The committee should be funded by contracts and grants from the government and private foundations to support staff and travel. The IOM committee envisions the planning committee to consist of 13-15 members. The members should be recognized leaders in their respective fields, have experience in leading change and improvement, and have some level of experience in interprofessional learning. At a minimum, membership should include practicing professionals and individuals with expertise in CPD research and government. The committee should be led by a chair who has a record of success in setting and implementing visions and building consensus.
The CPDI should be an independent body with membership and financing from both the public and the private sectors. The federal government initially should oversee and coordinate the development of the CPDI, and a competency-based board should be appointed to lead the CPDI’s activities. Ultimately, upon the decision of the institute’s board, the government’s responsibilities should be transferred back to CPD stakeholders. Unless the board determines otherwise, the Secretary will eventually have no formal role in the institute. The size of the CPDI’s budget should depend on its exact functions and breadth, and its budget should be initially projected by the planning committee and refined by the board.
The planning committee should determine the structure of the CPDI’s initial board, its membership size, and the competencies that need to be represented among board members. Several members of the planning committee should be named to the board, in order to facilitate the institute’s transition from planning to implementation. Once the board has achieved a more permanent structure, its members should rotate off in an overlapping manner.
Considering the breadth of issues addressed by the CPDI, the board may find it valuable to establish a number of standing councils and ad hoc committees as needed. The committee suggests four initial standing councils on issues identified in this report—on the science of CPD, on regulation, on financing, and on data collection and dissemination. The councils would involve a larger group of diverse stakeholders in raising issues and providing advice to the board, and would add transparency to the CPDI’s planning and operations.