# FP-C vs CCP-C



## TransportJockey (Jun 29, 2013)

So I am about ready to take one of the certifying tests and was wondering on people's opinions about the two different ones. I am doing some ground CCT when I pull some shifts in the city, along with a year and a half as a lead medic I a very busy rural 911 system with two years as a lead intermediate before that. My goal is flight eventually, either fixed wing or rotor, but I don't know if having my FP-C prior to applying will hurt me or not. I've heard stories or it hurting and it helping. 
Any ideas?


----------



## STXmedic (Jun 29, 2013)

I've never heard of it hurting, but certainly heard of it being helpful. At the minimum, it shows that you're committed and showing a desire to further yourself and your education.


----------



## shfd739 (Jun 29, 2013)

A few flight medics I've talked to have said to just do FP-C. The clinical questions are the same and when you do apply it will put a you little ahead of the ones that don't have it. 

If your area is like around here its competitive and any little advantage you can get will help.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jun 29, 2013)

It is a requirement with most reputable flight companies.

FP-C and CCEMT-P

Get them both and maintain them if flight is your goal. It will make you eligible for most jobs which open and for those which do not require it, it will give you a competitive edge.


----------



## WTEngel (Jun 29, 2013)

FP-C will generally get you on the short list automatically.

It by no means is a guarantee of a job, but having it will almost certainly guarantee a second look.

CCP-C and FP-C are basically equivalent. The clinical content is the same, except for some light flight physiology on the FP-C. The other main difference is that CAAMTS ground standards are tested on FP-C and ground standards are tested on CCP-C.

Those changes are pretty minor. If you can pass one exam, there is no reason you shouldn't be able to pass the other.


----------



## TransportJockey (Jun 29, 2013)

Around here FP-C seems to be a requirement after a year I think... No requirement on hire (PHI, Tri-State Careflight, UNM Lifeguard, and Native Air are the local flight services to me). I'm trying to get into a CCEMT-P class, but it's rather hard to take two weeks off (or at least it was before I went to 48/96 schedule... I might try again soon, since there's one three hours away in Roswell). 
Thanks everyone. I think I'll go with the general consensus of testing for my FP-C. I might test for CCP-C later on for grins later on too.


----------



## STXmedic (Jun 29, 2013)

That's how it is around here, too. It's not a requirement to get hired, but you'll have to get it within a year of being hired. However, like WTE and Ak said, having it already provides a pretty good leg up against those applicant that they would have to push through after hiring.


----------



## WTEngel (Jun 29, 2013)

I haven't seen it as a hiring requirement anywhere around here either, but...

Flight services are generally inundated with applications. Every Tom, **** and Harry wants to fly for whatever reason...and few of the applicants are actually qualified.

When the hiring manager looks through the apps for people they want to invite in for a second look, I can promise you FP-C is probably at the top of of their list nearly 95% of the time. It is a major foot in the door.

If you don't have FP-C when you apply, you are competing with all the other applicants. If you do have it already, you are in a very small pool, and have already accomplished one of the hardest parts of the process, which is standing out for a second look.

It also demonstrates a pretty sharp knowledge bank on your part. The FP-C exam is one of the few alphabet soup certs that is still legit in my opinion. Before everyone jumps on me and says that there are still other good certs out there...I'm not bashing them all. I'm just saying it is one of the few remaining that hasn't been watered down and still remains pretty exclusive. I think there are something like 2200 total now. I am 1756 and Kyle is just under 2000, and he got his a year or two back...this isn't the type of test that people just study for a weekend and pass, which is why flight services still look highly upon it.


----------



## TransportJockey (Jun 29, 2013)

WTEngel said:


> I haven't seen it as a hiring requirement anywhere around here either, but...
> 
> Flight services are generally inundated with applications. Every Tom, **** and Harry wants to fly for whatever reason...and few of the applicants are actually qualified.
> 
> ...



Thanks man. That does help. And I have heard that it's the hardest test that a medic can take. So far before even attempting it I've done the Creighton University CCP program (Mostly online w/ a pratical and clinical portion) and been going over Wingfield's stuff. I want to make sure my knowledge base is very much equal to the task... plus I'm a nerd like that and I've been doing it out of pocket and on my own time lol


----------



## tacitblue (Jun 30, 2013)

TransportJockey said:


> So I am about ready to take one of the certifying tests and was wondering on people's opinions about the two different ones. I am doing some ground CCT when I pull some shifts in the city, along with a year and a half as a lead medic I a very busy rural 911 system with two years as a lead intermediate before that. My goal is flight eventually, either fixed wing or rotor, but I don't know if having my FP-C prior to applying will hurt me or not. I've heard stories or it hurting and it helping.
> Any ideas?



My understanding is that they are equivalent on most accounts except for flight physiology in the FP-C.


----------



## ExpatMedic0 (Jun 30, 2013)

If you look at both the UMBC CCEMT-P and the BCCTPC FP-C resources on there websites, you will see in theory, that the UMBC is a foundation training course for people entering the critical care field whilst the FP-C is a difficult test designed for seasoned providers who have been working in critical care for several years. 
Do not quote me on this, but I think the CCP-C draws from the same test bank as the FP-C from my understanding. The only difference being the CCP-C excludes flight ops/physiology. I believe it gives you more of the other questions to make up for that section being excluded.  My friend (WT remember AJ?) took both the CCP-C and FP-C, failed the CCP-C but passed the FP-C lol. Go figure...

 However, with no real national standards for this stuff and no rock solid rules, the same "Tom, ****, and Hairy's, that WT mentioned can take both of these things right out of paramedic school and ignore the recommendations, because that is all they are... recommendations. I also agree with AKF that from what I have seen, many reputable HEMS places recommended both the CCEMT-P and FP-C certifications. Even CAMTS using words like "recommends" instead of "required". There is also currently no national standard requirements for CME hours in critical care transport, only lots of "recommendations". 

I just started getting into all this CCT stuff, so take what I say with a grain of salt, its just my understanding of things so far. I am taking my CCEMT-P at UMBC in a couple weeks. I am sure the guys here with CCT experience can be more helpful, I am just giving my 2 cents.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jun 30, 2013)

I used to interview a lot of potential flight paramedics who had no previous flight experience.

What I found was that those who had FP-C were usually no more knowledgeable than those who didn't, yet were almost always significantly more cocky. Almost as a rule, they would show up thinking they were owed a position.

I don't think I ever offered a job to someone who had no flight experience, but did have their FP-C. 




akflightmedic said:


> It is a requirement with most reputable flight companies.



This is absolutely false. 

I have seen very few programs that required FP-C of non-experienced candidates. And I can name many "reputable" programs that do not require FP-C.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jun 30, 2013)

I did not say those with FP-C were more knowledgeable however it does demonstrate a level of commitment above other candidates and elevates one higher in the selection process.

I have not observed any extra or over cockiness as a result of this certificate.

I also did not say "all" reputable companies, I said "most" reputable companies require this cert in addition to the other alphabet soup and many years experience.

It is and always has been a competitive market to enter and anything you can do to improve your overall knowledge, education, exposure to higher skills, should be pursued if you want to achieve your goal.

Anyone who frowns on the above or implies it is not necessary should be avoided as they are doing you no favors.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jun 30, 2013)

akflightmedic said:


> I said "most" reputable companies require this cert



I know that is what you said, and it is a patently false statement.

I assure you that the vast majority of programs* do not* require it of new hires.

There may be a few out there that do, but they are a small minority.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jun 30, 2013)

Halothane said:


> I know that is what you said, and it is a patently false statement.
> 
> I assure you that the vast majority of programs* do not* require it of new hires.
> 
> There may be a few out there that do, but they are a small minority.



And I will take the counter position and we will agree to disagree...unless you are just trying to argue semantics.

Because YOU are the one who inserted/implied that I said it was required of new hires. That is not what I said. I said most reputable companies require it, which they do. If you do not have it beforehand they require it within 6 months to a year.

Exceptionally competitive programs will require it of new hires as to increase the talent in their hiring pool.

And I am still unsure why you seem to be against it, especially as a current or past hiring authority. Who frowns on more education?


----------



## TransportJockey (Jun 30, 2013)

ExpatMedic0 said:


> If you look at both the UMBC CCEMT-P and the BCCTPC FP-C resources on there websites, you will see in theory, that the UMBC is a foundation training course for people entering the critical care field whilst the FP-C is a difficult test designed for seasoned providers who have been working in critical care for several years.
> Do not quote me on this, but I think the CCP-C draws from the same test bank as the FP-C from my understanding. The only difference being the CCP-C excludes flight ops/physiology. I believe it gives you more of the other questions to make up for that section being excluded.  My friend (WT remember AJ?) took both the CCP-C and FP-C, failed the CCP-C but passed the FP-C lol. Go figure...
> 
> However, with no real national standards for this stuff and no rock solid rules, the same "Tom, ****, and Hairy's, that WT mentioned can take both of these things right out of paramedic school and ignore the recommendations, because that is all they are... recommendations. I also agree with AKF that from what I have seen, many reputable HEMS places recommended both the CCEMT-P and FP-C certifications. Even CAMTS using words like "recommends" instead of "required". There is also currently no national standard requirements for CME hours in critical care transport, only lots of "recommendations".
> ...


I'm jealous you get to do the CCEMT-P at UMBC... I wish I could have taken it at this point, but I couldn't take the time off all at once. That's why I did the CCP program through CReighton. IT's a semester long mostly online program and actually is rather good. Good luck man. I'm still finding out the ins and outs (obviously) of CCT, and it's a convoluted world to be sure lol. 
Good luck to ya


----------



## ExpatMedic0 (Jun 30, 2013)

TransportJockey said:


> I'm jealous you get to do the CCEMT-P at UMBC... I wish I could have taken it at this point, but I couldn't take the time off all at once. That's why I did the CCP program through CReighton. IT's a semester long mostly online program and actually is rather good. Good luck man. I'm still finding out the ins and outs (obviously) of CCT, and it's a convoluted world to be sure lol.
> Good luck to ya


haha ya it is a whole other world of confusion, I am still figuring it out. I plan on posting a detailed thread regarding my experience and opinion of the UMBC with the CCEMT-P after I am done. Stay tuned end of July for the details. I will probably post under the "education and training" part of the forum once I have completed the class. Its a long flight to Baltimore, so at least I get some last minute study time!


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jun 30, 2013)

duplicate


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jun 30, 2013)

akflightmedic said:


> And I am still unsure why you seem to be against it, especially as a current or past hiring authority. Who frowns on more education?



Why do you assume I frown on more education? Just because I disagree with you on the value of a given credential? 

I am very much a supporter of education. What I am not in favor of is "certifications" that imply a competency which very often doesn't exist. 

To me, the FP-C is yet another example of paramedicine using a "quick fix" to try to compensate for a major deficit in education. The fact that it can be easily obtained without any experience or real training makes it worthless, and cheapens the meaning of it for those who are expert flight paramedics.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jun 30, 2013)

Halothane said:


> Neither AEL or LN require FP-C of new hires, and combined they make up a large majority of the community-based HEMS operations in the US.
> 
> In addition to them, I could name several dozen hospital based programs - many which are quite reputable and competitive to get into, I might add - that I am familiar with that I know don't require FP-C of their new hires.
> 
> ...



If they are "non experienced" would that not make them a new hire?


----------



## akflightmedic (Jun 30, 2013)

Halothane said:


> Why do you assume I frown on more education? Just because I disagree with you on the value of a given credential?
> 
> I am very much a supporter of education. What I am not in favor of is "certifications" that imply a competency which very often doesn't exist.
> 
> To me, the FP-C is yet another example of paramedicine using a patch to try to compensate for a major deficit education.



Yes, you are frowning on more education because by requiring this challenging certification, it would certainly weed out the ricky rescues and typically the individuals who complete the course are very pro education, career oriented and highly motivated candidates.

It seems you have had some very bad personal experiences and paint with broad strokes. As with any "patch" or card in someone's wallet, it is the beginning. It is entry level, so an experienced hiring manager would not assume there is complete competency but instead would understand that this was a successful completion demonstrating basic competency in the course. It does not signify subject matter expertise.

As with all medicine, it is continuously evolving and we must evolve with it. The course/card/patch however does do as I stated earlier and weeds out a lot of wannabes. That is the first step. With what is left, you then have ability to choose from the cream.


----------



## usalsfyre (Jun 30, 2013)

My take on it. If when interviewing I see FP-C and some CCT experience (honest CCT, not "I used the Autovent and transported dopamine every once in a while") then I tend to put those people high up in the order. If I see FP-C and no experience, we'll talk but you have no special leg up on anyone else. 

Favorite question for those who come to an interview bragging about how much CCT experience they have with dubious credentials? "Tell me everything you know about balloon pumps...."


----------



## TransportJockey (Jun 30, 2013)

usalsfyre said:


> My take on it. If when interviewing I see FP-C and some CCT experience (honest CCT, not "I used the Autovent and transported dopamine every once in a while") then I tend to put those people high up in the order. If I see FP-C and no experience, we'll talk but you have no special leg up on anyone else.
> 
> Favorite question for those who come to an interview bragging about how much CCT experience they have with dubious credentials? "Tell me everything you know about balloon pumps...."



Heh I have some honest CCT experience  LTV1200 w/ multiple drips a couple times a week. But I get what you're saying and I appreciate it. Lol it's kinda funny cause balloon pumps scare the crap out of me so I've been reviewing all sorts of stuff on them cause I have no idea how much will be on the test. I've only seen one in person a few times, so I haven't gotten a lot of hands on time with them.


----------



## usalsfyre (Jun 30, 2013)

TransportJockey said:


> Heh I have some honest CCT experience  LTV1200 w/ multiple drips a couple times a week. But I get what you're saying and I appreciate it. Lol it's kinda funny cause balloon pumps scare the crap out of me so I've been reviewing all sorts of stuff on them cause I have no idea how much will be on the test. I've only seen one in person a few times, so I haven't gotten a lot of hands on time with them.



Not a lot on mine. Don't neglect the neo/peds stuff. My test had me going "Why the fark do I need to know this stuff?!? Don't we have Neo teams for a reason?!?"


----------



## TransportJockey (Jun 30, 2013)

usalsfyre said:


> Not a lot on mine. Don't neglect the neo/peds stuff. My test had me going "Why the fark do I need to know this stuff?!? Don't we have Neo teams for a reason?!?"



Heh peds and neo I'm actually rather comfortable with. Between the extra studying for class and the STABLE and NRP courses I don't hate peds as much as I used to


----------



## truetiger (Jun 30, 2013)

I too am studying for the FP-C exam. Purchased the ACE-SAT book, however noticed is dated 2008. I'm concerned some of the info may be outdated, anyone have any experience with this? For example, during a CEU class this week the instructor mentioned that the inverse ratios for ARDS are no longer recommended and pressure cycling is the new standard, I believe the book still suggests the 2:1 ratio, has the test been updated?


----------



## TransportJockey (Jun 30, 2013)

I was wondering kinda the same thing, since I'm using ACE-SAT and the video series...


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jun 30, 2013)

akflightmedic said:


> Yes, you are frowning on more education because by requiring this challenging certification



Huh? 

I'm the one saying the credential is questionable precisely _because_ it doesn't require any additional education. 

You are the one arguing in favor of a system where all one needs to do is memorize (not actually _learn_) some stuff out of a textbook, take and pass an hour long exam, and suddenly become regarded as having done something special.

Which one of us is anti-education?




akflightmedic said:


> it would certainly weed out the ricky rescues and typically the individuals who complete the course are very pro education, career oriented and highly motivated candidates.



No, it doesn't weed out the Ricky Rescues. Some of them, sure. All it does is give them more reason to think they're special, when they haven't really done much of anything.

I'm sorry, but this credential just doesn't mean what you think it does.

I certainly don't mean to be insulting of those who have taken the FP-C or are planning to take it. But it needs to be viewed for what it is. How much value can something really have that requires nothing more than passing an hour-long written exam?


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jun 30, 2013)

truetiger said:


> I too am studying for the FP-C exam. Purchased the ACE-SAT book, however noticed is dated 2008. I'm concerned some of the info may be outdated, anyone have any experience with this? For example, during a CEU class this week the instructor mentioned that the inverse ratios for ARDS are no longer recommended and pressure cycling is the new standard, I believe the book still suggests the 2:1 ratio, has the test been updated?



Recommendations for ARDS are all over the place. There's very little that has been proven to actually make a difference. Check out ardsnet.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jul 1, 2013)

Halothane said:


> Huh?
> 
> I'm the one saying the credential is questionable precisely _because_ it doesn't require any additional education.
> 
> ...



No I am not arguing in favor of a SYSTEM, however I am arguing for a course which demonstrates a higher degree of intelligence, education and possibly experience (most times). You cannot state that of the few thousand people who have completed the course, none of them are worthy or do not demonstrate the above qualities. The overwhelming majority do and those who do not typically are not employed as it will quickly be realized during the interview or skills process of the interview.

Those who spend the money, travel to take the class, prep for the class, pass the class in my opinion beat out any other candidate who does not when evaluating the area of personal drive (self motivation), desire to be better, hungry for knowledge. This is a small part of the total package I want on my team and representing my company.

Yes, completing this course IS something special in the sense that it gives more insight into a candidate's character. Could be good, could be bad but that is what the remaining of the interview process is for. I state again, requiring this course up front weeds out a LOT of candidates which increases potential talent pool.

If I had two candidates rate exactly the same on every other part of the process...presentation, likeability, written, practical, same years medic experience...completely identical, the deciding factor would then come down to extra courses and the person who demonstrates they went above and beyond...they would get the job.

But at the end of the day, we will agree to disagree, the original poster can evaluate the pros and cons as presented and make an informed decision. I am done with this conversation and wish you the best in your goal pursuit.

I have nothing more to contribute apparently as a medic of 20 years and a business owner (yes, one of which is a medevac service).


----------



## Flight-LP (Jul 1, 2013)

Halothane said:


> Huh?
> 
> I'm the one saying the credential is questionable precisely _because_ it doesn't require any additional education.
> 
> ...



How is this any different from the CEN, CCRN, or CFRN exams? They certainly are not viewed in the same light as your opinion of the FP-C, yet are equaly as demanded and viewed as reputable credentials. Can you offer a logical explanation for this?


----------



## ExpatMedic0 (Jul 2, 2013)

According to the UMBC and its "levels of difficulty" it places the NREMT-P at par with the NCLEX, the CCEMT-P with the CEN, the CCP-C with the CFRN and CTRN and at the top for RN and Medic is the FP-C which ranks equally as difficult as the CCRN it claims. 

The difference is that, we in EMS are still catching up to nursing when it comes to traditional formal higher education and its breadth requirements and classrooms. Although, knowledge is not always attained by sitting in front of a lecture, more and more universities are recognizing this by offering online learning. Even John Hopkins university offers masters degrees mostly online, with only testing taking place on campus. Most of the time this learning is student lead and self study but is equal in terms of the end result for any classes taken. In theory, the FP-C is like this in a way. The knowledge is still acquired, its just acquired by another  learning method.

Although there are  no mandatory degrees or hours for the FP-C, it should be  very difficult for someone to attain with out many hours of interdisciplinary study and experience. The critical care transport books I have to study for the FP-C rival text I have for 300 or 400 level classes I have taken at university.
At the end of the day, its just a written multiple choice test that almost any paramedic can try. I think they should also do practical skills and require so many documented hours or classes before taking it.... This would certainly help nay-sayers from striking it down so quickly, and I agree I would like to see elements like that introduced to it. However, despite that, I still look at it as an achievement, and for what else we have to compare it to in EMS, our highest and most difficult certification to obtain. Especially if coupled with a CCEMT-P, which shows you at least took 80 hours of foundation lectures and skills training before taking the FP-C. I would be more proud of my bachelors degree, but I would still be very proud of passing the FP-C exam and I take people very seriously who obtain that.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jul 2, 2013)

Flight-LP said:


> How is this any different from the CEN, CCRN, or CFRN exams? They certainly are not viewed in the same light as your opinion of the FP-C, yet are equaly as demanded and viewed as reputable credentials. Can you offer a logical explanation for this?



CEN and CFRN are the same as FP-C. The only thing they indicate is that the credential holder was able to remember (not even necessarily understand) some stuff out of a textbook for just long enough to write it down on a multiple choice exam. They prove nothing as far as competency.  

CCRN is a little different because it requires 1 year of verifiable critical care nursing experience, which normally means a lengthy and structured orientation as well as daily function in the environment one is being certified in. It'd be better still if they required structured experience objectives as well as skills verification, but it's far better than requiring no background at all. The AACN's reasoning for the experience requirement is simple: How can one be "certified" in something they've never even done before? If the BCCTPC and the ENA would apply such reasoning to their respective certification processes, they'd carry a lot more credibility.


I have an idea: Why don't we let EMT-B's who *have never even been inside an ambulance*, and who possess *no ALS experience or education whatsoever* become certified as paramedics, just by passing a 100-question clinical exam? That's right, we'll "certify" paramedics who have never snapped a laryngoscope blade onto a handle, never drawn a med up into a syringe, and never seen an EKG tracing other than in the textbook they studied to pass the written exam.   

Would that be good for the paramedic profession? 

Would it be good For EMS agencies? 

Would it be good for the public? 

Would it be good for the credibility of the title "paramedic"?

That's exactly what we are doing with "flight" and "critical care" paramedics. Calling oneself a FP-C or CCP communicates nothing. You might be smart as hell and have all kinds of great experience, or you may be a minimally experienced paramedic who has never done a critical care transport in your life. Who knows? You certainly can't tell from the credential. And if the credential doesn't communicate "competency", then what is the point of it?


----------



## akflightmedic (Jul 2, 2013)

Halothane said:


> And if the credential doesn't communicate "competency", then what is the point of it?



NO credential communicates "competency"....not even the two letters of MD after one's name. 

The guy who graduates last in Med School....yep, he is still called Doctor.

You have taken the point of this discussion and tried to twist it every way possible to demonstrate in your opinion it (the cert) means nothing. Fine, we acknowledge your disinterest and support for a course which thins the herd.

At the end of the day, the course is still valuable to the individual and an asset when it comes time to be interviewed and considered for positions. Does it guarantee a job? not at all. Does it mean you are super smart and the bestest of the best....not at all. But again it does demonstrate a desire to push oneself above the rest and the ability to complete successfully a higher level course. If you as a hiring manager fail to appreciate that fact about a candidate sitting in front of you and then consider his other merits in the interview process, then you suck as a hiring authority.

The best advice to a person trying to enter the field, regardless of how you personally feel about the course is to advise them to complete it, keep your ego in check, know that it doesn't earn a right to a job but also know that it does give you a slight edge over candidates who do not have it if all other qualities/experience are equal.

As with any badge, license, cert, degree in medicine....it is only a demonstration of having met the basic core competencies. It does not mean you will continue to meet them 3 years, 3 months or even 3 days from now...only that you did so when it mattered most and that was at the time of the test. The rest is up to you to continue to learn and grow and then of course demonstrate and prove naysayers like the one above how wrong he is.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jul 3, 2013)

akflightmedic said:


> we acknowledge your disinterest and support for *a course* which thins the herd.
> 
> regardless of how you personally feel about *the course*
> 
> At the end of the day, *the course* is still valuable



I'm curious why you keep calling the FP-C exam a "course"? That strikes me as odd. If it were a course, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.




akflightmedic said:


> *NO credential communicates "competency"*....not even the two letters of MD after one's name.



Interesting that you start your post out by saying that, but then finish it by saying this:

​

akflightmedic said:


> with any badge, license, cert, degree in medicine....it is only *a demonstration of having met the basic core competencies.*



So, is the point of a credential to communicate a competency, or not? I say it is.

Add again, as I've asked before, how does a multiple choice exam evaluate the basic core competencies that a flight paramedic should possess?

If that is a valid approach, then why don't we substitute a multiple choice exam for paramedic programs?





akflightmedic said:


> If you as a hiring manager fail to appreciate that fact about a candidate sitting in front of you and then consider his other merits in the interview process, then you suck as a hiring authority.



Hmm. What I think makes a hiring manager "suck" is being lazy and using something objective but with little actual value to rank people. Using that approach, you could easily pass over a really good person who for whatever reason, just hasn't taken the exam yet.

What I think makes a hiring manager NOT suck is taking the time to periodically go through all 150 or more resumes that have accumulated, and reading them and evaluating the applicants by EXPERIENCE. Experience matters far more than exam scores. 

Here is how we always approached this where I worked, and exactly how I would do it again. The process is identical for flight nurse and flight paramedic candidates, aside from obvious differences in the knowledge and competencies we expect them to come with. You can substitute CFRN for FP-C here:


When looking at resumes, the people who have flight or solid CCT experience generally go to the top of the list, regardless of their credentials.


Assuming you DO NOT have flight experience, if you have a neat looking resume that conveys several years of high quality ALS experience _(high quality, not necessarily high volume; quality is always > than quantity, and it is often hard to have both)_, as well as involvement in things such as QA, protocol development, and teaching, I will probably want to interview you whether you have FP-C or not.


On the other hand, I will _not_ bother interviewing someone whose experience appears inadequate, just because they have FP-C


When you come to interview, you will be judged on how you interact and communicate with people, your past experience, how well you do in simulation and oral scenarios, and by the overall feeling we get as to your level of competence, maturity as a clinician, ability to manage stress, ability to interact with with other clinicians and the public, and how you would fit in with the team and learn the job. 


If you do well on those things during the interview, you will probably be put on the hiring list, even if you don't have FP-C.


If, on the other hand, you do poorly on those things during the interview, then you will NOT be put on the hiring list, no matter what initials you have behind your name.

So where in this process is there even any room for considering the importance (or lack thereof) of the FP-C credential, or any other credential for that matter? The qualities listed in bullet 4 are critical and mandatory, and cannot be conveyed at all by the FP-C exam, which is exactly why it means next to nothing when it comes to hiring newbies.

I would not want to be associated with a program that ranked FP-C, CFRN, CCEMTP, or any other merit badge as more important than quality experience and having the right personality for the job.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jul 3, 2013)

Halothane said:


> I'm curious why you keep calling the FP-C exam a "course"? That strikes me as odd. If it were a course, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.



It is a course in the sense that if you do not procure the study guide, review other supporting texts and perform some independent research and study...you will not pass. While it is not a structured in the classroom course, it is a course none the less.




Halothane said:


> Interesting that you start your post out by saying that, but then finish it by saying this:
> 
> ​​
> So, is the point of a credential to communicate a competency, or not? I say it is.



As I stated, there is a difference between subject matter expertise versus basic core competency. This holds true for any degree, license or certification. Holding the license/cert demonstrates a basic competency whether it be a few hours or a few years, but it does demonstrate you retained the knowledge long enough to demonstrate that. However, retaining this particular knowledge to pass is far more difficult than say retaining enough knowledge to pass a CPR course or something as simple. By this I mean those who pass this exam, usually have worked hard and DO have the knowledge...do some barely skate by? Sure they do but this does not hold true for the majority.



Halothane said:


> Add again, as I've asked before, how does a multiple choice exam evaluate the basic core competencies that a flight paramedic should possess?



The same way a multiple choice exam validates every other medical profession. We are not unique in this requirement so I am unsure what the issue is. It does however assist in determining whether or not that candidate has the knowledge or not. It will be up to the employer to weed out the ones who somehow are idiots yet hold the title through other processes but this requirement is a great start to thin the applicant pool.



Halothane said:


> If that is a valid approach, then why don't we substitute a multiple choice exam for paramedic programs?



Because you are comparing apples to oranges. Your stretch at asking why don't EMTs with zero experience just test out as a medic is ludicrous. You know this which is why you presented this weak argument. A paramedic has already had a license and presumably experience before adding a little extra education via titles such as FP-C. Even if they do not have enough experience in your opinion to be seeking this title (FP-C), at the end of the day they are still competent in paramedic knowledge and skills. This was achieved by schooling, lectures, practicals and yes, multiple choice exams. The EMT scenario is not giving consideration to those other factors, therefore is not comparable.




Halothane said:


> Hmm. What I think makes a hiring manager "suck" is being lazy and using something objective but with little actual value to rank people. Using that approach, you could easily pass over a really good person who for whatever reason, just hasn't taken the exam yet.



Yes, a great candidate could be passed over however as a hiring manager this is not your issue, it is THEIR issue for not yet taking the exam to demonstrate that they are a desired candidate. There are plenty of desirable candidates who have taken the exam. And again, I did not say the title was the sole criteria but it certainly does assist in the initial screening of applicants.



Halothane said:


> What I think makes a hiring manager NOT suck is taking the time to periodically go through all 150 or more resumes that have accumulated, and reading them and evaluating the applicants by EXPERIENCE. Experience matters far more than exam scores.



Experience is a factor but not the entire consideration. There are people who have great "experience" on paper but have done little to improve themselves professionally. Part of the character assessment is evaluating what they have done on their own to grow and expand their knowledge and understanding. What challenges have they taken on willingly to make themselves standout. I have selected candidates on experience before and learned a valuable lesson the hard way. These days I am more inclined to take a fairly fresh recruit over an experienced one especially if they demonstrate a lot of energy and excitement about themselves and the profession. These are the people who will continue to improve personally which ultimately benefits the business. This is who I want out there representing my name.



Halothane said:


> Here is how we always approached this where I worked, and exactly how I would do it again. The process is identical for flight nurse and flight paramedic candidates, aside from obvious differences in the knowledge and competencies we expect them to come with. You can substitute CFRN for FP-C here:
> 
> 
> When looking at resumes, the people who have flight or solid CCT experience generally go to the top of the list, regardless of their credentials.
> ...



Everything you listed above is what I stated or implied as important. The total package. However to streamline the process and increase talent pool, having requirements before applying will give you all of those needs and more. You can then assess through the process who gets along, who performs well, who handles stress...

Do you require your candidates to have ACLS or CPR?

If not, why not? These courses mean next to nothing right? So why do you have them as job requirements? I mean there could be some really great candidates you are passing over all over a simple little multiple choice group effort test that has actual classroom time and scenarios....(should I stretch it any further?)


----------



## Summit (Jul 3, 2013)

akflightmedic said:


> It is a course in the sense that if you do not procure the study guide, review other supporting texts and perform some independent research and study...you will not pass. While it is not a structured in the classroom course, it is a course none the less.



By your definition any board certification is a course. That is a weird definition of course. Course is normally something that involves organized and mandatory instruction. CCEMTP is a course. You are stretching hard to call FP-C a course and by your definition CEN or CFRN would also be courses but RNs call them certifications.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jul 3, 2013)

Summit said:


> By your definition any board certification is a course. That is a weird definition of course. Course is normally something that involves organized and mandatory instruction. CCEMTP is a course. You are stretching hard to call FP-C a course and by your definition CEN or CFRN would also be courses but RNs call them certifications.



Hate using Wikipedia however Google the certification and its relation to the word "course".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-C

Most candidates if not all take a course to complete the exam. While there is not one directly sponsored, there are many review courses available to attend to be successful at passing the exam.

I keep saying course and I attempted to explain it previously but maybe was not successful at doing so. It is a course in the sense that if you do not get organized, study the right associated material, and prepare, you will not pass. You are creating/designing a "course" for yourself to follow in order to pass successfully.

If you do not do any of the above, if you just walk in without structuring a course, a lesson plan, a study guide to follow, you will fail.


----------



## ExpatMedic0 (Jul 3, 2013)

Originally it was mentioned CCEMT-P with the FP-C, as a duo, was what many (not all) prefer.
 CCEMT-P being a foundation course in the traditional since, and FP-C being a difficult test for experienced providers to challenge themselves with. We also seem to be drifting from the OP's questions and comments ;-)


----------



## Summit (Jul 3, 2013)

akflightmedic said:


> Hate using Wikipedia however Google the certification and its relation to the word "course".
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-C
> 
> ...




All your comments apply to CEN CCRN CFRN and most of the other nursing specialty board exams. Most people take review classes, structure their study, read books, and use study guides. Are they all courses by your interpretation?


----------



## akflightmedic (Jul 3, 2013)

Summit said:


> All your comments apply to CEN CCRN CFRN and most of the other nursing specialty board exams. Most people take review classes, structure their study, read books, and use study guides. Are they all courses by your interpretation?



Is there a point to your question since you know the answer to this?

Seeing as how I was not against any of those courses or the FP-C, what is the relevance?


----------



## Carlos Danger (Jul 3, 2013)

akflightmedic said:


> Because you are comparing apples to oranges. Your stretch at asking why don't EMTs with zero experience just test out as a medic is ludicrous. You know this which is why you presented this weak argument. *A paramedic has already had a license and presumably experience before adding a little extra education via titles such as FP-C.* Even if they do not have enough experience in your opinion to be seeking this title (FP-C), at the end of the day they are still competent in paramedic knowledge and skills. This was achieved by schooling, lectures, practicals and yes, multiple choice exams. The EMT scenario is not giving consideration to those other factors, therefore is not comparable.



Yeah, and the EMT already has a license, too, and "presumably" has experience before adding "a little extra education" via titles such as EMT-P.....

Obviously you are having a tough time following. Let me break it down:



The way things are now, a paramedic can sit for the FP-C exam without proving ANY previous experience whatsoever. The only pre-requisite is holding a paramedic card for a year, and all they have to do to earn the FP-C credential is memorize enough stuff for just long enough to pass a brief multiple-choice exam and become "certified" in running balloon pumps, ventilators, chest tubes, RSI, PA catheters, etc; all skills they have never actually learned to do.


In my theoretical scenario, an EMT-B can sit for the EMT-P exam without proving ANY experience whatsoever. The only pre-requisite is holding an EMT card for a year, and all they have to do to earn the EMT-P credential is memorize enough stuff for just long enough to pass a brief multiple-choice exam and become "certified" in interpreting EKG's, starting IV's, drawing up and giving meds, doing needle chest decompressions, etc; all skills they have never actually learned to do.

So what, exactly, is the difference between the two? How are they apples and oranges?


----------



## WTEngel (Jul 3, 2013)

Probably just going to have to agree to disagree here fellas. 

I've seen both sides of the coin, and the answer probably lies somewhere in the middle. 

At this point it is just a difference of opinion on what you place importance on and how you want to prioritize and sift through credentials and experience for hiring. 

Hal, you've taken AK's argument and gone to the extreme with it in order to discredit it. AK didn't recommend an extreme or advocate for automatic credibility to be given to anyone who has passed an exam. He simply said it can be a good indicator that a candidate deserves a little bit closer look.

At the end of they day, any amount of experience or certifications should only serve as a foot in the door. The real due diligence on the part of any hiring manager is to actually sit and talk to the candidate. As Kyle mentioned earlier, it doesn't matter if you have FP-C, RN, MD, RT or any other initials behind your name...I can talk to you for about five minutes and tell if you walk the walk. 

It isn't hard to separate the experienced folks who have their FP-C from the people who studied a few review guides and then tested. In all honesty, with so few FP-C credentialed medics out there, I think your point about people simply graduating from medic school and hitting the review books to get their FP-C short time later is a bit overblown, but that's just my anecdotal opinion. Nobody has actually presented any evidence to support any of the claims they've made so far....


----------



## akflightmedic (Jul 4, 2013)

WTEngel said:


> Probably just going to have to agree to disagree here fellas.
> 
> I've seen both sides of the coin, and the answer probably lies somewhere in the middle.
> 
> ...



I raise my glass to your voice of reason.


----------



## shfd739 (Jul 4, 2013)

WTEngel said:


> Probably just going to have to agree to disagree here fellas.
> 
> I've seen both sides of the coin, and the answer probably lies somewhere in the middle.
> 
> ...



What you said. I wanted to post similar but probably wouldve gotten in trouble


----------



## TransportJockey (Jul 4, 2013)

Thank you everyone for your input anyways. I will be testing for my FP-C in the next six weeks. Those of you who remember me from previous stays on the forum know I'm not just doing it to show off or play a merit badge. I have taken the education seriously and did it to better my own practice and be a better provider for my patients. 
I just want to test to prove to myself I'm familiar enough with the material and procedures to do it. I'm six to eighteen months from being a me to fly and will still be working on my BS in bio while waiting to hit that mark anyways. Then who knows. Maybe PA school.


----------



## MSDeltaFlt (Jul 4, 2013)

FP-C and CCP-C are the exact same exam.  CCP- C has the same number of questions only without any of the flight physiology.

That being said these exams are testing the experienced provider.  Any critical care/flight paramedic obtaining these certifications show them as a testatment of passing a test proving experience in their field.  And should wear the patches proudly.

Anyone passing these exams before gaining any critical care or flight experience make the credentials mean absolutely nothing.

Get the experience THEN test.


----------



## Antioch (Oct 12, 2013)

MSDeltaFlt said:


> FP-C and CCP-C are the exact same exam.  CCP- C has the same number of questions only without any of the flight physiology.
> 
> That being said these exams are testing the experienced provider.  Any critical care/flight paramedic obtaining these certifications show them as a testatment of passing a test proving experience in their field.  And should wear the patches proudly.
> 
> ...


I know this thread is a few months old. However, after reading the entirety of the thread, it appears that a person should pretty much take it in whatever order they can. Without experience OR the certification, will you even get hired in order to get the experience? 

I'm only a 4 year paramedic with no CCT experience (just basic ALS transport) and I have the chance to take the CCP at Univ. of Florida come this Dec. You bet I'm gonna jump on that chance as are dozens of other's who are coming from basic ALS transport departments. And you can also bet that I'll challenge the FC-P soon thereafter. I want possible employer's to know I'm serious about this so that I can get the experience.


----------



## HH1251 (Aug 27, 2020)

Carlos Danger said:


> Huh?
> 
> I'm the one saying the credential is questionable precisely _because_ it doesn't require any additional education.
> 
> ...


Carlos, you're the guy who takes the test and doesn't pass them then you tell everyone the test doesn't actually represent knowledge anyways.


----------



## StCEMT (Aug 28, 2020)

HH1251 said:


> Carlos, you're the guy who takes the test and doesn't pass them then you tell everyone the test doesn't actually represent knowledge anyways.


Considering he is one of our resident gas passers with that background, I am fairly certain his understanding of that area of medicine isn't lacking. Maybe I am wrong, but I doubt it.

Also....why dig up something from 7 years ago?


----------



## Carlos Danger (Aug 28, 2020)

HH1251 said:


> Carlos, you're the guy who takes the test and doesn't pass them then you tell everyone the test doesn't actually represent knowledge anyways.


Actually, back in 2002 I became one of the original CFP’s when I was one of the first 100 people to pass it. Back in the day when there weren’t dozens of online resources and prep courses and books devoted to the exam. Just for the record.

Thanks for playing, though. Better luck next time.


----------

