Institutional/Operational Policies

Committee on Student Affairs (COSA) Operational Policy

I. Introduction

The Committee on Student Affairs (COSA) is a standing committee of the RSOM Faculty Senate at the Renaissance School of Medicine. COSA promotes a respectful, professional, and inclusive learning environment. It reviews individual concerns about mistreatment or unprofessional behavior by faculty or staff that may affect medical students.
COSA considers and recommends actions to the RSOM Dean and the RSOM Faculty Senate Executive Committee on matters affecting student well-being.

II. Committee Composition

COSA is composed of the following members:

• COSA has nine voting faculty members appointed by the Faculty Senate. Faculty may be from Stony Brook University or its clinical affiliates (NUMC, Northport VA, and Southampton). At least two must be from Stony Brook University. One must be from the Northport VA. Faculty may come from any department, but the group should include at least three people with expertise or responsibility for: a) graduate medical education; b) pre-clinical undergraduate medical education; and c) clinical undergraduate medical education.
• Medical Student Representatives:
  • One voting student member from each class year (MS1–MS4), selected via an application and interview process in coordination with the Office of Student Affairs
• Ex Officio (Non-Voting) Members:
  • The Associate Dean for Student Affairs
  • Representatives from the Office of Undergraduate Medical Education (UME)

III. Term Limits

By RSOM Faculty Senate By-Laws, COSA chairs and co-chairs serve four-year terms. Standing committee members serve three-year terms. These limits help with continuity, institutional memory, and broader faculty involvement.

IV. Voting Procedure and Quorum Policy

This policy ensures COSA decisions reflect the will of its members and maintain process integrity. COSA votes on official matters only with a quorum present. Quorum is 50% plus one of the total voting membership.

Once a quorum is reached, decisions are made by a simple majority of those present. Voting can be conducted in person, electronically, or by other approved means, as long as all members have equal access and receive adequate notice. The vote results are recorded and shared with members.    

V. Scope and Responsibilities

COSA is responsible for: 

• Reviewing individual reports of medical student mistreatment or unprofessional behavior involving faculty or staff.
• Assessing the nature and context of the reported concerns.
• Sending letters to the individuals involved and their supervisors with recommendations for professional development.

COSA gives de-identified feedback to the Faculty Senate, RSOM leadership, and stakeholders, including medical students. This feedback supports improvements in the learning environment and helps close the feedback loop.

VI. Categories of Concern Reviewed by COSA

COSA reviews individual concerns primarily related to:

• Verbal mistreatment or intimidation
• Physical harm or threat of physical harm
• Discrimination or harassment based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, disability, or other protected status.
• Unprofessional behavior by educators or clinical staff, including quid pro quo and asking students to perform personal services
• Gender-based mistreatment
• Violations of norms for a respectful learning environment

COSA does not review concerns about academic dishonesty, grading disputes, or curriculum content or design.

VII. Reporting Mechanisms

Medical students can report concerns through official university and RSOM channels, including:

• Direct reports to the Associate Dean for Student Affairs
• Navex Reporting Mechanism (third-party reporting system that can be either confidential or anonymous)
• Mistreatment Notes (via CBase)
• Professionalism Notes (Stony Brook Medicine website)
• Course and Clerkship Evaluations (anonymous)
• End-of-Phase Focus Groups
• Gender-Based Mistreatment Committee (GBMC)
• Learning Environment Concerns Committee (LECC)

VIII. How Reported Events Are Addressed

1. Initial Reporting

Students file concerns using an approved reporting mechanism. The choice of mechanism—anonymous, confidential, or attributed—determines if the reporter's identity is shared during review.

2. Central Review by the Associate Dean for Student Affairs

The Associate Dean for Student Affairs reviews all submitted reports and:

• Aggregates and assesses incoming reports.
• Refers urgent issues to appropriate offices (e.g., Title IX, Human Resources, Department Chairs).
• Identifies individual-reported concerns appropriate for COSA review.
• Prepares de-identified or redacted summaries of these reports for COSA’s review.

3. COSA Review Process

When COSA receives a report:

• The committee reviews the details of the concern.
• Evaluates the behavior described in the report.
• Decides whether communication to the involved parties is warranted.

4. Communication to Faculty or Staff

If COSA determines that a concern merits follow-up:

• A formal letter is sent to the faculty or staff member named in the report.
• A copy also goes to the immediate supervisor, such as the Course Director, Clerkship Director, or Department Chair.

5. Each letter includes:

• A general, non-identifiable description of the concern.
• An emphasis on maintaining a respectful and professional learning environment.
• Recommendations for professional reflection or improvement, such as seeking feedback or mentoring.

IX. Meetings and Documentation

• COSA meets regularly during the academic year to review student reports, discuss cases, and make decisions.
• The committee will convene a minimum of eight times per academic year.
• COSA will address concerns within 30 days of receipt.
• Meetings are private except for invited individuals. All deliberations are confidential.
• Internal records are maintained for all cases reviewed and letters sent.
• An annual de-identified summary report is submitted to the RSOM Faculty Senate, which includes:
  • Common themes
  • Institutional areas of concern
  • Recommendations for improving the learning climate

X.  Recusal

COSA members must recuse themselves from any case where their impartiality may reasonably be questioned. This includes, but is not limited to:

• Direct involvement in the allegation, close personal relationships with involved parties, and perceived bias due to prior opinions or actions.

XI. Policy Review

This operational policy is reviewed annually by COSA faculty and the RSOM Faculty Senate Executive Committee. Revisions must be approved by a vote of the RSOM Faculty Senate.

XII. Conclusion

COSA plays a vital role in maintaining RSOM’s commitment to a safe, inclusive, and professional learning environment. By reviewing individual concerns and providing constructive, confidential feedback to involved parties, COSA helps promote accountability, foster professional development, and support the continuous improvement of the educational experience.

Approval Date: November, 2025

Committee on Academic and Professional Progress (CAPP) Operational Policy

I. Introduction

The Committee on Academic and Professional Progress (CAPP) is charged by the Faculty Senate of the Renaissance School of Medicine (RSOM) to oversee students' adherence to RSOM’s academic and professional standards. CAPP is tasked with making decisions regarding academic standing and professional progress and ensures that students are meeting the established expectations for success.

CAPP is composed of faculty members from both basic science and clinical departments, as well as representatives from other educational sites, such as the VA. Ex officio members from the Dean’s Office include the Vice Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education, the Associate Dean for Student Affairs, the Dean of Admissions, and the Associate Dean for Clinical Education. Additionally, four elected student representatives, one from each class of medical students, serve as non-voting members and participate in all deliberations.

CAPP meets monthly to review student progress, deliberate on cases, and make decisions. Faculty members are the only voting members on the committee.

II. Criteria for Referral to CAPP

Students may be referred to CAPP for review based on various academic or professional concerns, including but not limited to:

• Accumulation of five exam failures in Phase I.
• Failure of two Phase I courses in one academic year.
• Failure of two or more NBME exams in Phase II.
• Failure of a clinical clerkship in Phase II.
• Behavioral or professionalism concerns at any time during their education.

If a student is identified for review, they will receive a letter of invitation to the next CAPP meeting from the Chair of CAPP.

III. Student Rights in CAPP Proceedings

Meeting Format:

CAPP meetings are closed, except for invited individuals. All deliberations are confidential.

Advocates:

Students may bring a Renaissance School of Medicine medical student or faculty member as an advocate to the meeting. Legal representation is not permitted, and the proceedings of the meeting cannot be recorded by the student or advocate.

Written Statements:

Students may submit a written statement for distribution to the committee before or during the meeting.

IV. Decision-Making and Actions

CAPP will review the student's academic record, any submitted statements, and other relevant documents to determine appropriate actions. Actions may include, but are not limited to:

• A letter of warning
• Remediation plan
• Dismissal

CAPP will notify the student of its decision in writing within ten days of the review. The decision is final unless subject to the appeal processes outlined below.

V. Appeal Process

Non-Dismissal Decisions:

Decisions other than dismissal, suspension, or repeating a year may be appealed back to CAPP if:

• Pertinent evidence was available at the time of the initial review but was not presented to CAPP, or
• There was an error in the review process.

If an appeal is filed, CAPP will review the case and notify the student of its determination within 30 days. This decision is final.

Dismissal, Suspension, or Repeat Year Decisions:

Decisions resulting in dismissal, suspension, or the repetition of a year may be appealed to the Dean of the School of Medicine. The student must submit an appeal within 14 calendar days of receiving the CAPP decision.

• If no appeal is submitted within 14 days, the CAPP decision becomes final and effective on the 15th day.
• If an appeal is submitted, CAPP’s decision is held in abeyance pending the outcome of the appeal.

The Dean of the School of Medicine will review the student’s file and consult with the Chair of CAPP and other relevant parties before making a final decision. The Dean will communicate the final decision to the student within 30 days.

VI. Recusal Policy

Any member of CAPP with a conflict of interest regarding a student case must recuse themselves from the presentation, deliberation, and vote. A conflict of interest exists under the following conditions:

• The member is the director of a course, clerkship, or translational pillar that prompted the referral.
• The member has a familial or social relationship with the student (e.g., significant other, family member, or close personal relationship).
• The member has a financial interest in the outcome of the case.
• The member has provided health services to the student.
• The member is aware of any bias that could impair judgment.
• The member has participated or intends to participate in another level of review regarding the student’s case.

VII. Review and Actions for Non-Advancement

Circumstances that may lead to a student decision not to advance to the next academic period include:

• Failure of two Phase I courses.
• Failure of six or more Phase I exams.
• Failure of two or more clerkships in Phase II.
• Accumulation of multiple Zs due to failures of NBME clerkship subject exams.

In these cases, the student will be invited to a CAPP meeting where their entire academic record will be reviewed in context, and the student will have the opportunity to present their perspective.

VIII. Time Limits for Completion of Degree Requirements

Students must complete Phase I within three and a half years after their initial enrollment. A maximum of two attempts are allowed to complete Phase I.

All requirements for the MD degree must be completed within seven years of first enrollment (five years for transfer students after the first year).

Time spent in dual degree programs (e.g., MSTP) does not count toward this limit.

Students failing to meet these time limits are subject to review by CAPP and may be dismissed.

IX. Dismissal Criteria

Reasons for dismissal include, but are not limited to:

•    Failure to pass the NBME Step 1 exam after four attempts.
•    Failure to maintain academic integrity or professional standards.
•    Failure to meet the above-mentioned time limits

In such cases, CAPP will review the student's case and, if necessary, vote on dismissal.

X. Pre-CAPP Review Process

Before a student's case is brought to CAPP, it is discussed in a "Pre-CAPP" meeting attended by the CAPP Chair, Associate and Assistant Deans for Student Affairs, the Registrar, medical education specialists, and learning specialists. Following this discussion, the CAPP Chair determines whether the student should be invited to a CAPP meeting.

XI. Conclusion

CAPP is entrusted with ensuring that students meet academic and professional standards throughout their medical education. Through fair review processes, CAPP aims to support students in their development and success while upholding the integrity of the Renaissance School of Medicine.

Approval Date: April 2025nswer to question is written here

Committee on Curriculum (CC) Operational Policy

I. Introduction

The Committee on Curriculum (CC) at the Renaissance School of Medicine (RSOM) holds primary authority—granted by the RSOM Faculty Senate By-laws—for overseeing the MD program curriculum. Guided by the School’s mission, goals and strategic plan, the CC is responsible for defining the educational objectives of the MD degree, determining the curriculum’s overall content, structure, sequencing, and duration. The Committee reviews and approves course directors and conducts regular reviews of individual courses and the curriculum to ensure ongoing quality and relevance.

II. Committee on Curriculum – Charge and Functions

The Committee on Curriculum (CC), under the authority of the RSOM Faculty Senate, is charged with the following responsibilities:

1. Curriculum Goals: Develop, regularly review, and update statements that define the goals and institutional learning objectives of all RSOM curricula.
2. Curriculum Content: Define the overall content of the curriculum, including the approval of the development and design of new courses and curricular topics.
3. Curricular Structure: Recommend and approve modifications to course content, structure, size, sequencing, academic calendar, and course/clerkship leadership as needed to achieve curricular goals.
4. Curriculum Oversight: Review and manage the evaluation of courses and the overall curriculum to ensure alignment with institutional learning objectives and LCME accreditation standards; monitor student progress and educational outcomes.
5. Academic Policies and Procedures: Develop, review, and approve academic policies and procedures.
6. Stakeholder Consultation: Coordinate with affected departments and schools when curricular changes may impact their programs.
7. Reporting: Report committee actions to the Dean and Faculty Senate.

III. Leadership

The Chair of the Committee on Curriculum is appointed, approved, and renewed in accordance with RSOM Faculty Senate by-laws for a four-year term. The Vice Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education (UGME) serves as the non-voting, ex officio administrative co-chair.

IV. Voting Membership

The voting membership on the Committee on Curriculum is comprised of:

• 7 faculty from Basic Science Departments
• 10 faculty from Clinical Departments
• 1 faculty member at-large
• 1 faculty from the Veterans Affairs Medical Center Northport
• 1 faculty from each clinical affiliate sites
• Phase I Subcommittee Chair
• Phase II/III Subcommittee Chair
• 1 student from each medical school class
• 1 MSTP student

No more than one voting member per department, except for the Department of Medicine and at-large positions. Faculty serve 3-year renewable terms (max 3 terms). For the process of election and selection of committee members, please see RSOM Faculty Senate By-laws, Article V, Section 4. Students are chosen by peers and must remain in good academic standing.

V. Ex officio and Other Non-voting Members

• Dean, Renaissance School of Medicine
• Vice Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education
• Vice Dean for Faculty Affairs
• Associate Dean for Student Affairs
• Associate Dean for Clinical Education
• Assistant Dean for Phase I Curriculum
• Associate Dean for Education, School of Dental Medicine
• Leadership (Chair, Co-Chairs) Senate Committee on Student Affairs
• Leadership (Chair, Co-Chairs) Senate Committee on Academic and Professional Progress
• Liaison for Academic IT at the Health Sciences Schools
• Director, Academic Evaluation and Assessment
• Medical Education Specialist/Director, Pathways to Success
• Instructional Design and Technology Specialist
• Director, HSC Library (or designee)

VI. Responsibilities of Voting Members

• Commit to a 3-year term
• Attend at least 70% of meetings (unless excused)
• Engage in discussions leading to recommendations put forth by the CC
• Participate in 80% of votes, in person or electronic

VII. Proceedings

The CC meets monthly (typically first Monday at 8:00 a.m. via Zoom). Meetings are open to all faculty and students, except in extraordinary circumstances.

1. Meeting Format

   • Review and approval of minutes
   • Announcements
   • Subcommittee reports
     • Phase I
     • Phase II/III
     • Learner Assessment, Curriculum Evaluation and Scholarship (LACES)
   • Student Curriculum Report
   • LCME Compliance Monitoring Committee Report
   • Old business
   • New business
   • Adjournment

2. Decision-Making and Actions

   Proposals can be brought directly to the CC from members of the Dean’s Office, course/clerkship directors, faculty, or students. All relevant proposals that have been brought to and approved by the CC subcommittees shall be submitted to the Curriculum Committee (CC) for discussion and final vote for approval. Supporting documents are distributed in advance with the meeting agenda to allow for prior review. A quorum (more than half of all voting members) is required to proceed with voting; if a quorum is not met, the vote occurs electronically. Approval requires a simple majority. Decisions are final and reported to the RSOM Dean and Vice Dean for UGME. The Dean may request reconsideration if a proposal involves unavailable funding or conflicts with RSOM, Stony Brook University, SUNY, NY State, or LCME policies.

3. Revisions to CC Charges and Operations

   Any changes to the charges or responsibilities of the CC or its standing subcommittees must be presented, discussed, and approved by majority vote of the CC, and then submitted to the RSOM Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate for approval, and then to the Faculty Senate for majority vote. The CC is responsible for maintaining a record of all changes to its operational policies.

VIII. Subcommittees of the CC

The CC has three subcommittees: Phase I, Phase II/III, and LACES (Learner Assessment, Curriculum Evaluation, and Scholarship). Each reports monthly to the CC. The Phase I and Phase II/III subcommittees oversee day-to-day operations of the pre-clinical and clinical curricula, implementing CC policies and addressing instructional practices. LACES reviews curriculum content, outcomes, and student performance across all phases, and evaluates the effectiveness of the LEARN curriculum. LACES also promotes curricular innovations and scholarship through evidence-based literature. Detailed descriptions of each subcommittee’s charge, membership, and operations follow.

1. Phase I Subcommittee

   • Charge:
     • Oversee pre-clinical curriculum design, delivery, and leadership through collaboration and cooperation between Phase I courses to assure horizontal integration
     • Collaborate with the UGME Office and the LACES Subcommittee in completing periodic reviews of the structure and success of the Phase I curriculum
     • Develop common and consistent policies for the teaching and evaluation of students across segments of the Phase I curriculum
     • Explore innovative teaching and assessment methods and educational technologies
     • Collaborate with the Phase II/III and LACES subcommittees to assure vertical integration of the LEARN curriculum
   • Leadership:
     The Chair of the Phase I Subcommittee is appointed by the CC Chair, in consultation with the Vice Dean for UGME, from among current Phase I course directors. Chairs serve a 3-year term and may be reappointed for a second 3-year term. The Assistant Dean for the Phase I Curriculum serves as the ex officio (non-voting) administrative co-chair.
   • Voting Members:
     • Phase I Course Directors
     • Phase I Course Co-Directors
     • 2 medical students (one from each of the first two years) selected by the student body through the Student Senate
   • Ex officio and Other Non-voting Members:
     • Vice Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education
     • Associate Dean for Student Affairs
     • Assistant Dean for Phase I Curriculum
     • Associate Dean for Education, School of Dental Medicine
     • Liaison for Academic IT at the Health Sciences Schools
     • Director, Academic Evaluation and Assessment
     • Medical Education Specialist/Director, Pathways to Success
     • Instructional Design and Technology Specialist
     • Director of the Clinical Simulation Center
     • Student Success Coaches
   • Member Responsibilities:
     • Attend at least 70% of meetings (unless excused)
     • Engage in discussions leading to recommendations put forth to the CC
     • Participate in 80% of votes, in person or electronic
   • Proceedings:
     • The Phase I Subcommittee meets monthly on the fourth Thursday at 12:00 pm on Zoom.
     • The Phase I Subcommittee meets annually in joint sessions with the Phase II/III Subcommittee.

2. Phase II/III Subcommittee

   • Charge:
     • Oversee clinical curriculum design, delivery, and leadership through collaboration and cooperation between Phase II/III clerkships/courses to assure horizontal integration
     • Collaborate with the UGME Office and the LACES Subcommittee in completing periodic reviews of the structure and success of the Phase II/III curriculum
     • Develop common and consistent policies for the teaching and evaluation of students across segments of the Phase II/III curriculum
       •    Explore innovative teaching and assessment methods and educational technologies
       •    Collaborate with the Phase I and LACES subcommittees to assure vertical integration of the LEARN curriculum
   • Leadership:
     The Chair of the Phase II/III Subcommittee is appointed by the CC Chair, in consultation with the Vice Dean for UGME, from among current Phase II/III clerkship/course directors. Chairs serve a 3-year term and may be reappointed for a second 3-year term. The Associate Dean for Clinical Education serves as the ex officio (non-voting) administrative co-chair.
   • Voting Members:
     • Phase II/III Clerkship/Course Directors
     • Phase II/III Clerkship/Course Co-Directors
     • 2 Phase III medical students selected by the student body through the Student Senate
   • Ex officio and Other Non-voting Members:
     • Vice Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education
     • Associate Dean for Student Affairs
     • Assistant Dean for Phase I Curriculum
     • Associate Dean for Clinical Education
     • Liaison for Academic IT at the Health Sciences Schools
     • Director, Academic Evaluation and Assessment
     • Medical Education Specialist/Director, Pathways to Success
     • Instructional Design and Technology Specialist
     • Director of the Clinical Simulation Center
     • Student Success Coaches
   • Member Responsibilities:
     • Attend at least 70% of meetings (unless excused)
     • Engage in discussions leading to recommendations put forth to the CC
     • Participate in 80% of votes, in person or electronic
   • Proceedings:
     • The Phase II/III Subcommittee meets monthly on the 1st Monday at 12:00 pm on Zoom.
     • The Phase II/III Subcommittee meets annually in joint session with the Phase I Subcommittee.

3. LACES Subcommittee

   • Charge:
     • The broad charge of the LACES Subcommittee is to make a positive difference in the way we assess our students, evaluate our curriculum, and promote curricular innovations through evidence-based literature.
     • Promote the use of a variety of formative and summative assessment methods to ensure that the educational goals and institutional learning objectives of RSOM are achieved.
     • Provide quality control and improvement for the curriculum, through careful monitoring of program evaluation data (including student outcomes) and regularly scheduled reviews of courses, clerkships, and phases of the curriculum.
     • Review new courses/programs and take the lead on educational initiatives that will further strengthen and enhance the mission of the RSOM
     • Facilitate a scholarly approach to curriculum development; utilize both quantitative and qualitative methods to advance research in medical education; and disseminate scholarship related to the teaching and learning of medical students.
     • Report regularly its findings and recommendations to the Curriculum Committee, which has responsibility for overall management of the curriculum.
   • Leadership:
     The Chair of the LACES Subcommittee is the Director of Academic Evaluation and Assessment. The Vice Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education serves as the administrative co-chair.
   • Voting Membership:
     • At least 1 course director from each of the first two years in Phase I, selected from the Phase I Subcommittee
     • At least 1 clinical clerkship director from Phase II, selected from the Phase II/III Subcommittee
     • At least 1 clinical course director from Phase III, selected from the Phase II/III Subcommittee
     • At least 1 medical student from each of the three phases selected by the student body through the Student Senate. Student members must remain in good academic standing.
     • At least 2 faculty members-at-large who have been chosen by the Vice Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education because they have knowledge and skills that are important to the function and charge of the LACES Subcommittee.
   • Ex officio and Other Non-voting Members:
     • Assistant Dean for Phase I Curriculum
     • Associate Dean for Clinical Education
     • Director of the Clinical Simulation Center
     • Liaison for Academic IT at the Health Sciences Schools
     • Medical Education Specialist/Director, Pathways to Success
     • Instructional Design and Technology Specialist
     • Student Success Coaches
   • Member Responsibilities:
     • Serve a 3-year term
     • Attend at least 70% of meetings (unless excused)
     • Serve as a course reviewer for at least one Level 1 or Level 2 Course Review per academic year upon request of the committee co-chairs
     • Participate in school-wide efforts to collect programmatic data, including annual student focus groups
     • Engage in school-wide initiatives that significantly contribute towards the enhancement of programmatic evaluation efforts and curricular improvements
     • Engage in discussions that will lead to findings and recommendations put forth to the Curriculum Committee.
     • Participate in the review of current medical education literature, collaborate on medical education scholarly projects and activities, and, when applicable, provide mentorship to trainees interested in medical education research.
   • Proceedings:
     • The LACES Subcommittee meets monthly on the 4th Thursday at 8:00 am on Zoom.
     • LACES meetings are generally open to all RSOM faculty and students.

Approval Date: November 2025
 

Committee on Admissions Operations Policy

I. Introduction

The Committee on Admissions (COA) is a standing committee of the Faculty Senate at the Renaissance School of Medicine (RSOM). The COA is responsible for reviewing and screening all the medical school applications to RSOM, and determining which candidates have the appropriate academic and personal competencies to become outstanding physicians and fulfill the mission of our school of medicine. After screening, the COA invites candidates for two one-on-one virtual interviews to further assess the personal qualities of the interviewed candidate. Committee members who interview candidates forward their evaluation to the Executive Committee for further deliberations on who are  offered admissions, who are wait-listed and who are declined admissions.

II. Committee Composition

The COA is composed of about 80 faculty and 20 student members. The number of faculty members varies slightly each year depending on the numbers of faculty stepping off or on the committee.

III. Recruitment of Faculty and Students

• Faculty Members - Members of both the basic and clinical sciences faculty are recruited to serve on the COA by way of  an annual invitation sent by the RSOM Faculty Senate. This invitation includes a description of the roles and responsibilities of a COA member. Faculty must submit a letter of interest to the COA Chair that is reviewed by the Associate Dean for Admissions and the COA Chair. If the Associate Dean and COA Chair find no obvious conflict of interest, they schedule a follow up interview with the faculty member.

All new faculty members are trained in the COA’s  processes and expectations. Faculty members are expected to serve no less than a three-year term,  and there are no restrictions on the number of terms an individual may serve on the COA.

Faculty members are asked to recuse themselves from potential conflicts of interest. A typical conflict of interest occurs when a COA member has a personal relationship with an applicant or a relationship to an applicant through a member of their department. In such instances, the COA member is recused from interviews and deliberations.

• Student Members – Each year, the second-year class senators conduct an election of approximately 20 second-year students to serve on the COA. The names of the nominated students are forwarded to the Associate Dean for Admissions, who together with the COA Chair and the Assistant Dean for Admissions, conducts one-hour small-group interviews of the nominees.
  
  Students selected to serve on the COA are trained to interview applicants and assess those interviews using the interview scoring rubric. Student members of COA interview applicants during the fall (September- December) of their second year, and again during the winter of their fourth year (January-March). Student members are asked to recuse themselves from potential conflicts of interest.
   
• Executive Committee Members – The Executive Committee of the COA consists of the Chairperson of the COA and 12 veteran COA faculty members who have committed to serving on the Executive Committee for no fewer than three and no more than four consecutive years. Executive Committee members may serve two terms, but there must be a break of at least one year between the two terms. This gives other members of the COA the opportunity to serve on the Executive Committee, and it prevents people from serving too long.

Membership on the Executive Committee has additional responsibilities and time commitment, thus faculty membership on the Executive Committee changes in part annually.

• Ex-Officio Members of the Executive Committee – the following individuals serve as ex-officio members of the Executive Committee:
• Associate Dean for Admissions
• Associate Dean for Minority Student Affairs
• Assistant Dean for Minority Recruitment
• Assistant Dean for Admissions
• Director of the Master’s Degree in Physiology and Biophysics Post- Bac Program
• Director of Molecular Foundations in Medicine Course

Ex-Officio members can participate in deliberations/discussions at Executive Committee meetings, but do not vote with one exception. The Associate Dean for Admissions will vote only in the extremely rare instance of a tied vote.

IV. Scope and Responsibilities

Using the Application Management Program (AMP), all completed medical school applications are first pre-screened by the Associate Dean and Assistant Dean for Admissions. Applications  that merit further review based on established metrics are forwarded to veteran COA faculty members for a complete holistic review of the application.

First-year COA members only interview applicants. After completing their first year on the COA, members also screen applications.

• Holistic Review –  Faculty members are trained by the Associate and Assistant Deans for Admissions to screen applications to assess personal qualities based on letters of recommendation, personal statements, and responses to questions in the RSOM supplementary application. In addition, faculty members are trained to assess non-academic activities, health and research activities, and academic credentials. Faculty members are also trained to assess an applicant’s journey to choosing a career in medicine and whether they have overcome adverse conditions and hardships. The faculty reviewer completes a scoring instrument which is then returned to the RSOM Office of Admissions where scored applications are ranked for interviews.
   
• Interviews – Faculty and student members are trained by the Associate and Assistant Deans for Admissions to review applications and conduct interviews. Each applicant invited for an interview meets with two members of the COA, at least one of whom must be a faculty member. After interviewing a prospective candidate, the COA member completes an evaluation instrument (with qualitative and quantitative measures) which is then returned to the RSOM Office of Admissions.
   
• Executive Committee Admissions Decisions – The Associate Dean and Assistant Dean for Admissions review the most recently interviewed applicants and prepare and present a report on each interviewed applicant to the Executive Committee of COA. This report includes any concerns raised by interviewers or the Associate and Assistant Deans. These concerns can include a history of academic difficulties, institutional actions, professionalism issues, poor communication skills, etc. Based on the aforementioned  report, as well as discussion of issues of concern, Executive Committee members are given the opportunity to ask questions and offer perspectives prior to voting on whether a candidate is offered admission, wait-listed, or declined admission.

V. Meetings

The Committee on Admissions meets twice at the beginning of the year. The first meeting of the year is to train new members to assess applications and to conduct interviews. At the second meeting of the year, the RSOM Dean gives the COA its charges, which includes goals and the mission of the RSOM.

• Frequency – The Executive Committee of the COA meets twice monthly between September and April to discuss interviewed candidates.
• Quorum – Including the Executive Committee Chair, there are 13 members of the Executive Committee. A quorum is at least 50% (7 members) of the committee membership.

Review of Policies and Procedures

At the end of each admissions cycle and prior to the beginning of the next admissions cycle, the Executive Committee meets to discuss the successes of the prior year as well as review what policies and procedures should be considered for modification. All recommended  changes to policy and procedures are then presented to the Faculty Senate for further consideration before enacting.

Admission to Special Programs

Scholars for Medicine is a combined BA–MD program that identifies exceptional high school students committed to a medical career. Applicants submit the standard university application, which is reviewed by a committee of faculty and administrators from the Stony Brook University Office of Admissions. Forty applications are forwarded to the RSOM Committee on Admissions (COA) for further evaluation. Selected candidates are interviewed by COA members, and conditional offers are extended based on completion of specified academic and professional requirements.

• SUPREMES is a BA–MD program for current Stony Brook University undergraduates from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. Eligibility requires completion of at least three and no more than five semesters of full-time coursework at SBU. Applications are reviewed by the RSOM COA, and qualified candidates are interviewed. Conditional offers for future admission to RSOM are extended to applicants who demonstrate strong academic and professional potential.
   
• Post-Baccalaureate Master’s in Physiology and Biophysics is designed for candidates with strong personal attributes who require additional scientific preparation prior to medical school. Funded by Associated Medical Schools of New York (AMSNY), the program targets students from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. Applicants are interviewed by RSOM COA members and must meet defined academic and professional criteria for admission.
   
• Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP) is an NIH-sponsored combined MD–PhD program. Applicants apply through AMCAS and the applications are reviewed by MSTP leadership and faculty. Selected candidates are interviewed by MSTP faculty and students. The MSTP committee submits recommended candidates to the RSOM COA Executive Committee for final review and decision, following the same process as standard MD applicants.

VI. Conclusion 

The Committee on Admissions continues to meet its responsibility of evaluating and selecting very qualified and competent individuals whose career goals are congruent with the mission of the Renaissance School of Medicine. Our graduates are recruited to top tier residency programs and then go on to have illustrious careers as academic and community physicians, researchers, and public health professionals. Many of our alumni practice in underserved communities and safety net hospitals.

Approval Date: January 12, 2026

Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) Policy

I. Introduction

The Renaissance School of Medicine (RSOM) is committed to continuous quality improvement (CQI) of the medical education program through ongoing, systematic monitoring of compliance with the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) accreditation standards and its achievement of measurable outcomes used to enhance programmatic quality.

Results of the CQI process may be used to inform policy or procedure revisions, make recommendations to committees and the RSOM leadership, and identify short- and long-term programmatic goals for specific LCME elements. 

II. Scope and Responsibilities

CQI responsibilities consist of:

• Development of criteria for including an element in the CQI plan
• Identification of LCME elements to be monitored
• Identification of measures of compliance and source of data
• Identification of metrics to determine compliance
• Establishment of benchmarks
• Delineation of responsible and accountable parties
• Determination of frequency of monitoring
• Management of the CQI calendar to ensure timely collection, analysis, and dissemination of data
• Preparation of annual status reports for the Dean, Committee on the Curriculum (CC) and relevant stakeholders
  .

III. Procedures and Guidelines

LCME elements which are prioritized for more frequent monitoring and/or improvement in the CQI plan are identified based on the following categories:

• Elements that include an explicit requirement for monitoring or involve a regularly occurring process
• New or recently revised changes in LCME expectations related to performance in elements
• Elements that could be reviewed to ensure that policies are congruent with current operations
• Elements that directly or indirectly affect the core operations of the school
• Elements that were cited in the medical school's previous accreditation surveys
• Elements that were commonly cited in the last three years
• Other elements that were identified through program evaluation processes, the Committee on the Curriculum, and/or its subcommittees.

IV. Process for Review and Monitoring

The LCME Compliance Monitoring Committee, a RSOM standing committee, has primary responsibility for overseeing CQI efforts. In conjunction with co-chairs of the Committee on the Curriculum (CC) and its subcommittees (e.g. Phase I, Phase II/III, and LACES), subject matter experts, and key stakeholders, the LCME Compliance Monitoring Committee regularly reviews, at minimum on a monthly basis, LCME standards and elements to identify gaps, guide program modifications, and ensure follow-through to make improvements to support accreditation compliance and institutional goals. The LCME Compliance Monitoring Committee employs a structured, data-driven process to inform CQI and strategic planning activities and evaluate the effectiveness of any modifications, new goals, or initiatives.

Under the Office of UGME, the LCME Compliance Monitoring Committee, reports to the Dean, the Committee on the Curriculum, and relevant stakeholders, providing recommendations and outcomes related to CQI and accreditation activities. The LCME Compliance Monitoring Committee may coordinate efforts with CC subcommittees and other stakeholders to ensure transparency and continuous oversight of the medical education program. Based on the LCME Compliance Monitoring Committee’s recommendations, the Committee on the Curriculum approves and ensures the implementation of CQI and accreditation initiatives and decisions.

The frequency of review of elements is based on their citation risk which is as follows:

At a minimum, the LCME Compliance Monitoring Committee membership is comprised of: the Vice Dean of UGME, the Assistant Dean for Curriculum, the Assistant Dean of Preclinical Education, the Director of Assessment and Evaluation, and the Director of Pathways to Success.

V. Effective Date

This policy is effective immediately.

VI.    References to Regulations and/or Other Related Policies

LCME Element 1.1: Strategic Planning and Continuous Quality Improvement

VII.    Policy Managements

Executive Stakeholder: Vice Dean of Undergraduate Medical Education
Oversight Office: LCME Compliance Monitoring Committee
 

Approval Date: February 2, 2026

Faculty and Non-Faculty Instructors Preparation for Teaching Policy

I. Introduction

Faculty and non-faculty instructors in the Renaissance School of Medicine (RSOM) are critical contributors to medical student learning. This policy codifies the requirement that those who teach or supervise medical students receive appropriate training. 

II. Policy

To be adequately prepared, all faculty and non-faculty instructors who teach or supervise RSOM medical students, must be familiar with the following:
Overall RSOM 20 Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs).

• The objectives of the course or clerkship in which they are teaching medical students.
• Key policies related to working with and supervising students (e.g., Policy on Work Hours, Duty Hours, Supervision of Students, Student Mistreatment, Exposure to Infectious and Environment Hazards).
• Faculty development guides, resources, and tools necessary to effectively teach and assess medical students.
• Course/Clerkship-specific orientation materials/resources that may include: roles and responsibilities as teachers, required clinical experiences (RCEs), and medical student assessment using the clinical performance evaluation form.
• Faculty and non-faculty instructor’s familiarity with objectives and policies is accomplished through participation in required training through review of relevant materials provided.

III. Scope

This policy applies to all RSOM faculty and non-faculty instructors who teach or supervise RSOM students.

IV. Procedures

A.    The Office of Undergraduate Medical Education (UGME) will collaborate with the Committee on the Curriculum subcommittees (i.e. Phase I subcommittee and Phase II/III subcommittee) to ensure high-quality teaching and a supportive learning environment for our medical students

B.    Prior to the start of the Fall semester (i.e. July/August) all faculty and non-faculty instructors who participate in teaching during courses, clerkships, and sub-internships are required to complete the Faculty and Resident Training Module (https://guides.library.stonybrook.edu/facresteachers). 

C.    The Office of UGME disseminates this training module by sending a request email with the links to the training module and the attestation form (https://stonybrookuniversity.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_1ySxq2nqThtck4K) to all course, clerkship and program directors prompting them to forward this information to all faculty and non-faculty instructors in their department who teach students via email distribution lists which are also shared with the Office of UGME. 

D.    Reminder emails are sent periodically until full compliance is achieved.

E.    Upon completion of the training module and attestation form, the faculty/non-faculty instructors will receive a confirmation email as documentation that they completed the requirement. The confirmation email also includes the link to the training module if they want to refer back to the materials at any time. Since the attestation form is collected using Qualtrics, the Office of UGME has records of the individuals who have attested to completing the training module and monitors completion rates. 

NOTE: Non-Faculty Instructors refer to Residents and Fellows. 

V. Effective Date

This policy is effective immediately.

VI.    References to Regulations and/or Other Related Policies

LCME Element 9.1: Preparation of Resident and Non-Faculty Instructors.

VII.    Policy Managements

Executive Stakeholder: Vice Dean of Undergraduate Medical Education
Oversight Office: LCME Compliance Monitoring Committee
 

Approval Date: February 2, 2026