Our goal is to eliminate the unnecessary time and resources currently spent on negotiating (and renegotiating) agreements, if a standard and predictable approach is sufficient. The AAMC Uniform Clinical Training Affiliation Agreement is a simple and unique agreement that can be found on the AAMC website. A modern and well-structured affiliation agreement between the health system and the university is one that clearly expresses the value of the partnership, defines the main commitments and responsibilities and takes into account the needs of each party (as shown in the figure below), while allowing for the implementation of common strategic priorities. As the healthcare market evolves, affiliations continue to be negotiated and renegotiated. New configurations of the healthcare system, market competition, new medical schools, extensions of the clinical campus and national economic priorities will have an impact on the landscape of academic affiliations. Organizations that have taken the time to design and adopt thoughtful membership frameworks will be well positioned to act together in a coordinated and mutually beneficial way to pursue new opportunities. Agile partnerships will bring strategic benefits to both parties and create measurable value. Crosswalk between the AAMC UCTA Agreement and LCME`s accreditation standards (Academic Years 2019-2020 &2020-2021) (PDF) Simultaneously, the scale and breadth of funding agreements between academic medical schools and their affiliated hospitals and health systems continue to increase. As a percentage of total turnover, the medical school`s funding by its affiliated hospitals and health systems more than doubled, from 7 percent in 1981 to 18 percent in 2017. a At its June 2014 meeting, the Liaison Committee for Medical Education approved the AAMC Uniform Clinical Training Affiliation Agreement, which meets its accreditation standards. The support limits a multi-year public relations process to reduce the need to negotiate and renegotiate agreements for short-term and supervised training experiences, which pose a relatively low risk to all parties involved. The proportion of doctors` practices in the possession of a hospital or health system increased from 27 per cent in 2006 to 79 per cent in 2016.

c Depending on the disposition of the FGP (which can be created separately or exists as a subsidiary/business department of the health system or faculty of medicine) and/or the structure of the non-academic medical enterprise (i.e. non-academic doctors employed or linked to the health system), health systems and universities will be faced with different questions about how best to organize their combined medical enterprise. From the point of view of the health system, expenditure on the flow of funds to university affiliates represents an important part of the operating budget: a recent survey of 55 AMCs showed that funding the health system for their affiliated university or medical partners represented on average 8.4% of their net turnover. b With hundreds of millions of dollars at stake over several decades of agreements and large memberships that have continued to be announced in recent years (e.g. B Geisinger Health System and Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine in Pennsylvania, ProMedica and the University of Toledo in Ohio, Hackensack Meridian Health and Seton Hall University in New Jersey, RWJBarnabas Health and Rutgers University in New Jersey and Banner Health and the University of Arizona) it is important that organizations critically evaluate their membership agreements and related funding agreements, to ensure that they are well placed to advance their partnership objectives. . . .