Designing a Road Map for Action to Address Bias and Racism Within a Large Academic Medical Center.

ABSTRACT: The convergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Black Lives Matter Movement, and the public anguish and outrage resulting from the murder of George Floyd in 2020 intensified the commitment of many health care institutions to pursue racial and social justice and achieve health equity. The authors describe the Road Map for Action to Address Racism, which was developed to unify and systematize antiracism efforts across the Mount Sinai Health System. A 51-member Task Force to Address Racism, comprising faculty, staff, students, alumni, health system leaders, and trustees, developed recommendations to achieve the goal of becoming an antiracist and equitable health care and learning institution by intentionally addressing all forms of racism and promoting greater diversity, inclusion, and equity for its workforce and community. Grounded in the principles of Collective Impact, the Task Force developed a set of 11 key strategies to effect systemwide change. The strategies affected all aspects of the organization: business systems and financial operations, delivery of care, workforce development and training, leadership development, medical education, and community engagement. The authors describe Road Map implementation, currently in process, including the appointment of strategy leaders, evolution of a governance structure integrating stakeholders from across the health system, development of an evaluation framework, communication and engagement efforts, and process measures and progress to date. Lessons learned include the importance of recognizing the work of dismantling racism as integral to, not apart from, the institution's day-to-day work, and the need for specialized expertise and a significant investment of time to coordinate Road Map implementation. Going forward, rigorous assessment of quantitative and qualitative outcomes and a commitment to sharing successes and challenges will be critical to eradicating systems that have perpetuated inequities in the biomedical sciences and medicine and in the delivery of health care.

Increasing the Representation of Black Men in Medicine by Addressing Systems Factors.

In 2015, data released by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) showed that there were more Black men applying and matriculating to medical school in 1978 than 2014. The representation of Black men in medicine is a troubling workforce issue that was identified by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine as a national crisis. While premedical pathway programs have contributed to increased workforce diversity, alone they are insufficient to accelerate change. In response, the AAMC and the National Medical Association launched a new initiative in August 2020, the Action Collaborative for Black Men in Medicine, to address the systems factors that influence the trajectory to medicine for Black men. The authors provide a brief overview of the educational experiences of Black boys and men in the United States and, as members of the Action Collaborative, describe their early work. Using research, data, and collective lived experiences, the Action Collaborative members identified premedical and academic medicine systems factors that represented opportunities for change. The premedical factors include financing and funding, information access, pre-health advisors, the Medical College Admission Test, support systems, foundational academics, and alternative career paths. The academic medicine factors include early identification, medical school recruitment and admissions, and leadership accountability. The authors offer several points of intervention along the medical education continuum, starting as early as elementary school through medical school matriculation, for institutional leaders to address these factors as part of their diversity strategy. The authors also present the Action Collaborative's process for leveraging collective impact to build an equity-minded action agenda focused on Black men. They describe their initial focus on pre-health advising and leadership accountability and next steps to develop an action agenda. Collective impact and coalition building will facilitate active, broad engagement of partners across sectors to advance long-term systems change.

Breaking boundaries through Doctors Reaching Minority Men Exploring Neuroscience: a mentorship model to foster a pipeline for underrepresented minorities.

OBJECTIVE: In 2015, the Association of American Medical Colleges report titled "Altering the Course: Black Males in Medicine" showed a decline in the number of Black men matriculating into medical school. To alter this trend, the authors' hypothesis was that formally exposing Black men to the clinical neurosciences during high school would enhance their chances of entering the physician workforce. For this reason, in 2007, the Doctors Reaching Minority Men Exploring Neuroscience (DR. MMEN) program was established at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. The program aimed to provide early exposure, mentorship, and inspiration to high school-age Black and Latinx men. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the DR. MMEN program in the context of the recent race and ethnicity trends among medical school matriculants (MSMs). METHODS: Association of American Medical Colleges data on MSMs stratified by race and ethnicity were reviewed for the period between 2015 and 2020. Data pertinent to the academic achievements of DR. MMEN participants, such as matriculation to college and/or medical school, were prospectively tracked and incorporated with mixed-methods exit assessment data. Qualitative responses were coded and analyzed using a thematic concept analysis method. RESULTS: Over the study period, the increase of MSMs in the US was 1.0% and 1.7% for Black and Latinx individuals, respectively. Changes for the male MSM cohort were negligible: 0.3% for Black and 0.7% for Latinx. With respect to DR. MMEN, 42% of participants from 2017 to 2019 earned college scholarships, and 25% of students from the 2017-2018 cohort matriculated to a combined college-medical program. Survey data showed that 100% of DR. MMEN participants found the program useful. Analysis of qualitative data revealed that participants considered pursuing a career in neurosurgery or in another medical field. Diligence and a passion for medicine were identified as the top two most important lessons in the program, and witnessing patient satisfaction and observing a neurosurgery operation were described as the most important experiences. Participants considered availability to give advice and feedback and a passion for teaching as the principal attributes of their mentors. CONCLUSIONS: Over the past 6 years, the slight increase in Black and Latinx MSMs has not been significant enough to remedy ethnoracial disparities among MSMs. In particular, Black male matriculation to medical school has remained stagnant. The DR. MMEN program is a promising model to inspire young scholars and improve diversity within neuroscience and medicine at large.

Role of institutional climate in fostering diversity in biomedical research workforce: a case study.

This article reviews the barriers to diversity in biomedical research and describes the evolution of efforts to address climate issues to enhance the ability to attract, retain, and develop underrepresented minorities, whose underrepresentation is found both in science and medicine, in the graduate-school biomedical research doctoral programs (PhD and MD/PhD) at Mount Sinai School of Medicine. We also describe the potential beneficial impact of having a climate that supports diversity and inclusion in the biomedical research workforce. The Mount Sinai School of Medicine diversity-climate efforts are discussed as part of a comprehensive plan to increase diversity in all institutional programs: PhD, MD/PhD, and MD, and at the residency, postdoctoral fellow, and faculty levels. Lessons learned from 4 decades of targeted programs and activities at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine may be of value to other institutions interested in improving diversity in the biomedical science and academic medicine workforce.

Diversity in academic medicine no. 6 successful programs in minority faculty development: ingredients of success.

This article describes the ingredients of successful programs for the development of minority faculty in academic medicine. Although stung by recent cuts in federal funding, minority faculty development programs now stand as models for medical schools that are eager to join the 140-year-old quest for diversity in academic medicine. In this article, the ingredients of these successful faculty development programs are discussed by experts in minority faculty development and illustrated by institutional examples. Included are descriptions of program goals and content, mentoring and coaching, selecting participants, providing a conducive environment, managing the program, and sustaining support. This article is a companion to another article, "Successful Programs in Minority Faculty Development: Overview," in this issue of the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine.

Diversity in academic medicine no. 1 case for minority faculty development today.

For the past 20 years, the percentage of the American population consisting of nonwhite minorities has been steadily increasing. By 2050, these nonwhite minorities, taken together, are expected to become the majority. Meanwhile, despite almost 50 years of efforts to increase the representation of minorities in the healthcare professions, such representation remains grossly deficient. Among the underrepresented minorities are African and Hispanic Americans; Native Americans, Alaskans, and Pacific Islanders (including Hawaiians); and certain Asians (including Hmong, Vietnamese, and Cambodians). The underrepresentation of underrepresented minorities in the healthcare professions has a profoundly negative effect on public health, including serious racial and ethnic health disparities. These can be reduced only by increased recruitment and development of both underrepresented minority medical students and underrepresented minority medical school administrators and faculty. Underrepresented minority faculty development is deterred by barriers resulting from years of systematic segregation, discrimination, tradition, culture, and elitism in academic medicine. If these barriers can be overcome, the rewards will be great: improvements in public health, an expansion of the contemporary medical research agenda, and improvements in the teaching of both underrepresented minority and non-underrepresented minority students.

Diversity in academic medicine no. 4 Northeast Consortium: innovation in minority faculty development.

In fiscal year 2006, the US Government abruptly and drastically reduced its funding for programs to increase the racial and ethnic diversity of academic medicine, including programs to increase the development of minority medical faculty. Anticipating this reduction, 4 such programs-the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, University of Medicine and Dentistry in New Jersey-New Jersey Medical School, and University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine-decided to pool their resources, forming the Northeast Consortium of Minority Faculty Development. An innovation in minority faculty development, the Northeast Consortium of Minority Faculty Development has succeeded in exposing faculty trainees to research and teaching that they might not have considered otherwise, expanding the number and diversity of their mentors and role models, providing them potential access to larger and different populations and databases for purposes of research, and expanding their peer contacts. After introducing the Northeast Consortium of Minority Faculty Development, this article describes the origins and goals of each member program.

Diversity in academic medicine no. 5 successful programs in minority faculty development: overview.

Despite recent drastic cutbacks in federal funding for programs to diversify academic medicine, many such programs survive and continue to set examples for others of how to successfully increase the participation of minorities underrepresented in the healthcare professions and, in particular, how to increase physician and nonphysician minority medical faculty. This article provides an overview of such programs, including those in historically black colleges and universities, minority-serving institutions, research-intensive private and public medical schools, and more primary care-oriented public medical schools. Although the models for faculty development developed by these successful schools overlap, each has unique features worthy of consideration by other schools seeking to develop programs of their own. The ingredients of success are discussed in detail in another article in this theme issue of the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine, "Successful Programs in Minority Faculty Development: Ingredients of Success."

Quality oversight for Medicaid managed care plans: impact on providers.

The purpose of this study was to describe managed care organization (MCO)-provider interactions around quality monitoring in Medicaid managed care. Heads of ambulatory pediatrics in institutions and private providers in offices in New York City (NYC) responded to questions regarding several forms of MCO-provider communications around quality. It appears that the current quality monitoring review process undertaken by managed care plans in provider sites in NYC is duplicative and overlapping. Feedback from the quality reviews is not being received by the providers who are giving care and incentives/disincentives are not felt. These constitute severe limitations to the current system of quality oversight.