CUNY SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH at Hunter College
SELF-STUDY
PREPARED FOR THE COUNCIL ON EDUCATION
FOR PUBLIC HEALTH
November 15, 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0.
1.1.
1.2.
1.3.
1.4.
1.5
1.6.
Introduction .............................................................................................................1
The Public Health Program ......................................................................................4
Mission..............…………………………………………….……………………..4
a. A clear and concise mission statement for the school as a whole ............................. 4
b. Goal statements for major functions ......................................................................... 5
c. Measurable objectives relating to each major function ............................................. 5
d. Development, monitoring and dissemination of mission, goals and objectives ....... 8
e. Value statement ......................................................................................................... 8
f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ............................................. 9
Evaluation and Planning ........................................................................................11
a. Evaluation procedures and planning processes used by the school......................... 11
b. Results of evaluation and planning to enhance programs and activities ................. 13
c. Outcome measures that monitor school’s effectiveness in meeting MGOs ............ 15
d. An analytical self-study document .......................................................................... 19
e. Response to recommendations in the last accreditation report................................ 19
f. Description of the self-study development process ................................................. 19
g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met .......................................... 21
Institutional Environment ...................................................................................... 23
a. Description of the institution in which the school is located ................................... 23
b. One or more organizational charts of the university ............................................... 26
c. A brief description of the university practices ....................................................... 26
d. Any processes that are different from other professional schools........................... 33
e. Description of participating institutions and relationship to SPH ........................... 37
f. Copy of formal written agreement that establishes rights and obligations .............. 38
g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met .......................................... 38
Organization and Administration ...........................................................................39
a. Organizational charts showing administrative organization of school .................... 39
b. Roles and responsibilities of major units in the organizational chart...................... 39
c. Description of how interdisciplinary coordination, collaboration are supported .... 46
d. Written policies to show school’s commitment to fair and ethical dealings .......... 48
e. Manner in which student grievances are addressed................................................. 48
f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................... 49
Governance ............................................................................................................50
a. School’s governance, committee structure and processes ....................................... 50
b. Copy of the constitution, bylaws or other policy documents .................................. 50
c. A list of the school’s standing and important ad hoc committees ........................... 50
d. School faculty who hold membership on university committees............................ 52
e. Description of student roles in governance ............................................................. 56
f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................... 56
Resources ...............................................................................................................57
a. A description of the budgetary and allocation processes ........................................ 57
b. A clearly formulated school budget statement, showing sources of all funds ........ 59
c. Budget statement showing financial contributions of each campus ........................ 60
d. Number (head count) of faculty in each of the five concentration areas ................ 66
e. A table showing faculty, students and student/faculty ratios .................................. 67
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
i
2.0.
2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
2.5.
2.6.
2.7.
2.8.
f. A statement or chart concerning the availability of other personnel ....................... 67
g. A statement or chart concerning amount of space available to the school .............. 71
h. A statement or floor plan concerning laboratory space, etc. ................................... 72
i. A statement concerning the amount, location and types of computer facilities ....... 73
j. A statement of library/information resources available for school use .................... 74
k. Community resources available for instruction, research and service .................... 75
l. Amount and source of ―in-kind‖ contributions available......................................... 77
m. Identification of outcome measures school has showing adequate resources ........ 78
n. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met .......................................... 79
Instructional Programs ...........................................................................................80
Master of Public Health Degree .............................................................................80
a. Instructional matrix. ................................................................................................ 80
b. The school bulletin or other official publication that describes curricula ............... 82
c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met .......................................... 87
Program Length .....................................................................................................89
a. Definition of a credit with regard to classroom/contract hours ............................... 89
b. The minimum degree requirements for professional degree curricula .................... 89
c. Number of MPH degrees awarded for fewer than 42 semester-credit units ........... 89
d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met .......................................... 89
Core Public Health Knowledge .............................................................................90
a. Core public health curriculum in SPH professional degree programs .................... 90
b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met .......................................... 94
Practical Skills .......................................................................................................95
a. School’s policies and procedures regarding practice experiences........................... 95
b. Identification of agencies and preceptors for practice experiences ....................... 103
c. Data on the number of students receiving a waiver of the practice experience .... 104
d. Data on the number of preventive medicine, occupational medicine residents ... 104
e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 104
Culminating Experience.......................................................................................106
a. Identification of the culminating experience required for each degree ................. 106
b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 113
Required Competencies .......................................................................................115
a. Identification of school-wide core public health competencies ............................ 115
b. A matrix that identifies the learning experiences of the core PH competencies ... 115
c. Identification of a set of competencies for each program of study ....................... 115
d. How competencies are developed, used and made available to students .............. 117
e. The manner in which the school assesses the changing needs of PH practice ...... 130
f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ......................................... 130
Assessment Procedures ........................................................................................131
a. Monitoring and evaluating student progress in achieving competencies. . ........... 131
b. Outcome measures to evaluate student achievement in competencies ................. 133
c. Outcome measures – degree-completion rates ...................................................... 137
d. Destination of graduates by specialty area ............................................................ 137
e. National examinations for graduated students ...................................................... 137
f. Results from periodic assessments of alumni and employers of graduates ........... 138
g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 139
Other Professional Degrees..................................................................................140
a. Identification of professional degree curricula offered by the school ................... 140
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
ii
2.9.
2.10.
2.11.
2.12.
3.0.
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
4.0.
4.1.
4.2.
b. Curricula assure grounding in public health core knowledge ............................... 140
c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 140
Academic Degrees ...............................................................................................141
a. Identification of academic programs by degree and area of specialization ........... 141
b. School assures that students in research acquire a public health orientation ........ 141
c. Identification of culminating experience required for each degree program ........ 141
d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 141
Doctoral Degrees .................................................................................................142
a. All doctoral programs offered by the school by degree and specialization ........... 142
b. Number of active students in each doctoral degree program ................................ 143
c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 145
Joint Degrees ........................................................................................................146
a. Identification of joint-degree programs offered by the school .............................. 146
b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 148
Distance Education or Executive Degree Programs ............................................149
a. Degree programs offered in a format other than regular course sessions ............. 149
b. Description of the distance education or executive degree programs ................... 149
c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 149
Creation, Application and Advancement of Knowledge .....................................150
Research ...............................................................................................................155
a. Research policies, procedure and practices ........................................................... 155
b. Current community-based research activities ....................................................... 163
c. Current research activities of primary and secondary faculty ............................... 164
d. Research outcome measures.................................................................................. 164
e. Student involvement in research ........................................................................... 165
f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ......................................... 165
Service..................................................................................................................167
a. Service activities, policies and procedures ............................................................ 167
b. Current service activity ......................................................................................... 167
c. Service outcome measures .................................................................................... 168
d. Student involvement in service ............................................................................. 169
e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 170
Workforce Development ......................................................................................171
a. School’s continuing-education program................................................................ 171
b. Non-degree or certificate programs ...................................................................... 172
c. Continuing-education programs offered by the school and number of students ... 173
d. Continuing-education collaborations .................................................................... 173
e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 176
Faculty, Staff and Students ..................................................................................177
Faculty Qualifications .........................................................................................177
a. Table showing primary faculty ............................................................................. 177
b. Table showing other faculty .................................................................................. 177
c. Integration of perspectives from practice .............................................................. 186
d. Faculty qualification outcome measures ............................................................... 186
e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 187
Faculty Policies and Procedures ..........................................................................188
a. A faculty handbook ............................................................................................... 188
b. Provisions for faculty development....................................................................... 188
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
iii
4.3.
4.4.
4.5.
4.6.
c. Formal procedures for evaluating faculty.............................................................. 190
d. Student course evaluation and evaluation of teaching effectiveness .................... 191
e. Emphasis of community service in the promotion and tenure process ................. 192
f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ......................................... 192
Faculty and Staff Diversity ..................................................................................193
a. Summary demographics on the school’s faculty ................................................... 193
b. Summary demographics on the school’s staff ....................................................... 193
c. Policies and procedures regarding equal opportunity ........................................... 193
d. Recruitment and retention efforts for a diverse faculty and staff .......................... 195
e. Efforts to maintain an environment that supports diversity .................................. 195
f. Outcome measures for faculty and staff diversity ................................................. 198
g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 199
Student Recruitment and Admissions ..................................................................200
a. Description of the recruitment policies and procedures ........................................ 200
b. Description of the admission policies and procedures .......................................... 201
c. Example of recruitment materials ......................................................................... 204
d. Quantitative data on number of applicants, acceptances, enrollments .................. 204
e. Quantitative data on number students enrolled in each program .......................... 207
f. Outcome measures on number of students enrolled .............................................. 208
g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 208
Student Diversity .................................................................................................209
a. Policies and procedures and plans for a diverse student body .............................. 209
b. Recruitment efforts to attract a diverse student body ........................................... 209
c. Quantitative demographic characteristics of the student body .............................. 210
d. Outcome measures on achieving a diverse student body ...................................... 211
e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 212
Advising and Career Counseling .........................................................................213
a. Advising and career counseling services ............................................................... 213
b. Procedures for students to communicate concerns to school officials .................. 215
c. Student satisfaction with advising and career counseling services ....................... 216
d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met ........................................ 217
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
iv
TABLES AND FIGURES
TABLE 1.1.e.
TABLE 1.2.c.
FIGURE 1.3.b.
FIGURE 1.3.b.1.
FIGURE 1.3.b.2.
FIGURE 1.3.b.3.
FIGURE 1.4.a.1.
FIGURE 1.4.a.2.
FIGURE 1.4.a.3.
TABLE 1.4.b.1.
TABLE 1.4.b.2.
TABLE 1.4.d.
TABLE 1.5.c.
FIGURE 1.5.c.1.
TABLE 1.5.d.
TABLE 1.6.b.
TABLE 1.6.c.
TABLE 1.6.d.
TABLE 1.6.e.
TABLE 1.6.m.
TABLE 2.1.a.
FIGURE 2.1.a.
TABLE 2.1.b.1.
TABLE 2.1.b.2.
TABLE 2.1.b.3.
TABLE 2.1.b.4.
TABLE 2.1.b.5.
TABLE 2.3.a.1.
TABLE 2.3.a.2.
TABLE 2.3.a.3.
TABLE 2.4.a.1.
TABLE 2.4.a.2.
TABLE 2.5.a.
TABLE 2.6.b.
TABLE 2.6.c.1.
TABLE 2.6.c.2.
TABLE 2.6.c.3.
TABLE 2.6.c.4.
TABLE 2.6.c.5.
TABLE 2.7.b.
TABLE 2.7.b.1.
TABLE 2.7.b.2.
TABLE 2.10.a.
TABLE 2.11.a.
TABLE 3.1.a.1.
SPH Core Values .............................................................................................. 10
SPH Outcome Measures and Targets for the Last Three Years ........................ 15
Map of NYC Showing Location of Consortial Campuses ................................ 29
SPH University-Level Reporting Structure ..................................................... 30
SPH Campus-Level Reporting Structure ......................................................... 31
SPH School-Level Reporting Structure ............................................................ 32
SPH Organization ............................................................................................. 40
SPH Administrative Structure and Staff ........................................................... 41
SPH Consortial Campus Administrative Structure and Staff............................ 42
SPH Public Health Leadership Council ............................................................ 43
SPH Administrative Personnel.......................................................................... 44
Policies That Illustrate Fair and Ethical Dealings ............................................. 48
SPH Faculty and Student Council Standing Committees ................................ 52
SPH Committee Processes ................................................................................ 53
SPH Faculty on College and University-Wide Committees ............................. 54
Sources of Funds & Expenditures by Major Category, FY 2008-2012 ............ 62
Current & Ongoing Contributions by Partner Campuses.................................. 63
Number of Full-Time SPH Faculty by Core Knowledge & Campus ............... 66
SPH Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Ratios ......................................... 68
Adequacy of Resources – Outcome Measures .................................................. 78
Instructional Matrix Presenting SPH’s Degree Programs ................................. 80
SPH Degree Programs by Specialization and Campus ..................................... 81
MPH Specializations and Degree Requirements ……………... ...................... 83
DPH Degree Requirements ............................................................................... 84
MS and BS Degree Requirements..................................................................... 85
MS/MPH Dual-Degree Requirements .............................................................. 86
Proposed Curriculum for the BS in Community Health ................................... 87
Courses That Address the Basic Public Health Knowledge Areas in the
MPH, MS/MPH and EOHS-MS Degree Programs .......................................... 91
Courses that Address the Basic Public Health Knowledge Areas in the
DPH Degree Programs ...................................................................................... 91
Courses that Address the Basic Public Health Knowledge Areas in the
NUTR-MS and BS Degree Specializations ...................................................... 92
Practice Experience in the SPH Degree Programs ............................................ 97
DPH Practice Experience Locations, 2008-2010 ............................................ 101
The Culminating Experience in the SPH Degree Programs ........................... 107
MPH Core Public Health Competencies ......................................................... 116
Competencies for the MPH Degree Specializations ....................................... 120
Competencies for the DPH Degree Specializations ........................................ 123
Competencies for the MS Degree Specializations .......................................... 125
Competencies for the MS/MPH Dual-Degree ................................................ 126
Competencies for the BS Degree Specializations ........................................... 129
Outcome Measures by Which the SPH Evaluates Student Achievement ...... 133
Graduation Rates by Specialization Area ....................................................... 135
Destination of MS and MPH Graduates by Specialization ............................. 136
Academic Progress of DPH Students by Specialization ................................. 144
A Comparison of MS/MPH & MPH Degree Programs at the SPH ................ 147
Highlights of SPH Research Activities, 2009-2010 ................................. 157
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
v
TABLE 3.1.a.2.
TABLE 3.1.a.3.
TABLE 3.1.a.4.
TABLE 3.1.a.5.
TABLE 3.1.c.
TABLE 3.1.d.
TABLE 3.2.c.
TABLE 3.3.b.
TABLE 4.1.a.
TABLE 4.1.b.
TABLE 4.1.d.
TABLE 4.3.a.
TABLE 4.3.b.
TABLE 4.3.f.
TABLE 4.4.c.
TABLE 4.4.d.
TABLE 4.4.e.
TABLE 4.4.f.
TABLE 4.5.c.1.
TABLE 4.5.c.2.
TABLE 4.5.d.
Administrative Support for Research .............................................................. 158
Technical Assistance to Investigators ............................................................. 159
CUNY-Wide Sources of Support for Research............................................... 161
CUNY-Sponsored Research Assistance ......................................................... 163
SPH Externally Funded Research Projects ..................................................... 164
Outcome Measures To Evaluate the SPH’s Research Activities ………… 165
Outcome Measures To Evaluate the SPH’s Service Programs ....................... 169
SPH Certificate Programs and Other Non-Degree Offerings, 2008-2010 ...... 174
Primary SPH Faculty Who Support MPH and DPH Degree Offerings ......... 178
Other SPH Faculty Who Support MPH and DPH Degree Offerings .............. 183
Outcome Measures To Evaluate the Qualifications of SPH Faculty .............. 187
Summary Demographic Data for Primary and Other SPH Faculty ................ 194
Summary Demographic Data for Full-Time Staff .......................................... 194
Outcome Measure To Evaluate SPH Achieving Diverse Faculty & Staff ...... 199
SPH Materials ................................................................................................. 204
Number of Applicants, Acceptances and Enrollments by Program Area ....... 205
Students Enrolled in Each Degree Program by Area Specialization .............. 207
Outcome Measures To Evaluate Success Enrolling Qualified Student Body . 208
Demographic Characteristics of Student Body ............................................... 210
Comparison of Racial/Ethnic Composition of Students at
SPH to Other Schools of Public Health in the U.S.A ..................................... 211
Outcome Measures by Which the SPH Evaluates Success in Achieving
a Diverse Student Body................................................................................... 212
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
vi
Appendices
Table of Contents
PAGE
Appendix Criterion 1.0: The School of Public Health
Appendix 1.3.f.
Memorandum of Understanding ........................................................................1
Appendix 1.5.a.
SPH Governance Plan .......................................................................................7
Appendix 1.5.b.
SPH By-laws ...................................................................................................11
Appendix Criterion 2.0: Instructional Programs
Appendix 2.1.
Description of SPH Degree Programs and Specializations..............................24
Appendix 2.4.
Fieldwork Handbook ........................................................................................27
Appendix 2.4.b.
List of Agencies and Preceptors Used for Practice Experience .......................64
Appendix 2.5.a.
Titles of Capstone Projects ...............................................................................70
Appendix Criterion 3.0: Creation, Application & Advancement of Knowledge
Appendix 3.1.c.1. Internally Funded Research Activity of Core & Affiliated Faculty .................76
Appendix 3.1.c.2. Externally Funded Research Activity of Core & Affiliated Faculty ...............81
Appendix 3.1.e.
SPH Student Professional & Scholarly Activities AY 2007-2009...................93
Appendix 3.2.a.
SPH Core and Affiliated Faculty Funded Service Activities ...........................98
Appendix 3.2.b
SPH Core and Affiliated Faculty Service Activities .......................................101
Appendix 3.2.d.
SPH Student Service Activities ......................................................................112
Appendix 3.3.c.
Continuing-Education Courses Offered at the SPH. ......................................117
Appendix 3.3.d.
SPH Core Faculty Funded Training Activity. ................................................120
Appendix Criterion 4.0: Faculty, Staff and Students
Appendix 4.1.d.
List of SPH Faculty Peer-Reviewed Publications ..........................................126
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
vii
ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE SELF-STUDY
ABET
ADA
ASPH
AY
BS
CADE
CEPH
CBPH
CHES
CIH
CLT
COMHE
CPWR
CSH
CUNY
DFTA
DI
DPD
DPH
EOHS
EOH
EPI
EPI/BIOS
FSC
GPH
HCPA
SSW
HEO
HHC
HPM
MGOS
MOU
MPH
MS
MS/MPH
MSSM
NFS
NIEHS
NIGM
NIH
NIMH
NINR
NIOSH
NURS
NUTR
NYAM
NYCDOHMH
NYSED
ORGS
P&B
PHANYC
PHLC
PHN
Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology
American Dietetic Association
Association of Schools of Public Health
Academic Year
Bachelor of Science
Commission on Accreditation for Dietetics Education
Council on Education for Public Health
Community-Based Public Health and Health Equity (Lehman College)
Certified Health Education Specialist
Certified Industrial Hygienist
College Laboratory Technician
Community Health Education (Hunter College)
Center for Construction Research and Training
Community, Society and Health (GC)
The City University of New York
New York City Department for the Aging
Dietetic Internship
Didactic Program in Dietetics
Doctorate in Public Health (CUNY Graduate School and University Center and Hunter College)
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences (Hunter College)
Environmental and Occupational Health (GC)
Epidemiology (Graduate School and University Center
Epidemiology/Biostatistics (Hunter College)
Faculty and Student Council (CUNY SPH)
(general) Public Health (Brooklyn College)
Health Care Policy and Administration (Brooklyn College)
School of Social Work (Hunter College)
Higher Education Officer
New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation
Health Policy & Management Program (Graduate School and University Center and Hunter College)
Mission, Goals and Objectives
Memorandum of Understanding
Master of Public Health
Master of Science
Master of Science/Master of Public Health
Mount Sinai School of Medicine
Nutrition Food Science (Hunter College)
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
National Institute of General Medical Sciences, NIH, DHHS
National Institutes of Health
National Institute of Mental Health, NIH, DHHS
National Institute of Nursing Research, NIH, DHHS
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, CDC
School of Nursing (Hunter College)
Nutrition (Hunter College)
New York Academy of Medicine
New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
New York State Education Board
Office of Research and Grant Support (Hunter College-NOW OFFER)
Personnel and Budget Committee
Public Health Association of New York City
Public Health Leadership Council
Community/Public Health Nursing (Hunter College)
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
viii
ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE SELF-STUDY
PSC/CUNY
PSYCH
RD
RWJ
SPH/School
UBO
UHC
UPH
Professional Staff Congress of the City University of New York
Psychology Department (Hunter College)
Registered Dietitian
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
CUNY School of Public Health
University Budget Office (CUNY)
Urban Health Collaborative
Hunter College School of Urban Public Health (BS, MPH, and MS programs in public health offered at
the Hunter campus)
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
ix
INTRODUCTION
This self-study describes the new collaborative City University of New York (CUNY)
School of Public Health at Hunter College (SPH). In this introduction, the origins of the
school, its structure and governance and the unique contributions this new collaborative SPH
offers to its students and faculty, New York City and the wider public health community, are
briefly described.
CUNY, the largest and most diverse urban public university in the United States, began
training public health professionals in 1968 at Hunter College. CUNY was one of the first
public institutions without a school of public health to seek to meet the growing demand for
professionals who could help to solve the complex health problems facing the nation’s
increasingly diverse cities and to translate the promise of the health and social reforms of the
1960s into public health practice and policy in urban neighborhoods.
By 2006, CUNY offered masters of public health (MPH) degrees at three campuses: Hunter,
Brooklyn and Lehman Colleges, located in three of the five boroughs of New York—
Manhattan, Brooklyn and the Bronx—in or near communities living with the highest rates of
poverty and greatest burdens of disease. In September of that year, CUNY Chancellor
Matthew Goldstein, believing that New York City and CUNY would be better served by
uniting these public health programs, announced the university’s commitment to develop a
School of Public Health. The new entity brings together the existing programs into a
collaborative school of public health that expands CUNY’s capacity to prepare the diverse
professional workforce needed to meet the 21st -century challenges of public health; widens a
pathway into public health for the many New Yorkers who cannot afford the tuition at New
York’s private public health training programs; and creates a new doctoral program and
defines an interdisciplinary research and teaching mission. By integrating the resources of the
previously independent programs under the leadership of a single president at Hunter College
and a single dean, CUNY is better able to strategically invest its resources to develop a
world-class school of public health. In addition to the benefits of economies of scale, the
SPH offers CUNY students and faculty a richer and broader array of university and
community resources.
Dr. Kenneth Olden was appointed as the SPH’s founding dean in 2008 by the CUNY Board
of Trustees. Dr. Olden is a highly visible leader in environmental health, having served as
director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), an institute
within the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the National Toxicology Program, an
agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), from 19912005. Over the past two years, Dean Olden has led an effort to recruit 18 new full-time
tenure-track faculty members and 12 new administrative staff members, including an
associate dean for academic affairs, Professor Susan Klitzman, a long time faculty member at
Hunter College. Seven additional administrative staff will be hired by January 2011. The
new faculty, recruited from leading universities, health departments and research institutes,
add a new capacity for research, teaching and service to the SPH’s 68 faculty with
appointments in the four public health programs that comprise the collaborative school. Dean
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
1
Olden’s leadership has established a clear pathway toward the development of a world-class
school of public health that taps into the richness of CUNY, New York City and beyond.
In 2007, CUNY received approval from its Board of Trustees and the New York State
Education Department to create a Doctor of Public Health (DPH) program jointly offered by
Hunter College and the CUNY Graduate Center (GC), the home for the university’s 32
doctoral programs. By September 2010, the DPH Program had enrolled 73 students in four
tracks (Community, Society and Health; Epidemiology; Environmental and Occupational
Health; and Health Policy and Management). The program, headed by CUNY Distinguished
Professor Nicholas Freudenberg, has appointed 50 faculty representing 15 disciplines, eight
campuses and with affiliations with eight university research centers or institutes. In
December of 2010, the DPH will graduate its first student. Her dissertation topic, the impact
of post-traumatic stress disorder on problem alcohol use among those exposed to the World
Trade Center disaster, is based on an analysis of 38,302 records in the New York City
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene’s (NYCDOMH) World Trade Center Registry. It
illustrates CUNY students’ potential to gain access to unique data on urban health exposures
and to contribute new insights that can inform health policy and practice.
In addition to its doctoral programs, the SPH offers MPH programs at three CUNY
campuses, with specializations in (general) Public Health (GPH) and Health Care Policy and
Administration (HPCA) at Brooklyn College; Community Health Education (COMHE),
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences (EOHS), Epidemiology and Biostatistics
(EPI/BIOS), Public Health Policy and Management (HPM) and Public Health Nutrition at
Hunter College; and Community-Based Public Health and Health Equity (CBPH) at Lehman
College. It also offers bachelor degrees in Community Health and Nutrition and Food
Sciences at Hunter College, providing an important pipeline into its graduate programs.
In November 2009, Hunter College and CUNY broke ground for a new building for the SPH
in East Harlem. The SPH will share the eight-story, 147,000-square foot green building with
the Hunter College School of Social Work. Faculty, staff and students from both schools will
work closely with community organizations and health and social service agencies in East
Harlem to strengthen existing and create new approaches to improving the well-being of East
Harlem and other low-income communities. The building will be ready for occupancy in the
fall of 2011.
In the last six months, CUNY has approved a governance and administrative structure and
bylaws that allow the SPH to function in its environment. While the structure meets the
requirements for a Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) consortium (e.g., a single
lead institution, Hunter College; a single dean; a school-wide curriculum, etc.), it also
provides added benefit for faculty and students. Each of the four institutions is part of the
CUNY system, with the presidents reporting directly to the chancellor. This administrative
structure allows for open and continuous communication that facilitates a high level of
commitment and ensures the SPH’s progress. The dean of the SPH sits on the University’s
Council of Presidents and has regular access to members of the Chancellery and the Board of
Trustees via a variety of formal meetings as well as on an as-needed basis.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
2
In the last two years, SPH faculty have identified four core research and teaching themes for
the SPH that build on existing strengths, help fulfill the mission, address emerging public
health needs in New York City and elsewhere and offer the promise of meaningful external
partnerships and resources. These themes are creating healthier cities, promoting healthy
aging across the lifespan, preventing and controlling chronic disease and advancing health
equity. In the coming years, the SPH expects to further develop these themes and weave
them into the fabric of its teaching, research and service.
Already the SPH has begun to deliver on new benefits of collaboration to students and
faculty:
By fall 2011, students in the three MPH programs will have access to the more than 120
organizations and agencies that have established field placements in New York City’s 42
neighborhoods, nonprofit agencies, government offices and international programs. This
significantly expands the choice for field placements and allows public health students to
benefit from the rich diversity of organizations that the MPH programs have established
over the years in New York City and beyond.
Public health students can enroll for up to 12 credits in any of the consortial public health
programs, expanding the opportunities for specialized training in the various public
health disciplines. In addition, qualified students enrolled in other CUNY institutions can
enroll in the public health courses at the four campuses, expanding opportunities for
public health training for social work, nursing, urban planning, social science and other
students.
Faculty have broader opportunities to develop the interdisciplinary and collaborative
research programs that funding agencies favor. For example, a new interdisciplinary
CUNY Institute on Demographic Research includes several SPH faculty members, three
of whom recently won National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding for their research.
Under the leadership of Dean Olden, the school has developed several flagship initiatives
that are in planning or early implementation stages. These include a multi-institutional,
transdisciplinary research center to determine how genes and environmental agents
interact to influence chronic diseases, a New York City Food Policy Institute to support
the development of healthier food environments in New York by providing scientific and
policy guidance to city agencies, nonprofits and service providers; a public policy
program to provide evidence-based solutions for local public health problems; a
comparative effectiveness research program on the cost-benefit of public health policies
and practices; and a comprehensive analysis of how local health-care services are
organized in New York City. The first two have convened stakeholders and established
planning groups; the latter three are being developed by new and continuing faculty
members.
In sum, the SPH is poised for its second stage of development. With an accreditation sitevisit, a plan for the recruitment of a permanent dean to lead this second phase, new faculty
hiring, expansion of public/private partnerships and increased external funding for flagship
projects, it looks forward to creating a national model for a public urban school of public
health that reflects the diversity and challenges of 21st -century urban America. In the
following chapters, the ways the SPH meets the requirements for the Council on Education
for Public Health (CEPH) accreditation are described.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
3
CRITERION 1: THE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
1.1. Mission. The school shall have a clearly formulated and publicly stated mission
with supporting goals and objectives. The school shall foster the development of
professional public health values, concepts and ethical practice.
The SPH is a collaborative public health school with a focus on urban health. The SPH
comprises the public health programs at four CUNY Consortial Campuses: Brooklyn
College, Hunter College, Lehman College and the GC -- (the Consortial Campuses) as well
as related faculty, courses, institutes and centers across CUNY. Within this collaboration,
Hunter College is the lead institution because it has the largest and most long-standing public
health program within CUNY.
Using the resources of the nation’s largest and most diverse urban public university, in a
global city challenged by many of the world’s most serious health problems that also serves
as a cradle of public health innovation, the SPH seeks to create new models of innovative,
interdisciplinary, multi-level, public health education, research and practice. To realize its
vision, the SPH brings together students and faculty from throughout CUNY’s academic and
professional programs with practitioners, researchers, activists, community residents and
policy makers from many sectors. Informed by the values of public health, social justice and
democracy, the SPH seeks to become a platform for collaboration to examine the causes of
and solutions to pressing health problems, to engage the public in an ongoing dialogue on
public health policy and to develop a workforce with the capacity to plan and implement
health-promoting programs and policies.
1.1.a. A clear and concise mission statement for the school as a whole.
The mission of the SPH is to engage in teaching, research and service to create and sustain a
healthier New York City and promote equitable, efficient, evidence-based solutions to
pressing health problems facing urban populations around the world. To realize this mission,
the SPH works with communities, non profit and private organizations and government at all
levels to build the capacities that help people to lead healthier and more productive lives. The
ultimate goal of these activities is to improve the health of communities in New York City
and beyond.
During its first decade, the SPH will focus on four key themes that reflect critical public
health challenges and that will guide the SPH’s education, research and service activities that
will:
Contribute to healthier cities
Promote healthy aging through the lifespan
Prevent chronic diseases and improve their management
Advance health equity
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
4
1.1.b. One or more goal statements for each major function by which the school intends
to attain its mission, including instruction, research and service.
The SPH faculty, staff and administration have established four major goals around
education, research and service:
Goal 1 – Education: Provide a diverse student body with knowledge and skills in public
health practice and science.
Goal 2 – Research: Contribute new and apply existing knowledge to improve the health
and well-being of populations, with a focus on the SPH’s key themes.
Goal 3 – Service and Practice: Develop, implement, evaluate and promote programs and
policies to improve community and population health.
Goal 4 – Promote faculty and staff excellence and diversity.
1.1.c. A set of measurable objectives relating to each major function through which the
school intends to achieve its goals of instruction, research and service.
The SPH faculty, staff and administration have established measurable objectives, based on
its major goals and themes. These are described below.
GOAL 1 – EDUCATION: Provide a diverse student body with knowledge and skills in
public health practice and science.
Objective 1.1: Recruit and educate a highly qualified and diverse student body
Increase the number of recruitment activities (outcome measure 4.5.d.)
Increase the geographic diversity of doctoral applicants (outcome measure 4.5.d.)
Maintain or increase the percentage of racial and ethnic minorities in the graduate student
body (outcome measure 4.5.d.)
By 2013, increase the number of pipeline programs (e.g. at community and 4-year CUNY
colleges) for students to earn bachelor’s, joint bachelor’s-masters or master’s degrees in
public health (outcome measure 4.5.d.)
Increase the number of qualified applicants of graduate programs (outcome measure
4.4.f.)
Objective 1.2: Provide students with education to be effective public health professionals
Increase school expenditure per full-time equivalent (FTE) (outcome measure 1.6.m.)
Maintain or reduce FTE student to FTE core faculty ratios at 10:1 (outcome measure
1.6.m.)
Maintain MPH and MS graduation rates at 80% or higher (outcome measure 4.4.f.)
Maintain MPH and MS job placement rates (outcome measure 2.7.b.)
Objective 1.3: Develop the infrastructure for providing coordinated administrative and
support services to SPH students and alumni
By 2011, improve the methods for tracking alumni, including certification and career
paths
By 2011, improve academic advisement and career counseling for students
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
5
Objective 1.4: Advance an innovative, interdisciplinary curriculum that addresses SPH’s key
themes
Ensure that core public health, specialization and elective course offerings address SPH’s
key themes
By 2012, increase the number of practice experiences that address SPH’s key themes
(baseline 2009-2010: 79)
Increase the number of interdisciplinary partnerships between SPH and other CUNY
entities (e.g., cross-listed courses, certificate programs, dual-degree programs) (baseline
2009-2010: 26)
Objective 1.5: Ensure that the curriculum enables graduates to meet the professional
standards of public health and its disciplines
Continue to ensure that faculty and students are familiar with competencies and use them
to guide course content (ongoing activity)
By 2012, review core and specialization competencies with internal and external
stakeholders to assure that graduates are prepared to meet changing public health needs
GOAL 2 - RESEARCH: Contribute new and apply existing knowledge to improve the
health and well-being of populations, with a focus on the SPH’s key themes.
Objective 2.1: Promote and increase faculty research activities
Increase the amount of research dollars per FTE faculty (outcome measure 1.6.m.)
Increase extramural funding as a percent of total budget (outcome measure 1.6.m.)
Maintain the diversity of external research funding streams (outcome measure 3.1.d.)
Increase the overall total award amount of research funding (outcome measure 3.1.d.)
Increase the percent of Full-time SPH faculty investigators (outcome measure 4.1.d.)
Objective 2.2: Promote research relevant to SPH’s key themes
Maintain or increase the number of externally funded research projects relevant to SPH’s
key themes (baseline 2009-2010: 36)
Maintain or increase the number of faculty engaged in research relevant to SPH’s key
themes (baseline 2009-2010: 20)
Objective 2.3: Strengthen the SPH’s research infrastructure
Maintain the number of workshops and other activities to improve faculty grant writing
skills and on mechanisms for obtaining grant support (baseline 2009-2010: 16)
Increase support for mentoring relationships between junior faculty and senior researchers
(baseline 2009-2010: faculty fellows, eight)
Increase the percent of faculty receiving released time from teaching and/or summer
salary for research (baseline 2009-2010: 40%)
Objective 2.4: Promote research partnerships
Increase the percentage of faculty research collaboration with CUNY centers, institutes
and initiatives (baseline 2009-2010: 15)
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
6
Continue and expand the percentage of faculty with research relationships with
governmental, non-profit and other organizations outside of CUNY (baseline 2009-2010:
57%)
Maintain the percent of community-based research projects (outcome measure 3.1.d.)
Objective 2.5: Influence public health scholarship, practice and policy through research
Increase the number of faculty- and student-authored peer-reviewed publications relevant
to SPH’s key themes (baseline 2009: faculty, 50; students four)
Increase the number of peer-reviewed publications by faculty (outcome measure 4.1.d.)
Increase the number of faculty and student-authored peer- reviewed publications on other
topics (baseline 2009: faculty, 40; students three)
Increase the number of faculty and students who present the results of their research at
regional, national and international conferences and other venues (baseline 2009: core
faculty 24; students five)
Increase the percentage of research projects involving students (outcome measure 3.1.d)
GOAL 3 -- SERVICE AND PRACTICE: Develop, implement, evaluate and promote
programs and policies to improve community and population health.
Objective 3.1: Contribute to the preparation of a qualified and diverse public health
workforce
Maintain or increase the percentage of SPH graduates working in public health or a
related discipline within five years of graduation (baseline 2009-2010: 83%)
Increase the number of workforce development programs offered by the SPH (baseline
2009-2010: 17)
Objective 3.2: Strengthen the service activities of SPH faculty and students
Increase the number of partnerships between SPH and community leaders, organizations
and government agencies in the SPH’s future home in East Harlem and elsewhere
(baseline 2009-2010: seven)
Increase the number of faculty who serve as advisers or provide testimony in policymaking capacities (outcome measure 4.1.d.)
Maintain the percentage of faculty engaged in service (outcome measure 3.2.c.)
Maintain the number of service activities in total (outcome measure 3.2.c.)
Increase the number of community-based service activities (outcome measure 3.2.c.)
Increase the number of SPH service projects in which students are engaged (outcome
measure 3.2.c.)
GOAL 4 – PROMOTE FACULTY AND STAFF EXCELLENCE AND DIVERSITY.
Objective 4.1: Recruit and retain highly qualified and diverse faculty and staff
Maintain a diverse faculty (outcome measure 4.3.f.)
Maintain a diverse staff (outcome measure 4.3.f.)
Maintain or increase the diversity of faculty and staff in leadership positions (outcome
measure 4.3.f.)
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
7
Objective 4.2: Promote excellence in teaching
Ensure that faculty continue to maintain above-average teaching ratings as measured by
the Student Evaluation of Faculty Teaching (outcome measure 4.1.d.)
In addition to the measurable objectives, the SPH faculty and administration also have
identified more aspirational objectives for the next 10 years. In the next few years, the SPH
will elaborate these more distant objectives and determine ways to quantify them and set
more specific goals.
By 2020, the SPH seeks to become a school nationally known for:
Integrating interdisciplinarity into the core of its teaching, research and service activities
and its organizational structure
Demonstrating that in the 21st century chronic disease prevention and management are as
integral to public health teaching, research and service as infectious disease control was
in the previous two centuries
Developing a close and ongoing partnership with a municipal health department and
other municipal agencies
Educating public-health researchers and practitioners who can solve complex urban
health problems, work across disciplines and sectors and engage communities in
improving health and reducing health inequities
Translating emerging public health science into programs and policies that can improve
the health of urban populations and reduce health inequities
Other public health programs around the nation and world share some of these goals, and the
SPH looks forward to learning with others how to meet the public challenges of this century.
Some of the objectives below will begin the journey of defining and realizing the broader
objectives listed above.
1.1.d. A description of the manner in which mission, goals and objectives are developed,
monitored and periodically revised and the manner in which they are made available to
the public.
The SPH’s mission, goals and objectives (MGOs) reflect CUNY’s overall mission and
strengths and those of its component public health programs as well as the educational and
public health needs of the communities it serves. The MGOs were developed through a
collaborative process, involving internal and external stakeholders, over a three-year period
(See: Criterion 1.2.).
1.1.e. A statement of values that guide the school, with a description of how the values
are determined and operationalized.
Eight core values guide education, research and service throughout the SPH. These are:
Promotion of social justice
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
8
Creation of evidence-based and solution-oriented knowledge that contributes to the
improvement of community and population health
Improvement of community and population health through practice, policy and long-term
sustainable change
Commitment to students and teaching
Promotion of a strong and relevant public health workforce and infrastructure
Promotion of cultural competency and mutual responsiveness between professionals and
diverse communities
Promotion of collaborative partnerships
Commitment to excellence
These core values were developed through a multi-stage, inclusive process. The Dean’s
Cabinet, (formerly Executive Advisory Committee) reviewed the value statements of the
public health programs at Brooklyn College, Lehman College, Hunter College and the GC in
2008 and 2009 and summarized common themes. The full SPH faculty reviewed common
themes at a retreat in January 2010 and provided comments to the Dean’s Cabinet, which
finalized them in spring 2010. Table 1.1.e. provides specific examples of how the core values
are operationalized in specific educational, research and service activities and also lists
sections of this self-study where they are discussed in greater detail.
1.1.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The SPH has established a mission, core values, goals, measurable objectives and targets that
are consistent with its educational, research and service activities. The SPH will continue to
seek input from internal and external stakeholders through ongoing assessment mechanisms
(See: Criterion 1.2.) and continue to monitor progress in achieving its goals and objectives.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
9
Table 1.1.e. SPH Core Values
Examples of how values are operationalized
Core Value
1. Promotion of social justice
a.
b.
c.
d.
2. Creation of evidence-based and solutionoriented knowledge that contributes to the
improvement of community & population
health
3. Improvement of community & population
health through practice, policy & long-term
sustainable change
4. Commitment to students & teaching
5. Promotion of a strong & relevant public health
workforce & infrastructure
6. Promotion of cultural competency & mutual
responsiveness between professionals &
diverse communities
7. Promotion of collaborative partnerships
8. Commitment to excellence
e.
a.
b.
c.
d.
a.
b.
c.
a.
b.
c.
For more
details, see
criterion
Policies to promote fair and ethical dealings
Curriculum focus on health disparity and equity
Fieldwork and service to underserved populations
Policies to promote student diversity (targeted recruitment; low tuition;
evening, part-time and full-time course options)
Policies to promote faculty & staff diversity
Curriculum focus on interdisciplinary, problem-based approaches
Applied fieldwork requirements
Academic-agency-community research partnerships
Interdisciplinary research focus
Faculty service activities
Student service activities
Impact of research & service on policy & programs
Policies to promote high-quality teaching
Admission, advisement & enrollment policies
Faculty availability, student support services
a. Workforce development partnerships & activities
b. Service to improve public health infrastructure
a. Curriculum focus on cultural competency and awareness and public health
literacy
b. Culturally aware and responsive research partnerships
c. Culturally aware and responsive service partnerships
a. Collaborative fieldwork partnerships
b. Collaborative service partnerships
c. Collaborative research partnerships
a. Publication in high-impact journals
b. Support for research
c. Support for faculty development
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
10
1.4.d. & e
2.6.
2.5, 3.2.
4.4, 4.5.
4.3.
1.4.c, 2.3, 2.6.
2.4.
3.1.
1.4.c.
3.2.b.
3.2.c.
4.1.c.
4.2.d.
4.4, 4.6.
4.6.
3.3.
3.2.
2.6.
3.1.
3.2.
3.2.
2.4.
3.1.
3.2.
3.1.
3.1.a.
4.2.b.
1.2. Evaluation and Planning. The school shall have an explicit process for
evaluating and monitoring its overall efforts against its mission, goals and objectives;
for assessing the school’s effectiveness in serving its various constituencies; and for
planning to achieve its mission in the future.
1.2.a. Description of the evaluation procedures and planning processes used by the
school, including an explanation of how constituent groups are involved in these
processes.
CUNY has well-established requirements and procedures for planning and evaluation, in
which the SPH is fully engaged. The school also has established additional planning and
evaluation mechanisms. University-, college-, and school-level planning and evaluation
processes are described here. Procedures and processes related to students are described in
Criterion 2.7; those related to faculty are in Criterion 4.2.
University- and College-Level Planning and Evaluation: At the university level, CUNY
develops a master plan every four years, to which all units contribute. Senior leadership,
faculty and students, representing each institution, have an opportunity to review and
comment on a draft of the plan, and responses are submitted to the Office of the Chancellor.
Final approval rests with the Board of Trustees. The plan identifies the university’s
overarching vision and its academic, student and administrative goals. The most recent
Master Plan 2008-2012 for CUNY included the CUNY School of Public Health at Hunter
College1. The initiatives laid out in the master plan are operationalized and assessed via the
performance management process, where the university sets broad goals in the areas of
academic excellence, student success and financial management, and the individual colleges
set specific goals for themselves. Progress is measured continually and reported annually. In
addition, each college requires periodic review of its academic programs.
School-Level Planning and Evaluation: The founding and development of the SPH is itself
the product of an evaluation and planning process that began with the Master Plan 2008-2012
and has resulted in this first self-study, which establishes benchmarks for future evaluation
and planning (See: Criterion 1.1.). In 2008, all consortial faculty and SPH administrators met
for the first of four retreats that were convened over the subsequent two years. During this
two-year period, under the leadership of Dean Olden and Acting Associate Dean for
Academic Affairs, Dr. Susan Klitzman, SPH developed, among other things, a unified
mission, goals and objectives, a governance structure, a unified MPH core curriculum with
shared competencies and learning objectives, research foci and a commitment to recruiting a
diverse faculty, staff and student body. Evaluation and planning activities built upon existing
structures at the Consortial Campuses and were undertaken with involvement of constituent
groups, including senior leadership, faculty, students and administrators and external
stakeholders representing health, public health, community and other organizations. Senior
1
The Master Plan 2008-2012 for CUNY,
ttp://web.cuny.edu/administration/chancellor/materplan_08_12.pdf
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
11
leadership, faculty, students and external stakeholders have input into the evaluation and
planning process. Their specific roles in planning and evaluation are summarized here.
(More general descriptions of their roles on formal administrative, advisory and governance
bodies are described more fully in Criteria 1.4. and 1.5.)
Senior leadership at the four Consortial Campuses – represented by the Council of Provosts,
(See: Criteria 1.4. and 1.5.) -- advise the dean on overall academic, financial and
administrative planning for the SPH. These arrangements are codified in the SPH
governance plan, bylaws, MOU (See: Appendices 1.3.f. and 1.5.a. and b.) and reflected in the
SPH budget (See: Tables 1.6.b. and c.) The council is also responsible for evaluating the
extent to which needs and concerns of the Consortial Campuses are addressed and that the
policies and procedures of the SPH are consistent with those of the Consortial Campuses.
The faculty leaders (campus directors) at each campus (See: Criteria 1.4. and 1.5.) work
directly with the dean, associate dean for academic affairs and assessment coordinator
through the Dean’s Cabinet on program assessment. The Dean’s Cabinet develops common
assessment tools; oversees the conduct of routine assessment, evaluation and dissemination
of results and makes recommendations for improvements based on the findings (See:
Criterion 1.2.b).
Faculty and students participate in planning and evaluation through several mechanisms.
The most important of these is the Faculty and Student Council (FSC) and its committees, as
described below (See also: Criteria 1.5.).
Assessment Committee: This committee recommends procedures for monitoring and
evaluating student progress in achieving the expected competencies and the quality of each
program. It assists the dean in evaluating student achievement and the quality of each
program and in presenting annual data assessing performance against those measures. It also
establishes policies and procedures for monitoring and evaluating additional SPH activities,
as needed, such as progress in meeting goals and objectives in education, research and
service. The elected membership of this committee consists of one faculty member from each
of the Consortial Campuses, as well as one student from each of the degree programs (DPH,
MPH/MS, BS).
The Assessment Committee coordinates its activities with other committees, depending upon
need. For instance, it works with the Admissions Committee on the evaluation of objective
1.1 (―recruit and educate a highly qualified and diverse student body‖) and with the
Curriculum Committee for evaluation of objective 1.5 (―ensure that the curriculum enables
graduates to meet the professional standards of public health and its disciplines‖).
Accreditation Committee: This committee is a subcommittee of the Assessment Committee
and focuses on assuring that ongoing evaluation, as required for accreditation, is carried out.
It also is responsible for producing documents – including self-studies, annual and interim
reports and other documents required for accreditation. It is under the leadership of the
associate dean for academic affairs.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
12
Curriculum Committee: SPH faculty and students evaluate and approve the new changes to
existing academic programs, through the Curriculum Committee and the FSC as a whole.
This Curriculum Committee reviews programs and courses and reports its recommendations
to the FSC. The committee establishes policies and procedures for developing and revising
interdisciplinary curricula, as well as policies and procedures for assuring coordination and
review of curriculum proposals, as appropriate, at the Consortial Campuses. It also
establishes policies and procedures for periodic review of degree programs and/or
specialization curricula in accordance with accreditation and other requirements.
In its periodic review of curriculum, course content and competencies, the Curriculum
Committee coordinates its activities with the Assessment Committee. The Curriculum
Committee has primary responsibility for evaluation of the school’s attainment of Goal 1 –
Education, in particular Objectives 1.2, 1.4 and 1.5.
In addition, campus faculty and students approve curriculum through the Consortial
Colleges’ governing bodies (See: Criteria 1.3.d. and 1.5.c.). New academic programs and
changes to existing programs also must be evaluated and approved by the Board of Trustees
and the New York State Education Department (NYSED). These multi-level and rigorous
evaluation and approval processes are designed to assure that academic programs are wellconceived, effective and meet high standards.
Admissions Committee: This committee recommends standards for admissions for each
program within SPH and reviews the qualifications of students who have been proposed for
admissions by each of the Consortial Colleges. This committee coordinates its activities with
the Assessment Committee when measuring its activities against the SPH goals for
education, in particular Objective 1.1.
External members of the public health community participate in planning and evaluation
through the Public Health Leadership Council (PHLC). This body consists of members
appointed by the dean who are representative of external organizations involved in public
health research or policy or the delivery of health or health-related services. It advises the
dean with respect to the research, programs and workforce development and training of the
SPH to ensure that they meet the needs of the community. It recommends to the dean areas in
need of further evaluation, and it reviews the results of evaluation to ensure that the School is
meeting its MGOs and the needs of the public health community.
1.2.b. Description of how the results of evaluation and planning are regularly used to
enhance the quality of programs and activities.
As described in Criterion 1.2.a., the SPH has a functioning evaluation and planning
infrastructure and a process for quality improvement based on evaluation findings. Examples
of the way in which the results of evaluation and planning have been employed to improve
the quality of the programs are highlighted:
Goal 1: Education, Objective 1.1.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
13
Over the past several years, master’s degree students were surveyed regarding course
availability. Results indicated that some students were interested in attending earlymorning and weekend classes. (Currently, master’s courses only are offered on weekday
late afternoons and evenings.) The Dean’s Cabinet evaluated the feasibility of responding
to this need and has begun offering a limited number of additional sections of required
classes on Saturdays and weekday mornings, based on availability of teaching faculty and
ability to continue to offer sections during weekday evenings, to accommodate the vast
number of graduate students who work full time.
Goal 1: Education, Objective 1.3.
Students participated in discussions and surveys regarding academic and career
advisement during spring and fall 2010. The feedback received indicated that while
students received regular academic advisement, the content of advisement sessions
varied, depending on the adviser. The SPH also learned that career advisement was
somewhat uneven. To enhance the quality and uniformity of advisement, in fall 2010,
campus directors, through the Dean’s Cabinet, updated and expanded the guidance
documents and provided training to faculty on academic and career advisement. The
Assessment Committee will continue to follow up with students to determine whether
career and professional advisement have improved. (Academic advisement and career
counseling are described in detail in Criterion 4.6.)
Goal 1: Education, Objective 1.5.
In the MPH program, to develop a common core curriculum with common program
competencies and core course learning objectives beginning in 2008, the SPH convened
an ad hoc curriculum committee consisting of representatives from each core knowledge
area and campus (Drs. Klitzman, Levin, Levitt and Merzel). They reviewed curricula and
competencies within the MPH programs at the Consortial Campuses with the goal of
identifying commonalities and differences. In addition, they reviewed curricula and
competencies from external sources, including the Association of Schools of Public
Health (ASPH) and other schools and programs in public health. Based on this
information, the committee drafted a common set of core competencies for the MPH
program. Several iterations were reviewed by the SPH faculty until a common set of
competencies was agreed upon. Faculty from the three campuses, representing each of
the core disciplines, then identified which core competencies would be primarily
addressed in which core courses. Common course learning objectives were developed for
each of the core courses. Draft curricula that included syllabi with common competencies
and common learning objectives were developed by faculty from each discipline and
circulated and discussed among faculty, students and the PHLC. The curriculum changes
were voted upon and approved by the SPH faculty as well as by the formal college and
university governing bodies. The result is a common core curriculum across the SPH
MPH programs, with core program competencies. (The development of the SPH
competencies is described further in Criterion 2.6.e.)
In the DPH program, student meetings were held each semester to elicit feedback about
courses, curricula, examinations and other aspects of the program. In the first three years
of the program, several key issues were identified by students. The issues were
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
14
considered by the DPH program leadership and by the faculty, and several modifications
were made based on student feedback. For example, with respect to coursework in
quantitative methods, student feedback revealed an inadequate number of courses in
quantitative methods; some repetition of material between courses; and lack of clarity
about the relationship and successive skill building between courses. After considering
these concerns, the program added a new course in applied data analysis for public health
and revised the course content for two research seminars. In May 2010, the GC’s
Graduate Council, its governing body, approved these curricular changes.
Goal 2: Research
Under the dean’s leadership, a research committee for the SPH was formed, led by
Professor Lorna Thorpe, director of the EPI/BIOS program. This committee brought
recommendations to the full faculty at several faculty retreats held during 2009-2010.
Also involved in this process was the dean’s PHLC. Among the products of these
deliberations are the four research foci for the SPH. The committee is working on
developing research funding and a center on gene-environment interactions (See:
Criterion 3.0.).
1.2.c. Identification of outcome measures that the school uses to monitor its
effectiveness in meeting its mission, goals and objectives. Target levels should be defined
and data regarding the school’s performance must be provided for each of the last three
years.
Table 1.2.c. SPH Outcome Measures and Targets for the Last 3 Years
Outcome Measure
Target
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
1.6.m. Outcome measures by which the school may judge the adequacy of its resources, along with data regarding
the school’s performance against those measures for the last 3 years
SPH expenditure per
FTE student
Extramural research
dollars (total award
amount) per core &
affiliated FTE faculty
Total extramural
funding (total award
amount) for core &
affiliated FTE faculty
as a percent of total
budget
Total extramural
funding (current year
amount) for core FTE
Increase the
amount of school
expenditure per
FTE student
Increase or
maintain the
amount of research
dollars per FTE
faculty
Increase or
maintain total
extramural funding
as a percent of
total budget
$10,076
$13,534
$17,494
$605,114
$588,133
$478,543
85%
81%
73%
53%
47%
37%
Increase total
extramural funding
as a percent of
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
15
Table 1.2.c. SPH Outcome Measures and Targets for the Last 3 Years
Outcome Measure
faculty only as a
percent of total budget
Graduate FTE studentto-FTE faculty ratios
(SFRs) ≤ 10:1
Target
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
total budget
BIOS (0.9)
BIOS (1.0)
EPI (2.3)
EPI (6.2)
EOHS (7.3)
EOHS (6.4)
EOHS (7.9)
HPM (3.8)
HPM (3.1)
HPM (5.8)
SOC BEHAV (11.2) SOC BEHAV(18.6)
SOC BEHAV (13.6)
NUTR (8.5)
NUTR (8.2)
NUTR (11.3)
2.7.b. Identification of outcomes measures by which the School will evaluate student achievement in each program,
and presentation of data assessing the school’s performance against those measures for the last 3 years
MPH and MS
≥80% graduation
CBPH - NA
CBPH – 43%
CBPH – 73%
graduation rates at
rate in all degree
COMHE - 80%
COMHE - 81%
COMHE - 65%
80% or higher
programs
EOHS - 86%
EOHS - 79%
EOHS - 66%
GPH - 63%
GPH - 50%
GPH - 54%
HCPA - 64%
HCPA - 73%
HCPA - 50%
NUTR - 83%
NUTR - 77%
NUTR - 67%
BS graduation rates at ≥80% graduation
COMHE -76%
COMHE – 85%
COMHE – 60%
80% or higher
rate in all degrees
NUTR - 93%
NUTR – 68%
NUTR – 68%
Job placement rates1
Maintain the job
92%
92.5%
86%
for MPH/MS degree
placement rate
students
3.1.d. Identification of outcome measures by which the school may evaluate the success if its research activities,
along with data regarding the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last 3 years
Diversity of Funding:
Maintain or
Federal increase the
20
18
26
State diversity of
2
3
1
City funding
2
3
2
Foundation/other
14
14
13
Total award amount
Maintain or
$19 Million
$22.7 Million
$21 Million
increase total
award amount
% of communityMaintain or
63%
63%
60%
based research
Increase the
projects
number of
community-based
research projects
% of Research
Increase the
39%
47%
60%
Projects Involving
percent of research
Students
projects involving
students
3.2.c. Identification of outcome measures by which the school may evaluate the success if its service program, along
with data regarding the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last 3 years
# of SPH core &
Maintain or
16
22
27
affiliated faculty
increase the # of
1
Maintain or
decrease FTE
student-to-faculty
ratios
N/A
This % represents the number of MPH/MS students who were employed at the time of graduation.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
16
Table 1.2.c. SPH Outcome Measures and Targets for the Last 3 Years
Outcome Measure
Target
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
engaged in service
faculty engaged in
service
% of SPH core1 &
Maintain or
34%
42%
44%
affiliated2 faculty
increase the % of
engaged in service
faculty reporting
external to CUNY
service
Total # of service
Maintain or
49
82
98
activities in total
increase the total #
of service activities
# of community-based Maintain or
13
13
12
service activities
increase the # of
community-based
activities
# of SPH projects in
Increase the
22
26
42
which students are
number of projects
engaged
in which students
are engaged
4.1.d. Identification of outcome measures by which the school may judge the qualifications of its faculty
complement along with data regarding the performance of the school against those measures for each of the last 3
years
Number of peerIncrease the
33
65
101
reviewed pubs by core number of peer& affiliated faculty
reviewed
publications
% of core & affiliated Increase the
56%
41%
42%
faculty investigators
number of FT
on grants
SPH faculty
investigators
# of core & affiliated
Increase the
4
5
11
faculty who serve as
number of faculty
advisers or provide
who serve as
testimony in policyadvisers and
making capacities
provide testimony
in policy-making
capacities
Courses taught at the
At least 90% will
88%
94%
91%
SPH by faculty will be be rated above
rated above average on average
student course
evaluations
4.3.f Identification of outcome measures by which the school may evaluate its success in achieving a diverse
faculty and staff, along with data regarding the performance of the school against those measures for each of the last
3 years
1
2
Core faculty are defined as faculty with primary appointments in the SPH. They are identified in Table 4.1.a.
Affiliated faculty are full-time CUNY DPH faculty with primary appointment outside the SPH.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
17
Table 1.2.c. SPH Outcome Measures and Targets for the Last 3 Years
Outcome Measure
Target
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
African-Amer 5%
Caucasian 71%
Hispanic/Latino 7%
Asian/Pacific Is
17%
African Amer 50%
Caucasian 50%
Hispanic/Latino 0%
Asian/Pacific Isl 0%
8/11 female
3/11 male
African-Amer 15%
Caucasian 67%
Hispanic/Latino 9%
Asian/Pacific Is 9%
Maintain a diverse
core & other1 SPH
faculty
Maintain or
increase faculty
diversity
African-Amer 6%
Caucasian 74%
Hispanic/Latino 6%
Asian/Pacific Is14%
Maintain a diverse
SPH administrative
staff
Maintain or
increase staff
diversity
African Amer 43%
Caucasian 57%
Hispanic/Latino 0%
Asian/Pacific Isl 0%
4/6 female
2/6 male
0/6
Diversity in
leadership positions
within the SPH
African Amer 50%
Caucasian 44%
Hispanic/Latino 6%
Asian/Pacific Isl 5%
8/11 female
3/11 male
Maintain or
increase diversity
in leadership
positions (Dean,
Assoc Dean,
Campus &
Program Directors)
4.4.f. Identification of outcome measures by which the school may evaluate its success in enrolling a qualified
student body, along with data regarding the performance of the school against those measures for each of the last 3
years
MPH/MS admit rate
Maintain or
71%
73%
68%
decrease the admit
rate of qualified
applicants
MPH/MS yield rate
Increase the yield
74%
66%
60%
rate
DPH admit rate
Maintain or
53%
50%
40%
decrease the admit
rate of qualified
applicants
DPH yield rate
Increase the yield
100%
75%
80%
rate
4.5.d. Identification of measures by which the school may evaluate its success in achieving a demographically
diverse student body, along with data regarding the school’s performance against these measures for each of the last
3 years.
Number of
Increase the
N/A
15
24
DPH/MPH/MS
number of
recruitment activities
recruitment events
Geographic diversity
Maintain or
4%
9%
11%
of doctoral applicants
increase the % of
from outside NYS
DPH applicants
from outside NYS
1
Other faculty include affiliated faculty, adjuncts and visiting professors. They are identified in Table 4.1.b.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
18
Table 1.2.c. SPH Outcome Measures and Targets for the Last 3 Years
Outcome Measure
Target
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
Racial and ethnic
diversity of student
body
Increase the % of
racial & ethnic
minorities in the
graduate program
African-Amer 16%
Caucasian 29%
Hispanic/Latino 8%
Asian Pacific Is 6%
Unknown 30%
International 9%
African-Amer 19%
Caucasian 11%
Hispanic/Latino 8%
Asian Pacific Is 5%
Unknown 44%
International 10%
African-Amer 22%
Caucasian 38%
Hispanic/Latino 12%
Asian Pacific Is 13%
Unknown 7%
International 6%
Number of pipeline
programs (e.g., at
community and 4-year
CUNY colleges) for
students to earn
bachelor’s, joint
bachelors-masters or
masters
By 2013, increase
the number of
pipeline programs
to two
0
0
0
1.2.d. An analytical self-study document that provides a qualitative and quantitative
assessment of how the school achieves its mission, goals and objectives and meets all
accreditation criteria, including a candid assessment of strengths and weaknesses in
terms of the school’s performance against the accreditation criteria.
This document is the analytical self-study that fulfills the requirement.
1.2.e. An analysis of the school’s responses to recommendations in the last accreditation
report (if any).
This is the first self-study undertaken by the SPH, and thus there are no previous
recommendations.
1.2.f. A description of the manner in which the self-study document was developed,
including effective opportunities for input by important school constituents, including
institutional officers, administrative staff, teaching faculty, students, alumni and
representatives of the public health community.
Primary responsibility for developing the self-study document was delegated by the Dean to
Susan Klitzman, acting associate dean for academic affairs (who is also the Hunter campus
director), with an Accreditation Team that comprised the following individuals:
Professor Arlene Spark and Associate Professor Mark Goldberg, two core SPH faculty
Associate Professor Elizabeth Eastwood, Distinguished Professor Nicholas Freudenberg
and Associate Professor Jane Levitt, the campus directors from Brooklyn, GC and
Lehman, respectively
Martina Lynch, SPH curriculum and assessment coordinator
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
19
Robert Park, director of academic services
Sharon Neill, assistant vice president for budget and finance at Hunter College, was
responsible for compiling financial data, in collaboration with her counterparts at the
Consortial Campuses and with the Office of the Chancellor.
Additional administrative support was provided by several key staff, including:
Zora Flores-Kitongo, executive assistant to the dean
Erica Sigmon, grants and administrative coordinator
Diane Brows, academic program specialist
Donna Levine, secretary
Velvet Brown, office assistant
Attiqa Mirza, administrative assistant to the dean
The accreditation team developed the work plan for the self-study; identified the sources of
and responsible parties for gathering information pertaining to each criteria; assigned
selected sections to others for drafting based on their respective knowledge and position;
drafted selected sections themselves; sought review of drafts from students, alumni, staff and
senior administrators and compiled the preliminary document for submission to CEPH.
Professors Spark and Goldberg were granted released time from teaching and paid summer
salary to work on the self-study during 2009 and 2010. A more detailed description of the
planning, drafting, review and final compilation process is provided below:
Initially, the self-study team developed a work plan that detailed the status, tasks and
responsible party for obtaining information pertaining to each criterion and sub-criterion.
It gathered existing documentation from the appropriate parties.
The Dean’s Cabinet was responsible for advising the dean in several key areas, such as:
mission, values, goals and objectives; calculation of measures; research; service;
curriculum and evaluation and planning.
Faculty, administrators, staff and students participated in working and informationgathering groups on specific accreditation issues including: MPH and DPH curriculum
and competencies, research, governance and workforce development. These working
groups produced drafts for review by the dean, faculty, staff and provosts at each of the
Consortial Campuses and the chancellery.
Between 2008 and 2010, the SPH faculty held four retreats to discuss key issues and, as
needed, review draft documents for the self-study. These sessions helped to familiarize
faculty with accreditation requirements and also to discuss substantive issues (such as
MGOs, values, key themes, curricula and competencies) so as to achieve consensus or
identify areas for further discussion. Also, sections of the self-study, especially those
related to curriculum, research, governance and workforce development, were reviewed
by faculty members and discussed at the retreats. Opportunity for feedback and input was
provided through direct discussion and by having faculty email comments and
suggestions to the accreditation coordinator, Martina Lynch.
In July 2009, Dean Olden, Associate Dean Klitzman and Distinguished Professor
Freudenberg met with CEPH Executive Director Laura Rasar King in Washington, D.C.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
20
to review accreditation standards for collaborative schools and to seek CEPH guidance on
specific issues.
In April 2010, the CEPH executive director met with Dean Olden, members of the
accreditation team and Executive Assistant Zora Flores-Kitongo to provide feedback on a
draft of the preliminary self-study and to review CEPH’s procedures and expectations.
Each of the four campus directors was responsible for assuring that accurate information
on respective personnel and activities were submitted, including: students (recruitment,
admissions, enrollment and graduation), faculty, staff, curriculum, service, research and
workforce development. They also were responsible for assuring that uniform criteria
were employed (e.g., for gathering data on faculty and students).
Individual faculty and staff were assigned specific data to gather or sections to write,
based on their respective knowledge and position. For example, financial officers at each
of the Consortial Campuses and at the Chancellor’s Office prepared the budget
information. As another example, grants officers prepared information about extramural
projects and funding for other faculty who head particular research and service institutes
and contributed descriptions of these to the self-study.
The Dean’s Cabinet met weekly with the dean and/or associate dean for academic affairs
during 2010 to provide feedback on specific issues, including: values; goals and
objectives; coordination of interdisciplinary activities; research; student services; and
governance.
In 2010, the SPH PHLC met with Dean Olden and his cabinet to provide feedback about
the themes, mission, goals and objectives for the SPH.
The provosts and presidents of the four Consortial Campuses and representatives from
the Office of the Chancellor received monthly updates from the dean on the development
of the self-study; through the Chancellor’s Council of Presidents and provost meetings,
respectively, these individuals have been available for consultation and reviewed and
commented on drafts.
The preliminary self-study was posted on the SPH website, and constituents were asked
to submit comments.
The resource file contains lists of individual members of the working groups as well as
agendas and planning documents for the self-study.
1.2.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The SPH administration, faculty and staff have:
Developed the organizational infrastructure (through the Office of the Associate Dean for
Academic Affairs, curriculum and assessment coordinator and Assessment Committee) to
evaluate assessment findings, monitor progress and make recommendations for
improvements where necessary
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
21
Developed the tools necessary to conduct ongoing assessments of the SPH’s educational,
research and service activities and to determine its effectiveness in achieving the stated
MGOs
Conducted surveys and focus groups of current students, alumni, employers of public
health professionals and external leaders in public health and health care
Analyzed evaluation findings to inform the development of the SPH’s MGOs, program
competencies and course learning objectives
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
22
1.3. Institutional Environment. The school shall be an integral part of an
accredited institution of higher education and shall have the same level of
independence and status accorded to professional schools in that institution.
1.3.a. A brief description of the institution in which the school is located, along with the
names of accrediting bodies (other than CEPH) to which the institution responds.
CUNY and the SPH Consortial Campuses
CUNY is the nation’s largest and oldest urban public university system. It began in 1847,
with the founding of the Free Academy, which later became The City College, the first
CUNY College. In 1961, The City University of New York was established under New York
State Education Law, with Hunter, City College, Brooklyn College and Queens College as
the founding senior institutions.1 Today, CUNY comprises 23 independently accredited
institutions. It serves more than 260,000 degree-seeking students and 273,000 continuing
and professional education students and confers approximately 35,000 degrees each year—
more than 1.1 million associate, baccalaureate, master’s and doctoral degrees since 1967.
CUNY plays a crucial role in the life and economy of the city and state. As of 2007, 54% of
undergraduates and 46% of higher-education students in New York City were attending
CUNY.2 No other institution of higher education in the nation’s largest city has a broader
impact on population well-being and no other U.S. city has a comparable municipal
university system.
The geographic location of the four Consortial Campuses that comprise the SPH – Brooklyn,
Hunter and Lehman Colleges and the GC -- is shown in Figure 1.3.b. The four campuses are
located across three of the five boroughs within New York City – Brooklyn, Manhattan and
the Bronx – within a 25-mile radius of each other. They are each conveniently accessible to
public transportation. The campuses are in or near some of the city’s most high-need
communities, including Central Brooklyn, East Harlem and the South Bronx.
Hunter College was established in 1870 to train young women to become teachers. It is one
of the older public colleges in the country. Male students were admitted beginning in 1964,
but its importance to the education of women accounted for its national reputation. By 1970,
more American women who had earned PhD’s had received their undergraduate education at
Hunter College than at any other institution in the United States. In January 2009, The
Princeton Review named Hunter College as one of its Top 10 Best Values in public higher
education nationally, a testament to Hunter’s remarkable success in fulfilling its mission to
provide an excellent and affordable education. Currently, 21,000 students attend Hunter,
pursuing undergraduate (75% of students) and graduate degrees (25% of students) in more
than 170 programs of study. It is the largest and most sought-after senior college in the
CUNY system -- the first choice of more than 11,000 applicants to CUNY (for only 1,800
seats for regularly admitted freshmen). While Hunter has become more selective, it has
1
2
CUNY History, available at: http://www1.cuny.edu/portal_ur/content/invest/cuny_history.php
City University of New York. About CUNY. Available at: http://web.cuny.edu/about/cuny/about.html
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
23
retained its commitment to serving the ethnically, socio-economically and linguistically
diverse population of New York City. Today, Hunter students are winning more prestigious
national fellowships than ever before, and retention and graduation rates are on the rise.
The public health programs are housed at the Brookdale Health Sciences campus, which is
on East 25th Street in Manhattan. In summer 2011, the public health programs will move into
a new building at a new location at 119th Street in East Harlem, together with the Hunter
College School of Social Work.
Brooklyn College is a senior liberal-arts college within CUNY. Located in the borough of
Brooklyn approximately 12 miles east of the borough of Manhattan, the college is reachable
by public transportation (local Q train and No. 2 or No. 7 trains). There are also a number of
local Brooklyn bus lines. The college was founded in 1930 and occupied rented facilities in
Downtown Brooklyn for its first seven years. Construction of the current campus, in the
Flatbush area of Brooklyn, began on Oct. 2, 1935. On Oct. 28, 1936, President Franklin D.
Roosevelt laid the cornerstone for Roosevelt Hall, and the college moved to the newly
completed campus the following year. The campus consists of 13 buildings on 26 acres.
Approximately 17,000 students — of whom about 13,000 are undergraduates and 4,000 are
graduate students — are enrolled at the college. The College offers nearly 100 undergraduate
majors and programs in the humanities, sciences, performing arts, social sciences, education
and pre-professional and professional studies. The college also offers a variety of graduate
programs and degrees, including the master of arts, master of science, master of science in
education, master of fine arts, master of music and MPH degrees. In addition, the college
offers PhD-level courses through the CUNY GC.
Lehman College was founded in 1931 as the Bronx campus of Hunter College. Lehman was
established in 1968 as an independent college of CUNY and named for Herbert H. Lehman,
the former New York governor, U.S. senator, philanthropist and humanitarian known for his
honesty and integrity in public service. During World War II, the campus was the main
national training site for women in the military. For six months in 1946, it served as interim
headquarters for the newly formed United Nations.
Lehman College is a public, comprehensive, coeducational liberal-arts college with more
than 100 undergraduate and graduate degree programs and specializations. Its enrollment is
approximately 12,000 students, including 9,600 undergraduate students and 2,400 graduate
students.
The tree-lined 37-acre campus is noted for its distinctive blend of Collegiate Gothic and
modern architecture; its 15 buildings include a Center for the Performing Arts, a College Art
Gallery, four venues for theatre and dance, a Speech and Hearing Clinic and The APEX, a
world-class facility for sports and recreation. It is along the Jerome Park Reservoir in the
Kingsbridge Heights neighborhood of the northwest Bronx. The college is near public
transportation (No. 4 and D trains) and Bronx buses and also offers on-campus parking in
secured lots. Its distinct mission is to address the educational and social needs of the Bronx.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
24
The Graduate School (GC) and University Center of CUNY is made up of two entities,
the ― GC, which is the doctoral-granting arm of the institution, and the ― University
Center, which refers to CUNY-wide professional and other programs that cover a broader
and more diverse educational audience.
The Graduate School was founded in 1961. It is devoted primarily to doctoral study and
awards most of CUNY's doctoral degrees. In this nationally unique consortium of more than
1,700 faculty members, a core faculty of 130 GC appointments is supplemented by 1,600
additional faculty members drawn from throughout CUNY’s 11 senior colleges and New
York City’s leading cultural and scientific institutions. With more than 4,000 doctoral
students and 200 master’s degree students, GC offers more than 30 doctoral programs and
seven master’s programs in the humanities, social sciences and sciences. The recently
released Faculty Scholarly Productivity Index placed 10 of the GC’s PhD programs among
the top 10 in the country, and six were ranked in the top five. In the ―broad‖ category of
humanities, the GC was fourth; the first three were Harvard, Yale and Princeton. Located in
the center of midtown Manhattan, about a mile from the Brookdale campus at Hunter
College, the GC is easily accessible by public transportation.
University Center: The University Center includes the School of Professional Studies, the
CUNY Baccalaureate Program, the Graduate School of Journalism, Macaulay Honors
College, the SPH and such other university-wide programs and schools created or assigned
there by the CUNY Board of Trustees. This arrangement has provided the CUNY system and
the CUNY chancellery with a flexible mechanism for establishing, governing and supporting
new and innovative academic and public programs that do not easily or comfortably fit into
the traditional academic structures of CUNY’s constituent senior and community college
campuses. The educational entities that are part of University Center, including the SPH, are
constituted and governed separately from the Graduate School’s faculty and administrative
governance structures. (Additional details are provided under Criteria 1.3.d. and e., 1.4.,
1.5.)
Accrediting Bodies
In addition to CEPH, each of these four Consortial Campuses is separately accredited by the
Middle States Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools.1,2,3,4 Within each of the four
Consortial Campuses, specific schools and programs are accredited by various bodies such as
the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education, the Council of Social Work
1
Middle States Commission on Higher Education. Statement of Accreditation Status, Brooklyn College, CUNY.
http://www.msche.org/documents/SAS/56/Statement%20of%20Accreditation%20Status.htm
2
Middle States Commission on Higher Education. Statement of Accreditation Status, Hunter College, CUNY.
http://www.msche.org/documents/SAS/62/Statement%20of%20Accreditation%20Status.htm
3
Middle States Commission on Higher Education. Statement of Accreditation Status, Herbert H. Lehman
College, CUNY. http://www.msche.org/documents/SAS/60/Statement%20of%20Accreditation%20Status.htm
4
Middle States Commission on Higher Education. Statement of Accreditation Status, Graduate School and
University Center, CUNY
.http://www.msche.org/documents/SAS/59/Statement%20of%20Accreditation%20Status.htm.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
25
Education, the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE), the Department of
Baccalaureate and Higher Degree Programs, the American Planning Association, the Council
on Rehabilitation Education, the Educational Standards Board of the American SpeechLanguage-Hearing Association and the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy.
The SPH degree programs are accredited by their respective professional bodies:
The MPH and DPH degree programs are accredited by CEPH
The MS-Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences (MS-EOHS) is accredited by
the Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET)
The Dietetic Internship (DI) is accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for
Dietetics Education (CADE), the accrediting agency of the American Dietetic Association
(ADA). The DI fulfils 12 credits of the MPH degree with a specialization in Public Health
Nutrition. CADE also accredits the BS degree in Nutrition and Food Science (BS-NFS)
1.3.b. One or more organizational charts of the university indicating the school’s
relationship to the other components of the institution, including reporting lines.
The university-level reporting structure is shown in Figure 1.3.b.1. Each of the units that are
part of the SPH has a reporting relationship to the school and within the respective Consortial
Campus (See: Criteria 1.3.d. and 1.4.b.). The campus-level reporting structure for the
Consortial Campuses that are part of the CUNY SPH is shown in Figure 1.3.b.2. The schoollevel reporting structure is shown in Figure 1.3.b.3.
1.3.c. A brief description of the university practices regarding lines of accountability,
including access to higher-level university officials; prerogatives extended to academic
units regarding names, titles and internal organization; budgeting and resource
allocation, including budget negotiations, indirect cost; personnel recruitment,
selection and advancement, including faculty & staff; academic standards and policies,
including establishment and oversight of curricula.
Reporting Lines
CUNY comprises 23 institutions that include 11 senior colleges, six community colleges and
six honors and professional colleges, which include the SPH. CUNY is headed by a
chancellor, who reports to the CUNY Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees consists of
17 trustees. Ten are appointed by the governor of the state of New York, five are appointed
by the mayor of New York City, and two ex officio members sit on the board in their roles as
chair of the University Student Senate and chair of the University Faculty Senate.
Each of CUNY’s 23 institutions is headed by a chief executive officer, appointed by the
Board of Trustees. These institutions each have unique histories, as described in Criterion
1.3.a., above, some predating the development of the CUNY system. The governance and
structure of each campus has been shaped by its history and leadership as well as by financial
considerations. For all of these reasons, there may be differences in the internal reporting
structure between CUNY institutions. Reporting lines for the four Consortial Campuses that
comprise the SPH are shown in Figure 1.3.b.2. and described in Criterion1.3.d.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
26
Prerogatives extended to academic units regarding names, titles and internal
organization
The names, titles, and internal organization of major academic units within the university –
e.g., colleges and schools -- are subject to approval by the CUNY Board of Trustees. Each
college -- including the four Consortial Campuses that are part of the SPH -- has adopted a
governance plan that has been approved by the president of the college and by the faculty and
student constituencies. These governance plans generally extend wide latitude to academic
units within colleges – e.g., divisions, departments, programs and component programs or
sub-programs – regarding names, titles and internal organization, given the difference in their
respective sizes and variations in their programs and to allow for changing needs of students.
Budgeting and resource allocation
The CUNY Office of Budget, Finance and Fiscal Policy oversees and manages the budget
and finances for CUNY’s 23 campuses and the central administration and represents the
university on operating budget matters. Within it, the University Budget Office (UBO) is
responsible for the overall management of $2.6 billion in city and state tax-levy operating
funds, including more than $1 billion in tuition revenues. Every year, each college submits an
operating budget request to UBO, which submits an overall request to the state and city. The
state finances about 60% of CUNY’s operating budget, and tuition revenues comprise about
40%. (See also: Criterion 1.6.a.)
Faculty and staff recruitment, selection and advancement:
As a public institution, CUNY has an ongoing commitment to increasing the qualifications
and diversity of its workforce. Toward this end, CUNY1 and each of the four Consortial
Campuses2,3,4,5 have adopted faculty and staff recruitment and selection policies and
procedures to promote opportunity and fairness and attract the best candidates for positions.
This includes detailed requirements for job descriptions, search plans, search committees,
candidate evaluation and selection and other related matters. Search committees must
document that applicable policies and procedures were followed during a search. A senior
administrator, such as a dean for diversity, must approve each step before a position can be
filled and a search can be deemed complete. Faculty and professional staff positions in
public health are advertised locally and nationally, in venues of general interest to the
academic community (e.g., Chronicles of Higher Education, Hispanic Outlook and The New
York Times) as well as to those within public health (e.g., publications and electronic sources
1
CUNY. Human Resources Management. Policies and Procedures: Diversity, Equal Employment Opportunity.
http://web.cuny.edu/administration/ohrm/policies-procedures.html
2
Graduate Center. CUNY, Office of Affirmative Action. Affirmative Action Policies and Procedures.
http://www.gc.cuny.edu/admin_offices/affirmative_action/aa_policies/policies_and_procedures.htm
3
Hunter College. CUNY. Office of Diversity and Compliance. Recruitment and Search Guide
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/affirmativeaction/Recruitment_and_Search_Guide_Final.pdf
4
Brooklyn College. CUNY, Office of Affirmative Action, Compliance and Diversity. Policies and Procedures.
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/offices/affirmact/
5
Lehman College. CUNY, Human Resources. Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Policy.
http://www.lehman.edu/vpadmin/hr/html/policies.htm#EQUAL
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
27
affiliated with such organizations as American Public Health Association, American
Industrial Hygiene Association and ADA).
Faculty and staff are represented by collective bargaining agreements. The largest single
collective bargaining agreement is between CUNY and the Professional Staff Congress of
CUNY (PSC-CUNY), which sets the wages and terms of employment for faculty and
professional staff in the Higher Education Officer (HEO) and College Laboratory Technician
(CLT) series.1 Promotion and tenure are governed by the contract between CUNY and the
PSC. The standard tenure clock for newly hired tenure-track faculty is seven years.
Promotion is not tied to the tenure process, thus tenure can be awarded without promotion
from assistant to associate professor, and faculty can be promoted from the rank of assistant
to associate professor without tenure. Eligible faculty members are invited to apply for
promotion each year. Those who apply submit materials to the respective program and
college-wide personnel and budget committees for review and recommendation to the
college president and CUNY administration.
Academic Standards and Policies
CUNY and its campuses have well-established academic standards and policies. The Board
of Trustees’ bylaws specify that, at each college, faculty are responsible for the formulation
of policies relating to such academic matters as: student admission and retention, student
attendance, including leaves of absence, curriculum, awarding of college credit and granting
of degrees.2 Each CUNY institution, including the four Consortial Campuses that comprise
the SPH, has well-established academic standards and policies covering these matters that
were developed in accordance with the applicable college governance plans and bylaws 3,4 ,5,6.
1
Professional Staff Congress/CUNY. Key Contract Documents. http://psccuny.org/NewContractJuly08.htm#KEY_CONTRACT_DOCUMENTS.
2
Board of Trustees Bylaws, Section 8.6. Duties of Faculty, available at:
http://policy.cuny.edu/text/toc/btb/Article%20VIII/Section%208.6./
3
Brooklyn College, Faculty Council Bylaws, available at:
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/pub/departments/facultycouncil/pdf/by_laws2007.pdf
4
Governance of the Graduate School and University Center, City University of New York, available at:
http://web.gc.cuny.edu/provost/pdfs/Governance_Document.pdf
5
Charter for a Governance of Hunter College, available at:
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/senate/assets/Documents/H.C.%20Governance%20Charter%20as%20approved%2
0by%20BoT%206-26-06.pdf
6
Documents of Governance, Lehman College, available at: http://www.lehman.edu/collegesenate/documents/governance.pdf
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
28
FIGURE 1.3.b. Map of CUNY SPH Consortial Campuses
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
29
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
30
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
31
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
32
1.3.d. Identification of any of the above processes that are different for the school of
public health than for other professional schools, with an explanation.
Because the SPH and each of the four Consortial Campuses are CUNY institutions, governed
by the CUNY Board of Trustees, the basic University processes described above are
applicable. The collaborative nature of the SPH requires that some processes differ slightly
from other CUNY institutions so as to assure involvement of each partner campus and to
assure central coordination, through the Office of the Dean. These processes are summarized
below, and further details about the administrative and governance structures are provided in
Criteria 1.4.a. and 1.5.
Reporting Lines
SPH: The SPH is one of CUNY’s 23 institutions and is headed by a dean. The Dean of the
SPH reports to the chancellor through the president of Hunter College, and with respect to
the DPH program, the dean also reports to the chancellor through the president of the GC.
The dean is a member of the chancellery and, as such, attends the monthly meetings of the
Chancellor’s Council of Presidents and meetings of the Board of Trustees. (See: Figure
1.3.b.1.)
Hunter College: The dean of the SPH is also the dean of the Hunter College School of
Urban Public Health (UPH). UPH is comprised of the BS, MPH and MS programs in public
health that are offered at the Hunter campus. UPH is headed by a campus director, who
reports to the dean. The dean reports to the provost, who reports to the president. (See:
Figure 1.3.b.2)
Lehman College: At Lehman College, the MPH program is headed by a campus director.
The program is part of the Department of Health Sciences, which is headed by a department
chair. The department chair reports to the dean for the Division of Natural and Social
Sciences. The dean reports to the provost, who reports to the president. (See: Figure 1.3.b.2)
Brooklyn College: At Brooklyn College, the MPH program is headed by a campus director.
The program is part of the Department of Health and Nutrition Sciences (HNS), which is
headed by a department chair. Currently, the department chair reports directly to the provost,
who reports to the president. Starting on July 1, 2011, Brooklyn College is instituting a new
administrative structure that will include deans. HNS will become part of a new School of
Natural and Behavioral Sciences, which will be led by a dean. This new dean will report
directly to the provost. Thus, the new structure at Brooklyn College will be identical to the
structure at Lehman College. (See: Figure 1.3.b.2.)
GC: At the GC, the DPH program, like other doctoral programs, is headed by an executive
officer (EO). EOs are considered the equivalent of department chairs. The EOs report
directly to the two associate provosts and to the provost of the GC. (See: Figure 1.3.b.2.)
Budgeting and resource allocation
The SPH budget and allocation process is a collaborative and iterative process involving the
Consortial Campuses, the dean of the SPH, the UBO, and the University Office of Academic
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
33
Affairs (OAA). Each of the four provosts at the Consortial Campuses submits an annual
operating budget for the public health programs at the respective campuses to the dean of the
SPH, along with any special requests and justification for expenditures. The dean, in
collaboration with the Council of Provosts, makes recommendations and decisions on hiring
plans, prioritizing resource requests and allocations and any budget requests. Once a
preliminary SPH budget has been established, the dean submits it to the chief operating
officer (COO) of Hunter College. Hunter’s COO is the formal liaison to the UBO. The UBO
reviews the budget and considers requests in consultation with the OAA, Dean of SPH and
the COO of Hunter, as needed, to ensure alignment of the requests with the SPH goals and
objectives.
The formation of the initial budget request for the SPH followed a similar process in that
each Consortial Campus was asked to identify its resources and make requests for additional
resources to strengthen the respective programs and the SPH as a whole. Hunter College
worked closely with each campus’ provost, fiscal staff and program leadership to identify the
existing level of resources available to support the school and to prioritize the request for
additional resources to UBO. The preliminary plan (and budget request) was submitted to the
dean of the SPH prior to being submitted to the UBO. Discussion took place with the UBO,
OAA, Council of Provosts, the dean of the SPH, and Hunter’s COO to adequately express the
funding priorities for the SPH.
The SPH receives funding for its ongoing operating expenses from the presidents of each of
the four Consortial Campuses and the CUNY Central Office (see: Criterion 1.6.a-b.). This
funding covers full-time university personnel (i.e., faculty and staff assigned to the SPH),
adjunct faculty and other than personnel services (OTPS), which includes supplies and
equipment. The SPH has leeway to acquire and deploy its faculty and other resources within
the budgetary guidelines and financial constraints imposed by the college and CUNY. Within
the constraints imposed by this budget, allocation of resources to programs, course offerings
and faculty assignments are the responsibility of the dean.
Faculty and staff recruitment, selection and advancement
Faculty appointment, promotion and tenure occur through the individual’s home campus –
that is, one of the four Consortial Campuses or another CUNY campus. The SPH governance
plan and bylaws describe the procedures and steps by which faculty, who have been
appointed at a home campus, may be appointed and reappointed as consortial faculty
members to the SPH. (See: Appendices 1.5.a. and b, respectively, and Figure 1.5.c.)
The SPH Faculty Appointments Committee (as described in Criterion 1.5.c.) is responsible
for making recommendations to the dean on the appropriate guidelines for designating core
faculty; for reviewing faculty qualifications; and for making recommendations to the dean
regarding initial and reappointment of consortial faculty to the SPH. The final decision
regarding such consortial appointments rests with the dean.
Initially, the SPH core faculty include the full-time faculty from the Consortial Campuses
(See: Table 4.1.a.) whose primary appointment is in a degree program that is part of the
school (See: Table 2.1.a.) New consortial faculty may be appointed to the SPH after a
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
34
recommendation by the president of one of the Consortial Colleges and review by the Faculty
Appointments Committee.
Untenured consortial faculty are reviewed annually by the Faculty Appointments Committee.
The committee’s recommendation regarding reappointment is conveyed to the dean and to
the president of the Consortial College at which the faculty member has his/her primary
appointment. The final decision regarding reappointment as a consortial faculty member rests
with the dean, who coordinates the review process and consults with the president of the
Consortial College at which the consortial faculty member has his/her primary appointment.
However, tenure and promotion occur at the faculty member’s home campus, not at the SPH.
Academic and Student Affairs: CUNY and the Consortial Campuses have well-established
academic standards and policies that have been adopted by the SPH, such as standards and
policies pertaining to curriculum development, academic and student affairs (described
below); academic integrity (See: Table 1.4.d.); and student academic progress (See: Criterion
2.7.a.)
Curriculum Development: The steps involved in curriculum development at the SPH are
depicted in Figure 1.5.c. and are summarized here. Faculty from within the particular degree
program(s) (BS, MPH, MS or DPH) and specialization(s) (e.g., EPI/BIOS, HPM, NUTR)
seeking the change draft curriculum proposal(s). Proposals are evaluated successively by the
SPH Curriculum Committee, SPH FSC and the respective campus faculty governing bodies
for need, pedagogical integrity and coherence, and conformance with the existing curriculum
and mission. The SPH and the respective campus provosts review curriculum proposals as
members of these governing bodies. Once a curriculum proposal has been approved by the
SPH and respective Consortial Campus governing body, it is transmitted to the CUNY Board
of Trustees for approval and becomes part of the college’s curriculum. New degrees and
changes in graduate programs and significant changes in undergraduate programs also
require prior approval by the New York State Department of Education (NYSED). Once
curricula are approved, the campus directors are responsible for implementation and
monitoring. The Dean’s Cabinet is the coordinating body.
Academic and Student Affairs
The SPH, through the Office of the Dean and the Dean’s Cabinet (See: Criteria 1.5.) sets
standards and provides oversight and coordination of academic and student affairs. Each
campus, through the campus directors, is responsible for implementation. The campus
directors have day-to-day responsibility for managing their respective academic and student
affairs (e.g., recruitment, admissions, course scheduling, academic advising, registration and
enrollment management and teaching and curriculum implementation). Each campus
maintains systems for tracking student- and academic activities (e.g., admissions, enrollment,
course registration, student progress) and provides this information to the Dean at least once
each semester.
Recruitment activities are coordinated by the SPH recruitment coordinator and organized by
degree program (BS, MPH, MS and DPH). The recruitment coordinator seeks input from
each campus director in developing common recruitment materials and organizing
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
35
recruitment events for the respective degree program. The associate dean for academic
affairs provides oversight and coordination. For example, there is a common presentation
used for recruitment for the MPH program. Information sessions for prospective MPH
students, based on this common presentation, rotate between the three campuses. This
presentation describes the common elements of the curriculum across the three campuses and
the different specializations that are offered at each campus. Faculty are available during and
following these sessions to advise prospective students about each specialization.
With respect to course scheduling, each campus director proposes a schedule of the courses
to be offered each semester, including the number of sections, dates, times, and rooms, based
on the needs of students and resources at each campus and degree program as well as on the
overall needs and resources of the school. The associate dean for academic affairs is
responsible for providing coordination and oversight.
Through the Dean’s Cabinet, the Campus Directors develop and implement coordinated
advisement and registration policies and procedures. MPH students are permitted to take up
to 12 credits (four courses) at one of the Consortial Campuses, outside of their home campus,
subject to approval by their academic adviser and based on availability. Course offerings and
schedules at each of the four campuses are made available to all students, faculty and staff at
the SPH prior to advisement and registration. Faculty advisers review relevant course options
across the Consortial Campuses with students during advisement sessions.
The MPH degree program has a uniform curriculum structure across the three campuses
(Brooklyn, Hunter and Lehman) as described in Criteria 2.1. -- 2.6. which was developed in
accordance with the procedures described in Criteria 1.3.c. and 1.5.a. It is the responsibility
of the campus directors, working through the Dean’s Cabinet, to coordinate implementation
and assure uniformity with respect to the common elements of the curriculum (e.g., uniform
learning objectives for each of the core courses).
Student administrative and financial services
Student administrative and financial services – such as admissions; course registration, grade
reporting and transcripts; tuition collection and financial aid – are localized at each campus,
through the respective campus admissions, registrar, bursar and financial aid offices. Each
campus is responsible for ensuring accurate record keeping on: applicants, admissions,
enrollment, course registration and tuition collection; and for reporting relevant data to the
SPH at least once a semester.
Inter-institutional relations
As the lead institution, Hunter manages the development and coordination of interinstitutional processes, external relations, fundraising, accreditation processes, faculty
appointments to the school and the other school-wide administrative functions. The
Consortial Council of Provosts provides oversight and coordination in addressing interinstitutional processes.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
36
1.3.e. If a collaborative school, descriptions of all participating institutions and
delineation of their relationships to the school.
The four Consortial Campuses work together as equal academic partners. Each campus is
represented on all school-wide governing and coordinating bodies, i.e., FSC and its steering
committee and the Dean’s Cabinet (See: Criterion 1.4.b.). The FSC and its standing
committees are responsible for such matters as admissions, curriculum, assessments and
faculty appointments (See: Criteria 1.5.a and c.)
The primary collaborative academic programs within the SPH are the MPH and DPH degree
programs. The MPH degree program is offered at the Brooklyn, Hunter and Lehman
campuses, with different specializations at each (See: Table 2.1.a.). The DPH degree
program is offered jointly by the GC and Hunter College. It is a consortial program, in which
faculty from Brooklyn, Hunter and Lehman as well as other CUNY campuses participate
(See: Criteria 2.10.). BS and MS degree programs are offered at Hunter College.
Brooklyn College: Brooklyn College offers the MPH degree program, with specializations
in GPH and HCPA. The program was established in fall 1999 and first accredited by CEPH
in 2001. It is an integral component of Health and Nutrition Science (HNS) of Brooklyn
College.
Graduate Center: The GC, with Hunter College, offers the DPH degree program, with
specializations in CSH, EPI, EOH and HPM. The program was established in 2007,
successively phasing in one new specialization each year. It operates under the consortial
model, like other GC doctoral programs. Under this arrangement, full-time faculty from the
three Consortial Campuses, as well as other CUNY campuses, are appointed to the doctoral
faculty. DPH courses are offered at the GC, with a small number of joint MPH-DPH courses
offered at the Hunter campus.
Hunter College: Hunter College offers the MPH, MS and BS degree programs. The MPH
program in Community Health Education was first accredited by CEPH in 1972. In 1998,
MPH specializations in EOHS and Public Health Nutrition were added, forming the Urban
Public Health Program. In 2008, MPH specializations in HPM and EPI/BIOS were added.
Hunter also offers MS degree programs in EOHS and NUTR and BS Degree Programs in
COMHE and Nutrition and Food Sciences.
Lehman College: Lehman College offers the MPH program in CBPH, which began in 2006.
It was accredited by CEPH in 2010. It is housed within the Department of Health Sciences,
within the Division of Natural and Social Sciences.
1.3.f. If a collaborative school, a copy of the formal written agreement that establishes
the rights and obligations of the participating universities in regard to the school’s
operation.
The MOU, establishing the rights and obligations of the participating colleges, is provided in
Appendix 1.3.f.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
37
1.3.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The SPH operates as an independent school within CUNY, comparable in status to other
professional schools and subject to well-established college and university policies and
procedures regarding resource allocation, personnel, academic standards and other matters.
As a collaborative school, each of the Consortial Campuses is independently accredited. The
inter-campus MOU establishes the rights and obligations of the participating institutions.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
38
1.4.
Organization and Administration. The school shall provide an organizational
setting conducive to teaching and learning, research and service. The
organizational setting shall facilitate interdisciplinary communication, cooperation
and collaboration. The organizational structure shall effectively support the work of
the school’s constituents.
1.4.a. One or more organizational charts showing the administrative organization of the
school, indicating relationships among its component offices, departments, divisions or
other administrative units.
The organization of the SPH is shown in Figure 1.4.a.1 - 3.
1.4.b. Description of the roles and responsibilities of major units in the organizational
chart.
The dean has primary responsibility for oversight and management of the SPH. The PHLC
advises the dean with respect to the external public health community several administrative
and governance bodies – including the Council of Provosts, Dean’s Cabinet and FSC and its
committees and respectively, assist the dean in coordinating between the Consortial
Campuses and the SPH. Advisory and administrative bodies are described below; governing
bodies are described in Criterion 1.5.
The PHLC is chaired by the dean and consists of public health leaders representing external
organizations involved in public health research, policy or the delivery of health or healthrelated services. The members and their positions and affiliations are listed in Table 1.4.b.1.
The council advises the dean on research, academic programs, workforce development and
training to help ensure that the SPH meets the needs of the community.
The Council of Provosts is chaired by the dean and is made up of the provosts of the four
Consortial Campuses. The council advises the dean on matters related to the policies and
operations of the SPH, with particular emphasis on ensuring that needs and concerns of the
Consortial Campuses are addressed and that the policies and procedures of the SPH are
consistent with those of the Consortial Campuses. The council also advises the Dean on the
implementation of the MOU. (See: Appendix 1.3.f.)
The Dean’s Cabinet consists of the dean, associate and assistant deans, the campus directors
and other persons designated by the dean. The cabinet advises the dean with respect to the
policies and operations of the SPH. As described in Criterion 1.3.e. it is through the Dean’s
Cabinet that SPH coordinates day-to-day student and academic affairs through the campus
directors.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
39
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
40
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
41
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
42
Each of the four Consortial Campuses has a director who is a member of the faculty. The
campus director at Hunter reports to the dean on academic and administrative matters. The
campus directors at Brooklyn and Lehman report to the dean on academic matters and to the
department chair on administrative matters. The campus director at the GC reports to the
dean on academic matters and to the provost on administrative matters. The SPH academic
programs at the four Consortial Campuses are described in Criteria 1.3.e. and 2.1.
Table 1.4.b.1. SPH Public Health Leadership Council
First Name
Robert
Last Name
Amler
Mary
Basset
Vicki
Breitbart
Pam
Michael
Brier
Carrera
Title
Dean, School of Health
Sciences and Practice
Associate Director for the
African Health Initiative
Vice President
and President
President & CEO
Director
Nancy
Clark*
Assistant Commissioner
Ed
Davila
Oliver
Fein
Robert
Fullilove
Yvonne
Graham*
Diane
Philip
Lacey
Landrigan
Director of External
Relations
Associate Dean
for Affiliations
Associate Dean
for Students
Deputy Brooklyn Borough
President, Policy &
Analysis
Reverend & Vice Chair
Chair
Chair
Ethel H. Wise Professor
Maggie
Meehan*
Manager
Carol
Associate Director
Sharon
ParkerDuncanson
Schwartz
Professor, Epidemiology
Lloyd
Sherman
Director
Michelle
Steny
Heping
Hongyu
Zhang
Zhou
Director, Community &
Government Affairs
Professor
Professor
Organization
New York Medical College
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation
Planned Parenthood of New York
Public Health Association of NYC
Maimonides Medical Center
National Pregnancy Prevention
Program, Children’s Aid Society
NYCDOHMH
Touro College of Pharmacy
Cornell Weill Medical School Office
of Affiliations
Mailman School of Public Health
at Columbia University
Brooklyn Borough President’s Office
HHC Board of Directors
Department of Preventive Medicine
Children’s Environmental Health Ctr
Pediatrics
Mount Sinai School of Medicine
Seniors Nutrition Education, City
Harvest
Cornell University Cooperative
Extension
Mailman School of Public Health at
Columbia University
Center for Excellence in Youth
Education, Mount Sinai School of
Medicine
North General Hospital
Yale School of Public Health
Yale School of Public Health
* MPH alumni of Hunter College
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
43
Table 1.4.b.2. SPH Administrative Personnel
NAME and POSITION
KENNETH OLDEN
FOUNDING DEAN
MARILYN AUERBACH
ACTING SENIOR ASSOCIATE DEAN
SUSAN KLITZMAN
ACTING ASSOCIATE DEAN
FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS
ZORA FLORES-KITONGO
EXECUTIVE ASST. TO THE DEAN
ROBERT PARK
ACADEMIC SERVICES DIRECTOR
JEROME RICHARDSON
BUSINESS SERVICES DIRECTOR
MICHAEL DUNHAM
FACILITIES MANAGER
ERICA SIGMON (Hunter)
TBA (Brooklyn)
TBA (Lehman)
GRANTS/ADMIN COORD.
KEY RESPONSIBILIITIES
Lead the programs and resources of the SPH,
including long-term planning; faculty recruitment
and development; student and alumni relations;
budget; interdisciplinary collaboration; and
development. Provide leadership excellence in the
academic and educational standards of the SPH.
Oversee the day-to-day administration and
management of the SPH and its academic
programs, faculty, staff and facilities. Assure
compliance with college and university reporting
requirements and academic policies and
procedures. Serve as liaison with college and
university bodies.
Oversee academic and student-related matters for
the SPH, including: scheduling and coordination of
classes; student recruitment, admissions, and
enrollment; curriculum development; and program
assessment, evaluation and accreditation.
Support the dean in managing the programs and
resources of the SPH. Manage day-to-day
operations for the Dean’s Office. Serve as liaison
between the dean and school, college and
university administration and external
organizations.
Develop, implement and evaluate systems for
applicant, student and alumni administrative
services, including recruitment, admissions,
registrar, bursar, scholarships and financial aid,
course scheduling, enrollment management and
alumni relations. Assure coordination between
Consortial Campuses and the SPH.
Oversee SPH budget and resources management;
assist in planning, allocating and monitoring
budget; oversee acquisition of goods and services
for the SPH; oversee appointments and record
maintenance for personnel.
Oversee allocation, utilization and maintenance of
space and facilities for the SPH.
Coordinate and support pre- and post-award grants
administration.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
44
Table 1.4.b.2. SPH Administrative Personnel
NAME and POSITION
RITA M LYNCH
CURRICULUM & ASSESSMENT
COORDINATOR
DIANE BROWS (Hunter)
TBA (Brooklyn)
TBA (Lehman)
ACADEMIC PROGRAM SPECIALISTS
TBA (GC)
ASSISTANT PROGRAM OFFICER
ESTHER CORTORREAL (Lehman)
ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR
CRYSTAL MANCHA
RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS
COORDINATOR
TBA
STUDENT AND ALUMNI
COORDINATOR
TBA
SOFTWARE TECHNICIAN
(IT Associate)
NZINGA AJANI
SECRETARY TO THE DEAN
KEY RESPONSIBILIITIES
Assist in curriculum development, review and
revision; conduct program assessment and
evaluation; prepare accreditation reports.
Provide administrative support to academic
programs, including: class scheduling, student
advisement, registration and enrollment; and
faculty and student meetings and events. Prepare
and maintain student and faculty calendars. Assist
students and faculty in addressing academic
administrative issues.
Provide administrative support to DPH program,
including: class scheduling, student advisement,
registration and enrollment; and faculty and
student meetings and events. Prepare and maintain
student and faculty calendars. Assist students and
faculty in addressing academic administrative
issues.
Provide administrative support to the MPH
program at Lehman, in-office organization,
including: creating and updating documents,
databases and files and other special projects
requested by supervisor and faculty; respond to
student and prospective student inquires; provide
proper referrals.
Support recruitment and admission activities,
events, records, files and databases; analyze data
and produce reports related to recruitment and
admissions; manage scholarship awards and
processing; and maintain website relevant to
recruitment & admissions.
Create and maintain student and alumni databases,
files and records related to: course scheduling,
enrollment, advisement, registration and
graduation and other related issues.
Plan, implement and maintain software, systems
and networks; assure user training; resolve
complex technology problems.
Provide secretarial support to the dean, including:
maintain files; prepare and maintain meeting
schedule and calendar for dean and SPH; provide
support to the dean in travel arrangements,
meetings, professional activities and manuscript
and grant preparation.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
45
Table 1.4.b.2. SPH Administrative Personnel
NAME and POSITION
JUANITA WARD
SECRETARY TO THE SENIOR
ASSOCIATE DEAN
CHAQUON POLANCO
ASSISTANT TO THE DIRECTOR
OF BUSINESS SERVICES
VELVET BROWN (Hunter)
BARBARA ALLIER (Brooklyn)
PROGRAM SECRETARIES
DONNA LEVINE
SECRETARY TO THE SENIOR
ASSOCIATE DEAN
KEY RESPONSIBILIITIES
Provide administrative support to the senior
associate dean: assure access and communications
with faculty and staff; schedule appointments and
maintain calendar for the senior Associate Dean;
process materials for faculty appointment,
promotion and tenure; answer general inquiries.
Process personnel appointments and maintain
personnel files; maintain supply and equipment
inventory and order and monitor procurement of
supplies, equipment, services, reimbursements,
travel and other goods and services.
Provide secretarial support to the MPH programs
at Hunter and Brooklyn, including creating and
updating documents, databases and files and other
special projects requested by supervisor and
faculty; responding to student and prospective
student inquires; providing proper referrals.
Provide secretarial support to the senior associate
dean: prepare reports, student and graduate
certificates, honors and awards, meeting minutes;
master lists of class schedules, faculty workload
and other reports and materials.
1.4.c. Description of the manner in which interdisciplinary coordination, cooperation
and collaboration are supported.
Interdisciplinarity is at the heart of the CUNY SPH. It permeates education, research and
service throughout the school. In its effort to create an environment that fosters and deepens
interdisciplinary approaches, the SPH has decided not to create traditional departments, often
observed to discourage interdisciplinary collaboration in other institutions. In addition, by
developing and emphasizing four broad research, teaching and service themes (contributing
to healthier cities, promoting healthy aging across the lifespan, preventing and managing
chronic diseases and advancing health equity), the SPH encourages the interdisciplinary
approaches that are needed to achieve these goals. This section describes some of the
specific ways that the SPH fosters interdisciplinary collaboration.
Education
Interdisciplinary coursework is required throughout the curricula. Both required and elective
courses are designed for students in multiple specializations and from multiple academic and
professional backgrounds and experiences.
In the MPH program, faculty across specializations and campuses developed a single set of
cross-cutting interdisciplinary core competencies that all graduates are expected to attain.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
46
Core competencies are developed, at minimum, through a combination of multiple required
core courses, fieldwork and culminating experiences. (See: Criterion 2.1. and Table 2.6.b.)
Required core courses are designed so that students learn to apply cross-cutting skills and
knowledge to multiple disciplines. For example, in the core courses in biostatistics and
epidemiology, classroom examples and projects are selected to enable students to apply
quantitative principles and methods to a range of behavioral, environmental, occupational,
infectious, non-infectious, acute and chronic health conditions, as well as to the analysis of
health policy and health services. Specialization and elective courses also may contribute to
the development of interdisciplinary core competencies. (See: Criterion 2.)
The DPH program was created with input from faculty across multiple disciplines and
campuses specifically to develop researchers and public health leaders with an
interdisciplinary perspective. With support from an NIH Roadmap Award from the National
Institute of General Medical Sciences, Transdisciplinary Research on Urban Health to
Professor Nicholas Freudenberg and an interdisciplinary group of CUNY faculty from
psychology, urban planning, anthropology, sociology and other disciplines, the CUNY Urban
Health Collaborative developed two interdisciplinary courses on urban health that became
the first two required courses for the DPH curriculum (PUBH 800 Cities Society and Health
and 801 Interdisciplinary Approaches to Urban Health Research). More than half of the 60
credits required for the DPH degree are interdisciplinary courses that students from all
specializations take. In addition, many public health doctoral courses include students from
other doctoral programs, giving students the opportunity of interacting with people with other
disciplinary perspectives. The DPH curriculum also requires students to take at least one and
often several courses in other disciplines, further expanding their exposure. Finally, as of fall
2010, more than a quarter (28%) of the DPH full-time faculty members have their primary
appointments outside public health – including disciplines such as anthropology, psychology,
sociology, culinary management, biomedical education, geography and history. At the
organizational level, the doctoral program was created as a single interdisciplinary unit with
concentrations but not departments in Community, Society and Health; Epidemiology;
Environmental and Occupational Health and Health Policy and Management. This structure
encourages interdisciplinary collaboration on teaching and research. (See: Criterion 2.10.)
The SPH offers several interdisciplinary elective courses for MPH, DPH and MS students.
Examples include courses in: Visual Media, Technology and Public Health; Immigration and
Health, Human Rights and Public Health, Global Health, History of Public Health; Chronic
Disease Management, Mapping Public Health Data and Ethics in Public Health. Other
interdisciplinary electives are cross-listed and co-taught by faculty in disciplines outside of
public health. Examples include: Urban Planning, Geography and Public Health (co-taught
by faculty in each discipline) and Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (psychology) and
Cultural Aspects of Food (sociology).
Research
The multi-campus setting fosters interdisciplinary collaboration between programs, centers
and initiatives. Many full-time SPH faculty members who teach graduate courses work with
colleagues from other disciplines. SPH faculty also participate in a range of interdisciplinary
activities in the school, division, college and university. Currently, SPH faculty have
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
47
appointments at more than 10 CUNY institutes and centers. These include the Center for
Human Environments (GC), Brookdale Center on Healthy Aging and Longevity (Hunter),
Center for the Biology of Natural Systems (Queens), Center for Urban and Community
Health (Hunter), Center for Gene Structure and Function (Hunter), Culinary Management
Center (Kingsborough), Center for HIV Education and Studies (Hunter), Institute for Health
Equity (Lehman), CUNY Institute for Sustainable Cities (Hunter), CUNY Institute for
Demographic Research (Baruch) and Center for Health Promotion (Brooklyn). These
affiliations provide a wealth of intellectual capital and an infrastructure for future research
for SPH faculty (See Criteria: 3.1.).
1.4.d. Identification of written policies that are illustrative of the school’s commitment
to fair and ethical dealings.
The SPH is dedicated to fair and ethical dealings in its academic and professional practices.
The SPH has developed or adopted from CUNY and the Consortial Campuses written
policies governing a range of issues, including student grievance, student disciplinary
procedures, student honor system, plagiarism and use of copyrighted materials, employment
practices, research ethics, conflict of interest and intellectual property. These policies are
summarized in Table 1.4.d.
1.4.e. Description of the manner in which student grievances and complaints are
addressed, including the number of grievances and complaints filed for each of the last
three years.
Formal grievance and complaint policies are discussed in detail in Criterion 4.6.b. There
were no formal grievances or complaints filed in the last 3 years because issues were
resolved informally at the program level.
Table 1.4.d. Policies That Illustrate Fair and Ethical Dealings
Description
Title
Student Conduct
Policies
Student Records &
Grievance Policies
Student Rights
and
Responsibilities
Policies Against
Sexual Harassment
URL
http://www.cuny.edu/about/administration/offices/sa/advocacyreferral/Student_Conduct_bylaws.pdf
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/studentservices/advising/policies-sub/policies-studentdisciplinary-procedures
http://www.lehman.edu/lehman/about/policies_pdf/RulesonCampusConduct.pdf
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/pubs/handbook/shandbook.pdf
http://www.gc.cuny.edu/current_students/pdfs/StudentComplaintProcedure-Feb07.pdf
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/middle-states/repository/files/standard9/CUNY%20student-complaint-procedures.pdf
http://www.lehman.edu/lehman/about/policies_pdf/RecordsPolicy.pdf
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/pub/1347.htm
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/pub/privacy_statement.htm
http://www.gc.cuny.edu/current_students/handbook/complaints.htm
http://www.cuny.edu/about/administration/offices/ohrm/policies-procedures/policyagainst-sexual-harassment.html
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/publicsafety/policies-and-procedures/sexual-harassmentpolicy
http://www.lehman.edu/lehman/public-safety/documents/annual-security-report.pdf
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/pub/1350.htm
http://www.gc.cuny.edu/policies_and_procedures/updates/sh_policy.pdf
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
48
Table 1.4.d. Policies That Illustrate Fair and Ethical Dealings
Academic
Integrity
Research
Ethics Policies
Academic Integrity
Policy
CUNY Research
Conduct Policy
IRB Policies and
Procedures
Policies
Regarding
Academic
Freedom
Statements of
Academic Freedom
Institutional
Ethics
and Policies
Ethics Policies
Affirmative
Action Policies
and Handbooks
Affirmative Action
Policies
http://web.cuny.edu/academics/info-central/policies/academic-integrity.pdf
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/senate/assets/Documents/Hunter%20College%20Policy%2
0on%20Academic%20Integrity.pdf
http://www.lehman.edu/lehman/about/policies_pdf/CUNYAcademicIntegrityPolicy.pdf
http://www.lehman.edu/undergraduate-bulletin/academicintegrity.htm
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/pub/documents/academicintegritypolicy.pdf
http://www.gc.cuny.edu/current_students/handbook/acadPol.htm
http://www.cuny.edu/research/ovcr/human-subjectsresearch/CUNYHUMANRESEARCHPROTECTIONSPROGRAMPOLICIESANDPR
OCEDURES.html
http://www.cuny.edu/research/ovcr/human-subjects-research/irb-admin.html
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/research/compliance.shtml
http://www.lehman.edu/provost/irb/
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/pub/departments/irb/
http://web.gc.cuny.edu/che/ie.htm
http://www.law.cuny.edu/about/legal/academic-freedom.html
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/senate/assets/Documents/CAF%20Final%20Report%20to
%20senate%202.1.06.pdf
http://www.lehman.edu/college-senate/academic-freedom.php
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/pub/1347.htm
http://www1.cuny.edu/portal_ur/cmo/i/6/15/gifts_to_faculty.pdf
http://hr.hunter.cuny.edu/policies/computeruser.html
http://www.lehman.edu/provost/grants/compliance.html
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/offices/diversity/index.php
http://hr.hunter.cuny.edu/policies/aa.html
http://www.cuny.edu/about/administration/offices/ohrm/policiesprocedures/affirmative-action-policy.html
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/affirmativeaction/index.shtml
http://www.lehman.edu/lehman/about/policies_pdf/NondiscriminationStatement.pdf
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/offices/diversity/
1.4.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
Since 2008, 19 new full-time administrative positions within the SPH have been funded.
The SPH’s organizational structure is designed to facilitate interdisciplinary
communication and collaboration. This is evidenced by its interdisciplinary educational
programs, research activities and service projects.
The SPH complies with the extensive college and university policies and procedures
regarding fair and ethical dealings on such matters as student conduct, academic integrity,
research ethics, academic freedom, affirmative action and related issues.
Future Plans:
Searches for seven administrative positions are underway, and it is expected that candidates
will be interviewed and hired by January 2011.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
49
1.5. Governance. The school administration and faculty shall have clearly
defined rights and responsibilities concerning school governance and academic
policies. Students shall, where appropriate, have participatory roles in conduct of
school and program evaluation procedures, policy-setting and decision-making.
1.5.a. Description of the school’s governance and committee structure and processes,
particularly as they affect: general school policy development, planning, budget and
resource allocation, student recruitment, admission and award of degrees, faculty
recruitment, retention, promotion and tenure, academic standards and policies,
research and service expectations and policies.
The SPH operates in accordance with its governance plan, which has been approved by the
CUNY Board of Trustees, and in accordance with the SPH bylaws, which have been
approved by the governing body of the SPH FSC. The FSC consists of the dean, the associate
dean for academic affairs, the campus directors, all core faculty, two affiliated faculty, two
staff in the title series HEO or CLT, and five students (one elected from students in each of
the Consortial Campuses, except that two are elected from Hunter College, one from the
undergraduate program and one from the master’s programs). The FSC is responsible for:
formulating educational policy and developing standards for admissions, academic
performance and degree requirements for students consistent with the bylaws and policies of
the CUNY Board of Trustees and other CUNY policies and procedures; reviewing programs
and curricula; recommending to the dean and the CUNY Board of Trustees the granting of
undergraduate degrees, graduate degrees and honorary degrees to qualified candidates;
considering any other academic matters and making recommendations to the dean and the
CUNY Board of Trustees; establishing or abolishing such standing or temporary committees
as it deems necessary and considering reports and recommendations of those committees;
and recommending revisions to the SPH Governance Plan.
1.5.b. A copy of the constitution, bylaws or other policy document that determines the
rights and obligations of administrators, faculty and students in governance of the
school.
A copy of the SPH Governance Plan is provided in Appendix 1.5.a., and a copy of the SPH
bylaws is provided in Appendix 1.5.b.
1.5.c. A list of school standing and important ad hoc committees, with a statement of
charge, composition, and current membership for each.
The FSC has the following standing committees: a Steering Committee, a Curriculum
Committee, an Assessment Committee and an Admissions Committee. The SPH also has a
Faculty Appointments Committee. The faculty members of these committees are listed in
Table 1.5.c. Their charge and composition are described on the next page. A flow chart
showing the steps and responsible parties for each function is provided in Figure 1.5.c.1.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
50
The Steering Committee establishes the agenda for the meetings of the FSC identifies
major issues for the council’s consideration and oversees the activities of the other
standing committees. It also may act for the council between council meetings, where
there is an urgent need for immediate action and when the dean requests such action. The
Steering Committee is composed of the chairs of the standing committees, the dean, the
associate dean for academic affairs and other persons designated by the dean.
The Curriculum Committee reviews proposals for new and revised programs and courses
within the SPH and reports its recommendations to the FSC. It also coordinates with the
appropriate committees and governing bodies of the Consortial Colleges. The Curriculum
Committee is composed of at least four core faculty members, one each from the four
Consortial Campuses, and three matriculated students, one each from the undergraduate,
master’s and doctoral programs.
The Assessment Committee recommends procedures for monitoring and evaluating
student progress in achieving the expected competencies and the quality of each program.
It also assists the dean or his/her designee in evaluating student achievement and the
quality of each program and in presenting annual data assessing performance against
those measures. The Assessment Committee is composed of at least four core faculty
members, one each from the four Consortial Campuses and three matriculated students,
one each from the undergraduate, master’s and doctoral programs.
The Admissions Committee recommends standards for admissions for each program
within the SPH and reviews the qualifications of students proposed for admission by each
of the Consortial Colleges. The Admissions Committee is composed of at least four core
faculty members, one each from the four Consortial Campuses.
The Faculty Appointments Committee reviews faculty qualifications for initial
appointment and faculty performance in connection with reappointment and makes
recommendations to the dean regarding appointment and reappointment to the SPH. The
Faculty Appointments Committee also makes recommendations to the dean on the
appropriate guidelines for designating core faculty. The Faculty Appointments
Committee has five faculty members, two from Hunter College and one from each of the
other Consortial Campuses.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
51
1.5.c. SPH Faculty and Student Council
and Standing Committees’ Members
Campus
Faculty/
Brooklyn
GC
Hunter
Student
Lehman
Faculty
All core
faculty
Student
Stephen Bove
Steering/Elections
Faculty
Elizabeth
Eastwood
Curriculum
Faculty
Gerry
Oppenheimer
Student
Carina Iezzi
Liza Fuentes
Diana Wu (UG)
Faculty
Nancy Sohler
Khursheed Navder
Mary Huynh
Student
Elizabeth
Eastwood
Pauline Pratt
Noemi
Rodriguez
TBA1
Richard Sierra
Faculty
Appointments
Faculty
Emmanuel
Schwimmer
Robert Padgug
Jennifer Dowd
Jack Caravanos
Arlene Spark
Luisa Borell
Admissions
Faculty
Jean Grassman
Luisa Borell
Lynn Roberts
Andrew
Maroko
Faculty &
Student Council
Assessment
Mary Clare
Lennon
Nancy Sohler
Michael
Schmeltz
All core faculty
All core
faculty
Drew Schiemel (G)
Kelli-Ann Paris (UG)
Olivia Ngou
Tom Matte
Jack Caravanos
Arlene Spark
Tom Matte
Jane Levitt
1.5.d. Identification of school faculty who hold membership on university committees,
through which faculty contribute to the activities of the university.
See Table 1.5.d. for a list of SPH faculty on college and university-wide committees.
1
Election to be held November 22, 2010.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
52
Figure 1.5.c.1. SPH Committee Processes
Curriculum
SPH
programs
initiate
curriculum
revisions
Admissions
SPH Admissions
Committee
recommends, and
dean approves
standards and
procedures regarding
admissions
Assessment
SPH Assessment
Committee
recommends, and dean
approves policies and
procedures regarding
assessment
Faculty
Appointments
Faculty are
appointed at their
home campus
Campus
and/or
Program
approves
SPH
Curriculum
Committee
approves
SPH director of
adademic services and
campus directors
assure systems are
implemented
SPH dean or designee
campus directors
assure systems are
developed
SPH FSC
approves
Programs review
applications, make
recommendations
Campus directors
assure
implementation
SPH Faculty Appointments
Committee recommends
and dean approves criteria
and procedures for initial
and re-appointments
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
Relevant
Consortial
College(s)
Governing
Body(ies)
approves
CUNY
BoT and
NYSED
approve
SPH Admissions
Committee
reviews
recommendations
SPH Dean
or his/her
designee
approves
Assessment coordinator
oversees collection,
analysis and feedback to
Assessment Committee
SPH Faculty Appointments
Committee reviews , qualifications
recommends faculty for appointment
and re-appointment to the dean, and
for untenured faculty, also to the
President of the Consorital College
53
Dean appoints
and re-appoints
faculty to the
SPH
Table 1.5.d. SPH Faculty on College and University-Wide Committees
Committee
Faculty Member(s)
College or
University-Wide
Lehman College
By-Laws and Governance
Committee
College Task Force for Advisement
Marilyn Aguirre-Molina
Luisa Borrell
Jane Levitt
Committee on Evaluation
& Teaching
Committee on Master Planning,
Education Policy & Budget
Committee on Sustainability
Khursheed Navder
Hunter College
Raymond Weston
Brooklyn College
Barbara Berney
Jack Caravanos
Nancy Sohler
Hunter College
Lorna Thorpe
Luisa Borrell
Tracy Chu
Mary Clare Lennon
Alfredo Morabia
Jennifer Dowd
Shiro Horiuchi
Nancy Sohler
Hunter College
Lehman College
Brooklyn College
GC
Queens College
Hunter College
Food & Nutrition Discipline
Council
Graduate Council
Arlene Spark
Hunter College
Betty Wolder Levin
Brooklyn College
Graduate Course of Study and
Academic Requirements Committee
H1N1 Advisory Committee
Beatrice Krauss
Hunter College
Mary Huynh
Lehman College
Honors Committee
Phil Alcabes
Hunter College
Human Resources Workplace
Violence Committee
Institutional Review Board
Mary Clare Lennon
GC
Beatrice Krauss
Hunter College
Health Sciences Panel
PSC/University Committee
on Research
Hunter College Senate
Betty Wolder Levin
Brooklyn College
Phil Alcabes
Jack Caravanos
Makram Talih
Hunter College
CUNY Collaborative Grant
Review Committee
CUNY SPH Ad-hoc Committee on
Research Agenda and Infrastructure
Executive Committee, CUNY
Institute for Demographic Research
Faculty Senate
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
Lehman College
GC
GC
54
Table 1.5.d. SPH Faculty on College and University-Wide Committees
Committee
Lehman College Senate
Middle States Accreditation
Committee
Nutrition Faculty Council
Faculty Member(s)
Jane Levitt
Luisa Borrell
Phil Alcabes
Khursheed Navder
Mary Clare Lennon
Arlene Spark
College or
University-Wide
Lehman College
Hunter College
Hunter College
GC
Hunter College
President’s Strategic
Planning Council
Promotions and Budget Committee
Jane Levitt
Lehman College
Arlene Spark
Hunter College
Search Committee, Chief Librarian
Diana Romero
Hunter College
Search Committee, Dean of the
School of Arts and Sciences (Chair)
Senate Committee on
Academic Freedom
Senate Committee on Computing
and Technology
Senate Committee on the Library
Phil Alcabes
Hunter College
Phil Alcabes
Hunter College
Jack Caravanos
Hunter College
Barbara Berney, Chair
Hunter College
Senate Departmental Governance
Committee (By-Laws Committee)
Senate Select Committee on
Strategic Planning
Software Advisory Committee
Makram Talih
Hunter College
Makram Talih
Hunter College
Makram Talih
Hunter College
Student Academic
Progress Committee
University Faculty Senate
Nancy Sohler
GC
Arlene Spark
Hunter College
University Faculty Senate
Mary Clare Lennon
GC
University Faculty Senate
Research Committee
University Committee on Food and
Housing Insecurity among CUNY
Students
University Tobacco Policy
Committee
Mary Clare Lennon
GC
Nicholas Freudenberg
Hunter College
Nicholas Freudenberg
Hunter College
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
55
1.5.e. Description of student roles in governance, including any formal student
organizations, and student roles in evaluation of school and program functioning.
Students have formal representation on the governing body for the SPH, the FSC and on the
standing committees on curriculum and assessment. (See: Criterion 1.5.a.) In addition,
students are active members of campus governing bodies.
The GC and DPH program bylaws mandate student participation in all committees, including
Faculty Appointments, Curriculum and Admissions and Awards, and Executive Committees.
DPH students have been elected to and served on these committees since the program’s
inception. While students do not vote on admissions or faculty appointments, they participate
in all policy discussions, including on faculty and admissions processes. In addition, students
are elected to serve on the Graduate Council, and DPH students have participated in this GC
governing body since the program’s second year. Finally, doctoral students have formed
their own independent organization, meet regularly and communicate suggestions and
concerns to the Executive Officer and faculty.
MPH students at Brooklyn, Hunter and Lehman Colleges have been active participants on
faculty search committees, assessment committees and focus groups on program assessment.
1.5.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The SPH’s governance is fully operational. The governance plan for the SPH has been
approved by the CUNY Board of Trustees and is in effect. By-laws for the SPH have been
approved by the FSC and are in effect. Faculty members have been elected to the Faculty
Appointments Committee and to the standing committees.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
56
1.6.
Resources. The school shall have resources adequate to fulfill its stated mission
and goals, and its instructional, research and service objectives.
1.6.a. A description of the budgetary and allocation processes, sufficient to understand
all sources of funds that support the teaching, research and service activities of the
school. This should include, as appropriate, discussion about legislative appropriations,
formula for funds distribution, tuition generation and retention, gifts, grants and
contracts, indirect cost recovery, taxes or levies imposed by the university or other
entity within the university, and other policies that impact on the resources available to
the school.
New York State tax-levy funds are the principal funding source for CUNY’s senior colleges,
financing approximately 60% of operating costs. Funds are allocated to CUNY using lineitem legislative appropriations as outlined in the approved State Adopted Budget. CUNY’s
budget has three major components. These are college-base budgets (which are appropriated
to the colleges and expended locally); central administration (funds for costs of fringe
benefits, energy and building-rental costs); and university-wide programs (which are lumpsum appropriations that are allocated to the colleges via an allocation formula). Budget
allocations are contingent upon the overall economic and fiscal health of the state.
Tuition revenue comprises the remaining 40% of the senior colleges’ budgetary allocations.
The tuition revenue budget is appropriated by the state to the senior colleges and represents a
component of each college’s planned operating budget. It is critical that the colleges collect
revenue at or above their established targets for the university to expend its total budgetary
appropriation. In other words, monies collected as tuition revenue are assumed in the state
appropriation. As an incentive for colleges to maximize tuition collection, any overcollection of revenue above the target is retained by the college to fund expenditures above
the base appropriations and to balance its financial plan. The Adopted State Budget for
FY2010 provided that a portion of the total revenue generated by the recent 15% tuition
increase be retained by the university to fund core activities. The Adopted State Budget
called for the percentage of the revenue retained by the university to be 20% in FY2010,
growing incrementally to 50% by FY2013. These funds will be used to support CUNY’s
master plan goals. All tuition and fees collected are used to meet the tuition target mentioned
above. Each campus has discretion in allocating funds above the target. However, in times of
fiscal austerity, the state or the university can opt to use any college’s tuition over collection
to close budget gaps.
CUNY has a multi-layered budget planning and allocation process that occurs at the state,
university and college levels. The state’s formal budget request and planning processes
incorporate the university as liaison, where the UBO submits formal budget requests and
negotiates support on behalf of the colleges. The operating budget request comprises the
mandatory (or baseline) needs and the programmatic request. The mandatory request
includes contractual salary increases, (OTPS) inflationary increases as well as new needs
associated with rent increases, fringe benefits, energy and new building needs. The
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
57
programmatic request is developed by CUNY’s central leadership and various CUNY
constituencies, including the members of the Board of Trustees, college presidents and
faculty and student representatives, and is based on the university program initiatives guided
by the master plan, college expenses and educational priorities as shown in the requests
submitted to the university by the colleges. In the recent past, CUNY has succeeded in
receiving significant increased support from the state to bring the new CUNY master plan to
fruition, providing for, among many other salient programs, the establishment of the SPH.
UBO allocates the colleges their ―base‖ or annual operating budgets at the beginning of the
academic year. Additional allocations are made during the year to adjust for revenue
collections and to disburse additional funds. In turn, each college allocates funds to its
programmatic divisions depending on its organizational hierarchy. Budgets and expenditures
are organized in the following categories: full-time personnel, adjunct employees, temporary
services (part-time employees) and OTPS. The majority of spending supports personal
services – including full-time, adjunct and part-time appointments. Program requests are
formulated at each college by its central and program leadership, students and faculty.
The colleges’ financial plans usually are developed incrementally, wherein adjustments are
made to the base budget to account for mandatory increases in collective bargaining and
targeted program spending. Each campus has a budget request process. Typically, requests
are formulated by program leadership and presented up the college hierarchy. Requests are
prioritized by the divisional leadership and presented to the president and/or designee for
review and consideration. Budget requests may be funded internally through the reallocation
of resources or within allowable budget authority by the college. If the request is above the
college’s base means, then a program request may be included in the college’s program
request to UBO.
The colleges also prepare and submit financial plans to UBO twice a year. Expenses are
forecast based on active personnel on payroll and any planned hires for the year; temporaryservices employees; adjuncts; and contractual obligations and purchases of supplies, parts
and equipment. Requests for additions to the base allocation are included in this report as part
of mandatory costs as well as program requests. Program requests often are submitted
separately to UBO with additional justification and greater detail of projected costs. Each
college is required to keep college-wide administrative costs low (or flat as a percentage of
the college’s overall expenses) as directed by CUNY’s master plan and productivity goals.
Program initiatives are targeted on improving full-time faculty ranks, fostering research and
providing direct student support services.
The impact of funding changes from the university or the state and new resource requests
from within the college are a major factor shaping the college financial plan and program
requests. The SPH is no exception. During the budget request process for the SPH, each
Consortial Campus outlined its program request in consideration with its current budgeted
resources. Special consideration was made to support hiring more full-time faculty to
adequately support each program track, provide start-up packages to competitively recruit
faculty and to support research, and to provide administrative support for the school and
student services. The request was presented to UBO for consideration in the FY2010 budget.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
58
CUNY provided an additional $4 million to the Consortial Campuses’ operating budgets to
support the SPH in the FY2010. These funds are recurring in FY2011, and additional funds
are provided to support the SPH’s activities.
Tax-levy expenses will occur at each Consortial Campus in the spending categories
previously mentioned. The collaborative model will allow for many opportunities to leverage
and share resources – especially for faculty participation. The program expenses will be
tracked locally at each college and reported as part of the total costs for each college’s
financial plan.
The Consortial Campuses will report on their spending each year and prepare an annual
budget to be presented to the dean of SPH by their respective provost. The Council of
Provosts will discuss the SPH resources, program initiatives, priorities, planned hires and
expenditures in regard to the short-term and long-term goals of the school and its programs.
The dean of SPH will formulate a final plan and make recommendations to the Hunter
College COO, who will present the plan and any funding requests to the UBO.
1.6.b. A clearly formulated school budget statement, showing sources of all available
funds and expenditures by major categories, since the last accreditation visit or for the
last five years, whichever is longer. This information must be presented in table format
as appropriate to the school.
The expenditures and planned budgets presented in Table 1.6.b. are the direct tax-levy costs
associated with administration, teaching and student support for the SPH programs at each
college. Historical expenses for FYs 2008 through 2010 and projected budgets for FYs 2011
and 2012 have been presented. The majority of the expenses are to support full time faculty
and staff. The personal services costs include fringe-benefit costs. Additional funds have
been provided to support full-time faculty research and start-ups. OTPS funds have been
provided to augment library resources, support recruitment and provide funds to support
office operations.
Administrative support — such as facilities, student-service offices (admissions, registrar,
financial aid, bursar), information technology services and campus-based learning centers —
is provided by each college’s central budget. Each campus allocates funds to the appropriate
administrative department responsible for providing these support services. In addition,
facility improvements and capital investments also are administered centrally and are not
included in table 1.6.b. Central college costs are not ―charged back‖ to programs based on an
overhead rate or student FTE allocation formula, with the exception of the specific programs
administered at the GC. The GC ―charges back‖ direct program expenses and some general
administrative (bursar and registration) expenses associated with the Health Science Doctoral
Programs (HSDP) to the participating campuses. These costs are deducted from each
participating college’s share of tuition. The expenses and tuition for the portion of the SPH
programs at the GC (approximately 25% of the costs for the HSDP) are included in Table
1.6.b. They are not expressed in the college Tables 1.6.c. since the majority of expenses (fulltime faculty costs and track coordinators) are included in the colleges’ costs.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
59
Each participating campus provides administrative support to the SPH programs as an
extension of the overall campus cost. These administrative support functions include
buildings and grounds, maintenance, information technology (IT), student services and
business functions. These costs typically fall within a percentage range of the overall
operating spending at each campus (not including the GC). Student services typically account
for 7.5 to 9.5 percent of total operating costs. Student services expenses include expenses
incurred for the offices of admissions, registrar, financial student aid administration,
counseling and career guidance (excluding informal academic counseling by the faculty), and
student health services. Building maintenance and operating spending at the colleges is 14%
to 16%. IT is included in the category of general institutional support spending, which
accounts for approximately 9% to 11 % of operating costs at the colleges.
Program funding may include components that are allocated as a direct resource to a program
or as a centrally managed resource. The budget allocation will depend on a variety of factors
such as term of the need, leverage of staff for implementation and whether it is considered a
direct or indirect service. The level of service varies from campus to campus depending upon
campus physical plant, composition of student population, student-service needs and
administrative systems and business practices.
CUNY central administrative costs associated with energy, capital assets and depreciation
and rental costs are not represented in any of the included tables, with the exception of
fringe-benefits. The portion of fringe-benefit costs associated with staff is included in the
personal services figures.
1.6.c. If the school is a collaborative one sponsored by two or more universities, the
budget statement must make clear the financial contributions of each sponsoring
university to the overall school budget. This should be accompanied by a description of
how tuition and other income is shared, including indirect cost returns for research
generated by school of public health faculty who may have their primary appointment
elsewhere.
Table 1.6.c. shows the funding sources and amounts as well as the expenditures for each
partner college in the SPH. Funding is derived from five sources: tuition, state
appropriations, direct costs from extramural grants and contracts, indirect cost recovery and
university funded grants and contracts. Tuition and state appropriations support 100% of the
direct tax-levy expenditures. The extramural grants and contracts and indirect cost recovery
are related to core SPH faculty only.
As previously discussed, CUNY is funded by state tax-levy funds. The university and each
college have a tuition-collection target. Tuition collected by the university is part of its state
tax-levy appropriation. Each campus is allocated a base budget from the University and
projects its tuition collection based on its total enrollment. Each campus remits its tuition
collection to the university. Collections above the targeted amount are used by each college
to balance its respective financial plan and/or fund specific initiatives. The tuition overcollection typically represents less than 5% of the colleges’ overall base operating budgets
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
60
and varies from year to year contingent on each college’s financial plan and tuition
collection.
Tuition revenue for the DPH program, administered at the GC, as with other doctoral
programs, is distributed to the campuses whose teaching faculty participate in the program.
The GC calculates the appropriate share, as a percent of total, for each campus based on
faculty teaching. Each campus is then assigned its share of tuition revenue based on the
courses faculty from each home campus taught. Monies are returned to the campuses net of
the GC’s direct and indirect administrative/overhead costs. These funds are applied to each
college’s tuition collection target.
The distribution method for any indirect cost recoveries (overhead) garnered from research
grants within CUNY varies from campus to campus. The only constant is that a large portion
of the total overhead earned by each college is used to fund the administrative costs of the
CUNY Research Foundation. Most distribution methods recognize the provost, president/
vice president, researcher and deans as recipients of portions of the funds. Some campuses
also recognize the library and the department in the distribution calculation. There is no set
standard. The campus offices of research administration are tasked with upholding campusspecific arrangements concerning fund distribution. These arrangements are made between
each college administration and academic faculty. In most cases, the overhead funds are
semi-discretional funds to be reinvested in the direct programs associated with the grants
and/or the college’s otherwise less-funded academic and research pursuits.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
61
Table 1.6.b. Sources of Funds and Expenditures by Major Category, Fiscal Years 2008 to 20121
FY 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
Source of Funds
Tuition2
State Appropriations3
Grants/Contracts Direct Cost4
Indirect Cost Recovery
University-Funded Grants/ Contracts
Endowments/Gifts5
Expenditures
Faculty Salaries & Benefits
Staff Salaries & Benefits
Faculty Start-Up Funds
Library OTPS Resources6
Student Support
Program Operations7
Travel8
GC Expenses9
$1,843,654
$1,751,478
$4,099,432
$347,685
$79,740
--
$2,021,539
$3,738,966
$5,134,468
$494,552
$29,300
--
$2,718,883
$5,954,778
$4,825,577
$508,360
$84,660
--
$3,021,408
$8,728,414
$4,825,577
$508,360
$84,660
--
$3,021,408
$8,844,737
$4,825,577
$508,360
$84,660
--
$3,410,366
$114,106
--
$4,487,332
$826,358
$90,500
--
$6,239,626
$1,268,883
$333,082
$349,974
$7,360,268
$2,331,070
$1,107,605
$410,000
$7,702,109
$2,746,489
$450,000
$513,000
---$22,367
$139,680
$94,185
-$43,728
$136,019
$104,756
$14,871
$68,897
$195,492
$88,938
$30,000
$68,897
$149,604
$42,493
$36,000
$68,897
--
1
Fiscal years (FY) are from July 1 through June 30 (i.e., FY 2011 = July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011).
Fees are excluded since many are earmarked for college-wide purposes and not specific to public health (i.e., technology fee, student activity fees, etc.).
3
State appropriations represent direct program tax-levy support.
4
Extramural funding for core SPH faculty only.
5
There are no endowment and gift funds specifically earmarked for SPH programs.
6
Library OTPS resources specific to public health for FY08 and FY09 were not readily available.
7
Program operations include OTPS costs (i.e., office supplies, memberships, office equipment, etc.).
8
Travel expenses for the SPH were not calculated separately from other expenditures in FY08 and FY09.
9
The GC expenses represent additional administrative expenses only, not already included in other expenditures.
2
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
62
Table 1.6.c. Current and Ongoing Contributions by Partner Institutions to the Overall School Budget
FY1 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET FORECAST
BUDGET FORECAST
HUNTER
Source of Funds
Tuition2
$
1,353,838
$
1,461,184
$
1,953,090
$
2,186,958
$
2,186,958
3
$
1,298,699
$
3,028,125
$
3,892,755
$
6,121,484
$
5,970,281
Grants/Contracts Direct Cost
$
3,806,152
$
4,902,381
$
4,467,463
$
4,467,463
$
4,467,463
Indirect Cost Recovery
$
298,851
$
485,889
$
446,474
$
446,474
$
446,474
University-Funded Grants/Contracts
$
75,750
$
18,300
$
42,220
$
42,220
$
42,220
State Appropriations
HUNTER EXPENDITURES
Personnel Services
FTE
Cost
FTE
Cost
FTE
Faculty Lines
23.0
$
2,458,820
26.2
$
3,195,003
28.3
Academic Support Lines
0.0
$
-
0.7
$
68,056
0.9
Administration Lines
2.0
$
83,717
6.5
$
716,070
Adjunct
0.0
$
110,000
0.0
$
Total Personnel Services:
25.0
$
2,652,537
33.4
$
Travel/Conferences
0.0
$
-
0.0
$
4
0.0
$
-
0.0
General (OTPS)
0.0
$
-
Total OTPS:
0.0
$
Total Student Support:
0.0
25.0
Cost
$
FTE
Cost
FTE
Cost
3,561,743
36.5
$
4,475,770
36.0
$
4,647,513
$
68,141
2.3
$
168,619
3.0
$
268,458
8.4
$
1,038,267
14.8
$
1,719,806
16.5
$
1,960,664
192,500
0.0
$
374,518
0.0
$
380,000
0.0
$
335,000
4,171,629
37.5
$
5,042,669
53.6
$
6,744,195
55.5
$
7,211,635
-
0.0
$
4,503
0.0
$
15,000
0.0
$
18,000
$
-
0.0
$
310,000
0.0
$
370,000
0.0
$
473,000
0.0
$
178,000
0.0
$
352,654
0.0
$
983,755
0.0
$
305,000
-
0.0
$
178,000
0.0
$
667,157
0.0
$
1,368,755
0.0
$
796,000
$
-
0.0
$
139,680
0.0
$
136,019
0.0
$
195,492
0.0
$
149,604
$
2,652,537
33.4
$
4,489,309
37.5
$
5,845,845
53.6
$
8,308,442
55.5
$
8,157,239
Other than personnel services (OTPS)
Library Resources
Student Support
HUNTER TOTAL EXPENDITURES
1
Fiscal years (FY) are from July 1 through June 30 (i.e., FY 2011 = July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011).
Tuition fees (for the Consortial Campuses) are excluded since many are earmarked for college-wide purposes and not specific to public health (i.e.
technology fee, student activity fees, etc.,).
3
State appropriations represent direct program tax-levy support.
4
Library OTPS resources for FY08 and FY09 were not readily available.
2
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
63
Table 1.6.c. Current and Ongoing Contributions by Partner Institutions to the Overall School Budget
FY1 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET FORECAST
BUDGET FORECAST
LEHMAN
Source of Funds
Tuition
$
143,306
$
145,043
$
State Appropriations
$
361,475
$
520,218
$
Grants/Contracts Direct Cost
$
286,630
$
219,437
Indirect Cost Recovery
$
45,484
$
5,313
University -Funded Grants/Contracts
$
-
$
6,000
182,578
$
218,870
$
218,870
687,196
$
922,712
$
1,148,661
$
252,704
$
252,704
$
252,704
$
4,296
$
4,296
$
4,296
$
16,500
$
16,500
$
16,500
LEHMAN EXPENDITURES
Personnel Services
FTE
Cost
FTE
Cost
Faculty Lines
4.0
$
474,198
4.5
$
Academic Support Lines
0.0
$
-
0.0
Administration Lines
0.0
$
-
0.0
Adjunct
0.0
$
30,583
Total Personnel Services:
4.0
$
Travel/Conferences
0.0
Library Resources
FTE
Cost
626,446
4.8
$
$
-
0.0
$
3,500
0.7
0.0
$
29,165
504,781
4.5
$
$
-
0.0
0.0
$
-
General (OTPS)
0.0
$
Total OTPS:
0.0
Total Student Support:
FTE
668,138
5.3
$
-
0.0
$
45,393
2.8
0.0
$
74,425
0.0
659,111
5.4
$
787,956
$
-
0.0
$
0.0
$
-
0.0
-
0.0
$
6,150
$
-
0.0
$
0.0
$
-
0.0
4.0
$
504,781
4.5
Tuition
$
State Appropriations
Cost
$
FTE
Cost
709,168
7.3
$
900,266
$
-
0.0
$
-
$
212,907
3.0
$
242,257
$
70,050
0.0
$
70,050
8.1
$
992,124
10.3
$
1,212,573
4,129
0.0
$
7,500
0.0
$
9,000
$
20,000
0.0
$
20,000
0.0
$
20,000
0.0
$
57,690
0.0
$
121,958
0.0
$
125,958
6,150
0.0
$
81,819
0.0
$
149,458
0.0
$
154,958
$
-
0.0
$
-
0.0
$
-
0.0
$
-
$
665,261
5.4
$
869,774
8.1
$
1,141,582
10.3
$
1,367,531
275,850
$
292,862
$
356,765
$
389,130
$
389,130
$
91,304
$
190,623
$
1,374,827
$
1,684,218
$
1,725,795
Grants/Contracts Direct Cost
$
6,650
$
12,650
$
105,410
$
105,410
$
105,410
Indirect Cost Recovery
$
3,350
$
3,350
$
57,590
$
57,590
$
57,590
Other than personnel services (OTPS)
Student Support
LEHMAN TOTAL EXPENDITURES
BROOKLYN
Source of Funds
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
64
Table 1.6.c. Current and Ongoing Contributions by Partner Institutions to the Overall School Budget
University-Funded Grants/Contracts
FY1 2008
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
ACTUAL
BUDGET FORECAST
BUDGET FORECAST
$
3,990
$
5,000
$
25,940
$
25,940
$
25,940
BROOKLYN EXPENDITURES
Personnel Services
FTE
Cost
Faculty Lines
3.0
$
Academic Support Lines
0.0
Administration Lines
0.5
Adjunct
Total Personnel Services:
FTE
Cost
320,765
3.0
$
$
-
0.0
$
30,389
0.3
0.0
$
16,000
3.5
$
Travel/Conferences
0.0
Library Resources
FTE
Cost
426,618
10.0
$
$
-
0.0
$
38,732
1.3
0.0
$
17,600
367,154
3.3
$
$
-
0.0
0.0
$
-
General (OTPS)
0.0
$
Total OTPS:
0.0
Total Student Support:
BROOKLYN TOTAL EXPENDITURES
FTE
Cost
FTE
Cost
1,676,000
11.0
$
1,511,522
11.0
$
1,700,000
$
-
0.0
$
-
0.0
$
-
$
117,082
2.5
$
229,738
3.3
$
275,110
0.0
$
49,280
0.0
$
49,280
0.0
$
49,280
482,950
11.3
$
1,677,884
13.5
$
1,955,018
14.3
$
2,024,390
$
-
0.0
$
6,239
0.0
$
7,500
0.0
$
9,000
0.0
$
-
0.0
$
19,974
0.0
$
20,000
0.0
$
20,000
-
0.0
$
535
0.0
$
27,494
0.0
$
90,830
0.0
$
61,535
$
-
0.0
$
535
0.0
$
53,708
0.0
$
118,330
0.0
$
90,535
0.0
$
-
0.0
$
-
0.0
$
0.0
$
-
0.0
$
-
3.5
$
367,154
3.3
$
483,485
11.3
$
1,731,592
13.5
$
2,073,348
14.3
$
2,114,925
$
70,660
$
122,450
$
226,450
$
226,450
$
226,450
Other than personnel services (OTPS)
Student Support
-
GRADUATE CENTER
Source of Funds
Tuition
Personnel Services
FTE
Cost
FTE
Cost
FTE
Cost
FTE
Cost
FTE
Cost
Administration Lines
.5
$
17,367
.5
$
38,728
.5
$
56,897
1
$
56,897
1
$
56,897
Total Personnel Services:
.5
$
17,367
.5
$
38,728
.5
$
56,897
1
$
56,897
1
$
56,897
General (OTPS)
0.0
$
5,000
0.0
$
5,000
0.0
$
12,000
0.0
$
12,000
0.0
$
12,000
Total OTPS:
0.0
$
-
0.0
$
5,000
0.0
$
12,000
0.0
$
12,000
0.0
$
12,000
.5
$
22,367
.5
$
43,728
.5
$
68,897
1
$
68,897
1
$
68,897
Other than personnel services (OTPS)
1
TOTAL GC EXPENDITURES
1
Graduate Center (GC) expenses represent direct program expenses incurred by the GC and not already included in the other partner institutions
expenses.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
65
1.6.d. A concise statement or chart concerning the number (headcount) of faculty in
each of the five concentration areas (and any other concentration areas identified in
Criterion 2.1) employed by the school as of fall for each of the last three years. If the
school is a collaborative one, sponsored by two or more institutions, the statement or
chart must include the number of faculty from each of the participating institutions.
Table 1.6.d. Number of Full-Time SPH Faculty by Core Knowledge Area and Nutrition by
Campus AY 2007-20091 & Fall 2010
Core
Knowledge
Area
BIOS
EOHS
EPI
HPM
Social &
Behavioral
Science
NUTR
Total
Campus
Brooklyn
Hunter
Lehman
Sub Totals
Brooklyn
Hunter
Lehman
Sub Totals
Brooklyn
Hunter
Lehman
Sub Totals
Brooklyn
Hunter
Lehman
Sub Totals
Brooklyn
Hunter
Lehman
Sub Totals
Brooklyn
Hunter
Lehman
Sub Totals
AY20072
AY2008
AY2009
Fall 2010
2
5
7
1
1
4
1
5
3
11
2
16
4
4
1
1
2
5
7
1
4
1
6
4
3
1
8
4
6
2
12
5
5
3
1
4
1
5
6
1
3
1
5
5
4
1
10
4
9
2
15
5
5
4
1
5
1
5
1
7
1
5
1
7
6
6
1
13
6
9
1
16
5
5
33
39
45
53
1
All core faculty who teach in the DPH degree program have their primary appointments at one of the three
Consortial Campuses listed in this table.
2
Since there were no BIOS and EPI specializations in 2007, those faculty who later were placed into one of
those specializations were counted in the Social and Behavioral Science specialization.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
66
1.6.e. A table showing faculty, students, and student/faculty ratios, organized by
department or specialty area, or other organizational unit as appropriate to the school
for each of the last three years.
Table 1.6.e. shows the SFRs for the AY 2007, 2008 and 2009 and fall 2010. SFRs are
presented by knowledge area.1 Each faculty member was assigned to a single knowledge area
based on his or her primary responsibilities during a specific time period, even though he or
she may have had responsibilities in more than one area. As shown in Table 1.6.e., for the
most part, graduate SFRs consistently remained below 10:1, as recommended by CEPH.
Fluctuations from year to year were due, in part, to the initiation of the DPH program in
2007, the initiation of new MPH specializations – CBPH at Lehman College and HPM and
EPI/BIOS at Hunter College in 2006 and 2008, respectively -- and the hiring of 18 new
faculty.
1.6.f. A concise statement or chart concerning the availability of other personnel
(administration and staff).
Figure 1.4.a.2. and Table 1.4.b.2. depict the SPH administration and staff.
1
The titles of several specializations generally correspond to CEPH-defined knowledge areas basic to public
health: EPI, BIOS, EOH and EOHS. Social and Behavioral Science, however, is represented by distinct
specializations: MPH specializations in CBPH (at Lehman College), GPH (at Brooklyn College), COMHE
(Hunter College); BS specialization in COMHE (at Hunter College) and DPH specialization in CSH (at GC and
Hunter College). Health Policy and Management is represented by distinct MPH specializations: HCPA (at
Brooklyn College) and HPM at Hunter College.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
67
Table 1.6.e. Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Ratios by Core Knowledge Area and Nutrition
AY 2007
HC Core
Faculty
FTEF
Core
HC Other
Faculty
FTEF
Other
Total
Faculty HC
Total FTEF
HC
Students
FTE
Students
SFR by
Core FTEF
SFR by Total
FTEF
Graduate degree programs (DPH, MPH & MS)
BIOS
EPI
EOH/EOHS
HPM/HCPA
COMHE/CBPH/GPH/CSH
NUTR
6
6
14
2
6
6
12.3
2
5
2
26
2
2
.5
5.3
1.8
11
8
49
4
8
6.5
17.6
3.8
64
33
181.5
24.5
43.5
23
137.5
17
7.3
3.8
11.2
8.5
4.4
3.5
7.8
4.5
2
2
2
2.5
1
8
4
4.5
3
36.5
57
24
31.5
12
15.75
5.3
10.5
2
Undergraduate degree programs (BS)
COMHE
NFS
2
2
AY 2008
Graduate degree programs (DPH, MPH & MS)
BIOS
EPI
EOH/EOHS
HPM/HCPA
COMHE/CBPH/GPH/CSH
NUTR
2
6
7
8
9
3
2
6
7
8
8
3
5
4
3
6
30
1
1.5
1.5
.8
1.5
4.4
.5
7
10
10
14
39
4
3.5
7.5
7.75
9.5
12.9
3.5
2
22
67.5
35
206.5
33
1.7
13.6
45
25
149
24.5
0.9
2.3
6.4
3.1
18.6
8.2
0.5
1.8
5.8
2.6
11.5
6.1
2
2
4
6
1
1.25
6
8
3
3.25
61.5
46.5
57.6
33.9
28.8
16.95
19.2
10.4
Undergraduate degree programs (BS)
COMHE
NFS
2
2
AY 2009
Graduate degree programs (DPH, MPH & MS)
BIOS
EPI
EOH/EOHS
HPM/HCPA
COMHE/CBPH/GPH/CSH
NUTR
4
5
6
10
14
2
4
5
6
9
11.1
2
3
7
9
9
14
5
1.3
2.6
2.2
3.1
4.8
1.2
7
17
15
19
29
8
5.3
7.6
8.2
12.1
15.8
3.5
5
42
72
69.5
222
31
3.8
31
47.5
52
151.0
25.5
1.0
6.2
7.9
5.8
13.6
11.3
0.7
4.1
5.8
4.3
9.6
7.4
2
2
6
7
2
3
8
5
4
5
71
64
65.2
44.4
37.6
22.2
16.3
8.9
Undergraduate degree programs (BS)
COMHE
NFS
2
2
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
68
Table 1.6.e. Faculty, Students and Student/Faculty Ratios by Core Knowledge Area and Nutrition
Fall 2010
HC Core
Faculty
FTEF
Core
HC Other
Faculty
FTEF
Other
Total
Faculty HC
Total FTEF
HC
Students
FTE
Students
SFR by
Core FTEF
SFR by Total
FTEF
Graduate degree programs (DPH, MPH & MS)
BIOS
EPI
5
7
5
7
4
4
1.3
1.1
9
11
6.3
8.1
8
62
6
43.3
1.2
6.2
1.0
5.3
EOH/EOHS
HPM/HCPA
7
13
7
12.5
2
9
0.8
1.8
9
22
7.8
14.3
67
116
34.7
74.4
5.0
6.0
4.5
5.2
COMHE/CBPH/GPH/CSH
14
11.5
20
5.4
34
16.9
209
144
12.5
8.5
3
3
5
1.3
8
4.3
60
42.6
14.2
10.0
NUTR
Undergraduate degree programs (BS)
COMHE
2
2
3
0.8
5
2.8
56
73
36.5
26.5
NFS
2
2
4
1.5
6
3.5
61
77
38.5
22.0
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
69
Explanation of Student/Faculty Ratio Table 1.6.e. Pages 68-69
Key:
HC = head count
Primary (Core) = full-time CUNY faculty whose primary responsibilities are related to the SPH
FTE = full-time-equivalent
FTEF = full-time-equivalent faculty
Other = adjuncts, faculty from part-time and secondary faculty
Total = core + Other
SFR = student/Faculty Ratio
Faculty Notes:
Faculty FTE calculations: Primary faculty consist of full-time faculty from the Consortial Campuses
whose primary appointment is in a program leading to a doctoral or master’s degree in public
health, master’s of science degree in nutrition or environmental and occupational health sciences
or a bachelor’s degree in nutrition or community health education. Primary faculty have an annual
contractual workload of 21 credits: (generally seven courses x three credits) or the equivalent in
public health administration and/or research with FTE equal to 1.0.
For primary faculty engaged less than 100% in public health, the FTE calculation is based upon the
percent time devoted to teaching, administration and/or research in public health.
―Other‖ faculty consists of adjuncts, faculty from cross-listed courses and DPH faculty from other
CUNY colleges. Reasons for large Head Count of other faculty in the Social and Behavioral
Sciences are twofold: first, there are a number of non-core faculty who teach in the DPH program
who are counted as ―other,‖ and there are a number of faculty who contribute to teaching and
administration in the MPH Programs at Brooklyn College although their individual FTEs are very
small.
For adjunct faculty, one course is considered 0.25 FTE.
Faculty on leave are not counted in the head count while they are on leave.
Core faculty who teach in the undergraduate programs (at Hunter) are either dedicated to teaching in
these programs or teach in graduate and undergraduate programs. In calculating the head count for
the latter faculty, the SPH averaged the total teaching, advising and administrative load for several
faculty and assigned this number to one faculty member. Such approximations very closely reflect
the real FTE faculty numbers and the resultant SFRs.
Student Notes:
The source of data for students is the Office of Institutional Research.
FTE calculation = total number of credits taken by students/9. For instance, according to Institutional
Research, Hunter College COMHE MPH students in fall 2009 registered for a total of 229 credits,
which accounts for 25.4 student FTEs. The count includes only matriculated students who are
currently enrolled in courses. Institutional Research does not count students on leave. No student
can be counted as more than one FTE. Consequently, if a student took more than nine credits in a
semester (or 18 in an academic year), the calculations ensured that those credits would not be
attributed to an additional FTE.
Student count does not include the MS/MPH dual-degree program because the college includes them
in the Hunter College School of Nursing’s head count.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
70
1.6.g. A concise statement or chart concerning amount of space available to the school
by purpose (offices, classrooms, common space for student use, etc.), by program and
location.
Space is available to SPH students, faculty, administrators and staff. At Hunter College, the
BS, MS and MPH degree programs are housed at the Brookdale campus, located at 25th
Street and First Avenue in Manhattan. Facilities at the Brookdale Campus include classroom
space, teaching laboratories, the Health and Sciences Library and the Health Professions
Education Center (HPEC). For more information see
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/shp/centers/hpec/. The faculty and staff members, including new
faculty and staff recently hired for the SPH, have their own offices on the seventh, eighth and
10th floors of the West building. There are two meeting rooms on the 10th floor and a
faculty/staff lounge on the eighth floor. There are 16 classrooms for 20 to 35 students and
three large amphitheater-style classrooms for 60 to100 students. SPH students have access to
the public areas on the Brookdale campus, which includes an indoor pool and other sports
and recreational facilities, a cafeteria, a library and an 884-seat auditorium.
On the Brooklyn College campus, faculty offices are on the fourth floor of Ingersoll Hall.
Approximately 8,000 net available square feet is allocated to faculty, administration and staff
(including the main administrative office and faculty offices, a lab/storage area, a large
computer laboratory and an audiovisual/storage closet). In addition, two rooms serve for
MPH and departmental seminars and meetings and for students. Classroom space is allocated
as needed by the college in Ingersoll Hall or its extension, New Ingersoll Hall.
Approximately 25 classrooms for 10 to 50 students are located throughout Ingersoll Hall.
For larger classes, Ingersoll Hall offers five amphitheater-style classrooms. SPH students
have access to the student facilities at Brooklyn College including recreational facilities, the
Brooklyn College Library and campus computer facilities.
At Lehman College, the MPH degree program is housed in the Department of Health
Sciences on the fourth floor of the Gillet building. Four of the faculty offices are on the
fourth floor, and the fifth full-time faculty member’s office is on the third floor. All classes
are taught on the fourth floor except for biostatistics classes, which are taught in the
Information Technology Center computer labs in Carman Hall, and the environmental health
course that is taught in a GIS lab on the third floor of Gillet building. The programs in the
Department of Health Sciences share a conference room that is separated by sliding doors
from the nutrition labs. The college is constructing a new science building, and it is expected
that when other departments move into it, there will be more room for the expansion of the
MPH Department.
At the GC, the DPH program is housed in a nine-story landmark building at 365 Fifth Ave. in
midtown Manhattan. Formerly home to the B. Altman Department Store, the building has
been redesigned as a state-of-the-art facility to meet the needs of the 21st-century institution
of advanced learning. The SPH faculty have access to extensive resources that meet the
needs of the doctoral programs. In addition, the Robert E. Gilleece Student Center is on the
fifth floor. It houses offices for student government and chartered organizations of the
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
71
Doctoral Students’ Council. DPH faculty have office space for meeting with students,
classrooms for meetings and auditoria and conference rooms for special events.
In fall 2011, the SPH will be housed in a new, 142,000-square-foot state-of-the-art facility in
East Harlem on 119th Street and Third Avenue. The SPH building will consist of eight stories
and a basement and will house an auditorium, academic science classrooms, a cafeteria,
scientific laboratories and ample room for faculty and staff offices. A student/faculty dining
common area will be constructed to encourage faculty and students to meet, converse and
socialize. The new facility is being designed to meet Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) standards with respect to environmentally responsible
construction. Occupancy in the new facility, which also will be home to the Lois V. and
Samuel J. Silberman School of Social Work and the Center for Puerto Rican Studies (Centro)
library and archive, is expected in fall 2011.
1.6.h. A concise statement or floor plan concerning laboratory space, including kind,
quantity and special features or special equipment.
The SPH has three teaching laboratories:
1) The Advanced Nutrition Laboratory (Hunter College), in the East Building of the
Brookdale campus, is approximately 950 square feet. The lab includes 10 work stations
and is equipped with eight student spectrophotometers, three thin layer chromatography
tanks, four electronic balances, two micro-centrifuges, four microscopes, one vortex, one
sonicator, eight cell disrupting systems, four mini-gel horizontal electrophoresis systems
with gel trays and combs, one Mini-Protein cell (2-gel capacity) with casting trays and
loading guides (for 10 and 15 well gels), one Mini-Protean Tetra cell (4-gel capacity), one
Tetra blotting module (2-membrane capacity, one power supply (4 electrophoresis system
capacity) and one PCR system, as well as a large collection of glassware, including
beakers, graduated cylinders, volumetric and Erlenmeyer flasks, mortars and pestles,
crucibles and glassware for staining blood slides.
It also includes the following nutrition assessment equipment: two physician’s scales with
height indicator, an electronic stadiometer, a Tanita bioelectrical impedance balance, five
Lange calipers for skin-fold assessment with measuring tapes, five knee-height calipers, a
metabolic cart to measure resting energy expenditure, a DCA analyzer to measure A1C,
two sphygmomanometers, four blood glucose meters, four computers with nutrition
analysis and statistical software (additional computers with all software are also available
in the Health Professions Education Center).
2) The Experimental Foods and Sensory Laboratory (Hunter College) is in the West
Building of the Brookdale campus. The laboratory is approximately 1,600 square feet with
12 work stations. This laboratory is used for experimental foods courses and cooking
demonstrations for projects like the CUNY Diabetes Prevention Campaign. The lab also is
used to instruct university staff, dormitory residents and other community members on
preparing healthy meals in ―Healthy Eating‖ and ―Shake n Bake‖ and to instruct
individuals with various metabolic disorders on alternative food preparation techniques.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
72
The lab is divided into four stations each with three complete units. Each complete unit
has a gas range, a sink and other standard kitchen utensils, pots and pans. It also has
microwave ovens, a dishwasher, and two refrigerators. In addition, the lab is equipped
with audiovisual equipment.
Equipment in the foods lab includes four electronic balances, two moisture analyzers
(purchased in 2000), one water activity meter, a viscometer, a pH meter, a volumeter, a
penetrometer, a texture analyzer (purchased in 2002), a shortometer, a shearometer, and
two consistometers ).
3) Environmental and Occupational Health Laboratory (Hunter College), in the East
Building of the Brookdale campus, is approximately 900 square feet and equipped with
two emergency showers, two laboratory sinks, one externally vented fume hood and
numerous tabletop analytical devices and equipment, such as spectrometer, gas-liquid
chromatograph, muffle furnace and several analytical balances.
1.6.i. A concise statement concerning the amount, location and types of computer
facilities and resources for students, faculty, administration and staff.
The SPH has superior state-of-the-art technology to meet the needs of students, faculty,
administration and staff. The classrooms are equipped with Internet access, and in some
cases, with Wi-Fi capabilities. In addition, smart and enhanced classrooms at the Brookdale
campus also include a ceiling-mounted data/video projector and a crestron touchpad (mediacontrol panel). There are also facilities for video conferencing and distance learning. Each
campus has a media center (or computer laboratory) to assist faculty in developing
electronic-based course materials.
Instructional computing laboratories are available to SPH students (primarily those taking
classes in biostatistics, epidemiology and mapping). At Brooklyn College, the computer
laboratory in Room 326 New Ingersoll Hall is equipped with 40 terminals. At Hunter
College, there are three instructional computer laboratories, in rooms 015E with 15 terminals,
016E with 34 terminals and 245W with 15 terminals. At Lehman College, there are two
computer laboratories, CL 125 and CL 126, with 25 terminals. At the GC, there are five
computer laboratories in rooms 6418 with 34 terminals, C196.01 with 11 terminals, C196.02
with 15 terminals, C196.03 with 12 terminals and C415B with 29 terminals. These
laboratories are equipped with Dell PCs or Macs, printers, DVD/VCR players, LCD
projectors and screens. Internet access is available from all computers.
The faculty and staff have up-to-date computers and printers in their offices and access to
college emails and the Blackboard™ platform for courses. In addition to instructional
computing laboratories, students have access to computers in the libraries, media centers and
other student areas. Students, faculty and staff have access to statistical software packages,
such as Microsoft Office, SPSS, SAS and various nutrition-assessment programs. Access
from off campus is available for many of these resources, either directly to the campus
communications server or through the web.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
73
1.6.j. A concise statement of library/information resources available for school use,
including description of library capabilities in providing digital (electronic) content,
access mechanisms and guidance in using them, and document delivery services.
Library resources are available to SPH students, faculty, administrators and staff.
At the GC, the Mina Rees Library occupies three floors. Circulation, reserves, copying
machines, the dissertation collection and interlibrary loan office are on the ground floor. The
largest area of the library is on the second floor, which houses the reference, periodicals and
circulating collections, the microform collection and the music and video-viewing room, as
well as the reference desk and library staff offices, including the office of the dissertation
assistant. Study tables, many computer-equipped, are located throughout this floor. The
computer commons and electronic classrooms are on the concourse level, one floor below the
library entrance. The library has been designed to meet the special needs of the doctoral
programs in the humanities, social sciences, mathematics and health sciences, including
public health. The collection includes more than 301,000 volumes, 600,000 microforms and
about 1,800 current print subscriptions and more than 16,000 e-subscriptions to journals and
other serial publications.
The Hunter College Health Professions Library (HPL), on the Brookdale campus, is open 74
hours a week. The library has 26,500 volumes and 224 professional journals housed in its
10,000-square-foot space. In addition, full-text articles from more than 50,000 journals are
accessible via the library’s electronic resources. The library provides seating for 212 (156 in
the library and 56 computers). In 2007, the library’s wireless network was created along
with a laptop loan program for in-house use. Within the HPL, students and faculty are able to
access many specialized health-sciences electronic databases and resources at
http://library.hunter.cuny.edu/hpl/, including CINAHL, MEDLINE (Ovid and EBSCO), Web
of Science, Health Source, Health Reference Center, Books@Ovid, Lippincott Williams &
Wilkins Nursing & Health Professions Premier Collection, SAGE: Health Sciences
Collection, RefWorks and the Cochrane Library. These resources also are available to
students and faculty off-site through university email authentication.
The Brooklyn College Library, recently rebuilt and elegantly refurbished, contains more than
1.3 million volumes. This is an extensive collection covering all disciplines on campus. The
library makes available more than 40,000 printed books, documents, periodicals and
electronic journals (using more than 20 electronic databases) relevant to health and public
health researchers, including major health and public health periodicals. The Brooklyn
College Library is a U.S. Government Documents Repository. Books and journals in the
libraries of other CUNY colleges are available through online catalogs (CUNY+) and
databases on campus computers or from home. Books may be requested from other libraries
for delivery at Brooklyn, and faculty and students may visit other campuses and check out
books.
Lehman College’s library offers academic support for student research and learning. The
library subscribes to multiple electronic databases covering health topics, including Health
Reference Center, Health Source, MEDLINE with Full Text CINAHL with Full Text, and
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
74
Cochrane Library. The library subscribes to more than 13,000 full-text journals online, many
from databases such as SAGE Journals Online Premier, Elsevier’s ScienceDirect, ProQuest
Platinum, JSTOR and Project MUSE. Of these, at least 223 are identified as primarily about
public health.
The SPH and the Hunter School of Social Work will have a joint library on the new East
Harlem campus. This new library is in the advanced planning stages. SPH students have
equal access to borrowed materials from the 20 libraries of the CUNY system. CUNY+, the
online public access catalog of the CUNY libraries, is available from PCs throughout the
campuses and by web access from any location. Faculty and students enjoy well-developed
Document Delivery/ILL services, which further encourages the circulation of knowledge from
campus to campus. The electronic resources licensed by the CUNY libraries can be accessed
off-campus by the SPH’s faculty, students and staff. This year, the CUNY-campus libraries
received an extra infusion of funds to support purchase of student textbooks and eBooks.
1.6.k. A concise statement describing community resources available for instruction,
research and service, indicating those where formal agreements exist.
There are a variety of community resources within New York City that are available to
public health students and faculty for education, research and service. Some key examples
are:
The agencies that provide preceptors who supervise SPH student practice experiences are
provided in Appendix 2.4.b.
Approximately 20 professionals representing nonprofit, governmental, medical and other
health and professional agencies serve on the SPH’s PHLC (See: Table 1.4.b.1.). The SPH
also has access to other individuals and agencies, for example, through additional advisory
boards that are affiliated with SPH that are accredited by additional bodies such as ABET
and CADE.
The New York Public Library (NYPL) comprises scholarly research collections and a
network of community libraries. The NYPL’s holdings exceed 50 million items making it
the most comprehensive library collection ever brought together for free use by the public.
Used for on-site reference, the research collections are in four major centers in New York
City, including the Science, Industry and Business Library, which is in the same building
as the GC. In addition, the NYPL’s main collection is a five-minute walk from the GC
campus. There also are community libraries throughout the Bronx, Manhattan and Staten
Island. In addition, the Brooklyn Public Library and the Queens Library have branches
throughout their boroughs.
The New York Academy of Medicine, including the library, training facilities and online
resources, is open to faculty and students. The academy is on Fifth Avenue and 103rd
Street in Manhattan, a 10-minute walk from the new SPH campus.
NYCDOHMH provides several forms of expertise to the SPH. It maintains a significant
collection of public-health-related books, documents, brochures and periodicals in its
William Hallock Park Memorial Public Health Library on First Avenue and 27th Street,
two blocks from the Brookdale campus. It also provides print and electronic materials for
professionals, students and the public on a variety of public health topics. NYCDOHMH
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
75
staff have served as adjunct and guest lecturers and provide speakers for faculty and
students (on such topics as GIS and the use of the department’s databases).
Other government agencies, such as EPA Region II, OSHA Region II, the New York City
Housing Authority and New York City Department of Environmental Protection support
the SPH by providing adjunct faculty and guest lecturers; serving as recruitment sites for
potential students; and partnering in research.
Other CEPH-accredited public health schools and programs in NYC offer programs that
are available to students and faculty. For example, the NYU Program in Global Health,
the Mount Sinai School of Medicine Global Health Center and the Albert Einstein College
of Medicine Institute for Public Health Sciences offer a variety of lectures and forums,
training programs and seminars of interest to MPH program students and faculty. Many of
these programs are free or reduced-cost for students. The Mailman School of Public
Health at Columbia University sponsors Grand Rounds in Public Health on its 168th
Street campus.
Many of the area’s major teaching hospitals and medical centers – such as SUNY
Downstate Medical Center, Kingsbrook Jewish Medical Center and University Hospital of
Brooklyn Medical Center (Brooklyn), New York-Presbyterian Hospital of Columbia
University, NYU Langone Medical Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, Memorial
Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Rockefeller University, Harlem Hospital and Mount Sinai
Medical Center (Manhattan), Montefiore Medical Center and Albert Einstein College of
Medicine (the Bronx) – offer a plethora of educational events for public health
professionals and professionals-in-training.
Professional organizations, such as the Public Health Association of New York City
(PHANYC), the New York Metropolitan Chapter of the American Industrial Hygiene
Association and the Greater New York Dietetic Association, regularly offer meetings and
seminars on topics of public-health interest for practitioners as well as faculty and
students.
Local chapters of the American Red Cross, American Heart Association, American
Diabetes Association and other groups provide classroom presentations.
Industrial facilities in the metropolitan area host plant visits for EOHS students.
The SPH has established a MOU with Weill Cornell Medical College to collaborate on
education and research between public health and clinical and translational sciences.
Under this agreement, the SPH makes public health courses available to Cornell MS
students in clinical investigation, and Weill Cornell Medical College makes clinical
research courses available to public health students at the SPH. The two institutions also
are seeking opportunities for collaborative research in the public health, with the
possibility of collaborating through Cornell’s Clinical and Translational Science Center
on community research and engagement.
1.6.l. A concise statement of the amount and source of “in-kind” academic contributions
available for instruction, research and service, indicating where formal agreements
exist.
The SPH receives ―in-kind‖ academic contributions from a variety of sources for
instructional, research and service activities:
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
76
Each of the four Consortial Campuses hosts sponsors and co-sponsors free lectures,
seminars and conferences on a variety of public health topics. For example, the Brooklyn
College Graduate Center for Worker Education (at 25 Broadway in Lower Manhattan)
hosts a public lecture series. In 2008, the MPH program sponsored at least three sessions:
―National Health Insurance for the United States: Has its Time Come?‖ (3/17/2008), ―9/11
Aftermath: WTC Responders Pay a Heavy Mental Health Toll‖ (5/12/2008) and ―Health
Reform and the November Elections‖ (10/23/2008). Hunter co-sponsored, with the
Greater New York Dietetic Association, the Mary Swarz Rose lecture in nutrition in 2010.
The GC hosted NYCDOHMH’s launching of its 2010 Take Care New York Initiative.
The SPH’s new building on East 119th Street will include an auditorium that will be
available for public health programs that target the surrounding community.
SPH students may enroll in relevant courses that are offered in academic departments
outside of public health, and faculty from other departments teach courses that are
applicable to public health.
The colleges and university sponsor fellowships in public health and related areas. For
example, urban public health is a focus of the Joan H. Tisch Legacy Project at Hunter
College. The project funds the Tisch Distinguished Fellowship in Public Health. The
inaugural Fellow (Jan.-Dec. 2010) was John E. McDonough, PhD, who served as senior
adviser to the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and was
chief adviser on health-care reform to the late Senator Edward M. Kennedy. In spring
2010, Dr. McDonough taught a graduate course on the politics and policy of health-care
reform and led an interdisciplinary faculty seminar dealing with current public health
issues. In fall 2010, he will be teaching an advanced graduate seminar in public health
policy analysis.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
77
1.6.m. Identification of outcome measures by which the school may judge the adequacy
of its resources, along with data regarding the school’s performance against those
measures for each of the last three years. At a minimum, the school must provide data
on institutional expenditures per full-time-equivalent student, research dollars per fulltime-equivalent faculty, and extramural funding (service or training) as a percent of the
total budget.
Table 1.6.m. measures the adequacy of the SPH’s resources for 2007 – 2009.
Table 1.6.m. CUNY SPH Outcome Measures for Adequacy of Resources
FY 2007-2009
Outcome Measures
SPH expenditure per FTE
student
Extramural research
dollars (total award
amount) per core &
affiliated FTE faculty
Total extramural funding
(total award amount) for
core & affiliated FTE
faculty as a percent of
total budget
Total Extramural funding
(current year amount) for
core FTE faculty only as a
percent of total budget
Graduate FTE student to
FTE faculty ratios (SFRs)
≤ 10:1
Target
2007
2008
2009
$10,076
$13,534
$17,494
$605,114
$588,133
$478,543
85%
81%
73%
53%
47%
37%
EOHS (7.3)
HPM (3.8)
SOC BEHAV
(11.2)
NUTR (8.5)
BIOS (0.9)
EPI (2.3)
EOHS (6.4)
HPM (3.1)
SOC BEHAV
(18.6)
NUTR (8.2)
BIOS (1.0)
EPI (6.2)
EOHS (7.9)
HPM (5.8)
SOC BEHAV
(13.6)
NUTR (11.3)
Increase the amount of
school expenditure per
FTE student
Increase or maintain
the amount of research
dollars per FTE
faculty
Increase or maintain
total extramural
funding as a per-cent
of total budget
Increase total
extramural funding as
a per-cent of total
budget
Maintain or decrease
FTE student-tofaculty ratios
N/A
Expenditures per FTE student have increased more than 70% during the past three years.
This is largely owing to the dramatic increase in state appropriations during this same period
— from $1.7 million in FY 2008 to $5.9 million in FY 2010 and $8.7 million in the current
fiscal year. Most of this funding has been devoted to hiring faculty and staff. A tuition
revenue also has increased during this period — from $1.8 million in FY 2008 to projected
$3 million in the current fiscal year (See: Table 1.6.m.). Consequently, as the proportion of
the funds from state appropriations and tuition increased, the proportion due to extramural
funding decreased. Going forward, we fully expect extramural funding to grow as new
faculty obtain grants and contracts.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
78
1.6.n. Assessment to which this criterion is met.
This criteria is met.
Strengths:
The SPH has the financial, personnel, space, technology and community resources to
adequately carry out its educational, research and service activities.
Resources are expected to grow over the next three years.
Future Plans:
In fall 2011, the SPH will move into its new home in East Harlem, in a newly constructed
building with state-of-the-art laboratory, library, instructional computing, and advanced
technology equipment and facilities, where there are additional office, classroom and
communal space and community resources.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
79
CRITERION 2.0: INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS
2.1
Master of Public Health Degree. The school shall offer instructional
programs reflecting its stated mission and goals, leading to the Master of Public
Health (MPH) or equivalent professional master’s degree in at least the five areas
of knowledge basic to public health. The school may offer other degrees,
professional and academic, and other areas of specialization, if consistent with its
mission and resources.
2.1.a. An instructional matrix (see CEPH Data Template C) presenting all of the
school’s degree programs and areas of specialization, including undergraduate degrees,
if any.
Table 2.1.a. Instructional Matrix Presenting the SPH’s Degree Programs and Areas of Specialization
HEGIS
Code
1214
1214
1214
1214
1214
1
1214
1214
1214
1214
1214
1214
1214
1214
1299
1306
1203.1/
1214
1214
1306
2
Degree
Specialization
MPH
MPH
MPH
MPH
MPH
Community-Based Public Health & Health Equity
Community Health Education
Environmental & Occupational Health Sciences
Epidemiology and Biostatistics – Biostatistics Option
Epidemiology and Biostatistics – Epidemiology
Option
(general) Public Health
Health Care Policy & Administration
Public Health Nutrition
Health Policy & Management
Community, Society & Health
Environmental & Occupational Health
Epidemiology
3
Health Policy & Management
Environmental & Occupational Health Sciences
Nutrition3
Community/Public Health Nursing/Urban Public
Health
Community Health Education
Nutrition and Food Science
MPH
MPH
MPH
MPH
DPH
DPH
DPH
DPH
MS
MS
MS/
MPH
BS
BS
Abbreviation
Campus
CBPH
COMHE-MPH
EOHS-MPH
BIOS-MPH
EPI-MPH
Lehman
Hunter
Hunter
Hunter
Hunter
GPH
HCPA-MPH
NUTR-MPH
HPM-MPH
CSH
EOH
EPI-DPH
HPM-DPH
EOHS-MS
NUTR-MS
PHN
Brooklyn
Brooklyn
Hunter
Hunter
GC/Hunter
GC/Hunter
GC/Hunter
GC/Hunter
Hunter
Hunter
Hunter
COMHE-BS
NFS
Hunter
Hunter
# Credits
required
45
45
45
45
45
The five degree programs (MPH, DPH, MS, MS/MPH and BS) offered by the SPH, along
with the specializations, campus locations and number of credits required for each, are listed
in Table 2.1.a. and Figure 2.1.a. The SPH offers eight MPH specializations: in all five core
areas
1
These programs have been approved by the NYS Education Department and are listed in the Inventory of Registered
Programs http://www.nysed.gov/heds/irpsl1.html. New York State uses the Higher Education General Information Survey
(HEGIS) taxonomy to classify instructional programs.
2
The degrees offered in the SPH are professional (not academic).
3
First entering class: fall 2010
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
80
45
45
45
45
60
60
60
60
46
41
57
120
120
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
81
and in public health nutrition at the Hunter campus; in GPH and HCPA at the Brooklyn
College campus; and in CBPH at the Lehman campus. The GC and Hunter College offer the
DPH degree, in collaboration with the public health faculty at Brooklyn and Lehman
Colleges and other CUNY campuses. The DPH offers four specializations: Community,
Society and Health; Epidemiology; Environmental and Occupational Health; and Public
Health Policy and Management. There also are two MS degree programs, two BS degrees,
and a dual MS/MPH degree. Appendix 2.1 provides brief descriptions of each degree
program and specialization.
2.1.b. The school bulletin or other official publication, which describes all curricula
offered by the school for all degree programs. If the school does not publish a bulletin
or other official publication, it must provide for each degree program and area of
concentration identified in the instructional matrix a printed description of the
curriculum, including a list of required courses and their course descriptions.
The curricula offered by the SPH are described in the graduate and undergraduate catalogs,
which are available on the SPH website and on the websites of the Consortial Campuses,
where the specific degree programs and specializations are offered.
CUNY SPH: http://www.cuny.edu/site/sph.html
MPH, MS and BS degree programs at Hunter: http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/uph
MS/MPH degree program at Hunter:
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/nursing/admissions/graduate
DPH degree program at Hunter College and the GC:
http://web.gc.cuny.edu/ClinicalDoctoral/index.asp
MPH degree programs at Brooklyn College:
http://www.brooklyn.edu/programs/index.jsp?div=G
MPH degree program at Lehman College:
http://www.lehman.edu/lehman/programs/graduate-bulletin/index.htm
The following curriculum summaries are included in this section:
MPH
Table 2.1.b.1.
DPH
Table 2.1.b.2.
MS
Table 2.1.b.3.
MS/MPH Table 2.1.b.4.
BS
Table 2.1.b.3.
BS
Table 2.1.b.5.
As indicated in Table 2.1.b.1., MPH students take one core course in each of the five
knowledge areas basic to public health (the core courses). Students also take five to six
required courses in their respective specializations (15-18 credits), supervised fieldwork (3
credits), and two to three elective courses (6 – 9 credits). In addition, students complete a
culminating experience, with one or more accompanying seminars, for which they receive an
additional 3-6 credits. The core courses are offered at the three Consortial Campuses that
house the MPH degree programs. A core course taken at one site satisfies the SPH core
requirement at the other sites, as discussed in Criteria 2.3. Each core course has a set of
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
82
defined learning objectives that are linked to the development of program-wide
competencies. Core competencies are presented in Criteria 2.6.
Table 2.1.b.1. MPH Specializations and Degree Requirements
MPH specializations
15 credits
Specialization required courses
MPH core courses
15-18 credits
required for all specializations
Specialization elective courses
6-9 credits
Practice experience
3 credits
Culminating experience
3-6 credits
Biostatistics
Environmental Health & Safety
Epidemiology
Social and Behavioral Sciences
Public Health Policy and Management
(general) Public Health (Brooklyn): 15 credits
Health Care Policy and Administration (Brooklyn): 15
credits
Biostatistics and Epidemiology (Hunter): 15 credits
Community Health Education (Hunter): 15 credits
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences (Hunter):
15 credits
Public Health Nutrition (Hunter): 18 credits
Public Health Policy and Management (Hunter): 15 credits
Community-Based Public Health (Lehman): 15 credits
(general) Public Health (Brooklyn): 6 credits
Health Care Policy and Administration (Brooklyn): 6
credits
Biostatistics and Epidemiology (Hunter): 9 credits
Community Health Education (Hunter): 9 credits
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences (Hunter):
9 credits
Public Health Nutrition (Hunter): 6 credits
Public Health Policy and Management (Hunter): 9 credits
Community-Based Public Health & Health Equity
(Lehman): 9 credits
Supervised fieldwork, plus accompanying course
Capstone project or research essay (Hunter & Lehman),
master’s essay (Brooklyn & Hunter) or thesis (Brooklyn)
plus accompanying seminar/s or meetings with faculty
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
83
Table 2.1.b.2. DPH Degree Requirements
60 Credits
Course
Public Health Core
9 credits
PH800: Cities, Society and Health
PH801: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Urban Health Research
PH802: Advanced Methodological and Ethical Issues in Urban
Health Research
Specialization-Specific Requirements
Community, Society & Health
PH810: Community Health Interventions
9 credits
PH811: Soc/Behavioral Dimensions of Health
Elective GC, PH or MPH courses on population or health
problem-specific issues
Epidemiology
PH820: Epidemiological Methods, I (may be waived for
12 credits
students w/ 6 or more MPH EPI courses); PH 821-823:
Epidemiological Methods, II-IV
Environmental & Occupational
PH830: Emerging Issues in Environmental & Occupational
Health
Health; PH 831: Environmental & Occupational Health Risk
9 credits
Assessment Management & Communication in Urban Settings;
elective GC or PH course on the urban environment
Health Policy & Management
PH840: Seminar in Health Policy and Management; PH 841:
12 credits
Quantitative Methods in Health Services Research, plus two
GC theory courses in a social science cognate related to health
policy or management, e.g.: economics, sociology, political
science
Specialization-Specific Research, Methods or Practice Courses
Community Health and Society
PH820: Epidemiological Methods 1, plus two additional
9 credits
courses
Epidemiology
Two courses in statistics or advanced research methods
6 credits
Environmental & Occupational
PH820: Epidemiologic Methods I, a course in statistics or
Health
instrumentation, and a course in GIS
9 credits
Health Policy & Management
PH820: Epidemiologic Methods I and a GC course in research
6 credits
design or methods
GC Interdisciplinary Requirement One course in a GC department outside of public health,
3 credits
options vary by specialization
Research Seminar
PH890: Research Seminar I
6 credits
PH891: Research Seminar II
Public Health Leadership
PH892.01 &.02: Public Health Leadership Development
Development
Fieldwork (6 credits)
12 credits
PH893: Public Health Leadership Development Seminar
Elective course to develop leadership competencies
Dissertation Research
12 credits
Dissertation proposal approved
PH899: Dissertation Research
PH898: Dissertation Seminar
PH900: Dissertation Supervision (as needed, 0 credits)
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
84
Table 2.1.b.3. MS and BS Degree Requirements1
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences -- MS
PH 751: Principles of Biostatistics
EOHS 755: Industrial Ventilation & Environmental
PH 754: Environmental Health & Safety
Control
PH 753: Principles of Epidemiology
EOHS 757: Principles of Industrial Hygiene
PH 755: Urban Health and Society
EOHS 762: Noise & Radiation Hazards & Controls
PH 756: Public Health & Health Care Policy PH 737: Supervised Fieldwork
& Mgmt
PH 738: Capstone Seminar
EOHS 702: Introduction to Occupational
Electives, 6 credits
Safety & Health
Comprehensive examination
EOHS 741: Environmental & Industrial
Hygiene Lab, 4 credits
EOHS 754: Environmental
and Occupational Toxicology
Nutrition – MS
PH 750: Introduction to Biostatistics
NUTR 734 & 745: Clinical Nutrition I & II,
NUTR 705: Nutrition & Biochemistry
6 credits
NUTR 715: Food Service & Management
NUTR 746: Nutrition and Disease
NUTR 720: Community Nutrition Education NUTR 747: Advanced Nutrition & Assessment Lab,
NUTR 725: Nutrition Research
1 credits
NUTR 731 & 732: Adv Nutrition I & II,
NUTR 756 & 757: Food Sci & the Environment
6 credits
lecture & lab, 4 credits
NUTR 733: Nutrition & Human
NUTR 760: Practicum
Development
Comprehensive examination
Community Health -- BS
BIOL 120 or 122: Anatomy & Physiology
COMHE 402: Directed Fieldwork II, 2 credits
4.5 credits
COMHE 403: Directed Fieldwork III
NFS 141: Nutrition
COMHE 405: Principles of Administration of Health
PSYC 150: Human Development
Care Agencies and Institutions
COMHE 301: Introduction to Community
COMHE 420: Introduction to Clinical Medicine
Health Education: Social and Psychological
9 credits of these: COMHE 321, 322, 323, 324, 326
Bases
or COMHE 400 (special topics courses)
COMHE 302: Principles of Health
Social science electives, 12 credits
Education Practice I
Free electives, up to 21 credits
COMHE 303: Principles of Health
College general requirements in writing, pluralism &
Education Practice II
diversity, etc.
COMHE 325: Environmental Public Health
Problems
COMHE 330: Principles of Epidemiology
COMHE 401: Directed Fieldwork I
Nutrition and Food Science – BS
COMHE 305: Epidemiology
NFS 435: Food Service Systems
NFS 333: Nutrition Education
NFS 441: Community Nutrition
NFS 335: Institution Management
NFS 443: Practicum
NFS 342: Nutrition Through the Life Cycle
College general requirements in writing, pluralism &
NFS 402: Seminar in Nutrition & Food
diversity, etc.
Science
1
All courses are 3 credits unless indicated otherwise
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
85
Table 2.1.b.4. MS/MPH Dual-Degree Requirements
Core courses in nursing (12 credits)
NURS 700: Theoretical Foundations of Nursing Science
NURS 702: Nursing Research
NURS 704: Urban Health Care Systems
NURS 749: Health Promotion/Disease Prevention In Diverse Populations
Specialization courses in nursing (15 credits)
NURS 771: Community/Public Health Nursing I, 5credits
NURS 772: Community/Public Health Nursing II, 5credits
NURS 773: Community/Public Health Nursing III, 5credits
MPH core courses (18 credits)
PH 750: Introduction to Biostatistics
PH 752: Introduction of Epidemiology
PH 754: Environmental Health and Safety
PH 755: Urban Health and Society
PH 756: Public Health and Health Care Policy and Management
Concentration courses (9 credits)
COMHE 751: Community Health Interventions
COMHE 752: Community Organizing and Development for Health
COMHE 753: Health Program & Planning Funding
or
EOHS 702: Introduction to Occupational Safety & Health
EOHS 754: Environmental & Occupational Toxicology
EOHS 757: Principles of Industrial Hygiene
Elective courses (3 credits)
Examples: HIV/AIDS: 707, 708
Nursing Education: 730, 752, 701
Proposed Curriculum for COMHE-BS
Based on input from majors, alumni, prospective employers of graduates and deliberation of
the faculty, in May 2008 the COMHE Undergraduate Curriculum Committee released a
report that called for changes in the program’s name and degree requirements. After
extensive discussion, the changes were approved by the COMHE program and SPH faculty.
Once the curriculum is reviewed by curriculum committees in the college, it will be
transmitted to the Hunter College Senate for a final vote of approval. It is expected that the
revised curriculum will be implemented in AY 2011.
The proposed changes bring COMHE-BS in line with the undergraduate public health
learning outcomes being developed by the ASPH, the objectives in Healthy People 2010 as
well as draft objectives for Healthy People 2020, the needs of potential employers and
opportunities in the job market, the changing fields of community health and public health
and the mission of the SPH. The revised curriculum reflects ecological models of health
promotion (i.e., the importance of intervening on multiple levels of social organizations); the
importance of competencies in research design and analysis; and the need for competencies
and skills in health communication and literacy within a changing theoretical, practical and
media landscape.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
86
In particular, the proposal includes a program name change from ―Community Health
Education‖ to ―Community Health‖ and a series of three required courses designed to
enhance the research and data-analysis skills of students. These courses are COMHE 411
(Seminar in Community Health Assessment), COMHE 412 (Directed Fieldwork Practicum)
and COMHE 413 (Research Symposium). Additionally, new elective options in
communication have been introduced: COMHE 304 (Introduction to Health Communication
Theory and Practice) and COMHE 408 (New Media and Health). The curriculum appears in
Table 2.1.b.5.
Table 2.1.b.5. Proposed Curriculum for the BS in Community Health
Admission requirements
60 credits with a minimum 3.0 GPA
Social sciences (9 credits): PSYCH 100, PSYCH 150, SOC 101
Sciences (10½ credits): CHEM 100, 101 and BIO 120, 122
Mathematics (3 credits): STAT 113
Curriculum
COMHE 330: Principles of Epidemiology
COMHE 301 Introduction to Community & Public Health
COMHE 302 Principles of Health Promotion
COMHE 304 Health Communication Theory and Practice
COMHE 306 Social Disparities in Health
COMHE 325 Environmental Public Health Problems
COMHE 328 Public Health Biology
COMHE 330 Epidemiology
COMHE 408 New Media and Health
COMHE 405 Health Care Systems & Health Policy
COMHE 411 Seminar in Community Health Assessment
COMHE 412 Directed Fieldwork Practicum
COMHE 413 Research Symposium
NFS 141: Nutrition
COMHE or NFS 400-level electives (9 credits)
Throughout the remainder of Criteria 2.0, references to COMHE-BS in discussions and
tables refer to the extant program. Information about the proposed curriculum is bracketed [ ]
when the proposed and current curricula differ.
2.1.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The SPH offers the MPH-degree programs in the five required knowledge areas (plus
public health nutrition areas) and the DPH degree program in four of the five knowledge
areas basic to public health.
MPH degree program is offered on three campuses (Brooklyn, Hunter and Lehman
Colleges) and has a common set of core competencies and core courses with common
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
87
course learning objectives. Introductory core courses taken at one campus satisfy the core
requirements at the other campuses.
Future Plans:
By December 2010, at least one student, Joseph Kennedy will graduate from the EPI/BIOS
specialization, with the BIOS option. As of fall 2010, he has 36 of 45 credits with a 3.85
GPA, has registered for the remaining nine credits and is on track to complete them by
December, 2010.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
88
2.2.
Program Length. An MPH degree program or equivalent professional
master’s degree must be at least 42 semester credit units in length.
2.2.a. Definition of a credit with regard to classroom/contact hours.
One contact hour per week over a 15-week semester (fall and spring) is equivalent to one
credit. The contact hour may take the form of classroom, online or advisement hours. Most
courses are three-credits. The number of contact hours is a minimum of 15 hours per credit,
or a minimum of 45 hours per 3-credit course. The fall and spring semesters are 15 weeks in
length. Three-credit courses offered during the regular fall and spring semesters meet for 15
weeks and require three contact hours per week. In addition to the traditional fall and spring
45-hour courses, there also are courses that include a laboratory component, fieldwork-based
courses and short intensive courses that often meet during the January intersession or during
summer sessions of varying length. For courses with a laboratory component, typically, one
credit hour is associated with a laboratory class meeting for 50 to 200 minutes per week for a
semester. For fieldwork-based courses, one semester credit hour is awarded for 50 to 100
hours of supervised fieldwork or dietetic internship.
Credit hours may be earned in short intensive summer sessions that run from 4 to 7.5 weeks,
and three-week January intercessions -- with credits awarded proportionately to those earned
for the same activity during a regular term, normally at no more than one per week of fulltime study.
2.2.b. Information about the minimum degree requirements for all professional degree
curricula shown in the instructional matrix. If the school or university uses a unit of
academic credit or an academic term different than the standard semester or quarter,
this should be explained and an equivalency presented in a table or narrative.
The minimum number of credits for each of the degrees offered by the SPH is presented in
Table 2.1.a.
2.2.c. Information about the number of MPH degrees awarded for less than 42 semester
credit units, or equivalent, over each of the last three years. A summary of the reasons
should be included.
None.
2.2.d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The curricula leading to the MPH degree are 45 credits in length.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
89
2.3. Public Health Core Knowledge. All professional degree students must
demonstrate an understanding of the public health core knowledge.
2.3.a. Identification of the means by which the school assures that all professional
degree students have a broad understanding of the areas of knowledge basic to public
health. If this means is common across the school, it need be described only once. If it
varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be provided to assess
compliance by each program.
SPH students are provided with a broad understanding of the five knowledge areas basic to
public health, and the degree programs -- MPH, MS, MS/MPH, DPH and BS -- have equivalent
exposure to the public health core.
MPH, MS/MPH and EOHS-MS students are required to take at least one course in each
of the five knowledge areas. As indicated in Table 2.3.a.1., equivalent courses in these
five areas are taught at each of the three Consortial Campuses that offer the MPH degree.
DPH students must complete at least one master’s-level course in each of the knowledge
areas basic to public health. Students who have earned an MPH generally meet this
requirement. Students who have earned a masters degree in a field outside public health
must have completed a master’s-level course in at least three of the five knowledge areas
basic to public health prior to enrolling in the DPH program and must complete the
remaining two courses within their first year. These master’s-level courses do not count
toward the DPH degree. In addition, content related to each of these five areas is included
in the DPH required curriculum as indicated in Table 2.3.a.2.
NUTR-MS students and students in COMHE-BS and NFS-BS are exposed to the five
knowledge areas basic to public health through coursework in their respective
specializations. For example, while Epidemiology (COMHE 330) is required of students
in COMHE-BS and NFS-BS, there is no epidemiology course in the NUTR-MS
curriculum. Instead, NUTR-MS students cover epidemiology in a combination of
Microbiology (BIOL 230) and Nutrition Research (NUTR 725).
The COMHE and nutrition program directors regularly review syllabi of required
specialization courses to assure that the curriculum for each degree covers in sufficient depth
core public health areas that do not have their own courses. A recent review of those courses
is summarized below and in Table 2.3.a.3.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
90
Table 2.3.a.1. Courses That Address the Basic Public Health Knowledge Areas in the MPH,
MS/MPH and EOHS-MS Degree Programs
Courses within each knowledge domain are equivalent.
They contain the same learning objectives and contribute to the same program-wide competencies.
BIOSTATISTICS
HNSC 7150 Introduction to Biostatistics and Evaluation in Health Sciences I (Brooklyn)
PHE 600 Biostatistics in Public Health (Lehman)
PH 750 Introduction to Biostatistics or
PH 751 Principles of Biostatistics [required for BIOS, EPI, EOHS; optional for CBPH, COMHE,
GPH, HCPA, HPM, NUTR] (Hunter)
EPIDEMIOLOGY
HNSC 7120 Epidemiology (Brooklyn)
PHE 606 Public Health Epidemiology (Lehman)
PH 752 Introduction to Epidemiology for Public Health Practice or
PH 753 Principles of Epidemiology [required for BIOS, EPI, EOHS; optional for CBPH, COMHE,
GPH, HCPA, HPM, NUTR] (Hunter)
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES
HNSC 7130 Environmental Health in the Urban Community (Brooklyn)
PHE 702 Environmental Health (Lehman)
PH 754 Environmental Health & Safety (Hunter)
HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
HNSC 7140 Introduction to Health Care Policy & Administration (Brooklyn)
PHE 701 Public Health Policy and Management (Lehman)
PH 756 Public Health and Health Care Policy and Management (Hunter)
SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
HNSC 7110 Social & Behavioral Sciences in Public Health (Brooklyn)
PHE 703 Social & Behavioral Dimensions of Health (Lehman)
PH 755 Urban Health and Society (Hunter)
Table 2.3.a.2. Courses That Address the Basic Public Health Knowledge Areas in the DPH
Degree Program1
Core knowledge areas
Courses
Biostatistics
PH 802: Advanced Methodological & Ethical Issues in Urban Health
Research
PH 890: Research Seminar I
PH 891: Research Seminar II
Epidemiology
PH 820: Epidemiologic Methods I
Environmental health
PH 800: Cities, Society and Health
sciences
PH 890: Research Seminar I
Health services
PH 800: Cities, Society and Health
administration
PH 801: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Urban Health Research
Behavioral and social
PH 800: Cities, Society and Health
sciences
PH 801: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Urban Health Research
PH 890: Research Seminar I
PH 891: Research Seminar II
1
DPH students enter with an MPH degree or are required to take the five MPH core courses, which do not
count towards the DPH.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
91
Table 2.3.a.3. Courses That Address the Basic Public Health Knowledge Areas in the
NUTR-MS Degree Program and the Programs in COMHE-BS and NFS-BS
Core knowledge
areas
Biostatistics
Epidemiology
Environmental
Health Sciences
NUTR-MS
PH 750:
Introduction to
Biostatistics
NUTR 725:
Nutrition
Research
BIOL 230:
Microbiology
NUTR 756 &
757: Food
Science & the
Environment
COMHE-BS
through summer
2011
[COMHE-BS
effective fall 2011]
NFS
COMHE 330:
Epidemiology
COMHE 330:
Epidemiology
COMHE 330:
Epidemiology
NFS 402: Seminar
in Nutrition &
Food Science
COMHE 411:
Seminar in
Community
Assessment
NFS 402: Seminar
in Nutrition &
Food Science
COMHE 330:
Epidemiology
COMHE 413:
Research
Symposium
COMHE 330:
Epidemiology
COMHE 325:
Environmental
Public Health
Problems
COMHE 325:
Environmental
Public Health
Problems
NFS 435: Food
Service Systems
COMHE 405:
Principles of
Administration of
Health Care
Agencies &
Institutions
COMHE 405:
Health Care Systems
& Health Policy
NFS 335:
Institution
Management
COMHE 301:
Introduction to
Community
Health Education:
Social &
Psychological
Bases
COMHE 301:
Introduction to
Community Health
Education: Social &
Psychological Bases
COMHE 330:
Epidemiology
BIOL 230:
Microbiology
BIOL 230:
Microbiology
Health Services
Administration
Social and
Behavioral
Sciences
NUTR 715: Food
Service &
Management
NUTR 720:
Community
Nutrition
Education
Introductory
Psychology
NFS 441:
Community
Nutrition
NFS 333:
Nutrition
Education
Introductory
Psychology
Behavioral sciences
COMHE-BS students take COMHE 301 (Introduction to Community Health Education:
Social and Psychological Bases)
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
92
NFS-BS students take NFS 333 (Nutrition Education), which includes education and
behavior-change theories and techniques. These students also take psychology as a
requirement for entering the BS-degree program.
NUTR-MS students take NUTR 720 (Community Nutrition Education), which includes
some of the same competencies (e.g., sharing public health information verbally and in
writing; designing and evaluating interventions to prevent or control public health
problems) with the core behavioral science courses (HNSC 7110: Social & Behavioral
Sciences in Public Health, PHE 703: Social & Behavioral Dimensions of Health and PH
755 Urban Health and Society). These students also take psychology as a requirement for
entering the MS-degree program.
Biostatistics
COMHE-BS students do not take a course in biostatistics but rather are exposed to
principles of biostatistics through STAT 113 (Elementary Probability & Statistics) and
NFS 402 (Research Seminar in NSF). Key concepts that are covered in the core
biostatistics courses (HNSC 7150: Introduction to Biostatistics & Evaluation in Health
Sciences I, PHE 600: Biostatistics in Public Health and PH 750: Introduction to
Biostatistics) also are covered in STAT 113, i.e., variance, summaries, correlation,
regression, randomness, conditional probability, variables, sampling
distributions, confidence intervals and normal density. NFS 402 covers the t-test,
ANOVA and non-parametric statistics.
NFS-BS students do not take a course in biostatistics, but rather are exposed to principles
of biostatistics through STAT 113 and NFS 402, which cover key concepts that are
examined in PH 750.
NUTR-MS students take PH 750.
Epidemiology
COMHE-BS students take COMHE 330 (Epidemiology).
NFS-BS students take COMHE 330.
NUTR-MS students do not take a course in epidemiology but rather are exposed to
principles of epidemiology through BIOL 230 (Microbiology), a requirement for
admission to the MS degree program and the required graduate course, NUTR 725
(Nutrition Research). BIOL 230 covers epidemiologic investigation (descriptive,
analytical, experimental) and the functions of the Centers for Disease Control. NUTR 725
covers descriptive epidemiologic research, observational and experimental research
studies and meta-analysis.
Environmental health science
COMHE-BS students take COMHE 325 (Environmental Public Health Problems).
NFS-BS students do not take a course in environmental health science but rather are
exposed to principles of environmental health through NFS 131 (Foods I), NFS 141
(Nutrition), NFS 435 (Food Service Systems) and BIOL 230. Issues relating to
sustainable agriculture are covered in NFS 131 and 141. Food-borne illness and water
safety are examined in NFS 131, 141 and 435. BIOL 230 covers environmental, applied
and industrial microbiology. Students in NFS 435 are required to the ServSafe Food
Protection Manager Certification.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
93
NUTR-MS students do not take a course in environmental health science but rather are
exposed to principles of environmental health through NFS 131, NFS 141 and BIOL 230.
These graduate students also take NUTR 756 and 757 (Food Science & the Environment,
lecture and lab), which covers some of the environmental issues examined in the core
environmental health courses (HNSC 7130: Environmental Health in the Urban Community,
PHE 702: Environmental Health and PH 754: Environmental Health & Safety).
Health services administration
COMHE-BS students take COMHE 405 (Principles of Administration of Health Care
Agencies and Institutions).
NFS-BS degree students do not take a course in health services administration, but rather
are exposed to administration through NFS 335 (Institutional Management) and NFS 441
(Community Nutrition), which address some of the same competencies that are covered
in COMHE 405.
NUTR – MS students do not take a course in health services administration but rather are
exposed to administration through NUTR 715 (Food Service & Management), which covers
some of the same competencies as the core health services administration courses (PHE 701:
Public Health Policy and Management, PH 756: Public Health and Health Care Policy and
Management and HNSC 7140: Introduction to Health Care Policy & Administration).
2.3.b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The curriculum for SPH degree programs is designed to assure that students develop an
understanding of the five core areas fundamental to public health. Students in the MPH and
EOHS-MS degree-programs and the MS/MPH dual-degree program are required to take at
least one course in each of the five knowledge areas. Students in the degree programs leading
to the DPH, NUTR-MS and COMHE-BS and NFS-BS are required to take degree-specific
courses that address core public health knowledge areas.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
94
2.4. Practical Skills. All professional degree students must develop skills in basic
public health concepts and demonstrate the application of these concepts through a
practice experience that is relevant to the students’ areas of specialization.
2.4.a. Description of the school’s policies and procedures regarding practice
experiences, including selection of sites, methods for approving preceptors, approaches
for faculty supervision of students, means of evaluating practice placement sites and
preceptor qualifications, and criteria for waiving the experience.
Each SPH student completes a supervised practice experience. The courses that provide the
practice experience and the number of hours of practice required for each degree program are
summarized in Table 2.4.a.1. Practice experience requirements include completion of a
minimum number of fieldwork hours that are tied to one or more credit-bearing courses. A
list of preceptors and their organizations appears in Appendix 2.4.b.
The SPH uses various terms when referring to practice experience. What Brooklyn and
Lehman refer to as ―internship,‖ Hunter and the GC call ―fieldwork.‖ In this report, the terms
fieldwork, supervised fieldwork, practice and supervised practice are used interchangeably,
while internship is reserved for Hunter’s 12-credit dietetic internship program (NUTR 700703).
Practice experience for the MPH-degree programs and the MS in EOHS
The 150-to 210-hour planned and supervised practice experience contributes to the student’s
preparation as a public health professional by offering an opportunity to apply knowledge
and skills learned in course-work to real-world experiences in public health and health care in
community-based or other organizations. Students are matched to field organizations
appropriate to their specialization and on the basis of their individual interests, professional
goals and needs and an interview by a representative from the prospective field site.
The supervised practice experience strives to increase students’ understanding of public
health organizations while improving their professional self-confidence through involvement
in developing, planning, organizing, executing and evaluating activities, involvement in
general evaluation and self-evaluation and involvement in research investigations or public
health projects and programs. Fieldwork placements may involve program planning,
implementation or operation, applied public health research, community health education and
outreach, health advocacy or other appropriate public health-related work.
During the fieldwork, students are required to follow policies, rules and regulations of the
field organization, seek and accept the field preceptor’s guidance and appraisal of
performance throughout the placement, share with the field preceptor any questions and
concerns regarding the progress of the fieldwork, plan for conferences with the preceptor,
plan participation in activities and secure approval of the field preceptor as necessary.
Fieldwork faculty are responsible for developing and implementing policies regarding the
approval of preceptors and placement sites and for supervising students in the selection and
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
95
evaluation of their field placements. The SPH began using GoogleDocs™ in the fall 2009
semester to collect electronically students’ fieldwork-related data. Information collected
includes names of organizations where students are placed; names, titles and credentials of
their preceptors; time spent in the agency and titles of capstone essays that were written
based on the fieldwork experience. Collected separately are the preceptor evaluations of the
students and students’ evaluations of the fieldwork site and experience.
Written instructions spell out policies and procedures for selection, approval, execution,
completion and evaluation of field placements.
Site Selection
There are a number of means by which students learn about appropriate sites for their
fieldwork placements. Students can identify and select sites via word of mouth, faculty
recommendation and LISTSERV postings. Each campus maintains a list, notebook or
database of potential sites. These sites include NYCDOMH, health-care facilities,
community-based organizations, foundations and other nonprofit organizations, including
international government agencies and non-governmental organizations. Students may
complete their supervised practice at their present place of employment as long as they do so
at a department in which they are not currently employed and/or they will perform activities
different from those required by their current position, the practice activities are relevant to
their individualized area of specialization and they have the permission of the fieldwork
course faculty.
Field placement sites must meet the following criteria:
The organization defines a meaningful public-health project in which the student will
have the opportunity to work with other public-health professionals.
The organization identifies a preceptor with public-health experience and expertise in a
relevant area of the student’s work who will be responsible for supervising and mentoring
the student.
The organization is able to accommodate the academic and/or schedule of the students
hosted at its facility.
The organization assists the student in developing a scope of work for the supervised
practice experience, including identification of a written product or deliverable for the
host agency, in consultation with the fieldwork faculty.
Fieldwork sites are screened and ultimately approved by faculty based on documentation
provided by the student and information provided by the prospective preceptor regarding: a)
the site’s and prospective preceptor’s willingness to host the student and fulfill practice
requirements as described on the following page b) the proposed fieldwork project; and c)
proposed student learning objectives.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
96
Table 2.4.a.1. Practice Experience in the SPH Degree Programs
Degree
Program
Master in Public
Health (MPH)
Doctorate in
Public Health
(DPH)
Master of Science /
Master in Public
Health (MS/MPH)
Master of Science
(MS)
Bachelor of
Science (BS)
1
Course no.
Course name
Practice
hours
180
Credits
Community-Based Public Health
(CBPH)
PHE 790
Public Health
Internship
(general) Public Health (GPH)
HNSC 7920
Internship in Public
Health
150
3
Health Care Policy &
Administration (HCPA)
optional
HNSC 7921
optional
150
optional
3
Biostatistics (BIOS)
Community Health (COMHEMPH)
Environmental & Occupational
Health Science (EOHS-MPH)
Epidemiology (EPI)
Health Policy & Management
(HPM)
Public Health Nutrition (NUTRMPH)
PH 737
210
3
Supervised
Fieldwork
or
Pre-Professional
Practice in
Dietetics
Community
Public Health
Leadership
Development
Fieldwork
210
or
300
3
Community Society & Health
(CSH)
Epidemiology (EPI-DPH)
Environmental & Occupational
Health (EOH)
Health Policy & Management
(HPM-DPH)
Community/Public Health
Nursing/Urban Public Health
(PHN)
EOHS-MS
PH 892
420
6
NURS 771772
Community/Public
Health Nursing I-II
333
6
PH 737
Supervised
Fieldwork
Practicum
210
3
NUTR-MS
NUTR 760
PH 737
or
NUTR 703
optional
Internship in Public
1
Health II
Supervised
Fieldwork
210
or
300
210
105
150
3
3
Community Health Education
(COMHE-BS) through summer
2011
COMHE 401
COMHE 402
COMHE 403
Directed Fieldwork I
Directed Fieldwork II
Directed Fieldwork
III
Community Health Education
(COMHE-BS)
COMHE 401
COMHE 402
COMHE 403
Directed Fieldwork I
Directed Fieldwork II
Directed Fieldwork
III
210
105
150
3
2
3
Nutrition & Food Science (NFS)
NFS 443.51
Practicum in NFS
90
3
Elective field course for students requiring or desiring additional field experience
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
97
3
2
3
Previous students’ practice experiences with the organization also may be considered, where
applicable. Specific policies and procedures for site selection are described briefly below.
The student or fieldwork faculty member contacts potential field organizations to determine
their willingness to host a student during a specific semester or period of time. The field
organization accepts responsibility for collaboration with the fieldwork faculty member to
provide field experience for a designated period. The field organization identifies by name,
business address, phone number and academic degree, a field preceptor who has primary
responsibility for planning and conducting the fieldwork experience in consultation with the
fieldwork coordinator.
Fieldwork Preceptor Qualifications, Screening and Role
Site preceptors are screened by the fieldwork faculty. Preceptors generally must have at least
a graduate degree or otherwise demonstrate significant public health practice work
experience and responsibilities. The majority of preceptors hold doctoral degrees
(DPH/DrPH, PhD, EdD, MD). A variety of certifications are also represented among the
preceptors (CDN, RD, RN, CHIS, CIH, CSP). Beginning in fall 2010, preceptors in the
master’s level programs are asked to submit a resume that includes their education, work
experience and two professional references. Updated resumes will be requested at least every
five years.
Preceptors also must be prepared to provide the student with ongoing supervision, guidance
and mentoring. Preceptors who have previously received a satisfactory rating from students
are automatically approved to continue volunteering as preceptors. Prior to 2009, preceptors
who were new to the SPH were accepted on the basis of their professional credentials, such
as the MS for students in EOHS, the RD for dietetic interns and the MPH for all other
master’s degree students.
Responsibilities of the fieldwork preceptor:
Orients the student to the field organization’s mission, programs, policies and protocols.
Commits time for instructional interaction and dialogue with the student.
Provides supervision of the student’s activities.
Plans for visits by the fieldwork coordinator during the fieldwork period.
Assists the student in determining specific, mutually agreeable, written field objectives.
Reviews fieldwork reports, and if indicated, resolves conflicts with field organization
policy or personnel.
Prepares an evaluation of the student and discusses it with the student prior to transmittal
to fieldwork coordinator (a blank copy of the preceptor evaluation form is part of the
written materials provided to the student).
Faculty Supervision
The fieldwork faculty work closely with students to help develop and maintain a quality
practice experience. Supervision may occur individually and/or in groups and includes verbal
and written communication about the student’s progress. Documentation of the fieldwork
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
98
includes a report consisting of logs describing the practice experience, discussing
assignments and projects and noting significant events, problems or potential new approaches
to the work of the participating agency. A template for the fieldwork is part of the written
materials provided to the student.
Post-fieldwork evaluation
At the end of the semester, students and preceptors complete evaluations of the experience,
including verification by the preceptor that the student has completed the requisite fieldwork
hours. Students evaluate the quality of their practice experience through either open-ended
reflections that Hunter students note in their professional portfolios, reflections during a
structured seminar at Lehman or completion of a structured survey administered by the
faculty at Brooklyn. As part of the evaluation, students are asked to consider the quality of
on-site supervision received during the fieldwork and the overall quality of the fieldwork,
whether the fieldwork was a worthwhile educational experience, how the fieldwork
experience could be improved and why they would (or would not) recommend that other
students conduct fieldwork with the same organization.
Practice Experience for the DPH Degree Programs
Based on suggestions from employers of doctoral-trained public health professionals in the
New York City region conducted during the planning of the DPH in 2005 and 2006, the
Leadership Development Project (LDP) was created to develop the leadership skills of DPH
students and to prepare them to identify and solve the organizational problems that can be
obstacles to the implementation of public health research, intervention and policy. The LDP
fulfills the requirements for a practical experience in the SPH doctoral program. Given the
additional experience of DPH students, (they have at least three years of professional
experience), this requirement is organized somewhat differently from MPH fieldwork
requirements.
Practice Requirement
DPH students are required to complete the 12-credit LDP. The LDP has three components:
PH 893: Leadership Seminar (3 credits)
PH 892: Leadership Field Project and corresponding seminar (6 credits)
An elective relevant to leadership, organizational change and the student’s professional
objectives (3 credits)
The LDP requires 420 hours of supervised professional experience in one of the following
public-health arenas: research, program development or management, policy analysis or
advocacy or teaching. Students are expected to identify a specific organizational and/or
public-health problem, need or challenge within a specific organization. It should be a
problem that can be addressed within the time and effort parameters of the placement.
Students are then expected to undertake a problem-solving process that contributes to change
and solution of that problem. The emphasis is on the identification of well-defined and
focused problems for which it is possible to initiate solutions within the life of the placement.
The types of problems and outcomes that are possible in this project will vary and students
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
99
will be judged on the soundness of their plan of action and their success in taking steps to
implement it rather than on the organizational changes actually achieved. However, students
are expected to do more than study or document problems; they are to take action to solve
them.
The goals of the LDP are to develop professional competencies needed in leadership
positions in public health research, professional practice or education. The LDP provides
students with an opportunity to:
Learn the various theoretical perspectives on leadership and their application
Experience practical approaches to leadership and organizational change
Diversify their professional experience
Gain experience in identifying and solving the practical problems that professionals
encounter in various settings
Identify their own approach to leadership by ascertaining their interests, strengths and
limitations
Observe and learn from leaders in public health
Placement
Students can complete their placement at their employment site providing they are engaged
in work that is substantially different from their regular responsibilities and that the work
meets the requirements of the project. Students also can choose to work at a different site, for
example, work with a faculty researcher, at an independent public-health agency, an
advocacy or community-based organization or at other sites approved by the coordinator of
the LDP experience. Students are expected to begin the placement during their second or
third semester of enrollment and to complete it prior to beginning their dissertation. Students
are encouraged to choose field projects that will prepare them for dissertation research. As
appropriate for doctoral-level students, learners select their own placement, subject to
approval by the faculty sponsor.
Faculty Sponsor and Project Seminar
Field project students meet at least four times during the semester in the Leadership Project
Seminar. A faculty sponsor is responsible for the seminar as well as guiding students who are
registered for the field leadership projects in a specific semester. In addition, each student
meets regularly with the supervisor/mentor at the field placement site.
The field projects are evaluated based on a portfolio that includes the following:
An initial self-assessment and statement of student learning and leadership skill
development objectives for the project
A contract between student and the site sponsor identifying specific objectives, time frame
and deliverables
A brief paper stating the problem the student plans to address, a summary of relevant
literature and a description of relevant contextual factors
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
100
A final paper in the format of a case study of the organization and the change achieved.
The case study includes a preface summarizing the purpose, public health significance and
findings of the project, with reference to the appropriate scholarly literature.
Assessments of the portfolio by the site supervisor and the faculty sponsor
As indicated in Table 2.4.a.2., by the end of the spring 2010 academic year, DPH students
had begun their leadership development projects at 18 organizations.
Table 2.4.a.2. DPH Practice Experience Locations, 2008-2010
Location
Asian Americans for Equality
Asian & Pacific Islander Coalition on AIDS
Banana Kelly High School
Bronx Public Health District Office
Brooklyn YWCA
CUNY -- Institute for Health Equity
CUNY -- Literacy Program
Federation of County Perinatal Networks
Harlem Community & Academic Partnership (HCAP) at the New York Academy of
Medicine
Hospital for Special Surgery
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Hospital, Clinical Trials Office
National Adolescent Sex Education Program
National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health Inc.
NYCDOHMH
New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health (NYCOSH)
New York University Medical Center
St. Charles Hospital
Urban Institute
Practice Experience for the Degree Program Leading to the MS in Nutrition
The MS in nutrition (NUTR-MS) requires completion of the three-credit NUTR 760
Practicum, which provides practical as well as culminating experiences for this MS degree
program. Offered for the first time in spring 2011, NUTR 760 provides students with
nutrition and food science-related fieldwork in hospitals, schools, laboratories and
community-based organizations, placements that are designed to provide opportunities to
apply knowledge and skills gained from the classroom education to professional practice. On
a weekly basis, students spend eight hours in the field, plus two hours in class or two to three
hours online. To assure that only advanced students take this course, 27 credits in NUTR,
including a course in research, are required to enroll.
Practicum provides didactic and experiential learning opportunities in the areas of clinical
nutrition, food science and /or food service management. Fieldwork in nutrition, food science
and management focuses on the application of the knowledge and skills needed to promote
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
101
delivery of effective nutrition services to the public. Experiences include participating in
community nutrition programs, implementing health promotion and disease prevention
activities, providing nutrition education, participating in activities in laboratories and test
kitchens, developing research protocols, counseling individuals, assisting therapeutic
dietitians and interning at food-service establishments.
Students complete at least eight hours of experiential learning each week (a total of at least
120 hours), guided by an on-site preceptor and the course instructor. Weekly online
assignments that require two to three hours of preparation support the experiential learning.
The supervised practice hours are reinforced by weekly activities and assignments the student
completes outside of the fieldwork. Students and the course instructor meet for a two-hour
class once per month during the semester, except the meetings will be weekly for the last
three weeks of the term for student presentations. At the end of the course, students present a
case study or field report on a chosen aspect of the practicum experience, submit a portfolio
and complete a final analytic report.
Practice Experience for the BS Degree Programs
For the BS degrees in COMHE and NFS, the practice experiences are incorporated into
COMHE 401-403 and NFS 443.51, respectively. [Effective fall 2011, the COMHE-BS
practice experience is covered in COMHE 412 (Directed Fieldwork Practicum)]. Practice
experiences for the BS degree include supervised fieldwork, a fieldwork journal, preprofessional portfolio and an oral presentation to the class about an aspect of the fieldwork
experience and evaluations. During the semester, students have the opportunity to integrate
knowledge gained from classroom education into practice, incorporate professional ethics
and prepare a pre-professional portfolio. BS-degree students discuss their experiences weekly
in class and also regularly submit fieldwork logs.
Fieldwork, Journal and Portfolio
NFS and COMHE students spend, respectively, a minimum of 90 and 465 hours in one or
more fieldwork assignments. During the placements, each student develops and implements
one or more projects based on a need identified at the fieldwork site. Projects may include
patient/client survey research, curriculum and material development, a quality-improvement
project or other appropriate professional project. The student completes an evaluation form
for the site. In addition, the fieldwork preceptor completes an evaluation form for the student,
which is returned to the course instructor after it has been discussed with the student.
Each student also maintains a personal journal of daily activities and reflections on the
fieldwork experience. The journal is a recording of job activities performed, including
thoughts and impressions. A journal entry is required for each day spent at the facility, and
the number of hours worked also is recorded. A pre-professional portfolio is submitted at the
end of COMHE 403 [412] and NFS 443.51. The portfolio includes the student’s personal
statement, which may become the basis for the personal statement that often is required when
applying for jobs and graduate school.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
102
Criteria for Waiving the Experience
MS/MPH- and BS-degree students are not waived from the practice experience requirement.
MPH-degree students who are admitted to the SPH possessing extensive public health
experience may have the fieldwork experience waived. Before a waiver is granted, the
student must demonstrate in writing with supporting documents ―experience in application of
basic public health concepts and of specialty knowledge to the solution of community health
problems.‖ Public health knowledge includes the core competencies as well as a population
approach to health problems, use of a prevention framework and collaboration with
community partners. Using the fieldwork waiver application, the student must show that his
or her previous experiences relate to specialty knowledge acquired in the specialization.
Eligible students should discuss the possibility of a waiver with their academic adviser within
a year of enrollment. The adviser, specialization coordinator and associate dean for academic
affairs will determine whether the written summary of the student’s experiences
demonstrates an adequate applied public-health experience in the appropriate area of
concentration. The summary must include the name of the organization; name, title and
contact information of supervisor(s); dates and approximate number of hours of field-based
experience and, with reference to core and program-specific competencies, a description of
how the experience demonstrates application of knowledge from the core and specialty
public health areas. (Instructions for waiving the fieldwork experience and a fieldwork
waiver application form are included in the written materials provided to students.)
DPH-degree students who enter the program with five or more years of leadership experience
in public health can apply to base their field project case study on prior experience. This is
not a waiver but an opportunity to prepare a case study illustrating a past accomplishment in
leadership, rather than a prospective project. An opportunity to pursue this option will be
based on a review of a portfolio the student prepares that documents the products of this
experience (e.g., programs developed and evaluated, papers published, formal leadership
positions and accomplishments). The portfolio also should include a statement by the student
explaining why the experiences documented are sufficient to prepare this student for the
leadership positions to which he or she aspires. After reviewing this application, the student’s
adviser and the DPH program director will determine within one month whether the
retrospective option will be offered. In general, only students with extensive leadership
experience and a documented track record of significant public health accomplishments will
be approved for this option. Students who are approved for this option still register for the six
credits during the time they are preparing their case study, which is reviewed similarly to
those students following the prospective option.
2.4.b. Identification of agencies and preceptors used for practice experiences for
students, by program area, for the last two academic years.
Appendix 2.4.b. contains a list of the agencies and preceptors used for practice experience by
program area, 2008-2010.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
103
2.4.c. Data on the number of students receiving a waiver of the practice experience for
each of the last three years.
No MPH-degree students received waivers of the practice experience for the period 20072010. Since 2008, however, seven CSH doctoral students with extensive public health
experience chose the option to prepare a case study illustrating a past (retrospective)
accomplishment in leadership, rather than a prospective project. Each of the six students who
completed case studies was awarded six credits for the documented prior-leadership
experience; a seventh project is in progress. Listed below are their project titles with start and
end dates.
Dates
Fall 2008-Fall 2008
Fall 2008-Fall 2008
Fall 2008-Fall 2008
Fall 2008-Spr 2009
Fall 2008-Fall 2009
Fall 2008-Fall 2009
Fall 2009-
Project
Post-911 Emergency Preparedness Training for Department of
Health Personnel
Staying Alive: The Reinvention of the Harlem Community
Academic Partnership
Access to Prescription Medications for Medicaid Patients
From Fracture to Functioning: Bringing Collaboration to a
Fragmented Organization
Improving the Delivery of Services in an Adolescent Sex Ed
Program
Diabetes Care at Saint Charles Hospital
Emergency Preparedness Plan for a Large Medical Center
2.4.d. Data on the number of preventive medicine, occupational medicine, aerospace
medicine, and public health and general preventive medicine residents completing the
academic program for each of the last three years, along with information on their
practicum rotations.
Not applicable.
2.4.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
Every professional degree program in the SPH requires students to complete a practice
experience.
There are well-defined guidelines for site selection, approving preceptors, faculty
supervision of students, evaluating practice placement sites, waiving the fieldwork
experience and for reflecting on and synthesizing practice and classroom experiences.
Over the past three years, SPH students have completed practice experiences at more than
100 agencies representing government, health-care and nonprofit organizations.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
104
Future Plans:
Improve coordination and centralization field placements, policies and procedures,
including creating a centralized computer system for keeping track of field sites and
preceptors, cataloging fieldwork projects, computerizing fieldwork forms, supervising a
SPH Bb™ site or website, maintaining the fieldwork handbook/s and other activities that
would enhance the practice experience.
In 2011, the COMHE-BS will assess the current fieldwork requirements and determine
whether changes in length, content and oversight are warranted.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
105
2.5. Culminating Experience. All professional degree programs identified in the
instructional matrix shall assure that each student demonstrates skills and
integration of knowledge through a culminating experience.
2.5.a. Identification of the culminating experience required for each degree program. If
this is common across the school’s professional degree programs, it need be described
only once. If it varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be
provided to assess compliance by each program.
A culminating experience, which is required for all degree programs, allows students to
synthesize and reflect on knowledge acquired during their studies. As such, the culminating
experience is completed no sooner than during the student’s penultimate semester.
Requirements for the culminating experience vary by program. Table 2.5.a. summarizes the
courses, major writing assignments and portfolio/reflection components of the culminating
experience for the degree programs in the SPH.
The Culminating Experience in the MPH-Degree Programs
The culminating experience builds on the knowledge acquired by students through their
coursework. As summarized in Table 2.5.a., preparation for the culminating experience
includes completion of at least 36 credits of MPH coursework, including one course in each
of the five core areas of public health, the practice experience, and three courses (nine
credits) in the student’s specialization. The three-to-six credit capstone experience is
designed to assist students in preparing a professional-quality written and oral presentation
and provide opportunities to reflect on and synthesize the knowledge and skills gained during
classroom and practice experiences.
To that end, the culminating experience consists of four components: 1) attendance at a
capstone course or individual meetings with a faculty mentor 2) completion of a major
writing project 3) an oral presentation of the project and 4) reflection, synthesis and analysis
of course- and fieldwork experiences. Students are provided with written instructions for the
culminating experience.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
106
Table 2.5.a. Culminating Experience in the SPH Degree Programs
COMPONENTS
MPH
BIOS,
COMHE,
EOHS, EPI,
HPM, NUTR
MPH
GPH, HCPA
MPH
CBPH
DPH
CSH, EPI, EOH,
HPM
MS/MPH
PHN/PH
MS
EOHS
NUTR
BS
NFS
Prerequisite
Courses and
Number of
Credits
Completion of
at least 36
credits of MPH
coursework,
including the
five MPH core
courses and at
least three
specialization
courses
Completion of at
least 36 credits of
MPH coursework,
including the five
MPH core
courses and at
least three
specialization
courses
Completion of at
least 36 credits of
MPH
coursework,
including the five
MPH core
courses, at least
three
specialization
courses
Completion of at
least 48 credits of
DPH coursework,
including PH 890:
Research Seminar I
Completion of at
least 18 cr of
MS/MPH
coursework,
including
NURS 771:
Community/Publ
ic Health
Nursing (30 hrs
theory, 166
hours
practicum);
NURS 772:
Community/Publ
ic Health
Nursing II (30
hrs theory/ 167
hours clinical)
and
NURS 702:
Nursing
Research
EOHS
Completion of at
least 36 credits
of MPH
coursework,
including the
five MPH core
courses and at
least three EOHS
courses
Completion
of at least
three 300- or
400-level
NFS courses
NURS 773
Public Health
Nursing III (30
hours theory and
167 hours
practicum
EOHS
PH 738:
Capstone
seminar (3
credits)
Related
Coursework
PH 738:
Capstone
seminar (3
credits)
Thesis option
HNSCX 7935:
Research Seminar
II plus HNSC
7999: Thesis
Research
or
Master’s paper
option
HNSCX 7940:
Research Seminar
III plus
PHE 790: Public
Health Capstone
Seminar (3
credits);
PHE 792: Public
Health Capstone
Project (3
credits)
PH 899:
Dissertation
Research (12
credits);
PH 891: Research
Seminar II (3
credits);
PH 898: Seminar
(0 credits);
PH 900:
Dissertation
Supervision (0
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
BS
COMHE
Through
summer 2011
[effective fall
2011]
COMHE 301:
Introduction to
Community
Health
Education
COMHE 302
& 303:
Principles of
Health
Education
Practice I & II
NUTR
Completion of at
least 27 credits
of NUTR-MS
coursework,
including NUTR
725: Research
[COMHE 411:
Seminar in
Community
Assessment
COMHE 412:
Directed
Fieldwork
Practicum]
NUTR
NUTR 760:
Practicum (3
credits; 8 hours
in the field + 2
hours in class or
107
NFS 443:
Practicum in
NFS (3
credits)
COMHE 401403: Directed
Fieldwork IIII (8 credits)
COMHE 413
[COMHE 413:
Research
Symposium]
Table 2.5.a. Culminating Experience in the SPH Degree Programs
COMPONENTS
Written
Requirements
Portfolio
MPH
BIOS,
COMHE,
EOHS, EPI,
HPM, NUTR
Master’s essay
or
Capstone essay
about applied
research
or
Capstone paper
based on
fieldwork
Yes, in order
for students to
reflect on and
synthesize their
academic and
applied
experiences
MPH
GPH, HCPA
one of the courses
numbered
HNSCX 7950 7990
Master’s thesis or
master’s paper
Yes
MPH
CBPH
DPH
CSH, EPI, EOH,
HPM
MS/MPH
PHN/PH
credits, as needed).
MS
EOHS
NUTR
BS
NFS
BS
COMHE
Through
summer 2011
[effective fall
2011]
Reflections
about the
fieldwork
experience
in NFS
443.51
Reflections
about the
fieldwork
experience in
COMHE 401403
2-3 hours online
per week)
Master’s paper,
case study or
grant proposal,
preparation &
submission;
journal article; or
policy paper -- all
of which may or
may not be
fieldwork carried
out in PHE 790:
Public Health
Internship
Doctoral
dissertation, which
may or may not be
related to fieldwork
carried out in PH
892: Public Health
Leadership
Development
Fieldwork
Grant proposal
that is related to
fieldwork carried
out in NURS
771-772:
Community/
Public Health
Nursing I-II
No, although in
PHE 790,
students reflect
on and synthesize
their academic
and applied
experiences
Required in PH
892: Leadership
Field Project.
Yes
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
EOHS
Master’s essay
or
Capstone paper
based on
fieldwork project
NUTR
Applied research
or applied
program report
that is related to
fieldwork carried
out in NUTR
760
Yes
108
[Reflections
about the
fieldwork
experience in
COMHE 413]
Yes
Yes
Course Attendance and Major Writing Assignment
Students in the MPH specializations at the Hunter campus develop the written project during
the Capstone Seminar (PH 738). The major writing assignment is in the form of a capstone
essay or a master’s essay. The Capstone Seminar is attended by students who choose to write
the capstone essay. The seminar includes instructions for writing the capstone paper,
strategies for giving a professional presentation, guidelines for developing a professional
portfolio, the steps involved in the peer review of submitted abstracts and papers,
professional ethics and professionalism. A student with a GPA (>3.7) may write a master’s
essay under the tutelage of a faculty sponsor. For these students, attendance at the seminar is
optional. Students who write the master’s essay register for the Capstone Seminar, but in
place of attending the weekly seminar classes, they meet on an individual basis with their
master’s essay adviser.
Two three-credit courses make up the culminating experience for the GPH and HCPA
specializations at the Brooklyn campus. Students choose a master’s thesis or a master’s
paper. The project may focus on a specific area addressed during fieldwork or during
coursework or may be on a new topic. The thesis and master’s essay are developed in HNSC
7935 (Research Seminar II) and HNSC 7940 (Research Seminar III), respectively. In either
case, students also take a research course in the sequence HNSC 7950-7990 (health behavior,
medical-care costs, dilemmas in health care, issues in women’s health and medicine, or
adherence with health promotion/disease prevention and treatment regimen).
The CBPH capstone at the Lehman campus consists of two courses: PHE 790 (Public Health
Capstone Seminar) and PHE 792 (Public Health Capstone Project). These two courses
integrate the core and specialization courses of the MPH-degree program and build on a
student’s practice experience obtained in PHE 770 (Public Health Internship). Projects
developed in PHE 790 and PHE 792 incorporate knowledge and concepts related to
community-based public health and health equity. The Capstone Seminar builds on the
knowledge acquired by students through their coursework. Emphasizing the core public
health functions of assessment, policy development and assurance, students are asked to
critically evaluate the relevant public-health literature in the examination of their practice
experience. This includes an analysis of the public-health literature and data acquired during
their practicum by using their basic foundation in biostatistics, epidemiology and research
methods. In assessing the strategies and interventions of the organizations where students
were placed for their practical experience, the students use the information from their
program planning and evaluation and policy and management courses to discuss and analyze
the health inequities confronting the populations they work with and the importance of
collaborative relationships within that community. A key underlining aspect of all the
discussions in the Capstone Seminar is the close attention to ethical principles within public
health activities. In the subsequent Capstone Project seminar, students convert their seminar
papers into presentations where faculty, students and preceptors are invited to hear their
work.
Using the information and insights gained from the preceding assignments, students are
ready to identify a project that will be developed into the final capstone product. This project
may take many forms, but all must refer to the public-health literature to expand, support or
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
109
make clear the relevance of the project to public health. Once the project focus is decided in
consultation with seminar faculty, the student prepares a logic model of the project, develops
a detailed outline of the proposed project and determines the format that is best suited for the
goal of the project. The Capstone Project may take many forms, such as a master’s paper,
grant proposal, journal article and policy paper.
Reflections on Coursework and Fieldwork Experiences
Lehman campus: Students are required to reflect on and synthesize their academic and
applied experiences. This requirement is met during the reflective assignment in PHE 790
(Capstone Seminar for CBPH students) or through a professional portfolio that is required of
students in the other MPH degree programs and submitted during the capstone course.
PH 790 builds on the knowledge acquired by students through their coursework.
Emphasizing the core public-health functions of assessment, policy development and
assurance, students are asked to critically evaluate the relevant public-health literature in the
examination of their internship experience. PHE 790 is taken at the completion of the field
experience (PHE 770). The seminar synthesizes the students’ academic and applied
experiences and prepares them to move on to the Capstone Project (PHE 792), where they
complete the project and prepare for the formal presentation of their work to faculty and
fellow students.
The primary focus of the Capstone Seminar is for students to (a) reflect on the internship
experience and identify the public health lessons learned (b) assess and analyze the
organization within which they completed the internship and (c) determine which of the
activities or projects carried out during the internship is most suited for development into a
final project. Throughout these processes, students draw upon the competencies and skills
developed throughout their course of study.
The first assignment of the seminar is to prepare an in-depth reflection paper that requires the
student to identify and discuss the internship experiences with regard to: satisfaction with the
extent to which learning goals were met (why or why not); challenges encountered during the
internship and how they were addressed; overall lessons learned; and, how the student would
change or revise the experience if doing it again. Students’ experiences are summarized with
common trends identified and discussed to determine the extent to which conditions and
circumstances within a public-health practice setting effect the work carried out and how
they shaped the student’s experience. The students are expected to identify and describe how
the experience has informed or influenced their ultimate practice within public health.
The second expectation that students must meet as part of the seminar is a public-health
organizational analysis of the setting where the internship was conducted. Using guidelines
based on key core competencies, they assess the extent or degree to which the organization
applies the core public-health functions of assessment, policy development and assurance to
the development and analysis of public-health problems and their solutions; applies ethical
principles to public-health activities; and applies the core orientation and values of public
health in professional practice. Specifically, they assess these competencies by way of
analysis of the leadership and management of the organization; staff competencies;
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
110
organizational culture; degree to which organizational mission and goals are met; evidence of
commitment to health equity and social justice. The outcome of the assessment and analyses
is to identify the implications for public-health practice within the community served.
Brooklyn and Hunter Campuses: Similarly, the portfolio asks students to reflect on core
public-health and specialization competencies and professional and community service. The
portfolio has been required at the campuses at Hunter and Brooklyn since 2002 and 2007,
respectively. Increasingly, students are encouraged to submit their portfolios electronically.
An electronic portfolio will be required in PHE 790 as soon as a suitable electronic platform
is identified.
Each portfolio contains at least one in-depth report presenting the student’s applied work on a
public-health problem, as well as narrative and analytic sections to demonstrate the student’s
ability to address the problem by applying public-health theories and methods of public
health practice. Students may choose to include material on additional public health
problems, samples of their work from their fieldwork, jobs, volunteer work and their
capstone papers.
Most students entering the MPH degree programs work in the health field and have acquired
many public-health practice competencies before entering graduate school. In fact, a
requirement for matriculation for the MPH degree is at least a year of paid or volunteer
experience in health and/or related areas. One function of the portfolio is to help these
students critically examine their work within the context of the MPH program and
demonstrate their achievement of public-health competencies outside of school.
Students are introduced to the portfolio during orientation at the beginning of their studies
and are aware in advance that a portfolio is one of their graduation requirements. The
portfolio is viewed as a process, not an outcome. As such, faculty advisers encourage
students to start developing their portfolios as early as the first course.
The Culminating Experience in the DPH Degree Program
In keeping with the interdisciplinary, multi-level orientation of the DPH program, students
are encouraged to select a culminating research project that analyzes a specific public health
issue in depth from multiple disciplinary perspectives and at more than one level of social
analysis. For DPH students, the culminating experience consists of the completion and
defense of doctoral-level research that yields new knowledge.
Before beginning the dissertation process, students complete six credits of research seminars
(PH 890 and PH 891). PH 890 Research Seminar I focuses on developing an oral and written
presentation of a proposal for a research project, including a detailed literature review and
methods. PH 891 Research Seminar II focuses on issues of data analysis, presentation,
interpretation and contextualization. Before beginning dissertation research, students consult
with their academic advisers regarding requirements concerning the protection of human
subjects. The final product of PH 891 is a draft of the student’s dissertation proposal.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
111
The dissertation requirement is for 12 credits of dissertation research (PH 89901, 02, 03 and
04, 3 credits each), usually taken over four semesters. With permission of the program
director and the dissertation committee, the student may register for up to 12 credits of PH
899 in a semester. Each semester a student is enrolled in PH 899, he or she is required to take
a non-credit seminar that meets three times a semester, at which students present their work
to their classmates and the faculty. On an as-needed basis, students also register for the noncredit bearing PH 900 if their projects require more than four semesters. Students are
encouraged but not required to organize their dissertation in a format that will allow them to
convert separate chapters into manuscripts for submission to peer-reviewed journals.
The Culminating Experience in the MS Degree Programs
The SPH has two accredited MS degree programs, one in Environmental and Occupational
Health Sciences (EOHS-MS) and the other in Nutrition (NUTR-MS). EOHS-MS is
accredited by ABET, the accreditor for college and university programs in applied science,
computing, engineering and technology. NUTR-MS is accredited by CADE, the accrediting
agency of the ADA.
EOHS-MS
The EOHS-MS and EOHS-MPH culminating experience requirements are the same, with the
exception that the EOHS-MS capstone paper must reflect an applied science project or
research activity resulting in a report that demonstrates mastery of the subject matter and a high
level of professional and public communication skills. Additionally, to prepare EOHS-MS
students for the Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH) exam offered by the American Board of
Industrial Hygiene (ABIH), EOHS-MS students are required to complete an in-class
comprehensive examination covering five rubrics (environmental health science,
occupational safety and health, industrial hygiene, toxicology and physical hazards).
NUTR-MS
The MS in nutrition requires completion of NUTR 760 Practicum, which provides the
practical as well as culminating experiences for the degree program. This course will be
offered for the first time in spring 2011. At the end of the semester, students in NUTR 760
present a case study or field report on a chosen aspect of the practicum experience, submit a
portfolio and complete a final analytic report. Students also are required to complete an inclass comprehensive examination. The course writing assignments include a contract
between the student and preceptor outlining the fieldwork experience, an interim fieldwork
report or case study, a final fieldwork report and an electronic professional portfolio.
The Culminating Experience in the MS/MPH Dual-Degree Program
For RNs in the MS/MPH dual-degree program, the culminating experience is NURS 773
(Community Public Health Nursing III -- 30 hours theory and 167 hours practicum). The
course involves developing a grant proposal that addresses the needs identified by the student
in two previous courses. The courses that precede NURS 773 are NURS 771
(Community/Public Health Nursing -- 30 hours theory, 166 hours practicum), which focuses
on a community assessment) and NURS 772 (Community/Public Health Nursing II -- (30
hours theory, 167 hours clinical), which focuses on an aggregate assessment, plus
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
112
identification of a philanthropic foundation to address the needs and gaps identified in the
assessment.
A professional portfolio is completed by MS nursing students, including those in the
MS/MPH specialization. Upon admission to the program, and through discussion with their
specialization coordinators, each student identifies a general area of concern related to
advanced nursing practice. Starting in the first core-nursing course, NURS 700, students
begin compiling a professional portfolio. Each of the four nursing core courses (NURS 700,
702, 704, 749) has an assignment identified in the syllabus designed to help build the depth
and breadth of the portfolio, as do the first two advanced nursing practice specializations
(NURS 771, 772). Students review their expanding portfolios with specialization faculty in
those courses and core nursing faculty. During the last specialization, NURS 773, students
complete the culminating Capstone Project. The Capstone Project incorporates all aspects of
acquired knowledge throughout graduate work and is completed by the end of NURS 773
and graded by that course instructor.
NURS 773 is the capstone course for the MS/MPH degree program. The grant proposal
developed in NURS 773 is based on data collected in the two preceding courses, NURS 771772. Before enrolling in this capstone course, nurses in the dual-degree program must
complete a minimum of 18 credits, including a research course and two fieldwork courses:
NURS 771 Community/Public Health Nursing (30 hours theory, 166 hours practicum,
which focuses on a community assessment)
NURS 772 Community/Public Health Nursing II (30 hours theory and 167 hours clinical,
which focuses on an aggregate assessment, plus identification of a philanthropic
foundation to address the needs and gaps identified in the assessment)
Appendix 2.5.a. contains a list of the titles of culminating experience projects from 2008
through 2010.
The Culminating Experience in the BS Degree Programs
As described in Criterion 2.4.a., the practice and culminating experiences are combined for
the BS degree programs in the SPH. [Effective fall 2011 the culminating experience for
COMHE-BS is contained in a single course, COMHE 413.]
2.5.b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The SPH has well-defined culminating experience requirements for students in its degree
programs.
The culminating experience in the MPH and MS degree programs is a major writing
assignment (thesis, master’s essay, capstone paper generally based on fieldwork or grant
proposal) and oral presentation. MS students also must complete a comprehensive
examination.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
113
The culminating experience for the DPH degree program is a dissertation, based on
original research and its defense.
For the BS degree programs, the culminating experience is a combination of fieldwork
and a written report.
The degree programs and specializations require a written self-reflection, demonstrating
synthesis of classroom and practice experiences and attainment of competencies.
Future Plans:
Develop capacity for electronic creation, maintenance, submission and archiving of
culminating experience documents, including requirements, portfolios, culminating projects
and other materials.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
114
2.6. Required Competencies. For each degree program and area of specialization
within each program identified in the instructional matrix, there shall be clearly
stated competencies that guide the development of educational programs.
2.6.a. Identification of school wide core public health competencies that all MPH or
equivalent professional degree students are expected to achieve through their courses of
study.
The SPH faculty has identified 13 public health competencies listed in Table 2.6.b. that MPH
students are expected to achieve by the time they graduate.
2.6.b. A matrix that identifies the learning experiences by which the core public health
competencies are met. If this is common across the school, a single matrix will suffice. If
it varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be provided to assess
compliance by each program.
The matrix in Table 2.6.b. identifies the core public health courses in which each MPH
competency is addressed. This table illustrates how the MPH core competencies are
developed through multiple educational experiences.
2.6.c. Identification of a set of competencies for each program of study, major or
specialization, depending on the terminology used by the school, identified in the
instructional matrix, including professional and academic degree curricula.
Competencies for the MPH Degrees
In addition to mastering school-wide core public health competencies, MPH students also are
expected to attain the competencies specified by their specialization. Table 2.6.c.1. presents
the competencies for each of the eight MPH specialization degree programs.
Competencies for the DPH Degree
Graduates of the DPH program will be prepared to teach, conduct applied and etiological
research, manage and evaluate community-level interventions and guide policy development
and analysis in public health. Program graduates will be qualified for faculty and senior
research positions in schools and programs of public health and other health-related programs
as well as senior managerial, policy and research positions in governmental, nonprofit,
community and other sectors. Through coursework, doctoral exams and dissertation research,
graduates of the DPH program are expected to demonstrate mastery of the competencies in
Table 2.6.c.2.
Competencies for the MS Degrees
The EOHS-MS is designed for individuals seeking careers as environmental and
occupational health professionals. While emphasizing the recognition, evaluation and control
of environmental and occupational factors affecting health, the curriculum also includes
consideration of economic, sociopolitical and regulatory issues.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
115
Table 2.6.b. MPH Core Program Competencies and Elements of the Core Curriculum in Which They Are Primarily Addressed 1
MPH Core Program Competencies
Core courses addressing core competencies2
BIOS
EPI
ENV
HPM
Social/
Behavioral
Sciences
Field
Work
Culminating
Experience
1
Apply the core functions of PH practice (assessment, policy development and
assurance)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
2
Understand basic theories, concepts, models and methods from a range of core and
related disciplines and apply them to the design of PH research, policy and practice
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
3
Apply ethical and social justice principles and standards
x
x
x
x
x
4
Interpret and apply the PH literature
x
x
x
5
Use basic statistical and informatics techniques
x
x
6
Communicate PH information verbally and in writing
x
x
7
Explain key social, behavioral, biomedical and environmental determinants of
and inequities in health and disease across the lifespan in urban settings
x
8
Design and evaluate interventions to prevent or control urban PH problems
x
9
Collect, analyze and interpret PH data
10
Collaboratively engage with diverse groups
11
Describe the legal foundations of the U.S. PH system and its interrelationships with
other systems (e.g., health care, education, environmental protection)
12
Use key planning constructs (e.g., values, vision, mission, goals, objectives
and outcomes)
x
x
13
Demonstrate knowledge of the context of public and private health-care systems,
institutions, actors and environments in which health care and public health policy are
made and health care is delivered
x
x
1
2
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Although the core competencies are addressed throughout the curriculum, the above table identifies only the key courses that address each competency.
This table pertains to the common elements of the MPH curriculum: the PH core courses, fieldwork and culminating courses.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
x
116
Career options include air and water pollution control, hazardous waste management,
industrial hygiene, occupational health and safety, environmental planning and
environmental public health. The purpose of the MS in Nutrition is to prepare students to
become registered dietitians (RDs). Graduates of this CADE-accredited didactic program in
dietetics are eligible to apply for a dietetic internship, the successful completion of which is
necessary to sit for the registration exam to become an RD. Through coursework and
fieldwork, EOHS-MS and NUTR-MS graduates are expected to attain the competencies in
Table 2.6.c.3.
Competencies for the MS/MPH Dual Degree
Nurses graduating with the dual MS/MPH degree are prepared to assume leadership roles in
the profession, as discussed in Criterion 2.11.a. The competencies for this program are
derived from the national public health nursing competencies released in 2003 by the Quad
Council of Public Health Nursing Organizations. The MS/MPH degree competencies are
listed in Table 2.6.c.4.
Competencies for the BS Degrees
Graduates of the BS degree program in COMHE will be prepared to participate in the
implementation of community-level health programs, assist in applied research, evaluate
health education materials and supervise paraprofessionals in the delivery of community
health interventions. Graduates of the BS degree program in NFS will be prepared to work as
food managers in the food service industry (in hotels, airlines, schools, universities and
workplace cafeterias). NFS graduates also can work as nutrition educators with weight
control and fitness programs or other special groups, such as WIC (Women, Infants &
Children) in community settings. Graduates also may become food science technicians in
food companies. Students may take steps to enter a graduate didactic program in dietetics to
become registered dietitians. Through coursework and fieldwork, COMHE-BS and NFS
graduates are expected to attain the competencies listed in Table 2.6.c.5.
2.6.d. A description of the manner in which competencies are developed, used and made
available to students.
Competencies for the MPH degree programs
The MPH program-wide competencies were developed through a multi-stage, multi-year
process involving the core SPH faculty. First, the MPH program directors convened an ad
hoc faculty committee to develop a set of common competencies and common learning
objectives for the core curriculum. Existing competencies from the MPH program curricula
were reviewed with respect to the proposed values, mission and core themes of the SPH.
Several common competencies were identified through this process. In addition, faculty
reviewed several guidance documents on competencies, such as those issued by ASPH1 and
1
ASPH master’s degree in public health (MPH) core competencies (Version 2.3), available at:
http://www.asph.org/userfiles/version2.3.pdf
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
117
CEPH1. Next, core competencies were drafted and reviewed by the full faculty. These
proposed competencies were mapped to the core courses and course-specific learning
objectives. A final working version (See: Table 2.6.b.) was developed and distributed to
students. The competencies are available on the SPH website and in the written materials
provided to students for developing their portfolios.
Competencies for the DPH degree programs
The DPH competencies were developed by consulting with faculty in each specialization,
reviewing CEPH and ASPH documents on competencies for doctoral-level students and by
reviewing competencies for similar doctoral programs in established schools of public health.
Competencies for the MS/MPH, MS and BS degree programs
The competencies for the MS/MPH dual-degree program, which are presented in Table
2.6.c.4., were developed by reviewing the Quad Council of Public Health Nursing
Organizations’ national public health nursing competencies. The MS/MPH list of
competencies is much lengthier than the list of competencies for any of the other SPH-degree
programs. Roughly, the competencies may be summarized as:
Obtain and interpret information regarding risks and benefits to the community
Identify, interpret and implement public health laws, regulations and policies related to
specific programs
Identify the role of cultural, social and behavioral factors in determining the delivery of
public health services
Collaborate with community partners to promote the health of the population
Define, assess and understand the health status of populations, determinants of health and
illness, factors contributing to health promotion and disease prevention and factors
influencing the use of health services
Prepare proposals for funding from external sources
Competencies for the MS in EOHS and the MS in Nutrition were developed by reviewing
ABET and CADE competencies for students preparing to enter environmental science and
dietetics, respectively.
Competencies for the BS degree in COMHE were developed by reviewing materials from the
National Commission for Health Education Credentialing (NCHEC), which administers the
Certification for Health Education Specialist (CHES) credential. Similarly, competencies for
the BS degree in NFS were developed by reviewing materials from CADE. [Competencies
for the curriculum that will go into effect in 2011 were developed by reviewing objectives
articulated by the ASPH and Healthy People 2010 as well as draft objectives for Healthy
People 2020.]
Competencies for the BS degree in NFS were developed by reviewing materials from CADE.
1
CEPH Technical Assistance Paper on Competencies and Learning Objectives, available at:
http://www.ceph.org/files/public/Competencies.pdf
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
118
Making competencies available to students
Competencies are available to students before they enter the program, while they are
pursuing coursework for their degrees and in the latter part of their studies during the practice
and self-reflection components of their degree work. Specifically:
Before entering the SPH, prospective students may familiarize themselves with the
various degree programs’ competencies via websites of the SPH and its Consortial
Campuses.
Competencies for each course are stated in the course syllabus.
Competencies are discussed at required meetings for graduate students and at new student
orientation sessions for undergraduates.
Competencies are addressed in the written practice and self-reflection instructions for
each degree program.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
119
Table 2.6.c.1. Competencies for the MPH Degree Specializations
Biostatistics
1. Describe and correctly apply core and intermediate-level statistical methods to the study, design, management and analysis of population
health data
2. Understand the assumptions, applicability, strengths and limitations of core and intermediate-level statistical methods and be able to select
appropriate methods and measures for different types of health data
3. Correctly use data management and statistical software and computing technology to collect, manage and analyze population health data
4. Collaborate on applied population health research
5. Communicate statistical findings to lay and professional audiences
6. Apply statistical findings to the development of evidence-based interventions to improve population health
Community-Based Public Health and Health Equity
1. Analyze critical health inequalities confronting urban populations by social and economic determinants such as race, ethnicity, income and
neighborhood
2. Identify aspects of public health ethics and values of social justice that affect public health practice and decision-making
3. Apply a community-based participatory framework to addressing health issues confronting communities
4. Effectively communicate public health information through oral, written and visual presentation
5. Conduct a community health assessment
6. Develop a plan for an evidence-based public health program
7. Use information resources to gather and analyze public health data
8. Analyze and interpret public health literature
9. Synthesize theories, methods and practice of public health to address income inequities within communities
Community Health Education
1. Identify theories from psychology, sociology and health education that apply to behavior change and maintenance
2. Identify models for health program planning
3. Develop theory-driven health education programs
4. Plan and write proposals for program funding
5. Plan budgets for public health programs
6. Use group dynamic strategies for problem-solving
7. Design and manage the application of group processes for change
8. Develop strategies to support organizations to play a stronger role in health promotion and disease prevention
9. Involve communities in the design of appropriate intervention strategies
10. Develop and train peer-education and train-the-trainer strategies
11. Develop and/or incorporate culturally sensitive and age appropriate health education materials
12. Develop, produce and evaluate media campaigns to create health consciousness
13. Incorporate process, impact and outcome evaluation into program development
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
120
Table 2.6.c.1. Competencies for the MPH Degree Specializations
Environmental & Occupational Health Sciences
1. Predict and prevent health, safety and environmental risks from processes, work tasks, the built environment and other economic and/or
social activities
2. Identify and describe environmental and occupational sources of chemical, biological, physical and/or safety (CBPS) hazards
3. Evaluate the human health risks from CBPS hazards using qualitative, quantitative and/or instrumental assessment methods
4. Recommend appropriate engineering, personal protection or administrative controls and policies for CBPS hazards and evaluate their
effectiveness
Epidemiology
1. Describe and correctly apply core and intermediate-level principles and methods to the design of epidemiologic studies
2. Understand the strengths and limitations of common epidemiologic study designs
3. Understand the limitations of and identify issues related to causal inference in epidemiology
4. Correctly use data management and statistical software and computing technology to collect, manage and analyze epidemiologic data
5. Collaborate on applied population health research
6. Interpret epidemiologic findings
7. Communicate epidemiologic findings to lay and professional audiences
8. Apply epidemiologic findings to the development of evidence-based interventions to improve population health
(general) Public Health
1. Discuss approaches for improving the health status of populations, including a specific initiative for a target population
2. Apply principles of planning, development and practice of organizational and community initiatives that relate to program planning, policy
formulation or research
3. Use audience-appropriate written and oral communication to convey public health information
4. Develop collaborative public health programs and strategies responsive to the diverse cultural values and traditions of the communities being
served
5. Differentiate among evaluation methods in relation to their strengths, limitations and appropriate uses
6. Analyze the effects of political, social and economic policies on public health systems at the local, state, national and international levels
Health Care Policy and Administration
1. Demonstrate knowledge of political, economic and social context of health policies
2. Examine, analyze and explain the intended and unintended consequences of national policies and reforms
3. Discuss the policy process for improving the health status of populations
4. Discuss the legal and ethical bases for public health and health services
5. Demonstrate leadership skills for building partnerships
6. Apply principles of program planning, development, budgeting, management and evaluation in organizational and community initiatives
7. Explain methods of ensuring community health safety and preparedness
8. Apply systems thinking for resolving organizational problems
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
121
Table 2.6.c.1. Competencies for the MPH Degree Specializations
Health Policy and Management
1. Demonstrate knowledge of the context of public and private health-care systems, institutions, actors and environments in which health care
and public health policy are made and health care is delivered
2.
Apply theoretical/conceptual models and leadership principles relevant to developing health policy and administrating health programs
3. Analyze the legal, economic, ethical and health bases and implications of public health policies that affect urban populations
4. Describe and apply strategies for advocating for effective public health policies and programs
5. Evaluate public health programs and health policies and apply evaluation results to their improvement
6. Describe how non-public health policies (e.g., education, environment, criminal justice, housing, employment) can mitigate or exacerbate
health disparities and influence the health of urban populations
7. Articulate the skills needed for building partnerships and collaborating across programs, organizations and sectors to develop effective public
health programs and policies
8. Describe and critique theoretical and conceptual models relevant to health care seeking, access, use, quality, costs, health, health policy and
health-care decision-making
9. Apply economic concepts and theories to the analysis of health care policy and management issues and to inform decision-making and
policy development
Public Health Nutrition
1. Use dietary guidelines to make appropriate nutritional recommendations to individuals and communities
2. Prioritize nutritional problems of various age and population groups using appropriate anthropometric, biochemical, clinical, dietary and
socioeconomic techniques
3. Use nutrition research findings to guide practice
4. Evaluate nutrition claims and popular literature for accuracy, reliability and practical implications
5. Apply management principles for community assessment, program planning, implementation and evaluation to community-based public
health nutrition programs
6.
Assess results of research and evaluation used in nutritional sciences
7. Participate in organized advocacy efforts for health and nutrition programs
8. Select and develop nutrition education materials and approaches that are appropriate for the population of interest
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
122
Table 2.6.c.2. Competencies for the DPH Degree Specializations
Program –- wide competencies
1. Describe the role of social, political, biological, economic, historical, behavioral and environmental factors in health and disease in urban
settings and identify opportunities for interventions to improve population health at individual, community, city and policy levels
2. Explain the mechanisms and pathways by which urban conditions affect health and the roles of various urban systems in promoting health and
preventing disease
3. Explain the value and limitations of multi-level, ecological models in the study of urban health and apply such models to the investigation of
specific health problems
4. Apply concepts, theories and methods from two or more disciplines to the study of urban health
5. Design etiological intervention or policy research studies that contribute to new knowledge about urban health
6. Select methods and theories from diverse disciplinary perspectives to apply to the study of urban health and demonstrate a capacity to combine
methods and disciplines in order to achieve fuller understanding of urban health issues
7. Describe principal historical developments, theories, current intellectual conflicts and research questions within one specialization area (CSH,
EPI, EOH or HPM)
8. Demonstrate familiarity with scientific and professional literature and main scientific questions for at least two current public health issues or
population groups
9. Demonstrate proficiency in each of the following areas and advanced skills in at least two of the following areas: (1) written communication
with diverse constituencies, (2) collection and analysis of data on population health, (3) familiarity with health-related cultural beliefs and
practices of at least two populations, (4) management of complex health projects, (5) teaching public health and (6) policy analysis and
advocacy
10. Understand the ethical dilemmas posed by many public health issues and apply the highest ethical standards to their own public health research
and practice
Community, Society and Health
1. Apply and integrate multi-disciplinary, multi-level approaches to urban health research to develop, implement and evaluate community health
programs
2. Draw on the methods and theories from multiple disciplines to design and implement research studies on health and urban populations
3. Formulate, analyze and advocate for policies that promote health and prevent disease
4. Teach students and professionals about the social determinants of health, health behavior, health interventions, health policy and health
disparities in urban settings
5. Lead, plan, manage and evaluate community health interventions in urban settings
Epidemiology
1. Advance the scientific understanding of the social, behavioral and biomedical determinants of health and disease with a focus on the health of
urban populations
2. Design, implement and analyze research aimed at understanding the determinants of health of urban populations
3. Apply, adapt and develop epidemiologic perspectives to the interpretation of ongoing research
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
123
Table 2.6.c.2. Competencies for the DPH Degree Specializations
4. Teach students and other public health professionals about epidemiologic field and analytic methods and their practical application to the
investigation and control of health conditions among urban populations
5. Interact with other urban health-related disciplines and organizations such as engineers, environmentalists, trade unions and commuter
organizations, public health experts, lawyers, etc.
6. Develop expertise in substantive content areas relevant to urban health
Environmental and Occupational Health
1. Advance the scientific understanding of the impact of environmental and occupational conditions on health and disease
2. Plan, lead and manage studies to monitor and evaluate the effect of environmental and occupational health hazards in the urban environment
3. Plan, direct, manage and evaluate environmental and occupational health programs
4. Teach students and professionals about the impact of environmental and occupational hazards on the health of urban populations and about
strategies for controlling such exposures
Health Policy and Management
1. Contribute to new knowledge about the mechanisms that influence the delivery of health services and public-health programs and the
development of health policy in urban settings
2. Develop and manage initiatives to strengthen the functioning of health systems, health care organizations and public health agencies and
programs
3. Develop, advocate for and implement health-care and public health policies
4. Analyze the impact of health and non-health policies on population health
5. Teach students and professionals about the social determinants of health, health interventions, health policy, health management and health
disparities in urban settings
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
124
Table 2.6.c.3. Competencies for the MS Degree Specializations
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences
1. Identify and describe environmental and occupational sources of chemical, biological, physical and/or safety (CBPS) hazards
2. Predict and prevent health, safety and environmental risks from processes, work tasks, the built environment and other economic and/or
social activities
3. Evaluate the human health risks from CBPS hazards using qualitative, quantitative and/or instrumental assessment methods
4. Recommend appropriate engineering, personal protection or administrative controls and policies for CBPS hazards and evaluate their
effectiveness
Nutrition
1. Use dietary guidelines to make nutritional recommendations to individuals and communities
2. Prioritize nutritional problems for individuals at various stages of the life cycle and for diverse population groups using appropriate
anthropometric, biochemical, clinical, dietary and/or socioeconomic assessment methodologies
3. Use nutrition research findings to guide practice
4. Describe factors that influence the accessibility, adequacy and safety of the food supply system (production, processing, distribution,
consumption) and explain the relationship of those factors to community health
5. Communicate the principles of food science, food preparation and management to various population groups
6. Evaluate nutrition claims and popular literature for accuracy, reliability and practical implications
7. Recognize federal, regional, state and local government structures and processes involved in the development of public policy relating to
nutrition and health services
8. Describe the political considerations involved in agency planning and decision-making
9. Apply management principles for community assessment, program planning, implementation and evaluation to community-based public
health nutrition programs
10. Assess results of research and evaluation used in nutritional sciences
11. Compile and analyze data on nutrition and health
12. Function as a member of a multi-disciplinary team
13. Participate in organized advocacy efforts for health and nutrition programs
14. Select and develop nutrition education materials and approaches that are appropriate for the population of interest
15. Use social and behavioral theories relevant to public health and nutrition
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
125
Table 2.6.c.4. Competencies for the MS/MPH Dual Degree
Public Health Nursing/Public Health
Domain
Competencies
1. Defines a problem
2. Determines appropriate uses and limitations of quantitative and qualitative data
3. Selects and defines variables relevant to defined public health problems
Domain #1
4. Identifies relevant and appropriate data and information sources
Analytic
5. Evaluates the integrity and comparability of data and identifies gaps in data sources
Assessment
6. Applies ethical principles to the collection, maintenance, use and dissemination of data and information
Skills
7. Partners with communities to attach meaning to collected quantitative and qualitative data
8. Makes relevant inferences from quantitative and qualitative data
9. Obtains and interprets information regarding risks and benefits to the community
10. Applies data collection processes, information technology applications and computer systems
storage/retrieval strategies
11. Recognizes how the data illuminate ethical, political, scientific, economic and overall public health issues
1. Collects, summarizes and interprets information relevant to an issue
2. States policy options and writes clear and concise policy statements
3. Identifies, interprets and implements public health laws, regulations and policies related to specific
Domain #2
programs
Policy
Development/ 4. Articulates the health, fiscal, administrative, legal, social and political implications of each policy option
5. States the feasibility and expected outcomes of each policy option
Program
6. Utilizes current techniques in decision analysis and health planning
Planning
7. Decides on the appropriate course of action
Skills
8. Develops a plan to implement policy, including goals, outcome and process objectives and implementation
steps
9. Translates policy into organizational plans, structures and programs
10. Prepares and implements emergency response plans
11. Develops mechanisms to monitor and evaluate programs for their effectiveness and quality
1. Communicates effectively in writing and orally or in other ways
2. Solicits input from individuals and organizations
Domain #3
Communication 3. Advocates for public health programs and resources
4. Leads and participates in groups to address specific issues
Skills
5. Uses the media, advanced technologies and community networks to communicate information
6. Effectively presents accurate demographic, statistical, programmatic and scientific information for
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
126
Courses
PH 750
PH 752
PH 754
Nurs 700
Nurs 702
Nurs 704
Nurs 749
Nurs 771
Nurs 772
Nurs 773
PH 750
PH 752
PH 754
Nurs 700
Nurs 702
Nurs 704
Nurs 749
Nurs 771
Nurs 772
Nurs 773
PH 750
PH 752
PH 754
Nurs 700
Nurs 702
Table 2.6.c.4. Competencies for the MS/MPH Dual Degree
Public Health Nursing/Public Health
Domain
Competencies
professional and lay audiences
7. Attitudes: listens to others in an unbiased manner, respects points of view of others and promotes the
expression of diverse opinions and perspectives
Domain #4
Cultural
Competency
Skills
1. Utilizes appropriate methods for interacting sensitively, effectively and professionally with persons from
diverse cultural, socioeconomic, educational, racial, ethnic and professional backgrounds and persons of all ages
and lifestyle preferences
2. Identifies the role of cultural, social and behavioral factors in determining the delivery of public health
services
3. Develops and adapts approaches to problems that take into account cultural differences
4. Attitudes: understands the dynamic forces contributing to cultural diversity
5. Attitudes: understands the importance of a diverse public health workforce
1. Establishes and maintains linkages with key stakeholders
2. Utilizes leadership, team building, negotiation and conflict resolution skills to build community partnerships
3. Collaborates with community partners to promote the health of the population
Domain #5
4. Identifies how public and private organizations operate within a community
Community
Dimensions of 5. Accomplishes effective community engagements
Practice Skills 6. Identifies community assets and available resources
7. Develops, implements and evaluates a community public health assessment
8. Describes the role of government in the delivery of community health services
1. Identifies the individual’s and organization’s responsibilities within the context of the Essential
Public Health Services and core functions
2. Defines, assesses and understands the health status of populations, determinants of health and illness, factors
Domain #6
contributing to health promotion and disease prevention, and factors influencing the use of health services
Basic Public
Health Sciences 3. Understands the historical development, structure, and interaction of public health and health
4. Identifies and applies basic research methods used in public health
Skills
5. Applies the basic public health sciences, including behavioral and social sciences, biostatistics,
epidemiology, environmental public health and prevention of chronic and infectious diseases and injuries
6. Identifies and retrieves current relevant scientific evidence
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
127
Courses
Nurs 704
Nurs 749
Nurs 771
Nurs 772
Nurs 773
PH 750
PH 752
PH 754
Nurs 700
Nurs 702
Nurs 704
Nurs 749
Nurs 771
Nurs 772
Nurs 773
PH 752
PH 754
Nurs 704
Nurs 749
Nurs 771
Nurs 772
Nurs 773
PH 750
PH 752
PH 754
Nurs 771
Nurs 772
Table 2.6.c.4. Competencies for the MS/MPH Dual Degree
Public Health Nursing/Public Health
Domain
Competencies
7. Identifies the limitations of research and the importance of observations and interrelationships
8. Attitudes: develops a lifelong commitment to rigorous critical thinking
1. Develops and presents a budget
2. Manages programs within budget constraints
3. Applies budget processes
Domain #7
4. Develops strategies for determining budget priorities
Financial
5. Monitors program performance
Planning and
6. Prepares proposals for funding from external sources
Management
7. Applies basic human relations skills to the management of organizations, motivation of personnel and
Skills
resolution of conflicts
8. Manages information systems for collection, retrieval and use of data for decision-making
9. Negotiates and develops contracts and other documents for the provision of population-based services
10. Conducts cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit and cost-utility analyses
1. Creates a culture of ethical standards within organizations and communities
2. Helps create key values and shared vision and uses these principles to guide action
3. Identifies internal and external issues that may impact delivery of essential public health services (i.e.
Domain #8
Leadership and ,strategic planning)
4. Facilitates collaboration with internal and external groups to ensure participation of key stakeholders
Systems
Thinking Skills 5. Promotes team and organizational learning
6. Contributes to development, implementation and monitoring of organizational performance standards
7. Uses the legal and political system to effect change
8. Applies theory of organizational structures to professional practice
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
128
Courses
Nurs 773
PH 752
Nurs 771
Nurs 772
Nurs 773
PH 750
PH 752
PH 754
Nurs 704
Nurs 749
Nurs 771
Nurs 772
Nurs 773
Table 2.6.c.5. Competencies for the BS Degree Specializations
Community Health Education
1.
Identify community and individual needs, concerns and assets related to health (assessment)
2.
Utilize a variety of outreach methods and strategies, including various forms of media, to provide health information and services to
populations that traditionally have not been served and/or been underserved (outreach, public speaking, media)
3.
Communicate effectively with the public, whether in one-to-one conversations, public speaking to groups or through computer-mediated
communication to convey knowledge of basic health and social indicators clearly and in culturally appropriate ways (communication,
public speaking, media)
4.
Identify relevant languages, respectful attitudes and demonstrate deep cultural knowledge in all aspects of work with individuals, families,
community members and colleagues (cultural competence)
5.
Work with other community members, workers and professionals to develop collective plans to increase resources in the community and to
expand broader public awareness of community needs (capacity-building)
6.
Find, comprehend and review public health research relevant to specific populations, communities and health conditions or issues
(research analysis)
7.
Develop community health goals informed by community involvement and relevant public health research (research analysis)
8.
Write and prepare clear reports about clients, own activities and assessments (written communication)
Nutrition and Food Science
1.
Use dietary guidelines to make food recommendations to individuals and communities
2.
Select and develop nutrition education materials and approaches that are appropriate for the population of interest
3.
Address nutritional needs of community members at various stages of the life cycle and for diverse population groups
4.
Recognize federal, regional, state and local government programs that address food and nutrition problems in the community
5.
Apply management principles for community assessment, program planning, implementation and evaluation to community-based public
health food and nutrition programs
6.
Identify social and behavioral theories relevant to public health and nutrition
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
129
2.6.e. A description of the manner in which the school periodically assesses the changing
needs of public health practice and uses this information to establish the competencies
for its educational programs.
It is a policy of the university that on a regular basis each program undergoes a periodic
curriculum review. The SPH administration, faculty, students and staff employ multiple
mechanisms and sources of information to assess the needs of public health practice and to
revise the competencies of its educational programs accordingly. Several such assessment
mechanisms are summarized in Criterion 1.2. and in Criterion 2.7. and include: needs of the
job market, based on employer surveys and feedback from the fieldwork preceptors and
members of the SPH’s PHLC; routine reviews of competencies for the public health
workforce defined by professional and accrediting agencies; and current events. In addition,
SPH senior administrators and faculty are engaged in service with many public health
agencies and cutting-edge research and have direct access to developments in policy, practice
and services. Individual faculty or faculty-led specializations or programs may propose
curriculum revisions to update courses and curricula. One common mechanism for
introducing new developments into the curriculum is through the use of special topics
courses, which explore in depth subject matter not covered by the standard curriculum. In
this way, the SPH is able to handle the need for the rapid infusion of new material in
response to current events, such as the 9/11 terrorist attacks, 2005’s Hurricane Katrina, the
2009-H1N1 influenza, the 2010’s Haiti earthquake and the plethora of food recalls during the
past few years. Subjects such as GIS, food policy and the mass media that were previously
offered as topics courses have become regular electives and, in the case of food policy, a
requirement for students pursuing the NUTR-MPH.
2.6.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
SPH faculty collaborated on developing program-wide competencies for the MPH and DPH
programs. The competencies are met through multiple didactic and practice-based
experiences. Faculty within each knowledge area collaborated on refining competencies and
learning objectives for their respective specializations.
Future Plans:
Continue to ensure that faculty and students are familiar with these competencies and use
them to guide course content.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
130
2.7. Assessment Procedures. There shall be procedures for assessing and
documenting the extent to which each student has demonstrated competence in the
required areas of performance.
2.7.a. Description of the procedures used for monitoring and evaluating student
progress in achieving the expected competencies.
The SPH employs multiple methods to monitor and evaluate individual student progress in
achieving the expected competencies in each of its degree programs.
The MPH and MS degree programs
Satisfactory academic progress: GPAs are one of several measures used to monitor and
evaluate student progress. College policies stipulate that graduate students must maintain
a B average (i.e., minimum cumulative GPA of 3.0) to continue in the masters degree
programs. Students whose grades fall below this standard are placed on probation and are
required to raise their GPAs to at least 3.0 within one semester. Students who fail to raise
their averages are dismissed from their programs1,2,3. GPAs are evaluated by faculty
advisers and discussed individually with students during advisement sessions at least once
every semester. Faculty advisers work with students who are on or at risk for academic
probation (i.e., GPAs close to 3.0) to identify sources of academic or other difficulties and
to develop corrective action plans.
Practicum planning and evaluation: In planning the practicum experience, students meet
with faculty advisers to identify competencies they seek to attain. Once a field placement
site is identified, the student, preceptor and faculty develop and sign a contract that
specifies the relevant competencies. At the completion of the practicum experience,
students and preceptors complete a written evaluation that includes an assessment of the
extent to which the experience and a student’s performance contributed to the
development of the relevant competencies.
Self-assessment: Students must prepare a professional portfolio or other compendium that
includes a self-assessment and evidence that they have acquired core and specialization
competencies. This may take the form of a narrative self-assessment and/or evidence of
academic and professional accomplishments. This information is evaluated by faculty
during advisement sessions and as part of the culminating experience.
Culminating experience: The culminating experience requires students to synthesize
knowledge and skills attained in classroom and practice-based courses throughout the
curriculum. Culminating experiences are evaluated by SPH primary faculty, and students
must receive a grade of B or better to satisfy this requirement (See: Criterion 2.5.).
1
Graduate Student Policies and Procedures, Brooklyn College, available at:
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/pub/departments/hns/hns_prg_detail1.htm
2
Graduate Student Policies and Procedures, Hunter College, available at:
http://registrar.hunter.cuny.edu/pdf_folders/graduatecata2003_2006bysections/academicpolicies.pdf;
3
Graduate Student Policies and Procedures, Lehman College, available at:
http://www.lehman.edu/provost/enrollmentmgmt/advising/pdf/grad/grad_pols.pdf;
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
131
Comprehensive examinations (EOHS and NUTR-MS students) Students in the EOHS and
NUTR-MS degree programs are required to pass a comprehensive examination at the end
of their studies.
The DPH degree program
Satisfactory Academic Progress: Faculty review each student’s record every semester.
Students must be making satisfactory progress toward the degree to maintain status at the
GC and to be eligible for student financial assistance. A student is deemed not to be
making satisfactory progress if he or she has a GPA below 3.0, has accumulated more
than two open grades, has completed 45 credits without having passed the First Exam,
has completed 10 semesters without having passed the Second Exam or has received two
―no record of progress‖ grades in succession for dissertation research or has exceeded the
6-year time limit for the degree.1
Qualifying Examinations: DPH students complete a First and Second Qualifying Exam.
The First Exam, a take-home exam with three essays covering theory, research
methods and policy, leadership and organizations, is taken after students have
completed at least seven required courses and18 to 24 credits. This exam is designed
to assess students’ mastery of core public health theories, methods and practice and
assesses their readiness to begin advanced study. Each exam is graded by at least two
faculty members.
The Second Exam, completed at the end of course work, assesses students’ readiness
for dissertation research. Students, in consultation with faculty advisers, select at least
two methodological approaches and at least two content areas relevant to their
dissertation research and prepare an integrated critical review of the literature on the
selected topics. The exam is graded by at least two faculty members, and students
must present an oral defense.
Dissertation: Students are required to complete an original research project that
contributes to developing knowledge in a significant area of public health theory,
methods, practice, policy or education. Dissertation research projects must meet rigorous
standards of research and scholarship and are expected to incorporate the theoretical
context for the research, development of research methods employed, findings and
implications for public health research, practice and policy. Students are encouraged to
select a research project that analyzes a specific public health issue in depth from
multiple disciplinary perspectives and at more than one level of social analysis. Students
prepare a formal written dissertation, give a departmental seminar and complete an oral
defense of the dissertation in a meeting with their doctoral committee. Students are
expected to complete and successfully defend their dissertations within two years of
beginning their dissertation research.
BS degree programs
Satisfactory Academic Progress: An indicator of student achievement is satisfactory
progress toward the degree. COMHE-BS and NFS students must maintain a minimum
GPA of 2.02. The student is placed on academic probation if the GPA falls below the
1
GC Student Handbook, available at: http://www.gc.cuny.edu/current_students/handbook/acadPol.htm#13
Hunter College, Office of Student Services, available at:
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/studentservices/advising/repository/files/AllAboutGPA.pdf
2
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
132
established retention level. A student who does not achieve the minimum GPA by the end
of the probationary period is dismissed. The Senate Committee on Student Standing
reviews appeals and makes the final determination.
Practice Experience: Students in fieldwork courses are expected to attain the competencies
they have identified in their fieldwork contracts. In their portfolios, students state how
they know they have acquired these competencies. At the completion of the practicum
course, each portfolio is reviewed by the practicum faculty member.
External Advisory Committee: The BS programs are evaluated by their respective
advisory committees.
2.7.b. Identification of outcomes that serve as measures by which the school will
evaluate student achievement in each program, and presentation of data assessing the
school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years.
The SPH uses graduation and job-placement rates to evaluate student achievement in its
programs. Table 2.7.b. shows graduation rates for the past three academic years for each
SPH MPH and MS specialization and for the BS programs in community health and
nutrition.
Table 2.7.b. Outcome Measures by Which the SPH Evaluates Student Achievement
in Each Program, AY 2007-2009
Outcome Measure
Target
MPH and MS
graduation rates
degree programs
≥80% graduation rate
in all degree
programs
BS graduation rates
at 80% or higher
≥80% graduation rate
in all degree
programs
Job placement rate
≥80% or greater
Job placement rates1
for MPH/MS degree
students
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
CBPH - NA
COMHE - 80%
EOHS - 86%
GPH - 63%
HCPA - 64%
NUTR - 83%
COMHE - 76%
NUTR - 93%
CBPH - 43%
COMHE - 81%
EOHS - 79%
GPH - 50%
HCPA - 73%
NUTR - 77%
COMHE - 85%
NUTR - 68%
CBPH - 73%
COMHE - 65%
EOHS - 66%
GPH - 54%
HCPA - 50%
NUTR - 67%
COMHE - 60%
NUTR – 68%
92%
92.5%
86%
Graduation rates
Table 2.7.b.1. indicates that graduation rates measured over a five-year period vary for the
different specializations, but the median rate was 66%. Also, the rates have fallen somewhat
from AY 2007 to AY 2009. While these rates are below CEPH’s 80% benchmark, the vast
majority of students continuing in the program indicate that they are able to meet academic
standards and are proceeding at a slower rate.
SPH tracks students who take leaves of absence to determine why they have done so and to
encourage them to return to the program. We have established the main reasons why a leave
of absence is taken, including:
1
This % represents the number of MPH/MS students who were employed at the time of graduation.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
133
Financial. A majority of the MPH and MS students work-full time and attend school
part time (about 80%). Many have families of their own; some help support their
extended families. Many take only one or two classes each semester. For instance,
two students in the GPH specialization at Brooklyn College are each taking one
course per semester. They have high GPAs but cannot afford to take more classes.
Recent declines in the economy and increases in tuition have led some students to
take fewer courses.
Family-related, such as pregnancy, baby and divorce
Health-related, on the part of either the student or a family member
Job-related, usually when a student gets a new job that has strict scheduling
requirements that conflict with the times classes are offered.
The challenges faced by the students are related to the nature of the institution and the
student population that it serves. CUNY is a public institution whose historic mission has
been to provide excellence and opportunity to students, primarily in New York City. In
keeping with this mission, one of the goals of the SPH is to provide students from diverse
backgrounds with knowledge and skills in public health practice and science. Much of the
graduate student body is drawn from underrepresented populations of working-class and
socioeconomically disadvantaged students who often are the first in their families to attain
college and graduate degrees. They bring to the classroom and to their studies a depth and
wealth of experience in the very urban communities whose public health challenges inform
the SPH’s mission and values. Students also bring their own real-life problems that members
of underprivileged communities experience, including economic need and uncertainty. For
these and other reasons, students may need to cut back on the number of classes taken or take
a leave of absence, thus slowing their academic progress.
There is one other reason for the decrease in graduation rates from AY 2007 to AY 2009: In
the last three years, as declining support from the state legislature, CUNY has raised tuition.
In fall 2009, the CUNY Board of Trustees raised tuition for full-time master’s-level study for
New York State residents from $2,720 per semester to $3,680 per semester, a 35% increase.
While still much lower than tuition at private universities, these increases impose a burden on
students with modest incomes and family responsibilities.
Job-placement rates
MPH and MS graduates have high rates of employment. The results of alumni surveys
conducted between 2004 and 2006 show that 83% of those responding were employed in
public health. Table 2.7.b.2. shows the destination of MPH and MS graduates over the past
three years by specialization. These data were gathered from graduating student exit surveys
and represent the employment of students at the time of graduation or their intended
employment immediately after graduation. The largest and highly stable employment sectors
are government, nonprofit and health care. Smaller proportions of graduates worked in
proprietary, university and research settings. Two percent or fewer immediately went on for
further degrees. The proportion of unemployed graduates for those specializations that
indicate high rates of unemployment should be interpreted with caution, as it is based on very
small numbers.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
134
Table 2.7.b.1. MPH and MS Graduation Rates1 by Specialization
AY 20072
CBPH
COMHE
EOHS
GPH
HCPA
NUTR
COMHE-BS3
NUTR-BS
Number
entering at
start
NA
35
29
8
11
6
25
14
Number
withdrawn
Number
graduated
NA
2
0
1
2
1
6
0
NA
28
25
5
7
5
19
13
Number
continuing
toward degree
NA
5
4
2
2
0
0
1
Graduation rate
(# graduated/
# entering
NA
80%
86%
63%
64%
83%
76%
93%
6
26
19
6
5
10
22
13
4
6
1
1
0
0
1
0
43%
81%
79%
67%
50%
77%
85%
68%
16
20
19
8
1
6
24
17
2
7
4
0
1
0
3
1
73%
65%
66%
54%
50%
67%
60%
68%
AY 20084
CBPH
COMHE
EOHS
GPH
HCPA
NUTR
COMHE-BS
NUTR-BS
14
32
24
9
10
13
26
19
4
2
4
2
5
3
3
6
AY 20095
6
CBPH
COMHE
EOHS
GPH
HCPA
NUTR
COMHE-BS
NUTR-BS
22
31
29
13
4
9
40
25
5
4
6
5
2
3
13
7
1
Five years is considered normal time to graduation for undergraduate and graduate degrees
Based on students entering in AY 02 and graduating by AY 07
3
BS programs are transfer programs and students are admitted as transfer students either through internal
manual change of major/minor forms or through centralized CUNY University Application Processing Center
(UAPC). In some instances of internal transfer students, the change of major code may not be changed within
the same year as when students enter the program.
4
Based on students entering in AY 03 and graduating by AY 08
5
Based on students entering in AY 04 and graduating by AY 09
6
First cohort started spring 2006, and second cohort started fall 2006
2
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
135
Table. 2.7.b.2. Destination of MS and MPH Graduates by Specialization1
AY2007
Specialization (Campus)
COMHE (Hunter)
EOHS (Hunter)
GPH (Brooklyn)
HCPA (Brooklyn)
Government
Nonprofit
#
%
#
%
#
%
2
7
4
15
9
34
4
40
1
10
3
30
2
32
1
17
1
17
1
17
2
33
NUTR (Hunter)
TOTAL
Health Care
8
#
1
1
9
Private Practice
University/ Research
%
17
Proprietary
#
%
#
%
3
11
2
7
1
17
2
33
Further Education
#
1
%
Non-Health Related
Not Employed
#
%
#
%
4
15
3
11
1
10
1
10
17
100
14
1
6
2
1
5
4
AY2008
CBPH (Lehman)
3
COMHE (Hunter)
7
30
EOHS (Hunter)
4
25
GPH (Brooklyn)
HCPA (Brooklyn)
NUTR (Hunter)
TOTAL
2
25
13
10
75
44
3
19
2
20
3
30
1
17
3
50
6
75
19
12
1
25
2
9
3
3
13
1
4
1
6
5
31
1
10
4
7
2
2
2
13
20
2
1
6
2
20
2
33
5
2
AY 2009
CBPH (Lehman)
COMHE (Hunter)
EOHS (Hunter)
EPI (Hunter)
HPM (Hunter)
5
16
12
55
1
50
2
17
20
7
70
5
16
11
35
1
10
4
13
3
10
3
10
3
13
5
23
2
9
1
50
5
41
1
14
3
GPH (Brooklyn)
HCPA (Brooklyn)
NUTR (Hunter)
TOTAL
2
20
3
25
1
33
2
67
2
29
4
57
13
2
24
9
1
17
8
0
1
Does not include BIOS, EPI and HPM specializations, which only began accepting students in AY 2008 and did not have graduates in AY 2007 and AY 2008.
Results are based on self-administered student exit surveys; response rates ranged from 76-78% in each of the last three years.
3
Although there were HPM graduates in AY 2009, none completed the student exit survey.
2
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
136
12
2.7.c. If the outcome measures selected by the school do not include degree completion
rates and job placement experience, then data for these two additional indicators must
be provided, including experiential data for each of the last three years. If degree
completion rates, in the normal time period for degree completion, are less than 80%,
an explanation must be provided. If job placement, within 12 months following award
of the degree, is less than 80% of the graduates, an explanation must be provided.
See Table 2.7.b.
2.7.d. A table showing the destination of graduates by specialty area for each of the last
three years. The table must include at least a) government (state, local, federal), b)
nonprofit organization, c) hospital or health care delivery facility, d) private practice, e)
university or research institute, f) proprietary organization (industry, pharmaceutical
company, consulting), g) further education, h) non-health related employment, or i) not
employed. See CEPH Data Template D.
This information is provided in Table 2.7.b.2.
2.7.e. In public health fields where there is certification of professional competence,
data on the performance of the school’s graduates on these national examinations for
each of the last three years.
Sources of information on SPH graduates who have attained nationally recognized
certifications are the student exit survey, the alumni survey1 and an EOHS phone survey of
its graduates done for a NIOSH grant renewal. According to the information gathered, SPH
graduates have attained the following certifications over the past three years:
Certified Health Education Specialist (CHES)
Certified Hazardous Materials Manager (CHMM)
Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH)
Certified Safety Professional (CSP)
Registered Dietitian (RD)
Registered Environmental Health Specialist (REHS)
Certified in Public Health (CPH)
13
2
4
2
19
1
7
SPH does not have information on the years in which students were certified and does not
collect information on the number of students who take the certification exams and do not
pass. However, SPH knows that in 2010, one alumus took the CPH exam and passed; in
2009, two alumni took the exam and passed; and in 2008, four alumni took the exam and
passed.
1
Based on alumni survey of MPH and MS students graduating in AY 2004-2006.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
137
2.7.f. Data describing results from periodic assessments of alumni and employers of
graduates regarding the ability of the school’s graduates to effectively perform the
competencies in a practice setting.
There are three sources of information on performance of SPH students in practice settings:
surveys of alumni, an employers’ discussion group and the SPH PHLC.
Alumni surveys were conducted in 2009 for Hunter MPH and MS and Brooklyn MPH
graduates. Of 161 alumni surveyed, 71 (44%) responded. When asked how strongly they
agree with the statement that the training received from their public health programs prepared
them for their current work, 50.8% said they strongly agreed, 33.9% said they agreed, 13.6%
disagreed and 1.7% strongly disagreed.
Alumni were also asked to list the new skills that should be incorporated into the curriculum
to meet the emerging public health needs of the 21st century. The skills and knowledge areas
that alumni felt should be enhanced in the SPH curricula are listed below in order of
frequency of occurrence:
Data-analysis, including the use of SPSS and SAS
Computer technology
Research design, integrated into more courses
Project management
Media and new technology, including use of interactive computer websites
Data mapping
Basic written and verbal communication skills
Many of these areas were reinforced in a discussion group with employers in December 2009
and in the meeting of the PHLC. Employers emphasized three areas that MPH and MS
graduates will need in the coming decades:
Data-analysis skills
Grant-writing skills
Skills needed to work in diverse communities
Employers felt that SPH alumni have many tools needed to work with diverse communities,
including conducting surveys, outreach and education. They attributed this, in part, to the
diverse nature of the members of the SPH student body, their roots in the communities in
which they work and the students’ maturity and level of experience. Participants emphasized
the need for the SPH faculty and its curriculum to include competencies on analysis of public
health data, particularly in biostatistics and epidemiology courses but also in other courses.
PHLC members emphasized the need to strengthen data-analysis skills, especially in light of
projecting job opportunities for data analysts and managers. Graduates should be able to
describe a public health problem, based on analyzing a public health data set, and
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
138
recommend research and policy implications. Additional competencies include: program
management, an ability to apply classroom-based theory, methods and knowledge to practice
settings, and the need for more service-oriented opportunities in the curriculum, emphasizing
the link between institution and community.
This feedback has been taken into account by the Curriculum Committee, especially in
revising program-wide and specialization competencies and course learning objectives, as
described in Criterion 2.0.
2.7.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The SPH has well-established methods for monitoring and evaluating student progress and
the extent to which they meet the core and program-specific competencies. These include:
Academic advisement
Academic progress based on GPAs
Practice experience
Examinations
Portfolios
Culminating experience
Academic advisement or similar documents or face-to-face assessment during advisement
or both
Professional certification
Graduation rates
Post-graduation employment
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
139
2.8.
Other Professional Degrees. If the school offers curricula for professional
degrees other than the MPH or equivalent public health degrees, students pursuing
them must be grounded in basic public health knowledge.
2.8.a. Identification of professional degree curricula offered by the school, other than
those preparing primarily for public health careers, and a description of the
requirements for each.
Not applicable.
2.8.b. Identification of the manner in which these curricula assure grounding in public
health core knowledge. If this means is common across these other professional degree
programs, it need be described only once. If it varies by program, sufficient information
must be provided to assess compliance by each program.
As indicated in various locations in this section, the curricula for the MS, BS and MS/MPH
degree programs provide grounding in the five knowledge areas basic to public health.
Table 2.3.a.1. indicates that the five core public health courses are components of the
EOHS-MS curricula.
Table 2.3.a.3. identifies where in the curriculum the core knowledge areas are covered in
the NUTR-MS and BS degree programs.
2.8.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
Students in the MS and BS degree programs receive instruction in the five core areas of
public health. NUTR-MS and BS students take courses within their respective specializations
that cover these five domains.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
140
2.9. Academic Degrees. If the school also offers curricula for academic degrees,
students pursuing them shall obtain a broad introduction to public health, as well
as an understanding about how their discipline-based specialization contributes to
achieving the goals of public health.
2.9.a. Identification of all academic degree programs, by degree and area of
specialization. The instructional matrix may be referenced for this purpose.
Not applicable. The programs in the SPH are professional-degree programs. The SPH does
not have academic degrees.
2.9.b. Identification of the means by which the school assures that students in research
curricula acquire a public health orientation. If this means is common across the school,
it need be described only once. If it varies by degree or program area, sufficient
information must be provided to assess compliance by each program.
Not applicable.
2.9.c. Identification of the culminating experience required for each degree program. If
this is common across the school’s academic degree programs, it need be described only
once. If it varies by degree or program area, sufficient information must be provided to
assess compliance by each program.
Not applicable.
2.9.d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
Not applicable.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
141
2.10. Doctoral Degrees. The school shall offer at least three doctoral degree
programs that are relevant to any of the five areas of basic public health knowledge.
2.10.a. Identification of all doctoral programs offered by the school, by degree and area
of specialization. The instructional matrix may be referenced for this purpose. If the
school is a new applicant and has graduates from only one doctoral program, a
description of plans and a timetable for graduating students from the other two
doctoral programs must be presented, with university documentation supporting the
school’s projections.
The DPH program prepares students to be researchers, teachers and managers who can meet
the public health needs of urban populations. It prepares future faculty members for the
growing number of training programs in public and community health and leaders for the
public health workforce. The curriculum integrates health and natural and social sciences as
applied to public health. Students are prepared to become interdisciplinary health researchers
and practitioners, capable of working across levels, disciplines and sectors to address
complex public health problems with a focus on urban populations. Graduates will develop
the skills and knowledge to help eliminate urban health disparities, a major goal of the
nation’s health blueprint, Healthy People 2010. The DPH program recognizes the strong
links between public health and social justice.
The DPH curriculum is summarized in several places throughout this document.
The DPH degree program and specializations are listed in the instructional matrix in
Table 2.1.a.
The curriculum is summarized in Table 2.1.b.2.
The program-wide and specialization competencies are summarized in Table 2.6.c.2.
The mission of each of the four specializations that comprise the DPH program are
summarized here:
The CSH specialization prepares researchers and advanced public health practitioners to
increase scientific understanding of the social determinants of health, health behavior, the
delivery of health services and health policy.
The EPI specialization prepares graduates to work as senior epidemiologists in research,
teaching and public health leadership positions. Graduates of the EPI specialization will
serve as epidemiologists in academia, industry, research institutes and domestic and
international government agencies.
The EOH specialization trains doctoral-level researchers, faculty and advanced
professionals about environmental and occupational health problems affecting urban
populations. Coursework and research are aimed at furthering scientific understanding of
the ways in which urbanization compromises the physical environment and human health
as well as the ways in which it promotes health. Such topics as environmental
sustainability, environmental justice, economic viability and political participation will be
examined.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
142
The HPM specialization prepares students for careers in research, teaching, policy
analysis and organizational analysis in the broad fields of health services, health policy
and health management. Students will select a concentration in either health policy or
health management. Students who choose the policy concentration will develop a
nuanced understanding of how a range of mechanisms, systematically associated with
policy, influence health in the urban environment. Students who choose the management
concentration will incorporate organizational theory and analysis in understanding how
organizational structures, networks and behavior influence health in the urban
environment.
Graduating Doctoral Student
One doctoral student, Alice Welch, is expected to graduate in December 2010. She
completed her second exam in May 2010, completed her dissertation proposal in August and
will have a complete draft by Nov. 15, 2010 of her dissertation, ―Alcohol Use and PostTraumatic Stress Disorder among Participants in the World Trade Center Registry.‖ Her
defense is scheduled for Nov. 29, 2010. She expects to deposit her dissertation, the final
requirement for completing the degree, the week of Dec. 6. Her dissertation is based on
secondary analysis of records in the NYCDOMH’s World Trade Center Registry, a database
that tracks the health status of more than 70,000 New Yorkers exposed to the World Trade
Center attack on Sept. 11, 2001 and its aftermath. Ms. Welch is a full-time employee of the
registry and has been analyzing data based on these records since June 2009. Her dissertation
committee includes Professors Luisa Borrell, Lorna Thorpe and Nicholas Freudenberg.
The SPH is applying for initial accreditation concomitant with the graduation of our first
doctoral candidate, a student from the CSH specialization. In 2010, two other CSH students
in addition to Ms. Welch completed their second exams. Assuming it takes four to five years
to complete the program, it is reasonable to assume these students will complete their degrees
by 2012. Table 2.10.a. outlines the academic progress of current DPH students by
specialization. Five students entered the EPI specialization in 2008, and four entered the
EOH specialization in 2009. It is reasonable to expect that by 2013 there will be at least one
graduate from each of these two specializations.
2.10.b. Data on the number of active students in each doctoral degree program as well
as applications, acceptances, enrollments and graduates for the last three years.
See Table 4.4.d. for numbers of DPH student applications, acceptances and enrollments for
the last three years.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
143
Table 2.10.a. Academic Progress of DPH Students by Specialization
2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010Number of students
111
Total as of
7/10
Community, Society & Health
Who entered cohort
Who left program as of June 1, 2010*
Who successfully completed exam No. 1
Who successfully completed exam No. 2
Whose dissertation prospectus was approved
Who advanced to candidacy
Who scheduled date for dissertation defense
Who are expected to graduate by December 2010
Epidemiology
Who entered cohort
Who left program as of June 1, 2010 **
Who successfully completed exam No. 1
Who successfully completed exam No. 2
Whose dissertation prospectus was approved
Who advanced to candidacy
Who scheduled date for dissertation defense
Who are expected to graduate by December 2010
Environmental and Occupational Health
Who entered cohort
Who left program as of June 1, 2010
Who successfully completed exam No. 1
Who successfully completed exam No. 2
Whose dissertation prospectus was approved
Who advanced to candidacy
Who scheduled date for dissertation defense
Who are expected to graduate by December 2010
Health Policy and Management
Who entered cohort
Who left program as of June 1, 2010
Who successfully completed exam No. 1
Who successfully completed exam No. 2
Whose dissertation prospectus was approved
Who advanced to candidacy
Who scheduled date for dissertation defense
Who are expected to graduate by December 2010
Total number of students in specializations
15
2
13
3
1
1
1
1
9
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
42
4
13
3
1
1
1
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
18
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
13
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
12
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
18
13
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
39
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
82
* From 2007 class, two left to enter doctoral programs in other disciplines; from 2008, one left for another public health
doctoral program; in 2009, one left to attend another public health program
** From 2008 class, one left to attend medical school
1
As of June 1, may change slightly
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
144
2.10.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The SPH has sufficient faculty expertise, availability of advanced-level courses and
active research to support the DPH degree program with four specializations.
The DPH program was developed over the course of more than five years with input
from faculty across the university through the CUNY Urban Health Initiative and with
consultation from nationally recognized leaders in the field.
The four specializations were phased in over four years (2007-2010), allowing the faculty
to concentrate on one new specialization each year.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
145
2.11. Joint Degrees. If the school offers joint degree programs, the required curriculum
for the professional public health degree shall be equivalent to that required for a separate
public health degree.
2.11.a. Identification of joint degree programs offered by the school and a description of
the requirements for each.
The SPH offers one dual-degree program – the 57-credit MS/MPH in Community/Public
Health Nursing/Urban Public Health. This dual degree has been offered jointly between the
program in Urban Public Health and the Hunter-Bellevue School of Nursing since 1998. The
MS/MPH was accredited by CEPH in 2003. In 2010, the MS portion of the dual-degree
program received its most recent accreditation from the CCNE.
The program prepares nurses to assume leadership roles in community-health nursing in a
variety of health-care settings, including home care, public health and community-based
agencies. Students learn to apply theories and research findings to nursing practice through
coursework and a series of practica. Students who select the dual-degree option attain
additional knowledge of public health sciences, with emphasis on community health
education or environmental and occupational health sciences. Graduates meet educational
requirements for specialty certification by the American Nurses Credentialing Center as
Advanced Public Health Nurses.
Requirements for admission
In addition to MPH admission requirements, students seeking matriculation in the School of
Nursing must meet the following requirements:
Completion of an accredited baccalaureate program in nursing with a GPA of 3.0
License and current registration to practice professional nursing in New York State
Although the MS/MPH can be completed by full-time students in four semesters, most
students earn the degree by attending part time. Students have five years to complete the
degree requirements. Courses are offered in the late afternoons and evenings.
Students choose one of two specializations in this degree-program: COMHE and EOH.
Course of Study for the Master’s in Nursing/Master’s in Public Health
The curriculum for the MS/MPH appears in Table 2.1.b.4. As indicated in the table, the
program consists of core courses shared with other master’s-level students in nursing and
other MPH students, courses in the specialization and health sciences and an elective, which
may be chosen from any of the graduate programs at Hunter College. Through coursework,
practica and electives, students develop an area of expertise related to an
aggregate/community, e.g., family nursing, home care, public health, school health or
occupational health. Using nursing process, students apply nursing and public health theories
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
146
and research to the study of communities and aggregates. Competencies for the degree
program are in Table 2.6.c.4.
The MS/MPH degree requirements are at least equivalent to the requirements for a separate
public health degree, as indicated in Table 2.11.a.
Table 2.11.a. A Comparison of MS/MPH and MPH Degree Programs in the SPH
MPH Specialization
18 credits: Public Health Nursing (Hunter)
15-18 credits
(general) Public Health (Brooklyn): 15 credits
Health Care Policy and Administration (Brooklyn):
15 credits
Biostatistics and Epidemiology (Hunter): 15 credits
Community Health Education (Hunter): 15 credits
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences
(Hunter): 15 credits
Public Health Nutrition (Hunter): 18 credits
Public Health Policy and Management (Hunter): 15
credits
Community-Based Public Health (Lehman): 15
credits
NURS 700: Theoretical Foundations of Nursing
Science
NURS 702: Nursing Research
NURS 704: Urban Health Care Systems
NURS 749: Health Promotion/Disease Prevention
In Diverse Populations
NURS 771: Community/Public Health Nursing, I
HPM 750: Public Health Management
MPH Core Courses: 15 Credits
Biostatistics
Environmental Health & Safety
Epidemiology
Social and Behavioral Sciences
Public Health Policy and Management
6-9 credits
PH 750: Biostatistics
PH 752: Epidemiology
PH 754: Environmental Health & Safety
PH 755: Urban Health & Society
PH 756: Public Health & Health Care Policy &
Management
Specialization Electives
9 credits: Public Health Nursing
(general) Public Health (Brooklyn): 6 credits
Health Care Policy and Administration
(Brooklyn): 6 credits
Biostatistics and Epidemiology (Hunter): 9 credits
Community Health Education (Hunter): 9 credits
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences
(Hunter): 9 credits
Public Health Nutrition (Hunter): 6 credits
Public Health Policy and Management (Hunter):
9 credits
Community-Based Public Health & Health Equity
(Lehman): 6 credits
COMHE 751: Community Health Interventions
COMHE 752: Community Organizing
and Development for Health
COMHE 753: Health Program & Planning Funding
-orEOHS 702: Introduction to Occupational Safety &
Health
EOHS 754: Environmental & Occupational
Toxicology
EOHS 757: Principles Industrial Hygiene
Practice Experience: 3 credits
Supervised fieldwork, plus accompanying course
NURS 772: Community/Public Health Nursing II
Culminating Experience: 3 credits
Capstone project or research essay (Hunter & Lehman),
masters essay (Brooklyn & Hunter), or thesis
(Brooklyn); plus accompanying seminar/s or meetings
with faculty
NURS 773: Public Health Nursing III (30 hours theory
plus 167 hours practicum
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
147
2.11.b. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
Hunter has offered the MS/MPH for more than a decade. Graduates receive specialty
certification by the American Nurses Credentialing Center as Advanced Public Health
Nurses. The program is accredited by the CCNE and in 2003 the dual degree was included in
the accreditation that CEPH awarded to the program in Urban Public Health. The core public
health courses required for the dual-degree program are the same as the core public health
courses required in the MPH degree programs at Hunter, and therefore, the MS/MPH core
public health courses are equivalent to the core courses in the MPH degree programs in the
SPH.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
148
2.12 Distance Education or Executive Degree Programs. If the school offers
degree programs using formats or methods other than students attending regular
on-site course sessions spread over a standard term, these programs must a) be
consistent with the mission of the school and within the school’s established areas
of expertise; b) be guided by clearly articulated student learning outcomes that are
rigorously evaluated; c) be subject to the same quality control processes that other
degree programs in the school and university are; and d) provide planned and
evaluated learning experiences that take into consideration and are responsive to
the characteristics and needs of adult learners. If the school offers distance
education or executive degree programs, it must provide needed support for these
programs, including administrative, travel, communication, and student services.
The school must have an ongoing program to evaluate the academic effectiveness
of the format, to assess teaching and learning methodologies and to systematically
use this information to stimulate program improvements.
2.12.a. Identification of all degree programs that are offered in a format other than
regular, on-site course sessions spread over a standard term, including those offered in
full or in part through distance education in which the instructor and student are
separated in time or place or both. The instructional matrix may be referenced for this
purpose.
None are offered.
2.12.b. Description of the distance education or executive degree programs, including
an explanation of the model or methods used, the school’s rationale for offering these
programs, the manner in which it provides necessary administrative and student
support services, the manner in which it monitors the academic rigor of the programs
and their equivalence (or comparability) to other degree programs offered by the
school, and the manner in which it evaluates the educational outcomes, as well as the
format and methodologies.
Not applicable.
2.12.c. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
Not applicable.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
149
CRITERION 3.0. CREATION, APPLICATION
AND ADVANCEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE
Introduction
The SPH’s research, service and workforce development activities reflect its overall mission
to help create and sustain a healthier New York City and to promote equitable, efficient,
evidence-based solutions to pressing health problems facing urban populations everywhere.
Research, service and workforce development activities also reflect the SPH’s four broad
goals to: (1) contribute to healthier cities (2) promote healthy aging through the lifespan (3)
prevent chronic diseases and improve their management and (4) advance health equity.
The SPH’s research, service and workforce development activities also are shaped by its
institutional base and geographic location. As noted, CUNY is the largest urban public
university in the nation and has a long history of research and service dedicated to improving
the lives of New Yorkers. The SPH builds on this tradition, and SPH researchers collaborate
with other CUNY faculty, centers and institutes to pursue interdisciplinary, intersectoral
research designed to benefit New York and other urban populations. In addition, as an
institution committed to providing access to higher education to groups often excluded,
CUNY has a history of providing New York City with the personnel needed for its vast
human services, health and educational systems. These contributions come from its degree
programs and many non-degree offerings that build the city’s workforce.
SPH students and faculty also benefit from being in a city with myriad institutions dedicated
to public health, health care, community development, and professional and continuing
education. Unlike other schools of public health, which might be the only show in town in
their region, the SPH has the luxury of defining a unique research, service and workforce
development niche, knowing it can depend on and establish collaborations with the many
other organizations engaged in these endeavors to meet other needs.
Centers and Institutes
Several multi-disciplinary centers, institutes and initiatives that are affiliated with the SPH
and its faculty are a locus of research, service and workforce development activities. These
centers and institutes have developed over the last 10 or more years, and each has its own
history, expertise and relationships with SPH faculty and resources. In the future, some may
become part of the SPH. In the coming two years, SPH leaders and faculty will explore with
these centers how they can best relate to and be supported by the SPH, what types of new
centers and institutes the school may create and how to create an efficient infrastructure to
support existing and new ventures. As described below, planning for several new initiatives
is under way. These centers, institutes and initiatives are:
The Brookdale Center for Healthy Aging & Longevity (BCHAL), at the Hunter campus,
was founded in 1974 and is one of the country’s first multi-disciplinary academic centers
dedicated to the advancement of successful aging and longevity. Through research,
education, training and evaluation of evidence-based models of practice and policy, it plays a
vital role in enhancing the quality of life of older Americans and their families. Its current
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
150
focus is on contributing the knowledge that can help cities to support healthy aging.
Professor Marianne Fahs, PhD, and Associate Professor William T. Gallo, PhD, are full-time
tenured faculty at the SPH. http://www.brookdale.org/index.htm
The Center for Community and Urban Health (CCUH), at the Hunter campus, was
founded in 1986. The center’s director, Beatrice J. Krauss, PhD, is a full-time tenured
professor at the SPH. The CCUH is dedicated to strengthening the capacity of individuals,
families, organizations and populations to address and resolve contemporary community and
urban health issues and concerns. The center conducts scientifically informed,
interdisciplinary research and evaluation, program development, training and education,
technical assistance and consultation and policy advisement. Professors Alcabes, Wheeler,
and Parsons also are affiliated with this center.
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/schoolhp/centers/comm_urb/index.htm
The Center for Human Environments (CHE), at the GC campus, provides opportunities to
study the interactions between environments and well-being. CHE offers a forum for
environmental research, where the primary emphasis is on examining the problems faced by
neighborhoods, schools, community organizations, non profits, policy-makers and
government agencies. CHE is comprised of five research groups: the Children’s
Environments Research Group, the Health and Society Research Group, the Housing
Environments Research Group, the Public Space Research Group and the Youth Studies
Research Group. CHE also partners with ActKnowledge, an organization at the GC that
works with community groups, non profits, foundations and government agencies to
understand, evaluate and transform programs and policies and to disseminate research
findings. Professors Freudenberg and Lennon are affiliated. http://web.gc.cuny.edu/che/
The Center for Occupational & Environmental Health (COEH), at Hunter, was founded
as a research, training and educational center whose mission is to promote community and
workplace health. The COEH works with community-based organizations, schools, labor
unions, private employers and federal, municipal and state agencies to promote better
understanding, access to information and improved skills in addressing workplace and
environmental hazards. The center’s director, Professor Jack Caravanos, is a full-time faculty
member in the SPH. Recent areas of COEH’s focus include: improving the skills of
hazardous materials and emergency response workers, enhancing community-based research
partnerships to address neighborhood air pollution, reducing asthma rates in New York City
and training community health workers. Professors Goldberg, Klitzman and Matte also are
affiliated. http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/health/coeh/.
The CUNY Institute for Health Equity (CIHE), at Lehman, was established in 2008 to
narrow the gaps in the health status of NYC’s underserved ethnic/racial populations. SPH
Professor Marilyn Aguirre-Molina is the founding director, and Assistant Professor Andrew
Maroko is coordinating the research agenda. In addition to research, CIHE has a community
capacity-building and a knowledge transfer core. Together, the cores work to achieve the
institute’s mission to contribute to strategies that reduce health inequities in New York City.
Professors Borrell, Levitt and Roberts also are affiliated.
http://www.cunyhealthequity.org/ihe/
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
151
The Immigration and Health Initiative, at Hunter, was created in 2004 by SPH faculty
member Anahí Viladrich to meet the research interests of UPH faculty and students working
on immigrant health issues in the United States and abroad. The initiative brings together
scholars, professionals, activists and students committed to developing innovative research
projects, teaching and advocacy curricula on immigration and health. Its goals and activities
include conducting research on the health needs of immigrants and their children, developing
teaching curricula and training guidelines, organizing workshops, symposia and conferences
and supporting partnerships with national and international academic centers and community
organizations and advocating for immigrant rights. Professors Yeh and Fahs also are
affiliated. http://www.immigrationandhealthinitiative.org/
The Latino Health Fellowship Initiative, at Hunter, was founded by SPH faculty member
Diana Romero in 2007. It seeks to reduce health disparities affecting the Latino community
in the United States by advancing research, informing relevant policies and supporting the
next generation of Latino public health professionals. The initiative provides fellowships to
Hunter MPH students who are interested in working on issues related to Latino health and
connects graduate students to Latino health-focused research and fieldwork opportunities.
www.latinohealthfellowship.com
The CUNY Campaign Against Diabetes (CCAD) is a five-year initiative designed to
improve the management and prevention of diabetes among the CUNY community,
including students, faculty, staff and their respective family members. Through CUNY’s
teaching, research and service capacities, the campaign develops, implements and evaluates
prevention and management programs across the University. The campaign is conducted
under the auspices of the Health and Society Research Group of the Center for Human
Environments (PI: Nicholas Freudenberg) received funding for the project from the New
York State Health Foundation (2007-2009) and the CUNY Chancellor’s Office (2006-2009).
The campaign was launched on Jan. 17, 2007 with an all-day conference, ―Diabetes Policy in
New York City: A Call to Action.‖ Since 2008, the campaign has worked in the CUNY
community by sponsoring workshops to demonstrate heart-healthy cooking, organizing and
leading exercise groups, providing diabetes management sessions and generally promoting
diabetes awareness within the CUNY community. Professors Deutsch, Spark, and Yeh also
are affiliated. http://www.cuny.edu/about/centers-and-institutes/urban-health/campaignagainst-diabetes.html
The SPH is affiliated with seven additional CUNY centers and institutes:
Center for the Biology of Natural Systems (CBNS), at Queens College, responds to
environmental and resource problems and their policy implications. CBNS is known for its
pioneering studies to devise and assess alternative solutions and its assistance to government
agencies and community organizations. Researchers continue to monitor and address the
health risks of first responders at the World Trade Center, workers in U.S. nuclear bomb
plants and also are studying exposures and health effects from soot and other easily inhaled
particulates at street level in the New York City’s five boroughs. Professor Morabia also is
affiliated. http://www.qc.cuny.edu/Academics/Centers/Biology/Pages/default.aspx
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
152
Center for Gene Structure and Function, at Hunter, builds unique collaborations among
biologists, chemists, biopsychologists, biophysicists, bioanthropologists and health scientists;
recruits and equips outstanding faculty; develops and shares core research facilities; and
implements strategies for scientific networking. Affiliated public health faculty are
Professors Freudenberg, Parsons, Talih and Wheeler. http://genecenter.hunter.cuny.edu
Center for Health Media and Policy, at Hunter, is an interdisciplinary initiative for
advancing the health of the public and healthy public policies through the use of new and
traditional media. The center seeks to be a catalyst for shaping professional and public
conversations about health and health care by focusing on the intersection between policy
and media. The center works with public health advocates and health-care professionals to
raise their voices to influence policies that will create a more equitable, cost-effective healthcare system through research and strategic use of media. Most recently, several SPH faculty
have worked with the center on policy issues related to welfare reform and reproductive
health. Professor Daniels is affiliated. http://mediahealth.wordpress.com/
CUNY Institute for Demographic Research (CIDR), at Baruch College, was established in
2007 as part of a significant commitment to launch New York’s first demographic research
and training program. The institute is a home where scholars can gather to exchange ideas
and receive the support necessary to accomplish the research agendas they establish. This
engagement takes many forms, including cross-campus collaborations of faculty and
students, development and support for new research and training initiatives and a vibrant
seminar series sponsored by the institute. SPH full-time faculty members Dowd, Horiuchi
and Romero have formal affiliations. http://web.cuny.edu/academics/centers-andinstitutes/cidr/aboutus.html
CUNY Institute for Sustainable Cities, at Hunter, creates understanding of the connections
between the everyday lives of urban citizens and their natural world, leading to the discovery
and use of cities like New York as learning laboratories to create a sustainable future for
cities worldwide. Affiliated public health faculty include Professors Freudenberg and
Maantay. http://www.cunysustainablecities.org
Center for HIV Educational Studies & Training, at Hunter, conducts research on social
and psychological factors that contribute to HIV transmission. Affiliated public health faculty
are Professors Grov and Parsons. http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/chest/
Roosevelt House Public Policy Institute, near Hunter, provides a place for students to
analyze critical public policy issues and experience meaningful civic engagement; a place for
faculty to research, teach and write constructively about the most important issues of the day;
and a place for scholarly and public audiences to participate in high-profile lectures, seminars
and conferences. Through a gift from the Laurie M. Tisch Illumination Fund, from 20102015, the Roosevelt House will be home to the Joan H. Tisch Distinguished Fellow in Public
Health. The fellowship is awarded annually to a prominent health-care professional who will
teach, conduct faculty seminars and serve as a scholar-in-residence in the Hunter community.
The 2010 Fellow is John McDonough, PhD, former senior adviser, U.S. Senate Committee
on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, and health policy adviser to Senator Edward M.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
153
Kennedy. Since its founding in 2006, the institute has sponsored policy seminars in which
several SPH faculty have participated. http://www.roosevelthouse.hunter.cuny.edu/
In 2009-2010, 47% of the SPH’s tenure-track faculty with appointments in public health (26
of 55) had affiliations with one or more centers or institutes, providing many opportunities
for research, service and workforce development. In the two coming years, as the SPH
leadership and faculty develop and expand new research directions for the SPH, the school
will need to consider how best to build on the accomplishments of these centers.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
154
3.1. Research. The school shall pursue an active research program, consistent
with its mission, through which its faculty and students contribute to the knowledge
base of the public health disciplines, including research directed at improving the
practice of public health.
3.1.a. A description of the school’s research activities, including policies, procedures
and practices that support research and scholarly activities.
Full-time faculty in the SPH, tenured and untenured, are expected to engage in research
relevant to public health. Active engagement in basic or applied research is evaluated in the
consideration of promotion of faculty members for tenure. In the SPH, current and future
research falls into several broad categories: funded research projects led by independent SPH
faculty investigators; studies based at one of the centers or institutes affiliated with the SPH;
and, prospectively, new research initiatives supported by the dean or groups of faculty. In the
coming years, it is expected that the three streams will be important but that the latter two
will grow in importance. In the SPH, all categories of research depend on collaboration with
community partners, city agencies and other research and academic institutions. In addition
to contributing to the art and science of public health, faculty investigators provide the
students with opportunities to engage in research through fieldwork, independent study, class
assignments and paid positions in public health research endeavors.
The SPH and its constituent colleges promote research by providing investigators with
administrative support, technical assistance, seed money and released time from teaching.
Each of these areas is summarized in the following sections.
Overview of Research in the SPH
Funded research activities of core and affiliated faculty are summarized in Appendix 3.1.c.2.
The highlights of research activity are summarized in Table 3.1.a.1. A majority of research
is interdisciplinary and cuts across several key themes. Current research includes: the impact
of urban living, such as housing and neighborhood conditions, climate and air quality, food
and physical activity on health; prevention and management of chronic diseases such as HIV
and other chronic infections, mental health, diabetes and immune functioning; health
disparities; and life course health and aging.
For the past year, a research committee consisting of faculty representatives from the
Consortial Campuses has met regularly to assess the capacity of the CUNY research
infrastructure and to articulate a research agenda for the SPH. A preliminary draft of a report
by that committee was presented and discussed at the fall 2010 faculty retreat and is
undergoing further revisions. The draft outlined a strategic vision, described conditions and
resources needed to achieve the vision and assessed resources at the Consortial Campuses.
The committee is chaired by Professor Lorna Thorpe and includes Professors Tracy Chu,
Mary Clare Lennon, Alfredo Morabia and Luisa Borrell. This committee is charged with
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
155
making recommendations for strengthening the SPH’s research infrastructure and defining its
research priorities to the dean, the Dean’s Cabinet, and the FSC.
Administrative Support for Research
Several university-wide and campus-based offices provide administrative support, pre- and
post-award, to SPH administrators, faculty, students and staff engaged in research. These are
described in Table 3.1.a.2.
Technical Assistance to Investigators
CUNY, the SPH and its constituent campuses offer a variety of types of technical research
assistance to faculty. For example, the Office of Faculty Research and Project Development
(OFFER) at Hunter College—directed by SPH faculty member Beatrice Krauss—provides an
array of pre-submission support to junior and senior faculty, such as concept design,
information on federal and other types of funding, budget development and grant-writing
skills, in addition to post-award start-up, implementation, analysis and dissemination support
in conjunction with the Hunter College Office of Research Administration. A list of the
types of technical assistance provided to SPH investigators over the past year is provided in
Table 3.1.a.3. OFFER—formerly called the Office of Research and Grant Support (ORGS
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/shp/centers/orgs/index.htm) - also provides limited financial
support to faculty through internal award mechanisms for grant development, seed money for
pilot projects and poster production.
Support and Funding for Research
Table 3.1.a.4 provides a summary of the annual research funding opportunities available to
faculty in the SPH throughout the university. Many of these awards are intended as seed
money for investigators, especially junior faculty, to conduct pilot studies or prepare grant
proposals for external funding.
In the past three years, SPH faculty received funding to develop research projects from a
variety of internal sources, including RF CUNY, CUNY Collaborative Incentive Research
Program, PSC CUNY and OFFER seed money. A list of the CUNY-supported research
activity for core and affiliated SPH faculty for this period appears in Appendix 3.1.c.1. Table
3.1.a.5 provides a summary of this support for AYs 2007-2009 and fall 2010. As indicated in
the table, in AY 2007, five faculty received support for five projects, totaling $476,490. In
AY 2008, 11 faculty received support for nine projects totaling $167,300. In AY 2009, 12
faculty received support for 14 projects totaling $231,176 Thus far, in fall 2010, one faculty
member has received support for a project totaling $100,000.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
156
Table 3.1.a.1. Highlights of SPH Research Activities, 2009-2010
Impact of City Living on Health
Transdisciplinary Research on Urban Health Collaborative (N. Freudenberg)
Residential Mobility and Young Children: Family, Neighborhoods and Well-Being (M. Lennon)
Near Real Time Modeling of Weather, Air Pollution and Health Outcome Indicators in NYC
(T. Matte)
NYC Public Housing Resident Health Assessment Project (L. Thorpe)
Parks, Fast Food, Supermarkets and Obesity in NYC (N. Sohler)
Prevention and Management of Chronic Disease
Investigation of Neighborhood-Based Determinants of Risk for Diabetes and Obesity (M. Fahs)
HIV Risk and Venues for Meeting Sex Partners (C. Grov)
Commuting Mode and Inflammatory Response (A. Morabia)
Compulsive Behaviors, Mental Health & HIV (J. Parsons)
Tailored Interactive Multimedia to Reduce Colorectal Cancer Screening Disparities (N. Sohler)
CUNY Campaign Against Diabetes (N. Freudenberg)1
Health Disparities
Examining the Contribution of Country of Origin Among Hispanics on Diabetes and
Hypertension Racial/Ethnic Disparities in NYC (L. Borrell)
Under the Skin: Understanding the Role of Stress and Immune Function in Health Disparities
(J. Dowd)
The Impact of Patient Activation on Low SES and Minority Populations (M. Gold)
Fertility Disadvantage Among Low-Income Adults: A Mixed Methods Approach (D. Romero)
Life Course, Health and Aging
Young Motherhood and Social Functioning Among a National Cohort of HIV+ Adolescents and
Young Adults (E. Eastwood)
Bringing Evidence-Based Health Care Practice to Older Adults Aging in Place in NYC
(M. Fahs)
Improving Hispanic Elders’ Health: Community Partnerships for Evidence-Based Solutions
(M. Fahs)
Longevity & Mortality in Industrialized Societies (S. Horiuchi)
Body Fat in Newborns of Teenage Mothers (K. Navder)
.
1
This project, which includes research and service components, was allocated to service funding. Accordingly,
the project is listed in Appendix 3.2.b. Faculty Service Grants, and is included in figures of the corresponding
text in Criterion 3.2, Service.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
157
Office
CUNY Office of Academic Affairs, Office of
Research Conduct
http://www.cuny.edu/research/ovcr/humansubjects-research/orc.html
Office of the CUNY Vice Chancellor for
Research
http://web.cuny.edu/research/index.html
Research Foundation of CUNY
http://www.rfcuny.org/rfwebsite/
Brooklyn Campus
Office of Research & Sponsored Programs
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/pub/department
s/orsp
Hunter Campus
Office of Research Administration
http://research.hunter.cuny.edu/about_us.htm
Lehman Campus
Office of Research and Sponsored Programs
http://www.lehman.edu/provost/grants/
GC Campus
Office of Research and Sponsored Programs
http://web.gc.cuny.edu/orup/
Table. 3.1.a.2. Administrative Support for Research
Responsibilities
Provides oversight, education, policy and advice regarding ongoing research involving human subjects.
Responsibilities include: reviewing IRB policies and procedures CUNY-wide and at each campus for compliance with
federal requirements; leading educational efforts, including seminars, lectures, developing the Collaborative
Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) and informing campuses of important research ethics and human subjects
protection issues as they arise; and providing counseling to researchers as needed.
Promotes outstanding research at CUNY, expanding and improving the research profile of the university in typical
research areas such as the natural and social sciences and engineering, as well as the arts, education and humanities.
The office is concerned with all aspects of research, innovation, scholarship and creativity at CUNY colleges and in a
number of multidisciplinary centers, institutes and programs. Responsibilities include: providing support to help
faculty; leveraging external funding, complying with federal and state regulations, partnering with industry, establishing
collaborations across the university and raising the profile of CUNY in the global research community.
A private, non-profit educational corporation chartered by the State of New York in 1963, the foundation supports
CUNY faculty and staff in identifying and obtaining external support (pre-award) from government and private
sponsors and is responsible for the administration of all such funded programs (post-award). Responsibilities include
management of a planned giving program, liaison with governmental agencies and foundations, negotiation of
agreements, facility construction and renovation, protection and commercialization of intellectual property; and
compliance with applicable standards in research involving human subjects, animal care, environmental and
radiological safety and conflicts of interest.
These offices are responsible for overseeing the use of human participants in research and ensuring compliance with the
federal guidelines. The offices have access to the latest search engines that may be used to assist researchers in
identifying sources of possible funding based on topic areas and interests. They also assist researchers in developing
strategies for securing external funding and provide advice in the preparation of budgets to ensure proper support and
resources so as to successfully complete the project. Monetary resources awarded to researchers are managed through
the Research Foundation of CUNY for payment of expenses and accounting. The offices compile and distribute
periodic grant bulletins and notification of grant opportunities are emailed to individuals based on their areas of interest.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
158
Date
Table 3.1.a.3. Technical Assistance Support Provided to SPH Investigators, Fiscal Year 2010
Topic
Format/Sponsor
Presenter
7/9/2009
An overview of NIH funding
Presentation/OFFER1
David Stoff, PhD2
7/14/2009
Ethical considerations in
research
Ethical considerations in
research
Grant writing 1
Workshop and case
study/OFFER
Individual online
training/OFFER
Workshop/OFFER
Darrell Wheeler, PhD, MPH
Workshop/OFFER
7/21/2009
Literacy considerations in
intervention and assessment
Online bibliographic
management tools
Use of media in intervention
7/22/2009
NIMH funding mechanisms
7/23/2009
Graphic presentation and poster
presentation
Motivational interviewing as an
intervention technique
Mentoring: for fellows and their
mentors
Clinic- and home-based
intervention
Family-based intervention
Workshop and individual
consultation/OFFER
Workshop/OFFER
7/14/2009
7/15/2009
7/15/2009
7/16/2009
7/23/2009
7/27/2009
7/28/2009
7/29/2009
1
2
No. SPH faculty
and students
19
(4F, 4S)
12
(3F, 1S)
10
Beatrice Krauss, PhD, &
Tom Mehnert, MBA
Roseanne Flores, PhD
Workshop/OFFER
Workshop/OFFER
Workshop/OFFER
Workshop/OFFER
Workshop/OFFER
Workshop/OFFER
8
(1F, 1S)
8
(1F, 1S)
John Carey, MA, MLS
7
(1F, 2S)
Martin Dornbaum, MS
14
(3F, 5S)
Susannah Allison, NIMH program
10
officer
(3F, 2S)
Shawn McGinnis, BA, media specialist, 10
& Martin Dornbaum, MS
(1F, 3S)
Jeffrey Parsons, PhD
10
(1F, 3S)
Roseanne Flores, PhD
10
(2F, 2S)
Carol Roye, EdD, RN, CPNP
9
(2F, 1S)
Beatrice Krauss, PhD, & Mary McKay, 10
Office of Faculty Research and Project Development (OFFER)
Program Chief: Neuropsychiatry of HIV/AIDS, AIDS Research Training, HIV/AIDS Health Disparities, Center for Mental Health Research on AIDS
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
159
Date
Table 3.1.a.3. Technical Assistance Support Provided to SPH Investigators, Fiscal Year 2010
Topic
Format/Sponsor
Presenter
7/29/2009
Community-based intervention
Workshop/OFFER
PhD
Mary McKay, PhD
7/31/2009
Interventions with LGBT youth
Workshop/OFFER
Joyce Hunter, DSW
8/4/2009
Measuring biological outcomes
Workshop/OFFER
Carol Roye, EdD, RN, CPNP
8/6/2009
Qualitative methods
Workshop/OFFER
Lynne Roberts, PhD
8/6/2009
Analytic techniques-I
Workshop/OFFER
Phil Alcabes, PhD
8/11/2009
Analytic techniques-II
8/12/2009
8/13/2009
8/26/2009
11/03/2009
11/17/2009
3/26/2010
4/28/2010
Individual consultation/
OFFER
Grant writing II
Workshop and individual
consultation/OFFER
Planning and supporting research Workshop and individual
careers
consultation/OFFER
Grant writing seminar
Workshop/OFFER
Statistical Package for the Social Workshop for faculty and/or
Sciences-I
research assistants/OFFER
Statistical Package for the Social Workshop/OFFER
Sciences-II
Evaluation as a part of proposal
Workshop/OFFER
writing
Evaluation as a part of proposal
Workshop/OFFER
writing logic models
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
160
Phil Alcabes, PhD
Beatrice Krauss, PhD, & Robert
Kaplan, PhD
Beatrice Krauss, PhD, & Carol Roye,
EdD, RN, CPNP
Beatrice Krauss, PhD, with others
Beatrice Krauss, PhD
Beatrice Krauss, PhD
Mosen Auryan, PhD, & Beatrice
Krauss, PhD
Mosen Auryan, PhD, & Beatrice
Krauss, PhD
No. SPH faculty
and students
(1F, 3S)
10
(1F, 3S)
10
(1F, 2S)
7
(1F, 2S)
4
(2F, 1S)
4
(2F, 1S)
10
(1F, 1S)
11
(2F, 2S)
10
(1F, 2S)
16 (1F)
10
(2F, 2S)
10
(2F, 2S)
16
(3F)
11
(1F)
Name
Deadline
PSC-CUNY1 Research
Awards
Oct 15. in
2009
CUNY Diversity
Projects Development
Fund
Oct 30. in
2009
CUNY Faculty
Fellowship Publications
Program
Oct 30. in
2009
CUNY Scholar Incentive
Awards
Dec.
CUNY Collaborative
Incentive Research
Grants Program
Feb-Mar
Graduate Research and
Training Initiative
(GRTI)
Bridge Fund Program
Early
summer
1
No deadline
Table 3.1.a.4. CUNY-Wide Sources of Research Support
Description
It is a major vehicle for the university’s encouragement and support of faculty research and leverage external funding. It seeks to enhance the
university's role as a research institution, to further the professional growth and development of its faculty and to provide support for the
established and the younger scholar. Effective 2010, the total funding for the PSC-CUNY Research Awards is $3.7 million. Application
submission available at http://www.rfcuny.org/rfwebsite/research/content.aspx?catID=1190
It supports scholarly research projects and other educational activities for or about populations that are traditionally under represented within
higher education. The purpose of the fund is to assist in the development of educational projects, scholarly research, creative endeavors and
professional activities that promote diversity, multiculturalism, and non-discrimination on the basis of the following categories: race, color,
national or ethnic origin, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, transgender, disability, genetic predisposition or carrier status, undocumented
or citizenship, veteran or marital status. Projects/activities will be considered that explore non-discrimination and the condition of the
protected classes, for CUNY, including Italian-Americans. Information and application materials are available at:
http://www.cuny.edu/jobs/recruit-diverse/Retention/DPFDF.html
This program is sponsored by the University Office for Compliance and Diversity Programs and is part of CUNY's commitment to increasing
diversity in the faculty. CUNY protected-class members are particularly encouraged to apply. The program is designed to assist full-time,
untenured CUNY faculty in the design and execution of scholarly writing projects in their discipline. The goal of the program is the
successful completion of a scholarly work to assist in meeting requirements for tenure. Eligible faculty must be untenured at the assistant or
associate professor rank hired on or after September 2000 and must be employed full-time for at least one academic year in humanities, social
sciences, mathematics or computer science and must have earned a doctorate. For program details and application instructions, visit:
http://www.cuny.edu/jobs/recruit-diverse/Retention/FFPP.html
The purpose of this award is to facilitate scholarly research by members of the faculty on leaves of absence not supported by the university.
The amount of the award may be up to 25% of annual salary, and the effect is to place its recipient on leave of absence without pay for at
least the 75% of annual salary for which the recipient does not receive CUNY compensation. The common use of the award is to mediate the
difference between a research grant or fellowship and annual salary. Eligibility is limited to full-time faculty members who have completed
one full year or more of continuous paid full-time service before becoming eligible for the Award. For additional information, visit:
http://web.cuny.edu/research/index.html click Faculty Resources
The purpose of this program is to enhance, through multi-campus collaborations, the prestige and prominence of CUNY to a national and
international audience. CUNY encourages faculty to address problems that will lead to new and future areas of multi-campus research
strengths by seeding research that will become the basis of new external grant proposals. For additional information, visit:
http://web.cuny.edu/research/index.html click Faculty Resources
The GRTI program is not a traditional grant program. The funds are allocated via the Dormitory Authority of the State of New York and used
in support of equipment for graduate and undergraduate research and technology. CUNY notifies the provost of each college, who advises
the respective deans on how much may be requested each year.
CUNY faculty PIs of externally funded research who run into a funding crisis due to a competitive renewal of their grant not being funded
may apply for bridge funds. When appropriate, the program will provide a maximum of $25,000, with an equal match requirement from the
home campus of the faculty member. It is required that 50% of the funding provided be repaid within six months of the faculty member
receiving external funding. This repayment should come from indirect costs generated by the newly funded grant(s). Each college scrutinizes
applications for funding from this program closely as it is expensive for the home college.
Professional Staff Congress-City University of New York (PSC-CUNY)
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
161
Name
Deadline
CUNY Research
Equipment Grants
Program
Future
deadlines tba
The New Faculty
Development Program:
Fostering a Research
Environment: NYC
William Stewart Travel
Awards
Feliks Gross Endowment
George N. Shuster
Fellowship Fund
TBA
Table 3.1.a.4. CUNY-Wide Sources of Research Support
Description
The goal for this initiative is for internal grants to help full-time faculty investigators purchase an item of laboratory equipment that will
strengthen their research program, and thus assist them in applications for external research funding. Proposals must involve at least two
faculty members from one college or among CUNY colleges. Cost sharing of at least 50% is required. Maximum request is $40,000;
maximum equipment cost is $80,000.
The program accepts applications for Fostering a Research Environment: NYC Research proposals that take interdisciplinary approaches to
study topics that are relevant to NYC are encouraged. Proposals must be submitted by interdisciplinary teams of two or more.
Mar 1
About 25 grants up to $500 each for assistant professors to help costs for conference attendance.
Mar 31
Two awards at $500 granted annually for assistant professors with outstanding promise as future contributors in their fields.
For junior faculty, typical grant awards range from $300 to $2,500 for a period of up to one year to support scholarly work in progress by full
- time faculty. These grants may not be used for research connected with the completion of advanced degrees. The work should be scholarly,
not commercial, and evidence of progress should be available. Preference is given to non–tenured, tenure–track faculty.
http://research.hunter.cuny.edu/funding_opportunites.htm
Additional opportunities at: http://research.hunter.cuny.edu/funding_opportunites.htm http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/provost http://web.cuny.edu/research/index.html
click Faculty Resources. Depending on availability of funds, additional seed money and development awards are available at
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/shp/centers/orgs/index.htm
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
162
Table 3.1.a.5. CUNY-Sponsored Research Assistance for SPH Faculty
AY 2007
AY 2008
Number of Research Projects
5
9
AY 2009
14
Fall 2010
Number of Core & Affiliated SPH
Faculty Receiving CUNY Support
5
11
12
1
Total Project Amount
$476,490
$167,300
$231,176
$100,000
Current Year Amount
$114,740
$94,300
$118,176
$25,000
1
School Policies
The SPH follows all university and college policies and procedures related to the responsible
conduct of research, protection of human subjects, HIPPA compliance, research ethics and
other related issues. These are referenced in Table 1.4.d. University and college policies and
procedures are well established for addressing possible issues related to research misconduct
and non-compliance. The SPH complies with these policies and procedures and has not
adopted any unique policies governing these matters.
3.1.b. A description of current community-based research activities and/or those
undertaken in collaboration with health agencies and community-based organizations.
Formal agreements with such agencies should be identified.
BCHAL in Manhattan and the CIHE coordinate some of the SPH’s community-based
research activities. For example, BCHAL collaborates on community-based programs with
Mount Sinai School of Medicine (MSSM), New York Presbyterian Hospital-New York,
Weill Cornell Medical Center and NYU Medical Center (all in Manhattan). CIHE is a
CUNY-wide institute and works across the SPH campuses in Brooklyn, Manhattan and the
Bronx with a network of non-profit community organizations across the city in a number of
capacities that include research.
One of BCHAL’s projects involves the evaluation of daily money management programs and
Health Modalities for Aging in Place (H-MAP). CIHE works with the Literacy Collaborative
to create partnerships between adult literacy programs and health-care providers and is
collaborating with Bronx Health to analyze food offerings in bodegas. In some cases, these
affiliations are ongoing and are summarized in letters of agreement among participating
agencies.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
163
3.1.c. A list of current research activity of all primary and secondary faculty identified
in Criterion 4.1.a. and 4.1.b., including amount and source of funds, for each of the last
three years. This data must be presented in table format and include at least the
following information organized by department, specialty area or other organizational
unit as appropriate to the school: a) principal investigator, b) project name, c) period of
funding, d) source of funding, e) amount of total award, f) amount of current year’s
award, g) whether research is community based, and h) whether research provides for
student involvement.
A complete list and total amounts of the externally funded research activity conducted by
core and affiliated faculty in the SPH during AY 2007-2009 and fall 2010 appears in
Appendix 3.1.c.2. For each project listed, PI (and/or Co-PI, if applicable) are delineated as
core or affiliated faculty. Table 3.1.c. below provides a summary of this information and
includes the total number of projects involving SPH core and affiliated faculty (as PI or CoPI) amount of project funding, current year amount, number of community-based projects
and number of projects involving students.
As indicated in the table, between AY 2007-2009, the number of research projects increased
from 38 to 42; the number of core or affiliated faculty involved from 17 to 22; the total
project amount increased from $19 to $21 million; the number of community-based projects
increased from 24 to 25; and the number of research projects involving students increased
from 15 to 25.
Table 3.1.c. CUNY SPH Externally Funded Research Project Totals
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
Fall 2010
Number of Research Projects
38
38
42
14
Number of Core/Affiliated
Faculty Involved
17
19
22
9
Total Project Amount
$19 Million
$22.7 Million
$21 Million
$14.5 million
Current Year Amount
$8.1 Million
$6.1 Million
$5.8 Million
$3.6 Million
24
24
25
9
15
18
25
8
Number of Community-Based
Projects
Number of Projects Involving
Students
3.1.d. Identification of measures by which the school may evaluate the success of its
research activities, along with data regarding the school’s performance against those
measures for each of the last three years.
The SPH evaluates the success of its research activities by a variety of measures. These are
summarized in Table 3.1.d. Over the past three AYs (2007-2009), the SPH experienced a
growth in research activity, as evidenced by multiple indicators: continued funding from a
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
164
variety of external sources, including federal, state and city agencies; an increase in federal
support from 20 grants to 26; and an overall funding increase from $19 million to $21
million. In addition, in each year, almost two-thirds of research projects are communitybased. Finally, the percentage of projects engaging students increased notably from 39% to
60% during this period.
3.1.e. A description of student involvement in research.
As mentioned above, students have the opportunity to participate in faculty research projects.
In addition, students are involved in research through credit-bearing courses, such as
independent study, capstone master’s essays and special topics courses that are related to a
research theme. Moreover, students may seek employment on funded research projects at
centers, institutes and initiatives at the SPH and throughout the CUNY system. As indicated
in Table 3.1.c.d, 60% of the SPH faculty grants in the last academic year involved students.
Currently, 64% of students are involved in faculty research. Furthermore, Appendix 3.1.e.
indicates that from 2007-2009, students took part in 79 publications, professional
presentations and other scholarly activities that emanated from the SPH.
Table 3.1.d. Outcome Measures by Which the SPH Evaluates the Success of Its
Research Activities, AY 2007-AY 2009
Outcome Measure
Target
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
Fall 2010
Diversity of Funding
Federal
State
City
Foundation/Other
Total Award Amount
% of CommunityBased Research
projects
% of Research
Projects Involving
Students
Maintain or increase
diversity of
external funding
sources
Increase total award
amount
Increase the % of
community-based
research projects
Increase the % of
research projects
involving students
20
2
2
14
18
3
3
14
26
1
2
13
12
--2
$19 Million
$22.7 Million
$21 Million
$14.5 Million
63%
63%
60%
64%
39%
47%
60%
57%
3.1.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The SPH has an active research program, consistent with its mission, goals and objectives
that contributes to knowledge aimed at improving population health, especially around
the SPH’s four key themes.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
165
The SPH’s research program has experienced significant growth in the past three years,
especially as it relates to the number of full-time faculty engaged in funded research, the
number of students engaged in research, the number of community-based projects and the
amount of federal funding.
The college and university have well-defined policies and procedures to support research.
The college and university have well-established mechanisms that provide administrative
support, technical assistance and seed money to investigators.
Future Plans:
Continue to develop research initiatives around the four key themes, including a proposed
research center to examine gene/environment interactions in the etiology of chronic
diseases in urban settings. Ultimately, this center will develop and test model
interventions designed to modify urban environments and lifestyles to reduce the
expression of genotypes that predispose to chronic diseases.
Expand external research partnerships with local medical centers, NYCDOHMH, and
several community-based organizations.
Strengthen research infrastructure, with the hiring of two more administrative and grants
coordinators at Brooklyn and Lehman Colleges who will work with faculty and the
Office of the Dean to identify appropriate funding streams and track, coordinate and grow
research.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
166
3.2. Service. The school shall pursue active service activities, consistent with its
mission, through which faculty and students contribute to the advancement of
public health practice.
3.2.a. A description of the school’s service activities, including policies, procedures and
practices that support service. If the school has formal contracts or agreements with
external agencies, these should be noted.
Service is strongly supported and encouraged throughout the SPH, colleges and university.
CUNY has many policies that support faculty service, including:
Tenure and promotion guidelines that include service
A multiple-position policy, allowing faculty to work outside of CUNY on service or other
projects under specified conditions
A four-day-per-week class schedule that allows faculty time to participate in service or
other activities
3.2.b. A list of the school’s current service activities, including identification of the
community groups and nature of the activity, over the last three years.
The school participates in a range of professional-service activities. Overall, SPH core and
affiliated faculty have taken part in more than 165 service projects and activities with
municipal, state and federal government agencies; professional organizations; community
organizations and other partners in the last three years. This includes service projects funded
through grants and contracts as well as voluntary and paid service. A list of funded services
activities appears in Appendix 3.2.a. In the last three years, SPH faculty received 14 awards
from 12 federal, state, municipal and other sources in the amount of $2.4 million to advance
public health service and practice in the community. Appendix 3.2.b. provides a list of
additional faculty service activities along with a description of the organization and project or
activity.
Some of the key organizations with which students and faculty are engaged in service are:
SPH faculty and students have long-standing ties with a number of city, state and federal
government agencies that include the NYCDOMH, Environmental Protection, Aging and
Corrections; the New York City Council and Mayor’s Office; the New York State
Departments of Health, Labor and Environmental Conservation; the U.S. Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration, the
US Environmental Protection Agency, NIH and National Science Foundation. Individual
SPH faculty are called upon by these and other agencies to provide consultation and
ongoing technical assistance in designing, monitoring and evaluating public healthrelated services and policies.
SPH faculty and students are affiliated with professional organizations such as the New
York Academy of Medicine; the American Public Health Association and its local
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
167
affiliate, the Public Health Association of New York City, ADA; the American Industrial
Hygiene Association; American Council of Governmental Industrial Hygienists; and the
American Psychological Association.
SPH faculty and students provide service to a number of non profit and local, regional
and national nonprofit and community organizations, including the Brooklyn AIDS
Project, Federation of Jewish Philanthropies, Bronx Health Literacy Collaborative,
Campaign for Bronx Health and labor organizations (such as the Transport Workers
Union, New York State United Teachers and the New York Committee for Occupational
Safety and Health).
3.2.c. Identification of the measures by which the program may evaluate the success of
its service efforts, along with data regarding the program’s performance against those
measures for each of the last three years.
The SPH evaluates the success of its service activities by a variety of measures. These are
summarized in Table 3.2.c. During the past three AYs (2007-2009) and fall 2010, the SPH
experienced a growth in service activities, as evidenced by multiple indicators: an increase in
the number of core and affiliated faculty reporting service, an overall increase in the number
service activities, an increase in the number of community-based service activities and an
increase in the number of student service activities.
Another measure is the extent to which important programmatic, funding and policy changes
have occurred as a result of SPH faculty and students. For example:
Under the leadership of DPH Executive Officer and Distinguished Professor Nicholas
Freudenberg, SPH faculty and students worked with the Food and Fitness Partnership1 to
help the group turn its two-year planning grant into a five-year demonstration program.
The CCAD has helped CUNY campuses rethink their food policies.
Acting Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Susan Klitzman is one of 11 mayorally
appointed members of the New York City Board of Health, which has enacted several
ground breaking public health policies, including calorie-menu labeling and the banning
of transfat.
1
This service/planning grant includes a research component and was allocated to the budget as research.
Accordingly, it appears in Appendix 3.1.c.2.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
168
Table 3.2.c. Outcome Measures by Which the SPH Evaluates the Success of Its Service
Programs, AY 2007-AY2009
Outcome Measures
Target
AY 2007
AY 2008 AY 2009 Fall 2010
# of SPH core & affiliated
faculty engaged in service
% of SPH core & affiliated
faculty engaged in service
external to CUNY
# of service activities in total
# of community-based service
activities
# of SPH projects in which
students are engaged
Maintain or increase
the # of faculty
engaged in service
Maintain or increase
the % of faculty
reporting service
Maintain or increase
the total # of service
activities
Maintain or increase
the # of communitybased activities
Increase the number
of projects in which
students are engaged
16
22
27
29
34%
42%
44%
43%
49
82
98
113
13
13
12
13
22
26
42
16
3.2.d. A description of student involvement in service.
Examples of student volunteer service projects are listed in Appendix 3.2.d. Students are
encouraged to participate in school-wide, community and professional service activities. For
example, bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral students are represented on SPH governing
bodies and committees (See: Criterion 1.5). Students are encouraged to join and be active in
professional organizations, such as the American Public Health Association (APHA) and its
local affiliate PHANYC, which has an active student chapter that has been chaired and wellrepresented by SPH students. Additionally, MPH students are asked to provide evidence of
community and professional service in the portfolio, which is part of the culminating
experience (described in Criterion 2.5). Students are asked to summarize the service
experiences they have had; absent any service, they are to reflect on what they can do to
provide service in the future.
Students sometimes are able to participate with faculty in their service activities. For
example, as shown in Appendix 3.2.d., since 2008, six EOHS-MPH and EOHS-MS students
assisted Professor Jack Caravanos in assessing and monitoring hazardous wastes in Ghana,
Senegal, Panama and the Dominican Republic. Many student organizations and clubs
emphasize service. NFS-BS and NUTR-MPH students who belong to the Nutrition Club and
Kappa Omicron Nu (KON), the nutrition honor society, have a long history of providing
service. In 2010, the Nutrition Club met with college administrators in order to spearhead
the development of a roof garden at Hunter, while KON sponsors annual food drives for City
Harvest. Every NFS major who plans to apply for a dietetic internship is advised that service
activities will strengthen the application, which may explain why service in food and
nutrition appears so frequently in Appendix 3.2.d.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
169
3.2.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
Growing numbers of SPH faculty and students are engaged in professional and
community-service activities.
SPH faculty and students participate in professional and community service with a wide
range of organizations at local, state and national levels.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
170
3.3
Workforce Development. The school shall engage in activities that support
the professional development of the public health workforce.
3.3.a. A description of the school’s continuing education program, including policies,
needs assessment, procedures, practices, and evaluation that support continuing
education and workforce development strategies.
The SPH is committed to contributing to the professional development of the public health
workforce, with a specific focus on the public health workforce for the New York metropolitan
region. As noted previously, the SPH’s workforce development activities are shaped by its
institutional home within CUNY and geographic location in three of the five boroughs of New
York City. First, through its extensive continuing-education programs, CUNY brings hundreds
of thousands of New Yorkers into higher education. In spring 2010, CUNY enrolled more than
240,000 adult learners in its continuing-education programs. Many courses and certificates
address health, including programs for health care translators, electronic health record
specialists, and community health workers. (A full listing can be found at
http://www.cuny.edu/academics/conted/aceprograms.html?category=hlc&college=allcunycolleges). Through these continuing-education
and certificate programs, CUNY contributes to the expansion and development of the health
workforce and puts people on the first step of a career ladder that can lead to public health
degree programs.
In 2009, Dean Olden formed a Workforce Development/Continuing Education Committee
(WFD) to assess the SPH’s activities in this area and identify new opportunities and unmet
needs of the New York City public health workforce. Members include faculty from each of
the four Consortial Campuses.
On Dec. 11, 2009, the SPH WFD committee convened a focus group with representatives of
key employment sectors and organizations in the New York City metropolitan region,
including: NYU Medical Center, the NYCDOHMH, the HHC and the Brooklyn Perinatal
Network. Participants identified some of the skills that graduates of public health academic
programs and public health workers need to develop more fully, such as expository and grant
writing, use of GIS, SPSS, SAS and other software, public health advocacy, strategic and
critical thinking, data collection and evaluation and infection control. Cultural competence was
another area identified by the participants in the employer’s discussion group. In response,
faculty in the SPH, led by Associate Professor Diana Romero, are examining the framework
within which cultural competence can be integrated into the public health curriculum and
cultural competence training can be developed and made available for preceptors of fieldwork
students. In May 2010, Professor Romero conducted focus groups with 60 stakeholders to
determine their wants and needs vis-à-vis cultural competence.The results of her inquiry, which
will be made available in the coming months, will help the SPH determine how to address
cultural competence in future workforce development activities.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
171
The committee recommended that administrative support for the SPH’s WFD programs be
incorporated into similar functions performed by institutes and centers, such as BCHAL. With
its long history of providing WFD programs, Brookdale is equipped to do needs assessment,
publicity, customer service, logistics/implementation and evaluation. Additionally,
Brookdale’s move to the new SPH campus at East 119th Street will facilitate the relationship
between the center and the SPH.
Beyond the SPH but within CUNY, there are at least three other entities involved with WFD:
the CUNY Institute for WFD, the Graduate Center for Worker Education and the extensive
WFD taking place at Kingsborough Community College (KCC) under Chef Jonathan Deutsch,
PhD, who teaches in the SPH DPH program. Professor Deutsch directs the KCC Certificate in
Culinary Arts and Food Management (a one-year certificate designed for students who have a
college degree in another field) and is incorporating principles of public health and nutrition
into the curriculum. Also external to the SPH and still in the planning stages is a Food Policy
Institute. On June 22, 2010 Professors Nicholas Freudenberg and John McDonough convened
a Dialogue on Food Policy for NYC at the Roosevelt House to review New York City’s food
policy achievements in the past decade and discuss the emergence of the food movement in
New York City and determine how institutions such as Hunter and CUNY can help in
advancing its goals and objectives.
The CUNY Office of Academic Affairs supports the CUNY Workforce Development Initiative
(WDI), which allocates WDI funds to campuses, if appropriated by the state to CUNY. Funds
support a variety of initiatives that address workforce development, such as: development of
new or modified courses or certificates (credit or non-credit), undergraduate or post-bachelor
degrees to meet the education and needs of the city's workforce, strengthening the relationship
between the university and employers through industry-sponsored programs and internships,
innovation, expansion or improvement of curriculum, instruction, facilities or equipment to
increase the college's ability to meet employers' needs and economic or labor market research
projects that support the design or redesign of curricula that meet the needs of the New York
City workforce.
3.3.b. Description of certificate programs or other non-degree offerings of the school,
including enrollment data for each of the last three years.
In addition to the previously mentioned certificates in health-related programs offered by the
CUNY Adult and Continuing Education program, the SPH and its affiliate centers offer an
array of certificate programs that are summarized in Table 3.3.b. Many of the programs
presented by BCHAL are funded by training grants awarded to the center or by contracts
between the center and the outside organization requesting the program. The dietetic
internship is supported, in part, by regular graduate tuition. The HAZWOPER courses were
funded by a Hazmat Disaster Preparedness Training grant.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
172
3.3.c. A list of the continuing education programs offered by the school, including
number of students served, for each of the last three years. Those that are offered in a
distance learning format should be identified.
The SPH offers many types of continuing-education programs, such as refresher courses for
environmental specialists, lectures and workshops for dietitians and nutritionists and programs
for the general public health workforce. See Appendix 3.3.c. for a table outlining the 24
continuing-education opportunities offered by the SPH during the past three years.
3.3.d. A list of other educational institutions or public health practice organizations, if
any, with which the school collaborates to offer continuing education.
The SPH faculty is continually seeking to engage in activities that will support the
development of the public health workforce. As indicated below, the school’s continuing
education efforts involve collaborating with a range of educational institutions and public
health practice organizations. SPH faculty are engaged in a variety of activities and
partnerships ranging from grass-roots community groups to professional associations.
Professional Development
SPH faculty participate in a variety of professional activities and conferences that are geared
toward the public health and academic communities.
Certification
SPH faculty members have partnered with PHANYC and various accrediting bodies such as
the National Board of Public Health Examiners, American Industrial Hygiene Association to
hold forums for students, alumni and public health professionals on certification options. They
include CPH, CHES and CIH. At these sessions, faculty and public health professionals
discussed how the certification processes professionalize the field of public health and its
related disciplines; how to prepare for certification exams; fees; and the benefits of
certification. Ten to 25 students and alumni attended each session. Attendees indicated the
sessions were useful in helping them decide whether to pursue certification. The SPH also has
sponsored review sessions for CPH, CIH and CHES exams. The SPH intends to continue close
collaboration with PHANYC and other organizations in developing additional curriculum and
events that can better develop the public health workforce of New York City
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
173
Certificate
Program
Sponsor
Certificate in Aging
BCHAL
Certificate in Aging
& Mental Health
BCHAL
Certificate in
Geriatric Care
Management
BCHAL
Homeless Shelter
Administration
BCHAL
Local District
Services Training
Table 3.3.b. Certificate Programs and Other Non-Degree Offerings
in the SPH, 2008-2010
Audience
Enrollment
Program
Health practitioners and clinicians
holding at least a bachelor’s degree who
are interested in or working in the field
of aging
Human service professionals/clinicians
with a bachelor’s or master’s degree
2008-2010:
30 enrolled
To provide a 90-hour certificate program to
practitioners and clinicians who are interested in or
working in the field of aging
2008-2010:
25 enrolled
Professionals with a bachelor’s degree +
4 years of paid experience in human
services or a master’s degree + 2 years
of paid experience in human services
NYS public service employees who
work in homeless shelters
2008-2010:
15 enrolled
To provide a 90-hour certificate program to mental
health practitioners and clinicians for specialized
practice with older clients and their families
To provide a 138-hour certificate program that prepares
practitioners to become geriatric care managers
(professionals trained to assess, plan, coordinate and
monitor services for older adults)
1-7 day programs that address psychology, social work
and nonprofit business management for workers in
homeless shelters
BCHAL
NYS public service employees
2009: 2,181
participants trained
in 107 sessions over
139 days
Protective Services
for Adults (PSA)
BCHAL
PSA staff
Management
Development
Institute (MDI)
BCHAL
Non-supervisory OCFS and OTDA staff
Dietetic internship
certificate of
completion
Advanced
Nutrition
program
Nutritionists who have completed the
DPD
Brooklyn
Individuals holding at least a bachelor’s
2009: 1,155
participants trained
in 26 sessions over
51 days
2009: 484
participants trained
in 35 sessions over
51 days
2008-2010: 44
interns (19 were not
degree students)
2009: 14 enrolled
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
2009: participants
trained in 51
sessions over 56
days
174
Human services trainings on supervision and WFD
skill topics, selected by staff development coordinators,
Office of Temporary Disability Assistance (OCFS) and
Office of Temporary Disability Assistance (OTDA) via
needs assessments
Case management WFD development for PSA staff
throughout NYS
Skill development to prepare non-supervisory staff to
assume supervisory positions
1,200 hours of didactic and experiential training
required to sit for the RD exam
Six 3-credit courses for practitioners to meet
Table 3.3.b. Certificate Programs and Other Non-Degree Offerings
in the SPH, 2008-2010
Audience
Enrollment
Program
Certificate
Program
Sponsor
Certificate Program
in Grief Counseling
College MA
in
Community
Health
COEH
degree who are working or interested in
working with the dying and the
bereaved; or individuals with a master’s
degree who are seeking further training
NYC Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC) employees
COEH
College and university laboratory health
& safety officers
Hazardous
Materials &
Emergency
Response Training
Hazardous
Materials &
Emergency
Response Training
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
2009: 550 trainees
2009: 40 trainees
175
professional continuing-education requirements to
maintain licenses or certifications. The program meets
Association for Death Education & Counseling
(ADEC) certification requirements
eight-hour Hazardous Waste Operations and
Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) Refresher
Training Course, presented at various locations across
NYS
eight-Hour Hazardous Waste Operations and
Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) Refresher
Training Course, presented at the Hunter College
Brookdale Center
Continuing Education in Community-Based Organizations
SPH faculty members have participated in continuing-education lectures and events designed
to disseminate cutting-edge research, provide skill-building and other relevant information
that is integral for community and health service providers. Examples of such lectures
include:
10/18/2007: ―Shattered Dreams: the South African AIDS Epidemic‖ by Gerald
Oppenheimer (Brooklyn College & GC) and Ronald Bayer (Mailman School of Public
Health)
11/12/2007: ―Are We Ready? Public Health since 9/11‖ by Gerald Markowitz (John Jay
College & CUNY Graduate Center) and David Rosner (Mailman School of Public Health)
3/3/2008: ―Our Bodies Our Selves‖ book release party, with Judy Norsigian discussing
birth today
3/17/2008: ―National Health Insurance for the United States: Has its Time Come?‖ by
Oliver Fein, MD (Weill Cornell Medical College)
5/12/2008: ―9/11 Aftermath: WTC Responders Pay a Heavy Mental Health Toll‖ by
Jeanne Stellman (SUNY Downstate Medical Center)
The SPH also has co-sponsored a large, annual conference at KCC by providing speakers,
discussants and workshop leaders for ―Implementing the Leadership Imperative: Annual
AHA! Conferences for Aspiring, New, and Rising Community & Public Health Leaders‖ in
2008, 2009 and 2010. SPH faculty were featured speakers at these events.
In addition to the workforce development program and activities discussed over the past
three years, SPH faculty received $7.4 million in training and workforce development grants
from federal, state and municipal sources. A list and totals of these funded service activities
appear in Appendix 3.3.d.
3.3.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
Programs in the SPH have a long and rich history of offering WFD programs in the areas of
environmental health, nutrition and aging as well as to selected members of the public health
workforce who want to become credentialed (CHES, CPH and RD). Not before 2009,
however, did the various programs that make up the SPH have the incentive to develop a
policy regarding WFD. The committee established by Dean Olden in 2009 is the first major
step taken to focus efforts on a targeted audience, define priorities and marshal considerable
resources WFD. This is a solid plan to establish a strong WFD program in the SPH.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
176
CRITERION 4.0 FACULTY, STAFF AND STUDENTS
4.1
Faculty Qualifications. The school shall have a clearly defined faculty
which, by virtue of its distribution, multidisciplinary nature, educational
preparation, research and teaching competence, and practice experience, is able to
fully support the school’s mission, goals and objectives.
4.1.a. A table showing primary faculty who support the degree programs offered by the
school.
Table 4.1.a. presents faculty with primary appointments in the programs that comprise the
SPH. There are 53 full-time SPH core faculty members. Slightly more than one-half (n=29)
are tenured. The highly diverse faculty includes renowned researchers, educators and
practitioners who are recognized within CUNY and locally, as well as nationally and
internationally. Many have training in more than one discipline, strengthening the
interdisciplinary focus of the programs. Faculty received advanced degrees in over 40
disciplines and earned nine types of doctoral degrees: PhD, DrPH/DPH, ScD, EdD, MD, JD,
DSW, DDS and DMH.
4.1.b. If the school uses other faculty in its teaching programs (adjunct, part-time,
secondary appointments, etc), summary data on their qualifications should be provided
in table format, organized by department, specialty area or other organizational unit as
appropriate to the school and must include at least: a) name, b) title/academic rank, c)
title and current employment, d) FTE or % time allocated to teaching program, e)
gender, f) race, g) graduate degrees earned, h) discipline in which degrees were earned,
and i) contributions to the teaching program. See CEPH Data Template G.
At the beginning of the fall 2010 semester, 51 ―other‖ faculty members taught in the SPH
degree programs. This category includes adjunct faculty; affiliated full-time CUNY faculty
whose primary appointments are in departments or schools outside of the SPH; and visiting
professors. (See: Table 4.1.b.). About three-fifths (59%, n=30) of the other faculty were
female and about two-thirds (65%, n=33) held doctoral degrees. Other faculty are largely
public health practitioners representing agencies in governmental, nonprofit, consulting and
community-based organizations.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
177
Table 4.1.a. Primary (Core) SPH Faculty1 – Fall 2010
Knowledge Area
Name (campus)
Title/
Academic Rank
Biostatistics
1. Jennifer Dowd
(Hunter)
Environmental
& Occupational
Health
Tenure
Status or
Classification
FTE
or %
Time
Gender
Race or
Ethnicity
Graduate
Degrees
Earned
Institution
Discipline
Teaching Area
Research Interests
Assistant
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
F
Caucasian
M
Asian
Princeton U
Princeton U
U of Michigan
Keio U
Johns Hopkins
Public Affairs
Demography/Public
Affairs
Sociology
Sociology
Biostatistics
Epidemiology
Demography
Biostatistics
Demography
SES, stress, immune
function and health
100%
MA
PhD
Post-Doc
MA
PhD
2. Shiro Horiuchi
(Hunter)
Professor
Tenure-track
3. Mary Huynh
(Lehman)
Assistant
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
F
Asian
PhD
U of Pittsburgh
Epidemiology
Biostatistics, social
determinants of health
Assistant
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
F
Caucasian
Tenured
100%
M
Caucasian
Tulane U
Columbia U
Columbia U
Columbia U
Yale U
Latin Amer. Studies
Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Statistics
Mathematics &
Statistics
Statistics
Environmental
Science
Biostatistics
Epidemiology
Associate
Professor
MA
MPH
MPhil
PhD
MA
MS
PhD
Social determinants of
maternal child health,
environmental health
Reproductive health
practices and services
related to HIV
4. Elizabeth Kelvin
(Hunter)
5. Makram Talih
(Hunter)
1. Jack Caravanos
(Hunter)
Associate
Professor
Tenured
100%
M
Caucasian
MS
DrPH
2. Mark Goldberg
(Hunter)
Associate
Professor
Tenured
100%
M
Caucasian
MS
PhD
McGill U
Yale U
Polytechnic U
Columbia U
Hunter College
New York U
3. Jean Grassman
(Brooklyn)
Associate
Professor
Tenured
100%
F
Caucasian
MS, PhD
UC Berkeley
4. Thomas Matte
(Hunter)
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
M
Caucasian
MD
5. Andrew Maroko
(Lehman)
Assistant
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
M
Caucasian
PhD
Albany Medical
College
Harvard School of
Public Health
CUNY
6. Frank Mirer
(Hunter)
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
M
Caucasian
MA
PhD
Post Doc
Harvard U
Harvard U
Harvard U
MPH
1
Core faculty have primary appointments in the SPH and are at one of the Consortial Campuses.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
178
Env & Occ Health
Sciences
Germanic Languages
and Literature
Environmental Health
Science
Data Analysis
Linear Models
Probability Theory
Env health & safety
Env chemistry
GIS
Occupational health
Industrial hygiene
Ventilation
Environmental health
and safety
Environmental
Epidemiology
Environmental health
Earth &
Environmental
Science
Organic Chemistry
Organic Chemistry
Toxicology
Environmental health
Occupational health
toxicology
env. chemistry
physical hazards
Major PH
Leadership
and Practice
Positions
Mortality patterns
aging, Longevity
Applications to health,
natural and social sci
Graphical and dynamic
models, large datasets
Urban environmental
exposures
Construction and
immigrant health and
safety, industrial
hygiene
Environmental and
occup. health, industrial
hygiene
Air pollution,
environmental
monitoring, lead
poisoning, asthma
Environmental health,
environmental justice,
GIS
Occ. health policy,
industrial hygiene
Former Medical
Epidemiologist CDC and
NYCDOHMH
Former Director
Occupational
Health and
Safety, UAW.
Table 4.1.a. Primary (Core) SPH Faculty1 – Fall 2010
Knowledge Area
Epidemiology
Name (campus)
Title/
Academic Rank
Tenure
Status or
Classification
FTE
or %
Time
Gender
7. Kenneth Shaw
(Hunter)
Race or
Ethnicity
Graduate
Degrees
Earned
Institution
Discipline
Teaching Area
Research Interests
Substitute
Instructor
Substitute
100%
M
Caucasian
MS
Hunter College
Industrial Hygiene
and Occupational
Health
M
Caucasian
100%
F
Hispanic
UC Berkeley
Columbia U
Johns Hopkins
Columbia U
U of Michigan
Biochemistry
Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Dentistry
Epidemiology
Constructionoccupational health
issues and disparities,
radio frequency
exposure risks.
occupational health
program management
PH ethics
ID epidemiology &
policy
Social determinants of
health
100%
F
Caucasian
MA
MPH
PhD
DDS
MPH
PhD
PhD
Physical Hazards in the
workplace, industrial
hygiene, industrial
ventilation,
environmental and IH
lab, Intro to occ. safety
and health
Epidemiology
Social aspects-disease
PH Ethics
Methods
1. Philip Alcabes
(Hunter)
Professor
Tenured
100%
2. Luisa Borrell
(Lehman)
Associate
Professor
Tenured
3. Heidi Jones
(Hunter)
Assistant
Professor
Tenure-track
Columbia U
MPH
Hunter College
Community Health
Education
Epidemiology
Epidemiologic methods
Infectious Disease
modeling, reproductive
health
Epidemiology
Improving reproductive
health in resource-poor
settings
Epidemiology, Public
Health Surveillance,
Infectious Disease
Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Biostatistics
HIV/AIDS, health
disparities
Epidemiology, Public
health surveillance,
health disparities
Diabetes,
cardiovascular disease,
infectious disease
epidemiology
Built env. & health
Hospital workers health
& safety
4. Ruth McChesney
(Brooklyn)
Associate
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
F
Caucasian
PhD
Mount Sinai /CUNY
5. Denis Nash
(Hunter)
Associate
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
M
Caucasian
MPH
PhD
MPH
Columbia
Johns Hopkins SPH
University of
Maryland
6. Mary Schooling
(Hunter)
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
F
Caucasian
7. Lorna Thorpe
(Hunter)
Associate
Professor
Tenured
100%
F
Caucasian
MA
MSc
MSc
PhD
PhD
St Andrew’s U
Strathclyde U
Birkbeck College
UC London
U of Illinois,
Chicago
U of Michigan
MPH
Health Policy &
Mgmt
Biomedical Sciences
General Public
Health
Epidemiology
Mathematics/ History
Operational Research
Statistics
Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Population Planning
& International
Health
Health
Administration
Environmental
Management
Health Policy
Sociology, public
health
1. Barbara Berney
(Hunter)*
Associate
Professor
Tenured
100%
F
Caucasian
MPH
PhD
UCLA
U of Southern
California
Boston U
2. Tracy Chu
(Brooklyn)
Assistant
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
F
Asian
PhD
MPH
CUNY GC
Hunter College
3. Elizabeth Eastwood
(Brooklyn)
Campus Director
Associate
Professor
Professor
Tenured
100%
F
Caucasian
PhD
Brandeis U
Social Policy &
Management
Biostatistics, health
policy and management
Tenured
100%
F
Caucasian
MPH
PhD
U of Michigan
U of Michigan
Community Health
Services
Health Management
& Policy
(Economics)
Health economics
4. Marianne Fahs
(Hunter)
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
179
Health policy and
administration
Health policy
Major PH
Leadership
and Practice
Positions
Reproductive health
and epidemiology
Socioeconomic
development & health
disparities
Infant mortality,
international public
health
HIV/AIDS, youth,
women of color,
retention in care
Healthy Urban Aging
Cancer Control racial/
ethnic minorities
Cost/effectiveness
Former deputy
commissioner for
epidemiology,
NYCDOHMH
Co-director,
Brookdale Ctr.
Healthy Aging &
Longevity
Table 4.1.a. Primary (Core) SPH Faculty1 – Fall 2010
Knowledge Area
Name (campus)
Title/
Academic Rank
Tenure
Status or
Classification
FTE
or %
Time
Gender
Race or
Ethnicity
Graduate
Degrees
Earned
Institution
Discipline
Teaching Area
Research Interests
5. William Gallo
(Hunter)
Associate
Professor
Tenured
100%
M
Caucasian
Yale U
U of Connecticut
U of Connecticut
M
Caucasian
Epidemiology
Economics
Intl Mgmt
Bus Mgmt
Environmental
Science
Health Economist
Gerontologist
50%
Post Doc
PhD
MA
MBA
PhD
TenureTrack`
100%
M
Caucasian
MPH
PhD
U Michigan
Brandeis U
Health Policy
Health policy and
management
Professor
Tenured
100%
M
Caucasian
MD
Columbia U,
Physicians &
Surgeons
Internal Medicine
Health Policy & Mgmt
Health/behavioral
effects of involuntary
job loss in workers
nearing retirement
Nutritional
Epidemiology
Obesity Research
Substance Abuse
Policy, Performancebased payment policies
Health Care Reform,
Medical bankruptcy,
hospital financing
6. James Greenberg
(Brooklyn)
Associate
Professor
Tenured
7. Sean Haley
(Brooklyn)
Assistant
Professor
8. David Himmelstein
(Hunter)
9. Jane Levitt
(Lehman)
Campus Director
Associate
Professor
Professor
Tenured
100%
F
Caucasian
PhD
MPA
NYU
Health Politics
Health administration
History/Philosophy of
PH, Policy & Mgmt
Health literacy
CBPH
Tenured
100%
M
Caucasian
PhD,
MPH
U Chicago,
Columbia
History,
epidemiology
Epidemiology;
fieldwork/capstone
Associate
Professor
Program
Director
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
M
Caucasian
PhD
Harvard
History
Tenured
100%
F
Caucasian
Sc D
Post Doc
Fellow
Johns Hopkins U
Yale U
13. Stephanie
Woolhandler
(Hunter)
Professor
Tenured
100%
F
Caucasian
MD
MPH
Louisiana State
University
U of California,
Berkeley
Health Serv.
Research
Inst. Social & Policy
Studies
Internal Medicine
Fieldwork/Capstone,
health policy
Health policy and
administration
History of
Epidemiology,
HIV/AIDS
Financing health care,
health reform
Domestic violence –
health care and policy
1. Ann Gaba
(Hunter)
Assistant
Professor (DI
Director)
Tenure-track
100%
F
Caucasian
MS
Ed D
Russell Sage
College
Columbia U
2. May May Leung
(Hunter)
Assistant
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
F
Asian
PhD
10. Gerald
Oppenheimer
(Brooklyn)
11. Robert Padgug
(Brooklyn)
12. Stacey Plichta
(Hunter)
Nutrition
MS
3. Khursheed Navder
(Hunter)
Associate
Professor
Tenured
100%
F
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
Asian
Post Grad
MS
PhD
UC Berkeley
Health policy and
management
Health policy, medical
bankruptcy
Access to care, health
care finances and
reform
Health Education
Nutrition Education
Dietetic Internship
University of North
Carolina
University of
Massachusetts @
Amherst
Community/ Public
Health Nutrition
Community Nutrition
Education; Principles of
Public Health Nutrition;
Foodservice Systems
U of Bombay,
Kansas State U
Dip. Dietetics
Foods & Nutrition
Nutrition and food
science
Nutrition & energy
intake – Huntington’s
disease, Nutritional
care – cancer patients
Development of
childhood obesity
interventions;
Translational research;
Health
Communications
Obesity & metabolism
Impact of fat
replacement in food
180
Major PH
Leadership
and Practice
Positions
Chief, Division
of Social and
Community
MedicineCambridge
Hospital
Honorary Fellow,
School of Health
and Social
Science,
University of
Edinburgh,
Scotland
Table 4.1.a. Primary (Core) SPH Faculty1 – Fall 2010
Knowledge Area
Social &
Behavioral
Sciences
Name (campus)
Title/
Academic Rank
Tenure
Status or
Classification
FTE
or %
Time
Gender
4. Arlene Spark
(Hunter)
Program
Director
Professor
Tenured
100%
5 Ming-Chin Yeh
(Hunter)**
Associate
Professor
Tenured
1. Patricia Antoniello
(Brooklyn)**
Associate
Professor
2. Jessie Daniels
(Hunter)
Associate
Professor
3. Nicholas
Freudenberg
(Hunter)
Executive
Officer of DPH
Distinguished
Professor
4. Paula Gardner
(Hunter)
Race or
Ethnicity
Graduate
Degrees
Earned
Institution
Discipline
Teaching Area
Research Interests
F
Caucasian
MS
Med
Ed D
Columbia U
Columbia U
Columbia U
Nutrition policy, public
health and community
nutrition and education
Childhood nutrition
size acceptance
100%
M
Asian
MS
M Ed
PhD
Post Doc
Nutrition, epidemiology
Fruit and vegetable
consumption and
obesity
Tenured
25%
F
Caucasian
PhD
New York U
Columbia U
UNC Chapel Hill
Yale Prev. Research
Center
Columbia U
Public Health
Nutrition
Community Nutrition
Nutrition Education
Nutrition
Nutrition Education
PH Nutrition
Obesity / Wt. Control
Anthropology
Public health; social
aspects of health
Tenure-track
100%
F
Caucasian
MA
Sociology
PhD
U of Texas at
Austin
U of Texas at Austin
Social inequality,
community health
education, visual media
& technology for health
Urban and community
health, public health
policy
HIV/AIDS, women’s
health, workplace
health promotion
How new media and
visual technologies
affect social
inequalities in health
Corporations and
health, jails and public
health, urban health
Sociology
Tenured
100%
M
Caucasian
MPH
DrPH
Columbia U
Columbia U
Public Health
Health Education
Associate
Professor
Substitute
100%
F
Caucasian
PhD
University of
Toronto
Community Health
Education
5. Michele Greene
(Brooklyn)*
Professor
Tenured
100%
F
Caucasian
DrPH
Columbia U
Public Health
Health
Communications
6. Christian Grov
(Brooklyn)
Assistant
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
M
Caucasian
PhD
MPH
CUNY GC
Hunter college
Sociology, Public
Health
7. Lydia Isaac
(Hunter)
Assistant
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
F
AfricanAmerican
MS
PhD
Harvard SPH
Johns Hopkins
Bloomberg SPH
Health & Social
Behavior
8. Beatrice Krauss
(Hunter)*
Professor
Tenured
75%
F
Caucasian
MA
PhD
U of Kansas
CUNY GC
Clinical Psychology
Social Personality
Psychology
9. Kiyoka Koizumi
(Brooklyn)
Assistant
Professor
Tenured
50%
F
Asian
PhD
U Ill., ChampUrbana
10. Marilyn AguirreMolina
(Lehman)
11. Raymond Weston
(Brooklyn)
Professor
Tenured
100%
F
Hispanic
MS
EDD
Associate
Professor
Tenured
50%
AfricanAmerican
PhD
M
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
Addictions &
dependencies; healthy
aspects of aging
Undergraduate deputy
chair; health, women’s
health; communication,
social sciences & health
Undergraduate
biostatistics, graduate
research, human
sexuality
Social & economic
determinants of health
cultural competency
health disparities
Program planning,
funding and evaluation
Health education
Health Education
Health education
International health
Columbia U
Public Health Ed
Health equities
Social determinants of
health
Rutgers
Clinical Psychology
Undergraduate social
and behavioral sciences
Health disparities,
community evaluation
181
health communication;
geriatric and primary
care medicine; medical
education
Sexuality, drugs and
contextual risk
behavior, HIV, men
who have sex with men
Health and health
behavior
health care
health policy
Family and community
adjustment to
HIV/AIDs and other
conditions
Major PH
Leadership
and Practice
Positions
Past-president
PHANYC,
founder CCUH,
COEH, UHC,
CCAD
Exec. dir, Center
on Community &
Urban Health and
Office of Res. &
Grant Support
Director, CUNY
Institute for
Health Equity
Table 4.1.a. Primary (Core) SPH Faculty1 – Fall 2010
Knowledge Area
Name (campus)
Title/
Academic Rank
Tenure
Status or
Classification
FTE
or %
Time
Gender
Race or
Ethnicity
Graduate
Degrees
Earned
Institution
Discipline
Teaching Area
Research Interests
12.Betty Wolder
Levin (Brooklyn)
Professor
Tenured
100%
F
Caucasian
PhD
Columbia U
Socio-medical
Sciences
PH survey;
fieldwork/capstone
Assistant
Professor
Tenure-track
Substitute
100%
M
Caucasian
PHD
Public Health
Community Health
MPH
JD
Florida International
University
Fordham University
School of Law
Public health ethics,
socio-medical aspects
of health
Behavioral health,
community health
13. Charles Platkin
(Hunter)
MA
MA
MPhil
PhD
PhD
New York U
Columbia U
Columbia U
Columbia U
Cornell U
Sci. /Env Reporting
SMS
SMS
Community health,
research methods
Reproductive health
policy
PhD
Universita’ degli
Studi di Napoli
New York
University
Human Service
Studies
Biological Sciences
Journalism and Mass
Communications
Community health
Community organizing
Community health
Youth, gender, race and
sexuality
Strategic health
communication for
behavioral, social &
org. change, global
health
14.Diana Romero
(Hunter)
Associate
Professor
Tenure-track
100%
F
Hispanic
15.Lynn Roberts
(Hunter)**
16. Renata Schiavo
(Hunter)
Assistant
Professor
Associate
Professor
Tenured
100%
F
Tenure-track
100%
F
AfricanAmerican
Caucasian
MA
*On sabbatical for AY 2010; not included in faculty headcount calculations in Tables 1.6.d. and 1.6.e. for fall 2010 semester
**On sabbatical for AY 2009-2010; not included in faculty headcount calculations in Tables 1.6.d and 1.6.e. for the 2009-2010 AY
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
182
Major PH
Leadership
and Practice
Positions
TV Host and
health expert,
executive
producer,
WE Television,
―I Want to Save
Your Life‖ 2009
Founder and
principal,
Communication
Recourses (SCR)
Table 4.1.b. Other SPH Faculty1 – Fall 2010
Knowledge
Area
Name (campus)
Title/
Academic Rank
Title and Current Employment
Biostatistics
1. Jodi Casibianca
(Hunter)
2. Anthony DeVito
(Hunter)
3. Sal Leggio
(Hunter)
4. Catherine Richards
(Hunter)
Adjunct Lecturer
Distinguished Research Fellow –
Fordham University, NY
Vice President, Chemical Specifics
Inc., Maspeth, NY
Adjunct Lecturer
1. Juliana Maantay
(Lehman)
Associate Prof.
2. Benjamin Sallemi
(Hunter)
1. Rosann Costa
(Hunter)
Adjunct Lecturer
2.Barbara Menendez
(Lehman)
3. Alfredo Morabia
(GC)
4. Nancy Sohler
(GC)
1. Rose Gasner
(Hunter)
2. Marthe Gold
(GC)
3. George Schwartz
(Hunter)
4. Shoshana Sofaer
(GC)
5. Jessica Steier
(Hunter)
6. Emmanuel Thorne
(Brooklyn)
7. Lester Wright*
(Hunter)
Associate Prof.
Environmental
& Occupational
Health
Epidemiology
Health Policy &
Management
Adjunct Lecturer
Adjunct Lecturer
Adjunct Lecturer
Adjunct Lecturer
Professor
Tenured
Associate Professor
Tenured
Adjunct Assoc Prof.
Professor
(Tenured)
Adjunct Lecturer
Professor
Adjunct Lecturer
Associate Professor
Visiting Professor
FTE or
%
Time**
25%
Discipline
Teaching Area
Hispanic
Highest
Degree
Earned
MA
Psychometrics
EPI/BIOS
M
Caucasian
MS
BIOS
50%
M
Caucasian
MA
Environmental and
Occupational Health
Stat & Applied Math
12.5%
F
Caucasian
MPH
Epidemiology
EPI/BIOS
25%
F
Caucasian
PhD
Environmental
Geography
EOHS
Sr. Project Manager,
GZA Geoenvironmental, Inc. NYC
Research Associate Columbia
University College of Physicians &
Surgeons, NYC
Associate. Prof.
Lehman College, NY
Queens College, Center for Biology &
Natural Systems, NY
Sophie Davis School of Biomedicine,
Community Health, NY
Director, DOHMH, NYC
25%
M
Caucasian
BS
EOHS
50%
F
Hispanic
Environmental
Geology
Sociology
Research Associate,
Built Environment & Health Project,
Columbia University , NYC
Assoc. Prof.
Lehman College, NYC
Gender
Race or
Ethnicity
F
25%
EPI/BIOS/PH
PH
BS
25%
F
Hispanic
PhD
Epidemiology
EPI
10%
M
Caucasian
MD, PhD
EPI
20%
F
Caucasian
PhD
Medicine, Public
Health
Columbia University
25%
F
Caucasian
JD
Legal
HPM
Sophie Davis School of Biomedicine,
Community Health, NYC
Vice President, Gilbert, Doniger &
Co, Inc, NYC
Baruch College, NYC
10%
F
Caucasian
MD, MPH
HPM
25%
M
Caucasian
MBA
Medicine, Public
Health
Health Care Admin
20%
F
Caucasian
DrPH
HPM
CUNY SPH Doctoral Student
NYC
Brooklyn College, Economics, NY
25%
F
Caucasian
MPH
25%
M
Caucasian
PhD
Health Policy
and Management
Evaluative Sciences
Concentration
Economics
Deputy Commissioner, New York
Department of Correctional Services
25%
M
Caucasian
MD
Health
Administration
HPM
EPI
HPM
HPM
HCPA
1. ―Other‖ SPH Faculty include: 1) Affiliated Faculty: DPH faculty with full-time appointments in CUNY but not the SPH; 2) Adjunct faculty: instructors who
do not have an appointment at CUNY but teach a public health course in the SPH; and 3) Visiting faculty from outside CUNY.
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
183
Table 4.1.b. Other SPH Faculty1 – Fall 2010
Knowledge
Area
Nutrition
Social and
Behavioral
Science
Name (campus)
Title/
Academic Rank
Title and Current Employment
8. John McDonough*
(Hunter)
9. Neal Cohen*
(Hunter)
Visiting Scholar
Roosevelt House Scholar, Visiting,
NYC
School of Social Work, Hunter
College, NYC
Distinguished Lecturer
FTE or
%
Time**
See *
* Three visiting professors Team teaching a course – total 25%
1. Ucheoma Akobundu
Adjunct Assistant.
Adjunct Assistant Professor
(Hunter)
Professor.
Hunter College & Consultant,
University of Maryland
2. Regina Toomey-Bueno,
Adjunct Lecturer
NYU Langone Medical Center, Sr.
(Hunter)
Director, Food & Nutrition, NYC
3. Steven Clarke
Professor
HNSC (Nutrition)
(Brooklyn)
4. Jonathan Deutsch
Associate Professor
Kingsborough Community College,
(GC)
Tourism & Hospitality, NY
5. Ronita Ghatak
Adjunct Assistant
Scientific Writer, Mt. Sinai School of
(Hunter)
Professor.
Medicine, NYC
6. Janet Lupoli
Adjunct Assistant
Accountant: Duval & Stacherfeld,
(Hunter)
Professor.
LLP, NY
7. Allison Marshall
Adjunct Lecturer
Diabetes Education, White Plains
(Hunter)
Hospital
8. Marc A. Meyers
Adjunct Lecturer
President: Meyers Consulting, LLC .,
(Hunter)
Richboro, PA
9. Joseph Wilson
Adjunct Professor
Brooklyn College, Political Science
(Brooklyn)
1. David Balk
Professor
Professor, Brooklyn College
(Brooklyn)
Race or
Ethnicity
Discipline
Teaching Area
Caucasian
Highest
Degree
Earned
DPH
M
Public Health
HPM
See *
M
Caucasian
MD
Social Work
Community
Health
Education
50%
F
AfricanAmerican
PhD
Nutrition
NUTR
25%
F
Caucasian
MS
NFS
10%
M
Caucasian
PhD
Health Systems
Administration
Human Nutrition
25%
M
Caucasian
PhD
Food Studies
75%
F
Asian
PhD
25%
F
Caucasian
PhD
25%
F
Caucasian
MS
New York
University
Food Science &
Technology
Nutrition & Food
Science
Human Nutrition
25%
M
Not revealed
PhD
Food Science
NFS/NUTR
25%
M
PhD
Political Science
HCPA
25%
M
AfricanAmerican
Caucasian
PhD
Counseling
Psychology
PH/HCPA
12.5%
F
MD
Medicine
PH
25%
M
PhD
50%
F
African
American
AfricanAmerican
Caucasian
University of
Michigan
Personality and
Social Psychology
Race and
Sexuality
PH
25%
M
AfricanAmerican
Caucasian
PhD
Psychology
Public Health
MPH
Public Health
AfricanAmerican
Caucasian
MPH
Public Health
Community
Health
PH/HCPA
MS
Geographic
Information Systems
2. Mary Bassett
(Hunter/GC)
3. Juan Battle
(GC)
4. Dee Burton
(Hunter)
Adjunct Professor
5. John Cardwell
(Lehman)
6. Susan Cavanaugh
(Hunter)
7. Hayley Figueroa
(Brooklyn)
8. Christopher Goranson
(Hunter)
Adjunct Professor
Dir. of Human Rights, Public Policy
& Health, Hunter College Center for
Community & Urban Health
President, EVAXX Inc., NY
Adjunct Lecturer
Librarian, UMDNJ, NJ
25%
F
Adjunct Lecturer
Research Foundation, CUNY, NYC
50%
F
Adjunct Lecturer
Director, NYCDOHMH, Bureau of
Epidemiology Services, GIS Center of
Excellence, NYC
25%
M
Professor
Tenured
Adjunct Associate
Professor
Director, Doris Duke Charitable
Foundation, NYC
Sociology Department, GC
Gender
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
184
PhD
NUTR
NFS
NFS/NUTR
NFS/NUTR
PH
Table 4.1.b. Other SPH Faculty1 – Fall 2010
Knowledge
Area
Name (campus)
Title/
Academic Rank
Title and Current Employment
Social &
Behavioral
Science contd.,
9. Joyce Hall
(Hunter)
Adjunct Lecturer
Executive Director, Federation of
County Networks, Inc., NYC
10. Maya Korin
(Hunter)
Adjunct Assistant
Professor
11. Mary Clare Lennon
(GC)
Professor
(Tenured)
Adjunct Assistant Professor,
Department of Health Behavior,
Columbia University, NYC
GC, Sociology
12. James McCarthy
(GC)
13. Nancy McKenzie
(Hunter)
14. Jeffrey Parsons
(GC)
Professor
(Tenured)
Adjunct Professor
Highest
Degree
Earned
MPH
Discipline
Teaching Area
Public Health/
Community Health
COMHE
Caucasian
PhD
Sociomedical
Science
PH
F
Caucasian
PhD, MS
Sociology
10%
M
Caucasian
PhD
Adjunct Professor
Transtext, Brooklyn, NY
Chair, Psychology Dept. Hunter
College
50%
F
10%
M
Caucasian
MA
PhD
PhD
Population & Family
Health
Duquesne U
SUNY Stony Brook
Psychology
Deputy Executive Director,
Astrea Foundation for Justice, NYC
Baruch College, Sociology
25%
F
MPH
COMHE
10%
F
AfricanAmerican
Caucasian
PhD
Sociology
Associate Professor, Associate
Chairperson, St. Joseph’s College
NYC Dept. of Education
25%
M
Caucasian
DrPH
25%
F
Caucasian
Professor
(Tenured)
Adjunct Lecturer
Hunter College, Anthropology
20%
F
Caucasian
MA
MA
PhD
Health Care Policy
and Management
School Psychology
Sociology
Anthropology
Quantitative
methods, urban
health research
Community
Health
Philosophy
Philosophy
Quantitative
methods,
research design,
sexuality
Community
Health
Medical soc,
Bioethics
PH
15. Tata Rogers
(Hunter)
16. Barbara Katz Rothman
(GC)
17. John Sardelis
(Hunter)
18. Freda Steinberger
(Brooklyn)
19. Ida Susser
(GC)
20. Carrie Lee Teicher
(Hunter)
Adjunct Lecturer
Adjunct Lecturer, SPH
25%
F
Caucasian
MD
21. Darrell Wheeler
(GC)
22. Anahi Viladrich
(GC)
Associate Professor
(Tenured)
Associate Professor
(Tenured)
Hunter College, Sociology
20%
M
Queens College
25%
F
AfricanAmerican
Hispanic
PhD,
MPH
MA
MPhil
PhD
Tropical/Travel
Medicine, Infectious
Disease
Social Welfare,
Public Health
New School U
Columbia U
Columbia U
23. Janette Yung
(Hunter)
Adjunct Lecturer
Clinical Care Coordinator,
Charles B. Wang Community Health
Center, NYC
25%
F
Asian
MPH
Epidemiology
Professor (Tenured)
Professor
(Tenured)
Adjunct Associate
Professor
Adjunct Instructor
Gender
Race or
Ethnicity
F
AfricanAmerican
25%
F
33%
Provost, Baruch College, NYC
CUNY School of Public Health -- November 15, 2010
FTE or
%
Time**
25%
185
Caucasian
PH
Medical
Anthropology
Community
Health
Qualitative
Methods
Community,
global, urban &
immigrant
health
PH
4.1.c. Description of the manner in which the faculty complement integrates
perspectives from the field of practice, including information on appointment tracks for
practitioners, if used by the school.
SPH faculty have extensive experience in public health practice and are therefore well
qualified to integrate practice into classroom instruction, student practical experiences,
research and service. Among the 53 core SPH faculty in the fall 2010 semester, many have
held significant leadership and practice positions in government, nonprofit and private
organizations in each of the core areas of public health and in related fields. For instance, in
the EOHS program at Hunter College, Dr. Frank Mirer was formerly the director of health
and safety for the United Auto Workers Union, Dr. Thomas Matte held positions with CDC
and the NYCDOHMH, and Dr. Mark Goldberg held positions with federal OSHA and the
NYCDOHMH. Dr. Lorna Thorpe in the EPI/BIOS program at Hunter was a deputy
commissioner of epidemiology in the NYCDOHMH. In the Lehman College MPH program,
Dr. Mary Huynh worked as the field manager of the World Trade Center Health Registry,
NYCDOHMH, and Dr. Marilyn Aguirre-Molina held positions as the executive vice
president of the California Endowment and senior program office of The Robert Wood
Johnson Foundation. In the Brooklyn College MPH programs, Dr. Elizabeth Eastwood held
positions with the Westchester County Department of Health (director, research and
evaluation), and with the department of rehabilitation medicine, MSSM (manager, program
evaluation). Dr. Robert Padgug was the special assistant to the vice president, Empire Blue
Cross/Blue Shield.
As described in Criteria 3.1. and 3.2., 58% of Core and Affiliated Faculty were engaged in
community-based research and service.
4.1.d. Identification of outcome measures by which the school may judge the
qualifications of its faculty complement, along with data regarding the performance of
the school against those measures for each of the last three years.
The SPH employs multiple indicators to judge the qualifications of its faculty complement.
Several of these, along with performance data for each of the last three years are described in
Table 4.1.d. and elsewhere in this self-study and include research funding, service activity,
and peer-reviewed publications (See: Criteria 3.1. and 3.2.; Tables 3.1.d., 3.2.c. and
Appendices 3.2.a. and 4.1.d.). In addition, 100% of core SPH faculty and 100% of CUNY
full-time faculty who are affiliated with the SPH hold doctoral degrees (See: Tables 4.1.a.
and 4.1.b.)
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
186
Table 4.1.d. Outcome Measures by Which the SPH Judges the Qualifications of Its Faculty
Complement, AY 2007-AY 2009
Outcome Measures
Target
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
Number of peer- reviewed
publications by core &
affiliated faculty
Increase the number of
peer-reviewed
publications
% of core & affiliated faculty
Investigators on grants
Increase the % of fulltime SPH faculty
investigators
Increase the number of
faculty who serve as
advisers and provide
testimony in policymaking capacities
At least 90% will be rated
above average
# of core & affiliated faculty
who serve as advisors or
provide testimony in policymaking capacities
Courses taught at the SPH by
faculty will be rated above
average on student course
evaluations
33
65
101
56%
41%
42%
4
5
11
88%
94%
91%
4.1.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
SPH has 53 core faculty members who have received advanced degrees in more than 40
disciplines and have earned nine types of doctoral degrees: PhD, DrPH/DPH, ScD, EdD,
MD, JD, DSW, DDS and DMH.
Core and other faculty have broad experience in public health practice and integrate this
perspective into the curriculum. In addition to their advanced degrees, many adjunct
faculty are experienced public health practitioners whose familiarity with public health
organizations informs their teaching, supervision of student field placements and
advisement.
Faculty qualifications are judged on teaching, research, publications and service and
training. From spring 2009 through spring 2010, SPH full-time faculty published more
than 100 books and articles, many in prestigious journals.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
187
4.2. Faculty Policies and Procedures. The school shall have well-defined policies
and procedures to recruit, appoint and promote qualified faculty, to evaluate
competence and performance of faculty, and to support the professional
development and advancement of faculty.
4.2.a. A faculty handbook or other written document that outlines faculty rules and
regulations.
SPH faculty members are subject to numerous policies and procedures published by their
respective Consortial Campuses1,2,3,4 and by the university5. These policies and procedures
cover a range of issues, such as academic freedom, integrity and resources; ethics and legal
issues; intellectual property; nondiscrimination and personnel matters; time off; and
workload. The dean brings for deliberation and decision to the Council of Provosts those
cases where there might be a difference in the policy or procedure among the campuses.
4.2.b. Description of provisions for faculty development, including identification of
support for faculty categories other than regular full-time appointments.
Criterion 3.1.a. describes in detail a variety of mechanisms of research support for SPH
faculty, including administrative (Table 3.1.a.2.) and technical-assistance support (Table
3.1.a.3.) as well as CUNY-wide sources of support (Table 3.1.a.4). Other avenues for faculty
development include:
New full-time faculty attend orientation sessions that cover the general policies and
procedures governing teaching, promotion and tenure and faculty support services.
The provosts’ offices sponsor workshops on navigating the CUNY tenure process and
other academic matters.
Senior SPH faculty are expected to orient and mentor newly appointed colleagues and be
available to them for consultation and assistance on issues related to research, scholarship,
students and teaching.
The colleges and university sponsor ongoing workshops for full-time and part-time faculty
on a variety of technology-related topics, including: instructional, bibliographic and
citation software.
1
Brooklyn College Faculty Handbook, available at: http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/pubs/fhandbook/07.pdf.
Graduate School & University Center, Health Sciences Doctoral Programs Faculty Handbook, available at:
http://web.gc.cuny.edu/-ClinicalDoctoral/pdf/Faculty%20Handbook%202009%20Revised%208.26.09.pdf.
3
Hunter College Faculty Handbook, available at:
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/fda/repository/files/handbooks/Faculty%20Handbook%20-%202009.doc.
4
Lehman College Faculty Handbook, available at:
http://www.lehman.edu/provost/provostoffice/facultyhandbook/index.html
5
CUNY Faculty and Staff, Policies and Procedures, available at: http://www.cuny.edu/faculty-staff.html.
2
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
188
The Collective Bargaining Agreement between CUNY and the PSC/CUNY (henceforth,
the ―Agreement‖) 1, provides newly hired untenured faculty 24 credits of release time
from teaching, to be used within the first five years of employment, to allow for time for
research and scholarship. The faculty member and the program director determine the
specific semesters when and the quantity of released time to be taken in any given
semester, based on the faculty member’s needs and those of the program.
Junior, untenured faculty may apply for travel awards to help defray costs when traveling
to professional meetings to present their work. Depending on the campus, funds are
available from the dean of the respective campus department and, in the case of Hunter
College, from the president. These funds are awarded on an as-needed basis and are
preferentially given to non-tenured, junior faculty. The total amount available for such
rewards, as well as the amount awarded, varies from year to year. For instance, during the
2008 academic year, funds to attend conferences were granted to two untenured faculty
members, Drs. Diana Romero, of COMHE and Ann Gaba of the nutrition program at
Hunter. During the 2010 academic year, traveling grants were awarded to Drs. Romero,
Gaba and Jessie Daniels (COMHE) at Hunter, to Mary Huynh of Lehman College, and to
Christian Grove and Tracey Chu from Brooklyn College.
Over the past three years, new SPH faculty hires were provided with start-up funding that
was used at the discretion of the faculty member and has been used for travel to
conferences and hiring research assistants. The amount of the funding has varied.
Full-time tenured faculty may apply for sabbatical leave up to once every seven years for
research and scholarship. Faculty must submit a request for sabbatical leave, which must
be approved by the administration. Sabbaticals are available at 80% pay for nine months,
with a small number at 100% pay for one semester.
Career Enhancement Fellowships for Junior Faculty, funded by the Andrew W. Mellon
Foundation increase the presence of minority junior faculty and other junior faculty
committed to eradicating racial disparities by advancing these faculty members’ scholarly
research and intellectual growth. These fellowships provide a maximum $30,000 stipend,
a $1,500 stipend for research, travel or publication and participation in a fall retreat.
Adjunct faculty members who are teaching six or more classroom contact hours in a
semester may apply for a grant from the PSC/CUNY Adjunct Professional Development
Fund. Grants up to $3,000 per AY can be used toward research, courses, conferences,
field studies and other activities that will enhance professional development. Adjunct
faculty members who have taught for at least 10 semesters in the same college are eligible
for tuition waivers for courses offered throughout the university.
The university recently has begun a new faculty development program, ―Teaching
CUNY’s Undergraduates.‖ Proposals are invited from individuals or disciplinary/
interdisciplinary teams. Especially welcome are projects that explore the richness of
disciplinary knowledge as well as projects that integrate multiple disciplinary
perspectives, pedagogies and methodologies.
1
Agreement between The City University of New York and the Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, Nov. 1,
2002 – Sept. 19, 2007 available at: http://www.cuny.edu/about/administration/offices/lr/lr-contracts/20022007_PSC_CUNY_Contract.pdf and Memorandum of Agreement for a Successor Collective Bargaining
Agreement Between The City University of New York and the Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, available at:
http://psc-cuny.org/ContractJuly08/ContractMOA071708.pdf.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
189
4.2.c. Description of formal procedures for evaluating faculty competence and
performance.
Formal procedures for evaluating faculty competence and performance include an annual
evaluation of full-time faculty below the rank of tenured professor by the program director or
a member of the departmental personnel and budget committee (P&B) who is in the same
program as the faculty member; peer observations of teaching; and an annual review for
reappointment for the next academic year of non-tenured faculty. The peer observation and
annual evaluation processes are described in the Agreement.
Annual evaluation of full-time faculty
In accordance with Article 18.3 of the agreement, once a year each member of the teaching
faculty other than tenured full professors must have an evaluation conference with the
program director or a member of the departmental P&B committee. An employee's academic
performance and professional progress for that year are reviewed at the conference and
include such elements as:
Classroom instruction and related activities
Administrative assignments
Research
Scholarly writing
Departmental, college and university assignments
Student guidance
Course and curricula development
Creative works in the individual’s discipline
Public and professional activities in the field of specialization
Mentoring of junior faculty
The annual evaluation conference is one of the more important opportunities for a faculty
member to discuss frankly with the program director how he or she is progressing toward
tenure or promotion. Before a faculty member is granted tenure, the director is responsible
for providing the faculty member with an assessment of performance as well as specific
guidance on what steps can be taken to improve performance. Within 10 working days after
the annual evaluation, the faculty member is provided with a written record of the discussion,
and a copy is included in the faculty member’s personnel file.
Non-tenured faculty also are reviewed annually by the faculty members’ home campus P&B
for reappointment.
In addition to the annual evaluation, the SPH Faculty Appointments Committee reviews each
faculty member’s qualifications for initial appointment and faculty performance in
connection with reappointment and makes recommendations to the dean regarding
appointment and reappointment to the SPH.
Peer observation of teaching
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
190
In accordance with Article 18.2(b)1 of the agreement, at least once every semester each
member of the teaching staff (except tenured full professors) must be observed for a full
scheduled classroom period during the first 10 weeks of the semester, with at least 24 hours’
notice. The faculty being observed receives a copy of the completed evaluation form and has
the opportunity to discuss it with the observer and the program director. The report becomes
part of the faculty member’s personnel file and is one of the items discussed during the
annual evaluation meeting with the program director. The purpose of the teaching
observation is to facilitate teaching excellence and offer practical advice to achieve that.
Student evaluation of teaching and courses
Student evaluation is described in Criterion 4.2.d. below. All courses and faculty teaching
those courses are evaluated. This includes tenured full professors and part-time (adjunct)
faculty.
Evaluation of adjunct (part-time) faculty
Before an adjunct faculty is hired, he or she submits a CV and other required documents to
the faculty P&B committee, and the committee votes on whether to hire the adjunct. Adjunct
faculty are evaluated by the processes of peer observation and student evaluation described
above. The program director of the program in which the adjunct teaches reviews the results
of these evaluations, confers with the adjunct, and, if deemed necessary, discusses ways of
improving performance. Part-time faculty are appointed on a semester-by-semester basis.
The P&B committee reviews the adjunct’s performance and the program director’s
recommendation and votes on rehiring the adjunct in subsequent semesters.
4.2.d. Description of the processes used for student course evaluation and evaluation of
teaching effectiveness.
Student evaluations of faculty teaching occur every semester in every section of every course
taught. Each campus develops its own student evaluation forms. Most commonly, the
evaluation takes place during the last three weeks of the semester. The students are given 25
minutes to complete a scanable form that asks for ratings on a number of dimensions.
Students also may write comments on the faculty member’s performance. Instructors are
required to leave the classroom, and a monitor is selected to bring the completed evaluations
to a secured drop box. The primary goals of students’ evaluation are to furnish information
for assessing course content and presentation; provide data that may be used in support of a
faculty member's development, as well as considerations for promotion, tenure or other
forms of recognition; and provide the student body with a voice assuring an effective faculty
and curriculum. Secondary goals are to provide information to assist in developing a more
effective course; provide data that may assist in making curricular decisions; and assist with
student course choice and decision-making. Results of the evaluations are tabulated by the
college and returned to the program directors, who discuss results with faculty and, when
warranted, suggest ways to improve performance. Evaluations become part of the permanent
record for full-time and adjunct faculty.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
191
In addition, the SPH Curriculum Committee reviews core course evaluations to ensure that
students are satisfied with them and to take corrective action if they are not.
4.2.e. Description of the emphasis given to community service activities in the
promotion and tenure process.
Tenure and promotion decisions are based on teaching effectiveness, scholarship and
professional growth and service. Service includes service to the community, state and nation,
both in the faculty member’s special capacity as a scholar and in areas beyond this when the
work is pertinent and significant.1 Faculty are informed that public health professionals are
expected to participate in professional and/or community endeavors. Examples of such
service include: participation in professionally relevant community service projects; invited
presentations or contributions to professional meetings; elected officer and/or committee
membership in professional organizations; and service on professional review or editorial
boards. All candidates are expected to be members of at least one appropriate professional
organization.
It is also emphasized that members of the faculty in all ranks should fulfill necessary
institutional service obligations to the school and the college, such as elected or appointed
committee membership. Some candidates for tenure perform a service to their program,
school, and college that is above and beyond the ordinary responsibilities of faculty. For
example, serving as a program director or playing an active role in an accreditation/self-study
process, are considered important service activities.
4.2.f. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The SPH, Consortial Campuses and university provide many avenues for faculty
development, both for full-time and part-time (adjunct) members of the teaching staff.
The university requires an annual evaluation of each full-time faculty member below the
rank of tenured full professor. Included in the evaluation are a peer review and student
evaluations of teaching.
CUNY requires that every semester every course offered be evaluated by students,
including the teaching effectiveness of the instructional faculty. The results of these
evaluations are used as one element in retention, tenure and promotion considerations and
are discussed with the faculty member during the annual evaluation.
Every effort is made to guide the faculty member through the tenure and promotion
process by developing a program to attain needed goals and benchmarks.
1
CUNY Board of Trustees, available at: http://policy.cuny.edu/text/toc/btm/1975/09-22/005/__/
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
192
4.3
Faculty and Staff Diversity. The school shall recruit, retain and promote a
diverse faculty and staff, and shall offer equitable opportunities to qualified
individuals regardless of age, gender, race, disability, sexual orientation, religion or
national origin.
4.3.a. Summary demographic data on the school’s faculty, showing at least gender and
ethnicity; faculty numbers should be consistent with those shown in the table in 4.1.a.
Data must be presented in table format. See CEPH Data Template H.
Data on faculty diversity is summarized in Table 4.3.a. Almost two-thirds of the faculty are
female (60%). The SPH faculty are considerably more diverse with respect to race and
ethnicity, compared with faculty from U.S. schools of public health as a whole. The racial
and ethnic composition of the SPH faculty is as follows: 73% white, 12% African-American,
7% Hispanic/Latino, and 9% Asian/Pacific Islander. In 2004, the racial and ethnic
composition of faculty at all schools of public health was about 80% white, 5% AfricanAmerican, 4% Hispanic/Latino, 9% Asian, less than 1% Native American and 2% other1.
The SPH faculty has twice the proportion of African-Americans and Latinos as public health
faculty nationally. The proportion of minorities is also higher than that of the minority
doctorates granted in the United States for all disciplines. According to the American
Council on Education, these numbers, for 2006, are 5.7% African-American, 3.1%
Hispanic/Latino and 5.4% Asian/Pacific Islander. The total number of minorities is 14.5%.2
4.3.b. Summary demographic data on the school’s staff, showing at least gender and
ethnicity. Data must be presented in table format. See CEPH Data Template I.
Data on staff diversity is summarized in Table 4.3.b. SPH staff are also highly diverse.
Three quarters (78%) are female and more than (61%) represent racial and ethnic minorities:
45% are African-American, 11% are Hispanic/Latino and 5% are Asian/Pacific Islander.
4.3.c. Description of policies and procedures regarding the school’s commitment to
providing equitable opportunities without regard to age, gender, race, disability, sexual
orientation, religion or national origin.
The SPH follows the University’s nondiscrimination policy, titled Council of Presidents’
Policy on the Revitalization of the University's Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity and
Compliance and Diversity Programs.3 Additional college policies on affirmative action are
summarized in Table 1.4.d.
1
Kellogg/ASPH Minority Faculty Retreat, Jan 30-31, 2006, presentation on: Faculty Self-assessment
As a Tool for Strategic Planning Toward Promotion and Tenure by Yvonne Bronner, Morgan State University ,
available at: http://www.asph.org/document.cfm?page=911
2
American Council on Education, available at:
http://www.acenet.edu/AM/Template.cfm?Section=CAREE&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=
34226).
3
CUNY Council of Presidents' Policy on the Revitalization of the University's Affirmative Action, Equal
Opportunity and Compliance and Diversity Programs, available at:
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
193
Table 4.3.a. Summary Demographic Data for SPH Primary and Other Faculty, Fall 2010
# % Male
# % African American Male
# % Caucasian Male
# % Hispanic/Latino Male
# % Asian/Pacific Islander Male
# % Native American/Alaska
Native Male
# % Unknown/Other Male
# % International Male
# % Female
# % African American Female
# % Caucasian Female
# % Hispanic/Latino Female
# % Asian/Pacific Islander
Female
# % Native American/Alaska
Native Female
# % Unknown/Other Female
# % International Female
TOTAL
Core Faculty
#
%
21
40
1
2
18
34
0
0
2
4
0
0
Other Faculty
#
%
21
41
4
8
16
31
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL n=104
#
%
42
5
34
0
2
0
40
5
32
0
2
0
0
0
32
2
22
3
5
0
0
60
4
41
6
9
1
0
30
5
19
4
2
5
0
59
10
37
8
4
1
0
62
7
41
7
7
1
0
60
7
39
7
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
53
0
0
100
0
0
51
0
0
100
0
0
104
0
0
100
Table 4.3.b. Summary Demographic Data for SPH Full-Time Staff, Fall 2010
Full-Time Staff
# % Male
# % African American Male
# % Caucasian Male
# % Hispanic/Latino Male
# % Asian/Pacific Islander Male
# % Native American/Alaska
(Native Male)
# % Unknown/Other Male
# % International Male
# % Female
# % African American Female
# % Caucasian Female
# % Hispanic/Latino Female
# % Asian/Pacific Islander Female
# % Native American/Alaska ( Native Female)
# % Unknown/Other Female
# % International Female
TOTAL
4
3
0
0
1
0
0
0
14
5
8
1
0
0
0
0
18
22%
17%
5%
78%
28%
39%
11%
100%
http://www.cuny.edu/about/administration/offices/ohrm/policies-procedures/affirmative-action-policy.html.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
194
4.3.d. Description of recruitment and retention efforts used to attract and retain a
diverse faculty and staff, along with information about how these efforts are evaluated
and refined over time.
As a school within one of the more diverse public universities in one of the more diverse
cities in the nation, the SPH is committed to maintaining and increasing the diversity of its
core faculty. Toward this end, CUNY1 and each of the four Consortial Campuses 2,3,4,5 have
adopted faculty and staff recruitment and selection policies and procedures to promote
opportunity and fairness and attract the best candidates for available positions. This includes
detailed requirements for job descriptions, search plans, search committees, candidate
evaluation and selection and other related matters. Faculty and staff positions in public
health are advertised locally and nationally, in venues of general interest to the academic
community (e.g. Chronicle of Higher Education and The New York Times) as well as to those
within public health (e.g. publications and electronic sources affiliated with such
organizations as American Public Health Association, American Industrial Hygiene and
ADA. In addition, faculty and non-managerial staff are represented by collective bargaining
agreements, the largest of these between CUNY and the Professional Staff Congress of
CUNY, which sets their terms of employment. (See: Criterion 4.2.c.). Search committees
must document that applicable policies and procedures were followed during a search. A
senior administrator, such as a dean for diversity, must approve each step before a position
can be filled and a search can be deemed complete.
4.3.e. Description of efforts, other than recruitment and retention of core faculty,
through which the school seeks to establish and maintain an environment that supports
diversity.
Diversity and inclusion are core values of CUNY. Adherence to these values creates an
environment that best allows students, faculty and staff to learn, to work and to succeed. As a
university, we strive to respect differences, but more importantly, we seek to leverage the
talents of all members of the university community to foster academic and administrative
excellence. These values make CUNY a great place to learn and to work. The SPH leverages
the vast and varied resources available University-wide to establish, maintain and support a
culture of diversity that is integral to our mission. These resources include more than 21
centers and institutes that are dedicated to diversity and carry out their objectives through
seminars, lectures, workshops, curriculum, multi-cultural events, trainings, financial awards,
plays, art shows and CUNY-TV programs. Additionally, the university’s website hosts a
centralized events calendar that lists a sampling of hundreds of events on CUNY campuses in
1
CUNY. Human Resources Management. Policies and Procedures: Diversity, Equal Employment Opportunity,
available at: http://web.cuny.edu/administration/ohrm/policies-procedures.html.
2
Graduate Center. CUNY, Office of Affirmative Action. Affirmative Action Policies and Procedures, available
at: http://www.gc.cuny.edu/admin_offices/affirmative_action/aa_policies/policies_and_procedures.htm.
3
Hunter College. CUNY. Office of Diversity and Compliance. Recruitment and Search Guide, available at:
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/affirmativeaction/Recruitment_and_Search_Guide_Final.pdf.
4
Brooklyn College. CUNY, Office of Affirmative Action, Compliance and Diversity. Policies and Procedures,
available at: http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/offices/affirmact/.
5
Lehman College. CUNY, Human Resources. Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Policy,
available at: http://www.lehman.edu/vpadmin/hr/html/policies.htm#EQUAL.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
195
five boroughs that are open to members of the university community and the public,
contributing to the enrichment of the intellectual and cultural life of the city and its diverse
communities.
Diversity Resources
University-wide diversity resources are as varied and culturally rich as the university itself
and include hundreds of events and activities too numerous to list. A list of the university’s
diversity resources may be found at www.cuny.edu. Below is a small sampling of universitywide diversity resources:
The University Affirmative Action Committee and the vice chancellor for human
resources management established the Diversity Projects Development Fund to support
scholarly research projects and other educational activities for or about populations that
are under-represented traditionally within higher education. The purpose of the fund is to
assist in the development of educational projects, scholarly research, creative endeavors,
and professional activities that promote diversity, multi-culturalism and nondiscrimination
on the basis of the following categories: race, color, national or ethnic origin, religion,
age, sex, sexual orientation, transgender, disability, genetic predisposition or carrier status,
alienage or citizenship, veteran or marital status. Projects/activities considered explore
nondiscrimination and the condition of the protected classes, for CUNY, including ItalianAmericans.
In keeping with the university’s commitment to diversity, the University Office of
Compliance and Diversity Programs, Office of the Vice Chancellor for Faculty and Staff
Relations, sponsors the Faculty Fellowship Publications Program (FFPP). This is a
university-wide initiative designed to assist full-time untenured CUNY junior faculty
(assistant professors) in the design and execution of scholarly writing projects essential to
progress toward tenure. These writing projects may include articles for juried journals as
well as books for scholarly presses.
The Office of the University Dean for Health and Human Services provides support and
technical assistance to CUNY schools to prepare a large, culturally diverse pool of
qualified health and human services personnel in areas such as nursing, social work,
nutrition, speech pathology and mental health counseling.
The John F. Kennedy Jr. Institute supports workforce development initiatives in health,
education and human services. The institute works with colleges, public and private
employers, organized labor, professional associations, advocacy groups, community
organizations, foundations and government agencies to:
Design and implement collaborative worker education programs
Provide career mentoring and college scholarships for exemplary workers
Advocate for career ladders, health and educational benefits and a living wage for frontline workers
Support the employment of people with disabilities
The Center for Lesbian and Gay Studies (CLAGS) at the GC provides intellectual leadership
toward understanding and addressing the issues that affect lesbian, gay, bisexual and
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
196
transgender (LGBT) individuals and members of other sexual and gender minorities. As the
first university-based LGBT research center in the United States, CLAGS nurtures cuttingedge scholarship; organizes colloquia for examining and affirming LGBT lives; and fosters
network-building among academics, artists, activists, policy makers and community
members. CLAGS stands committed to maintaining a broad program of public events, online
projects and fellowships that promote reflection on queer pasts, presents, and futures.
The CIHE at Lehman College collaborates directly with 14 community organizations in the
Bronx, Manhattan, and Brooklyn, including Mothers on the Move, African Hope Committee
and Brooklyn Young Mothers Collective. It has three core objectives: building the capacity
of nonprofit and community-based organizations to address health problems in their
communities; providing learning opportunities for students to work toward health equity; and
strengthening multidisciplinary cooperation and research on health equity issues within and
beyond CUNY.
In addition to university-wide resources, diversity is established, maintained and supported
via a variety of mechanisms at the Consortial Campuses. These include discussions,
seminars, lectures, workshops, cultural celebrations, educational activities or scholarly
research on topics related to diversity and/or multiculturalism. Examples of these activities
and events across the consortium include:
Annual Diversity Celebration
The Brooklyn campus organizes an annual Diversity Lecture Series that features discussions
and workshops designed to foster inclusion and diversity on campus and in the community.
The free program is open to students, faculty and the public. Panelists and presenters explore
ways to increase awareness and understanding across the lines of ethnicity, disability, gender,
immigrant status, religion, socioeconomic status and sexual orientation.
Faculty Day
On Faculty Day, Brooklyn campus faculty members celebrate one another's scholarly and
creative achievements as part of a 12-year tradition to support faculty diversity. This daylong
in-house conference -- perhaps unique among institutions of higher education -- gives faculty
members an opportunity to hear what their colleagues in other disciplines are doing, to
present multi-disciplinary perspectives on issues of common concern and to honor
accomplishments in teaching, research and service.
Pluralism and Diversity Discussion
The Hunter Campus Pluralism and Diversity Committee hosts panel discussions throughout
the year that provide an opportunity for members of the campus and university community to
participate in open dialogue and make recommendations to the committee.
Cultural Celebrations
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
197
Black Solidarity Day, Haitian Flag Day, Hands Across the Campus, Human Rights Week,
and Women’s Her-Story Month are additional examples of the yearly events held across the
Consortial Campuses in support of SPH’s diverse community.
School of Public Health Faculty Retreats
Semi-annually, the school hosts one-day faculty retreats that provide a context for faculty to
engage in discussions concerning relevant topics and to participate in professional
development workshops and trainings that cover a range of topics, including cultural
competency, inclusion and diversity initiatives.
Commitment by the University and School Leadership
A campus environment or culture can be a very difficult to define entity. At once amorphous
and concrete, there is no denying the powerful impact culture plays in the comfort, success or
failure of people and groups. Given this understanding and its diverse population, CUNY
will continue to recognize the need to support existing initiatives that will enhance the culture
of the university for all its constituents. Along with university leaders, the CUNY SPH will
continue to support diversity as a priority. It has committed to several steps that center on
articulation of the school’s commitment to sustain and promote diversity. These include:
Public commitment to equity and diversity
Articulate how the school and university will benefit by increasing equity and diversity
Benchmark the activities and resources that have proven effective in sustaining diversity
Develop and announce concrete goals, efforts and successes
In addition to the recruitment and retention efforts described in Criteria 1.4.d, 4.2 and 4.3.d,
the SPH offers its faculty an environment that supports and values diversity. For example,
faculty and staff from under-represented ethnic and racial minorities are encouraged and have
been selected to play leadership roles. SPH initiatives such as the CIHE, the Latino Health
Fellowship Initiative and the Immigration and Health Initiative engage primary and other
faculty and seek to promote equity (See: Criterion 3.0.)
4.3.f. Identification of outcome measures by which the school may evaluate its success in
achieving a diverse faculty and staff, along with data regarding the performance of the
school against those measures for each of the last three years.
The key outcome measures used by the SPH to evaluate its success in achieving a diverse
faculty and staff are:
Recruitment of a diverse faculty and staff
Diversity of faculty and staff in leadership positions
Promotion and tenure of a diverse faculty and staff
Over the past three years, SPH has conducted searches for 18 new faculty members and 12
staff (two are in progress), adhering to the stringent affirmative action and equal opportunity
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
198
guidelines described in Criterion 4.3.d. Of the 10 administrative staff hired, five or 50%
represent racial and ethnic minorities, including the dean, executive assistant to the dean,
academic services director, recruiter, and the administrative coordinator at Brooklyn College.
Of the 18 new faculty hired, five or 28%, represent racial and ethnic minorities, which is
comparable to the SPH as a whole and well above the proportion in U.S. schools of public
health. Several of these faculty and staff members play leadership roles in teaching, research
and service at the SPH as well as in the affiliated centers, institutes and initiatives.
Table 4.3.f. Outcome Measures by Which the SPH Evaluates Its Success in Achieving
a Diverse Faculty and Staff, AY 2007-AY 2009
Outcome Measure
Maintain a diverse
Core & Other SPH
faculty
Target
Maintain or
increase core
faculty diversity:
Maintain a diverse
SPH administrative
staff
Maintain or
increase staff
diversity:
Diversity in
leadership positions
within the SPH
Maintain the
diversity in
leadership positions
(dean, assoc dean,
campus directors,
etc)
AY 2007
African Amer 6%
Caucasian 74%
Hispanic/Latino 6%
Asian/Pacific Is 14%
African Amer 43%
Caucasian 57%
Hispanic/Latino 0%
Asian/Pacific 0%
4/6 female
2/6 male
AY 2008
African-Amer 5%
Caucasian 71%
Hispanic/Latino 7%
Asian/Pacific Is 17%
African-Amer 50%
Caucasian 50%
Hispanic/Latino 0%
Asian/Pacific 0%
8/11 female
3/11 male
AY 2009
African-Amer 15%
Caucasian 67%
Hispanic/Latino 9%
Asian/Pacific Is 9%
African-Amer 50%
Caucasian 44%
Hispanic/Latino 6%
Asian/Pacific 5%
8/11 female
3/11 male
4.3.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
The SPH has a diverse faculty, full-time and adjunct, and one that is considerably more
diverse than schools of public health as a whole.
SPH staff also is highly diverse at junior, mid-level and senior management positions.
College and university policies and procedures ensure that all faculty regardless of age,
sex, race, disability, religion, national origin or sexual preference, have equitable
opportunities for hiring and advancement.
Many SPH initiatives, as well as curriculum, teaching and service opportunities, support
diversity.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
199
4.4
Student Recruitment and Admissions. The school shall have student
recruitment and admissions policies and procedures designed to locate and select
qualified individuals capable of taking advantage of the school’s various learning
activities, which will enable each of them to develop competence for a career in
public health.
4.4.a. Description of the school’s recruitment policies and procedures.
The main goals of the recruitment efforts of the SPH are to:
Recruit potential applicants from underrepresented populations
Increase the geographic diversity of doctoral applicants
Develop an integrated recruitment infrastructure among the Consortial Campuses
Continue to recruit a diverse student body by developing a strong recruitment base among
CUNY campuses throughout New York City
Recruit highly qualified students
Maintain and increase racial and ethnic diversity of the student body
To attain the recruitment goals (see: Objective 1.1), the SPH employs a full-time recruitment
and admissions coordinator (recruiter). The recruiter works closely with the associate dean
for academic affairs, academic services director and the campus directors to reach out and
respond to prospective SPH students.
The Internet and web are major recruitment tools. Prospective students who email a faculty
or staff member at the SPH are directed to the recruiter, who invites them to register for an
upcoming information session. Information sessions for every SPH degree program are
offered throughout the academic year. Sessions follow this format:
Introductions of faculty and staff representatives from each degree program and
specialization
Introductions of prospective students
A PowerPoint presentation that covers:
Overview of public health
SPH mission and philosophy
Degree program(s) and specialization goals and career opportunities
Degree requirements/costs
Faculty
Admissions requirements, timetable and process
A question-and-answer period
Small group sessions that focus on specializations, led by faculty
The recruiter attends career and graduate fairs at CUNY and other universities in the NYC
metropolitan area, at professional conferences and meetings (such as the APHA annual
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
200
meeting), where a booth or table is set up to answer questions and distribute literature on
SPH programs to prospective students. In addition, the recruiter and SPH faculty and staff
organize targeted on-site recruitment sessions – such as at NYCDOHMH and at selected
CUNY undergraduate programs – where large groups of prospective applicants are likely to
work or go to school. The NYCDOHMH offers a number of scholarships to students who
attend one of the SPH programs.
The recruiter also works with faculty from individual specializations within degree programs
to conduct targeted recruitment, focusing on academic venues or organizations that are
known to have potential students. For instance, the EOHS program at Hunter College
conducts targeted recruitment activities at undergraduate EOHS programs, at science
departments within CUNY and at large employers of environmental health professionals,
such as local health and environmental agencies like OSHA Region II and EPA region II.
The Health Equity program at Lehman College targets community organizations within the
Bronx.
The recruiter maintains a database of prospective students who attend information sessions,
who are met during events or who contact the recruiter by phone or email. This list is used to
inform prospective students of upcoming events and to provide relevant information,
including registration deadlines, to them.
Among the features of SPH graduate programs that are highlighted in recruitment activities
and materials are the low tuition in relation to similar programs at private universities and the
fact that the programs are geared to working adults; the faculty’s commitment to teaching as
well as research; classes that are held in the evenings; options for part-time and full-time
students; student, faculty and staff diversity; and an emphasis on classroom and practicebased learning. Additionally, there are student scholarships that partially defray the costs of
tuition.
Over the past two years, the SPH’s recruitment efforts have been successful. As shown in
Criterion 4.5., the SPH has attracted a diverse student body and has been able to grow the
new DPH degree programs and the new MPH specializations CBPH, HPM and EPI/BIOS.
4.4.b. Statement of admissions policies and procedures.
Graduate Degree Programs
MPH and MS Degree Programs
Requirements for acceptance to the SPH MPH or MS programs are :
A bachelor’s degree from a regionally accredited institution
Undergraduate major in natural or social sciences, health studies, nutrition or a related
field
B average in the student’s undergraduate major
B minus average in the undergraduate record as a whole
The aptitude section of the GREs or a master’s degree from an accredited U.S. university
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
201
Two letters of recommendation
At least one year of paid or volunteer experience in a public-health-related field
A short essay on why the student would like to attain the MPH or MS degree
Test of English as a Foreign Language exam if the undergraduate degree is from a country
where English is not the official language
There are additional requirements for individual specializations:
Applicants to the EOHS-MPH program are expected to have a background in science and
mathematics, usually at least 18 undergraduate credits, including a course in statistics or
calculus.
Applicants to the EOHS-MS program are expected to have completed at least 40 credits in
undergraduate or graduate-level basic science and math courses such as organic chemistry
(with labs), general chemistry, general physics, biology and environmental or health
sciences.
Generally, an undergraduate major in biology, chemistry, environmental sciences or
physics would satisfy these requirements.
Students also must have completed one semester of calculus and one of statistics.
Applicants to the NUTR MS program must have at least 30 credits in the following
undergraduate or graduate-level basic science and math courses: one semester each of
undergraduate courses in introductory foods, introductory nutrition, general chemistry
(with lab), organic chemistry (with lab), microbiology (with lab) and statistics or calculus
and two semesters of anatomy and physiology (with lab).
The DPH Degree Program
Requirements for acceptance into the DPH degree program are as follows:
Completion of an MPH, MS or similar graduate degree in a related field
At least three years of prior relevant teaching, research and/or programmatic work
experience
Ability to demonstrate well-defined research interests in urban health
Results of the verbal, quantitative and written portions of the GREs
Completion of at least two master’s-level quantitative or research courses (such as
biostatistics, epidemiology, GIS, grant writing, planning and evaluation) relevant to the
student’s specialization of interest
Students with advanced degrees in fields other than public health, such as law, social work,
public policy, medicine, nursing, urban planning, social sciences and natural sciences also are
considered. Such applicants must complete (or demonstrate proficiency in) master’s-level
core public health courses in biostatistics, epidemiology, environmental health sciences,
health-care administration and social and behavioral dimensions of health. Three of these
five courses must be completed before entry into the program, and all must be completed by
the end of the first year.
In addition to completing coursework in the core areas of public health, applicants are
required to fulfill specialization requirements, which include:
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
202
CSH: At least three master’s-level courses in social dimensions of health and two
quantitative research courses (e.g., biostatistics and epidemiology). Those in the
concentration in PHN must be an RD or have completed the DPD accredited by CADE.
EPI: At least three master’s-level quantitative research courses (e.g. biostatistics,
epidemiology and research methods), preferably with a grade of A minus or better.
EOHS: One course in toxicology; at least two courses in either occupational safety and
health or environmental sciences; plus one course in public, environmental or
occupational health law or policy.
HPM: One course in health-care systems, management or administration; one course in
health policy; one social science course in a cognate-related field, such as economics,
sociology or political science.
The Office of the Dean and the SPH admissions committee oversee the admissions policies
and procedures for the SPH, including setting admissions standards for SPH degree programs
and specializations. Admissions subcommittees which review applications for specific degree
programs and specializations make recommendations and forward them to the SPH
Admissions Committee for approval. Students apply to the degree program and
specialization(s) they wish to attend. Members of the committee review applications when
they are completed. This rolling admissions process involves a weekly review of completed
applications. Acceptance is based on balancing the pool of prospective students, taking into
account their diverse backgrounds, relative majors, GPAs, grades as a non-matriculated
student (where applicable), GRE scores, work experience and writing skills. No criterion
weighs more heavily than the others.
In addition to the admissions committees within each program, the SPH has an admissions
committee with members from each of the Consortial Campuses. The main responsibilities
of this committee are to recommend standards for admissions for each program within the
SPH and to review the qualifications of students proposed for admissions by each of the
programs.
Undergraduate Degree Programs
To apply to either the BS programs in COMHE or in NFS, both at Hunter College, students
must have earned 60 credits with a minimum GPA of 2.5 for COMHE-BS and 3.0 for NFS.
The applicants, including current Hunter College students, must file an online undergraduate
transfer application1 to apply. Students enter in the fall semester on a full-time or part-time
basis. Applicants must meet the admission requirements by the start of the fall semester to be
accepted and must have completed the following courses:
For COMHE-BS:
One semester of college-level biology with lab
One semester of statistics
For NFS, a grade of C or better in:
1
Hunter College, on-line transfer application, available at:
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/prospectivestudents/ug_students/transfer.shtml
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
203
Two semesters of anatomy and physiology with lab
One semester of general chemistry with lab
One semester of organic chemistry with lab
One semester of microbiology with lab
One semester of statistics
A grade of B or better in one semester of introductory food science and one semester of
nutrition
4.4.c. Examples of recruitment materials and other publications and advertising that
describe, at a minimum, academic calendars, grading, and the academic offerings of the
school. If a school does not have a printed bulletin/catalog, it must provide a printed
web page that indicates the degree requirements as the official representation of the
school. In addition, references to website addresses may be included.
For electronic information about SPH degree programs – including academic calendars,
grading systems, admissions requirements and application procedures and academic
offerings, See: Table 4.4.c.
Homepage
Academic
Offering and
Program
Information
Academic
Calendar
Academic
Information (i.e.
Grading Systems)
Admissions
Requirements
Table 4.4.c. SPH Materials
www.cuny.edu/sph
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/graduateadmissions/program-requirements/schools-ofhealth-professions/urban-public-health
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/courses/acad/program_info.jsp?major=323&div=G&dept_
code=46&dept_id=86#323
http://www.lehman.edu/graduate-bulletin/
http://web.gc.cuny.edu/ClinicalDoctoral/ph-overview.asp
http://registrar.hunter.cuny.edu/subpages/academic_calendar.shtml
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/pub/schedules.htm
http://www.lehman.edu/registrar/calendars.php
http://web.gc.cuny.edu/ClinicalDoctoral/ph-schedule.asp
http://registrar.hunter.cuny.edu/index2.shtml
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/courses/acad/program_info.jsp?major=307&div=G&dept_
code=46&dept_id=86#307
http://www.lehman.edu/graduate-bulletin/
http://web.gc.cuny.edu/ClinicalDoctoral/ph-academic-requirements.asp
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/graduateadmissions/program-requirements/schools-ofhealth-professions
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/courses/acad/program_info.jsp?major=307&div=G&dept_
code=46&dept_id=86#307
http://www.lehman.edu/lehman/grad-studies/prospective-students.html
http://web.gc.cuny.edu/ClinicalDoctoral/ph-admissions.asp
4.4.d. Quantitative information on the number of applicants, acceptances and
enrollment, by program area, for each of the last three years. Data must be presented in
table format. See CEPH Data Template J.
Data on the number of applicants, acceptances and enrollment by degree program and
specialization are provided in Table 4.4.d. Over the past three years, applicants, acceptances
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
204
and enrollments have grown, as the SPH added new doctoral and master’s specializations. In
2007, the number of MPH, MS and DPH applicants was 282, of whom 196 were accepted
and 149 enrolled. This translates into an acceptance rate of 70% and an enrollment rate of
76%. In 2009, there were 512 MPH, MS and DPH applicants (an increase of 81.5% from
2007) of whom 332 were accepted and 204 enrolled, yielding an acceptance rate of 65% and
an enrollment rate of 61%.
4.4.e. Quantitative information on the number of students enrolled in each specialty
area identified in the instructional matrix, including headcounts of full- and part-time
students and a full-time-equivalent conversion, for each of the last three years. Nondegree students, such as those enrolled in continuing education or certificate programs,
should not be included. Explain any important trends or patterns, including a
persistent absence of students in any program or specialization. Data must be presented
in table format. See CEPH Data Template K.
Table 4.4.d. Quantitative Information on Applicants, Acceptances and Enrollments
by Specialization, AY 2007 to Fall 2010
Status
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
Fall 2010
BIOS - MPH
Applied
Not offered
3
4
5
Accepted
2
3
4
Enrolled
2
3
3
CBPH - MPH
Applied
27
48
48
46
Accepted
16
29
35
35
Enrolled
13
21
32
22
COMHE - MPH
Applied
91
85
89
94
Accepted
60
63
52
39
Enrolled
42
34
31
15
EOHS – MPH
Applied
28
20
20
9
Accepted
18
17
11
8
Enrolled
13
13
9
7
EPI - MPH
Applied
Not offered
29
45
43
Accepted
21
30
18
Enrolled
17
15
9
GPH - MPH
Applied
29
36
59
51
Accepted
27
25
48
34
Enrolled
13
15
23
10
HCPA - MPH
Applied
17
34
42
37
Accepted
14
29
33
25
Enrolled
14
18
9
11
HPM – MPH
Applied
Not offered
24
71
50
Accepted
16
47
22
Enrolled
12
32
17
NUTR - MPH
Applied
30
32
46
29
Accepted
20
25
26
25
Enrolled
15
17
13
14
NUTR – MS
Applied
Not offered
Not offered
Not offered
29
Accepted
25
Enrolled
23
CSH - DPH
Applied
28
27
36
32
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
205
Table 4.4.d. Quantitative Information on Applicants, Acceptances and Enrollments
by Specialization, AY 2007 to Fall 2010
Status
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
Fall 2010
Accepted
15
13
13
11
Enrolled
15
10
10
10
EOH - DPH
Applied
Not offered
Not offered
9
11
Accepted
4
6
Enrolled
4
5
EPI - DPH
Applied
Not offered
13
18
24
Accepted
7
8
8
Enrolled
5
6
6
HPM – DPH
Applied
Not offered
Not offered
Not offered
25
Accepted
12
Enrolled
10
EOHS - MS
Applied
16
16
23
5
Accepted
13
11
16
4
Enrolled
12
9
14
3
PHN – MS/MPH
Applied
16
16
11
9
Accepted
13
11
10
7
Enrolled
12
7
7
6
1
COMHE – BS
Applied
NA
NA
NA
NA
Accepted
NA
NA
NA
NA
Enrolled
NA
NA
52
8
NFS – BS
Applied
NA
NA
NA
NA
Accepted
45
37
39
26
Enrolled
45
37
39
26
Totals* Excluding
Applied
282
383
512
499
BS programs
Accepted
196
269
332
283
(MPH, MS and
Enrolled
149
180
204
171
DPH)
As seen in Table 4.4.e, which represents enrollment data for the past three years, student
enrollment has been fairly stable or has increased slightly in long-standing degree programs
and specializations and has grown in the new degree programs and specializations (DPH
program and the MPH specializations in BIOS, EPI and HPM). For instance, the NUTRMPH shows a slight increase from 17 FTEs in AY 2007 to 25.5 FTEs in AY 2009. In that
same period, the GPH-MPH shows an increase from 26 to 31 FTEs. The HPM-MPH had
eight FTE students in its first year and grew to 33 FTEs in its second. The CSH-DPH began
its first year with eight FTE students and grew to 22 FTEs in AY 2009. The EOHS and EOH
specializations are relatively small, as they are in other SPHs, owing to the specific
admission requirements and technical nature of the field.
There is currently no mechanism to track applications and acceptance to the undergraduate COMHE & NFS
programs. Students apply to Hunter College and then ―declare‖ a major. The college acts as a first filter for
acceptance, and applications are then passed on to COMHE and NFS.
1
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
206
It is also clear from the data that most SPH students attend school part-time. For instance, for
the fall 2010 semester, there were 81 full-time MPH students and 316 part-time students, or
79.5%, making the MPH student body mostly part-timers.
Both undergraduate specializations in COMHE and NFS showed a marked increase in
student FTEs from 2007 to 2009, 27% for COMHE and 48% for NFS.
Table 4.4.e. Students Enrolled in Each Degree Program by Area of Specialization
AY 2007 to AY 20091 and Fall 2010
AY 2007
HC FT
CBPH – MPH
COMHE –
MPH
EOHS – MPH
HCPA – MPH
HC PT
FTE
HC FT
HC PT
FTE
HC FT
HC PT
FTE
Not offered
0
2
1.7
2
3
3.8
3
5
6
1
37
25.0
1
50
33.5
1
60
38.5
5
47
33
15.5
88
78.5
11.5
87
74.5
6
81
59.5
9
70
55
1.5
29
20.5
1.5
31.5
22.5
1
29.5
19.5
1
28
15
Not offered
3
14
13.6
10
22
24.0
22
25
31.6
2
27
26
12
25
26
9
35
31
15
27
30
6
27
23
8
27
25
8
23
22
12
32
28.7
Not offered
0
10.5
8
3.5
35
33
7
52
36
4.5
20
17
7
26
24.5
8.5
22.5
25.5
7
30
21
2
9
8
4
17
15
7
23
22
13
23
26
Not offered
1
3
3
1
8
5.7
1
9
7
5
10
11.7
Not offered
3
10
9.7
25
3
26
14
Not offered
20
3
21.6
HPM – MPH
NUTR – MPH
CSH – DPH
EOH – DPH
Not offered
EPI – DPH
Not offered
HPM – DPH
EOHS – MS
COMHE – BS
NFS – BS
Totals
1
0
Not offered
2.5
NUTR – MS
PHN MS/MPH
Fall 2010
HC FT
EPI – MPH
GPH -- MPH
AY 2009
FTE
BIOS – MPH
HC PT
AY 2008
31
23
5
3
Not offered
2
Not offered
32.5
22.5
3
Not offered
34.5
0
19
13
1
20.5
14
1
19.5
14
0
19
12
44
13
75
48
13.5
83
56.5
14
95.5
40
16
73
27.5
9
43
28.5
18
53
42.5
12
63.5
42
19
77
106
309
352
127.5
379.5
419.8
161
426
486.8
208
450
507
Includes all the degrees outlined in the instructional matrix (See Criterion: 2.1.a.)
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
207
4.4.f. Identification of outcome measures by which the school may evaluate its success in
enrolling a qualified student body, along with data regarding the performance of the
school against those measures for each of the last three years.
Outcome measures that SPH uses to evaluate its success in enrolling a qualified student body
are contained in Table 4.4.f. below. Other outcome measures include graduation rates and
job-placement rates (See: Criterion 2.7.b.).
Table 4.4.f. Outcome Measures by Which the SPH Evaluates Success in Enrolling a
Qualified Student Body, AY 2007-AY 2009
Outcome Measure Target
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY 2009
MPH/MS admit rate
MPH/MS yield rate
DPH admit rate
DPH yield rate
Maintain or decrease
the admit rate of
students
Increase the yield rate
71%
73%
68%
74%
66%
60%
Maintain or decrease
the admit rate of
students
Increase the yield rate
53%
50%
40%
100%
75%
80%
4.4.g. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
SPH has established recruitment and admissions policies and procedures that successfully
locate, recruit and enroll qualified students into the degree programs.
The SPH has hired a recruiter who coordinates and implements all recruitment efforts.
The SPH is experiencing stable or increasing numbers of applicants and enrollments each
degree program and specialization.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
208
4.5
Student Diversity. Stated application, admission, and degree-granting
requirements and regulations shall be applied equitably to individual applicants and
students regardless of age, gender, race, disability, sexual orientation, religion or
national origin.
4.5.a. Description of policies, procedures and plans to achieve a diverse student
population.
CUNY’s historic mission has been to promote access and excellence in higher education.
The university is dedicated to providing first-rate academic opportunities for students of all
backgrounds. The diversity of CUNY’s student body, as a whole and within public health, is
one of its greater strengths.1
4.5.b. Description of recruitment efforts used to attract a diverse student body, along
with information about how these efforts are evaluated and refined over time.
The SPH’s recruitment efforts are described in Criterion 4.4.a. Within public health, student
recruitment efforts draw a diverse pool of prospective applicants from such populations as
current CUNY students and government agencies, such as NYCDOHMH and HHC. As
demonstrated in Criterion 4.5.c., the SPH has been highly successful in recruiting a diverse
student body.
The SPH is committed to maintaining and strengthening the diversity of the student body.
The recruiter, under the direction of the academic services director and associate dean for
academic affairs, meets routinely with specialization leadership and other faculty, to assess
recruitment targets, including the numbers of minority students being recruited. As the
associate dean for academic affairs, along with the recruiter and faculty, have summarized
the success of the efforts of SPH, they realized that more focused outreach is necessary. To
this end, in fall 2010, the Recruiter is meeting individually with several program directors
and faculty to develop outreach strategies for the particular student populations served by the
specialization. For instance, in fall 2010, the recruiter met with the EOHS specialization
faculty and designed outreach to governmental agencies, and, in particular, to CUNY
campuses and programs that have large numbers of minority students.
Another initiative that the dean and faculty are undertaking to recruit a diverse student body
is the development of pipeline programs (e.g., at community and four-year CUNY colleges)
for students to earn bachelor’s, joint bachelor’s-master’s or master’s degree in public health.
Targets for these efforts have been established (See: Objective 1.1.) and will be assessed
continuously by the associate dean for academic affairs, the recruiter, the assessment
committee and the campus directors.
While the study body is quite diverse, some groups – such as Hispanic/Latinos – are
somewhat underrepresented, compared to the New York City population as a whole. In fall
1
CUNY. About CUNY. http://web.cuny.edu/about/cuny/about.html.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
209
2011, SPH will be moving into its new building in the heart of Harlem, a largely Hispanic
and African-American community. In addition to existing ties that faculty and students have
to organizations in this community, SPH representatives have begun to expand outreach
efforts by meeting with community groups and leaders to map out plans for future research
and service.
4.5.c. Quantitative information on the demographic characteristics of the student body,
including data on applicants and admissions, for each of the last three years. Data must
be presented in table format. See CEPH Data Template L.
Table 4.5.c.1. Demographic Characteristics of SPH Student Body, Including Data on Applications
and Admissions for Each of the Last 3 years1 and Fall 2010
AY 2007
M
African-American
Caucasian
Hispanic/Latino
Asian Pacific
Islander
Native
American/Alaska
Native
Unknown/Other
International
Total (M/F)
TOTAL
Applied
Accepted
Enrolled
Applied
Accepted
Enrolled
Applied
Accepted
Enrolled
Applied
Accepted
Enrolled
Applied
Accepted
Enrolled
Applied
Accepted
Enrolled
Applied
Accepted
Enrolled
Applied
Accepted
Enrolled
Applied
Accepted
Enrolled
4
3
3
12
11
4
4
2
2
2
1
1
0
0
0
18
11
10
12
7
2
52
35
22
266
183
137
AY 2008
AY 2009
F
M
F
M
F
43
26
21
52
40
37
12
8
8
15
11
7
0
0
0
74
50
32
18
13
10
214
148
115
7
5
5
8
5
4
5
4
4
4
3
1
0
0
0
26
18
15
16
10
5
66
45
34
55
35
28
38
28
17
25
12
11
21
14
8
0
0
0
138
105
61
24
19
14
301
213
139
30
11
8
28
18
9
11
6
6
21
13
8
0
0
0
17
7
5
18
12
4
125
67
40
93
49
36
141
114
65
37
24
18
38
26
18
1
1
1
31
21
10
35
20
9
376
255
157
367
258
173
501
322
197
Fall 2010
M
F
29
16
10
32
19
10
5
3
3
14
5
4
0
0
0
5
4
3
4
1
1
89
48
31
490
276
165
Data on student diversity are shown in Table 4.5.c.1. These figures are based on applicant
self-reports which are deemed optional by the university. Between 45% (2008) and 7.5%
(2009) of applicants choose not to fill in this information. Still, the available data show that
applicant diversity mirrors student diversity and that a majority of students represent racial
1
Excludes PHN MS/MPH students
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
210
101
51
24
148
96
65
50
27
16
68
37
19
1
1
0
30
14
8
3
2
2
401
228
134
and ethnic minorities (52% in AY 2009): 22% African-American, 12% Hispanic/Latino and
18% Asian/Pacific Islander.
From AY 2007 to 2009, there was a substantial growth in the proportion of racial and ethnic
minorities: African-American (15.7% v. 22%), Hispanic/Latino (7% v. 12%) and
Asian/Pacific Islander (5.7% to 18%) students. The data for fall 2010 are in line with the
2009 data.
The SPH is generally more diverse than SPHs as a whole (See: Table 4.5.c.2.). The SPH has
higher proportions of African-American and Hispanic/Latino students than other SPH’s. The
proportion of Caucasians is lower by almost 20%.
Table 4.5.c.2. Racial/Ethnic Composition of Students at
SPH Compared to All Schools of Public Health in the U.S.A
All Schools of
Racial/Ethnic Group
Number
%
Public Health1
Caucasian
77
37
56.5
African American
44
21
11.0
Hispanic/Latino
24
11
8.5
Asian/ Pacific Islander
26
12
13.3
Other
0
0
10.1
Unknown
28
13
International
13
6
Total
209
100
4.5.d. Identification of measures by which the school may evaluate its success in
achieving a demographically diverse student body, along with data regarding the
school’s performance against these measures for each of the last three years.
The Dean’s Cabinet has set the following recruitment objectives as measures of SPH success
in achieving a diverse student body:
Number of recruitment activities
Geographic diversity of doctoral applicants
Racial and ethnic diversity of student body
Number of pipeline programs (e.g. at community and four-year CUNY colleges) for
students to earn bachelor’s, joint bachelors-masters or Master’s degrees
1
ASPH, 2008, Annual Data Report
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
211
Table 4.5.d. Outcome Measures by Which the SPH Evaluates Success in Achieving a Demographically
Diverse Student Body, AY 2007-AY 2009
Outcome Measure
Target
Number of
DPH/MPH/MS
recruitment activities
Geographic diversity of
doctoral applicants from
outside NYS
Increase the number
of recruitment
events
Maintain or
increase the % of
DPH applicants
from outside NYS
Racial and ethnic
diversity of student
body
Increase the % of
racial and ethnic
minorities in the
graduate program
Number of pipeline
programs (e.g. at
community and 4-year
CUNY colleges) for
students to earn
bachelor’s, joint
bachelors-master’s or
master’s
By 2013, increase
the number of
pipeline programs
to two
AY 2007
AY 2008
AY2009
N/A
15
24
4%
9%
11%
African-Amer 16%
Caucasian 29%
Hispanic/Latino 8%
Asian Pacific Is 6%
Unknown 30%
International 9%
0
African-Amer 19%
Caucasian 11%
Hispanic/Latino 8%
Asian Pacific Is 5%
Unknown 44%
International 10%
0
African-Amer 22%
Caucasian 38%
Hispanic/Latino 12%
Asian Pacific Is 13%
Unknown 7%
International 6%
0
4.5.e. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion in met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
SPH has a diverse student body.
The SPH has enrolled higher proportions of African-American and Latino students, two of
the nation’s more disadvantaged groups, than all U.S. SPHs. In fact, like urban America
and a growing portion of the nation as a whole, the SPH has become a ―majorityminority‖ institution, preparing it to meet the nation’s public health workforce needs.
Recruitment efforts to maintain and improve student diversity are a principal goal of
outreach. The move of SPH to East Harlem will amplify efforts at recruiting a diverse
student body.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
212
4.6
Advising and Career Counseling. There shall be available a clearly
explained and accessible academic advising system for students, as well as readily
available career and placement advice.
4.6.a. Description of the advising and career counseling services, including sample
orientation materials such as student handbooks.
Academic Advisement
Academic advisement begins with a prospective student’s first contact with the program.
Faculty continue offering academic advice throughout the admissions process, through the
student’s matriculation and beyond. Most SPH faculty are involved in advising students.
MPH, MS and BS degree programs: Academic advisement is available to prospective
students, matriculated students, non-matriculated students (for programs that accept such
students) and individuals who do not attend the program.
Prospective students:
Initial student inquiries are handled by the SPH recruiter, who sends the student general
program information and an invitation to attend the next information session.
Information sessions for prospective MPH and MS students are described in Criterion
4.4.a.
Information sessions for the BS degrees (COMHE and NFS) are held twice a year. Each
session is chaired by the faculty member assigned to undergraduate programs.
Matriculated students:
MPH/MS students accepted for matriculation are sent information packets. Some
campuses send a student handbook.
An academic adviser is assigned to each person who accepts an offer of admission as a
matriculant. Ideally, the student-adviser team is maintained until graduation. In some
cases, another adviser will be assigned to the student (e.g., the student’s area of
specialization changes, the faculty member goes on sabbatical, the two are otherwise
incompatible).
Students meet with their advisers at least once per semester to discuss career goals,
progress in the program and planning for the following semester. Since students need
faculty permission to register for the following semester, they must meet regularly.
New student orientation sessions for degree programs take place before or during the first
week of each semester.
Most programs have LISTSERV, which provides a way to communicate rapidly with
students.
Required graduate student meetings: Each campus holds a meeting early in each semester
during class hours that graduate students and faculty are required to attend. At these
sessions, faculty present information about courses to be offered the following semester
and planned times for advisement. They also ask for student input on a variety of other
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
213
topics, including ease of registering, adequacy of counseling and career advisement, and
scheduling of classes. This is done via email for the BS programs.
For MPH/MS students who expect to enroll in fieldwork within the coming year,
responsible faculty meet with them to orient them to the requirements and procedure for
fieldwork and discuss the availability and suitability of fieldwork assignments and
professional practice.
Non-matriculated students:
In specializations that accept non-matriculated students, the students also may be assigned
an adviser. The main purpose of the advisement is to encourage capable students to apply
for matriculation, or, in some cases, recommend other courses of action to students who
are having trouble meeting academic requirements.
DPH Degree Program
Academic advisement for doctoral students begins with a prospective student’s first contact
with the program. Information about advisement is available in the graduate student
handbook at: http://www.gc.cuny.edu/current_students/handbook/index.htm. With some
differences, the procedures for student advisement are the same for the DPH program as they
are for the MPH and MS degree programs. In the first semester, students are assigned a
faculty adviser. As they move to dissertation, students may change advisers to select a faculty
member with appropriate expertise.
Career Counseling
Counseling activities such as resume writing, dressing for success and honing interview skills
are offered by the Career Services Office on each campus. In addition, the SPH offers career
counseling in the following ways:
As mentioned above, students receive career counseling from their advisers during their
periodic advisement sessions and are encouraged to discuss their short- and long-term
professional goals at these sessions. Of course, advisers are available to counsel students
during regular office hours.
Each student is encouraged to join the LISTSERV hosted by the student’s degree program
and/or specializations. One of the functions of the LISTSERV is to announce position
openings, professional meetings and award and grant opportunities, thereby serving as a
conduit for career guidance.
Students are encouraged to become active members of the student committees of the local
affiliates of their professional associations, such as PHANYC and the Greater New York
Dietetic Association. These associations offer students networking opportunities and
advice on career building.
There are specialized groups that have career counseling as one of their activities. For
instance, the Latino Health Fellowship Initiative provides ongoing informational listings
of organizations, field placements and employment opportunities and Latino healthrelated events throughout the year for Latino students and students interested in working
with Latino populations.
Students frequently are invited to attend career fairs that are sponsored by CUNY
campuses or by governmental agencies and private organizations.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
214
4.6.b. Description of the procedures by which students may communicate their concerns
to school officials, including information about how these procedures are publicized
and about the aggregate number of complaints submitted for each of the last three
years.
The university recognizes its responsibility to establish procedures for addressing student
complaints about faculty conduct that is not protected by academic freedom and not
addressed in other procedures. Therefore, in January 2007, the CUNY Board of Trustees
adopted a university-wide policy regarding student complaints about faculty conduct that are
not protected by academic freedom. All units of CUNY must subscribe to this statement. As
such, it appears on the constituent websites1.
The CUNY Office of Academic Affairs (OAA) maintains an electronic suggestion box at
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=y2weo5thPTRacDHlIGCIBg_3d_3d, which is
designed to enable all CUNY faculty and staff as well as students to share ideas directly with
the OAA. Suggestions submitted are forwarded to the appropriate OAA personnel. Students
who want a response are asked to include their name and e-mail address, but that information
is optional. Some questions and comments may be publicized, with any identifying
information removed.
Through college catalogs, student handbooks, orientation materials and individual course
syllabi, SPH students are made aware of policies regarding fair and ethical practices. For
example:
During orientation, students are advised to familiarize themselves with college policies,
which are described in Criterion 4.6.a.
Students are advised that if there is a complaint about a faculty member, the issue should
first be broached to the faculty member and then in progressive order to the program
director and the campus director. At any point, the student may wish to contact the college
ombudsman.
The ombudsman is empowered to investigate complaints and grievances by any member
of the college community (student, faculty, staff, or administration) about a problem or
condition in the college. When requested and where possible, the anonymity of a
complainant will be protected, and names will not be used in any reports the ombudsman
may make. When someone feels unfairly treated or unjustly disadvantaged, the
ombudsman advises the person of the available appeals procedures, recommends
corrective action to be taken by the appropriate college officers or recommends changes in
college procedures or regulations that would eliminate such injustices in the future.
1
Brooklyn:
http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/mkframe/mkframe.htm?frontURL=http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/info/right.
htm/
Graduate Center: http://www.gc.cuny.edu/current_students/handbook/complaints.htm/
Hunter: http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/studentservices/advising/policies-sub/policies-student-complaints/
Lehman: http://www.lehman.cuny.edu/lehman/programs/undergrad-bulletin/1819.htm/
SPH: www.cuny.edu/sph
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
215
It is a policy of the university that information about grade appeals will appear in every
course syllabus. When there is a grade dispute, students are advised to appeal in a
progressive order to the instructor, program director and campus director. Students have
the right to request in writing that the associate dean for academic affairs appoint a student
as a member to the Grade Appeals Committee. This appeal conference should be held
within the first five weeks of the semester after receipt of the grade, in accordance with
the ―College-wide Grade Appeals Procedures‖ adopted by the Senate in 1985. This
information appears in the college catalog.
Over the past three years, there have been no complaints lodged at the DPH program or
the MPH programs at Lehman and Brooklyn. According to the campus director at Hunter
College, since July 2006, several complaints from students were received regarding
enrollment in filled classes and grading, but these issues were resolved in her office.
Similarly, the college ombudsman’s office reports that during the same period, no
complaints were received. Since no complaints lodged by students have gone beyond the
campus director’s office for the past three years, the Program has no student complaints
filed.
4.6.c. Information about student satisfaction with advising and career counseling
services.
Academic Advising
Student satisfaction with academic advising and career counseling is gauged by the student
exit survey and during the student focus group. In addition, students are given the
opportunity during the required student meeting held every semester to express their
concerns about advising and career counseling. Most recently, a survey was conducted at a
student town hall meeting of the SPH students in September 2010. This survey asked
students about their satisfaction with advisement and career counseling.
The findings of the exit survey over the past two years show that the majority of students find
advisement either entirely adequate (34% to 39%) or somewhat adequate (16% to 39%). A
sizable minority found advising completely inadequate (11% to 21%). The September survey
of students found comparable results. During the student focus groups, students made the
following comments:
Students should be better informed of whom their advisers are, especially when advisers
are changed.
Faculty should offer consistent advice and ensure that students receive the same
information from different faculty members. Students reported that they received
contradictory information from different advisers or when comparing advice received
from the same adviser with their colleagues.
Advisement sessions should be longer than the usual 20 minutes allotted to students
during registration periods.
Not all faculty are as knowledgeable about the courses and course sequencing as they
should be. Students complained of receiving contradictory or wrong information.
Students need earlier and better advising on fieldwork and culminating experience, and
the website should provide better information on these courses.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
216
The Dean’s Cabinet has responded to these assessments and comments in three ways:
The associate dean for academic affairs has provided more guidance in advising
approaches and content. An advising guidance sheet was prepared and reviewed at faculty
meetings.
The advisement period before student registration has been expanded to one-half hour.
Faculty continue to be available to students on an as-needed basis. Faculty members are
required to schedule at least three office hours per week.
The associate dean for academic affairs convened a session with the faculty to review
advisement procedures and faculty responsibilities.
Career Counseling
As part of the survey administered during the September town hall meeting, students were
asked whether they had ever sought career advice from their academic advisers and whether
they were ever offered career advising from them. About 18% said that they had sought or
were offered advice from their advisors. Fewer students (about 8%) responded that they
sought advice from their college’s office of career services or from some other source.
Students also were asked about the career services they would most likely take advantage of.
The two services that received the highest ratings were job listings and internship
opportunities (67%) and career advancement and networking (49%). This latter statistic on
job listings is consistent with the fact that anecdotally, students are very pleased with the
frequent job announcements on the LISTSERVS. Based on the large number of students who
subscribe to them, it is assumed that the electronic communication system is of value.
The Dean’s Cabinet has acted quickly upon the results of the survey by ensuring that career
advising becomes a part of every advisement session every semester. As mentioned above,
SPH leadership has convened advisement-training sessions for faculty and has included a
discussion of career advisement as part of those sessions.
4.6.d. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
This criterion is met.
Strengths:
SPH has well-developed and publicized advising services for students from the time they
express interest in the program through graduation.
There are well-defined and publicized procedures for communicating concerns to school
officials and leveling formal and informal complaints.
The director of student services is working more closely with campus and university
career services and alumni offices to enhance career advisement services.
CUNY School of Public Health – November 15, 2010
217