An Open Letter to the UERM Board of Trustees and Alumni

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE UERM BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND ALUMNI

We write to bring to the attention of the Board of Trustees and the alumni community a series of policy decisions and organizational changes that, while perhaps intended to improve institutional performance, have had significant unintended consequences for educational quality, faculty morale, student experience, and the long-term reputation of UERM. 

In recent months, an increasing number of faculty members, students, staff, and alumni have openly voiced concerns regarding the university's leadership, governance, and institutional priorities. While these concerns vary in their specifics, they collectively reflect a growing sense of dissatisfaction and unease about the future of the institution. Many of these issues have been raised repeatedly through formal and informal channels, yet remain unresolved.

We respectfully request that the Board of Trustees undertake an independent review of these concerns, engage directly with faculty and students through a meaningful consultative process, and evaluate whether the university's current leadership and strategic direction remain aligned with the institution's long-term mission.

Our concerns are not based on isolated incidents or temporary disagreements, but on a longstanding pattern of leadership decisions that have steadily eroded morale, weakened trust in administration, harmed the university’s reputation, and compromised the quality of medical education and patient care.

Many of the policies implemented in recent years—including increased student admissions, rising fees, restructuring of clinical services, staffing reductions, and limitations on faculty development—may have produced short-term operational or financial benefits. However, their cumulative effects have raised serious concerns regarding educational quality, faculty retention, student satisfaction, accreditation readiness, and institutional reputation. These outcomes, if left unaddressed, may ultimately undermine the very sustainability they were intended to support. 

1.Consequences of Policy Decisions on Educational Quality

Foremost among these concerns is the continued increase in student enrollment despite persistent limitations in faculty manpower, facilities, and clinical exposure. Faculty members were not meaningfully consulted regarding these enrollment increases, which proceeded despite concerns about institutional capacity. In fact, the first time this happened, it was explained to the faculty as an accident, due to the fault of a miscommunication in the system. At the same time, the hospital's patient census remains insufficient to adequately support the growing number of learners requiring clinical experience.

The university has increased student enrollment while faculty numbers, classroom space, clinical exposure opportunities, and support personnel have not expanded proportionately. Furthermore, requests for additional personnel are subjected to an unnecessarily burdensome and bureaucratic process, with departments frequently left uncertain whether critically needed positions will be approved. As a result, many faculty members have expressed concern that educational resources are no longer keeping pace with institutional growth. This has contributed to overcrowded learning environments, increasing demands on faculty, and growing challenges in maintaining the quality of instruction and supervision expected of a leading medical institution. 

The university has also implemented major structural changes—including the reduction of ward bed capacity and the removal or merging of wards—without adequate prior consultation with the departments most directly affected. These changes have significant implications for patient care, clinical education, residency training, and fellowship programs. 

Compounding these concerns is the declining number of admissions to the service wards. High hospital fees and increasingly burdensome cash deposit requirements prior to admission have reduced the availability of clinical material for second- and third-year medical students, clinical clerks, postgraduate interns, and residents. This shortage of patient encounters threatens the quality of clinical training and may ultimately affect accreditation outcomes (e.g. PAASCU, residency training programs) and the competitiveness of our training programs. 

Many faculty members have also expressed concern that decisions regarding ward closures, residency programs, fellowship programs, and specialized clinical services appear to prioritize short-term financial considerations without sufficient transparency regarding their long-term academic consequences. 

These concerns are particularly troubling given the increasing financial burden placed upon students and their families. Tuition fees continue to rise despite persistent shortages in faculty manpower, facilities, and clinical resources. Many members of the university community have questioned whether institutional investments are keeping pace with enrollment growth and whether educational quality is receiving the priority it deserves.

Taken together, these developments create a widening gap between the university's educational commitments and its ability to adequately support them, and likely lead to violation of CHED guidelines on student:teacher and student:patient ratios.

2. Consequences of Policy Decisions on Governance, Transparency, and Trust

A second major concern is the deterioration of meaningful consultation and shared governance.

Faculty members have repeatedly reported that important institutional decisions are made with limited input from those most directly affected. While consultations and town hall meetings are occasionally conducted, many participants have come away with the impression that major decisions have already been made before consultation takes place. Questions are often met with deflection, circular discussions, or prolonged responses that fail to address the issues raised, leaving many faculty members feeling unheard and excluded from the decision-making process.

There is likewise a widespread perception that there is insufficient transparency regarding strategic plans, institutional priorities, allocation of funds, and the rationale behind major administrative decisions. The same is true of the selection of deans, department heads, and officers of the institution. Some have expressed concern that academic leaders are viewed primarily as implementers of administrative directives rather than as partners in institutional governance. Decisions that significantly affect departments, training programs, clinical services, and academic operations are frequently announced only after they have already been finalized. While strategic plans have been presented to stakeholders, opportunities for meaningful dialogue, feedback, and collaborative implementation are often perceived as limited. Over time, this has contributed to a decline in trust between faculty and administration. 

Universities function best when leadership values collaboration, open dialogue, and the expertise of its academic community. The continued weakening of these principles risks creating an environment in which trust becomes increasingly difficult to maintain.

3. Consequences of Policy Decisions on Faculty Morale and Institutional Stability

Faculty morale has deteriorated significantly under the current leadership of UERM. 

Many faculty members have expressed concern regarding a management style characterized by excessive micromanagement, centralized decision-making, and insufficient respect for established academic leadership structures. Responsibilities that traditionally belong to deans and department heads have frequently been bypassed, while faculty members and consultants who express differing views may be marginalized or excluded from meaningful participation in decision-making. 

Faculty members have likewise been compelled to participate in the Accelerated Medicine Program without appropriate compensation. Concerns have also been raised regarding the continued operation of this program despite the absence of a student manual that would provide students and faculty with clear guidance regarding policies, expectations, and procedures.

Long-serving staff members have been dismissed in the name of "efficiency" with little warning and inadequate transition planning. Departments have been left scrambling to replace personnel who perform essential functions, even as student numbers continue to increase.

At the same time, efforts to improve retention of part-time faculty members have repeatedly encountered resistance. Proposals that could strengthen faculty stability, including pathways toward regularization and improved institutional support, have been blocked or delayed despite the growing need to recruit and retain qualified educators.

The consequences have been substantial. Capable and respected faculty members have resigned from leadership positions, declined opportunities to serve, or become disengaged from institutional initiatives. The university has lost not only personnel, but also valuable institutional knowledge, mentorship, continuity, and goodwill.

4. The Stakes for UERM

The concerns outlined above extend beyond questions of administrative style or individual decisions. They strike at the core of what has historically made UERM a respected institution.

Faculty concerns are increasingly echoed by students, who have publicly expressed frustrations regarding overcrowding, access to learning opportunities, administrative responsiveness, and the overall educational experience. Whether all such concerns are justified or not, their growing visibility contributes to reputational risk and affects how the institution is perceived by prospective students, trainees, faculty members, and alumni.

The greatest risk is not any single policy decision, but the cumulative effect of many such decisions over time. Institutions rarely decline because of one major event; they decline when warning signs are repeatedly identified but insufficiently addressed. Declining faculty engagement, increasing student dissatisfaction, reduced competitiveness of training programs, challenges in faculty recruitment and retention, and erosion of trust in leadership all threaten the reputation and long-term viability of the university.

Such damage is not easily reversed. A reputation built over generations can be undermined in only a few years, while rebuilding trust may take decades. The consequences of today's decisions will be borne not only by current students and faculty, but also by future generations who will inherit the institution that we leave behind.

For this reason, our concerns are raised not out of hostility, but by a sincere desire to restore the health of an institution which generations of extraordinary faculty, dedicated staff, committed students, and supportive alumni have helped build. 

UERM deserves leadership that listens, consults, collaborates, and inspires confidence. It deserves leadership that values faculty expertise, supports students, strengthens departments, and builds consensus rather than imposing decisions through authority alone.

We therefore respectfully urge the Board of Trustees and the alumni community to undertake a thorough review of these concerns, engage meaningfully with stakeholders, and take whatever actions are necessary to safeguard the future of UERM.

For the students we teach, the patients we serve, and the institution we love, meaningful change is necessary.

Respectfully,

Concerned Faculty Members of the UERM College of Medicine (in alphabetical order):

Dr. Maria Cristina Ablaza-Candelaria
Dr. Ma. Martina Alcantara
Dr. Napoleon Alcedo, Jr.
Dr. Jose Roberto Amparo
Dr. Antonio Anastacio
Dr. Camille Angeles
Dr. Rommel Bataclan
Dr. Czarina Kay Beltran
Dr. Christian Betita
Dr. Oscar Cabahug
Dr. Pia Camara-Chua
Dr. Lex Lycurgus Castillo
Dr. Randy Castillo
Dr. Rod Castro
Dr. Cynthia Castro
Dr. Cindy Chacon
Dr. Alberto Chua
Dr. Joseph Chua
Dr. Lilli May Cole
Dr. Maria Cristina Cruz
Dr. Christian Cuaresma
Dr. Oliver Domingo
Dr. Janelyn Dy-Ledesma
Dr. Idelfa Elevazo
Dr. Asis Encarnacion, Jr.
Dr. Joselyn Eusebio
Dr. Erman Fandialan
Dr. Bridget Fernandez
Dr. Francis Fernandez
Dr. Olivia Flores
Dr. Arthur Go
Dr. Jose Gil Guillermo, Jr.
Dr. Ramon Jason Javier
Dr. Hannah Labajo-Pagaduan
Dr. Clarissa Angela Layusa
Dr. Sue-Ann Locnen
Dr. Ronaldo Macaraig
Dr. Gabriel Martinez
Dr. Elmer Jose Meceda
Dr. Belinda Mesina-Nepomuceno
Dr. Frank Nacario
Dr. Ruby Nagtalon
Dr. Meinard Nepomuceno
Dr. Marietta Olaivar
Dr. Christia Padolina
Dr. Monique Punsalan
Dr. Jose Quebral
Dr. Vinna Marie Quiñones
Dr. Imelda Rivera
Dr. Isagani Rodriguez
Dr. Minette Rosario
Dr. Natividad Salazar
Dr. Luis Salvador
Dr. Rontgene Solante
Dr. Ma. Felicidad Soto
Dr. Ma. Lourdes Sta. Ana
Dr. Gail Turalba
Dr. Zebedee Uy
Dr. Erlinda Valdelleon
Dr. Eric Constantine Valera
Dr. Katrina Zialcita
Dr. Ricardo Zotomayor
Dr. Ma. Petrina Zotomayor