Innovations Funding

Funded Proposals

Back to Frequently Asked Questions

WHAT ARE THE FUNDING PRIORITIES FOR FALL, 2007?

During each call for proposals, the Academy (working closely with curricular leadership in the School of Medicine) suggests areas of project development that will be viewed as priorities by the Innovations Funding Committee. The stated priorities should not discourage interested faculty from developing proposals in other areas, although in previous years, about half of the funded projects did address a priority area. The priorities for funding during the Fall 2007 call include the following:

1. Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of Novel Competency-Based Assessment Tools
   Examples would include proposals for assessing the competencies of practice-based learning and system-based practice, and innovative ideas using newer assessment techniques such as web-based learning modules, simulations, portfolios and other methods of self-assessment at all levels of medical education.
2. Support of the Pathways and Area of Concentration Initiatives
   Applicants are encouraged to submit proposals which promote the development of individualized learning pathways longitudinally, across the continuum of medical education. Proposals that link UME and GME activities and/or emphasize scholarly activity within these pathways are of particular interest.
3. Extension of Cross-Disciplinary Teaching and Courses
   Projects that promote interdepartmental collaboration of faculty and learners are strongly encouraged. Models of past successes in this vein have included integrated block courses and site-specific integrated clerkship experiences. At the GME level, an example would be the elaboration of core competency learning modules which could be offered to trainees in multiple departments.
   
   

Faculty whose ideas are not related to curriculum priorities are encouraged to submit proposals. Funding will not be restricted to prioritized areas.

WHAT KINDS OF PROJECTS DOES THE ACADEMY SEEK TO FUND?

Academy innovations funding will focus on medical student education; programs may involve other learners but the link to improvement of medical student education must be clear. The curriculum at the UCSF School of Medicine has many strengths, but ongoing assessment by internal and external reviewers highlights several areas for fruitful development. In general, the Academy seeks to fund projects that increase collaboration across current discipline or department boundaries within the medical school, and such projects will likely be attractive to reviewers. Projects that link the basic sciences with the clinical sciences, for instance, would likely improve or enrich our students' education. Likewise, projects that span more than one year of the medical school's classes education would strengthen our current curriculum. In addition to any "new" courses that might be developed, projects that specifically address the evaluation or quality improvement of the curriculum are particularly sought and will be considered a priority for Academy funding.

(See past funded Curricular Innovations projects for details)

WHAT KINDS OF PROJECTS DOES THE ACADEMY NOT FUND?

The Academy is interested in new program development, so will not be funding projects that look to sustain educational activity already taking place at UCSF. Programs that are not closely linked to the improvement of the education of UCSF medical students will not be funded.

WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF "CURRICULAR INNOVATIONS"?

Prior and current projects that have been funded by The Haile T. Debas Academy of Medical Educators are available for review in this section of the Academy web page. Other examples of appropriate projects might focus on:

• A specific component of faculty development
• Measuring the efficacy of learning of a particular objective(s) in an innovative way
• Integration of specific basic sciences with clinical disciplines (Anatomy Selective, as above, for example)
• Addressing specific, "emerging" curricular areas of importance. Examples include but are not limited to:
• long-term care & chronic illness
• geriatrics
• pain management
• disabilities
• rehabilitation
• end-of-life care
• Developing electives for fourth-year students that cover content that is recommended for students heading into a particular field, but content that would not necessarily be considered "in the mainstream" of that field. Examples include but are not limited to:
• office gynecology and contraceptive management for the future primary care physician
• fluid and electrolyte management strategies for the future surgeon

HOW ARE PROPOSALS REVIEWED AND SELECTED?

The Curricular Innovations Committee has developed an initial screening tool that proportionately evaluates the details of each proposal in two major domains from criteria already established and outlined within this webpage:

• The relevance, innovation and impact of the idea behind each project-for example: Does the project address an area of high curricular need? Does the project address learning strategies and teaching methods in a novel way? Does this proposal affect many students?
• The "mechanics" of the proposal itself-for example: Is the measurement of project outcome/efficacy clear?
  
• Is the budget specific and well justified?
• The screening process to include both of these domains accommodates the wide variability of faculty expertise in submitting projects, and specifically encourages faculty who have excellent ideas for curricular innovations but are relatively novice at structuring a funding proposal.

Three committee members screen all proposals, with attention to the details within each of these two major domains described above. An initial ranking is performed based on this screening. Once proposals have been screened and ranked, the committee then meets, deliberates and funding decisions are made. Some proposals selected may be returned to authors for modifications prior to funding.

The Academy seeks to fund proposals that are innovative and highly relevant to our curriculum, as well as proposals that are technically well conceived.