Economic models for sustainable interprofessional education

Patricia A. Carney, David T. Bearden, Molly Osborne, Martha Driessnack, Curt C. Stilp, Judith Gedney Baggs, Jared P. Austin, Kristi Tonning, Jennifer Boyd

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations


Limited information exists on funding models for interprofessional education (IPE) course delivery, even though potential savings from IPE could be gained in healthcare delivery efficiencies and patient safety. Unanticipated economic barriers to implementing an IPE curriculum across programs and schools in University settings can stymie or even end movement toward collaboration and sustainable culture change. Clarity among stakeholders, including institutional leadership, faculty, and students, is necessary to avoid confusion about IPE tuition costs and funds flow, given that IPE involves multiple schools and programs sharing space, time, faculty, and tuition dollars. In this paper, we consider three funding models for IPE: (a) Centralized (b) Blended, and (c) Decentralized. The strengths and challenges associated with each of these models are discussed. Beginning such a discussion will move us toward understanding the return on investment of IPE.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)745-751
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Interprofessional Care
Issue number6
StatePublished - Nov 2 2018


  • Economic frameworks
  • health professions tuition
  • interprofessional education
  • sustainability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'Economic models for sustainable interprofessional education'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this