Justifications for Discrepancies Between Competency Committee and Program Director Recommended Resident Supervisory Roles.

Objective: To explore justifications for differences between summative entrustment decisions made about pediatric residents by individuals who are charged with the review of residents (clinical competency committee, or CCC, members) and those who ultimately make final summative decisions about resident performance (program directors, or PDs).

Methods: Individual CCC member and PD supervisory role categorizations were made in the 2015 to 2016 academic year at 14 pediatric residency programs, placing residents into 1 of 5 progressive supervisory roles. When PD recommendations differed from CCC members, a free-text justification was requested. Free-text responses were analyzed using manifest content analysis.

Results: In total, 801 supervisory role categorizations were made by both CCC members and PDs, with the same recommendations made in 685 cases. In the 116 instances of discrepancy, PDs assigned a lower level of supervisory responsibility (n = 73) more often than a greater one (n = 43). When moving residents to a greater supervisory role category, PDs had more justifications anchored in resident performance than experience. When moving residents to a lower supervisory role categorization, PDs conversely noted experience more than performance.

Conclusions: PDs provide more justifications anchored in resident performance when moving residents to a greater supervisory role category compared with CCC members. However, when moving residents to a lower supervisory role categorization, they note experience more than performance. These patterns may or may not be entirely consistent with a competency-based approach and should be explored further.