1

ReportoftheConventionTaskForce

February8,2011TheTaskForce

APA President Dr. Carol Goodheart appointed the Convention Task Force (CTF) in March 2010 based on chronic complaints that the Convention had poor quality control, poor attendance at many sessions, and serious scheduling conflicts with similar programs offered at the same time and many governance responsibilities conflicting with the convention program. The Task Force was charged with an examination of the APA Convention against benchmarked associations and development of recommendations for changes to be presented to the Board of Directors at its December 2010 meeting. The Task Force was chaired by Board member Dr Suzanne Bennett Johnson and included Drs. Jean Carter, Louise Douce, Elena Eisman, Carl Hart, G. William Hill, Jennifer Kelly, Thomas McNeese II, Elizabeth Vera and Tony Chi-Chang Wu. The group had two meetings over the course of the year.

BackgroundThe Task Force reviewed the following background information. Recent APA Convention Attendance Statistics - APA Research Office

The convention currently draws between 10,000 and 15,000 attendees each year. Approximately half of those in attendance are full APA members, associates and affiliates; the remaining attendees are students, non-members, APA staff, guests and exhibitors. Only 4-6% of the APA membership attends the annual convention. Exhibit 1 shows the breakdown for attendance over the past 6 years.

In 2010, there were close to 1400 programs and over 2100 programming hours distributed over three and a half days at the annual convention. Of these, 1362 were Division program hours, 298 hours were offered by APA governance groups (e.g., President, Boards and Committees) and 375 hours were reserved for CE workshops.

Currently, allocation of division hours is based on a complex formula - the Thayer Formula - developed in 1975. The formula divides a pool of 1000 programming hours among the divisions based on each division’s percentage of total APA membership and its average division member attendance at the last three conventions (Exhibit 2). As the number of divisions increased, total division program hours were divided into “substantive” hours which were kept at 1000 and “non-substantive” hours which were to be used by divisions for the business activities of the division (e.g. social hours, awards, Presidential address, executive committee meetings, etc.) In 2010, each division received a minimum of 14 “substantive” program hours (range: 14-70) and seven “non-substantive” hours (range: 7-14). Divisions also had access to poster hours beyond the allocation above.

With over 2100 program hours distributed over three and half days, there is a great deal of session overlap. There are two blocks of time that are reserved for the Board of Convention Affairs (BCA) selected plenary presentations and sessions offered by APA groups, typically scheduled on Friday from 10 am to 2 pm and Saturday from 2 pm to 6 pm. Divisions may not

2

schedule against those hours. Attendance at these plenary sessions, which feature highly respected psychologists and cross-cutting themes, tends to be in the 200 – 400 person per session range. In contrast, attendance at non-plenary sessions is often very low. In 2008, an extensive analysis of session attendance was conducted for 815 sessions; There were 25 or fewer persons in attendance at 314 sessions (35%) and only 41 (5%) of sessions had more than 100 persons in attendance and 15 of the 41 were presidential or plenary programs.

Additional analyses of attendance data indicate that 30% of APA members who attended the 2005 and 2007 annual conventions had no division affiliation, 28% of APA members who attended the 2009 annual convention had no division affiliation, and 38% of APA members who attended the 2010 annual convention had no division affiliation. Convention Changes Introduced in 2002 In 2002, BCA introduced a number of changes to the 2002 Chicago convention including (a) a shorter overall duration with a Sunday end date; (b) all substantive programming housed in the same physical location rather than scattered among convention hotels; (c) thematic programming organized around clusters of divisions around topics of shared interests; and (d) plenary sessions featuring widely recognized speakers on topics of broad interest. Attendance data were taken at the 26 plenary and 83 cluster sessions and compared to attendance data at a similar time in the convention at two prior conventions. Attendance at the plenary (M = 180) and cluster programs (M = 111) in Chicago was substantially higher than attendance at prior conventions (M=56 and M=34 respectively). BCA concluded that thematic presentations on broad topics will increase attendance and decrease the number of sessions with very low attendance. A number of changes were made to the convention after the 2002 Chicago experience. The convention was shortened from five days (Friday through Tuesday) to four (Thursday through Sunday). BCA established plenary sessions developed by a central programming committee designed to appeal to a broad cross-section of APA membership (including those without divisional affiliation) and represent psychology as a discipline and a profession. Two 4-hour periods were established for the APA Plenary and Presidential sessions; Friday 10 am to 2 pm and Saturday, 2 pm to 6 pm. No Division substantive programing occurs during this time. All division and APA programs are scheduled in the convention center. Only sessions that are non-substantive division hours (business meetings, social hours, some presidential addresses) are scheduled in hotels. One centralized registration area and all exhibits are located in the convention center. Some attempts were made to cluster programs by divisions. In 2002 and 2003 BCA assigned divisions to clusters. In 2004-2007, divisions that were not usual partners were asked to submit proposals to BCA on cross-cutting themes. This approach has not been utilized since 2007. 2007 Task Force to Recommend Changes to Convention That Would Appeal to Scientists The APA Council of Representatives established a Task Force of 12 members who were past program chairs for 7 science divisions; an additional 8 divisions sent representatives to the meeting which was held in September of 2007. The Task Force made the following recommendations:

1. Provide opportunities for professional development relevant to the practice of science. This might include best practices for working with Institutional Review Boards, specialized statistical analysis, strategies for multidisciplinary work. Formats

3

might include symposia followed by discussion or break out groups, half or full day workshops, or a plenary speaker followed by a roundtable discussion. Special emphasis should be placed on creating mentoring opportunities.

2. Implement innovative programming formats. There should be more opportunities for dialog among scientists. Changes must be made to the poster sessions making them more attractive and valued. There should be opportunities for late submission of “late-breaking” findings.

3. Organize programming around integrative topics. The Division Leadership Conference could be used to bring the division Presidents-elect together to develop integrative topics for programming during their Presidential year.

4. Revise the “nuts and bolts” of APA convention program planning to facilitate collaborative programming. There needs to be earlier and better communication between division program chairs and BCA central programming to encourage greater collaboration and reduce program conflicts.

5. Increase dialog with the greater community. The Task Force included two examples: a “psychological science camp” for children and a community outreach program implemented as part of the convention.

2007 Convention Consultants’ Report APA hired AMMR (Association Management and Marketing Resources) to evaluate the

APA Convention and suggest modifications and improvements. AMMR delivered their report to APA in November of 2007. Exhibit 3 details the recommendations in the AMMR report and their current status as of January 2010. Many recommendations have been enacted, some are in process, some have been rejected; the remaining recommendations were considered by the Task Force. The Task Force considered consultant recommendations in four main areas: clarification of the purpose and goals of the Convention, quality of programming (including poster sessions), lack of a centralized planning committee, and the lack of integration of programming with continuing education. The report’s recommendations in these four areas are detailed below.

1. Purpose and goals. The long range goals of the Convention are unclear in terms of attendance, constituencies, etc. There is no consensus on whether the Convention is a member benefit, a revenue source or some combination of the two. More attention needs to be given to perceived member value.

2. Quality of programming. The system has inconsistent quality controls, since each division has their own criteria for acceptance. In addition, there is no central review of programs offered by Boards and Committees. Some programs are offered every year, regardless of attendance or relevance. There is no flexibility in the system for inclusion of late breaking findings or innovative learning modalities. The current format for poster sessions makes them seem as 2nd tier and primarily attractive to students. Too many sessions are short (1-2 hours in length) and there are too many competing sessions scheduled concurrently given the number of attendees. Governance meetings should be scheduled outside the main program hours to minimize conflicts.

3. Lack of centralized planning committee. There is minimal coordination among Divisions and prior efforts to cluster divisional program have not always succeeded. The current system promotes siloed content rather than cross-cutting, interdisciplinary or over-arching themes.

4

4. Lack of integration of CE. CE workshops are handled as a separate conference, with no coordination between CE, BCA or the divisions. A single one-price model that would cover all CE’s taken was suggested. Although the CE workshops are designed to meet specific needs and are viewed as high quality, convention sessions designated for CE credit appear to receive minimal review and are not seen as uniformly high in quality.

2010 Benchmarking Report

McKinley Marketing, a local association consulting firm, was asked to provide research about the structure and process of peer association conventions. The consultants surveyed twelve scientific societies with major conventions (Exhibit 4) and conducted detailed interviews with three (Exhibit 5.) In addition, they secured the Convention program books from several groups to allow for specific comparison of how their daily programs were organized. The selected associations were comparable in locations, size of attendance and length, but there was far more variability in membership size, program size and structure. Of those interviewed, all had a central program committee that oversaw all selections.

1. At the American Psychiatric Association, attendance was larger than APA’s but they offered only 333 sessions, plus 75 CE workshops, a reduction from prior years aimed to increase attendance per workshop. There are separate fees for the CE workshops

2. The American Speech Language and Hearing Association has about 10,000 attendees and 1500 sessions of which 900 are poster sessions. All are available for CE at no additional cost.

3. The American Physical Society has a central programming committee that reviews all programs. They allocate a total of 100 hours to their 14 divisions for invited presentations. There are 550 additional hours for content solicited from the general membership. The committee reviews the invited presentations to eliminate overlap in topics and sorts the submitted abstracts into sections based on content.

DefinitionoftheIdealConventionThe Task Force began its work by clarifying the purpose and goals of the Convention and identified six objectives: Objective 1: High Valued by APA Members

Streamline and simplify the program with a focus on quality over quantity. Individual Value Added—members feel they are getting value for the dollar. Focus on the user (attendee) experience. Develop mechanism for assessment and evaluation of convention experience to be used for quality improvement of the convention Attract attendees that are representative of the APA membership and from diverse employment backgrounds (scientists, practitioners, educators)

Objective 2: Highlight APA’s Successes and Psychology’s Scientific Contributions APA brand and logo visibility Positive media coverage

5

Highlight psychology as a science, its vast content expertise, and its contributions to major societal challenges

Provide cutting edge psychological science on integrative topics Highlight and educate about APA’s Strategic Plan Attract International attendees and attendees from other professions Provide opportunities for the public to learn about psychology by participating in aspects

of the convention

Objective 3: Provide Opportunity and Resources for Professional Skill Development Opportunity for professional development, advancement, continuing education and

lifelong learning Translating research into practice Opportunity for advocacy education and involvement Expanding skills and knowledge in specialty areas Development of a national network of professional connections

Objective 4: Pipeline Opportunity for Attracting Next Generation of Psychologists Attract Psychology Graduate Students and ECPs Attract individuals representative of society’s diversity Attract undergraduate psychology students Attract teachers of psychology

Objective 5: Creating and Participating in Divisions and Other Smaller Communities

Establish and solidify professional identity and connections through networking, mentoring and friendships Provide opportunity for member recruitment in the division or community

Objective 6: Conduct APA/Divisional Business

Provide opportunities for APA and Divisional governance activities Use membership in attendance as a data source for APA and divisional activities

DivisionFeedback Since the Divisions are such a central part of the current Convention structure the Task Force felt it was critical to have Division input into the process, and solicited Division feedback at the 2010 Convention. Divisions were asked specifically to address ways to improve the poster sessions and to improve session attendance figures. The Committee on Division APA Relations (CODAPAR) also surveyed the Divisions for their perspectives on improving the Convention. (Exhibit 6) The findings from both sources yielded several major themes related to programming, CE, logistics, and innovations in session formats, submission process and use of technology. 1. Programming. Many divisions expressed a clear desire for more cohesive programming;

thematically based with increased collaboration and cross-cutting topics that showcased multiple perspectives. They preferred fewer concurrent sessions to increase attendance at

6

each and a reduction in scheduling conflicts (programmatic and governance). At the same time, respondents expressed concerns about the loss of hours and autonomy. For a few, there was a strong desire to leave the system as is or to decentralize it even further.

2. CE. Many divisions see CE credits as important to drawing attendees. They would like to see more CE sessions available, and they should be longer and at lower cost.

3. Logistics. Numerous complaints were made about scheduling conflicts. Often similar programs are scheduled opposite each other, and division business meetings occur at the same time. There is insufficient time allotted between sessions to allow attendees to deal with long distances between sessions and venues. Since the current rules for CE credit require arrival at the start of the session, this problem further compounds effective access to CE programming.

4. Innovation. In general there was interest in innovation, both in session formats and structure and in the utilization of new technologies. Many felt the Convention submission and scheduling process was too cumbersome, lengthy, and rigid. There is a desire for later submissions for student research and late-breaking findings. Innovation in session formats would include more interactive, conversational time. The paper session format in particular was singled out as ineffective. Suggestions included applying technology to foster community (e.g., use social media such as Twitter and Facebook for communication during meetings, simplify access to program offerings, decrease lag time between submission and the event and make the program available earlier).

5. Poster suggestions. A host of ideas were generated to improve and raise the prestige of poster sessions: Organize by topic/ theme instead of division; move out of exhibit hall to more conducive environment; offer food, evening sessions w/ social hour; offer awards/ prizes to recognize outstanding work; highlight “top dogs”; eliminate paper sessions and replace with poster symposia; round table discussions of findings by themes; virtual presentation options; hosted sessions with experts; unopposed hours; and, expansion to 90 minute sessions.

Recommendations

The Task Force recognized that meeting the six objectives of an ideal convention is a process that will take a number of years to implement. The Task Force firmly believes that this effort is directly relevant to Goal 1a of APA Strategic Plan: Goal 1. Maximize organizational effectiveness: The APA’s structures and systems support the organization’s strategic direction, growth and success. 1a. Enhance APA programs, services and communications to increase member engagement and value.

The Task Force recognizes the incredible complexity of the current convention structure

and as a result chose to focus on the following issues as initial first steps. 1. Increase the number of programming hours around cross-cutting themes. This

recommendation is consistent with the 2007 Convention Task Force report, AMMR Consultant’s report and divisional feedback. The APA convention is a venue that can bring together scientists and practitioners from many different backgrounds with varying expertise. Developing programming that focuses on cross-cutting themes would provide exciting programming that is not readily available in other venues.

7

2. Decrease the total number of convention program hours. Currently, the large number of program creates numerous simultaneous sessions, reducing attendance at an individual session. Low session attendance is such a problem that some divisions stated that they no longer invite leaders in their field because they fear an embarrassing low turnout.

3. Enhance training for division Program Chairs alongside division Presidents-Elect to improve quality and develop mechanisms to foster collaborative division programming. Collaborative division programming on cross-cutting themes has been successful in the past but there has been no structural mechanism to promote and maintain it. Although divisions should not be required to participate in collaborative programming, mechanisms should be put in place to encourage and enhance collaborations among divisions that wish to participate.

4. Enhance poster sessions. Poster sessions assure presentation opportunities without increasing programming hours. Poster sessions can be enhanced in a variety of ways. They could be organize by topic/ theme and coordinated with the cross-cutting themes of the convention. They could be moved out of the exhibit hall to a more conducive environment. They could be offered during lunch or social hours with food available. Awards or prizes could be offered for outstanding work. Leaders in the field could offer poster tours of selected high-impact posters. Poster symposia could be offered with discussion. A poster session could focus on late-breaking findings or issues of high relevance to the media. Poster abstracts could be published. These are just a few examples.

5. Increase opportunities for mentoring and member interactions and collaborations. Plenary sessions on cross-cutting themes could be followed by discussion periods where attendees could meet with the presenters. Scheduled time could be designated for new investigators to meet with senior investigators in the field. The speed mentoring program used in the last several conventions has been very successful and should be continued. Opportunities to learn new scientific techniques or clinical interventions should be offered in appropriate learning formats (half of full day sessions with opportunities for hands-on learning).

6. Offer CE as part the convention registration fee or for a single additional charge. The Task Force recognized that this is a complex issue but felt strongly that it needs to be addressed for the convention to be truly valued added for many of its members. Currently, the majority of attendees at the convention are licensed providers for whom CE offerings are particularly important. However, many non-licensed individuals – students and scientists – would welcome continuing education in a variety of areas (e.g., data analysis strategies, new research techniques etc).

Implementation The Task Force spent a great deal of time considering structural changes that could be made to meet recommendations 1-5. It did not have time to address the CE issue highlighted in recommendation 6, although staff is apparently already working on strategies to achieve this goal. The Task Force recommends the following structural changes be considered.

8

1. A Central Programming Group (CPG) be established. a. The CPG will be responsible for central programming at the convention b. Its charge will be to create programming that demonstrate the unique role of APA as a

unifying force for psychology and the only association that represents all of psychology. It will develop cross-cutting themes that are presented in a variety of formats: keynote, workshops, symposia, related posters

c. The CPG will consist of members representing the 4 Major Boards (BAPPI, BEA, BPA, BSA), CAPP, CODAPAR, Early Career Psychologists, APAGS, and BCA.

d. BCA will oversee the CPG e. The APA President is encouraged to coordinate presidential programming with

the CPG 2. A mechanism for divisional collaborative theme-based programming and

communication be established a. CODAPAR will work with the division President-Elects and their respective

Program chairs to develop theme tracks at the Division Leadership Conference (DLC).

b. CODAPAR communicates the theme tracts to the CPG through its representative on the CPG

c. A theme track program may be offered by a single division or a cluster of divisions and may take on any format (keynote, symposium, poster session, workshop)

d. Theme track programs will be coordinated to assure multiple non-conflicting programming hours within a theme

3. Presidential programming will be retained but coordinated with the CPG a. The CPG will communicate to the President the central programming themes and

the divisional collaborative themes b. The President is encouraged to coordinate presidential programming with CPG to

reduce scheduling conflict and overlap 4. Further improve quality of programming by training divisional President-Elects’

Program Chairs1 a. CODAPAR would develop a set of program development guidelines for

new program chairs (PC), taking into account the considerable differences in how Divisions approach convention programming.

b. Use DLC to train President-Elects’ PCs to ensure that PCs have at least a one year training period

c. Training should include a comprehensive assessment component for PCs: 1) immediately after training; 2) after the program is developed (did they use the information); and 3) immediately after Convention (was the information helpful)

d. Suggested DLC training might include: i. President Elect (PE) Friday morning full days. Friday evening

dinner with PE/PC

1 Although there are alternate means to accomplish training of Program Chairs, the Task Force felt integration of this component into the DLC was the most effective way to achieve the stated goals.

9

ii. PE/PC tracks all day Saturday (understanding CE, develop topics for collaborative theme-based programming, strategies for shaping and building program, new innovative format for presenting)

iii. PE/PC Sunday end at noon (APA President-elect, CPG representative meet with PE/PC to discuss division collaborative themes, CPG ideas for central programming and President-elect ideas for presidential programming)

5. Increase the visibility and number of high-quality Poster sessions. Both central programming and divisional collaborative programming should offer poster formats. These sessions should be moved out of the exhibit hall to a more conducive environment. Other incentives for participating in the poster sessions could include scheduling the poster sessions during lunch or social hours with food and beverage options; having plenary speakers meet with poster presenters or conduct poster tours of selected posters; offering awards/ prizes to recognize outstanding work; providing virtual presentation options; publishing poster abstracts.

6. Increase number of hours dedicated to central and division theme-based

programming and decrease total number of programming hours. a. As a first step, reduce total convention programming hours by 20% to 1250 hours b. Of the total, 250 hours would be allocated for central programming, with 125

program hours determined by the CPG and 125 hours set aside for division collaborative theme-based programming

c. Current APA Governance programming hours will be incorporated into central programming. Groups may request time to cover emerging issues and CPG will solicit input from existing groups as it develops central themes. In addition, CPG will work to retain the Governance programs that have traditionally been most successful (e.g., Ethics.)

d. The remaining 1000 hours will be allocated to Divisions, with no distinction made between substantive and non-substantive hours

e. The Thayer Formula be eliminated and be replaced by a new formula that assures all divisions a minimum of 10 Convention hours with additional programming hours above 10 determined by a new representational formula. Two representational formulas were considered. Both formulas include the following elements:

i. Each formula is based on a rolling average of the three prior conventions to reduce skewed numbers based on environmental factors.

ii. The total pool of all division convention programming hours will be limited to 1000 and will include all division hours (plenary sessions, presidential hours, board and committee hours, social hours).

iii. Each division will retain 10 guaranteed hours to be used at their discretion (e.g. business activities, social hours, etc.) These hours are included in the 1000 programming hours.

iv. If a division chooses in advance to not use some or all of its allocated hours, the unused hours are added to the pool of additional program hours to be distributed to the remaining divisions.

10

v. After subtracting the 540 guaranteed hours, the remaining pool of 460 (plus any additional unused division hours from the 10 hours guaranteed each division) will be allocated based on actual division attendance.

f. The Task Force looked at two models, the Proportional Model and the Primary Division Model. Both are shown in the attached spreadsheet. The Task Force recommends adoption of the Proportional Model as best reflecting the actual alliances of division attendees. The two models are described below:

i. Proportional Model: Each division member in attendance at an APA convention allocates a total of 1.0 credit to the divisions of which he or she is a member . If the division member belongs to one division, that division gets 1.0 credit. If he or she is a member of two divisions, the two divisions each get 0.5 credits. If he or she is a member of three divisions, each division gets 0.33 credits. Each division’s total credits is then divided by the total number of division members attending the convention. The resulting percentage (averaged over the three preceding conventions – see e.i. above) is then multiplied by 460 hours to determine the additional hours awarded the division over and above its 10 guaranteed hours. The advantage of this model is that it gives each division member one credit and distributes that credit across all of that member’s divisions.

ii. Primary Division Model: Each division member in attendance at an APA convention allocates a total of 1.0 credit to one division of his or her choice. A division member who belongs to more than one division must choose only one division for his or her credit allocation. Each division’s total credits is then divided by the total number of division members attending the convention. The resulting percentage (averaged over the three preceding conventions – see e.i. above) is then multiplied by 460 hours to determine the additional hours awarded the division over and above its 10 guaranteed hours. The advantage of this model is that it gives each division member one credit and distributes that credit to the division that member considers most important.

iii. In order to minimize excessively large reductions in programming hours for any single division, the Task Force recommends a temporary accommodation in program hours be made in cases where the new formula results in very large decreases in numbers of programming hours for a specific division. More specifically, in the first year the formula is implemented, no division shall have its total program hours reduced more than 30% below the number of hours it had in the convention program immediately prior to the introduction of the new formula. In the second year the formula is implemented, no division shall have its total program hours reduced more than 40% below the number of hours it had in the convention program immediately prior to the introduction of the new formula. The Task Force recommends no further accommodations thereafter.

i. For those divisions with very active programming and attendance who would lose more than 10 hours in year 1, and 15 hours in year 2, they would be able to place a reserve on collaborative program hours using the

11

following formula: For each lost hour over 10 in year 1, or 15 in year 2, the division would receive .5 hours from the collaborative pool, rounded to the next whole number. These hours must be developed as collaborative programming.

FinancialImplications

Division Program Chairs attendance at the Division Leadership Conference: $80,000. (50 individuals @ $15,000 travel, $65,000 subsistence)

Allocation to CPG to bring in high quality presenters: $50,000.

Allocation to Divisions to cover presenter costs for high-quality collaborative programming: $25,000

Costs to expanding the Central Program Group to 15 for two meetings:$33,000 ( $15,000 travel, $18,000 subsistence)

Social hours in conjunction with Poster Sessions: $15,000 (3 events at $5,000 each.)

Total: $203,000

Division 2010 HOURS

3 year average: % of division member attendance under 

proportional formula

Hours above guaranteed 10 hours 

based on % in previous column

Total Hours under 

Proportional Formula

As a % of 2010 hours

Adjust to 70%   of 2010

FINAL HOURS (70% 

MIN applied)

Change in Hours from 

2010

Equity Formula 

Collaborative Hours Reserved

1 37 1.63% 7 17 47% 26 26 ‐11 12 26 3.17% 15 25 95% 25 ‐13 21 1.11% 5 15 72% 15 ‐65 21 1.78% 8 18 87% 18 ‐36 21 0.57% 3 13 60% 15 15 ‐67 21 1.17% 5 15 73% 15 ‐68 29 2.83% 13 23 79% 23 ‐69 21 1.28% 6 16 76% 16 ‐510 21 0.66% 3 13 62% 15 15 ‐612 84 5.49% 25 35 42% 59 59 ‐25 813 21 1.42% 7 17 79% 17 ‐414 27 1.54% 7 17 63% 19 19 ‐815 22 1.61% 7 17 79% 17 ‐516 33 3.29% 15 25 76% 25 ‐817 75 7.74% 36 46 61% 53 53 ‐23 718 21 1.87% 9 19 89% 19 ‐219 21 1.16% 5 15 73% 15 ‐620 21 1.74% 8 18 86% 18 ‐321 21 0.41% 2 12 57% 15 15 ‐622 21 1.63% 7 17 83% 17 ‐423 21 0.06% 0 10 49% 15 15 ‐624 21 0.79% 4 14 65% 15 15 ‐625 21 0.70% 3 13 63% 15 15 ‐626 21 0.65% 3 13 62% 15 15 ‐627 21 1.09% 5 15 71% 15 ‐628 21 0.86% 4 14 67% 15 15 ‐629 25 2.68% 12 22 89% 22 ‐330 21 0.68% 3 13 63% 15 15 ‐631 21 1.11% 5 15 72% 15 ‐632 21 1.03% 5 15 70% 15 ‐633 21 0.92% 4 14 68% 15 15 ‐634 21 0.48% 2 12 58% 15 15 ‐635 24 3.68% 17 27 112% 27 336 21 1.58% 7 17 82% 17 ‐437 21 1.29% 6 16 76% 16 ‐538 31 4.15% 19 29 94% 29 ‐239 27 1.78% 8 18 67% 19 19 ‐840 40 4.42% 20 30 76% 30 ‐1041 24 1.95% 9 19 79% 19 ‐542 35 3.76% 17 27 78% 27 ‐843 21 2.03% 9 19 92% 19 ‐244 21 2.10% 10 20 94% 20 ‐145 21 3.11% 14 24 116% 24 346 21 0.71% 3 13 63% 15 15 ‐647 21 1.42% 7 17 79% 17 ‐448 21 0.99% 5 15 69% 15 15 ‐649 21 0.70% 3 13 63% 15 15 ‐650 21 1.85% 9 19 88% 19 ‐251 21 1.18% 5 15 73% 15 ‐652 21 1.82% 8 18 87% 18 ‐353 25 2.84% 13 23 92% 23 ‐254 21 2.22% 10 20 96% 20 ‐155 21 1.27% 6 16 75% 16 ‐556 21 2.03% 9 19 92% 19 ‐2

TOTAL HOURS 1362 100% 460 1000 1065

PROPORTIONAL MODEL

MODEL COMPARISON 

Division 2010 HOURS

3 year average: % of division member attendance under 

primary division formula

Hours above guaranteed 10 

hours based on % in in previous 

column

Total hours Under Primary Division 

Formula

As a % of 2010 hours

Adjust to 70% (75%) of 2010

FINAL HOURS 

(70% MIN applied)

Change in Hours 

from 2010

Equity Formula Collaborative Hours Reserved

Proportional Hours ‐ Primary Hours

1 37 0.72% 3 13 36% 26 26 ‐11 1 02 26 2.95% 14 24 91% 24 ‐2 13 21 0.75% 3 13 64% 15 15 ‐6 05 21 1.84% 8 18 88% 18 ‐3 06 21 0.64% 3 13 62% 15 15 ‐6 07 21 1.18% 5 15 74% 15 ‐6 08 29 1.57% 7 17 59% 20 20 ‐9 39 21 0.65% 3 13 62% 15 15 ‐6 110 21 0.75% 3 13 64% 15 15 ‐6 012 84 6.29% 29 39 46% 59 59 ‐25 8 013 21 1.71% 8 18 85% 18 ‐3 ‐114 27 1.42% 7 17 61% 19 19 ‐8 015 22 1.50% 7 17 77% 17 ‐5 016 33 4.30% 20 30 90% 30 ‐3 ‐517 75 11.47% 53 63 84% 63 ‐12 1 ‐1018 21 2.12% 10 20 94% 20 ‐1 ‐119 21 1.29% 6 16 76% 16 ‐5 ‐120 21 1.88% 9 19 89% 19 ‐2 ‐121 21 0.56% 3 13 60% 15 15 ‐6 022 21 1.96% 9 19 91% 19 ‐2 ‐223 21 0.04% 0 10 49% 15 15 ‐6 024 21 0.86% 4 14 66% 15 15 ‐6 025 21 0.45% 2 12 57% 15 15 ‐6 026 21 0.80% 4 14 65% 15 15 ‐6 027 21 0.75% 3 13 64% 15 15 ‐6 028 21 0.97% 4 14 69% 15 15 ‐6 029 25 1.37% 6 16 65% 18 18 ‐8 430 21 0.56% 3 13 60% 15 15 ‐6 031 21 1.22% 6 16 74% 16 ‐5 ‐132 21 1.47% 7 17 80% 17 ‐4 ‐233 21 1.22% 6 16 74% 16 ‐5 ‐134 21 0.38% 2 12 56% 15 15 ‐6 035 24 3.10% 14 24 101% 24 0 336 21 1.69% 8 18 85% 18 ‐3 ‐137 21 1.01% 5 15 70% 15 ‐6 138 31 3.21% 15 25 80% 25 ‐6 439 27 2.41% 11 21 78% 21 ‐6 ‐240 40 4.42% 20 30 76% 30 ‐10 041 24 1.97% 9 19 79% 19 ‐5 042 35 3.59% 17 27 76% 27 ‐8 043 21 1.76% 8 18 86% 18 ‐3 144 21 2.65% 12 22 106% 22 1 ‐245 21 2.67% 12 22 106% 22 1 246 21 0.57% 3 13 60% 15 15 ‐6 047 21 1.28% 6 16 76% 16 ‐5 148 21 1.13% 5 15 72% 15 ‐6 049 21 0.79% 4 14 65% 15 15 ‐6 050 21 1.92% 9 19 90% 19 ‐2 051 21 1.18% 5 15 74% 15 ‐6 052 21 1.27% 6 16 75% 16 ‐5 253 25 2.48% 11 21 86% 21 ‐4 254 21 2.44% 11 21 101% 21 0 ‐155 21 1.32% 6 16 77% 16 ‐5 056 21 1.50% 7 17 80% 17 ‐4 2

TOTAL HOURS 1362 100% 460 1001 1066

PRIMARY DIVISION MODEL

ATTENDANCE BY DIVISION

2009 2008 2007 2006

Div# TORONTC BOSTON SAN FRAN NORLEANS

1 405 587 145 209

2 191 295 239 295

3 104 86 62 98

5 134 149 114 165

6 92 71 55 63

7 143 164 93 136

8 177 205 162 195

9 80 57 65 141

10 62 69 58 51 12 794 1.085 732 730

13 78 109 101 121

14 160 168 142 133

15 196 196 115 134

16 328 382 255 260

17 813 1.094 772 701

18 97 138 127 127

19 91 100 87 70

20 100 152 135 150

21 31 43 36 37

22 .66 111 94 99

23 6 32 11 15

24 58 59 54 71

25 34 43 42 81

26 47 48 48 68

27 71 74 63 93

28 61 86 58 73

29 131 143 133 240

30 36 34 45 46

31 45 64 63 115

32 78 84 72 67

33 64 89 41 60

34 23 33 18 18

35 167 214 214 321

36 82 113 97 100

37 49 71 79 131

38 238 283 227 262

39 95 147 157 118

40 199 295 234 217

41 151 205 170 149

42 120 204 220 285

43 79 108 120 129

44 142 168 167 154

45 205 236 283 369

46 27 35 37 57

47 65 ·111 65 71

48 47 70 59 75

49 38 39 36 56

50 104 131 132 110

51 66 82 65 92

52 90 108 122 171

53 180 249 167 231

54 105 159 114 127

55 40 53 61 122

56 84 124 97 3

ANALYSIS OF REGISTRANTS 2009 - 2004 Conventions

REGISTRANTS BY AREA

2005 2004 2009 2008 2007 2006

WASH HON Area of Country TORONTO BOSTON SAN FRAN NORLEANS

913 317 New England 620 2.359 560 428

351 352 Mid-Atlantic 2.670 3.707 2.315 2.024

140 149 Southeastem 983 1.464 1.253 1.328

186 200 Mid-Central 1,494 1.624 1.438 1.187

78 92 North Central 412 545 499 336

154 209 South Central 753 1.074 1.110 1.292

290 306 Westem 1.264 1.731 4.176 1.112

227 206 Other" 1.874 1.018 3.859 1.955

65 64 900 1.075 Total 10.070 13,522 15,210 9,662

164 141 181 205 162 209 314 302

787 642 175 166

2005

WASH

696 4.756 1.407 1.519

414 782

1.256 2.828

13,658

112 95 REGISTRANTS BY WORK/STATUS CATEGORY 208 184 39 53 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005

150 141 Category TORONTO BOSTON SAN FRAN NORLEANS WASH

12 18 University 5,029 6,659 6,646 4,570 6,341

104 76 School 135 149 113 n 128

93 88 Buslnessllndustry 131 159 454 336 475

81 67 Human Services 1,072 1,548 1,514 818 1,097

145 154 Govemment 398 604 645 386 585

90 108 Other" 3,305 4,403 5.838 3,475 5,032

346 341 85 64 Total 10,070 13,522 15,210 9,662 13,658

150 128 104 109 n 64

29 23 453 464 166 129 181 183 DIVISIONAL AFFILIATIONS 380 421 183 146 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005

348 323 Category TORONTO BOSTON SAN FRAN NORLEANS WASH

230 205 One or more dlv. 5,738 7,346 5,530 3,715 5,183

438 436 No divisions 61 181 159 141 123

186 174 217 195 Total 5,799 7,527 5.689 3,856 5,306

413 452 n 74

101 110 • Includes registered spouses/dependents

99 99 84 75

159 172 125 105 226 215 294 294 162 162 116 116

0 0

16

2004

HON 496

2.086 1.099 1.271

391 840

2.810 3.827

12.820

2004 HON 5,262

148 312

1,198 555

5.345

12,820

2004

HON 4,851

443

5,294

i I' !

I.

I

I'

I i

I

I I· I !

I

I

I I. i.

I

I

ngm

Typewritten Text

EXHIBIT 2

1

Current Status of Recommendations and Suggestions

from the Consultant’s Report

January 2010

KEY Done

In Process

Work of TF

Possibility – low priority or hasn’t been fully scoped

No – not currently doing this. May or may not be useful

N/A Not Applicable /Not Feasible

REGISTRATION, FEES AND LOGISTICS COMMENTS

Registration Process

Suggestions and Recommendations

1. With technology what it is today and for the number of convention registrants, there should be no excuse for not automating this system. The key is to make seamless web-based registration the primary registration tool so that onsite registrations are the exception. Make procurement and implementation of an automated electronic registration system, which is integrated with the accounting system for online and onsite registration a top priority.

Integrated online convention and CE registration

2. Need a dearly marked APA staffed HELP Registration Desk that is aside from the bank of registration booths to permit brief inquiries of those uncertain where to go and what to do regarding registration process.

3. Provide an alternative location for EXPRESS Registration Pickup Only away from registration booths for those already pre-registered and who need only to pick up a badge holder. EXPRESS Registration Pickup Only desks could also be located in the two primary convention

2

hotels for same purpose, and noted ahead in registration mail packet and with proper signage of dates and times.

4. Provide multiple computer desktops for onsite attendees to register online and receive the discounted rate, and then proceed to desk for badge/materials.

5. If exhibit hall space is limited, place registration operation completely outside of hall to permit ample square footage and visibility for setup, large, visual signage, registration booths, well-identified lines, sufficient desktops with computers for attendees' to register online or complete paper forms. If feasible, provide some high counter top tables nearby for attendees to meet and greet one another.

N/A

6. Since 40% of the survey attendees were first time attendees, many may have been drawn by the location or a particular program. APA might consider adding incentives to first .time attendees for the next year's convention to entice them to come again.

Maybe; Dependent on Format

Change

The current policy does not allow for reduced convention rates.

7. Hire coat check personnel with a nearby assigned room or roped off space with good signage for attendees to check their luggage and coats while in the Convention Center.

8. See Bookstore category for specific suggestions relating to location.

9. With an automated system, offer an online up to date registration attendee roster and allow attendees to post their hotel location (if desired) for viewing by registrants and networking.

In Process

We will have an online roster – looking into being searchable by name, city, state and graduating institution

REGISTRATION FEES AND OTHER

Suggestions and Recommendations

1. APA must reassess its registration fee schedule to be on par with similar size groups. This assessment should involve the pricing

In Process

BCA approved increasing member – non-member differential. Needs to be

3

levels of the early bird/ advanced, online and onsite; all the categories for potential reduced fees (i.e., early career psychologists or those internationally, students depending on level); and the timing registrants can still obtain the reduced registration rate. Although the research indicated many attendees' voiced concern over registration costs, offering a greater differential (even if you lowered the member rate) and better segmented marketing (also an IT issue) would support two objectives: keep current members happy, and encourage more nonmembers to join and take advantage of the savings.

tied to “join now and save” which will require infrastructure changes in how memberships are processed.

2. APA should promote widely full listing/chart of registration fees/timelines for certain dates and advertise savings for each in all promotional pieces, in particular, the preliminary convention program with the registration form, and online at the convention portal.

3. Should explore offering a day rate (perhaps the first day of the convention only to start) option as part of APA's overall registration schedule assessment as noted in recommendation one of this section.

No

Staff have concerns about reduced income with higher numbers of regular attendees taking the one day option.

4. Given that 1/2 of the attendee respondents feel the registration fees ate about right, AP A could increase the price of the meeting by the cost of living each year without too much pushback from attendees, or consider reducing member fees and increasing the nonmember differential substantially as benchmark against other associations. (Benchmark groups promote anywhere between 30 - 75% savings for members).

In Process

Looking at possible small price increases but not in this economy.

5. Extend the advanced registration fees through the days of the convention via an. automated and integrated registration system. If attendees register online before or at the convention using onsite computers for processing data/payment information, they are eligible for reduced rates vs. paying premium

In Process

BCA approved increasing onsite fees to encourage online registrations and reduce/offset onsite staffing costs

4

onsite registration costs with paper processing.

6. Allocate and promote aggressively block of lower cost hotel rooms for students only on a first come first serve basis. After the assigned cut-off date, all unbooked rooms will be released for general sale to all attendees.

Not recommended

Offered this in Toronto. Even though student attendance was good, rooms didn’t fill and we paid a significant attrition fee.

7. Offer and test a roommate matching service via an online forum that will allow member only students and early career professionals to locate and communicate with others interested in saving by sharing a hotel room.

Not recommended

8. Permit students and ECP to volunteer onsite as room monitors, to introduce session speakers, distribute handouts, etc., in exchange for additional registration discounts, or complimentary meals.

Not recommended

Past efforts to use student volunteers had disastrous result with very high no-show rates.

9. Work closely with local state or nearby regional chapters (within a day's driving distance) to arrange and promote bus transportation for students to travel to the convention site.

Not recommended

APA is in competition with states over CE activities. Would have to offer some sort of revenue sharing to get local buy in.

BOOKSTORE

Suggestions and Recommendations

1. Convention and Publication staffs should jointly explore ways to maximize the presence of the bookstore from a more membership/organizational perspective as do most organizations at their shows. The convention marketing materials, special member discount offers/incentives, or possibly integrating and showcasing more of the available member benefits and resources all in one location should be reviewed as a possibility.

Bookstore is controlled through

OPD.

2. Think about setting up a full-blown bookstore operation inside the hall and perhaps have a few separate tables outside the hall near the registration and other member related booths of only sample copies of the latest, best-selling

Discuss with Gary

5

books for attendees to browse and purchase in the exhibit hall during show hours.

3. Have a membership booth near the bookstore to encourage sign-up and promote value of APA membership and its publication operation.

Discuss with Gary

4, Offer a 10% discount to members and nonmembers at the show, but maintain the member/nonmember differential. Currently, all attendees get the member rate for the books if purchased at the convention.

Discuss with Gary

5. Have author signings inside the exhibit hall for APA books also.

Discuss with Gary

6. Provide other incentives to promote value of membership inside the APA Bookstore.

Discuss with Gary

CITY/LOCATION AND TIMING

Suggestions and Recommendations

1. Develop written guidelines with key goals and objectives and convention measurements prior to future site selection and dates beyond 2015. Staff and leadership must determine desired outcomes for APA's annual convention, which may impact future city, dates, and facilities requirements.

In Process

Currently booked through 2018

2. Address and implement changes necessary to the program content/process /quality as delineated within the research to help build AP A's annual convention reputation as the PLACE to be for all those in the profession regardless of location. Price may no longer be such a critical concern to many.

Work of TF

3. When planning the convention in more destination cities, APA must take a more proactive look at creating and promoting increased incentives (from pricing, activities to packaging) of the entire convention experience to take advantage of the site location and attract increased attendance. However, when promoting widely popular and free special events (such as Asian Museum Reception in

In Process

Have altered system for ticketing at limited events. Have not yet tackled incentives ideas.

6

2007) that are limited on a first come first serve basis, ensure there is sufficient space or other events so all have a place to go. Not to do so may do more in generating dissatisfaction among the attendees vs. offering events that can more easily accommodate greater numbers at a reasonable cost per attendee, or book several events, from which a sufficient number of attendees might choose.

4. Avoid Mondays as a last convention day and use the weekend days to support those in practice and as overall travel days returning.

5. Providing major incentives (i.e., nonmember differential, strong, cohesive content) and responding to other findings in this report should greatly enhance attendees' ROI for the convention dollars.

Work of TF

AUDIO/VISUAL

Suggestions and Recommendations

1. Current A/V contractor has worked very closely with APA for many years, and staff finds their onsite assistance and extra pair of hands valuable. However, as a good business practice, AP A should conduct a competitive bid analysis and review every 3-5 years to ensure the organization continues to receive top quality, most up to date and value-added services at a competitive price for all convention audio visual equipment. This same principle also applies to all related convention contractors.

In Process Freeman contract through 2011. Have requested RFP for following year. Staff notes that they provide superior onsite support.

2. Make a LCD projector/screen standard in all session rooms during the convention.

In Process “LCD and screen” is the default package in 2010

3. Require speakers to have their sponsor, a division committee, or other volunteer unit review PowerPoint slide presentations ahead to maintain consistent quality.

In Process

Quality less of an issue if BCA has greater control over program offerings

GENERAL LOGISTICS

Suggestions and Recommendations

7

1. Generate and maintain a working convention planning document where events, action items, deadlines and staff accountable and involved in the preparation are recorded and tracked. This document could easily be placed on an intranet for staff to review and update routinely before each convention planning meeting.

Teamsite

2. Enforce schedule deadlines to meet the early program information timing for marketing purposes. Once enforced, players (division leaders/ speakers/ staff) will learn to accept and meet these requirements in the future.

No

Deadlines have not changed but working to ensure marketing gets information in much more timely fashion

3. Create a Convention Team with representatives from every organizational unit to meet regularly (once to twice or more a month depending upon needs) with an agenda to discuss issues, recommendations, and review of working document. The representatives are also responsible for reporting back to their unit to provide updates.

Convention team meets regularly with Experient (registration and housing vendor) and discusses general issues.

4. Begin to hold monthly (or every six weeks) all staff key player meetings (at least 6 months out) to update employees on convention progress and to generate enthusiasm and support across the organization.

Marketing, sales, web and convention staff meet regularly

5. Set up prominently located manned HELP Desks in every facility with assigned meetings, including the pre-convention workshops.

6. Assign room monitors and additional support personnel in critical areas by using other non-convention APA staff that are not busy with other roles at the meeting.

Possible

Need to work with EMG to discern whether their staff could cover

7. Provide complimentary shuttle service to and from majority of contracted hotels and the convention center not just major hotels, but hotels that have substantial room blocks. Post shuttle routes, specific pickup points, and intervals of service on the website in advance of meeting.

No

Very costly to add all outlying hotels

8

8. Place on website all contracted convention' hotels in chart format with address, rates by category, distance to Convention Center, shuttle service availability, and amenities at each (i.e., high speed internet access, room service times, number of restaurants bars, and fitness center for attendees' resource and customer service.

Possible

9. Expand current APA meeting scheduler to be in real-time and up to date through the actual convention (with last minute room changes, cancellations, speaker changes, etc.) and offer attendees a free CD containing the entire convention program and where they can reference their personal daily schedule. Enable access to a downloadable version of the schedule before the annual meeting too.

In Process

Adding mobile application in 2010

10. Provide complimentary wireless internet access (via sponsorship) not in the Cyber Cafe of the exhibit hall or poster sessions but throughout the convention center lobbies and meeting rooms for attendees' to check email or to access their itinerary on a Meeting Planner.

Possible Need major sponsor – is very expensive

11. Provide several message centers for APA attendees in the convention center with television monitors nearby. Monitors will scroll the names of the attendees who have unread messages. Attendees can check monitors periodically and arrange to meet colleagues at one of the centers. Attendees need only to use their email address (same one for registering at convention) and badge number to log in and set their individual message preferences. In addition to their name appearing on the message center monitors in the convention center, attendees can also select to be notified by a text message, cell phone, or email when they receive a new message. Attendees that do not wish to receive messages can select not to have their information available. This is another value-add, customer focus support for large size conventions.

No

Looking into different notification system through Experient

9

12. Hold a daily early morning convention staff meeting onsite to review day's schedule, major concerns and resource needs.

No

Staff indicate it is not needed.

13. Be clear in the upfront registration/hotel information the actual walking/driving and/ or shuttle distance of each of the hotels to the convention facility and available transportation means and costs so attendees are not surprised and disappointed upon arrival. Prepare NOW for transportation and distance between housing and convention center to avoid unhappy attendees.

Not an issue in 2010

14. Provide online personal convention planner program that is automatically updated throughout the convention (i.e., speaker cancellations, room changes, etc.) for easy reference and planning by the attendee. Offer an optional downloadable CD onsite with their personal schedule.

Exists but will be enhanced this year

15. For 2008 in Boston, address the transportation issues NOW the time and distance between the convention center and the hotels to offset what is already known to be difficult. Speak with organizations that have already met in Boston to learn how they handled the situation.

N/A

PROGRAM CONTENT, DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT

Suggestions and Recommendations

Program Structure and Process

1. Determine long range goals and objectives of the APA convention including desired attendance levels, and more importantly, what targeted segments and balance among those within the profession should be served via a high quality educational convention.

Work of TF

2. APA must revisit its operating structure/policies for annual program content development to evaluate and determine the best model to address long range goals and objectives of the convention, current meeting

Work of TF

Divisional control issue

10

attendees' needs and frustrations, and to become far more nimble and effective in making future program content/structural adjustments in order to reflect evolving challenges and needs of the profession on behalf of its members. Specifically, APA's attendees are seeking:

Consistently high quality presentations across divisions

Work of TF

Greater thematic, cross-cutting or integrated programming opportunities and application of other learning, innovative modalities

Work of TF

Fewer conflicts or overlap among sessions,

Work of TF

Flexibility to incorporate critical topics/themes facing clinicians and scientists at large, and lastly,

Work of TF

Ability to be nimble for making program adjustments to better address the attendees' changing needs and interests.

Work of TF

3. Create a centralized program committee with elected Chair made up of individuals possessing a broad perspective and knowledge base of the profession or industry area they represent. This committee would work in concert with in house staff for developing each year's major convention themes or tracks to focus on current key industry/professional issues and themes; these are promoted upfront in the Call for Papers for speaker solicitation. In-depth, well-articulated proposals that demonstrate a cohesive, quality-driven treatment of a subject area/theme will be accepted vs. two-paragraph type abstracts.

Work of TF

4. Allow the Program Committee or sub working group to facilitate the interaction among the divisions/SIGs and review submitted proposals, analyze for potential conflicts, opportunities for shared/cosponsored sessions, and ultimately plan the overall program schedule to meet the shared convention goals and objectives as set by the Board, Chief Elected Officer, and the organization.

Work of TF

11

5. Create "pods" or "clusters'" among the divisions representing theme/ topical areas and appoint theme/track chairs from each to serve on the central program committee. This cross-division group should assist in de-fragmenting the program, streamlining the format, and seizing new opportunities for collaboration and ways to incorporate more easily smaller yet evolving group / specialty area programming, or late-breaking, innovative, hot topical issues into the overall content. (See Enclosure D - APA Content and Program Review and Analysis for greater detail of proposed content development, session hour allocation, role of Program Committee and BCA.). A similar concept was tried without success several years ago, but not given 'sufficient time or the opportunity to succeed. AP A has to revisit this model, streamline it and get everyone behind it. It cannot happen unless "buy-in" is universal.

Work of TF

Note that this was done in 2002 and died out from lack of interest/ energy by Divisions. COR revoked it after a couple of years.

6. The number of program hours (for symposia. 1 hour to 2 hour sessions. plenary. workshops. etc.) is determined through a submission and acceptance process from the clusters of quality-driven proposals (maybe of varying session length/format) to the Program Committee. The committee would also take into account the available space / facility available to accomplish overall convention goals and objectives in their evaluation. Session hours, thus, would no longer be allocated to individual divisions using a designated formula as in the past. The current allocation method promotes silos and not integration of content, creates content fiefdoms in an era of shared and cross-cutting subject matter, creates competition between divisional units for content program time and lends itself to politics instead of a fair and transparent process that emphasizes excellence in subject matter regardless of divisional affiliation. The current system was tailor made for the siloed content of the past and not for integrated content areas of the future and must be replaced.

Work of TF

12

7. Along with the BCA, APA should investigate, among its division leadership, the overall viability of requiring a minimum abstract fee (from the perspective of receptivity among authors to cost of handling the process). Obtain direct feedback from groups applying set fees in the submission of convention abstracts to better understand their process and benefits to the organization. Requiring abstract fees could serve a two-fold purpose:

Work of TF

Offset expenses of managing the large abstract submission process;

Raise the expectation bar for potential authors in submitting only high quality abstracts for consideration. A member/nonmember differential fee could possibly be applied here to further promote member value.

8. Place all APA and division business meetings and social activities outside of the major convention programming schedule. Either require meetings scheduled prior to convention opening, after the convention is over or hold an All AP A Business Conference at a separate location and date (i.e., The American Society of Mechanical Engineers has some 3,000 volunteer leaders attend only such a meeting to train leaders and transact business.)

Work of TF

9. Eliminate the added financial expense for top entertaining speakers if necessary and utilize monies more effectively in other programmatic ways to satisfy attendees' interest, such as sponsoring field related high-profile speakers.

Work of TF

Do they enhance value or is money better spent elsewhere

CE Workshops and CE Credits

10. Investigate the current APA CE credit approval process and requirements to find ways for expanding CE credit offerings throughout the convention. Also, review means to make the onsite process more user-friendly and streamlined.

Looking at integration of CE into Convention itself. Prohibitive monitoring costs are a factor. In Dec 09, BoD asked CEC to review and find less burdensome alternative structure.

11. The APA CEP office may consider cross- Work group may want to

13

pollinating and coordinating its operations more fully with other APA educational departments so that operations can be streamlined and become more user friendly to participants.

Work of TF discuss

12. A longer range goal for APA would be to integrate the CE pre-convention programming activities within the convention itself or offering combined registration packages. This approach would improve the branding and communications of both important functional areas and stimulate attendance for each plus enhance overall branding and value of education at the convention and the CE Workshops.

In Process

Cynthia and I are exploring this already with possible pilot study for 2011

13. The APA CEP office should explore other types of continuing medical/professional education systems that may allow for broader participation of its convention attendees at a significantly lower price and be more user-friendly such as some those offered by benchmark associations.

In Process

CEC task

14. Consider the honor system, where possible for CE sessions to save attendee's time, and/or use the room monitors to collect forms at end of each session.

In Process CEC was asked to review

15. Offer a one time CE credit fee directly on the registration form to cover participation in the workshops and/or CE credit division programming sessions.

In Process

Under discussion

Poster Sessions

16. AP A should reassess its poster session format. setup and selection process to enhance the value for attendees and increase presentation opportunities for serving science-based constituents, in particular, wanting to come to hear and give cutting-edge research. This examination with subsequent change should increase registrations, expand educational support for and participation within the scientific and graduate school community, generate more speaker

Work of TF

14

opportunities, enhance exhibit hall traffic and value of the convention experience for attendees and researchers/scholars alike. Group like functional area posters in the same area.

17. Posters should not be branded as second tier, or "student" sessions, but rather as "cutting edge" research sessions in all promotional vehicles.

Work of TF

18. Placing poster sessions around the perimeter or in the back of the exhibit hall should also encourage greater traffic flow and interest in the exhibit booths. Layout/ setup (i.e., sessions on certain topics organized in clusters around non conflicting times) plus effective key coding of poster sessions in the program book and on the floor are critical to create a positive, value-add experience for aII attendees.

19. Consider appointing chairs representing the clinical and the scientific side of the profession to manage the poster session process including approvals, coordination/ structure, etc.

Work of TF

CONVENTION MARKETING, COMMUNICATIONS AND MEMBERSHIP

Suggestions and Recommendations

Program Book This entire section – I am open to new ways of managing the program book but significantly reducing the number of programs will solve much of the problem. Moving to online and mobile schedule system may replace book for some.

1. Solicit bids for an outside professional print/ design firm which specializes in large scale soft bound books such as directories and convention programs to provide alternative approaches for producing a more user-friendly

15

program book from the perspective of overall packaging indexing/color-coding to design and paper options.

2. Like one benchmark association, consider publishing mini-program book for each convention day plus a Final Program General Information book (highlighting the program at a glance, key features, Awards programs, APA and division business related meetings, plus a listing of sessions by theme and an Index of Authors book listing all speakers, session number(s), and day of week, or a total of 7 books. It is very easy for the attendees to find what they need and carry around a small volume that does not weight them down. APA has been provided a copy of this best practice at the BCA meeting.

3. Having only one softbound program booklet per day allows for a simple canvas convention book bag to be used to carry materials. The cost for a company sponsoring current attendee carry bags might instead go towards revamping current convention program book plus shrink wrapping both the light weight bag folded along with the daily program books together.

Bags offered by sponsor

4. To further offset expenses, have attendees who register by a certain date, receive Book 1 of the Program by mail. Those registering by a later date, provide them with an option to pay a small fee ($10 -12) and more if outside North America ($25) to have a complete set of book of the program shipped to them via expedited service. If attendee chooses to have book(s) sent ahead, they would not be able to receive an additional copy onsite.

Personal Convention Planner

5. Provide on the web a highly interactive, real-time Psychology Meeting Planner containing the full text of abstracts to allow attendees to plan their own itinerary up to and during the convention. Make it also available online for attendees to use through a web browser or to

In Process

Replacing current tool

16

download a copy to their desk-top or PDA. With the desktop version attendees can periodically check the web for changes and updates ensuring that itineraries are as up-to-date as possible. Provide onsite viewing areas for previewing and using the planner in the exhibit hall, or if preferred, attendees may request the Planner on a free CD-ROM via APA's website for pickup onsite only.

Membership Value

6. Membership value takes many forms. Offering a major pricing differential between member and nonmember for convention registration along with other products, programs and services is accepted and understood among all best practice associations. ''You have to pay to play" has never been more appropriate than in association membership. Otherwise, your nonmembers are taking advantage of the sweat equity of all members in growing and maintaining the association. Recommend that APA charge as minimum, the price of dues for convention registration in this regard.

Work of TF

BCA approved large differential but put on hold and to be considered as part of the whole TF package of recommendations

7. APA lacks strong incentives for members and nonmembers alike to perceive the .value of dues investment in APA before and during the convention. Evaluate opportunities including: registration costs/fee differentials between members and nonmembers; make joining APA easy, user-friendly online all the way up to the convention (2-3 weeks out) to take advantage of the discounted meeting rates, offering lower member/ student member registration fees for those residing in developing countries and current student member undergraduates, and early career psychologists; accept online registration discounted fees through the annual convention; promotion of more targeted member benefits at key venues throughout the event and within the exhibit area; build a stronger onsite career center to attract employers and attendees with member incentives; and, increase number of poster sessions to encourage more speakers, to name

In Process

Working with Member Services on some of this. Will implement a “join now and save” program in 2011 or 2012 (it is complicated by roll out of new member database next year.) Welcome TF input

17

a few.

8. Create excitement about APA as an organization (not just a meeting of mini divisions/conventions/special interest groups), and the VALUE of joining throughout the convention. There are' countless ways to carry out this goal without breaking the treasury! Only a few are listed below. However, training all staff in all departments the membership value equation and providing high levels of customer-service onsite at all times will more than make up for any short-falls or mishaps that can typically occur at any large meeting of this size and scope. The long wait and lines for on-site registration and pre-registration pick up of materials are an excellent example for demonstrating the "power" and of your organization. Rather than remain behind the desks away from the frustrated and angry attendees, calling in additional staff outside of the convention management team who may be available to assist, to help talk with the attendees while waiting in line, and even offering free bottles of water would go a long way towards diffusing registrants' initial convention experience and impression. Sometimes, it can not always be about the "bottom-line" (i.e., costs of offering bottled water); this expense pales to the pain of generating poor public relations and members' negative perception of the meeting. More often than not, it is these "little inconveniences" that members often never tend to forget about you. (Create a mini-sponsorship for bottled water with the logo of the company on the label!)

In Process

Registration lines resolved.

9. Redesign all the member resources/benefits table tops to be placed inside the exhibit hall in a first class booth or build more attractive, compelling set up/displays outside the hall near registration which speaks to the professionalism and pride of members belonging to APA. Enable both members and nonmembers to browse, get educated about APA's benefits, meet and interact with staff in more informal ways (not always behind a table

Moving to more conspicuous location in 2010

18

top), and to network with colleagues in the membership area.

10. Encourage traffic and membership sign up with a flyer/special offering in the convention book bag.

Possible

Staff believe there are more effective ways to accomplish

11. Include membership benefits and an invitation to stop at the booth in the preregistered nonmember packets.

Possible

Staff believe there are more effective ways to accomplish

Marketing Outreach

12. Foster relationships and recognize schools sending large numbers of students in program, onsite and perhaps via monies, (create a contest).

maybe

Welcome TF input and ideas

13. Develop stronger relationships among the state and regional chapters and create incentives for each to aggressively promote the annual convention to the respective members.

No

Competitive relationship

14. Reengineer current AMS system to begin building a prospect database of nonmembers and former members who have requested information, purchased books, attended programs, etc. for future marketing efforts.

In Process

Entire database under revision

15. Staff should begin to track all promotional mailings against targeted lists to determine value for potential future mailings.

16. Begin to collect and profile members for better segmentation and enhanced, personalized marketing-regarding the convention activities/sessions important to them.

In Process

Will be able to do more with new database

EXHIBIT SALES MANAGEMENT AND

SPONSORING

Suggestions and Recommendations

1. APA conduct a review and analysis of current marketing and selling approach to the corporate community to determine best operating model from exhibit sales, to

In Process

Working with consulting firm in 2011 to rebrand our exhibit sales

19

advertising to sponsorships and to meet organizational financial and strategic goals.

2. The exhibits have not grown substantially over the past few years. APA must discern carefully the universe of potential companies and whether it wants to bring in other classes of exhibitors to grow the show.

In Process

Looking at new branding approach/ new exhibitors

3. Evaluate among attendees what types of exhibits/educational booths will attract their interest on the show floor.

In Process

Adding art/craft booths in 2010; adding technology section in 2011. But could do more

4. Generate more than one-non-competing hour on the show floor to encourage attendees to meet with exhibitors.

Work of TF

5. For the career site, market to and encourage employers well in advance to post want ads online just prior to convention date with incentives such as another free posting over a certain period, and for job seekers to post their resumes ahead to build the volume in both areas.

In Process

6. Ensure all possible activities have been identified for sponsorship and solicit from vendor community. Benchmark other associations for possible categories of sponsorship.

In Process

Consultants on rebranding

CONVENTION EVALUATION

Suggestions and Recommendations

1. Evaluation is a key part of preparing for next year's convention. APA should use a combination of surveys, interviews and focus groups to evaluate thoroughly its convention annually to discover how to correct deficiencies noted. Continuous improvement and adjustments to the annual convention are required to effectively serve changing attendees' educational needs and higher expectations at their association's annual convention.

In Process

Add survey to post-convention site

20

2. APA must also incorporate more relevant (onsite) and immediate feedback of its attendees as well as reaching out to those who do not return to the convention for the following year.

maybe

Resource issue; have done some

3. Although this question was not asked among other associations, many organizations also require individual session/speaker evaluations to maintain high quality presentations.

No

Not truly feasible with current structure. Have done some evals

4. Use of kiosks with electronic means and incentives for capturing surveys of attendees' immediate feedback and impressions. Or, send a nightly email to the attendee's desktop to complete a brief questionnaire on each day's program and activities (latest innovation in attendee feedback).

In Process

Have done some

5. With an automated registration system, a post attendee survey can be conducted immediately following the annual meeting vs. several weeks or months.

No

Was not timely this year – need to be planning ahead more.

6. At the completion of each annual convention, all key groups (staff/volunteers) should participate in a wrap-up review and analysis of the meeting and generate areas for future consideration and implementation. A meeting of ALL staff attending the convention should offer their input and observations prior to planning the next year's event.

No

Over 250 staff attend convention. Do meet with key staff in all directorates.

ORGANIZATION OF CONVENTION FUNCTION

Suggestions and Recommendations

1. By all benchmark standards in the survey work APA's convention department is understaffed. The benchmark groups average a minimum of three FTEs to support convention planning and execution regardless the extent of outsourcing contracted. In interviews at APA, convention staff expressed lack of time to effectively strategize and evaluate future convention management opportunities beyond their daily tracking and planning for the current year's annual meeting. Additional staffing

Work of TF

Note that numerous Convention support personnel are housed in other directorates (eg Convention marketing, exhibit and advertising sales; IT services; finance)

21

would benefit APA in its efforts to revitalize the annual meeting and have better capacity to stay on top of new resources and tools used by their competitors to monitor changes within the convention industry.

2. The association should re-evaluate current position descriptions and requirements needed to fully lead and support APA's conventions for the future. The FTE allocation should range from 3.5 - 4 based on our review of the current job descriptions and benchmark organizations, and staffing levels needed to bring the convention to a higher level. A full review of staffing vis a vis outsource components should be conducted to establish the final FTE allocation.

Work of TF

3. Revisit outsourcing opportunities as a way to nurture, grow, and maintain your core competencies within the convention activity in house. APA must conduct a full review of current contracts of all outsource components and other optional vendors as contracts come up for renewal to determine best utilization of resources and ways to enhance convention operation.

Possible

4. Suggest all staff desiring to attend the convention first submit a request for participation indicating function(s) and role (s), days and number of hours required to perform those activities outside of the specific convention-related management and logistics. Executive senior staff to review requests and determine what functions might be best shared and where individuals could lend additional support to the convention management team during those times when they are not directly involved in their specific assigned activities. Given some of the comments by participants about the lack of support in session rooms and troubles with registration, AP A needs to re-look at its staff attendance policies to ensure adequate support is available for logistics. Most associations have a daily all-staff meeting to outline the day's activities and divide

Up to EDs to approve. Moving from paper request form to online form in 2011.

22

responsibilities and augment key areas where necessary.

5. Conduct an internal technology audit to determine specific tools and processes for streamlining, planning, promoting and executing the convention.

Tech support has improved dramatically

6. APA should look carefully at its net-net gain loss) after all expenses including staff travel and time to and during convention so it has an accurate gauge as to whether its convention is a revenue producer or a subsidized activity subsidized in part by member dues. Expenses also should include all overhead in time and direct costs to obtain an accurate gauge of expenses vs. revenues.

Possible Need different accounting process.

7. APA needs to examine its convention revenue sources to ensure that it has identified all possible revenue sources and develops marketing plans to exploit them. As indicated above, visiting other sister association meetings may assist in identifying new sources of convention income.

In Process

8. Based on responses from attendees, APA needs to augment its budget to increase: their signage (internal and external) for onsite; packaging of their program book materials; technology costs; providing A/V equipment in all sessions/presentation rooms as standard; internet access for attendees throughout the convention - APA has an internet café which is sponsored, but only have limited computers with often long wait lines for attendees with their hotel rooms far away, and increased support of the ECP and graduate students.

In Process

Signage improved. Can do more.

9. Evaluate and clarify the role and responsibility of the Board of Convention Affairs. Ensure that proper authority and tools are provided for the Board to:

Work of TF

develop, oversee and monitor all convention and program-related policies and guidelines,

set annual budget with staff, goals and objectives for the convention,

23

review and approve submission to board future annual convention locations;

handle disputes when necessary,

evaluate, monitor and recommend improvements or adjustments following each annual convention utilizing proper research tools, and finally,

oversee a newly established Program Committee's activities and delivery.

10. A newly formed APA Program Committee (reporting to the BCA) works in conjunction with internal staff leadership and the cluster representatives to develop the annual convention program .themes / tracks; the content layout/ program structure (time/location), and manage to maintain cohesive, high quality, content and presentations throughout the program duration.

Work of TF

11. More teambuilding across the organization needs to occur in order to foster greater support and resource allocation, the sharing of ideas and responsibilities, and conducting the annual convention at an optimal level where attendees are delighted and value the APA Annual Convention as the place to be beyond other subspecialty conferences.

In Process

Working to create a stronger working team but there are challenges

Organization Convention Number of

Days

Content Schedules Registration Fees Total

Attendees

Attendance History # exhibitors 2010& 2011 Other Cities Total

Members

American Academy of

Pediatrics (AAP)

National

Conference &

Exhibition

4 days:

Saturday -

Tuesday

(October 15-

18, 2011)

Continuing medical education (CME),

Welcome reception, plenary session,

ribbon cutting ceremony in exhibit hall,

President's reception, Annual business

lunch

Friday - 7:30-9:30 pm Welcome

Reception

Day 1 - 7:00 am-5:45 pm

6:00-7:30 pm Poster Sessions

Day 2 - 7:00 am-5:45 pm

5:30-8:00 pm Receptions

Day 3 - 7:00 am-5:45 pm

Day 4 - 7:00 am-5:45 pm

N/A 7,000 N/A 300+ San Francisco

/Boston

N/A 60,000

American Association of

Pharmaceutical

Scientists (AAPS)

AAPS Annual

Meeting &

Exposition

5 days:

Sunday -

Thursday

(November 14-

18, 2010)

In 2010 FIP and AAPS have agreed to hold

the PSWC and the AAPS Annual Meeting

together in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA

from 14–18 November. Meeting inlcudes

6 short courses, 47 symposia, 42

roundtables/mini-symposia, 14 sunrise

sessions, 6 hot topics, 8 open forums

Day 1 - 4:30-6:30 pm Opening

Session

Day 2 - 8:00 am-5:00 pm

Day 3 - 8:00 am-5:00 pm

Day 4 - 8:00 am-5:00 pm

Day 5 - 8:00 am-5:00 pm

Full Congress $850 Early

Registration / $1,150 On-

site

*Every current AAPS

member will have their

membership term

extended for 1-year;

membership dues are

included in the

registration rate

estimate

10,000

N/A 300-500 New Orleans/ N/A 12,000

National

Meeting -

Spring

5 days:

Sunday -

Thursday

(March 27-31,

2011)

N/A 18,064 2009 - 10,295

2008 - 13,664

2007 - 14,605

2006 - 12,637

2005 - 15,769

300 San Francisco

/Anaheim

Salt Lake City, UT - 2009

New Orleans, LA - 2008

Chicago, IL - 2007

Atlanta, GA - 2006

San Diego, CA - 2005

National

Meeting - Fall

5 days:

Sunday -

Thursday

(August 22-

26, 2010)

The ACS President, 28 technical divisions

and 6 committees host 816 scientific

sessions, invited symposia, poster

sessions, special lectures and events,

award presentations, workshops,

exposition, networking opportunities,

exhibitor sessions.

Governance and Business meetings held

throughout the conference.

Day 1 - 8:00 am-5:00 pm

5:30-9:00 pm Receptions and

Poster Sessions

Day 2 - 8:00 am-5:00 pm

5:30-10:00 pm Receptions and

Poster Sessions

Day 3 - 8:00 am-5:00 pm

5:30-9:00 pm Receptions and

Poster Sessions

Day 4 - 8:00 am-6:00 pm

5:30-10:00 pm Receptions and

Poster Sessions

Day 5 - 8:00 am-4:00 pm

Member $420 Regular

Non-Member $745

Regular

14,151 2009 - 14,129

2008 - 13,805

2007 - 15,554

2006 - 15,714

2005 - 13, 148

300 Boston

/Denver

Washington, DC - 2009

Philadelphia, PA - 2008

Boston, MA - 2007

San Francisco, CA -

2006

Washington, DC - 2005

American Geophysical

Union (AGU)

Fall Meeting 5 days:

Monday -

Friday

(December 13-

17, 2010)

Scientific sessions, Poster sessions,

Workshops, Academic Showcase, Section /

Focus Group Business Meetings, Lectures,

Town Halls, Honors Ceremony, Honors

Banquet

Day 1 - 8:00 am-6:00 pm

Day 2 - 8:00 am-6:00 pm

Day 3 - 8:00 am-6:00 pm

7:00 pm-9:00 pm Honors

Ceremony

Day 4 - 8:00 am-6:00 pm

8:00 pm-Honors Banquet

Day 5 - 8:00 am-6:00 pm

Member $350 Early Bird

/ $420 Regular

Non-Member Early Bird

$410 / $480 Regular

Meals are extra $15 -

$60

16,000 2009 - 16,642

2008 - 16,242

2007 - 14,649

2006 - 13,972

2005 - 12,008

300 San Francisc/

San Francisco

San Francisco, CA - all

Fall Meetings held here

58,287

American Chemical

Society (ACS)

150,000

Annual

Meeting-

March (for

physicists)

5 days:

Monday -

Friday (March

21-25, 2011)

100 invited sessions, 550 contributed

sessions, 7,000 papers presented.

Tutorials and workshops held before the

meeting.

Member $340 Early Bird

/ $400 Regular / $475

On-site

Non-Member $505 Early

Bird / $570 Regular /

$650 On-Site

7,500 Portland/

Dallas

Annual

Meeting-April

(for particle,

nuclear and

astrophysicist

s)

4 days:

Saturday -

Tuesday (April

30-May 3,

2011)

3 plenary sessions (9 plenary talks), 75

invited sessions, 100+ contributed

sessions, poster sessions. Public lecture

one evening.

N/A Anaheim, CA

American Society of

Hematology (ASH)

Annual

Meeting and

Exposition

4 days:

Saturday -

Tuesday

(December 4-

7, 2010)

Education program sessions, scientific

program sessions, plenary scientific

session, simultaneous sessions, poster

sessions, late-breaking abstracts session,

general sessions, special-interest sessions,

trainee sessions, ticketed sessions

2 days of pre-meeting

Day 1 - 7:30 am-5:30 pm

5:30-7:30 pm Poster Sessions

Day 2 - 7:00 am-6:00 pm

6:00-8:00 pm Poster Sessions

Day 3 - 7:00 am-6:00 pm

6:00-8:00 pm Poster Sessions

Day 4 - 7:30 am-1:30 pm

Member $395 Advance /

$450 On-Site

Non-Member $775

Advance / $850 On-Site

estimate

18,000 -

20,000

2009 - 21,266

2008 - 23,671

2007 - 20,474

2006 - 20,748

2005 - 18,683

300 Orlando /San

Diego

New Orleans, LA - 2009

San Francisco, CA -

2008

Atlanta, GA - 2007

Orlando, FL - 2006

Atlanta, GA - 2005

15,700

American Psychiatric

Association (APA)

Annual

Meeting

5 days:

Saturday -

Wednesday

(May 14-18,

2011)

Poster sessions, Continuing education,

Convocation (Desmund Tutu, speaker)

Member $350 Early Bird

/ $395 Advance / $435

On-site

Non-Member Early Bird

$910 / $955 Advance /

$1,000 On-site

16,000 1,000 Honolulu, HI 38,000

American Speech

Language Hearing

Association (ASHA)

ASHA

Convention

3 days:

Thursday -

Saturday

(November 18-

20, 2010)

over 1,500 educational sessions (any 1- or

2-hour seminar, technical, or poster

session), the exhibit hall, career fair,

graduate school fair, and the Opening

Session and Awards Ceremony without

additional registration. Convention

registrants may sign up for the Closing

Party for no fee, as long as tickets are

available

Wed./Pre-meeting: Committee &

Board meetings

Day 1 - 8:00 am-5:30 pm Program

Sessions

6-7 pm Opening General Session

Day 2 - 8:00 am-5:30 pm Program

Sessions

6-7:30 pm Awards Ceremony

Day 3 - 8:00 am-5:30 pm Program

Sessions

6-8:30 Closing Party

Member $365 Early-

Early Bird / $395 Early

Bird / $420 Regular /

$450 On-site

Non-Member $730 Early-

Early Bird / $790 Early

Bird / $840 Regular /

$900 On-site

10,000 300+ Philadelphia

/San Diego

New Orleans, LA - 2009

Chicago, IL - 2008

Boston, MA - 2007

Miami, FL - 2006

San Diego, CA - 2005

140,000

American Physical

Society (APS)

47,000

American Statistical

Association (ASA)

Joint

Statistical

Meetings

(held jointly

with ASA and

5 other

associations)

6 days:

Saturday -

Thursday (July

30-August 4,

2011)

Meeting activities include oral

presentations, panel sessions, poster

presentations, continuing education

courses, an exhibit hall (with state-of-the-

art statistical products and opportunities),

career placement services, society and

section business meetings, committee

meetings, social activities and networking

opportunities.

6,000 Vancouver

/Miami Beach

Washington, DC - 2009

Denver, CO - 2008

Salt Lake City, UT - 2007

Seattle, WA - 2006

Minneapolis, MN -

2005

18,000

American Urological

Association (AUA)

Annual

Meeting

6 days:

Saturday -

Thursday

(May 14-19,

2011)

Scientific program: plenary, poster and

podium sessions, forums, video sessions

Educational offerings: courses, live robotic

surgery programs, hands-on labs, lunch

with the experts, AUA 365 Online

Community (allows participants to engage

in peer-to peer learning, connect with

peers, and communicate with faculty).

International Society programs

Specialty Society programs

Programming is between 7:00 am-

7:00 pm daily

Member $0 Early Bird /

$75 Regular

Non-Member $150 -

$600 Early Bird / $200 -

$750 Regular

Courses & Meals are

extra $35-$295 or $175

if bundled

11,000 2009 - 10,840

2008 - 9,580

2007 - 8, 766

2006 - 8,637

2005 - 8,923

300+ San Francisco

/DC

Chicago, IL - 2009

Orlando, FL - 2008

Anaheim, CA - 2007

Atlanta, GA - 2006

San Antonio, TX - 2005

16,000

Institute of Food

Technologists (IFT)

Annual

Meeting +

Food Expo

4 days:

Saturday -

Tuesday (June

11-14, 2011)

100 scientific sessions, professional

development offerings, continuing

education units. Includes oral, poster,

division competitions, graduate student

research paper competition, International

Research Paper.

Day 1 - Pre Meeting Short Courses

8:00 am-5:00pm

Day 2 - 7:30 am-5:00 pm

Day 3 - 8:30 am-5:00 pm

7:00-11:00 pm Welcome

Assembly

Day 4 - 8:30 am-4:00 pm

Member $370 Early Bird

/ $470 Regular

Non-Member $570 Early

Bird / $670 Regular

24,000 1,000+ New Orleans,

LA

22,000

Mathematical

Association of America

(MAA)

Math Fest 3 days:

Thursday -

Saturday

(August 4-6,

2011)

Invited paper sessions, contributed paper

sessions, panels and other sessions,

undergrad and graduate student

activities,mini courses, short courses

2 days of pre-meeting

Day 1 - 8:30 am-5:00 pm

Day 2 - 8:00 am-5:00 pm

Day 3 - 8:30 am-5:00 pm

Social events cost $50+

Registration info N/A

1,400 20 Pittsburgh

/Lexington

20,000

*ApA includes

Registration fee includes:

* Abstract Book**

* Abstracts on CD-ROM

* Hematology 2010 (Education Program Book)

* Program Book

* Admission to the General, Special-Interest, Education, Scientific, Oral, and Poster Sessions

* Admission to the exhibit hall*

* Admission to receptions in the poster hall*

* Daily coffee breaks*

McKinley Marketing, Inc. APA Benchmarking Study – November 2010

1

American Psychological Association

Benchmarking Report

Prepared by: Jay Younger, Managing Partner & Chief Consultant

Tracy Talbot, Consultant

November 4, 2010

McKinley Marketing, Inc. APA Benchmarking Study – November 2010

2

Background McKinley Marketing, Inc. (McKinley) was retained by the American Psychological Association (APA) to execute a benchmarking project which will help the APA better understand the large convention environment and accepted practices. The following associations were contacted and interviewed:

American Physical Society (APS)

American Psychiatric Association (APA)

American Speech Language Hearing Association (ASHA) A summary of findings, as well as an edited and abridged version of the notes taken during the interview sessions follow. Profiles of twelve associations are included in a separate Meetings Matrix document.

McKinley Marketing, Inc. APA Benchmarking Study – November 2010

3

Summary The associations profiled in this research are all professional associations serving individuals. While each organization has its own mission and serves different types of members, most have scientific sessions. Meeting Structure & Pricing

McKinley has also prepared a Meetings Matrix of twelve scientific associations with major conventions. Like APA’s meeting, these annual meetings are generally four to five days long with full days of scientific programming. Some groups offer one or two receptions as part of the registration fee, but many do not offer any amenities. Early bird registration fees are generally under $400 for members, and some groups have significant variances between member and non-member pricing.

Two associations – the American Chemical Society (ACS) and the American Physical Society (APS) – hold two large conventions per year. ACS has a March and August meeting, and APS has a March meeting for physicists and an April meeting for particle, nuclear and astrophysicists.

Meetings are held throughout the year:

Spring March

ACS National Meeting-1 APS Annual Meeting-1

April APS Annual Meeting-2

May APA Annual Meeting AUA Annual Meeting

Summer June Institute of Food Technologists

August ACS National Meeting-2 ASA Joint Statistical Meetings MAA Math Fest

Fall/Winter October AAP National Conference & Exposition

November AAPS Annual Meeting & Exposition ASHA Convention

December AGU Fall Meeting ASH Annual Meeting & Exposition

Meeting Content

Among the three groups interviewed, all have central program committees to review submissions and organize content. The American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) scientific program committee reviews submissions by topic rather than format (such as workshop, symposia or poster). The program is built around topic areas, as well, to create a more meaningful experience for attendees with less overlap in programming.

McKinley Marketing, Inc. APA Benchmarking Study – November 2010

4

Both APA and APS have room for “invited” sessions and “contributed” sessions. In the case of APA, invited sessions are handled by the President of the association and the Chair of the scientific program committee, while APS’ divisions are allocated a set number of these invited sessions. The “contributed” sessions are open for submission by any member of APS, while APA opens submissions to members and non-members.

Governance meetings do not overlap with the American Physical Society’s (APS) scientific program or the American Speech Language Association’s (ASHA) sessions. APA schedules their Assembly and Board of Trustees meetings during the earlier part of the meeting.

APA offers continuing education during their Annual Meeting. At one point APA offered 120 courses but now offers 75 continuing education sessions. Additional fees are charged for continuing education courses. All of ASHA’s educational sessions are eligible for credit and are included in the registration fee.

Poster sessions are on the schedule for all three groups interviewed. The submission process is the same as abstract or other research. These sessions are open to all, but in the case of APA only new research may be presented in this format.

Exhibitors

Exhibitors are an important part of each meeting. However there are few, if any “unopposed” hours. ASHA has one unscheduled hour per day during lunchtime, while APA has three to four unopposed hours during their five day meeting, and APS does not set aside any time for exhibitors.

McKinley Marketing, Inc. APA Benchmarking Study – November 2010

5

American Physical Society (APS) # of attendees: 7,500 Donna Baudrau, Director of Meetings and Conventions Phone: (301) 209-3285 Email: baudrau@aps.org Website: www.aps.org

Content

Is there a centralized program committee that reviews submissions for the meeting and makes final

decisions on the program? If so, how does the committee work with various stakeholder groups to

prioritize which submissions are selected?

We have a program committee consisting of representatives of each of the divisions in our organization. Each division is allocated a certain number of what we call "invited sessions". These are sessions to which eminent physicists are invited to give 36 minute talks. The divisions are free to identify the topics of their invited sessions. Invited speakers are required to submit an abstract of their talks. In addition, we have what we call "sorting categories" to which any member of APS can submit a "contributed abstract” (as opposed to an "invited" abstract). The committee meets twice - once to schedule the invited talks to ensure no, or little overlap in topics. Then again to "sort" the contributed abstracts. They are sorted by category and placed into sessions. Contributed abstracts are allotted 15 minutes each for presentation. In total we get about 7,200 abstracts - both invited and contributed. Are governance meetings held during the convention? If so, are they held before, after or during the

convention? Do they overlap with scientific sessions or other important convention programming?

Each division holds one business meeting at 5:30 on a designated day, after the scientific program is over for the day. They also hold executive committee meetings, usually on the day before the scientific meeting begins, but sometimes in the evening. The APS executive board and council also meet, but prior to the scientific meeting, we do not allow any governance or other activities to conflict with the 5 day scientific program. Do you offer continuing education courses during the convention? How are these incorporated into

the overall meeting? Do they require a separate, fee-based registration?

Almost all of our attendees are PhDs or are studying for their doctorates, so we don't offer CMEs. Structure and Pricing

How are registration fees for the event structured? Are there discounts available?

We offer a range of fees including early bird, regular and on-site rates, as well as member and non-member pricing.

McKinley Marketing, Inc. APA Benchmarking Study – November 2010

6

Are you experimenting with new techniques or presentation methods to engage audiences (e.g.,

rather than a presenter giving a PowerPoint presentation)? If so, please describe.

No, we are very unadventurous here - we only provide power point and believe it or not we still provide overhead projectors as some still prefer this method. We do sometimes video tape some sessions. How many poster sessions? How are they handled?

We have 6 poster sessions located in the exhibit hall. The same process for abstract submission applies to those who want to present a poster rather than an oral talk. How many meals are included with registration?

Ha! None. We give them a badge and a program book. Not even free coffee. We do however provide free wireless throughout the convention center which is not cheap. Approximately what percent of your attendees are from outside the US?

About 20%+ out of 7,500 attendees are from outside the United States. Exhibitors

How are exhibitor relationships managed? Are the exhibitor relationships strong? Why/ why not?

We outsource our exhibit show sales and management. Our exhibits manager has very good relationships with our exhibitors. However, when I first came to APS I established an exhibits advisory committee, but after two meetings of this committee during the convention with very little attendance, we disbanded the committee. What are the exhibit hours? How many of these are unopposed hours with nothing else competing

with the exhibit hall?

Exhibit hours are Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday 9:00am - 5:00pm. No hours set aside for exhibits only. Our program is 5 solid days of non-stop scientific programs from 8:00am-5:30pm – with more than 600 sessions in those 5 days.

McKinley Marketing, Inc. APA Benchmarking Study – November 2010

7

American Psychiatric Association (APA) # of attendees: 16,000 Diane Runnels Phone: 703-907-7300 Email: runnels@psych.org Website: www.psych.org

Content

Is there a centralized program committee that reviews submissions for the meeting and makes final

decisions on the program? If so, how does the committee work with various stakeholder groups to

prioritize which submissions are selected?

Yes we have a scientific program committee – they meet twice per year. Submissions are accepted in September – and the committee meets in October and March to make final decisions – and then attendees are notified after that. We have space for 333 sessions – and the scientific committee reviews for symposia, workshops, and posters by TOPIC area rather than format. Participants don’t have to be members – we have a submission site and each presenter has to put in their email and disclosures before we can begin grading (grading system from 7 to 1) – and submissions are reviewed by at least 3-4 on committee and are reviewed by TOPIC area. We also go outside and find consultants who are subject matter experts to review our sessions that have been submitted. When putting together the program, we try to organize by track so that an attendee can attend all relevant sessions in their area – and that seems to be going well. Sessions are getting better because of the organization by topic and we’re getting a higher caliber of speaker.

We partner with NIMH, NIDA and NIAA and they put on symposia and workshops. These are called invited sessions. The President of the association and Chair of the scientific program committee handle the invited sessions and lectures (often based on input from previous chair of committee and president). We also have a DSM track (a publication). We have committees and councils; however they must make submissions and go through the same process as everyone else. For instance, the Council on Disaster Psychiatry might submit a workshop or symposia for review. We used to do 90 minute component workshops and issue workshops – but the Board cut back on the number of components and councils within the APA because there were too many.

We used to have 120 CEs and they weren’t well attended. We cut back to 75 and now focus on quality. Our goal is to create a quality program because we were finding people had to decide between sessions and this way there are fewer and better options. Attendees have a better bang for their buck.

We also have series, lectures and master courses and presenters are invited. The “Advances In” series are invited by API (publication), lectures and authors are also invited by API (publication).

McKinley Marketing, Inc. APA Benchmarking Study – November 2010

8

Are governance meetings held during the convention? If so, are they held before, after or during the

convention? Do they overlap with scientific sessions or other important convention programming?

Yes. Assembly and Board of Trustees meet toward the earlier part of the meeting. Do you offer continuing education courses during the convention? How are these incorporated into

the overall meeting? Do they require a separate, fee-based registration?

Yes we offer continuing education and there is a separate fee. We used to print the materials for course directors and found the bibliographies, notes, etc. weren’t really needed. Now we print the PPT and put all info on a CD-ROM so participants have the bibliographies and literature. The CLE fee pays for printing costs and to cover the registration fees for the faculty. These courses are handled by a course committee and they are typically half day (4 hours), full day (6 hours). (Other presenters do have to pay a registration fee – but we waive the registration fee for CLE faculty.) Structure and Pricing

How are registration fees for the event structured? Are there discounts available?

Yes – students get discounts w/ID and letter from school. There are different rates set by the Board of Trustees. It costs significantly less for members than nonmembers, and we have a daily rate. Are you experimenting with new techniques or presentation methods to engage audiences (e.g.,

rather than a presenter giving a PowerPoint presentation)? If so, please describe.

Basically it’s PPT presentations and lectures, for some we use Audience Response System (ARS). Not much thought given to different formats. How many poster sessions? How are they handled?

800-1,000. Handled through submission process. It must be new research. How many meals are included with registration?

None. Sometimes pharmaceutical companies sponsor meals. Approximately what percent of your attendees are from outside the US?

60-70% are international Exhibitors

How are exhibitor relationships managed? Are the exhibitor relationships strong? Why/ why not?

Managed in-house. We just brought it back in-house. Exhibitors seem comfortable with structure. We have exhibitors meetings where they can voice their opinions. We have close to 1,000 exhibitors at Annual Meeting. Two staff manage exhibitors, and Freeman handles the logistics and shipping.

McKinley Marketing, Inc. APA Benchmarking Study – November 2010

9

What are the exhibit hours? How many of these are unopposed hours with nothing else competing

with the exhibit hall?

4 days, usually from 8 am-4 pm (programming starts at 7am), and on last day the exhibit hall closes at 12:00. Very few hours are “unopposed” – at the most 3 or 4 hours – and I think they’re going to look into changing this because attendance was low in the exhibit hall last year.

McKinley Marketing, Inc. APA Benchmarking Study – November 2010

10

American Speech Language Hearing Association (ASHA) # of attendees: 10,000 Nellie Dickens, Director, Meetings & Registration Phone: 301-296-5700 Email: ndickens@asha.org Website: www.asha.org

Content

Is there a centralized program committee that reviews submissions for the meeting and makes final

decisions on the program? If so, how does the committee work with various stakeholder groups to

prioritize which submissions are selected?

We do have a program committee. 2 program chairs (one for each discipline) and then over the years we have developed approximately 40 “topic areas”, divided into SLP, Audiology, and General Interest. Each topic area has a Topic Coordinator, who works with a group of volunteers of their choosing to supervise the area. Each sub-committee is given a flat sum of money to cover costs associated with putting on any “invited” sessions (they decide on content, choose speakers, etc), and that usually works out to about 3-6 special sessions per topic area. The rest of the sessions are submitted through our Call for Papers process, and evaluated by the sub-committee (with ultimate oversight by the Program Chair). The number of approved sessions is proportionally related to the number of submissions in that area (i.e., Language and Learning in School Aged Children is always the biggest % of submissions, so they get the largest # of slots). Are governance meetings held during the convention? If so, are they held before, after or during the

convention? Do they overlap with scientific sessions or other important convention programming?

Not anymore; we eliminated our Legislative Council a few years ago and now have an Advisory Council that only meets in the spring. We do have a “committee day” the Wednesday before. Nothing overlaps with sessions or other events. Do you offer continuing education courses during the convention? How are these incorporated into

the overall meeting? Do they require a separate, fee-based registration?

All of our 1,500 educational sessions are for CE credit (average 24 hours over the show of possible credits). We have posters, technical sessions, and 1- and 2-hour seminars. We do have approximately 30 3-hour sessions whose intention is to be “advanced” which are a combination of submitted and invited, which do require a ticket (tiered pricing of either $30 or $60).

McKinley Marketing, Inc. APA Benchmarking Study – November 2010

11

Structure and Pricing

How are registration fees for the event structured? Are there discounts available?

No discounts, limited number of complimentary registrations (about 500). Most are presenters from outside of the professions (OTs, Psychiatrists, Linguists, etc).

Are you experimenting with new techniques or presentation methods to engage audiences (e.g.,

rather than a presenter giving a PowerPoint presentation)? If so, please describe.

Not really! How many poster sessions? How are they handled?

About 900. We have a full exhibit hall with poster boards and the posters are set up daily (300 per day) and “presented” during a certain 1.5 hour period during the day. Presenters must be at their poster board in order for attendees to receive CE credit, and they can claim up to 6 posters during one time slot. We provide boards, pins and Velcro – presenters bring their own posters. How many meals are included with registration?

Separate ticketed lunch (used to be free, but we couldn’t accurately monitor orders). We do not cover our costs (the tickets are $5) but it has helped us better monitor counts. Approximately 2,000 people/day order lunch. No coffee, etc. (our registration fees are extremely low but our members don’t see it that way!) Approximately what percent of your attendees are from outside the US?

About 3% Exhibitors

How are exhibitor relationships managed? Are the exhibitor relationships strong? Why/ why not?

We have 2 staff dedicated to Exhibit sales and Operations. (We have 2 other conferences/year that have exhibit halls). We do have a core group of exhibitors that come every year and do all of our shows, so I think they are strong. The one problem is the same as the answer to the below question: they want more unopposed time during Annual, but our members need their CEUs. What are the exhibit hours? How many of these are unopposed hours with nothing else competing

with the exhibit hall?

For our annual, the only unopposed hours are at lunchtime really, 1 per day. Exhibit hours are Day 1:

10:00 am–5:00 pm; Day 2: 9:00 am–5:00 pm; Day 3: 9:00 am–3:00 pm.

Summary of Results for 2010 APA Convention Task Force Survey of Divisions by CODAPAR The Committee on Division/APA Relations (CODAPAR) thanks the Convention Task Force for allowing it to provide input on ways to restructure the APA Convention. In August 2010, CODAPAR conducted a survey to solicit input and feedback from the divisions. All 2010 division presidents and presidents-elect were asked to participate in the survey. Of the 54 divisions, 29 divisions responded. Of those responding 24% self-identified as being large divisions, 41% identified as mid-sized divisions and 35% identified as small divisions. As you know, some of divisions hold their own stand-alone conference. Of the respondents, 27% of the divisions hold a separate major conference annually and 15% hold a conference every 2-5 years. The majority of the responding divisions, 77%, use their allocated program hours for their major programming. Divisions use hospitality suites for programming as well; 19% of the responding divisions have a hospitality suite that is used for substantive programming as well as committee meetings, while 50% use a hospitality suite for minor programming and meetings. Below are the questions that were asked on the survey and the responses submitted. The responses were broken into subcategories and the number of responses are in parentheses. I. What concerns do you have for your Division regarding potential changes in Convention? Programming Concerns

Loss of program hours (8) Less flexibility/availability in programming (1)

Cost Concerns

Increased cost for students (1) Increased cost for public service members (1) Increased cost of social hours/hospitality suites (1)

Attendance Concerns

Having too few attendees per session (1) Change of Council meeting time will affect Division Board meeting/convention attendance

(1) Increased “balkanization” of convention (2) Convention will continue to be “useless” for specialty scientists (1)

Other Concerns

To make sure website is searchable by keywords for invited speakers (1) No Concerns Not many/None/Unsure (3)

II. What suggestions do you have for enhancing poster sessions, especially considering exemplars from other conferences you have attended? 22 respondents Thematic and Topical Clustering/Organization

Thematic organization across divisions with more clarity in themes/topics (4) Set-up of posters by topic – clear demarcation (1) Similar topics located close together (1) Setting up 2 different topics together to balance each other out (1)

Location and Set Up

Location easier to find (1) Location should be in a central place – in front of meeting rooms (2) Continue to offer nearby tables/chairs for conversing (1)

Incentives

Offer student prizes (1) Offer an award for outstanding poster at each session (1) Offer food at poster sessions (4) Include evening sessions with cash bar (1)

Logistics Offer APA printing of posters on site in large format (1) Make large format mandatory (1) Time suggestions, including 90 minute sessions (1) Gentle 10 minute reminder chime nearing the end of the session (1) Make session more interactive and/or like symposia (3) Have 3-4 poster presenters give short summations (1) Having hosted sessions with experts on topic at the session (1) Have no competing events/meetings/presentations during poster hours (1)

No Suggestions

None/feel good about posters (4) III. What suggestions do you have for enhancing plenary sessions, including how to increase attendance? 23 respondents Location

Select cities where it is easy to get from one conference location to another (n=1)

Programming Increase scientific programming (1) Have CE at every session (1) Offer free CE (1) More renowned, big name speakers (5) Decrease time conflicts, competing events (7) Too many practitioners not interested in science attend the conference (1)

Technology - Submissions

Improve Convention website so that Invited Presentations/Plenary Sessions are searchable via keywords (1)

Implement a mechanism for submission of sessions closer to convention (1)

Divisional Programming

Increase appeal of plenary sessions across divisions, including talks with broad relevance to science and practice (2)

Improve planning across divisions and the APA central office (1) Let divisions put all division programming into 2-3 days to decrease cost for members (1) Have integrated panels/symposia across divisions (1)

Advertising

Advertise plenaries more and earlier (4) Advertise via SPTAs and press releases (1) Have flyers in convention book (1) Make it a can’t miss event (1) More catchy titles for talks (1)

Other

Plenaries aren’t a priority for people who go to do business and/or socialize with colleagues (1)

No Comment

None (4) IV. Many programs in all divisions have fewer than 25 attendees. What suggestions do you have to improve attendance at divisional programs? 25 respondents

Collaborations

Pooling of resources (1) Collaborating across divisions (4) Increase division program hours (1) Eliminate divisional programming (1)

Advertising

Provide opportunities to highlight programming in Convention advertising (1) Email division members from division leaders regarding programs (1) Publicize plenary speakers (1) Publicize general program earlier (1)

Continuing Education

Chairs to encourage CE (2) Offer free CE (2) Require advanced registration and give CE credit (1)

Programming

Feature better known speakers (2) Schedule multiple and/or similar sessions in same/nearby room in contiguous time slots

(2) Avoid topic overlaps in scheduling (1) Have fewer concurrent sessions (4) Start at 9 AM instead of 8 AM and don’t schedule programs late Sunday (1) Have program based on member surveys, as well as program committee acceptance (1) Offer programs that deal with pressing member issues (1) More posters, fewer programs (1) Making convention more attractive to division members (1)

Other Comments

Decrease membership dues to increase membership (1) Unsure; Not our problem; Small is not bad (6)

V. What creative suggestions do you have to continue to offer divisional programming for small audiences, but to change it such that it does not require individual rooms? 22 respondents Set Up

Partitioning ballroom space (1) Having more round table discussions - including small screen/poster display - (5) Host posters in communal spaces (1) Hold tele-sessions via Skype (1) Hold sessions with meals (1) Hold programming in neighboring rooms by division clusters (1)

Programming

More conversation hours (1) Have poster/symposia hybrids (1) Use hospitality suites for programming – with CE programs (8) Focus divisional work on “political labor” for the field (1)

Other comments

None/Unsure (4) VI. What suggestions do you have for facilitating the presentation of late-breaking, cutting edge research at convention? 21 respondents Programming

Leave some program time open for late submissions with later deadlines (8) Have “rapid communications posters” that are reviewed one month prior to convention (1) Use Psychology in the Public Interest’s or President’s hours, with APA contacting

divisions to solicit speakers (1) Allow divisions to leave program time open and add late submissions to the program (1) Organize a plenary session with a few tracks of non divisional programming (1) Have the same time slot each day for the late breaking research (1) Encourage debates (1)

Technology

Use up to date technology; social networking sites (1) Have researchers tweet during convention (1)

Advertising

Organize it like a news briefing (1) Have a marquee board in front of the exhibit hall (1) Encourage listservs to disseminate late breaking research and encourage presenters to

incorporate it (1) Other Comments

None; nothing is new; didn’t like the idea - too gimmicky- (4)

VII. To address multi-topical conflicts in scheduling that often result in low turnout, what creative suggestions do you have for interdivisional collaboration and/or time sharing? 24 respondents

Programming

More cross-divisional programming on themes (2) Increase divisional collaboration – divisions that typically don’t work together - (7) Choose 1 topic and ask multiple division reps to present on their side of it (1) Prioritize cross-cutting proposals that pull together multiple divisions (1) Have hours set aside for this purpose/have APA staff connect persons with similar topics

following submission/review for collaboration (1) Utilize the convention within a convention idea (1) Increase communication between division program chairs and others to ensure that

presentations are not overlapping (1) Offer input on master schedule of all programs (2) Talk to Master Lecture schedulers when presenters are members of their divisions (1) Have a uniform time and location for all division social hours (1) Have divisions program on alternate years to avoid convention being too big (1) Focus division programming sequentially by days: Div 1-20 on day 1, Div 21-30 on Day 2,

etc (1) End the distribution of hours by based on attendance (1) End divisional programming (1)

Technology

More sophisticated computer software to identify cross cutting topics at point of submission (1)

Software to ensure speakers are not double booked (1) Advertising

Get word out to division presidents on value of collaboration (1)

Other Comments None/unsure (3)

VIII. What opportunities do you envision for your Division with possible changes to Convention? 23 respondents Attendance and Division Membership

Increased attendance (5) More engaging convention (1) More outreach to division members (1) Focus on and meeting division needs (2) Focus on scientists (2) More attention to those interested in health topics (1) Increased involvement of senior division members, other divisions’ members (2)

Technology

Opportunity for tech savvy members to highlight their innovative work (1) Better use of our website (1)

Collaboration

Greater collaboration with other divisions (4) Programming

Greater ability to focus on current topics (1) Greater use of hospitality suite for programming (1) Greater use of poster sessions and/or poster symposia in presentations (1)

Continuing Education

Enhanced CE opportunities (1)

Other Comments

None; unsure; depends (6)