Pros
While there are dedicated individuals within the institution, systemic leadership failures and a culture that discourages transparency make this a difficult environment for faculty committed to ethical practice, patient welfare, and honest communication with clients.
Cons
I served as a faculty member at the Colorado State University Veterinary Teaching Hospital. Unfortunately, the work environment was toxic and characterized by poor leadership, favoritism, and a lack of accountability. Leadership appeared to prioritize faculty visibility in meetings over meaningful clinical contribution. Faculty who raised concerns about patient safety—particularly regarding chronic understaffing or recurrent substandard care by certain residents—were routinely dismissed rather than supported. Staffing shortages directly impacted patient care, with extremely high fees that was charged despite limited staffing and, at times, insufficiently trained technicians. Certain residents were repeatedly favored despite multiple medical errors. These errors were not consistently disclosed to owners, who were still expected to pay full medical charges. When concerns about resident performance and quality of care were raised, faculty were met with attempts at intimidation rather than constructive review or remediation. The hospital advertises specialist-level care; however, in practice, many patients were primarily managed by interns and residents with minimal or no direct faculty supervision. The internal medical review process lacked credibility, frequently involving individuals without direct knowledge of the patient or case, and showed little willingness to acknowledge mistakes or pursue meaningful quality improvement.
