skip to main content
Menu
Back to Top

Chapter 4: Committees and Resident Evaluation

SURGICAL FOUNDATIONS COMPETENCE COMMITTEE (SFCC)

The SFCC meets 4-6 times per academic year to review residents. As each resident has different strengths, the SFCC aims to provide each resident with individualized feedback on their progress in Surgical Foundations. Each member of the SFCC (listed below), is given 4-6 residents to review per meeting.

The SFCC is comprised of:

  • The SF Program Director
  • Program directors of subspecialties participating in Surgical Foundations
  • The SF Program Coordinator
  • At least one external member

2019-2020 SFCC: 

Chair

Dr. Stephen Kelly

SF Director

Dr. Nalin Amin

SF Program Coordinator

Dr. Naomi Downer

External Member, Director OES

Dr. Ranil Sonnadara

UG CTU Director, Orthopaedic Surgery, JCC

Dr. Victoria Avram

UG/PG CTU Director, General Surgery, SJH

Dr. Cagla Eskicioglu

General Surgery/Surgical Oncology

Dr. Valerie Francescutti

General Surgery / Undergrad MEP

Dr. Ilun Yang

PD Obstetrics & Gynecology

Dr. Valerie Mueller

General Surgery, ACS Lead, SJH

Dr. Rahima Nenshi

PD Pediatric Surgery

Dr. Lisa Van Houwelingen

CBD Lead, Urology

Dr. Piotr Zareba

                                               

SFCC RESIDENT EVALUATIONS

Using an electronic reviewer form, the SFCC member comments and provides feedback on variables including but not limited to:

SFCC Flow of Review

Each resident is divided in to one of the following categories:

  1. Promote
  • From Transition to Discipline to Foundations of Discipline
  • Foundations of Discipline to Core of Discipline (SF completed)
  1. Do not Promote
  • Progressing as Expected
  • Limited Progression
  • No progression, requires remediation

The results of each resident as found by the SFCC are then reviewed by the Surgical Foundations Resident Program Committee (SFRPC).

SURGICAL FOUNDATIONS RESIDENT PROGRAM COMMITTEE (SFRPC)

The SFRPC is comprised of:

  • The SF Program Director
  • Faculty members from each subspecialty participating in surgical foundations
  • The SF Program Coordinator
  • The Resident Representative Group (RRG) President
  • The RRG PGY1 Representative

2019-2020 SFRPC: ​

DIVISION

Program Director

Gen Surg

Dr. Nalin Amin

Chair

Dr. Stephen Kelly

Gen Surg

Dr. Michael Marcaccio

Ob/Gyn

Dr. Michelle Morais

Ortho

Dr. Vickas Khanna

Plastics

Dr. Matt McRae

Uro

Dr. Edward Matsumoto

Oto/H&N

Dr. Han Zhang

Neuro

Dr. Olufemi Ajani

Vasc

Dr. John Harlock

Cardiac

Dr. Andre Lamy

SF Program Coordinator

Naomi Downer

RRG President

Dr. Sepi Mohajeri (PGY2)

RRG V. President

Dr. Emily Hodgson (PGY2)

RRG R1 Rep

Dr. Maryam Kotait (PGY1)

 

SFRPC REVIEW

The SFRPC reviews commentary provided by the SFCC for each resident. The SFRPC may recommend changes to the outcome of a residents individual evaluation (i.e. promotion eligibility). Any suggestions agreed upon by the SFRPC are communicated with the SFCC for consideration. 

In addition to resident-specific review, the SFRPC discusses overall themes and ways in which to improve resident progression. These themes vary, and include discussions on curriculum, communication, understanding, and resident experience (among others). 

Once the resident review and outcome is agreed upon, residents receive a letter outlining their individual progress in surgical foundations. Each letter provides detailed information on the following:

  • Date of the SFCC meeting
    • Those in attendance
    • The member assigned to review the resident
  • Date of the SFRPC meeting
    • Those in attendance (all review)
  • EPA Progress 
    • Transition to Discipline EPAs  (marked as competent or not achieved)
    • Foundations of Discipline EPAs (marked as competent ​or not achieved)
  • Individual resident strengths and weaknesses (personalized)
  • Themes found throughout the review (all residents)
  • Promotional Status 
    • Promote
      • From Transition to Discipline to Foundations of Discipline
      • Foundations of Discipline to Core of Discipline (SF completed)
    • Do not Promote
      • Progressing as Expected
      • Limited Progression
      • No progression, requires remediation
  • Date of next review

 

Residents are encouraged to review the letter thoroughly and communicate with the SF PD, PC, and their home-discipline PD and PC should they have any comments about the letter and its contents / information. 

Related Pages

ft_logo_michaelgdegroote
ft_logo_mcmaster

© 201​​7 McMaster University  |  1280 Main Street West  |  Hamilton, Ontario ​L8S 4K1  |  905-525-​9140   |  Contact Us | Terms of Use & Privacy Policy