Impact of an Innovative Endowed Chair Program on Medical Educator Recipients

Abstract

Purpose Rarely do faculty members receive endowed chairs as recognition for their work as educators. In addition to the title, endowed chairholders have traditionally received discretionary income to pursue value-added work. This study assessed the impact on recipients of receiving an endowed chair for education. Method The authors conducted a qualitative thematic analysis between 2018 and 2020, interviewing University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine chairholders who had completed at least one 5-year term. Authors double-coded all transcripts, reconciled codes, applied social cognitive career theory during analysis, and identified themes through an iterative consensus-building approach. Results Twenty-three of 24 (96%) eligible faculty members from 16 departments participated. Themes identified were symbolism, resources, education and educator credibility, development, and impact. The chair was a symbol that brought recognition, indicated quality, and amplified visibility and status within the institution and externally. Receiving an endowed chair conferred credibility on recipients and empowered them in the educational domain. The resources allowed chairholders the flexibility to undertake activities that were of value to them, to mentees, and to the organization. Holding the chair facilitated professional development for self and others. Chair recipients reported impact that persisted long after their term(s) concluded. A model of impact emerged, suggesting that simply possessing the chair title led to visibility and gravitas, which, combined with resources, allowed the holder to leverage opportunities in education. Conclusions The endowed chair is an important strategy for career development in education for the chairholder and enhances the position of education institutionally. Having a plan sharpens the focus on activities, results, and impact.

Identifying Value Factors in Institutional Leaders’ Perspectives on Investing in Health Professions Educators

“…We developed a semistructured interview guide (eAppendix in Supplement 1) based on 5 VMM domains (financial, individual, operational, social or societal, and strategic or political), adapted for education. We highlighted as exemplars 2 EIPs developed by the UCSF Haile T. Debas Academy of Medical Educators (AME): the Innovations Funding for Education program (IF), and the Endowed Chair program (EC) at $15 000 to $30 000 per year. The IF supports UCSF health professions educators to develop, pilot, and study curricular innovations with competitive intramural grants .…”

“…The IF supports UCSF health professions educators to develop, pilot, and study curricular innovations with competitive intramural grants . The EC supports the career development of AME members, with the aim of expanding their impact within and beyond the institution . We gave each leader a list of IF recipients and EC holders from their department or unit to illustrate these programs and serve as a prompt.…”

“…Investing in educators, educational innovation, and scholarship is essential for excellence in medical education, a core mission of all medical schools and health care . Studies demonstrate the benefit of intramural grants and endowed chair programs to outcomes like education innovation and educator growth . Yet, funding for medical education, including for innovation and the educators themselves, remains at significant risk as academic medical centers (AMCs) face declining revenue from the clinical and research enterprises along with increasing costs of undergraduate and graduate medical education .…”

The Future of Endowed Chairs in Academic Medicine

“…Chin-Hong and colleagues 2 interviewed 23 medical educators at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine who received endowed chairs for their work as educators. It appears that value, use, and support of endowed chairs among this cohort, selected as part of a novel program, were thematically equivalent to the experiences of colleagues who received endowed chairs for their work as researchers.…”

“…Editor's Note: This is an Invited Commentary on Thorndyke This issue of Academic Medicine includes 2 thoughtful and provocative articles on the strategic deployment of endowed chairs in schools of medicine. 1,2 Together, they cause us to step back and examine the timehonored tradition of how endowed funds are awarded and allocated in our institutions. Favoring certain disciplines for these funds, such as basic science research, results in inequities, both in the institutional priorities expressed by which work is rewarded over generations and in the priorities shown by who receives these endowments, typically faculty from historically advantaged groups.…”