Statewide Primary Health Care Work Force Planning
by Tim Size, April, 1995
The State of Wisconsin each biennium spends tens of millions of dollars of General Purpose Revenue dollars to train health care providers without the benefit of even a basic work force or education plan. The state continues to face major problems relative to the supply and distribution of primary care providers. Two basic sets of questions need to be thoroughly addressed: (1) how can educational institutions receiving State funds to train or educate primary care providers be more effective, and (2) what is the relationship between their programs and the need for primary care providers throughout the state?
It would greatly benefit the state if the University of Wisconsin, the Medical College of Wisconsin and Marquette University would work cooperatively with the Wisconsin Area Health Education Center System and the Consortium for Primary Care in Wisconsin to develop a statewide primary health care work force plan.
The University of Wisconsin, the Medical College of Wisconsin and Marquette University each need to develop their own institutional plan for those health care training or educational programs for which they receive state funds.
1. The cooperative state-wide plan needs to be completed by July 1st, 1996.
2. Each educational institution's plan needs to:
a. address the following disciplines (as appropriate): dentistry, nursing, medicine, pharmacy, physical therapy and physician assistants.
b. address recommendations from the cooperative state-wide plan available by July 1st, 1996.
c. be submitted to the Governor and the Legislature by September 1st, 1996 in time for public reaction before the Governor submits the administration's biennial budget bill.
3. Each individual educational institution's plan needs to include:
a. annual goals through the year 2006 regarding the percent of graduates who are expected to choose to enter a primary care practice immediately after graduation.
b. annual goals through the year 2006 regarding the percent of graduates who after any post-graduate training (i.e. medical residencies) will enter a primary care practice.
c. for 3(a) and 3(b), what percentage of graduates will chose to work in "an underserved community and/or with an underserved population" (i.e. in a health professional shortage area (HPSA), medically underserved area (MUA), medically underserved population (MUP) or in communities or with populations that are at risk of becoming a HPSA, MUA or MUP.)
d. for 3(a) and 3(b), how these future goals compare with their own past goals and accomplishments.
e. a five year work plan with specific educational strategies, i.e. curriculum and institutional changes designed to foster the stated career and placement choice goals as well as an explanation of the assumed functional relationship of these strategies to the stated goals. Training to enhance cultural competence relevant to underserved communities and populations is expected.
f. data, independent and verifiable wherever possible, to back all claims of past achievement and as the baseline to verify future changes.
g. for the two medical schools, a plan for working with residency sites to jointly foster medical residents choosing post-residency primary care practices in "an underserved community and/or with an underserved population."
h. evidence of community and constituency participation in the institutional planning process.
i. the results of any outside peer reviews that have been completed regarding the institution's plan as well as any relevant comparative information with other schools in the Midwest.