degrees for all paramedics 10 year plan

Veneficus

Forum Chief
Messages
7,301
Reaction score
16
Points
0
Here it is, as simple as it gets.

First, we legally set a date. Call it Jan 1, 2024.

Next we extort states to comply by tying medicare reimbursement for ALS service only to agencies that have 100% degreed paramedics.

So if your agency has 1 paramedic without a 4 year degree, you can only get the BLS rate for your whole agency.

When this happens, seeing a need and a market, 4 year universities will open programs left and right.

That is the only major hurdle, and since it isn't an unreasonable time frame, resistance will be lower.

Since most state EMS authorities decide what con ed requirement need to be met, instead of some arbitrary hours like 48 or 96 every 2 years, depending on what state you are from, call it 12 credit hours a year at an accredited university for all with a 2 year degree and 15 a year to those without.

With the average credit for EMT and paramedic class counted, that should get everyone to 120 credits in 10 years.

It will also allow employers to shift the money they currently spend for coned and allow them to negotiate group tuition rates with the unis in the area.

It will not be overly burdonsome for individuals who must pay their own way. Not to mention depending on what your coned fees are, you may be paying less than you do now. Additionally since this coned will be recognized university healthcare courses, it will provide lateral transfer opportunity to other degrees. So when you hurt your back, you can go into being an ultrasound tech.

It then becomes beneficial for employers to hire people who come with a degree because it protects their revenue stream, reduces agency coned costs, and scheduling problems.

If you go to an agency with a degree in hand, you have the bargaining power of coming ready made, which means you can demand a higher pay, since your agency will spend less on you over time and have a provider at the level they will need.

At the end of these 10 years, since providers will be much more educated than now, you could drop the recert con ed back to hours and make it minimal. Say: 20 every 2 years. Make it really enticing and give credit for teaching public classes. (like CPR, first aid, etc.)

Now with a large body of equally educated providers, they can form a real professional organization (not like the pityful NAEMT) and start lobbying for increased pay, etc. with the world accepted bargaining chip.

Now this is not without problem, for example, if you fail your coned classes, you could really be in a bind. Not only would you probably take a financial hit, most likely being forced to pay again out of your own pocket for this conEd, you very easily could fall out of compliance with the necessary credit hours. Which means you could not work in EMS until you made it right.

But this would give every provider a fair shot. I suspect it would eliminate a fair few. (But honestly, is it really a loss?)

Now this could really put a hurt on volunteer agencies. But, it is so far in the future, and the advancements right now considerabe, chances are, an EMT-B will have enough gadgets in hand (like an AED that could recognize any rhtym and apply the appropriate electrical therapy, epipen, etc) to help any life threatening emergency.

Hopefully by then the AHA will have its $hit together on ACLS and PALS medications and all the useless ones (aka most of them) will be gone.

The degree also positions for the future EMS revenue streams, like prevention, education, and public health. As you raise the value of service you provide, you raise your pay.

It also opens up the possibility of making being an instructor a master's degree. Less teachers = less providers. (proven by medical and nursing professions)

Less providers = higher demand = pay bargaining chip.

HIgher paid providers = less fly by night minimalist services = better pay and working conditions for all. Especially when employers are invested in your education.

It can be done, but it is not realistic to say "paramedics need a 4 year degree next year."
 
Considering what is starting shortly, I'm not going to respond directly to your plan, which I like.

But, this is what EMS needs. If all we keep doing is talking about the problems but, we get nowhere. Even a solution that is purely theoretical is better than whining. I applaud you for taking the time and thinking things out. Obviously there are holes in the above plan, but there is no such thing as a perfect plan. This where the real discussion comes from.
 
If only schools offered Paramedic Bachelors programs like Loma Linda University....
 
I don't see a jump from most states requiring just a cert to all requiring a bachelors that quickly. It will have to start at an associates first.

Simply stated, the average salary does not warrant a bachelors, therefor people will not go to school for 4 years to get the average paltry wages, just for the 'hope', that it will be increased in the future.


Starting at an associates, then increasing the pay somewhat, THEN moving to a bachelors is a lot more feasible.
 
We can start by requiring paramedics to have at least an associates degree from a regionally accredited college/university and tie that to reimbursement. Then we can lobby CMS to reimburse paramedic services for CCT and community medicine if the service employs BA/BS prepared medics.

I think Oregeon requires an AS for licensure already.
 
We can start by requiring paramedics to have at least an associates degree from a regionally accredited college/university and tie that to reimbursement. Then we can lobby CMS to reimburse paramedic services for CCT and community medicine if the service employs BA/BS prepared medics.

I think Oregeon requires an AS for licensure already.

Yup, we do; I believe Washington is the only other state to require it as well.
 
With RT and RN still only requiring a associates, I don't see this happening. But one can dream.
 
So, how do we go about getting reimbursement changed? You need EMS people in high positions in the government to get that passed, and probably people in HHS. Not going to be easy.
 
I think this is one of many things that could help drive EMS forward.
 
EMS wont go anywhere until we have a Nationally recognized board that governs what we all do to begin with.

The government of our nation works the way it does because it is unified. The states can make federal law stricter, but they cannot make them more lenient.

The same should go for EMS. We need a unified, governing federal body for the entire country to bring us all together as a recognized professional group.

The National Registry is an option, not a requirement. For me here in NY for example, its just a merit badge. It serves me 0 purpose and isn't recognized anywhere by me. It is simply a complete waste.

Nurses have a national board.
Doctors have a national board.
PAs and NPs have a national board.

We may be lower on the food chain, but we are still a big part of it and should fit into it just the same.

In pieces like we are, we are weak. Together we would be strong.

DISTURBED-10000fists.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
EMS wont go anywhere until we have a Nationally recognized board that governs what we all do to begin with.
This is an important point. Without a national unification of EMS, there will be no change at any government level because there will be no unified voice asking for it.
 
Associate's is probably more realistic, at least now.

Agree that we need an associate's, but in what? Army-style "anything goes" degrees, nursing, medical, or specific Paramedic degrees?

Also, and more importantly, who is going to lobby for this, pay for the effort to get it passed, and enforce it. Remember that the resistance to this will be very, very strong, and the current system "works" well enough for now that it's going to be hard to change.

Arguments that will be used against it:
1. Why? Studies still haven't shown a difference in patient outcomes between US and degree-mandated systems.
2. Who pays? Really relevant to volunteers, who do need to go- but there's going to be a lot of resistance. Especially relevant to municipal departments- how do you convince cities that they should support increased salaries for the same job?

3. What should be mandated? Do firefighters need degrees too?
4. Where will the standard of care end up?

My greatest fear is that we end up like the UK, where paramedics are "independent", but they're essentially Intermediates. Here, paramedics legitimately need to be able to perform a lot of techniques that our European counterparts don't, simply due to our nation's size, population, and health-care system. While Veneficus raises excellent points, I really don't think that we need PAs or doctors on ambulances when we could empower paramedics to do the same thing with proper education and protocols.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Also, and more importantly, who is going to lobby for this, pay for the effort to get it passed, and enforce it. Remember that the resistance to this will be very, very strong, and the current system "works" well enough for now that it's going to be hard to change.

Another key point, few outside of EMS are aware of how broken the system really is, especially since quality and delivery methods vary so much from place to place. Just another reason that a national "EMS voice" is needed. In a way we have that now with the NAEMT and NREMT, but I'm not sure many people outside of the industry know what those organizations do, or even who they are.
 
In regards to a national board, it should be noted that those are private institutions that the state governments defer to much in the same fashion as they do with the NREMT. The National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME), which runs the USMLE (MD licensing exam) is not a Federal agency.
 
Another key point, few outside of EMS are aware of how broken the system really is, especially since quality and delivery methods vary so much from place to place. Just another reason that a national "EMS voice" is needed. In a way we have that now with the NAEMT and NREMT, but I'm not sure many people outside of the industry know what those organizations do, or even who they are.


We can take a page from the IAFF, who (within my lifetime) have quite successfully painted the "you'll burn to death without a paid FD" scenario. Kids love firemen because Fire is marketed hard, early, and often. Police as well. When your average elementary kid thinks of a paramedic, chances are that the truck is red and helmets are involved somehow- MARKETING! Few of them will say "paramedics are not firefighters, they're a third service or a private contractor."

Another thing we really need to focus on is EMS's service model. All the private-worker or third-service complaints on the Internet, regardless of the validity of their point, mean nothing when they're cancelled out by firefighter-paramedics who do the same job and view the appropriate educational pathway as a tradesman- and they've got some good points.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Arguments that will be used against it:
1. Why? Studies still haven't shown a difference in patient outcomes between US and degree-mandated systems.

What studies?

2. Who pays? Really relevant to volunteers, who do need to go- but there's going to be a lot of resistance. Especially relevant to municipal departments- how do you convince cities that they should support increased salaries for the same job?

Every other country with degree minimum paramedics has managed to pay for it.

3. What should be mandated? Do firefighters need degrees too?

Who cares? The discussion is about paramedics.

4. Where will the standard of care end up?

Higher.

My greatest fear is that we end up like the UK, where paramedics are "independent", but they're essentially Intermediates. Here, paramedics legitimately need to be able to perform a lot of techniques that our European counterparts don't, simply due to our nation's size, population, and health-care system.

What is that you think UK paramedics can't do that US paramedics can?
 
When EMS has a professional lobby spending millions of dollars to influance legsislation at a national and then a state level we might see that kind of program. Fire spends money, private ambulance spends money, nurses spend money, doctors spend money EMS sorry Charlie...

We can rant and plan and speculate all we want on this and other forums but EMS is still unorganized at a national level. We can't even get agreement on which federal agency should be lead for us.

Like it or not what drives change in America is MONEY or massive public reaction, which for the most part takes money. When we have a "Super PAC" and big lobbists working for us perhaps we can grow. Sorry to sound so cynical but our system of government works that way and until we do too we are doomed to be the rented mule of the farm.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, how do we go about getting reimbursement changed? You need EMS people in high positions in the government to get that passed, and probably people in HHS. Not going to be easy.

But nobody in EMS is going to get to one of those positions without a degree.
 
With RT and RN still only requiring a associates, I don't see this happening. But one can dream.

With many health systems nationwide striving to achieve magnet status... the 2 year RN is soon to be going the way of the LPN. BSN is quickly becoming the gold standard.
 
Back
Top