Does the Boogey Man Cometh?

As I’m out traveling and teaching, one of the more common topics of conversation is mandatory paramedic program accreditation. Beginning in 2012 (is there a more specific date?), the National Registry will no longer test paramedic graduates from non-accredited programs. Speculation as to what this actually means is fuel for the overly active imagination. To separate facts from fantasy, I went to the head-shed for CoAEMSP (Committee on Accreditation of Educational Programs for the Emergency Medical Services Professions) and talked with its executive director George W. Hatch Jr., EdD, LP, EMT-P, to get the straight skinny on what is unquestionably one of the most significant policy shifts in the history of the EMS profession.

What do you see as the primary benefits of CoAEMSP accreditation?

Standardization. The need for all paramedic education programs to be measured using the same “yardstick” is essential to the growth of the profession. Currently, it’s uncertain that paramedic graduates have the same educational experiences as their colleagues nationally. The fact is, there is a wide disparity of just how we view a “minimally competent" entry-level paramedic.

Protection. Another objective in this process is to protect the student. Although we are not advocating that all paramedic educational offerings occur in colleges, it is essential that students understand that accreditation assures their education experience meets rigorous standards, particularly with national acceptance and portability.

Describe how the relationship between CoAEMSP and any given paramedic program works.

The CoAEMSP is the professional body that is responsible for all of the “heavy lifting” with the Commission of Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP) accreditation process. We provide technical assistance to program directors (PDs) and state EMS officials, as well as the national EMS community. PDs can expect to submit their program self-studies to the executive office and receive a detailed executive analysis about the submission. Next, a site visit is scheduled and two peers (generally a paramedic educator and physician) will be on hand for two days to verify the submission is correct and take a look at the program with “boots on the ground.” A detailed but, at that point, unofficial report is generated on site, which is followed in several weeks by a detailed findings letter. The findings become the emphasis for action by the CoAEMSP board of directors, who act upon a recommendation for accreditation action and send it to CAAHEP for final disposition.

Why do you think some EMS educators have this “fear factor” with the accreditation process?

Most educators are just like I was when I first looked at this project nearly 25 years ago. They are fearful of the unknown and of change. Will my paramedic program measure up? What happens if we don’t meet the standards? Who are these folks and why do we need to do this? All of these questions/feelings are legitimate in that this process is about change, and that in and of itself makes people uncomfortable. To anyone seeking accreditation in the years to come, I would say, your program is not perfect. Mine wasn’t, and neither are the programs that are currently accredited. What we all share is the need to continually strive to improve the education experience for our students. The accreditation process is designed to allow programs to meet the standards as they move forward. It’s a process of continuous quality improvement. Think of it as an opportunity to demonstrate that your program does meet a national peer review standard. If you are waiting to have the perfect self-study before you send it in, it will never get done. Do it as openly and honestly as you can, and expect that you will discover things that you do well along with things that need improvement. Look at it as an opportunity to gather data that shows what you need and quantifies those needs to the advantage of the program, i.e. new faculty, better equipment, improved classroom space. Remember, the process starts with a self-study, so expect this process to enlighten you about both strengths and limitations.

I’ve heard you use the phrase “ongoing introspection” many times. What does that mean to you and to a paramedic program seeking accreditation?

Self-study is about you. Who knows your program better? Your dean? Your president? The fire chief? You are the person who knows the most about what you do and how you do it. Take the opportunity to fully embrace the process. Accreditation is not a destination—it’s a journey. Rather than a sprint, think of accreditation as a marathon. Your program is never going to be perfect, but it can pursue perfection over time. We all must strive to find what works best in our classrooms to better educate those in our charge. We are growing the next generation of EMS providers, educators and administrators who will be taking care of us and those we love. The accreditation process is the next evolution of growing the EMS profession and something we should all be proud of. Frankly, I think it’s about time we did this. In our lifetime, accreditation of paramedic education programs is perhaps one of the most important opportunities we have to learn from ourselves how to better prepare our future generations of EMS providers. I am proud of the steps we are taking.

I’d like to thank George for taking time out of his busy life to answer my questions. I have been involved with the accreditation process for over 20 years, and it has been nothing but a positive experience for my program, my graduates and me.

Until next month…

Mike Smith, BS, MICP, is program chair for the Emergency Medical Services program at Tacoma
Community College in Tacoma, WA, and a member of the EMS World editorial advisory board.