California Northstate University College of Medicine(CNUCOM): Avoid this school at all costs!

[jhmmd]

The Kings are involved because the new site of their medical center is the Kings former stadium, I'm guessing they must own the stadium or something because apparently they had to sign off on the medical school building there

Well the Kings got rid of K St. mall so I guess what goes around comes around

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[jhmmd]

No doubt. You are 1,000,000% correct.

The issue is with the people behind the school, the for-profit business model, the disregard for diversity in recruiting and enrollment, the lack of availability of federal loans, financial aid, etc., etc., etc. These were concerns from Day One, but they received preliminary and then provisional accreditation, and then went to town, apparently remaining focused on everything but addressing LCME concerns. And now here they are, deficient in not one, not two, but ALL areas, and not being placed on probation, but being flat out denied, which is apparently unprecedented, other than in the SJB case.

As a result, no one seems to know how an appeal will go, since no one has seen this before, other than with SJB, where there was no public disclosure until the very end, after whatever appeal was heard, when the accreditation was indeed pulled. So all the experts know is that it's happened before, and LCME apparently did not consider impact on current students in carrying out its mission.

So, I guess we need to stay tuned, because we have no idea whether LCME wants to work with management to fix this, or whether they are disgusted and want to use this as an opportunity to drive these guys out of the medical school business. It's clear that all involved want to see more medical school seats, particularly in CA, but apparently not at a cost of "anything goes."

I agree with you. To be clear, CNSU DOES have the chance to appeal, though, so it's important to remember that due process applies here.
With respect to your second point, I hope that the accreditation body gives CNSU a clear, concise list of things that they need to improve on with deadlines. Sorta suspect that funding is an issue, as I mentioned before...as often is the case with new schools.

 

[Go2Mars]

Oh my gosh. Who here who made comments are themselves physicians and who here that have commented have experience in state regulatory boards and in credentialing and licensing boards. I’d say little to none of you guys. Licensing new entities, whether it’s a new hospital or a new medical school has lots of regulatory tags associated with them. It’s a back and forth discussion between the entity being licensed (in this case Cal Northstate) and the regulatory board, in this case LCME and ACGME. Please don’t be an alarmist this school has a good reputation in putting out good solid students. Look at their match list. Look at their steps exams and benchmarks. They do well. It’s a fine solid medical school and they will work with the regulatory bodies to satisfy what they need to do to get their accreditation. Good luck to the students in the school. They are solid and will graduate to become physicians and will match highly at a residency program while doing it.

How did the council not know about this already? And why does it matter what CNSU tells a particular news station? This sounds like a big brouhaha over nothing. I understand that new campus =/= accreditation. However, it really does seem like CNSU is meeting most benchmarks. There will always be a disgruntled med student or two throwing shade.

Considering I originally created this thread to expose the ethical and legal issues of CNUCOM, I feel I should respond to both of these posts. The statements of "they will work with the regulatory bodies to satisfy what they need to do" or "it really does seem like CNSU is meeting most benchmarks" was exactly what the school has been advertising since they opened in 2015, and yet they have failed to do so for 7 consecutive years. This is literally how they were able to recruit multiple medical, post-bacc, and BS/MD students to their school. To me, that is providing false hope to vulnerable students.

This is unheard of for a school to have failed to achieve full accreditation status for two years following provisional accreditation 2-4 year prior. We also can't glossed over the absurd issues of CNU (go to first page of this thread to find these sources): financial fraud, multiple lawsuits by current students and former faculty members, lack of diversity throughout the institution, refusing to offer federal loans and scholarships to disadvantaged students, blatant disregard during the racial protest movements in contrast to other CA medical schools such as UCSF/UCLA/USC, lack of respect from other CA medical schools (other CA M.D. medical schools created a joint documents excluding CNUCOM during the COVID-19 pandemic to assure applicants and provide them with delayed MCAT deadlines), multiple conflicts with the residents of Elk Grove, environmental disregard to the surrounding wildlife reserve.... should I continue on the trend of ethical/legal/financial issues?

Source of other CA M.D. Schools (including the brand new Kaiser M.D. school) excluding CNUCOM from their joint statements: https://medschool.kp.org/content/dam/kp/som/homepage/admissions/California Admissions Deans Joint Statement.pdf

 

[jhmmd]

Considering I originally created this thread to expose the ethical and legal issues of CNUCOM, I feel I should respond to both of these posts. The statements of "they will work with the regulatory bodies to satisfy what they need to do" or "it really does seem like CNSU is meeting most benchmarks" was exactly what the school has been advertising since they opened in 2015, and yet they have failed to do so for 7 consecutive years. This is literally how they were able to recruit multiple medical, post-bacc, and BS/MD students to their school. To me, that is providing false hope to vulnerable students.

This is unheard of for a school to have failed to achieve full accreditation status for two years following provisional accreditation 2-4 year prior. We also can't glossed over the absurd issues of CNU (go to first page of this thread to find these sources): financial fraud, multiple lawsuits by current students and former faculty members, lack of diversity throughout the institution, refusing to offer federal loans and scholarships to disadvantaged students, blatant disregard during the racial protest movements in contrast to other CA medical schools such as UCSF/UCLA/USC, lack of respect from other CA medical schools (other CA M.D. medical schools created a joint documents excluding CNUCOM during the COVID-19 pandemic to assure applicants and provide them with delayed MCAT deadlines), multiple conflicts with the residents of Elk Grove, environmental disregard to the surrounding wildlife reserve.... should I continue on the trend of ethical/legal/financial issues?

Source of other CA M.D. Schools (including the brand new Kaiser M.D. school) excluding CNUCOM from their joint statements: https://medschool.kp.org/content/dam/kp/som/homepage/admissions/California Admissions Deans Joint Statement.pdf

Are you sure CNSU was not excluded simply because they are not a UC school?

 

[WildWing]

Are you sure CNSU was not excluded simply because they are not a UC school?

There are multiple non-UC schools on the list - USC, Stanford, Loma Linda, Kaiser, Drew.

Edit: Confirmed that Drew is private and independent.

 

[Med Ed]

Oh my gosh. Who here who made comments are themselves physicians and who here that have commented have experience in state regulatory boards and in credentialing and licensing boards. I’d say little to none of you guys. Licensing new entities, whether it’s a new hospital or a new medical school has lots of regulatory tags associated with them. It’s a back and forth discussion between the entity being licensed (in this case Cal Northstate) and the regulatory board, in this case LCME and ACGME.

The LCME doesn't license, it accredits. Some of us have been interacting with it for many years.

 

[Med Ed]

This is unheard of for a school to have failed to achieve full accreditation status for two years following provisional accreditation 2-4 year prior.

To be fair, CNU isn't the only relatively new school having difficulties.

CUSM was initially accredited in 2018 and it's still in preliminary, with the next survey date "pending." That's bad. CUNY was initially accredited in 2015 and it's on probation at the provisional level. That's also bad. UTRGV was initially accredited in 2015 and is still at provisional, with a site visit coming up in the next academic year. Fingers crossed.

That said, while any school can have trouble with resources and leadership, CNU remains an outlier for its sheer volume of shady behavior.

 

[KnightDoc]

To be fair, CNU isn't the only relatively new school having difficulties.

CUSM was initially accredited in 2018 and it's still in preliminary, with the next survey date "pending." That's bad. CUNY was initially accredited in 2015 and it's on probation at the provisional level. That's also bad. UTRGV was initially accredited in 2015 and is still at provisional, with a site visit coming up in the next academic year. Fingers crossed.

That said, while any school can have trouble with resources and leadership, CNU remains an outlier for its sheer volume of shady behavior.

This^^^^^^ beautifully sums up what I have been trying to say. And now, with current students caught in the middle, LCME has signaled with its determination that the school is "not satisfactory" in all areas, that it is going to address the situation once and for all.

Of course the school is receiving due process. That's why there will be a hearing, which the e-mail that was posted earlier in the thread said was scheduled for last week.

What we don't know is whether LCME actually wants to work with them to address their many issues, or whether they are going to use this as a pretext to just get rid of a group that has repeatedly, and in many different contexts, revealed themselves to be bad actors. And, if they want to get rid of them, are they going to have an opportunity to transfer the school to a new ownership group, or are they just going to order it to be closed by 2024?

 

[OK I'll Join]

I have been an observer of SDN for a few years. This thread has given me a reason to join and post, I believe there may be distortions being portrayed.

The letter from the school's administration to the students and staff of CNUSOM may be misinterpreted by many of the posters on this thread.

The letter says ,"The LCME determined that the COM was not "satisfactory" in all areas."

This can be interpreted as the school has been deemed satisfactory in SOME or MOST competencies, but not all. This seems like the most likely case. However, many of the prior posts have read it as every competency was unsatisfactory.

This jumping to conclusions and reporting as fact things that may not be true is unfair to the students at that school. I'm sure they all worked very hard to be where they are now and they are quite deserving of representing the field of medicine. I know that the critiques so far have mostly been toward the school itself, but please remember to be thoughtful about what you bring to this forum, as this could be affecting the lives and livelihood of many good medical students.

 

[OK I'll Join]

To add context to my post, I am the mother of a first year medical student, not at California Northstate. As someone who cares for, and loves a person who has been through the agony of preparation for medical school, as well as the amount of work that goes into being in medical school itself, I hope and pray for the best for those students.

 

[KnightDoc]

To add context to my post, I am the mother of a first year medical school, not at California Northstate. As someone who cares for, loves, and has seen the agony of preparation for medical school, as well as the amount of work that goes into being in medical school itself, I hope and pray for the best for those students.

With all due respect, while your heart is certainly in the right place, you are grasping at straws here. Not satisfactory in all areas means exactly what it says.

No way the administration would be so sloppy as to use that language if they were found to be unsatisfactory in, for example, 2 out of 12 areas. Believe me, every area was found to be deficient. That is why they are not on probation, why they were denied full accreditation, and why they asked for and were given a hearing.

 

[jhmmd]

With all due respect, while your heart is certainly in the right place, you are grasping at straws here. Not satisfactory in all areas means exactly what it says.

No way the administration would be so sloppy as to use that language if they were found to be unsatisfactory in, for example, 2 out of 12 areas. Believe me, every area was found to be deficient. That is why they are not on probation, why they were denied full accreditation, and why they asked for and were given a hearing.

The verdict's not out yet, though. OK is just asking people to not spread misinformation.

 

[OK I'll Join]

The prior poster does not have the experience or knowledge to make these claims as fact.

My respect and love goes out to all of you premeds. Use your independent and critical thinking skills you have worked to develop throughout your lives and throughout your formal education - Not only here on this thread, but anywhere you find yourselves.

 

[KnightDoc]

The verdict's not out yet, though. OK is just asking people to not spread misinformation.

True, the final verdict is not out, but, posting that the e-mail from the administration did not mean exactly what it said, and that it "can be interpreted as the school has been deemed satisfactory in SOME or MOST competencies, but not all. This seems like the most likely case." is the very definition of spreading misinformation!

 

[jhmmd]

The prior poster does not have the experience or knowledge to make these claims as fact.

My respect and love goes out to all of you premeds. Use your independent and critical thinking skills you have worked to develop throughout your lives and throughout your formal education - Not only here on this thread, but anywhere you find yourselves.

Whose side are you on?

 

[jhmmd]

True, the final verdict is not out, but, posting that the e-mail from the administration did not mean exactly what it said, and that it "can be interpreted as the school has been deemed satisfactory in SOME or MOST competencies, but not all. This seems like the most likely case." is the very definition of spreading misinformation!

That's not what I said. As an aside, I can never understand your posts Not very linear.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Would students/parents have a class action case? Surely there must be some contract law that was violated

 

[jhmmd]

Would students/parents have a class action case? Surely there must be some contract law that was violated

I think the issue is more clarifying the precedent that was explained by @soporspelare earlier in this thread. I'm not an expert, but it seems like there have been laws established for different types of colleges--and it's not clear if they apply to med school or not. That is what needs to be determined (as well as whether or not CNSU meets specified standards).

 

[OK I'll Join]

Whose side are you on?

I did not mean that you have no experience, I was referring to KnightDoc. Of course, I am on the students' side. It would be bad for the students at CNUSOM to have misinformation out there. All I am saying is that posters should be careful to present as much factual information as possible. Thanks to all considering my post!

 

[KnightDoc]

That's not what I said. As an aside, I can never understand your posts Not very linear.

Not you, @OK I'll Join!!! Sorry for not being more clear, but I did put the statement in quotes!

I was saying you are correct, the final verdict is not in, and then pointing out the irony in your saying @OK I'll Join was asking people not to spread misinformation while @OK I'll Join was actually the one spreading misinformation.

And, for the record, I have many years experience reading and correctly interpreting all sorts of written documents! I stand by my analysis of the e-mail in question.

 

[jhmmd]

Ok

 

[KnightDoc]

Would students/parents have a class action case? Surely there must be some contract law that was violated

What law? The school could only offer the accreditation it had. First preliminary and then provisional.

And what claim would parents have in any event? Notwithstanding what some helicopter parents might believe, and in spite of the fact that their finances are reviewed when schools determine whether to provide need-based tuition discounts, the students are all legal adults and the parents are not the schools' customers!

If there was a viable claim, it would have been brought when SJB lost its accreditation. There isn't. The school can't sell something it doesn't have, and, caveat emptor. People need to take some responsibility for knowing what they are buying. In this case, a seat at a shady for-profit with a provisional accreditation that was subject to a final review.

If they were offered medical school instruction at a school with a provisional accreditation, they received exactly what they paid for. No one is guaranteed a residency match. That includes the ability to enter the match if the school granting your degree is not accredited at the time your degree is awarded, your reasonable expectation notwithstanding. I am pretty sure contract law governs what's in a contract, not what's in your head when you sign a contract, and certainly not a guaranty against anything that could go wrong after you sign a contract.

If CNU took their money, closed its doors, and failed to provide refunds, that would be the basis of a claim. Not failing to receive full accreditation, unless the matriculation agreement made some kind of guarantee regarding the school receiving full accreditation. Given how everything ,and I mean everything, in this process is stacked against applicants, what do you think the odds are of that being in any matriculation agreement, let alone the one these dudes have their students sign?

 

[jhmmd]

What law? The school could only offer the accreditation it had. First preliminary and then provisional.

And what claim would parents have in any event? Notwithstanding what some helicopter parents might believe, and in spite of the fact that their finances are reviewed when schools determine whether to provide need-based tuition discounts, the students are all legal adults and the parents are not the schools' customers!

If there was a viable claim, it would have been brought when SJB lost its accreditation. There isn't. The school can't sell something it doesn't have, and, caveat emptor. People need to take some responsibility for knowing what they are buying. In this case, a seat at a shady for-profit with a provisional accreditation that was subject to a final review.

If they were offered medical school instruction at a school with a provisional accreditation, they received exactly what they paid for. No one is guaranteed a residency match. That includes the ability to enter the match if the school granting your degree is not accredited at the time your degree is awarded.

Like I said above--for-profit isn't necessarily a bad thing. Let's remember to stick to the facts, eh?
1. Do students at CNSU have a viable case? This hasn't been determined yet.
2. Does the school merit full accreditation? This hasn't been determined yet.

I feel like a broken record.

 

[chilly_md]

Being denied full accreditation is indictment enough. I hope current students are able to graduate and match, but under no circumstances can this school be recommended to perspective students at present time.

 

[KnightDoc]

Like I said above--for-profit isn't necessarily a bad thing. Let's remember to stick to the facts, eh?
1. Do students at CNSU have a viable case? This hasn't been determined yet.
2. Does the school merit full accreditation? This hasn't been determined yet.

I feel like a broken record.

I hear you, and generally agree with you, in all of your posts, but I respectfully disagree here. I think for-profit directly led to all of this school's issues, from the very beginning. The fact that there is no law against it existing is the very reason the poor students find themselves in the situation they are in right now. But make no mistake, cutting corners because their primary motive is returning money to investors is the reason CNU finds itself where it is right now.

LCME expectations are not a mystery. Many schools have opened in the past 20 years and successfully navigated the process. The people running CNU are not unfamiliar with the process. Profits, ROI and limiting capital expenditures have to be at the very center of why CNU is deficient in all areas, and that goes directly to its status as a for-profit. Maybe it's a coincidence, or sheer bad luck, but it is the only for-profit MD school in the mainland US, and also the only school find itself in this situation.

Maybe I'm stupid since I clearly lack experience, but I am entitled to an opinion like anyone else, and I see a cause and effect here. Of course, YMMV.

 

[jhmmd]

I hear you, and generally agree with you, in all of your posts, but I respectfully disagree here. I think for-profit directly led to all of this school's issues, from the very beginning. The fact that there is no law against it existing is the very reason the poor students find themselves in the situation they are in right now. But make no mistake, cutting corners because their primary motive is returning money to investors is the reason CNU finds itself where it is right now.

LCME expectations are not a mystery. Many schools have opened in the past 20 years and successfully navigated the process. The people running CNU are not unfamiliar with the process. Profits, ROI and limiting capital expenditures have to be at the very center of why CNU is deficient in all areas, and that goes directly to its status as a for-profit. Maybe it's a coincidence, or sheer bad luck, but it is the only for-profit MD school in the mainland US, and also the only school find itself in this situation.

Maybe I'm stupid since I clearly lack experience, but I am entitled to an opinion like anyone else, and I see a cause and effect here. Of course, YMMV.

I'm not calling you stupid, but that's called an outlier.

 

[KnightDoc]

I'm not calling you stupid, but that's called an outlier.

I know! I was preemptively calling myself stupid to get in front of any comment regarding me having no experience and therefore no idea what I'm talking about.

Yes, it's an outlier, but I don't think it's a coincidence. If it's such a brilliant, feasible idea, where are all the thriving, legit for-profit MD programs, since it's such a sellers' market?

 

[Mr.Smile12]

I'll just let the process play itself out. But many of us are familiar with the process as mock reviewers or actual reviewers or the petitioners that we do see how this situation is extremely unusual and could be bad.

 

[Goro]

I have been an observer of SDN for a few years. This thread has given me a reason to join and post, I believe there may be distortions being portrayed.

The letter from the school's administration to the students and staff of CNUSOM may be misinterpreted by many of the posters on this thread.

The letter says ,"The LCME determined that the COM was not "satisfactory" in all areas."

This can be interpreted as the school has been deemed satisfactory in SOME or MOST competencies, but not all. This seems like the most likely case. However, many of the prior posts have read it as every competency was unsatisfactory.

This jumping to conclusions and reporting as fact things that may not be true is unfair to the students at that school. I'm sure they all worked very hard to be where they are now and they are quite deserving of representing the field of medicine. I know that the critiques so far have mostly been toward the school itself, but please remember to be thoughtful about what you bring to this forum, as this could be affecting the lives and livelihood of many good medical students.

One parent to another, I understand fully where you're coming from, and I sympathize.

Alas, two separate sources access to the LCME have told me CNU was deficient in all twelve accreditation areas.

What CNU was feeding you and the students is called in the scientific world as "spin".

 

[FootballAndSkiing]

I know a lot of you blame the school's problems on its for profit status, and its loyalty more to the investors rather than its students. What I don't get is, won't they go out of business? Won't they get sued? Was all of this to make money for 5 years for a few a few people then get shut down? At some point I feel like you have to say regardless of their profit status, they just seem to be flat out inept or blatantly disregarding the rules. Someone must have miscalculated because money does not seem like its working as the incentive to succeed. They have to be losing money at this point right?

 

[jhmmd]

I know a lot of you blame the school's problems on its for profit status, and its loyalty more to the investors rather than its students. What I don't get is, won't they go out of business? Won't they get sued? Was all of this to make money for 5 years for a few a few people then get shut down? At some point I feel like you have to say regardless of their profit status, they just seem to be flat out inept or blatantly disregarding the rules. Someone must have miscalculated because money does not seem like its working as the incentive to succeed. They have to be losing money at this point right?

Well I'm sure that that's not intentional. Businesses flop all the time and nobody plans for that.

 

[jhmmd]

I know! I was preemptively calling myself stupid to get in front of any comment regarding me having no experience and therefore no idea what I'm talking about.

Yes, it's an outlier, but I don't think it's a coincidence. If it's such a brilliant, feasible idea, where are all the thriving, legit for-profit MD programs, since it's such a sellers' market?

Once Banned, For-Profit Medical Schools Are On The Rise Again In The U.S.

Montana is one of only four states without a medical school, and two groups with different financial models hope to remedy that. One plans a for-profit school, but critics say students may suffer.

www.npr.org

 

[Med Ed]

If it's such a brilliant, feasible idea, where are all the thriving, legit for-profit MD programs, since it's such a sellers' market?

Grenada, Sint Maarten...

 

[Med Ed]

Once Banned, For-Profit Medical Schools Are On The Rise Again In The U.S.

Montana is one of only four states without a medical school, and two groups with different financial models hope to remedy that. One plans a for-profit school, but critics say students may suffer.

www.npr.org

Those are osteopathic programs. It's easy to conceptualize a viable for-profit school model operating under COCA accreditation.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

I hear you, and generally agree with you, in all of your posts, but I respectfully disagree here. I think for-profit directly led to all of this school's issues, from the very beginning. The fact that there is no law against it existing is the very reason the poor students find themselves in the situation they are in right now. But make no mistake, cutting corners because their primary motive is returning money to investors is the reason CNU finds itself where it is right now.

LCME expectations are not a mystery. Many schools have opened in the past 20 years and successfully navigated the process. The people running CNU are not unfamiliar with the process. Profits, ROI and limiting capital expenditures have to be at the very center of why CNU is deficient in all areas, and that goes directly to its status as a for-profit. Maybe it's a coincidence, or sheer bad luck, but it is the only for-profit MD school in the mainland US, and also the only school find itself in this situation.

Maybe I'm stupid since I clearly lack experience, but I am entitled to an opinion like anyone else, and I see a cause and effect here. Of course, YMMV.

Based on how misleading the school response was to this, I almost guarantee that there was some sort of false advertising that went on to recruit old classes.

 

[KnightDoc]

Based on how misleading the school response was to this, I almost guarantee that there was some sort of false advertising that went on to recruit old classes.

To be fair, there has not yet been a final outcome, so we don't know just how misleading their response was. As far as suing them goes, anyone who is disgruntled should definitely have at it.

Just go back and look at @Go2Mars' initial posts. There are currently a bunch of pissed off former BS/MD students suing them. Let's see how that goes. People got involved with a bunch of sleazy characters and are later shocked that they aren't treated well.

Specifically with respect to the BS/MD thing, ALL programs have outs in case they don't want the student at the end of the day. Normal programs don't liberally invoke those outs like these guys did, but those outs are there for a reason -- to protect the school from being forced to admit people who don't meet their standards.

The thing about needing to pass an interview is a catch-all that any school could always use to exclude anyone, regardless of their stats or anything else. Don't you think there are a bunch of 3.95/520+ applicants in regular admissions who would love to sue Harvard every year?

A BS/MD program with a "guarantee" that is contingent on later going through an interview screen is only as good as the good faith of the people doing the interviews, (i.e., not worth the paper the guarantee is written on). My prediction is that some pissed off former BS/MD students are going to learn a valuable lesson about the enforceability of verbal modifications ("don't worry -- the interview is only a formality"! ) to written agreements. All the time I spent watching Judge Judy might not turn out to have been as big a waste as my parents thought!

These things are written by lawyers. I seriously doubt the students here will prevail. It's true that normal schools don't use this technicality to exclude people, but CNU was never a normal school. My guess is that the students in the early BS/MD classes were weaker than whoever they were attracting before this accreditation thing blew up, and they used the technicality to exclude the weaker students in order to create room for stronger ones. An argument that they received verbal assurances that this would not happen will fall flat when the school produces a contract giving them the right to do what they did.

Same thing here. What false advertising? That they are provisionally accredited by LCME? They were! You think anyone has anything in writing promising them compensation if the school fails to receive full accreditation?

 

[Goro]

I know a lot of you blame the school's problems on its for profit status, and its loyalty more to the investors rather than its students. What I don't get is, won't they go out of business? Won't they get sued? Was all of this to make money for 5 years for a few a few people then get shut down? At some point I feel like you have to say regardless of their profit status, they just seem to be flat out inept or blatantly disregarding the rules. Someone must have miscalculated because money does not seem like its working as the incentive to succeed. They have to be losing money at this point right?

Several DO schools have school that a for-profit med school can be a cash cow.

But right from the beginning, CNU seems to have had a gift for ineptitude. I mean, if you can't even write a mission statement, how good can the rest of the program be???

 

[Med Ed]

The letter from the school's administration to the students and staff of CNUSOM may be misinterpreted by many of the posters on this thread.

The letter says ,"The LCME determined that the COM was not "satisfactory" in all areas."

This can be interpreted as the school has been deemed satisfactory in SOME or MOST competencies, but not all. This seems like the most likely case. However, many of the prior posts have read it as every competency was unsatisfactory.

The LCME defines 12 standards that all medical schools must meet in order to be accredited. Each standards is subdivided into parts or elements, in total there are about 100 of them. Some carry more weight than others.

You are probably correct, the statement by the school does not necessarily mean there were deficiencies in all 12 standards (although it is conceivable that there were). When SLU was put on probation back in 2017 the letter from the LCME was made public. It included 20 areas deemed unsatisfactory, spread among standards 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Pointing out that they did fine on standards 2, 4, 5, 11, and 12 is technically true but remains cold comfort.

 

[KnightDoc]

The LCME defines 12 standards that all medical schools must meet in order to be accredited. Each standards is subdivided into parts or elements, in total there are about 100 of them. Some carry more weight than others.

You are probably correct, the statement by the school does not necessarily mean there were deficiencies in all 12 standards (although it is conceivable that there were). When SLU was put on probation back in 2017 the letter from the LCME was made public. It included 20 areas deemed unsatisfactory, spread among standards 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Pointing out that they did fine on standards 2, 4, 5, 11, and 12 is technically true but remains cold comfort.

Actually, @Goro seems to be kind of plugged in here:

One parent to another, I understand fully where you're coming from, and I sympathize.

Alas, two separate sources access to the LCME have told me CNU was deficient in all twelve accreditation areas.

What CNU was feeding you and the students is called in the scientific world as "spin".

I think most would agree that CNU being placed on probation would actually be a great outcome for them under the circumstances, and that everyone's fear and concern is that, with ALL areas of review determined to be unsatisfactory, that outcome is far from certain.

 

[WildWing]

LCME site has been updated:

Accredited U.S. Programs | LCME

lcme.org

CNU's Accreditation Status is now listed in "Provisional, on Probation" status. The next survey date is Pending, but that is not a change.

 

[jhmmd]

LCME site has been updated:

Accredited U.S. Programs | LCME

lcme.org

CNU's Accreditation Status is now listed in "Provisional, on Probation" status. The next survey date is Pending, but that is not a change.

Thank you for updating us, WildWing!

 

[ToliBro]

Interesting. Perhaps LCME is offering them a remediation plan? Hopefully it will be publicized...

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Interesting. Perhaps LCME is offering them a remediation plan? Hopefully it will be publicized...

The LCME does not make plans. Look at the definitions in the glossary "accredited on probation". The university admins have up to 2 years to fix things or the LCME can revoke their accreditation.

"Any program placed on probation must promptly notify all enrolled students, any applicants newly accepted for enrollment, and any applicants seeking enrollment of this accreditation status."

 

[gyngyn]

Interesting. Perhaps LCME is offering them a remediation plan? Hopefully it will be publicized...

Here's a nice article on Severe Action Decisions: https://lcme.org/wp-content/uploads...evere_Action_Decisions.30-article-from-AM.PDF

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Here's a nice article on Severe Action Decisions: https://lcme.org/wp-content/uploads...evere_Action_Decisions.30-article-from-AM.PDF

Yes, thanks for the information. Let's see when the public notices all go out. This is definitely really bad. Anyone monitoring the acceptance thread? Or other Med Student threads? Match Day should be interesting.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Maybe I’m missing something, but recent developments don’t seem to be very clearly articulated here

Accreditation & Licensing

www.cnsu.edu

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Maybe I’m missing something, but recent developments don’t seem to be very clearly articulated here

Accreditation & Licensing

www.cnsu.edu

Give them more time since it doesn't look like that website will be updated until necessary. I'm more interested in the notification to students. This is like a slow train moving towards the bridge that's out.

 

[Goro]

Maybe I’m missing something, but recent developments don’t seem to be very clearly articulated here

Accreditation & Licensing

www.cnsu.edu

You mean like this:

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

That’s weird, the link was working on my pc

 

[MD-in-waiting]

If the school maintains it's provisional status despite probation, does that not mean its faults are fixable within a reasonable window of time?

See top row (Yes, Survey Visit, Denied*) here: