Excellence in National or Local Education Meetings/Stand-Alone Events

Sponsored by:

This award recognises domestic meetings series or standalone events that successfully address unmet educational needs via the integration of national clinical/professional expertise and experts in the field, who are known and respected by their peers for their dedication and integrity.

The meetings/event(s) should cater for national and local delegates and provide robust guidance which are consistent with national guidelines and applied in the local setting of each delegate.

Entries must show how the activity has resulted in a positive change in awareness/understanding amongst delegates that will ultimately lead to delegate-initiated local education campaigns or changes in their own teaching/clinical practices. The entry must demonstrate how the educational content has increased awareness and knowledge of effective diagnoses/treatment, optimised patient care pathways and ultimately has the potential to improve standards of care.

Judges will want you to put your meetings/event(s) into context, at the outset, to clarify the rationale behind your strategy and tactics. They need to know what your ambitions were and how the meetings/event(s) were used to drive them.

Entries may be submitted for virtual or in-person national or local meetings. Entries should acknowledge/ credit the role of meeting organisers.

Work conducted between July 2018 and December 2020 will be eligible. However, where applicable, the next steps for the campaign should be included in the entry. If the submission has been entered previously, the current entry must provide benchmarks to clearly demonstrate how the programme was evaluated and how it has developed over time.

Remember: anonymise your entry.

Don’t forget:
- provide a copy of any previous submission for this work
- be open! Were there any other contributors to the programme?

JUDGING CRITERIA AND ENTRY FORMAT:

Entry Title

Please give a simple title for your entry of no more than ten words

Executive Summary – 200 words. 0 (zero) marks

This will be used if entry is selected as a finalist and does not need to be anonymised.

Main entry

• The word/character limit for each criterion will be outlined via the online entry system, which is new for 2021.

1. Budget Band Information, as below:

Band A under £10,000
Band B £10,001-£25,000
Band C £25,001-£50,000
Band D £50,001-£100,000
Band E £100,001-£200,000
Band F over £200,001.

If your client has declined to allow this, you must state this within your submission.

• Failure to provide the budget band seriously impacts the judge’s ability to assess the entry against other entries and may result in the entry being disqualified
• The budget band provides important context for judging the innovation, delivery and impact of a piece of work.
• Impressive work is not always dependent on budget size, so there is no right or wrong budget.

2. Situation Analysis and needs assessment – 15 marks (300 words)

• In this section you should show the judges how well you understood the situation at the start of the project, establishing a clear need for the initiative
• Use this situation to clearly lay out benchmark data that you will refer to in your measurement of effectiveness later
• Show the judges the best information, data and insights you have about uptake of health interventions, current practice, defining/ segmenting audiences, identifying educational or information needs, which channels will best reach the audience, competitive environment, creative landscape before the start of your work

3. Objectives – 15 marks (250 words)

• Describe the objectives for the project or programme and how these will be measured

4. Strategy – 15 marks (250 words)

• Please outline what your strategy was and why
• Refer to the data and insight in the situation analysis section
• Explain why this was the right strategy and any points to emphasise bold or innovative strategy selection

5. Implementation – 15 marks (400 words)

• Please describe how you implemented the project or programme
• Please briefly outline why these specific tactics were selected
• For a programme this should include describing what tactics were deployed to implement the strategy
• For a meeting or stand-alone event this should describe how the meeting or event was delivered

6. Effectiveness: Outcomes vs Objectives – 20 marks (400 words)

• Show clearly how the programme or project delivered against the stated objectives
• Help the judges to understand how the effectiveness was measured so they can judge the strength of the evaluation
• Include comments from third party stakeholders in this section but ONLY if they clearly help to demonstrate the impact of the work and were a planned part of the measurement approach

Supporting Materials

Please remember that the first round of scoring is based only on the content of the two-page entry form. No supporting material is viewed at this stage.

Please only send information that helps the judges to see how you researched, planned, implemented and measured the programme within each specific category, e.g.:

• Information illustrating how the strategy was brought to life is helpful but we don’t need a copy of every item
• Information supporting the evaluation and measurement is the most relevant
• ESSENTIAL: a summary sheet must be supplied detailing each piece of supporting material and clearly identifying where evidence can be found to support claims in the entry
• PLUS: An approved visual image or video that supports the entry for use in print, results pages online and in the AV.