I'd like to go ahead and um Eugene call this meeting to order and uh if you can could you do a roll call for us? >> Yes. Right. Dr. Cliff Knights, Dr. Steven Becker >> here.
>> Dr. Michelle Henstein. Dr. Tom Sonaman. Dr. Trisha >> here. >> Rob Mcllin >> here. Paul Han hasn't been here and I'll talk about that in a second. Uh Beth Ro
>> here. >> Rachel Shockley. Dr. Shockley, I saw you. I believe you're on the phone. >> We can't hear you though, Dr. Shockley. >> Yeah, I did hit unmute. Yes. Thanks.
>> Dr. [snorts] Shockley, can you hear us? I'll you'll verify you're present. So, we'll go ahead. Dr. Shockley is present and uh Kurt Ward >> here. >> All right. And um our non- voting members, but advisory members who have
joined us today. Uh Sarah Colmes >> here >> and Christian Bre >> here. >> Congratulations to Sarah on your recent your recent marriage. So my apologies that I haven't I'll get your name plate changed for the next meeting. Uh Dr. Hearn right now we have one
so we have three board members here in person. We have one two three attending remotely. Uh right now we do not have enough board members for the quum yet. However when Dr. Knight arrives we can call the form into place. Okay.
Can we uh do we need to pause on all agenda items or >> We can move for anything that's not an action item. We can discuss >> anything that's on the on the agenda that's not an action item. >> Okay. Perfect. >> All right. So, we'll skip over. Well,
first of all, um thanks every let me let me start out by just uh first thanking everyone who was able to come in person today. You know, now that we no longer have the governor's order in place, we have to have um how many people in person, Eugene? Four, at least four,
>> minimum of four in person. >> Four in person at each meeting. And so I just bring that to our attention now because we've been doing these meetings virtually and um everyone has a requirement who is a member of the board to come to at least one in person a year
if I remember the rule correctly. Is that right? >> That's correct. >> Okay. Thank you. So, um, thank you to Beth Roel who made some last minute changes in her schedule so that she could be here in person for us today. So, we did indeed have a quorum and could move forward with action items because last meeting that we postponed
in April, we just did not have enough. Didn't meet the the total forum today. Um, thanks to Beth's uh work, we are able to um have the in-person forum. So, thank you for and and just want to bring that awareness to the board because moving forward some of that inerson
presence will be needed for us to conduct these meetings and so please make um you know schedule changes appropriately so we can we can be there. Um while we have a moment I wanted to congratulate our student member uh Sarah
Sarah Combmes now um congratulations you are officially Dr. Combmes. Yes. and she just graduated from IU School of Medicine. Do you want to share with everyone um what you'll be doing in the year ahead? >> Yes. Sorry. Um I will be going to watch
you for OB residency. >> Wonderful. Congratulations. >> Thank you so much. >> Yeah. So this is um I think your last meeting with us then as um as a student advisory member as you move on to your next new phase of your of this chapter
at um in St. Louis. So, we thank you for your service to this board and we um look forward to um maybe talking to the folks at IU and figuring out maybe through Michelle and who who could be the next student member that would step into the um your position. So, but thank
you very much for being part of >> All right. So, I'm going to keep um moving us through some things where we do not uh need um to take action until we have the arrival of Dr. Knight. So, I think the legislative update would be the next
thing that we could move to. Eugene, could you share with us the legislative update? >> Right now, we do not have an exhaustive legislative update. Uh, right now it's kind of a I'll call it a dead period, but we are starting to prepare for the legislative session that will start in
January of 2023. That will be a budget session. And so, we will be looking at the the GME expansion plan and the ask from the board. Uh we've been fortunate that the general assembly since 2015 has continued to started to support uh with the base funding of $6 million for the
GMA expansion plan and that's continued to increase with successive legislative sessions in 2017, 2019 and 2021. Uh we're at a roughly $29 million commitment to GMBB development and expansion for the general assembly. I think the board has should say I think
the board has shown good work with over a hundred new positions funded well over 300 almost at this point 340 residency slots and starting to work it's hard to get results from uh those slots the initial board funded slots back in 2017
I think roughly 60% roughly 50 60% get that number verified of those residents who were supported through GM funds stated within the state of Indiana so good measurements there. I will be working with Linda in the upcoming months as reports become due to get
additional data on on outcomes and then uh Dr. Hearn later in the agenda we talk about putting together a committee to to to look at what funding opportunities are available and that way we're making sure excuse me uh that way we're making sure that the ask from the from the
board is in concert with the plan needs for the next two three four years. Yeah, perfect. So, yes, we're gonna talk Thanks for that update, Eugene. We'll talk about that uh later in the meeting about Yeah. convening a group of folks to talk about what the act should mean
financially to the legislature. >> I want to add something. >> And I think we need to remember that Doc Brown has retired. That's correct. >> And he was our big champion in ways. I just saw I put up there, but I was going to say that I'm I'm a little concerned. >> Yeah, it was comment in the chat. Thank you, uh, Luke. Luke
Luke Luke Mcame noting that there will be a new ways and means chairperson. Luke represents the state medical association. He's been they've been a partner with this board for years. Luke has has made himself available. Really helped us to push forward some some data and some some
feedback we needed to secure not just funding but additional funding especially when the pandemic hit and and things were questionable. the uh the work of our our stakeholders uh ISM other stakeholders and Luke especially being on the ground to help the board not only secure funding but get an
additional million dollars and so appreciate that feedback and uh they are available they've made themselves available to partner with this board on any of the the conversations we need to have any of the data we need for putting together the ask for or future funding.
>> Yeah. Wonderful. Well, thank you for that update. Yeah, it's a it'll be a critical time and critical connections we need to make with the legislature. So, um appreciate those updates. Let me uh if it's okay, um Eugene, can we note that we have a
>> Yes. Uh thank you. Good afternoon, Dr. Knight. So, this we do have the appropriate quorum at this point to take action on any action items on the agenda. Uh thank you again everybody for for being here today and thank you Dr. Knight and Dr. Ward
and uh Dr. Hearn. Thank you all. Glenda, >> Sarah, I'm I'm a little bit uh this is my first meeting again. I said this in two and a half years and so I am ecstatic to see everybody in person and to to get everybody downtown back here in Indianapolis and to also see the
folks who have taken time on Zoom. Know Dr. Becker, Dr. Mclenn, you all have a big event to attend in a couple of hours. So can you through everything here but any questions anyone has please feel free to bring through the chat >> you want to mention now Paul's um >> yeah good point thank you uh so we do
have a board slot uh Dr. Paul hot who is no longer with Rally Children's Health Dr. Hart his position was a medical director of the residency program and the hospital association and so we are working to get uh get that appointment
made the hospital association uh did submit a name Dr. Kevin >> GKY. >> GKY. Thank you, Dr. Gky. So, that name has been submitted for consideration to the governor's office and we are just working with that office waiting to hear back. Usually, they make appointments kind of in waves and so at the point
that that appointment is made and Dr. Gy will be a member of the board, but as of now, Dr. Hart is technically still on the board even though he's not at his u not in that role anymore with with Riley. >> Yeah. >> Perfect. Thank you for that update. All right. All right. Well, let's go ahead
and go back to agenda item three, which was just to review the January 28th uh meeting minutes. And uh hopefully folks had a chance to read through that. And um is there any corrections uh amendments? Anything what anyone wants
to share about the the minutes? All right. If not, hearing nothing that I take entertain a motion to approve the minute. I'll >> move to approve the minutes. >> Thank you, Dr. night. Second. Thanks, Beth. All in favor? >> I.
>> Any opposed? All right, that motion carries. Thank you. We've approved the minutes of our January meeting. Let's, uh, so now we'll skip back down to our fiscal update. Eugene, um, can you share with us where we are? >> Yes. I'll bring this up. I'll see if I can share if I share my screen.
>> Pull that up so everybody can see. >> Just, uh, as I pull that up, I will say nothing has changed. did run his initial calculation in fact before the last board meeting, but we haven't had any changes since uh since then. So, let's me zoom out here and I will get this when I pull this up. I'll share my
screen. If anybody on anybody can be see it, please let me know so that way I'll try to make adjustments. Um, my daughter tells me that my eyes are getting colder and so why don't you wear your Why don't you wear your glasses? I don't know.
All right. Can we share this here? There we go. Can everyone see uh that fiscal document? >> Yes. Little little small need to be a little bit bigger.
>> I don't see it. I see it. I see it. >> Okay. >> Okay. Don't worry. >> Oh, there it is. >> Sorry about that. All right. So um starting at the top you take a look and you see this was again as of um about a month ago but nothing we haven't had any changes here so we didn't change that date to make sure it was it was
preserved as the date but the beginning budget for the GME board was around 11.9 million so almost $12 million as beginning budget with salary expenses of 53,000 as I stated in in previous meetings I I am paid by the graduate medical education board part of my
salary comes from this fund and uh roughly 50% to be to be clear uh from this fund other operating expenses that are charged to our charge to the board around $8,000. Those are other in other other things that our office that touches GMBB. So whether is outreach, whether it's u commun other
communications in charge that fund. So new grants as of January of your last meeting was around $1.6 billion. Those were new grants for this this year, this fiscal year with around $2 million in previous grants. So roughly 3.6 $3.5
million or so. That leaves a budget balance left a budget balance of $8,300. Uh $8,38,000, excuse me. Other funds obligated, these are funds that the board obligated in previous fiscal years that carried over into uh upcoming fiscal years. So you
can see for fiscal year 23, which starts for the state of Indiana on July 1 of 2022 of $2.9 million. Then fiscal year 24 that will start on July 1 of 2023 of 1.9 million. And then finally, fiscal year 25, that's the the um current the
current expansion grant fund that carries into 2025 of $270,000. So the current available balance is $3.1 million. On July 1, the board will receive the second part of the appropriation, which is $5 million that was appropriated by the general assembly
back in 2021. Uh the GMBB board received $4 million for the current fiscal year and then five million for the upcoming fiscal year. So, the available balance after July 1 of this year, the limit of about a month and a half, will be $8.1 million. Um, again, that's the funding that will be available as of July 1, but
that $5 million won't hit this hit the GM board's fund until that date. So, as of right now, there's 3.1 million um available. Looking at the applications that are in front of you today for grant consideration, those are programs that won't start until July 1. Uh and so the
current fund balance would support potentially if the board would move forward to approve those applications, uh the fund would support that. >> Okay. If >> anybody has any additional questions, as you can see on this sheet, just kind of keep a running total of the programs uh that have been funded so far. I will
make this available uh publicly on our website or if you need a copy of it, please let me know and I'm happy to email that to you here at a time. We can find time to get that to you. >> So Eugene, >> yes, ma'am. Come July, there's going to be $5 million that has
not been spoken for. >> It's been So, it's been appropriate. It was passed into law. It just hasn't been put into our accounts. That's what I'm >> But is any of that already being used by Okay. So, we have 5 million. >> Correct. None of that at this point. >> Yeah. >> Great question. Thank you.
>> Yeah. Thanks for the clarification. anybody on the call has any questions again please let me know and I'm happy to answer anything that I didn't address didn't address just now >> my question excuse [clears throat] me that I have is um
at this time there are no other appropriations that we have funding um that this one that's coming the 5 million that's coming July one of 2022 that's all we know at this point that will add to our availability of funds.
Beyond that, we'll be talking to that next >> right. It's in the bud. >> Yeah. The next um legislative session to ask for money. So, this >> this will be all we have really for right now that we know for sure. >> Correct. >> That $5 million is coming in July is for
sure. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> And Dr. where I'm trying to focus things device there we go supposed to focus on the speaker as you speak so my apologies I should have moved there we go think that's a little bit better there
>> no good questions because we you know we want to understand what's the future and what is for sure and what is still you know to be determined and where do we need to really leverage our influence as a board to help advance that. So, thanks for clarifying and certainly we've got
new members of the board that relatively new new folks and so these are great questions. Any other comments about the financials that Eugene shared? Any other questions or comments? Okay, wonderful. Well, thanks for that table. I find that really uh helpful the
way you've set that up and organized that for all of us to review. Um, all right. Well, let's go ahead and move into our new business. We have several grants applications today. We um we apologize to the board members for the 300 pages that were sent because we know
that that was a lot to review. Um but thank you for everyone who got their scores in. And I think we'll go through one by one and talk about each of these and then um entertain a motion on on each of these grants. Starting with the southwestern Indiana uh consortium grant
which has Eugene are we going to take these in total um the the southwest or we going to individually um approve family medicine internal medicine and psychiatry you know the applications
>> I'm trying to remember what was done in your stat maybe remembers I'm trying to remember yeah the past they've been evaluated individually >> individually individually and then vote because each each of the agreements will be an individual agreement. Um and so we'll make one one agreement for family
medicine, one for maternal medicine, then one for psychiatry. >> Okay. All right. So let's um go ahead if and talk first then about the family medicine. Um and can you remind us Eugene this is uh this is continuation
grant. to continually expand um I think a 555 if I have that right in family medicine. >> That's correct. >> And um and you everyone had the application to review. Well, just go ahead, >> Joe. As as a point of information, um I believe this may be a situation where we
may look to invoke the rule of necessity if possible, just in case so to ensure that folks on the call who may have a um a a conflict adventure is real or perceived are able to appropriately discuss and score the uh the applications.
>> Yes. Yes. So, uh, as chair, I'd like to invoke that rule of necessity right now because we will need, um, everyone to, uh, participate in the vote so that we can move forward and, uh, given and have enough of a forum to make make the vote. So, yes, thank you. I'd like to invoke that.
>> Well, the will of necessity is in place. Um, anybody on the call, I know for this today, we have Southwest GM consortium, Dr. Beckards, IU School of Medicine, uh, potentially may have a conflict. Everybody has identified their conflict. So, thank you um everybody, community
and and IU School of Health. Uh those conflicts have been identified and again the chairman woman chairwoman her has invoked the rule. We are good to go. Okay. Wonderful. Um so I wanted to open it up for discussion if there were as folks reviewing there were any concerns,
questions, things that we should raise and discuss as a group um around that application. C Dr. work. >> You started [clears throat] to ask this question um at the beginning, but and I apologize because I'm relatively new to
the board and in the whole process, but this is what's confusing to me about these applications is where is where is what is being requested in the line of what has already happened and in regards to south um southern Indiana GME. So
what is being because those programs are up and running and we supported that. So, how does this play into that whole picture? And I understand it's you who called it a continuation grant. I just I'm I should have called you beforehand
and asked you this question, but I didn't. So, I'm asking it now if somebody can explain to me where this grant fits into the big picture of what has already happened and what is going to happen. >> Yes. Steve, do you want to fill in I if
I can't I don't have the grant up in front of me. I'm trying to watch the group and also but I think this this grant was approved as a new program grant was the 500,000 back in 2017 >> 17 >> 17 I was going to say 18. Okay, 2017.
>> Yeah, there were three in in 2017. So the southwestern GME consortium received three program development grants for $500,000 a piece for psych for psychiatry program, family medicine and internal medicine. And then from that continued on with the development of
their program with the first grant for each of the let me ask correction. the first family medicine and psychiatry grants were received or applied for and received starting with the program to start in July of 2019 and then a term medicine uh apply for an applicant apply for a grant and receive initial funding
in 2020 of July one of 2020 and so uh Dr. Becker I'll let you uh step in and provide any additional details that I may have left out. >> Yeah. All right. real quick. Good afternoon for joining us.
>> That's okay. So, the three programs were new programs um um in the consortium in southwestern Indiana and our IU sponsored programs. Um we are currently this coming year the match for the medicine program will have brought in
the third year of the program. So, this will be the first year that we'll have three full years of residents in that program. The psychiatry program originally started with four residents and then the second year um that was bumped up to six a year. So that program
has six a year for four years and we are accepting our our first fourth year. We'll have all four years in the psych program starting July of this year. The family medicine program uh is graduating
its first group of residents um in June of this year. So that's the status of what our three new programs in our region. >> Does that answer your question? You're asking about >> why are we why are we granting more money if we've already established
programs and funded the establishment those of those programs? Where does this request come in the request for more money? So, I think um the way the way we've thought about it as a board, I think, and um Eugene, help me if if I misspe on
any of this, is that we we help the programs get started. We fund them to get established, and then they are able to apply for expansion grants up through, I think, the time until they've graduated that first cohort or like if
it's a four-year program, four years of of expansion funding. If it's a three-year program, three years of expansion funding uh for each individual slot to help during that time where they are um do not have the funding from the f federal.
>> And is this expansion from like the four to six psychiatry residents or just expanding the program from the first few years to the subsequent? >> Okay, >> the second. >> All right. >> It's the perhead. So there's three types of grants, right? feasibility
development and then this grant to help with operations. Is that what you were >> to help with what >> with the with the with the is the 40,000 per >> 45 sorry >> to help >> that until they they get their cap they
get their funding. >> So it's as much a say sustainability grant functionally as it is expansion >> well expanding the full number. >> Yes. They're expanding from the origin of the program, I guess, is the way you might think about it. And that do you want to say something? Sure something?
>> Yes. I I I really appreciate your questions because I think it is very confusing and uh and I guess I I just want to be sure that I'm looking at it the right way, too. So, the reason that we discuss these um every time they're needed is because there's no guarantee
the money is there. Is that the reason that it comes up? because we know at the beginning when we award these grants that then you the goal is to fund them through you know the the slots so people graduate. >> Um but is the reason that we have to they have to apply every time is to make
sure the money is there. >> That's essentially correct. And so going back and I can pull back up the uh I'll share my screen again pull back up the the fiscal and thank you for those who emailed. I will get that to you. I'll get that to you as soon as we get done today. So going back to looking at the
funds obligated out where it says FY23 2425 when we the when the board approves a grant essentially we submit it to the state budget agency they verify that the funding is available and then they encumber those funds to ensure that it can pay out through the uh duration of that contract. So as an example you see
the the 25 fiscal year 25 funds obligated pull up another sheet here real quick just so I can kind of give context to that. Um that is for actually for 25 that's a
dollar for uh fiscal year actually it's the wrong screen I apologize I link it here um let me go back to to my spreadsheet I've got 20 sheets open right now uh but essentially the board if the board will approve a grant then the funds are encumbered so that it pays
out for the duration of that contract so for three-year family medicine residency example and Dr. Beckers and the Southwest team's case that start that program would start if we're approved on July 1 of 2022. We would encumber funding for that full program to be paid
through 2025. So that would be uh correction on my math that that would be for $675,000. So that would fund those five slots uh 45,000 times five each of the fiscal years that that fund. So fiscal year 23,
fiscal year 24, fiscal year 25. And that money once it's approved, we put in the contract, it becomes encumbered and then it's available to ensure that as uh we're invoiced that that money is paid. Also, uh keep in mind, I'm sure everybody knows this. So, just to reiterate, for each grantee, there's a
25% matching requirement that's that's in the RFP. So, each of the the entities that receives funding has to provide 25% of the amount funded u of their own of from their own support of their own institution. that help clarify?
>> Yeah, that's helpful. I That's helpful. >> Uh Eugene, can I can I add something? I think as someone who was here at the very beginning, the the initial legislation, the goal was to add 500 spots in the state. And there was a hope that we
would get up to over 20 million a year in state funding, which long-term would support 45,000 for these new programs long term. Now that's you know whether that ever happens or not is debatable.
Um so you know we we basically have been going along and each year requesting um enough to cover the needs of what we have in what is proven to be a very successful program. Um over the past
couple years the board realized that we may well not have enough to fund everything we want to fund. So we have looked as a board at some um scoring metrics. So one of the things the board did in the past few years was to start altering the scores so that new programs
year one could get up to 25 points on the scoring and it's a sliding scale down to the fifth year in which then they would get no additional points. So we have built in something where a brand new program would gain extra points over
one that's been established for five years. So those are the two things I think historically over the past few years have occurred. >> Yeah, thanks for that clarification Dr. Becker. That that is yeah I for uh
recall that we we did sort of prioritize so that more points would when we get into that competitive environment if that happens and we have to decline grants and the newer programs who've just established get them would be more likely to be awarded.
>> So I apologize let me ask one more time. So, southern Indiana got the initial um >> develop revelopment grant which is million dollar >> developed it and then is coming back because established those residents are
metriculating through their years but additional funding to fund them to metriculate. That's why they're coming back for more money is to support them through their graduation. >> Correct. >> Once once
once that initial class graduates out, then Southern Indiana won't come back and ask for additional funding. >> I I don't think we've been as firm as that. We haven't gotten it. Okay. >> They can continue to ask as long as we have money. We could continue to grant
it. We could we could keep these going >> as long as we want. is as long as we have the money and there's not somebody else asking us for money. >> Correct. Okay. That's the way right now. >> Okay. Great. >> And the scoring priority would help us phase out people programs that are older
if it comes to competition >> and unless southern Indiana ask us or anybody else um ask us for more money. We wouldn't give them more money to to sustain expand those programs. They have to come back and ask us for
>> correct. Okay. application. >> Thank you. >> And every year, >> right? Okay. >> Yeah. >> Thank you [clears throat] for asking that. >> Eugene, you had said that the f when you initially find the grant, it's like all the funds are already in covered for the successive years until they graduate
out. So, are these funds that are being asked for already in the funds obligated for like 23 24 or >> No, they're not. These are just proposals at this point. These are requests. These are responses to uh there's three request requests for proposal for each of the funding bucket.
To give some just historical context back in 2016 when the board first came together consult uh contractor with tripbach uh Paul the founder CEO of trip on is on the call today uh looking at for the uh the economic impact impact study but tripbach was selected out of
uh three vendors who applied to essentially work with the board to develop a GMBB expansion plan for Indiana. So, those three funding buckets that we talked about, uh, feasibility grant, $75,000 for one-year grants for entities who were interested in potentially starting a GME program and
wanted to work, uh, use that state funding to evaluate whether they should could start and sustain a GM program. The board had 11 respondents to that from across the state. From that, some did start programs, others said that they couldn't find it feasible. Program development is the second bucket.
$500,000 two-year grants that allow entities who decide we're going to start a a GME program, an expansion program, a question, a new GME program to have that funding available to pay for technical cost, startup cost to get that program off the ground. Then the final bucket, which is the largest funding bucket the
board has funded uh to date, is the expansion grant. Used to be called development and expansion grant. We uh shortened that. That's why I have more more letters than you need. Uh but that's $45,000 per slot per year. and the board again those slot those are it's uh this is going back and Dr.
Becker will know this Dr. Becker has been working with the legislature and working on this uh this this process almost a decade now with 45,000 being what the stakeholders the general assembly agreed to be amount that would allow entities hospitals other
organizations conducting residencies to uh be make it financially sustainable I think some numbers have been floated out and Dr. In fact, correct me if I'm wrong or anybody else who remembers I think it was as low as 25,000 had been discussed 30,000 but 45,000 was the amount uh that the general assembly the stakeholders
and then trip on lock our consultant uh landed on to be the amount for each slot per each slot each year. I gave a longer answer than you will but I hope that >> and we have choices going forward if we start to get tight we can lower that. Um
this is a we haven't had to be in that um to that situation but eventually we could all right well this is a good discussion because I do think it is it is a little confusing um it is a little hard to
track sometimes and so uh thank you for raising the questions and creating the dialogue so we can further understand it. Um [clears throat] so Eugene I'm so the family medicine let's so let's look at family medicine and isolation and
then um any particular questions about that application that application for the family medicine is is for >> oh $675,000 to be funded over a three-year period beginning July 1 of 2022 and concluding
on June 30th of 2025 that will support uh five res Five positions each year. >> Yeah. >> Five slots. >> Yeah. 675,000. Any discussion about the family medicine application uh itself.
>> Okay. Hearing [clears throat] none. Um >> I'll go ahead and read the scores for that. Then let me go ahead and read. So for the family medicine uh application from the Southwest Graduate Medical Education Consortium, uh I will just go through averages. uh here
uh so uh I'll read what the criterion was and then I'll read what the average score from each of the board members for public record the members who are scored are Dr. Hearn do uh Dr. Hearn Mrs. Roel Dr. Knight Dr. Ward Dr. Becker Dr.
Houndstein Mr. Mclenn and Dr. Shockley for residency program development in an underserved area of Indiana. Again, the data being based on county rankings from Johnson Robert Wood Johnson Foundation data. The average possible of a 20 average score is a five and again going
back to previous conversation that's because priority is given to um to areas who are in underserved areas metropolitan area within this was not considered that and Linda went through got that average. Thank you. Uh, rural program development and a rural area of
in residency program development in a rural area of Indiana based on population to primary care provider ratio again using Robert Blue Johnson data uh possible 20 the average was a 10 residency program development including a collaborative approach uh such as a
consortium FQC hospital systems critical access hospital etc. possible of 20, the average was a 19. Priority priority score for uh fiveyear and newer programs, the uh possible was 25, the average there was a 15. Strength
of application, faculty commitment, letters of support, etc. Possible 20, the average was 19. So out of average of 105 with again a 5% a five point bonus for uh for the underserved and especially for the new programs, the
average score was a 68. Perfect. All right. Well, I'd like to go ahead and entertain a motion to approve this request for 675,000. >> Everybody go up there. Thank you. That
is I see a hand up. >> We do have members of the public joining today. So, if anybody has a question, but that is actually Dr. Henstein who was >> Dr. Henstein. >> Yeah. Just wondering if Steve and I need what do we need to do as far as having
conflicts here. >> Yeah, we um I invoked the rule of necessity um just a little bit ago because we we'll need uh both of your votes um I think today. Is that right or no? >> I'm just I'm looking through the room. So once if we have
>> Well, hang on. Let us recount. >> So let's see Dr. >> No, actually uh to be I'm just looking through the room. So, uh, please correct me if I'm wrong, board members, but, uh, board members who I am looking at that I do not believe have a conflict would be
Dr. Ward, Dr. Knight, Dr. Hearn, uh, Mrs. Roel, Mr. Mclan, and Dr. Shockley, I do not believe you have a conflict. So, Dr. Hstein and Dr. Becker, if you would like to recuse yourselves and not vote on this, uh, you can do so.
>> Okay. What's the best way to do that? just to exit and you will call us back or have Linda text us. >> Uh Linda, if you wouldn't mind texting. Yeah, we go ahead and exit and then we'll uh >> go off screen. >> Yeah, go off screen. >> Let's trust.
>> Let's go off screen and then we'll let you know when it's time to get back on. >> Hey, excuse me, Eugene. Um this Rob I just so I am not part of the family practice with Jasper but I am a 14th member of Sigme.
>> Uh okay well in that case then yeah Dr. Becker and Dr. Henstein we need you to come back and we do need you to participate. I I my apologies Rob I completely spaced on on that fact. So again we will need Dr. Houndstein and Dr. Becker to to participate. Again my
apologies for not remembering that. It's up to you. >> So, we're still under the rule of necessity and so if they >> over both of them or one of them >> um one both we're still both can participate back. >> Yeah, we're we're under the rule of necessity. So everybody
>> All right. So we're back reinvoking reinvoking >> just to trust me verify. >> Well, it's a Thank you for the clarification. This gets a little um Yeah, we have to think about all the relationships and how they interface and then our tell we'll wait for Dr. com to
pop back in. And uh >> and while we're waiting on that, I just remembering this conversation in the past um particularly you uh calling out just some historic how we treat these particular scores um and that what scores are acceptable
scores and not acceptable scores and I I just want to >> be consistent with history. Uh so is there a comment on that or no? >> No. Yeah. No, I think it's a good question. we have um had the benefit as
a board of being able to approve essentially I'm trying to think almost almost all the applications there may have been some exceptions and so um it's certainly our judgment uh as a board people can vote you know whatever they
so choose in terms of looking at the application as quality and and and whatnot but there we do not have a threshold. >> Okay very good thank you. >> Yes. I'm sorry. Final thing. I'm wrong. It won't be the final thing. Um [laughter]
uh is um in regards to uh the total ask. I forgot to look at this, but the total ask for today. Everything that we we approved everything. >> Is it under the $8 million? >> Yeah. July one, the 8 million. We have
we have the funds to support all of these requests today. So we are not in a competitive environment with these >> um if we have the funds available. >> Okay. >> Um just quick diversion I want to uh
before we go to the vote I would like to introduce uh our new commissioner of the Indiana Commission for Higher Education, Mr. Chris Lowry. >> Thank you. >> Uh he showed up just here to to meet. Uh this is his first time coming to a board meeting and so uh you've been in the position about two months now.
>> A whole month. Yes. a month to two days, but who's counting? Right. >> Chris has been barntorming the state uh meeting with university presidents, really getting engaged in uh everything that the Commission for Higher Education offers and what we're doing. So, I appreciate you being here for this meeting today and allow you opportunity
to just remark. >> It it really wasn't to interrupt you, but I managed to do that already. So, uh but I just wanted to come by and say hello. Wanted to thank you for your service. Um and I was trying to catch you. I I was I I walked back. I thought I don't want him to even have to stand
up, you know, and I was going to try to text, but you caught me in time. Um, yeah, I just wanted to come by and say hello and and thank you. And I really would like to have been around here for your meeting, and I'm I'm literally double booked uh half the day, but um um
please let me know how I can be of service and support. And um gosh, there's several things share with you, but you have an important meeting and you don't need me to take your time on Friday afternoon. ask a little bit about your background with Ivy Tech. Sure. That's tied to somewhat to what what the
board's working through with uh especially when it comes to to training and education. Sure. Beth I know people like Beth Robo as a as the CEO of Health Link. >> I'm also a trustee for the IvyTech. Um Valpo. >> Oh, okay. Okay. That's probably where
I've seen your name before. >> Probably the most wanted >> and maybe Well, I was going to say my face is normally there from the post office, you know. Yeah. poster there. Uh but um yeah, so so thanks. Real quickly, I've been with Commission, as I said, a whole month now. Uh I was with IvyTech
for almost eight years, the last five of which five and a half as the chief workforce officer. Um six years ago, the Indiana General Assembly created the position I held, which was the parallel to the provos to to have a chief academic and chief workforce officer.
and uh prior to that had served as a as a chancellor for one of the big regions that the college used to have. But most of my professional life was in the private sector and a company some of you may have familiarity with Hill and Brand down in Batesville was with them 20
years um including when they owned Hill Rom the medtech company and so forth. But uh was involved there for as I said 20 years. did public policy before I left there became an inquisitive we split became the sequisitive company and
uh prior to that uh I like to think when I was a youngster for about uh 10 years I was in public policy in Washington DC and the state house and so all this has been somewhat of convergence for me professionally and um yes so as you said
Eugene I've spent a lot of time the last month being involved with presidents a lot of the independent college presidents uh many employers a lot of fs state house and have found myself double booked on more than one occasion. So, thanks for thanks for the grace to let
me at least kind of stop by really quickly. No problem. Real quickly, and I'll just add this uh to some of the conversation that part of what this board is doing is not just expanding the opportunities for more doctors to conduct residencies at state here in Indiana. But as a workforce development piece, uh some of the work the board has
done with the consultant they hired several years ago, trip who's actually on the call today. Uh as a workforce development piece where we're getting new doctors, the number of new doctors, how many new positions that creates and the economic impact to a community, I believe, and I don't have the RFP in front of me, but it was roughly three to
four million dollars. Paul Hotton's on the call, so if you want to jump in, Paul, and correct that number. Uh but it all ties into some of that work you did at IvyTech. Secondly, I believe you had a relationship with uh one of our former board members who was our chair for six years. He's the part of the board a
couple of months ago, but uh Dr. Tyson it not Yeah, he's a good friend. Uh so stay for the jury right there. And uh Tim and I have been known to conspire on some crazy ideas once in a while. um including as you all may know his strong
push at Margaret Mary Health to really integrate youth into experiences at hospital and I speak really personally about this since they were this tall our 31-year-old son and his very best friend who is now a doctor an ER doctor in
Richmond at Reed um that young man began his journey because of Tim Putton and uh as a teenager in high school experiencing a lot of Margaret Mary health and yeah that we we schemed around a lot of that when I was school
board president pushing for a lot of this kind of work with pill and brand and companies and so forth and yeah Tim was a a co-conspirator things that maybe seemed a little out there at first we were doing I should have remembered that
I bumped into Tim over the weekend he was he was kidding me I I passed him on a bicycle early in the morning whatever morning that was I think But and then hours later I passed him again and he said, "Are you still writing it?" And I said, "No, this is round two." But u
Josh go thanks for reminding. Gosh, I don't know what God fortunate Dr. Ford and Dr. Knight have joined the board recently and and appreciate them joining the board and then Dr. uh Dr. Hearn, Mr. Robo and then uh Dr. Putnham were on the board initially and so foundational
pieces and then continuing pieces of the board and thanks to general assembly the governor's office and each of the associations that are represented on the board but putting people in place who are really excited. Let me not forget our student adviserss uh Sarah and Kristen who bring in perspective from being medical students and so it's a
well-rounded group here. Everybody told me when I started imagine the board seven years ago, you're going to do it. A lot of big personalities, adopted, everybody from this board is embrace me as we move forward with this mission or expand here across the state. So that's wonderful. >> They try to scare me. It's like, oh [laughter] >> yeah, scary.
>> All they can do is simply tell me no. So, but this has been a great group to work with and lovers was really excited about working with what they've done so far, just the impact. And as we sit here today really hope it's a good position to continue to over 100 new new
residency slot position extra 103 new medical new doctors in Indiana over 330 residency slots and almost a $30 million commitment thanks to the individuals who are sitting around this table. >> It's amazing. By the way, Teresa
mentioned this group yesterday. She and I had a chance to grab lunch and catch up and yeah she mentioned she was asking so what's going on? Well, there's this meeting. It's probably going to just be really quick and you know, I'm going to be on the run. Literally, I'm on the run. I just ran to the governor's office. I went I've got to see them
before 1:00. So, um anyway, but thanks for having me. >> Wonderful. Thank you. >> Thank you. And and count me as an advocate and partner, please. Yeah. Not just officially, but personally. >> Wonderful. Thank you so much for stepping back. >> Appreciate it. >> We appreciate commission support. Thank you.
>> All right. Thanks. Be well. Thank you. Thank you, Joe. >> No problem. No, that's wonderful that it's wonderful. He stopped in to to greet us. So, >> Dr. House, thank you, Linda. Dr. House thing is back and we can move forward. >> So, I'm reinvoking re reinvoking the
rule of necessity and uh and so then we are ready um I think since we didn't have any discussion to entertain a motion to approve the um Southwest Family Medicine grant for a total of 675,000 for those five slots. So moved.
>> Second. >> Thank you. All in favor? >> I I >> Okay. Any oppose? >> All right. That motion carries. We've approved the first of the Southwest grants. We'll move on to uh next the internal medicine. [clears throat]
Eugene, can you describe for us the total volume uh total dollars for that one and the number of slots? >> Yeah. So the total dollars for the 48 positions for the internal medicine uh residency program is $2,160,000. There's another eight positions for transitional year uh that is a
commitment being requested of $360,000. Uh so that is a total of $2,520,000 uh being requested for the internal medicine program for the southwest Indiana GME consortium. >> Great. >> Okay. I have a question.
>> Yes, please. So that if that's 2 million, you said 2 >> 2.5. >> So now we've eaten up 3.1 of the 5 million. >> Uh >> that we're getting >> if you were to improve this particular one then. Yes.
>> Any discussion that we want to have around that? >> And then how much is psychiatry? >> Psychiatry is $1,80,000. >> Okay. So that means all next year >> it'll be total of 4 million.
>> We got 900,000 for the whole year. >> Okay. >> That's it. >> And but you also had carryover from this current fiscal year. So you still have that. >> How much carryover? >> So right now we're at 3 million. Okay. 1.1. So that will carry over to fiscal
year 23. >> So >> be added on to the five million. Let me see. Do I still have that up on the screen for those? >> Sorry. >> That's all right. That's a good clarification. clarification. >> I just realized I everybody on the call I think I still have that screen open. >> Yeah. So your question you're clarifying
Ben how much if we approve this and we approve the others today how much will we have left? It's 4.1 if we improved everything them is 4.1 and we have in theory we have eight you
said 3.1 by 8.1. So we got we'll have 3 million. I mean, we're used to having a lot of carryover, but I'm thinking >> so if everything were to be approved today, if if all of Southwest Park View and Park
>> Park View, which is $500,000 request, and then community, which is 75, the amount remaining would be, and just quick math here, 3,250,000 would still be available for fiscal year 23. That 68 million balance um includes
everything that could be approved today which would be roughly back math roughly 5 million >> and there's no one else that will potentially come in for the expansion
>> and there is and I can tell you we're coming in for >> we're starting out just yeah there are so to Again, if everybody I'm sure there are people who have read all the minutes from these meetings since 2016
um and Mr. Ro Beth has been very other board members as well but has said at some point we would hit um >> we're hitting the cliff >> hitting the cliff. >> Yeah, we're approaching we're approaching >> to use language from from Dr. Putnham when he was on the board. uh the board operated with in in a in an era might be
the wrong word but operated within abundance and was approaching an era of scarcity and the era of scarcity could be closer than could be here just to be completely transparent I think right at this point as we sit here today with all these where if they were to be approved we're still looking at
Northwest >> and you're looking at the psychiatry up there >> we're looking at and we're looking at Park View >> um >> and so those are discussions that could need to take place in in future in future board meetings. Not agenda items right now, but if we're talking about
it, um I do know their representation from police park you on the call I believe today >> and once we get through the action items of today, maybe we have time to I know we have a hard stop for some board members. So that may be a discussion worth having today or looking at the
future funding committee and we can have discussion to that committee to >> because in theory I think next year was when we're supposed to go up to nine. I'm pulling you guys could talk >> at this point and Dr. Becker alluded to this a little bit ago. uh when you take
a look at the if you take a look at the fiscal impact note which is available on the the board's website uh on our website here at the CH website for the GME board the fiscal note we're in year seven roughly of this expansion and the commitment from the state was to be
roughly I want to say $18 million I think that number back >> already up 18 okay >> no $18 million for a two-year fiscal year commitment so we >> so 9 million >> yeah so three.5 million I believe was a number in year five and then moving to
18 million for years six and seven. Um I can find a copy of that fiscal notes. Uh but to be to to set the size we just we're not we haven't hit that that amount of funding yet that commitment yet. So the question is, do we go ahead and
hit the cliff to be able to prove that we are at the cliff? And if the state wants us to finish up the 500 residents, they're going to have to go back to the original plan. >> Yes.
>> I mean, I think that's where we're at. >> Something. Yeah, that's that's a discussion that the board will need to to have board stakeholders, legislative stakeholders, etc. >> But we have hit a point where
a good a good initiative and things have seen funding that's been provided and showing positive results and more programs are looking to be to be engaged. Also, let me not forget we have IU Health down in Bloomington, their two programs. So, Those are also two uh two
programs that the board has funded for program development grants. Uh you funded them for emergency medicine and internal medicine. Those are two-year grants that are scheduled to complete 2024. So looking forward to 2024 uh which would be fiscal year 25. If those
programs are going off the ground, then adding in everything else we just discussed there would need to be how much of a commitment does the board need? Yeah. And that's where again going further in the agenda looking to establish the >> yeah the committee uh to to discuss the
to discuss the expansion of question I'm looking at the wrong agenda but the committee to discuss funding for future funding in concert with the potential of an economic impact analysis. All this is why we're going to have this to go take to the legislature in 2023 and say look this is this program has worked. It's
doing what you intended it to do. >> Um and then >> and we need more money. Yeah, we're going to to if we're going to sustain the programs in essentially in perpetuity. Correct. >> Right. >> And then if if if otherwise we'll have to make some decisions. Um but today we
do have enough to fund and then we have we would have as I understood it is it 3 million? >> 3 million. Yeah. Roughly 3.2 billion. >> 3.2 million for the rest of the >> that would be now through >> through the end of that would be through the July of 2023.
>> Okay. press June 30th of 2023, >> right? And we don't have a backup napkin expectation of what's coming >> really >> for that that could use up >> to point there's a new we have and I think Luke alluded to this so that you we have new people Dr. Dr. Brown's
retired he has been the >> G&B champion this funding has come from the master tobacco settlement fund and he Dr. others in the room know better than me. Uh but he has been the >> and there's no one and maybe >> we have
>> a lot of there's not a clear picture of who's taken it dependably >> there's conversations that need to happen and we can again discuss that as part of next meeting legislative legislative uh legislative impact Dr. My apologies. >> No, that's right. I think I I think I
know this, but I didn't say it out loud. You can correct me if I'm wrong. Um, so what we approve today um then goes in the books as obligated funds for for future years for each of the up to because some of it is in four years in the future, right? Approving positions
for psychiatry >> four years. Correct. >> Um so that that takes us into even into fiscal year um 26, I guess. Is that right? Correct. >> And so, um, that obligation then just it
does draw down what we would have to use in future years because we already have that obligation. Correct. Right. But that doesn't necessarily uh that that really we if things continue the way it's been,
we continue to get an additional five million each year. Um if things continued the the way they've been is that >> but we were supposed to get more if we understand >> to do the plan >> but I'm just saying yeah if we continue at the current >> yeah it's the it's the will of the
general assembly the uh you know the house of waste committee senate fiscal committee >> and what happens with our office so again going back to just something I forgot to touch on this real quick when somebody asked about the the scoring metrics my apologies for being late on saying this reason we have scoring metrics are in place is Because the
commission is admin board is administered by the commission for higher education and for any programs any grants that we administer. We have to have a scoring rubric to evaluate why and how we gave set funding. So that's the reason for that. We got that question years ago. Why can't we just approve the denial? Well, that's because
it's a CH thing. U going back to that going back to the question with the budget. We will make our legislative ask and that's is where we incorporate the amount. Your timing could not be more better. Joshua Garrison, everybody, our associate commissioner for >> Wait a minute. Why are you leaving?
>> Um, well, just to to get context so get you warmed up, but we're we're discussing uh the potential for our fiscal ask for uh for 2023 and talking to the board about how we will go to the legislature to ask for continuation of funding and
looking at what we will need to continue to expand uh GME expansion. And so these conversations today, knowing what you're going to take a look at today and then knowing what programs again in this discussion, we've talked about Park View, we've talked about Northwest Indiana psychiatry, we've talked about IU Health in Bloomington, not having
that math right in front of me, but I can tell you if we had 9 million over two more years, let's say that they gave us that. I don't know whether that I don't think that would even cover everything coming in the future. >> I think I agree in the north >> expansion grants like correct. Yeah,
they're gonna Yes, they're gonna >> So, yeah. Dr. Knight, >> so have we and again historically because I'm relatively new to this group, has there been consideration rather than paying for a full four years in a request like this for for a renewal
of for example the psychiatry program? Have we ever looked at approving for two years instead of the full four years so that there's less obligation? And I I just >> we looked at that, but the thing is then how do you commit? I think yeah, what we
looked at was going less than 45 to try to make it. >> So covering all four years, but less per year. >> I don't know if Judge wants to say anything, but there's I mean there's a strategy here on do we use it all up? I
mean in the past we haven't used it. >> Yeah. And the state attitude is if you haven't used it, you don't need anymore. >> So, >> so is there a benefit potential benefit to having us get to that? >> Yeah. And there's just no guarantee that
their funding will continue any time. So, I would hate to leave an organization with the full bill in the final however many years of the residency. So, I think the [clears throat] way it's done now and covering it all up front is probably best way to do it just to ensure that the
no one putting a bill they did not expect. Um so um I was I was just going to say that I do think is it okay if I >> Yeah, please please go ahead. >> I think that as we as we look up at the upcoming budget cycle getting a number
is going to be super important. There's right now not a chair of ways and means. Um they're interviews right now. So as soon as that has been said we're going to get in the long line to go meet with whoever that person is. So, we'll go ahead and get that done as well as we
can update our ask at the commission. So, if we can get that as part of um not just the commission budget, but the governor's budget. If we can get that in there, that is a much better thing. So, the if we can have an ask or somewhere settled on by when's the next board
meeting? >> July week of August. August. >> Perfect. So if we could have a suggested ask in that August meeting so that can then be incorporated in the commission's budget request and then hopefully in the governor's budget request that will be
much more likely to work note to our stakeholders. So hospital association thank you for being here today Andy um with the hospital association uh we have state primary healthcare association hospital association state medical association uh both the schools of medicine uh the
osteopathic association and about getting anybody. They're going to cover everybody. But all those have rep all those organizations, those groups have representation on this board and also work in concert with us going to the governor's office, going to legislators to make the same case that we're trying
to make here with this board for uh not just continuation of funding, but an expansion of funding. So everybody's we try to working in concert. It's been great to have everybody at the table, and that's part of what we start doing now is making sure we bring everybody at the table. again to Andy Loops up on the
call. Um any other stakeholders who I did not mention? Um I I apologize if you're on the call. Go ahead, Dr. >> Um so I've got kind of comments and questions. Um so in regards to this particular proposal that's in front of
us right now. >> Yes. >> Um I I don't know if I anyway I'm all in favor of continuing the internal medicine support of the internal medicine residency programs. I have concern about supporting the transitional year program um as it when
we go back to the prioritization of award selection that really doesn't fall into the categories that are our priorities. Um uh so I I don't know if we can pull those out or not. Um is one question. Uh second the second question
and concern is so as we go to what you were just proposing coming to August and having our request and do we spend all of our money or do we not spend all of our money is that we've got a legislature that is telling hospitals in our state to cut cost of health care. Um
and so a a legislature that's not wanting to give hospitals more money which this is money to hospitals. Um, yes, it goes to education, but it's to the sponsoring institutions, so it's to hospitals. Um, and so, um, uh, I guess I
have concern about that. Um, and so I I'm not, you know, if we're supposed to spend our money, then I'll support the transitional year, um, uh, ask because that'll help us spend all this money. Um, but if we need to save it for other
the family medicine program in Bloomington, presuming that they're going to come back and ask us for expansion grant, um, I want to add money to support a family medicine program um, over a transitional year program. Not that we don't need more
anesthesiologists and radiologists and etc. But it's not our priority. >> Yeah. And it's not on our list of our initial specialties. I when we delineated that way at the inception of the board to your point Kurt. >> Yeah.
>> Trish if I could just clarify and Kurt your the reasoning still is the same but this is not a transitional year it's preliminary medicine but again it's a launch to a different program but I just want to clarify it's not a a ACG
accredited transitional program. >> Thank you for that clarification. Okay. just kind of clarify. I mean, I think spending as much of the money as possible actually tells a better story than holding money back. Um, for the
most part, the legislature has been fairly supportive of the workforce initiatives that this board is trying to achieve. So, while I think they while there is that concern obviously on the hospital cost side, um, I think they see
it differently. Okay. Um, and so that would be how we would approach it. So I I you know, if we have the need out there, I think we can make a strong case for increasing the dollars moving forward. Um,
>> and and that is helpful for me and partly why I asked the question because I needed to hear that. >> Yeah. And I think we one other thing is that we're in the middle of the commission for public health and the workforce issue is huge with that. There's a whole subcommittee
>> um on that. So as much Yeah, I >> there is likely going to be a lot of dollars put into work for healthcare workforce in this next budget bienium um that I I see this as a component of that overall. >> Very good. Thank you.
>> Yeah. I mean, this Rob I I want to back up what Andy was saying. I think it's really important for people to to as much and as difficult as this legislature has been in their focus on health care and hospitals and everything's the hospital's fault. One of the things that is clear is that they
still understand the importance of residency programs needing doctors in our state and the and the success of this program throughout the state. the expansion has been um second to none and and it's an easy story to tell. So, I
would I would hate to see us not spend this money and be able to go back and show them the results of what we've done and the and the work that's been done, not only throughout the state, but in these collaborations with multiple hospitals, which you know, sometimes the
legislature thinks that we all hate one another and the reality is we don't. We work together pretty darn well. And so, this is a good example of that. I I would really strongly encourage people to let's let's let's spend this money so we've got a story to tell when we go back to say, "Hey, this is working.
Don't give up on us." Now, >> we do um as an agency working in concert with the state budget agency, and Josh can speak to this, that we we get questions when money doesn't get spent. And so, what one thing that the board has really done is work with us to put together not just metrics, but to make
them uh quick quick conversations that we can have that show all the details. So we do have these we have one pages which are two-sided documents that one side makes the case as to the why and how we got to this point and the other side shows the outcome how the money is being spent where we are uh Dr. Plutton
used to always spoke the fact that this is a marathon, not a sprint. So, we have to justify that to uh folks. We call it across the street. We're across the street from the state house. Uh but we continue to bring into context how we got started and how this train got rolling and where we are now. Then we
can explain well that's why you see this fund balance here. However, the board meets quarterly. Here's what's coming down the how here's where here's where G&P starts. It starts on July 1. And so grants are awarded that. That's we've been able we've had done a good job Josh
and and the the executive team have done a good job of of working with those stakeholders. Um and again now we're at this point where we're hitting that supply and demand situation I guess is the easiest way to put it. >> And we knew eventually we were going to come most likely come to it. And one of
the things that we do need to do better on our end and I and we'll bring it to the board in August is explaining um how why there is a rollover each session to the budget staff agency staff because even though it's it's
allocated for future years, it looks like there's money remaining. So that's something that we have to do a better job because budget agency staff are the gatekeepers for most everything. So we need we will work on that. um uh to get that explanation clear and that will be
more of Eugene and I behind the scenes trying to get them to understand look this money is spent we need more money so that's something that we have to do we recognize we have to do a better job >> okay well for the sake of time I'm going to this is a really robust discussion and I think helpful because we do have some newer board members and you know
I'm new in my role and and so just getting some group think around this and making sure we're all on the same page especially as we're coming upon such a critical time um potenti potentially when we might have all our funds obligated then uh you know I I think this is a really healthy and useful
discussion. Are we um at a place now where we're >> did we do we do a motion? >> Can I entertain a motion um regarding the uh application from Southwest for internal medicine? And is this inclusive of the preliminary?
>> This will be inclusive of the preliminary. Yes. >> Yeah. Can we do that? You're saying we can. It's it's wrapped within we have just to give context in prior times we have funded the board is funded uh with it include with both included. >> Okay. So I'd like to entertain a motion
to approve that grant. >> So move. >> Thank you Dr. Knight. Second >> second. People seconding. Thank you. Thank you Dr. Ward. Um any discussion or any further clarifications on this?
All right. Okay. All in favor say I. >> Okay. Any opposed? No. With none opposed and everyone in favor, we will go ahead and approve this
uh this grant for the internal medicine at Southwest and we'll go ahead and move on to the psychiatry program. Eugene, can you share with us the total dollars and positions for that one? So the total hours in position is $1,80,000 for six positions over four years from be funded
from July 1 of 2022 through June 30th of 2026 for a total of 20 24 positions for uh psychiatry program. It's located in Vincent, Indiana. >> Wonderful. All right. Um let's open up discussion or questions on this one.
Maybe we hit our threshold there, but just want to make sure there's nothing on this one. All right. Um, like to entertain a motion to approve the Psychiatry Southwest grant for today. >> I move it be approved.
>> Motion from Dr. Ward. A second. >> Second. Thank you, Beth. Um, any other discussion or clarification? All right. All in favor of approving the psychiatry grant raise your hand or say I. >> I.
Any opposed? All right, that also carries. And so we have approved all of the Southwest Consortium grants today. So um Steve and others drinks next time we're all together
>> that you can carry this good news back to your teams and uh we um you know and thank you for your leadership down there and all that's come out of that region. I mean it really is amazing. So, um, thank you. >> All right.
>> Can and I realized we were already into approving and seconding the we had clarified what the scores were on average for the family medicine but not for medicine. I think it would be appropriate for
>> the records what what those scores were and if we could do that for the next two. >> Yeah, we could go back. Can you share with us? >> I do apologize. That's on me. I did not. So, my apologies. So let me read that for psychiatry for the expansion grant. Residency program development in underserved areas of Indiana uh based on
Robert Wood Johnson data possible of 20. The average was a 20. Residency program development in rural areas of Indiana based on population of primary care provider ratio. Robert Robert Wood Johnson data possible of 20 average of a 10. Residency program development involving a collaborative approach approach [clears throat]
such as a consortium FQC hospital systems critical access etc. possible of 20 the average was 19. Priority score for programs five years and newer a possible of 25 there's an average of 15 and strength of application including faculty commitment letters of recommendation financial commitment etc
possible of 20 max of 20 excuse me possible u the average was a 19 for a total score of 83 out of 105 with the southwest Indiana G&B consortium a psychiatry application for the internal medicine application same metrics apply again we'll read them
since I'm required to do so residency program development in underserved areas of Indiana, possible 20, average of 20, program development and rural areas, possible 20, average of 10. Program development involving a collaborative approach including uh such as a consortium, FQAC, hospital system,
critical access, other possible 20, average 18, priority score for five-year and newer programs, possible 25, average of 20, and the final metric is strength of application possible a maximum of 20. And the average was 19 for a total score of 87 out of 005 for the Southwest
Indiana GMA Consortium Internal Medicine Residency Grant application. And again, thank you for uh inviting me to read those scores for the record. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> Apologize for that oversight again. >> Yeah. >> All right. Thanks for getting us back on track. So, let's move to our next item
of new business, which is the program development grant for Park View. um they submitted a development grant to start a new OBGYn residency. I know there's some members on the call today from Park View affiliated with this program and um want
to hear from the board if there's any questions uh around that particular application or clarifications that we need to discuss as a board. Anyone on this on virtual don't want to forget you all.
Okay. Um, you want to go through that? >> You have all the scores for that? >> I do have the scores. Uh, let me also say thank you to everybody on the board for getting your scores to me. Uh, and Linda, thank you for staying on top of that. I really appreciate it. Uh, yeah,
got that done. And and again, thank you all so so much for that. So, let's go through the Park View Health program development application for the OBGY development of an OBGYn residency program and different metrics for each of the [clears throat] Yes.
>> Do you want us to sign off before you go over those scores? >> Dr. Stephanie and myself. >> Yes. You're not uh not being on the board, you're a member of the public, so you have uh all rights to stick around and hear any discussion, scoring,
announcements, etc. Thank you for asking that. >> Thank you. >> Right. Uh let's go through the score. So for residency program development in an underserved area of Indiana, again using Robert Wood Johnson Foundation data, a possible of 20, the average was a 15. A
residency program development in a rural area of Indiana, possible of 25, the average was 10. Residency program development involving a collaborative approach such as a consortium FQAC hospital system, critical access hospital, etc.
Um uh possible 20 average of 16. Uh native naive specialty new program and or density of residency in the area possible of 20. The average of uh score was 18. And then strength of application
average score of 20. Correction possible average possible average possible maximum of possible of 20. The average score was 18. Out of 105 the total score for the Parkview Health application was a 76. And let's see anybody does anybody have
any questions about about those scores. Believe we had a comment. >> Okay, sounds good. >> Sorry about that. >> Just reading the some of the chat here. Um, okay. So, I'm sorry, Jud, can you repeat the total?
>> Yeah, total was 70 uh 76 out of 105. Okay, wonderful. So, there was no discussion. Um, any uh like to entertain a motion? >> I'll I'll make a motion that we approve the Park View Health program development grant for OBGYn. >> Thank you, Dr. Knight. Can I have a
second? >> Second. >> All right. Thank you. Um, any discussion or clarification before we take a vote? All right. Um so uh all in favor of approving this application say I or
raise your hand. >> I I >> All right. This all this grant also carries. This motion carries and we will approve that grant. Congratulations to the folks at Parkview and thanks for joining the call. Um >> thank you.
>> All right. >> Yeah. Thank you. We're excited about that. Um want to jump to >> Yeah. So, can I move um Paul Umbak was uh I know is on the call and he um Oh, yeah. There you are. Gotcha. And I know
can I u move around the agenda a little bit if it's okay and skip over the community health network intern u internal medicine feasibility grant and jump right to the economic impact analysis because we got that RFP since Paul is going to have to jump off the
call here in a couple minutes I think if we have any clarifications or questions. >> Yeah. Yes. I really appreciate the opportunity. I'm sorry to jump in with a flight from the Mountain West home on a Friday. It's beautiful here. I could
probably stay another day or two, but I've been gone all week. Uh I want to thank you for the opportunity to present a proposal. We've been involved since the beginning of the the program and nationally we've been involved with about a hundred communities that have
either started medical schools or expanded uh graduate medical education. And I think the Indiana program is one of the ones I'm the most proud of working with Steve Becker, working with Beth Robble, working with really all many, many of you. uh it's a national
model and I think this um report is so important not just to tell the legislature how important uh growing the position workforce has been in the economic and the social impact but really to be a national example of
continuing a program and measuring and tracking the the success. So I am excited about that. I only have I don't want to take too much of your time. I know there's so much that you're going over on the on the programs, but there are three things I wanted to mention
about the proposal. Uh the first is that I think a small working group or a subcommittee would be very helpful uh so that we don't miss some of the things that you really want to tell and some of the stories. Although we've had experience in eight other states with
similar projects uh and we almost every day of our life are measuring the economic and social impact of GME. I want to make sure that we get some input from from members of the board that can volunteer to be a a working group with us. Uh and the second part of that is
really to do interviews with some of the programs so we can get some nuance into the report. Uh I know that the big challenge will be the data and you've done a great job Eugene and others in gathering and tracking but we want to pull the stories in as well and doing
that by interviewing the the different program sites will be really helpful. Uh then there's the economic impact analysis that comes off of the data and comes off of the the interviews. And I feel that that's going to be really important for us to not just say here's
how many jobs and here's how many dollars, here's how much tax revenue. Those are very important metrics, but really um how many physicians have stayed in communities, how many are uh metriculated into um other um how many are coming into the program, how many
are are staying in Indiana, and what kind of social and community impacts are there, especially if some of the graduates stay in rural and underserved areas. And there's some really great metrics that we want to use to show beyond just the dollars of what the cost
savings is and how much it really helps the the state of Indiana to have workforce in uh underserved areas. And that's going to be super important. And then the final thing which we're really excited about is to develop a real compelling report and probably fact
sheets or high quality executive summary that can be used at many levels because if you think about it you have a lot of audiences. You have the audience of course the legislature excellent audience um but you also have all the community partners that you all have
that need to know about this. uh the hospitals are an audience, the FQC's and the network of supporters, your local foundations. I noticed from the uh work that we did initially and listening in today that there's matching funds that
are required. So the people that are providing those funds will need to see the benefit of this uh program. Uh last thing I want to end with is just that you know this is all part of an idea action and impact process that has to
continue and um you might say what comes before idea well it's actually inspiration and spark a little lightning bolt and then what comes after impact which is what our project will be uh after impact comes keep it going and
continue it and uh continue to expand it and and that leads to uh so much benefit. So, I'm really excited about the opportunity to work with you all and to uh have my team uh the same team that was involved early on uh to now get to
measure the economic impact. It's truly an honor to be able to do that. Um, and it's something in our career we look so forward to to be able to go full circle and say and now here's what this has meant to have that many residency slots and also to project uh and we'll do this
project uh as the program continues how many of these uh graduates will go and stay in Indiana and we'll need some data for that and then how many will continue to be physicians on in the long term and and the economic impact of that will be
in the hundreds of millions of dollars and it's going to be it's going to be fun to do that. So, I don't know if we want to do questions. I have a few minutes if that's okay or I can just say that I'm available for questions as I put in the chat if you want to send them to me. Uh, and I can have an offline
conversation, Eugene, with you if that's appropriate. Uh, if there's anything because I don't want to slow down. You're you're right in midstream of approving funding and and I'm sort of bothering you with the economic impact. So, I appreciate the opportunity and
nice to see some of my my friends. >> Well, um I just want to jump in and say real quick. Uh first I want to say give credit to to this board. Uh this was a pro this was a an analysis that the board visual uh envisioned conducting three years ago. Uh and we were actually
ready to to put this to on an agenda item for a vote and then uh the pandemic hit and the board was forced to table this project for uh for two years. So going back to our conversation pre previously about funding. While we were fortunate to get the additional million
dollars, so went from 8 million in fiscal year 17 to 9 million in 2019, we didn't have the question in 2021. We went from u 8 million in 2019 to 21 uh 21 getting 9 million. Didn't have the benefit of an economic impact analysis
uh to help guide the general assembly in making that appropriation. So again, being grateful for the additional million they did uh did allocate. But now in a position where fortunate that we working through the pandemic still uh the state of Indiana's fiscal strength is in a good place and now having the
opportunity to to to potentially conduct this analysis will give the more give the board more tools in the toolbox to go to the general assembly and make the case for not just a continuation of GMBB expansion funding but an increase. Uh the second thing I say is working with Paul and his team u Dr. Becker Dr. Ward
uh Mr. Roble uh worked with them since the inception and found them to be they were in Indiana uh several times. We did several um several meetings, several community gatherings across the state of Indiana back in 2016 2017 bringing
multiple stakeholders to the table to put the initial plan in place. Uh Trip always made themselves available to board members to myself as the staff for the board and Paul and his team were just the utmost professionals and um the possibility of potentially working with you again is is something that I I will
only speak for myself but I uh look forward potentially look forward to. So >> yes, thank you. Yeah, I'm actually in Boise at a GME conference for mountain states areas and they are always looking for examples and so everybody wants to
know what's the economic impact and show me another state that's done this and also help Utah get some funding with a similar economic study uh this year and so this is a big family of people around the country and all kinds of places uh looking for leadership in this and
Indiana is a state that we're so proud to tell the story. So, thank you. >> All right. Well, let's um thank you, Paul, for joining today. And if you need to um catch catch your plane, please do. Um we don't want to hold you back. We'll make sure any questions get to you that
are needed. Um and so, >> yeah, just from the fiscal just to give some information, uh uh trip off proposal is for $50,000 to uh conduct this analysis that the project fees are all listed within the the meeting packet. Uh just to uh and that's all
there. additional $5,000 will be allocated for any travel, some travel here to the state. That could be variable depending on, you know, again, how airline, flights, gas, etc. like that and how many times they would find themselves need to be on the ground here. Um how uh Josh and I so the board
back at the last meeting gave Josh and I the ability to move forward with uh reviewing and approving this application and we we took a look at it. Um it was a scoring metrics that we used for the RFP out of 80 it was 103 points. uh trip unboxing and 85 hitting all the major
categories getting the full awards but they're the only categories that weren't hit. Uh there's some state requirements for uh veteranowned business mbe participation and those were just not part of this project. Uh but all the other measures they hit uh pass fail and the the commitment to the to the to the
what the trip scored highly on that. So Josh I don't know if you had anything to ask. Did we see anything that we had questions on? >> No no concerns. So, have you approved it or you just reviewed it? >> We approved it. If you all feel if you would like to go ahead and and move forward, >> endorse our endorse our approval. Um, we
can do that. >> You did make a motion to >> I think a motion would be appropriate. >> Okay. Wonderful. All right. Um, any comments, questions before entertaining the motion from our board members? >> I move we approve it. >> Wonderful. Thank you, Dr. Ward. Any
second? >> Second that. >> All right. Dr. balancing also affected at the same time. Wonderful. All in favor of supporting the approval of the tripbach uh agreement to do the economic impact
study, raise your hand, say I. >> I. >> All right. Any opposed? >> All right. Our support for that um is approved. So, we look forward to working with you, Paul, and your team. >> Thank you, Trisha. Thank you, everybody.
Have a good rest of the weekend. Okay. Hi. >> Great. Wonderful. Well, this will be super helpful as we go into the timing could not be more useful in terms of what they're going to bring us back. So, I I [clears throat] see this is
something that the board wanted to do two and a half years ago and >> got styied by the by the pandemic. But fortunately, >> this is better timing. >> Yeah. Right. And and they their timeline I thought to turn the report around I thought was quite good.
how quickly they could turn that around for us. >> Just as an aside, Dr. Dr. Hearn, at some point put together a committee, the U committee at this I don't know how you want to handle that, but that's your perview of how putting together these committee >> to work. >> Well, let's yeah, we want to make sure
>> you want to get community discussing. >> Get Yeah, let's get But I can let's let's make sure we take care of today's business, but I will make a note that we need to get a group of folks to work um as a subgroup with trip. So, if you're interested in that, be thinking about that. Let's go back to the feasibility
grant application submitted by Community Health Network. Uh, this was I think was this for 75,000 or was it a little under 75 for the feasibility study at community? >> It was a little under 75 as a matter of fact. >> And then um >> Oh, that's unusual.
>> We had one we had one that was $69,6,96. >> So, they are proposing um Yeah. feasibility study to look at starting internal medicine there at community well here at community which is central here in Indianapolis spreads the a little bit up to Howard and Anderson and down south um
>> just to clarify another potential rule of necessity situation just make sure you say that just >> well do we need to with Dr. Shley and I I think are the two who would we have a quorum without the two of us >> I believe so yeah I don't see Dr. Dr.
Knight Dr. award you have no affiliation with community >> I know many more there for >> 27 years but not >> but I will say there's there needs to be four people in the room that's the >> okay then let me keep uh let me keep
invoking the rule of necessity then based on that thank you for the clarification >> um all right so any discussion about communities application I know it's a little lengthy but hopefully We're able to read through that. Any
clarifications or questions? >> All right. Well, then for the sake of time, I'll move us along. And please score. >> Yep. Let me go ahead and get those. All right. All right. So for the community health application and uh
studies that explore the feasibility of residency program development in underserved areas of Indiana based on healthcare outcomes, Robert will Johnson data out of a possible 25. The average was 25. Studies that explore the feasibility of residency program development in rural areas of Indiana
based on population to PCP ratio uh using utilizing Robert Johnson data possible 25. The average is 10. residency program development involving a collaborative approach such as FUAC, consortium, hospital systems, critical access hospitals, other out of possible
25 the average was 13 and uh naive specialty new program and or density of residencies in the area out of a 25 uh community scored an average of 16. So out often 100 the average score was a 63. Um, again, I believe looking at the
score, some of that was based on the community being an older u older hospital being well established. Uh, but they're looking for the 75,000 uh to to evaluate whether to move forward uh with this program. >> Wonderful. >> All right. I'd like to entertain a
motion to approve community's application for feasibility study. So moved. >> Second. >> Second. >> All right. Steve and Michelle both at the same time. All in fa favor raise your hand or say I. >> I. >> Any opposed.
>> All right. Uh, community feasibilities grant is approved today. Thank you. >> Hey Trish, it's Michelle. If if your crew um wants to reach out to us since we've just completed and got another one in progress, we're happy to share some
of the um ups and downs that we've discovered. So just have them get in touch with us. >> Okay, perfect. Thank you for uh being willing to collaborate and have that partnership because there is a lot of a lot of leg work that happens in that journey and I'm sure there's a lot tons
of lessons learned. So thank you. All right, so I think we're now to the point on the agenda to talk about the administrative services agreement with IU School of Medicine. This is for the support from Linda and um managing some of our trans reports and all all
everything else she helps us with. Many things to help you, Jean. >> Yes. Thank you. Uh Linda, without you, I will just falter. I I my truth is my my truth is is is my destiny, I swear. Um but no, but Linda has supported this board and supported me for the last five
years or so. And we appreciate the partnership with the Indiana University School of Medicine. uh the school of medicine reached out to to CHG to entertain continuing that relationship uh for a total of $9,000 which would support uh Lender's work for the period
starting July 1 of 2022 and ending on June 30th of 2023. Um so again just to say thank you Lenda for your support. >> Sounds like I'm a bargain. >> Indeed. Linda is just again having her wealth of
knowledge and supporting me from the government and the legislative end has been invaluable um to a lot of the work and a lot of the success and the accomplishments of the board without them her these meetings would not be able to go I hope relatively smoothly smoothly uh but I promise next time we
won't have a 300 page agenda book [laughter] >> that's got to be the limit should make a motion for that >> so >> okay wonderful um any discussion um around this this application or this funding for support for Linda,
>> we need rule of necessity might need to be invoked. >> Oh, okay. Thank you. Yeah, keeping track of the rule of necessity. Quite a job. Okay. >> Point of clarification as well. My apologies. I made I was incorrect. The proposed budget is for two years through
July 30th, 2024. >> Okay. >> So, my apologies. >> So, two years 9,000 per year. >> Correct. >> All right. Thank you for that clarification. All right. And um do we um who would have a conflict? >> Sorry, Dr. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to cut you off. I'm sorry. It's not It's
9,000 for the total of the two years. So 5,000 for the period. >> And you really are. >> So yeah, July 1 July 1 of 2022 through June 30th of 2023 would be 5,000. And then >> you s [laughter] >> July July. Thanks for clarifying.
>> Yeah, my apologies. I was looking again that's my comments about to my daughter about wearing my glasses more. >> All right. So um we have conflicts of interest that we need to um share so people step out of the vote today or Dr.
Becker Michelle Dr. Howenstein can necessity >> real necessity you can stay uh you don't I'm just looking through the >> I think the only person uh Mr. Mlin, I don't believe you're not affiliated with the IU School of Medicine. So, you wouldn't. Um, so if Dr. Becker and Dr.
Howenstein wanted to, we would still have four in the room, two on the call and be good to go without the rule of necessity. But if you want to keep it either, it's it's up to your perview. If you feel more comfortable leaving, we can do that and then just bring it back in. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. We're not good.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. We'll just um Yeah, we'll just Yeah, we'll just We'll keep >> turn volume down. Well, turn your camera off and turn it back on. That'll be >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, go ahead and uh we'll just the folks um who don't have a conflict, we'll go ahead and vote. Is that what
we're doing? Yeah. Okay. >> All right. Make sure we approve. >> Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Wart. Motion to approve. Second. >> Second from Dr. Knight. All in favor? >> Raise your hand or say I. >> Uh any opposed? >> All right. Thank you, Linda. We will continue your services for the next two
years and thank you for your >> Thank you so much. >> Yeah. Thank you for all your support. It's a pleasure. >> Okay. Um ex let's get um make sure we're going to wrap up on time. We have 15 minutes so we're going to do this uh expansion communication roll out.
>> Yeah. So we uh the board we talked about getting some statewide information and stories out. And so CH we put out some uh some information about the residency permit. We focused initially on Lafayette in Evansville. I'm going to share my screen here quickly to show the
meeting. is in the meeting packet, but we did get some press. Uh I think we wanted a little bit more. And so we're going to have to look at uh potentially this was another situation we're having uh now that the economic impact analysis is in play. That may be something we utilize to drum up more uh media. We and
I I'm not our media person. Um Allison uh Alison Gap I'm saying Alison Gatin that's her main name. Allison Cure uh and I worked together. She did a great job. Unfortunately, when we put out our story, the Ukraine war broke out.
>> So, we did not get, I think, the level we wanted, but we did get some good press. And I just was going to pull up and share it here. Somebody please keep me on time watching because I don't pass. >> It's on about three page 300.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank Thank you, Dr. >> You're right. 297. >> 297. Okay. So, let me pull up uh I'm going to share my screen here quickly and we'll show you some of the coverage we did get. So, you see the journal and courier uh wrote a story about the Arnet
residency. Uh we were interviewed there and again, let me give thanks to uh both the IU School of Medicine, their their staff uh down in Evansville and then in Lafayette for providing us with stories for of uh providing us with their residents to to give us feedback. So, we got coverage in the journal and courier.
slide back up here and journal Courier. Uh, WISH TV, not Wish TV, excuse me, channel 18 in Lafayette. Um, as a Purdue res, as a Purdue graduate, it's good to be on there as long as you're doing good stuff. I remember college some Well, let me not even go there. Anyway, the local
news station covered it. And then, um, that was our two major. We did get some smaller I didn't include that, but we did get a little bit of coverage from some of the smaller uh, news networks down in the Evansville area. we didn't get uh the major push that we were hoping to get down there, but again, I
think we can go back. We just got caught in a bad bad timing cycle. So, I'm going to work with our our outreach, our outreach, correction, our communications team to see if we can push that again at some point. Uh summer tend to be slower news cycles, maybe we can get some more
coverage there. We still would like to get some feedback. Have worked but haven't gotten feedback from the folks up in uh over in Reed over in Richmond to try to get them to engage with us to give some feedback that with their residents but haven't heard back. So more opportunities there as well with Fort Wayne. I know Park View was on the
call today. The board's first engagement with the Fort Wayne area was through the Fort Wayne medical education program. Funded several family medicine residencies there. So we can potentially look to uh get feedback from there. But any any news that's in the coverage? any any any good news coverage is something
we the board wanted and going into the summer I think we had more opportunity to get the word out there >> so we put in to the requirements when they have to do their report that they get one good story or something as part
of their report >> yeah that's >> I mean then they won't get the next year's money unless they give I mean there's got to be no matter who right can that be a requirement I I am not a lawyer. Josh is >> Is that a problem?
>> Or could we at least request it? I mean, we could request it. >> Oh, I you have I got you and they're just not >> I didn't know about the uh >> Can you require to have as part of >> I mean we can require just what the consequences not doing that we pull
their money because they did an article. I mean that we can >> not an article but just give some story. >> Yeah. >> What are the repercussions if they don't? Is that what you're saying? Maybe the next time. That's what >> you can't do that. It's part of the contract. >> No,
we can contract. >> I honestly think if they're asked, they've got a lot of good stories. Um, you just need to let us know and we can get out there and get them recruited. >> We we literally though uh the issue at hand is I had so just to be transparent,
I reached out to people in both of those organizations I previously mentioned and initially it said no problem. we can get you and then the the the line just went dark. >> Yeah. [clears throat] >> And I've reached out made phone calls, emails, um we've had other situations with certain
certain certain folks that getting the money and and not >> and we're getting all the reports. Are we getting reports? Well, after many many phone calls and uh emails to people higher up within the within the organization uh which don't like to do that, but sometimes you left little
option but to go over people's heads to get the information you need and people sign a contract requiring that information. So yeah, that has this had to be done not not a lot but once or twice. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So back to the point though, can we
require it? We can ask. I think it would be something that could be put in maybe not as a you in order to get future funding you must but we can be very persuasive within the language of saying this would be a great benefit to part of getting the funding is being a benefit
not just your organization to the state of Indiana and there's a commitment to uh being a good steward of the public dollars that says get us information back and stories please. Can we incorporate it into the report? A blank space could
instead of saying like in addition to the report the story just sort of like >> that could >> fill in a story of you know your what see if we can capture it that way >> because the report is a requirement right >> that's correct. Yeah. And there's still
>> that's just a question in a report, >> right? >> Tell us [laughter] >> that that's actually that would be >> that's what I was think I'll work with. >> All right. We got there. All right. Perfect. Perfect. But I think we also in our minutes as I was reviewing them for
this meeting, we talked about we did we ask about diversity in the report and I don't think it's in there. So I think we need to add that >> add that as a question around the back racial >> I can see everyone >> and uh yeah I did I reached out to we
talked about Dr. Hearn asked me to reach out to Dr. Hannah Maxi about her report that she provided to the board back in October and adding that additional data. Dr. housing was very focused on some of the racial gets more with the additional racial and ethnic diversity data
including Latinx uh students in the not just the population of students in the state but the uh physicians practicing and so Dr. Maxi did reach back out to me said she would touch base with me next week to discuss that further. >> Okay, wonderful. Yeah. So yeah, we followed up on that point you would
raise with us um Dr. Henstein and then >> thank you Eugene. >> Thank you. No problem. Thank you Dr. her for for for bringing it back to my attention to to make that make that connection. >> Yeah. Yeah. And then Linda, if you want to add a little section in there where
we can inquire about our the grant recipients and the residents that go through, then we can understand a little bit more about the diversity of our the folks that are awarded the grant. Okay. Um All right. We're got
eight minutes here. uh Indiana Department of Health loan repayment application. Eugene, >> yes. So, I'm trying to make sure I have the uh the speaker on the Can every I hope everybody can still see. I think I'm in good shape here. Uh we got a
request from the Sorry, just making sure that the camera is camera's working where it needs to be. Uh we received a request from the uh state department of health uh and and Alli who's the director there and they are looking to
uh work with uh HERSA to establish a state loan repayment program for uh for medical provider for medical students and looking to get that support and so they reached out to us asked us would the board uh be willing to support uh their letter uh reached out to Dr. Hearn
as chair and she she offered her support. So, I did author a letter uh to to the uh to the to the state uh to the department of health copy of which is that in no that was that's not in the agenda in the meeting packet. I do apologize. I'll get that to you, but I
did bring it up here on the screen just to give you a quick outline of what that what that communication entailed. And so, this letter was sent to uh to Mrs. Valley back in back in April uh with the support of of Chairwoman Hearn and again just offering the board support for the
the funding that they are are looking to get um in order to to create some loan repayment programs for uh for certain certain specialties. many of the um the disciplines that they were looking to put into their loan repayment program did match to the borders the board's
priorities for GMBB expansion funding and you can see the list of the of the specialties that are were included within that letter and primary the first one is what this board has been working on which is getting additional primary care physicians so um just gives some
detail about what my role is and then I'll provide that letter to her so she was very appreciative and wanted to thank the GME board for its support and may have said that she is available to answer any questions that you could have, but they're going to move forward with that that student loan repayment
plan. >> Perfect. Thanks for sharing that, Eugene. >> And you said you'd forward that to us. >> I will get that to you. >> Good. I'll forward that to you. >> Wonderful. >> Okay. The next item that we have on the agenda is to talk about that future funding committee. I you know because of
what we just talked about the fact that we're going to need to ask for more um we wanted to pull a small group together that would you know to to gather offline in between these board meetings and have a discussion about you know what should our ask be financially to the
legislature and uh put our heads together on that and u obviously the trip on report will help uh weigh in a little bit on that but Really, I think the focus of this group would be then to figure out what are the future grants
that are coming. What are we what are we going to need to award? What do we need to do to kind of get to our aspiration and make sure we have adequate funds to continue to to uh support these programs as long as we can. Um, so we're looking
for volunteers who might want to be a part of that group. Eugene, this this group had met before if I remember correctly. I wasn't in in a part of that group but there there had been a subgroup of this board that had collectively gathered I think Steve were
you on that Dr. Becker >> um probably Tim Budnum >> yeah I was >> Dr. Becker representation from both Marian uh so Dr. Dr. at that point Dr. S for a session Dr. tonight and then uh Peter Nen from the I but some
representation for both medical schools as well as Southwest and so uh as we discussed I think it would be appropriate to have potentially that same representation >> as well as well as anybody else who would like to be involved um >> yeah so I think >> this would spill over as well with the
trip >> I think it could be the same work group really um the economic impacts uh group that would work with trip bumbok to help provide context that way. So to me that that kind of they're so aligned I think
it would make sense rather than creating two work groups. So volunteers who would like to be a part of that or you can you know speak up now or we can you can >> there may be a little duplication for Steve and I but and I'm the newbie but I'm I'm happy to participate.
>> Okay. I see Dr. Becker, Dr. Howenstein, uh Rob Beth and Dr. tonight. Tonight I um and Rachel and Dr. Shockley. All right. There's a there's a good good group. What do we got? Five. Is that five? Six.
>> Yeah. And if the group needs to meet a couple times, then you know you've got a little bandwidth there when people can't make it because conflicts certainly come up. So you get at least four or five people each time you meet hopefully have those discussions. Wonderful. Perfect. All right. Thank you
all for for volunteering to have spend some extra time outside of the board meetings to do that. I think that'll be really helpful um as you know we think about our legislative ask and the economic impact that we so wonderful. All right, we have two minutes time for
a little public testimony if there's anyone who would like to um share anything um from the public our visitors today. I'll just I think this is one of the meetings a lot of people from the
outside have joined this meeting for a lot of reasons. Thank you for being here again. Thank you everybody who was able to join a join on the team's call today uh from the board u and stakeholders as well as thank you uh board members for being here. Thank you adviserss thank you uh Andy thank you for being here the
hospital association just good to see everybody in person. This is again I said my first time in two and a half years seeing you all in person and that's uh appreciative. A lot has happened since then and just grateful that you are still here engaged and looking forward to continuing to work with you.
>> Wonderful. All right. Well, hearing no public testimony, uh our next meeting is scheduled for August >> Friday, August 5th. We had it in July. I think we moved it to due to a schedule issue. So, but it's been on the calendar
for a while. So, please um if you're able to make it in person, we we're going to need four and >> not be able to be in person that week. I'll join remotely, but I won't be able to be in person. >> Okay. And we may need to I was telling Eugene, we may need to have our RSVPs when you uh you know, just make sure we
get that ahead of time who can come in person and who can't because it it got daisy um here at the at the last second. So, thanks again to Beth. Uh congratulations again to Sarah on her graduation and um your last meeting with us. Again, we recognized her at the beginning, but we appreciate your
service with us and we will see you all in uh in August. >> Let's I'd like to take a motion to adjourn this meeting. So, all right. >> And second and all everyone in favor, I think. >> All right. Amen.