Proposal Types and Criteria

The following options are available to individuals and teams submitting proposals:

Presentation

We are looking for impactful practices, research, and evidence aligned with one or more of our five streams. Presentations should be 45 minutes in length, with 15 minutes for Q&A.

Panel

We are looking for diverse panels of subject matter experts and individuals with lived and first-hand experience to discuss important topics related to one or more streams. Panels should be 30 minutes in length, with 15 minutes for Q&A.

Virtual Poster

Submit a poster presentation to share your practice and/or research findings and learnings, while connecting with others during our 60-minute poster breakout sessions.

Workshop

Host a workshop training session to share and encourage knowledge and skills in student mental health and wellness practices and research. Workshops should be 45 minutes in length and take into consideration different levels of familiarity and experience with the subject matter.

Selection Criteria

The following selection criteria will be used to review and select the proposal, and we strongly encourage all applicants to review the rubric before writing and submitting your proposal:

Strategy and Collaboration
Impact and Application
Proposal Design and Learning

Collaborations for Change strongly encourages applications from equity-deserving communities, including persons with lived and living experience of mental health and illness, First Nations, Inuit, and Métis communities, racialized persons, women, persons with disabilities, LGBTQ2SIA+ communities, and others who contribute to the diversity of ideas.

Conference Proposal Rubric

The following rubric is intended to be shared with applicants and reviewers to support selection of presentations, panels, posters, and workshops:

All selection criteria are evaluated out of 4 points.
Scores can be assigned to the 0.1 of a point for each selection criteria.
A proposal score is calculated by adding the sum of each of the three selection criteria for a total score out of 12.
A score of 3 is the proposed cut-off score for accepted proposals.

Selection Criteria	Does not meet criteria (Score 0-1.0)	Meets criteria (Score 1.1-2.0)	Exceeds criteria (Score 2.1-3.0)	Exceptional (Score 3.1-4.0)
Strategy and collaboration: Strategic alignment to conference focus areas, national standards, research and best practices, and descrbies collaboration and engagement with post-secondary mental health community.	Little to no alignment with the focus area of the conference. Lack of minimum connection to broader strategy, standards, research, and practices. Lack of minimum partnerships and enege,ent with students, community, and those with lived experience. Little to no considerations and integration of equity, diversity, inclusions and accessibility (EDIA).	Alignment described between the proposal and the focus areas of the conference. Connections made to broader strategy, standards, research, and practices. Partnerships and engagement with students, broader community and those with lived experience. Some consideration and integration of EDIA present in the proposal.	Conference focus areas and princiles woven into all aspects of the proposal. Proposal demonstrates potential to advance broader strategies, research, and best practices. Partnerships are diverse with meaningful contribution and representation of students, community partners, and lived experience, and lived experience. EDIA considerations and engagement are present in all elements of the proposal.	In addition to exceeds critera rating: Proposal has strong potential to significantly advance future practice, research, and strategy at a national level. Priorities, recommendations, and strategies of national standards and practices are woven into all activities and engagement of the proposal. EDIA strategies have potential to advance broader practices.
Impact and application: Impact and application to the field of post-secondary mental health.	Little to no discussion of how the content contributes to the field of post-secondary mental health. Little to no description of how the proposal content can be applies to post-secondary settings or its impact on the target population. Little to no description of outcomes and practices that may be impacted.	Good description of the contributions of the proposal content to the field of post-secondary mental health. Good description of how the content can be applied to post-secondary settings and its impact on the target population. Outcomes and impact are outlined in the proposal.	Great description of the contribution to the field of post-secondary mental health with potential for broader impact. Clear and demonstrated applicability in defined post-secondary settings and with defined target population(s). Outcomes clearly defined with potential to significantly improve student mental health outcomes.	In addition to exceeds criteria rating: Proposal addresses and impacts a significant gap in service, care, and/or research.
Proposal design learning: Clear description and value for learners.	The proposal design is unclear and/or missing clear learning objectives. Little to no use of engagement or consideration of the learner in the session.	Proposal design is clear, and activities are well thought out. Learning objectives are clear and of value to the learners. Good use of audience engagement or consideration of the learner in the session	Innovative and engaging proposal design, with well thought out objectives and activies. Meaningful engagement throughout proposal with learning impact for multiple audience gruop. Well-defined learning objectives that align with conference focus areas.	In addition to exceeds criteria rating: Includes post-proposal learning objectives and takeaway strategies and practices. Proposal provides opportunity for future engagement and learning.