Okay, we're going to go
ahead and get started.

Welcome, everyone, to

our spring faculty
and staff meeting.

We have a pretty packed agenda,

so we're going to jump right in.

But before we begin,

I want to acknowledge
that our university and

our school occupies
ancestral Ho Chunk land,

and beyond this acknowledgment,

we know that we must learn
more and more importantly,

take more action as we work
to embody our mission.

So first up, it's a pleasure
to welcome to the podium,

doctor Elizabeth Petty,

our Senior Associate Dean
for Academic Affairs.

She will call our
annual faculty vote

to award degrees to
this year's graduates.

So it's all yours, Liz.

Thank you, Bob. Yes, every year,

this is something we
have to do every year,

which is to approve the list of

graduates so they can
get their degrees.

So if we go to the next
slide for the motion,

we need a motion

to accept the degrees of
the students who've been

certified by their
programs to get

their degrees from the
School of Medicine and

public health and that they've

completed their requirements.

That's the motion. It's
cumbersome language,

but that's the
language I was given

when I started here in 2011.

But that's the language
of the motion.

Okay.

So moved.

Second, and we need

a vote we need a majority
to vote. Thank you.

I think it passes with a
majority faculty vote.

And I am going to
welcome welcome up

Sam Lubner to briefly
talk about the MD match.

No, no, no, no.

Now that we've
granted them degrees,

we want to get them jobs, right?

That's the point
of the exercise.

So it is exciting to report

that the 2025 NRMP
data suggests that,

Applicants are still

this number of applicants
are still increasing.

We had an increase of 3.1% in

both MD seniors applying

but also MD seniors
acquiring positions.

So that was fantastic.

In addition, non US MD seniors

similarly increased
across the board.

So the fact that
the percentage of

MD seniors matching to
PGY one positions stayed

static reflects the strength of

US medical schools putting
people into those PGY spots.

So those numbers are
the highest on record.

Looking at the UW data,

we had on match Monday,

we had 162 students fully
matched out of 173.

So that left 11 without
specific spots.

So the student services team
worked very closely with

those students and
managed to reduce

that number to one by
the end of the week.

We did have three students
extend graduation

and then a number of
students matching

to a PGY one without
an advanced position.

And our pre so these
data reflect post SOAP,

the sort of match rate
and the fact that

we were in excess of the
match rate nationwide,

even pre SOAP was
pretty tremendous.

So a lot of effort in

advising our students
to apply to programs.

So by the end of
the SOAP process,

which was Thursday, we had

a 99% match rate,
which is fantastic.

Looking back
historically, similarly,

our match rate is in excess of

the national mean by a
significant percentage.

So we are very proud of that,

and I think it

reflects the diligence of
the Student Services team,

our career advising director

Sarah Brask and our
ACAP mentor team.

So,  looking back at
last year's match data,

students who extended
their graduation by

one year, we went one for one.

So the student who
extended their program did

in fact match into a program
in their desired specialty.

So we are very happy about that.

Similarly, the folks
who had to SOAP into

a PGY one position, similarly,

all of them found
further employment,

seven of the nine into a
categorical program and two,

at least into a PGY two year.

So again, a lot of effort by

those interns who went through

the application interview
and match process

during a very stressful time.

So we are grateful
for that success.

In terms of top specialties,

internal medicine continues to

be a very popular specialty with

25% of the class in
internal medicine.

And in primary care,

our numbers of about 40%

of our matched
applicants matching

into a primary care specialty

continues to be very strong.

And within Wisconsin, we
have around a third of

our matched applicants sticking

around to do their
training here,

and we're really proud and

grateful for their
future efforts.

In terms of national trends,

emergency medicine
took a big hit

a couple of years ago with
match interest that was low.

They had a lot of
unfilled spots.

They have rebounded
significantly and

are back into one of our
more popular specialties.

The numbers for pediatricians at

our institution and nationwide
continue to decline,

and that is a trend that
we want to see reversed.

So summary, our students

continue to find success in

a challenging national
landscape of the match.

Our percentage rates
continue to be

excellent and well in excess
of the national mean.

Our applicants have gone to
competitive programs across

the country and in
30 plus states with

a strong contribution to primary
care with our dedication

to our state of

around a third sticking around
for residency training.

And you don't have to
take my word for it.

Ronnie AlRamahi, who is sticking

around for radiology residency.

He was a couples matcher.

But without Student Services and

the Dean's office and the WMAA,

I can't imagine how
stressed I would have been.

I can because a lot

of folks were really
stressed out this year,

but I was very grateful to have

such a great team
get these folks

the match outcomes they
wanted. Thank you.

Thank Hello, I'm Darlene Wood.

I'm the Director of Finance
and here with Kristin Seguin,

Director of Talent Management,

and we're going to
talk to you about

the administrative
transformation program.

We are really close to
actually going live.

If you can tell, we're all

the way on the other
side of that timeline.

But the Workday system
itself that we're going

to be talking to you about today

really goes live in July.

We've had training
starting in March already.

The system is going to
go live in July one.

Our SMPH users are going to
be going live on July 7th.

And just know with
this presentation,

we're doing kind of an
abbreviated presentation,

but in your packets,

there's going to be slides from

our recent committee on
academic staff issues.

So you'll get a lot more
details in those in the packet.

So what is administrative
Transformation Program?

This is a Universities
of Wisconsin

wide system re implementation.

The first phase of this
was actually taking

our pre reward system,
replacing Whisper,

and really changing that over to

the research administration

management portal called RAMP.

We are now in the phase of now

taking all of our
finance, our HR,

and our budgeting and some of

our reporting systems
and converting

them from current systems now

into one system called Workday.

The reason for doing this is

really trying to reduce
a lot of, you know,

what kind of has become a
very complex environment

to really do
administrative tasks.

We've created a lot of
workarounds because

current systems aren't
working as we need them to,

and they've been around
for lots of years.

They were built with
a different purpose,

and so now we're going to get

some efficiencies

related to that
administrative environment.

Now, we know it's going to
be slow going right away,

so we're going to not see

those efficiencies
all right up front,

but over time, we
will get there.

One of the other benefits is now

that we're combining all
of these things into

one system is that we will have

easier and greater
accessibility to

see both your
appointment information

for yourself as well
as for managers,

for your staff as well.
So the change impact.

So this is a really big change
that we're going through.

So it's really going to
impact all of our areas

here related to research,
finance, IT, HR.

So if you work with
anybody that does

any administration related to

those areas or you are
part of those areas,

there will be an impact
to you probably already,

but for sure in a
couple of months.

So just be aware that this
is a significant change.

So really start thinking about
this in timing this out.

Give yourself time
to take training.

Training will take a while

so you'll want to think about
over the next two months,

what training can you
check off the list as

you're going through
so you don't have it

all right at the time
that we're going live.

But give your time to
learn the system as well.

If you're working
with staff that

are in these areas that
are affected by this,

they're really trying
to do the best they

can to navigate all
of these changes.

So please be patient
with the staff.

Know that they're really
starting from ground

zero with the system
and how it works.

So please try to be

patient with the team

as they're working
through all of this.

And for everybody that's
actually doing it,

have patience with yourself too.

You're not going to know
everything on day one,

you're not going to know
everything on day 30 either.

Just, you know, please

try to do things to
help you de-stress,

walk away, take a walk,

whatever it might
be, and then come

back and then kind
of dig in again.

But please be patient too.

And we are going to get
through this together.

We're going to have people in

our dean's offices,
people from campus,

people from system trying to

help answer questions
as they come up.

So what can you do to
start preparing right now?

So the big thing right
now is training.

For any faculty that
aren't PIs or staff

that don't have any sort of
initiator or approval role,

your training is going to
start in a little bit.

It's going to start in May.

You're going to start
seeing things that you can

do as just a general employee.

So I need to submit an absence,

need to approve an
absence as a manager,

or you might need to just

find your pay stub, all
that kind of stuff.

There's going to be
more training on how to

do those kinds of things in May.

If you're a faculty
that is a PI on grants,

there is additional training
that's going to help

orient you to the new
naming convention,

the new structure, the
way approvals will work.

Just know everything's going

to look a little bit different.

There's going to be a
whole look and feel.

The naming convention and

numbering convention will
be a little bit different.

There is some training on that.

Your local teams will have
your more specific grants and

things more set up for you

and they'll be able to help you

on more specific questions.

But this training will give you

that broader general feel

of what the system is
going to look like.

If there's courses that

you have, you're not
sure what they are,

there is a link here
to the course catalog,

so you are able to then
go and take a look and

read more about those courses
that you've been assigned.

If you have been
assigned courses that is

in your Canvas at
the system level,

you should have an
email for that as well,

but I think you can get there

through this course catalog.

All right. I'll turn
it over to Kristin.

Okay. So as we are

cutting over or sunsetting

the systems that we're
currently using,

we have to come up
with some cutover

dates so that the
data can essentially

come from the systems
that we're currently

using and convert over
to the new systems.

So there needs to be
a period of time in

which new data is not
being entered in there,

so all of that data can
convert accurately.

So what does this mean
for you as employees?

Our HRS system is where

you go in and you enter
if you get a new address,

you know, you need to
update your address,

you would enter that
into our HRS system

is what we currently call that.

That's where you also
enroll in benefits,

and all of that is
going to be sunsetted.

And so we need to
have a period in

which the data we have
in there is locked.

So after June 14th,

there will not be
the opportunity to

make any edits into that system.

If you have changes,
if you move June 20th

and you need to make
your new address

known to the university,

you'll just hold on
to that and when

we can get into the
system in July,

you'll then go in and update

it in our catch up and go phase.

So that's a cutover date

that just to keep on
the top of your mind,

if you have any changes
during that period of time,

you won't be able
to enter them into

HRS as you typically do.

Also for time entry,

we need to get all of

the absences for this
fiscal year entered into

the system by June 14th
so that those can all

convert into the
new payroll system.

If you have absences,

maybe from anytime
this past summer,

if you took a vacation and

you still need to
get that entered,

please take the time soon to
get those absences entered.

We will be locked out of
that system by June 14th.

Your payroll and benefits
specialists will

be sending out very
frequent reminders

on these cutover dates and are

happy to walk through this with

you if you have any questions.

Remote work
agreements, similarly,

these will move to Workday.

They're currently done
in our HRS system,

and they'll move to Workday.

So if you enter a remote
work agreement now

with an effective date

when we're in the new
system, it won't convert.

So if you have a new remote

work agreement that
you're looking to get

entered that has
an effective date

of June 29th thereafter,

please hold on to
that, and we'll get it

entered in July when we can
get into the new system.

And then the last bullet that

I just wanted to call out
for everyone is parking.

We really make a push
that everyone gets

their parking application
in this first spin,

and this year, I think
it's really important.

The first spin will be done
in our current systems,

and so the deadline to get

in for the first
spin is May 23rd.

The subsequent spins,

they will happen in
Workday in the new system,

and that just comes
with a different level

of the unknown.

So I would highly
encourage everyone to

get their parking
applications in by May 23rd,

if you're looking for parking
for the upcoming year.

And then other information.

If you're a supervisor
or a manager,

there's some recruitment
cutover information,

there's some compensation
cutover information.

A lot of that is detailed on

our SMPHHR Workday
implementation site,

so please follow this link
and you can see a whole bunch

of other cutover dates that

might be important
for you to know.

Then cutover activities on

the research
administration side.

Proposals for those research
proposals coming through,

they need to be to
our dean's office

by Friday, June 20th,

and then they will have
to be processed by

RSP the following week
on Friday, June 27th,

So please do what you can to get

those proposals in
by then earlier if

possible to give
our dean's office

some time to get those reviewed
and RSP to review those.

Similarly, any agreements
that need to come

through our dean's office

in the research
administration area,

those two also have a Friday,

June 20th due date,

so RSP can process
those on June 27th.

And then for any award setup,

so Friday, May 16th,

this is the last day that you
can get your new projects

for your grants submitted and

set up to be able
to spend on those.

So that's awards in advance

or any of these modifications
or even new awards.

So for that one, please, again,

try to get those in
as early as possible,

but by May 16th as the deadline.

Unfortunately, if
those aren't set up,

there will have to
be a little bit of

a hold time until
we can go live on

July 7th for getting

things charged directly
to those funding strings,

those new grants
or those changes,

and we'll have to find a
different temporary location

to put those expenses

and then transfer
them once we go live.

That'll be a little bit of

the hold and then the
catch up period in July.

Um, all in all, Ramp is going to

be offline for really
one business day.

Friday, June 27th, at 4:00 P.M.

Ramp is going to go down,

and then it will go live

again on July one,
which is a Tuesday.

So that's for RSP

and all of the consultants
that are helping us

really get the new ramp system

updated and then get it
connected into Workday.

So only one business day.

So that was really good news.

There's also any other
cutover dates for research is

listed on the website that's
listed there from RSP.

On the finance side,

we just have a couple
of selected dates,

but trust me,
there's plenty more.

You could find the rest of
these out on our website.

There's also in the appendix.

There are additional
dates there as well,

but wanted to really highlight

purchasing and expense
reimbursement.

Purchasing, you're
really thinking

about from our research side,

we need to do a
lot of purchasing

to continue that research.

For this catalog purchases,

that's going to be going
through your Shop UW plus.

These are things that
are under contract.

The last day to
process those reqs

over $1,000 is June 18th.

Those under $1,000 is June 23rd.

That's about 2.5 weeks,

two weeks of downtime for those.

Then non catalog
purchase wrecks,

those have to be
processed by May 7th,

just coming up here
in a little bit.

Now, know for purchasing,

if there's things that
you can have purchased

earlier that have a shelf life

that can sustain
that time period,

really think about
that and how you can

pull and purchase some
items now in advance.

If you have a
purchasing credit card

or your department does,

those purchases can
go through as well,

so there isn't any hold on
the purchasing credit cards.

Then I think really
thinking about then,

if there's certain emergencies,

we need to just really
be reaching out to

your department and then
working with the dean's office.

Just as we see some of these,

we know some of the
research purchases aren't

going to have a
shelf stable life

that's going to last this long.

And so we know there's going to

be some, but please,
please, please,

whatever you can do to really
think ahead of how much

you might need
during this downtime

and try to purchase
that in advance.

On the expense
reimbursement side,

really something to
think about here

is really if you're
traveling and

you need a reimbursement
and you finished your trip,

the last day that you can submit

in the current
system is June 9th,

and then after that, it
won't be until July 7th.

So really think about that,

and again, You know
the system right now,

it'd be good for you to be

getting those in in
the current system,

otherwise, you'll have to
recreate them in Workday.

On the reporting side,
Workday is going to replace

wiser and much of the HRS
reporting that we have.

From the school side,
we are prioritizing

rebuilding specific reports that

we've created in the SMPH.

That includes
reports that are in

our accounting data
warehouse, the FAST system,

which is used for many
of our PI reporting,

Qlik reports, HRMed and CATT system.

So that's being worked on
through our internal team,

and then campus and ATP are

working on those that
are the broader reports.

However, unfortunately,
reporting is behind schedule,

but all of the teams,
our team, campus,

are really working hard to get

certain critical reports
ready for Go Live.

But there are reports
that are going to

be not available right away,

but might be three months
after, six months after.

So your patience will be
appreciated in this area.

Just know, we have a lot

of really smart people
really trying to work

on getting these reports
and getting them up

and going with the
new Workday criteria.

In a similar vein,

the PI reporting, you know,

in addition to FAST,

there's a lot of different
PI reporting that happens.

And so we are still
trying to work through on

how we can provide something

similar to what
you're getting now.

And, you know, we
know that there's

different steps we're going to

have to take in order
to get that done.

And so that is something we are

working on because we
know that's going to be

a really critical piece
to make sure that

we're really staying on
top of those grants.

All right. And that
is all for us.

Thanks.

All right, so we're
here to talk about

LCME and I want to thank

Dean Golden just to start
for supporting us through

the process and supporting

medical education
throughout the years.

And I'm sorry, this is going
to be your last kind of LCME hurrah.

I'm sure he looks sad.

You can't see him, but
he looks very, very sad.

But seriously, I
want to really thank

everybody who's been involved
in our LCME programming.

We've got a lot of
people involved,

and medical education
accreditation is

just one of the many program

accreditations that
we have to do,

and that's coming up and that's

what we'll be
talking about today.

But I also want to say that

all these other programs
have to go through

formal national
accreditations and

the physician assistant program,

the NPAS program, just did

their self study and

they had their survey
visit last week.

Kudos to Amanda DeVos

and all of the folks
in the PA program

for doing a wonderful job

with their accreditation
visit last week.

This LCME really

focuses on the medical
education program,

but they look at a variety
of different things.

The medical education
program they look

at broadly in terms of
all the things that we

do from curriculum to

student services and
everything that touches

medical education
from faculty and

resources, space, et cetera.

It also looks at
our medical school

Our School of Medicine
and Public Health

at our statewide
campus because we are

one medical school
across the state of

Wisconsin for the School of
Medicine and Public Health.

They also look very
carefully at all of

our partner institutions
across the state.

We know we've got great
regional campuses,

and now we just have
to prove that to

the LCME with lots
and lots of data.

LCME is an independent
accrediting body recognized by

the AAMC and AMA that is

recognized by the US

Department of Education
for accreditation.

You might have been keeping

abreast of some of
the executive orders,

and you may know that the
Department of Education

has been a little bit at

risk in terms of
challenges that have

been raised as has
been accreditation.

As of now, accreditation is
continuing as on schedule.

And there haven't
been any deviations,

but the LCME is

committed to demonstrating
and working with

the administration
sharing the desire for

high caliber
accreditation programs.

And the accreditation programs

are absolutely
essential in terms of

federal grants and
programs around

student education like
the financial aid,

eligibility for sitting
for national exams,

licensing boards, residency
programs, et cetera.

And this happens
every eight years at

medical schools to ensure that

all medical education
programs meet the standards

and to promote self evaluation
and quality improvement.

As I mentioned earlier, there's

12 standards or there's

standards across the
entire medical school.

These are the 12 main standards,

and within each standard,
there's multiple elements.

So there's 93 total
elements that we have

to review and that we have

to describe and we have
to do analysis on.

And again, it's everything

from strategic planning
and the organization

and infrastructure of our
school to student services,

personal counseling,
financial aid,

and everything in between.

A lot on curriculum,

a lot on faculty preparation
and productivity,

a lot on educational resources,
facilities, et cetera.

LCME will ask three
core questions.

Has the school established
their mission and

institutional learning objectives
for medical education?

Are the curriculum and resources

organized to meet its
mission and objectives,

and what evidence demonstrates
this and how likely are we

to continue to meet

this mission and meet our
objectives in the future.

Those are the three
core questions

across all 93 elements.

They'll look at each
element to determine

if we're satisfactory,
unsatisfactory,

or satisfactory with the
need for monitoring,

meaning that they feel like
we're making it right now,

but there's an environment or

a challenge that they
think could change

and might affect our status
for being satisfactory and then

that determines
whether or not we're

compliant on the
specific 12 standards.

Some of you may
remember in 2018,

which is the last
time we officially

went through the
accreditation process.

Again, there were 12 standards

and 93 elements at that time.

We were full compliance

with ten of the standards
and two of the standards,

they felt we needed monitoring,

and that's because
of the 93 elements.

They found that three
were unsatisfactory

and four were satisfactory
with the need for monitoring.

But the vast majority,

92% were satisfactory and

that's actually quite good for

medical schools
across the country.

Um, the specific
elements that we were

unsatisfactory are listed
here in the red with the U,

and that was around
strategic planning

and quality improvement,

diversity pipeline
programs and partnerships,

and feedback to faculty.

We have had to do status
reports, as you can see,

the years on top that we've
turned in status reports.

Those things quickly
converted to satisfactory.

We had a few areas,

four areas that were
satisfactory with monitoring.

That you can see listed here.
I won't read through them.

Again, we do status
reports to update and work

on quality improvement in

between to try to get
where we need to be.

As you can see, for
career advising,

which was satisfactory
monitoring up until this last in

2024 when we sent
in our report in

2024 for our 2025 outcome
of satisfactory.

The two year self study process,

I'm not going to read
through this slide.

I'll just go to a figure, but

it includes multiple things.

This is standard across
all medical schools

and you'll get this slide,

but it looks at a lot of

data that we have
to collect, review,

analyze, and address,
including data from students,

So an independent student analysis,

and then a task force that
oversees the process.

Then that results in
a survey team visit

by peers that will review
everything carefully,

and then they'll
write a report for

the LCME to review for our
accreditation decision.

This is just shown graphically
in terms of the timeline.

It's usually a two year
process of the formal process.

You can see that here.
Where that yellow arrow

is on top is where we are now.

I congratulate to

all the subcommittees
who have been working

diligently doing their
subcommittee DCI,

their data collection instrument,
gathering all the data,

analyzing the data,
identifying where we have

some gaps or some weaknesses

or opportunities
for improvement,

and we're in the process of
reviewing those materials,

analyzing the data, and
really getting it ready.

We will have a mock site visit

and a mock reviewers that
will help prepare us.

They will review
all the materials

that we are planning to submit.

They will come in, they will do

a mock site visit that will

run just like the
actual site visit.

We did that before
and most schools

do that and it's very very helpful to

prepare people so
you know what kinds

of questions may be asked
of the different groups.

They will meet with lots of

different groups that
include faculty, staff,

students, residents, and a
variety of different areas.

This is a very busy slide,

but I had to acknowledge

all the people that are
working so hard on this.

We have leaders for

every subcommittee that include

members of the Dean's office,

members that are
chairs of departments.

We have statewide leaders
on every committee,

we have project managers,

we have administrative
champions that

are helping navigate
everything and

then core members that bring

content expertise and
critical eyes to the process.

Congratulate and thank people

on this list because
they've been

instrumental in helping us
get through this and it's

truly a dream team of

individuals that
have been involved.

In the spring of 2024,

last year at this time, we

were really starting to
sort through everything.

Now in the spring of 2025,

we are just like

sorting through
the leftover socks

that still haven't matched.

We're going through that and by

spring next year when the
LCME visitors are here,

hopefully everything’s
stacked up really

neatly and nicely and
really organized well

and they see how awesome
our school is and how

awesome our medical education

program and our students are.

So the peer reviewers will use

all this data to see if we're

compliant with the
elements and standards.

They'll look at the self study,

they'll look at the data
collection instrument,

which ends up to be about
a 600 page document

with a couple thousand
pages of appendices.

They'll look at the
independent student analysis,

they'll look at the surveys
that our students do,

look at all the output data
on national exams, et cetera,

and really importantly,

they'll be meeting with
institutional leaders,

faculty, staff, and students
while they're here,

and they'll be trying to
understand all of our data as

they look at us and try to

determine if we meet
their criteria.

Based on those findings,

we hope we will be granted re

accreditation for the
full eight years.

If that doesn't happen,

they may have a shorter
term for accreditation.

They may place
programs on warning.

There's a few schools across

the country that
are our peers that are

on warning and require
more frequent reviews.

They might put a
program on probation.

I think that's extremely
unlikely in our case,

but I can never say never,

but I think that's very unlikely

given all the great work
people have been doing here,

or they may deny
accreditation withdrawal.

Those are the outcomes
they could do.

If we aren't compliant
with all the standards or

unsatisfactory in areas
or multiple areas,

again, they may require
additional visits,

additional consultations,
or like at the last bullet,

their status reports like
we've had to do last time,

and that's just regular updates

internally that we do and
send to the LCME for review.

So we do know we've got
some vulnerabilities.

It's not perfect, right?

There's always things
we can improve,

and we want to share
that information

with the LCME honestly.

We're not going to
sugarcoat anything,

but we also want
to present things

in the vulnerabilities as
positively as possible.

So some of the recognized

vulnerabilities
where we're doing

active QI around things
like student mistreatment,

around counseling and

mental health wellness
services for students,

a few areas in our curriculum,

responsiveness to
student feedback,

how we counsel students
about electives,

faculty appointments
and reviews,

especially for our
statewide clinical

adjunct faculty,
space in storage.

They look at things
like do students

have places to lock up

their backpacks when they're at

a specific clinic site or
hospital site, et cetera.

Making sure that no
matter where you

go across our statewide campus,

you have an
equivalent education,

equivalent opportunities to
learn, equivalent services.

They'll also look at
transitions in leadership.

Again, we've got a
strong leader coming in,

and I think that'll
be viewed very,

very positively, but oftentimes

they'll say, well, transitions,

we have to monitor that
a little bit longer

because we don't know what
a transition might do.

Certainly in our current
economic environment,

financial resources
might be an area that is

a potential challenge because

we may not exactly know
where we are at that time.

Busy slide, but just
to show in red,

these are different elements
and these are not all 93,

but these are the ones that

we are monitoring
internally at our school

with our strategic
Initiative and

Accreditation committee
compliance monitoring.

We meet once a month and thanks

to all of you in the room that

are part of that committee,

many leaders across
different domains

of our school are part
of this committee.

The ones in red and you'll
see multiple ones in red,

these are ones where LCME is
frequently citing schools.

It's not uncommon for schools
to get citations like

up to ten to 20
different citations

of things that are
not satisfactory.

You can see some of
these areas and some are

ones I just mentioned some of

the facilities or the space

or the student mistreatment,
things like that.

So to be successful,

we have to meet or exceed
the standards and elements.

We have to identify, address

the areas that we
want to improve.

We have to anticipate and

address any potential
threats that could

impact our compliance or

noncompliance or impact
student outcomes in any way.

And as we go through
this process,

it's important that
we continue to

be our own worst critics,

as well as our most
vocal champions, right?

We have to really
support each other and

work together because
it takes people

across multiple units from

our finance office
to our departments,

to our statewide campuses,

to our health systems to make

sure that we can deliver
the education to

our students really do have

extraordinary futures and match

well as doctor Lunner
talked about earlier.

Related to LCME,
there is going to

be a Med Ed Day this
year on May 29th.

The morning is going to have

a great keynote address
that's going to focus

on AI and some other areas

in education that I think

will be a really good
keynote address.

In the afternoon, there will be

an LCME workshop with breakout
sessions so we can get

together and try to
continue to work on some of

the areas where we are invested
in quality improvement.

We'll have our mock
visit in October,

our LCME survey team

visit just like a
year from now or so,

and we will be ready and

hopefully many of you can

engage in some of
this processing.

If you have any questions

or if you want to
get more involved,

and anybody want to
get more involved?

If you want to get more
involved, just reach out.

We're always happy to
have other readers,

reviewers, input from people.

Again, it's really valuable.

We're having right now
going through, as I said,

the review process of

our internal documents and

every edit that I'm
seeing people make,

it's like, oh, yeah, people

should think more
about this or that.

It's really helpful
to go through

that process to have other
people looking at it.

The other thing is
we are going to have

to identify residents to meet.

If you know of some great
residents who will be

dynamos as they meet
with LCME, let us know.

We'll be reaching out to
departments again to get names

of people and also meeting
with junior faculty.

They want to meet
with junior faculty

to talk about faculty policies,

promotion policies, their
roles in education,

their support for
their research,

their support for scholarship.

We'll also be reaching
out to get names of

good junior faculty to
meet with the LCME team.

That's not just a
medical education.

They want to meet
with faculty across

the whole spectrum of our
school, across every mission.

So with that, I'm
going to end and

we're going to this was
after our last LCME.

It's got to be fun, right?

I mean, it's always great to
work on quality improvement,

especially with such a
dream team of individuals,

all of you that are here and
all of you that are online.

But it's got to be
fun and really see

some of that difference that

we make by doing this process.

So I want to thank
you all in advance,

and I'm grateful for
all that you do.

And with that, I'm going to turn

it over to the team that's
going to be talking

about some of those
executive orders

and how they may impact
what's going on.

So I'm going to
invite Connie and

to come on up and
to share information.

Thank you. Hello, everyone.

I am Connie Schulze.

I'm the Director of
Government Affairs for

SMPH and UW Health.

In my role, I am

responsible for developing
and implementing

our advocacy strategy based on

direction and guidance that

I receive from
senior management,

but I'm based in

Madison and we know there's
a lot going on in DC,

we depend heavily on

our government affairs
firm based in DC,

known as Venn strategies.

We've worked with Venn strategies
for nearly two decades,

and we are fortunate to have

Elizabeth Lee with us here today

to present on
what's happening in

DC. Elizabeth has
actually been on

She's been our account
leader for 10 years.

She knows us backwards
and forwards.

We are so fortunate to have her

and there's really no
one better to help lead

us through the challenging or

complex environment
in DC right now.

With that, I'm going to turn

it over to Elizabeth to present,

and then I am happy to stick
around and take questions.

If there are questions
related to state policy,

of course, I'm happy to
try and answer those.

But again, Elizabeth's
really going to be

our expert on all
things federal.

Elizabeth, are you
ready to take it?

Thank you. Yes. Can
you hear me okay?

Yep. Okay. Great. I'm
going to dive in.

Thank you, Connie, for
that great introduction.

I'm going to split this
presentation up into two parts.

The first is Congress,

so the House and the Senate
and what they're up to,

and then the second is
the Trump administration.

I'm going to try and stick to

my ten minute allotted time.

So on the
congressional side,

the federal fiscal year runs
through September 30th.

So we are currently in
federal fiscal year 2025.

So that is the funding
for NIH, CDC, VA,

all of the discretionary
funding in

the government is currently
under continuing resolution,

which means completely flat
funded from the year before,

mostly because Congress couldn't

do a full appropriations bill.

We are expecting that the
same will be true for FY 26

and actually in this
current environment,

we are actually advocating
for a continuing resolution

because we think that
the potential cuts that

will be teed up will
be so dramatic.

So there was a leaked budget,

some of you might
have read about it

last week from Trump that

did significant cuts to NIH,

CDC, and others, and

so we're expecting that
a lot of people in

Congress will want to enact

that budget at significantly
lower funding levels.

So we are actually
going to go in and say,

let's stick with the
continuing resolution,

which is probably the first time

we've ever advocated for that.

So his official budget

will come out probably in
the next couple of weeks,

and then the FY 26
will get underway.

The other thing you might
have read about in the news

is of the budget
reconciliation process,

which is what Congress
is working on right now.

The goal is a big
tax cuts package

that Republicans
really want to pass.

The issue is, of course,

how they pay for that,

and that's where
health care comes in.

So they're looking at some
pretty significant cuts

to the Medicaid program.

Upwards of $880 billion.

So we're actually waiting
right now to see the text of

that bill and how
it might impact

UW more on the UW health side,

but certainly lots of folks in

the School of Medicine
see Medicaid patients,

and it will impact the
institution as a whole,

institutions across the country.

So we've been doing a lot of

advocacy around the
importance of Medicaid and

also the importance of
tax exempt status for

universities and
hospitals and things like

that because a lot of those
things are in the mix to

potentially pay for some of

these tax cuts that they
want to put forward.

So there's going
to be a lot of

stuff going on on that in

the next couple of
weeks and months.

The final passage is likely
not until September,

so we will rest

assured we will be working
on it every day until then,

and please try not to panic

until it actually goes into law.

I did want to mention they

just released a
couple hours ago,

the committee on Education and

Workforce released their part
of the reconciliation bill,

so every committee in Congress
gets a bite at the apple,

and they made some pretty
significant changes to

the grad plus and public

service loan
forgiveness programs.

So we're going to try and work

and understand the impact on

SMPH to some of

those programs because if

that goes through and
gets signed into law,

we could start to see the
impacts as soon as 2026.

Okay, so we will leave Congress.

That's pretty much all they're
going to do really through

the end of the summer are

Is the appropriations process
and reconciliation,

so they don't have the attention
span for anything else,

so that really covers it.

I'm going to move on to
agencies in the White House.

So as you may have
read, they're doing

a significant
restructuring of HHS.

Secretary RFK junior
wants to reduce

HHS workforce by 20%
and streamline HHS,

which currently
has 28 divisions.

So divisions like
the NIH, the FDA,

he wants to streamline those from

28 to 15 and reduce a lot
of the regional offices.

So the biggest impact obviously
is on NIH and whether

we have the workforce
there to support

grant renewals and stuffing
the advisory committees,

et cetera, et cetera.

So Jay Bhattacharya has

been there for a
couple of weeks now,

so we're waiting to see how

he enacts some of these things.

But I just wanted to put

up a couple of names you
all might recognize.

Really, really senior folks were

subject to what they called
a reduction in force,

and they were essentially put on

administrative leave and
will never be rehired.

And so there's a lot of

upheaval at the senior
levels of these agencies,

which you can imagine is tough
on all the career staff.

They are also making
a new administration.

In that 28 to 15,

they are folding in a couple of

different agencies to a new

administration for
a healthy America.

That combines agencies you

might have heard of
like HRSA and SMSA,

and so we're going to be
tracking this closely.

There are a lot of things
that RFK Junior says and

espouses that actually fit in

really well with a lot of
the research that we do.

But the inconsistencies in some

of the messaging is
obviously a challenge.

We're trying to see how
this all shapes out,

who might run the administration

for Healthy America to see

where and if UWSMPH
should engage.

So this should all be in place

in the next couple of months.

Unfortunately, ARC, which I know

has funded grants
for us in the past,

is set to be phased out.

NIH, obviously, even without

the restructuring or
the reduction in force,

they're making huge
changes to how we can draw

down existing grants
and get new DRI grants.

So there's multiple I'm
sure you all know this,

but multiple levels
of justification.

The defend the
spends initiatives.

So every time you go back for

additional drawing down
against the grant,

you've already been awarded,

you're facing a
lot of challenges

on getting those resources.

We've also been
asked to attest to

not engaging in certain
DEI activities.

These are all things that
we expected from some of

the executive orders that Trump

released earlier in
his administration.

But it's happening fast and

the attestations are required
to be returned quickly.

And so they're really trying

to flood the zone or whatever

the terminology is to
make sure that we are

always back on our heels and
not able to fully respond.

The good news is the
15% indirect cost rate

was frozen by a judge.

They are not moving
forward with that.

The question obviously is,

does the Trump
administration abide by

judge rulings because they

are not consistently doing that.

So anytime you
all encounter issues,

please let Connie know.

That's really important
for us to know in terms of

our advocacy with the
administration and with Congress.

It's helpful to hear those
stories in real time.

I talked about this earlier.

They leaked this budget draft.

It's hard to know
if it was real.

It was like a copy of a copy.

Obviously, some, bedraggled
career person leaked it.

So we're trying to determine
what of it is actually real,

what they might do on their own,

and what they need Congress for.

So happy to give updates once we

see the actual budget that
the Trump team is proposing.

There's a new set of

executive orders last week
targeting higher education,

they want to change
accreditation,

which is definitely even

relevant to the presentation
right before me,

and how they want to change and

do additional
accrediting bodies.

There's also new disclosure
of foreign funding,

so just not really new,

but additional compliance and he

is looking to continue his
very aggressive stance,

which I'm sure you all
are reading about towards

some elite universities,
Columbia, Harvard.

And so there's interesting
splits just in

the university community about
How do we approach this?

Do we immediately cow tow?

Do we stand strong?

How are our board and donor

community going
to react to that?

It's been very
interesting to see where

different people have fallen
out along the spectrum.

Just ending on a good note,

Dr. Sterling Johnson came

to DC a couple of weeks ago and

testified on what gutting

NIH research means for
Americans with cancer,

Alzheimer's, and other diseases.

He was able to talk about

his incredible research and

all the research that
goes on at SMPH.

So he met with a couple of

the senators that
held the hearing and

we love having people in DC

and being witnesses and telling
all of our good stories,

so don't be shy if you're
interested in doing advocacy.

That's it. I can stop there.

I'm happy to take
questions or Connie,

if you want to after
either way is fine.

Hopefully I've stuck
to my ten minutes.

Yeah, we're happy to take
questions at this point

if that's how you'd
like us to proceed.

I'm not sure there are
people online too, right?

I'm not sure.
I think it’s just me.

Does anyone
have any questions?

Both of you, any thoughts

about the interaction
intersection

between what's happening

with our federal
government in DC and what

might happen in our
state government as

we move towards the state
budgeting season and

the other political
activities that

might resonate with
each of the caucuses?

Yeah, that's really
interesting, Dingl.

We're seeing that
on so many levels,

and I think the clearest
indication of this is

how slow the budget process

is proving to be
this time around.

We do a biannual budget in
Wisconsin, every other year,

we spend from about
January to June

figuring out what the
budget is going to

look like for the next
two fiscal years.

By now we've had agency
briefings and we've had

a number of hearings and
that just hasn't happened.

It's just been a
really slow rollout.

And so I think
there's a sense of,

you know, kind of caution
on both sides of the aisle,

like, what is going to happen in

DC and what is this
going to mean to us and,

you know, how do we
react accordingly?

There is still a lot
of talk in Wisconsin

about the fact that we have
a $4,000,000,000 surplus,

which we are in a really
good financial position

compared to other states,

and a lot of talk about,

should that come back
to the people in

the form of a tax cut, a
tax rebate, something?

You know, should you get a check

for a few hundred dollars,

however that may look in the end.

But yeah, there's definitely

trepidation on both
sides of the aisle

about how to proceed
specifically

with the budget is where
I'm seeing it the most.

But then, you know,

there are other things too,

you know, the reduction

in force that Elizabeth
talked about,

there's kind of a different
approach to it in

Wisconsin in this
return to work bill,

where Republicans want to see

all state employees come
back to the office.

So the governor has
said, you know,

he'll never sign
that if it actually

makes its way to his desk.

But that it's kind of part of a
larger approach to, you know,

state employees and
making sure that,

you know, people are doing the

work and that kind of thing.

So what happens in

DC does definitely trickle
down to the states.

Any other questions in the room?

I'll ask a selfish question.

I'm going to ask a selfish
question, Elizabeth.

Is there any rumor that PSLF
loans that were previously

forgiven would be
retracted in some way

that we need to be looking
out for on a personal level?

Thanks. A question
we should be asking,

that is not part of the proposal

they're marking up tomorrow.

But as they dismantle the
Department of Education,

everything is on the table.

I can't imagine well,

I can't say that anymore.

I think it's probably

low on their list, but
I wouldn't rule it out.

Thank you.

Thanks. I have a question and it

relates to the
Department of Education,

but also other executive

orders and other things
that have happened

where there's been federal
courts challenging

it or other groups
putting in injunctions,

how does that all play out

and how does that stall things?

Does that change things
or it feels like

some things just keep
happening despite
I know.

I know. So for the
indirect cost example,

there's a nationwide injunction

and they're not allowed to

impose a 15% indirect
cost rate on you guys,

but to your point, it
doesn't mean they won't.

And the groups who
have sued have gone

back to the courts,
given them examples.

But if you have a president and

an administration
who doesn't really

care about any kinds of

enforcement actions
or going against,

I mean, they went against
judges orders in some

of the deportation cases and
don't seem to care much.

So it's unpredictable

what they will comply
with and what they won't.

I think on the
indirect cost rate,

as I'm sure you've read,

a number of associations
have gotten together,

AAMC and others and said,

we're willing to come
to the table and

talk about restructuring
the indirect cost rate.

I think I think that was

a smart move personally
because I think the fact

that they're willing to
have those discussions

means that they won't
be as aggressive.

But it's really issue by issue

whether or not the
administration

will listen to the courts.

This might be really
far out there,

but I'm just thinking in terms
of some of our colleagues,

for example, in the
Nelson Institute.

There's a whole area of
restoration ecology.

I'm just curious if

anyone's paying attention
to the current or

the ecology of all
these federal programs

that have been in existence,

and if anyone's putting
any effort into looking

at In the event
that things change,

you get different leadership,

can we restore back
to where things were?

Yes. Yeah. So maybe betraying
my political affiliations,

but I was an appointee in
the Obama administration,

and there are several
groups that have

started of former HHS
employees that are

doing exactly that
because it's much

harder to build something back

than it is to tear
it down, right?

So some of these changes
they're making might be good.

I mean, it depends.
I don't want to,

you know, a rush to judgment.

Maybe they'll do
wonderful things

with this new administration
for healthy America.

But my suspicion is
that they will make

some errors and will
need to build that back.

I think there is some
funding interest

in that as well is like,

can we have a plan that's

ready day one to build back
some of the things that

need to be built back when

and if we get a different
administration.

All right. If there are no
other questions in the room,

I'll turn it over
to Dean Golden to

lead his final
town hall as Dean.

All right. Okay.

Well, it was wonderful to start

this last town hall that
I'll be participating in

in this capacity with

the annual affirmation
of our graduates.

The vote wasn't close,

which is a sign of how
we are all united.

Whether we focus on research or

administration, clinical
care education,

we know that while
the patients and

populations we serve are our
number one constituent,

all of our learners are
really close seconds.

So I'm glad we started
out with that.

I think that ATP and

LCME are in a way,
kind of burdensome.

But they are important tools
for us to continuously

find ways to improve our
efficiency, our effectiveness,

and to make sure that we are not

complacent in all of
our learner programs,

including not just the LCME,

but I hope you appreciated
that slide which

shows the amazing leadership of

Liz and her entire team
because while we do spend

a lot of time on LCME because
of its size and scope,

all those others are just as

important and in their own ways,

just as challenging, but
also just as much an

opportunity for us to
learn and to grow.

And then I guess it's
hard to say with

a straight face that we saved
the best for last because,

quite frankly, what's
going on in Washington,

DC is really,
really challenging.

And I guess the quotation
that comes to my mind is

an update of a famous
quotation from

the very earliest
revolutionary time

that we went through
as a country.

In which it was
written that these are

the times that try an
institutional soul.

And that was a
slight modification

of an observation during
another period of pain,

so to speak, that
we went through.

And like that
revolutionary time,

I think we will come out
of this even stronger.

There will be some pain,

maybe even some really
disruptive loss.

But I am absolutely

convinced because I know
the soul of this school,

and I know the soul
of this university,

and I think we will come
out guided by our values,

with our missions intact.

And I don't want
to sugarcoat it.

The next couple of years are
going to be challenging.

It's not the reason why
I'm passing the baton.

I had no idea that this
would be the timing,

but I am really

convinced that this will be

an opportunity for
us to reconfirm,

reaffirm, and come out of it
even stronger in many ways.

And as a faculty member,

I hope to be able to contribute

to that process
as much as I can.

I am really so heartened every

time I spend moments
with your new dean,

which took place just minutes
before coming down here,

I am convinced that Nita

has all the right stuff,
all the right values,

all the right expertise,

and a great leadership team,

including the dean's
leadership team

and the department chairs,
the center directors.

But the real secret weapon of

this place. It's a faculty and
the staff and our learners.

If I ever have an
occasional tough day,

if I can spend time
with some students,

it really recharges
my batteries.

Whenever I feel overwhelmed,

how are we going to
find our way forward?

I spend time with the
faculty and the staff.

I know that that's how

we're going to find
our way forward.

So I just want to
end thanking you for

the unbelievable honor and

privilege to work on your
behalf for the last 19 years.

We've really accomplished you

have really accomplished a lot,

and I am really convinced
that the best is yet to come.

And no matter what challenges
are thrown our way,

we will find a way
to trump them.

So thanks for everything,
and on Wisconsin.