Employee Development

Communication

Integrity

Employee Empowerment

Knowledge

Authenticity

Comment

As both a previous student and employee, experienced harassment and observed her harassing, undermining and back stabbing other employees and peers for the purpose of expanding her good-standing and power within the organization. Uses gender and racial dynamics to accuse, embarrass and slander others while presenting herself as beyond criticism. Criticizes and undermines administration behind their backs. Hugely misrepresents the service hours and numbers of visits given by her students and herself. Her franchised educational organization, ACPE, requires that at least half of the students' time is in class and reflection groups, greatly limiting the patient visiting time. Also in violation of Medicare reimbursement laws misrepresenting the hours/data required for the Medicare reimbursements for her training program. This could be particularly damaging to the organization if thoroughly investigated. What counts as a 'patient visit' or 'staff encounter'?, knocking on a patient's door or making a note in a chart? Her primary loyalty is to her franchise educational organization which encourages all its franchises to misrepresent their beginning students as 'residents', a term otherwise used in the healthcare field for people with much more education and clinical experience. She blocks identifying them as the beginning 'students' that they are. Patients have the right to know they are being visited by first year students, not experienced 'residents' as a 'resident' physician would be. Particularly insulting to peers in the interfaith religious community, minimizing their importance in caring for their hospitalized patients/members while presenting herself and her first year students as the 'spiritual care professionals', and other community clergy and religious leaders as not being 'professionals', in terms of caring for hospitalized patients. Minimizes recognition and involvement of community clergy in hospital care and education while lifting up her students as THE 'professional' care providers, thereby embedding a STUDENT LEVEL STANDARD of care. In choosing the students for her program, the religious affiliations of her student prove she has a preference towards fringe religious groups that represent very small percentages of the patient and staff populations. This is indicative of her cultural and political prejudices and has her students much less likely to be visiting patients of their own faith or a closely related faith, faiths representing much higher portions of the patient population. The students are trained more as amateur therapists than spiritual/religious care providers and proceed to 'analyze' patients in their visitings, also a scary proposition, when they should be providing only related to the patient's religious background and spiritual experience. Supervisors in her education franchise based organization are supervisors trained to present themselves and run their training programs as though they were pscyhologists or therapists, spending a good bit of their training session time analyzing their students over against providing chaplaincy training, teaching skills specific to chaplaincy and the hospital setting. This also opens up the health system to additional liability as the students psyches are broken down and not always put back together in a healthy way. What opportunities are the students given to objectively evaluate her without fear of retribution of some sort when the supervisor's evaluation of them may limit their advancement within their profession?