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.

‍^‍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

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

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

‍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

‍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.

• 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

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.

‍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.

‍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

‍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

‍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

‍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

‍Present: Bob, David, James, Katherine, Len, Miri, Roman
Apologies: Tim
‍
Meeting minutes:
We discussed what to do about the 2026 conference in terms of staying partnered with SPA versus moving to an independent model with volunteer local hosts and an elected conference program chair.

• James described the breakdown of pros and cons of each approach from his perspective
• The group consensus was to move to an independent model, which requires we identify local hosts and build our own systems for running the meeting (Len mentioned Wild Apricot as a potential option)
• We discussed areas with high concentrations of HiTOP members as options and agreed to send out a call for EOIs for members who would be interested/willing to act as local hosts
• Len and David will both look into the cost of local options in Buffalo and Dallas/Denton
• Miri will put out a call for EOIs

We also agreed that the timeline for elections will be after the summer in the US (September). Next meeting will need discuss how to proceed with identifying a slate of candidates, etc.

Action Items:

• Len and David to look into the cost of local options in Buffalo and Dallas/Denton
• Len and Katherine to liaise with Nathan in getting the information we need to set up our membership database so we can prioritise setting up a system for communicating with members
• Miri will send out a call for EOIs for local hosts
• Katherine is looking into membership database management systems

Items for next meeting:

• Need to set up system for communicating with members as a priority once we have member info from SPA
• Develop a timeline and plan for holding elections in September
• Moving forward with an advocacy mission
• Interface between Clinical Network and Society

Present: Bob, David, James, Katherine, Len (first half), Miri, Roman, Tim
‍
Updates: We have a bank account and are officially incorporated as a society with final steps requiring state-level registrations! 
‍
2026 Conference

• We discussed identifying a location for the next HiTOP meeting and beginning working with the corresponding local host(s). The people who responded to the call for local hosts:
• Giovanni Salum with potentially free space options in NYC
• Sylia Wilson (UMN) with a preliminary inquiry about number of attendees
• Brady Nelson and Katherine Jonas willing to look into hosting at Stonybrook
• Stephanie Sweatt willing to look into hosting at OSU
• Mike Bagby willing to host in Toronto
• Martin Sellbom and Miri Forbes willing to host in Sydney
• We discussed the importance of surveying members to understand the impact of holding the conference inside/outside the US, given there are challenges for non-citizens both visiting and leaving/re-entering the country

‍Handover from SPA

• We discussed the need to complete a hand-off from SPA: We need to hand over finances, membership processes, and contact information for members. Key people have been on leave currently, but while we have an old list of early members, we still don’t have email addresses to communicate with society members.
• The membership committee will need to vet the membership applications and we will then email the membership as soon as possible - a welcome email together with the poll on preferences around the meeting, and call for nominations for the elections

‍Elections in September
We discussed the steps to progress to elections in September:

• Call for expressions of interest (self-nominations or nominations of others) to serve in roles with society-wide re-elections: President, secretary, treasurer, conference program chair, membership committee chair, trainee engagement committee chair
• We will draft information on the nature of our roles so people know what they’re signing up for
• Follow up/confirm that nominees are willing to run
• We will ask for a brief blurb on individuals’ vision for the role/why they are a good fit to provide when people vote
• Miri will administer the elections

Action Items

• Miri will draft a survey to share with the Executive (preference on location, preference for time of year), and will let the people who responded to the call know that that is the plan
• Miri will look into integrating membership on the website to hand over the process from SPA
• Roman is working with local council to complete the state-level filings required for the last steps of incorporation
• Len is working with SPA on transfer of finances
• [carried forward] Len and David to look into the cost of local options in Buffalo and Dallas/Denton
• [carried forward] Len and Katherine to liaise with Nathan in getting the information we need to set up our membership database so we can prioritise setting up a system for communicating with members
• [carried forward] Katherine is looking into membership database management systems

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

2026 Conference

• We discussed feedback on the location and timing of conferences (link to attached document), agreeing that Minneapolis or Toronto over a weekend in the May-July period looks like the best way to balance the varied feedback. We will proceed with looking into those options in more detail, and let other local host volunteers know that we’re looking into those options for 2026.

Handover from SPA

• We still don’t have a list of members or emails that we can use to progress with member input and communications, and for soliciting expressions of interest/nominations for the elections in September. Len and Katherine will get a meeting on the books ASAP to get the finances and member information sorted.
• We need to get a membership portal ready to activate to complete the handover. This requires drafting the material for the page, building the page for the website, upgrading the website to an Ecommerce site, and linking the payment options to the HiTOP accounts.

Elections in September

• To proceed with elections after our next meeting, we all need to draft a brief description of on our positions to share as part of the call for expressions of interest and nominations – we’ll co-ordinate this call with calls for potential workgroup chairs too.
• Need to draft the call, and prepare the online surveys for administering the elections.
• Once we have member emails we can get the ball rolling.

Action Items

• Bob will get in touch with Mike Bagby as the potential local host in Toronto to ask about May-July availability, and approximate costs. Bob will also look into some Minneapolis options in tandem.
• Miri to let other local host volunteers know we’re looking into Toronto and Minneapolis for the 2026 meeting.
• Len and Katherine to meet with Nathan to finalise handover of finances and member information.
• Katherine to draft the content for the membership portal on our website.
• Miri to upgrade website to standard Ecommerce site and build draft version of the new membership portal ready for activation (invoice HiTOP for the cost).
• Miri and Len to figure out linking the payments to HiTOP accounts.
• All: Write a description of your position (check if there is relevant information in the bylaws (here), and can draw on the content from our group presentation in Denver).
• David will draft the information for a call for expressions of interest or nominations to serve in the Executive Committee roles/Chairs of Society Committees (president, secretary, treasurer, conference program chair, membership committee chair, trainee engagement committee chair), and Workgroup Chairs. Probably with placeholders for position descriptions for now?
• Miri will build Qualtrics pages to administer the elections in September.

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

SPA Handover

• We have received the funds from SPA to the HiTOP bank account (~$21,700)
• We have received a list of members (185 total), including email addresses and length of membership, so we are now ready to set up a mailing list, send a welcome email, and get the ball rolling on elections
• The handover from SPA will be finalised on October 1st when they will deactivate their membership registration option for HiTOP and send us any final member information and fees.
• Our new membership portal needs to be ready before October 1st.

2026 HiTOP Conference

• We voted to move ahead with Toronto as the location for the 2026 meeting with Mike Bagby as local host. The tentative dates are in June, but when the options are ironed out we will vote on the best fit based on the feedback we received.
• Next step is to get an MOU in place—Bob, Len, and James will be the primary liaisons and the whole Executive can provide feedback on the MOU when it’s drafter.

Elections

• We now have position descriptions for everyone’s roles
• Before the elections, James proposed we amend the bylaws to make the role of conference chair a 1-year term, rather than a 3-year term. The Executive voted to progress with this change. The next step is to take the vote to members, where the majority of voting members need to vote in favour of the amendment to make the change.
• Following the initial welcome email, we will aim for a call for (self-)nominations for candidates for the election on October 1st. If we allow two weeks for nominations, and two weeks to confirm candidates are willing to run and provide some information about their ideas for the role, then we can have official votes start on November 1.
• We will send out the call for (self-)nominations for the Society Executive and for the Workgroup Chairs simultaneously, but will hold the elections separately.
• The Executive voted to approve a ranked-choice voting system for the Society roles (instant run-off method).

Action Items

• Miri to build new membership portal on the website, liaising with Katherine (re: content, survey questions, functioning of page) and Len (re: linking payments to HiTOP accounts).
• Miri and Katherine to figure out how to link together the new membership portal with the emailing list and to automate as many of the administrative aspects as possible.
• Katherine to set up a new mailing list (moving away from Google Groups) for the Society
• Bob, Len, and James to work with Mike Bagby to draft an MOU for the 2026 conference
• Bob to draft a welcome email, which will include the vote on the amendment to the bylaws (conference chair to have a 1 year term) – maybe also point to historical minutes if they’re interested in how the first six months have unfolded.
• Miri to set up the survey for the bylaws vote
• Miri to post the minutes on the website

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

2026 HiTOP Conference

• Dates are locked in for Toronto June 23-25 (no other options for the venue), and we have signed an MOU with Mike Bagby as our local host.
• The initial expected cost (~$9K) increased substantially with more research to ~$25K assuming approximately 125 attendees.
• Budgeting for a 10% buffer for unexpected costs, and ensuring we cap student registration casts at $100, registration fees for other attendees will be $300-$400 to cover costs (similar to the 2025 costs).
• Once a conference chair is elected, they can co-ordinate with Mike Bagby as the local host, and James has agreed to be available to consultation as needed (outgoing conference chair).
• We are not planning formal arrangements with a specific hotel, but will suggest some nearby options.

Update on Referendum

• Vote is underway, closing at the end of this week.
• Miri will send a reminder along with a request that people check their information on the list of Society members page.
• For future bylaws referenda, we will loop in the Research and Publications Board for input on whether it is relevant to research or publications before proceeding.

Elections

• We will do elections for Society roles before proceeding with the elections for Workgroup chairs, to avoid confusion. An exception is the election for the Normal Personality Workgroup Chairs, which is ready to proceed and can act as a test case for how the elections go.
• Call for (self-)nominations for society roles will go out on October 1st
• Miri will draft the email calling for (self-)nominations and send to the EC for feedback. The email needs to include position descriptions and eligibility information.
• Miri will screen all nominees for eligibility, and then check with them whether they are willing to run, familiar with the role, and appropriately qualified. Candidates will need to provide a bio/information on why they would be a good fit for the role to include in the elections.
• Once we reach the actual voting stage, will need to ensure we have one anonymous vote per person – Miri to look into whether Qualtrics can generate individual links that don’t record the respondents’ email addresses with the vote.
• We voted and agreed that we will need to have two presidential roles in the election to align with the bylaws: One for two-years (steps straight into President role), and one for three-years (starting as President-Elect [nominally Vice President]). Once we have the slate of nominees, we can discuss with them how to proceed with the election (e.g., is it based on most and second-most votes, or two separate votes).

Policies

• In future, we’ll need to develop ‘principles and policies’ that cover:

• Identifying whether candidates are qualified for a role (e.g., treasurer), determining or confirming the slate of candidates for elections
• Use of funds, who can sign for expenses
• Calendar dates for when elected roles start

Action Items

• [carried forward] Miri to build new membership portal, liaising with Katherine (re: content, survey questions, functioning of page) – payments via PayPal now linked, so can proceed.
• [carried forward] Miri and Katherine to figure out how to link together the new membership portal with the emailing list and to automate as many of the administrative aspects as possible.
• Miri will send a reminder along with a request that people check their information on the list of Society members page.
• Miri will draft the email calling for (self-)nominations and send to the EC for feedback. The email needs to include position descriptions and eligibility information.
• Miri to look into whether Qualtrics can generate individual links that don’t record the respondents’ email addresses with the vote.
• Miri to post the minutes on the website

Present: Bob, David (first half), James, Katherine, Len, Miri, Roman (second half)

2026 HiTOP Conference

• The costs for the 2026 meeting in Toronto in June have turned out to be far more than anticipated - from an initial estimate of $9K to $36K (includes $18K in conference planning services). The dates also coincide with the FIFA World Cup in Toronto, making it likely accommodation will be hard to find and very expensive, and the dates also clash with the BGA conference. Given we don’t have the financial reserves to absorb the loss if we don’t get enough registrants to cover the costs ($21K in the bank with some debts to settle), this is no longer a tenable option.
• The leading alternatives we are looking into include later in the summer or into the fall in Toronto, an option in Nassau County, or University at Buffalo. Other tentative options include Stony Brook and University of Pittsburgh. The goal is to have three solid options firmed up in three weeks when we meet again to choose the path ahead, as we need to lock in these details to get planning (had 6-7 months of planning time for the last conference).
• In future years we need to get three comprehensive bids/solid quotes before deciding which one to pursue, and need to be planning 2-3 years out. Once we have the 2026 plan pinned down we should start working on the 2027 plan.

Inaugural Elections

• Elections will be next week.
• Miri will email the main HiTOP listserv to let people know about the elections/opportunity to vote if they join the Society. SPA is keeping up the membership portal for us for now.
• Bob will officially be outgoing president after the elections, remaining on the committee.
• We now have enough candidates for an election for each role except conference committee chair if the president candidates run together and sort out the president vs president-elect after the results are in.
• Miri will put together the initial Qualtrics information with the materials from each candidate and send to David, who will administer the elections using personalised anonymous links to ensure one vote per member.

Action Items

• Bob to liaise with Mike re: alternative Toronto dates
• Katherine, Len, and Tim to look into alternative conference locations
• Miri to email HiTOP listserv
• Miri to create Qualtrics template for election
• David to administer elections
• [carried forward] Miri will keep trying to get the new membership portal sorted for after the elections

Present: Bob, David, James, Katherine, Len, Miri, Roman, Tim

Conference Proposals

• Buffalo (Len)
• • Medical school isn’t a good option, given uncertainty around availability
  • There is a traditional conference option for a space in downtown Buffalo (500 Pearl, part of a hotel). All costs included (food and drinks, space, AV, poster boards, etc.) is ~$25K maximum. Includes breakfast, coffee all day, drink at the reception, and 30 discounted hotel room rates. Estimated registration would be $100 for students, $400 for professionals
• New York (Katherine)
• • First option is a really nice retreat space north of Manhattan, but it takes 2 hours to get there from JFK and there aren’t enough rooms on site for everyone, with limited options for transport, so better for a smaller meeting
  • Second option is a nice retreat centre on Long Island, which is very cheap and has no minimum spend, reducing risk. Downsides are that it is a religious institute with religious iconography and rules (e.g., need to be married in a ‘marriage recognised by the Catholic church’ to share a room), not many options for bars or restaurants onsite. Would want to have enough time to talk to members about this, survey opinions and if people would feel uncomfortable with the religious aspect, so better to look into down the road when we have more time.
• Pittsburgh (Tim)
• • Similar to the Buffalo option, but more expensive (baseline quote $28K, maybe $35K all up). Near a hotel with a potential for a negotiated rate. Might be better for a few years down the road when we’re more financially stable and able to take on more risk. Registration would be $100 for students, $600 for professionals, so similar to current Toronto quotes
• Minnesota (Bob)
• • Alumni centre are more traditional conference option, pretty expensive
  • Union as a cheaper alternative option: Can get the space (seats up to 176 people) including AV support and poster boards for $1000 per day. Bare bones cheapest option, so potentially a bunch of work needed to pull the elements together, including paying students to help with the hosting work on site. Bob, Colin, Sylvia, Whitney as local HiTOP members who could be a local host committee. Major upside is ease of transport with direct flights and proximity to the airport.
• Toronto (Mike Bagby)
• • Would need to be moved to the fall, could consider reducing to two days to reduce costs, but like Pittsburgh would be a better option down the road when we can handle more financial risk/higher costs for the meeting
• We agreed that Minneapolis and Buffalo are the front runners. Bob and Len will pursue full proposals over the next two weeks and we’ll then vote to pick a final option
• We’ll also put together a proposal for the incoming executive committee on options to line up and lock in for future conferences

Elections

• 79 responses so far, and David as sent out a reminder to people who haven’t voted yet that the votes close on Wednesday this week
• David will score the votes according to the instant run-off method we agreed previously
• David will draft an email to share with the EC announcing the results
• Bob will contact the people who aren’t elected to let them know, and then email the Society members to announce the results

Action Items

• Bob and Len to pursue full proposals for all conference costs with options for dates for the group to vote on in two weeks
• David to tally votes after the election ends on Wednesday, draft email announcing results to share with the group
• Bob will subsequently contact people who weren’t elected to let them know before sharing the results with the larger group. 

Next meeting on December 1st.

Present: Bob, David, James, Katherine, Len, Martin (incoming Conference Committee Chair, not yet a voting a member), Miri, Roman, Tim
Apologies: none

2026 Meeting

• Frontrunners are Buffalo and Minneapolis, and Len and Bob have both pursued detailed information about each option
• We need to get insurance ($1 million liability) regardless of which option we pursue
• Buffalo: Several options for dates, spanning two half days and two full days. The best option looks like July 14-17.
• • Pros for Buffalo include a conference hotel for socialising, a block of discounted rooms (45 at $189 for the dates above), more time to plan, three rooms to allow for multiple tracks/separate poster room etc.
  • Cons are that it's harder to get to from within the US (but two flights from Australia/Europe to both locations), potential we would be on the hook for costs if we had low registration rates, Len would be the solo local host
• Minneapolis: One option for dates, spaning three full days of June 4-6 (winding down on June 6)
• • Pros for Minneapolis include more local HiTOP members to help with the work, easier to get to, flexibility in budget given we organise catering ourselves
  • Cons include no conference hotel, discounted rooms, less time to plan, and one room (single track), but all of these were deemed workable
• The costs are similar for the two options, with more flexibility in cost in Minneapolis given we can organise catering independently ($15K minimum spend in Buffalo, which waives the room fee). Estimated costs are $100 for students and ~$320 for professionals.
• We voted that Len and Bob are empowered to proceed with locking in the conference this week - trying with the Minnesota union location first, with Buffalo as the fallback. An MOU and/or contract will follow, and the EC will vote via email to approve urgent expenses that come up in the process of securing the venue. A detailed budget will be needed for EC approval before other costs proceed.
• When we have the dates and location locked in, we will announce it to the big listserv and society members (watch this space for call for abstracts), and put out a call to society members to join the conference committee.
• This EC will work to have everything locked in prior to the new EC starting in January

2026 Executive Committee

• The new committee will start in January, and some of our current members will rotate off
• We will aim to all meet together in January for a handover/welcome/thank you meeting. Miri will send an email with a poll for availbility.

Action Items

• Len will look into insurance and present the quotes to the EC for approval
• Len and Bob to lock in location and dates for 2026 meeting asap
• EC to vote via email to approve costs that arise in locking in the location and dates - Miri will be on leave, but available via text
• Martin to draft emails 1) announcing the date and location of the meeting (watch this space for call for abstracts) for the main listserv, and 2) also including a call for conference committee members for society members
• Once locked in, Katherine will send the emails to the listserv and society members
• Miri to add Katherine as an admin on the HiTOP News Google Group (done)
• Miri to send email to current and incoming EC members to find a time to meet in January

Attendees: Bob Krueger; Len Simms; Martin Sellbom; Holly Levin-Aspenson; James Li; Chris Conway; Caroline Balling; Katherine Jonas; Timothy Allen; Miri Forbes; Kelsie Forbush

Meeting Summary (Brief)

The HiTOP Executive Committee met to discuss vision and priorities for leadership transfer and the society’s next chapter. The committee focused on strengthening clinical and teaching dissemination, improving communication and membership infrastructure, clarifying the distinction between the HiTOP Society and Consortium, and addressing operational sustainability (including finances, conference planning timelines, and measure licensing/norms collection). The meeting concluded with concrete next steps assigned across officers and committee members.

Action Items / Next Steps

Financial and Administrative Infrastructure (Len Simms)

• Create a society budget
• File 501 (c) taxes
• Build an accounting system
• Provide a financial report to the Executive Committee
• Determine whether officer insurance is needed
• Verify whether PayPal dues are transferring into the correct account

Training and Teaching Materials (Timothy Allen)

• Provide editor access to Caroline Balling for training materials

Membership Systems and Onboarding (Holly Levin-Aspenson)

• Create a system to notify members of society membership lapses
• Develop “welcome wagon” materials for society members, including pathways to join the Clinical Network and other Workgroups
• Coordinate norms-related stakeholder connections as appropriate via the Norms Subcommittee

Consortium/Society Rosters and Access (Katherine Jonas)

• Send consortium member and workgroup lists to Holly Levin-Aspenson and Miri Forbes to support access and coordination

Norms Collaboration (Kelsie Forbush)

• Reach out to Holly Levin-Aspenson to coordinate norms-related collaboration with the Clinical Translation Workgroup

Newsletter Coordination (Kelsie Forbush)

• Ask Miri Forbes how she coordinates with Whitney for the newsletter

Conference Planning and Governance Input (All Officers)

• Send ideas for the conference to Martin Sellbom
• Provide input on conference chair onboarding timeline needs, including feedback on:
• • adding an ex officio role, and/or
  •  adjusting election/onboarding timelines for the conference chair role
• Share keynote speaker ideas and award ideas with Martin Sellbom

Leadership Transition Support (All Outgoing Officers/Chairs)

• Share administrative task lists with incoming leaders
• Hold warm handoff meetings between outgoing and incoming leaders

Website Accuracy (All Officers)

• Review the website to ensure role information and society details are current and accurate

Website Updates (Miri Forbes)

• Make required changes to ensure accuracy of the website
• Set up a draft conference registration page and test to make sure it can receive payments

Next Meeting

• Kelsie Forbush will send a poll to schedule the next meeting
• Likely meeting time: 3:00–4:00 p.m. CT to support attendance for Miri Forbes and Martin Sellbom
• Proposed agenda items: officer updates and continued leadership transition planning

Discussion Summaries

1. Vision and Priorities for Leadership Transfer

• Bob Krueger provided a brief history of HiTOP and the evolution of HiTOP into a formal society.
• The committee discussed the importance of structured transitions, including documentation of key responsibilities and warm handoffs between outgoing and incoming leaders.

2. Clinical Dissemination and Teaching Tools

• Chris Conway emphasized the importance of expanding clinical dissemination of HiTOP.
• Chris also highlighted the need to strengthen dissemination of teaching tools and training resources.

3. Society Structure, Committees, and Communication

• Miri Forbes proposed several ideas for the next chapter of the society, including:
• • launching HiTOP awards that recognize important work in this space, particularly primary empirical studies
  • drafting an Executive Committee editorial on the society’s next chapter
  • formalizing new committees such as a Web and Social Media Committee
  • bringing the Clinical Network more centrally into the society
  • clarifying and communicating the distinction between the HiTOP Consortium vs. HiTOP Society
  • improving society communications and listserv structures, including sustainability
  • building connections and community in the group through initiatives like social events at the conference and town halls throughout the year
  • navigating challenges in the current global political environment

4. Membership Growth and Financial Sustainability

• Bob Krueger and Caroline Balling raised questions about the desired size and growth trajectory of the society.
• The committee discussed the potential need for fundraising (including scholarships).
• Katherine Jonas recommended increasing membership and maintaining engagement strategies.
• Katherine also raised the question of whether HiTOP should remain operationally net neutral or maintain a small financial safety net for emergencies.

5. Clarifying Society vs. Consortium Membership

• Holly Levin-Aspenson emphasized the importance of clarifying membership categories and ensuring consistent communication about the distinction between society membership and consortium participation.

6. Conference Planning, Keynotes, and Awards

• James Li recommended not requiring local hosting for conference chairs in the bylaws.
• James suggested the Clinical Network could help grow conference attendance and impact by incorporating clinical programming (e.g., a clinical roundtable, similar to the teaching roundtable at the prior year’s     conference).
• ‍Martin Sellbom asked the committee to identify which ideas are essential versus aspirational and requested suggestions for keynote speakers and awards.
• Martin raised concerns about conference planning feasibility given the current onboarding timeline, noting that five months is insufficient for planning. The committee discussed exploring an ex officio role and/or modifying election/onboarding timelines (potentially for the conference chair role specifically).
• Martin noted that if abstract submissions are low, the deadline may be extended to March 1.

7. Measure Commercialization and Norms Collection

• James Li raised questions about whether HiTOP should be patented and recommended developing a formal proposal for commercialization and licensing, including guidance around commoditization of measures.
• James also questioned whether a Public Relations Committee is needed.
• The committee discussed commercialization in light of norms collection and related governance needs.
• Holly noted she chairs a Norms Subcommittee, and coordination across stakeholders may support the norms collection process.

Note: AI was used to format meeting minutes.

Attendees: Caroline Balling; David Cicero; Kelsie Forbush; Miri Forbes; Roman Kotov; Bob Krueger; Holly Levin-Aspenson; Stephanie Mullins-Sweatt; Martin Sellbom; Len Simms

Meeting Summary (Brief)

The HiTOP Executive Committee met to discuss conference planning, membership and committee updates, fiscal infrastructure, and strategic growth of the Society. The committee addressed lower-than-expected conference submissions and discussed strategies to boost attendance and programming. Miri proposed forming new ad hoc committees to strengthen communication, clinical engagement, and policy advocacy. The meeting concluded with action items assigned and confirmation of upcoming meeting dates

Action Items / Next Steps

Conference Submissions and Promotion (Martin Sellbom)

• Send reminder email about abstract submission deadline (include keynote speaker description and CE credits)
• Track abstract submission timing to inform future planning
• Evaluate programming shortfall; consider additional content if submissions remain low

Keynote Promotion (Bob Krueger)

• Draft text about keynote speaker and send to Martin

Conference Advertising (Conference Committee / Local Hosts)

• Advertise conference and CE credits locally in Minneapolis
• Promote to relevant professional organizations in the area

Membership and Training Engagement (Holly Levin-Aspenson & Caroline Balling)

• Draft responsibilities and scope for Membership and Training Engagement Committees
• Check in with current trainee engagement members about continued service
• Prepare call for expressions of interest (verify society membership status)

Trainee Engagement Data (Miri Forbes)

• Send Caroline spreadsheet of trainee engagement survey data
• Send old Google Form for trainee signups

Workgroups (David Cicero)

• Collect blurbs from nominated workgroup chairs
• Prepare for workgroup chair elections in March

Fiscal and Tax Filing (Len Simms)

• File U.S. taxes using calendar year as fiscal year

Clinical Network (Stephanie Mullins-Sweatt)

• Resend clinician network survey
• Report back on participation

Clinical Network Sign-Ups (Miri)

• Send Stephanie data on recent sign-ups from the website, and try to fix the broken sign-up system

New Committee Formation (Miri)

• Prepare and send calls for expressions of interest for:
• • Communication and Engagement Committee
  • Clinical Network Committee
  • Advocacy Policy Working Group

Calendar Coordination (Kelsie Forbush)

• Send calendar invite for next meeting (March 17, 4:00 p.m. CT USA)

Attendance Confirmation (Chris Conway)

• Confirm availability for March meeting and notify Miri if unable to attend

All Members

• Encourage abstract submissions from labs and professional networks

Future Conference Planning (Miri / Board)

• Begin planning for 2027 conference dates and location
• Consider adjusting conference committee chair term to allow earlier onboarding

Discussion Summaries

1. Project Updates and Organizational Infrastructure

• Miri provided updates on communication efforts and troubleshooting broken systems (including listserv functionality). The group discussed continued progress toward operational independence from SPA
• Len reported approximately $2,000 accumulated in PayPal dues and confirmed the decision to use the calendar year as the fiscal year. He noted that, as as mall organization, tax filing requirements are minimal unless revenue exceeds $50,000.

2. Membership, Working Groups, and Trainee Engagement Committee Updates

• Holly reported new membership applications and pending committee review.
• Caroline discussed Google Drive organization and trainee engagement processes.
• David reported nominations for new workgroup chairs and noted that electionswill be required in March.

3. Research and Publications Board Updates

• Roman discussed the upcoming suicide-focused symposium led by Alex Domborowski to build bridges with the Association for Suicide Prevention.
• The group discussed inviting Carlos Blanco as a potential keynote speaker to increase visibility and attendance, pending availability and budget approval.

4. Conference Programming Shortfall and Submission Strategies

• Martin reported that submissions are significantly behind last year's numbers across all categories. Current projections suggest only approximately 1.5 days of programming, short of the desired 3 days.
• The committee discussed strategies to increase submissions and registration, including:
• • Highlighting keynote speaker
  • Emphasizing CE credits in email subject lines
  • Extending the poster submission deadline, if necessary
  • Advertising locally in Minneapolis
  • Circulating a preliminary lineup of speakers
  • Creating a shared spreadsheet for programming ideas
  • Encouraging workgroup participation
• The group acknowledged that overlapping conferences and travel limitations may affect attendance.

5. Ad Hoc Committee Formation

• Miri proposed forming two ad hoc committees and one working group
• • Communication and Engagement Committee
  • Clinical Network Committee
  • Advocacy Policy Working Grouping
• The committee supported issuing calls for expressions of interest after the abstract deadline. Although an awards committee was discussed, Miri recommended only proceeding with the three ad hoc committees and one working group at this time, with potential to re-visit the need for an awards committee as the society grows. Miri noted she would like to follow-up on trainee awards around the time of the conference. EC members unanimously approved Miri’s proposal.

6. Clinical Network and Future Initiatives

• Stephanie provided updates on the Clinical Network and plans to increase engagement via a clinician survey.
• The committee discussed future possibilities including:
• • Monetizing CE content
  • Strengthening society-clinician integration Strengthening society-clinician integration through the Clinical Network Committee proposed above

7. Future Meetings

• Next Meeting: March 16, 4:00 p.m. CT (North America)
  Following Meeting: April 22, 4:30 p.m. CT (North America)
  https://kansas.zoom.us/my/kelsie.forbush

Appendix: Additional Conference Programming Suggestions for Martin

The following ideas were discussed for potential inclusion in the conference schedule if additional programming is needed:
‍Clinician Integration Roundtable
‍A roundtable featuring clinics that have integrated HiTOP into practice, particularly appealing if inviting local clinicians and offering CEs. Bob offered to reach out to potential participants.
‍Open Membership Meeting
‍As permitted by the bylaws, an Open Membership Meeting could provide:
· Executive Committee updates
· Member input and dialogue
· Increased transparency and engagement
‍Workgroup / Big-Idea Sessions
‍Dedicated space for workgroup meetings and collaborative project generation.
‍Graduate School / Internship Panel
‍Caroline offered to coordinate a trainee-focused panel (e.g., applying to graduate school), which tends to be well attended.
‍Funding / Grant Strategy Panel
‍A session on funding strategies for HiTOP-oriented research, particularly for measurement-focused or descriptive psychopathology projects that are challenging to pitch.
‍Trainee Housing / Hotel Block
‍Clarify whether hotel blocks or housing arrangements will be available to facilitate trainee attendance.

Note: AI was used to format meeting minutes.