Overcoming Mission Competition in Departments of Family Medicine.

Departments of family medicine are centered around the tripartite mission of education, research, and clinical care. Historically, these three missions have been balanced and interdependent; however, changes in the funding and structures of health systems have resulted in shrinking education and research missions and an increased emphasis on clinical care. In the wake of waning state and federal contributions to primary care research, many departments of family medicine have adopted a private practice approach. This approach is centered on generating revenue for the institution, incentivizing physicians to remain clinically focused through productivity and intense attention to volume targets. As a department's focus shifts to the clinical care mission, education and research are increasingly neglected and underresourced. Meanwhile, the administrative burden of electronic health records (EHRs) has further encroached on time previously allocated to research, with the EHR burden disproportionately affecting the primary care workforce. To counteract mission competition in departments of family medicine and to recover the vital missions of education and scholarship, devising a clear plan for reclaiming and sustaining a tripartite mission is important. Advocating for increased primary care research funding, enhancing EHRs, balancing clinical and education metrics, and supporting primary care research, especially for groups underrepresented in medicine, are interventions to help fully support education and research missions and to recover and sustain mission balance in departments of family medicine.

Are committee experiences of minoritized family medicine faculty part of the minority tax? a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Because much of the work in academic medicine is done by committee, early career URiM faculty, are often asked to serve on multiple committees, including diversity work that may not be recognized as important. They may also be asked to serve on committees to satisfy a diversity "check box," and may be asked more often than their non-URiM peers to serve in this capacity. We sought to describe the committee experiences of early career URiM faculty, hypothesizing that they may see committee service as a minority tax. METHODS: Participants in the Leadership through Scholarship Fellowship (LTSF) were asked to share their experiences with committee service in their careers after participating in a faculty development discussion. Their responses were analyzed and reported using qualitative, open, axial, and abductive reasoning methods. RESULTS: Four themes, with eight sub-themes (in parenthesis), emerged from the content analysis of the LTSF fellows responses to the prompt: Time commitment (Timing of committee work and lack of protected time for research and scholarship), URiM Committee service (Expectation that URiM person will serve on committees and consequences for not serving), Mentoring issues (no mentoring regarding committee service, faculty involvement is lacking and the conflicting nature of committee work) and Voice (Lack of voice or acknowledgement). CONCLUSIONS: Early career URiM faculty reported an expectation of serving on committees and consequences for not serving related to their identity, but other areas of committee service they shared were not connected to their URiM identity. Because most of the experiences were not connected to the LTSF fellows' URiM identity, this group has identified areas of committee service that may affect all early career faculty. More research is necessary to determine how committee service affects URiM and non-URiM faculty in academic family medicine.