Purpose Faculty development is vital for sustaining and advancing medical education. While accreditation standards require US medical schools to offer faculty development, existing frameworks lack the specificity to guide program planning, implementation, and evaluation across all key domains—and none have been developed through a systematic, consensus-based process with national medical education leaders. To address this gap, authors launched a pilot initiative to derive a consensus-based framework, entitled the Medical Education Faculty Development Program Framework (FDPF), for undergraduate medical education. Methods Over the course of 2021 to 2024, faculty development experts from 3 medical schools conducted a sequential, mixed-methods study in 7 phases to develop the FDPF. Phases included literature and expert conceptual reviews to generate an initial draft, followed by 4 iterative rounds of focus groups and semi-structured interviews with faculty development leaders from national medical education organizations to refine the framework. A short form with 27 quality indicators was then piloted at 2 US medical education conferences in 2023 with a combined sample of 55 faculty development participants. Results Focus group and conference participants endorsed the FDPF as potentially valuable for onboarding new faculty development professionals and for self-assessment of institutional programs or accreditation preparation. Across both pilot administrations of the short form, participants reported the highest agreement with quality indicators related to tracking faculty development participation and offering sessions on core teaching topics and learning science. Agreement was lower for indicators related to program alignment with teaching standards, access to faculty performance metrics, preceptor training programs, and support for instructional design. Conclusions Iterative expert feedback through focus groups and leader interviews contributed to 2 distinct final products: (1) a concise short form, “27 Quality Indicators of Faculty Development Programs,” designed for rapid self-assessment, and (2) a comprehensive FDPF checklist designed for systematic program benchmarking, design, and enhancement. Together, these tools offer faculty development professionals a systematic, consensus-based resource for driving continuous improvement and adaptability in medical education.
McCoy et al. (Wed,) studied this question.