Conferences Consultation Report June 2012
Introduction At the Spring General Assembly 2011, a Small Working Group on Medsin conferences was proposed with the intended aim of re-evaluating the function of our twice yearly conferences and to consider ways in which they can be brought more strategically in line with our vision and mission. Activity within the SWG was very limited so the National Committee decided to take a lead in collecting data in order to inform decisions about the future direction of conferences. The following methods were used to gain data: 1. Feedback form at GHC12 2. Consultation with previous conference organising committee presidents 3. ‘Ideas Café’ discussion station at SGA12
This document summarises the results of these various surveys, and then outlines our consequent recommendations as a National Committee for the future direction of conferences. Voting to officially adopt this report will take place at the Medsin Autumn Weekend (MAW) in September 2012. In the meantime, the contract for the National Conference 2012 in Warwick (20-21 st October) will be refined based on the results of this consultation, and the publicity for GHC13 will also be based upon this document. Many thanks, Medsin-UK National Committee 2011/2012
Current Medsin Conference Structure & Historical Context
Medsin-UK classically hosts 2 national full weekend conferences per year: the National Conference held in the autumn (October-November) and the Global Health Conference held in the spring (March). Medsin branches bid for the right to host the conference on behalf of the national network and in return take on responsibility for all of the logistical organisation as well as the thematic content, with a certain amount of support and stipulation from the National Committee on behalf of the network. Historically there was a distinction between the NC and the GHC. The National Conference had a greater focus on Medsin’s own activities and training, whereas the Global Health Conference was primarily an educational event on a particular theme within global health. However in recent years the distinction between the 2 conferences has been lost with both following a very similar basic structure. Furthermore with the distillation of Medsin’s 3 core areas of concern, (education, advocacy and action), there has been increasing effort to capitalise on the conferences to feed into all 3 areas rather than simply focussing on education. The current conference structure that has emerged is as follows: • Focussed around 1 broad thematic area • Each half day consists of a plenary (roughly 1.5 hrs) with all delegates together and a workshop (1 hr) with delegates choosing from a list of options • Plenaries focus on a specific area of the theme and have 3 speakers and a chair. Each speaks for 1520 mins followed by an extended time for questions from the floor • Sometimes a workshop slot has been replaced by an advocacy oriented Question Time event – notably at GHC10 which occurred in the run up to the general election and attracted representatives from all political parties • Buffet style ethical sandwich lunches are provided within the delegate fee, along with tea and coffee in breaks • Various National Working Groups, Branch Presidents, Activity Coordinators etc may meet during lunchtimes with an emergency voting session often tacked onto the end of a day • The organising committee arrange a social for the Saturday evening which includes a hot meal and evening entertainment such as a ceilidh or salsa dancing • Delegates are offered floor-space accommodation either with a student host or in a school/church hall • Student delegate fees are in the £20-30 range, with online pre-booking taking place online through paypal
Consultation 1: Feedback survey at GHC12 An extensive feedback form was produced and distributed to all delegates at the Global Health Conference at KCL 14th-15th April. The form was split into 3 sections: feedback specifically on GHC12; feedback on Medsin conferences in general; and feedback on other aspects of the network. A total of 128 forms were collected and the data has been analysed. Most relevant to this discussion is section 2, the results of which are below: 1. Proposed Changes in Conferences The form proposed a new format of conferences as follows – and then asked delegates if they would be in favour of this model and why: •
•
National Conference in the Autumn with much more emphasis on training with sessions primarily run by inspiring students from our branches and activities (including some of Medsin’s trustees and patrons), focussing on equipping the network with skills for the year in our key areas of work in education & advocacy & action – as well as more direct advocacy actions over the weekend A Global Health Conference in the Spring with more external speakers and focus on education around a theme – but still with a bit more time for specific Medsin discussion eg. regarding National Working Group time for everyone
2. Possible Changes to the Timetable Mean ideal number of workshops per slot: Mode preferred number of workshops:
9.4 12
Would you be prepared to reduce plenary/workshop time for ADVOCACY: Would you be prepared to reduce plenary/workshop time for OPEN SPACE:
Yes – 44 Yes – 38
No – 68 No – 44
Would you be prepared to reduce plenary/workshop time for BRANCH/ACTIVITY sessions: Yes – 25 No – 88 Everyone else was confused or didn’t respond!
Example comments on altering timetable for these various options: “I would like more advocacy/working group time, but I also think the formal education is very important!” “More branch/activity meetings would allow improved cooperation and coordination between groups.” “Advocacy can be fitted around existing sessions, open space should take the place of one workshop slot, branch/activity meetings are fine over lunch!” “Advocacy is a niche activity for many members - Education should be the key function of conferences.” “We should better coordinate existing advocacy actions. Incorporate opens space discussions into longer lunchbreaks. Education should be the most important and most prominent aspect. We don't want to bore/intimidate newer members who do not want to be involved with activities!” “I like the current format and I'm here to get myself educated and plenaries/workshops are great for that.” “Open space discussion should definitely be available at some point.” “One fewer plenary could be good, or maybe even two fewer for the national conference. Interactive discussions are good; people get bored just going to more lectures; we do that during the week!”
3. Ideal Number & Type of Conferences
Average number of conferences preferred:
2.26
What scale of conferences do you prefer: All national Mixture All regional No response
54 54 2 6
Consultation 2: SGA Open Space Discussion Feedback At the Spring General General Assembly 28th-29th April 2012 in Leeds an ‘Ideas Café’ open space discussion on conferences was facilitated as an informal way of canvassing opinion of ~50 of the most involved individuals in the network. Obviously this doesn’t allow objective consultation, but the hope was that the method would allow a general direction to occur, in conjunction with other methods of collecting ideas. The following report summarises the general opinion in the group: 1. Plenaries
The group were generally happy with the idea of a reduced number of plenaries in favour of a more varied timetable. It was suggested that plenaries could perhaps be slightly longer to accommodate more time for questions as this is the most engaging part of a plenary.
2. Workshops
Workshops are universally a very popular aspect of conferences. There was a discussion on how many different options per workshop slot was ideal, recognising that a greater number of options does mean smaller and potentially more interactive individual sessions – some suggesting that 12 participants should be a maximum per ‘training’ workshop – lecture style sessions could obviously hold more. However the general consensus was that there didn’t need to be as many options (recent conferences have had as many as 20 options per slot) as this is an unnecessary burden on an Organising Committee (OC) when generally delegates would be interested in attending several of the options in any one slot. Delegates were keen for more training style workshops and would like to see sessions that are longer than 1 hour. It was also suggested that individual sessions may be repeated in multiple slots to give more delegates the chance to attend when there are several popular options. The need to have clear and accurate stated aims and contents blurbs for workshops in advance was also highlighted as some workshops at recent conferences did not end up matching the published briefs.
3. Themes
It was considered whether the theme should be determined by the Organising Committee or more strategically set by the network in advance. People clearly felt it was important for OCs to have ownership over the theme and it was recognised that the network can exert influence over the theme through which host proposal they vote for – therefore the NC should work to increase the amount of competition for conference hosting bids. It was also suggested that the network could vote on a shortlisted set of thematic options that OCs could choose from. Regarding the thematic distinction between National Conference and GHC, it was suggested that a more literal distinction of National theme vs Global theme may work to emphasise our ‘global health local issue’ tag line, and providing a yearly chance for advocacy on national issues – but also recognised that stipulating a theme too narrowly may reduce the number of branches keen to host, so may be better to encourage more nationally themed conferences but not stick to a rigid distinction. Regarding the new proposed National Conference, ideas proposed included that the National Committee take more of a role in organising it (though people accepted that the NC don’t currently really have the capacity to do this); that we could move to more of an IFMSA ‘Standing Committee’ structure where we have several parallel theme events running and people can choose which to attend. 4. Cost
The discussion briefly touched upon the fact that conferences are currently heavily subsidised by sponsorship money that may be better used elsewhere by Medsin. Participants in the discussions recognised this but also felt the need to keep the delegate fee fairly low as students are having to travel sometimes long distances to attend – which is also expensive. The impression was that people would be willing to see the delegate fees increase slightly but not too much, and that it would be useful for delegates to be better informed about where the money goes to persuade them of the value for money! The importance of making sure the conference moves around geographically from event to event was also reiterated. 5. Catering
The discussion also briefly touched on catering, as this is an area that invariably gets lots of complaints. The idea of not providing catering was considered, as this would be logistically easier and would make conferences cheaper – however often delegates seem to justify paying the delegate fee as they get something concrete like 2/3 meals for this money. Participants also recognised that providing lunch meant people stayed together more and was better for meeting others, as if people had to go out to buy lunch then they would be more likely just to go with their existing friends. Participants also felt that having to go out for lunch would mean that lunchtime working meetings would be difficult. 6. Training
The importance of training was also universally recognised. It was suggested that if regional and local training was strengthened then there may be decreased need for it at national events, though voting members also recognised that national conferences are great opportunities to also bring in high level external trainers to train in novel areas. The importance of making sure that different people from the same branches go to different training sessions in order to maximally equip the branch/activity collectively was also emphasised. Participants strongly supported the idea of having increased attendance and training at the Medsin Autumn Weekend.
Consultation 3: Conference OC Presidents Consultation A skype consultation of various previous and future Organising Committee Presidents was conducted. The following individuals were present: Sunil Bhopal – National Conference Leeds 2005 Yize Wan – National Conference Nottingham 2009 Claire Ferraro – Global Health Conference Newcastle 2010 Dan Knights – Global Health Conference Cambridge 2011 Charlie Player – National Conference Warwick 2012 Summary of discussion: -
-
-
-
-
In theory the group was in favour of making the 2 conferences qualitatively different (as suggested above), but everyone recognised that it would be very difficult to get people to attend a national conference if it didn’t have some big speakers and thematic component – and concluded that whilst perhaps a difference in emphasis would work, it would be important to maintain elements of everything in both conferences There was strong consensus that OCs should have say over what the theme is – organising a conference is a big burden on a group of people and it has to be something that they are passionate about – and the group was in agreement that the network could exert its strategic influence through recommendations and how they vote rather than dictating themes directly The group emphasised the importance of having plenaries that are also action focussed – so have at least one speaker that talks about potential solutions rather than focussing on the problems Plenary length – all recognised that debate and question time is the most engaging. There was debate about whether to lengthen debate time by asking speakers to speak for less time – although it was felt that it’s difficult to expect a big name speaker to speak for less than 15 mins The group considered whether we are trying to make our conferences too professional and hence making the work for the OC too much – but again recognised the balance that we are also trying to professionalise the image of the network and conferences can be a great opportunity to do this There was unanimous agreement on more student speaker involvement – felt that it is inspiring for delegates to see speakers who are closer to them in age and stage The group recognised challenge of making a conference inspirational for newcomers yet still deep and challenging enough for old-hands Regarding financing, it was felt that it was worth exploring using sponsorship money elsewhere and perhaps allowing the conference to become slightly more expensive The social was recognised as a really important feature to allow Medsin members to meet one another and enjoy themselves, but in order to do this it wasn’t felt that it needed to be expensive or glitzy! Regarding collaborating with other organisations to run conferences, it was emphasised that whilst there may be financial gains – in which case it would be an attractive option – we should be cautious as many older global health organisations are much less experienced than Medsin at running conferences and we should consider what there is to be gained from partnership for Medsin
Recommendations Based upon the above listed consultations and upon further informal conversations with various members of the network, the National Committee 2011-12 has come up with the following recommendations. The General Assembly is invited to adopt this whole report at MAW 2012, and to vote upon the recommendations as a guidance statement. If a guidance statement is adopted, these recommendations will be acted upon for the the Global Health Conference 2013 and all subsequent conferences. If 3 or more voting members request to vote on the guidance statement in parts, then adoption of the recommendations of each of the following 15 sections will be done separately. 1.
Increasing competition for hosting conferences
1.1 The National Committee will issue the initial advert for hosts of the next year’s conference at least 2
weeks prior to the equivalent conference that year. 1.1.1 Advertising media will include emails to branches, website advert, facebook & twitter 1.1.2 Regional Coordinators will be tasked with approaching branches specifically to discuss and encourage the possibility of them submitting a bid 1.2 The conference itself should be regarded as a prime opportunity to encourage and inspire attendees to volunteer to host the conference in their branch the next year 1.2.1 The conference programme should include an advert for the next year’s host 1.2.2 The National Committee will be responsible for arranging a short presentation from previous/current conference hosts on what is involved in organising a conference at some point during the conference itself 1.3 The deadline for proposal bids should be 1 month after the conference 1 year previously 1.3.1 All proposals will be circulated to the voting members and an e-vote will be conducted as per the bylaws 1.3.2 Voting members should be given guidelines of what to consider when voting, to include: feasibility of budget, relevance of proposed theme to Medsin’s long term strategic development, ethical & environmental considerations etc. [As stated in Bylaw 8.2.2.] 2.
Fundraising and Ticket Pricing 2.1.1 Delegate ticket prices should be allowed to rise slightly from the incredibly low levels they have been maintained at for a number of years – a student ticket including social should be in the region of £30 – thus removing some of the financial strain on Organising Committees whilst still maintaining a remarkably cheap rate 2.1.2 A limited number of high profit non-student tickets should always be sold for conferences
2.2 Conference Events must not operate from personal bank accounts. A new account should be created or arrangements made with the National Committee to use the Medsin-UK account for this purpose. 2.3 The National Committee should take entire responsibility for raising sponsorship from all national
sponsors as part of long term sponsorship packages including exposure at conferences, in the magazine, on the website etc. 2.3.1 The National Committee & Board of Trustees should be free to decide where best to use sponsorship money raised within the network, with the freedom to channel it into other more needed areas of the network (such as branches, activities, personnel etc.) rather than necessarily using to directly over-subsidise conferences 2.3.2 The requirements for exposure of nationally secured sponsors at conferences should be stipulated in the contract with the Organising Committee
2.3.3 2.3.4
Organising Committees should only be allowed to fundraise from companies and organisations in their local area, as stipulated in their contract with the National Committee If Organising Committees wish to approach any specific national sponsors then they should consult the National Committee prior to doing so
3. Supporting, Reporting and Accountability of Organising Committees: 3.1 A full and explicit contract should be signed between the National Committee and the Organising
Committee within a month after successful election of host branch 3.1.1 This contract should define deadlines for regular (2 monthly & fortnightly in last 2 months) updates from the Organising Committee to the NC (to then be circulated to the Voting Members), including a comprehensive, up-to-date budget at each report 3.1.2 The Organising Committee should compile a report for presentation at the next General Assembly following the conference 3.1.3 This report should include a full financial report and shouldn’t be adopted by the voting members until 50% of the profits have been transferred to Medsin-UK and the conference bank account has been closed 3.2 The National Committee should support the Organising Committee and decrease the burden on them by: 3.2.1 Provision and hosting of a conferences section on the national website 3.2.2 Management of ticket bookings through the Medsin-UK paypal account (though a small charge to the OC will be incurred to pay the web developer to set up the necessary ticket options) 3.2.3 Supporting of the Organising Committee in their publicity strategy by helping to circulate leaflets produced by the OC; passing on blurbs and adverts prepared by the OC through regional coordinators, branch presidents and activity coordinators; promotion through MedsinUK social media channels 3.3 In turn the Organising Committee will be expected to: 3.3.1 Provide the necessary resources 3.3.2 Keep the website section up to date from the earliest possible opportunity (issuing an introductory “Coming Soon� page at least six months before the conference, and putting up initial details at least 3 months before the conference) 3.3.3 Open ticket booking at least 2 months before the conference 3.4 Conference events should be run according to environmental principles wherever possible, for example, avoiding the use of disposable items and packaging, and encouraging the use of public transport wherever possible. 4. Catering 4.1 Providing lunch is important is it enables networking and enables meetings to occur during the lunch
break 4.2 More details of the amount of food to be provided for an individual lunch should be shared beforehand so delegates have the option of bringing extra food with them to add to their lunch if they feel it necessary 4.3 Catering provided should always be ethically sourced, but organising committees should avoid only ordering vegan food
5. Themes in general 5.1 Organising Committees should retain the right to decide the overall theme of their proposed
conference and should be clear about this in their proposal document
5.2 National Conference themes should be much broader as the focus will be on training and building the
network in various ways within a broad theme
5.3 Global Health Conference themes may be more specific but should be in line with the strategic
priorities of the network
5.4 Voting members should ensure that the theme (amongst other features) is born in mind when voting
upon a host branch as a way of ensuring that themes are in line with Medsin’s strategic direction/national priority areas 6. ‘Network Time’ at Conferences 6.1 Each conference should comprise dedicated time to showcase relevant aspects of the network: 6.1.1 Basic information about activities should be communicated through encouraging activities to
hold stalls and run workshops Network podium time should be focussed towards the sharing of specific recent success stories from branches, activities, national working groups and the national committee. Time for this should be particularly reserved at the National Conference 6.2 Network podium time at the Global Health Conference should be focussed towards strategically selected activities and national working groups to be featured that are of particular relevance to the conference theme 6.3 Introductions to the various aspects of the network should also take place during the ‘National Working Group’ and Ideas Café times at the Global Health Conference 6.1.2
7. Workshops 7.1 Workshops provide an opportunity for delegates to discuss areas in greater detail, and to gain skills or
7.2 7.3
7.4 7.5
7.6
7.7 7.8
knowledge on specific areas. The organising committee should emphasise the importance of interactive exercises to those they offer workshop slots to, with a recommendation that any grounding “monologue/presentation” based aspect of the workshop should not last more than 20 minutes, before engaging in discussion. The number of different workshop options in any given slot should be in the region of 12 and the possibility of repeating popular workshop options in multiple slots Workshop capacities should be matched to the style of session: 7.3.1 Training style workshops should not have more than 20 participants 7.3.2 Educational style workshops may have up to 40 participants. Where possible these should have break-out group discussions and a lot of question/discussion time. In general workshops of 75 minutes or more should be aimed for A wider range of workshop facilitators should be encouraged, including: 7.5.1 Trained student trainers 7.5.2 Activity coordinators 7.5.3 Students with relevant expertise 7.5.4 External partner individuals/organisations Training at conferences should be: 7.6.1 Mainly higher level delivered either by students with specific experience or external/high level professional trainers 7.6.2 Include SOME basic level training for newcomers to the network Most basic TNT-style training sessions should be mainly delivered at a local branch/regional level rather than at national conferences General Assembly weekends should be prioritised as opportunities for role-specific training for individuals on branch committees or activity national committees 8. Plenaries
8.1 Plenary speakers should aim to speak for 15 minutes, and a minimum of half an hour should be
8.2
8.3
8.4 8.5
reserved for questions and debate at the end of each plenary, as this is widely recognised to be the most appreciated part of plenaries by both speakers and delegates. In order to ensure this time is reserved for interaction, trained and assertive time-keepers are needed, to politely, but firmly insist the discussion moves on. Organising Committees should not discriminate in their choice of speakers, and thus should aim to find speakers from a diverse range of social groups, including multiple cultural, religious and ethnic backgrounds, and should aim for gender-balanced panels. Plenaries provide an excellent opportunity for students with expertise in the area being discussed to chair a panel. Chairs should aim to give a very brief introduction and conclusion, to introduce the speakers, and to coordinate the discussion time at the end. Their role is considered to be to facilitate, rather than direct or dominate the discussion. Time-keeping is essential, and students should have some experience in chairing events of this nature if at all possible. These requirements should be communicated clearly to potential chairs by the Organising Committee. Where possible, student speakers with relevant experience in a topic being discussed should be sought. Panels should aim to include a student perspective where possible. Plenaries should aim not just to educate about the problem, but also to suggest possible solutions. In particular, speakers should be asked to focus on specific examples, and tangible action points that students can effect now. 9. Advocacy/Campaigning
9.1 Advocacy, as a key part of Medsin’s work, should be incorporated and fully integrated into the 9.2
9.3
9.4 9.5 9.6
conference timetable at every opportunity. Opportunities to gain advocacy skills (e.g. in training and workshops), to engage with policy-makers (e.g. through global health question times and workshops), and to discuss how to integrate advocacy into existing projects (e.g. through NWG discussion time)should be provided wherever possible. Opportunities to campaign at the conference itself should also be provided, in collaboration with the National Committee, Activities, and National Working Groups. As a minimum, organising committees should aim to organise at least one large campaign stunt, providing the opportunity for a photoshoot, and media releases on a relevant topic, and three campaigning actions, such as sending of postcards/petition-signing etc. The numbers of Medsinners participating in each campaigning action should be recorded and released as part of the conference report. Wherever possible, campaigning groups (both Medsin’s advocating groups and externals) should be offered display space (stalls and/or poster displays) to encourage engagement from Medsin members. With support from the Policy & Advocacy Director, Communication Director and their teams, Organising Committees should develop a press strategy and try to issue press releases on advocacy topics and stunts related to the conference both before and after the conference.
10. Socials 10.1 The opportunity to socialise with other delegates is important in providing informal opportunities
for ideas-sharing, welfare and cohesion of the network. Thus committees should aim to provide a small social event on the Friday night for any delegates arriving early (e.g. a film or quiz night), and a large social event on the Saturday night. 10.2 This social should not start before 7.30pm and food should not be served before 8pm, in order to allow voting members sufficient time to reach the venue after late meetings. 10.3 Organising committees should aim to provide sufficient spaces for the majority of the delegates to attend if they wish to, some form of entertainment, and a hot evening meal.
A VIP room/area should be provided for speakers and high profile guests, to enable development of Medsin’s external relationships. Inviting these individuals to the earlier part of the Saturday social should enable their engagement with Medsin members
10.4
11. Long-Term Outcomes and Action Points 11.1 Medsin recognises that the impact of a conference can extend far beyond the weekend upon which
it occurs. Therefore the Organising Committee should be aware that the responsibilities of hosting a conference extend beyond the conference itself, and should aim to follow-up on the areas below, providing monthly summaries of progress to the National Committee. 11.2 The organising committee should thank appropriately all externals they have engaged with in the organising of the conference, hand over contact detail spreadsheets and, where appropriate, introduce these contacts to the National Committee to enable long-term engagement. 11.3 Before the conference, a post-conference communication strategy should be drawn up in collaboration with the Policy & Advocacy Director, Communication Director and their teams to allow advocacy beyond the conference, and to also share information about the conference and its successes. This follow-up communication strategy should be cohesive with pre-conference publicity and should aim to incorporate as many of these forms of engagement as possible: use of social media, newsletter follow-up, emails to delegates, press releases to local and national newspapers, press releases to journals, use of Medsin’s website, use of blogging platforms. All key publicity/press releases should be distributed within 2 weeks of the conference, and a communication strategy should be implemented to spread news about the conference. 11.4 The organising committee should produce conference report within 6 weeks of the conference to be circulated to all delegates and archived on the Medsin-UK website. This should include as a minimum 11.4.1 Summaries of not less than a page of all plenaries, including the presentations, discussion and “action points” to take away from each plenary 11.4.2 Write-ups of some of the workshops 11.4.3 Sharing of advocacy successes 11.4.4 Sharing of branch and activity engagement in the conference 11.4.5 Contact details for all those delegates and contributors who are happy to share this information. 11.5 During the conference an individual from the organising committee should be responsible for producing high quality photographs, which should be utilised in follow-up material and shared with the national committee within a week of the conference. Organising committees should also aim to produce a conference video and other methods of sharing and storing memories of the event where possible, and to share these with all delegates. 11.6 The National Committee should provide the organising committee with a feedback form which should be distributed and collected before the end of the conference, and evaluate feedback within 6 weeks of the event, to share with the Organising Committee and network. Where possible, feedback on individual workshops and plenaries should also be collated. 11.7 The Organising Committee should aim to complete all outstanding financial transactions as soon as possible following a conference, and should update the National Committee monthly on their progress, with appropriate budgets, before submitting a final financial report, accompanying their main report to the General Assembly.
Recommended Timetables The following recommended timetables have been produced as a summary of the above recommendations, showing relatively how much time should be dedicated to each different aspect of the conference. It should be emphasised that these are suggested timetables and acceptance of these recommendations does not
imply that they will be rigidly enforced – simply used as a guide on which to model future conference timetables. These will be voted on separately from the recommendations above. Global Health Conference The recommended timetable for the Global Health Conference remains similar to the existing structure – just with one fewer plenary leaving time for some National Working Group time.
Saturday
Sunday 9.30am – 10.00am
NC
10.00am – 11.30 am
Plenary 2
Coffee Break
11.30am – 12.00pm
Coffee Break
12.00am – 1.15pm
EDUCATE Workshop
12.00am – 1.30pm
NWG Meetings (into Lunch)
1.15pm – 2.00pm
Lunch
1.30pm – 2.15pm
Lunch
2.00pm – 3.15pm
ADVOCATE Workshop
2.15pm – 3.30pm
ACT Workshop
3.15pm – 4.00pm
Ideas Café
3.30pm – 5.15pm
Plenary 3
4.00pm – 4.30pm
Coffee Break
5.15 – 5.30pm
Closing Ceremony
4.30pm – 5.30pm
Question Time
5.30pm – 6.30pm
Voting Session (Voting Members only!)
7.30pm (for 8pm)
Social Starts Food
9.00 – 9.45am
Intro and Keynote Speech
9.45 – 11.30am
Plenary 1
11.30am – 12.00am
National Conference Option #1 The first option for a new national conference would be a fairly significant change, comprising: - A broad theme e.g. ‘Social Determinants of Health’ - A keynote speech and opening and closing plenary focusing around this theme with all delegates together - Subsequently delegates would choose to follow one of 6-8 streams - Any individual within or outside of the network could propose to coordinate a ‘stream’ which focusing on the work of a specific activity or NWG, relevant to the broad theme - This would comprise a 5 hours of dedicated time during which the person coordinating the stream would organise relevant education/speakers, discussion forums, relevant training and coordinating advocacy actions and long term tangible outcomes to effect positive change in this area from the group - There would also always be a ‘General Introduction to Global Health’ stream for people who are new to the network - Further to this there would be time for ‘Network Success Presentations’, National Working Group meetings and High-level/External Training Logistics of Implementing Streams - The Organising Committee would determine the overall theme and would organise the opening and closing plenary content - The National Committee would make suggestions for training sessions and possible speakers for the “Network Successes” session from Activities, Branches and National Working Groups, and the Organising Committee would coordinate these - A call-out would be issued for stream-organisers once a host has been elected
-
Applications to run ‘streams’ would be jointly considered by the Organising Committee and National Committee
Advantages of this Format - Currently delegates who are “new” to global health often feel they leave a conference knowing a lot about one area but wanting a better “grounding” in the wider issues of global health from engage further. The ‘Introduction’ stream would provide this. - Conversely some network members feel less inclined to attend conferences because they already have a grounding in the main theme. The provision of streams increases the range of options, and thus there is likely to be an area they know less about. - Working together in a stream for 5 hours is likely to provide delegates with the opportunity to form deeper, longer-lasting relationships with other members of the network. - Feedback shows that delegates feel our workshops are too short to really explore an issue -having these longer session gives the opportunity to engage on a deeper level. - Streams would provide different groups within the network to engage more members in their work and build up their national working group/activity. - This format allows education, advocacy and action to be effectively integrated around a particular topic. Additionally training within the stream would be applied and thus engaging.
A potential timetable for this format, including streams, would be as follows:
Saturday
Sunday 9.30am – 10.00am
NC
10.00am – 11.30am
Stream Session (2)
Coffee Break
11.30am – 12.00am
Coffee Break
12.00am – 1.15pm
Training Session
12.00 – 1.15pm
NWG Meetings (Into Lunch)
1.15pm – 2.00pm
Lunch
1.15 – 2.00pm
Lunch
9.00 – 9.45am
Intro and Keynote Speech
9.45 – 11.30am
Opening Plenary
11.30am – 12.00am
2.00pm – 4.00pm
Stream Session (1)
2.00pm – 3.30pm
Stream Session (3)
4.00pm – 4.30pm
Coffee Break
3.30pm – 5.15pm
Closing Plenary
4.30pm – 5.30pm
Network Success Presentations
5.15pm – 5.30pm
Closing Ceremony
5.30pm – 6.30pm
Voting Session (Voting Members only!)
7.30pm (for 8pm)
Social Starts Food
National Conference Option #2 A less radically different version of the National Conference could continue to comprise: - 2 plenaries - Opportunities for advocacy through question time event - Opportunities for Training - Network Success Presentations and National Working Group meetings. A proposed timetable for this would be as follows:
Saturday
Sunday 9.30am – 10.00am
NC
10.00am – 11.00am
Question Time 2
Coffee Break
11.00am – 11.30am
Coffee Break
12.00am – 1.15pm
Network Success Presentations
11.30am – 12.30pm
NWG Meetings (Into Lunch)
1.15pm – 2.00pm
Lunch
12.30pm – 1.30pm
Lunch
2.00pm – 4.00pm
Training Workshop
1.30pm – 3.30pm
Workshop
4.00pm – 4.30pm
Coffee Break
3.30pm – 5.15pm
Plenary 2
4.30pm – 5.30pm
Question Time 1
5.15pm – 5.30pm
Closing Ceremony
5.30pm – 6.30pm
Voting Session (Voting Members only!)
9.00 – 9.45am
Intro and Keynote Speech
9.45 – 11.30am
Plenary 1
11.30am – 12.00am
7.30pm (for 8pm)
Social Starts Food
The General Assembly are invited to vote on the following: 1) Whether to adopt this report (i.e. to approve the consultation work that has been done) 2) The recommendations of this report, as a guidance statement for conference organisation. 3) If (2) passes, a motion to remove the existing by-laws on conferences, and replace them with a shorter by-law which refers to upholding the contents of the guidance statement. 4) Which of the two National Conference options they would like to adopt. 5) The recommended timetables (once a National Conference option has been adopted)