§ 51.4 How will the plans be evaluated? After consultation with the Federal Substantial Disruption Waiver Board (seven Federal representatives charged with the responsibility of reviewing substantial disruption waiver applications), the Secretary of Health and Human Services will make recommendations to the Director, United States Information Agency, for the purpose of granting waivers. The Secretary will consider the following factors in determining whether or not a plan is satisfactory: ( a ) The extent of the specific problems that the program or institution anticipates without a waiver, including, for example, ( 1 ) Curtailment of services currently provided,
( 2 ) Downgrading of medical care currently being provided,
( 3 ) Reduction in the number of inpatients and outpatients receiving care,
( 4 ) Inadequate medical coverage for population served, or
( 5 ) Inadequate supervision of junior residents.
( b ) The adequacy of the alternative resources and methods (including use of physician assistants (as defined in 42 CFR 57.802), nurse practitioners (as defined in 42 CFR 57.2402), and other non-physician providers) that have been considered and have been and will be applied to reduce such disruption in the delivery of health services, especially in primary medical care manpower shortage areas, as established under section 332 of the Public Health Service Act, and for medicaid patients. This may include, for example: ( 1 ) Greater reliance on fully licensed physicians, and on physician assistants, nurse practitioners and other non-physician personnel in an expanded role in the delivery of health care, such as admission patient histories, making patient rounds, recording patient progress notes, doing the initial and follow-up evaluation of patients, performing routine laboratory and related studies, or
( 2 ) Utilization of the team approach to health care delivery (individuals functioning as an integral part of an interprofessional team of health personnel organized under the leadership of a physician working toward more efficient and/or more effective delivery of health services).
( c ) The extent to which changes (including improvement of educational and medical services) have been considered and which have been or will be applied to make the program more attractive to graduates of medical schools who are citizens of the United States, as demonstrated, for example, by: ( 1 ) Adding additional services to the existing programs to provide a broader educational experience for residents,
( 2 ) Expanding affiliations with other residency programs to offer a broader experience for residents,
( 3 ) Expanding undergraduate clerkships to provide a broader educational experience.
( 4 ) Creating or modifying administrative units which will provide broader clinical experiences, or
( 5 ) Initiating research projects.
( d ) The adequacy of the recruitment efforts which have been and will be undertaken to attract graduates of medical schools who are citizens of the United States, as demonstrated, for example, by: ( 1 ) Broad-based advertisement of the program and of the institution through notices in journals, contacts with medical schools, etc.
( 2 ) Forming committees for the purpose of recruiting U.S. citizens.
( 3 ) Working with national organizations which are involved with medical students and U.S. graduate medical trainees, e.g., the American Medical Student Association and the Physician National House Staff Association, to attract U.S. citizens.
( e ) The extent to which the program on a year-by-year basis has phased down its dependence upon aliens who are graduates of foreign medical schools so that the program will not be dependent upon the admission to the program of any additional such aliens after December 31, 1983.