Application – Social Accountability Health

1. What is the name of your institution?

2. Where is the location of the institution?

3. What is the name and contact of the institution's leadership?

4. What is the name and contact of the person-in-charge in leading the ISAT assessment and implementation in the institution? This person will be the primary resource person for TUFH when contacting the institution related to ISAT.

5. Please list a minimum of 5 faculty delegates included in the application process who are aligned with Social Accountability principles, including their email addresses. The delegates should represent a diverse range of seniority, departments and divisions, gender and sexual orientation, and racialized and classed identities. Institutional leaders are encouraged to consider a cross-section of faculty beyond medical faculty within the university. A diverse and representative group of leaders can ensure institutional buy-in. Depending on national and regional contexts, terms like “school” and “faculties” may be defined differently. Regardless, institutional leaders should define their stakeholders and their criteria for selecting them.

6. Please provide the names and email addresses of 5-7 student delegates, included in the application process who are sympathetic with Social Accountability principles, and who will be included in the application process. The delegates should represent various levels of seniority (year/batch of study), study program, gender and sexual orientation, racialization and socioeconomic class, etc.

7. Please provide a list of prospective and confirmed stakeholders and constituents who reflect the societies and communities to which the institution is accountable, as it undertakes the ISAT process. Please emphasize concrete representatives and groups such as health administrators, government officials, legislators, and community delegates, in ways that align with the Partnership Pentagram Plus (environment, infrastructure, economy, society, people, and the health system).

8. This question aims to understand to what extent your institution engages stakeholders in planning for advancements, policy and decisions overall. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental descriptions provided in the criteria below, please indicate your institutional phase.

(Phase 1) Involvement of internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plan to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) Involvement of internal stakeholders and health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3) Involvement of internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) Involvement of internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

9. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental milestones provided in the criteria for student recruitment, selection and support, please select the best description of where your institution falls between Phase 1 and Phase 4. (Please provide a narrative-qualitative explanation for your selection to support your choice. You may upload supporting evidence (i.e., documents, webpage, images, published works, etc) to justify and further elaborate your choice.)

(Phase 1) Student selection criteria focuses mostly on academic performance, or the institution has no authority to change selection criteria. No emphasis on supporting students from underserved or underrepresented backgrounds (for example, rural and remote, racialized and oppressed groups).

(Phase 2) Milestones: The institution is reviewing student selection criteria to better address diversity, equity, and regional health workforce needs; these criteria are not yet being implemented.

(Phase 3) Milestones: The institution has integrated selection criteria to improve student diversity and equity and address workforce needs. The institution also defines the type of selection criteria related to diversity to be incorporated in its selection process. The institution actively recruits students from underserved or underrepresented backgrounds. The institution offers active support for students from underserved or underrepresented backgrounds. Indicators: 1. Selection criteria aim to attract students who represent the socio-economic, geographic, ethnic, linguistic, and cultural diversity of the regions the institution serves. 2. Advocacy to support access to health professions education for underserved groups. 3. Admissions Committees have geographic and demographic diversity in their make-up. 4. The institution actively encourages return to service to the communities that its faculty and graduates come from. 5. Admissions committees are made up of diverse socioeconomic backgrounds with equitable distribution of decision-making power. 6. The institution is exploring partnerships with other local institutions in underserved areas. Note: In some cases, national or institutional policies severely limit the ability of faculty and administrators to make changes in student selection. In these cases, institutions should clearly note advocacy efforts within the institution or country to shift their policies on student selection.

(Phase 4) Standard: The student body reflects the socio-demographic and other characteristics of the communities and regions the institution serves, especially underserved populations and those deemed most likely to be willing to serve those populations and regions. Indicators of Student Recruitment and Selection: 1. The proportion of learners from the populations and regions the institution serves. 2. Successful outreach and orientation pathway programs for institutions in underserved communities that include learners from those communities and track outcomes. 2. Explicit and targeted admission pathways and educational support for learners from underserved populations who may require additional support to succeed. 3. Admission Committees have diversity in memberships and community involvement at all levels. 4. Equivalency in ratios of attrition, progress, and completion statistics of learners from underserved populations compared to all learners. 5. The institution provides scholarships and bursaries that directly support students whose social and economic class status prevents their full participation in educational opportunities. 6. The institution has an action plan for advocating for university and/or national policy reform to influence student recruitment toward social accountability. Indicators of Student Support 1. The institution has a program dedicated to award scholarships for students from underserved communities. 2. The institution has comprehensive support, counselling, and remedial programs including mental health supports for all students. 3. The institution provides additional support to students from rural and remote areas, and for students who are first generation attendees of college/university programs (for example, an enrichment term of 3-6 months or a preparatory year, as deemed appropriate by a medical school). 4. The institution provides remote work and digital options for students who are unable to join classrooms in person. 5. The institution ensures that all students and faculty are knowledgeable about social accountability within the contexts of recruitment, selection, and support. 6. The institution provides financial support for student-led community engagement projects.

10. Please provide a narrative description that supports your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for student recruitment, selection, and support.

11. Please upload any documents that support your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for student recruitment, selection and support.

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 11 attachment - 1".

12. Please articulate your institution’s plan of action to move to the next phase. Please include the involvement of key stakeholders including internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in your plan of action.

13. Based upon your plan of action, please self assess your institution based upon the below narrative.

(Phase 1) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 2-3 years and involves internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 6 months to 1 year and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

Section Break

14. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental milestones provided in the criteria for faculty recruitment, please select the best description of where your institution falls between Phase 1 and Phase 4.

(Phase 1) The institution recruits faculty based on “conventional” academic and clinical credentialing and most clinical teachers are based in hospital settings.

(Phase 2) Milestones: The institution has a strategy to recruit faculty with competencies needed to address health systems and community needs, in addition to delivering the core curriculum.

(Phase 3) Milestones: The institution prioritizes recruitment of faculty who possess competencies agreed upon as needed to address the health system and community needs and reflects the diversity of the communities it serves, in addition to delivering the core curriculum (for example, from beyond the sciences, and from the Social Sciences and Medical Humanities). Indicators: 1. The institution has a mix of primary care, clinical specialists, subspecialists, basic sciences, and social sciences aligned with needs. 2. Faculty selection and promotion processes aim to attract faculty from a diverse mix of professional, cultural, social, and community backgrounds. 3. Faculty recruitment from local contexts contributes to institutional identity. Note: The definition of “faculty” will vary depending on national and institutional contexts. Faculty definitions for the ISAT process encourages the inclusion of all educators.

(Phase 4) Standards: The institution employs and promotes faculty who possess competencies needed to address health systems and community needs and those reflecting the diversity of the communities it serves and incorporates the principles of social accountability in their teaching. Ideally, most of the faculty who the institution employs and promotes, should possess competencies in social accountability. The institution employs, trains, and supports community members and community-based practitioners as standardized patients and educators in a manner which strengthens local health services. Indicators: 1. Faculty composition reflects the diversity of the communities the institution serves. 2. Training, use, compensation, and recognition of community practitioners and members of the health care team in underserved communities and across the region as faculty. 3. Proportion of community members and practitioners who are faculty members and adjunct faculty who are engaged with the institution in training health professionals. 4. Proportion of faculty involved in social accountability activities to develop the health system and workforce, and health care to meet community needs. 5. Proportion of faculty members who engage in teaching and research activities related to community health needs and service learning. 6. The institution values education and community engagement service in their assessment for career advancement. 7. Proportion of faculty – whether community-oriented, clinical, or of basic sciences – who have become educated about Social Accountability and incorporated it into their teaching and discipline (i.e. a cardiologist who becomes involved with primary prevention heart programs, or a gastroenterologist who participates in the ECHO Program). 8. Proportion of faculty who come from local areas and/or bring local perspectives. 9. Faculty are recruited from beyond the sciences, including from the Medical Humanities, bioethics and biopolitics, and Social Sciences.

15. Please provide a narrative description that supports your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for faculty recruitment.

16. Please upload any documents that support your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for faculty recruitment.

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 16 attachment - 1".

17. Please articulate your institution’s plan of action to move to the next phase. Please include the involvement of key stakeholders including internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in your plan of action.

18. Based upon your plan of action, please self assess your institution based upon the below narrative.

(Phase 1) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 2-3 years and involves internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 6 months to 1 year and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

19. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental milestones provided in the criteria for faculty development, please select the best description of where your institution falls between Phase 1 and Phase 4. (Please provide a narrative-qualitative explanation for your selection to support your choice. You may upload supporting evidence (i.e., documents, webpage, images, published works, etc) to justify and further elaborate your choice.)

(Phase 1) The institution has no faculty development program or if there is one, it is limited to conventional pedagogical approaches and curricular topics.

(Phase 2) Milestones: The institution has a faculty development program that values student-centered and active learning strategies but overall promotes conventional approaches.

(Phase 3) Milestones: 1.The institution has a faculty development program that includes a focus on topics related to community needs (e.g. social determinants of health, community mobilization, etc.) as well as principles of student centered and active learning, assessment of students, workplace-based learning, and community-based learning. Indicators: 1.Faculty assessments and development programs are designed to update and strengthen teaching and competencies relevant to priority health needs. 2. Educators undertake training and development of cross-cultural skills, cultural humility, and cultural competency.

(Phase 4) Standard: The institution assesses faculty performance and community engagement; and provides faculty development programs aligned with the goals of socially accountable health professional education including active, student-centered and community-based learning. Indicators: 1. Proportion of faculty who completed clinical skills training relevant to identified priority health care needs. 2. Proportion of faculty who completed professional development in effective community engagement. 3. Proportion of faculty who are engaged in social accountability aligned education, research, and service. 4. Proportion of faculty members from the local health workforce (including practitioners and community members) who have completed courses on teaching methodologies including inter-professional education and community service. 5. Faculty, especially those from underserved groups, receive personalized development and career enhancement. 6. The institution has a program to reward the quality of teaching and community engagement. 7. Faculty are appraised of best practices and strategies to respond to society’s health needs, and are recognized and rewarded for doing so. 8. The institution includes Social Accountability Standards as part of recruitment, hiring (contracts), orientation, and promotion. 9. The institution provides a program to bring awareness of and promote Social Accountability.

20. Please provide a narrative description that supports your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for faculty development.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 21 attachment - 1".

21. Please upload any documents that support your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for faculty development.

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

22. Please articulate your institution’s plan of action to move to the next phase. Please include the involvement of key stakeholders including internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in your plan of action.

23. Based upon your plan of action, please self assess your institution based upon the below narrative.

(Phase 1) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 2-3 years and involves internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 6 months to 1 year and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

24. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental milestones provided in the criteria for curriculum content, please select the best description of where your institution falls between Phase 1 and Phase 4.

(Phase 1) The curriculum is speciality-driven and focuses on disease management and individual health.

(Phase 2) Milestones: The traditional curriculum incorporates elements of public health and topics related to community needs.

(Phase 3) Milestones: Curricular content reflects identified priority health, cultural and social needs of populations in the geographic area the school serves. The curriculum is competency-based and includes content related to interprofessional teamwork. Indicators: 1. Required competencies are defined based on the health needs of the populations and regions the school serves. 2. Proportion of the curriculum allocated to learning about priority community health needs not traditionally part of a medical curriculum.

(Phase 4) Standard: 1. The curriculum design, content, delivery, assessment, and evaluation each reflect the expected competencies of graduates related to health equity and social accountability. 2. Professional orientation is identified through needs assessment of the geographical area of the underserved communities the institution serves in collaboration with stakeholders. It integrates the principles of primary health care, basic and clinical science with population health and the social determinants of health. Indicators: 1. The institution identifies graduate competencies that are based on the priority health, cultural, and social needs of: the geographical area the institution serves, as well as the health system, and services in collaboration with community stakeholders. 2. There is a strong alignment throughout the whole duration of the program between curricular content and the findings of needs assessment and desired graduate competencies. 3. Student assessment focuses on competencies that best prepare students to meet the health needs of communities, with an emphasis on primary health care. 4. Curriculum is reviewed regularly by all stakeholders to ensure its quality and that it meets the needs of the community.

Please provide a narrative-qualitative explanation for your selection to support your choice. You may upload supporting evidence (i.e., documents, webpage, images, published works, etc) to justify and further elaborate your choice.

25. Please provide a narrative description that supports your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for the curriculum content.

26. Please upload any documents that support your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for the curriculum content.

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 26 attachment - 1".

27. Please articulate your institution’s plan of action to move to the next phase. Please include the involvement of key stakeholders including internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in your plan of action.

28. Based upon your plan of action, please self assess your institution based upon the below narrative.

(Phase 1) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 2-3 years and involves internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 6 months to 1 year and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

29. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental milestones provided in the criteria for learning methods in the curriculum, please select the best description of where your institution falls between Phase 1 and Phase 4.

(Phase 1) Learning methods are predominantly teacher-centered with few initiatives on active learning, i.e. Teaching Based Learning, interactive lectures.

(Phase 2) Milestones: Learning methods are student-centered and include active learning, but mostly implemented in classroom settings.

(Phase 3) Milestones: Learning methods integrate student-centered and active learning with community-based service-learning. Indicators: 1. Learning methods include problem-solving to address priority needs in the communities the school serves. 2. The school offers inter-professional learning in primary care contexts and students actively engage in primary care health teams. Note: We recognize that in some contexts teacher-centered approaches may be the only viable option because of policy and other limitations.

(Phase 4) Milestones: The School offers an integrated student-centered learning curriculum, with educational programs located in communities integrated with health work teams and with a clear view of social determinants of health as well as inter-professional learning. Indicators: 1. Teaching methodologies are relevant and appropriate to learner’s needs and context. 2. Learner satisfaction with learning methodology is reviewed on a regular basis. 3. Proportion of the curriculum is spent in inter-professional team learning environment. 4. Continuous assessment that includes evaluating and monitoring the acquisition of competencies associated with social accountability.

Please provide a narrative-qualitative explanation for your selection to support your choice. You may upload supporting evidence (i.e., documents, webpage, images, published works, etc) to justify and further elaborate your choice.

30. Please provide a narrative description that supports your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for learning methods in the curriculum.

31. Please upload any documents that support your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for learning methods in the curriculum.

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 31 attachment - 1".

32. Please articulate your institution’s plan of action to move to the next phase. Please include the involvement of key stakeholders including internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in your plan of action.

33. Based upon your plan of action, please self assess your institution based upon the below narrative.

(Phase 1) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 2-3 years and involves internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3)The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 6 months to 1 year and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

34. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental milestones provided in the criteria for types and locations of educational experiences offered by the curriculum, please select the best description of where your institution falls between Phase 1 and Phase 4.

(Phase 1) Learning takes place mostly in classrooms and hospital settings with little or no time spent in community and primary care settings.

(Phase 2) Milestones: Curriculum includes required short placement in primary care and community sites while most clinical learning takes place in hospital settings.

(Phase 3) Milestones: There is an appropriate balance in clinical training between classroom, community, primary, ambulatory, and hospital settings. Indicators: 1. The curriculum ensures that students achieve an appropriate mix of mandatory community, primary care, and hospital experiences. 2. Proportion of student’s time spent in community and primary care placement. 3. The curriculum provides a diversity of experiences in settings in which students learn and addresses social determinants of health. 4. Quality assurance processes including supervision and clear process for site selection. Note: Institutions should distinguish between Undergraduate vs. Postgraduate Curriculum and provide details on both.

(Phase 4) Standards: Students are placed in community, primary care, and hospital settings, including underserved communities, with the opportunity for an extensive, immersive, experiences during the final years when most clinical learning takes place. Indicators: 1. Proportion of student’s time is spent in primary care, community and underserved settings each year. 2. The institution trains and assesses performance of all clinical preceptors. 3. Proportion of learners who choose careers in primary care, community and underserved settings. 4. Stakeholders directly involved in the creation and evaluation of community placements for learners. 5. Provides adequate learner exposure to priority health needs and community strengths while learning in context. 6. The institution and its stakeholders evaluate longitudinal experience in the community. 7. Community involvement is sustained throughout each year of medical education. 8. Student assessment results, in community settings, are equally valued no matter at which clinical sites the students received their training. 9. The institution is able to articulate why they have chosen their balance of time in the hospital vs. in the community. 10. Social Accountability is incorporated into specialization curricula content, tools, and across different types of experiences and locations. 11. Student assessments include social accountability standards and awareness of those standards. 12. The institution integrates the voices of community members into faculty development programs and strategy.

Please provide a narrative-qualitative explanation for your selection to support your choice. You may upload supporting evidence (i.e., documents, webpage, images, published works, etc) to justify and further elaborate your choice.

35. Please provide a narrative description that supports your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for types and locations of educational experiences offered by the curriculum.

36. Please upload any documents that support your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for types and locations of educational experiences offered by the curriculum

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 36 attachment - 1".

37. Please articulate your institution’s plan of action to move to the next phase. Please include the involvement of key stakeholders including internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in your plan of action.

38. Based upon your plan of action, please self assess your institution based upon the below narrative.

(Phase 1) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 2-3 years and involves internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 6 months to 1 year and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

39. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental milestones provided in the criteria for community-based, community-engaged, and socially accountable research, please select the best description of where your institution falls between Phase 1 and Phase 4.

(Phase 1) Limited or no research focusing on priority issues in the communities that the institution serves.

(Phase 2) Milestones: A number of individual faculty members, at their own initiative, conduct research that is relevant to particular health equity, community health, and workforce needs.

(Phase 3) Milestones: The institution has specific community-based research programs supported mainly by faculty members with irregular participation of students, health workers, and community members Indicator: Proportion of research projects that have a translational component that is relevant and accessible to the communities they serve.

(Phase 4) Milestones: The institution has an integrated research programs based on the social determinants of health, with substantial participation of students, faculty, health workers and community members. The institution has integrated research programs across all educational departments that focuses on health equity, gender parity, and community health needs. Indicators: 1. Research projects and results arise from identified community needs and are regularly presented to the community, with demonstrable impact on regional community health. 2. Proportion of research is community-based and involve socially accountable research projects involving community members and other stakeholders. 3. Proportion of research is community-engaged and involve socially accountable research projects engaging community members and other stakeholders. 4. Demonstrable impact of research on health services, policy, and practice. 5. Faculty and students who do community-based, community-engaged, and/or socially accountable research are recognized and rewarded. 6. Curricula includes resources on how to do community-based, community-engaged, and/or socially accountable research. 7. The institution identifies motivated and committed community leaders interested in contributing to the development of curricula and research in ways that allow them to influence decisions. 8. The school assesses the sustainable impact on people’s health in the specific region it is mandated to serve, in close partnership with key stakeholders in that region.

Note: For an ongoing project focused on Socially Accountable Research, see: https://www.arcandcentre.ca/research/create. Please provide a narrative-qualitative explanation for your selection to support your choice. You may upload supporting evidence (i.e., documents, webpage, images, published works, etc) to justify and further elaborate your choice.

40. Please provide a narrative description that supports your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for community-based, community-engaged, and socially accountable research.

41. Please upload any documents that support your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for community-based, community-engaged, and socially accountable research.

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 41 attachment - 1".

42. Please articulate your institution’s plan of action to move to the next phase. Please include the involvement of key stakeholders including internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in your plan of action.

43. Based upon your plan of action, please self assess your institution based upon the below narrative.

(Phase 1) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 2-3 years and involves internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 6 months to 1 year and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

44. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental milestones provided in the criteria for governance (Social Accountability Mandate), please select the best description of where your institution falls between Phase 1 and Phase 4.

(Phase 1) No social accountability mandate appears in the institution’s vision, mission and values. Decision-making is done through councils and committees solely composed of faculty members.

(Phase 2) Milestones: Contemplation of a socially accountable mandate in the institution’s vision, mission, and values is underway. Institution’s councils and committees are composed of faculty and students.

(Phase 3) Milestones: 1. Social accountability mandates are present in the school’s strategic plan, mission, vision, and values. 2. Decision-making is done through partnership tables and councils and committees representing both internal and external stakeholders including communities. Indicators: 1. The governance structure includes a statement and/or policy regarding Social Accountability on the institution’s commitment to respond to people and society’s needs.

(Phase 4) Standards: A social accountability mandate is part of the institution’s vision, mission, and values. It is fully defined, with metrics and benchmarks, and is presently being implemented. Indicators: 1. The governance structure includes both a statement and/or policy and action plan regarding Social Accountability on the institution’s commitment to respond to people and society’s needs. 2. Important institutional decisions reflect the input of key stakeholders, including educators, leaders, learners, and communities. 3. Evidence that education, research, and service are designed, implemented and evaluated by external stakeholders.

Please provide a narrative-qualitative explanation for your selection to support your choice. You may upload supporting evidence (i.e., documents, webpage, images, published works, etc) to justify and further elaborate your choice.

45. Please provide a narrative description that supports your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for governance (Social Accountability Mandate).

46. Please upload any documents that support your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for governance (Social Accountability Mandate).

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 46 attachment - 1".

47. Please articulate your institution’s plan of action to move to the next phase. Please include the involvement of key stakeholders including internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in your plan of action.

48. Based upon your plan of action, please self assess your institution based upon the below narrative.

(Phase 1) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 2-3 years and involves internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 6 months to 1 year and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

49. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental milestones provided in the criteria for stakeholder and partner engagement, please select the best description of where your institution falls between Phase 1 and Phase 4.

(Phase 1) Decisions are made by university and/or faculty authorities with no regard to social accountability or involvement of stakeholders, including community partners.

(Phase 2) Milestones: Decisions are made by the university and/or faculty authorities with limited regard to social accountability or formal involvement of stakeholders.

(Phase 3) Milestones: Decisions are made through consultation and formal involvement of stakeholders in some but not all committees and processes. Indicators: 1. Decisions are made with inputs from targeted stakeholders. 2. The institution has policy and processes in place to seek out and consult with stakeholders in decision making. 3. The institution has a clear method for identifying and connecting with stakeholders.

(Phase 4) Standards: The institution actively partners with students, faculty, health sector stakeholders, policy makers, and communities to design, manage, and evaluate both education and research activities that address the priority health and social needs of the communities the institution serves. The institution takes an explicitly multi-sectoral approach that reaches beyond the health sector. Indicators: 1. Decisions that affect the social accountability mandate of the institution consistently reflect the input of key stakeholders including educators, leaders, learners, service providers, patients, governments, and communities 2. Evidence that external stakeholders from the community are actively involved in the design, implementation and evaluation of education, research, and service. 3. Proportion of projects and partnerships involving local communities and health service providers that the institution has a mandate to serve. 4. Institutional leadership includes personnel who have demonstrated knowledge of the theory and practice of social accountability, ideally in influential and visible roles beyond departmental chairs and deans. 5. The institution provides leadership training in Social Accountability. 6. Institutions document the move from identifying stakeholders, to developing partnerships and welcoming partners into the decision-making and program evaluation of the institution.

Please provide a narrative-qualitative explanation for your selection to support your choice. You may upload supporting evidence (i.e., documents, webpage, images, published works, etc) to justify and further elaborate your choice.

50. Please provide a narrative description that supports your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for stakeholder partnership and engagement.

51. Please upload any documents that support your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for stakeholder and partner engagement.

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 51 attachment - 1".

52. Please articulate your institution’s plan of action to move to the next phase. Please include the involvement of key stakeholders including internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in your plan of action.

53. Based upon your plan of action, please self assess your institution based upon the below narrative.

(Phase 1) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 2-3 years and involves internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 6 months to 1 year and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

54. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental milestones provided in the criteria for school/graduate outcomes, please select the best description of where your institution falls between Phase 1 and Phase 4.

(Phase 1) The school doesn’t track its graduates.

(Phase 2) Milestones: The school is developing systems and processes to track the location and practice of its graduates.

(Phase 3) Milestones: The school tracks its graduates and is beginning to measure its influence on graduates’ location and practice. Indicators: 1. Graduate career choice and practice location. 2. Research on educational factors that influence location and career choices.

(Phase 4) Standards: An appropriate number of the school’s graduates practice according to where they are needed within the geographical regions the school serves. Indicators: 1. There is a system in place to continuously track the school’s graduates and the relevance of the training they received to their practice. Tracking shows a consistent upward trend, and/or the school demonstrates efforts toward improving its statistics. 2. The school uses feedback from its graduates to adjust its programs as part of continual quality improvement. 3. The practice-choices of graduates reflect the needs of the regions that the school serves for primary care and specialties. 4. Location of graduates closely mirrors geographical distribution of health needs in the communities and regions the school and its graduates serve. 5. The school works closely with post-graduate/vocational residency training programs to develop a continuum of learning. 6. Proportion of graduates practicing in high need areas and professional orientations such as primary care. 7. Graduates become social catalysts who make a public impact beyond clinical settings.

Please provide a narrative-qualitative explanation for your selection to support your choice. You may upload supporting evidence (i.e., documents, webpage, images, published works, etc) to justify and further elaborate your choice.

55. Please provide a narrative description that supports your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for school/graduate outcomes.

56. Please upload any documents that support your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for school/graduate outcomes.

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 56 attachment - 1".

57. Please articulate your institution’s plan of action to move to the next phase. Please include the involvement of key stakeholders including internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in your plan of action.

58. Based upon your plan of action, please self assess your institution based upon the below narrative.

(Phase 1) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 2-3 years and involves internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 6 months to 1 year and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

59. Using the most appropriate/realistic developmental milestones provided in the criteria for societal impact, please select the best description of where your institution falls between Phase 1 and Phase 4.

(Phase 1) The institution does not measure the impact it has on the regions it serves.

(Phase 2) Milestones: The institution is developing systematic measurement of its societal impact. Note: Institutions are encouraged to name minimum and maximum outcomes, and establish gradual development plans open to different levels of institutional maturity.

(Phase 3) Milestones: The institution implements research to systematically measure its societal impact Indicators: 1. Faculty, outlines community research opportunities to assess the impact of implementing social accountability strategies in geographic regions. 2. Faculty, in partnership with community partners, implements research to assess the impact of implementing social accountability strategies on the geographical regions it serves.

(Phase 4) Standards: The institution’s education, research, graduates, health service, and partnerships have a positive impact on the health care, the health and equity of the communities and regions that the institution and its graduates serve. Indicators: 1. Systematic measurement of the institution´s impact on well-defined and specific territories, populations, communities, and regions. 2. Graduates contribute to improving the quality and equity of healthcare access in the specific communities they serve. 3. Institution’s educational programs are integral to regional health care systems. 4. The institution’s partnerships with health care organizations and communities include projects that improve the health of underserved populations. 5. Institutional and its graduates are actively engaged in improving health systems, advocacy for underserved populations, and increased health equity. 6. Research findings inform policy and practice to improve health and health care in the regions that the institution serves.

Please provide a narrative-qualitative explanation for your selection to support your choice. You may upload supporting evidence (i.e., documents, webpage, images, published works, etc) to justify and further elaborate your choice.

60. Please provide a narrative description that supports your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for societal impact.

61. Please upload any documents that support your selection of Phase 1 to Phase 4 for societal impact.

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 61 attachment - 1".

62. Please articulate your institution’s plan of action to move to the next phase. Please include the involvement of key stakeholders including internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in your plan of action.

63. Based upon your plan of action, please self assess your institution based upon the below narrative.

(Phase 1) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 2-3 years and involves internal stakeholders (i.e., faculty members and students) in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 2) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals and community representatives in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 3) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 1-2 years and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives and health care organizations in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

(Phase 4) The plan is concrete and realistic to move the institution to the next phase in 6 months to 1 year and involves internal stakeholders, health professionals, community representatives, health care organizations, and government in the completion of self-assessment and action plans to advance to the next stage.

64. Please provide explanatory narratives of other social accountability activities/initiatives in your institution that has not been covered in the previous items.

Other Social Accountability Initiatives

65. Please upload any additional files needed for the other social accountability activities.

Drop files here or

Max. file size: 2 GB.

Upload to application on website https://socialaccountabilityhealth.org/application/ or attach in an e-mail, clearly marking "Question 65 attachment - 1".