> What do other people think about keeping a meeting for after the 15th
> versus before? It's a lot of our personpower all concentrated in one
> meeting if we meet before and the 11th would leave very little time to
> assimilate the results into the submission. The 4th is possible for
> me, the 11th possible but will involve cancelling things.
>
> I think it's a good idea to meet as I think we get things,
> particularly practicalities, thrashed out very efficiently when we
> meet like this. However, I suggest that we don't do it before
> the deadline of the 15th. I think we need our energies for digesting
> what we've got. If we've launched one site to feel our way before
> then, that would be grand but I feel that if we could identify a
> friendly site and start there very tentatively without such a full
> meeting. Maybe I'm misreading the priorities or the nature of the
> submission.
>
JANICE'S REPLY
My only reservations are that Huddersfield is not what I would call a
friendly site and I would not therefore want to go in there unless I
was well prepared. I could postpone, but they said they need plenty
of notice to set things up and they only meet once a month. How much
time do we realistically need for collecting data for the 'field
development' phase, before the 'implementation' phase starts (or
should they not be regarded as separate stages), assuming we get the
MHF grant, of course.
Jan
=============== M.H.F. Core Battery Study ==============================
This message was redistributed by the MHF study list:
mhf_study@psyctc.sghms.ac.uk
If you have technical problems with this message or the list, reply to:
Chris Evans <C.Evans@sghms.ac.uk>
The list is archived for WWW browsing at:
http://psyctc.sghms.ac.uk/mhf_study/list/index.htm
User name: Core_Battery Password: Duracell (both case sensitive)