Report of Site Visit Team FindingsChecklist
Medical Dosimetry
Name of Program:City/State:
Date(s) Visited:
Clinical Setting(s)
Visited
(City/State)
(City/State)
(City/State)
Name of Team Chair:
Team Chair Signature:
Name of Team Member:
Team Member Signature
The Report of Site Visit Team Findings Checklist is based on the Joint Review Committee on Education in
Radiologic Technology (JRCERT) Standards for an Accredited Educational Program in Medical Dosimetry adopted April, 2010; implemented January 1, 2011.
Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology
20 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 2850
Chicago, IL 60606-3182
312.704.5300 ● (Fax) 312.704.5304
Copyright © 2010 by the JRCERT (05/10)
1Medical Dosimetry
Introduction and Instructions
The Report of Site Visit Team Findings Checklist (Checklist)has been designed by the Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology (JRCERT) to assure consistency in the evaluation of medical dosimetry programs. The checklist provides assurance that each site visit team is substantiating compliance with each standard by reviewing specific, pertinent information. Utilize this instrument in conjunction with the electronic Report of Site Visit Team Findings (RSVTF)available through the JRCERT Accreditation Management System (AMS).
The primary functions of the site visit team are to verify information, to assess program outcomes, and to report findings. Again, this is accomplished, in part, through the completion of the Checklist but in no way does the Checklist supersede the actual RSVTF. The JRCERT is responsible for determining the extent and degree of program compliance with the JRCERT STANDARDS.
ThecompletedChecklist should be signed by each team member and uploaded to Standard Six - Objective 6.5 of the electronic RSVTF or emailed to the JRCERT at no later than one week post onsite evaluation.
Standard One
Integrity
Standard One: The program demonstrates integrity in the following:
- Representations to communities of interest and the public,
- Pursuit of fair and equitable academic practices, and
- Treatment of, and respect for, students, faculty, and staff.
Please indicate evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard One (Check all that apply).
Reviewed the institution catalog
Reviewed the employee/faculty handbook
Reviewed the student handbook
Reviewed published program materials
Reviewed master plan of education
Reviewed policies/procedures that assure equitable treatment of students, faculty, and staff
Reviewed institution’s/program’s published policies/procedures to assure security and confidentiality of student records and other program materials
Reviewed institutional/program grievance procedure
Reviewed formal grievance record(s) and how complaint was resolved, if applicable
Determined pattern of complaints that impacts compliance with Standards, if applicable
Reviewed student records, including clinical records
Reviewed graduate records
Reviewed course objectives
Reviewed student schedule(s)
Reviewed student clinical assignment schedule(s)
Reviewed listing of enrolled students in relation to clinical assignments
Reviewed clinical placement process
Reviewed materials made available to students, faculty and general public via institution’s/program’s Web site
Admissions policies
Tuition and fees (including fees associated with distance education, background check(s), and drug screening, if
applicable)
Refund policies
Academic calendars (including specific start and stop dates for each term, recognized holidays, and breaks)
Clinical obligations
Grading system
Graduation requirements
Criteria for transfer credit
Institutions with which the program has an established articulation agreement
Reviewed publications that contain the program’s mission statement, goals, and student learning outcomes
Reviewed the program’s Web site that contains the program’s mission statement, goals, and student learning outcomes
Reviewed samples of meeting minutes to assure engagement of communities of interest
Reviewed evaluations (e.g., course and/or faculty) to assure engagement of communities of interest
Reviewed surveys (e.g., exit, graduate, and/or employer) to assure engagement of communities of interest
Reviewed institutional and/or program admission policies
Reviewed the institution’s and/or program’s non-discrimination statement
Reviewed the institution’s and/or program’s admissions application form
Reviewed the institution’s employee/faculty application form
Reviewed published institutional/programmatic materials that outline procedures for maintaining integrity of distance education courses
Reviewed the process for student identification (associated with distance education courses)
Reviewed institution/program publications that clearly identify distance education, weekend, or evening curricular track, if applicable
Toured program offices
Toured clinical setting(s)
Toured the institution’s and program’s Web site
Interviewed institutional administrators
Interviewed Admissions personnel
Interviewed Registrar
Interviewed program director
Interviewed faculty (full- and part-time)
Interviewed students
Interviewed graduates (at clinical sites, if applicable)
Interviewed employers of graduates (at clinical sites, if applicable)
Interviewed clinical preceptor(s)
Interviewed clinical staff
Interviewed members of various communities of interest
Please identify any other evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard One.
Standard Two:
Resources
Standard Two: The program has sufficient resources to support the quality and effectiveness of the educational process.
Please indicate evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard Two (Check all that apply).
Reviewed institutional and program organizational chart
Reviewed meeting minutes that demonstrate institutional support of program
Reviewed materials that indicate sufficient administrative support for distance education courses, if applicable
Reviewed published program materials
Reviewed master plan of education
Reviewed institutional policies in relation to teaching loads and release time
Reviewed position descriptions
Reviewed institutional and/or program policies in relation to professional development opportunities
Reviewed program budget or other fiscal appropriations
Reviewed evidence of faculty participation in professional development opportunities
Reviewed materials that document faculty are provided sufficient training and/or orientation to develop and enhance distance education courses prior to implementation
Reviewed learning management platform (e.g., Blackboard, Moodle, Desire2Learn, etc.)
Reviewed program’s staffing plan
Reviewed JRCERT program information and clinical setting summary (formerly, JRCERT database)
Reviewed clinical records
Reviewed learning resources (e.g., educational software, classroom/laboratory accessory devices, etc.)
Reviewed surveys and/or meeting minutes for review and maintenance of learning resources
Reviewed published institution/program materials that outline the accessibility to student services. If program offers an evening, weekend, or distance education curricular track, these enrolled students must also have access to student services.
Reviewed institution/program published publications that indicate access to information for personal counseling, requesting accommodations for disabilities, and financial aid
Reviewed the program budget and/or expenditure records
Reviewed most recent Title IV financial aid compliance audit for program, if applicable
Reviewed most recent three year student loan default data and institution’s/program’s policies/procedures for monitoring student loan default rates, if applicable
Reviewed the institution’s/program’s policies/procedures for notifying students of the obligation for loan repayment
Toured classroom(s), laboratory(s), administrative and faculty office(s)
Toured physical library or e-library database offerings
Toured computer laboratory(s)
Toured clinical setting(s)
Interviewed institutional administrators
Interviewed institutional financial aid staff
Interviewed program director
Interviewed faculty
Interviewed clerical support staff
Interviewed students
Interviewed clinical preceptor(s)
Interviewed clinical staff
Please identify any other evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard Two.
Standard Three
Curriculum and Academic Practices
Standard Three: The program’s curriculum and academic practices prepare students for professional practice.
Please indicate evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard Three (Check all that apply).
Reviewed a copy of the program’s mission statement
Reviewed meeting minutes that document periodic reevaluation of mission statement
Review master plan of education (that at a minimum contains course syllabi and program policies and procedures)
Reviewed materials to substantiate delivery of competency-based curriculum
Reviewed current curriculum analysis grid
Reviewed course descriptions, outlines, syllabi, and lesson plans
Reviewed curricular sequence (part-time, evening, and/or weekend curricular tracks and distance education track/courses must be clearly identified)
Reviewed a portion of each course offered via distance delivery (online or hybrid)
Reviewed student and graduate records
Reviewed analysis of graduate and employer surveys
Reviewed opportunities in current and developing imaging and/or therapeutic technologies
Reviewed relationship between program length and terminal award
Reviewed institution catalog
Reviewed published institution/program materials
Reviewed class schedule(s)
Reviewed method/formula for assigning credit/clock hours for lecture, laboratory, and clinical courses
Reviewed institution’s/program’s policy/procedures for determining credit hours and its application
Reviewed a listing of all didactic and clinical courses including their associated credit/clock hours
Reviewed sample records of academic, behavioral, and clinical advisement. Distance education students must also receive appropriate advisement, if applicable
Reviewed position description(s)
Reviewed faculty/employee handbook(s)
Reviewed faculty and clinical preceptor evaluation(s)
Toured clinical settings
Toured classroom(s) and laboratory(s)
Interviewed institutional administrators
Interviewed program director
Interviewed faculty
Interviewed students
Interviewed graduates (at clinical sites, if applicable)
Interviewed employers of graduates (at clinical sites, if applicable)
Interviewed clinical preceptor(s)
Interviewed clinical staff
Interviewed faculty and clinical staff to assure responsibilities are being performed
Please identify any other evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard Three.
Standard Four
Health and Safety
Standard Four: The program’s policies and procedures promote the health, safety, and optimal use of radiation for students, patients, and the general public.
Please indicate evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard Four (Check all that apply).
Reviewed institution’s/program’s radiation safety policy(s) including the threshold and protocol for incidents in which dose limits are exceeded and how said policy(s) are made known to enrolled students
Reviewed procedure for monitoring student radiation exposure data
Reviewed procedure for making student radiation exposure data available to students
Reviewed student handbook
Reviewed student dosimetry reports
Reviewed student and graduate records
Assured that students utilizing energized laboratory or clinical environment are monitored for radiation exposure, including but not limited to simulation or quality assurance (Interpretation 4.1, effective April 2015)
Reviewed published pregnancy policy
Written notification of voluntary declaration
Option for student continuance without modification
Option for written withdrawal of declaration
Reviewed how pregnancy policy is made available to accepted and enrolled female students
Reviewed curricular sequence to assure students are prepared for safe radiation practices prior to assignment to clinical settings and increasingly proficient in application of radiation safety practices
Reviewed policy(s)/procedure(s) for assuring safe and proper use of equipment
Reviewed policies/procedures used to assure ALARA concept
Reviewed safety screening protocol for students having potential access to the magnetic resonance environment (Interpretation 4.3, effective October 2014)
Reviewed how program assures dosimetry calculations and treatment plans are approved by a credentialed practitioner prior to implementation
Reviewed the program’s dosimetry calculation/treatment plan approval policy
Reviewed how the approval process is enforced and monitored in the clinical setting(s)
Reviewed how program assures direct patient contact procedures (e.g., simulation, fabrication of immobilization devices, etc) are performed under the direct supervision of a credentialed practitioner
Reviewed the program’s direct supervision policy
Reviewed how the direct supervision requirement is enforced and monitored in the clinical setting(s)
Reviewed documentation that the direct supervision requirement is made known to students, clinical preceptor(s), and clinical staff
Reviewed meeting minutes that document supervision policy overview
Reviewed program policies that safeguard the health and safety of students
Emergency preparedness
Harassment (sexual, hostile work environment, bullying, etc)
Communicable diseases
Substance abuse
Reviewed process for orienting students to clinical setting’s(s’) policy(s)/procedure(s) in regard to health and safety
Reviewed documentation that students are apprised to each clinical setting’s policy(s)/procedure(s) in regard to health and safety
Hazards (fire, electrical, chemical)
Emergency preparedness
Medical emergencies
HIPAA
Standard Precautions
Toured clinical settings
Interviewed faculty
Interviewed radiation safety officer
Interviewed clinical preceptor(s)
Interviewed clinical staff
Interviewed students
Interviewed graduates (at clinical sites, if applicable)
Interviewed employers of graduates (at clinical sites, if applicable)
Please identify any other evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard Four.
Standard Five
Assessment
Standard Five:The program develops and implements a system of planning and evaluation of student learning and program effectiveness outcomes in support of its mission.
Please indicate evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard Five (Check all that apply).
Reviewed program’s current assessment plan that, at a minimum, must include a separate goal in relation to:
Clinical competence
Communication skills
Critical thinking
Professionalism
Reviewed assessment tools
Reviewed a copy of the program’s current program effectiveness data that contains:
Credentialing examination pass rate
Job placement rate
Program completion rate
Graduate satisfaction
Employer satisfaction
Reviewed sample publications (must include program’s Web site) that document the availability of program effectiveness data (credentialing examination pass rate, job placement rate, and program completion rate) via the JRCERT URL address
Reviewed how the program analyzes student learning outcome data and program effectiveness data to identify areas for program improvement
Reviewed how the program shares its student learning outcome data and program effectiveness data with its communities of interest
Reviewed examples of changes that resulted from analysis of student learning outcome data and program effectiveness data
Reviewed the actual student learning outcome data and program effectiveness data since the last accreditation award
Reviewed program’s analysis of unmet/met benchmark(s) including an action plan for any unmet benchmark(s)
Reviewed documentation that student learning outcome data and program effectiveness data has been shared with communities of interest
Reviewed representative samples of measurement tools used for data collection
Reviewed aggregate data
Reviewed advisory/assessment committee meeting minutes related to the assessment process (analysis of and sharing of student learning outcome data and program effectiveness data)
Reviewed process for periodic (every two years) reevaluation of assessment plan
Reviewed documentation that assessment plan is evaluated at least every two years
Reviewed advisory/assessment committee meeting minutes related to the assessment process
Interviewed program director
Interviewed faculty
Interviewed students
Interviewed graduates (at clinical sites, if applicable)
Interviewed employers of graduates (at clinical sites, if applicable)
Interviewed members of various communities of interest
Please identify any other evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard Five.
Standard Six
Institutional/Programmatic Data
Standard Six: The program complies with JRCERT policies, procedures, and STANDARDS to achieve and maintain specialized accreditation.
NOTE: JRCERT staff has reviewed all content within Standard Six. The site visit team is not required to review any of this material unless clearly identified in the correspondence to the program or during the pre-site visit conference call. If the site visit team discovers a substantive change not previously identified or approved by the JRCERT, it must be thoroughly reviewed and cited under Standard Six – Objective 6.5.
If you have been requested to review information within Standard Six, please indicate evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard Six (Check all that apply).
Reviewed documentation of current accreditation of the sponsoring institution
Reviewed faculty and staff academic and professional qualifications appropriate to their assignment
Reviewed current, executed affiliation agreements with each active clinical setting
Reviewed documentation of accreditation or equivalent that each clinical setting is in compliance with applicable state and/or federal radiation safety laws
Reviewed any previously unreported substantive change
Interviewed program director, if applicable
Interviewed faculty, if applicable
Please identify any other evidence the site visit team reviewed to assess whether the program meets each of the objectives of Standard Six.
1Medical Dosimetry