Improving hospital-based programs
II.
by Adkins, Mark
III. Justify the Program's Existence
"The allied health administrator must be prepared to justify
the institution's expense of sponsoring hospital-based educational
programs."
--Dan Shock
Those comments were made by a radiography program administrator in
an article published in Radiologic Technology in 1990, (20) and they
still hold true today. Hospital-based radiography programs exist to
educate and train highly qualified radiographers. Doing so without
regard to the financial impact a program has on the sponsoring and
affiliate organizations ultimately has spelled the demise of many
certificate programs. To remain viable, hospital executives must have a
clear understanding of the program's financial benefits.
Return on Investment
In business circles, executives weigh the financial impact of an
investment based on a projected dollar return over time. This return is
simply termed return on investment, or ROI, which is calculated along
with intangible benefits in a business case to justify an investment.
Executives may decide in favor of an investment if the business case
projects an agreeable ROI.
Hospital-based radiography programs are an investment. The
sponsoring and affiliate organizations invest time and money in
supporting the program. Hospital-based educational programs exist
because of the organization's support.
Cost Avoidance
Radiography programs do not necessarily exist just to generate a
profit. However, when executives are encouraged to cut costs, such
programs are at risk due to their fixed-cost nature. Unfortunately, many
program directors have not given due diligence to justifying their
programs financially. Financial justification for educational programs
is based primarily on avoiding costs that would be incurred if the
program did not exist. These costs include but are not limited to:
* Marketing and advertising dollars associated with recruiting
technologists or graduates from other programs for vacant positions.
* Orientation expenses associated with a training period for new
employees, generally 4 to 6 weeks.
* Temporary staffing costs incurred when the demand for
technologists greatly exceeds supply.
* Costs associated with reduced overtime and higher-salary PRN use.
In and of themselves, avoided or reduced costs associated with
hiring program graduates cannot justify a program's existence.
Programs also must look for revenue streams and cost-sharing
arrangements constantly to offset their fixed operating expenses.
Revenue Streams Tuition
Revenue sources alone should not be expected to offset the
program's operating expenses, yet they are essential in justifying
the program's existence. The most notable revenue source is student
tuition. The amount of tuition charged per student should be balanced
between keeping the program competitive with the market and offsetting a
portion of the program's operating expenses.
CMS Reimbursement
Another potentially significant revenue stream is CMS (Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services) reimbursement for medical education
expenses. The Medicare Code of Federal Regulations, CFR Section 413.85,
allows for payments to hospitals under Medicare Part A for the cost of
allied health education programs that meet the Medicare definition of
approved educational activities. (21) Medicare's share of the
hospital's radiography program is determined as a percentage of
program costs compared to inpatient and outpatient radiology charges.
This reimbursement can offset much of the program's operating
expenses and significantly justify the program's existence.
Charitable Sources
Programs also might wish to explore educational grants and
charitable sources of funding. Equipment manufacturers and contrast
media vendors routinely budget grant money for donations to nonprofit
organizations for education and training purposes. Such funding can be
very valuable in offsetting expenses associated with the educational
process. However, to avoid conflicts of interest, pharmaceutical and
equipment manufacturers must follow business practices that meet PhRMA
(Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America) and NEMA
(National Electrical Manufacturers Association) guidelines. (22, 23) It
would behoove program directors to become familiar with these guidelines
and any internal policies on corporate relations before applying for or
accepting grants.
Cost Sharing
Interestingly, while the Preston and Comello study revealed that
70.6% of the 160 respondents indicated that their program had multiple
clinical education sites, a staggering 75.8% of the 91 respondents who
had multiple sites indicated that these sites did not support the
program financially.' It is difficult to imagine how a program can
yield a positive ROI when clinical sites do not provide financial
support.
The nature of the corporate relationship between the program
sponsor and affiliated clinical sites will determine the cost-sharing
arrangement. If an enterprise-wide structure is developed in which
clinical sites are affiliated with the program sponsor and the clinical
sites are eligible for CMS reimbursement for program expenses, then
those organizations can shoulder a greater portion of program-related
expenses. Conversely, if clinical affiliates are not eligible for CMS
reimbursement, more of the expenses should remain with the sponsoring
entity because those costs will be captured when submitting expenses for
CMS reimbursement.
Annual Financial Performance
Once the program has maximized its revenue stream, established a
cost-sharing arrangement with affiliated clinical sites and determined
what expenses are avoided as a result of hiring program graduates,
program officials can determine the overall financial impact the program
has on its affiliate organizations.
Determining the annual financial return for the program will depend
on an agreed-upon benchmark for comparison, such as total program return
relative to no educational affiliation or relative to a college
affiliation. A more relevant benchmark would be to compare the
hospital-based program with a college-based program affiliation because
most hospitals align with some program, given recent and forecasted
shortages of technologists. If this is the case, program officials
should carve out expenses, such as clinical faculty salaries, that would
be incurred if the hospital were affiliated with a college or university
program. Thus, when an annual return is calculated, it will represent
dollars saved as a result of sponsoring the program as opposed to
affiliating with a college or university.
Once a financial return is calculated, program officials must
communicate these results to executives in affiliated organizations.
Ideally, this communication should be in the form of an annual report.
Intangibles
Hospital-based programs justify their existence in part through the
fact that they are not restricted by university credit-hour limitations.
This enables students to complete more clinical and didactic contact
hours than in comparable associate-degree programs. However, care must
be exercised because more clinical or classroom hours do not equate
necessarily to greater skill or competency. Program officials must be
mindful of accreditation standards involving clinical resources,
educational validity of program activities and program assessment of
student outcomes. Nonetheless, the additional clinical and class time
can be a valuable asset if used conscientiously. This additional clinic
time also benefits the organization by allowing it to "try
out" students as potential employees. Thus, the program becomes a
human resource filter for the organization.
The hospital-based program also justifies its existence through its
unique advantage of having core faculty on hand at clinical sites. By
having didactic faculty on site where clinical rotations are performed,
faculty are better positioned to diagnose student deficiencies and
implement correctives as needed. This observation is not meant to
denigrate college-based programs, but to elevate this advantage of the
hospital-based program.
Other intangible benefits of hospital-based programs include the
following:
* Sponsoring and affiliating hospitals have greater influence over
program structure, curriculum and operations.
* Program officials can assist imaging departments with the
education and training needs of practicing technologists by conducting
educational needs analyses and educational in-services.
* Hospital-based programs are well positioned to help affiliate
hospitals establish training and education pathways for medical imaging
modalities such as sonography, nuclear medicine and mammography.
* Program faculty can serve on department or organizational
committees or assume other roles in medical imaging, provided such
activities do not negatively affect their primary role as program
faculty.
IV. Strategic Vision
"Vision without action is a dream. Action without vision is
simply passing the time. Action with vision is making a positive
difference."
--Joel Barker
As the hospital-based program evolves in structure and
organization, establishes multiple clinical education sites and
justifies its existence, program officials must begin to look at other
ways the program can support its sponsoring and affiliate organizations
and the communities they serve. Hospital-based radiography program
officials cannot afford to be myopic regarding the purpose of their
existence and must champion the educational needs in medical imaging
beyond entry-level radiography training. The program must develop a
strategic vision.
COPYRIGHT 2008 American Society of Radiologic
Technologists Reproduced with permission of the copyright holder. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Copyright 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights
reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.
NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.