Your archive of old EMCEF news:
11 January, 2017: EMCEF 25 - one week to go
Registration closes tomorrow. What are you waiting for?
2 September, 2016: EMCEF 24 cancelled
2 August, 2016: EMCEF 23 cancelled
6 July, 2016: EMCEF 23 still not confirmed
With 2 months to go, the brochure for EMCEF 23 should have been e-mailed this week. However, for reasons related to other commitments, the whole process is on hold for the time being. Please keep track of developments via this website until I send out further information to the e-mail addresses on the EMCEF database.
24 June, 2016: EMCEF 22 feedback database closed
Thanks to all those who have sent their feedback (all will have received their CPD certification e-mail in response, with receipt included, if applicable). Overall, 60% returns have been received.
27 May, 2016: EMCEF 22 feedback database closing soon
Only a few days left now if you aim to have your feedback included in the statistics that will go back to the College. The database will reply with a CPD certification e-mail (with receipt included, if applicable). Feedback returned late leads to a lot of additional work for me and will not be included in the statistics sent to lecturers for their own portfolios. By the close of business today, 51% returns have been received.
6 May, 2016: EMCEF 23 venue now decided
EMCEF 23 is due to take place on 7 September, 2016. It will take place at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham.
4 May, 2016: EMCEF 22 feedback forms have been sent out
All those who completed the registration process and attended the event should have received an e-mail with a feedback form attached. If you have not received one, please use the CONTACT form to let me know.
1 May, 2016: Survey results on a potential cost rise for EMCEF in 2017
The following question was sent out to the addresses on the EMCEF database, for the attention of consultants who had attended at least one of our events:
If we need to raise income slightly in the near future, do you think we should...
Option a. Raise the charge for all consultants who attend?
Option b. Raise the charge for those who "sponsor" a middle-grade (in practice, we will be charging for the middle-grade)?
Option c. Either way - you have no preference
Your responses were as follows:
Option a (raise for all): 30%
Option b (charge for accompanying middle-grades): 14%
Option c (whatever): 56%
The good news is that, at this time, it does not appear necessary to raise the fee at all, but at least I have an idea about what do do if/when it does becomes necessary.
If we need to raise income slightly in the near future, do you think we should...
Option a. Raise the charge for all consultants who attend?
Option b. Raise the charge for those who "sponsor" a middle-grade (in practice, we will be charging for the middle-grade)?
Option c. Either way - you have no preference
Your responses were as follows:
Option a (raise for all): 30%
Option b (charge for accompanying middle-grades): 14%
Option c (whatever): 56%
The good news is that, at this time, it does not appear necessary to raise the fee at all, but at least I have an idea about what do do if/when it does becomes necessary.