Jump to Article
Sponsoring Institution
Program
GME Office / Administration
Finance / Public Policy
Sponsoring Institution
By: Christine Redovan, MBA, MLIS Christine@PartnersinMedEd.com
Do Our Well-Being, Leave, and Professionalism Systems Actually Work?
As July 1 approaches, Sponsoring Institutions (SIs) should shift from verifying policies to evaluating performance. In today’s environment—marked by workforce strain, regulatory scrutiny, and evolving resident expectations—paper compliance is not enough. Institutional strength depends on whether well-being, leave, and professionalism systems are credible, trusted, and operationally reliable.
Well-Being Systems
A well-being system is more than access to counseling and potlucks; it reflects an institution’s commitment to psychological safety and sustainable workload design. Effective systems normalize help-seeking, address structural contributors to burnout, and provide clear pathways for residents to step away when fatigue or distress threatens safety. When residents feel safe reporting concerns without stigma or career risk, patient care and learning both improve. Well-being must be embedded in scheduling, supervision, and leadership behavior—not treated as a peripheral benefit.
Leave Systems
Leave policies operationalize institutional values. Transparent, equitable processes reinforce fairness and belonging; inconsistent application erodes trust. A functioning leave system anticipates operational impact, aligns with board eligibility requirements, and ensures that taking medically necessary or family leave does not jeopardize professional standing. Reliability and consistency—not simply written policy—determine whether residents experience the system as supportive.
Professionalism and Mistreatment Systems
Professionalism frameworks succeed when reporting pathways are independent, confidential, and responsive. Culture is shaped by accountability: prompt review, pattern analysis, and visible corrective action strengthen psychological safety and reduce repeat harm. Opaque or slow processes, by contrast, signal tolerance of dysfunction.
Institutional Review Risk
Institutional Review findings rarely stem from missing policies; they arise when systems fail under stress. Inconsistent leave practices, unresolved mistreatment patterns, or weak centralized oversight signal governance gaps. A systems check is not just culture work—it is risk mitigation. Strong systems demonstrate that the SI is actively governing its clinical learning environment. CLICK HERE for a copy of our checklist to perform a review of these key systems and demonstrate true oversight.
Program
By: Tori Hanlon, MS, CHCP Tori@PartnersinMedEd.com
Professionalism Challenges in GME: Trends, Patterns, and Proactive Approaches
Professionalism is a core competency in graduate medical education, yet it is one of the most common and challenging aspects of resident development. Recent literature on professionalism assessment highlights ongoing variability in training, feedback, and expectations as factors that contribute to the persistence of professionalism lapses among residents.
Common Professionalism Lapses in Residents
Frequently reported professionalism lapses across GME programs include:
- Communication Challenges – Residents may struggle with timely, clear, or respectful communication across the care team.
- Reliability and Accountability – Late or incomplete documentation, missed deadlines, or delayed follow-through
- Inappropriate Use of Technology – Issues such as inappropriate digital communication or lapses in maintaining patient confidentiality remain common in GME training environments
- Challenges Accepting and Applying Feedback – Feedback about professionalism is often difficult for residents to interpret or internalize
As GME programs and healthcare in general continue to evolve rapidly, changes influence how professionalism concerns emerge and are addressed. Therefore, the demands on programs to both teach and assess professionalism have never been higher. Additionally, residents come from increasingly varied educational, cultural, and interpersonal backgrounds, creating a broader, more diverse resident population. These trends reveal that professionalism concerns are rarely simply individual deficits, but rather structural and cultural challenges within the educational environment.
Setting the Tone: Establishing Professionalism Expectations with New Residents
As we approach a new academic year, the onboarding/orientation period presents an opportunity to establish clarity, alignment, and shared values regarding professionalism. Start with clear, behavior-based definitions. Because professionalism expectations vary across contexts, cultures, and institutions, programs should articulate concrete, observable behavior-based examples rather than relying on abstract concepts.
Role modeling, structured curricula, simulations and frequent feedback remain essential tools. These strategies are among the most effective and widely recommended approaches to teaching professionalism. Faculty development can help ensure residents receive consistent messages across clinical settings.
Normalizing a feedback culture from day one will allow new residents to understand that professionalism, as a core competency, will be discussed openly and regularly. It’s important to reiterate that feedback is part of the learning process, and not a sign of failure.
Many professionalism issues arise from fatigue, stress, or systematic issues. Acknowledging these realities helps frame professionalism expectations as shared responsibilities between residents and the learning environment.
GME programs can foster a culture where professionalism grows naturally throughout training by establishing clear expectations early, reinforcing them consistently, and supporting residents through structured teaching and feedback. Clarity and consistent modeling remain key to cultivating the next generation of clinicians who embody the values of the profession.
GME Office / Administration
By: Heather Peters, M.Ed., Ph.D. Heather@PartnersInMedEd.com
The Role Changed Before It Was Named: Understanding the Evolution of GME Coordinators
Many program coordinators describe feeling “caught in the middle”—balancing the needs of program leadership, residents, faculty, and the GME office. While this description resonates, it may not fully capture what is actually happening.
What coordinators are experiencing is not simply a position between competing demands. It is the result of a role that has evolved significantly—without a corresponding shift in how that role is defined, supported, or understood.
Over time, the responsibilities of program coordinators have expanded well beyond administrative support. Coordinators now serve as operational anchors for their programs, managing accreditation processes, interpreting requirements, supporting program leadership, overseeing complex data systems, and ensuring alignment with institutional expectations.
In many institutions, this evolution happened gradually. Responsibilities accumulated in response to need—new programs, increasing regulatory complexity, expanding oversight expectations—without a clear moment where the role itself was redefined.
As a result, many coordinators are functioning in roles that have effectively changed, even if the title, job description, and support structures have not.
This disconnect often shows up in familiar ways: – Navigating both program-level and institutional expectations without clear boundaries
– Translating requirements that are not consistently defined or communicated
– Holding operational responsibility without corresponding authority
– Being relied upon as essential to program function, yet without formal recognition of that scope
These challenges are often described as individual strain—but they are more accurately understood as structural misalignment.
When roles evolve faster than the systems that support them, individuals absorb the gap.
This is why the experience of being “caught in the middle” is so persistent. It is not simply about competing priorities. It reflects a broader reality: the coordinator role has shifted, but the shared understanding of that role has not fully caught up.
In many ways, roles shifted before identities did.
Recognizing this shift is an important first step—not to redefine coordinators themselves, but to bring greater clarity and alignment to the systems in which they work.
For GME office leaders, this creates an opportunity to move beyond reactive support and toward more intentional design. Clear role definition, aligned expectations, and structured professional development are not optional—they are necessary infrastructure for sustainable program operations.
This is where role-based development becomes especially important. Partners® Learning Pathways were designed to align professional development with the realities of evolving GME roles—providing coordinators, program leadership, and GME office teams with structured support that reflects what their roles have become—not what the system was originally designed to support.
NOTE: The link above goes to the Passport page at PME. Right now we don’t have a link to just the Learning Pathway section.
Finance / Public Policy
By: Cheryl Haynes, BA Cheryl@partnersinmeded.com
Grant Basics
One of the primary sources of funding for Graduate Medical Education outside of reimbursement from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is grant funding. While some states offer grant opportunities, most Graduate Medical Education–related grants are awarded through the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA).
The application process — along with required documentation and reporting requirements — may seem daunting, but don’t be intimidated. Yes, grant writing is complex and requires laser-focused attention to detail. However, multiple grants are awarded during each application cycle.
Getting Started
There are two required registrations before you can apply:
- Register with the System for Award Management (SAM).
You must register your organization in SAM. A detailed checklist is available on the SAM website to guide you through the process. You will need to designate a point of contact and provide their name and email address. Registration typically takes approximately 7–10 business days. - Register with Grants.gov.
This portal is where you will search for grant opportunities, submit applications, and access a wealth of resources to support you throughout the process.
Many successful organizations either employ or contract with professional grant writers. Depending on your experience level and available time, this may be a worthwhile investment.
Understanding Grant Cycles
As you review available grants, you will likely notice that many opportunities have already closed. Grant application windows are typically short, so vigilance is critical if you are preparing to apply.
Even reviewing closed opportunities can be beneficial. Doing so helps you understand:
- The types of grants available
- Application cycles and timing patterns
- Funding priorities
- Required documentation
This preparation will strengthen your readiness when a relevant opportunity opens.
Tips for Successful Grant Writing
- Designate a project manager. Coordinated planning and communication among your team is critical.
- Clearly and persuasively communicate your need and your plan. Keep it simple and direct — this is not the time to showcase creative writing.
- Answer the questions precisely. Avoid embellished narratives that may obscure your response. If reviewers cannot easily find your answer, they will move on.
- Maintain consistency throughout the application. Your needs statement, impact discussion, and budget narrative must align and reinforce one another.
- Write authentically. Convey your passion and enthusiasm — while remaining clear and consistent.
- Engage multiple reviewers. If you do not hire a professional grant writer, have your application reviewed by a skilled editor or wordsmith.
- Be realistic about time. Preparing a strong application typically requires approximately 50 hours of focused effort.
Spotlight: Rural Residency Planning and Development Grant
One of the most popular current programs is the Rural Residency Planning and Development Program, which supports start-up costs for developing new rural residency programs, including Rural Track Programs.
The current application cycle is open and will close in May 2026. Additional details are available on the HRSA website.
Good luck in your pursuit of grant funding. We are here to help if needed.
Grant Writing Services for Healthcare & Medical Education | Partners in Medical Education
https://sam.gov/sites/default/files/2024-11/entity-checklist.pdf
 |
 |
 |