ACOFP: OUR CONTINUING HISTORY 79 New Challenges and Opportunities her seat, the house rose to its feet, giving her and ACOFP a standing ovation. The following year, ACOFP President Kevin V. de Regnier, DO, FACOFP dist., nominated the first ACOFP representatives to the ACGME Family Medicine Residency Review Committee. Rob Danoff, DO, FACOFP dist., Harold Lausen, DO, FACOFP dist., and Joseph Mazzola, DO, FACOFP, would be the first of many to bring the osteopathic approach to ACGME. In the years since the SAS implementation, many of the concerns raised by ACOFP have come to pass. Far fewer residencies have chosen to pursue osteopathic recognition, many dedicated osteopathic family medicine residency directors were displaced as programs consolidated, the number of residents choosing AOA board certification has fallen dramatically, and, in the view of many, the identity of the profession is at risk. Despite these challenges, ACOFP has held true to the pledge made by Dr. Henwood, and ACOFP continues to lead the osteopathic profession. Sensing the need to assess the progress of osteopathic residents in residencies with osteopathic recognition, ACOFP developed a new in-training assessment to be used by residency programs. Working with the American Osteopathic Board of Family Physicians, ACOFP created a program that allowed residents who passed the first two years of the in-training exam to sit for a modified board certification exam before they graduated. Residents who participate in this program graduate from residency already AOA board certified. This is the history of ACOFP’s involvement in the SAS. As we look to the future, ACOFP will continue to lead and innovate as the long-term impact of the SAS unfolds. The Single Accreditation System: The California Perspective by David A. Connett, DO, FACOFP dist. The Single Accreditation System has been highly controversial in the osteopathic profession, and a retrospective analysis is certainly warranted. ACOFP is the largest osteopathic specialty organization. In 2015, there were a total of 262 family medicine residency programs, of which 164 were only AOA accredited and 98 were dual AOA and ACGME accredited. There were 1,072 AOA programs among all specialties with only AOA accreditation. Relinquishing control of the 164 osteopathic residencies certainly proved to be devastating to the ACOFP business model, given that the oversight and accreditation would prove to be a significant loss of revenue to this organization, as well as a continuous erosion of the osteopathic identity. The California perspective regarding the SAS was shaped in large part by the continuous osteopathic student and physician discrimination being experienced in the state. Upon resumption of the Osteopathic Medical Board of California being able to provide licensure for new osteopathic physicians in 1977, the state of California also passed a law under the California Business and Professional Code 2064.2 stating as follows: “No medical school or clinical training program shall deny access to elective clerkships or preceptorships in any medical school or clinical training program in the state solely on the basis that a student is enrolled in an osteopathic medical school. Any violation of this section or section 2064.1 may be enjoined in any action brought in the name of the people of the state of California by the district attorney of David A. Connett
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjI2NjI=