State of the University: Post-Oct 12, 2012 TCME Inspection and Denial of Application to Open AUP COM

http://filadnet.blogspot.com/2014/04/state-of-university-2013.html

http://souaoutline.blogspot.com/2013/08/outline-of-president-francisco-d.html

State of the University

August 2013

From AUP President's Desk

October 28, 2013

An Urgent Call

for Special Prayer

Dear Brethren, Colleagues, Workers, Alumni, and Friends of AUP,

The work of the Lord continues to move forward. We are again facing challenges in our dream to open the Doctor of Medicine (MD) Program. As we move forward we become more fully aware that this dream will not come to fruition unless we put our full faith and dependence on God’s guidance and providence. Many of us have been praying fervently for this project, but now with greater urgency and united effort there is a need for all of us to join in special prayer for the following concerns:

1. Consideration of our reapplication. The CHED Technical Committee on Medical Education (TCME) will meet on the second week of November to review the documents we have submitted describing our compliance to the requirements in aspects previously noted as deficiencies by the committee. To comply, we have in the past year prepared more detailed curriculum materials, purchased the required laboratory equipment, completed the clerkship manual, trained potential faculty, and resolved the base hospital issue resulting with a CHED resolution. What remains is the finishing of the building that will house the instructional facilities. Let us pray that as the TCME considers our documents, they will allow us to prove our readiness by visiting us rather than reject outright the reapplication. This TCME has turned down all applications the past five years and had recommended a moratorium of new medical schools. Let us pray that they will see our reapplication as in line with their purpose of reforming medical education in the Philippines.

2. TCME gives time to complete COM building. If the TCME looks at our report favorably, they will come to visit and verify our compliance by the latter part of November. We are anticipating only one major issue in the visit: that they will require a completed building. Due to storms and heavy rains in August and September, the building shell, targeted to have been finished this October, will only be completed by the end of November. The final phase of the building will still be from December to February 2014. When the Technical Committee visits by the end of November and find only an unfinished building, there is a possibility that they will turn down our application. Let us pray that they will see that we have ample time to complete the finishing works in readiness for the June 2014 opening. And let's pray for good weather and the best of health for the construction staff as they finish the building.

3. Urgent need of funds. The University's resources for this project are nearly depleted. As of mid-October, the total expenditure for the COM building construction was Php 56.5M. Around Php 40M of this amount came from University funds and less than Php 15M was received from donations. In addition, AUP disbursed another Php 5M for laboratory equipment. Our engineers estimated that we need an additional Php 25M for the building completion. We praise the Lord for the gifts and pledges already received. May we appeal for your continuous financial support. It is only because of committed and generous supporters like you that we are able to continue and realize this noble endeavor. The gift does not have to be very big amount; the most important thing is for us to give as the Lord blesses. We have a deadline and an amount to reach. This is the time when AUP needs our financial help. Together let us finish the COM building.

Let us always remember that prayer is the opening of our lives to God so that He can work for us and through us. Our call therefore is, in our daily personal devotions, family worship, and in our churches, let us include the opening of the MD program in our prayers and encourage our friends to do the same for with God all things are possible.

Sincerely yours,

Francisco D. Gayoba, DTheol
President

* * *

http://filadnet.blogspot.com/2011/12/open-meeting-with-neph-manez-npuc.html

Open Meeting with Neph Mañez, NPUC president and AUP board chair, in Charles David’s residence at 1531 Bellevue Rd , Redlands , CA– 2 October 2011 at 5 pm

Present:  Nepthali S. Mañez, Joselito Coo [recording secretary], Charles David, Alberto Bagingito [AWESNA president], Hedrick Edwards, Lydia T. Roda, Loida Miguel, Cora A. Coo, Alfonso Miguel, Jr., Li Cerdenio, Beth Cerdenio, Ben Cuizon, Roy Mananquil, Linda Mananquil, Eduardo Gonzaga, Jr., Myrna N. Dial

Prayer:  Hedrick Edwards

Opening remarks:  Nepthali S. Mañez welcomed the opportunity of meeting with a representative group of alumni and non-alumni on short notice and stressed the dawn of a new era in his administration of the North Philippine Union Conference that will not allow wrongdoing under his watch.

Concern 1:  Communication gap.  Specific questions from alumni with regard to the school are rarely answered by the people who can supply the info with a straightforward, relevant reply. Queries sent via e-mail or letters sent by regular post, if they were received at all, are rarely if ever acknowledged by recipient administrators.  Case in point, receipt of e-mail sent by Dr Witzel to the board chair, board secretary and the president has yet to be acknowledged.  Have they received it or not?  Another case in point:  Reply to an AWESNA Position Paper was sent by regular mail to the board chair, board secretary and the president.  Reception of the said letter was acknowledged only verbally but not officially in print by the university president who reasons it’s not for him to respond since it was addressed to the board chair.  Though the board chair was appraised of the AWESNA Position Paper by no less than the SSD president, the board chair will not comment because he claims he has not seen the letter re: AWESNA Position Paper that was specifically addressed to him.

Recommendation 1:  The need for structured communication [voiced by Myrna  Dial] should be put in place so that 1) the person in charge of the dept or office is enabled and empowered to respond and supply the requested information; 2) questions may be directed to a designated official spokesperson for the president or administration (such as a press secretary or the PR dept); 3) re-orientation, re-education, cultural sensitivity training on the side of the administration, faculty and staff, on the one hand, and alumni, on the other hand shall be conducted accordingly and respectively.

Note:  Presently, it’s assumed that Beth Casel, director of Philanthropy, fulfills the role of official spokesperson for the administration as she has been appointed recently, in addition to her current designation in the office of Philanthropy, as PR and alumni affairs director as well, taking the place of Romeo Barrios who has been reassigned to teaching.  Assisting Beth Casel in the office Philanthropy, PR and Alumni Affairs is Arlene M. Gayoba.

Further recommended to provide the AUP board chair another hard copy of the AWESNA Position Paper so he could respond to it by letter addressed to the AWESNA officers.

Concern 2:  Updates regarding the College of Medicine

a)      Temporary building, Plan B, for the COM and the Medical Technology Dept, downsized from an original Plan A, but one that costs nearly 3 times more per square meter.  Plan A: 8,933 sq.m. for PhP150 mil [PhP 16,791.67 per sq.m]
Plan B: 1,532 sq.m. for PhP70 mil. [PhP 45,691.00 per sq.m.] consists of several rooms at USD 1,659,573.00 [roughly USD 1,083.27 per sq.m.]

b)      With a hundred and thirty-five (135k) U.S. dollars on hand, received from pledges to date, which is far from the goal of seventy (70) million pesos in order to complete the project, besides being justified by faith for our salvation, is there sufficient reason to proceed with the construction of a temporary COM/Med Tech building?

One side note:  How about the College of Theology building that is. literally on inspection, just a “shell” and far from completed?  Does the school have a policy with regard to cash on hand – percent of the total cost – to begin construction on a new project (the COM) while there’s one (the COT) that has yet to be funded in order to finish it?

Another side note, with regard to the voided JVA or Joint Venture Agreement, per board action and in view of the threat of a lawsuit by Dr Meneses, the NPUC has retained the Angara [Accra] law office.  Still further, a formal business proposal by Mr Eping Ao to build for the university a COM and hospital of 5,000 sq meter floor space in exchange for six (6) hectares of AUP property is still  under consideration by a committee that has been appointed.

c)  Search for a dean and selection of faculty when there’s still no College of Medicine building. The university administration has reportedly unofficially sent feelers to a possible candidate, one with experience of having served as a dean of a state or government-run school of medicine and who plans to retire from government service.

Recommendation/s 2 re:  Updates on COM

1) Prior to starting construction and while expecting a miracle to happen, regardless of the availability of funds or lack of the same, that the people responsible for the project – the board in particular - should take another look  at the disparity of the construction cost in regard to Plan B, compared to Plan A.  A side question:  Are other contractors, SDAs in particular who have not been retained (i.e. outside the NPUC development committee), allowed or encouraged to bid?

2)      Appoint a development consultant from the alumni (Romelda Jereos Anderson was suggested in particular) as an addition to the NPUC development committee with the specific function of providing guidance with regard to the COM project.

3)      Consider an organizational re-structuring to enable the COM to have an internationally representative governance policy.  First, this may require forming a managing board specific for the College of Medicine and Training Hospital, per CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) with regard to one corporate body for the two units, that is inclusive of representatives coming from all three Philippine union conferences and other union conferences of the SSD that may have a vested interest in sending students from their region. Second, to open up the selection of a qualified dean and faculty to non-Philippine citizens, calls for whom may be coursed through the General Conference.

4)      In the interest of improved communication with university officials, at the same time that a restructuring is under consideration and a search for a dean is still in the works, Joselito Coo submitted the names of Drs  Alfonso Miguel, Jr. and Everet Witzel to be designated as official spokespersons , respectively, on behalf of AWESNA alumni and non-AWESNA members, non-alumni supporters of the COM project.   On a side note:   Dr Witzel’s ties with Dr Jeimylo de Castro casts some doubt in the opinion of at least one of those present in the open meeting regarding the wisdom of appointing Dr Witzel to such an important mission.  Nevertheless, Joselito Coo reiterated his recommendation to designate Dr Witzel on behalf of non-AWESNA, non-alumni supporters of the COM and further suggested that a letter of appreciation be sent to Dr Witzel for his untiring efforts, official and unofficial from way back, on behalf of establishing a medical school in the Philippines.  In light of the fact this particular recommendation, as well as other recommendations, wasn't formally voted on by those present, it’s presumed that each named individual who submitted a recommendation to Pastor Neph bears personal responsibility for the same

Adjourned:  8 p.m.

Prayer:  Charles David

* * *

AUPCOM: The Gap That Divides Us

Myrna Novilunio Dial,PhD
dialmyrna@yahoo.com

If I were to start bridging the gap in communication about AUP COM, let me begin by entering into the conversation. For the most part, many of the alumni were left in the dark as to the status of the COM up until the commentaries by Roy Mananquil and Jun Rivera came up in last week’s issue of Cyberlink. I tend to agree with Roy on his opinion that the lack of a master plan which includes financial sustainability may be one contributing factor in the disapproval of the COM proposal.

I am not sure, however, that a change in membership of CHED technical panel will make a difference in us receiving a more favorable evaluation of the COM proposal. More often, it is better to have the same members to reevaluate the corrective actions made by AUPCOM administrators based on the initial feedback. It may help if we understand what the technical panel of experts does. Gleaning from the website, here is a brief description that will help us understand who they are and what their job entails.

“The Technical Panels composed of academicians, practitioners, representatives of professional organizations and appropriate government agencies serve as advisory and consultative bodies to the Commission. These groups of specialists/experts of the discipline assist the CHED to formulate policies and standards for higher education programs. Members of the CHED Technical Panel are chosen through nominations from educational association, professional association, business and industry sector, non-government organizations, and government organizations.” 
http://www.cit.edu/v4/2010/04/06/ccs-dean-appointed-as-member-of-the-ched-technical-pane/

Recently, I had the privilege of sitting before a panel of technical experts from CHED, as chair of a proposed MSN/FNP nursing program for one of the universities in Manila. Based on their checklist of criteria for approving programs, the head of the technical panel team went over the evaluation results item-by-item in areas in which the institution complied with. She also cited recommendations for areas of non-compliance. Thereafter, we all received copies of the documents signed by all members of the technical panel team. In two weeks, we feverishly worked on correcting the deficiencies and submitted the final proposal to the same panel members with all the corrective actions done completely documented. We learned that once approved by the technical panel, the proposal still has to go to a chair for review and if review results are satisfactory, the proposal is forwarded to the executive director for the final review and approval. It is with interest that AUP COM became part of the conversation in which I learned firsthand that AUP COM proposal was not approved. Talk about gap in communication!

We, alumni, usually get the news from the grapevine. I wish, however, that AUPCOM constituency took the initiative in an open letter to share with us what the deficiencies are so that we are not left to guess what needs to be done. Often times, when a new set of administrators sit down, the previous work of former committees are either left on the back burner or drastically changed. My questions are: Why was the initial plan for a base hospital (non-SDA) changed? MAMC can be used as one of the training hospitals but it cannot be a base hospital based on CHED criteria. A well-articulated curriculum is much to be desired? What happened to the initial curriculum developed earlier? There was also an appointee for the dean. I believe he is an SDA and he is qualified. What happened to that appointment? There was already a list of qualified faculty, some of whom were non-SDAs. Where did that list go? The International Board of Education may have recommended that we get all SDA faculties for the proposed college of medicine but reality is that there are not enough qualified SDA fellows among our ranks. Why can we not have a mixture of non-SDA and SDA professors to start with? When the School of Pharmacy was newly established at Loma Linda University, they hired a non-SDA dean who was an expert in developing the pharmacy program because there was no SDA qualified to head that department. Even today, he remains the dean and the board exam pass rates for the past few years of its program graduates were 99-100%. I made an appointment to meet with the dean. During our brief meeting, I learned so much about the program and about him. He was such an excellent administrator that I tend to agree that our SDA institution was right in appointing him as dean. Now that we are producing professionals in pharmacy, perhaps in the future, the dean position can be filled by a qualified SDA pharmacy professor.

Roy Mananquil and Jun Rivera candidly shared with us their perspectives on what needs to be done on the proposal for the COM if it is to move forward. One major challenge I see is the lack of open communication with AUP alumni. June Rivera alluded this to lack of trust (?). As alumna, I have yet to read of any communication from AUP sharing with us in an open letter what their challenges are with regards to the aftermath of the CHED visit related to the proposed COM program. Like the rest of the alumni, I believe that a master plan needs to be in place that will include not a temporary building but a permanent one, a tertiary hospital as base training clinical facility, financial plan for sustainability as well as qualified faculty to teach. If AUP administrators and AUPCOM committee put their acts together in consultation (transparent and open communication) with alumni who have the gift to share expertise, financial ability to help and heart for praying for this project, then perhaps the reality of the COM may not be far off. Should we head in that direction, we can truly bridge that gap that often divides us. ++

* * *

Disappointed but Undaunted

Alfonso Miguel, Jr. MD
lolosnewfad@gmail.com


The planned opening of the AUP College of Medicine on June 2013 was placed on hold after the CHED Technical Panel for Medical Education in the Philippines determined on their visit last October 25, 2012 that there are issues that needed to be addressed and corrected by the university. As most of us Alumni know from the recently disseminated open letter via the internet from AUP President Dr. Francisco Gayoba, most of the deficiencies mentioned during the exit report were related to “curriculum and instruction, faculty and location of the base hospital”. These deficiencies are being actively pursued and hopefully the outlook for opening the AUP COM will have a better chance next year.

I am sure most of us alumni here and abroad were greatly disappointed with this recent development. In a very personal note, the negative news profoundly dashed my enthusiasm having been involved with dialogues at various times between AUP and LLU leaderships as well as with fellow alumni especially among our local physicians who are actively in private practice and some who recently retired. In fact, in our last visit with Dr. F. Gayoba with the LLU President Dr. Richard Hart and LLU SOM Dean Dr. Roger Hadley plans were to schedule seminars for those who indicated interest to serve as faculty to the AUP COM for short term duration before June 2013. In addition, Dr, Gayoba and I met with the LLU School of Religion leadership who are actively involved in the integration of Religion and Spirituality in the
training of future physicians. We also participated in the actual working of the program with the freshmen Class of 2013 in small group settings. Hopefully, the new AUP COM will follow the LLU COM model which will make it unique to our medical education program in the Philippines.Yes, there are many distractions, detours, setbacks, disappointments, you name it, along the road as we move forward, wrought with daunting difficulties but the opportunity of a realized dream of having our AUP COM soon is worth the time and effort and sacrifices to achieve it for God’s glory and honor. We are all very proud and appreciative of the training we had at PUC/AUP. The school has equipped us to move on forward in our professional endeavors. We have been blessed and continue to be blessed in this adopted country. We can ensure the success and future success of our Alma Mater if we persist in our resolve to help sustain our continued loyalty and support in its various needs. As the old refrain from our School song says, “On ever onward, dear AUP! For true and faithful we will always be, by deeds and praises, we’ll honor thee; And God blesses thee our AUP.” Shine on! Forever…

I certainly will encourage all our well-meaning alumni and friends of PUC/AUP to keep our university in our prayer and thoughts. Let us Pray Until Something Happens (P.U.S.H). We are surely disappointed, but undaunted with God leading the way in all our lives.++

* * *

AUP College of Medicine: Postmortem

By Roy Mananquil

rolin@crunchystudios.com

 CHED denied AUP’s request to establish a COM. The denial did not come as a surprise to many alumni. Only the diehard supporters were disappointed. One alumna “was in tears” when she relayed the news to her pastor husband.

It is postmortem time to reflect on the primary causes of AUP’s failure in order to correct its deficiencies. In the words of the school’s Philanthropy director, “But it doesn’t mean we cannot re-apply. Meaning they saw it not ready for 2013, so we can still have to do our homework to complete what we lack and we can lay our cards again. Who knows those technical panel today are no longer there. I heard their term will end this December. By January 2013, a new set of Technical panel are installed for the next term. As a summary the door is not totally closed or locked that God cannot open, for HE HOLDS THE KEY.”

 One common complaint of concerned alumni is lack of a master plan. AUP has no concept and vision of a long-term development where COM will be an integral part of its future. A master plan translates the imaginary into as clear understanding of the site where the buildings will be organized to provide integrated services to accomplish its mission. It gives us the confidence to move forward with understandable and meaningful purpose, and avoid costly mistakes. At this moment, the COM is an eyesore of upright rusting rebar. We know from an e-mail of an EASNAC official to a select number of alumni that the COM under present construction is only temporary. He said, “The building will continue anyway, it is temporarily the COM but will actually belong to the Med Tech in the future.” If the unfinished building is temporary, where will the permanent one be? Does it mean a second round of begging for alumni donations?

 The COM started off on the wrong foot. Initially conceived to be financed by the JVA subdivision, irregularities and mismanagement entangled the latter into lawsuits and counter-lawsuits. Nevertheless, the construction of the COM building was started with the hope that alumni would come to the rescue and provide enough money to complete it. The project was doomed when the new NPUC and AUP presidents failed to communicate with alumni, and hedged themselves from

demands of accountability and transparency. Alumni were divided more than ever in supporting it. 

There is no doubt that the COM failed because there is no money to finance the project. For such a big undertaking, alumni should not bear the burden of raising and funding the construction of the building. Instead, their donations must only be supplemental to provide needed equipment. After careful planning, AUP,SSD, and NPUC and its local conferences, should secure enough funds, through loans, if necessary. We know from e-mail that SSD supports the COM. According to

its president, once he learned that CHED rejected the request, he “encouraged Drs. Narbarte, Mendoza and Berto to go ahead with the planning of the curriculum and other preparations even if CHED has changed its earlier stand on a “training hospital.” We went ahead with this project because CHED said it is OKAY for MAMC to be the training hospital. People in the office keep changing. I told these three people not to be discouraged. God has led this far. I believe He has His own time

table.”

 Like any enterprise, the success of the COM depends to large degree on the person or persons at the helm. Those leaders must be humble enough to know their strengths and accept their limitations. They must be able to unite the church members and alumni, and utilize their expertise. Most of all, these leaders must have the integrity and moral character beyond doubt. I am sure that most alumni do not disagree that an SDA school for medical students is long overdue in the Philippines. With proper planning, management, and enough funding, there is no reason why it should not succeed, and make the COM a dream come true.

* * *

From: --------
To: bethcasel ;
Cc: reuelnmiriam ; entellco ; AlbertoBCPA1 ; agulfan ; nephmanz ; jeddvee ;ching_pedernal ; chelorodaj1
Sent: Mon, Oct 29, 2012 12:17 am
Subject: Re: AUP-COM

Dear all:

As far as EASNAC is concerned with the outcome of the CHED's Technical panel to delay the opening of the AUP COM, we are disappointed but not discouraged. We will resolve to work harder, increase the on-going fund-raising for the COM, pray harder for guidance and rally together to see that the COM building will not be a mockery of failure. The building will continue, anyway it is temporarily the COM but will actually belong to the Med-tech in the future.

Now we have a lesson learned that if we haphazardly support a project, it can fail. We hope to have the alumni rally with a renewed vigor until we reach a victory. If God is with us, who can stop us?

This is just a road-block, not a dead end. Let us not lose hope.

------------ EASNAC

http://filadnet.blogspot.com/2013/07/aup-com-update_26.html

* * *
http://filadnet.blogspot.com/2013/07/aup-com-update.html

* * *






* * *
From the AUP President's Desk

July 10, 2013

Dear Friends,

[snip]
Page 4
College of Medicine Update

The preparation of the College of Medicine (COM) is entering into a crucial stage. With the visit of the CHED Technical Panel of Medical Educations within three months, the basic requirements have to be met in time.

On the area of faculty training and development, eight (8) training sessions were already held in the campus which is being led out by Drs. Romeo and Ma. Theresa Dotollo, curriculum experts and consultants who were hired by the University. The topics they have already presented included, among others, AUP-COM Curriculum Development, Competency-Based Medical Education, Instructional Design, Formulation of Objectives, Selections and Organization of Content, Student Evaluation, Clinical and Oral Tests, Interactive Lecturing Strategies, and Rationale and Processes, Teaching Clinical Skills, Student Motivation and Reflective Practice, attended by more than thirty (30) doctors who are committed to serve as future faculty of the COM. Through the guidance of Drs. Romy and Tess Dotollo, the curriculum has been developed and the syllabi for the first year have been prepared.

This coming July 29-30 2013, I will visit Loma Linda University in California, USA and will sit down with the University leaders to finalize their offer to assist in the faculty training and other forms of support. Through my visit, the appointment schedule of Dr. Tamara Thomas, LLU Vice Dean for Academic Affairs; Dr. Daniel W. Giang, Associate Dean, Graduate Medical Education; and Dr, Barry Taylor, immediate past Vice Chancellor for Research Affairs at LLU, and emeritus professor of micro biology, to visit AUP will be finalized. The coming of these three consultants to the university in the first or second week of August 2013 will be a big help in the preparation of the Com faculty.

Page 5

Our COM building will not be finished in time for the CHED’s visit. However our target is to have the rough building shell (floors, walls, roof) constructed by October. The finishing phase will be in November to December. To meet this target, the University advances another 15 million pesos for the construction of the steel columns, beams, and roof. The construction will start in the second week of July. Another estimated 10 million pesos will be needed by August for the floors and walls of the ground floor, constructions of which will start as the columns and beams for the second floor and roof are put up, thus finishing the shell of the building by the end of September, in time for CHED’s visit. The CHED committee expects that the basic equipment such as those needed in the laboratories, simulation rooms, library books, and others purchased by August so that the items will be delivered by September.

We are still waiting for the finalization of purchase offers for our Malitlit property. We almost closed a deal two months ago but the offer was 14 million pesos less that the amount set by the Board. We do not know why in God’s timetable we have not sold the property yet. Meanwhile, we are starting a massive fund raising campaign that will raise a total of at least 90 million pesos by June 2014, to be raised from the gifts and support of our faculty, students, parents, alumni, and friends. We will explain more about the fund raising campaign in our next news release.

We continue to thank all of you who have already given their share, and for those who are saving and making sacrifices to help out of the abundance of your heart. We also appreciate the contributions of those who assist in the fundraising by helping us contact people and organize events and activities to establish support for the project.

Sincerely yours,

Francisco D. Gayoba, DTheol
President

= = =

http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/1849329/2067703745/name/COM%20Update%20REVISED.pdf

= = =

http://filadnet.blogspot.tw/2013/05/aup-com-update.html

May 10, 2013

Adventist University of the Philippines

Puting Kahoy, Silang 4118 Cavite

From the President’s Desk

Dear Friends,

On behalf of the AUP family, I would like to thank all of our Alumni for their support in the recent Convention. I gave updates about the progress of the College of Medicine project during the Convention but it was limited due to time constraint and moreover many were not able to come. In this letter, let me give you some more details.

I had reported last year about the results of the visits of the CHED Technical Committee on Medical Education and the GC International Board of education Survey Team. The Technical Committee denied our application to open in June 2013 but said we can reapply. The Survey Team, while affirming the recommendations of the Technical Committee, encouraged us to fulfill the recommendations so that we can open in June 2014. The Technical Committee’s recommendation that the training hospital be in the same political region as AUP was the main barrier in the COM plans. The visits with leaders of the

provincial hospital in Trece Martires and the Governor of Cavite led us to conclude that the hospital’s training program will not be accredited by September 2013 when the Technical Committee returns to visit. The Batangas Regional Hospital has accredited programs but it is located in another province and it is farther than MAMC by distance and travel time. The only way forward is if MAMC be accepted as our training hospital. With much prayers, we submitted to the CHED Central Office an application for exemption  from regulation about location, and appealed that since MAMC is our sister institution and within short travel time from the campus, it would be practical to use it as our base hospital.

We learned middle of March that the CHED approved our appeal. Great was the rejoicing for God’s goodness! The approval of MAMC as base hospital was the sign for us to move in full speed and prepare for the September revisit of the Technical Committee. What surprised us was that in the resolution was also the statement that we can open by June 2013. 

It took us about two weeks to study the full implications of the permit since there were many factors involved.The first question was, “Are we ready?” We know for sure that we still have to meet the recommendations of the Technical Committee because they are valid standards of quality medical education. Another question was, “Can we make it for the IBE approval?” The Board was scheduled to meet less than three weeks after we received the resolution. For sure, we will not be able to submit the documents in time for the April 8 meeting. Will the IBE allow us to open in June 2013?

We studied carefully the things that needed to be done in a period of 10 weeks before the June 2013 class opening. The main difference between the IBE framework and that of the Technical Committee’s is that the IBE requirement before opening focuses primarily on the basic medical sciences; only on the second year are the preparations for the clinical sciences required in detail. The Technical Committee on the other hand required from us all the details from basic sciences to clinical training. Apart from the curriculum, they required syllabi, instructional design materials and schedules for each block/module, including assessment up to clerkship. Moreover, they required that faculty for the entire medical program be identified, trained, and involved in the preparation of instructional materials before starting the charter class. When we received the resolution, only instructional materials for the first year are ready. The faculty for the basic sciences had yet to meet for the first training session on April 7 because the training timetable had June 2014 in mind. In addition, we had to prepare the temporary facilities.

Another consideration was that, even if we will be ready to open, what about the students? We wanted to have the best students in the inaugural class. With only two months before the June 2013 opening, there would be no time to process application and select the best students. From all these considerations, it became clear to us by end of March that we were not ready to open in June 2013; the preparation time was just too short. I immediately notified the GC Education leaders that we will stick to the original plan of opening in June 2014. They were very happy because they, too, believe that we do not have enough time to avail of the June 2013 opening.

Another issue was, “Can [we] open [on] June 2014 even if the permit expires?” We knew that CHED permit to open is good only for the year stated, - that is school year June 2013-2014. Our concern was again the moratorium. We received communication from the CHED that we are not covered by the moratorium and the previous plan of a revisit in September 2013 still stands.

With MAMC as the training hospital resolved, we are now moving full speed. A group of 20-30 physicians have already met three times with our training consultants to learn innovative teaching methods and write the course materials they will use in teaching. Three leaders of the GC education department met with us last May 6 to assess what we have done to meet the recommendations. They were satisfied that we are on track for the June 2014 opening. The Dean, Dr. Doris Mendoza, will start working full time on June 1, 2013. The GC has begun processing the call of the two missionaries who will assist us in the preparations and later teach when the medical program begins.

The sale of Malitlit property is still in the negotiation stage with the possible buyers. Meanwhile, the University has advanced 10 million pesos so that the foundation phase of the COM building will be completed by the end of May. Our engineers modified the structures of the building from reinforced concrete to steel columns and beams to shortened construction time. The target is to have the shell finished by September or October 2013.

We need your continued support and prayers. We will need your suggestions on how we can intensify our fund raising for the COM building. There is a lot of work to be done but we thank the Lord that we can have a part in fulfilling the dream of starting the medical program.

Sincerely yours,

(Signed)

FranciscoD.Gayoba, DTheol

President

* * *

From: Francisco Gayoba

Sent: Wed, Dec 12, 2012 9:53 pm

Dear Friends,

Following is the draft of the statement we will send in a day or two to our supporters and alumni.  I am sending you first the draft in case you have any questions or suggestions that may strengthen the final version.  Please keep this version to yourself first.

 Thank you so much again for your prayers and support.

FDGayoba

            Last November 23, 2012, the Survey Team appointed by the International Board of Education (IBE) of the GC to study our application to open a medical school gave their exit report after three days of work.  The visit of the survey team came a month after the visit of the CHED Technical Committee which denied our application to open in June 2013.  The Survey Team was composed of directors and several associate directors of the GC Education, Health, Chaplaincy and Treasury departments, as well as experienced educators from Loma Linda and our division.  The Team will recommend to the IBE that AUP be allowed to open a medical college if we meet the conditions they set.  The team gave specific suggestions on what AUP must do further and conferred with various denominational entities to encourage their gather support in order to open a medical school.   I will outline the challenges as we work hard so that we can resubmit our application to the CHED.  With the challenges, I will also describe the solutions that are presently opening to us.

            The first condition given by the Survey Team is for AUP to deposit 11 million pesos with SSD as a reserve to finance teach-out of the first cohort of medical students expenses in case the medical program will not continue for unforeseen circumstances.  The Division administrators, who were present during the exit report, promised that SSD would lend AUP this amount.

            The second condition set by the Survey Team is for AUP to comply with the CHED Technical Committee recommendations.  The Technical Committee required additional equipment and supplies in preparation for the opening.  Most of the recommendations however, are related to curriculum and instruction.  Unlike the traditional medical training, the curriculum of the propose medical program will be competency based and problem based, the teaching of theory and practice organized by organ system.   Because of this, there needs to be intensive faculty development of the faculty members facilitating the problem-based learning.  The Technical Committee also expects that by the time they come for the revisit, the 10 to 20 instructors professors needed for each organ system have already been identified and scheduled.  The faculty would have thoroughly reviewed the proposed competencies, ascertained how and when they will be taught within the curriculum, and most importantly, how competencies will be assessed. All these, especially faculty training on teaching method, preparation of course syllabi and materials including assessment, schedule of instruction for each organ system have to be prepared by the time the Technical Committee visits and decide if we are ready to open.  At present, there is only Dr Demuel Berto preparing all these, with Dr Doris Mendoza, the dean-elect, coming to the campus once in a while because she is still a professor at West Visayas State University.

            The IBE Survey Team therefore recommended that we find two full-time personnel who will prepare for the targeted June 2014 opening, one to work in the Basic Sciences and the other a Vice Dean for Clinical Sciences.  At present we cannot find qualified people who can work full time to do the work in our area or within SSD.  The Survey Team mentioned that they have several persons in mind who experienced in medical education who may be available to help us in the founding stage of the medical school.  The good news is, the SSD leaders immediately committed two inter-division employee budgets for the preparation of the AUP COM.  These missionaries will stay for two to three years to help us begin the medical college and train faculty.  All that AUP needs to provide will be their housing.

            The greater challenge is the issue of the base hospital.  The good news is that the IBE Team did not absolutely require that the base hospital be MAMC as long as a large amount of clinical training be done there.  The Team visited two government hospitals in Region IV which can possibly be our base hospital.  These are Batangas Regional Hospital in Batangas City and Emilio Aguinaldo Memorial Hospital in Trece Martires.  The week after the Team left, Dr Miriam Narbarte went to the CHED central office to officially request clarification on what “same geographic area” written in the CHED regulations means.  Meanwhile we have visited the governor of Cavite province to get support for our affiliation with the provincial hospital in Trece Martires in case we will be required a base hospital within Cavite.  The challenge however is that the Aguinaldo Memorial Hospital is not yet accredited in all the required departments.  The first choice therefore as base hospital is the Batangas Regional Hospital because it has already all its departments accredited for medical training.   We are waiting for the CHED reply, hoping that a base hospital within the same region would be acceptable.

            The IBE Survey Team gave us a challenge during the exit report.  Knowing that AUP has to resubmit its application to CHED by June 2013 in order, if allowed, to open June 2014, the challenge was to act in faith and timeliness. This was a sobering challenge because we have to continue working even as we wait for more definite indications.  We were already counseled by a CHED director to complete the requirements as soon as possible because in view of the moratorium, our reapplication may not even be entertained after 2014.   Thus we cannot wait until we get word from CHED if the Batangas Regional Hospital will be acceptable because the faculty selection, training and curriculum materials preparations have to start immediately.  We will have to expend time and effort and spend money even if we are not sure yet approval.  The University had already spent almost two million pesos to date in the preparation.  We estimate that we will have to spend another two million more just to prepare for the re-application.  This dream of starting a medical school will indeed need faith.  What if, having spent so much time and effort, we will still not be approved? The counsel of our church leaders in the Survey Team was to work hard and try, praying that we can open June 2014. The challenge given was to move with timeliness and courage and not doubt.  This is a challenge the University accepts.  If having worked hard, the CHED will not grant permission open a medical school in 2014, let it be so.  The SSD already gave 4 million pesos for the building and committed, in faith, an additional 12 million pesos for salaries of the two curriculum specialist.  The University can do no less.  Our constituencies, alumni, and friends can expect the best effort from us.  We ask the prayers and support for those moved by the Spirit to make the dream of a College of Medicine come true.

 Francisco D Gayoba, DTheol

President

Adventist University of the Philippines

* * *

http://filadnet.blogspot.com/2011/08/proposed-aup-college-of-medicine.html

AUP College of Medicine or School of Medical Technology?

“3.  Location of COM.  The best place for the COM would be adjacent to the present academic cluster and not near the New Gate as originally planned.  The location near the Tagaytay-Sta. Rosa road would be reserved for the future development of a bigger COM complex and the hospital...

“The building planned would cost around 70 million pesos." 

"The building will be used efficiently.  The COM will be sharing facilities with the Medical Technology (MT) department which could not be accredited until now despite their excellent academic performance due to lack of a building.”College of Medicine Updates August 2011

Plan B: 1,532 sq.m. for PhP70 mil. [PhP 45,691.00 per sq.m.] consists of several rooms at USD 1,659,573.00 [roughly USD 1,083.27 per sq.m.]

* * *

http://filadnet.blogspot.com/2012/01/blog-post.html

AUP COM Donor List

* * *

http://filadnet.blogspot.com/2012/01/aup-college-of-medicine-plans-b-and-c.html

AUP College of Medicine - Plan C [B-1+B-2]

* * *

http://filadnet.blogspot.com/2012/03/aup-com-updates.html

Temporary COM or Future AUP Administration building?