Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 14, Issue 6, pp 327–332

Rewarding teaching faculty with a reimbursement plan

  • Gregory W. Rouan
  • Robert G. Wones
  • Joel Tsevat
  • John H. Galla
  • John W. Dorfmeister
  • Robert G. Luke
Original Articles


OBJECTIVE: To develop a system for measuring the teaching effort of medical school faculty and to implement a payment system that is based on it.

DESIGN: An interventional study with outcomes measured before and after the intervention.

SETTING: A department of internal medicine with a university hospital and an affiliated Veterans Administration hospital.

INTERVENTION: We assigned a value in teaching units to each teaching activity in proportion to the time expended by the faculty and the intensity of their effort. We then calculated total teaching units for each faculty member in the Division of General Internal Medicine and for combined faculty effort in each subspecialty division in the Department of Medicine. After determining the dollar value for a teaching unit, we distributed discretionary teaching dollars to each faculty member in the Division of General Internal Medicine and to each subspecialty division according to total teaching units.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The distribution of discretionary teaching dollars was determined. In the year after the intervention, there was a substantial redistribution of discretionary teaching dollars among divisions. Compared with an increase in total discretionary dollars of 11.4%, the change in allocation for individual divisions ranged from an increase of 78.2% to a decrease of −28.5%. Further changes in the second year after the intervention were modest. The distribution of teaching units among divisions was similar to the distribution of questions across subspecialties on the American College of Physicians In-Training Examination (r=.67) and the American Board of Internal Medicine Certifying Examination (r=.88).

CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to measure the value of teaching effort by medical school faculty and to distribute discretionary teaching funds among divisions according to the value of teaching effort. When this intervention was used at our institution, there were substantial changes in the amounts received by some divisions. We believe that the new distribution more closely approximates the desired distribution because it reflects the desired emphasis on knowledge as measured by two of the most experienced professional groups in internal medicine. We also believe that our method is flexible and adaptable to the needs of most clinical teaching departments.

Key words

teaching reimbursement teaching recognition 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Jolly P, Krakower J, Beran R, Williams D. US medical school finances. JAMA. 1990;264:813–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jones RF, Sanderson SC. Clinical revenues used to support the academic mission of medical schools, 1992–1993. Acad Med. 1996;71:299–307.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kassirer JP. Tribulations and rewards of academic medicine—where does teaching fit? N Engl J Med. 1996;334:184–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Culliton B. Health research feels the chill. Nature. 1993;366:200–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Campbell EG, Weissman JS, Blumenthal D. Relationship between market competition and the activities and attitudes of medical school faculty. JAMA. 1997;278:222–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hilton C, Fisher W Jr, Lopez A, Sanders C. A relative-value-based system for calculating faculty productivity in teaching, research, administration, and patient care. Acad Med. 1997;72:787–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Allcorn S, Winship DH. Restructuring medical schools to better manage their three missions in the face of financial scarcity. Acad Med. 1996;71:846–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barzansky B, Jonas HS, Etzel SI. Education programs in US medical schools, 1995–1996. JAMA. 1996;276:714–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harrison DC, Hutton JJ, Hillard JR. Funding for the colleges of medicine: integrated delivery systems to the rescue. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 1995;107:238–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Abdelhak SS. How one academic health center is successfully facing the future. Acad Med. 1996;71:329–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Culbertson RA. How successfully can academic faculty practices compete in developing managed care markets? Acad Med. 1996;71:858–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johnston MAC, Gifford RH. A model for distributing teaching funds to faculty. Acad Med. 1996;71:138–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shea S, Nickerson KG, Tenebaum J, et al. Compensation to a department of medicine and its faculty for the teaching of medical students and housestaff. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:162–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goodwin MC, Gleason WM, Kontos HA. A pilot study of the cost of educating undergraduate medical students at Virginia Commonwealth University. Acad Med. 1997;72:211–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bardes CL, Hayes JG. Are the teachers teaching? Measuring the educational activities of clinical faculty. Acad Med. 1995;70:111–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sostok MA, Luke RG, Rouan GW. Confronting the costs of ambulatory-care training. Acad Med. 1995;70:949–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Knickman JR, Lipkin M, Fickler SA, Thompson WG, Kiel J. The potential for using non-physicians to compensate for the reduced availability of residents. Acad Med. 1992;67:429–38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Korn D, Jones RF. More on compensation for teaching. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:1537. Letter.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rein MF, Randolph WJ, Short JG, Coolidge KG, Coates ML, Carey RM. Defining the cost of educating undergraduate medical students at the University of Virginia. Acad Med. 1997;72:218–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gregory W. Rouan
    • 1
  • Robert G. Wones
    • 1
    • 3
  • Joel Tsevat
    • 1
    • 2
  • John H. Galla
    • 1
  • John W. Dorfmeister
    • 1
  • Robert G. Luke
    • 1
  1. 1.the Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnati
  2. 2.the Center for Clinical Effectiveness in the Institute for Health Policy and Health Services ResearchUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnati
  3. 3.the Alliance Partners at the Health Alliance of Greater CincinnatiCincinnati
  4. 4.College of MedicineUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnati

Personalised recommendations