Please login to the form below

Not currently logged in
Email:
Password:

The Porterhouse Medical Group Award for Excellence in Professional Education Programmes

Back to full list

Sponsored by:

Judging criteria:

The judges will be focusing on the following areas when scoring your entry. Write your entries accordingly.

  • Evidence of stakeholder/customer insight and identification of the needs of the relevant group (10)
  • Clearly-defined strategy to deliver against specific objectives (10)
  • Creativity or innovation in content, presentation or delivery (10)
  • Educational value – how well the programme met the needs of physicians and/or other stakeholders (10)
  • Evidence that the programme has developed or enhanced partnerships with key clinical groups or associations (10)
  • Effectiveness – evidence for and measurement of successful outcomes against key objectives (20)
  • Independent, third-party stakeholder feedback. (10)

Remember: anonymise your entry. Only one set of supporting materials required.

Don't forget: provide a copy of any previous submissions for this work.

This category recognises excellence in the delivery of professional education initiatives (programmes, not stand-alone meetings) that are designed to:

  • Deliver information and resolution for unmet needs/clinical issues
  • Challenge and improve existing standards of care
  • Provide information, education and support for specific therapy areas
  • Improve the quality of information about treatment or services
  • Raise standards of clinical practice.

Evidence must be provided to show how the initiative developed or enhanced partnership with key clinical groups or associations.

Eligible initiatives should:

  • Identify and address specific educational needs
  • Have had a positive, measureable impact on professional development as a result of changes in perception and/or behaviour
  • Improve the quality of information about a condition
  • Raise standards of clinical practice and patient care.

Work conducted during the two year period between January 2016 and December 2017 will be eligible to allow for the demonstration of real change brought about over time. Where submissions have been entered previously a copy of the previous submission(s) should also be included within the supporting materials. The current entry must provide benchmarks to clearly demonstrate how the programme was evaluated and how it has developed over time.

Entry Format

Executive Summary (max 200 words) 

Must be supplied separately from the two-page A4 submission.
If your submission is nominated for an award, only extracts from executive summaries will be published, allowing you to ensure it contains no confidential information. No other part of your entry will be reproduced. Please note that the judges will not see the executive summary and it does not need to be anonymised.

THE REMAINDER OF YOUR ENTRY SHOULD NOT
EXCEED TWO A4 PAGES AND MUST BE ANONYMISED

(unless otherwise indicated in the category description).

1. Situation/Market Analysis

A description of the situation/environment before you undertook the work. For example:

  • What information, research, analysis etc that led you to identify the problem, issue or opportunity
  • What insights that helped you work towards a plan or solution
  • Provide benchmark data* (if available) so that the judges can see what the metrics/trends were before the programme began. They can then see changes from baseline metrics brought about by your programme or initiative
  • What challenge(s) had to be overcome.

2. Objectives

Provide clearly defined SMART objectives 

The judges recommend no more than five.

  • Make sure you clearly identify key audiences and define benefits to them and to stakeholders and the organisation

3. Strategy

Describe your strategy

  • What was the plan/approach adopted to meet your objectives?
  • Who was involved in the delivery team (both internal and external)?
  • What was the rationale for any collaboration with external stakeholders?
  • Was there a part of the strategy that was truly innovative/groundbreaking?

4. Tactics

  • How was the strategy implemented in line with yourobjectives?
  • What channels/tactics did you employ to implement the strategy and why did you select these channels?

5. Effectiveness: Outcomes vs Objectives

Demonstrate how outcomes were delivered/achieved against your stated objectives. Show clear evaluation of:

  • Outtakes (knowledge, attitudes, opinions, levels of confidence, number of people who heard about the campaign etc.)
  • Outputs (volume of coverage, number of leaflets, hits to websites etc.)
  • Outcomes (quantifiable changes in behaviour or action taken as a result of the campaign).

What did success look like for the campaign? Show the real benefit that the work delivered for stakeholders, patients and the organisation.

*This is where you should refer to the benchmarks you identified earlier.

6. Stakeholder Testimonials and Client Verdicts

You must provide a minimum of one (maximum three) independent, third-party stakeholder testimonials. These will be scored by the judges in terms of their quality and relevance and can significantly influence your overall score.

You will also need to provide a minimum of one (maximum three) client testimonials.

  • Approved quotes may be submitted as a letter, fax or email supporting the overall effectiveness of the programme or activity, but the quotes themselves must be included in the two-page submission.
  • Include contact details for the stakeholder(s) (email address and telephone number) for verification purposes
  • If the stakeholder(s) references are confidential, please highlight this on the entry form.

7. Lessons Learned 

What lessons did you learn that would help with future work?

8. Supporting Materials (not included in submission length limit)

  • ESSENTIAL: A summary sheet must be supplied with supporting materials, detailing each of the supporting materials and clearly referencing where evidence can be found to support claims made in the entry about outcomes, such as shifts in awareness, attitude and reported behaviour, eg info on sample size, method of data collection etc. Entries will not be accepted without this document.
  • Where possible, provide a copy of the original brief from the client
  • If you have submitted the same campaign/work previously, provide a copy of the previous submission(s).
  • Supporting Materials do not need to be submitted until Thursday 29 March 2018.

Sponsors

Behind the Judging: Communiqué Awards

Behind the Judging: Communiqué Awards
Find out what the chair of judges Anna Korving, senior judges Sarah Matthew and Annabelle Sandeman and previous award winners Paul Tanner, 90TEN and Emma Reynolds, Cohn & Wolfe; have to say on how the judging process works, what the judges focus on, tips on what helps and what distracts within an entry and get insights into how previous winners have created that stand out submission.