Recruitment Tool Kit

Summit on the Shortage of Clinical Laboratory Personnel

SUMMIT II

The important and productive work of SSCLP I (the first Summit on the Shortage of Clinical Laboratory Personnel - 6/16/00 in Chicago) was continued after due consideration during the interim at SSCLP II in New Orleans with the Presidents and /or representatives of all of the leading clinical laboratory organizations and 2 federal agencies. The meeting proceeded after introductions with a brief review of SSCLP I observing that each of the original organizations perceived a need for this level of dialog driven by persuasive anecdotal data, including; (see appendix for details)

We are large (1)
We represent many tests & dollars (2)
We have a higher than mean growth rate (3)
There are measurable vacancies now (4)
- . . . data from SSCLP I - ASM (5)
Other factors
- To Err is Human -the first of four (4) IOM reports on the quality of health care in American hospitals describes an expected level of quality (6)
- CLIA ‘88 - since passed has gathered regulators, manufacturers, public health personnel, researchers and clinical laboratory personnel into the same community of interest (7)
- Pool factors can be identified as contributing to the interest of young persons in selecting our field as an area of study and career (8)

From this assumption base the work of SSCLP I was conducted and resulted in the;

Components of problem being identified (9)
Those components grouped (10)
Draft solutions proposed (11)
The chapter headings of a DRAFT Strategic Plan identified (12)
A plan for the next phase (organization vetting and SSCLP II)

SSCLP II then continued with reports on the vetting process from each of the original organizations and comments from those new to the effort. A thumbnail of some of those reports follows;

ASCLS = Direct discussions with the Board of Directors, vetting assignment to the Education Section of the ASCLS Scientific Assembly and appointment of a national task force.
NCA = Direct discussions with the Board of Directors, appointment of a national task force.
NAACLS = Future conference - 150 attendees, attempted to determine the immediate and intermediate environment. The Program Revitalization Task Force continues to have a document available which will be updated soon.
ASM = Report to and discussions with the Professional Affairs Committee. No discussion opportunity with the BOD yet. Continuing surveys and discussion on the ClinMicroNet [web site].
ASCP/BOR = Careers in MLS (discount @ CLEC ‘01) video available (circulated and discussed around the table). Independent efforts underway and continuing include;
ASCP/AMS = BOD committed to continue
Fifty $1,000 scholarships
H.S. teacher letter - download from web site
Task Force on collaboration with other professional organizations
FDA = Employer and devise regulator
- Met with CLP’s at FDA Center for Devises
- Many CLP’s hidden in other FDA branches
- suggest consideration of the full diversity of career options within the federal government and elsewhere for the skill set usually possessed by clinical laboratory professionals
AACC = Direct discussions with the Board of Directors, distribute Proceedings of SSCLP I ( 11/00, 9/00)
- Practice analysis for doctoral scientists
- Hi 5 - expand public awareness
- Evidence based Medicine
- 2001 AM - Chicago. Board of Ed.
- ? snapshot to take
- count phlebotomists - cent. processing ??
CLMA = Direct discussions with the Board of Directors, distribute Proceedings of SSCLP I, attended NAACLS Futures Conference & HRSA Conference.
- important to CLMA
- Council Chapter Presidents meeting in Charlotte, N.C. (1/21/01) discussed it.
ACLA = 12 members representing appx. 60% of all independent laboratory tests.
- Nat. Exploring Scouting
  - Scouting K-12

The discussion and vetting process also generated some stimulatory feedback to SSCLP II. Some of the observations and matters to consider as reported by the laboratory organizations included;

Would it make sense to develop a web site for all the information that has been and will be gathered? It seems reasonable that the quickest and most reliable way to distribute the ingredients for coping with this problem in the short term and managing our work force in the long term would be to make reliable information more broadly available and subject to updating.
Does it make sense to have some sort of coordinating council to continue this work beyond SSCLP II? In fact this was brought up at SSCLP I and seems to be supported by most of the organizations now.
The technical question was posed as to the best way to deal with the immediate staffing problem at hand. While we try to employ more and more of the available graduates (total number is in decline), industry and other segments of the general scientific community are providing ever enticing work situations and career options further putting pressure on the available pool of clinical laboratory personnel at all academic levels. It may be that laboratory environments (clinical, research, industrial, public health, etc.) of the near term may have less need for qualified scientists - - or just the opposite.
The current rate of program closures may be due mostly due to the number of applicants. It would seem on the face of things that the now more business savvy colleges & universities of the present day are not likely to operate expensive programs like ours with sub-optimal or less than marginal numbers of students.
It should be incumbent upon us as representatives of the practice field to try to get issues to come together consistently. This is all in the nature of managing better our situation in the face of so many changes over the past decade and more to come.
The question was posed as to how to determine right number of specialists, practitioners in any sub-set of our field, etc.? These are of course questions faced by Medicine, Nursing and the Law over the past couple of decades - now it is our turn.

On Cooperation

To the matter of how we will undertake actions (1) that will matter and (2) in a coordinated way from among so many individual associations, it was observed that our field expects this level of leadership and responsibility of all of us and in the end each of our organizational missions will be served as a "value added" to the larger goal of advancing the practice field. How does it apply here?

*All of us are taking steps in this direction now

*If we all get a better handle on the problem, solutions, maintenance, etc., then

we do subsequent activities

AND

do them in a compliant way

THEN

results will be comparable
collective impact will be greater
federal agencies will be in a better position to conduct their legislative function
legitimate entities will have to find some other way to write us off

It was observed for example that education and health care are very much on the public agenda and therefore there is a clear and present platform for exploitation to the advantage of patients through sustained high quality clinical laboratory testing. Our cooperation is not only possible without massive expenditure of resources and corruption of mission statements, but rather is obvious and quite doable.

Development of the STRATEGIC PLAN

SSCLP I was characterized by unearthing the philosophical underpinnings of the current situation and thinking about the components and methods of attack. The work program of SSCLP II was to write components of the Strategic Plan and bring some specific recommendations for action items to the governing body of each participating organization. These components are to date;