Logo

Heartfelt Efforts

May 15, 2015

This week it was announced that the MI HEARTSafe School Award Program will honor 122 elementary, middle and high schools in Michigan this month for demonstrating their preparedness for cardiac emergencies.
Among the criteria these schools have met are these:
  • A written medical emergency response plan (ERP), reviewed at least annually with staff.
  • A medical emergency response team (MERT) with current CPR/AED certification, sufficient to respond to an emergency during school hours AND during organized after-school activities and sports.
  • At least 10% of staff, 50% of coaches and 50% of PE staff with current CPR/AED certification.
  • The sufficient number of accessible, properly maintained and inspected AEDs, ready to use, with signs identifying AED locations. Sufficient number is estimated by time to scene, in place, and analyzing within a target goal of 3 minutes.
  • The performance of at least one cardiac emergency response drill per year, including recognizing signs of sudden cardiac arrest and using the American Heart Association’s Chain of Survival: calling 9-1-1 and use of bystander CPR and AED until EMS arrive to provide advanced life support.
  • All athletic preparticipation screening completed with the Michigan High School Athletic Association (MHSAA) form (updated in 2010).

MI HEARTSafe School designation is awarded for a period of three school years.

For questions about MI HEARTSafe Schools Award Program and how to qualify and apply for MI HEARTSafe designation, contact Deb Duquette at 517-335-8286 or email [email protected].

Sweating the Small Stuff - #3

June 5, 2018

I’m sure it discouraged some of our state’s high school football coaches to learn that the Representative Council of the Michigan High School Athletic Association did not approve at its May 6-7 meeting what some people refer to as the “enhanced strength of schedule proposal” for determining 256 qualifiers to the MHSAA’s 11-player football playoffs.

There was desire among some Council members to appease those who keep trying to reduce the difficulties that a football tournament causes for regular season scheduling and conference affiliations. Others noted that the proposal, as presented, could cause as much harm to some schools and conferences as it would help others, that it did not solve the scheduling problem but shifted it.

During spirited discussion, some Council members resurrected two ideas that have been rejected previously, such as (1) doubling the playoffs once again (and shortening the regular season to eight games), and (2) coupling a six- or seven-win minimum with the revised strength of schedule criteria. The pros and cons of each idea flowed freely.

And therein is the problem. If one digs down into the details of proposals, both old and new, there are both positive and negative aspects apparent, both intended and unintended consequences likely.

There can be paralysis in analysis; but when we are dealing with more than 600 high school programs and a physically demanding sport with fewer regular-season contests permitted than in any other sport, one cannot be too careful. Eliminating one of just nine regular-season games? Increasing first-round tournament mismatches? Disadvantaging larger schools locked in leagues or areas of the state where smaller schools predominate? These are not minor matters.

And until there are sensible answers, these are not trivial questions.