Practitioner, Program and Policy Scholarships selection criteria

Below you will see the Scholarship Selection Criteria for the Practitioner, Program and Policy Scholarships.

The deadline is 11:59pm AEST on Sunday 25th April 2021.

Apply now.

Applications are reviewed by three independent reviewers for each application according to the following scoring systems:

1). Please explain your role in your organisation and why attending this conference is important to you (score 1-5)

  • Very good (score 5) – The person is clearly doing important work focused on enhancing the health of people who use drugs and they have done an excellent job at clearly articulating why attending this conference is important to them. This person also has an abstract accepted for presentation at the conference.
  • Good (score 4) – The person is clearly doing work focused on enhancing the health of people who use drugs and they have done a good job at clearly articulating why attending this conference is important to them.
  • Average (score 3) – The person is doing work focused on enhancing the health of people who use drugs but they could have done a better job clearly highlighting why attending this conference is important to them.
  • Below average (score 2) – It is not clear how much work this person is doing with respect to enhancing the health of people who inject drugs, and they have could have done a better job clearly highlighting why attending this conference is important to them.
  • Poor (score 1) – The person did not do a good job at clearly highlighting their role in their organization and what they are specifically doing to enhance for the health of people who inject drugs. They did not do a very good job at clearly indicating why attending this conference is important to them.

2). Why are you in need of a scholarship to attend the conference? (score 1-5)

  • Very good (score 5) – The person has very clearly articulated why they need a scholarship to attend the conference. It is very clear that there is no other way that this person would be able to attend the conference if they did not have this funding to attend.
  • Good (score 4) – The person has clearly articulated why they need a scholarship to attend the conference. It is clear that there is no other way that this person would be able to attend the conference if they did not have this funding to attend.
  • Average (score 3) – The person has articulated why they need a scholarship to attend the conference. It is clear that it would be difficult for this person to attend the conference but may have other funding to attend.
  • Below average (score 2) – The person has tried to articulate why they need a scholarship to attend the conference but it is not clear why they need a scholarship to attend the conference. It is not clear if they may have other funding to attend.
  • Poor (score 1) – The person has not articulated why they need a scholarship to attend the conference. They did not do a very good job at indicating why attending this conference is important to them.

3). How will your presence at the conference assist in your health and/or hepatitis work for people who inject drugs (score 1-5)?

  • Very good (score 5) – The person has done an excellent job describing why this conference will benefit them in the work that they do.
  • Good (score 4) – The person has done a good job describing why this conference will benefit them in the work that they do.
  • Average (score 3) – The person has described why this conference will benefit them in the work that they do, but the response could have been more detailed.
  • Below average (score 2) – The person has some description about why this conference will benefit them in the work that they do, but the response lacks considerable detail.
  • Poor (score 1) – The person has some description about why this conference will benefit them in the work that they do, but the response lacks detail and is not well articulated.

4). Provide a brief outline and examples about how you will accomplish knowledge transfer of the information that you learned to other healthcare providers/ program managers/ policy makers and people who inject drugs in your community (score 1-5)

  • Very good (score 5) – They have clearly highlighted a comprehensive plan for the sharing of information and knowledge that they will acquire when they return home to their setting. They have provided some very concrete examples of how they will return home and share the results of the conference with their community.
  • Good (score 4) – They have highlighted a plan for the sharing of information and knowledge that they will acquire when they return home to their setting. They have provided an example of how they will return home and share the results of the conference with their community.
  • Average (score 3) –They have suggested some ways that they will share the information with their community but provide little details in terms of a plan or any concrete examples for how they will actually achieve this.
  • Below average (score 2) –They have not really suggested ways that they will share the information with their community, and do not provide details of a plan or any concrete examples for how they will achieve this.
  • Poor (score 1) –They have not suggested ways that they will share the information with their community, and do not provide details of a plan or any concrete examples for how they will achieve this.