Missiles launched at NCCPA

[Noreaster]

The NCCPA continues to refuse to be transparent about things and not fess up to their actions in hurting the PA profession. 

 

They took down hundrends of posts on their facebook site and also disabled the star rating on the FB site, too.   The Google reviews for NCCPA has "magically disappeared" as well.

 

Someone suggested to me that we can help NCCPA be transparent by going here:     https://www.consumeraffairs.com/

and help expose what the NCCPA refuses to be transparent about and also allow our concerns to be made publically as consumers. 

 

I will likely post on the site. 

[CAdamsPAC]

Meeting Coverage

AAPA Locks Horns with Certifying Body As with MDs and DOs, MOC is a flashpoint

• SAVESAVED
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  

• by Shannon Firth 
  Washington Correspondent, MedPage Today May 16, 2017

 

LAS VEGAS -- Grassroots efforts to increase physician assistant autonomy are being blocked by the certifying organization for PAs, a charge that ignited a firestorm at the American Academy of PAs conference here on Monday afternoon.

The conflagration began following an AAPA session on recertification, aka Maintenance of Certification.

 

States trying to advance bills to remove PA license restrictions were "blindsided" by National Commission on Certification of Physicians Assistants (NCCPA) lobbyists who, in some cases, destroyed years of work crafting legislation and educating legislators, charged Cameron Byers, PA-C, president of the Nevada Academy of Physicians Assistants.

Byers told MedPage Today that his experience convinced him of the difficulties involved in making a case for PAs with state legislators.

"When you've got a group that brings in opposition from within the profession, it undermines the whole foundational process of time that we've spent with each legislator and the confidence that we're trying to build within the profession."

"Their legislation dies and they're back at ground zero," he said.

Not so countered Dawn Morton- Rias, EdD, PA-C, president and CEO of NCCPA.

 

"NCCPA is not a membership organization. It is a certifying body ... We have to support initiatives that protect the public interest. To the extent that they are in line with what PAs want that's very nice, but that's secondary," she said. "We have a 40-year history of providing certification and recertification programs that are well-respected and well-accepted, not only by the medical community, but the public as well as the other stakeholders groups."

Regarding the most significant concerns about its lobbying efforts, Morton-Rias said the group's only reason for "registering opposition" is to prevent states from reducing the standards of practice while also expanding the scope of practice, she explained in a telephone interview. An NCCPA public relations person was present during the interview.

Byers said the NCCPA blocked a West Virginia bill aimed at easing limitations on PA practice and it also opposed recommendations from a 2014 National Governor's Association Position Paper on the Role of Physician Assistants in Health Care Delivery, also recommended increasing the use of PAs and encouraging states to review legislation and "consider actions to increase the future supply of PAs."

Meanwhile, Byers said AAPA leaders are considering establishing their own certifying body, which has put NCCPA on alert.

"The perception is that [NCCPA] is against the ropes," said Byers, "And it's in response to them lobbying in direct opposition to the progression of the PA profession in the future."

 

 

"We're not up against the ropes," Morton-Rias said. "We're having uncomfortable conversations."

Regarding the most significant concerns about its lobbying efforts, Morton-Rias said the group's only reason for "registering opposition" is to prevent states from reducing the standards of practice while also expanding the scope of practice.

In a phone interview last week, Josanne Pagel, MPAS, PA-C president and chair of the board of directors for the AAPA and and executive director of Physician Assistant Services at the Cleveland Clinic, criticized the NCCPA's efforts to block PA bills in Illinois and New Mexico, as well as West Virginia.

The NCCPA's insistence on "high stakes exams" for recertification was "jeopardizing the ability of PAs to practice," Pagel said.

She applauded the NCCPA's announcement that it would test alternative models to recertification other than these exams.

 

Byers added that he's "guardedly optimistic" about the prospects for PAs maintaining certification.

Some PAs at the meeting here suggested the possibility that the NCCPA collaborate and negotiate a new certification plan.

However, Morton-Rias called that approach a "slippery slope."

"As an accredited certifying body, we have the responsibility of developing certification and recertification process that are reflective of the profession. That's our responsibility to do. We can't negotiate with others. That's a violation of accreditation."

A press representative for the NCCPA also pointed out, in a follow-up phone call, that having the NCCPA negotiate its certification or recertification requirements would violate antitrust laws.

 

[south]

This is good stuff.  But as I keep saying, it's important to bring up the NCCPA's vested interest - WHY they are blocking these things, and WHY they make the exams so non-sensical and difficult.  

 

$$$$$$$$$.  Go for the jugular.  It is the first thing I would bring up.  

 

Insurance companies make money by denying claims.  The better they are at it, the more money they make.  And you can't run around with no health insurance.

 

Similarly, the NCCPA makes money by charging more - for more exams - to an absolutely captive audience.  Each test failure and repeat, each new graduate seeking certification, each increase in the cost of the exam, each state law enacted to require PA-C, is just guaranteed free money with no downside and no boundaries.  

 

Think about it - what would happen if - tomorrow - they doubled the cost of the exam to around $1000 and make the exams so nonsensical that pass rates started falling?  

 

I could justify it - watch this.  "Physician Assistant exams - cost and pass rates - need to be more in line with physician certifying exam costs and pass rates, especially since it is only one single exam and not a series of .... "  blah blah blah now I feel like I need to go wash my hands.  

 

Both will happen.  The exams' cost went up about $50 last year.  I'm assuming that trend will continue or accelerate.  A quick look at the forums will tell you more people are failing them.  And they have a GOLDEN opportunity to blame all the new programs for this.  Remember, increased failures = mo' free money for the NCCPA.

 

If this thread is still active one year from today, in May 2018, the PANCE will cost just over $550 (I don't know how much the PANRE costs).  And pass rates will be dropping through the low 90s.  You heard it here first.  

[rev ronin]

The implicit assertion that a certification body cannot be a membership-driven body is deceptive and incorrect.  I know multiple IT certification bodies (e.g., ISC2) that have directors democratically elected from within the constituency.  I see no reason why NCCPA should not also be that way.

[sk732]

Fact of the matter is these folks are supposedly accountable to someone - so who is it?  They seem to feel it's the public, however the public don't pay their salaries - you guys do.  As such, they do have accountability to YOU, in fact much more than to the public as they claim.  They may be the certification group nationally, but in the end, it's up to the State licensing bodies to determine how best people are employed and what their pre-requisites for employment are - they issue the licenses, not NCCPA. Is there anything to legally stop the State Medical Boards or Colleges from coming up with their recert process once a person is nationally boarded?  I'm asking out of ignorance of how things run policy wise south of 49 - as mentioned, here, we go by a 5 year cycle of validated CME at a national level.

 

SK 

[GetMeOuttaThisMess]

Theoretically I could surrender mine since my employer doesn't require it, nor the state of Texas after one time PANCE passage.

[Reality Check 2]

Two weeks to PANRE.

 

Get that behind me and hopefully pass and then return to my campaign of investigating the business structure and policies of NCCPA and how they actually came to power.

 

Everything has an OUT clause - just have to find it.

 

I do not intend to give NCCPA any more of my funds unless I KNOW they aren't sending it to lobbyists and they intend to actually listen to PAs and provide the services they were intended.

 

I am stuck having to have my C to work at the VA and stay employed once I get there. 

 

Don't like being cornered......

[Guest Paula]

I passed my last PANRE last year.  I'm so glad.  I still will keep the C active by doing my 100 CMEs, except during my last 2 years of practice I really won't need to log them with NCCPA.  Maybe they won't exist by then?  

[Noreaster]

Thanks CAdamsPAC. 

 

I am honestly sick of hearing the CEO of NCCPA say the same bullsh** every time she speaks.  Has anyone noticed the NCCPA somewhat recently tried a meger attempt to say they supported us?  Now, the shift to "protecting the public." 

 

sk732 asks an EXCELLENT question.  I've actually been asking the very same question.  I actually wrote the AAPA and asked whe the NCCPA is accountable to.  I got a very wordy-but-said-a-whole-lotta-nuttin reply.  They MUST be accountable to somebody.  It makes me almost nauseiated to see PAs getting their free T-shirts at the AAPA booth and PAs liking posts they put, when it just couldn't be more clear these recent posts on their facebook page is such utter patronizing bull. 

 

Why does NCCPA, including the CEO, refuse to admit the details of what they did in West Virginia? 

Why doesn't an interviewer ask more pertenant questions?  Ugh.. what a waste of an interview... I'd like to see Barbara Walters get in there in an interview haha.. kidding but geez, just wanna hear the real, specific, questions. 

[sk732]

Sounds like a job for "60 Minutes", though Dr Phil would be funnier - could set this up like a bad parenting thing...OK, maybe just 60 Minutes then.

 

SK

[PACDO]

So, this is not meant to throw fuel on the fire, but is a serious question that I am hoping someone more informed than me can answer:  I recently took the PANRE and I had no problem paying the expensive fee that is needed for test development or whatever, but in addition to that, I also need to pay my maintenance of certification fee.  Obviously, the recent spending habits of the NCCPA is somewhat controversial to many of us, and I'd like to know where that money is going when I send it in.  Is there any way we can see what this money is used for (NCCPA exec salary, etc.) and from where this nominal fee is derived?  In other words, is there any regulatory body that can govern how much the NCCPA sets this fee for, or what they use this money for? Maintenance of certification fees is also a very hot topic in the physician world these days, and I'm just wondering if anyone in the PA community is being equally proactive about this.... I much rather send my money to them.  Thanks

[Reality Check 2]

Did anything else transpire at AAPA national convention about NCCPA?

 

Was anyone there and went to their booth?

 

Would love to hear about the atmosphere with all this mess.

[mmiller3]

Just heard from an NP colleague that a bill in Illinois just passed allowing NPs to practice without any collaborating physician. I can't find any articles about it yet, but I trust her as a source. So, add another state that they can practice independently.

 

This worries me for continued employment as a PA in Illinois. While the NCCPA lobbies against us, the NPs continue to leave us further and further behind.

[WeBuyAndSellJunk]

The NCCPA booth at the AAPA conference seemed unsurprisingly quiet. They received a few quiet boos during the AAPA president's speech suggesting we work together still. 

[Reality Check 2]

Just got this in an email from NCCPA - some newsblast update thing.

 

Did we ASK NCCPA to help us with OTP? I don't think so.

 

They only mention CERTIFIED PAs - so we still have the whole issue of NCCPA ONLY supporting legislation that keeps them in business and not the general good and well being of the profession.

 

So, once again, I am not cool with their take on their role in our lives. Doesn't sound like they are collaborating with AAPA or even in communication.

 

Don't have my PANRE grade back yet. 

 

This is discouraging. NCCPA really is NOT listening to any of us and just plugging along as though they are welcome to our party.

 

Deep sigh

 

 

 

 

 

Ready, Set, Grow: Promotion of "Optimal Team Practice"

 

Last month, the AAPA’s House of Delegates unanimously approved a new policy in support of “Optimal Team Practice (OTP),” a concept designed to eliminate state-mandated supervisory requirements that may be impeding PA employability and practice in some states.

 

As reported in an AAPA press release, Optimal Team Practice reemphasizes the PA profession’s commitment to team-based care, and in an amendment offered on the floor of the House of Delegates, reaffirms that the degree of collaboration between PAs and physicians should be determined at the practice level. It also supports the removal of state laws and regulations that require a PA to have and/or report a supervisory, collaborating or other specific relationship with a physician to practice. In addition, the new policy advocates for the establishment of autonomous state boards to license, regulate and discipline PAs, or for PAs to be full voting members of medical boards. Finally, the policy calls for PAs to  be eligible for direct reimbursement from public and private insurance carriers for services rendered. 

 

Also, during the House of Delegates meeting, NCCPA leaders committed to working in concert with national and state PA organizations to advance the modernization of PA practice laws and regulations. NCCPA aims to extend support to the effort to help make Optimal Team Practice a reality in state laws and regulations. As the certifying body for more than 115,500 PAs, NCCPA can provide credible and persuasive information and data about the number, role and impact of Certified PAs in any state. Where state PA academies continue to rely on the standards of the PA-C credential as leverage to achieve optimal team practice rules and regulations, NCCPA can also provide information about the profession’s longstanding commitment to certification maintenance. There may be other ways NCCPA can support OTP as well, and NCCPA leaders are inviting dialogue about this as planning for these efforts gets underway.

 

This new Optimal Team Practice policy represents expansion of AAPA-led efforts to modernize PA practice laws, which has focused on six key elements: “licensure” as the regulatory term; full prescriptive authority; adaptable collaboration requirements; and practice-level determination of scope of practice, co-signature requirements, and physician-to-PA ratios.

 

All PAs are encouraged to remain informed about any changes to the PA laws and regulations in their state and the impact on practice at the local level.

[sas5814]

 

Just got this in an email from NCCPA - some newsblast update thing.

 

Did we ASK NCCPA to help us with OTP? I don't think so.

 

They only mention CERTIFIED PAs - so we still have the whole issue of NCCPA ONLY supporting legislation that keeps them in business and not the general good and well being of the profession.

 

So, once again, I am not cool with their take on their role in our lives. Doesn't sound like they are collaborating with AAPA or even in communication.

 

Don't have my PANRE grade back yet. 

 

This is discouraging. NCCPA really is NOT listening to any of us and just plugging along as though they are welcome to our party.

 

Deep sigh

 

 

 

 

 

Ready, Set, Grow: Promotion of "Optimal Team Practice"

 

Last month, the AAPA’s House of Delegates unanimously approved a new policy in support of “Optimal Team Practice (OTP),” a concept designed to eliminate state-mandated supervisory requirements that may be impeding PA employability and practice in some states.

 

As reported in an AAPA press release, Optimal Team Practice reemphasizes the PA profession’s commitment to team-based care, and in an amendment offered on the floor of the House of Delegates, reaffirms that the degree of collaboration between PAs and physicians should be determined at the practice level. It also supports the removal of state laws and regulations that require a PA to have and/or report a supervisory, collaborating or other specific relationship with a physician to practice. In addition, the new policy advocates for the establishment of autonomous state boards to license, regulate and discipline PAs, or for PAs to be full voting members of medical boards. Finally, the policy calls for PAs to  be eligible for direct reimbursement from public and private insurance carriers for services rendered. 

 

Also, during the House of Delegates meeting, NCCPA leaders committed to working in concert with national and state PA organizations to advance the modernization of PA practice laws and regulations. NCCPA aims to extend support to the effort to help make Optimal Team Practice a reality in state laws and regulations. As the certifying body for more than 115,500 PAs, NCCPA can provide credible and persuasive information and data about the number, role and impact of Certified PAs in any state. Where state PA academies continue to rely on the standards of the PA-C credential as leverage to achieve optimal team practice rules and regulations, NCCPA can also provide information about the profession’s longstanding commitment to certification maintenance. There may be other ways NCCPA can support OTP as well, and NCCPA leaders are inviting dialogue about this as planning for these efforts gets underway.

 

This new Optimal Team Practice policy represents expansion of AAPA-led efforts to modernize PA practice laws, which has focused on six key elements: “licensure” as the regulatory term; full prescriptive authority; adaptable collaboration requirements; and practice-level determination of scope of practice, co-signature requirements, and physician-to-PA ratios.

 

All PAs are encouraged to remain informed about any changes to the PA laws and regulations in their state and the impact on practice at the local level.

 

Well I read it a little differently and there was more in the mail blast about other issues. They believe in certification but later on said they were working on getting rid of the primary care recert and working on either a core knowledge exam...which doesn't sound unreasonable...or possibly something else. It is a thing in motion and it will be a while before we know just what "it" is.

Personally I think we are going to need all hands on deck to make OTP happen. This is going to take years and has to be done state by state by state. The more oars in the water the better as long as we are all rowing in the same direction. We can disagree with the NCCPA about recert and still find commonality on OTP. They also talked about working more with state societies which, if I am reading between the lines well, is a way of saying they screwed up with their lobbying and will do better. 

They heard us. Lets give them a little breathing room to regroup and roll out some ideas. There will be lots of discussion in the coming months.

I think there is some movement by the NCCPA and the signs are hopeful. I am taking a month off from yelling at them (which I have done plenty of) to see how things develop. I am, strangely for me, optimistic.

[GetMeOuttaThisMess]

Well I read it a little differently and there was more in the mail blast about other issues. They believe in certification but later on said they were working on getting rid of the primary care recert and working on either a core knowledge exam...which doesn't sound unreasonable...or possibly something else. It is a thing in motion and it will be a while before we know just what "it" is.

Personally I think we are going to need all hands on deck to make OTP happen. This is going to take years and has to be done state by state by state. The more oars in the water the better as long as we are all rowing in the same direction. We can disagree with the NCCPA about recert and still find commonality on OTP. They also talked about working more with state societies which, if I am reading between the lines well, is a way of saying they screwed up with their lobbying and will do better.

They heard us. Lets give them a little breathing room to regroup and roll out some ideas. There will be lots of discussion in the coming months.

I think there is some movement by the NCCPA and the signs are hopeful. I am taking a month off from yelling at them (which I have done plenty of) to see how things develop. I am, strangely for me, optimistic.

This is a moot point for me since I won't have to take again but what's the difference between "primary care" and "core"? Seems somewhat synonymous to me.

[CAdamsPAC]

Well I read it a little differently and there was more in the mail blast about other issues. They believe in certification but later on said they were working on getting rid of the primary care recert and working on either a core knowledge exam...which doesn't sound unreasonable...or possibly something else. It is a thing in motion and it will be a while before we know just what "it" is.

Personally I think we are going to need all hands on deck to make OTP happen. This is going to take years and has to be done state by state by state. The more oars in the water the better as long as we are all rowing in the same direction. We can disagree with the NCCPA about recert and still find commonality on OTP. They also talked about working more with state societies which, if I am reading between the lines well, is a way of saying they screwed up with their lobbying and will do better. 

They heard us. Lets give them a little breathing room to regroup and roll out some ideas. There will be lots of discussion in the coming months.

I think there is some movement by the NCCPA and the signs are hopeful. I am taking a month off from yelling at them (which I have done plenty of) to see how things develop. I am, strangely for me, optimistic.

I think they want to turn down the heat on them. It's important to NCCPA to distract and redirect the scrutiny they were under from the profession and general public. Watching what both of NCCPA's hands are doing and monitoring their oral and written promises should be unrelenting and equally unforgiving!

[GetMeOuttaThisMess]

Its like a magic show. Always keep an eye on the offhand.

 

Sent from my KFFOWI using Tapatalk

[ventana]

...

 

 

 

Full NCCPA Email and my comments follow...............................  just my $0.02

 

 

Ready, Set, Grow: Promotion of "Optimal Team Practice"

 

Last month, the AAPA’s House of Delegates unanimously approved a new policy in support of “Optimal Team Practice (OTP),” a concept designed to eliminate state-mandated supervisory requirements that may be impeding PA employability and practice in some states.

 

As reported in an AAPA press release, Optimal Team Practice reemphasizes the PA profession’s commitment to team-based care, and in an amendment offered on the floor of the House of Delegates, reaffirms that the degree of collaboration between PAs and physicians should be determined at the practice level. It also supports the removal of state laws and regulations that require a PA to have and/or report a supervisory, collaborating or other specific relationship with a physician to practice. In addition, the new policy advocates for the establishment of autonomous state boards to license, regulate and discipline PAs, or for PAs to be full voting members of medical boards. Finally, the policy calls for PAs to  be eligible for direct reimbursement from public and private insurance carriers for services rendered. 

 

Also, during the House of Delegates meeting, NCCPA leaders committed to working in concert with national and state PA organizations to advance the modernization of PA practice laws and regulations. NCCPA aims to extend support to the effort to help make Optimal Team Practice a reality in state laws and regulations. As the certifying body for more than 115,500 PAs, NCCPA can provide credible and persuasive information and data about the number, role and impact of Certified PAs in any state. Where state PA academies continue to rely on the standards of the PA-C credential as leverage to achieve optimal team practice rules and regulations, NCCPA can also provide information about the profession’s longstanding commitment to certification maintenance. There may be other ways NCCPA can support OTP as well, and NCCPA leaders are inviting dialogue about this as planning for these efforts gets underway.

 

This new Optimal Team Practice policy represents expansion of AAPA-led efforts to modernize PA practice laws, which has focused on six key elements: “licensure” as the regulatory term; full prescriptive authority; adaptable collaboration requirements; and practice-level determination of scope of practice, co-signature requirements, and physician-to-PA ratios.

 

All PAs are encouraged to remain informed about any changes to the PA laws and regulations in their state and the impact on practice at the local level.

 

Back to Top

________________________________________________

 

Celebrating the Profession's Gold Anniversary, Representing the Gold Standard in Health Care at the AAPA Annual Conference

 

NCCPA Board and staff members interacted with thousands of PAs at AAPA’s annual conference in Las Vegas last month, enjoying the opportunity to celebrate the profession’s gold anniversary by highlighting Certified PAs (Guess they don't care about PA, just PA-C) as the gold standard (where is the support for this?  This is Not something AAPA has come up with, they are trying to equate PA = PA-C - this is just trying to confuse the real issue.)  in health care.

 

Those staffing the NCCPA information booth gave away more than 3,000 t-shirts, insulated bags and other items in celebration of the occasion(Geez that is such a blatant bribe and I am unsure that I want my re-certification fee's going towards purchasing give away advertising that might well sway PA opinion.  Once again they(NCCPA) is trying to confuse and distract us from the real issue - they lobbied AGAINST PA's). NCCPA representatives also delivered CME sessions, poster presentations and addressed PA students as a sponsor of the National PA Challenge Bowl. We congratulate Southern Illinois, the winners of this event.

 

Important conversations took place throughout the week during which NCCPA leaders and staff had the opportunity to address questions, listen to concerns and correct misinformation

(MISINFORMATION??? NCCPA lobbied against PA's  more distraction and confusion.....  alternative facts)     about recent legislative activities

(I say NCCPA GET OUT OF LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES!!  You don't belong there!), listening and engaging in productive dialogue with national and state PA leaders. NCCPA leaders affirmed our commitment to reach out to the state PA organizations whenever NCCPA work places us before a stakeholder group at the state level.

 

We also welcomed the opportunity to clarify the purpose of the informational updates provided to state licensing boards. NCCPA president/CEO, Dawn Morton-Rias, EdD, PA-C stated: “PAs, employers and other stakeholders rely on the PA-C credential, and we work to keep them all informed about the credible, externally accredited certification and recertification processes in which more than 97% of PAs engage year over year.” She added: “The high recertification rates suggest that the PA-C credential is valuable. While testing continues to be a point of disagreement among some PAs, our work to modernize PANRE continues. We share the same passionate belief in the value and positive impact of Certified PAs, and a deep commitment to the patients we serve. We hope that translates into closer collaboration and even greater shared successes in the profession’s next 50 years.” (WHAT????  That is just the most outrageous claim - you can not use a 97% certification rate to justify yourself when certification is MANDATORY!  This is just once again spin and trying to confuse the issue.  The real question is what would the -C rate be if certification was not necessary?? 

These vibrant young professionals were among the thousands of PAs and PA students we had the chance to meet at the NCCPA booth in Las Vegas.

Special Thanks

NCCPA wants to publicly thank the many past presidents of AAPA who spoke eloquently in the House of Delegates (HOD) in favor of resolving current conflicts. These leaders called for a de-escalation of negative rhetoric; noted that PAs have been served well by the four pillars of the profession (AAPA, ARC-PA, NCCPA and PAEA), expressed strong opposition to the creation of a new certifying organization and proposed a meeting of those four national PA organizations to restore respectful relations among them and chart a positive path forward.  I was not there - and would like to hear from people that were - but this sounds like they are trying make it appear that everything is okay, and we all need to hold hands and sing a song........  Ahm NO - I am still furious that they are heading in this direction - they have yet to acknowledge that they were WRONG and seemingly just want to keep things rolling.  All they need to do is look at MD boards and the upheaval and very contested state that physician licensing and re certification (MOC).  We (PA's) are headed in the same direction.... 

 

Thanks in part to the testimony of those leaders, the HOD ultimately voted to postpone until its 2018 convening action on a resolution that would pave the way for AAPA to officially recognize new PA certifying agencies.  

Seems reasonable, BUT I would continue to work on an alternative certifying body as this is simply a delay tactic and NCCPA needs to realize they  either need to get on board, or get out of our way!  

 

NCCPA leaders have expressed desire to resolve the issues that have divided NCCPA and AAPA over the last 18 months and new optimism for positive outcomes that will benefit the public and the profession. “Having incorporated feedback from the PA profession and other stakeholders, we hope we have demonstrated our genuine desire to continue to improve the certification maintenance process and PANRE,” said Dawn Morton-Rias, EdD, PA-C, NCCPA president/CEO. NCCPA:

 

• Incorporated feedback on the PROPOSED changes to PANRE, received during the public comment period (November 2015 through June 2016) and has abandoned that proposal;
• Assessed availability of PI-CME and self-assessment CME activities and eliminated the requirement;
• Committed to narrowing the content of PANRE from a broad-based, generalist exam encompassing the breadth of PA practice to the core medical knowledge all PAs should maintain regardless of the discipline in which they practice; and
• Committed to pilot alternatives to the current high-stakes PANRE no later than 2020.

 

Back to Top 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

see above thoughts in black  - sorry it is not very readable - but it is worth reading it....

 

 

 

 

I found this deceitful and full of spin, they are presenting "alternative facts" and trying to confuse the issues.....

 

 

They talk about all these issues with the whole -C argument yet they refuse to admit there error, and they really have not changed their position one little bit

 

 

 

I am NOT in favor of tabling the idea of a new certification body.  I believe NCCPA has totally lost touch, and the best and likely only way, to get them quickly and effectively evaluate their positions on such topics to to threaten their very existence.......  They have lost site that they are to be helping us, trying to advance the PA profession (not the -C testing and money making machine....)

 

 

 

I would vote for AAPA to continue to study the formation of a alternative certifying agency - maybe "unofficially" at least, to keep pressure on NCCPA

 

 

 

Oh yeah, and BTW - did everyone see http://www.wvgazettemail.com/gazette-op-ed-commentaries/20170603/rafael-rodighiero-justice-prevails-with-bill-to-improve-patient-care

 

NCCPA lost that one..... re soundly....

[sas5814]

This is a moot point for me since I won't have to take again but what's the difference between "primary care" and "core"? Seems somewhat synonymous to me.

It was described as core knowledge everyone should have regardless of specialty rather than primary care. What that will be is anyone's guess right now.

[ventana]

It was described as core knowledge everyone should have regardless of specialty rather than primary care. What that will be is anyone's guess right now.

 

AKA a generalist exam....which is what we already have!!

 

This is just more misinformation and alternative facts.....

[Noreaster]

We were SUPPOSED to have a core knowledge re-cert test!  The NCCPA worded things in their email letters so that nobody even noticed that the NCCPA got away from generalist.  Having just taken, (and passed, thankfully), the PANRE, it was FULL of specialist questions...even in my own field, there were huge "zebras" and bazarro questions that I would need to discuss with my doc(s) at work, if I truly had a case like that coming into the office.  Most of the questions in my specialty were NOT generalist questions...not at all.  The NCCPA, again, did not take any responsibility for moving away from generalist re-cert test.  It's my believe they had a lot of questions vested in the PANRE for what was supposed to happen with all the specialty exams that they pulled out of doing entirely.

 

Regarding pulling back and "giving the NCCPA breathing room."  I could not disagree more.  That's EXACTLY what they would love...for PAs to pull back and not have their ears to the ground, and/or being acutely watchful of their behaviors.  As it is, then NCCPA don't really answer to anybody so, all the more the need to always be watched.  We've been blindsided by the NCCPA, more than once...letting our guard down is a mistake, entirely.    IMHO. 

[Bandidorooobs]

Just wanted to update that the WV bill that was vetoed before was signed into law after the governor reconsidered. It includes the not having to recertify deal for WV! You have to pass the initial certification and do CE every two years I think though.

[surgblumm]

Wow! There sure is a lot of commenting on the NCCPA. Be careful or they may charge the Physician Assistant forum for having such a healthy topic. We have had an ongoing disagreement with this organization for the last decade, we have commented, ranted, screamed and threatened but we still pay the fee for certification because it is the only show in town. When they made a good PA( Dawn) CEO we had all hoped for a change. Now, Paul Lombardo, a long time educator and past president of the AAPA is Chairman of the NCCPA but I don't think we will see the changes that people are looking for. They should never, never, never oppose us legislatively as this is high treason to me and a reason to plan for a new certification body. PAFT is asking for three changes that they would like to see. I would write to them or Eric Holden and tell them we would like to see them involved in this issue particularly after reading Josanne's report although it is a year old.  Murder has no statute of limitations and this was an attempt to stop PAs from growth. With a new president like Jonathan and a new President-elect like Dave, I am hopeful that they will do more than just look but plan a new certification body.