Podcasts about government relations committee

This week, we welcome Cornell Winston (current President of the American Association of Law Libraries) and Jenny Silbiger (President‑Elect). Speaking from sunny San Diego and O‘ahu's courthouse halls, the duo joins the show to preview AALL's 2025 Annual Meeting in Portland, Oregon—and to talk candidly about the challenges and opportunities facing the legal‑information profession during a time of rapid technological and political flux.Cornell and Jenny explain why open communication has become a strategic imperative for AALL. Although board books have long been public, they are doubling down on proactive updates—through e‑briefings, “Know‑It‑AALL” newsletters, and 80‑plus committee channels—because members crave clarity when the profession feels under siege. Their message is simple: phone numbers and inboxes are open; no question is off‑limits. The leaders frame transparency not as a defensive posture, but as an invitation to pull every member into the conversation and decision‑making process.The discussion then turns to the vacant Government Relations role—often seen as AALL's front line in Washington. Cornell reassures listeners that, despite the hiring gap, advocacy has never left the stage: the Government Relations Committee partners with ALA and other allies, tracks executive‑order whiplash, and issues public statements on IMLS funding or Library of Congress appointments. While lobby dynamics have shifted since COVID‑era restrictions, AALL continues to file comments, weigh amicus briefs, and equip members to speak up in their own jurisdictions until the position is refilled.Next, the hosts probe changes to the volunteer pipeline. Under the new process, virtually every member who raises a hand gets a seat—whether on a jury, committee, or the coveted Annual Meeting Program Committee. Headquarters now monitors overlapping appointments to spread opportunities and ensure early‑career librarians experience the career‑shaping mentorship Greg once received from the late Bob Oakley. Jenny underscores that engagement options range from micro‑tasks to multi‑year leadership roles, accommodating both time‑pressed newcomers and seasoned veterans.Turning to the July 19‑22 conference itself, Cornell shares upbeat registration numbers, hotel tips, and—importantly—news of no late‑registration fee increase. Portland's light‑rail pass, tax‑free shopping, and Nike/Columbia/Adidas discounts sweeten the trip, but the intellectual draw is formidable: 65‑plus programs, four pre‑conference workshops, and a cross‑pollinated AI track that unites academic and private‑sector librarians. Keynote speaker Roosevelt Weeks, renowned for transforming Austin Public Library into a nationally acclaimed, radically welcoming space, will challenge attendees to double down on access and inclusion.Asked for their “biggest challenge” predictions, Jenny cites the breakneck pace of AI and the resulting imperative to preserve integrity in an era of deepfakes and data deluge. Cornell echoes the warning: librarians must remain society's trusted validators and proclaim that expertise without apology. As the gavel passes in Portland, Jenny's presidential agenda crystallizes around three goals—meeting members where they are, converting dialogue into strategic action, and leaving the profession stronger for the next generation. Whether you are a long‑time AALL stalwart or a first‑time volunteer, this episode is a reminder that the future of legal information will be shaped by those who show up, speak up, and keep the channels open.Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠[Special Thanks to ⁠Legal Technology Hub⁠ for their sponsoring this episode.] Blue Sky: ⁠⁠@geeklawblog.com⁠⁠ ⁠⁠@marlgeb⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.comMusic: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Transcript

Lifting the Cloud: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and the Treatment of Major DepressionThis episode provides an in-depth exploration of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) and its impact on psychiatric disorders.  TMS has demonstrated effectiveness in numerous clinical trials and serves as a valuable adjunct to traditional therapy. Designed for clinicians and mental health professionals and those they serve, this podcast offers insights into:Identifying appropriate patient populations for TMS therapy.  Understanding the TMS treatment process from start to finish.  Exploring the role of neuromodulation in reshaping brain function for long-term improvement.  Reviewing clinical outcome data supporting TMS in the treatment of major depressive disorder.  Gain a deeper understanding of how TMS and neuromodulation techniques are advancing the field of functional neuropsychiatry and providing new hope for patients. Objectives: Identify appropriate patient populations for Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) treatment of psychiatric disorders.Describe the treatment process of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. Describe possible adverse events associated with Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.Explain how neuromodulation techniques impact long-term changes in brain network functioning.Discuss clinical outcome data for Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation treatment. Guests: Dr. Henry Emerle, MDDr. Rich Whitaker, PhDBios: Dr. Rich Whitaker began his career in the Quad Cities in 1994 as a doctoral intern at the historic Marriage and Family Counseling Service in Rock Island, Illinois as part of his Ph.D. in Marriage and Family Therapy from Brigham Young University. Since that pivotal year, Dr. Whitaker has pursued a career in community mental health, providing services, supervision, and executive administration at community mental health centers in Grand Island, Nebraska (9 years as COO) and Jasper, Indiana (12 years as CFO). Since January 2017, Rich has served as the CEO of Vera French Community Mental Health Center in Davenport, Iowa.  In addition to serving as a Director of Region 7 on the Board of the National Council for Mental Wellbeing, Dr. Whitaker also serves as a Government Relations Committee member for the Iowa Association of Community Providers, as a Board member of Churches United in the Quad Cities, and as a member of the Eastern Iowa MHDS Regional Advisory Committee.Rich and Miriam are the parents of 3 daughters and one son and the proud grandparents of a growing number of highly intelligent and multi-talented grandchildren. In his spare time, Rich enjoys family time, all types of sports and exercise, singing with the Quad City Singers, and service in the church and community.Henry Emerle, MD completed his medical school training at the University of Illinois College of Medicine at Urbana-Champaign, IL.  He completed Psychiatry Residency training as well as Geriatric Psychiatry Fellowship training at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, MI. He is the Medical Director at Vera French Community Mental Health Center.   He enjoys spending time with his family exploring the many charming towns in Iowa along the Mississippi River. References: Cash RFH, Cocchi L, Lv J, Fitzgerald PB, Zalesky A. Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging–Guided Personalization of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Treatment for Depression. JAMA Psychiatry. 2021;78(3):337–339. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.3794Jannati, A., Oberman, L.M., Rotenberg, A. et al. Assessing the mechanisms of brain plasticity by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Neuropsychopharmacol. 48, 191–208 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-022-01453-8Pitcher, D., Parkin, B., & Walsh, V. (2021). Transcranial magnetic stimulation and the understanding of behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 72, 97-121. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-081120-013144Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) Study (n.d.) https://www.nimh.nih.gov/funding/clinical-research/practical/stard

We're ​diving ​into ​the ​world ​of ​policy, ​legislation ​and ​regulation ​with ​Nick Blanck, MSN, CRNA, APN-Anesthesia, who is the Executive Director of Legislative Affairs in New Jersey. Along with guest host Tracy Castleman, DNP, CRNA, APN-A, FAANA, we're going to learn more about Nick's pivotal role in ensuring ​consistency ​and ​clarity ​in ​the ​ever-evolving ​landscape ​of ​healthcare ​policy ​in ​this ​state. His unique approach is shaping the CRNA industry in New Jersey and we want to find ways that states can implement similar models for improved advocacy. Here's some of what we discuss in this episode: Crafting the right message is all about having versatile, long-term, consistent messaging. What advantage does consistent visibility have with political advocacy? Why a CRNA and a lobbyist have driven his advocacy campaign? What are some of the biggest lessons he's learned from success? What does he envision for the future of the healthcare landscape for CRNAs in your region?   About our guest: Currently serving the New Jersey Association of Nurse Anesthetists and it members as the Executive Director of Legislative Affairs; and Chairman of their Government Relations Committee. In this capacity he tirelessly advances legislation aimed at removing restrictive barriers to profession of Nurse Anesthesiology. Nicholas spends a tremendous amount of time working with various stakeholder groups, both in New Jersey and across the county, aimed at building a consensus about how best to understand the overall value CRNA's have in healthcare markets. To decision makers and lawmakers in New Jersey, Nicholas is a well-established authority on the scope of practice of New Jersey CRNA's, and well as the regulatory and compliance processes surrounding these professionals.   Join our upcoming webinar ‘Navigating the 1099 CRNA Landscape in 2025: Insights and Strategies for Success' - https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_k3i11leGQFOwvixEHUS9Cg?utm_campaign=1099%20CRNA%20Institute&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_nw-WeZT9JBDErnfLekoQnV3lNLRwCdk2IDvoFeMTd90oHNdmqoXo-4nptpTScKkQT_ql6#/registration Visit us online: https://beyondthemaskpodcast.com/ The 1099 CRNA Institute: https://aana.com/1099 Get the CE Certificate here: https://beyondthemaskpodcast.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Beyond-the-Mask-CE-Cert-FILLABLE.pdf Help us grow by leaving a review: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/beyond-the-mask-innovation-opportunities-for-crnas/id1440309246 Donate to Our Heart Your Hands here: https://www.ourheartsyourhands.org/donate  Support Team Emma Kate: https://grouprev.com/haloswalk2024-shannon-shannon-brekken  

CATHERINE FILLOUX (BOOK) is an award-winning playwright who has been writing about human rights and social justice for twenty-five years.  Filloux is the librettist for three produced operas, NEW ARRIVALS (Houston Grand Opera, composer John Glover), WHERE ELEPHANTS WEEP (Chenla Theatre, Phnom Penh, Cambodia, composer Him Sophy) and THE FLOATING BOX (Asia Society, New York City, composer Jason Kao Hwang).  WHERE ELEPHANTS WEEP was also broadcast on national television in Cambodia, and THE FLOATING BOX was a Critic's Choice in Opera News and is released by New World Records.  Catherine is the co-librettist with composer Olga Neuwirth for the opera ORLANDO, which premiered at Vienna State Opera. In development:  Thresh's L'ORIENT (composer Kamala Sankaram, choreographer Preeti Vasudevan); MARY SHELLEY (composer Gerald Cohen, dramaturg Cori Ellison, Black Tea Music).  Her plays have been produced around the U.S. and internationally.  She has been honored with the 2019 Barry Lopez Visiting Writer in Ethics and Community Fellowship; the 2017 Otto René Castillo Award for Political Theatre; and the 2015 Planet Activist Award.  JIMMY ROBERTS  (MUSIC & LYRICS) composed the music for I LOVE YOU, YOU'RE PERFECT, NOW CHANGE, second longest running Off Broadway musical in New York theater history. Written with playwright Joe DiPietro, I LOVE YOU received both the Drama Desk and Outer Critics Circle nominations as Best Musical. It has since played in fifty states, twenty-five countries around the world, and is a major motion picture in Hong Kong. His second Off Broadway musical, THE THING ABOUT MEN, won the 2003 New York Outer Critics Circle award for Best Musical. Jimmy's songs were featured in two other Off Broadway shows: A…MY NAME IS STILL ALICE and PETS! His children's musical, THE VELVETEEN RABBIT, toured the United States for well over a decade. Jimmy is also a sought-after performer. In entertaining programs that combine classical and popular music, he has appeared at Merkin Concert Hall, the Time Warner Center, the 92nd Street Y, Steinway Hall, and the National Arts Club. A graduate of the Manhattan School of Music, where he studied with noted pianist, Constance Keene, Jimmy Roberts is also a poet, whose work has appeared often in the New York Times Metropolitan Diary, as well as TROLLEY, the journal of the NYS Writers Institute. JOHN DAGGETT (BOOK & ADD'L LYRICS) is a differently-abled actor who has starred Off-Broadway in the critically acclaimed plays LEMKIN'S HOUSE, TEAHOUSE OF THE AUGUST MOON, and LOVE LEMMINGS.  Other New York credits include: ROME, PORTRAIT OF A PRESIDENT, AN ARTIST'S LIFE, THE WITCHES TRIPTYCH, and his one-man show FLYING BY THE SEAT OF MY PANTS (Theatre Row).  Regional: Guthrie, Merrimack Rep, Jewish Repertory Theatre, Portland Stage, Roxy Theatre, Odyssey Theater, Kavinoky Theatre and H.T.Y.  Numerous roles for Pennsylvania Shakespeare, Orlando Shakespeare, Shakespeare in Delaware Park, Lake Tahoe Shakespeare and Sherwood Shakespeare.  John served as a member of the Government Relations Committee of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. Welcome to the Big Dipper What defines home, family, and identity? Joan Wilkes confronts these questions when she must sell The Big Dipper Inn, near Niagara Falls in upstate New York, known for its music and African American heritage. She's all set to sign the contract when a blizzard lands a group of Amish folks and a busload of men in dresses on her doorstep. For three days and nights, they wait out the storm. Cultures clash, romance crackles, and Joan struggles for answers, as a houseful of strangers becomes an unexpected community.

Caffeinators, you may remember our episode from a couple years ago with Sam Geiling, where we talked about her work starting a vet tech program in Hawaii, helping form a Hawaiian vet tech association, and much more. Well, she's back! We had a great conversation about her current work with the Government Relations Committee for NAVTA, moving back to the mainland to Minnesota, and her new work with Animal Policy Group and some of the controversy surrounding that. When we think about laws that are enacted that shape our profession, there is often YEARS of work put into it by several people, and this was a fascinating look into a small part of that process. Show Links: Sam's Work: https://animalpolicygroup.com/ NAVTA GRC: https://navta.net/volunteer-opportunities/government-relations/ Vet Tech of the Year: https://navta.net/awards/veterinary-technician-of-the-year/ HiVE: https://navc.com/vet-nursetech-hive/   Our Links: Check out our sponsor https://betterhelp.com/vettechcafe for 10% off your first month of therapy Follow us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/vettechcafe Follow us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/vettechcafepodcast Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/vet-tech-cafe Like and Subscribe on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMDTKdfOaqSW0Mv3Uoi33qg Our website: https://www.vettechcafe.com/ Vet Tech Cafe Merch: https://www.vettechcafe.com/merch If you would like to help us cover our podcast expenses, we'd appreciate any support you give through Patreon. We do this podcast and our YouTube channel content to support the veterinary technicians out there and do not expect anything in return! We thank you for all you do.

In this episode of On Pump, we're thrilled to welcome Blaine Johnson, a key member of AmSECT's Government Relations Committee. Join us as we dive deep into the intricacies of allied health professions, state licensure, and the public health policies that shape our practice. Blaine gives us an insider's perspective on the pivotal work of the Government Relations Committee, highlighting the varying levels of legal credentialing—from registration and titling to certification and licensure. We explore how these credentials impact the scope of practice, with real-world examples from states like California and Washington. Discover why licensure is the gold standard in our profession and what it means for the future of perfusion. Whether you're a seasoned perfusionist or just getting started, this episode will arm you with critical knowledge about the legal landscape that governs our work. Tune in for a compelling conversation that uncovers the vital connections between policy, practice, and patient care.

Send us a Text Message.In this episode of "People in Transition," I had the pleasure of speaking with Sarah JanTausch, the Founder of SRJ Coaching and Consulting and the creator of the Values-Based-Career method.  Sarah is an Executive & Career Coach, Speaker, and Trainer dedicated to helping individuals create values-based careers and uncover the hidden job market.  She specializes in guiding career pivots, teaching generosity-based networking, and aligning total vocational impact with core values.Sarah is the Chair of Government Relations for the Ohio Career Development Association and Co-Chair-elect for the National Career Development Association's Government Relations Committee.In this episode, we dive into several key topics, including:·  The importance of networking throughout your career journey.  Engage in networking that suits your style, from large gatherings to one-on-one informational interviews.·  How to network with curiosity and gratitude while being strategic in your efforts.·  Discovering the hidden job market through building relationships within your target organizations.·  Strategies for career pivots, including informational interviews, volunteering in new industries, and experimenting through consulting or special projects.·  The value of career assessments for mid-career changes to identify your core traits and strengths.·  The necessity of building a "freedom fund" before embarking on entrepreneurial or solopreneur roles.·  Feeling empowered to interview the interviewer to ensure the role is the right fit for you.We also touched on many other insightful and practical points during this informative, value-packed, and fun interview.  I know you'll enjoy Sarah's insights as much as I did.For more information on Sarah and her work, visit valuesbasedcareers.com.

Learn more about the work of NCDA's Government Relations Committee! In this episode Co-Chairs Shelby McIntyre and Elle O'Flaherty share the work of this vital, volunteer committee to help shape NCDA's nonpartisan policy platform, provide resources to career development professionals, and bring attention to state-level legislation. They emphasize how you can make a difference for your community, students, and clients, through both awareness and collective action. You are also invited to participate in future projects and connect with Shelby and Elle for more information or to get involved.Shelby McIntyre is a career counselor at Pasadena City College and Elle O'Flaherty is the Founder of Interlace Solutions. ResourcesAdvocacy in Action: How New Legislation Will Transform Career Development - NCDA Webinar with Shelby McIntyre and Elle O'FlahertyNCDA Government Relations CommitteeNCDA Advocacy Alerts, Reports & NewsSend us a Text Message.

In this episode, the host discusses leadership with Dan Blakemore, the vice president of philanthropy at the Conservancy for Cuyahoga Valley National Park. They explore the qualities of a good leader, the importance of adapting to change, and the commitment to learning. They also discuss how leaders can motivate their teams and embrace new technologies. The conversation concludes with a discussion on succession planning and measuring the social impact of nonprofit work.TakeawaysA good leader is someone who lives the mission, encourages others, and leads by example.Leaders need qualities such as good relationship management, the ability to take direction, strategic thinking, and inclusivity.Leaders must be open to new ideas and adapt to changes in the nonprofit sector.Succession planning is important for ensuring the continuity of leadership within an organization.Measuring the social impact of nonprofit work involves setting smart objectives, distinguishing between outputs and outcomes, and being transparent with stakeholders.Dan Blakemore, CFRE is Vice President of Philanthropy at the Conservancy for Cuyahoga Valley National Park.Throughout his more than 15 years in non-profit fundraising, he has worked in museums, the performing arts and higher education. Dan is an active member of the Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP), where he serves as the U.S. Political Action Committee Vice Chair and a member of the Government Relations Committee. He is a board member and past President of AFP's Northeast Ohio Chapter. Dan serves his community as a Diversity on Board Coach with Leadership Akron, as a Trustee of the African American Archives Auxiliary at Western Reserve Historical Society, and on the boards of Cuyahoga Arts & Culture and the National Park Friends Alliance. He is a proud graduate of both Howard University and New York University's Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service.He lives in Northeast Ohio with his wife and three young kids.Chapters00:33 Guest Introduction01:32 Defining a Good Leader03:09 Adapting to Change04:03 Commitment to Learning05:23 Staying Connected in a Pandemic06:20 Motivating the Team08:19 Embracing New Technologies09:37 Succession Planning16:09 Identifying Future Leaders35:15 Coaches Corner: “how can we effectively measure the social impact of our nonprofit's work?“Leave a review! Reviews are hugely important because they help new people discover this podcast. If you enjoyed listening to this episode, please leave a review.Like this episode? Subscribe to our podcast on Apple, Spotify, or your favorite podcasting app.Got a question that you'd like to ask a nonprofit professional? Email your questions to IMPACTcoaches@IMPACTability.net and listen to next episode to see if your question gets answered!This podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Chartable - https://chartable.com/privacy

This week, we're proud to introduce you to an extraordinary veterinary technician, Sam Geiling, CVT. Sam has just been named the National Association of Veterinary Technicians in America (NAVTA) Technician of the Year! Viewfinders, her journey is exceptional and sure to inspire! Hosts Dr. Ernie Ward and Beckie Mossor, RVT, MPA, talk to Sam Geiling, CVT and Chief of Staff for the Animal Policy Group, about her career in veterinary medicine and some of her remarkable achievements. From serving in the Navy to being a classmate of Beckie's in vet tech school to practicing and teaching in Hawaii, to working with state legislatures and veterinary boards around the country, Sam is a vet tech force to be reckoned with! Viewfinders, we hope you enjoy her unique story as much as we did! Here's a little more about Sam: Sam Geiling, CVT, is Animal Policy Group's project leader, working directly with clients and the entire APG team to oversee plans to ensure goals are successfully met. She is a credentialed veterinary technician with over a decade of teaching experience at an AVMA-accredited vet tech program. She has passed state legislation recognizing veterinary technicians, and volunteers as co-chair on NAVTA's Government Relations Committee. Sam lives in Minnesota with her husband and two sons. She enjoys summer days on the lake, grilling, and discovering new restaurants. @animalpolicygroup https://animalpolicygroup.com/  NAVTA's Government Relations Committee Email: info@navta.net  #veterinary #veterinarytechnician #veterinary #podcast #veterinarypodcast #vettechpodcast #vetpodcast

Today's episode comes to you from Ohio, Colorado, and Alaska.  Tim Lightner (in Anchorage, Alaska with CGI Technologies, and Solutions Inc.) welcomes two guests that are known throughout the child support program, and who are here to join in a conversation about the legislative proposals that NCSEA has initiated.   Amy Roehrenbeck, co-chair of NCSEA's Policy and Government Relations Committee; and Bob Williams, committee member and architect of the legislative proposals speak about how this came about.  They talk about key components:  retaining collections, recoupment, enforcement, performance measures, funding for noncustodial parent services and parenting time orders.  Listen as they talk about when the time may be right to bring these proposals forward, and what we can expect.

In today's episode, I sit down with Chris LaTempa, a seasoned college counseling expert with a wealth of knowledge in the intricate world of college athletic recruiting. If you have a child considering college athletics, this episode is a MUST LISTEN!BioChris began his current role as Director of College Counseling at Moorestown Friends School this past summer after 8 years as the Associate Director of College Counseling at Malvern Preparatory School. Prior to Malvern, he served as a college counselor at Salesianum School in Wilmington, DE and as a Senior Assistant Director of Admission at Lafayette College, where he managed the territories of Maryland, Washington D.C., Virginia, and Long Island. In addition to his counseling roles, Chris has designed and taught courses on public speaking and social entrepreneurship and coached the freshman baseball teams at Malvern and Salesianum as well as Lafayette's NCAA softball team. He is an adjunct faculty member of Villanova University's College Counseling Certificate Program, through which he teaches the Counseling College-Bound Athletes course. Chris is a member of both NACAC and PACAC, through which he has served on several Conference Planning Committees, the Government Relations Committee, Admission Practices Committee, and the Secondary School Counselors Committee, which he chaired from 2015-2019. Chris holds a Bachelor of Arts in American Studies from Lafayette College and a Masters of Science in Education from the University of Pennsylvania. Follow Chris on Linkedin.Access free resources and learn more about Sheila and her team at Signet Education at signeteducation.com or on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/sheilaakbar/.

Welcome to an interview with the author of How to Lead Your Family Business: Excelling Through Unexpected Crises, Choices, and Challenges, Julie Charlestein. In this book, Julie gets vulnerable about her experience as an emerging leader and ultimately CEO, who has worked to earn her colleagues' respect while navigating the succession to her father's company. Through stories full of candor and humor, Julie shares her leadership adventure, offering actionable strategies for those leading and working within their own family businesses. Julie Charlestein is a Philadelphia-based business leader and healthcare innovator who serves as the fourth-generation CEO of Premier Dental, just named a 2023 Top Ten Most Innovative Company in Wellness by Fast Company.  Premier Dental is a global provider of innovative dental products used by dentists in 75 countries. Products range from hygienist instruments to teeth polishers to prosthetic mouth devices. As Charlestein likes to say: “You may not know our name, but we've probably been in your mouth.” Heading the most trusted brand in dental products for over 100 years, Julie is an advocate for change and industry expert on integrating technology into modern dental practices to improve the treatment journey for both dentists and patients. She was recognized as one of Philadelphia Business Journal's “Most Admired CEOs,” awarded the Silver Stevie Award as Female Executive of the Year and honored with the Gold Award by the Best in Biz Awards as Executive of the Year. She has served on the Dean's Advisory Board of the School of Dental Medicine at Harvard University and as the Chair of the Government Relations Committee for the Dental Trade Alliance and is a member of The Young Presidents' Organization (YPO). Get Julie's book here: https://rb.gy/d07jl How to Lead Your Family Business: Excelling Through Unexpected Crises, Choices, and Challenges Check out Julie's website: https://www.juliecharlestein.com/ Here are some free gifts for you: Overall Approach Used in Well-Managed Strategy Studies free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/OverallApproach McKinsey & BCG winning resume free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/resumepdf Enjoying this episode? Get access to sample advanced training episodes here: www.firmsconsulting.com/promo

Note: this episode is cross-posted with the Rx for Biotech podcast, hosted by Chris Leidli. Francesca Cook is the Vice President, Pricing and Market Access, at REGENXBIO and past chair of ASGCT's Government Relations Committee. She's attended and helped with ASGCT's annual Policy Summit since its inception five years ago. In this episode, Cook shares her experience and advice around the event—coming up Sept. 18-19 (virtually + in Washington, DC) with its highest-profile line-up yet and more ways to interact with top CGT decision makers. Her interviewer is Chris Leidli, host of the Rx for Biotech podcast and member of ASGCT's Communications Committee. If you work anywhere in the field of cell and gene therapy (CGT)—science, industry, commerce, regulatory—Cook can tell you why you should register for the Policy Summit, a unique opportunity to discuss how your work can be affected by NIH, FDA, patient advocacy groups, private insurers, and more. And if you've already registered, we look forward to seeing you! Cook has some advice for making the most out of the event. Learn more and register at asgct.org/PolicySummitShow your support for ASGCT!: https://asgct.org/membership/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome to Strategy Skills episode 377, an interview with the author of How to Lead Your Family Business: Excelling Through Unexpected Crises, Choices, and Challenges, Julie Charlestein. In this book, Julie gets vulnerable about her experience as an emerging leader and ultimately CEO, who has worked to earn her colleagues' respect while navigating the succession to her father's company. Through stories full of candor and humor, Julie shares her leadership adventure, offering actionable strategies for those leading and working within their own family businesses. Julie Charlestein is a Philadelphia-based business leader and healthcare innovator who serves as the fourth-generation CEO of Premier Dental, just named a 2023 Top Ten Most Innovative Company in Wellness by Fast Company.  Premier Dental is a global provider of innovative dental products used by dentists in 75 countries. Products range from hygienist instruments to teeth polishers to prosthetic mouth devices. As Charlestein likes to say: “You may not know our name, but we've probably been in your mouth.” Heading the most trusted brand in dental products for over 100 years, Julie is an advocate for change and industry expert on integrating technology into modern dental practices to improve the treatment journey for both dentists and patients. She was recognized as one of Philadelphia Business Journal's “Most Admired CEOs,” awarded the Silver Stevie Award as Female Executive of the Year and honored with the Gold Award by the Best in Biz Awards as Executive of the Year. She has served on the Dean's Advisory Board of the School of Dental Medicine at Harvard University and as the Chair of the Government Relations Committee for the Dental Trade Alliance and is a member of The Young Presidents' Organization (YPO). Get Julie's book here: https://rb.gy/d07jl How to Lead Your Family Business: Excelling Through Unexpected Crises, Choices, and Challenges Check out Julie's website: https://www.juliecharlestein.com/ Here are some free gifts for you: Overall Approach Used in Well-Managed Strategy Studies free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/OverallApproach McKinsey & BCG winning resume free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/resumepdf Enjoying this episode? Get access to sample advanced training episodes here: www.firmsconsulting.com/promo  

This episode is hosted by NCDA President Lakeisha Mathews. It features a conversation with Diana Bailey, Co-Chair of NCDA's Government Relations Committee, about work-related legislation and advocacy for career development. They discuss current efforts to pass The Counseling for Career Choice Act, specific agencies currently addressing career development issues, and an upcoming Hill Day during which NCDA representatives will travel to Washington DC to meet with legislators. The conversation includes advice for becoming more informed and how to actively advocate for the students and clients you work with. Contact Diana Bailey at: dibailey@comcast.net.NCDA Resources:·      NCDA Government Relations Committee ·      Why and How to Advocate·      National Press Briefing on NCDA's Legislative AdvocacyFor more information about topics mentioned in this episode:·       Counseling for Career Choice Act·       The CROWN Act·       Creating Opportunities to Thrive and Advance Act·       The Fair Labor Standards Act – Internship Programs·       Catalyst.org – Workplaces That Work for Women·       The National Reentry Resource Center·       Workforce Innovation and Opportunity ActRelated articles from NCDA's Career Convergence Web Magazine·      Women Agents of Social and Political Change in Career Counseling History – Sarah Patterson-Mills·      Later Chapters with Niel Carey – Rich Feller·      Brain Waste: Developing Underutilized Potential in Highly-Skilled, Underemployed Immigrants – Oluwaseyi Fatokun·      Government Relations: Strengthening NCDA's Position in DC – Niel Carey and Matt Kent

On today's episode, Editor in Chief Sarah Wheeler talks with Jillian White, head of growth at Aloft, about racial bias in appraisals. Jillian, a Black appraiser who serves on the Appraisal Institute's Government Relations Committee and is an incoming trustee of the Appraisal Foundation's board of trustees, talks about the unconscious bias she thinks is at play in home valuations and the potential cures.HW Media articles related to this episode:Sandra Thompson talks volatility, affordability challenges, appraisal bias and moreWhat did the PAVE report on appraisal bias find?Enjoy the episode!HousingWire Daily examines the most compelling articles reported across HW Media. Each morning, we provide our listeners with a deeper look into the stories coming across our newsrooms that are helping Move Markets Forward. Hosted and produced by the HW Media team.

About the Podcast The Stevens Group has been presenting the PR Masters Series Podcast for more than two years now.  This series is part of the ongoing partnership between The Stevens Group and CommPRO to bring to PR, digital/interactive and marketing communications agencies the wisdom of those who have reached the top of the PR profession.  Today's special guest is Eric Mower, Chairman, & Chief Executive Officer, Mower.     About Our Guest Eric Mower has guided the privately-held Mower (formerly Eric Mower + Associates) over the past 54 years, growing it from a single location with a staff of four to one of the largest independent, digitally integrated, full-service marketing, advertising and public relations firms in the United States. Mower functions from ten US cities: Albany (New York), Atlanta, Boston, Buffalo, Charlotte, Chicago, Cincinnati, New York City, Rochester (New York) and Syracuse. Earlier this year Mower was named Midsize Agency of the Year for B2B by the Association of National Advertisers. In the last decade, Ad Age magazine twice-named the agency one of the Top-10 “Best Places to Work.” In addition to serving as Mower's chairman and CEO, Eric served the Business Council of New York State as co-chair of the board for two years followed by two years as chair of the board. He and his firm joined the Business Council in 1986. Eric is chair emeritus of the Advertising Self-Regulatory Council (ASRC) and a past director and secretary/treasurer of the American Association of Advertising Agencies (4A's), and he continues to serve in his 30th year as chair of the 4A's Government Relations Committee. 0ther board leadership positions include seven-years as president of the International Network of Advertising Agencies (IN); director of the International Council of Better Business Bureaus; director of the American Advertising Federation; eight years as the Founding Chair of the federal Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Commission. In addition to being inducted into the Association of National Advertisers' B2B Hall of Fame in 2019, Eric has been recognized by Ernst & Young as a Master Entrepreneur of the Year, and by City & State Reports, which bestowed on him the Lifetime Achievement Award and later named him to its “Responsible 100” list. In 2022 City & State Reports designated Mower as number 14 on “The 2022 Political PR Power 50 in New York.” Also in 2022, 100 Black Men of New York honored him with its J. Bruce Llewellyn Excellence in Philanthropy Award. Over many years Eric provided leadership to, and was recognized by, numerous community philanthropic and civic organizations in Upstate New York, including the SUNY Health Science Center at Syracuse, United Way, Community Foundation of CNY, Centerstate CEO, Syracuse Stage, Everson Museum, Boy Scouts, Junior Achievement, the Syracuse and Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, and others. Eric earned a bachelor's degree in English from Syracuse University's College of Arts and Sciences in 1966 and a master's degree in public relations from the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications in 1968. And he serves as a Life Trustee of Syracuse University and sits on several of its committees (Academic Affairs, Advancement and External Affairs, Athletics, and Facilities). He is also a member of the university's Subcommittee for Marketing and Communications. Mower joined SU's board in 1990 and served as Vice Chair from 1997-2001. In 2018 he received the Dritz Life Trustee of the Year Award for outstanding Board service.  His Syracuse University service includes ongoing membership on the Newhouse Advisory Council and he is a former member of the Whitman School of Business Advisory Council. Mower is a 2015 recipient of the George Arents Award, the University's highest alumni honor, and a 2012 co-recipient with his wife, S.U. trustee Judith C. Mower, of the University's Orange Circle Award.  He also received the University's Outstanding Alumni Award in 1995.  

About the Podcast The Stevens Group has been presenting the PR Masters Series Podcast for more than two years now.  This series is part of the ongoing partnership between The Stevens Group and CommPRO to bring to PR, digital/interactive and marketing communications agencies the wisdom of those who have reached the top of the PR profession.  Today's special guest is Eric Mower, Chairman, & Chief Executive Officer, Mower.     About Our Guest Eric Mower has guided the privately-held Mower (formerly Eric Mower + Associates) over the past 54 years, growing it from a single location with a staff of four to one of the largest independent, digitally integrated, full-service marketing, advertising and public relations firms in the United States. Mower functions from ten US cities: Albany (New York), Atlanta, Boston, Buffalo, Charlotte, Chicago, Cincinnati, New York City, Rochester (New York) and Syracuse. Earlier this year Mower was named Midsize Agency of the Year for B2B by the Association of National Advertisers. In the last decade, Ad Age magazine twice-named the agency one of the Top-10 "Best Places to Work." In addition to serving as Mower's chairman and CEO, Eric served the Business Council of New York State as co-chair of the board for two years followed by two years as chair of the board. He and his firm joined the Business Council in 1986. Eric is chair emeritus of the Advertising Self-Regulatory Council (ASRC) and a past director and secretary/treasurer of the American Association of Advertising Agencies (4A's), and he continues to serve in his 30th year as chair of the 4A's Government Relations Committee. 0ther board leadership positions include seven-years as president of the International Network of Advertising Agencies (IN); director of the International Council of Better Business Bureaus; director of the American Advertising Federation; eight years as the Founding Chair of the federal Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Commission. In addition to being inducted into the Association of National Advertisers' B2B Hall of Fame in 2019, Eric has been recognized by Ernst & Young as a Master Entrepreneur of the Year, and by City & State Reports, which bestowed on him the Lifetime Achievement Award and later named him to its "Responsible 100" list. In 2022 City & State Reports designated Mower as number 14 on “The 2022 Political PR Power 50 in New York.” Also in 2022, 100 Black Men of New York honored him with its J. Bruce Llewellyn Excellence in Philanthropy Award. Over many years Eric provided leadership to, and was recognized by, numerous community philanthropic and civic organizations in Upstate New York, including the SUNY Health Science Center at Syracuse, United Way, Community Foundation of CNY, Centerstate CEO, Syracuse Stage, Everson Museum, Boy Scouts, Junior Achievement, the Syracuse and Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra, and others. Eric earned a bachelor's degree in English from Syracuse University's College of Arts and Sciences in 1966 and a master's degree in public relations from the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications in 1968. And he serves as a Life Trustee of Syracuse University and sits on several of its committees (Academic Affairs, Advancement and External Affairs, Athletics, and Facilities). He is also a member of the university's Subcommittee for Marketing and Communications. Mower joined SU's board in 1990 and served as Vice Chair from 1997-2001. In 2018 he received the Dritz Life Trustee of the Year Award for outstanding Board service.  His Syracuse University service includes ongoing membership on the Newhouse Advisory Council and he is a former member of the Whitman School of Business Advisory Council. Mower is a 2015 recipient of the George Arents Award, the University's highest alumni honor, and a 2012 co-recipient with his wife, S.U. trustee Judith C. Mower, of the University's Orange Circle Award.  He also received the University's Outstanding Alumn...

On this episode of fishing the DMV we have the privilege of talk to Chair of the Maryland Sport Fisheries Advisory Commission David Sikorski on the state of the Chesapeake Bay.David Sikorski is a native Marylander and lifelong and avid sportsman  For many years, he worked in a small family residential building and real estate business where he largely focused on rental property management and new home sales.          With an interest in policy, a knack for understanding science, and a love for fishing and the outdoors, David gravitated towards Coastal Conservation Association(CCA) Maryland in 2005 and began volunteering as a part of their Government Relations Committee, helping guide their conservation work. After volunteering for over a decade for CCA Maryland, David was hired as the Executive Director in early 2017, and now leads CCA Maryland's habitat program and advocacy effortsDavid was appointed to the Maryland Sport Fisheries Advisory Commission(SFAC) in 2009 and currently serves as the Chair.  He also represents CCA Maryland on the Oyster Advisory Commission(OAC). In early 2021, David was selected as a legislative proxy for the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission(ASMFC), the interstate body that oversees the management of migratory fish in state waters along the Atlantic Coast.  Prior to being selected for this role, David was a member of the ASMFC Atlantic menhaden and striped bass advisory panels.           David is also a member of the Marine Resources Education Program National Steering Committee and Mid-Atlantic Implementation team. In this role he works to bring stakeholders, managers, and scientists together to learn and discuss the complexities of fisheries management, and the importance of finding pragmatic approaches to the many complicated facing all involved in the process.CCA: Joincca.org CCA Maryland website: ccamd.orgIG: @cca_md FB: @CCAMarylandAtlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission: Asmfc.org Places you can listen to Fishing the DMV audio version:          https://www.buzzsprout.com/1893009             Fishing the DMV YouTube Channel:         https://youtu.be/n3c-CFvmpFg               Jake's bait & Tackle website:           http://www.jakesbaitandtackle.com/           Jake's bait & Tackle Facebook:         https://www.facebook.com/JakesBaitAndTackle/?ref=pages_you_manage                Fishing the DMV Facebook page:         https://www.facebook.com/Arensbassin/?ref=pages_you_manage                Fishing the DMV Instagram page:         https://www.instagram.com/fishingthedmv/?utm_medium=copy_link                    #fishing #FishingtheDMV #CheasapeakebayCareer SweetspotA Greenhouse Coaching podcast for career and leadership growth.Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify

Olga and Mo are joined by Syrian activist Mouaz Moustafa and Ukrainian activist Michael Sawkiw to discuss Russian war crimes. Mouaz Moustafa is currently the Executive Director for the Syrian Emergency Task Force (SETF), Political Director of United for a Free Syria (UFS), and serves on the Government Relations Committee of the Coalition for a Democratic Syria (CDS). Mouaz on Twitter: @SoccerMouaz Michael Sawkiw, Vice President of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America and the Director of the Ukrainian National Information Service - the UCCA's public affairs bureau in Washington DC. The UCCA is the formal representative body of Ukrainians in America following the efforts of generations of immigrants, with an estimated 1.5 million Americans having roots in Ukraine. UNIS Twitter: @UNISdirect UCCA Twitter: @UkrCongComAm Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week at NSTA: The Bus Stop, join NSTA Executive Director Curt Macysyn as he welcomes Carina Noble, NSTA President, and Senior Vice President of Communications and External Affairs at National Express, and Bree Allen, NSTA Government Relations Committee Chair, and Senior Director of Operational Improvement at National Express, as the celebration of Women's History Month continues. Carina and Bree take time to highlight the beginning of their involvement with the NSTA Advocacy Team and Government Relations Committee. The trio highlights the importance and value that the NSTA Advocacy Team brings to NSTA membership, and how these advocacy efforts were particularly impactful over the past two years. The group then outlines the agenda for the upcoming 2022 NSTA Capitol Hill Bus-In (April 6-8), and the importance for NSTA members to take time to attend this program. Carina and Bree recall some of their fondest memories from previous Bus-In events, as well as the successful advocacy efforts with which they were involved. Finally, Carina and Bree offer advice for those who interested in participating on the Government Relations Committee, and how they developed a friendship over their support of safe and efficient student transportation. School transportation professionals rely on NSTA: The Bus Stop for their information, you should too. Subscribe today, so you never miss an episode!Support the show

In this Oncology, Etc. episode, Drs. Patrick Loehrer and David Johnson Speak with Drs. Lecia Sequist (Massachusetts General Hospital) and Melissa Dillmon (Harbin Clinic) on how ASCO's Leadership Development Program (LDP) has taken them down varying paths, as well as the ways it has influenced their lives, careers, and the lives of those around them. Subscribe: Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts | Additional resources: education.asco.org | Contact Us Air Date: 2/1/22   TRANSCRIPT [MUSIC PLAYING]   PAT LOEHRER: Hi, I'm Pat Loehrer. I'm director of the Center of Global Oncology here at Indiana University. DAVID JOHNSON: And hello. My name is David Johnson. I'm at UT Southwestern in Dallas, Texas. So Pat, we've got a couple of really great guests today. PAT LOEHRER: Yeah. I'm really excited. I've been looking forward to this. DAVID JOHNSON: So have I. Listen. Before we get started, I have a book I want to recommend to you. This one I got over the holidays and just finished it recently. It's called The Doctors Blackwell by Janice Nimura. So as many of our listeners know, Elizabeth Blackwell was the first female physician in America. Her sister Emily also followed her into the medical profession. Nimura really writes, I think, a fascinating biography about both ladies, particularly Elizabeth. And one point she made, and I think it's interesting, it's not really clear why Elizabeth went into medicine. Certainly at the point that she did in the mid-1800s wasn't a profession of great reputation at that time. And, in fact, Nimura describes Elizabeth as, quote, "lacking a caring instinct," which I thought was an interesting characterization of the first female physician. And she indicated that she was hardly a feminist. She was actually opposed to Women's Suffrage, for example. According to Nimura, she became a doctor largely just to show that she could. And then, really, the rest of her career I won't give away. The subplot is really quite interesting. I think you would find it most interesting to recommend to you and our listeners who have a particular interest in medical history. PAT LOEHRER: Actually, I've ordered the book. I can't wait to read it. DAVID JOHNSON: Excellent. PAT LOEHRER: I got a book for Christmas, Lyrics by Paul McCartney. And I read through that. That's fascinating, actually. So 158 of his songs were detailed and the backgrounds for it. So that was kind of fun. We're excited today because we're going to talk to a couple of graduates of our Leadership Development Program. That was a program of ASCO that was conceived a little over a decade ago. It's been, to my mind, one of the best programs that ASCO has done. It has taken younger faculty and oncologists from around the country, and Dave and I were among the first leaders of the program as mentors. I think that was one of the bigger mistakes ASCO has ever done. But despite that, we have a lot of fun. There were 12 graduates each year. They all had projects they presented to the board of directors. There were, if you will, classes and lectures throughout the year on leadership. And they all had projects. And for me, it was the best three years of my life, I think, through ASCO. It was just a lot of fun. And part of it was getting to know a lot of people, including Melissa and Lecia, who are with us today. Lecia is a Professor of Medicine at Harvard and Mass General Hospital. She did her medical school at Harvard, residency at Brigham and Women's Hospital, fellowship at Dana-Farber. She is currently the co-leader of the Cancer Risk Prevention and Early Detection Program at Dana-Farber and director-- I think I want to hear more about this-- she's the director of the Center for Innovation in Early Cancer Detection at MGH. Melissa, she went to Converse College in Spartanburg, South Carolina, went to medical school at Wake Forest. Then did her internship and residency at UAB. She did her fellowship at UAB. And she now serves as the Chairman of the Department of Oncology and the Board of Directors at the Harbin Clinic. And we're so excited to have both of you here. DAVID JOHNSON: Yeah. Very much so. And why don't we get started by just getting a little background information. Melissa, let's start with you. Can you tell us a little bit about how you got into medicine and, more specifically, why did you choose oncology? MELISSA DILLMON: That's a great question. I was a political science major at a women's college in South Carolina and was destined for the State Department. And we used to have January terms. And I mistakenly got put with-- and I don't think it's a mistake-- former graduate of Emigre Medical School, who is a medical oncologist in Greenville, South Carolina, for a six-week term and fell in love with medicine, fell in love with the ministry that he provided to his patients, and followed him to Bowman Gray and went back years later and told him thank you for changing my life. So that's how I got interested in medicine. I come from a long line of accountants and engineers. There is no person in my family in medicine. PAT LOEHRER: I was an engineer. Some of the best people in life are engineers. DAVID JOHNSON: I didn't know you drove a train. [CHUCKLES] PAT LOEHRER: Eat your heart out. DAVID JOHNSON: So Melissa, before you leave, I actually grew up very close to where you practice. How did you end up in Rome, Georgia? MELISSA DILLMON: Well, my dad and his twin are proud graduates of Georgia Tech. So he found me a job. And I said, well, I'm grown up. I was going to stay on faculty at UAB but came to Rome, Georgia and really was excited about the multispecialty group that I ended up joining. There's about 250 of us now. And kind of had the feeling of a university but in a small town. Kind of best of both worlds. Neither of my two daughters have gone to Georgia Tech. One of them is at Georgia. Just won that national championship. But my third one, we're hoping maybe she'll be the one that goes to Georgia Tech. PAT LOEHRER: So you stayed up and watched the game. I have to ask this, right? MELISSA DILLMON: I did. I stayed up to the very end. PAT LOEHRER: And so who are cheering for? Alabama or Georgia? MELISSA DILLMON: Definitely Georgia. PAT LOEHRER: Interesting. Good. Good. DAVID JOHNSON: And Lecia, why don't you tell us about your background and how you got interested in oncology. And let us know if MGH has a football team. [CHUCKLES] LECIA SEQUIST: Oh, sure. Thanks for having me here. This is going to be a fun conversation. So I grew up in the Midwest, in Michigan. But I've been on the East Coast now for the majority of my life. And when I was a resident, I was actually in a primary care track residency program, because I thought I wanted to be a primary care physician. And I really liked the idea of sticking with people, getting to know them over long periods of time, and kind of standing by them through the highs and the lows of their lives. Well, I was finding out in residency that primary care wasn't really like that. That was for television shows. People change primary care doctors and move around so much, it's rare that you actually do get to take care of people for a long time, at least in a big city. And I also found that, for me, primary care was a lot of asking people to do things they didn't want to do-- exercise, lose weight, stop smoking, do this, do that. And I always felt that I was at odds with my patients or nagging them. And then, when I would be in the hospital on oncology rotations, trying that out, I really felt like I was allied with my patients and not nagging them or pushing them, but really here we were together against this fight against cancer. And cancer was what we were fighting together. And I just fell in love with that. So much to the disappointment of the residency program that was really trying to get people to go into primary care, I said, I've got to be a specialist. And here I am. PAT LOEHRER: It's interesting, though, that you do risk reduction and prevention. So you're back to telling patients to lose weight and exercise again, you know? [CHUCKLES] LECIA SEQUIST: Yeah. I guess, in some ways that's true, although I'm not really taking care of primary care patients. But after spending a lot of years doing a more traditional medical oncology track of drug development and targeted therapies, the last five years I have switched my research over, kind of a midlife crisis situation, where I said I've got to do something different. I'm in a rut. And I started looking at new technologies for early detection. And I really enjoyed it because it's something different. For one thing, I just felt like I was in a rut. But it's really a way to be a lot more proactive with the community and to work on issues of social justice, thinking about cancer screening, and who has access and who doesn't, and what can we do better. So I'm really enjoying that in this phase of my career. PAT LOEHRER: Terrific. The four of us are linked because of this Leadership Development Program that the American Society of Clinical Oncology put together. And I think Dave and I are really curious whether, here it is many years later now. It's been almost 9 or 10 years later now. As you reflect on the LDP, what are some of the highlights? What did you learn about yourselves and was the program worthwhile for you? MELISSA DILLMON: Well, I'll start. I was part of the class, 2010-2011, best class ever. And it was the second class in the Leadership Development Program. I applied for the first year's class and didn't get it. And one of my friends and partners, a radiation oncologist, who was very involved in ASCO, encouraged me strongly. Said, don't give up. Try again. And I did. And it was instrumental in developing both my career within ASCO as well as pushing me to leadership positions in my own clinic and in my own state. And helped develop a lot of skills that have made me successful in pushing state legislative efforts. My political science background did not go away, just like her primary care roots. And so I think that the program also made friends with Pat and with Dave and with my co-classmates. And as the years have gone by, and I've gone to ASCO, when you see that LDP ribbon on somebody's tag, you immediately have a connection with them and know that you've been through a similar experience. So I think it's been really instrumental in developing my career. And I'm currently serving as a mentor for the leadership program. So I'm living your life 10 years ago, Pat and Dave, and it's great. DAVID JOHNSON: Oh, I'm sorry. PAT LOEHRER: Terrific. DAVID JOHNSON: [INAUDIBLE] LECIA SEQUIST: I would echo what Missy was saying about how much it's influenced my career. I was in the 2011 class. So I think the year after she was. And I also applied multiple times, and I always tell people who are thinking of applying that it often does take multiple attempts to get in and not to lose faith. The selection committee does like to see that persistence. So definitely apply more than once. I learned so much about what leadership is. I thought it was about being the best in a group of people. So then, being selected to have a certain title. And I just really learned so much during that year, that it doesn't really have anything to do with a title, although that can be a part of it for some people. But it's just more about a style, an approach to your profession, and that you can be a leader if you are the designated head or chief of something, but you can also be a leader if you don't have that designation. And there are many different styles and ways to lead and to help people to ultimately get a group to do the very best that they all can together. And the friends that I made that year from my co-classmates as well as you guys and Jamie, who are our leaders, are just lifelong friends and mentors. And you know, I think it really got me thinking seriously about my choices in my career too and not to just kind of cruise through a career and see what happened and where life took you, but to really plan and to chart your own course and to make sure to reevaluate. And if it's not going the way you want it to, to rechart and replan. DAVID JOHNSON: We had a bunch of different lectures on different topics. Was there one of the lectures or areas that was particularly beneficial to you? PAT LOEHRER: I can think of one. I'll start out by doing this. We threw this in the second year, just for the heck of it. We did this personality testing. And I thought it was fascinating because, in my group, there was a little bit of conflict going on with one of the people in my group. And I realized that we were both acting out our personalities. I like to look at the big picture, and he liked to just zoom in the middle one. And the other thing that I do remember is that we showed the profiles, and it turned out Dave and I were exactly opposite. And then we both said at the same time, we should be married. [CHUCKLES] MELISSA DILLMON: One lesson that stands out in my mind was the press preparation lesson that we received from Press Relations group at ASCO. And I think that was essential for developing skills with regards to preparing for difficult conversations and being able to redirect questions that were difficult. I use that as leader of the Government Relations Committee oftentimes. I will also say that the other lesson that stands out in my mind is conflict resolution because, at the time, I was not chair of my department and was having significant conflicts with the current chair of my department. And that lesson helped me to go back week after week and more constructively work towards a solution and then eventually became chair of that department. So I think those two lessons gave me lifelong skills that I've used in all my leadership roles. LECIA SEQUIST: Yes, it's amazing how 10 years later, we can still remember the specific lectures and specific comments that people made. I remember those that you were talking about Melissa, but yeah, before you had said yours, Pat, I was going to say the same thing, that personality test was extremely helpful. And I certainly don't remember all of the different initials of the personality types. But just to understand that concept that people have different emotional skills and blind spots that very much influence how they deal with others in the workplace. And to be able to think about that when you're having conflict with someone and think about how to take that into a strategy where you can kind of play to their strengths and understand where they're coming from, that was extremely helpful. And then, I also think that talking in small groups with our teams about specific problems we were having or obstacles that we were facing and getting advice from others on how to overcome them, that really started me on a recurrent mission to find friends who I could share that with outside of my institution, over the course of my career. I think that was a real exercise in how valuable that could be. It's so critical to have peer mentors that you can talk to and strategize with and get advice about how to handle something that you're struggling with at work and have people that aren't in the same room full of people or aren't living in it. So they're a little bit more objective. DAVID JOHNSON: Let me ask a question of the two of you. Do you think your home institutions in your case, Lecia, MGH and in your case, Missy, Harbin Clinic, valued that training that you received? Did they recognize it as something that was worth the time that you spent or do you think it just something that happened and they didn't really take notice? MELISSA DILLMON: I learned in LDP that institutions don't love you back. PAT LOEHRER: They don't love you to begin with. Joe Simone. Joe Simone. DAVID JOHNSON: So I take that as a no. Your institution really said, eh, OK, great. We're glad you did it, but so what? LECIA SEQUIST: I wouldn't say that. I don't know that they said, so what? I just, I'm not sure that they-- there was no rolling out the red carpet, thank goodness you did this. But I do think it's had an institutional impact in that I have since encouraged other people to apply from my institution. And I think that only strengthens the institution, to have multiple people going through that program. MELISSA DILLMON: So my clinic, being private practice, when I take time out, it is just a cut from my salary. There's no support given from the institution. But in order to be in positions of leadership, department chair or on the board of directors, which I later was elected to of the clinic, you have to have completed a leadership development program. And the clinic will pay for you to go do those things. But my participation in Leadership Development Program met all those criteria. So my clinic highly values professional development classes or meetings or programs and encourages that. Even if there's no financial support necessarily, it is encouraged, if you want to assume positions of leadership within our clinic. And so I think that it's important for institutions, whether they're private practice or university, to recognize the benefits that come from participation in a program like this. And it was interesting as a mentor this year, we did a personality test, but this time they did an interesting look at what our priorities, our top five priorities or values are. I think it was values. And it was a list of 300 things basically you go through. And you listed your top five values. And then you listed the values of your institution or employer. And then you wanted to look at, did they match? And did your university value what you value? And that was a really interesting exercise to go through because a lot of these young leaders who are taking their time out to do this program did not feel that support necessarily for them seeking out this program. PAT LOEHRER: It's no coincidence that Dave and I asked both of you to join because you both come from different places, if you will. And I think, Melissa, you've just been a rock star in terms of the community practices and so many things that you have done in the leadership roles. And Melissa's, you can't get any more prestigious in being in one of the Boston medical schools and particularly at Mass General. But the other reason we wanted to have you come in is to talk a little bit about your perspective as women and women in leadership roles. And if you could maybe share a little bit about your thoughts and perspectives of gender leadership and what you have noticed in men in leadership roles and women and what lessons you might give to other people, particularly other women in this capacity. MELISSA DILLMON: Well, I think we both were trained in a day. And I might be speaking for you, but when there were, at least here at the institutions where I trained, not that many women in internal medicine. Medical school was probably 45% female by the time I was in medical school. But when you look at the faculty of those medical schools that I went to and trained at, there were very few women in positions of leadership. And so there weren't very many role models. My dean of students at Wake Forest was a female nephrologist. And so she was a huge role model for me. And then I went to UAB, and I remember being asked in my interview, are you OK with being in a male-dominated program? Because you will be in a male-dominated program. I think there were 45 of us in my intern class, and eight of us were female. And I said, that's fine. But I had gone to a women's college, where obviously there were only women leading. So it was a big change for me to go back into a situation where I had to assert my unique female leadership qualities, which are different, and still use those in an effective way to lead. Right now, I'm serving as a mentor also for a small liberal arts college, primarily those interested in going into medicine or nursing, and usually most of those have been female. And so it's been a really great opportunity, because I've had very few mentors who were female, who were positive role models for me. So I think Leadership Development Program, one of the things they taught me was to go back and say thank you to your leaders and to be a leader for others. And specifically, as a female leader, I think that has been an important call for me. After leaving Leadership Development Program, I went back and ran for the board of my clinic as the first female to be on my board. My clinic was started in the 1860s, I think right after the Civil War, and I'm still the only female on that board. And I feel that it's important for me to stay there or to promote up more females within my clinic to be on that board because I think that having a diverse board helps in bringing different skill sets to the table. So I think Leadership Development Program gave me that courage to step up. LECIA SEQUIST: That's inspiring. Congratulations on being the first woman and may there be more soon. Yeah. I don't know that I've felt that I was in as much of a male-dominated field up in Boston. But certainly, leadership in my hospital and in my cancer center has been more male-dominated. And I think as I'm getting older now, I definitely appreciate-- of course, every individual has different leadership style. So you can't just paint a broad brush and say men are this type of leader and women are that type of leader. Everyone's a little bit different. But in general, I think women do tend to have a different leadership style and one that is maybe, present company not included, one that's less talking and more listening. And I think, when I was younger and trying to become a leader, I really felt out of peer pressure that I needed to talk more and sort of demonstrate more what a good leader I could be or what great thoughts I had. And I've really come to embrace a more listening type of leadership, which I have been happy to say that younger women that I work with have come up to me privately and thanked me for. And so I do think it's important to have all different types of role models for our junior faculty and all different types of styles, sort of on display and doing their best so that people can find something that matches with their own unique style to emulate. PAT LOEHRER: One of the lessons I learned a long time ago from someone, and I loved it, a great leader is one that changes the conversation. And to your point of listening, but it's really changing the conversation, deflecting it around it so that other people are talking. But you have a little role in moving that around. And I always liked that. MELISSA DILLMON: Today, I was listening to the National Press Conference, and I heard a definition of leadership that disturbed me. And I thought, I don't think that's my definition of leadership. So I think that defining what your type of leadership style is, is something that leadership development helped me with. And then, once I knew what my leadership style was, then using those skills to pull together a team and achieve a goal, a common goal, not the description of leadership today, which was pushing something up a mountain and rolling over boulders and doing whatever you had to do to get your way. I thought, well, that's not leadership, not my leadership. So I think that that was something that Leadership Development Program help me do is identify what my leadership style is and what kind of leader I want to be. DAVID JOHNSON: So I want to follow up on a point that both of you are making in a slightly different way. And that is, who are your role models? I mean, apart from Pat and me, but who are your role models? [CHUCKLES] LECIA SEQUIST: I've had lots of role models over the years, and I think at the beginning, my role models were really people that I wanted to emulate and be just like them. And that probably started with Tom Lynch, who was my initial research mentor when I started in lung cancer. And a lot of it was just the way he was with patients. I wanted to have that ability to make a patient feel just right at home from the first minute they walked in the door, which Tom is a master at. But over time, I think my mentors or my heroes have more become people that are different than me. And I'm not trying to be like them. But I appreciate the ways in which they lead or in which they conduct something, like balancing their home life and their professional life in a way that's just different but I appreciate. And that, in lung cancer, I would say another real big influence on my career has been Heather Wakely. She really has been my main female role model in my career. And she's given so much of her time to me and to so many to kind of sit and have personal talks and pep talks and strategies about what we're doing in our home institutions. DAVID JOHNSON: Missy, what about you? MELISSA DILLMON: So I would say from a professional standpoint, someone I respect and see as a mentor is actually now the female CEO of my clinic, who has been with my clinic for 20 years and worked her way up. And I think that's because she has retained her femininity, but she is recognized as a tiger that no hospital or other clinic wants to make mad. So she has a way of leading and listening that is unique. And I have learned a lot from her over the years and watched her rise in her leadership skills as I have alongside of her. And then, I will say from a personal perspective, one of the books I have enjoyed reading recently really talks a lot about servant leadership. And so I've really tried to identify servant leaders in my community and why it is that they're able to weather the storms of the last couple of years, for instance, and why their teams rally behind them and support them. And they're successful. And my husband is a restaurant owner times three, opening two of those, one right before COVID and one during COVID and yet has been able to mobilize a team. And that's because he's a servant leader that will get back in the kitchen and make pastry cream if that's what needs to be done or make reservations. And so I think during the last two years, what I have learned from that is to be a servant leader in the tough times has really helped rally my team and my clinic to be better and to continue to work, despite the challenges for our patients, for the bigger goal. PAT LOEHRER: Love it. We recently had a guy give a talk here at IU, and the lecture was on being a visionary leader. And to be honest, it was fine. It was good, but being a servant leader and being part of a group is more important than being the one right up in front. And it's good to be a follower too as a leader. So I really appreciate those comments. Just in a couple of sentences, I don't know if you guys could do this and reflect a little bit about your younger self. Say you're 21, and you could give yourself some advice now, what would those pieces of advice be? LECIA SEQUIST: I think one thing, and that's the common thread I've heard among a lot of more senior people in medicine, or in any profession probably, is that the things that you think are disappointments at the time often turn out to be some of the greatest opportunities that you're faced with. You plan and you think things are going to go a certain way, and then something doesn't work out, and you're very disappointed. But it's usually that process of how you deal with that disappointment that actually brings so much opportunity back to you. You can't see it at the moment. All you see is the disappointment. But I think that's a big lesson. PAT LOEHRER: Terrific. MELISSA DILLMON: So kind of similar to that, Lecia, doing our personality test this time, I wish I had done that same exact test 10 years ago, because I'd like to see what my leadership personality was 10 years ago versus now. I would not have scored as high in certain areas that I think I do now. And I think that one of the biggest things I have learned is, I'm very much a person of tradition. And I like things to continue the way I expect them, and I like things to be planned and done in medical school in four years, done with fellowship. So I like a regimen and a routine. And I have learned over the years to be comfortable with change. And I wish I had learned that earlier and to be open to change and listening to new ideas. I think that probably for the first few years of my practice and training, I was very much, this is the way it's done. And I think that that expressive part of my leadership had not developed yet. And I think that being open to change and looking at things in new ways, I wish I had learned that earlier. DAVID JOHNSON: So we only have a few minutes left. And what we have done in previous episodes, we like to ask our guests to tell us the book they've read recently or maybe a documentary or something they've watched recently that they would recommend to our listeners. LECIA SEQUIST: I really enjoyed the book The Four Winds by Kristin Hannah. That is a historical fiction about the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl and the migration of farmers from the Central Plains out to the West. And it was a really captivating book with a female protagonist. I enjoyed it quite a bit. MELISSA DILLMON: It's funny. I read that one just a few months ago. I love historical fiction, but I would say recently, and I know it's not a new book, Andre Agassi's Open, his autobiography, I found fascinating. I love sports, but it was very interesting to me to see how someone who's thrown into the limelight at a very early age and the pressure put on him by his parents and how that affected the course of his life. I found it a fascinating book and very insightful. And I like to play tennis, but I'm not a tennis player. But I found it interesting as a parent, who's got several sports-minded children, it gave me some lessons about parenting and how to just raise your children and where the focus should be. DAVID JOHNSON: Both my wife and daughter had been tennis players. I'm sure they would both love reading that book. Thanks for that recommendation. LECIA SEQUIST: It's a great book. DAVID JOHNSON: Well, that's really all the time we have for today. And Pat and I want to thank both of you, Missy and Lecia, for joining us. It's been a terrific conversation. Thank you so much for what you do. You're both, in our minds, fantastic leaders. You were when you arrived, and you certainly have been ever since. So thanks so much for that. I want to thank all of our listeners for tuning in. This is Oncology, Et Cetera an ASCO Educational Podcast. And we really have talked about anything and everything. And we'd like to continue to do so. So if you have an idea for a topic or a guest, please email us at education@asco.org. Thanks again for tuning in. And Pat, I just wanted you know I've ordered a chicken and an egg from Amazon. [CHUCKLES] PAT LOEHRER: It's because you couldn't quite make up your mind which was going to come first. I love it. I love it. You're the best. Thanks for doing this. And Dave, it's good to see you, as always. Take care. DAVID JOHNSON: Thank you so much. We really, really appreciate it. LECIA SEQUIST: Thank you. MELISSA DILLMON: Great to speak with you. Bye. [MUSIC PLAYING]   SPEAKER 1: Thank you for listening to this week's episode. To make us part of your weekly routine, click Subscribe. Let us know what you think by leaving a review. For more information, visit the comprehensive e-learning center at elearning.asco.org. [MUSIC PLAYING]   The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. [MUSIC PLAYING]

This week at NSTA: The Bus Stop - Bree Allen, Senior Director of Operational Improvement, at National Express, and Chair of the NSTA Government Relations Committee, joins NSTA Executive Director, Curt Macysyn, to discuss the Government Relations Committee and NSTA Advocacy Team efforts. Bree highlights her industry background, as well as her recent return to the position of Government Relations Committee Chair. Bree discusses a recent string of NSTA advocacy victories, and how NSTA GR victories are a benefit to its members. Lastly, Curt and Bree discuss the important role that grassroots advocacy plays on Capitol Hill, and they dive into a current NSTA initiative to streamline and update the School Bus CDL process. What you need to know when you need to know it, always at NSTA: The Bus Stop. Subscribe today!Support the show (http://www.yellowbuses.org/membership/)

Patrick Casey, head of the Government Relations Committee for The Guides' Association of New York City (GANYC) and professional tour guide for many years, discusses the future of the tour bus guide profession, as many tour bus companies in New York City eliminate the position.

Tony has been a licensed Real Estate Agent in the Province of British Columbia since 1991 and operates The PRIME Real Estate Team, as small but highly productive group which is one of Vancouver Island's top producing teams and regularly ranked Top 100 in RE/MAX Western Canada.  He is part owner of RE/MAX Island Properties with 3 office locations serving southern Vancouver Island.Tony served as an elected Director on the Victoria Real Estate Board for 3 terms and was President and spokesperson for the organization in 2008.  He has chaired, founded or participated in committees and task forces including MLS and Computer Services, Technology, Finance and Audit, Managing Brokers, Government Liaison, Members and Community Relations and Quality of Life.Following his Presidential year, Tony represented Victoria on the British Columbia Real Estate Association's Government Relations Committee and commenced volunteer work in his local community as the Co-Chair of the Greater Victoria Coalition to End Homelessness.  Since then, he served on Boards including The Victoria Symphony, the Union Club of BC, The Victoria Dragonboat Festival, Anawim Companions House, Victoria Hospice and the Cool Aid Society Capital Campaign.  He currently sits on the Victoria Telus Community Board which distributes $350,000 per year into local initiatives relating to kids, education, health and environment.This week on the show I am joined by Realtor/Trainer/Speaker – Tony Joe as we talk "Your Road Map to Real Estate".This Episode is sponsored by The Buzz Conference, and KiTS Keep-in-Touch Systems. Make sure you connect with The Buzz Conference by visiting their website www.thebuzzconference.com or by following them on Instagram @thebuzzconference to keep tabs on all the awesome events they host.KiTS is always with us. KiTS offers a fully loaded cross channel marketing suite including Loop CRM, Websites, the most personalized Newsletters in Real Estate, Follow up tools, curated social content, WOW Calendars and so much more. All to help you manage your business, build MindShare and drive even more sales. You can learn more on my site mindshare101.com by clicking on Marketing.This show is a Founding Member of the Industry Syndicate Media Network.Please subscribe, rate the show, and leave a review. You can also get more #MindShare on Facebook @MindShare101 and Instagram @davidgreenspan101. Check out YouTube #MindShare101, and https://mindshare101.com/While on my site, be sure to download your FREE copy of The Ultimate Marketing Bundle for Realtors. It's 31 pages of marketing tips and tricks, and includes a 90 day content calendar!AND if you want to be part of our Private MindShare Community where we meet every month live to share ideas, tips, tricks, and to motivate each other, where our MindShare Masters get access to our private VIP Q&A with our Special PodCast Guests each week, and where you get daily marketing & sales tips delivered right to you, plus the opportunity to motivate, learn, and network with a whole bunch of people just like you, just click here to join - https://mindshare101.com/plans/group-coaching/ If you would like to be a guest on the show, or know someone that should be a guest on the show, or if you would like to Sponsor the show, send us a message to info@mindshare101.com

In this episode, we speak with Elizabeth Green, Executive Director of the Association for Driver Rehabilitation Specialists (ADED), and Cassy Churchill, Co-Chair of ADED’s Government Relations Committee, about their new Recommendations for State Driver License Agencies document, created to help SDLAs make fitness-to-drive decisions for medically-at-risk drivers.   Host: Ian Grossman Producer: Claire Jeffrey & Chelsey Hadwin Music: Gibson Arthur This episode is brought to you by RecallBuzz, powered by VINsmart. Learn more about how we can help you with fleet recall management and maintenance updates as well as capture vehicle history and VIN data. Give VINsmart a call at 1-888-950-9550 or visit us on the web at www.vinsmart.com/for-businesses.

Q:  Why must you complete a background check on every person BEFORE their first day on the job? A:  Because there are too many liars applying for jobs with your company. But what about the background check process?  What should you check for?  Should you do education checks?  Credit checks?  Drug testing?  Our host, David, teaches this in our Hire the Best system, but this is the EXPERT on everything to do with background checks.  Join us for this engaging conversation on one of the two “must do” steps for every hiring process. Christine Cunneen, CEO of Hire Image, is the past chair of the Professional Background Screening Association (PBSA), and has held leadership roles on the Global Advisory Council, Government Relations Committee, Advocacy Committee, Finance Committee, and Ethics Committee for PBSA.  She is a member of the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) at both the national and local levels.  She is a director of the Rhode Island SHRM Board, serving on the Advocacy team, Legislative Committee, and Sponsorship Committee. She travels to Washington, DC to meet with legislators and is active in campaigns and advocacy pertaining to laws and regulations that impact the background screening profession, business owners, and small business entrepreneurs.  Ms. Cunneen also serves as a mentor to some exciting women-owned business leaders across the country.

Colleen Jennings-Roggensack, arts leader and visionary, is Vice President for Cultural Affairs for Arizona State University and Executive Director of ASU Gammage. In this inspiring and warm conversation, Colleen speaks with Hal about the safety measures she’s implementing for ASU’s audiences, the educational and outreach programs she is championing for children and families, and the thing she’s most hoping will change about the theatre in her lifetime. Colleen has artistic, fiscal and administrative responsibility for the historic Frank Lloyd Wright designed ASU Gammage, ASU Kerr Cultural Center, with responsibility for Sun Devil Stadium and Desert Financial Arena for non-athletic activities. She oversees the activation and transformation of Sun Devil Stadium into a year-round hub of cultural activity as ASU 365 Community Union. Colleen was also appointed by ASU President Michael Crow to co-lead the Advisory Council on African American Affairs. The council will enhance diversity, growth and opportunity for Black undergraduate and graduate students, faculty and staff. She serves on The Broadway League's Equity, Diversity & Inclusion Committee, Government Relations Committee, the Executive Committee and the Board of Governors, Labor Committee and co-chairs the Legislative Council and Road Presenters/Intra-Industry Committee and is Arizona's only Tony voter. Colleen is a founding and current member of the Creative Capital Board and Senior Advisor to Women of Color in the Arts, former Association of Performing Arts Professionals board president, served on the National Council on the Arts at the bequest of President Clinton and is a Life Director of the Fiesta Bowl. She is a consultant to universities, international governments and a featured speaker at conferences. In 2020, she has served on multiple panels addressing human rights, justice, diversity, equity and inclusion and the future of Broadway; including interviews with W. Kamau Bell and Tony Award director Kenny Leon related to the pandemic of racism; and participated in the TheaterMakers Summit on getting Broadway touring productions back on the road. Colleen is the recipient of numerous awards including the 2020 National Coalition of 100 Black Women Education Legend, 2019 Valley Leadership Woman of the Year, 2019 ASU West Pioneer Award, National Society of Arts and Letters Medallion of Merit, Valle del Sol’s Mom of the Year, APAP Fan Taylor Award, Black Philanthropy Initiative Honor, The Broadway League's Outstanding Achievement in Presenter Management and Arizona's Governor’s Arts Award. In 2012, The Arizona Republic recognized Colleen for Arizona’s 100th Anniversary as one of the individuals who had the greatest impact in the era. Follow Colleen on Instagram @CJRoggensack. Look out for ASU’s upcoming season of performances at https://www.asugammage.com/. For all things Broadway Biz, visit our Instagram @BroadwayBizPodcast or our website broadwaybizpodcast.com. Have a question for Hal or a topic you'd like him to explore? Send Hal an email at broadwaybiz@halluftig.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today we talk to Mandy Favolaro & Missy Alexander about the Annual COPAA Conference. COPAA stands for Council of Parents Attorneys and Advocates, an organization dedicated to protecting and enforcing the legal and civil rights of students with disabilities and their families. Their primary goal is to secure high quality educational services and to promote excellence in advocacy and their Annual Conference is one of the ways in which they do it! If you aren't familiar with COPAA, join us to learn about one of the best conferences out there for parents of students with disabilities (and attorneys and advocates). And if you are familiar with this inspiring conference, then listen in to hear about all the cool ways they plan to host the conference virtually this year! You can check COPAA out at COPAA.org and register for the conference here: https://www.copaa.org/page/2021-conference You can learn more about Mandy Favaloro here: http://www.a2zedad.com/about-us/ You can learn more about Missy Alexander here: https://www.ppmd.org/staff/missy-alexander/ TRANSCRIPT SUMMARY KEYWORDS conference, people, advocate, coppa, parents, attorneys, year, training, topics, sessions, missy, students, mandy, hear, learn, presentation, special education, government relations committee, specific, special ed SPEAKERS Missy Alexander, Mandy Favaloro, Dana Jonson Dana Jonson 00:02 Hello, and welcome to need to know with Dana Jonson. I'm your host, Dana Jonson and I'm here to give you the information you need to know to best advocate for your child. I'm a special education attorney in private practice, a former special education teacher and administrator, a current mom to four children with IPS and I myself have ADHD and dyslexia. So I have approached the world of disability and special education from many angles. And I'll provide straightforward information about your rights and your schools obligations, information from other professionals on many topics, as well as tips and tricks for working with your school district. My goal is to empower you through your journey. So if there's anything you want to hear, comment on, join our Facebook group, it's aptly named need to know with Dana Jonson, or you can email me at Dana at special ed dot life. Okay, let's get started. Damn speaking with Mandy favaloro and Missy Alexander, who are co chairs of the conference committee for the Council, a parent attorneys and advocates otherwise known as COPPA, co pa.org. If you're interested, I talk about them all the time. So I'm sure you've heard of them on my podcast. And Mandy is an attorney from California and Missy is an advocate from Maryland. Can't believe I almost got that wrong. Mandy Favaloro 01:28 He's an advocate from Maryland. And so first, why don't you guys introduce yourselves a little bit. I'd like to hear what you guys do and how you came to here and what you're doing on COPPA? Mandy? Sure, I'll go first. My name is Mandy favaloro. And I'm an attorney that I just represent students with disabilities in the special education system. I've been doing it for 15 years. And the first COPPA conference I went to was in 2005. So almost as soon as I was sworn in, I went to a conference. And I've been going ever since. And I think I've been involved COPPA, with the training Committee, which does our webinars, which have been in place for a number of years, I taught feet for about six years, which is a special education advocacy training program. And that's all done online. And I have been doing I've been on the conference committee for maybe four or five years now, maybe six years. And they all the years are kind of melding together on this. And Missy, who has been doing that for a very long time has sort of been my mentor and all things conference committee, and I've been presenting at the conference for a long time. Even before that, I have an interest in sort of sharing my knowledge and letting people know what we do and how to advocate for their own students and advocate for other students. And I'm currently the vice chair of the Coppa board of directors. Very nice. And Missy, also a board member, I believe, yes, I am a board member. I've been in the world of specialized advocacy. For a long time. My eldest, my youngest daughter is 28. And she has an autism spectrum disorder. And she was educated in our public school system, her entire educational career until she was 21 years old. So I've seen the bowels of special ed. And it's not pretty, but we live to tell about it. Missy Alexander 03:19 I work for Maryland's Parent Training and Information Center, every state has at least one as required by idea part day. And I've been with parents place for 18 years. So I've been doing this professionally for with other families for a little over 18 years now. And it's here in Maryland, and my work includes working with families directly, they also do some training. I also am involved in some local and statewide systemic work just depends on who's talking to what what committee I get invited to and, and if I feel it's, you know, worthwhile cause and I've been a member of COPPA for a long time. And I don't know how long I should have looked it up that I'm sorry, I didn't, but I don't know. And I've been going to the Coppa conference since second or third conference. I don't remember when that was I should have looked it up. And I didn't know sorry. list for me one year, so I could refer to it. Just so you've really been I've been going for so long. I've been here co chair of the advocate. They was co chair the advocate committee for a while. And then I became co chair of the conference committee, and I really enjoy doing that. And I'm like, Mandy, I want to share what I know with others. I don't want to hold on to it. If I knew it, I want everybody to know it. I think that's really, really important. And for COPPA, I'm also on the board and I was the first advocate chair of the board. Remember that? And I live to tell about it. So I think that was really, really great. Dana Jonson 04:47 Yes, that is wonderful. And I do think it's important to say for those who don't know, COPPA, and I just think it's so critical that I always assume everyone knows what it is and that everyone's a member, but it's a wonderful organization and they work on not only legislatively to try and get things passed on behalf of children with disabilities, but they also do a tremendous amount of training and support for people who do advocate for children with disabilities, as well as parents. And I also have been going to Copa for a very long time, I believe. And the conference is possibly my favorite part of the year. And I've been going to the cup of conference for at least 12 years, I think, at least. But it's wonderful, because not only are you surrounded by like minded people, but it's such a wonderful wealth of information for parents and attorneys and advocates. So could you guys talk a little bit about what the goal is of the conference, how you guys develop it and make those determinations as to what you're going to put out there. And and what it does for people, for parents and attorneys and advocates? Sure, I Mandy Favaloro 05:56 think the the part that we plan is really the the teaching and the breakouts and the keynote speaker. So all of that is planned ahead of time, we have a process where we get proposals from members and from people kind of outside the organization who give us their proposals about what they want to teach what they want to pass along their knowledge. And we have a committee that really goes through that process, and picks out the ones that we think are the best, which is very difficult. Some years, we get hundreds of applications, and there's about maybe around 40 spots on a typical year. So that is a laborious process. I think the part of the conference that brings people back every year is really the networking and getting to know people, meaning people from your area meeting parents that are going through the same thing that other parents are going through finding people that they really like to learn from I know Missy has her favorite instructors that she will go to whatever they teach about whatever topic. So you really make connections with people. And I think that that is what keeps people coming back. And they'll learning is sort of an add on bonus to that. But we're really proud of it. I think we you know, we put in a lot of work, the staff puts in a huge amount of work. As copas grown, we've got a lot more staff that's dedicated to the conference than ever before, even in the five years that I've been doing this, and I'm sure even more as long as he's been doing it. And they do a lot of the day to day work of answering everyone's questions and registration just open for this here. And there's a lot of very specific questions. And all of those are being answered by you know, Marcy, and Denise who is our executive director or CEO, and Marcy who's really kind of in charge in the heart of the company. Missy Alexander 07:40 MRC is like the glue, she did the keeps it all together. And sort of a little bit of a historical perspective of COPPA and the conference. While it's the Council of parent attorneys and advocates, it was really attorneys taking the lead. And we have really morphed advocates have really pushed their way into things so that we're now pretty much 5050 on the board and advocates and attorneys Wow, this year, I believe we have more advocate members than attorney members. And we wanted to reflect that in the conference. So as each year has gone on, we've included more and more in different categories to meet the needs of our various learners. And we've done a really, from my perspective, a really good job with making sure we have good quality content for advocates. And now we're saying hey, we also have parent members, too. So for the last couple of years, we've been working on being very intentional, that we have offerings for family for parents, who aren't quite ready to sit and listen to a two hour dissertation about the Andrew f case like I would be but yeah, so I think that we have a lot of really great subjects for a lot of people. And I think that's a great point. I Dana Jonson 09:01 mean, the counselor, parent attorneys and advocates started as more of a professional organization, I believe, and and as advocates sort of became just, you know, evolved out of parents who had been through this process, and could help other parents who maybe didn't need an attorney to come in and litigate a case, but they needed support this growing body of parents who started to do it, not just for fun or to help their friends but they started to do it professionally. And I got to watch that my time attending COPPA is to see that change how how it used to be parents and advocates are kind of lumped together. And then now I know that advocates, it's an actual profession that we now treat as such. And I love the conferences reflecting that I think there's also been a growth in options for parents to write up. Absolutely I know, I know that there's a pre conference that And then the main conference. So can you talk a little bit about the difference between those two components? Sure. So Mandy Favaloro 10:06 in a typical year, we have the pre conference and main conference are kind of together, they're back to back. It runs from Thursday to Sunday. And we'll talk a little bit about how that can be different this year. But yeah, basically, the conference runs from Thursday through Sunday, and Thursday and Friday, we have our pre conference training, which had includes skill based training, those go on for about two days, summer one day, but our big ones are really two day trainings. They focus on new attorneys. There's advocates specific training for brand new advocates all the way to advocates who are maybe ready to conduct a due process hearing if that's allowed in their state. We also have four new attorneys, we do due process training, those are ones that have been around for a long time, and are very successful, and people love. And those run Thursday and Friday, Friday night, we sort of have like an opening reception and a keynote speaker and then the main conference where we have breakout sessions starts Saturday. And so on Saturday and Sunday, there's breakfast, there's lunch provided with speakers and an award ceremony. The breakout sessions are about six runs simultaneously. So there's probably three typically on a Saturday and two or three on the Sunday. And those are very specific to topics so people can choose what they want to go watch and interact with the presenters who are talking for about 90 minutes, typically in person. And then there's usually Question and Answer periods, those are all recorded. And then you can kind of buy a recording later if there's a topic that you didn't get to go to or a session that you really want to hear over and over again. And that has been a really successful format. I think that's worked for, you know, it was last year, our 20th conference, I believe was the 20 right around 20. We may be past 20. But you know, it's worked for a really long time. And it's fun, it's grown. Dana Jonson 11:57 Yeah. Every first went it was just a Friday, Saturday, it was just Saturday, Sunday, I think so Mandy Favaloro 12:02 I grown every year the number of people that are there, I think the pre conference, Ystad, you know, be smaller, we keep adding sessions on to that, as we, you know, grow and are taking over spaces and larger hotels and conference space that we can get, we kind of offer as many sessions as possible. And there's ones that people will take twice, because they learned so much the first time that they're, you know, we're going to take it again, so we can get something else out of it the second time. And I really think that, you know, even someone who's been doing this a long time, or someone who's brand new, you get something different out of it. I know that you know, I've been doing this for a while. But if I get one thing out of every conference, I consider that successful. And it might be from someone that I'm teaching who has a tip that I haven't thought of who has a situation that I have not come across. And it really changes the way you think about your clients when you go back home. And you're in your practice, or you're advocating for your own child or for other students. And you're really, you can put that into what you're doing on a day to day basis. And I find that every year there's something new that I learned like a nugget that I can take away from a presentation that really changes the way I think and that I can kind of move forward with Missy Alexander 13:15 students I used to alternate when COPPA first started. One year I go to the Coppa conference and other year I'd go to the conference of another national organization that was more disability specific. And then after I had done that, I went to COPPA, what's the other one and then I went to COPPA. And then I went to the other one. And that was the last time I did that, because the quality of the materials themselves are worth attending the Copa conference, you get a compendium of everybody's presentations. The other one of the speakers brought copies of their PowerPoints on when they ran out. Oh, well, I mean, just the quality was just not there. That's one thing that I liked. And like Mandy said, you can get recordings of sessions, so you can listen to them, you know, throughout the year, as well as your you are hearing from people who argue and when before the Supreme Court on special ed issues, who better to learn from, that's the lewdly. Dana Jonson 14:14 Absolutely. And the Compendium, you're right, the materials are amazing. And that volume of information. I always take those companions and I have them in my office, I was really excited when you guys started doing it digitally. made me really happy in my office. Let's also talk a little bit about parents because with COPPA, and I want to focus on the conference. But I also want to mention that there's a lot of other supports that COPPA offers. So you know, the list serves for one. And missy. I don't know if he's still moderate. I know you did for a while, moderate some of them. So maybe you could talk a little bit to the listeners. And then I want to get back conference. Missy Alexander 14:49 We have shifted from a traditional listserv to a community platform, but it's virtually the same thing. You're getting email lesson. Yeah, I'm on moderated the long list, so I had to tell the attorneys, you need to turn your pose. And then I'd see him at the conference. I'd be like, Hi, I'm so glad to meet you. I miss you, Alexandra, you're the one that tells me to turn my post all the time. Sorry, sorry, not sorry. But it's, it's really great. We have a general list. And for families, you know, I was able years ago when my daughter was little to get 90 hours of combat service based on training i'd received as a parent. Now granted, I had a paralegal background. But I was able to get that for her based on what I had learned. So if parents if they feel like it's too overwhelming to learn, it's not just take what you need to get from that and more fit into moving forward into what you want to know. Dana Jonson 15:45 Yeah. And I do, I think that it's also there's the listserv for attorneys, where it's wonderful to be able to communicate with with just people who are doing what you do, and looking at it from just that legal perspective, and the same from the parent perspective to be able to reach out and have an attorney respond and say, that doesn't sound right now, and we can't always we can't give specific legal advice on the listserv, but certainly to say, you know what, maybe you should look in this direction. And to get that information, as you said, you know, these are people who are arguing before the Supreme Court who better to learn from Missy Alexander 16:21 exactly, you know, and the list, the general list, we have lists for different memberships, there's a parent list, there's the advocate list, there's, I think it's advocate related professionals. And I'm all in the parent list and the advocate list. And every now and again, I'll say, please put this on the general list. Because I know there are attorneys on there, and they will give you answers. And it's exactly what you said, Dan, they're not offering legal advice at all. But they're giving you a different framework to think about, or, you know, a different way to approach it, or what to research or guidance, don't go down that rabbit hole, it's not worth it. You know, it really sound advice that you're getting for the price of a membership. Dana Jonson 17:03 Yeah. And then and that level of information, I'm sure is what brought rise to the conference. So now, last year, I went to the conference. And while we were at the conference, I believe COVID was exploding. Mandy Favaloro 17:16 We got in under the wire, we were one re last conference in that hotel, everyone was canceling after us. So we, I think I flew home, like on the 11th or something of March, and I had this awful flight where I had to, like go through Seattle before I came back down to California. And you know, everyone was panicking. And if you coughed in the airport, you know, Death Stare. So it was certainly we were right at the beginning of this, and we were lucky enough to get in and not have anyone gets sick as from getting into the conference. We definitely had a few people who had to cancel because they were worried about their own health had, you know, weaker immune systems. And that was, you know, obviously understandable. So but we It was a successful conference nonetheless. And I think as soon as we came back, we started thinking, what are we going to do next year? And how are we going to address this? You know, should this continue? Right? And Dana Jonson 18:07 it it was and it was it was that awkward? Sort of no one knew whether we should be panicked or not like we heard it was bad, but we didn't really know yet. And there's hand sanitizer everywhere. And that anybody but no mask yet? That's right. We weren't into masks yet. No, we did not know about those yet. So yeah, we had no idea what we had in store for us. So as with many conferences that have been going on since March, they've been virtual, and that you guys are taking this virtual. So tell us what that's gonna look like? Sure. So Mandy Favaloro 18:39 I think that, you know, there were some challenges kind of going into that the decision about when we were going to actually make that decision. And if we wanted to wait until the last minute, I think we decided to do it early. And certainly there were people that had concerns about making the I think we decided what like an April or May that we were really going to go forward virtually just to be safe and not have to basically be planning to kind of simultaneous conferences in the event that we weren't going to be able to show up the conference was supposed to be in Irvine in March of 2021. In the hood, I know it's not I'm still sad, I'm sad to I was gonna have to drive down the road. So we made the decision pretty early to go virtual so that we can let our presenters know, we wanted to make sure that people were comfortable presenting virtually some people are not technologically savvy and you know, have said to us, they they don't want to do webinars. So if they didn't want to do a webinar, we were concerned about switching at the last minute and saying we're gonna go in person, oh, wait, now you have to do it virtually and making sure that everyone knew upfront what to expect and what was happening. So that's, that's why the decision was made so early. We, you know, something like timing. The regular conference runs from about, you know, eight in the morning until six at night, but we had to adjust our schedule so that, you know, people on the West Coast weren't expected to sign on at 5am You know, we had to make sure that we adjusted that some of our regular lunch is now a breakfast slash lunch so that, you know, everybody is at the same time eating and we're having extended breaks for people. You know, we did think a lot about typically, our breakouts are a little bit longer. But there was a concern about people being able to engage in online learning for 90 minutes without any breaks. And you know, Dana Jonson 20:24 a typical day we're learning from the student. Yeah, Mandy Favaloro 20:27 I think that a typical conference, you know, is, it's a lot, I think, even in person, it's a long day, and people get tired. And so we wanted to make sure that people weren't getting fatigued. So we've we've adjusted the schedule to really take that into consideration. Yeah, Dana Jonson 20:41 I know that that at the end of the Cobra conference, I always say like, it's the best time, but I'm exhausted, my brain is exhausted, because I've taken in so much information. But so what kind of topics are you covering this year? Has that changed at all? How when you change your format, did that impact at all how you decided to solicit topics? Because I know that often, you put out a list and say you're you're welcome to or you you're open to any proposals, but you usually put out a list of here's some topics that we're seeing that are pretty hot that we think need to be addressed. Mandy Favaloro 21:18 Yeah, I think so I think we got a lot of presentations surrounding that surrounding, you know, accommodations to address during this time period, distance learning. So we've tried to bring some of those topics and as well as just traditional topics that we focus on a lot from year to year, because that's what people need to know that they're going to need to know after this is all over and everybody's back in school. So I think we were able to get a mix so that we're able to address really what's currently happening for people and some of the unique situations that need to be addressed right now. As well as the kind of ongoing learning that you're going to need to know after hopefully everybody's allowed back in school full time. Dana Jonson 21:55 And what are some of the ongoing learning ones? I know you have some some programs that repeat every year that are very popular. So what are some of those? Mandy Favaloro 22:03 Yeah, so the format this year is it's a little bit different than kind of just a Thursday to Sunday, because we didn't want to burn people out. So we are doing our two days skills based training, sort of a week before the end of February. And those are really our most popular topics that we've done from year to year, the new attorneys, the due process, training, advocacy, one on one, which is one that Mitzi has been teaching for a number of years with a co presenter, as well as the advanced advocate training for due process. So those are standard, they've been on our agenda for years they are being adjusted to, I think that we've kind of trimmed the day a little bit. So they are being adjusted to run a little bit quicker in the format so that we don't burn people out online. We've now have also come up with these sort of on demand special topics that include I think you're doing one on podcasting for special we're doing there's a school refusal twice exceptional students technology, that's a big one right now, because so many people are using technology in a way that they haven't before, it was sort of like an option. And it was something you know, that certain kids were using that had assistive technology. But right now everyone is having to use technology to learn. So we have a lot of presentations on that we have our traditional kind of case law review that everyone enjoys, we have sort of two different formats that we do that and and then when we move into the virtual summit, that's going to be a week later, that is going to have those 3636 breakout sessions. And those are going to be on some new topics that are going to be very specific to this as well, as you know, topics that we talked about a lot. We also were looking into, you know, we talk a lot about diversity and equity and education. So there's topics that are going to address that as well. Dana Jonson 23:53 Those are pretty big issues right now. Definitely. How do you choose the topics that you pick? Like, how do you decide this is something we need more of, or this is something that has to be addressed? Now, like COVID is obvious, right? Like, yes, no one's gonna give a talk and not mention COVID. That's not getting nothing. That doesn't mean it has to be COVID specific. But how do you decide this? Missy Alexander 24:17 Well, one of the things that we look at our evaluations from the previous year's conference, what do people want to know, we ask for input? We kind of keep an eye on the listservs to see are there hot topics? You know, is there any case law or any litigation that people would want to know more about, I don't want to say as worthy because that that passes judgment, but what people want to know more about that. So those are things that would be sort of what I would refer to as like a fresh topic, something different, but there are standard topics that every year people want to hear about. And sometimes it's People like Randy said, it'll might be the second or third time they've heard it. Some people might have heard about it previously, and now want to listen, we really try, we really put forth a lot of intentional effort to meet the needs of our audience, you know, we we feel an obligation to them, to provide them with what they want, and what maybe what they need. And sometimes we'll choose things that hopefully will garner their interest, maybe they don't realize they need it, but if they receive training on it, so those are things that that we try to kind of put them all together. And then we say, how many spaces do we have? How many sessions can we have? And then we have to play Solomon and decide who you know, what are we to recut? What do we have to cut. And that's why I really like that we're having those on demand sessions this year. Because they're really a lot of those speakers are high quality that I know, I would want to hear. And we're offering them to everyone, so they weren't carved out. And I think, oh, sorry, who's to say so that on demand piece. So that's going to be the list that they can watch it anytime, Dana Jonson 26:06 yes, the others will be scheduled, and you'll be watching them live, Mandy Favaloro 26:10 right. So they will be pre recorded. So the presentation will be pre recorded. But the presenter so for example, I'm doing a breakout session, I will be pre recording my presentation, but then I'm available live to ask questions after the session. And something that's really unique this year is typically, if you're attending the conference, and you don't get to go to a section, there's we talked about the tape recordings, those are sold, that's a separate cost to someone attending the conference. But this year, because everything's pre recorded the presentation, you as someone who are choosing to go to one presentation live will have the opportunity later to view the pre recorded session that occurred at the same time. So you really will you can access all 36 of those sessions if you choose to do so. So that's a really unique situation that we're able to kind of offer people this year because of the fact that we're virtual, Dana Jonson 27:01 Oh, that's wonderful. And that has been a benefit, I think for some other conferences I've attended, because you know, you always have that one session where the three top things you want to see are all playing at the exact same time. And as you said, Miss, you can't get to everyone to get all the handouts. And so that's, that's wonderful. And I've also found that, at least for me, as a COPPA member, if somebody calls me and says, I got your name from COPPA, and I have these questions, or I need to talk to you, it's almost like there's some connection there. Because we've all been to COPPA, you know. And when we go to COPPA, and we're talking about the different levels for attorneys, and parents and advocates, but it's not separated like that, when you're there. It's not, you might have different interests and different sessions, but the whole conference is for everybody. And that's what I think is so great is to be able to see and hear from different people's perspectives, what's going on. And you know, I'm a parent, and I'm an attorney. And it's, it's helpful for me, too, I've had I've had to hire an advocate for my own child. So it was helpful for me to know, what I was looking for. And what I needed in that even though I'm an attorney, and for me to as a professional, understand what advocates do and what their role is, and that that was something that I was able to learn and understand through COPPA. And I think, you know, we could talk about advocates forever, because there's only you know, that that, but one of the things that I love about COPPA and what I always refer people to, which is not part of the conference, but it is part of your training is the special education, advocacy, training for advocates. And when I, when I tell parents, anyone, or I speak to parents, and I say, if you're looking for an advocate, I strongly recommend you look into your trainings. And by the way, here's the training that really does give a very well rounded background to an advocate. Can you guys talk a little bit about seat? Mandy Favaloro 28:53 Yeah, so Missy, your are you teaching feet kind of the 1.0 version? Yeah, Missy Alexander 28:58 I'm the training team for 1.0. We divided it up. 1.0 is sort of like a pre seed. And then there's the standard seat that Mandy, led for many years. And then we created a seat 3.0 and that's for advocates that really want to hang a shingle. Mm hmm. And the nuances behind that, and the considerations and that kind of thing. But see 1.0 You know, it was interesting, when we were having conversations, and preparing for the conference, you know, gee, how long is too long, what people go, how long can we hold people's interest, blah, blah, blah. And I finally had to say, listen, when I teach seat 1.0, it's two hours and those people would stay on another hour if we let them. So if you are giving somebody information that they want, they lose track of time, they're not going to be watching the clock necessarily, Dana Jonson 29:50 right well into your point. That's another reason why you want to make sure people are comfortable presenting that array. Mandy Favaloro 29:57 They think it's a it's a different you know, Beast, you don't I taught feet what is now see 2.0 for about five years, and every year, I kind of come in and do one class every year on section 504. And you don't necessarily see the students kind of everybody's you can go into the video. But while you're teaching, you don't have like a classroom in front of you can't see everyone and people are raising their hands virtually, you have to answer questions. And it certainly takes some time, I think to get used to that format. And teaching in that format, we wanted to make sure everyone was comfortable the going back to seat that's it's a year long course. So there's a lot of information that people who take that year long c point C 2.0 are getting out of it. They're learning, you know about state procedures, federal procedures, how to advocate at IEP meetings, how to deal with section 504, there's just it's, it's very intensive, and they're putting in a lot of work. It's, you know, every week to ours. And as Missy said, you know, we you could talk for three hours just presenting and answering questions, and people get very invested in that, because they've, you know, they've obviously paid for that. And even the presenters who are addressing the topics are passionate about what they're talking about. So, you know, I presented last Friday for two hours, we could have probably presented for four hours with all the questions that we were getting, and scenarios that people have that are that everyone can learn from, you know, if you have a situation that I've not addressed, but I might have some tips for that it can, you know, everyone's learning from each other. It's a really unique program. Dana Jonson 31:33 No, it's wonderful. And it's, it's, I think it's the best training, I really think that if someone's going to do it professionally, they really need to invest in that component, because you get that well rounded training. And it's easy to go through the process as a parent, and only really deal with the pieces that relate to your own case. And you have to learn a lot more than what your child needs in order to be able to advocate for them. So you do learn all this stuff that that you have to share. But I think he gives a great well rounded so that you get to see all aspects of it. And and you know, it's it's a testament to the training that COPPA does. And just as the conference, you know, comes across this training, and I think even with the seat program, you still have tons of advocates at the conference every year, because there's even more available there. And as you were saying, Misty, that you go back to the same people, I do that too. And I find that it depends on what cases I have that year, one year, I happen to have a lot of reading cases, and that might be the piece I pull out of somebody's presentation. And the next year, I happen to be in the middle of an autism case, and I go to the same presentation, I might pull something completely different out of it. So it really it's it's an amazing wealth of information for everyone in the Special Ed, parent side special ed world. 32:51 Which Dana Jonson 32:52 then brings me to what about teachers who are parents, and they come to your conference, Missy Alexander 32:58 they can, as a parent, there is an exception process, we had one situation, it's an exception process. And we mean it, it's a process, do it ahead of time, I remember when we were in Baltimore one year, and a teacher just kind of slid in under the radar, and was sharing, you know, wanting to everybody to know what the teacher side of it was, hadn't gone through the exception process. And we had to say you can't continue to attend the conference. You know, we mean it, we have a responsibility to our members, they trust us as a board and as leaders to ensure that we uphold what we say we're going to uphold. And part of that is we are for the children and the families. Not necessarily for the school folks, the school folks have their own organizations that they go to. So you know, we have exception processes for membership, we have exception processes for the conference, and people rely on us and expect us to follow those processes. And we really do our due diligence on them. Mandy Favaloro 34:05 And I think that the reason for that is to really create a safe space for parents and advocates and attorneys who are doing this, you know, if you are a parent, and you have a concern about your specific school district, you want to be able to share that concern without getting backlash from somebody from that school district who may be part of the conversation as well. And that's, I think that's kind of the global reason behind it is to really encourage an open dialogue and have people feel that they're in a safe space online when they're sharing when they're at the conference. And they're sharing. So that's why it seems sometimes I think, a little strict to some people. But the idea is really just to protect our members and allow them to have that open communication and dialogue. They don't feel like they can't ask a specific question that it's going to kind of come back and haunt them at some later point. Dana Jonson 34:50 And I think that was also a good point, which is that school districts do have their own organizations and they have a lot more organization many more organization. With with a lot more money than what parents have access to. So I think that's a really important point too. It's not a matter of excluding people, we want teachers and administrators and everybody else to learn what we're learning, we just know that they have other options. And, and parents didn't for a really, really long time only. Absolutely. Oh, and briefly and that I don't know if either of you are involved in this, but but can either of you talk just very briefly about some of the legislative stuff that COPPA does? Maybe not specifically, but I know that they Denise does a lot of work particularly Mandy Favaloro 35:32 sure COPPA is involved in, in lobbying and working with legislators at the federal level, and really educating them about the needs of our constituents about parents, and the students and what they're looking for in, you know, what our needs are and what our interests are. So that's sort of where we are, I am not involved in that part of COPPA, I find it very interesting. But we do have a committee of people who are very well versed in that who do a lot of work, who, when we were in DC, and I think maybe in Baltimore as well, this last year, there was kind of a pre pre conference where the day before the pre conference, people went and spoke with their representatives on Capitol Hill to really advocate for students and, you know, let everyone know what the needs are and what we're looking for. And I think that, you know, Denise, and that committee, what, what's the name of the committee 36:29 was government Missy Alexander 36:30 relations, government relations, Mandy Favaloro 36:32 thank you, the Government Relations Committee, they are on top of it, and they know what's coming down and what we need to do. And I think, you know, when everything kind of went on lockdown, we also had a, like a campaign to like a letter writing campaign for some specific topic that I can't remember. But they, we, you know, sent out a blast to our membership and said, Here's a sample letter, call your representative, write an email, we've done that a few times. And I think it's been really successful for different areas that affect our students to say, look, here's a sample, here's your, here's how you find your representative, you can email them, you can leave them a message, and people respond to that very well. And I think we're seeing that more and more in the last few months, I think. So it's really kind of grassroots organizing to get people Missy Alexander 37:18 involved. And I think our our members expect that of us to be knowledgeable about what's happening, I have seen just recently, the various listservs, bringing up a area of concern what is COPPA doing about this, what is COPPA know about this, there's COPPA involved in this. So people are realizing that we, as an organization, and Denise Marshall has really spearheaded this are invited to the table to talk about things as they're planned, which is a huge, huge thing to happen and to be heard and understood. Dana Jonson 37:52 Yeah. And I do like that, I love that, you know, it takes the thinking out of it. For a lot of people, if I know, I'm gonna get that action alert from COPPA, that's gonna tell me when I have to do something that I don't have to have all of my radar out there. And because the board meets in person at the conference, usually, although this year will be different, typically, you know, everyone from the Government Relations Committee is there and they're accessible. And so for anyone, whether it's a parent, Attorney, advocate, provider, who are interested in those areas, and how to be active in their areas, they have access to this government relations committee that can help them and direct them in the right direction. So it really is, I can't say enough about all of the resources that that Kobe has. But I really appreciate you guys talking about the conference with me today, because I really am hoping that a lot of parents who are listening to this have either already heard of it and have already signed up and registered and are ready to go and will of course all be in my podcasting class, or that they are hearing us right now. And they're saying, Oh my god, I can't believe I didn't know what COPPA was or how great it was. And now I have to go sign up and I have to join. And when they think that, where do they go? Mandy Favaloro 39:08 Sure. So you go to coppa.org. So it's co p a.org. And there will be a link for the conference. And I think registration actually opened yesterday. So it's live, it's up this week, you can register, I think, because it's virtual this year, that hopefully opens it up to more people because you don't have the typical cost of travel in a hotel and meals out of the home. So we're hoping that that really is going to make it accessible to more people this year as an introduction. So it's kind of less of an investment on your part. In terms of at least money. It's it's more time because you can go to so many more events and see so many more presentations and really get a taste for the conference this year. And hopefully, when we are Fingers crossed back in person in Boston in 2022 That we will see more people who have joined us virtually, who will now be making the you know the trip to join us in person. And with any with any conference of any kind, I am sure that this is going to be very high quality material, but I will miss the camaraderie and all of that that we get. And, and I do highly recommend that anybody listening to this who wasn't planning on it definitely attend because there's a ton of information. But even more importantly, I would recommend going when it's in person as well. Because just being able to be around people who are doing what you do or suffering through what you're suffering through, and who want to learn the same things you Dana Jonson 40:40 want to learn are all there. And I know at least in my daily life, that isn't always the case. Thank you guys so much for joining me. I really appreciate it. Is there anything else that I missed that people Missy Alexander 40:53 need to know about COPPA before we sign off? I don't think so. I think so either. Mandy Favaloro 40:57 I think we we covered a lot. Missy Alexander 40:59 Join us. Join us at just give us a year join us and we will definitely increase your knowledge and it for parents, it'll benefit your child. Yes, I Dana Jonson 41:10 think empowering parents is a huge part of what happens at COPPA. So thank you. And thank you both for all of the time that you donate to make sure that this conference comes off. I think it's really important to mention that it is a voluntary board. You do this all for free because you believe in the cause. Yes, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much for joining me today. Please don't forget to subscribe to this podcast so that you get notifications when new episodes come out. And I want to know what you want to know. So join our Facebook group also named need to know with Dana Jonson, or you can email me, Dana at special ed dot life. But definitely reach out with your comments and questions and I'll see you next time here on me to know with Dana Jonson have a fabulous day

Today I sit down with the amazing Jerry Moscowitz from our Plymouth office to chat about his annual Toys For Tots event which has resulted in over 6,000 toys for kids in need, and his involvement with the Government Relations Committee, a committee that has opened his eyes to the real estate fight going on behind the scenes. Reach out to Jerry, you can call: 612- 590-1300, or email: jerry.moscowitz@results.net And to give us feedback and suggest guests, head here: https://results.net/results-driven-podcast/

NCSEA’s own Gillyn Croog welcomes NCSEA President Lisa Skenandore and Past President Diane Potts. They provide an update of the activities of NCSEA’s Policy and Government Relations Committee, and discuss how they plan to remain engaged with the NCSEA membership in these trying times during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This week Real Money, Real Experts welcome guest Darren Liddell. Darren's extensive background involves everything from non-profit to tax preparation to extensive work as a racial wealth equity advocate. Liddell has been working in the financial security field for over 8 years. Most recently, Darren served at The Financial Clinic as Director of Program Innovation. In this role, he oversaw the services, data, and policy teams, while providing innovative direction to the Clinic’s new and existing local and national programs. Co-hosts Rebecca Wiggins and Dr. Mary Bell Carlson talk to Darren about his financial path and how to address racial wealth equity in the field of finance. *Show Notes*00:51 About Darren07:36 Turning Experience into Opportunity 08:21 Tax Prep and the Pandemic 09:12 VITA Services 11:15 Racial Inequality in Finance13:11 Building Wealth for Your Clients 15:33 Policy and advocacy as a way to address racial wealth equity21:04 Fintech and the Racial Wealth Gap25:17 Getting involved in non-profit26:41 Your Two CentsResource Links:University of Georgia's Financial Planning Program: https://www.fcs.uga.edu/financial-planningUnited Way’s Financial Coaching Program: https://www.unitedway.org/our-impact/focus/incomeNeighborWorks America: https://www.neighborworks.org/University of Georgia’s VITA program: https://www.fcs.uga.edu/fhce/vitaInternal Revenue Service’s VITA Programs: https://www.irs.gov/individuals/irs-vita-grant-programThe Financial Clinic: https://thefinancialclinic.org/Catalyst Miami: https://www.catalystmiami.org/Prosperity Now: https://prosperitynow.org/Road to Zero (Racial Wealth Equity Data): https://prosperitynow.org/resources/road-zero-wealthSaverLife: https://www.saverlife.org/Brunch and Budget: https://brunchandbudget.com/See Change: https://seechangefinancial.com/Propel: https://www.joinpropel.com/Join AFCPE’s Government Relations Committee: https://www.afcpe.org/afcpe-member-task-forces/We want to hear from you, so be sure to visit our website and follow us on social media!Facebook/AFCPE | Tweet us @AFCPE | Join us on LinkedInTell us what you're thinking and use #realmoneyrealexperts

When managed properly, the college admissions process is very much a team effort, and an applicant’s family can be the most critical members of that team. Amy and Mike invited author and admissions professional Rick Clark to describe the importance of family conversations about college admissions.  What are five things you will learn in this episode? Should parents decide which schools their teens should apply to? What is a useful technique to make sure parents and teens have the same college goals? At what points should families start talking about college? When is a discussion about paying for college necessary? How can family conversations help prepare for unexpected changes or crises? MEET OUR GUEST Rick Clark is the Director of Undergraduate Admission at Georgia Tech. In addition to his work on campus, he has served in a number of leadership roles, including the SACAC Governing Board, the ACT Council, and the College Board Search Advisory Board. He is a current member of NACAC's Committee on Leadership in College Admission and immediate Past Chair of the Government Relations Committee. Rick travels annually to U.S. embassies in collaboration with the Department of State to discuss the admission process and landscape of American higher education.  Over the last four years he has written a regular blog on the college admission process and topics regarding affordability of college, and is the co-author of The Truth about College Admission: A Family Guide to Getting In and Staying Together. In addition to Georgia Tech, Rick has also served in admission at Georgia State, The McCallie School, and Wake Forest University. Find Rick at http://pwp.gatech.edu/admission-blog/ or follow him on Twitter @Clark2College LINKS The Truth about College Admission: A Family Guide to Getting In and Staying Together College Conversations 5 College conversations you should have with your family NOW! RELATED EPISODES COLLEGE ADMISSIONS DURING A GLOBAL PANDEMIC DOES COLLEGE ENGAGEMENT MATTER MORE THAN SELECTIVITY? COLLEGE PRICE TRANSPARENCY ABOUT THIS PODCAST Tests and the Rest is THE college admissions industry podcast. Explore all of our episodes on the show page.

In the latest ASCO in Action Podcast, ASCO CEO Dr. Clifford A. Hudis is joined by Dr. Jason Westin, member of the Government Relations Committee of the Association of Clinical Oncology, to discuss CAR T-cell therapy, a groundbreaking and lifesaving cancer treatment that comes with significant side effects, a jaw-dropping price tag, and limited locations where treatment is currently available. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience and conclusions. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Welcome to the ASCO in Action podcast brought to you by the ASCO Podcast Network, a collection of nine programs covering a range of educational and scientific content and offering enriching insights into the world of cancer care. You can find all of the shows, including this one, at podcast.asco.org. The ASCO in Action podcast is ASCO's podcast series where we explore the policy and practice issues that impact oncologists, the entire cancer-care deliver team and the individuals we care for--people with cancer. My name is Clifford Hudis, and I'm the CEO of ASCO as well as the host of the ASCO in Action podcast series. For this podcast I am really pleased to have Dr. Jason Westin as my guest. Dr. Westin is a member of the Association for Clinical Oncology's Government Relations Committee. And he is the director of lymphoma clinical research in the Department of Lymphoma Melanoma within the Division of Cancer Medicine at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Today Dr. Westin and I will discuss chimeric antigen receptor, or CAR T cell therapy. Two years ago, ASCO named CAR T cell therapy as our advance of the year in our annual Clinical Cancer Advances Report. CAR T is a groundbreaking and life-saving treatment for children and young adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and also for adults with diffuse large B cell lymphoma. But it comes with serious side effects, an extraordinary price tag and a limited number of places--at least in the United States--where the treatment is currently available. Today Dr. Westin and I will discuss the current state of the science on CAR T cell therapy, as well as access issues that are facing those patients who are seeking treatment with this new modality. Welcome, Dr. Westin, and thank you for joining me today. Thank you for having me. Before we begin, I'd like to disclose that I have clinical trial funding disclosures that are listed on the ASCO conflict of interest website. Those that I view to be specifically relevant for today's discussion include advisory work as well as clinical trial research funding for CAR T cell companies including Kite/Gilead, Novartis and Juno. I also do clinical trial work with Celgene, Genentech, AB V, Amgen, MorphoSys, Curis, and 47 Inc. Thank you very much for that. We appreciate that. Let's get into the real focus of our conversation today. And let's start, of course, with CAR T cell therapy. What is it, for those who might not be familiar? How would you describe it? And further, what makes it so potentially transformative in oncology? CAR T cell therapy is an incredible breakthrough for our patients fighting cancer. The word car--c a r--stands for chimeric antigen receptor. What a CAR T cell is taking a T cell that's functional and in the body to fight infections, infusing a new receptor on the outside, often a receptor that has an antibody fragment fused to parts of a T cell receptor that now allow this car T cell to recognize the wolf in sheep's clothing that's the cancer. CAR T cells are usually modified genetically using a virus to introduce new DNA into the patient's T cell. And these are prepared in the lab, modified in a way that these can now recognize a surface marker, and then these cells are re-infused into the patient, where they can now grow. They can now find the cancer, and they can destroy it This has been potentially transformative because it is something that has completely different resistance mechanisms than standard chemotherapy. CAR T cells have shown incredible promise in clinical trials and now in early days standard of care. And the sky is the limit for how this could be used in the future, targeting other markers on other types of cancer and really opening up a whole new field of how we treat cancer, much in the way that immunotherapy with checkpoint antibodies has done over the past decade or so. Well, that's exciting. But you just hinted at what I think is the obvious next question. Breakthrough though this may be, clearly this has, at least for some patients, fairly significant side effects. And some of them, I understand, are somewhat different from what an earlier generation of oncologists might have been trained to recognize and to treat. Can you talk a little bit about what some of those side effects are, typically at least? And how we hope to limit that in the future? CAR T cell side effects are certainly unique and not overlapping in the way that we think of oncology therapies side effects. The CAR T cell therapy side effects in the short term are broken down into two main camps. The first is something called cytokine release syndrome, sometimes abbreviated CRS. Cytokine release syndrome is effectively almost like sepsis, in that it's an overwhelming immune response where the T cells that have been manufactured and infused into the patient release an avalanche of cytokines to effectively recruit other immune cells to come help fight the cancer. And in doing so, induces sepsis-like phenomenon of organ dysfunction, fever, and sometimes hypertension, which can be severe. The other acute short-term side effect that we can see from CAR T cell therapy is a significant neurologic toxicity. And this is a new diagnosis, a new syndrome that's recently been classified by a consensus group as immune effector cell associated neurologic syndrome, or icans, for short. This can range from mild slowing of speech or mild slowing of cognition all the way to status epilepticus and anything in between. The most common troubles folks have are mild slowing, but aphasias and/or seizures can certainly occur and can be quite distressing to the patient and to the family. Thankfully it seems that both cytokine release syndrome and icans, the neurologic toxicity, appear to be fully reversible in the nearly all patients, in the vast majority of patients. The late side effects of CAR T cells are also unique and different from what we've seen from prior chemotherapy-type induced side effects. These include, depending upon what target you're going after, an effective lack of the target expression long term. And for CD 19 focusing therapies, this effectively means a B cell aplasia that can sometimes be for a year or longer after the one infusion of car T cells are administered. We know from other immune therapies that depleting certain parts of the immune system is not usually overwhelming infections or other obvious toxicities, but can result in chronic infections, inflammation and need for replacement of things like intravenous immunoglobulin to replace immunoglobulin deficiency. So CAR T cell side effects are not what we typically think of in terms of chemotherapy, of cytopenias, nausea and fatigue, or immune therapies of inflammatory responses off target from the projected cancer. These are more specific toxicities related to the extreme expansion and cytokine release of these Car T cells during the battle against cancer as well as lingering effects from these T cells remaining active for many months and maybe even years after the infusion. There are a number of barriers right now. You've highlighted some of them. First of all, we don't have applicability yet established for a large number of diseases. That's an area for research. There are special toxicities. And it sounds like, realistically, anybody starting to do this needs to be trained and needs support staff and teams, just like you described. So there's a geographic limitation. But beyond all of that, there's also a more conventional limitation, which is just outright cost. And as I understand it, the cost, or at least the list price for available agents, can range from $373,000 to treat an adult with an advanced lymphoma up to 475 to treat a pediatric indication. And further, I think these prices do not include the additional costs of hospitalization or managing side effects, and maybe other adverse events. I'm curious, do these prices matter day to day in your practice? Do your patients need assistance navigating this? Or what's the real-world experience, given this price point? This is a major concern for us for the future of CAR T cell therapy. The accessibility not just based on physically being able to get it but financially being able to get these therapies, as you mentioned. The cost of the actual product itself, the one-time infusion of these T cells that are manufactured specifically for each given patient, it's a major cost. But in addition to that, the actual hospitalization, which is usually a significant amount of time. For most patients that receive CAR T cell, they're hospitalized between a week to 10 days. This is not a trivial admission for observation overnight in the hospital. These are huge costs. Now payers, including commercial and private payers, and now government payers, are supporting this. However, as the number of patients grow, this is going to be something that's going to increasingly strain the ability of the system to support an incredibly expensive therapy. This is potentially home-run therapy for patients that may, in some cases, have decades of life left to go. So, the cost is not trivial for the benefit received. But it is an incredible amount that's put upon the system, put upon the payers. Right now, through payers, it's doable. But I worry about the future of this as the number of patients who can benefit from this goes up. Well, I guess if it's as transformative as you're describing, it is at least plausible that it's front-loading costs, but net actually might not be particularly more expensive than traditional, long-standing, less-effective therapies. I assume those kinds of economic models and reports are being developed. Is there anything you can say about that at this point? Or is it just too soon to make those estimates? It's still very early days. But there are absolutely analyses being done, at looking at the number of quality life years gained from these kind of treatments. And depending upon the effectiveness of the treatment, it can absolutely be a net long-term positive of somebody getting back to health and not requiring chronic therapies, or not dying at a premature age. So, there is no doubt that the cost of this is high, but the benefit is also very high. But if this continues long term to scale up for more and more patients, even net long-term success and long-term neutrality of a cost, if you're paying more now and getting less costs later, it can still strain the system, if the upfront cost is substantial. So, I think this is something that's going to have to be looked at in terms of, what is the true cost of making CAR T cells? And potentially bringing those costs down as we try to scale up for more patients over time. So, you spoke about getting approval, and it sounded like you were talking about conventional commercial payers. Last year, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, announced that Medicare would cover CAR T nationwide and we at ASCO were really delighted with that. But we recognize that, while the drugs are being reimbursed, that reimbursement remains at a level well below the actual acquisition costs. So, I think this is another version of the same question, but how is that shortfall impacting patients? And how is it addressed? Or is that just something that the institutions have to eat? It's different from different institutions, depending upon their status with CMS and if they're grandfathered into older systems, or if they're not protected in that way, it is certainly a problem. And it's something that the approval for this to be funded by CMS was absolutely great for our patients. However, the reimbursement, as you mentioned, that's proposed for that approval is quite low. It's not close to the price for the product as well as for the inpatient stay. And so many hospitals are treating commercial patients with the idea that they are reimbursed at a higher level to cover patients who are treated and covered by government payer systems. The government payer systems also have temporary funding that's associated with the new technology, the end-tap mechanism, where there's an initial bump in the reimbursement that's not permanent. This is--these add-on payments are helping hospitals who are at risk of having a net loss financially for doing CAR T cells. But these are only usually two years in length, meaning that this is not going to be a cost assistance for those hospitals for the long future of CAR T cells. This is short term. So, this is something that is new to government payers. This took quite a while after approval for CMS to make a determination on where this would be supported or not. It's all brand new. And it takes time to figure out the potential benefit, the potential long-term reimbursement levels. But the current reimbursement levels are not going to be sustainable from government payers to hospitals, as a modality to keep this viable therapy for patients. We've already seen some hospitals that are not able or willing to treat patients who are on a government health-care system, actually sending them to larger systems that are treating many commercial patients to try and subsidize this net loss for a patient on Medicare or Medicaid. This is something that is a big problem that's in addition to the cost of it. The substandard reimbursement is going to be a strain on the system in the long run. Well, that's interesting. I mean before the CMS coverage announcement came out, we at ASCO actually submitted comments to the agency, and this included our perspective on both appropriate coverage and reimbursement for CAR T as well as an overarching description of ASCO's principles on approval coverage and getting the right treatment to the right patients at the right time. That's really the underlying principle that we try to rely on. I mention that because I know you have some familiarity with policy making in government, and then you've been--we've been--lucky, I think, that you're serving on the government relations committee right now. From the perspective of that, GRC, I wonder if you care to just expand a little bit on the importance of ASCO coming out and taking a stand on an issue like this. I think it's essential for organizations like ASCO to advocate on behalf of our patients to try and educate policymakers and lawmakers about exciting new breakthroughs and why this matters for our country, as well as for our future. This technology is so new and so innovative. So different than what we've done before in terms of treating diseases with medications or with antibodies, that it is sometimes a shock to the system about what exactly is this CAR T cell. What exactly does that mean? And having lawmakers and policymakers learn from organizations of experts like ASCO. And having policy statements and comments made on potential proposed recommendations. If we don't speak up for our patients, then our patients are going to suffer. And so, I applaud ASCO and the team at ASCO that works on these recommendations and policy statements. Because this really is essential for us to speak up and to be seated at the table in a way that we can advocate for our patients. It's sometimes difficult for lawmakers or for policymakers to know what to prioritize. Or if this is something that's real, or if this sounds too good to be true, and therefore we shouldn't learn much about it or pay attention to it. As mentioned earlier on this podcast, this is the beginning of a new era of therapy for fighting cancer. And we need to make sure that our policymakers and our lawmakers are aware this is coming, and aware that this is something that's going to be potentially transformative. And therefore, legislating and making policy in a way to allow patients dealing with cancer to have access to these incredible new treatments. So, on the question, again, of access, maybe going in a slightly different direction. We've talked a good bit just now about the science. We've talked a little bit about the toxicities. And we've spoken about the geographic limitations as well as payment. But addressing the geography issue. Obviously with scale and familiarity, it's at least conceivable that more centers could offer this, and they might offer it on an entirely outpatient basis. What do you think about that as a near-term potential? And what do you think we have to maybe accomplish? What advances might be needed in order to facilitate that? Or you could say, I guess, not going to happen. So, what do you think is coming in that regard? I think that the CAR T cell delivery has such a special need for both monitoring as well as anticipation of management of troubles, that this is not something that I see the current generation of CAR T cells being administered widely in settings that don't have experience with this, or settings that don't have experience with prior transplant-type treatments. This is treatment which has potential danger to go sideways in a hurry. And if you've never done this before, you may not anticipate that, and not be able to help your patients. So, there are current geographic limitations, and centers that do this and centers that don't. And I think that's probably for good reasons at this point and should not be something that we try and break down those walls and have this available at every oncology clinic until we work out ways to make this safer and less dangerous. So, it's been a significant challenge to try to transition the current generation of CAR T cells from an inpatient setting to outpatient setting. We are working on that, as others are. And there are some CAR T cell products that may lend themselves to easier use as an outpatient, either because of less toxicities or less severe toxicities projected.  So, this is not something that's going to be a forever problem. But to the current generation of the FDA-approved products, the vast majority are administered inpatient, which is a strain on the hospital systems as well as on patients who prefer not to be cooped up in the hospital for a week to 10 days, if they don't need to be. So, I think this will change as we get better technology, as we get systems in place to monitor patients through telemedicine system as an outpatient. And hospitals have more direct lines from the hotel to the inpatient service, if you have a toxicity. That's coming, but it's been a challenge. I think that's a great place for us to start to wrap this up. I have to ask though, reflecting on what we've covered, is there any area of CAR T science or clinical use that we've neglected to surface in this conversation? Or anything else you want to convey to the listeners? I think the CAR T cell story is an incredible advance. When I describe it to my patients, I describe it as almost a science fiction-like therapy where we're able to take your immune system, modify it in a way that it can now see the wolf in sheep's clothing, and get back and re-infuse these cells back in your body. And get them to work to effectively eliminate the cancer that they've not been able to do thus far. This is a therapy that works incredibly well for relatively rare cancers at this point. And so I think, as we're smarter and as we learn how to better manipulate the immune system in therapeutic ways, the sky is the limit for how we can both treat cancers and hopefully, even as we get further afield, maybe even prevent cancers from ever developing. If we know somebody has a genetic risk that is a high probability of developing a cancer, teaching their immune system new tricks, so that we can have the sky be the limit and really work to try to end cancer, to try and conquer cancer. This is something that is obviously a goal for many researchers and many people who focus on cancer. But this new advance of cell therapy, of CAR T cell therapy, is a major step forward in our efforts to try and rid the world of cancer. Well, I mean that's just a great way to wrap this up, I think. And I want to again thank you, Dr. Westin for taking the time to speak with me today and for providing so much clear and understandable information. I'm sure this will be useful for a lot of people. Really appreciate it. Thank you very much for having me. And I do hope that all of our listeners have enjoyed this conversation on CAR T cell therapy, an exciting and developing area of cancer care. I hope you also see, woven through this, the way in which we are able to take evidence-based advocacy to policymakers to support the kinds of cutting-edge, scientific advances that are members and all of our listeners contributed to through their research and their study. And I think that this is something that highlights the connected nature, again, of all of our work and the importance of our engagement. For those of you who want to learn more about CAR T and also breaking cancer policy news, we have that for you at ASCO in action on our website. And again, as a reminder, that's ASCO.org/ASCOaction. And in this case, ASCO action is all one word. Until next time, I want to thank everyone for listening to this ASCO in Action podcast. If you enjoyed what you heard today, please don't forget to give us a rating or a review on Apple podcasts or wherever you listen. And while you're there, please make sure you subscribe, so you never miss an episode. The ASCO in Action podcast is just one of ASCO's many podcasts. You can find all of our shows at podcast.asco.org.

In the latest ASCO in Action Podcast, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) CEO Dr. Clifford A. Hudis is joined by ASCO Chief Medical Officer Dr. Richard Schilsky to discuss the recently released 2020 Clinical Cancer Advances report, which named the refinement of surgical treatments for cancer as the Advance of the Year.  “A lot of the advances we’re seeing in surgical approaches now are driven by better systemic therapies for cancer. These systemic treatments have improved survival outcomes and quality of life for our patients, and have now begun to transform the role of surgery in cancer management by reducing the amount of surgery in some cases, eliminating the need for it in others, or, conversely, increasing the number of patients who could undergo surgery when it’s needed for treatment of their cancer,” says Dr. Schilsky.   Subscribe to the ASCO in Action podcast through iTunes and Google Play.   The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.  Welcome to this ASCO in Action podcast brought to you by the ASCO Podcast Network. This is a collection of nine programs covering a wide range of educational and scientific content and offering enriching insights into the world of cancer care. You can find all of ASCO's podcasts, including this one, at podcast.asco.org. The ASCO in Action podcast is ASCO's podcast series that explores policy and practice issues that impact oncologists, the entire cancer care delivery team, and the individuals we care for--people with cancer.  My name is Clifford Hudis, and I'm the CEO of ASCO, as well as the host of this series, and I'm delighted today to have as my guest the Society's Chief Medical Officer and Executive Vice President, Dr. Richard Schilsky. He's also an executive editor for the recently released 2020 Clinical Cancer Advances Report. In this report, ASCO identifies the most important clinical research advances of the past year across the full trajectory of the disease, from prevention and screening, to treatment and survivorship. The report also announces ASCO's Advance of the Year and updates our list of research priorities that have great potential to accelerate progress against cancer. Rich, welcome, and thank you for joining me today.  Thanks a lot, Cliff.  Now, starting at the beginning, this year ASCO has recognized refinement of surgical treatment of cancer as the Advance of the Year, and this is an area of clinical cancer research that has demonstrated the most significant progress in a year's time. I have to say, before we get into that, it seems almost poetic to me that this has happened this year because, one, we lost a leading surgical investigator in our field, Bernie Fisher, this year, and two, as I think about it, it came as a little bit of a surprise to me only because the mid 19th century was really the beginning of the century of surgery, and surgery for cancer dates back to Roman and Greek times, actually. So, can you tell us, in light of all of that, what was it that brought this back to the fore this year?  Over the years, we've seen a great deal of progress in developing the new systemic therapies for cancer, and this really, I think, illustrates the prescient work of Bernie Fisher in his seminal research on adjuvant therapy for breast cancer, because a lot of the advances that we're seeing in surgical approaches now are driven by better systemic therapies for cancer. These treatments have improved survival outcomes and quality of life for our patients, and they've now begun to transform the role of surgery in cancer management by reducing the amounts of surgery in some cases, and even eliminating the need for it in others. Or conversely, increasing the number of patients who can undergo surgery when, in fact, it is needed to help in the treatment of their cancer.  That's great to hear, because I was wondering at first if it was simply the fact that we just had a president who was a surgeon, and it's clearly about much more than that. What are some are the specific advances that you actually would cite as supporting this call out of surgery this year?  Yeah, I think there some really interesting reports that are summarized in this year's Clinical Cancer Advances that really speak to this issue. In melanoma, for example, there are two studies that examine the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant treatments for patients with locally advanced disease. Australian researchers examined the combination of two molecularly targeted drugs, dabrafenib and trametinib, given before surgery in patients with stage 3c melanoma that has BRAF V600 mutation. Not only did 86% of patients on the trial respond by the time of resection, but almost half had a complete response, either obviating the need for or simplifying the surgical treatment.  In another study, patients with stage three melanoma that was still treatable with surgery received ipilimumab and nivolumab for two cycles prior to surgery, resulting in a pathologic response rate of 77%. These studies are already changing practice, helping patients with locally advanced melanoma avoid surgery in many cases, or making surgery possible in patients with locally advanced disease who might not otherwise have been candidates for surgical resection. So this really is the year, I think, where we're seeing highly effective systemic therapies making surgery more possible where surgery can contribute to achieving better cure rates, or obviating the need for surgery where surgery is actually no longer necessary given the effectiveness of systemic treatment.  From your point of view, as you look at both our Clinical Cancer Advances for this year and also the totality of public health data, what role would you ascribe to federal funding in generating these advances?  Well, I think it's pretty clear that essentially every cancer advance begins in the basic science laboratory. It begins with new discovery, new understanding of biology, new description of mechanism of cancer progression, and the identification of novel cancer targets, and all of that basic research that's funded by NCI and NIH more broadly is the foundation for all the progress that we've made in development of new therapies, as well as prevention strategies and early detection strategies and so on. So, the federal funding is critical.   This year's Clinical Cancer Advances Report highlights 10 studies that were supported, directly or in part, by funding from the NIH, so that highlights another important role for the federal funding. Not only is there the discovery work, but there is also the work through NCI-funded cooperative group studies and other clinical trials that actually is helping to translate those basic science discoveries into clinical trials, and more importantly, helping to design clinical trials that are not likely to be pursued by commercial interests, but that answer important clinical questions that directly impact the way patients are treated by their physicians.  This is the second year that ASCO has included with its Clinical Cancer Advances Report a specific set of research priorities. Can you tell us a little bit about the motivation for creating this so-called research agenda for the country, and then the criteria that are used to select these specific priorities?  Well, as you said, as much progress as we're making, there still is substantial unmet need, and so we need to continue to accelerate progress in many areas and focus our resources, so we launched ASCO's list of research priorities to accelerate progress against cancer by sparking momentum in those areas of research where the opportunity is really ripe to spur new advances. The goal in doing this is to provide the cancer community with direction, or at least insight as to where to focus their investments and resources. The research priorities represent areas that have the potential to significantly improve the knowledge base for clinical decision-making and help us address vital needs in cancer care that remain unfulfilled.  Now, these priorities are nominated by ASCO volunteers and clinical experts who've worked on the Clinical Cancer Advances Report and have identified not only what the big advances are for the year, but what the unmet needs are, where the opportunities still lie to continue to accelerate our research momentum. So, they were then discussed and distilled and evaluated by various groups of ASCO experts, and what's now in the report represents our best current thinking about where we have opportunities to really have a big impact.  And I think, if I'm not mistaken, one of the hopes for results of this is to recognize that there are areas that get a lot of research. We know there are literally more than 100 I-O drugs theoretically in development right now around the world. Our goal here, I think, is to highlight some of the areas that may not be supported directly by industry necessarily, but in fact, may be dismissed as people think about high-impact targets. There are some places where we need to make progress in order to offer the most patients the greatest benefit.  I think the research priorities are not necessarily what might be thought of as underrepresented areas of research, but they are areas where ASCO feels that there is opportunity to have a big impact, because there's already sort of a glimmer of progress being made in these areas, and we believe that with further investment and prioritization, we can really much more rapidly accelerate progress in these areas. And the research priorities are by intention fairly broadly stated, because we're talking in the research priorities not necessarily about a specific disease or a specific target, but really a specific approach or an area where we believe we can have broad impact by focusing on a specific population or a way in which we can use therapy more effectively or with less toxicity.  So as an example, and just making it up, but a difficult to treat disease where there is not, again, meaningful scientific advance actually wouldn't make the list because there's not really an opportunity right now in our minds, right?  Absolutely. And in fact, when you look at the list, you'll see that there are no specific cancers that are called out in the list. The list is really about specific populations, specific approaches, ways in which we can better utilize available therapies or limit the toxicities of available therapies so that overall, the impact of treatment is greater for the particular patient population.  So then why don't we just dive right in and talk about what are some of the research priorities that made the list this year.  There are eight priorities this year. They really fall into three major thematic areas. The first of those is getting treatments to the patients who can benefit from them the most and sparing the toxicities and costs of treatment for the patients who would benefit the least. So, two priorities in that area are identifying strategies that predict response and resistance to immunotherapies.  So these are therapies that we already know can have an enduring impact on a small proportion of patients across a variety of different diseases, and the real question is, who are the patients who are likely to receive that long-term benefit, and who are the patients who are unlikely to benefit and understand why, but also if the patients are not going to benefit from those therapies to then turn to alternative treatments with fewer toxicities. Another priority in this area that sort of echoes of the advance of the year is to further understand how to limit the expensive surgery by optimizing systemic therapy, and this really gets back to the whole concept of adjuvant therapy in many ways, where we know that many patients who receive adjuvant therapy either don't need it or don't benefit from it. And what we want to be able to do is to tailor adjuvant therapy in such a way that it has the greatest impact on the population that needs it the most.  Now, the priorities are also focusing on improving treatment and care of special populations, emphasizing the importance of improving representation of these populations with clinical trials so that we actually have reliable data to better inform treatment approaches. A few priorities in this thematic area include increasing precision medicine research and treatment approaches in pediatric and other rare cancers, optimizing care for older adults with cancer, increasing equitable access to cancer clinical trials so that more patients can benefit from those studies, and importantly, reducing the adverse consequences of cancer treatment, particularly in long-term survivors who, in a sense, have to live with the consequences of their cancer and its treatment for the rest of their lives.  Finally, but not least, the research priorities focus on reducing the risk of cancer and on detecting it early. So, there is a priority on reducing obesity's impact on cancer incidence and outcomes, I know that's been of particular interest of yours for many years, and then on better identifying premalignant lesions and predicting when treatment is needed. We know from the natural history of many premalignant cancers that they never will evolve to invasive cancer, and so there's a risk of over-treating people based on a diagnosis of a pretty invasive cancer. We want to better understand the biology and natural history of those circumstances so that the patients who need treatment will get it and the patients who can safely forgo it can skip it.  Yeah, and one can imagine in the years ahead that that will actually, if you will, leap into even low-grade, but invasive cancers and start to help us know who actually needs therapy and you can just have a cancer--  Yeah, I'm sure you could do many hours of podcasting about DCIS and the controversy surrounding that type of cancer. Of course, the same is true in prostate cancer and other cancers that have a diverse natural history. There are clearly circumstances where patients who have early stage, but biologically indolent cancer may not need treatment or may not need aggressive treatment. We just have to be able to identify who those patients are.  Right. So, for people who are intrigued by this, and I hope you are, I encourage you to take a look at the full and detailed list of the research agenda by visiting asco.org/cca. That's asco.org/cca, and there, you can take a deeper dive into all of these items. Now, Rich, if we were to succeed and direct the right resources to these priority areas, how would you see this actually transforming patient care in the next few years?  Well, at a high level, I think it's-- we hope it'll dramatically change the care of cancer patients and allow more patients to get the right treatment at the right time, and of course, enabling them to live longer, fuller, better lives. It's really all about understanding the biology of each person's cancer, its likely natural history, its vulnerabilities, and then developing a treatment plan that is optimized for the care of that particular individual.  Now, we recognize-- and we touched on this already-- that we can't do all of this within ASCO, and we don't have the ability to specifically direct research programs. So, what is it that would satisfy us that the cancer community is responding to this goading, if you will, and is trying to make progress? What would be the indicators that you would find?  Well, as you said earlier, I mean, we continue to vigorously advocate for increasing federal funding for cancer research, which is the foundation of all the basic science breakthroughs that enable everything that flows from that in terms of development of new molecular diagnostics and treatments, so we want to continue to be aggressive in advocating for that improved funding. We clearly still need better prevention and screening approaches. We saw very little in the way-- other than vaccination, as we discussed earlier, and a few drugs, like some of the drugs that are approved to treat or reduce the risk of breast cancer in high-risk individuals, we saw very few effective prevention strategies. We need a lot more research on how to identify what those strategies might be and how to bring them to fruition.  We have a lot of opportunity that can really only be supported through federal funding to do what's often referred to as comparative effectiveness research. The pharmaceutical company's job is to bring new drugs to market, not to necessarily show which drug among many is the best drug for an individual person. And yet, we know that patients and doctors are confronted with these decisions all the time, particularly when there are several approved drugs in a given indication. Which is the best one to use, which is the least toxic, which is the one that's likely to produce the best outcomes for my particular patient? Those are questions that can be answered through comparative effectiveness studies that can be funded by federal funds.  And then finally. Breakthroughs on rare cancers. Rare cancers are not necessarily a focus for commercial drug development because they represent small markets. Now, we are beginning to see with the FDA approval of some histology agnostic drug approvals that even drugs that target very rare molecular alterations can potentially be attractive to the pharmaceutical industry. Because in the histology agnostic approval, it opens up a much broader market. But rare cancers otherwise are likely to not get the attention of commercial developers, and we need federal funding to support research in those areas, to be sure.  So really, our hope with these priorities is that we stimulate the entirety of the research and treatment ecosystem to think about these studies, to support them, design them, and enroll patients on them given the opportunity, right?  Well, that's exactly right. And the whole ecosystem has a role to play in bringing drugs from the discovery phase, through development, through ultimate commercialization, and then the effectiveness research then follows on after the commercialization so we really actually understand how the drugs perform in real-world populations, many of whom never get the opportunity to participate in the pivotal clinical trials.  So fundamentally, this can all be understood as advocacy. And in that regard, I guess it's reasonable, or at least our listeners may wonder what steps they and ASCO members in general can take to urge Congress to support these policies and support the critical cancer research that we're highlighting.  The easiest thing for ASCO members is to contact their members of Congress through ASCO's ACT, A-C-T, Network, which they can access at asco.org/actnetwork, and there, they can easily generate a letter advocating for federal support for cancer research to their congressmen and their senators. And I can't stress enough how important it is that all members get involved in this advocacy work. There are also opportunities for people to come to Washington to participate in ASCO's Hill days and to get involved in ASCO's other activities through the Government Relations Committee and other work that their society is doing on their behalf.  Well, this is great. In just about a half an hour here, we've covered a large amount of material and a lot of progress. Maybe at the risk of some redundancy, what do you think, in summary, is the takeaway that you hope that listeners and everyone reading the Clinical Cancer Advances Report takes away?  It's a bit hard for me to sort of grapple with this from time to time, but I've now been an oncologist for 40 years, and over the 40 years of my career, when you look at it through that broad span of time, I really feel like I've seen remarkable progress that we have made together in understanding cancer biology, developing far more effective and less toxic therapies, developing much better supportive care strategies, and we're now really beginning to see that at the population level with this substantial fall in cancer mortality rates that you alluded to earlier that's been occurring now year over year over year for at least the last two decades. And this year, as you suggested, it's being attributed, at least in part, to far more effective treatments for cancer than we've ever had in the past, particularly for lung cancer, which is still the nation's biggest cancer killer, but for which we have far better therapies than we've ever had before. All of this comes only from a sustained commitment to research, from having an ecosystem, as you suggested earlier, that's committed to making progress in every cancer type for every cancer patient. And I am remarkably optimistic as we now head into a new decade that the pace of progress is going to continue to accelerate in a very unprecedented way.  Yeah, I agree. I mean, it's been interesting to watch the advances I think one of the places where we have to acknowledge frustration on the part of our members and community and the patients we serve is that the advances are often very pointed because of scientific breakthroughs, and they are profound, and meaningful, and they transform disease, but the totality of the burden of cancer remains substantial. For some reasons outside the scope of this discussion, it will even continue to grow on a global level. So, we have a challenge here to celebrate real advances while respecting the fact that we have a lot of progress ahead, right?  Our work's not done, but it's gotten a lot easier, and in many ways, a lot more fulfilling.  Well, Rich, I want to thank you again, both for leading the production of this report, and for joining me today on this ASCO in Action podcast to talk about it. I encourage our listeners, again, to read the full report by visiting asco.org/cca.  Thanks, Cliff. This is really a fun project for me to work on every year with wonderful ASCO volunteers, and I hope our members will enjoy reviewing all the advances summarized in the report this year.  For those of you listening, if you enjoyed what you heard today, please don't forget to give us a rating or a review on Apple Podcast or wherever you listen. And while you're there, be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode. The ASCO in Action podcast is just one of ASCO's many podcasts. You can find all of the shows at podcast.asco.org. Until next time, thank you for listening to this ASCO in Action podcast.  Dr. Schilsky reports serving on the board of directors for the Reagan-Udall Foundation for FDA and research grants to ASCO in support of a clinical trial from the following companies: AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Meyers Squibb. Genentech, Lilly, Merck, and Pfizer. 

Dr. McNeely is a Past President of the South Carolina Optometric Association and a member of the AOA's State Government Relations Committee. A native of Florence, Alabama, Dr. Johndra McNeely graduated Magna Cum Laude from the University of North Alabama in Professional Biology. She received her doctorate of optometry from the University of Alabama at Birmingham where she graduated with honors and received the VSP Excellence in Primary Care Award for her graduating class. Dr. McNeely has completed an externship at the Tuscaloosa VA hospital focusing on eye disease and primary care, and she has been in practice in the Upstate since 2009. Her special interests in optometry include diabetic eye disease and children’s vision.

Christine Cunneen is CEO of Hire Image LLC, a nationally accredited company specializing in background screening and drug testing. She is Past Chair of the National Association of Professional Background Screeners (NAPBS), holds Advanced FCRA Certification through NAPBS, and held leadership roles on the Global Advisory Council, Government Relations Committee, Advocacy Committee, Finance Committee, and Ethics Committee for NAPBS. She is also a member of the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) at both the national and local levels. Ms. Cunneen has a BBA in accounting, is a CPA, and has been in the HR industry for more than 14 years. She is a frequent speaker at business, human resource and background screening association events throughout the U.S., educating employers and other professionals about background screening and drug testing topics, and is often quoted for her expertise in the news media. She often travels to Washington, DC to meet with legislators and is active in campaigns and advocacy pertaining to laws and regulations that impact the background screening profession, business owners, and small business entrepreneurs.

Subscribe through iTunes and Google Play. Lisa Lacasse, president of the American Cancer Society Cancer Advocacy Network, speaks passionately about the critical importance of advocacy and ACS CAN’s partnership with ASCO in reducing the cancer burden, in latest AiA podcast with host ASCO CEO Dr. Clifford Hudis. Find all of ASCO's podcasts at podcast.asco.org TRANSCRIPT Ad: Hi. My name is Shannon McKernin. And I am the host of the ASCO Guidelines Podcast Series. When a new ASCO guideline publishes, we release a podcast episode featuring an interview with one or more expert panel members. Each episode highlights the key recommendations and the implications for patients and providers. You can find the ASCO Guidelines Podcast Series on Apple Podcasts or wherever you're listening to this show. And you can find all nine of ASCO's podcasts, which cover a wide range of educational and scientific content, and offer enriching insight into the world of cancer care at podcast.asco.org. Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Clifford Hudis: Welcome to this ASCO in Action Podcast, brought to you by the ASCO Podcast Network, a collection of nine programs covering a range of educational and scientific content and offering enriching insights into the world of cancer care. You can find all of the shows, including this one, at podcast.asco.org. This ASCO in Action Podcast is ASCO's podcast series where we explore policy and practice issues that impact oncologists, the entire cancer care delivery team, and the individuals we care for-- people with cancer. My name is Clifford Hudis. And I'm the CEO of ASCO, as well as the host of the ASCO in Action Podcast series. For today's podcast, I am really pleased to have Lisa Lacasse, president of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, or ACS CAN, as my guest. Welcome, Lisa. Lisa Lacasse: Thanks so much, Cliff. It's really great to be with you today. I appreciate the invitation. CH: Well, I'm really delighted that you could join me today for this discussion. And I think there are probably hundreds of topics that you and I could discuss. But I want to start with the big picture first. The American Cancer Society, of course, is a very well-known, nationwide organization with a mission of saving lives and leading the fight for a world without cancer. Can you tell our guests about the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, ACS CAN? What's the relationship with ACS itself? And what exactly does ACS CAN do? LL: So thanks. That's a great question, Cliff. So many are very familiar with the American Cancer Society, which is a large, old organization that attacks cancer from every angle. The Society works to advance breakthroughs in research, treatment for patients, providing direction and information to help people manage their cancer care, and also mobilizes volunteers at the community level to really support patients in their fight against cancer. But we know that the fight to end cancer doesn't just happen in a doctor's office or a scientific lab. It really requires the government and all elected officials to join us to impact the disease. And so that effort to engage government requires advocacy. And that's where the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, ACS CAN, steps in. And we are the advocacy affiliate of the American Cancer Society. So ACS CAN simply urges lawmakers and rallies all of our community partners to lead in the fight against cancer. And together-- the American Cancer Society and the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network-- although we're two independent organizations, we're working towards the same mission. However, ACS CAN uses different but complementary set of tools. So we obviously resemble ACS in a lot of important ways. We're both nonprofits. We are both absolutely, obviously evidence-based. And we're both supported by a vast army of volunteers. And we all focus on the ultimate goal of eliminating cancer as a major health problem. But ACS CAN advances this mission using tools that aren't fully available to ACS. One, an electoral program called Cancer Votes, which is really an effort to educate voters on important issues to cancer. And we also do a significant amount of lobbying. And that's not just in Washington DC, but in all 50 state capitals and many, many localities. And because of the breadth of that direct lobbying, that's often beyond what's allowable for a charity. So back in 2001, which is-- we're coming up on our 20th anniversary, which is very exciting-- the American Cancer Society Board really recognized that if we were going to achieve our goal to reduce the cancer mission, we had to do that by improving public policy. And so they decided to create ACS CAN. And my job as president is really to empower this huge network of grassroots advocates across the country. And with their staff partners-- we have about 200 people that work for ACS CAN-- every single day, they're imploring their elected officials, working with administrative officials to impact the cancer burden. CH: Well, I mean, that's a remarkable portfolio. And I would say, obviously that ACS CAN has been a key ally and a natural partner for us here at ASCO in our own mission to conquer cancer through research, education, and the promotion of the highest quality patient care. I know that ASCO shares many advocacy priorities with your organization, including our strong support for robust federal funding for cancer research, improving patient access to clinical trials, and addressing, among other things, the alarming rise in youth tobacco use-- something listeners will recall, we discussed in detail with Scott Gottlieb last year. So it's really a privilege to be able to talk to you about all of this. One of the efforts I think that many of our listeners would want to hear more about would be the Medicare Part D, six protected classes issue. I think earlier this year, ACS CAN mounted a very public outcry and a very visible advertising campaign against a proposal that would have potentially impeded or limited access to lifesaving drugs within the Medicare Part D program, specifically in the six protected classes. And we were proud to join your campaign. We at ASCO couldn't have been more pleased than we were with the impact. Can you explain why this effort was so necessary and talk to our listeners a little bit about how it turned out? LL: Absolutely. And I do want to say thank you to ASCO's partnership on this issue. It was really important. So this is a regulatory issue. As you mentioned, it's colloquially referenced as the "six protected classes." But that's policy that was established more than a decade ago to make sure that Medicare beneficiaries had access to innovative therapies. So really, the concept's fairly simple. If you're a health insurer and you provide a Medicare Part D plan to a Medicare beneficiary-- so you sell a Part D plan, which is a prescription drug plan-- you are, by definition, required to cover virtually all drug therapies that treat cancer, epilepsy, HIV/AIDS, mental illness, and organ transplant. And unfortunately, late last year, the Department of Health and Human Services proposed to alter that rule. And if the rule that they had put forth had been finalized, we believe it would have dramatically impacted access and affordability to critical medications for cancer patients who are part of the Medicare Part D program. So the proposal, although it was put forth as an effort to save Medicare money-- programmatically to save Medicare money-- we were really concerned that that approach would potentially have the exact opposite effect. We were worried that it would result in raising costs in other parts of the Medicare program and absolutely shifting costs to patients. So that certainly would have happened, because the proposed changes included, for example, excluding drugs from formularies or increasing the use of utilization management tools, such as step therapy. And we know that for a disease like cancer, specific drugs are very important for specific cancers. So if beneficiaries were unable to access their prescription drug that was most medically appropriate for them, they certainly would incur higher costs because it wouldn't be a covered medication. But we also were worried that they wouldn't get physician services, or they would need additional physician services because they weren't getting the right medication, and/or they would end up in the emergency room, which is all things that we know happen if you're not on the right drug regime for your cancer diagnosis. So had these proposed changes gone into effect, it really could have been devastating for cancer patients and survivors. And because of that, once we analyzed the proposed rule, we launched a multi-pronged campaign. It's one of the things that we take a lot of pride in, and we're able to address these issues in many different ways. But one of the most powerful is working in coalition. So ACS CAN and ASCO were joined by nearly 60 other patient and provider organizations. And we ran an advertising campaign-- a very visible advertising campaign. We did a Twitter Day of Action, where all of our volunteer advocates from all of our organizations directed their concern to HHS Secretary Alex Azar. We know that he heard from us. We got confirmation of that. And additionally, ACS CAN and ASCO were among more than 23 patient provider organizations actually went to the Hill for a day, did a lobby day on the hill-- again, making sure that our legislators, congressional members really understood the patient perspective of this proposed policy change. And then finally, ACS CAN did something that we actually don't do that often, which is we shot and ran some television spots. We really wanted to make sure that we were coming at this issue from many different directions because we felt it was so critical to our cancer patients and their need to have access to innovative drugs. So once we went through all of that, we were really proud and, more importantly, thrilled for our cancer patients. The final rule did not include all the proposed changes to the six protected classes that were put forth. These plans are not allowed to impose additional utilization management techniques such as prior authorization and step therapy if a cancer patient already has an established Medicaid regimen. And we really think-- we know, actually-- that HHS and the White House, hearing from doctors and patients and survivors in such an incredible coalition made the agency realize that this could be a very problematic rule. And so I want to, again, Cliff, say thank you to ASCO providing such a critical perspective from your physicians, your oncologists. They know firsthand what these barriers and delays can mean. And the partnership really, really worked. And we're proud of the outcome of that campaign. CH: Well, again, we want to applaud ACS CAN for your bold leadership on the issue and the wonderful success. It does show the tremendous impact that we can have with a unified, collective voice on behalf of people with cancer. So another issue that I guess, in a way, relates at least tangentially to this-- and I know is near and dear to your heart-- is federal funding, in this case for cancer research and for clinical trials. But before you started ACS CAN, which I think is more than a decade ago, as I understand correctly, you were the CFO of the NIH's Cancer Research Center. So how did that experience shape your understanding of the federal research infrastructure and the need for increased funding for cancer research at the federal level? LL: So it's a great question. And it is true. I was at NIH for nearly a decade, a decade ago. I have been at ACS CAN for just a little over 10 years now. And NIH is really a fascinating place to work. And I learned so much when I was on the NIH campus just up the road in Bethesda. And I would say most importantly and what has been most impactful is really through that time understanding that the pathways to discovery, particularly in cancer, are very long, and they're very complex, and they are extremely resource-intensive. And all parts of that journey-- every single step has to work well together from the very early scientific discoveries at the bench to ultimately bringing those discoveries to the bedside of patients. And the government has a critical role to play in that journey. Because a lot of that initial science, as you know, is risky, you really have to take a long view. And the very, very early clinical trials, which is what the clinical center focused on-- really phase 0 and phase 1, a few phase 2 trials, natural history trials-- those can only be done in certain types of facilities that have a lot of resources like the NIH Clinical Research Center. And then the other thing that I think about often as I'm doing my work is the many, many patients that I met while I was there at the Clinical Center. We had a 200-bed hospital, a huge outpatient center. And they really are the true heroes. I really think a lot about the many patients who knew that they were enrolling on trials that may or may not benefit them, but would potentially move us forward in the fight against cancer. And so I'm very passionate about the resources that are needed for NIH and NCI. And a lot of that is driven because of this, what I consider, a really transformative experience for me while I was at NIH. CH: Well, many listeners will remember that I occasionally talk about when I was president of ASCO back in 2013 and '14. And that was the end of an era-- about a decade-long era-- where we had flat funding in dollars. And that, of course, with inflation meant a relative loss of purchasing power and missed opportunities. And this really rallied our broad community. And this is a bit of a little detour, but one of the things that ultimately helped, I think, increase the enthusiasm of many of our members for political engagement and reduce some of our cynicism is that the last few years, we've seen, instead, a steady rise and consistent support for federal funding. And it's crossed party lines. It's clearly been bipartisan. I wonder-- I mean, we like to take some credit for it-- but, of course, I was one of thousands of people knocking on doors and one of many thousands of people repeating the message. But why do you think that we currently are enjoying a period of such steady and reliable bipartisan support? And as you answer that, I would ask you to think about the future. Do you think that support can continue? LL: Yeah. Look, I think it's a really important question. And I do think that one of the important things that we collectively lend to this discussion is a bipartisan lens. I mean, cancer does not discriminate. It is not political. We ran a big campaign, as you might remember, a few years ago that we dubbed the "One Degree Campaign," because if you are not your own cancer story, you are certainly not more than one degree away from a cancer story. I think there are a couple reasons why we've been able to rally support from a bipartisan standpoint. One is, I do think that people can clearly understand the important role government has in the fight against cancer. But also, just that our patients are very compelling storytellers. They are there, talking to their lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in Washington DC when they're in district about their experiences-- their own, personal experiences about their fight or their engagement with someone else in the fight against cancer, and how critically important federal investment is in what their experience has been. And I do think that when members hear those stories from people who've been directly impacted, or maybe they've experienced it themselves or seen it themselves, it's compelling. I think collectively, as a community, we're getting better at continuing to show the incredible impact that NIH has. And the statistics sort of bear this out, right. There has been incredible progress in diagnosing cancer, treating cancer, caring for people who have cancer. And in the last 50 years, every major medical breakthrough in cancer can be traced back to NIH and the NCI. So I think when we tell those stories, we remind so many people that people that they love are alive today because they have helped fuel that discovery. And they do that by appropriating money for NCI. And so to that end, we would like to call it an evergreen issue. Getting appropriations every year from Congress is something that we can never let up on. It is a sustained effort. And we must continue to really coordinate well among partners-- so between ACS CAN and ASCO and many, many of our cancer partners-- so that we're sure to be bringing a concerted, collective voice to this issue. And we certainly know, because we see it every day in our political lives, that Congress definitely has a habit of reacting to the latest crisis. And so we want to make sure that we don't want cancer to continue to be such a huge crisis. We want continued forward movement. And that's why it's so critical that we bring the patient voice to this issue. We are good partners, again, united with ASCO, ACS CAN, and others in One Voice Against Cancer, which we fondly call "OVAC," which is our coalition that continues to make the case on a regular basis to lawmakers and their staff. But I'm really seeing-- and, Cliff, I know you probably have through your career, as well-- but if we get the patient voice to an elected official, it's not hard for them to support our cause and to understand why these funds to NIH are so critically important to changing the face of this disease. CH: Well, one of the ways-- I mean, one of the most tangible, obvious ways that we do that and the patients see it, of course, is through clinical trials. Those advances you describe at the NIH have to lead to clinical trials before they can actually change a standard of care. And this is another policy area where we've been working together, in particular advocating for the passage of the Clinical Trial Act. This is legislation that would federally require Medicaid to cover those routine care costs that come with participating in clinical trials, which would bring Medicaid into line with every other major payer, including Medicare, for example. Can you talk a little bit about what impact this bill would have on patients with cancer? And I ask that, reminding everybody that we will shortly post another podcast where we discuss this in detail with Melissa Dillmon, who is the current chair of our Government Relations Committee and on the front lines. LL: And a shout-out to Dr. Dillmon, because she actually worked with us on a congressional briefing around the six protected classes. And she is a fabulous leader. So congratulations for getting her to work with you. Because her voice needs to be heard in these fights, as well. And I want to do a shout-out to ASCO for your leadership in this particular piece of legislation. So specifically with Medicaid-- I mean, Medicaid by definition obviously serves people facing financial challenges. So right now, it is, as you mentioned, the only major category of insurance where routine costs in cancer clinical trials aren't covered. And so just to be clear, there's the experimental part of a cancer trial, but there are also maybe just regular standard of care that a patient would be getting even if they weren't enrolled in the trial. And those are the costs that you're talking about in this piece of legislation, and that when we talk about the financial challenges of enrolling on a clinical trial, it's not the experimental part of the trial itself. It's really the care around that. So currently, only 12 states and the District of Columbia have state requirements that Medicaid cover these routine trial costs. So that means 38 other states, if a patient wants to enroll in a trial, they're responsible for 100% of that routine costs out of pocket, which we know very few Americans could afford, much less those on a limited incomes. So to us, we see this as essentially a ban on participation by Medicaid patients, which really doesn't make any sense since, by definition, those routine costs would certainly be covered if they were seeing a doctor just on a regular visit. And we also don't want to exclude this whole cohort of millions of patients that we want to have participate in these clinical trials, since that is a critical success factor, as you noted, getting discovery out there that can impact a cancer diagnosis. CH: Well, while we're on the topic of Medicaid-- and here we were focusing on coverage of its beneficiaries' participation in clinical research-- but can you talk a little bit about your Medicaid Covers Us campaign? How does that relate to this, if it does at all? Or what direction does that take us in? LL: So Medicaid Covers Us-- I really hope that people that are listening to the podcast can take a minute and go to our URL, which is medicaidcoversus.org. And this is a campaign that we launched last year. And although ACS CAN has a very long history of advocating for Medicaid, Medicaid is just an insurance coverage, right. It just happens to cover a lower level of income for patients. But really, the focus of that program is to improve access to screening, diagnosis, treatment, which happens if you have insurance coverage. So when the Affordable Care Act was passed, there was an opportunity to expand Medicaid, although it is optional for a state. ACS CAN has worked hard with many partners to actively advocate for expanding and really educating the public on how important Medicaid is in the insurance landscape. And so part of that-- what we realized is that we really wanted to make sure that people understood what Medicaid truly is. And one of the ways we are doing that is through this campaign. And this is a public education campaign that's really trying to create a dialogue for everyone who touches health care, which is really an entire community, to understand the importance. If you want to achieve a healthy community, healthy economy, health care is a really important part of that. And Medicaid plays an important role in health care. So we decided to pursue kind of this larger educational effort, and it's really been an exciting project. We have gotten a lot of opportunity to have many members of a community have this conversation. And we're excited about the role that we're able to play in continuing to make sure that people understand that quality cancer care needs access to insurance. And access to insurance for many, many people means access to Medicaid. CH: So really, in the last few moments we've talked about Medicaid from two perspectives. One is coverage for a substantial bloc of Americans at about 42 million, if memory serves me correctly. And the second is specific coverage of a vulnerable subset that is those beneficiaries who need access to clinical research for advanced cancer or cancer at all. Is that a fair summary of the two prongs of this effort? LL: 100%, 100%. And I think that we want comprehensive coverage. And Medicaid provides, again, a lifeline for so many patients. And we really want to work to address a couple of big challenges right now in Medicaid. One is that there still 15 states that have not fully expanded their Medicaid program. So that means that there are low-income parents, adults that are not able to access affordable health insurance. And we've seen through a significant amount of research that we've done on our end that there are a lot of cancer patients in the Medicaid program. So that program itself is very, very important to our mission. And then another issue that we're paying a lot of attention to and trying to make sure through ACS CAN that we're having influence on, our policy changes that are creating some barriers if you actually are in Medicaid-- things like what are known as 1115 waivers that are introducing things like work requirements, or maybe some other types of barriers like a lockout period that really create a significant barrier in a pathway for patients to make sure they continue to be able to seek care. So we want to make sure that for all Medicaid enrollees with serious conditions like cancer, that they're able, one, to continue to work-- if they are unable to work, though, that they don't lose their coverage. So we are continuing to work on many, many components of Medicaid, so both the public education and awareness, but also a lot of these very direct lobbying issues. CH: You know what's interesting, I was thinking as you described all that, the ability to understand the system and then help to constructively shape it is, in fact, the reason-- personally, I can tell you-- that I was so interested in making the career change to go from breast cancer doctor to ASCO CEO. You've been at ACS CAN in total, as we heard already, for just about a dozen years. But recently you stepped into the role of president for the organization. So thinking about all of this, I wonder, has your view of the organization and its role and potential changed over these years? And what are the things that you want to focus on, going forward with this tool that you now have at your disposal? LL: Yeah. So that's a great question. I'm almost at my six-month mark, so that's very exciting. And it's certainly interesting and always very, very different to work in an organization from a different vantage point. But as president, the first thing I'll say as I continue to be unbelievably impressed with our partnerships and our staff and our incredible volunteers nationwide and their ability to impact policy through very deliberate approaches that we have trained people on-- and when we're clear about the impact that we can have and we talk to our legislators about that impact, we've found a lot of champions. I continue to be very proud, but also convinced that the role of advocacy is critically important to the future of cancer and changing that future for more and more people to have more opportunities to successfully fight their diagnosis. And for organizational goals, I think we obviously want to continue to grow ACS CAN. The bigger our organization is, both from a network of volunteers to resources, the more influence I know that we can have. And then finally, a personal passion of mine is to make sure that our organization is relevant to the entire cancer ecosystem, but particularly everyone who is going to face a cancer burden. And we know that cancer burden is unequal in many, many segments of our population. So I feel a great responsibility and drive to work with my many colleagues, including you, Cliff, and ASCO, to do everything we can to very deliberately reduce the disparity of cancer. CH: Well, that's an inspiring way, I think, to wrap up this conversation. I can't thank you enough for joining me today for this ASCO in Action Podcast. ASCO and ACS CAN share so many common goals, as I'm sure everybody will hear through this conversation. And we are both dedicated to helping people whose lives have been affected by cancer. And when patients, survivors, families, cancer care providers work together the way we do, and so many others, it's clear that the results can be tremendous in terms of impact and change. So thanks again for leading this charge with us. LL: Well, Cliff, it really was my pleasure to do this today with you. And I look forward to many years of productive partnership between ASCO and ACS CAN. Thanks for having me today. CH: Sure. And for all of you listening, if you want to keep up with ASCO's advocacy efforts, I encourage you to visit our website. This is ascoaction, written as one word, .asco.org. And there's more information about ACS CAN and Medicaid Covers Us available at fightcancer-- that's written as one word-- .org. And, Lisa, I think you previously told us that there's a special website for Medicaid Covers Us. What's that URL again? LL: Medicaidcoversus.org. CH: I don't know how I forgot it. So until next time, thank you for listening to this ASCO in Action Podcast. If you enjoyed what you heard here today, don't forget to give us a rating or review on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen. And while you're there, be sure to subscribe so you never miss an upcoming episode. The ASCO in Action Podcast is just one of ASCO's many podcasts. And you can find all of them at podcast.asco.org.

Subscribe through iTunes and Google Play. Dr. Joanna Yang and Dr. Robert Daly join ASCO CEO Dr. Clifford A. Hudis to discuss the Health Policy Leadership Development Program (HP-LDP). As former fellows, Drs. Yang and Daly provide insight as to how the program has made them better advocates for their patients. TRANSCRIPT Disclaimer: The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Clifford Hudis: Welcome to this ASCO in Action podcast. This is ASCO's monthly podcast series, where we explore policy and practice issues that impact oncologists, the entire cancer care delivery team, and the individuals we care for, people with cancer. My name is Clifford Hudis. And I'm the CEO of ASCO as well as the host of the ASCO in Action podcast series. For today's podcast, I am delighted to be joined by not one, but two of ASCO's rising leaders, Dr. Robert Daly and Dr. Joanna Yang. Both Dr. Daly and Dr. Yang are recent participants in ASCO's Health Policy Leadership Development Program, formerly known as the Health Policy Fellowship Program. This is a professional development program designed to build health policy and advocacy leadership expertise among our members. It's a one-year program where fellows get practical experience working with our policy and advocacy staff and council to craft policy positions and statements, along with other educational sessions on communication, leadership, and advocacy. Starting this year, participants will be able to participate as well in ASCO's Leadership Development Program, which offers mid-career oncologists the opportunity to improve their leadership skills and gain valuable training to set them up to be future leaders in oncology. Dr. Daly and Dr. Yang, welcome, and thank you for joining me today. Joanna Yang: Thank you so much for the opportunity. Robert Daly: Yes, thank you so much for having us. CH: So Dr. Yang, I'm going to start with you. You were an ASCO Health Policy Fellow in 2017-2018. And I want to kick off our discussion by talking about what brought you to the program. Why were you interested in developing special expertise in policy work? JY: Sure. So I've always been interested in health policy. And I had the opportunity to study health policy and health economics during undergrad. But of course, studying health policy is very different than creating or influencing health policy. When I started residency, I saw many ways in which health policy on a national level or even state level affected the patients I was caring for. And I felt compelled to do more. But the issue is that there is never any clear way for me to get involved or even to learn how I could learn how to shape health policy. And that's why the ASCO program is so great. I feel like it came at exactly the right time. I was looking for a way to learn more to develop the skills I needed to influence health policy. And ASCO came out with this structured and immersive experience where I could take the things that I had studied in school, and also the things that I'd seen in practice, and use them to actually have an impact on the patients I take care of. CH: So Dr. Daly, you as well were one of our inaugural Fellows. What prompted your interest in applying for the program, especially given I think you were the first year? RD: Yes. CH: Right, so you took a leap off of the ledge there and said, I'll go first. RD: Yeah, I'm similar to Dr. Yang. I had a real interest in cancer care delivery research during my fellowship at the University of Chicago. And I was lucky enough to be mentored by Funmi Olopade and Dr. Blase Polite. And Dr. Polite was really fundamental and helped developing the ASCO Health Policy Fellowship. And so I really saw this as an opportunity to augment that training but really gain skills in leadership, advocacy, and health policy, areas that I hadn't had exposure to in the past. So this seemed like the perfect program for me at that point in my career. CH: I have to say parenthetically that I'm jealous of both of you, because while I was personally drawn, especially in later years in my career to the policy and advocacy aspects of work with ASCO-- and it truly is the reason that I moved from my traditional academic career to this role as CEO at ASCO-- I never, of course, had the opportunity to be trained and to learn how to do this professionally as you two have. So I am in awe of your accomplishments, as well as the opportunities that are going to continue to unfold in front of you because of this. So given that, and given that this is really the beginning, we hope, of a career with impact, we should talk a little bit about what you actually did. The program, as I mentioned earlier, lasts for a year. And during that time, Fellows worked very closely with our policy staff on a mentor project. So I'll start again with Dr. Yang. Can you talk about the project you worked, what it entailed, what you learned, and where this is going? JY: Sure. So I worked on a two-part project with Alex Chen, who was my co-fellow during the past year. And as you hinted at, the work is actually still ongoing. So the first part was we looked at whether a bundled payment model could work in oncology. And this really culminated in a white paper for us. But the second part of the project, which built on the first part, was really the most fascinating. In the second part, it was really asking, if not bundled payments, then what? And we actually built on some of the work that Dr. Daly did that he'll probably describe in a little bit. But we actually worked on designing a pathway-based alternative payment model. And of course, going into this, I had no experience designing alternative payment models at all. But the beauty of the program is that from the very beginning, Deb Kamin, said, we will not be having you do any work that is not necessary. So all the work that you do is important to ASCO, is important to our patients. And that was really true for our project. So we were able to work with the ASCO staff, and our mentors, Ray Page, and Linda Bosserman, and a whole team of experts to create an alternative payment model that we thought would allow oncologists to prescribe the right drug at the right time, without being penalized by the high drug costs. CH: So I guess, based on that, we really should have started with you, Dr. Daly. But your mentor project was centered around clinical pathways. And I understand that ends up being the foundation for the alternative payment model that Dr. Yang just described. So can you talk a little bit about that process, what you did as an inaugural fellow in this and what you learned as you went through the work? RD: Absolutely. So I was lucky enough to be able to serve on the ASCO Task Force on Pathways. So that was an incredible experience for me because I really got to interact with leaders on this issue, including Robin Zon and Ray Page, who are very active in cancer care policy, both at the state level in Indiana and Texas, but also on a national level. So to be able to gain their mentorship that early on in the fellowship was really a great asset for me. And we were looking at, how do we write the criteria for what constitutes a high-quality pathway? So I really got to see, from soup to nuts, how do you write a policy statement? How do you solicit input from those important stakeholders? So the stakeholders in this case were fundamentally the patients, but also providers, ASCO's Government Relations Committee and State Affiliate Counsel, ASCO's board, the vendors-- get all of their input together to create a policy statement that can really influence change. And then lastly, I played the part of representing ASCO and in discussions with the pathway vendors about these criteria for high-quality pathways. So I learned about the important role ASCO can have on influencing the development of products and services that impact patient care, but also the impact ASCO can have on legislation. So in California, Connecticut, and other states, they started to look at policy around pathways, policies around implementing the criteria that ASCO had developed, so that those pathways that were being used in their state were high quality. So it really showed me the reach of ASCO and the impact of ASCO on patients and providers. CH: That is amazing because it really is a reminder-- and I'm going to come back to this idea-- about how much impact one person and one project can ultimately have. And I think that in these sometimes cynical times, people forget that. I alluded to this before about my own engagement with ASCO was accelerated by my experience as an advocate on Capitol Hill-- again, an amateur to your professionalism. So I wonder if you would reflect on your experience during the fellowship program. I understand you were both frequently called on to join in advocacy meetings on Capitol Hill. And this is with federal agencies, as well as, I assume, with representatives, senators, and their staff. Did either of you have any experience doing this before ASCO took it to Capitol Hill? RD: I had never had any experience doing advocacy meetings. So it was really-- the fellowship really helped me learn how to do that and how to do that effectively. CH: What was the first meeting like? RD: My first meeting was here in Manhattan. It was at the office of Senator Gillibrand. And I was accompanied by Heather Hilton, who is an ASCO advocate and someone who's served on the Government Relations Committee. And I was really nervous. I didn't know what to expect. But we met with one of her health policy staffers and really had an engaging discussion about an ASCO advocacy issue where we really felt heard. We were able to share patients' stories and also deliver data that ASCO had collected to help support our view. So it was really an exciting experience for me. And then I got to replicate that experience on Capitol Hill, meeting with congressional representatives from New York in their offices, but then also, as you said, going to government agencies, which was a different experience as well. So I really got to see a broad perspective of how you can advocate for policy issues for ASCO. CH: Dr. Yang, how would you describe your initial advocacy meetings for someone who hasn't participated before? What does it feel like to walk into that first meeting and begin that first discussion? JY: Sure. I've done that for my friends before. I've described these meetings. And they always say, it's really not at all what they expected. And I think that Dr. Daly's description is exactly right. So you go with your group-- usually it's by state-- to the member's office. And then depending on how much room there is and how many meetings are being held that day, your meeting is either going to be in a conference room in the member's office or even, more frequently, in the hall or any room that's available. And the member is not always there, but one of their staffers is, or sometimes multiple staffers, who are always really young but super, super, super knowledgeable about the issue. Basically, you go around, and you introduce yourselves and then describe the issues that you're here to discuss. And it's interesting because ASCO always does a great job of making you exceedingly well-prepared with the facts. But the truth is that most members and most staffers are most interested in hearing the patients' stories, which is why it's so important that oncologists come to the Hill to have these meetings. I think that no matter how well you try to prepare, ultimately, it really just comes down to engaging with the staffer and finding some area of common ground. And cancer is so common that most of the time in these meetings, I find that staffers or members will say, I have a family member or friend or some other loved one who has cancer. And it's really great that you guys are here. CH: My own experience-- I mean, I'm here to talk to you. And the listeners want to hear from you. But I just can't help but share. When I got involved in this before you all were, the key issue that we were confronting was the decade-long flat-- in dollars-- flat funding of the NIH and the NCI. And my first trips to Capitol Hill consisted of virtually beating on doors and explaining why this was a mistake for the country and for our people, and getting what felt like the cold shoulder. Over and over again, the same arguments seemed to fall on deaf ears. But-- and this is an important "but"-- what I have learned is that repeatedly making rational, evidence-based, and appealing anecdotal arguments, just as you describe, can ultimately move the needle. And it does. And so my personal cynicism with regard to politics and making a difference has gone down, not up, with aging. And I think listeners should think about this. You will never go to a congressional office and change a mind in one quick phone call. But when dozens and hundreds of people do it repeatedly over months and years, we actually do have the chance to positively influence policy and legislative actions and regulations in the United States. And you should forgive me for waxing so poetic. You should be proud that you've committed to doing this early. And I hope you start to see the rewards. So I'm sorry to carry on about my own experience here. But it really is part of what has helped motivate all the staff to get behind this program and launch it and support it. Looking back, I'll turn back to you Dr. Daly. You're a couple of years removed now from the program. Can you identify one or several key learnings from your time as an ASCO Policy Fellow that have stuck with you, that you find yourself coming back to in your daily life? RD: Yeah, I mean, I think what you've just said, Dr. Hudis, about how you can really have an impact is something that I learned during this fellowship. It wasn't something that I had been aware of in the past, because I had never done advocacy work before in the past. So I think what this fellowship really trained me to do is to be an effective advocate. And that is something that I can use in a multitude of different areas as an oncologist. So combining the patient stories that we talked about that are so visceral and so needed when you're trying to get through to those legislators or policymakers that you're trying to reach-- but also backing that up with data, and I think ASCO really equipped us well as advocates to have the data, as well as the personal stories, to influence change. So using tools like CancerLinQ to be able to look at broader data sets and say, we know this is impacting our patients. We can see that. And now we need to think of a solution for change. And I think being involved in helping to create some of those solutions was also really valuable for me. So with the pathways, creating the policy paper, but also serving on committees during that fellowship year on MACRA and other issues, like opioid legislation, that were really affecting our patients, and seeing how ASCO is effecting change in those areas, was something that will stay with me throughout my career. CH: And how about you, Dr. Yang? Do you see any practical day-to-day impact, for example, in your work with patients from your time in the fellowship? JY: Yeah, absolutely. I think because I spent most of the past year thinking about high drug costs, both for chemotherapies, immunotherapies, and supportive drugs, I'm much more thoughtful about the costs that are passed on to our patients. And that can actually be really significant. And one of the things that I do much more often is I ask about cost to my patients when I prescribe medications. And that I really attribute directly to work that I was doing with ASCO. The other thing is that working with patients actually often gives me ideas. So I'll see patterns emerging. And I'll think, we really need to work on a policy that addresses this. And the great thing about the Health Policy Fellowship is that you remain involved with ASCO. So when I see these issues, I'm able to take them back to ASCO and to the committees. CH: Well, speaking of the committees, after you and all of our Fellows complete the one-year program, you were automatically added to one of ASCO's relevant committees. And I think you're both members of the Clinical Practice Committee. I'm curious-- I'll start with you, Dr. Daly-- has your time as a Health Policy Fellow helped you in your work on the CPC, and how? RD: I think, absolutely. It's made me more fluent in the issues that the CPC is confronting, the sort of things like the Oncology Care Model, rural cancer care. I now have a foundation where I'm able to contribute in a way on that committee that I never could have before or without the Health Policy Fellowship. CH: Yeah, I think it's often the case that sometimes-- or I shouldn't say often-- I think sometimes it's the case that people get onto committees and really do have a steep learning curve. It seems like maybe this could have accelerated your start on the committee. Is that your experience, Dr. Yang? JY: Yeah, I think so. I think that the Health Policy Fellowship, that first year is a really steep learning curve. But it does, as Dr. Daly said, provide a great foundation to just be aware of all of the issues that affect cancer doctors and cancer patients. CH: So I'm going to go to a little bit of a speed round, if you will, and ask you both to think about the other members of our community who have not had the opportunity to do this and might not ever have thought about it. Dr. Yang, finishing the program last summer of course-- so it's fresher, I think, for you-- why do you think it would be important for oncologists to be aware of and engaged in policy discussions, rather than nose to the grindstone, thinking about their clinical and research responsibilities on a daily basis? JY: Mainly, I really think that the reason for oncologists to be involved in this is that regardless if you are thinking about it or not, health policy affects you. And it affects oncologists. It affects how they practice. It affects how they are able to care for their patients and the type of care that they're able to provide. And if oncologists aren't involved, their voice is going to be lost. And oftentimes, they're the most important voice for their patients. CH: And Bobby, what would you say to the old version of me, the cynic, who says, this is a waste of time-- I'm not getting involved? RD: Well, I do think it really makes your career more exciting to be involved in health policy issues. It really broadens your view of how you think about patients and how you think about cancer care, and makes coming to work every day, I think, more exciting because you have this other lens that you're looking at issues with. CH: And looking back more specifically, and not intending to turn this into a sales job for the Policy Fellowship-- we only have two slots a year-- but I wonder what each of you would say to young colleagues thinking about this. What's the best reason to get involved in the Health Policy Fellowship at ASCO? I'll start with you, Dr. Yang. JY: I think that if you're interested in quality of care, the costs of care, access to care, then this fellowship is the right fellowship for you. And I think that being interested in those things doesn't necessarily provide you with the skill set you need to actually do meaningful work in that realm. And I think that the fellowship program really does provide you with tangible skills that you can then use to write policy briefs, to hold meetings, to be an advocate, all of which are really, really, really important. CH: Dr. Daly, is there anything you can add to that? Or does that pretty much sum it up? RD: I think that's absolutely right. I would just add the mentorship of the fellowship is really incredible, so getting to interact with the ASCO leaders, like Robin Zon, or Ray Page, or Blase Polite, but also the ASCO staff as well, who are incredible in the policy area, like Deb Kamin. I think I learned so much from being in their presence for a year and just absorbing all of their knowledge that they had, an experience they had. And when I was at the annual meeting just a couple of weeks ago, it was just such a fun pleasure to be there and see all of them and know that those relationships are something that will be with me throughout my career. And they really influenced me. CH: Wow. I think that's great. And I am so proud of both of you and all the participants in these and the other development programs that we offer. I will share with you that from the perspective of the board of directors, these programs really represent the crown jewel, something that the board members take the light in. And you should be proud to have contributed the way you have. So Dr. Daly, Dr. Yang, I want to thank you again for joining me today for this ASCO in Action podcast. RD: Thank you so much for having us. JY: Thank you. And for all of our listeners, if you want to learn more about ASCO's Health Policy Leadership Development Program, please visit us at asco.org and search for "policy leadership." The application period for the 2020-2021 year is now open, and it will be open through the end of September. So there is time to get those applications in. And with that, until next time, I want to thank everyone for listening to this ASCO in Action podcast.  

Debora Moritz is a Grassroots Advocate, Chair of TS Alliance of Arizona, Member of the Government Relations Committee, and most importantly "just Griffin's mom trying to make things better for him and few other folks along the way." From diagnosis of TSC at 5 months, vigabatrin failure, ACTH treatment success, early frustrations with lack of knowledge, Debora kept asking questions everywhere she went with Griffin. Leaving no stone unturned in terms of trying anything and everything that she could discover that may help stop the seizures, her perseverance led to Griffin's getting chosen to participate in a clinical trial of an investigational medication in to shrink the SEGAs, and as a result, a significant reduction occurred in the size of his tumors. The exceptional results of this trial led to the rapid FDA approval of Afinitor, the first drug designated to specifically treat SEGAs associated with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) in 2010. We discuss Debora's government advocacy in the evolution of the March on Capitol Hill, growing from a handful of people to well over 100 volunteers last year and getting 200 Democratic & Republican Representatives signing on to support TSCRP funding. We hit some of the highlights from successes over the years, working with other volunteers, making personal connections and continually asking the tough questions that demand better answers are part of Debora's methods of grassroots advocacy. In her own words, " We cannot wait for others to keep the momentum going for us; we must do so together. "We can change lives. And we can get to a place where no one has to suffer from the devastating effects of tuberous sclerosis complex, but it takes action." (music credit: https://www.purple-planet.com/)

Debora Moritz is a Grassroots Advocate, Chair of TS Alliance of Arizona, Member of the Government Relations Committee, and most importantly "just Griffin's mom trying to make things better for him and few other folks along the way." From diagnosis of TSC at 5 months, vigabatrin failure, ACTH treatment success, early frustrations with lack of knowledge, Debora kept asking questions everywhere she went with Griffin. Leaving no stone unturned in terms of trying anything and everything that she could discover that may help stop the seizures, her perseverance led to Griffin's getting chosen to participate in a clinical trial of an investigational medication in to shrink the SEGAs, and as a result, a significant reduction occurred in the size of his tumors. The exceptional results of this trial led to the rapid FDA approval of Afinitor, the first drug designated to specifically treat SEGAs associated with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) in 2010. We discuss Debora's government advocacy in the evolution of the March on Capitol Hill, growing from a handful of people to well over 100 volunteers last year and getting 200 Democratic & Republican Representatives signing on to support TSCRP funding. We hit some of the highlights from successes over the years, working with other volunteers, making personal connections and continually asking the tough questions that demand better answers are part of Debora's methods of grassroots advocacy. In her own words, " We cannot wait for others to keep the momentum going for us; we must do so together. "We can change lives. And we can get to a place where no one has to suffer from the devastating effects of tuberous sclerosis complex, but it takes action." (music credit: https://www.purple-planet.com/)

Dr. William Foshee currently serves as the American Chiropractic Association Commission on Diversity Chair and on the Next Gen ACA committee. He is a 2017 graduate of Northwestern Health Sciences University where he was recognized as a Diversity Leadership Scholar and was named a PFund Foundation Scholar for his contributions to the LGBTQ community. Dr. Foshee practices in Dallas, Texas and endeavors to positively impact culturally competent delivery of chiropractic care both locally and nationally.Dr. Rebecca Warnecke is currently in her second year of practice as an associate doctor of chiropractic at Hartman Family Chiropractic in Jenison, MI (Grand Rapids). Although originally from Lake Geneva, WI, she went on to study Pre-Med at Iowa State University on a 4-year, full-tuition academic scholarship and graduated with a degree in Psychology and Biology. She then graduated as the salutatorian of her class from Palmer College of Chiropractic in Davenport, Iowa.Prior to graduating from Palmer College, Dr. Warnecke completed an eight month clerkship at the Martinsburg VA Medical Center in West Virginia where she provided chiropractic care to Veterans working in an interdisciplinary environment alongside primary care physicians, interventional anesthesiologists, interventional radiologists, physical therapists, orthopedic surgeons, and rheumatologists.She is an active member of both the American Chiropractic Association (ACA) and Michigan Association of Chiropractors (MAC). For ACA, she currently serves as a committee member on both the Commission on Diversity and Quality Assurance and Accountability. Through the MAC, she serves as a member of the Government Relations Committee. Her passions include serving Veterans and the underserved Hispanic/Latino population, research, and academia.Discussion TopicsWhat is diversity?What are some specific examples of diversity (race, gender, culture, etc.)?Why is it important in the chiropractic profession?What are the examples of diversity helping/hindering chiropractic (as a profession and/or on the individual patient level)?Why has the ACA convened the diversity commission?What are common misconceptions about diversity?ResourcesACA Statement on DiversityACA and Diversity: Inclusion Through ActionNational LGBT Health Education CenterDiversity in the chiropractic profession: preparing for 2050. Johnson, C. D., & Green, B. N. (2012). The Journal of Chiropractic Education, 26(1), 1–13.Multiple views to address diversity issues: an initial dialog to advance the chiropractic profession. Johnson, C., Killinger, L. Z., Christensen, M. G., Hyland, J. K., Mrozek, J. P., Zuker, R. F., et al. (2012). Journal of Chiropractic Humanities, 19(1), 1–11.American Black Chiropractic AssociationWomen ChiropractorsACA Facebook Live: Diversity MattersThe WAVE Diversity Panel (YouTube)To be contributors to society, it is not necessarily enough to acknowledge that we each have a different way of interacting in the world. To be truly effective, we must understand and grow from the richness that others offer to the social fabric. – Claire Johnson, et al. Multiple views to address diversity issues: an initial dialog to advance the chiropractic profession.

Meet Patrick Barrasso, founder and director of one of the most innovative and effective substance abuse treatment centres for young male teens in the United States, In Balance Ranch Academy, located near Tuscon, Arizona.Patrick and his family have built a school and ranch dedicated to helping young men and their families overcome this devastating abuse of self, and learn new coping mechanisms that feed their soul rather wreck it like drugs/alcohol. Patrick wants them to know that they can have fun while being clean. Hence the boys learn through equine therapy, snow boarding, they go to a gym, go camping, explore native spirituality, while going to a 12 step program in the US and visiting one out of the country, cognitive behaviour therapy, and other modalities. Patrick is a noted psychotherapist with over 25 years of extensive training and experience in adolescent and adult substance abuse and mental health treatment.He is a frequent presenter at both local and national conferences including the U.S. Journal Training National conferences, and the FACES, Family and Addiction Conferences and Educational Seminars on a variety of adolescent treatment topics including the challenges of overcoming the culture of adolescent substance abuse.Patrick is also the founder of FreshStart, an Arizona non-profit organization that raises funds for substance abuse treatment scholarships. He belongs to the NATSAP Board and is the liaison to the Government Relations Committee helping treatment throughout the US.

In this episode, Adam Russo and Brady Bizarro speak with Ryan C. Work – Vice President of Government Affairs at the Self-Insurance Institute of America (“SIIA”). They talk politics, D.C., and more importantly, about the efforts of the Government Relations Committee to advocate for the self-insured industry. From stop-loss protections and an updated “ERISA Notebook” to new wellness program rules, Ryan reveals the top issues on SIIA’s political agenda and explains how member engagement can really make a difference.

This was recorded in January 2018, so you understand some references to the political atmosphere at the time. A native of La Paz City, Bolivia, Fernando and his family migrated to Washington D.C. at an early age for the opportunity of achieving the American Dream. Learning from his father the qualities of a self-driven entrepreneur, Fernando founded the highly successful technology firm Nanotech.  Fernando Torrez is an Air Force Veteran, entrepreneur, and local political leader. He is a board member of the Alexandria Sheriff's Office's Correctional Services Advisory Board, the Government Relations Committee for the Alexandria Chamber of Commerce and the first Latino Commissioner to serve in the Alexandria Commission on Employment, Department of Community and Human Services & Center for Economic Support. Fernando is a proud family man, resides in Alexandria with his lovely wife Kamila, his two kids Alexandra and Fernando Jr. and their golden retriever Conan. For more information on Nanotech or to reach out: www.nanotechcomputers.com

Julie Charlestein is a 4th generation leader at Premier Dental Products Company. Started in 1913 by her great grandfather Julius Charlestein; Premier develops, manufactures and distributes innovative consumables to the dental professional worldwide. Julie currently serves as President & CEO. A native of Philadelphia.  Julie attended Emory University for her undergraduate studies and Temple University for her graduate work. In her role at Premier, Julie was voted to The Top 25 Most Influential Women in Dentistry by Dental Products Report. Julie is proud to serve on the Board of Overseers for The University of Pennsylvania School of Dental Medicine, the Dean's Advisory Council of Temple University Dental School, as well as  the Board of the Alliance for Oral Health Across Borders. She also serves on the Board of ASDOH (Arizona school of dentistry and oral health).    Julie is an honorary member of Alpha Omega Dental Fraternity, and sat on the Board of Directors of the Dental Trade Alliance, where she Chaired the Government Relations Committee. She also served on the Dean’s Advisory Board of the School of Dental Medicine at Harvard University   Julie is also a member of The Young Presidents’ Organization (YPO), and sits on the Board of Directors for the ALS (Lou Gherig's Disease) Association.   www.premusa.com

Topic:Sales Tax Issues and Impacts In This Episode:[02:27] Guests Bob Lewis, Jim Brasfield, and Sarah Coffin are introduced. [02:57] Jim shares why he’s interested in sales tax and distribution equity. [03:18] Bob tells why he’s interested in sales tax and distribution equity. [03:52] Bob talks about his role as Principal at Development Strategies. [04:13] Sarah speaks about why she’s interested in sales tax and distribution equity. [04:55] Bob gives his view of what sales tax distribution equity is. [06:13] Jim explains where sales tax money goes and what it pays for. [08:15] Sarah shares what the negatives of sales tax distribution are. [09:43] Bob speaks about how the sales tax system drives land-use decisions. [11:30] Who decides who is a point-of-sale city? [12:54] Mike speaks of the incentives for more commercial development than housing development. [13:51] Sarah comments about the zoning decisions made by local governments and the affordable-housing issue. [14:48] How do we fix the problem of poorer communities going to rich communities to shop and the rich communities taking the sales tax? [16:26] Is there any property tax sharing or is it just the sales tax? [17:31] Mike mentions the challenges of too many local governments and overlapping jurisdictions. [18:02] Bob adds to the conversation of sharing the costs. [18:55] Sarah reflects on how St. Louis County supports its cultural districts. [20:23] Are there any words of wisdom for other parts of the country that aren’t doing sales tax sharing? Guests/Organizations: Jim Brasfield is Emeritus Professor of Management at the George Herbert Walker School of Business and Technology at Webster University, and former Chair of the Department of Management for nineteen years. He has been on the faculty of Webster University since 1976. He has a Ph.D. in political science from Case Western Reserve University (1973) and MA in Political Science from St. Louis University. He was Mayor of the City of Crestwood from 1996 to 2002 and on the Crestwood Board of Alderman from 1978 to 2006. He has been President of the St. Louis County Municipal League and the President of the Board of the Greater St. Louis Health System Agency.   Since 2000 he has been a member of the Government Relations Committee of the Gateway Chapter of the MS Society. He was President of the Webster University Faculty Senate from 2001 to 2007. Currently he is a member of the Municipal Parks Grant Commission and the Board of Directors of Voyce. He is a past President of the Organized Section on Health Politics and Policy of the American Political Science Association, and was Book Review Editor of the Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law from 2010 to 2016.  In 2011 his book Health Policy: The Decade Ahead was published by Lynne Rienner Publishers. http://blogs.webster.edu/sbt/tag/jim-brasfield/ (Learn more about Jim. ) Dr. Sarah Coffin is an associate professor of urban planning at Saint Louis University in the School of Social Work where she directs the masters in Urban Planning and Development Program. Trained as an urban planner, Dr. Coffin’s work focuses on the impacts of brownfields on weak market economies and examining the role that common development tools like tax increment financing and tax credits play in local economic development planning practice in these post-industrial regions. Her work draws on both primary and secondary data sources, focusing primarily on property data. She has published work that examines the impacts of brownfields, vacant properties, and more recently development incentives on weak market economies and whether new ways of framing the redevelopment question might provide positive benefits for distressed communities. In addition, Dr. Coffin served as the principal investigator for the university team that supported data support for the St Louis Region’s sustainability plan, OneSTL. In that role she lead the effort to...

Host: Matt Birnholz, MD Guest: Robin Zon, MD, FACP Value-based, patient-centered care has become the destination for all branches of medicine, and is the philosophy driving modern payment reform initiatives like MACRA. But the unique care delivery needs in each specialty challenge the notion that one payment model can serve everyone. And nowhere has this become more relevant than in the field of oncology. Dr. Matt Birnholz joins Dr. Robin Zon, practicing oncologist and vice president and senior partner at Michiana Hematology-Oncology in South Bend, Indiana. Dr. Zon serves as Chair-Elect of ASCO's Government Relations Committee was Past Chair of the Clinical Practice Committee, which alongside other stakeholders at ASCO developed a Patient-Centered Oncology Payment (PCOP) model. Recently, Dr. Zon presented this information at the recent AMA House of Delegates meeting in June. She speaks to the phases of this model, how it can function as a defined APM under MACRA, and its demonstrated positive impacts on oncology care pathways.

Host: Matt Birnholz, MD Guest: Robin Zon, MD, FACP Value-based, patient-centered care has become the destination for all branches of medicine, and is the philosophy driving modern payment reform initiatives like MACRA. But the unique care delivery needs in each specialty challenge the notion that one payment model can serve everyone. And nowhere has this become more relevant than in the field of oncology. Dr. Matt Birnholz joins Dr. Robin Zon, practicing oncologist and vice president and senior partner at Michiana Hematology-Oncology in South Bend, Indiana. Dr. Zon serves as Chair-Elect of ASCO's Government Relations Committee was Past Chair of the Clinical Practice Committee, which alongside other stakeholders at ASCO developed a Patient-Centered Oncology Payment (PCOP) model. Recently, Dr. Zon presented this information at the recent AMA House of Delegates meeting in June. She speaks to the phases of this model, how it can function as a defined APM under MACRA, and its demonstrated positive impacts on oncology care pathways.

Episode Description If you are an employer and are at all curious about what’s happening in Washington D.C. that might impact your 401(k) plan, I am happy to report that my guest Joan McDonagh likely covers it in today’s episode!  Our conversation includes: Developments with state run retirement programs The DOL’s proposed Fiduciary Rule  Initiatives to help participants generate lifetime income in retirement plans Tax reform and how it could impact retirement plans Potential impact of the upcoming presidential election on retirement plans Guest Bio Joan is an ERISA attorney with Empower Retirement and has been working with retirement plans for over 30 years.  She is on the Government Relations Committee of the Society of Professional Asset-Managers and Record Keepers (SPARK) and Chairs the Public Policy Committee of the Defined Contribution Institutional Investment Association (DCIIA).  She has written numerous articles and presented a variety of seminars on retirement plan issues.  And, if all that wan’t enough she is also a co-author of the 401(k) Answer Book. 401(k) Fridays Podcast Overview Offers companies of all sizes free strategic, educational and actionable content to improve  their retirement plans.  My name is Rick Unser and I am your host.  All episodes leverage my nearly two decades of experience working with employers to bring you candid interviews with industry experts to enhance Fiduciary Protection, streamline Plan Operations and improve employee Retirement Readiness.   For more information please visit www.401kfridays.com

Dr. Jay S. Greenstein is a Maryland native. He received his undergraduate degree from the University of Maryland, his Doctor of Chiropractic degree from the National College of Chiropractic, and earned his post-graduate degree in Sports Chiropractic at the Logan College of Chiropractic. In addition to maintaining his private practice as CEO of Sport and Spine Rehab and Sport and Spine Athletics, he is the founder and President of the Sport and Spine Rehab Clinical Research Foundation. Dr. Greenstein is also the founder and CEO of Kaizenovation® Consulting, a leading-edge firm to help doctors and a wide variety of companies to improve their organizational performance. Kaizenovation® Consulting coaches businesses on Six Sigma, human capital management and the Entrepreneurial Operating System® (EOS). Dr. Greenstein served as a recommended provider for the National Football League Players Association for the Washington Redskins, and since 1997, has been the Official Team Chiropractor for the Washington Redskins Cheerleaders. Dr. Greenstein served as the Chiropractic Representative for the National Athletic Training Association, Inter-Association Task Force for Cervical Spine Injured Athletes, and the Maryland State Tae Kwon Do Association Medical Chairperson and team physician. Dr. Greenstein was selected to be the Chef de Mission for the International Sports Chiropractic Association to run the Chiropractic Sports Center at the World Olympians Association Reunion Center at the 2008 Beijing Olympics. He has served as the past Insurance Chairman and Public Relations Chairman for the Unified VCA and past Insurance Chairman for the Maryland Chiropractic Association. Dr. Greenstein was selected to represent both state associations on the United Healthcare/OptumHealth Chiropractic Professional Advisory Committee. He was also selected to represent both state associations on the professional advisory for American Specialty Health Network, the third party administrator for specific Aetna and Cigna chiropractic benefit plans. Since 2010, he has served on the Council on Chiropractic Guidelines and Practice Parameters as the Vice Chairman, and also represents CCGPP on the Chiropractic Summit, where he serves on the Government Relations Committee. The GR committee works on policy issues to ensure chiropractic access with healthcare reform taking place at the state and national level. In 2012, he was selected to the state of Maryland Governor's Office for Healthcare Reform Essential Benefits Advisory Committee. In 2012, Dr. Greenstein was elected as President of the East Coast Associations Independent Physician Network. Washingtonian Magazine also named him among Washington's Top Sports Physicians. Dr. Greenstein has published extensively and presented numerous original research papers at scientific symposiums throughout the world. He was awarded as Chiropractor of the Year in 2007 and 2010 for the Maryland Chiropractic Association and Chiropractor of the Year in 2010 for the Virginia Chiropractic Association. In 2007, Sport and Spine Rehab was the first multi-location practice in the entire country that was recognized by the National Committee on Quality Assurance's Back Pain Recognition Program (BPRP). In 2008, SSR practices were the first privately run Performance Health Centers of Excellence in the US. In 2009, DrScore.com, the nation's largest online patient satisfaction database, named SSR “America's Most Loved Practices” as the top seven doctors in the country in patient satisfaction. In 2011, SSR was named to the Inc 5000 list as one of the fastest growing private US companies. In 2012, Dr. Greenstein was recognized by SmartCEO Magazine by winning their 2012 Technology Implementer Award. In 2013, he was named a “Top Chiropractor” by Northern Virginia Magazine. Also in 2013, he was named “Person of the Year” by the Council on Chiropractic Guidelines and Practice Parameters (CCGPP).

Dr. William Davis is my guest this week and will highlight the AMTA Archives. Dr. Davis is currently Director of the graduate program in music therapy at Colorado State University and Chair and Director of Graduate Studies in Music for the Department.  He joined the CSU faculty in 1984 after completing a doctorate in music therapy with a performance minor in clarinet from the University of Kansas. His clinical background and area of clinical expertise is with adults and children who have intellectual disabilities. He has been active for many years in the American Music Therapy Association serving on the AMTA Board of Directors as historian; in 1998 he founded the AMTA Archives at CSU and continues in the capacity of Archivist. Dr. Davis has also served as an Editorial Committee member for the Journal of Music Therapy, an Assembly of Delegates representative, and as a member of the Government Relations Committee. He is co-author of an introductory level music therapy text in its third printing and is used by many music therapy programs in the United States and abroad. Previous editions of the book have been translated into Spanish, Korean and Japanese. His research interest is in the history of music therapy with numerous articles appearing in the Journal of Music Therapy, Music Therapy Perspectives and the British Journal of Music Therapy.

Dr. William Davis is my guest this week and will highlight the AMTA Archives. Dr. Davis is currently Director of the graduate program in music therapy at Colorado State University and Chair and Director of Graduate Studies in Music for the Department.  He joined the CSU faculty in 1984 after completing a doctorate in music therapy with a performance minor in clarinet from the University of Kansas. His clinical background and area of clinical expertise is with adults and children who have intellectual disabilities. He has been active for many years in the American Music Therapy Association serving on the AMTA Board of Directors as historian; in 1998 he founded the AMTA Archives at CSU and continues in the capacity of Archivist. Dr. Davis has also served as an Editorial Committee member for the Journal of Music Therapy, an Assembly of Delegates representative, and as a member of the Government Relations Committee. He is co-author of an introductory level music therapy text in its third printing and is used by many music therapy programs in the United States and abroad. Previous editions of the book have been translated into Spanish, Korean and Japanese. His research interest is in the history of music therapy with numerous articles appearing in the Journal of Music Therapy, Music Therapy Perspectives and the British Journal of Music Therapy.