The Executive Committee
Meeting Minutes

Meeting minutes are presented in chronological order. Minutes are taken by Miri Forbes.

June 27th
Present: Bob, James, Katherine, Len, Miri, Roman
Apology: Tim

Meeting Minutes:

• Society Formation: Roman prepaid US$5,000 for legal fees to begin the process of incorporating. The Department of Education needs to approve our application to incorporate in New York State (expected timeline of 3 months). No legal feedback on bylaws so far. By the end of summer, we expect approval, more forms to complete, and a bylaws review from a legal perspective, followed by filing with the IRS.
• Meeting planning discussion: We can’t rely on registration fees to cover the costs of the meeting because we don’t know how many people will attend, and we will be responsible for the costs either way. Bootstrapping from dues to underwrite the treasury is an option going forward, but for HiTOP 2025, we probably need the support of SPA, which would also allow us to put more effort into forming the society (rather than planning an independent meeting) over the next 12 months.
• We agreed to partner with SPA for our 2025 meeting (Bob will email them, CCing the committee).
• The plan is to move to an independent and lower budget model for the 2026 meeting (e.g., using free university-based space like earlier models of the meeting to keep costs low).
• The details of the 2025 meeting are to be discussed next time we meet (e.g., Nathan from SPA sent three options with the 2024 model potentially the least appealing from SPA's side of things).
• The 2025 meeting can also act as a membership drive for the society with reduced fees for members. We will need to draft a MOU with SPA that allows us to keep membership dues to start building a treasury while they keep registration fees.
• Action item: Everyone to look into whether they have options for free space at their institution that could work for hosting a conference.

July 11^th
‍Present: Bob, James, Katherine, Len, Miri, Roman, Tim
Apologies: none

Meeting Minutes:

• Talked about options for the 2025 meeting, working with SPA.
• • Agreed to have conference at the same time as SPA, in line with Nathan’s preference, potentially for the full duration of the conference if we have enough submissions.
  • We discussed the idea of a single independent ‘HiTOP’ track – SPA may allow SPA attendees (i.e., paying higher full rates) to attend the HiTOP track, but the reverse is less likely to happy with HiTOP-only attendees paying lower rates to attend.
  • The meeting will be a natural point for recruiting members, offering reduced rates for HiTOP members.
  • Katherine suggested a workshop before the conference for additional revenue on ‘HiTOP in the Clinic’ and Bob suggested the AMPD workshop could be put on hold for 2025 to reduce competition.

• Talked about next steps for society foundation.
• • To start a membership drive, we need to figure out:
  • • A way to receive dues (e.g., open a bank account, set up a PayPal link through the hitop-system.org website). If the meeting is being used as a primary point for the membership drive, we may need to collect dues through SPA, but keen to do it independently if possible.
    • What to charge for membership – we discussed low (e.g., $20) or free for students, reduced cost for early career researchers (e.g., $50), and higher for established researchers (e.g., $75). We could allow people to opt into lower cost fees for other reasons too (e.g., financial need).
                -       To decide on the amounts to charge we need to calculate a rough estimate of ongoing costs (e.g., insurance, travel or diversity awards, website, scrappy 2026 conference)
    • What’s the ‘pitch’ for recruitment
  • Roman has confirmed with the attorney that there are no legal reasons we can’t collect dues before the incorporation is formalised, if a bank will let us open a ‘HiTOP’ bank account; Len is looking into whether this is possible.
  • We brainstormed other ideas for fundraising so we can keep membership fees low
  • • People can make donations once we’re a non-profit
    • Sponsors
    • Starting a journal
    • Ad space in programs, etc.
    • Merchandise (Bob and Katherine were the dream team here)

Action items:

• Bob to email Nathan, CCing James (conference lead) and Len (SPA liaison) to progress 2025 conference plans
• Roman to email attorney re: moving ahead before incorporation is finalised [task complete]
• Len to ask his bank if it’s possible to open a ‘HiTOP’ account before incorporation is finalised
• Katherine to take preliminary steps thinking about a HiTOP workshop before SPA
• Everyone to keep brainstorming ongoing costs for the society and the ‘pitch’ for membership recruitment

Next meeting is August 21st 5pm ET

August 22nd
Present: Bob, Katherine, Miri, Roman
Apologies: James, Len, Tim

Meeting Minutes:

• Bob reported that James has set up a conference committee, which is having its first meeting next week
• Roman is optimistic that we will have an update on progress with the incorporation process next month
• We discussed several ideas for a membership drive (see below), including first recruiting ‘founding members’, then discounted registration costs for the meeting, then awards restricted to members, and maybe grants down the road.
• • We would not plan to paywall the newsletter (i.e., make it only available to members), but to continue to use it to reach the larger group of people who are interested in/working in quantitative psychopathology. For example, to keep them posted about the annual meetings, awards, to increase the likelihood they might join as members eventually
• We discussed what would happen to members of the current consortium who don’t join the society
• • When we get a sense of how many people join the society, we might have a better sense of how membership of the society vs. research consortium differs/what membership of the consortium (but not society) would mean.
  • The standard operating procedures of the consortium will need to be written in a way that doesn’t contradict the bylaws of the society.
• We discussed the importance of establishing a new memorandum of understanding with SPA around the finances for the 2025 meeting.
• • Expectation is that the arrangement will be the same/similar to 2024 (i.e., we are underwritten by them, but they keep any profits), but Katherine highlighted the value of seeing if there is room to negotiate that we can have some income from it (e.g., profit beyond a certain level, and anticipated income from the workshop).
  • Bob did end up submitting an AMPD workshop proposal to SPA, which will probably compete with/share potential attendees with a HiTOP workshop, if both are approved.
  • Main focus is that we should be thinking ahead about having enough funds to cover a 2026 conference (≥$20K based on Katherine’s quote).
  • Maybe we could ask for the gap between the discounted and higher registration costs for people who don’t choose to become members, since this is kind of in lieu of membership fees?
  • Bob emailed Nathan to organise a meeting with this focus

Action items:

• [Carried forward] Len to ask his bank if it’s possible to open a ‘HiTOP’ account before incorporation is finalised
• Bob to send a when2meet poll to schedule next meeting.
• All: Think about how to change/strengthen/expand the membership drive plan below
• All: With a view to thinking about how the consortium and society fit together, could everyone review the website (hitop-system.org) to think about how the current structure and content works with where we’re heading, and what new structures and content will be needed when we launch the society? We should probably plan ahead if we’re making this change in the next few months!

Next meeting is TBC

A possible membership drive plan drafted by Miri:

• First few months (e.g., to end of 2024 calendar year): Recruitment is focused on ‘founding members’ of the society who form the membership base that will nominate, serve, and vote in the elections for the leadership of the society. We could plan the elections for early 2025 to tie in with the timeline of the ‘founding members’ recruitment drive.
• • $99 for faculty
  • $1 for trainees for a limited time in this opening drive
  • $19 for anyone who self-nominates as having a financial need for reduced fees (not policed). We could highlight an expectation/encouragement that early career researchers, people without secure employment, and people from low-income countries would use this option.
• Next few months (Jan-March) will be tied to the meeting (i.e., membership will be associated with discounted registration costs)
• • $99 for faculty
  • $19 for trainees and anyone with financial need for reduced fees
  • Could we make these fees equal to the discount in registration costs, so membership is essentially ‘free’ (e.g., if HiTOP registration is $249 for members who are faculty, it’s $349 for non-members)?
• Following the meeting, we could run some awards that are only available to members (May-July)
• • Rising star award
  • Best research paper awards for 1) students, 2) EMCRs, 3) senior researchers
  • Applications for title of ‘fellow’ of the society
  • Ask for nominations of people making important contributions to the development of HiTOP as an organisation (i.e., to recognise and incentivise service)
• When we have enough funds (probably a few years down the track), could offer some small grants available only to members

September 17th
Present (in order of my Zoom screen): Bob, Miri, Len, Nathan Victoria (SPA), James, Roman, Katherine, Tim
Apologies: None

Meeting Minutes:
Roles:

• Bob is Founding President
• Len is Founding Treasurer
• Miri is Founding Secretary
• Tim is Chair of the Trainee Engagement Committee
• Katherine is Chair of the Membership Committee
• James is Chair of the Conference Committee
• Roman is outgoing Executive Chair of the Workgroups Committee (staying on in ex officio/non-voting capacity until incorporation and will then leave to serve the role of Chair of the Research and Publications Board - the bylaws specify this requirement of separation from this committee for the RPB firewall)
• David is incoming Executive Chair of the Workgroups Committee

SPA partnership

• Nathan discussed his role in SPA, and SPA’s work to find partner organisations to support with their large administrative team.
• Nathan is open to individual discussions with any/all of us on navigating issues relevant to his expertise as they arrive.

2024 Conference

• Nathan shared details on the financial side of the previous joint conference (attached). SPA essentially broke even.

2025 Conference

• Nathan has already met with the conference committee to explore various options.
• • The tentative plan is for HiTOP to have a separate floor in the venue for the conference
  • Fees will be more expensive this year with the longer conference length, but people can also attend all the SPA-related events (there is ongoing discussion around which events to co-brand/promote to HiTOP attendees, and potentially having a separate trainee lunch again)
  • Revenue sharing:
  • • The assumption is that we maintain the 2024 arrangement whereby SPA carries the risk—and provides logistics, on-site support and registration—and also retains any profit or loss.
    • Other organisations they partner with have arrangements like a 50/50 split after $10K profit after full costs, but they also share the risk (which we can’t).
    • We discussed a plan for HiTOP to receive any non-member fee gaps (i.e., when non-members register only for HiTOP, we receive the difference in registration costs vs. member rates). Nathan agreed this was a logical approach, but also mentioned the possibility it would be 2/3 or ½ of the difference, and will get back to us after running some numbers.
  • Nathan will draft a memorandum of understanding and share it with the committee
  • We will need to send members of the society (see below for next steps) a discount code for the reduced fee registration.

Future Conferences

• Nathan highlighted that this model is as expensive as conferences get and there are substantially cheaper alternatives for running conferences (e.g., university venues vs. hotels; smaller cities).
• SPA staff could be hired to manage logistics for future independent/standalone HiTOP conferences, with SPA offering a paid staffing option.
• Nathan also mentioned other options around piggy backing on future MMPI conferences in Minnesota, or with an SPA board meeting that could reduce costs.

Timelines/next steps

• SPA registration is opening on November 1st, which we agreed is our deadline for launching the society and membership recruitment, so we need to make decisions quickly.
• • Bob will send a poll to arrange the next meeting within a week or two
• If we can’t open a bank account until we are incorporated (still months away), we can get SPA to collect our membership feed and then transfer them.
• • Katherine is looking into options that might work before we’re incorporated

Other notes:

• The AMPD and HiTOP workshops will be scheduled at different times at SPA to reduce competition between them

Action items:

• Bob to send poll for a relatively urgent follow-up meeting
• Katherine to look into options for bank accounts prior to incorporation
• Nathan to draft and share MOU
• All [carried forward]: Think about how to change/strengthen/expand the membership drive plan below
• All: With a view to thinking about how the consortium and society fit together, could everyone review the website (hitop-system.org) to think about how the current structure and content works with where we’re heading, and what new structures and content will be needed when we launch the society? We will need to revise the website to align with the society launch

Next meeting is TBC

Loose membership drive plan [steps 1 and 2 should probably be combined now with the timeline for the conference]:

• First few months (e.g., to end of 2024 calendar year): Recruitment is focused on ‘founding members’ of the society who form the membership base that will nominate, serve, and vote in the elections for the leadership of the society. We could plan the elections for early 2025 to tie in with the timeline of the ‘founding members’ recruitment drive.
• • $99 for faculty
  • $1 for trainees for a limited time in this opening drive
  • $25 for anyone who self-nominates as having a financial need for reduced fees (not policed). We could highlight an expectation/encouragement that early career researchers, people without secure employment, and people from low-income countries would use this option.
• Next few months (Jan-March) will be tied to the meeting (i.e., membership will be associated with discounted registration costs)
• • $99 for faculty
  • $25 for trainees and anyone with financial need for reduced fees
  • Could we make these fees equal to the discount in registration costs, so membership is essentially ‘free’ (e.g., if HiTOP registration is $249 for members who are faculty, it’s $349 for non-members)?
• Following the meeting, we could run some awards that are only available to members (May-July)
• • Rising star award
  • Best research paper awards for 1) students, 2) EMCRs, 3) senior researchers
  • Applications for title of ‘fellow’ of the society
  • Ask for nominations of people making important contributions to the development of HiTOP as an organisation (i.e., to recognise and incentivise service)
• When we have enough funds (probably a few years down the track), could offer some small grants available only to members

October 3rd
Present: Bob, James, Len, Miri
Apologies: Katherine, Roman, Tim

Meeting minutes:
Plan for finances and admin for 2025 meeting

• To collect dues related to the conference registration, we can open our own bank account (not really an option in the timeframe) or have SPA collect those $ and then they write us a check.
• SPA branding would be on the page, but it would be a separate page for HiTOP, and they would charge us a 10% fee of the revenue for HiTOP. Same approach would be taken for the gap between full fees and member fees (i.e., 10% to SPA)
• $0 add-on to be badged for both SPA and HiTOP
• We can’t really open our own bank account until we’re incorporated, and paypal would take a cut too if we were doing it independently, so we all agreed this sounds like a good solution in the short run given the time and other constraints.

Plan for launching the society/pitch

• Motivation for forming a society
• • Necessary for the continued functioning of the group - we have outgrown our grassroots structure
  • To formalise and democratise HiTOP – formalise elected roles and voting members, governed by bylaws
  • Collecting dues will allow the society to support quantitative psychopathology research through awards, scholarships, and grants, as well as supporting future annual meetings as an independent body
  • The society will formalise/organise the financial, social, and political sides of things, but the research efforts themselves are independent and protected from the influence of the financial/social/political interests of the society in the bylaws
  • The initial bylaws we have developed to incorporate the society as a non-profit organisation will be available on the website when we start recruiting members
• Benefits for members will include:
• • Discount on going to the meeting (make the gap for fees for attending the meeting as a non-member bigger than membership costs, so you’re better off joining as a member)
  • Dues will go towards the next meeting, which we aim to have as an independent meeting
  • Awards, fellows, down the track small grants and support for ECRs to do work on quantitative psychopathology
  • The members who join before the first elections to be held in 2026 will be our founding members.
  • Founding members will have the opportunity to run for office as the inaugural president, secretary, treasurer etc…, vote in those elections, and the first elected officials will work with the society members to develop the operating procedures of the society
  • Swag?

Dues

• Len suggests dues be based on the costs of running the society – accountant, legal support, website hosting, insurance potentially (e.g., meeting insurance for unexpected cancellations)
• Len will make a spreadsheet to think about potential operating costs, and corresponding dues. Miri and James suggested we could use the fees we get/anticipate to make a budget and figure out how best to use those funds to ensure we keep the dues low. Len pointed out we need to work from both directions – fixed costs for running the society need to be covered (e.g., we owe Roman $5000 for incorporation costs)
• Thinking about how to get as many people as possible to join to maximise the funds we would have to work with. We currently have 210 official members, 591 people on the listserv
• The membership dues we have discussed previously are:
• • $99 for faculty
  • $1 for trainees for a limited time in this opening drive, then $25
  • $25 for anyone who self-nominates as having a financial need for reduced fees (not policed). We could highlight an expectation/encouragement that early career researchers, people without secure employment, and people from low-income countries would use this option.

• Len will work on this before the next meeting to come up with some options we can vote on
• Could add an option to donate to the 2025 conference registration page asking ‘Are you interested in donating any additional funds to support future initiatives for the society?’
• Need to give more time and energy in future meetings to fundraising ideas including options for tax deductible donations once we’re officially a not-for-profit organisation. Bob suggested we think about swag too.

Action items

• Bob will send an email about scheduling next meeting in two weeks, and will invite David Cicero
• Len will run models re: funding amounts. Len could you also follow up Nathan re: an MOU?
• Miri will write a blurb on the pitch for members

October 17th
Present: Bob, Len, Miri, David, Katherine
Apologies: James, Roman, Tim

Meeting minutes:

• Len showed projections on running costs for the society—both start-up and ongoing costs—and how those stack up against expected membership numbers (based on 2024 meeting attendance) and different costs for dues.
• • We discussed the possibility of multi-year membership options to raise more funds initially (e.g., 2 years at 5% discount, 3 years at 10% discount, lifetime membership for 10 years of dues).
  • Len highlighted that SPA will take a cut of whatever the costs are and that we need an MOU to know what these costs would be to factor into the funds we would end up with.
  • We discussed the options for donations for fundraising as something that won’t work smoothly while SPA is the intermediary for our funds – maybe a good second wave of fundraising once we’re officially incorporate as nonprofit?
• We discussed how membership would work:
• • Whether to have membership criteria – aim is to have a ‘big tent’ and ability to recruit and include lots of members, so (restrictive) membership criteria run counter to that aim
  • What the membership criteria might be – for example, having a terminal degree in a relevant field (including a Masters)
  • What it means to be a membership of the consortium after the society is created, especially with the complexity that non-members can currently be part of many workgroups and HiTOP publications. Consortium membership could be decided/revised down the road but we do need to be able to answer basic questions about things like what happens to someone who is currently a member of HiTOP but doesn't join the society.
  • What the consortium will be once the society is created – potentially it will be the workgroups/an umbrella for the research efforts. (We didn’t give David a chance to speak, but it would be great to hear his thoughts in the next meeting on this as the chair of the workgroups committee.)
  • After a recommendation from the membership committee on membership criteria, we will discuss and decide on these points in the next meeting.

Action items

• Len to propose membership dues amounts and work on MOU with Nathan
• Katherine to coordinate membership workgroup to discuss what membership criteria (if any) to have in the society model.

October 22nd
Present: Bob, David, James, Katherine, Len, Miri, Roman, Tim
‍
Meeting minutes:
Membership criteria:

• Not enough input yet to make a decision
• Can use procedural changes for different approaches to fee structure, but the bylaws should stay as they are. It’s possible to have the student membership option in the bylaws and not use it in practice, if necessary.
• Some discussion in the meeting on the topic of membership criteria included:
• • Why have a hurdle for a big tent approach? Lower fundraising opportunities, but comes with status to have peer-reviewed/contribution to the field criterion.
  • Roman suggested we don’t want members who aren’t in academia/clinical work. High criteria can still be a thriving model.
  • Bob added that it’s a scientific society - terminal degree in mental health discipline - rather than consumer advocacy for example.
• Ultimately it’s up to membership committee to decide - aiming to meet later this week
• • Given the tight time frame, we can frame any decision made this year as tentative and planned for revision if there isn’t clear consensus
  • Katherine to report back on membership committee’s decision

MOU and fees:

• Len shared plans for dues based on last year’s meeting numbers and suggested planning for $7600 of running costs with shoestring startup costs and then flush funds for ongoing costs.
• If necessary due to raising insufficient funds, it is a possibility to pay Roman back over a longer time frame than a year, but the aim is to be having income that exceeds expenses (e.g., $5000 per year, which would cover the debt to Roman)
• Service cost for SPA is 15%, and SPA will take 40% of the gap for non-members in the difference between registration costs for members and non-members.
• Multi-year dues are do-able for SPA, but they don’t want lots of options (1 or 2)
• After discussing the finding the balance of inclusivity, cost, and value the group voted in favour of $20 dues for students and $150 for members with the plan to specify a financial need discount and multiple year discounts
• Len shared the MOU at the end of the meeting

Decisions made

• Dues will be $20 for students and $150 for non-student members

Action items

• Katherine to convene a discussion with the membership committee to decide on the membership criteria for the society as well as how to define who qualifies for student dues, and report back in the next week or two.
• Send any feedback on the MOU with SPA to Len

Topics to discuss next time

• Implications of the membership committee’s decision on criteria
• What that nature and status of the consortium will be once the society is formed (e.g., a few meetings ago we discussed the workgroups being the consortium)
• Multi-year dues options and discounted rates for financial need.

November 19th
Present: Bob, David, James, Katherine, Len, Miri, Roman (second half), Tim
Apologies: None
‍
Meeting minutes:
MOU with SPA:

• Sets the percentage in place that SPA takes off the top of our income
• Final feedback discussion with no new points raised
• MOU is approved and we are happy with Len to proceed on our behalf with SPA
• Len will confirm with Nathan who should sign the MOU

Membership committee decided on the membership criteria:

HiTOP Society membership categories and criteria

• Trainee membership, with two sub-categories:
• Undergraduate. Any adult currently enrolled in an undergraduate degree program, or who received their undergraduate degree in the 3 years preceding the date of application.
• Graduate. Any adult currently enrolled in a terminal degree program in psychology, psychiatry, or a related field.

Individuals who don’t fall into one of these sub-categories but believes they qualify as a trainee is encouraged to contact the membership committee with a description of their status.

• Regular membership. Any adult with a terminal degree in psychology, psychiatry, or a related field

• We will use the term “student member” for students

Conference update:

• 62 submissions (4 symposia, 19 talks, 4 roundtable, fewer flash talks and posters than last year)
• Possibility of single track programming
• Decisions will be made and sent to people who submitted abstracts by mid December
• Registration costs will be the same as SPA, including an early career discounted bracket

Membership dues

• $150 membership, $20 for students agreed in the last meeting
• Discussed discount codes for multi-year memberships and for financial need
• Approved membership discounts:
• • 5% discount for 2 years, 10% for 3 years
  • 50% discount for people with financial need for reduced fees “We have a discount code for people with a financial need for reduced fees. For example, if you are a post-doc, have inconsistent employment, live in a low or middle income country, or have other financial need for reduced fees email…”

What that nature and status of the consortium will be once the society is formed

• One option is the consortium houses the research efforts, structured around the workgroups, and the society absorbs most of the other functions in the consortium
• This will be a discussion in the Workgroup Chairs meeting on Wednesday this week

Decisions made:

• MOU is approved
• We will use the term “student member” for students
• Approved membership discounts:
• • 5% discount for 2 years, 10% for 3 years
  • 50% discount for people with financial need for reduced fees “We have a discount code for people with a financial need for reduced fees. For example, if you are a post-doc, have inconsistent employment, live in a low or middle income country, or have other financial need for reduced fees email…”

Action items:

• Len will confirm with Nathan who should sign the MOU
• Bob to organise next meeting mid December

December 3rd
Present: Bob, James, Len, Miri, David, Katherine, Tim
Apologies: Roman
‍
Meeting minutes:
Discussion of co-ordinating timing of society launch with abstract acceptances and registration for conference

• MOU is in place with SPA
• Web portal is under construction for conference registration and membership dues
• Our registration will be the same as for SPA (student, early career, full member fees)
• Len will check back in with Nathan and team on webpage and will loop in James and Katherine.
• Timeline for coordination:
• • On Monday next week (December 9th), Bob will send the initial pitch email to the full consortium list and to the clinical network list
  • The registration/membership dues portal will be in place before the abstract acceptances go out on December 15th
  • Conference abstract acceptances go out on December 15th with a shortened version pitch and instructions on how to use the portal
  • Email to full consortium list and clinical network list again on December 15th that membership portal is now open (with links and instructions)
  • Post to Twitter and Bluesky on December 15th that society is launched and membership is open
  • In January, follow up emails to full consortium list and clinical network list about joining as a member - also write a brief update blurb for the January HiTOP News

Communication between groups under the HiTOP umbrella

• We will invite Stephanie to join as Director of the Clinical Network
• All other committees have the chairs on the Society Executive, who can report back to the committees about Society Executive updates, including Roman who can provide updates on RPB and continue joining as a non-voting member
• We’ll also post our meeting minutes on the website
• David or Bob will keep the Workgroup Exec updated on Society Exec progress/decisions
• David will invite Tim to join the Workgroup Exec to keep lines open with the Trainee Engagement Committee, Katherine will also provide updates/input from the Membership Committee

Other points:

• HiTOP is officially incorporated, but further details need to be finalised before it’s all wrapped up
• We agreed to post bylaws on website
• We agreed to maintain ‘consortium’ branch of website and idea of our structure, as an umbrella for research efforts (the workgroups, workgroup exec, and RPB)

Action items:

• Len will work with Nathan, James, and Katherine on the web portal for conference registration and membership dues
• Nathan will provide detailed instructions on using the portal to register for the conference and to join as a member, and to only join as a member/pay dues
• James to draft conference acceptance email with shortened pitch/info on society
• Everyone to add any feedback to the pitch document by EOD Thursday (I'm going on leave on Friday for ten days)
• Everyone to send any feedback on the revised website by EOD Thursday – I’ll send the draft later today. We’re using this kind of structure to guide the structure of the website:

• Miri to give Bob permission to email the HiTOP News Google Group (done – Gmail account), send final email after feedback with instructions on how to send it (hitop-news@googlegroups.com)
• Miri to get in touch with Stephanie
• • Ask to join the Society Executive Committee
  • Option for Clinical Network to become a standing committee, so Stephanie would be a voting member, or to maintain informal network status/structure and join as a non-voting member
  • Feedback on pitch for society
  • Ask whether/how Bob can email the pitch to the Clinical Network (or if Stephanie can do that)
• Miri to draft a blurb for next HiTOP update

Items to discuss next time

• January email for membership drive – do we want a time limit (e.g., the March meeting) on when ‘founding’ members are in or out and we get elections moving, or go for a longer time frame?
• Ok to share backdated minutes on the website?

Next meeting is January 6th 2pm CT

January 14th
Present: Bob, David, James, Katherine, Miri, Roman
Apologies: Len, Tim
‍
Meeting minutes:
Updates

• Updated on member sign-ups as of January 6th: 44 members, including 27 conference registrations. Expecting 120-150 people at the conference, but we won’t really know until the conference how final numbers look.
• We discussed how to approach requests/opportunities for commenting as an organisation on social and political causes. We agreed that writing something attributed to the executive would be tractable, and these statements could be shared with members (or publicly) as open letters for individuals to co-sign.

Decisions

• We will share backdated minutes on the website, and minutes of future meetings. For future meetings, Miri will share minutes with a week to send in any corrections or changes before they are published on the website.

Action items

• Miri will put a Google Doc together of past minutes for review
• James will send updated content on the conference for the website for Miri to post. Miri will also post the draft conference schedule
• Miri to share the post and policy that we were asked to comment on
• Katherine will start a draft statement about Meta’s new policy that allow LGBTQ individuals (but not other individuals) to be called mentally ill, and share it with the group for comment.
• Miri to follow up with Stephanie on whether she’s made a decision about the Clinical Network and/or joining the exec.

Items to discuss next time:

• Clinical Network
• Listserv options for the society
• Next email for membership drive, including a time frame for elections/when founding membership closes

HiTOP Society EC minutes
February 5th
Present: Bob, David, James, Katherine, Len, Miri, Roman, Tim
‍
Meeting minutes:
We discussed the issues that have arisen around the letter to Meta we drafted on their revised hateful conduct policy:

• Does it raise problems with our tax status as a nonprofit? No, per attorney feedback and IRS documentation for a 501c3 nonprofit.
• Discussed the need for policies and procedures to assuage other concerns about when advocacy is appropriate or indicated, the best process to follow to allow the input and personal preferences of members, and ensuring anyone signing is aware of the importance of checking their institutional policies about including their affiliation
• At the moment this founding executive committee is unelected, so we are not yet speaking on behalf of members, which informed our decision to draft a letter that was only on behalf of the signatories
• We discussed whether to proceed with the current letter to Meta before or in conjunction with (or after) the development of a formal policy.
• We agreed to proceed with the letter in addition to sending members some more detailed explanation around our process and decision-making in writing this letter. A formal policy that builds on what we’ve learned in this test case will be developed before any further statements or advocacy.
• We all agreed to revising the last sentence in response to member concerns raised
• We noted the substantial positive feedback on and enthusiasm for the letter, and thanked Katherine for all her work leading the effort.

The committee also unanimously approved posting the historical minutes Miri shared to the website to facilitate transparency and improve communication around the discussions and work in this group.

Action items:

• Tim will draft a few sentences to send about our decision making to be sent with the letter to members
• Everyone will send any feedback on Tim’s draft within 24 hours so it can be approved and the letter can be submitted.
• Katherine will send the revised letter to signatories to ask that they are happy with the edit, to check their name and title are correct, and to ensure they want their affiliation listed (encouraging people to check their institutional rules)
• Miri will post the minutes on the website