Each

Program

70 credits full-time (13 months) and part-time (25 months)/One-year

full-time 60 credits

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Netherlands

Institution Tilsburg University, TiasNimbas Business School

Program(s) Executive Master of Health Administration – MHA

Website www.tiasnimbas.edu.nl

Address Casa 400

Eerste Ringdijkstraat 4

1097 BC Amsterdam

The Netherlands


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

1) G.J. Caris – Academic Director

2) Corine Schriks – Program Advisor


Language(s) English and Dutch

Duration of Each

Program

Part-time program, 15 months


http://www.tiasnimbas.edu.nl/


104

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country Netherlands

Institution University of Twente

Program(s) Masters - Specialization in Health Services and Management

Website http://www.utwente.nl/master/international/hs/tracks/hsm/

Address University of Twente

Study Information Desk

Postbus 217

7500 AE Enschede

The Netherlands

Telephone/Fax +31 53 4895489

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

General Contact


Language(s) English

Duration of Each

Program

Health Sciences is a one-year Master program, 60 European Credits

(EC). First semester six courses. Each course comprises 5 EC. The

second semester, Master’s thesis (25 EC).

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

http://www.utwente.nl/master/international/hs/tracks/hsm/


105

SOUTH KOREA

POPULATION

% Urban 83% of total population (2010)

% Rural 17%

Age Structure 0-14 years: 15.7% (male 3,980,541/female 3,650,631)




HEALTH STATUS

Infant Mortality

Rate




Life Expectancy

at Birth


Male: 75.84 years

106


CHARACTERISTICS

Religions Christian 26.3% (Protestant 19.7%, Roman Catholic 6.6%), Buddhist 23.2%, other

or unknown 1.3%, none 49.3% (1995 census)

Languages Korean, English (widely taught in junior high and high school)

Geographic

Size


Land: 96,920 sq. km

Water: 2,800 sq. km

ECONOMY

Economy Since the 1960s, South Korea has achieved an incredible record of growth and

global integration to become a high-tech industrialized economy. Four decades

ago, GDP per capita was comparable with levels in the poorer countries of Africa

and Asia. In 2004, South Korea joined the trillion-dollar club of world economies,

and currently is among the world's 20 largest economies. With the global

economic downturn in late 2008, South Korean GDP growth slowed to 0.2% in

2009. In the third quarter of 2009, the economy began to recover, in large part

due to export growth, low interest rates, and an expansionary fiscal policy;

growth exceeded 6% in 2010. The South Korean economy's long-term challenges

include a rapidly aging population, inflexible labor market, and overdependence

on manufacturing exports to drive economic growth.

GDP Per Capita $30,000 (2010 est.)

GOVERNMENT

Type Republic

Components 9 provinces

Form Legal System:

Mixed legal system combining European civil law, Anglo-American law, and

Chinese classical thought.

Executive Branch:

Chief of State: President LEE Myung-bak (since 2008)

Head of Government: Prime Minister KIM Hwang-sik (since 2010)

107

Cabinet: State Council appointed by the president on the prime minister's

recommendation.

Legislative Branch:

Unicameral National Assembly or Gukhoe (299 seats; 245 members elected in

single-seat constituencies, 54 elected by proportional representation; members

serve four-year terms).

Judicial Branch:

Supreme Court (justices appointed by the president with consent of National

Assembly); Constitutional Court (justices appointed by the president based partly

on nominations by National Assembly and Chief Justice of the court).

Government

Departments

Involved In

Health Care

Ministry of Health, Welfare and Family Affairs (MIHWAF)

National Health Insurance Program


% of GDP 6.5%

Government N/A

Private N/A

FACILITIES

Hospitals 12.28 beds/1,000 population (2008)

Public N/A

Private Private hospitals and clinics account for 92.6% of all medical facilities in terms of

the number of facilities and 87.4% in terms of the number of beds.


Description Universal coverage has been in effect since 1989. The Ministry of Health and

Welfare provides policy direction and oversight. There are three national health

service programs; the universal plan that covers about 96% of the population

(2007) is the National Health Insurance Program (NHIP). The program is

supported primarily (80%) by premiums. There are two groups of insured

(including dependents), employees and the self-insured. Contribution rates are

adjusted annually. The rate is about 5% of payroll (2007), half paid by the

employee and half by the employer. The rates for the self-employed are based

108

on a complex formula that considers income, property, motor vehicles, age and

gender. Rates are reduced for individuals living in remote rural areas. In 2009 a

Korean family paid about US$8000. The national government provides about

14% of the plan’s cost and 6% comes from a tax on tobacco. NHIP is managed

by the National Health Insurance Corporation that is responsible for enrollment,

contribution collection and setting fee schedules. The Health Insurance Review

Agency reviews and adjudicates claims and evaluates services.

The small Medical Aid Program serves the indigent and some special populations,

including children up to the age of18 and patients with rare, intractable and

chronic diseases. It covers about 4% (2007) of the population. The government

pays all medical expenses with funding from the NHIP, the central and local

governments. A Long-term Care Insurance Program was launched in 2008 and

covers about 4% of the population, which is the most rapidly aging in the world.

The plan is limited to the seriously disabled over 65 and to younger people with

specific diseases. The government provides 20% of the cost and users pay 15%

for home care and 20% for institutional services.

Management of the NHIP benefit package has been the major policy issue,

balancing cost to the government, scope of services and the level of co-payment.

It is a low contribution and low benefit system. Covered services have been

gradually expanded, but with limited funding so that co-payments have remained

relatively high which is the reason for the popularity of private insurance. Benefit

expansion has been based on financial concerns rather than medical necessity or

cost-effectiveness. Protection for catastrophic expenses is limited but there is a

provision to limit out-of-pocket expenses within a time period. The government

also controls the cost of the program by keeping tight control over annual fee

negotiations with providers. The result of both is that the health share of GDP has

increased slowly, to 6.3% in 2007.

It is interesting to note that the Korean Medical Association and the Korean

Hospital Association are considered to be powerful forces, but that does not

translate into high physician remuneration. Korean doctors are well-off compared

to the rest of the society, but they have about half the income of doctors in Europe

and Japan and 25% of doctor’s income in the US. Even the leading doctors can

charge only what is in the fee schedule, but there may be a small addition for

higher qualifications or the hospital’s facilities. Private insurance is available to

cover expenses that are not covered by the national health plan.

A referral from a physician is usually required for hospital admission. A referral is

not required for delivery, emergency care, family medicine, rehabilitation and

dental care. With the exception of specialized hospitals, Koreans can go to any

provider that they choose. There are over 92,000 physicians, most of whom are

specialists, and over 90% of specialists are in private practice. The importance of

109

regional access disparities is debated. Eighty percent of the population is urban

and about 92% of physicians are in urban areas. 91% of hospital beds are in

urban areas. However, very few people live more than three hours by train or car

from an urban center.

Technically, South Korea prohibits for-profit hospitals. However, most health

services in Korea are owned by physicians so the key must be in the terminology

and legal forms. More than 90% of the medical institutions, with almost 90% of

the beds, are private. Most physician-owned clinics have beds. In 2005 the

25,500 clinics had 94,000 beds. In comparison with other industrialized countries,

hospitals have very large outpatient clinics. In 2005 there were 1261 general

hospitals with 189,000 beds. There are 84 specialized hospitals (leprosy, mental

and tuberculosis) with 31,000 beds. The average length-of-stay is long-13.5

days-, vs. the OECD average of 9.6 and the number of beds 6.8 per 1,000

people is also well above the OECD average of 3.9. Hospitals are reimbursed on

a fee-for-service basis. An experiment with DRGs was not considered to be

successful.

Korea is considered to have one of the most advanced IT infrastructures in Asia. It

has been encouraged by government subsidies, policies, guidelines and

regulations. There is a trend away from telemedicine to ubiquitous healthcare (u-

health), thereby enabling self-care and real-time monitoring by physicians. There

are many cost and quality of care issues that are driven by the fee-for-service

system. They include duplication of underused technologies, substitutions of high

priced drugs and services, promotion of profitable but unnecessary services and

kick-back schemes between doctors, pharmacists, and pharmaceutical companies.

Korea has a very high c-section rate, 43%, that is attributed to higher fees

(though it is argued that it also reflects the desire to deliver on lucky dates).

The government has made medical tourism a development priority under the

slogan “Medical Korea.” In August, 2011 2,016 institutions had registered to

meet government standards for inclusion in the promotion. There were 81.789

foreign medical visitors in 2010. The government issues medical visas, operates a

medical information call center and tourist service centers and set up an

arbitration office to handle medical disputes. Accreditation is a component of the

program. The Korean Hospital Association and JSI have a formal partnership to

improve quality and 22 hospitals are JCI accredited. Plastic surgery is being

promoted as the leading procedure. There were about 1000 plastic surgery

clinics in 2007.

Medical Korea is also promoting formal relationships with other countries. Fifty-

eight medical institutions have established branches in 11 countries. In December,

2011 the Ministry of Health and Welfare and The Korean Health Industry

Development Institute announced an agreement with the Abu Dhabi Health

110

SOUTH KOREA PROGRAMS

Country South Korea

Institution Ajou University, Graduate School of Public Health

Program(s) Health Policy and Management – Masters

Website http://www.ajou.ac.kr/english/academics/academics_3_10.jsp

Address Ajou University, San 5, Woncheon-dong, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon 443-

749, Korea

Telephone/Fax (+82)-(0)31-219-2921~6

Affiliations N/A

Authority for four Korean hospitals to provide treatment and collaborate in a

patient treatment-reference system.

Abstract from:

Central Intelligence Agency. (2011, Decemer 5). The World Factbook. Retrieved



Frost & Sullivan. (2010, November 22). South Korean Hospitals Increasingly Adopt

Healthcare IT to Remain Competitive, Finds Frost & Sullivan. Frost & Sullivan.

Hahn, D. J. (2007). Healthcare System in Korea - Korean Hospital Assocation

presentation. International Finance Corporation Clients. Washington.

Jeong, H.-S. (2011). Korea's National Health Insurance-Lessons from the Past Three

Decades. Health Affairs, (30) 1; 136-144.

Joint Commission International. (2009). Joint Commission International and Korean Hospital

Association Establish Strategic Collaboration. Joint Commission International.

Kwon, S. (2009, February 20). Health Care System and Policy in Korea: Politics and

Democratization. Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, US.

PR Newswire-Asia. (2011, December 5). South Korea Signs Accord with Abu Dhabi

Health Authority on Hospital Service Agreement. PR Newswire-Asia.

PR Newswire-Asia. (2011, November 1). South Korea's Hospitals Step Up Going Global,

Riding the 'Medical Hallyu' Wave. PR Newswire-Asia.

Song, Y. J. (2009). The South Korean Health Care System. JAMA , 52 (3) 206-209.

http://www.ajou.ac.kr/english/academics/academics_3_10.jsp

111


Name and Title

Mr. Dong-Yeol Lee – Director, Office of International Affairs


Language(s) English and Korean

Duration of Each

Program

2 years, 4 semesters, integrated graduate degree is 4 years, 8

semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

2004

Country South Korea

Institution Catholic University of Daegu, Graduate School of Health Science

Program(s) Health Science Administrator – Masters

Website http://cuth.cu.ac.kr/~spgr/infor/nurse.html#top=

Address Catholic University of Daegu 13-13 Hayang-ro, Hayang-eup,

Gyeongsan-si, Gyeongsangbuk-do, Rep, of Korea 712-702

Telephone/Fax +82-53-850-3007, 3039

Affiliations International Federation of Catholic Universities (IFCU)


Name and Title



Language(s) Korean

Duration of Each

Program

Night program, 2 years, 4 semesters

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

1990


http://cuth.cu.ac.kr/~spgr/infor/nurse.html#top

112

Country South Korea

Institution Chung-ang University

Program(s) Public Health Administration – Masters

Website http://neweng.cau.ac.kr

Address 84 Heukseok-Ro, Dongjak-Gu, Seoul, Korea

Telephone/Fax +82-2-820-6396

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title




Language(s) Korean

Duration of Each

Program

N/A

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country South Korea

Institution Chungnam National University

Program(s) Public Health Administration – Masters and Executive Masters

Website http://plus.cnu.ac.kr/org/gradbogun/index.jsp

Address 99 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-764, Korea


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title


http://neweng.cau.ac.kr/02_academics/specialized_graduate_schools.php



http://plus.cnu.ac.kr/org/gradbogun/index.jsp

113


Language(s) Korean

Duration of Each

Program

N/A

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

2011

Country South Korea

Institution Daejeon University

Program(s) Hospital Management – Masters

Website http://www.dju.ac.kr/

Address 96-3 Yongun-dong, Dong-gu, Daejeon, 300-716, Korea


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title



Language(s) Korean

Duration of Each

Program

N/A

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

1989

Country South Korea


http://www.dju.ac.kr/foreign/english/academic/undergraduate_04.htm?type=4


114

Institution Gyeongsang National University

Program(s) Health Care Management – Masters

Website http://health.gnu.ac.kr/main/

Address [660-987] as pearls Jinju, Gyeongsangnam-do, Gyeongsang

National University School of Public Health, 816 15 beongil

Telephone/Fax 055)772-8208

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Bakhosang – Graduate School of Public Health



Duration of Each

Program

45 credits

Number of Graduates

Per Year

20

Year Program(s)

Started

2009

Country South Korea

Institution Hanyang University, Graduate School of Business

Program(s) Global Healthcare Management – MBA

Website http://www.hanyang.ac.kr/english/

Address 222 Wangsimni-ro, Seongdong-gu, Seoul 133-791, Korea

Telephone/Fax +82-2-2220-0242~3

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Hyun-Soo Han – Faculty, Graduate School of Business

http://health.gnu.ac.kr/main/


http://www.hanyang.ac.kr/english/

115


Language(s) Korean

Duration of Each

Program

Total of forty-five credits (equivalent fifteen courses). Minimum of

four courses in healthcare management, five core MBA courses, and

field study (six credits).

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country South Korea

Institution Inje University

Program(s) 1) Health Administration – MA

2) Health Administration – PhD

Website http://home.inje.ac.kr/~health/

Address 607 Obang-dong. City: Gimhae-si. Postal Code: 621-749

Telephone/Fax +82 (55) 334 7111

Affiliations Korean Hospital Alliance


Name and Title

Gimgonghyeon – Professor, Health Administration


Language(s) English

Duration of Each

Program

1) 3 years

2) 5 years

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

1987


http://home.inje.ac.kr/~health/

116

Country South Korea

Institution Korea University, Department of Public Health

Program(s) 1) Health Policy and Hospital Management – MA

2) Health Policy and Hospital Management – PhD

Website http://pbhealth.korea.ac.kr/

Address 145, Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Jae-Wook Choi – Profesor


Language(s) English

Duration of Each

Program

1) 5 semesters, 2 years

2) 3 years

Number of Graduates

Per Year

Total of 399 students since opening of program

Year Program(s)

Started

1999

Country South Korea

Institution Kosin University

Program(s) 1) Health Care Administration – MS

2) Health Care Administration – PhD

Website http://www.kosin.edu/about09.ksu

Address 149-1 Dongsam-dong, Yeongdo-gu, Busan, Korea


Affiliations N/A

http://pbhealth.korea.ac.kr/


http://www.kosin.edu/about09.ksu

117


Name and Title

Dr. Song Guk Joh – Head of Graduate School of Christian Education


Language(s) Korean

Duration of Each

Program

N/A

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country South Korea

Institution Kyungpook National University

Program(s) Health Care Management - Masters

Website http://www.knu.ac.kr/bbs/newmain/sublayout.jsp?number=0205

Address Office of International Affairs, KNU, Daegu 702-701, Korea


Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Jaeyong Park – Health Care Management, Health Policy



Duration of Each

Program

23 classess

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A



118

Country South Korea

Institution Seoul National University

Program(s) Health Care Organization and Management – MHA

Website http://health0.snu.ac.kr/eng/

Address 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 151-742, Korea

Telephone/Fax 02-880-2705~8

Affiliations N/A


Name and Title

Kim Soonhee – General Management


Language(s) English

Duration of Each

Program

33 credits full-time, 29 credits part-time course

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

N/A

Country South Korea

Institution Yonsei University, Graduate School of Public Health

Program(s) Hospital Administration

Website http://gsph.yonsei.ac.kr/en/Departments/hospital/intro/

Address 50 Yonsei-Ro, Seodaemun-Gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea

Telephone/Fax 02) 2228-1864 / 02-392-8133

Affiliations Accredited by the Ministry of Education, Republic of Korea

University Contact(s) Kim Han Joong

http://health0.snu.ac.kr/eng/


http://gsph.yonsei.ac.kr/en/Departments/hospital/intro/

119

Name and Title


Language(s) Korean

Duration of Each

Program

15 courses

Number of Graduates

Per Year

N/A

Year Program(s)

Started

1995


120

APPENDIX E: ACCREDITING AGENCY PROFILES

Type/Field Health Services Administration

Institution EHMA – European Health Management Association

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

Mission: Membership is open to all organizations committed to

improving health and healthcare in Europe by raising standards of

health management.

Aims: EHMA is a membership organization that aims to build the

capacity and raises the quality of health management in Europe.

EHMA’s work splits into four core areas: policy, research, management

education and management improvement.

Policy: translating EU policy to the organizational level and

influencing the EU policy agenda bottom-up.

Research: engaging in cutting edge research with some of the

top research associations in Europe, including on health

professional mobility and quality of care.

Management improvement: supporting healthcare delivery to

be as good as the best in Europe, through networks, events and

projects.

Management education: joint European accreditation of

postgraduate health management courses with FIBAA

(Foundation for International Business Administration

Accreditation).

Their key constituencies are:

Senior managers who need to network and share information

and intelligence in a rapidly changing health sector.

Policy-makers who want to exchange ideas and debate policy,

121

both across Europe and at the EU level.

Academic institutions and educators who want to participate in

research and share learning amongst their peers across Europe.

Sponsorship The organization is sustained with membership fees in all categories

mentioned under Membership below, and with the proceedings from

their annual meetings, educational offerings and publications.

Membership [numbers,

types of membership,

international

membership

EHMA has over 160 members across more that 37 countries [EU, Egypt,

Georgia, Turkey & Kazakhstan]. in the European WHO region and

beyond, bringing together the research, policy and management

communities.

Their members range from hospitals to universities, from ministries of

health to primary care providers, from management education schools

to consultancies.

For a full list of members by countries go here:

http://www.ehma.org/index.php?q=node/864

Accreditation/Certificat

ion Process, Criteria,

Requisites, Cost.

Offers accreditation of Master Programs with FIBAA (The Foundation

for International Business Administration Accreditation). Information is

provided in the FIBAA report section.

Web Site http://www.ehma.org/

Contact(s) Name, Title

and email

Ilaria Pastorino. [email protected]

Telephone/Fax Phone: +32-2502-6525

FAX: +32-2503-1007

Address Rue Belliard 15-17, 6th Floor

1040 Brussels

Belgium

Other The following are 3 interesting initiatvies of EHMA to improve quality

of Healthcare Management:

1) EHMA's European Centre for Health Management Improvement

aims to enable health delivery to be as good as the best in

Europe.

2) The vision of the Centre is to support health management

http://www.ehma.org/index.php?q=node/864



122

improvement across the European region, through bridging

international learning and experience into local contexts.

3) Nil Nocere Project

Aim: Nil Nocere is an exciting 3 year patient safety project to train

teams from hospitals in the Czech Republic. The project is focused on

equipping senior personnel to understand patient safety and to be

able to implement patient safety initiatives in their hospitals.

By training clinical teams the project aims to stimulate sustained

organizational change in culture, as well as building the expertise of

individuals.

Project Lead: The project is led by Project Hope, Czech Republic, with

input from experts in patient safety including Prof David Marx.

Timescales: The project started in 2010 and finishes at the end of

2012.

EHMA's role: EHMA is evaluating the Nil Nocere project, using a

number of different tools to gauge the impact and effectiveness of the

training program. The evaluation is being carried out by Federico

Torres, EHMA Associate, who can be contacted for more information.

1) Management in Practice Database.

The aim of the MiP website is to allow health managers, policy

makers and researchers across Europe to exchange knowledge

and share learning, through a searchable database of articles,

presentations, policy papers and case studies.

Registration and usage of the Database is free of charge and

you will immediately have access to all files and attachments.

Members will gain entrance to a world of information. As well

as browsing the information and documents EHMA offers, you

will be able to upload your own documents, contributing to a

growing database of relevant reports, articles, presentations,

websites or data sets. Contact with other members is also

offered, with the possibility to pose questions to members who

have posted materials through online forums.

We hope that you will join this initiative and take part in our ever

growing database.

To directly navigate to the database, please click here:



123

http://www.ehma.org/learning-centre/

If you have any further questions or experience any difficulties, please

do not hesitate to contact us at: [email protected]

The Management in Practice Database arose from the project

PHeTEHM – Promoting Health Excellence in Health Management –

which has received funding from the European Union, in the framework

of the Health Program. Sole responsibility lies with EHMA and the

Executive Agency is not responsible for any use that may be made of

the information contained therein.

Type/Field Health Services Administration

Institution SHAPE – Society for Health Administration Programs in Education

ACHSM – Australasian College of Health Services Management

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

SHAPE Mission: SHAPE’s mission is the promotion of excellence in health

service management education and research in Australia, New

Zealand, Asia and the Pacific.

The need for advanced skills in health service managers has never

been more apparent. To achieve this, high quality academic programs

in health service management are essential.

Australia, New Zealand and the Asia-Pacific region are fortunate in

having a number of undergraduate and postgraduate academic

programs which provide University based education for people

working in the health field.

The objectives of SHAPE are: 1- To stimulate an exchange of ideas

between educators about student needs, course design, educational

methodologies, course content and course evaluation. 2-To promote

dialogue between industry leaders and academics about the

educational implications of developments in health service

management. 3- To liaise with similar international educational

associations including the Association of University Programs in Health

Administration, European Health Management Association and the

Asia-Pacific Academic Consortium for Public Health. 4- To facilitate

communication between educators with similar research interests and

expertise. 5- To engage in collaborative research, publications and

ducational activities with SHAPE member programs, the Australasian

http://www.ehma.org/learning-centre/


124

College of Health Service Management and other relevant industry

partners.

SHAPE began in 1985 with a kick-start grant of $300,000 from WK

Kellogg. The original organizational structure was modeled on AUPHA

(American University Programs in Health Administration). The driving

force was a perceived need for emerging programs in health service

management to have a forum for the sharing of ideas in order to

foster quality in educational offerings.

Tom Cloher (University of South Australia), was successful in obtaining a

three year grant from the Kellogg Foundation and was instrumental in

the development of SHAPE’s original constitution. At this time SHAPE

stood for the “Secretariat in Health Administration Programs in

Education”. Tom was the Executive Director with a Board of Directors.

During 2009 SHAPE’s role continues to be a forum for information

exchange in the interest of fostering quality in educational offerings

among programs offering courses in health service management.

Importantly, in recent years SHAPE has become a forum for

cooperative research activity among member programs and the

Australian College of Health Service Executives. Tangible evidence of

this latter activity has been the joint production of three publications: 1)

The Changing Roles and Careers of Australian and New Zealand

Health Service Managers: a collaborative workforce study involving

members of The Society for Health Administration Programs in Education

(SHAPE), The Australian College of Health Service Executives (ACHSE)

and The New Zealand Institute of Health Management (NZIHM), (1998);

2) Managing Health Service: Concepts and Practice, First Edition

(2002) and second edition (2006); 3) Medicine Called to Account:

Health Complaints Mechanisms In Australasia, First Edition (2002)

ACHSM Mission: Our mission is to 'Equip Health Leaders for Success'. By

joining the ACHSM you will open a world of new opportunities to

learn, gain experience, network with health leaders, and stay on the

cutting edge. You will receive the support from a dedicated and

professional team whose daily objective is to ensure that you have the

tools and support you need to be an effective health leader. Their

Vision is: To promote innovation and excellence in health leadership

and management

The Australian Institute of Hospital Administrators was incorporated on

the 24th December, 1945 as a public company. On 8th August 1990

the company changed its name to Australian College of Health Service

125

Executives and is a public company limited by Guarantee. Then, on the

23rd February 2010 ACHSE became the Australasian College of

Health Service Management (ACHSM).

Sponsorship Both organizations are sustained with membership fees in all

categories mentioned under Membership below and with the

proceedings from their annual meetings, educational offerings and

publications.



international

membership

ACHSM has membership from Australia, New Zealand and

International. The International membership has the following

individual membership categories are: Student undergraduate ($50);

Student graduate ($147); Affiliate ($218); Associate Fellow ($364);

Fellow ($364) and Retired Plus ($147). Full list of membership fees are

here: http://www.achsm.org.au/membership/how-to-join/

Membership Criteria: Emerging Managers: Student - Available to

students undertaking part time study in a postgraduate degree or full-

time students in an undergraduate degree in an ACHSM-accredited

university course. A current student ID card must be submitted with your

application; Established Managers: Associate Fellow –You must have at

least three years management experience health and/or aged care

and either; a Health Management qualification; another relevent

qualification (clinical health, accounting, business, IT, law etc); or

demonstrable relevant experiential learning; Experienced Managers:

Fellow – This is the highest membership category awarded in the

College. To be eligible for Fellowship you must have participated in at

least three years of Professional Development with the College, and

completed the requirements of the Fellowship program; Seen it all?:

Retired - This is the ideal way to stay in touch with former colleagues

and keep up with the latest industry news. This membership category is

available to those who are no longer in paid employment due to

retirement. You can also choose to upgrade to “Retired Plus” that

includes a subscription to the Asia Pacific Journal of Health

Management.

Life Member - A prestigious recognition for individuals who have

rendered conspicuous service to the College. Life membership cannot

be applied for and is awarded by the Board.

Affiliate - The Affiliate membership category is specifically for those

who have a strong interest in health management, but may not have

the specific qualifications or type of experience specified in the other

http://www.achsm.org.au/membership/how-to-join/

http://www.achsm.org.au/membership/futureleaders/

http://www.achsm.org.au/library/fellowship/

126

membership categories. Affiliate membership is ideal for legal

professionals, engineers or architects who have a specific interest in

healthcare leadership.

ACHSM offers a competency tool that is only available for members.

SHAPE: Here is the list of members of SHAPE

http://www.shape.org.au/?page_id=18 (15 programs in Australia

and 2 in New Zealand)



Requisites, Cost.

ACHSM does the accreditation process for the SHAPE programs. They

are reviewing the process. On 2011 they were undertaking an

Accreditation Review which will streamline the processes and give

clarity to the role of the university undertaking the accreditation as

well as the role of the National Office and the local ACHSM Branch in

the relevant jurisdiction. This will reduce lag times from request for

accreditation to finalizing report and notifying the university. It will

also reflect the desire to build on the relationships that exist between

the College and the university sector which will go beyond the one-off

accreditation review visit.

The list of accredited programs can be reviewed here:

http://www.achsm.org.au/library/university-programs/

The College promotes excellence and continual improvement of

university training in health service management by providing a

national university accreditation program.

The national university accreditation standards have been developed

through broad consultation with employers, industry groups, health

managers and universities, to ensure that graduates that complete

these programs are competent to perform the core tasks they face in

employment.

Accreditation provides universities with a framework to build courses of

excellence in Health Service Management, and is a valuable tool to

encourage continual improvement within their department. Students can

also identify accredited university courses as a recognition of quality

when choosing a university.

Web Site SHAPE: http://www.shape.org.au/

ACHSM: http://www.achsm.org.au/


and email

SHAPE: David Briggs, Chairperson. [email protected]

http://www.shape.org.au/?page_id=18

http://www.achsm.org.au/library/university-programs/


http://www.achsm.org.au/membership/welcome/


127

ACHSM: Mr Daryl Sadgrove, CEO [email protected]

Telephone/Fax SHAPE: +02-6765-5398

ACHSM: +61-2-9879-5088

Address SHAPE: No postal address

ACHSM: c/- NSEC Building, Macquarie Hospital, PO Box 341, Wicks

Road, North Ryde NSW 2113

Other SHAPE: SHAPE provides an academic forum to debate educational

issues, encourage innovation and enhance the work of member

programs in health service management education and research.

Health Management Research Alliance (HMRA)

New Professional Journal: “Asia Pacific Journal of Health

Management”, Editor David Briggs: www.achsm.org.au, Email:

[email protected]

SHAPE’s Annual Meeting in 2012 is in Coogee Beach in New South

Wales on July 19 and 20.

Type/Field Business Administration

Institution AACSB – Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

The Mission of AACSB International is to advance quality management

education worldwide through accreditation, thought leadership, and

value-added services.

The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business is a global,

nonprofit membership organization of educational institutions,

businesses, and other entities devoted to the advancement of

management education. Established in 1916, AACSB International

provides its members with a variety of products and services to assist

them with the continuous improvement of their business programs and

schools.

• These products and services include: Internationally recognized

accreditation for undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral

programs in business and accounting (Note: membership does

not imply accreditation.)


http://www.griffith.edu.au/business/griffith-business-school/research/health-management-strategic-research-program

128

• Conferences, seminars, symposiums, and webinars that provide

global professional development opportunities for business

school administrators and faculty

• Publications that provide insight into the business education

industry

• Access to extensive global data and corresponding reports

related to business schools

• Networking through groups and events held both online and in

live environments

• Sponsorships, exhibiting, and business development

opportunities

In addition to providing its members with products and services, AACSB

International strives to identify challenges and trends that are facing

the business education industry through its research and various

initiatives. The association also educates students, parents, employers,

and counselors about accreditation and how to choose a quality

business degree program that will fit their needs.


mentioned under Membership below.



international

membership

AACSB welcomes membership applications from educational

institutions, business organizations, foundations, professional

associations, nonprofit, and public sector organizations. Education

Institution Membership costs $2,550 a year. Corporate and nonprofit

and public sector organization ($1,000). For profit organizations can

join in 3 categories: Partner ($2,500); Executive Partner ($5,000) and;

Sustaining Partner ($10,000). Benefits and descriptions can be found

here: http://www.aacsb.edu/membership/AACSBPartnerProgram.pdf



Requisites, Cost.

In 1919, the first AACSB Accreditation Standards were adopted with

the primary objective of improving collegiate business education. In

1980, an additional set of accreditation standards were developed

for undergraduate and graduate-level degree programs in accounting

to address the special needs of the profession. Global accreditation

started 2002. As of April 2012, 649 member institutions hold AACSB

Accreditation. Overall, 43 countries and territories are represented by

AACSB-accredited schools. Of the accredited schools:

http://www.aacsb.edu/membership/AACSBPartnerProgram.pdf

129

• 42 institutions have undergraduate programs only (6% of

accredited members)

• 30 institutions have master's and doctoral programs only (4%

of accredited members)

• 178 institutions have AACSB’s additional accounting

accreditation (28% of accredited members)

• There are 160 international members accredited in Business

outside of the USA in 41 countries.

The process is: First, a school must be a member of AACSB International

and offer degree-granting programs in business or management. Next,

a school may apply for AACSB accreditation. The school’s application

is carefully reviewed to ensure it is eligible to pursue AACSB

Accreditation. Once it is determined that a school has the potential to

be accredited, it works with mentors, committees, and AACSB staff to

develop a Standards Alignment Plan. Once a school follows through

with its alignment plan and meets the AACSB standards, review

committees and the AACSB Board of Directors decide whether or not a

school should be accredited. In its entirety, the AACSB accreditation

process is rigorous and requires a significant amount of work to

achieve. Detailed process for accreditation is described here:

http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/process.asp

Fees are for PreAccreditation application fee: $1000;

PreAccreditation fee $4500; Annual Accreditation Fee: 4,500 (5 years

accreditation cycle) and $2,500 (10 years cycle with one time

maintenance review fee when moving 10 year to 5 year $7,800). Full

fee schedule can be found here:

http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/fees.asp

Accreditation Standards revised January 2012 can be found here:

http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/standards-busn-jan2012.pdf

Web Site http://www.aacsb.edu/


and email

John J. Fernandes, President and CEO.

Maria Baltar, Senior Manager, Accreditation and member services.

[email protected] Phone: 813-367-5208

Telephone/Fax Phone: 813-769-6500

http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/process.asp

http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/fees.asp

http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/standards-busn-jan2012.pdf



130

Fax: 813-769-6559

Address AACSB International

777 South Harbour Island Boulevard, Suite 750

Tampa, Florida 33602 USA

International Asia Headquarters:

AACSB International Ltd.

331 North Bridge Road

#08–07 Odeon Towers

Singapore, 188720

Other AACSB International maintains one of the most comprehensive

databases on business schools in the world. The data includes extensive

information concerning business school enrollments, programs, faculty,

operations, students, financial information, and much more.

With this data, AACSB provides a variety of products and services that

are useful for management educators and industry experts, including:

Business school data through annual and ad hoc surveys

Access to data through DataDirect

Assistance with data customizations

Standard and customized data reports

Tools, such as the Advanced School Search and DataDirect

Access to survey content and vehicles for survey participation

This data can be found here:

http://www.aacsb.edu/dataandresearch/default.asp


Institution ACBSP – Accreditation Council for Business Schools & Programs

Mission ACBSP is a leading specialized accreditation association for business

http://www.aacsb.edu/dataandresearch/default.asp

131

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

education supporting, celebrating, and rewarding teaching excellence.

The association embraces the virtues of teaching excellence and

emphasizes to students that it is essential to learn how to learn. ACBSP

acknowledges the importance of scholarly research and inquiry and

believes that such activities facilitate improved teaching. Institutions are

strongly encouraged to pursue a reasonable mutually beneficial

balance between teaching and research. And further, ACBSP

encourages faculty involvement within the contemporary business world

to enhance the quality of classroom instruction and to contribute to

student learning.

MISSION

ACBSP promotes continuous improvement and recognizes excellence in

the accreditation of business education programs around the world.

VISION

Every quality business program worldwide is accredited.

HISTORY

ACBSP, founded in 1988 and located in Overland Park, Kansas, a

suburb of Kansas City, was created by its members to fulfill a need for

specialized accreditation by institutions of higher education with

business schools and programs. Specifically, that need was for business

education accreditation based on the mission of the institution and of

the respective unit, an accreditation that acknowledged and

emphasized quality in teaching and learning outcomes.

There are approximately 2,400 U.S. institutions of higher education

that have business administration, finance, management, marketing,

accounting and economics. In 1988 only 260 of those 2,400 institutions

had their business schools and programs accredited, an accreditation

administered by only one organization (AACSB). Many of the

remaining 2,140 institutions felt that an alternative organization with

an accreditation philosophy more attuned to the missions of their

institutions should be created to satisfy their business accreditation

needs. Representatives of more than 150 business schools and

programs met to consider possible alternatives for external

accreditation of their business programs. Hence, ACBSP, the Association

of Collegiate Business Schools and Programs, a new accrediting

organization for business schools and programs was created, with a

primary emphasis directed toward fostering excellence in teaching.

In August of 1992, ACBSP was recognized by the U.S. Department of

132

Education as a specialized accreditation agency for business

education. That recognition continued through April, 1996, when the

Department of Education changed its policies to recognize only those

agencies that impacted the distribution of federal funding. The Council

for Higher Education (CHEA) was created in 1996. The CHEA-

recognized scope of accreditation approved at that time was: Degree

programs in business and business-related fields at the associate,

baccalaureate, and graduate degree levels. At its meeting on January

22, 2001, the CHEA Board of Directors reviewed the recommendations

of the CHEA Committee on Recognition regarding the recommendation

and recognized the Association of Collegiate Business Schools and

Programs.

In June 2009, ACBSP created a new regional organization for Latin

America. The Latin American Council of Business School and Programs is

composed of members in Mexico, Central America, and South America.

ACBSP now has nine regions, representing 44 different countries.

In 2008, ACBSP initiated an overall Rebranding Initiative for the now

20-year-old association. The Marketing Committee proposed a new

name that would better reflect a growing global presence and better

describe the mission of the association. Since the ACBSP acronym is

familiar to many in business higher education, the committee

recommended that it be kept.

In 2010, after review and recommendations by the Board of Directors

and the Bylaws Committee, the membership voted to adopt the new

name: Accreditation Council for Business Schools and Programs.





international

membership

Membership is available for any educational institution membership

offering an associate degree, baccalaureate major in business, and/or

graduate degree in business. If located in the United States, the

institution must be regionally accredited. International institutions must

present a certified translation of an official document from an

appropriate government organization in their country stating

recognition, accreditation, and/or their right to grant degrees. This

information will be verified before membership is granted.

Educational Institutions join as:

Any Associate Degree institution regionally accredited and

133

granting the associate degree as its highest degree.

Any Baccalaureate/Graduate Degree institution regionally

accredited and offering a baccalaureate or major in business

and/or graduate degree in business.

An International Degree-Granting institution awarding degrees

outside of the United States. The institution must provide a

certified translation of an official document from an

appropriate government organization in their respective

countries stating recognition, accreditation and/or their right to

grant degrees. After review of the application by the Board of

Directors, international degree-granting institutions may be

granted membership in this category or as an Associate Degree

or a Baccalaureate/Graduate Degree institution.

Membership is also granted to schools seeking accreditation and to

schools not seeking accreditation but desiring other benefits of

membership. As a result of several initiatives, ACBSP membership

offers a rich variety of benefits in addition to education.

Membership is required before beginning the accreditation process.

The above membership is effective until accreditation is achieved. The

annual dues for unaccredited institutions $1,350 annually for

accreditation within 5 years. The amount for accredited programs is

$1,950.

Membership in ACBSP does not confer accreditation that requires a

separate process described below. The list of members (around 680)

and their accreditation status can be seen in this link:

http://www.acbsp.org/p/cm/ld/fid=14



Requisites, Cost.

ACBSP offers specialized accreditation and focuses on business schools

and programs within colleges and universities that have already

received institutional accreditation.

Associate Application for Candidacy: Institutions interested in applying

for candidacy status should complete this document and submit it to

ACBSP along with the $1,250 candidacy fee (1,000 outside the U.S.).

The $1,250 candidacy fee is applied to the total accreditation fee of

$2,500 ($2,000 outside the U.S.) A mentor will be appointed for

institutions entering candidacy. Standards and criteria for Associate

degree schools and programs

http://www.acbsp.org/download.php?sid=15



134

Baccalaureate and graduate degree accreditation follows a detailed

process that can take up to 3 years and has variable costs depending

of the school and location of that school. A general estimated cost for

the accreditation process is around $11,000. The full manual with

detailed information can be found here:


This is an example of the letter of certification to start the process: We

certify that:

1) Our institution is accredited by one of the six regional

accrediting bodies and it is currently in good standing with that

body or, if located outside the United States, we are providing

documentation issued by a government authority that our

institution has met the requirements necessary to offer degrees.

2) Our institution has offered (a) degree(s) in business for at least

two years and has the necessary approval from the

appropriate state, provincial, national or other governing

bodies to confer the degree(s).

3) Our institution has a publicly stated mission appropriate to a

college or university and the mission has been approved by the

institution’s governing body (e.g. Regents, Trustees, etc.).

4) Our institution has reviewed ACBSP’s Accreditation Standards

and Criteria and is desirous of meeting those standards.

5) Our institution is enclosing or has previously provided payment

in the amount of $1,250 which represents one-half of the

application fee. (NOTE: For schools outside the United States,

this will be $1,000.)

6) Upon receiving candidacy status, we understand that our

institution will reimburse ACBSP for the travel expenses incurred

by the mentor in conducting the site visit necessary to complete

this process. We understand this will be done with our prior

approval of the budgeted amount.

7) Upon submission of the completed self-study, the $1,250

remaining balance of the application fee will be provided to

8) complete the process and move from candidacy

Web Site http://www.acbsp.org/p/cm/ld/fid=204



135


and email

Mr. Douglas Viehland, Executive Director. Phone: 913-339-9356

[email protected]


FAX: 913-339-6226

Address Accreditation Council for Business Schools and Programs

11520 West 119th Street

Overland Park , KS 66213

In Europe:

Rue Abbé Cuypers, 3

Brussels, 1040

Belgium

Phone: +32 2 741 24 26

Other Link to a descriptive brochure of activities, partnerships and benefits of

accreditation: http://www.acbsp.org/download.php?sid=5

Value of Accreditation

In April 2009, ACBSP released two new brochures that can be used by

accredited campuses to promote the value of their accredited status.

They are titled Value of ACBSP Accreditation--Guide to Students

(http://www.acbsp.org/download.php?sid=1390 ) and Value of

ACBSP Accreditation--Guide to Employers

(http://www.acbsp.org/download.php?sid=1389 ) being clearly

directed to the two major stakeholders that can benefit from the

accredited status. The brochures are available in English or Spanish.

In addition to these brochures we offer the following list of ways

member schools benefit from having accredited status. Several faculty

and administrators at accredited colleges identified the following

benefits of accreditation to a variety of different groups.

Benefits for the Institution:

The pursuit of accreditation reinforces a commitment to

continuous improvement, innovation, and scholarship.





136

The process of preparing an accreditation self-study enhances

the focus on quality of student learning and renews a

commitment to the educational mission.

The recognition of effective business units through accreditation

contributes to a more positive review by regional accreditors,

as specialized accreditation is a confirmation of quality

programming in specific divisions.

Accredited status creates greater visibility for the institution.

Accreditation provides prestige and credibility when seeking

funding resources from donors, foundations, governments.

In some states accredited status counts heavily in performance-

based funding.

Accreditation leads to more successful articulation of business

credits.

The accredited institution can utilize press releases to advertise

accreditation status.

Accredited status is printed in the college catalog.

Accredited status is printed on business cards.

Accredited status is posted on the college website.

Accreditation provides a sense of pride within the institution.

Benefits for the Business Unit:

Accreditation creates a process for continuous departmental

improvement.

Accreditation provides the impetus for identifying strengths and

weaknesses.

Accreditation keeps the programs current through curriculum

development.

Accreditation provides a forum for review and analysis of the

business unit.

137

Accreditation promotes an outcomes assessment process linking

goals, activities, and outcomes.

Accreditation creates guidelines for faculty credentials, which

leads to higher standards in hiring, increased scholarly and

professional activities, and more focused faculty development

decisions.

Accreditation creates guidelines when structuring programs.

Accreditation provides a platform to share ideas and to

question the status-quo, leading to effective change.

Accreditation is a source of pride among program faculty and

staff.

Accreditation validates quality of work in the business unit.

The business unit realizes greater local prestige through

accreditation.

Accreditation provides leverage when seeking on-campus

resources.

Accredited status leads to more effective acquisition of

technology.

Accreditation status is referenced when submitting budgets,

grant proposals, and course/program proposals.

Accredited status assists in recruitment of faculty.

Accreditation activities are communicated to the Board of

Trustees.

Accredited status is printed on Business Division stationery.

Accredited status is printed on course syllabi.

The certificate of accreditation is prominently displayed.

Accredited status is printed on brochures and newsletters.

Benefits for Faculty and Staff:

Accreditation provides a sense of pride within the business

138

faculty and staff when national peers have validated a

program.

Faculty at accredited institutions are provided opportunities to

keep current in quality procedures through seminars such as

Baldrige training.

Faculty experience a boost of self-esteem when teaching in an

accredited business unit.

Accreditation provides professional development and

leadership opportunities for faculty and administrators in

development of outcome assessments and conducting site visits

to other institutions.

Benefits for Students:

Accreditation creates the impetus for relevancy and currency of

faculty, programs, and courses to best serve students.

The pursuit of accreditation enhances the ability to serve

students by assuring a focus on quality performance.

Accredited status requires an ongoing effort to provide

excellent equipment, software, and learning resources for

students.

Accredited status reaffirms the commitment to effective student

services.

Students refer to accreditation status on resumes and in

employment interviews.

Accredited status provides the ability to host a chapter of Delta

Mu Delta or Kappa Beta Delta honorary society, recognizing

accomplishments of business students.

Students who join these honorary societies can cite their special

recognition when pursuing scholarships and writing resumes.

Benefits for the Community:

Accredited status provides recognition of the ability to serve

community stakeholders.

Accreditation creates the impetus for relevancy and currency of

139

faculty, programs, and courses to best serve employers.

External advisory committees learn the importance of

accreditation.

External advisory committee members can transfer the

accreditation process to their continuous improvement efforts.


Institution EFMD. The Management Development Network

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

An international membership organization, based in Brussels, Belgium.

A unique forum for information, research, networking and debate on

innovation and best practice in management development.

Acting as a catalyst to promote and enhance excellence in

management development internationally, EFMD:

COORDINATES projects & activities that foster an active

dialogue and exchange between companies and academic

institutions

DISSEMINATES knowledge throughout the network for the

benefit of its members that allows for a better understanding

and insight into the latest developments in management

development

GENERATES new ideas for a continual enhancement of

management thinking and practices

INITIATES customized events on highly topical issues bringing

business executives and distinguished academics together

MAINTAINS a series of on-going activities that foster learning,

sharing and networking among its members and helps

contribute to a better understanding of the continual changes in

the business and management education environments

MANAGES international projects in Asia, CIS and the Arab

World and has strong relationships with sister associations in

Eastern Europe, Central Asia, Central America, United States,

Canada & Australasia

140

PROVIDES an enabling context and environment that leads to

professional networking and bridges the divide between the

academic & business world

RUNS the EQUIS, EPAS, CLIP & CEL accreditation schemes which

deal with the very diverse approaches to management

education and development that exist around the world

EFMD is a strong advocate of the social and environmental imperatives

that must accompany business practices globally. Our commitment is to

offer professionals and institutions involved with management learning

and organizational development the opportunity to be part of a

dynamic, relevant and diverse network, sharing the common objective

of developing effective and socially responsible leaders and

managers. It was within this contextual basis that EFMD signed in 2003,

a partnership agreement with the United Nations Global Compact

(UNGC) and launched the Global Responsibility Invitation which in turn

led to the creation of the Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative

(GRLI).

More information in this link and document:

http://www.efmd.org/images/stories/efmd/downloadables/efmd-

about-efmd-leaflet-online_new.pdf





international

membership

Over 750 member organizations from academia, business, public

service and consultancy in 81 countries. A complete list of members can

be found here: http://www.efmd.org/index.php/what-is-efmd/list-of-

members

Benefits of EFMD Membership:

1) Access to a peer-based management development network

EFMD membership offers the unique opportunity to become

part of the leading international network in the field of

management development. The wide spread portfolio of

networking opportunities allows for an enriching interaction

among peers to discuss, share and benchmark their

experiences. It provides unlimited access to a global network of

management education providers, companies, public sector

organizations and consultancies.

http://www.efmd.org/images/stories/efmd/downloadables/efmd-about-efmd-leaflet-online_new.pdf

http://www.efmd.org/images/stories/efmd/downloadables/efmd-about-efmd-leaflet-online_new.pdf

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/what-is-efmd/list-of-members

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/what-is-efmd/list-of-members

141

2) Access to information:

Advice on learning suppliers for your management

education and development activities

EFMD knowledge services, newsletters, Global Focus

magazines

EFMD annual Membership Directory

Outcomes of all EFMD events

Profiles of management education providers

3) Access to services:

Preferential rates to EFMD events, seminars and webinars

on specific themes and subjects within management

education institutions

Advisory seminars

Special interest groups

Conferences for the different functions within management

education institutions

EFMD events around specific subjects such as

Entrepreneurship and Public Sector Management

Development

Free job advertisements

Access to industry relevant research and publications

Access to EFMD research projects and surveys

4) Access to quality improvement tools:

The European Quality Improvement System (EQUIS)

EFMD Program Accreditation (EPAS)

The Corporate Learning Improvement Process (CLIP)

Technology-Enhanced Learning Accreditation (CEL)

142

There are three types of membership:

A. Full Membership: It is for companies, business schools, public sector

organizations, executive development centers, chambers of commerce,

employers' associations, training consultancies and other organizations

actively involved in management development. it is aimed at

organizations based in Europe and worldwide. Full members benefit

from all EFMD services and have voting rights in the EFMD annual

general assembly. Full membership is the de facto membership for

European institutions. Annual Fee: 6,051 Euros

B. Affiliated Membership: aimed at organizations located outside of

Europe. Affiliated members do not have voting rights in the EFMD

Annual General Assembly. Annual Fee: 2,421 Euros.

C. Associate Membership: Associate Membership is for newly formed

business schools, executive development centers and companies which

have not been in existence for a sufficient period to demonstrate the

viability and quality of their activities and programs. Associate

members are accepted for a maximum period of three years, after

which they will be reviewed again by the Membership Review

Committee (for academic institutions) or the Director General (for

corporations) and considered for full membership. Annual Fee: 2,421

Euros.

Admission Procedures:

A. For Business Schools: The Membership Committee reviews and

creates minimum quality standards for membership of EFMD. Criteria

are constantly reviewed for the different categories of membership,

thus monitoring the existing membership and those potential members

who apply.

The membership application form should be accompanied by a

completed questionnaire about the organization, its interests and

expectations, as well as by two references from the existing

membership (referees must be Deans). This complete application file is

reviewed by the Membership Review Committee, which sits generally

three times a year and recommends membership to the Board of

Trustees for approval. The Board passes its proposals to the Annual

General Assembly which meets in June. It is during this Assembly that

membership is officially ratified.

B. For Corporations: Companies, consultancies, public sector

143

organizations and executive development centers are requested to

complete a membership application form and a questionnaire about

the organization, its composition, interests and expectations.

Applications from corporate members are reviewed by the EFMD

Director General and are then officially ratified by the EFMD Annual

General Assembly.



Requisites, Cost.

Recognized globally as an accreditation body of quality in

management education with established accreditation services for

business schools and business school programs, corporate universities

and technology-enhanced learning programs

AFMD offers accreditation for academic programs and corporate

accreditation.

Academic accreditation is offered with 3 programs: Institutional

Accreditation through EQUIS; Program Accreditation thorough EPAS

and CEL.

EQUIS:

The fundamental objective of EQUIS, linked to the mission of EFMD, is

to raise the standard of management education worldwide.

EQUIS assesses institutions as a whole. It assesses not just degree

programs but all the activities and sub-units of the institution, including

research, e-learning units, executive education provision and community

outreach. Institutions must be primarily devoted to management

education.

EQUIS is not primarily focused on the MBA or any other specific

program. Its scope covers all programs offered by an institution from

the first degree up to the Ph.D.

EQUIS looks for a balance between high academic quality and the

professional relevance provided by close interaction with the

corporate world. A strong interface with the world of business is,

therefore, as much a requirement as a strong research potential. EQUIS

attaches particular importance to the creation of an effective learning

environment that favors the development of students’ managerial and

entrepreneurial skills, and fosters their sense of global responsibility. It

also looks for innovation in all respects, including program design and

pedagogy.

Institutions that are accredited by EQUIS must demonstrate not only

high general quality in all dimensions of their activities, but also a high

144

degree of internationalization. With companies recruiting worldwide,

with students choosing to get their education outside their home

countries, and with schools building alliances across borders and

continents, there is a rapidly growing need for them to be able to

identify those institutions in other countries that deliver high quality

education in international management. Here is the list of EQUIS

Accredited Programs: http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-

main/epas/epas-accredited-programmes

EQUIS accreditation takes from one to two years and it is granted for

three to five years. The process can be seen here:

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/equis/equis-key-

timings The total process fee is 39,650 Euros (five years accreditation

and 24,400 Euros (non-accreditation). Details of fee structure can be

seen here: http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-

main/equis/equis-fee-structure. EQUIS Standards, Criteria and

Proceess Manual can be seen here:

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/equis/equis-

guides

EPAS:

EPAS is an international program accreditation system operated by

EFMD. It aims to evaluate the quality of any business and/or

management program that has an international perspective and,

where of an appropriately high quality, to accredit it.

The process involves a review in depth of individual programs through

international comparison and benchmarking. The process considers a

wide range of program aspects including:

The market positioning of the program nationally and

internationally.

The strategic position of the program within its institution

The design process including assessment of stakeholder

requirements – particularly students and employers

The program objectives and intended learning outcomes

The curriculum content and delivery system

The extent to which the program has an international focus and

a balance between academic and managerial dimensions

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/epas/epas-accredited-programmes


http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/equis/equis-key-timings

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/equis/equis-key-timings

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/equis/equis-fee-structure

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/equis/equis-fee-structure

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/equis/equis-guides

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/equis/equis-guides

145

The depth and rigor of the assessment processes (relative to the

degree level of the program)

The quality of the student body and of the program’s

graduates

The institution’s resources allocated to support the program

The appropriateness of the faculty that deliver the program

The quality of the alumni and their career progression

The evaluation report also includes the provision of strategic advice on

how the program may be improved so as to compete more effectively

in international markets. Where appropriate, focus may be put on the

program’s compatibility and / or conformance with the Bologna

structure.

Program Scope

A maximum of 2 program suites may be assessed in any one review

cycle. Program suites in any of the following categories may be

offered for evaluation:

Bachelor degrees or License (3 or 4 years)

Masters degrees (1 or 2 years, often based on the Bologna

model)

- Generalist (eg. MSc in Management)

- Specialist (eg. MSc in Marketing or in Finance)

Masters degrees pre-Bologna (5 or more years)

Master of Business Administration – MBA (post-experience)

Doctorates (eg. PhD or DBA)

EPAS is a service for EFMD members and is based on the same process

as EQUIS and covers the full range of academic programs from the

Bachelor to the Doctoral level. EFMD members may apply for stand-

alone programs, program suites or joint programs. The EPAS Standards

and Criteria cover all facets of program provision: (1) the institutional,

national and international environment, (2) program design, (3)

program delivery, (4) program outcomes, and (5) quality assurance.

They particularly emphasize achievements in the areas of academic

146

rigor, practical relevance and internationalization.

A list of accredited programs can be found here:

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/epas/epas-

accredited-programmes

The accreditation fees are: Application fee: 5,950 Euros. Review fee

for the first program 12,750 Euros and additional programs are:

3,400 Euros each. Accreditation fee for each program is: 850 Euros

one year, 2,550 3 years and 4,250 5 years accreditation.

Accreditation for 5 years of one set of Master programs would cost

22,950 Euros and two sets would cost 30,600 Euros. When an expert

conducts a briefing visit at the request of EPAS Committee, the

institution will cover travel, accommodation and other direct expenses

plus an administrative fee of 1,000 Euros.

The Standards, Criteria and Process Manuals can be found here:

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/epas/epas-

guides

CEL:

The fundamental objective of the EFMD CEL program is to raise the

standard of technology-enhanced learning programs worldwide. EFMD

CEL aims to facilitate standard setting, benchmarking, mutual learning,

and the dissemination of good practice. It allows for different

approaches and diversity in designing and implementing such

programs. EFMD CEL is directed towards educational management

programs incorporating ICT-based learning.

The Executive Office for EFMD CEL is located at the Swiss Centre for

Innovations in Learning (SCIL), University of St. Gallen, Dufourstr 40a,

St. Gallen CH-9000.

So far 11 technology-enhanced learning programs have received CEL

accreditation:

MBA at Curtin University, Curtin Graduate School of Business,

AU

Master of Business Administration programme at Universitas 21

Global, SG

Caterpillar University Sales Effectiveness Process (SEP)

Programme, CH



http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/epas/epas-guides

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/epas/epas-guides

147

FGV Online and EBAPE (Brazilian School of Public and Business

Administration) - Executive Master in Business Administration &

Undergraduate Course in Process Management, BR

Global Management Challenge, SDG – Simuladores e Modelos

de Gestão, PT

ESIC Business Marketing Game, ES

Online MBA Programme of the University of Liverpool, UK

Executive MBA, KMI - Kavrakoglu Management Institute, TR

Master’s Degree in Distance Education, University of Maryland

University College (UMUC), US

Citizen Act, Société Générale, FR

The accreditation fees are 18,000 Euros for the first program and

30,000 for two programs. Strategic advice for non-eligible institutions,

on-site assistance during the Self-Assessment, consultation for non-

accredited programmes or further consultation for accredited

programs: 1.900 Euros per day. Travel, lodging and other direct

expenses for EFMD CEL experts are to be paid by the institution

seeking EFMD CEL accreditation for a program.

Guides, Standards, indicators and procedure manuals can be found

here: http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/cel/cel-

guides

Web Site http://www.efmd.org/


and email

Eric Cornuel, Director General & CEO

[email protected]

Telephone/Fax Phone: +32 2 629 08 10

Fax: +32 2 629 08 11

Address EFMD

Rue Gachard 88 - box 3

1050 Brussels

Belgium

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/cel/cel-guides

http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-main/cel/cel-guides



148

Other Global Initiatives:

EFMD is the European partner in the China Europe International

Business School (CEIBS), a joint venture with Shanghai Jiaotong

University established as the first international business school with

autonomous status in 1994 under an agreement between the European

Commission and the Chinese Ministry of foreign Trade and Economic

Cooperation. CEIBS is a model for other similar initiatives which have a

high potential for global leadership and economic growth.

EFMD is a founding partner of the Global Foundation for Management

Education (GFME), which is a joint venture with the U.S.A.- based

Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB

International). The mission of the GFME is to identify and address

challenges and opportunities in, and advance the quality, content, and

development of management education and practice worldwide. This

initiative brings together representatives from all the continents to

address the global issues facing management education.

The Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative (GRLI) aims to promote

the understanding of globally responsible leadership and develop its

practice. The group was formed by EFMD with the support of the UN

Global Compact, and currently has 60 partners. The GRLI partners are

selected companies, business schools and centers for leadership

learning from five continents that join the Initiative in pairs of a

learning institution + a corporation. Since it started in September2004,

the concept has been developed, and collective a well as individual

actions have started all over the world. www.grli.org

In the context of the GRLI, EFMD has been actively engaged with the

UN Global Compact and other highly respected partners as a co-

convener of The Principles for Responsible Management Education

(PRME). Under the coordination of the UN Global Compact and

leading academic institutions, the PRME task force has developed a set

of six principles which lay the foundation for the global platform for

responsible management education. www.unprme.org


Institution AMBA. Association of MBAs

Mission

[School/Program,

The Association of MBAs is the international impartial authority on

postgraduate business education established in 1967. The only

http://www.grli.org/

http://www.unprme.org/

149

Interest HSA…) professional membership association for MBA students and graduates,

accredited business schools, and MBA employers. Our membership

network currently includes 9,000 members living in 88 countries.


mentioned under Membership below. They also have 5 corporate

members and 21 individual patrons.



international

membership

This organization has Individual memberships for Alumni of MBA

programs. For UK residents it costs 120 Pounds for 1 year and 200

Pounds for 2 years. Non UK residents 95 Pounds for 1 Year and 160

Pounds for 2 years. Students 95 pounds for 1 year. There is an

additional one time joining fee of 50 Pounds.

There is an engine to search for members and there are 3700

individual members and 270 business schools.

http://www.mbaworld.com/membersearch



Requisites, Cost.

Our accreditation service is the global standard for all MBA, DBA and

MBM programs. We currently accredit programs at 190 business

schools in over 75 different countries.

The Association of MBAs' international accreditation service is at the

heart of our commitment to the development of standards in global

management education.

Accredits MBA, DBA and MBM programs at 190 business schools in

over 70 countries. The rigorous assessment criteria ensure that only

highest caliber programs achieve our accreditation award. Unlike

other business education accreditation bodies we focus on individual

programs rather than whole institutions. This unique, in-depth and

detailed approach means that the highest standards of teaching,

faculty and student interaction are guaranteed by our accreditation.

Our accreditation is international in scope and reach. The Association

of MBAs International Accreditation Advisory Board (IAAB), which

drafts and constantly monitors the accreditation criteria, is drawn from

senior academics at top educational institutions around the world.

We believe that programs should be of the highest standard and

reflect changing trends and innovation in postgraduate management

education. Our accreditation process reflects this commitment to

fostering innovation and challenges business schools to continuously

perform at the highest level.

The accredited members are mostly in Europe 70% (28% in the UK,

http://www.mbaworld.com/membersearch

150

32% in Western Europe and 10% in Eastern Europe) and in Latin

America, 16%. The rest are: 5% en Asia, 2% in Middle East and

Africa, 5% in Australia and New Zealand and 2% in the USA. The full

list of accredited programs can be seen here:

http://www.mbaworld.com/guidetomba1/searchbschoolmbaprogram

mes

Accreditation criteria can be seen here:

http://www.mbaworld.com/administrator/file_sys/uploaded_files/12

99681060-MBA%20critieria_web.pdf

The assessment process can be seen here:

http://www.mbaworld.com/administrator/file_sys/uploaded_files/13

28193919-Assessment%20Process%200711.pdf

Web Site http://www.mbaworld.com/


and email

Sharon Bamford M.B.A., CEO.

Mark Stoddard, Accreditation Projects Manager

[email protected]

Dr. Robert Owen, Director of Accreditation & Business School Services.

[email protected]

Telephone/Fax +44 (0)20 7246-2697

Address Association of MBAs

25 Hosier Lane

London

EC1A 9LQ

Other The Global Guide to Accredited MBAs. http://www.ambaguide.com/

is a guide for students that includes 190 business schools in 70

countries.


Institution FIBAA. The Foundation for International Business Administration

Accreditation.

Mission Since the launch of the Bologna Process, along with the transition to

http://www.mbaworld.com/guidetomba1/searchbschoolmbaprogrammes

http://www.mbaworld.com/guidetomba1/searchbschoolmbaprogrammes

http://www.mbaworld.com/administrator/file_sys/uploaded_files/1299681060-MBA%20critieria_web.pdf

http://www.mbaworld.com/administrator/file_sys/uploaded_files/1299681060-MBA%20critieria_web.pdf

http://www.mbaworld.com/administrator/file_sys/uploaded_files/1328193919-Assessment%20Process%200711.pdf

http://www.mbaworld.com/administrator/file_sys/uploaded_files/1328193919-Assessment%20Process%200711.pdf




http://www.ambaguide.com/

151

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

Bachelor's and Master's programs and the growing independence

available to Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in designing their

degree programs, the call for the HEIs to establish and advance sound

and transparent quality assurance systems has grown continuously.

When the Accreditation System was established in Germany, FIBAA

was founded in 1994 and hence became one of the first agencies to

be accredited by the German Accreditation Council. Since 2002, it has

been entitled to award the Seal of the Accreditation Council for

degree programs in Germany.

The accreditation of degree programs is an internationally-established

quality assurance process in the higher education sector. It serves to

maintain fundamental standards in terms of the contextual and

structural design of educational offerings, to secure the comparability

of various study offerings at national and international level, and to

facilitate the international recognition of academic achievements and

degrees.

Since its founding, FIBAA has established itself as a quality assurance

agency which assesses degree programs, HEIs and their quality

management. It examines and promotes German and foreign state

and state-recognized private HEIs and universities (including during

their establishment phase).

Its work is shaped by an intensive quality process together with the

HEIs, whose goals are, on the one hand, to improve their quality and,

on the other, to provide a successful, accreditation, certification or

evaluation process. To achieve these goals as quickly and as efficiently

as possible, FIBAA also offers HEIs seminars and workshops only in

German so far, relating to quality management questions and topics.

FIBAA sees itself as a quality assurance agency committed to the

following goals:

Securing and improving quality in the higher education sector,

contributing to the transparency of studies offered for the

employment market, for students, companies, and for the HEIs

themselves,

collaborating in the elaboration of principles for the quality

process in the national and international education sector,

taking into consideration European and international concepts

152

and guidelines in the field of quality assurance in the higher

education sector; and

applying transparent combinations of information, quality

standards and procedural principles.


mentioned under Membership below. The organization has support of

the government and other organizations, mostly in Germany.



international

membership

Membership is mostly from Germany organizations and programs

(around 850 accredited). There are several international members that

are accredited, most in Europe (64) and some (5) in other parts of the

world. Accredited programs are located in: France:1; Jordan:2;

Liechtenstein:4; Nambia:1; Netherlands:3 (1 in HSA); Austria:37 (2 in

HSA); Romania:1; Russian Federation:1; Slovenia:1; Spain:1;

Switzerland:22 (1 in HSA) Czech Republic:3; and USA:2 (Louisville and

Kellogg in Chicago).



Requisites, Cost.

This organization is the one that provides accreditation to the members

of EHMA.

FIBAA offers the following services:

PROGRAMME ACCREDITATION: accreditation of Bachelor,

Master and PhD degrees

INSTITUTIONAL AUDIT of Higher Education Institutions,

faculties/Departments, Business Schools, etc.

CERTIFICATION of academic continuing training courses, plus

CONSULTING: Events (Workshops, Seminars and Trainings),

individual consulting, institutional evaluation and projects and

studies

Combined services – reduce input ("modular system")

The service divisions of FIBAA - program accreditation, institutional

audit, System Accreditation (only at state and state recognized

German HEIs) institutional evaluation and certification - can be

combined in a procedure to document and check the quality assurance

system. Initial Accreditation is for 5 years and re-accreditation 7 years.

Savings in input and costs create synergy effects, from which the HEIs

can benefit in the following ways:

http://www.fibaa.org/en/programme-accreditation.html

http://www.fibaa.org/en/institutional-audit.html

http://www.fibaa.org/en/certification-of-continuing-education-courses.html

http://www.fibaa.org/en/fibaa-consult.html

153

The special focus in awarding the FIBAA quality seal for accredited

programs is on internationality, employability and practical economic

relevance. In view of the globalization process and related cross-

border networking within the higher education system, FIBAA places, as

a matter of necessity, special emphasis on the aspect of

internationality. In addition to the international orientation of a study

program, the focus of the review is, e.g. also on the international

expertise of the lecturer, the internationality of the students,

intercultural and international contents of the curriculum as well as the

anticipated rate of lectures held in a foreign language. Other

important aspects are the practical economic relevance (e.g. in the

form or cooperation projects with business companies and integration

of theory and practice) as well as the resulting securing of

employability.

FIBAA assesses and accredits Bachelor's, Master's and PhD degree

programs in law, social and economic sciences. The service is designed

for German and foreign HEIs in public or private patronage; in the

latter case, with public approval or in the process of establishment.

Since its founding in 1994, FIBAA has performed already more than

1150 successful accreditation procedures. FIBAA has accredited not

only study programs at German HEIs, but also at European HEIs

(France, Great Britain, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Netherlands,

Austria, Russia, Switzerland, Slovenia, Spain and the Czech Republic)

as well as at non-European HEIs (China, India, Jordan, Mexico,

Namibia, USA and Vietnam).

154

All FIBAA Assessment Guides for Program Accreditation can be

downloaded here: http://www.fibaa.org/en/programme-

accreditation/prog-according-to-fibaa-quality-

requirements/fibaa0841.html

International Documents for Program Accreditation: FIBAA accredits

study programs not only according to the national quality standards

but also according to the international documents as Standards and

Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education

Areas, Equal - European MBA-Guidelines, Joint Quality Initiative (JQI),

Dublin Descriptors and Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications

concerning Higher Education in the European Region (Lisbon

Recognition Convention) (from 11.04.1997). All relevant documents are

available here: http://www.fibaa.org/en/programme-

accreditation/prog-according-to-fibaa-quality-

requirements/guidelines-and-targets/international-documents.html

They have an Accreditation Commission for Institutional Procedures.

Detailed information here: http://www.fibaa.org/en/institutional-

audit/fibaa-accreditation-commission.html

Web Site http://www.fibaa.org/en/welcome-page.html


and email

RA Hans-Jürgen Brackmann, Managing Director

e-mail: [email protected]

Telephone/Fax Phone: +49 228 - 280 356 0

Fax: +49 228 - 280 356 20

Address Berliner Freiheit 20 - 24

D-53111 Bonn, Germany

Other A strong Team: FIBAA and CHE Consult agree on Cooperation

(13/04/2012)

On March 8th, 2012 in Bonn FIBAA and CHE Consult signed a

memorandum of understanding in a view to leverage their long-term

experience and wide expertise in common projects in the field of

higher education.

CHE Consult is a consultancy firm and a center of excellence in the field

of higher education. It supports national and international higher

education institutions to become more autonomic, efficient, and

http://www.fibaa.org/en/programme-accreditation/prog-according-to-fibaa-quality-requirements/fibaa0841.html



http://www.fibaa.org/en/programme-accreditation/prog-according-to-fibaa-quality-requirements/guidelines-and-targets/international-documents.html



http://www.fibaa.org/en/institutional-audit/fibaa-accreditation-commission.html

http://www.fibaa.org/en/institutional-audit/fibaa-accreditation-commission.html



155

competitive as well as to participate in scientific development. "As a

consultancy institution for higher education institutions, research

establishment and science offices CHE consult is a strong partner which

well supplements the service offer of FIBAA. From this cooperation we

expect important impulse for higher education institutions", says

Daisuke Motoki, managing director of FIBAA.

This strategic cooperation between FIBAA and CHE Consult is

especially advantageous for higher education institutions which pursue

an institutional Audit by FIBAA as CHE Consult can assist these

institutions by developing their intern quality management system. "The

cooperation with FIBAA enables us to better support higher education

institutions and to establish institutional accreditation as an effective

management instrument in the field of higher education", says Christian

Berthold, managing director of CHE Consult.

For more information to CHE Consult: www.che-consult.de

FIBAA offers Institutional Audit to HEIs

International collaborations in higher education are becoming – and

not only in the Bologna Area – increasingly important. Cross-border

degree program offerings are becoming ever more popular,

international cooperation is increasingly serving as key proof of

scientific quality in the field of research. To the extent to which

international activities at universities are increasing, reliable proof of

their quality is orientating itself in line with international standards with

increasing relevance. The proof of verified quality facilitates access to

networks in the higher education sector and is gaining in importance for

activities in the international Higher Education Area.

As a result of the constantly increasing demand and building on its

international expertise, FIBAA has developed a verification process to

support the universities: FIBAA's Institutional Audit delivers reliable

proof of the quality of an institution's own performance measured

against the usual international standards and benchmarks, and

documents their efficiency and quality.

In accordance with the Mission Statement of an autonomous university

which has and uses its own decision-making and creative freedoms

within the scope of the national guidelines, a university's key

performance fields are

Commitment,

http://www.che-consult.de/

156

Governance,

Organization and Administration,

Teaching and Studies,

Teaching and Studies related support processes,

Performance field Research and Development,

Material and personal equipment,

Financing,

Quality Management and

Publication / Public Relations.

Each checked and documented with a focus on Strategy, Management

and Efficient Performance.

Our Brochure about Institutional Audit Procedure is available here:

http://www.fibaa.org/fileadmin/files/folder/Brosch%C3%BCren/11

0913_BROSCHUERE_INST_AUDIT_EN.pdf .

Target Group:

The Institutional Audit initially addresses universities, but also takes

higher education facilities into consideration (faculties, departments

and business schools, etc.), insofar as these are self-regulated. It

follows in line with the usual international "Benchmarks", thereby also

allowing checks to be made to determine an institution's own resilience,

including within national contexts and beyond to present a program’s

internal quality. Institutional Audits are particularly relevant for

internationally-orientated universities.

Notice:

If you need a consultant to assist you with your quality management

before you application for Institutional Audit, FIBAA recommends CHE

Consult. Contact: Thorsten Schomann, M.A., Head of Institutional

Quality Assurance Procedures, Phone: +49 228 - 280 356 18, Fax:

+49 228 - 280 356 20, e-mail: [email protected] Languages:

German, English, Franch, Italian

Partnerships

http://www.fibaa.org/fileadmin/files/folder/Brosch%C3%BCren/110913_BROSCHUERE_INST_AUDIT_EN.pdf

http://www.fibaa.org/fileadmin/files/folder/Brosch%C3%BCren/110913_BROSCHUERE_INST_AUDIT_EN.pdf


157

With a view to amplify its expertise FIBAA co-operates with the

following networks and accreditation agencies:

European Health Management Association (EHMA)

EHMA is an European Network. Its objective is to supporting policy

frameworks that enable innovative health management and

leadership, both at EU and country level. EHMA has just under 200

organizational members across more than 30 countries in the European

region. For further information: www.ehma.org

Russia – Agency for Higher Education Quality Assurance and

Career Development (AKKORK)

AKKORK is an independent professional agency in the field of

consultancy, conduct of the reviews, accreditation and certification of

the education institutions. Its mission is to form and develop in Russia an

independent system of education quality assessment and assurance

that corresponds to the principles of the Bologna declaration and the

world best practices. For further information: www.akkork.ru

FIBAA – National Partnerships

CHE Consult GmbH

CHE Consult is a consultancy firm and a centre of excellence in the field

of higher education. CHE Consult offers long-term experience in the

field of activity as well as methodological knowledge in consultancy,

and is firmly committed to research into higher education. For further

information: www.che-consult.org

Accreditation Agency for Study Programs in Health and Social

Sciences (AHPGS)

The AHPGS promotes the quality and transparency of German

university study courses for health and social professionals. The focus of

AHPGS' work is to guarantee uniform and international comparable

quality standards in the new Bachelor's and Master's degrees through

accreditation procedures. For further information: www.ahpgs.de

ASIIN Association

ASIIN accredits Bachelor's and Master's program in engineering,

informatics/computer sciences, the natural sciences and in mathematics.

ASIIN also offers system accreditation. For further information:

www.asiin.de


http://www.akkork.ru/

http://www.che-consult.org/

http://www.ahpgs.de/

http://www.asiin.de/

158


Institution ECBE. European Council for Business Education

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

Following a meeting of business educators from fifteen countries, in

1991, it was decided to form a global network of accreditation

agencies for business education and the institutions they served.

Subsequently, at a further meeting in London it was agreed to form a

European professional accreditation organization for business

education. The European Council for Business Education (ECBE) was

formally founded at a conference held in Paris in July of 1995.

ACBE is an associate of the European Association for Quality Assurance

in Higher Education ENQA http://www.enqa.eu/

The mission of the European Council for Business Education is to

promote and support quality business education internationally

In order to achieve our mission the following objectives have been

developed:

To establish accreditation standards for academic achievement

in business education whilst facilitating the development,

innovation and experimentation within the curricula and

instructional techniques.

To assist members in the improvement of their professional

business education and related activities.

To encourage and assist members to develop and use planning

and outcome assessment procedures in order to achieve

excellence in teaching business.

To provide an international forum to discuss issues pertaining to

business education in the complex and changing global

environment.

To develop and maintain relationships with individuals and

organizations to foster effective business education, within

institutions and business programs in business and industry,

government agencies, professional associations etc.

To provide information to members and the public concerning

issues relevant to business education.

http://www.enqa.eu/

159

To encourage innovation and creativity in business.

To provide consultants, publications and workshops to assist

business schools and programs in their pursuit and maintenance

of accreditation.

To promote lawful and ethical practices in business.


mentioned under Membership below



international

membership

Institutional membership is open to all institutions offering business

degrees and programs. Institutional members have the rights to

participate in the democratic functioning of ECBE.

Corporate and Organization membership is available to those

organizations who wish to support and participate in the activities of

ECBE as well as to use the services offered.

Individual membership is available to individuals who are active within

the field of business education and wish to support or benefit from the

services and activities of ECBE

ECBE has 50 members that are not accredited, 2 Candidacy Programs

and 37 Accredited members. Member and accredited programs can

be seen here: http://www.smbconsultinggroup.com/ECBE/what-is-

ecbe/list-of-members/



Requisites, Cost.

ECBE is a not-for-profit organization which accredits courses and

programs, concentrated within the field of business, at the

undergraduate, graduate and post-graduate levels. It is necessary for

Institutions to become a member of ECBE, before starting the

accreditation process. Each institution undergoing accreditation is

required to carry out a self-evaluation, an internal critical appraisal,

using the guidelines provided by ECBE. This is then verified by a

visiting team of peer evaluators. Following the report made by the

visiting team, recommendations are made, which may include the

award of accreditation.

ECBE`s accreditation is an independent, voluntary self-regulatory

system for business programs. Through the process of accreditation,

institutions and training organizations have their programs evaluated.

The objective of the Council is to assure the continual improvement of

educational quality and the effectiveness of public and private

business schools, their programs and that of training organizations. The

http://www.smbconsultinggroup.com/ECBE/what-is-ecbe/list-of-members/

http://www.smbconsultinggroup.com/ECBE/what-is-ecbe/list-of-members/

160

accreditation process is based upon self and peer evaluation providing

a vehicle for self-regulation and improvement.

There are two types of accreditation:

Accreditation of business and management programmes within

universities and

Accreditation of learning which takes place off campus such as

in-company training programs and work based learning

The accreditation of an academic program or an entire institution

normally involves three stages:

1. The administration, faculty, staff and students of the institution

or academic business programs carry out a self-evaluation by

following a detailed guide supplied by ECBE.

2. A team of peers, selected by ECBE`s Board of Commissioners,

reviews the evidence (self-evaluation), visits all campus sites,

interviews administrators, faculty, staff and students and draws

up a report. This report with recommendations is submitted to

the Board of Commissioners.

3. Guided by ECBE`s quality standards the Board of

Commissioners reviews the evidence, the self-evaluation report

and the recommendations and then takes a decision concerning

the award of accreditation. This decision is then transmitted to

the Board of Directors of ECBE for confirmation.

The process considers all factors that can influence the quality of the

education provided by an institution: inputs; educational processes and

outcomes

The Accreditation Process

Institutions interested in accreditation must first become members of

ECBE. ECBE provides two pathways to accreditation: a two stage

procedure - involving Candidacy Status for accreditation - or the direct

approach for full accreditation.

Candidacy Status

To achieve candidacy status an applying institution must demonstrate

that its institution meets the accreditation standards to a sufficient

degree that it can be expected to attain full accreditation within a

161

three-year period.

This pathway demands the presentation of specific documents followed

by a site visit, by an appropriate representative of ECBE, to review the

existing conditions and business education program(s) offered at the

member institution. The site visit will take one or two days depending

upon the size and complexity of the business program(s). If the site visit

produces a successful result, as expressed in a positive review of the

institution and its program(s), then Candidacy Status is awarded for a

period of three years. Within the three years period the institution must

apply for full accreditation.

Full Accreditation Award

Full Accreditation requires that:

1) an institution carries out a comprehensive self-evaluation,

2) a site visit be made to review and validate the veracity of the

self-evaluation. This visit is conducted by a visiting team of peer

evaluators, usually from different countries and

3) the Board of Commissioners is satisfied that ALL accreditation

standards are met sufficiently to warrant the award of full

accreditation

The Criteria, or Standards, for accreditation have been developed

and approved by the membership of ECBE and are the tools used to

identify the strengths and weaknesses of an institution and measure its

overall effectiveness in carrying out its mission.

The criteria are designed to cover all aspects of teaching and

administration within a department or faculty of economics, business

administration or management of a university, as well as independent

business schools.

Care has to be taken to allow for the differences of emphasis due to

regional and cultural diversity within Europe. The application and

maintenance of the standards is one of the chief roles of the Board of

Commissioners that acts independently of the Board of Directors.

The following documents can be downloaded directly by members

using the member`s login. Otherwise please contact ECBE

Undergraduate Standards

Graduate Standards

162

Accreditation Process

Stage 1 Guidelines

Stage 2 Self-evaluation Report (SER)

Stage 1 application for candidacy

Stage 1 application for accreditation

Accreditation of Programmes of Learning

Guidelines on the Accreditation Process for Programmes of Learning

ECBE HE Credit Level Descriptors

On request from ECBE:

Sample self-evaluation report

Accreditation documents (members only)

ECBE works in close co-operation with the ACBSP in the USA. Both

organizations have similar goals and objectives and have signed a

memorandum of understanding for a "fast track" accreditation for

institutions which perceive value in having both European and American

accreditation. This facilitates the mobility of teachers and students, the

transferability of credits and the recognition of qualifications

internationally.

Web Site http://www.ecbe.eu


and email

R. Bryan Holden - Executive Director

E-mail: [email protected]

Telephone/Fax Tel: +41 / 21 / 964 5430

Fax: +41 / 21 / 981 1477

Address ECBE En Brison,

CH - 1832 Chamby,

Switzerland

http://www.ecbe.eu/

163


Institution CEEMAN-IQA. Central and East European Management Development

Association- International Quality Accreditation.

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

Started in 1998 for business schools in Central and Eastern Europe.

Later expanded to all of Europe. International Management

Development Association

The main objectives of the CEEMAN IQA

In general:

To set and promote international standards for management

development programs and institutions in the context of their

respective mission and specific environments

To assist management development institutions in developing a

clear and meaningful focus in their environment that will result

in the creation and delivery of high-quality relevant

management education

To award and promote advanced management development

institutions for the results achieved and impact made, while also

encouraging their continuous improvement policy and programs

and providing advice and support in their implementation

To promote the originality, creativity, innovation, and high

professional and ethical contribution to local and international

business and academic communities, and to promote

responsible leadership, based on the Principles of Responsible

Management Education of the United Nations Global Compact

Specifically for the candidate institutions:

To identify the critical dimensions and criteria that an institution

should follow to create, improve and sustain high-quality and

relevant management education

To help faculty members and staff engaged in management

development institutions understand their role in the pursuit of

the institution's mission and its continuous self-improvement

process, and encourage them to provide their own contribution

For customers and potential participants:

164

To help customers and other stakeholders understand the value

of management education and obtain the benefits on a value-

for-value basis

To assure customers and users of an accredited institution that

the institution is pursuing and achieving the critical criteria for

high-quality and relevant management education and

development

Sponsorship The organization is sustained with membership fees. They also organize

annual meetings, conferences, executive education events, and other

possible sources of revenue.



international

membership

The directory of member Schools and Programs is under construction in

the Webpage and so is the directory of experts.

http://www.ceeman.org/pages/en/directory-of-schools-and-

programs.html

CEEMAN members are entitled to the following services:

preferential fees for all CEEMAN programs and events -

educational programs for faculty and staff, annual conferences,

deans & directors meetings, events organized in partnership

with other institutions

receiving all CEEMAN publications free of charge

contributing with articles to quarterly CEEMAN News

(developments in member institutions, reports from events and

initiatives, research findings, published books, etc)

placing announcements and calls for cooperation on CEEMAN

website

inclusion in the online CEEMAN Directory of Schools and

Programs with institution's profile and program descriptions (to

be available in summer 2010, institutional members only)

inclusion of faculty members and/or selected experts in the

online CEEMAN Expert Directory (to be available in summer

2010, members and IMTA Alumni only)

only CEEMAN members are eligible to apply for CEEMAN’s

International Quality Accreditation

http://www.ceeman.org/pages/en/directory-of-schools-and-programs.html

http://www.ceeman.org/pages/en/directory-of-schools-and-programs.html

165

benefits from CEEMAN publishing partners which include major

international publishers such as Emerald, Harvard Business

School Publishing, Pearson Education, the Adizes Institute, and

others

access to a strong-knit and committed international network of

schools working and interested in growing economies, which

opens possibilities for cooperation and development



Requisites, Cost.

Any CEEMAN member offering at least one degree program in

management or executing 30% more of the degree load in joint

programs and with at least five years existence is eligible to apply for

IQA accreditation. The five-stage accreditation procedure involves

assessment of eligibility, development of a comprehensive self-

assessment report by the applicant, a peer review on-site visit, an

evaluation report by the peer review committee, and award of the

CEEMAN IQA with permission to use the designation on all institutional

materials to the successful applicants. The initial IQA award is granted

for the period of six years, after which the institution has to apply for

re-accreditation.

Accreditation process can be seen in this document:

http://www.ceeman.org/data/files/pages/iqa_brochure_2009.pdf

The detailed guidelines for accreditation can be found in this

document:

http://www.ceeman.org/data/files/pages/CEEMAN_IQA_Guidelines

_Dec2011.pdf and the self-assessment report guidelines:

http://www.ceeman.org/data/files/pages/selfassessment_report_inst

ructions.pdf

Accreditation cost 10,500 EUR and typically accreditation last for 6

years.

Web Site http://www.ceeman.org/


and email

Derek Abell, President Accreditation Committee

[email protected]

Telephone/Fax Tel: +386 4 57 92 505

Fax: +386 4 57 92 501

Address CEEMAN

http://www.ceeman.org/data/files/pages/iqa_brochure_2009.pdf

http://www.ceeman.org/data/files/pages/CEEMAN_IQA_Guidelines_Dec2011.pdf

http://www.ceeman.org/data/files/pages/CEEMAN_IQA_Guidelines_Dec2011.pdf

http://www.ceeman.org/data/files/pages/selfassessment_report_instructions.pdf

http://www.ceeman.org/data/files/pages/selfassessment_report_instructions.pdf



166

Central and East European

Management Development Association

Prešernova 33, 4260 Bled, Slovenia

Other CEEMAN and Emerald are delighted to announce the launch of the

2012 Case Writing Competition.

The aim of the competition is to encourage and promote the

development of high-quality case material relevant for the realities of

transitional and emerging economies and at the same time promote the

development of case-writing capabilities in those countries.

In the spirit of a fully inclusive competition, global submissions are

encouraged.

The co-organizers will support global exposure of the submitted high-

quality cases through a direct link with the Emerald Emerging Markets

Case Studies collection. All case submissions will be considered for

international publication.

The total CEEMAN/Emerald award prize pool is worth over €10,000,

with €4,000 prize money. Prizes are awarded to the overall winner

and two runners-up. Depending on the quality and number of

submissions, additional awards may be bestowed in different

categories.

Compulsory submission criteria:

Cases should have a developing and emerging markets focus

(Central and Eastern Europe, Latin America, Africa, Asia,

Oceania)

All cases should be based on a real situation in a real

company, with a clear decision-making situation, and prepared

in accordance with the general case writing guidelines and

competition criteria

Case studies submitted should not have been published before

in their current or substantially similar form, or be under

consideration for publication in any ISSN/ ISBN-registered

publication or with any other case-center

All case studies must include appropriate signed permissions

167

from case protagonists

All submissions should be accompanied by a case teaching note

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/products/new/pdf/How-To-

Write-A-Teaching-Note.pdf

As all cases submitted for the competition will be considered for

publication in Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies collection,

submissions must comply with the author guidelines

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/products/new/pdf/author_guidelines.

pdf , which include information on editorial objectives and criteria, as

well as comprehensive manuscript requirements.

Please also consult the competition evaluation checklist before

submitting your case

http://www.ceeman.org/data/files/pages/Case_evaluation_checklist.

pdf .

Contact: Olga Veligurska, CEEMAN Head of Projects,

[email protected]

http://www.ceeman.org/pages/en/case-writing-competition.html


Institution AABS. Association of African Business Schools

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

To promote excellence in business and management education in Africa

by supporting graduate business schools through capacity building,

collaboration and quality improvement.

This brochure explains the key activities of the AABS and the key

partners

http://www.aabschools.com/files/15/AABS_Brochure_2010.pdf

Annual Report 2010 with some membership and financial information:

http://www.aabschools.com/cms/attachments/25/april_annual_report

_24_march.pdf

Sponsorship The organization is a non-Profit Organization and is sustained with

membership fees and Corporate partners (only 2 now that pay

$4,500 annual fee)

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/products/new/pdf/How-To-Write-A-Teaching-Note.pdf

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/products/new/pdf/How-To-Write-A-Teaching-Note.pdf

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/products/new/pdf/author_guidelines.pdf

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/products/new/pdf/author_guidelines.pdf

http://www.ceeman.org/data/files/pages/Case_evaluation_checklist.pdf

http://www.ceeman.org/data/files/pages/Case_evaluation_checklist.pdf


http://www.ceeman.org/pages/en/case-writing-competition.html

http://www.aabschools.com/files/15/AABS_Brochure_2010.pdf

http://www.aabschools.com/cms/attachments/25/april_annual_report_24_march.pdf

http://www.aabschools.com/cms/attachments/25/april_annual_report_24_march.pdf

168



international

membership

There are 26 member schools in Africa and 5 Pipeline Schools. See

map and schools here:

http://www.aabschools.com/directory/schools.html

In order to become an AABS Member a School needs to submit an

online form showing that they meet all the AABS membership criteria.

Criteria for full AABS Membership

A Business Schools is eligible for membership if it is an Africa - based

business school that meets all the non-negotiable criteria and satisfies

the committee in respect of the other criteria.

Negotiable criteria may be interpreted flexibly and as a whole, to

meet the spirit of the requirement rather than the letter.

Schools, which do not yet meet one of the negotiable criteria, may

provisionally be admitted to full membership if they submit a plan to

meet the requirements within not more than two years.

1) Staff:

1.1) Applicants must have a minimum of 12 permanent resident full-

time faculty members, with relevant postgraduate degrees or

qualifications. Up to six of the 12 full-time faculty may be

shared with other departments in the parent institution provided

that at least 50% of their workload is allocated to the Business

School. (Non Negotiable criteria)

1.2) At least six permanent full time faculty members must have

Doctoral Degrees. (Non Negotiable criteria)

1.3) Applicants must demonstrate a sustainable staff development

program by providing a document describing faculty

development.

2) Intellectual Contributions:

2.1) Each institution must have an output of two points per full time

faculty equivalent during the three preceding years. Points to

be calculated as: book - 2 points, refereed article - 2 points,

case study or practitioner article - 1 point, chapter in a book -

1 point and conference paper – 1 point.

3) Teaching Requirements:

http://www.aabschools.com/directory/schools.html

169

3.1) Applicants must have at least 500 hours classroom time in the

MBA or equivalent Masters Program. (Non Negotiable criteria)

Distance learning institutions must demonstrate that students engage in

activities equivalent to 500 hours of classroom time in the MBA or

equivalent master’s program. This can be done through:

Regular scheduled contact, either face to face, or by electronic

media with faculty members.

Required study schools throughout the course of the year

Study groups of students meeting according to a prescribed

timetable during the course of a year

Assignments, which require students to engage in the

application of the material in the workplace, including

engaging with executives and colleagues. (Non Negotiable

Criteria) Please provide this information in a word document.

3.2) Applicants must provide a document describing their teaching

methods, illustrating the use of participative learning, for

example through the use of case studies, syndicate groups,

action learning and projects.

3.3) Applicants must demonstrate that materials and cases include

local and African market content.

4) Fees:

4.1) Applicants' minimum annual full tuition fee for the MBA or

equivalent must be at least $3 500 per student.

5) Executive Education:

5.1) Applicants must provide at least 40 days of executive

education per year. (Non Negotiable criteria)

5.2) The Executive Education fee should be no less than $100 per

day per participant.

6) Quality assurance:

6.1) Applicants must demonstrate the use of an independent quality

assurance system on the MBA program, such as a national

accreditation body, external examiners or another quality

170

controlling body. (Non Negotiable criteria)

7) Association's website:

7.1) All Faculty Members from Schools applying for AABS

Membership must register on the Association's website.

AABS Pipeline Schools:

Schools that do not yet meet all the non-negotiable criteria for AABS

but would like to aspire to meet those criteria in the next two years can

join AABS as “AABS Pipeline Schools”.

AABS pipeline school applicants would:

1) Join the AABS network

2) Would be eligible to attend the Annual AABS Members

Conference

3) Will be assigned a Mentor (from the AABS Advisory board, AABS

board or an AABS consultant) for a year period (which could be

extended if needed). The mentor will visit the school for three days

once during the year, they will also be available for email and

telephonic contact and support during the year.

4) Be able to join AABS Workshops at discounted AABS member

rates.

5) Receive AABS peer visits

AABS pipeline school would need to:

Submit an online application form

Meet at least 2 of the five non-negotiable criteria

Must offer an MBA or equivalent Master’s program

Pay an annual fee of $3 000 per year

Need to aspire to meet the AABS non-negotiable criteria

within a period of three years.

Applications to be an AABS pipeline school can be submitted

at any stage.

Current Pipeline school fees are $3 000.

171



Requisites, Cost.

They do not provide accreditation, but in order to join you have to be

accredited by some other recognized accreditation body. It is

interesting and points into possible alternatives to a full accreditation

option.

Web Site http://www.aabschools.com/


and email

Dr. Enase Okonedo, Board Chair

Lagod Business School, Kenya

[email protected]

Sarah tinsley-Myerscough, AABS Program Director

[email protected]

Telephone/Fax 27 11 771 4382

Address N/A

Other Other African related organizations: South African Qualifications

Authority (SAQA)

An organization created to provide an integrated national framework

for learning achievements, facilitate access to mobility and progression

within education, training, careers, and to enhance the quality of

education and training


Institution CLADEA – The Latin American Council of Management Schools

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

The Latin American Council of Schools of Management is a premier

global network of business schools. This worldwide organization

provides a forum for international cooperation and reciprocity

between the world’s leading academic institutions.

Goals:

1) Broaden the scope of teaching Management, as well as

promote research in the field.

2) Disseminate management practices among social and economic

organizations in Latin America.

3) Develop global cooperation between directors and scholars

from different countries and areas of interest to promote

research, case studies, and bibliographic support.




172

4) Maintain ties of reciprocity with primary global networks to

ensure communication and the flow of information.

5) Ensure that membership means quality and the potential for

academic progress.

6) Offer technical support to Latin American development

organizations.

7) Support Document and Information Centers through CLADEA’s

Document Center.

8) Prepare management teaching materials based on those

developed by scholars of the member schools, as well as

publish books, journals or other teaching and research

materials.

9) Facilitate communication among management institutions within

each country and globally.

10) 10. Organize seminars and international events for the

exchange of information and solutions to problems specific to

Latin America.

Sponsorship The organization is sustained with membership fees and other events. It

also has some corporate sponsors.



international

membership

CLADEA’s membership includes over 180 leading business schools in

Latin America, North America, Europe, and Oceania dedicated to

offering high quality professional education and fostering scholarly

research into public and private sector management. Membership list

here:

http://www.cladea.org/home/index.php?option=com_content&view=

article&id=366&Itemid=327&lang=es

It also has strategic partnerships with sponsor organizations and

support groups such as: GMAC (Graduate Management Admission

Council) or Eduniversal the Ranking organization

http://www.eduniversal-ranking.com/ with also a comprehensive list of

international accreditation organizations http://www.eduniversal-

ranking.com/methodology/associations/area/3



Requisites, Cost.

CLADEA has strategic partnerships with several Accreditation

organizations such as: AACSB International, ACBSP and EFMD. It has

agreements for accreditation of its member organizations. It is also

http://www.cladea.org/home/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=366&Itemid=327&lang=es

http://www.cladea.org/home/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=366&Itemid=327&lang=es

http://www.eduniversal-ranking.com/

http://www.eduniversal-ranking.com/methodology/associations/area/3

http://www.eduniversal-ranking.com/methodology/associations/area/3

173

currently studying the feasibility of accreditation.

Web Site www.cladea.org


and email

Alberto Zapater, Ejecutive Director

[email protected]

Telephone/Fax Phone: (511) 345-1325 / 317-7200

Address Av. Alonso de Molina 1652

Monterrico, Surco

Lima 33 Perú


Institution AAPBS – Association of Asia-Pacific Business Schools

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

The primary purpose of the AAPBS is to provide leadership and

representation in order to advance the quality of business and

management education in the Asia-Pacific Region. The Association will

accomplish its mission by collaborating in research and teaching, and

working in partnership to improve business school standards and

quality. AAPBS and its members are striving to understand and

develop a solid paradigm for an Asian management education model

within a global context.

The Association started in 2004 when 11 Asia Pacific business schools

deans met in Seoul to decide to the formal establishment of the new

organization. The aspiration of the Association is captured by the

phrase: “Towards Global Managers, Global Leaders and Global

Cooperation”.

Sponsorship The organization is sustained with membership fees



international

membership

Membership is currently 147 representative schools from 22 countries

working to shape the role of the region’s management education in

close collaboration with the AACSB and the European Foundation for

Management Development (EFMD). The list of members can be found in

the webpage: http://www.aapbs.org/

Full Membership in the association is granted to granting degree

institutions within he Asia-Pacific region. New member institutes must




174

be approved by a majority vote from the Council and should have the

following attributes:

The mission of the organization is aligned with the mission of

AAPBS

The organization demonstrates a high level of contribution to

the advancement of management eduction

The organization have been endorsed and recommended by

an existing membership (referees must be Deans).

There are 4 categories of membership:

Full Membership: Business administration and management degree

granting institutions of the Asia-Pacific region. Institutions to be eligible

must have a formally organized administrive unit responsible for work

leading to business or management degrees of baccalaureate and/or

graduate level. Any eligible institution may apply for membership. The

amount of the annual dues per institution is US$1,000

Associate Membership: Business administration and management

degree granting institutions outside the Asia-Pacific. Associate

membership is determined by a majority vote of the Council, and shall

be completed by the payment of regulat institutional dues. The Amount

of the annual dues per institution is US$1,000.

Affiliate Membership: Institutions, either inside or outside the Asia

Pacific region, that share similar interests around management

education but are not degree granting institutions. Examples of

Affiliate Members are, but are not limited to, governmental

organizations, research institutes, and corporate training organizations.

Affiliate Membership is determined by a majority vote of the council

and shall be completed by the payment of regular institutions dues.

The Amount of the annual dues per institution is US$1,000.

Corporate Membership: Companies and organizations, either inside or

outside the Asia-Pacific region, that share an interest in management

education and the development of business professionals. Corporate

are determined by a majority vote of the council and shall be

completed by the payment of regular institutions dues. The Amount of

the annual dues per institution is US$3,000.



AAPBS does not provide accreditation currently, but works with AACSB

and EFMD to facilitate the process of accreditation for its members

175

Requisites, Cost.

Web Site http://www.aapbs.org/


and email

Betty Chung, Executive Director

[email protected]

Telephone/Fax Tel: 82-2-958-3293

FAX: 82-2-958-3290

Address AAPBS Secretary-General

C/-Kaist Business School

87 Hoegiro, Dongdaemoon-gu

Seoul, 130-722 South Korea

Type/Field Public Health

Institution CEPH – Council on Education of Public Health

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

The Council is a private, nonprofit corporation with APHA and ASPH as

its two corporate members. The affairs of the corporation are directed

by a 10-member board. As an independent body, the board is solely

responsible for adopting criteria by which schools and programs are

evaluated, for establishing policies and procedures, for making

accreditation decisions, and for managing the business of the

corporation

Mission: assures quality in public health education and training to

achieve excellence in practice, research and service, through

collaboration with organizational and community partners.

Goals and Objectives: "to enhance health in human populations

through organized community effort." The Council's focus is the

improvement of health through the assurance of professional personnel

who are able to identify, prevent and solve community health

problems. The Council's objectives are: 1. To promote quality in

education for public health through a continuing process of self-

evaluation by the schools and programs that seek accreditation; 2. To

assure the public that institutions offering accredited instruction in

public health have been evaluated and judged to meet standards



176

essential to conduct such education program; and 3. To encourage

through periodic review, consultation, research, publication and other

means improvements in the quality of education for the field of public

health.

Interest in HSA: There is no mention of HSA in their web page.

Sponsorship Council composition: Three councilors are appointed by APHA and

must be primarily involved in the practice of public health or in the

administration of related health services. Three are appointed by

ASPH and must be selected from the faculty, administration or students

of schools of public health. Two members are jointly appointed by

ASPH and APHA and serve as representatives of the general public;

they may be neither engaged in full-time public health practice nor

employed by an educational institution that has a school of public

health. Two additional councilors are elected by CEPH and approved

by the two corporate members to represent the programmatic interests

served by CEPH. They are nominated by appropriate professional and

educational organizations in community health education and

community health/ preventive medicine and must be individuals with

specific expertise in the programmatic areas they represent.

Financial Support: The Council is supported by a combination of fees

and contributions from the profession and the academic community



international

membership

44 accredited schools and 83 MPH programs. Oldest accredited

programs (1946) Columbia, Harvard, Hopkins, UC Berkeley, Michigan,

Minnesota, UNC Chapel Hill, and Yale (8). Oldest Accredited Programs

(1971) CalState Northridge & NYU (2). International accredited

members: 1 School: National Institute of Public Health Mexico since

2006; & 2 MPH Programs: American University of Beirut & St.

Georges University Granada WI since 2006. Full list of accredited

members (Feb 2012): http://www.ceph.org/pdf/Master_List.pdf

Currently in the pipeline, there are 4 schools and 29 MPH programs. 1

international (Ecole de Hautes Etudes en Sante Public-France)



Requisites, Cost.

Criteria for SPH and MPH programs outside SPH were revised June

2011(http://www.ceph.org/pg_accreditation_criteria.htm).

Accreditation process requires 18-24 months for self-study and 10-14

months for review and reaccreditation.

Fee Schedule 2012: Application Fee: (annually until accreditation is

achieved) $2,500 Program; $3,500 School; & $4,500 International.

Accreditation Review: $2,700 Program (plus $1,300 for each

http://www.ceph.org/pdf/Master_List.pdf

http://www.ceph.org/pg_accreditation_criteria.htm

177

additional needed review); $3,500 School (Plus $1,750 each

additional); $5,400 & $7,000 International Program & School (plus

$3,500 & $2,700 each additional). In addition travel expenses are

covered for all individuals and visits. If consultants are needed $500

½ day in CEPH office; $1,500 per day (USA); $2,500 per day

(International). International programs would typically pay $15,000 –

$20,000 plus travel expenses.

Web Site http://www.ceph.org/


and email

Laura Rasar King, MPH, MCHES

Executive Director

[email protected]

Maraquita L. Hollman, MPH

Accreditation Specialist

[email protected]

Telephone/Fax Phone: (202) 789-1050

Fax: (202) 789-1895

Address 800 Eye Street, NW, Suite 202

Washington, DC 20001-3710

Other: Benefits of Accreditation

CEPH accreditation serves multiple purposes for different constituents.

In general, specialized accreditation attests to the quality of an

educational program that prepares for entry into a recognized

profession.

For the public, accreditation promotes the health, safety and

welfare of society by assuring competent public health

professionals.

For prospective students and their parents, accreditation serves

a consumer protection purpose. It provides assurance that the

school or program has been evaluated and has met accepted

standards established by and with the profession.

For prospective employers, it provides assurance that the

curriculum covers essential skills and knowledge needed for

today's jobs.

For graduates, it promotes professional mobility and enhances

employment opportunities in positions that base eligibility upon

graduation from an accredited school or program.

For public health workers, it involves practitioners in the

establishment of standards and assures that educational

requirements reflect the current training needs of the

profession.

For the profession, it advances the field by promoting




178

standards of practice and advocating rigorous preparation.

For the federal government and other public funding agencies,

it serves as a basis for determining eligibility for federally

funded programs and student financial aid.

For foundations and other private funding sources, it represents

a highly desirable indicator of a program's quality and

viability.

For the university, it provides a reliable basis for inter- and

intra-institutional cooperative practices, including admissions

and transfer of credit.

For the faculty and administrators, it promotes ongoing self-

evaluation and continuous improvement and provides an

effective system for accountability.

For the school or program, accreditation enhances its national

reputation and represents peer recognition.

Type/Field Public Health

Institution ASPHER – The Association of Schools of Public health in the European

Region

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

ASPHER was founded in 1966 and it is the key independent European

organization dedicated to strengthening the role of public health by

improving education and training of public health professionals for

both practice and research.

Sponsorship



international

membership

ASPHER has over 80 institutional members located throughout the

Member States of the European Union (EU), Council of Europe (CE) and

European Region of the World Health Organization (WHO).

Members can be found here:

http://www.old.aspher.org/index.php?site=aspher_membership

By joining ASPHER, your organization would receive the following

benefits:

Access to ASPHER Working Groups:

Accreditation for Public Health Education

Public Health Core Competencies

http://www.old.aspher.org/index.php?site=aspher_membership

179

Global Health

Doctoral Programs and Research Capacities

Innovation and Good-practice in PH Teaching

Ethics and Values in Public Health

Public Health Advocacy and Communication

Access to ASPHER Forums:

Annual Conference

Deans' and Directors' Retreat

Summer School

Young Researchers Forum

Public Health Reviews Journal

Members Blog

Public Health Employment Portal



Requisites, Cost.

ASPHER is developing an accreditation agency that should start

working in 2012. The name is: Agency for Public Health Education

Accreditation (APHEA) in the European Region

For many years, ASPHER has been a key participant in initiatives to

establish an organized system of accreditation for public health

education in Europe. These initiatives included the PEER review system

started by ASPHER and funded by the Open Society Institute (OSI)

from 2001 to 2005, and the Leonardo da Vinci project from 2004 to

2007.

In 2008/2009, ASPHER conducted a strategic planning process

through a Delphi study. One of the highest priorities of ASPHER

members which emerged from the consultation process was the

establishment of a European accreditation system for Master of Public

Health programs. This led to the establishment of a Working Group on

Accreditation to prepare the launching of this system.

As the founders of this accreditation project, ASPHER and EUPHA (The

European Public Health Association) will contribute directly to the

180

fulfillment of their major aims, i.e.: (1) Improve the quality of the PH

workforce in Europe and its competitiveness globally; (2) Contribute to

the development and harmonization of PH education in Europe; (3)

Provide an added value with regard to national QA and

accreditation; (4) Reinforce ASPHER and EUPHA visibility globally.

MPH programs are at present evaluated or accredited by national

education authorities in most countries within the European Region.

However, there is presently no specific accreditation system for

education in public health either at the national or regional level in

Europe. An independent international (or transnational) accreditation

system, in accordance with the Bologna Process, will bring important

added value as far as benefitting students and academics, and

recognizing a school’s quality beyond the borders of its home country.

Establishment of the European system will help many institutions to

improve their quality and raise their profile, thereby helping them in

their ongoing planning and negotiation with the national authorities to

obtain financing for teaching and learning but also research and

advocacy activities. It will also bring greater academic recognition to

staff members, thereby assisting them in seeking grants from sources

such as the European Union.

A degree from a European accredited program potentially provides

the graduate with better opportunities for employment internationally

and allows for transferability of qualifications. It also allows for

greater benefit to foreign students who may wish to study in a

particular country and will be able to bring home an internationally

recognized degree. The mark of accreditation may thus increase a

program’s attractiveness to national as well as foreign students.

A program accredited by national authorities alone, no matter how

rigorously the accreditation process is carried out, still lacks the

international recognition that may come from a European accreditation

system. European accreditation serves as an additional proof of

quality for students, academics, partner institutions, and funding

bodies.

Where We Are? The Steering Committee of the Accreditation Working

Group consulted all ASPHER members in two stages, namely the first

stage during which the call for interest was circulated, and later, a

second stage during which a call for commitment was circulated.

All ASPHER members who responded to the Call for Interest in mid-July

of 2010 have endorsed the following objectives: (1) Commit to

181

continuous quality improvement of the MPH; (2) Share PH quality

standards on a European level; (3) Strive to attain a European

recognition on a voluntary basis.

The Call for Commitment, inviting all members to consider whether they

are willing to commit to the accreditation of their Master of Public

Health programs within the near future, was circulated in early

October. The results of this call for commitment were presented at the

Amsterdam Conference.

The Agency for Public Health Education Accreditation (APHEA)

in the European Region will be established as an independent, non-

profit organization, in association with ASPHER and EUPHA. The

associations will each nominate 2 members for the new Accreditation

Board, and will choose a Chair of the Board from among individuals

distinguished in the field, and not directly associated with either one of

the associations.

The system will develop progressively, focusing at first on the

accreditation of master programs in public health only and, after an

initial period of approximately two years, aiming at an average

number of 10 accreditations per year. Launched with the initial support

of ASPHER and EUPHA, the system will rapidly become self-sustainable

based on the fees paid by institutions seeking accreditation.

The Agency will be established in spring 2011 and will start to

operate at the beginning of the following academic year (2011-

2012). The preparatory phase was finalized at the Amsterdam

Conference in November 2010 when the official announcement was

made regarding the establishment of the Agency, its organization,

standards, procedures and costs.

An outline of the main steps and costs for applicants is:

Eligibility- check performed by the agency in communication

with the institution applying for accreditation. Average duration

2-4 months. Cost 4,000EUR

Self-evaluation- against the set of agreed standards resulting

in a self-evaluation report. Average duration 6-8 months. (cost

of this phase included in the next one “External Review”)

External Review- by a team of 3 peer reviewers including 2-

day site visit and resulting in an external review report.

182

Average duration 3-4 months. Cost 10,000EUR (plus

accommodation costs of the review team and an agency

representative during the site visit)

Accreditation- decision made by the Accreditation Committee.

Average duration 3-4 months. Cost 4,000EUR

Total estimated cost of accreditation 18,000EUR plus traveling

expenses of peer review team. Average length of the process: 14 to

20 months.

Web Site http://www.aspher.org/


and email

Stojgniew Jacek Sitko, Chair Accreditation for Public Health Education

(Jagiellonian University, Krakow)

[email protected]

[email protected]

Telephone/Fax Tel: +32 2735 0890

Tel: +4812-424-1375 (Stojgniew)

Skype: aspherskype

Address Campus Maastricht University

Avenue de l’Armée/ Legerlaan 10

1040 Brussels

Belgium

Other European Academic Global Health Alliance (EAGHA)

Mission and Objectives

Main objective: To create a single forum for interested academic

institutions with involvement in Global Health to exchange views and

ideas, so as to develop a European voice on Global Health issues and

influence relevant policies.

Other objectives include:

To advocate for evidence-based policies and increased

resources for global health in the European Union and other

relevant bodies and to inform EU policy on research and

183

development for global health;

To develop guidelines for partnerships between European

institutions and their counterparts in low- and middle-income

countries (including the issues of intellectual property and data

sharing); to learn about effective partnerships from case studies

and to promote the implementation of such guidelines;

To contribute to building capacity in partner institutions in low

income countries in response to their priorities including

supporting the development of capacity in areas such as

research, teaching, administration and infrastructure;

To foster exchange of ideas and, where appropriate,

collaboration between European global health institutions on

research, teaching and capacity building;

To encourage the formation of similar collaborative networks in

other world regions and forging links with those that already

exist;

To encourage and to support the evaluation of investments in

global health to ensure they have the desired effects;

To raise awareness of the challenges and opportunities of

global health in medical, nursing, public health and allied

health professions, as well as the wider public.

Alliance's Work Plan 2010

1) Meeting in March 2010 to convene institutions interested in

launching such a group;

2) Presented proposal at ASPHER Deans and Directors Retreat May

2010;

3) Invited ASPHER members who had indicated great interest during

ASPHER 2015 Project as well as other institutions with involvement

in Global Health;

4) Meeting of members/invited guests at World Health Summit, Berlin,

October 11, 2010;

5) Survey circulated to all members to devise priorities for Alliance;

6) Commentary by Andy Haines et al submitted to Lancet regarding

184

launch of Academic Alliance, October;

7) Session of the Alliance at the Amsterdam Conference, November

2010, entitled “The Contribution of European Academic Institutions

to Global Health.”

Alliance's Work Plan 2011

1) Two-part meeting with Alliance members and EU policymakers,

Brussels, end of January 2011;

2) Seminars to be held with EU policymakers in 2011, to be

arranged;

3) Presentation at ASPHER Deans‟ and Directors‟ May, 2011;

4) Meeting of members along with representatives from other similar

associations from other regions, Barcelona, October 2011;

5) Plenary at the Copenhagen Conference, November 2011;

6) Setting up taskforce to devise a set of guidelines for North-South

partnerships.

Justification

Numerous academic institutions within Europe are developing expertise

in global health which extends beyond the traditional boundaries of

tropical medicine or public health, to include topics such as: global

health governance, global threats to health such as climate change,

impacts on health of global policies in other sectors such as trade or

agriculture, and research on diseases which transcend national

boundaries such as pandemic flu. There is at present no representative

body for these institutions to provide evidence to inform European

policy on global health issues, act as a forum for exchange of views on

issues such as curriculum development, professional training, South-

North partnerships and research priorities, or to coordinate

collaborative activities on issues of relevance to global health.

In light of the EU Global Health Strategy launched earlier in 2010,

there is thus an unprecedented opportunity for academic institutions to

provide input into the implementation of this strategy for example by

providing evidence to support specific policies and actions or

advocating for evaluation of the impact of investments in global health

as well as promoting capacity strengthening with partner institutions in

low income settings.

185

The Alliance also aims to seek collaboration with nascent and existing

regional consortia of academic institutions in other regions of the world

with the intention of supporting the development of a World

Federation of such bodies.

Members of the EAGHA

Chair:

Andy Haines (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine)

Tel: +44 20 7927 2278, mailto:[email protected]

co-Chair:

Antoine Flahault (EHESP School of Public Health, Rennes/Paris)

Tel: +33 2 99 02 22 00, mailto:[email protected]

Full members:

Belgium | Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp

Denmark | Copenhagen School of Global Health, University of

Copenhagen

France | EHESP School of Public Health, Rennes/Paris

France | Université Victor Segalen Bordeaux 2, School of Medicine

Germany | Charité - Berlin School of Public Health

Germany | Tropeninstitut Charité, Berlin

Germany | Charité Universitatsmedizin Berlin, Institute for Social

Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics

Germany | Institute for Public Health, University Hospital Heidelberg

Germany | Section Clinical Tropical Medicine, University Hospital

Heidelberg

Ireland | Royal College of Surgeons, Dublin

Israel | Braun School of Public Health, Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Italy | Department of Public Health and Microbiology, University of

Torino

186

Kazakhstan | Kazakhstan School of Public Health

Norway | Centre for International Health, University of Bergen

Poland | National Institute of Public Health, Warsaw

Spain | Barcelona Centre for International Health Research

Spain | National School of Public Health, Madrid

Sweden | Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg

Sweden | Karolinska Institute, Stockholm

Sweden | Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umea

University

Sweden | Social Medicine and Global Health, Department of Clinical

Sciences, Lund University

Switzerland | Swiss Tropical Institute, Basel

United Kingdom | Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine

United Kingdom | Division of Public Health, University of Liverpool

United Kingdom | London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

United Kingdom | Centre for Tropical Medicine, Oxford University

United Kingdom | Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial

College London

United Kingdom | Research Department of Infection and Public Health

UCL

United Kingdom | Nuffield Centre for International Health and

Development, Leeds Institute Health Sciences

Associate Members:

Germany | University of Bielefeld, School of Public Health

Italy | Institute of Public Health and Preventive Medicine - Catholic

University of “Sacro Cuore”, Rome

Lithuania | Faculty of Public Health, Lithuanian University of Health

Sciences, Kaunas

187

Lithuania | Department of Public Health, University of Klaipeda

Macedonia | School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Skopje

Serbia | Centre - School of Public Health, University of Belgrade

Slovakia | School of Public Health, Slovak Medical University,

Bratislava

Guest Members:

Bulgaria | Faculty of Public Health, Medical University of Pleven

Serbia | Institute of Public Health of Vojvodina, Novi Sad

United Kingdom | University of Bristol, School of Health and Social

Care

Affiliated members:

Federation of European Societies of Tropical Medicine and

International Health (FESTMIH), TropEd, EUROLIFE Network of

European Universities in Life Science, and TropMed

Type/Field Medicine

Institution LCMA – Liaison committee on Medical Education

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

The Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) is the nationally

recognized accrediting authority for medical education programs

leading to the MD degree in U.S. and Canadian medical schools. The

LCME is sponsored by the Association of American Medical Colleges

and the American Medical Association.

Purpose and responsibility:

Accreditation is a process of quality assurance in postsecondary

education that determines whether an institution or program meets

established standards for function, structure, and performance. The

accreditation process also fosters institutional and program

improvement. Medical education programs leading to the M.D. degree

in the United States and Canada are accredited by the Liaison

188

Committee on Medical Education (LCME). The LCME's scope is limited to

the accreditation of complete and independent medical education

programs where students are geographically located in the United

States or Canada for their education and that are operated by

universities or medical schools that are chartered in the United States

or Canada.

Accreditation by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME)

establishes eligibility for selected federal grants and programs,

including Title VII funding administered by the Public Health Service.

Most state boards of licensure require that U.S. medical schools be

accredited by the LCME, as a condition for licensure of their graduates.

Eligibility of U.S. students to take the United States Medical Licensing

Examination (USMLE) requires LCME accreditation of their school.

Graduates of LCME-accredited schools are eligible for residency

programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate

Medical Education (ACGME). The Department of Education recognizes

the LCME for the accreditation of programs of medical education

leading to the M.D. degree in institutions that are themselves

accredited by regional accrediting associations. Institutional

accreditation assures that medical education takes place in a

sufficiently rich environment to foster broad academic purposes.

The U.S. Department of Education recognizes the Liaison Committee on

Medical Education (LCME) for accreditation of programs of medical

education leading to the M.D. degree in the United States. For

Canadian medical education programs, the LCME engages in

accreditation in collaboration with the Committee on Accreditation of

Canadian Medical Schools (CACMS). The LCME is recognized as the

reliable accreditation authority for M.D. programs by the nation's

medical schools and their parent universities. It also is recognized for

this purpose by the Congress in various health-related laws, and by

state, provincial (Canada), and territorial medical licensing boards.

The LCME

Sponsorship The LCME is jointly sponsored by the Association of American Medical

Colleges (AAMC) and the Council on Medical Education of the

American Medical Association (AMA). The AAMC and the AMA each

appoint an LCME Secretary and maintain accreditation offices in

Washington, D.C. and Chicago, respectively. Primary responsibility for

coordinating survey visits, hosting LCME meetings, and serving as LCME

spokesman (the "principal Secretary") alternates between the offices

each academic year. In even-numbered years beginning each July 1,

the principal Secretary is at the AAMC. In odd-numbered years

http://www.usmle.org/




189

beginning each July 1, the principal Secretary is at the AMA.



international

membership

The members of the LCME are medical educators and administrators,

practicing physicians, public members, and medical students. The

Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and the Council on

Medical Education of the American Medical Association (AMA) each

appoint six professional members. The AAMC and AMA each appoint

one student member. The LCME itself appoints two public members,

and a member is appointed to represent the CACMS.



Requisites, Cost.

The LCME is represented by ad hoc teams of evaluators who conduct

on-site surveys of medical schools. Survey team members are a mix of

basic science and clinical educators and practitioners. Members of the

LCME and surveyors conducting field evaluations serve as voluntary,

peer evaluators. The activities of the LCME are administered by two

Secretariats, at AMA headquarters in Chicago, IL, and at the offices of

the AAMC in Washington, DC. Members of the LCME and its survey

teams, excluding full and part-time staff, serve the LCME without

compensation.

Each year, the LCME reviews annual survey data and written reports

on all of the accredited U.S. and Canadian medical schools, and

conducts site visits to 20-30 institutions. The LCME holds two-day

meetings three times a year, usually in October, February, and June,

and may convene as needed to deal with special issues.

LCME has very detailed accreditation procedures that can be found

here: http://www.lcme.org/procedur.htm, rules of procedure:

http://www.lcme.org/rules_of_procedure.pdf, a Self-Study Guide:

http://www.lcme.org/pubs.htm#issguide, Accreditation Issues relating

to Distance Learning: http://www.lcme.org/distancelearning.pdf.

Currently, there are 137 LCME-accredited MD programs in the U.S.

and 17 CACMS/LCME-accredited MD programs in Canada. The

directory of Accredited Medical Schools in the U.S. and Canada can

be found here: http://www.lcme.org/directry.htm

Functions and Structure of a Medical School contains LCME standards

for accreditation of medical education programs leading to the M.D.

degree in the U.S. and Canada. Annotation to the standards are

provided to clarify the meaning of standards when necessary. Use of

the word "must" in accreditation standards signifies an absolute

requirement. "Should" is a requirement that must be met unless there is

a compelling reason, acceptable to the LCME, for waiving the need to

http://www.lcme.org/members.htm

http://www.aamc.org/

http://www.ama-assn.org/

http://www.lcme.org/contacts.htm

http://www.lcme.org/directry.htm

http://www.lcme.org/procedur.htm#quarterly meetings

http://www.lcme.org/procedur.htm

http://www.lcme.org/rules_of_procedure.pdf

http://www.lcme.org/pubs.htm#issguide

http://www.lcme.org/distancelearning.pdf

http://www.lcme.org/directry.htm

190

comply with the standard. Latest version of May 2011 can be found

here: http://www.lcme.org/functions.pdf

The LCME's scope is limited to the accreditation of complete and

independent medical education programs where students are

geographically located in the United States or Canada for their

education and that are operated by universities or medical schools that

are chartered in the United States or Canada. Osteopathic medical

schools are accredited by the American Osteopathic Association. There

is no single authority accrediting medical education programs.

Accreditation around the world is mostly done by national agencies.

Medical schools are not ranked by the LCME, which evaluates

educational programs according to standards for organization,

function, and performance, but does not attempt to stratify institutions

according to their characteristics. Medical schools differ greatly:

whether they are private or state-supported, free-standing, or part of

a parent university.

Other related accreditation agencies that are included in this report

are: 1- The World Federation for Medical Education (WFME) Supports

Accreditation of National Associations working with WHO

http://www.wfme.org/; 2- The Accreditation Council for Graduate

Medical Education (ACGME) http://www.acgme.org/ accredits

Residency programs/graduate medical education; 3- The National

Committee on Foreign Medical Education and Accreditation (NCFMEA)

of the Department of Education.

http://ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/ncfmea.html#members ; and 4-

The Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates. ECFMG.


Web Site http://www.lcme.org/


and email

Barbara Barzansky, Ph.D., M.H.P.E. LCME Co-Secretary. Council on

Medical Education American Medical Association (CMEAMA).

[email protected]

Dan Hunt, MD, M.B.A., LCME Co-Secretary. Association of American

Medical Colleges (AAMC). [email protected]

Telephone/Fax CMEAMA: 312-464-4933. FAX: 312-464-5830

AAMC: 202-828-0596. FAX: 202-828-1125

Address Council on Medical Education

American Medical Association

http://www.lcme.org/functions.pdf



http://ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/ncfmea.html#members





191

515 North State Street

Chicago, IL 60654

Association of American Medical Colleges

2450 N Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20037

Other Interesting initiatives related to accreditation:

1. Survey Prep Sessions

The LCME will host a number of sessions to support programs

preparing for upcoming survey visits, including Connecting with the

Secretariat, a monthly Q&A conference call with the LCME Co-

Secretaries, and an all-day Survey Visit Kickoff Workshop to be held

in June. Visit the LCME Events page for details.

2. LCME Connections

LCME Connections provides an integrated view of LCME accreditation

standards by connecting the text of each standard to (1) its

corresponding annotation, (2) the medical education database

questions related to that standard, (3) the questions that the

institutional self-study committee must address and (4) the findings that

survey team members must document in the survey report. Each

component of the Connections document is already accessible on the

LCME website, albeit in various LCME publications. By connecting each

standard to the relevant section of each related LCME publication, the

Connections document provides a more nuanced understanding of the

intent of each standard and the goals of the accreditation process.

Read Connections for each standard here:

http://www.lcme.org/connections.htm .

Type/Field Medicine

Institution IAOMC – International Association of Medical Colleges

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

The IAOMC is committed to peer evaluation of the education provided

by individual medial schools anywhere in the world. It is a not for

profit association. Its goal is to serve society and those with an interest

in the evaluation of the quality of undergraduate medical education to

enhance medial education/practice. The United Nations Department of

Economic and Social Affairs (ECOSOC) granted the IAOMC Special

Consultative status as a Non-Government Organization.

http://www.lcme.org/connections.htm

192

According to the Internet page, this organization seems to have an

appeal with the US Department of Education and in other 13 countries.

The Board meetings are conducted via Skype.





international

membership

Membership includes Accredited Programs and Affiliated Programs.

The fee structure varies depending on which region of the world the

school is located from Low Income countries to High Income countries as

defined by the World Bank, the Gross National Income, government

and private (for profit and not-for-profit is differentiated) ownership,

number of matriculated students. Dues for Accredited members go

from $1,000 to $20,000, Reviewed/Registered members (Fast Track)

from $750 to $17,000 and Affiliate members from $600 to $15,500.

The differences between this categories are explained in the next

section. The table can be seen here: http://www.iaomc.org/msm7.pdf



Requisites, Cost.

The accreditation process is defined in the following document:

http://www.iaomc.org/msm1.pdf . There is also a protocol for the

Self-Study in this document: http://www.iaomc.org/msm2.pdf and the

accrediting standards: http://www.iaomc.org/msm3.pdf . Since most

schools around the world are accredited by their national

organizations, there is a fast track system to review the comparability

of IAOMC’s standards and others used around the world. If found

comparable, the applicant school may apply for recognition via this

abbreviated fast track process. This is the document:

http://www.iaomc.org/msm4.pdf

When the circumstance of a medical schools operation is restricted

because of limited financial capacity or other restraints a second

category of membership is available. This review permits the school a

special membership application tract that allows a school to obtain the

maximum benefit of expert medical educator’s practical opinions on

how to enhance its medical school program. If, in the opinion of the

Board, the school satisfactorily acts on the advice provided and the

students receive at least a minimal education for that nation, it will be

registered by IAOMC as providing the maximum education under

restrictive circumstances. See document here:


When a medical school provides a self-study and data based study

and enters into an affiliation agreement it may become an affiliated

member http://www.iaomc.org/msm6.pdf







193

The International Association of Medical Colleges Site Visitor Panel

elects its member bi-annually and can be seen here:

http://www.iaomc.org/svp.htm#

There is no reference to the accredited schools of this organization, but

there is a reference to the US Department of Education Qualified

Foreign Medical Schools http://www.iaomc.org/afms.htm

Web Site http://www.iaomc.org/index.htm


and email

Bernard Ferguson, JD, President.

Telephone/Fax N/A

Address 32 Water Street - Unit#29, Stonington, CT 06378, USA

Type/Field Medicine

Institution ACCM – The Accreditation Commission on Colleges of Medicine

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

Founded in 1995 by Professor Conor Ward, the Accreditation

Commission on Colleges of Medicine is an independent, not for profit

organization based in the Republic of Ireland. ACCM is invited by

Governments of Caribbean countries which do not have a national

medical accreditation body, to act on their behalf in relation to the

inspection and accreditation of a specified medical school / university

/ college* in their jurisdiction.

ACCM is a medical accreditation body whose members (commissioners)

are respected senior medical educators who, with a former senior

hospital manager, work voluntarily and pro bono publico. Their work is

a contribution to the global effort to assure quality medical education.

ACCM serves Caribbean countries where the country has no medical

accreditation body of its own. All commissioners have signed a conflict

of interest declaration upon joining ACCM. The Commission is

independent of the countries it serves and of the schools it reviews for

accreditation.

The Chairman is Professor Raymond Fitzgerald, and the Hon.

Secretary/Treasurer is Dr Anthony Peacock.. One of the Commissioners

is Philip Berman, MA, Dip Admin Sci (IPA), BA (Hons), Former Hospital

Director, Strategy Advisor to the Irish Red Cross and President of

http://www.iaomc.org/svp.htm

http://www.iaomc.org/afms.htm

http://www.iaomc.org/index.htm

194

EHMA.





international

membership

The ACCM has currently 4 medical schools accredited in the Caribbean

region. The following medical schools have been accredited, subject to

their continuing compliance with the required standards. All are subject

to regular interim site inspections of the basic medical science campus

as well as inspection of all affiliated clinical training sites. Each medical

school must also report annually to ACCM utilizing ACCM's detailed

Survey Database Questionnaire.

1) Cayman Islands: St Matthew's University School of Medicine - full

accreditation for six years to June 30, 2013

2) Saint Maarten: American University of the Caribbean (AUC School

of Medicine) - full accreditation for six years to December 31,

2015

3) Nevis: Medical University of the Americas - full accreditation for six

years to May 31, 2016

4) 4. Saba: Saba University School of Medicine - full accreditation for

six years to September 30, 2015



Requisites, Cost.

In the Caribbean medical schools currently under accreditation by

ACCM, the student body is predominantly North American. The Liaison

Committee on Medical Education (LCME) is the recognized

accreditation authority for the accreditation of medical education

programs leading to the degree of M.D.in the United States and

Canada. ACCM's standards and processes are therefore aligned with

the Guidelines of the LCME.

The US Department of Education's National Committee on Foreign

Medical Education and Accreditation (NCFMEA) determines whether

the educational program in a foreign medical school and the standards

and processes used to accredit it are comparable to those in the

United States. ACCM adheres to the Guidelines of the NCFMEA, and

represents the countries for which it acts as medical accreditation body

at hearings of the NCFMEA when called to do so.

A medical school in full compliance with accreditation standards usually

receives a 6-year Unconditional (full) accreditation, subject to

submission of annual Survey Database reports. The medical school must

http://www.stmatthews.edu/

http://aucmed.edu/

http://www.mua.edu/

http://www.saba.edu/






195

continue to receive annual or bi-annual inspection visits to the campus,

as well as visits to all its affiliated clinical training sites, and must

demonstrate evidence of continued compliance with the ACCM

Elements of Accreditation (standards).

Medical schools which undergo substantive change (e.g. change of

ownership, relocation, etc.) receive an extra inspection visit within 6

months of the change so that ACCM may be assured that the medical

school remains in compliance with accreditation standards.

Conditional accreditation is for periods up to 3 years, and indicates

that the medical school is in substantial compliance with standards, and

has been informed of matters requiring attention.

Medical schools falling out of compliance with standards go to

Probationary accreditation status, and given up a time period up to

two years in which to correct the deficiencies after which accreditation

can be withdrawn. There is a process in place for appealing

withdrawal of accreditation decisions.

Provisional accreditation is when a medical school has met the ACCM

eligibility requirements, an initial inspection visit has been made, and

the medical school has certified its readiness and ability to comply with

the Elements of Accreditation (standards).

Accreditation Standards- Elements: Governments, Medical Schools,

other professional or educational bodies who wish to receive the full

text of the Elements of Accreditation may apply by email to the ACCM

Secretariat.

BRIEF OVERVIEW OF ELEMENTS:

Element 1: Educational Goals: The medical school must sponsor an MD

program and have defined and published its mission and educational

goals. It must evaluate outcomes using objective measures and ensure

its graduates have acquired the knowledge, skills, and professional

attributes expected of physicians.

Element 2: Corporate Organization: The medical school must be

licensed by the country in which it is located to offer courses of

instruction in medicine and to award the MD degree. It must be

governed by an independent and voluntary Board of Trustees.

Element 3: Medical School Management: There must be an efficient

and adequate administrative structure with sufficient faculty and staff

for effective delivery of the educational program.

196

Element 4: Curriculum: A curriculum appropriate to the educational

goals, and of at least 130 weeks duration, must have been developed

by a curriculum committee composed of faculty and administration. It

must include didactic and practical instruction in the basic medical

sciences, followed by instruction in the clinical sciences with supervised

training in hospital and ambulatory settings, taught with an integrated

and multidisciplinary approach. Appropriate professional attitudes,

behavior, conduct, integrity and ethics are required attributes within

the entire program Designated conditions for clinical training are

outlined, as well as requirements for evaluating the quality and

effectiveness of the curriculum and instruction given to the medical

students.

Element 5: Student Promotion and Evaluation: Carefully developed

methods for assessing students’ skills, knowledge and proficiencies must

be developed by the medical school and overseen by a promotions

and evaluation committee. Student counseling must be in place

throughout the program. Students must pass USMLE Step 1 prior to

proceeding to clinical training and must pass USMLE Step 2 (CS and

CK) as a prerequisite to graduation.

Element 6: Admissions: Appropriate policies on admission, readmission,

transfer students, visiting students and student dismissals must be in

place. Student body size must be appropriate to the medical school’s

resources.

Element 7: Fiscal Resources: The medical school must have sufficient

resources and reserves to carry out the educational program. There

are designated requirements in matters of institutional debt, budget

planning and compliance, fees and student refunds, and loan default

prevention program.

Element 8: Faculty and Instructional Personnel: Faculty must be

appropriately qualified and experienced to competently teach in their

area of instruction. The number of faculty must be sufficient to fulfill the

medical school’s educational goals. Defined policy on selection and

appointment of faculty is required, and there should be opportunities

for faculty to collaborate in research, and to have opportunities for

professional growth and continuing medical education. Matters of

faculty compensation, professional security, academic freedom,

workload, evaluation and promotion criteria and procedures are also

addressed.

Element 9: Library: This section outlines the requirements for the size,

197

design, facilities and resources of the library, including staff, including

audio, visual, computer and internet facilities.

Element 10: Student Services: The requirements for publications and

information to be available to students are given, as well as access to

academic or personal counseling and guidance, student health services,

and student financial aid and budgeting

Element 11: Facilities and Equipment: The medical school must have on

campus buildings, equipment, and facilities sufficient for its goals,

together with all necessary services. The hospitals used for clinical

training should have ACGME approval (US) or a SIFT agreement (UK)

and offer the appropriate range of clinical disciplines for student

training. There must be proper affiliation agreements in place with

these hospitals and the medical school must ensure that the educational

experience at the hospitals to which its students are assigned are of

equal quality and meet the requirements of the curriculum. There must

be direct control and supervision of the delivery of the clinical program

by the clinical deans, department chairs and faculty.

Web Site http://www.accredmed.org/index.html


and email

Joyce Timms, ACCM Secretariat [email protected]

Telephone/Fax Phone: +353-8-7238-8502

Fax +353 1 2868660

Address 201 Ardmore Park

Bray

Co Wicklow

Ireland

Type/Field Medicine

Institution WFME – World Federation for Medical Education

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

The World Federation for Medical Education is the global organisation

concerned with education and training of medical doctors.

WFME’s mission is to strive for better health care for all mankind;

http://www.accredmed.org/index.html


198

WFME’s primary objective is to enhance the quality of medical

education world-wide, with promotion of the highest scientific and

ethical standards in medical education.

This objective is met through the development of standards in medical

education, by the promotion of accreditation of medical schools, with

the development of databases on medical education, through projects

on the future of medicine and medical education, and through other

publications and partnerships.

WFME’s activities cover all stages of medical education, from basic

(undergraduate) medical education, through postgraduate medical

education including vocational and specialist training, and continuing

medical education and the continuing professional development of

medical doctors

WFME is an umbrella organisation for its six Regional Associations for

Medical Education, following the organisational model of the World

Health Organization (WHO); WFME is a non-governmental

organisation in official relation to WHO, Geneva.

WFME is associated to the World Medical Association, the

International Federation of Medical Students’ Associations, and other

international organisations active in medical education.

Sponsorship The organization is sustained with membership fees, several partners’

collaboration (list below) and with the proceedings from their annual

meetings, educational offerings and publications.



international

membership

WFME Members are the following regional associations worldwide:

AMEE: The Association for Medical Education in Europe

The Association for Medical Education in Europe is a worldwide

organization with members in 90 countries on five continents. Members

include educators, researchers, administrators, curriculum developers,

assessors and students in medicine and the healthcare professions.

http://www.amee.org/

AMEEMR: Association for Medical Education in the Eastern

Mediterranean

The Association for Medical Education in the Eastern Mediterranean

Region (AMEEMR) is one of the six regional organizations for medical

education under the umbrella of World Federation for Medical

Education (WFME). http://www.wfme.org/about/member-

http://www.wfme.org/standards

http://www.wfme.org/accreditation

http://www.wfme.org/projects/directories/avicenna

http://www.wfme.org/projects

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners

http://www.wfme.org/about/member-associations

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/who

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/wma

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/ifsma

http://www.amee.org/

http://www.wfme.org/about/member-associations/ameemr

199

associations/ameemr

AMEWPR: Association for Medical Education in Western Pacific Region

The Association for Medical Education in the Western Pacific Region is

the division of WFME concerned with the support and development of

medical education in the countries in the Western Pacific Region of

WHO. This region is the largest, by both population and area, of the

WHO regional divisions. http://www.amewpr.org.au/

AMSA: Association of Medical Schools in Africa

The African Medical Schools Association (AMSA) is a forum for

sustaining medical schools and strengthening education, research and

health systems in Africa. AMSA aspires to be the premier organization

to enhance standards and sustainability of medical schools and

advance sustainable development and quality of medical education

and science for the achievement of a healthy Africa. The goal of

AMSA is to improve the standards, value and relevance of medical

schools on the African continent through education, research, service

and collaboration. http://www.wfme.org/about/member-

associations/amsa

PAFAMS: The Pan-American Federation of Associations of Medical

Schools

PAFAMS is a private, non-profit, international, non-governmental

organization dedicated to the advancement of medical education and

the biomedical sciences in the American Continent, created in 1962 in

Viña del Mar, Chile. http://www.fepafempafams.org/

SEARAME: South-East Asian Regional Association for Medical Education

South-East Asian Regional Association for Medical Education

(SEARAME) is regional non-governmental organization under the

umbrella of the World Federation for Medical Education (WFME),

working closely with the World Health Organization – South East Asian

Regional Office (WHO-SEARO). http://searame.org/

Other partners include: The Centre for Medical Education in Context

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/cenmedic ; The

Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/ecfmg ; The

International Federation of Medical Student’s Associations

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/ifmsa ; UNESCO

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/unesco ; WHO

http://www.wfme.org/about/member-associations/ameemr

http://www.amewpr.org.au/

http://www.wfme.org/about/member-associations/amsa

http://www.wfme.org/about/member-associations/amsa

http://www.fepafempafams.org/

http://searame.org/

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/cenmedic

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/ecfmg

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/ifmsa

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/unesco

200

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/who ; and The

World Medical Association http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-

partners/wma



Requisites, Cost.

WFME is not an accrediting authority or agency. Accreditation of

medical education is normally carried out by national governments, or

by national agencies receiving their authority from government.

WFME, working with WHO, has developed Guidelines for

Accreditation, and has a strategic partnership with WHO for the

promotion of accreditation of medical education. The process of

evaluation of accreditation programmes and agencies is in

development.

WFME statement of intent on Accreditation – March 2012

This statement is to explain the plans of WFME about the international

recognition of accrediting agencies and bodies.

WFME supports and promotes the accreditation of medical schools,

using the guidelines agreed between WFME and WHO. The process of

accreditation of medical education is normally carried out by national

governments, or by national agencies receiving their authority from

government. However, there is a need for the worldwide, international,

recognition of accrediting bodies, to demonstrate appropriate

standards in the assessment of all medical schools in all countries. This

will benefit not only the local health care services, by assuring the

education offered by all medical schools, but should also support all

sectors of medical education.

WFME is working on the development of a programme to evaluate

and support accreditation agencies and programmes. There has

already been a successful pilot study. The programme will be agreed

at the WFME Executive Council meeting in May 2012, and launched

soon thereafter. The principle will be a systematic approach to the

evaluation, development, and recognition of accreditation that WFME

will conduct in an accountable and transparent manner.

This will be the only mechanism for accreditation agencies and

programmes to be confirmed as using the criteria for accreditation put

forth by WFME.

WFME policy, once it has been confirmed at the WFME Executive

Council, will be widely disseminated.

http://www.wfme.org/about/other-wfme-partners/who



201

Standards: The WFME program on definition of international standards

in medical education was launched in 1997. The purpose was to

provide a mechanism for quality improvement in medical education, in

a global context, to be applied by institutions, organizations and

national authorities responsible for medical education.

The original Trilogy of WFME Global Standards was developed by

three international task forces with broad representation of experts in

medical education from all six WHO - WFME Regions, and published

in 2003.

Since 2004, the Standards program has been promoted by the

WHO/WFME Partnership to Improve Medical Education.

WFME Global Standards have been used in self-evaluation, peer

review and other reform processes in several hundreds of medical

schools, and used as a template for national and regional standards

and for recognition and accreditation procedures in more than 60

countries.

European Specifications of the WFME Global Standards were

developed by a joint WFME – Association of Medical Schools in

Europe (AMSE) task force, under the MEDINE Thematic Network, and

published in 2007.

In 2010, a joint task force of WFME, AMSE and ORPHEUS (the

Organization for PhD Education in Biomedicine and Health Sciences in

the European System) began work to develop the ORPHEUS position

paper “Towards Standards for PhD Education in Biomedicine and

Health Sciences” into agreed standards for the PhD degree in

biomedicine.

WFME also works with the Educational Commission on Foreign Medical

Graduates (ECFMG) in evaluation and development of accreditation

programmes and agencies.

Web Site http://www.wfme.org/


and email

Stefan Lindgren MD, PhD, FACP, FRCP, FEFIM (hon), President of the

WFME [email protected]

Telephone/Fax Phone: + 45 353 27103

Fax: + 45 353 27070

Address World Federation for Medical Education



202

University of Copenhagen

Faculty of Health Sciences

Blegdamsvej 3

DK-2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark

Other The Centre for Medical Education in Context (CenMEDIC)

http://cenmedic.co.uk/ is dedicated to using knowledge and skills to

support the development of medical education that is sensitive to

context and to local needs and conditions. CenMEDIC was formerly

The Open University Centre for Education in Medicine (OUCEM).

http://www.wfme.org/projects/cenmedic

Type/Field Medicine

Institution ACGME – Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education is a private,

nonprofit council that evaluates and accredits residency programs in

the United States.

The ACGME was established in 1981 from a consensus in the academic

medical community for an independent accrediting organization. Its

forerunner was the Liaison Committee for Graduate Medical Education,

established in 1972.

The mission of the ACGME is to improve health care by assessing and

advancing the quality of resident physicians' education through

exemplary accreditation.

Vision Statement: Exemplary accreditation

Values are manifest through: Accountability Processes and results that

are: Open and Transparent; Responsive to the educational community

and the health of the public; and Reliable, valid and consistent

Excellence Accreditation that is: Efficient and Effective; Outcomes-

based; Improvement-oriented; and Innovative

Professionalism Actions that are: Respectful and Collaborative;

Responsive; Ethical; and Fair

Sponsorship The organization is sustained with membership and sponsors fees and

http://cenmedic.co.uk/

http://www.wfme.org/projects/cenmedic

203

with the proceedings from their annual meetings, educational offerings

and publications.



international

membership

The ACGME's member organizations are the American Board of

Medical Specialties, American Hospital Association, American Medical

Association, Association of American Medical Colleges, and the Council

of Medical Specialty Societies. Member organizations each nominate

four members to the Board of Directors, which also includes two

resident members—the chair of the Council of Review Committee

Residents and a resident member appointed by the Resident and

Fellow Section of the AMA—three public directors, the chair of the

Council of Review Committees, one to four at-large directors, and a

non-voting federal representative.



Requisites, Cost.

In academic year 2010-2011, there were 8,887 ACGME-accredited

residency programs in 133 specialties and subspecialties. The number

of active full-time and part-time residents for academic year 2010-

2011 was 113,142. Current programs can be seen here:

http://www.acgme.org/adspublic/reports/accredited_programs.asp

The ACGME has 28 Review Committees (one for each of the 26

specialties, one for a special one-year transitional-year general

clinical program, and one for institutional review). Each Review

Committee comprises about 6 to 15 volunteer physicians. Members of

the Residency Review Committees are appointed by the AMA Council

on Medical Education and the appropriate medical specialty boards

and organizations. Members of the Institutional Review Committee and

Transitional Year Committee are appointed by the ACGME Executive

Committee and confirmed by the Board of Directors.

ACGME Policies and Procedures, June 2011

http://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/about/ab_ACGMEPoliciesProcedu

res.pdf

Basic information of all accredited programs and sponsoring institutions

can be found in this page:

http://www.acgme.org/adspublic/default.asp

Fees for Evaluation and Accreditation: Fees charged for the

accreditation of programs are determined annually by the ACGME.

Effective for the Academic year 2011-2012 the following fee schedule

is in effect:

Application Fee: A fee is charged for processing applications for

programs seeking initial accreditation. This also applies to programs

http://www.acgme.org/adspublic/reports/accredited_programs.asp

http://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/about/ab_ACGMEPoliciesProcedures.pdf

http://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/about/ab_ACGMEPoliciesProcedures.pdf

http://www.acgme.org/adspublic/default.asp

204

seeking re-accreditation following any withdrawal status. The charge

for applications is $5,500. These Fees are normally billed at the time

the application is received.

Program Fee: An annual accreditation fee is assessed on a per

program basis for all accredited programs. This annual fee is $3,500

for programs with five or fewer residents and $4,400 for programs

with more than five residents. This fee is billed January 1 of each year

and applies to the current academic year.

Appeal Fee: The fee for an appeal of an accreditation decision is

$10,000. There is an additional cost for the expenses of the appeals

panel members and associated administrative costs. This additional

expense shall be shared equally by the appellant and the ACGME.

Finance Charges: There is a 1.5% Finance charge assessed for late

payment of fees. All ACGME invoices are due within 60 Days.

Canceled Site Visit Fee: If the program or institution cancels a

previously scheduled site visit, at the discretion of the Senior Vice

President for Field Activities, a Site Visit Cancellation Fee of $3,200

may be assessed.

Web Site http://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/home/home.asp


and email

Thomas J. Nasca, MD, MACP, CEO [email protected]


Address Suite 2000

515 North State Street

Chicago, IL 60654

Other The ACGME Learning Portfolio

As the ACGME works to become more responsive in its provision of

timely and complete data, there will be an increasing focus on annual

data collection and outcomes. Our data systems will change to

accommodate these new data collection needs. Among these changes,

summative resident evaluations will soon be done directly within the

Accreditation Data System (ADS) using a new assessment tool

developed out of the ACGME Milestone Project. As a result, the beta

version of the Learning Portfolio will not be further developed and will

http://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/home/home.asp


205

not be supported after June 30, 2012. Resident evaluations completed

through June 30, 2012 will be available in a read-only format through

June 30, 2013.

Graduate Medical Education Data Resource Book

The collection and analysis of data are crucial to the ACGME's mission

to assess and advance the quality of resident physicians' education

through accreditation. The Data Resource Book was developed by the

ACGME to provide readers with an easy-to-use collection of current

and historical data related to the accreditation process. The data book

is intended to be a concise reference for policymakers, residency

program directors, institutional officials and others to identify and

clarify issues affecting the accreditation of residency programs.

Beginning with the 2007-2008 edition of the Data Resource Book, the

ACGME makes the publication electronically available free of charge

to the entire public. Hardcopy editions of the publication will no longer

be available except for those editions prior to the 2007-2008

academic year.

To download the current electronic edition or to order previous

hardcopy editions, go to

https://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/dataBook/dat_index.asp .

Type/Field Medicine

Institution NCFMEA – National Committee on Foreign Medical Education and

Accreditation

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

NCDMEA is a Committee of the U.S. Department of Education. The

NCFMEA was established in 1992 through amendments reauthorizing

the Higher Education Act. The NCFMEA is charged with reviewing the

standards that foreign countries use to accredit medical schools to

determine whether those standards are comparable to the standards

used to accredit medical schools in the U.S. If a country is determined

to have comparable medical accreditation standards, then accredited

medical schools in that country may apply to participate in the Federal

Family Education Loan (FFEL) program. The committee’s function is

specified in section 102(a)(2)(B) of the Higher Education Act.

Sponsorship Dependency of the U.S. Department of Education

https://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/dataBook/dat_index.asp

206



international

membership

The NCFMEA is an operational committee that makes final decisions for

the Department on comparability. It typically consists of 11 members,

appointed by the Secretary of Education, who are knowledgeable

concerning medical education and international educational systems.

Foreign countries voluntarily submit applications for a comparability

determination review using the NCFMEA Guidelines for Requesting a

Comparability Determination (Guidelines). The NCFMEA Guidelines are

similar to, and based upon, the standards used by the Liaison

Committee on Medical Education (LCME) to accredit medical schools in

the U.S.



Requisites, Cost.

The NCFMEA does not review or accredit individual foreign medical

schools. Questions about individual foreign medical schools can be

address to the Office of Federal Student Aid’s Foreign Schools Team

at [email protected] or (202) 377-3168. The request by a

foreign country for review by the NCFMEA is voluntary.

The latest report to the US Congress by the NCFMEA recommending

eligibility criteria for foreign medical schools to participate in the FFEL

program can be found here:

http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/ncfmea-

dir/reporttocongress2009.pdf

Decisions of Comparability:

The countries listed below have been reviewed by the NCFMEA and

found to use standards to accredit their medical schools that are

comparable to the standards used to accredit medical schools in the

United States. The date(s) in parentheses is (are) the date(s) of the

Committee's decision(s) of comparability.

Australia - Australian Medical Council. (Note: The Australian

Medical Council also accredits medical schools in New Zealand

under the terms of an agreement with that country.)

Canada - Committee on Accreditation of Canadian Medical

Schools

Cayman Islands - Accreditation Commission on Colleges of

Medicine

Czech Republic - Czech Republic Accreditation Commission

Dominica - Ministry of Health & Social Security and the

http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/ncfmea-dir/reporttocongress2009.pdf

http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/ncfmea-dir/reporttocongress2009.pdf

207

Dominica Medical Board

Dominican Republic - National Council of Higher Education,

Science and Technology

Grenada - Grenada Ministry of Health, Social Security, The

Environment, and Ecclesiastical Relations in conjunction with the

New York State Department of Education's Office of the

Professions

Hungary - Hungarian Accreditation Committee

India - Medical Council of India

Ireland - Irish Medical Council

Israel - Council for Higher Education

Mexico - Mexican Board for the Accreditation of Medical

Education

Netherlands - Netherlands Flemish Accreditation Organization

Pakistan - Pakistan Medical and Dental Council

Philippines - Philippine Accrediting Association of Schools,

Colleges and Universities

Poland - Ministry of Health/Accreditation Committee of Polish

Universities of Medical Sciences

Saba - Accreditation Commission on Colleges of Medicine

St. Maarten - Accreditation Commission on Colleges of

Medicine

Slovak Republic - Accreditation Commission of the Government

of the Slovak Republic

Sweden - National Agency for Higher Education

Taiwan - Taiwan Medical Accreditation Council

United Kingdom - General Medical Council

Web Site http://ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/ncfmea.html#members

http://ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/ncfmea.html#members

208


and email

Carol Griffiths, Acting NCFMEA Executive Director

[email protected]


Fax: (202) 502-7874

Address U.S. Department of Education

Room 8073

1990 K Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20006

Other Direct Loan Program for US Students attending foreign medical

schools.

http://www.ifap.ed.gov/ForeignSchoolInfo/ForeignSchoolInfo.html

This page contains all details on how to process these loans, who is

eligible, which schools are eligible and many more details. It is an

example of the possible incentive for a foreign educational program

to have some for or recognition of accreditation or quality/excellence

in education.

Type/Field Medicine

Institution ECFMG – Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates

Mission

[School/Program,

Interest HSA…)

ECFMG is a world leader in promoting quality health care—serving

physicians, members of the medical education and regulatory

communities, health care consumers, and those researching issues in

medical education and health workforce planning.

International medical graduates (IMGs) comprise one-quarter of the

U.S. physician workforce. Certification by ECFMG is the standard for

evaluating the qualifications of these physicians before they enter U.S.

graduate medical education (GME), where they provide supervised

patient care. ECFMG Certification also is a requirement for IMGs to

take Step 3 of the three-step United States Medical Licensing

Examination (USMLE) and to obtain an unrestricted license to practice

medicine in the United States.


http://www.ifap.ed.gov/ForeignSchoolInfo/ForeignSchoolInfo.html




209

ECFMG provides other programs for IMGs pursuing U.S. GME,

including those that assist them with the process of applying for U.S.

GME positions; and that sponsor foreign nationals for the J-1 visa for

the purpose of participating in such programs. We offer a verification

service that allows GME programs, state medical boards, hospitals,

and credentialing agencies in the United States to obtain primary-

source confirmation that their IMG applicants are certified by ECFMG.

ECFMG’s Acculturation Program has developed a spectrum of

resources designed to assist IMGs with the transition to living and

working in the United States and familiarize them with the U.S. health

care system; these resources also can be used by program staff in

developing orientation programs for IMG residents.

ECFMG partners with the National Board of Medical Examiners

(NBME) in administering the Step 2 Clinical Skills (CS) component of

USMLE, a requirement for IMGs and for graduates of U.S. and

Canadian medical schools who wish to be licensed in the United States

or Canada. Through this collaboration, ECFMG uses its experience in

assessment to ensure that all physicians entering U.S. GME can

demonstrate the fundamental clinical skills essential to providing safe

and effective patient care under supervision

Values

The values of ECFMG are expressed in its vision statement:

“Improving world health through excellence in medical education in the

context of ECFMG’s core values of collaboration, professionalism and

accountability.”

Mission

The charge of ECFMG is expressed in its mission statement:

“The ECFMG promotes quality health care for the public by certifying

international medical graduates for entry into U.S. graduate medical

education, and by participating in the evaluation and certification of

other physicians and health care professionals nationally and

internationally. In conjunction with its Foundation for Advancement of

International Medical Education and Research (FAIMER), and other

partners, it actively seeks opportunities to promote medical education

through programmatic and research activities.”

Purposes

http://www.ecfmg.org/eras/index.html

http://www.ecfmg.org/eras/index.html

http://www.ecfmg.org/evsp/index.html

http://www.ecfmg.org/cvs/index.html

http://www.ecfmg.org/cvs/index.html

http://www.ecfmg.org/acculturation/index.html

http://www.nbme.org/

http://www.nbme.org/

http://www.faimer.org/


210

The purposes (goals) that actuate and accomplish ECFMG’s mission are

to:

Certify the readiness of international medical graduates for

entry into graduate medical education and health care systems

in the United States through an evaluation of their

qualifications.

Provide complete, timely, and accessible information to

international medical graduates regarding entry into graduate

medical education in the United States.

Assess the readiness of international medical graduates to

recognize the diverse social, economic and cultural needs of

U.S. patients upon entry into graduate medical education.

Identify the needs of international medical graduates to

become acculturated into U.S. health care.

Verify credentials and provide other services to health care

professionals worldwide.

Provide international access to testing and evaluation

programs.

Expand knowledge about international medical education

programs and their graduates by gathering data, conducting

research, and disseminating the findings.

Improve international medical education through consultation

and cooperation with medical schools and other institutions

relative to program development, standard setting, and

evaluation.

Improve assessment through collaboration with other entities in

the United States and abroad.

Improve the quality of health care by providing research and

consultation services to institutions that evaluate international

medical graduates for entry into their country.

Enhance effectiveness by delegating appropriate activities in

international medical education to FAIMER.

Sponsorship The organization is sustained with certification fees, the organizational

members’ contributions/support, and with the proceedings from other

211

services such as educational offerings and publications.



international

membership

The Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG)

is a private, nonprofit organization. ECFMG’s organizational members

are:

American Board of Medical Specialties

The American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) is a

nonprofit organization that is comprised of 24 medical

specialty Member Boards and oversees the certification of

physician specialists in the United States. The primary function

of ABMS is to assist its Member Boards in developing and

implementing educational and professional standards to

evaluate and certify physician specialists.

American Medical Association

The American Medical Association (AMA) is a professional

association of physicians and medical students in the United

States whose mission is to promote the art and science of

medicine and the betterment of public health. AMA helps

doctors help patients by uniting physicians nationwide to work

on the most important professional and public health issues.

Association of American Medical Colleges

The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC)

represents all 134 accredited U.S. and 17 accredited

Canadian medical schools; approximately 400 major teaching

hospitals and health systems, including 62 Department of

Veterans Affairs medical centers; and nearly 90 academic and

scientific societies. Through these institutions and organizations,

the AAMC represents 125,000 faculty members, 75,000

medical students, and 106,000 resident physicians. AAMC

serves and leads the academic medicine community to improve

the health of all.

Association for Hospital Medical Education

The Association for Hospital Medical Education (AHME) is a

national nonprofit, professional organization involved in the

continuum of hospital-based medical education: undergraduate,

graduate, and continuing medical education. AHME’s more than

http://www.abms.org/

http://www.ama-assn.org/

http://www.aamc.org/

http://www.ahme.org/

212

600 members represent teaching hospitals, academic medical

centers, and consortia nationwide. The mission of AHME is to

promote improvement in medical education to meet health care

needs; serve as a forum and resource for medical education

information; develop professionals in the field of medical

education; and advocate the value of medical education in

health care.

Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States, Inc.

The Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) is a national,

nonprofit organization representing the 70 medical and

osteopathic boards of the United States and its territories. The

FSMB leads by promoting excellence in medical practice,

licensure, and regulation as the national resource and voice on

behalf of state medical and osteopathic boards in their

protection of the public.

National Medical Association

The National Medical Association (NMA) is the largest and

oldest national organization representing African American

physicians and their patients in the United States. The NMA is

committed to improving the quality of health among minorities

and disadvantaged people through its membership,

professional development, community health education,

advocacy, research, and partnerships with federal and private

agencies.



Requisites, Cost.

ECFMG was founded in 1956 to assess, through a program of

certification, whether international medical graduates (IMGs) are

ready to enter residency or fellowship programs in the United States

that are accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical

Education (ACGME). ECFMG Certification is a requirement for IMGs

who wish to enter such programs. ECFMG Certification is also one of

the eligibility requirements for IMGs to take Step 3 of the three-step

United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE). Medical

licensing authorities in the United States require that IMGs be certified

by ECFMG, among other requirements, to obtain an unrestricted license

to practice medicine.

The foundation of ECFMG’s certification program has endured

remarkably over the last five decades. Throughout the history of the

program, the requirements have included examinations in the medical

http://www.fsmb.org/

http://www.nmanet.org/






213

sciences, evaluation of English language proficiency, and

documentation of medical education credentials. Over the years, there

have been changes in the examinations accepted to meet the

requirements for ECFMG Certification and changes to the requirements

themselves. These changes have been made to enhance the

certification program, respond to the needs of the U.S. graduate

medical education community, comply with the changing immigration

landscape, take advantage of new technologies, and achieve a

common examination pathway to medical licensure for IMGs and U.S.

medical graduates.

ECFMG Certification is an effective screening mechanism for ensuring

that IMGs in patient care situations have met minimum standards. Each

year, thousands of IMGs in the certification process apply to ECFMG

for USMLE. Approximately one-half of these individuals are successful

in completing all the examination and medical education credential

requirements for ECFMG Certification. During the 20-year period

between 1986 and 2005, more than 267,000 international medical

students/graduates applied to take their first examination with

ECFMG; of this number, only 57.2% ultimately achieved certification.

An international medical student/graduate (IMG) begins the ECFMG

certification process by applying to ECFMG for a USMLE/ECFMG

Identification Number. Once an IMG has obtained this number, he/she

can use it to complete the Application for ECFMG Certification. Once

the Application for ECFMG Certification has been submitted, the IMG

may then apply for examination.

To be certified by ECFMG, an IMG must meet both examination and

medical education credential requirements. These requirements include

passing performance on medical science and clinical skills

examinations—USMLE Step 1, Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK), and

Step 2 Clinical Skills (CS) are the exams currently administered that

satisfy these requirements—and primary-source verification of the

IMG’s medical education credentials, including the final medical

diploma, final medical school transcript, and transcript(s) to document

transferred academic credits.

The time required to complete the certification process is different for

each individual. Both medical school students and graduates may begin

the certification process and may apply for the required exams as

soon as they meet the eligibility requirements for examination.

However, since one of the requirements for ECFMG Certification is that

the final medical diploma be verified by ECFMG with the issuing

http://www.ecfmg.org/certification/requirements-for-certification.html


https://secure2.ecfmg.org/emain.asp?app=iwa



http://www.ecfmg.org/certification/verification-of-credentials.html

214

medical school, an IMG cannot complete the certification process until

after graduation from medical school. The time required for some

aspects of the certification process, such as the time required by a

medical school to verify medical education credentials, is beyond the

control of ECFMG.

The fees for application for ECFMG Certification $50. The examination

fees are: For Step 1: $790; for Step 2 CK $790 & CS $1,375. Full list

of fees can be seen here: http://www.ecfmg.org/fees/index.html

A certification fact sheet with detailed information on the process can

be found here: http://www.ecfmg.org/forms/certfact.pdf

The complete list of International Medical Education Schools can be

found here: http://www.faimer.org/resources/imed.html Schools can

be searched by geographical region, country, name of school or name

of city where the school is located. It contains the school detailed

information, website, degrees, year that instruction began, language

of instruction, duration of curriculum, entrance requirements, eligibility

for foreign students and total enrollment.

Web Site http://www.ecfmg.org/


and email

N. Emmanuel G. Cassimatis, M.D.

President and CEO

[email protected]


Fax: (215) 386-9196

Address ECFMG

3624 Market Street

Philadelphia, PA 19104-2685 USA

Other The following are two interesting initiatives of ECFMG:

1) Through more than five decades of certifying IMGs, ECFMG has

developed unparalleled expertise on the world’s medical schools,

the credentials they issue to their graduates, and the verification of

those credentials. ECFMG has expanded this expertise to include

credentials related to postgraduate training and

registration/licensure through its primary-source credentials

http://www.ecfmg.org/fees/index.html

http://www.ecfmg.org/forms/certfact.pdf

http://www.faimer.org/resources/imed.html


http://www.ecfmg.org/eics/index.html

215

verification service for international medical regulatory authorities.

And now, through an upcoming initiative, we are preparing to

bring this expertise to individual physicians and the entities that

license, train, educate, and employ them.

2) ECFMG’s commitment to promoting excellence in international

medical education led to the establishment of its nonprofit

foundation, the Foundation for Advancement of International

Medical Education and Research (FAIMER) http://www.faimer.org .

FAIMER has assumed responsibility for, and expanded upon,

ECFMG’s programs for international medical educators and

ECFMG’s research agenda. Through FAIMER, ECFMG offers

training in leadership and health professions education; creates

and maintains data resources on medical education worldwide;

and conducts research on international medical education

programs, physician migration, and U.S. physician workforce issues.

http://www.ecfmg.org/eics/index.html





216

APPENDIX F: CAHME PROGRAMS AND FACULTY CONTACTS

UNIVERSITY/PROGRAM NAME PROGRAM NAME FACULTY CONTACT EMAIL ADDRESS

Armstrong Atlantic State University Health Administration Joseph Crosby [email protected]

Baylor University Health Administration Lee Bewley [email protected]

Boston University Health Management Mark Allan [email protected]

California State University – Long Beach Health Care Administration Tony Sinay [email protected]

Columbia University Public Health Thomas D’Aunno [email protected]

George Mason University Health Administration & Policy P.J. Maddox [email protected]

Georgia State University Health Administration Andrew Sumner [email protected]

Governors State University Health Administration Rubert Evans [email protected]

Arnold School of Public Health Health Administration Michael Byrd [email protected]

Johns Hopkins University Health Administration William J. Ward, Jr. [email protected]

Medical University of South Carolina Health Administration Andrea White [email protected]

Northwestern University Health Management Joel Shalowitz [email protected]

Rush University Health Administration Susan Lawler [email protected]

Saint Louis University Health Administration Ana Maria Lomperis [email protected]

Temple University Healthcare Management Barbara Manaka [email protected]

















217

Texas Tech University Health Management Mark Thompson [email protected]

The George Washington University Health Administration Leonard Friedman [email protected]

The Pennsylvania State University Health Administration Karen Volmar [email protected]

Tulane University Health Administration Thomas Stranova [email protected]

Union Graduate College Health Management John Huppertz [email protected]

University of Alabama Health Administration Jeffrey Burkhardt [email protected]

University of California-Los Angeles Public Health Diana Hillerman [email protected]

University of Central Florida Health Services Administration Reid Oetjen [email protected]

University of Colorado Denver Health Administration Errol Biggs [email protected]

University of Iowa Health Administration Thomas Vaughn [email protected]

University of Kansas Medical Center Health Administration Robert Lee [email protected]

University of Kentucky Health Administration Martha Riddell [email protected]

University of Miami Health Management Steven Ullmann [email protected]

University of Michigan Health Administration Kyle Grazier [email protected]

University of Minnesota Health Administration Daniel Zismer [email protected]

University of Missouri Health Administration Eduardo Simoes [email protected]

University of Montreal Health Services Administration Lise Lamothe [email protected]

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Health Administration Peggy Leatt [email protected]

University of North Carolina-Charlotte Health Administration Michael Thompson [email protected]




















218

University of North Florida Health Administration Mei Zhao [email protected]

University of Scranton Health Administration Steven Szydlowski [email protected]

University of Southern California Health Administration Michael Nichol [email protected]

University of South Carolina Health Administration Michael Byrd [email protected]

University of Southern Maine-Muskie School Health Policy & Management Andrew Colburn [email protected]

University of Washington Health Administration William Welton [email protected]

Virginia Commonwealth University Health Administration Dolores Clement [email protected]








219

FACULTY NETWORK LISTING

Faculty Contact University Email Telephone

Steven Berkshire Central Michigan University [email protected] 989-774-2888

Rhonda Bleau The Pennsylvania State University 814-863-2900

Nancy Borkowski Florida University [email protected]

Dranita Cava University of Miami [email protected]

Leandra Celaya University of Alabama-Birmingham [email protected] 205-934-3588

Julia Costich University of Kentucky-CPH [email protected] 859-257-6712

Mike Counte St. Louis University [email protected] 314-977-8118

Bob Curtis Franklin University [email protected] 614-947-6127

Peter Fitzpartrick Clayton State University [email protected] 678-466-4933

Margaret Gillingham University of Baltimore [email protected] 410-837-6090

David Hartley University of Southern Maine-Muskie School [email protected] 207-780-4514

Bob Hernandez University of Alabama-Birmingham [email protected] 205-934-1665

Lanis Hicks University of Missouri [email protected] 573-882-8418

Kyung Hoon (Byian) Yang University of Wisconsin-Lacrosse [email protected]

Steven Howard St. Louis University [email protected] 314-977-8111















220

John Huppertz Union Graduate College hupperti@uniongraduatecollege.

edu

518-631-9892

James Johnson Central Michigan University [email protected] 989-774-1351

Ken Johnson Weber State University [email protected] 801-626-6988

Tricia Johnson Rush University [email protected] 312-942-7107

Nalin Johri Seton Hall University [email protected] 973-275-2131

Mahmud Khan University of South Carolina [email protected] 803-777-9928

Margaret Kruk Columbia University(Mailman-Public Health) [email protected] 212-305-2856

Nino Ly Governors State University [email protected]

Brian Malec Cal State University-Northridge [email protected] 818-677-3101

Steve Micks Virginia Commonwealth University [email protected]

Lydia Middleton AUPHA [email protected] 703-894-0940

Peter Otto Union Graduate College [email protected]

u

518-631-9895

Bernardo Ramirez University of Central Florida [email protected] 407-823-4133

Janet Reagan Cal State University-Northridge [email protected] 818-677-2298

Natalia Rekhter Lincoln College [email protected]

Louis Rubino Cal State University-Northridge [email protected] 818-677-7257



















221

Lizheng Shi Tulane University [email protected] 504-988-6548

Jay Shiver George Mason University [email protected] 703-993-1955

Bob Spinelli University of Scranton [email protected] 570-941-5872

Joni Steinberg Tulane University [email protected] 504-988-275

Steve Szydlowski University of Scranton [email protected] 570-941-4367

Michael Thompson University of North Carolina-Charlotte [email protected] 704-687-8980

Daniel West University of Scranton [email protected] 570-941-4126

Ken White Virginia Commonwealth University [email protected] 804-828-8651

Dan Zimmerman Towsan University [email protected] 410-704-4223










222

CAHME PHASE II STUDY (Universities Included, n= 40)

Armstrong Atlantic State University

Baylor University

Boston University

California State University Long Beach

Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health

George Mason University

Georgia State University

Governors State University

Johns Hopkins University

Medical University of South Carolina

Northwestern University

Rush University

Saint Louis University

Temple University

Texas Tech University

The George Washington University

The Pennsylvania State University

Tulane University School of Public Health & Tropical Medicine

UCLA School of Public Health

UNC Charlotte

Union Graduate College

University of Alabama at Birmingham


University of Colorado Denver

University of Iowa

University of Kansas

University of Kentucky

223

University of Miami

University of Michigan

University of Minnesota

University of Missouri

University of Montreal

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

University of North Florida


University of South Carolina

University of Southern California

University of Southern Maine, Muskie School

University of Washington

Virginia Commonwealth University

CAHME PHASE II STUDY (Universities Participated, n=26)

Boston University

Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health

George Mason University

Georgia State University

Governors State University

Johns Hopkins University

Medical University of South Carolina

Rush University

Texas Tech University

The George Washington University

The Pennsylvania State University

Tulane University School of Public Health & Tropical Medicine

UCLA School of Public Health

Union Graduate College

224


University of Colorado Denver

University of Kentucky

University of Miami

University of Minnesota

University of Missouri


University of South Carolina

University of Southern California

University of Southern Maine, Muskie School

University of Washington

Virginia Commonwealth University

225

APPENDIX G: BIBLIOGRAPHY

1) Bogota, B. E. (April 2009). General Summary of the Health Care Market in Colombia.

2) Bryndova, L., Pavlokova, K., Roubal, T., Rokosova, M., & Gaskins, M. (2009). The Czech

Republic Health System Review. Health Systems in Transition , 2(1), 1-119.

3) Busse, R., & Blumel, M. (2011). The German Health Care System 2011: International Profiles

of Health Care Systems. 57-64: The Commonwealth Fund.

4) Central Intelligence Agency. (2011, Decemer 5). The World Factbook. Retrieved



5) Colombia Reports. (2011, August 12). Universal Healthcare for Colombians by 2012:

Major Changes Announced by President of Colombia Juan Manuel Santos. Colombia

Reports .

6) Escobar, M.L. (2005). Health Sector Reform in Colombia. World Bank Institute,

Development Outreach, 6-22.

7) European Hospital and Healthcare. (2011). Country Analysis, Czech Republic. European

Hospital and Healthcare Federation.

8) Frankova, R. (2008, October 10). Current Affairs - Will the Lack of Doctor and Nurses

Affect the Quality of Health Care in Czech Hospitals? Czech Radio 7 . Czech Republic:

Radio Prague.

9) Frost & Sullivan. (2010, November 22). South Korean Hospitals Increasingly Adopt

Healthcare IT to Remain Competitive, Finds Frost & Sullivan. Frost & Sullivan.

10) Madeleine F. Green (2011): Lost in Translation: Degree Definition and Quality in a

Globalized World, Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 43:5, 18-27.

11) Hahn, D. J. (2007). Healthcare System in Korea - Korean Hospital Assocation presentation.

International Finance Corporation Clients. Washington.

12) International Finance Corporation. (2011). 2010 Client Meeting Presentations. HOPE-

European Hospital and Healthcare Federation, Country Analysis, 69-70.

13) Jeong, H.-S. (2011). Korea's National Health Insurance-Lessons from the Past Three

Decades. Health Affairs, (30) 1: 136-144.

14) Joint Commission International. (2010). Country Status Report. Joint Commission

International.

226

15) Joint Commission International. (2009). Joint Commission International and Korean Hospital

Association Establish Strategic Collaboration. Joint Commission International.

16) Kwon, S. (2009, February 20). Health Care System and Policy in Korea: Politics and

Democratization. Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, US.

17) Maarse, H., & Lodewick, L. (2011). Netherlands. In R. Saltman, A. Duran, & H. Dubois,

Governing Public Hospitals and European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. 179-

199.

18) Medici, A. (2009, May 10). Colombia: The Sinuous Path to the Universal Health Care.

Retrieved 2011, from Health Care Global Monitor: blogspot.com

19) PR Newswire-Asia. (2011, December 5). South Korea Signs Accord with Abu Dhabi Health

Authority on Hospital Service Agreement. PR Newswire-Asia .

20) PR Newswire-Asia. (2011, November 1). South Korea's Hospitals Step Up Going Global,

Riding the 'Medical Hallyu' Wave. PR Newswire-Asia .

21) Roubal, T., & Hrobon, P. (2011). Czech Republic. In R. Saltman, A. Duran, & H. Dubois,

Governing Public Hospitals. European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. 99-

111.

22) Schafer, W., Kroneman, M., Boerma, W., van den Berg, M., Westert, G., Deville, W., et al.

(2010). The Netherlands Health System Review. Health Systems in Transition, (12): 1-229.

23) Song, Y. J. (2009). The South Korean Health Care System. JAMA, 52 (3) 206-209.

24) The Government of Ireland. (2010). The National Treatment Purchase Fund, Annual Report.

Dublin: Government of Ireland.

25) The Government of Ireland, Department of health and Children. (2007). Health Insurance

Market Reforms. Dublin: The Government of Ireland.

26) The Government of Ireland, Department of Health and Children. (2007). The Health

Information and Quality Authority, "About Us". Dublin: The Government of Ireland.

27) The World Bank. (2011). Colombia Health Insurance System Background Information and

Objectives. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

28) Tiemann, O., Schreyogg, J., & Busse, R. (2010). Which Type of Hospital Owndership has

the Best Performance? Evidence and Implications from Germany. Eurohealth, 17(2-3): 31-

33.

29) U.S Agency for International Development (2010). USAID Policy Framework. Retrieved

March 2012, from http://www.usaid.gov/policy/USAID_PolicyFramework.PDF.

227

30) Wikipedia. (2011, November). Healthcare in the Republic of Ireland. Retrieved December

2011, from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland

31) World News. (2011, September). Colombia's Poorest Could Lose Healthcare. Retrieved

September 2011, from AmericaEconomia: www.upi.com

32) Wynand, P., van de Ven, M., & Schut, F. T. (May/June 2008). Universal Mandatory Health

Insurance in the Netherlands: A Model for the United States? Health Affairs, (27): 3

CAHME Phase II: International Healthcare Management Education · The project team submitted an...

Documents

Transcript of CAHME Phase II: International Healthcare Management Education · The project team submitted an...