ࡱ> 7 4<bjbjUU .P7|7|7Ul8,4.~l :"V @` ӯu  :M 0.Yx: Impact Evaluation Guidance Note One This document was written during the development of the postgraduate professional development programme (PPD) in England. What became the Training and Development Agency for schools (TDA) was still the Teacher Training Agency (TTA). It did not at that time have a remit for continuing professional development (CPD) but it did administer the Award-Bearing INSET programme and was keen to develop PPD, which encompasses both masters and doctoral provision for schoolteachers in England. I was the UCET representative on the group developing PPD and was very concerned to avoid the possibility that UCET members would be required to bid for funding without any idea of what that might draw down upon them in the form of inspection. As soon as I discovered that the body that would have done any inspection (Ofsted) had not been asked to think about an inspection regime, and indeed had no funds to do it, I wrote this paper which, having been discussed by colleagues in UCET, was circulated to the group working to develop PPD. Essentially, it was an attempt to prevent discourse around the evaluation of impact becoming dominated by government agenda: to prevent, as I used to say a lot at the time, impact becoming a killer concept. I continue to believe that approached with an open mind the concept of impact offers considerable opportunity for critical sense making. Before the completion of the work of the PPD group I came to the end of my time as Chair of the UCET CPD Committee and stepped down from the group. It was heartening to discover later that it was the local government and school representatives on that group that proposed that the framework of the paper form the basis for the proforma of self evaluation reports to compiled annually by providers. The proforma was designed collaboratively by my successor as chair, Kit Field, James Noble-Rogers, Chief Executive of UCET and me; all of us working with the TTA. It remained in use with few changes until recently; and you can see examples of the reports at  HYPERLINK "http://www.ipda.org.uk" www.ipda.org.uk. Note Two You may detect the continued application of the UCET Principles and originally this paper also included as an annex the Needs and Impact document. I have removed it because, although I like it, you may find it irksome to keep seeing the same thing; and, in any case, the framework of the following document is very similar. You may also see references to criteria alignment. This is because the document was written at the time when the criteria for bidding for PPD funding were emerging and I was trying to explore what they meant and signified.  POSTGRADUATE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ANNUAL IMPACT EVALUATION UCET Guidance Note: This document has been designed before practice has given meaning to PPD and the guidance contained within it is likely to change. Rationale HEIs in England that bid to the TTA for PPD funding are required to provide an annual evaluation of the impact of their programmes. There may be benefits to the research profiles of all participating HEIs if there is some commonality to how such information is gathered and exchanged. There may be benefits to HEIs if this process encourages research networks. Ofsted reports on accredited CPD have shown that while there is considerable impact arising from the work of HEIs insufficient is done to gather, collate, discuss and report on it. The concept of impact may be interpreted simplistically unless HEIs systematically demonstrate its richness. All the countries of the UK can benefit from taking part in this exercise. HEIs should not shrink from a process that may bring a considerable political benefit. It is a good idea to establish at the outset how we come to understand the contexts and baselines from which we operate. Framework and Guidance for the Impact Evaluation Report Note: I have tried to map the TTA bidding criteria onto the different sections of the Framework. At this stage of our knowledge of how things will work it would be wise to regard such alignments as tentative. I am aware that at times it looks as though everything maps onto everything but, rather than be too mechanical at this stage, I have done this in the manner of a draft from which I hope we can learn. Needs Analysis It seems sensible that any kind of evaluation report should begin with a description of how we set about establishing our knowledge and understanding of CPD need before making any statement about context. I guess that understanding of Need should be established on two levels. The first is institutional: schools, LEAs, Networked Learning Communities etc. The second is the individual teacher or small groups of teachers. Institutional need is likely to be driven by target setting and the fulfilment of policy. Fortunately, at present, part of the policy environment in which institutions work includes building CPD capacity. This should enable HEIs to connect with such institutions on the basis of helping them to achieve policy targets. I guess, therefore, that each HEI should be able to provide evidence of having consulted on need at an institutional level. Understanding the needs of teachers or small groups of teachers is not disconnected from institutional need but is often more dynamic and a part of how we teach. Conversation with the TTA and the DfES tells me that they are aware of how teachers understanding of their own needs is likely to (indeed, should) change during an accredited CPD programme. Nevertheless, there may be political pressure to measure what is easy to measure and, therefore, to simplify the process of understanding need and to link it very tightly to national targets and expectations. I believe this pressure should be resisted. But we should resist intelligently and make frequent use of the phrase often used by David Miliband: The thinking professional. Good quality thinking is less likely when confined to an orthodoxy. The activity (Relating Professional Needs to Professional Impact) included in the Annex below (see DOCUMENT ONE for this) was designed to help resolve the dilemma of satisfying, simultaneously, HMI who were looking for evidence that HEIs were aligning teachers needs with government priorities and external examiners who were looking for evidence that we were encouraging teachers to think critically. The activity is included in the Guidance for the Compilation of a Critical Journal of Professional Development for both the Key Stage Three Strategy and the Primary Strategy. Another way in which HEIs respond to and assist in the articulation of the needs of teachers is to set well designed, and often negotiated, assignments. There must be very many ways in which we can demonstrate that we not only respond to need but help professionals to develop and communicate their understanding of their needs. Possible criteria alignment: 2, 3 and 4. Context For years we have said that this is important: that teachers should set their intentions in context; that knowledge of learning is diminished if we are ignorant of its context. Well, the same applies to us. Now that we can describe how we came to understand need we can say something useful about the context within which we operate. We may be concentrating on particular fields, we may be working collaboratively, we may be doing something for the first time such as helping to build a networked learning community or using a variety of modes of delivery and assessment. Some of us may be working in areas of the country that do not have a good history of accredited CPD: where recruitment is problematic for various reasons. Perhaps the reorganisation of schools or local government has made things particularly difficult. Perhaps the age profile of teachers in the area does not include many NQTs or relatively new teachers who might have been expected to take more easily to accredited CPD. Some HEIs have few central staff but many associates. Some have particular research interests. Whatever, we should describe the situation in which we operate when reporting our evaluation of the impact of what we do. A description of context establishes a baseline. Possible criteria alignment: 2, 3 and 4. Intended Professional Impact - What did we want to do from the start of the year under review? I am not suggesting that we list all the outcome statements of all the modules of all the programmes for which we have won funds. What I mean is that we should have had an overall set of intentions relating to impact on behalf of participants, our partners and ourselves at the outset of a year. As the notion of teacher researcher gains currency it could be useful if our list/description of intentions drew attention to any plans we might have had to encourage it. I have used the word intended deliberately because good evaluation allows for a natural learning process and I think that life gets interesting when, eventually, we start to examine unexpected evidence for unintended outcomes. Simply measuring the distance between target and achievement can easily become unintellectual, sterile, not what we signed up for and boring. I think it is important for all sorts of reasons to establish that we and partners and participants may discover things of interest that were not targets at the outset. The word intended may also allow us some freedom to show that, even if some targets were tied closely to improved pupil performance, the way to achieve that can be quite tortuous and indirect. Expected Evidence for Impact - What did we think would happen when we began the year? I guess that this should merely be an indication of how we imagined that we would address a combination of what we are bidding for and what participants from earlier years or partners have said about their needs. Doing this would provide a basis for reflection upon the significance of actual evidence when it is generated. We should avoid being too prescriptive here. The word expected has been chosen as a match for the word intended. Both are somewhat tentative and allow for other things to happen and to be considered. I guess, however, that evidence for impact might be classified in different ways. It could be seen in terms of: different timescales (in other words some impact can be seen quite quickly but some takes a long time to develop); individual, collective or institutional impact; pastoral or academic; research output; increased recruitment; formation of partnerships; and many others. Activities: what did we plan in order to achieve our targets? This would be an outline of the range of things we planned to do including the modes of assessment we set out to use. We could make reference here to, say, school based work, distance learning and a range of teaching, learning and assessment strategies. We could also indicate what we proposed to do in terms of practitioner research. Monitoring Arrangements: how did we observe what happened? This should give some indication of how evidence was collected. We actually collect all sorts of evidence for impact including evaluation sheets, external examiners reports and internal programme monitoring reports. We sometimes involve participants in evaluation of CPD impact as part of assignments and research projects. I guess that an often-overlooked means of discovering impact is the reference to it in assignments. This section could refer to where evidence can be found and interrogated. There could be appendices containing selected illustrative evidence. The danger would be that we fall into the trap of only compiling for consideration evidence that is tangible and considered to be unproblematic. If we wish to move forward the discussion of the concept of impact then we should not shy from consideration of the problematic. Review of Evidence for Impact If we look back at what actually happened during the year we might examine the actual evidence by asking the following questions. Did we do exactly as we intended? Do we now understand our intended professional impact outcomes differently? Were our intentions practical? Were our intentions as appropriate as we thought at the outset? If we have not achieved any intended professional outcomes are they, nevertheless, worth pursuing in the future? Have we done more than we intended? Have we any unexpected evidence for unintended professional outcomes? We often tell participants to be careful about evidence: that it is crucial to make sense of its nature, strength and significance; that it may be unassailable but not significant; and weak or problematic but highly significant. Reporting on CPD impact should not become a pass/fail exercise. People in the education business are always making discoveries that they did not expect to make and examining them for significance and value before deciding to adopt or discard them. We should do this for ourselves. I do think it is also important to bring to the surface apparent inconsistencies between what participants and partners are interested in and what government wishes them to do. It would be one way of legitimising the collective professional voice, especially when it is a dissenting voice. So, if we are meeting needs that are, as yet, unarticulated by government we should find the voice to say so. Impact Claim This is where we tell the world what we have achieved. Of course we will be making claims about what we and our participants and partners believe to be important. This means that, especially when we depart from any imposed script, we will need to be both sure of ourselves and articulate. I imagine that we might make a verifiable list here that could include items such as the numbers we had recruited; completion rates; achievements by participants and partners irrespective of completion rates; changes to teaching, learning and assessment; changes in terms of leadership and management; changes to school culture. There are lots of possible items. 9. Follow-up Plans This is simply what we wish to do next although quite a lot of it will, I guess, arise from the above. I am suggesting here simply an outline of what might reasonably happen next. Cliff Jones August 2004 Cliff Jones Critical Professional Learning www.criticalprofessionallearning.co.uk '(  < = > M N P Q R [ \ almP+`^q;E$$j%%%&&&&&&y))a- OJQJ^J5\ 56\] jU\ B*ph56B*]ph 0J56]j56U]j56U] 56]5CJ5B*CJph5B*CJ$ph5CJ$<'( Q R [ \ $a$$a$$a$$a$^^$^a$;3<ablmFOP$ & Fa$$ & Fa$$a$$a$$a$^_`a;<DE  ##6$7$`$a$$$%$ & Fa$$a$$a$%%&&x)y)))++`-a---.....///o/p/z2{22233$a$$ & Fa$$a$$a$a--.//o/p/21f1{22446W8f8v8w899:;p;q;;;;;; < <1<4<5CJ$6]CJ 5CJ\5\3?3333[44445566W8X8e8f899::; ;p;q;;;$ & Fa$$a$$a$ $ & F a$;;;;;;; < <1<2<3<4<$^a$ $a$ ,1h. A!"#$% DyK www.ipda.org.ukyK Hhttp://www.ipda.org.uk/yX;H,]ą'coDd%N  C *AucetlogobnE"ɼSon!nnE"ɼSoPNG  IHDRi$sRGBgAMA a cHRMz&u0`:pQ< pHYs.#.#x?vnIDATx^1 %˺7a>|١€ fD\1LId01ႁrPvͷuު^?lgU]k+     @@@@@ a]є            V,~/#     @O@@@@@@`YZ_JG@@@@@,>     Z     Y<}@@@@@dk})@@@@@x     kR:     d@@@@@ ůt@@@@@      _K     @@@@@X+@֗@@@@@       V,~/#     @O@@@@@@`YZ_JG@@@@@,>     Z     Y<}@@@@@dk})@@@@@x     kR:     d@@@@@ ůt@@@@@      _K     @@@@@X+@֗@@@@&?~?۟Oovc  \Qa@@@ (1Wn/_?~?| @S,I   Jzl'L음5xzW+6Ua/n^թN>},"  ^=z omNltyp€P꭮;}ڻo5\>Lw6:E6\d;O$`   W`CCm "x->Ça͢@ oqVa((>&edG>},B@@" )Y<=ZFS"<L߿ߙlWʼO9ДYsdWuWxE@@^G`CC: G4QF}:n{̅ۓ_u&œ_/   :R.?o߾]ƻ|sEWZ]?[V?-۷Vp(}S xE@@^G`CC:GOnU_~㇇J 6D~~^WmaV_oxotU?$'_@@@u6o|nߩRw~X%Y]qQmgϒ@@@`,~UQ6 I;anOl/COxmg5(Y,IA@@V lHyW5Q`ۢisNc]`(UvGYF'%I9   * )Yƣ? l/YK}ҭ&l;Xnb'%I9   * )Yƣ߶_~OJg?=6N掘YF'%I9   * )YƣⰒ5Z t3"߶Y풽oW/@@ؐwv lqB 9cs&lEO1O+b0NNA}@@@ؐſh߹amqBzx'anF6 Mdoد8d@@@R;6RW18&av5wD9^h(@@@8-!!?Jp([zKufPaKص;%z$)@@X%!!_x:o2>uCm|CY {*&%I9   * )Yƣ\xl ߠGH?gIR   J`C˗Uմi!цvņlǏuc{l䫇PO S̳ !^d$)@@X%!ٳY.rr{ a{!cVY#%I9   * )Ϟ,^ӖWGEDzr78_&E`\`(z0;Q [,&   @C`Cʳ؟ oIHtiC:ϟ?o(@^^`(=<*N 7 {C.o;˛    K|/az$HH{w! =:l?E,~ #V`0N֧b   { lxVǏdo[]|T_q94 l!!  B`3BLeKvQoKe?!BY=>{ Wpwj  Z g枬j!PÇÕPU;i}pV}GݹXYK*J9   ; l`|TӧObϪK^ zoxmvR>aΔ Y}Oe_ [PYd$)@@X(!7fZT2#*%D?pz& ]QõAN ş '%I9   Buߞev4zaP 9N8Au=97Яn87]\ωſE3Anm:YF:   7!QCG@@n&mKQ{JMYQ$!I2uk.فm_P ySZB6 dcMç@@@l[CkO<=+o=Q S㵯u9K_/xÞsC&Q3dgϲF,IA@@ \cV-goR;pHW̎W Lꌓ! Jq7 d$)@@X+I8oY~]U ;'Aږj.=t&^įue:I|@X}!  o'90f^ӟ7WEr2l~C)>K/sz߼I̋%I9   rKSڕc*iңQ.6Ofϝ!xZ}%}M J͞_!>-Uέ}C?n3*#@ߣUۖ,~$   Z#+*y;yySc˻2MR(6@6=b ;U _b MFݺ⻸*ϒ@@@`9p(oe2&+N՟O>tzc?`R9)0'a~K9Yz75B@@4KwuϯN,p}^'6bw]dd]qj2Y  lv껥&wv3O@ka՗uty낒/vwI? ,~$   >LfׯO¯^Z4׵8-@OiYE?Kr@@@},a{܏;,z$'߫T"Y %I9   >?~<"F\]I s #e99_,,~~SdZ,~$   [~$U-[%g=kw d&%I9   nw^ive#/Qb}o`:O 'ܥnVY!%I9   n]C Sm+G+ےtJ?)gIR   pZDG}5\)=4 V%eœ/X),~VSϒ@@@ 1 d[c[œUw*,~Vkϒ@@@27 /av>}y\z߾}%~& œOR7+,~Vϒ@@@J?bK\6ׯ E,-Ytʩܼ?^/Ø"dd=%d$)@@x@10S^uL~@׹e՟ ?~xLؚO^RddK:m %d$)@@xBŅ w0ELZ.HT߱I/xC:jꅢJ$)" $ [@@@fzuEʕfUQi*S%1yeK.=eR~jd|ulMW+ K,~4A@@)1 gS?xg:i}'J~"R0      #      V,~/#     @O@@@@@@`YZ_JG@@@@@,>     Z     Y<}@@@@@dk})@@@@@x     kR:     d@@@@@ ůt@@@@@      _K     @@@@@X+@֗@@@@@       V,~/#     @O@@@@@@`YZ_JG@@@@@,>     Z     Y<}@@@@@dk})@@@@@x     kR:     d@@@@@ ůt@@@@@      _K     @@@@@X+@֗@@@@@       V,~/#     @O@@@@@@`YZ_JG@@@@@,>     Z     Y<}@@@@@dk})@@@@@4@@@@@@`HY'B@@@@@ f|S@@@@@ ^\OJC@@@@@  O      V,~/#     @O@@@@@@`YZ_JG@@@@@,>     Z     Y<}@@@@@dk})@@@@@x     kR:     d@@@@@ ůt@@@@@      _K     @@@@@X+@֗@@@@@       V,~/#     @O@@@@@@`YZ_JG@@@@@,>     Z     Y<}@@@@@dk})@@@@@x     kR:     dW?㟟?^Y޷0o;={d//|z^|Ǐq/b{!};z~LIiu>voOdxQ, 5) Out~M,'4nK'Ko)nR腊.{b  , .tFILUr;H.G{+]ɷ@%ɋ%ĝ#0 ;OKF63nHz / y.;I@@.;'y3kɏvxw7i0_Q_m>]^1c8Vϛ/i[eY):uo>aɽ蔱Eû}˵w.M"*\^u{p@xs˲*f?ctwUEtOgN,]{>Y&}CJ8Q/,:o*G^$=MIUeX\O L=k1Ow ܔA#L s  ,M&}o Hܥ1ۯ|G8TW)7gbW.iyW83f8hxW1?}%V~g,ཻ]-'(ʨ{u ɟU&L-7HSyۄ ߤ`骕wfn  G,8dVhp_uT.n ~O_Ov9V[& UcCy]8g$c-Χcgb/8wwf%ҙD*<_gG=58;ӓ>twxSqL6|0Nl+_ɿ G ^ʋ_ *~MpoL!pN @Y,8_l`gd?cۜU&w 7u^,ȮJ z 1kt317mg 3vënc FySwY}E/x,!ӫ+ppV֧ ė'%[p VwLNzZQ@xae0y/܄~V!EZj[>vT2Y ii][x'8SauxRa{{ھ9LnYqk)InrZٗDoΗ~zHD]su7jwi+,C Yؗm%ozɲ?E {D@G\NNtu^֥'XbTnʹ?靤RxIst4МKB9plQgf5'wU7>Z6&CS>9!a-3Q|i7 Q  _9Σ>OlMKdbљ~;7^Lmqv-43MsI$987N)t[w Ԡge;h 6y5MJ3XKvJ=)@^F, e d4 nL6xs(g_:Tu7|)fb>K:yuĹo=Aazo$95y>d9FW.ْa{~0yv͏~|y+7yl8gMmdy.'! Y|<5@RIxf~Ŭ$?O2=չ?v-n>k<ׅ@26΍TBˁOy͗>^u=D`R'ۣ7I-pxeK:g5:'<Vi8}yû%oNr{?~[]Ko?QQyMl&LL:N8sDyhR*#_lG91:U)f|ĖwEB;+y&K$Yع*[.%w34)GSaGylbgTT|J%2?}dOMs3d;DSޔZ d<{}֍0{=6._gnZRqP_ܵ;[%ΜQLjn~RG|NApa@~(<cйΑCͽ}umf0%guT=%꟪?`5O\;-أ=gb~\/nİx{zz0 qGյ&i,37O|~w8&ɀ>y3~{=v.I5*i[xbϿ6 nVS{S]߃XoM{{ >AF *rEJoQV/|g6zFyyy`9B~w :/U7Q{=%Ė {1E72!M-Q.rtSPt7 Iߪ Gw~Dʡl:d|oGQ_ml6p=jW:om@AΠң1+WTh)ck`65>'`{&~>>QĪ#uȣ&G9N<`O8;ObdN'A+ZO%< ONTOoG@%*;W4 ѕ++U$I!')F%OuWm$icOKv?]ygD{Ou j:?9c|J!p)vx}LTOv 3A}*o5O9v&捘='9AxWN8 -Nӓgz+]*o:3ԾX$!_'zmS9\cc Go_QWޱ/=ѧ!N;-˺WO/>KynFⷲ/>?笳?+Bx|=g /,pY dG rxTl\q}*a:y>,$GOڅv⎚lګd >ߨWߔV[1 wM6& MNFN],>;G(@\O̭gV'yX]z9&Nz&78w|J'oXEd6+~xg7S5Õ+.Vͥu>\;T$VJ<͛么vXiU7o&F*Gz:ӣOŧ^ hleG%= qg>a޸pUJۛݠXzߜ5]p5dr'2jb@0L -/<VOxl ; \_t=r\T5 z`㹇N=;ҷ|x)wna9z$sa_͓y39TFskhs3¹\"̦6O;:OߵM>Rsb IG;O%YobST՟~:>8O8ɧ6y,0Np<ߥP\s +!67΃*;_Fλb|Wj[=Yj!1ߊʿe?n[Ws.O;-}-lQ_>5Vڕs/>vZG@%.H8冲{`a3v9poy[tw˼E<'HpK漵·b5q߮WtXMZ4 K+\m8spsAog{@^R,>}sX &III浮ߊy"iH1\8zF')|sjfOCDS?!O9_/v'U9K,izgzw8CҎ/Gqԓ3)ޔ#ER+F}?vvGRI$Ko@ytyB4$҉PҮ)5na_u^#j\TJМ-Rzœ.Cs_w'ĺf۽qT*#.>( .]yr6VA~$VwW[u7qj+[ˇӓ>yZ)@&ϧvU["4p'6iϱq}t?S|t(iI5|wqbGK$4k)89Yas†‹% cv?{rr]ӺYg`ǨlKHC+8r@霞j8sxO3Tx{+?W󊯍t]XS)u>^WgU~FX}b杧k#Z06DxΩmPXƶ3\8Wz|.΋׎tZBlCK7H,.+RX5ֱ )pM5aMs@DdޜS|_?8]LNY}MZ/9x JB&~߮)T}9.G4ͼ5{'/d??څ3NT D}UCm{+<9נP%}mxw<3v-!98;R^1gʷ<-Tzۑ?JhRxlf4$h/,}B/Qj;/JffCg ]o\A'Kr:6 Q ? ?d9Og6C Ǐ#d'o(6<ӵ|q̴3a 1͊x~]g>xb8}FK'U%!יȻ"LS\AM9Oڽ+YOGCp.Կt fLԧΌ-{zo2Ok+hnI'1vs?xZK `G:R'6- T }kO9l7v΋xy8B58t][AWCe-رK 8c3> t~> (o 7}2G%O=%4wl?R[p['fԧj ҼYh}no ^khwNT^B7G:6S!6_x:G7aG_TGT^c&G/^z dt5 잛űpg`ؗJM kg%OYiwq`Jixb'EyN{Nu]+vxzrL<}rN*e{k,95\os}9Y8sџkR)o<rzSnB7|JSj/: 6b orkGOs ʜ:tθ4@ǽ٥g_7+.[yz@:շZ{Y/|.յ(g ( Qf*ILK)Wd==?+d 4#fůZv,O2\E(j]o!ug!wS)Yrmmq{#,qN^/%]H[WĽN"kpqk}W-/ wo26$E |q̴|Cy+f%_bp-N<)RRU|>0kէc6h)*sjcOGIMN[O*y=U*n?Ϩݵ?rO%-<)XdIĪ Y|iCR$7?T恟@{L~q: 9 TsG'vy7exա9kZX GzIί\l.NA{qS^\0֝OP*(lN˵|3}J(΃F.vB37%jj(yżXq"iTrSx =XJUz>UY&rP]7KOxa{ n8qsCg[Y1oOHyXDv z]SrɰjyxoΉKG.tD/Ͻڑsw CC;xˉC:%+E|*~(0t; ?Ξ&78dTY&8Dף׍]늜iOwpO*|YGz~k*0ɓd׎X SSw{~.R?v}mazJvtcCDv^CeK4+?kk^%k"K!hHQaPdvya@ppO3nОrpsAWwbc^CRQ6˸GZ/\FWAӛoBGVbe[ ? ,^in+6gZxVGcuţ:OOǓUl,LVgƲڣJ=]v)i#kŀuckM5Z6l>9dÀ.xU@9/r^XJgrO?=[ran>0klm\;dˮ$sR$L7LrG7ѐ5hBlv8{rX{8JNPHtDGF'ݣ9Ziɮ=os C>SZ y}N\_4tbǥO2xvwT|VQv~{NJ}ma{nE_ErzJx:ꍘN.OO>9Lg ;p-=bGw'Qr&0v\V8Ohy[#νhӥؙ><ːe"&,Vpfx7xռ7("t66Qd*:t@P.NT{\Ь  J3,/nE?-x:aU P~3q-HI[#J'CZOd6l!u8dx% .Gv8AϬJb%Jɿ F$xu "=G_;(~ÎrU83IOALrU!iQॲ9|quJZY2ÿ :Sr;6_O:ZQ߿|vX8<́7gVߋaވ %c]οӰ)~yѮw}vsyzrnbZDӁ=G] {#>+3=٣K>\;]Ɔ܊U5 Oz Ŭ2]}TŜ_;%vKryh`<n"JޏTh>9o V `c:Ϻy.8O9y&9v,iS ڞTv!{ܱM9?^mi>H+h' #.+Dk3Jo8}Ǚ\+ΩyG]߾+ E9g'vwɛ{;Gma79IPBe>๸_u;4eM cE\$uHMye2v.ƖTry,cQ~Խ/ˏ=GW@d|hN0/^.OެXghNovkw޵ GM]CeƂZϱm_{'YrVg;C$=7EB; T>|&c'BY6[mޞsO曇+f!fT9Zx$*f2jʋ),ѼOƲat#jf6c~T:['~06/>^@Mоxeūs3і6*vi؞Uf۾%$ o:ϿkGH6,ּ$_i>^&%Bҫnb֯Oa{O;}|dc=ûE͎l?YCTګk&p|7OzqN-?݄ؕ{ry֓i_~>~fiW_)L%/W#>xܞu޻=| 92Xhh%N*"yXdTr:@gCWhW3N|6ߎv:Kxk`?->zFJ?LnL,YަBOYV{ueˮ0.g`IKs>PvڌխΤ;//4Ŵ@';oϻJSunN\HL2`c {F0tױkv}<͊[Tq{0W;'.:$c\B@; 퓕깠=(а_x ?iq+K|s§ 8y*8ƞ=tWȺ %y7XhAKH%h)mYj1I\15B Ǿsx*~)Sߝ53|ptfI2Teu3whXVB#G^db_u$u޴EL?Q{ ڄQ\x#ᗐ_C+-&Vl\Oɔuߡ6<䦪z䓧;G8OK; ínßJPEohPϴշ'IX͞ۋfj&#تBsh]Q_9<=Yy; IsVW2VOHwWFeCSjkR5ϟae'=+~]LMփOvOeDv]>Wy] ,'@>sx=ϧCNmmCyxkSGGx_|ɷ)~h}IZ~B2jsDb]<.W#N^k3< ׸bCщS|!ӯNU~m o<9#K?:Pjeny:U2}*~UEq CēY^_7ɖ$a| o(MbwIIcC9qL:RREg1,^vf)xv3$O7Ht?!ɓs9%u6_ztڣ" Oγf:T:*RavhUY,f:ĚNwU%?\LIVsC ) Ppi 2( esCK ,_ x|qM읍SLg}>v,WKWemaJ{6,CI_^- -* ]p}Y# 9UæUvԦ(S%'GSmufRp_(N ,ƽ>%|fo~r ?Ua 3bK?]dN(oxpy?^-{c-W}>Wp+FQ3]=S+8ֹ:]g3+Pf1!&'>G)yl+7U 6\QTgp|uhRR aQhʻ:kG2?Q2I_ǞaMKs%.7p|yTy~Qd|=/Uo`ea1Ɲ9ϼ@/VuNC*DbaMYjE<\{˼[18=XZL6KGoƇsG˔y1n)|vR@H+qg]T G=`uftX |ف&b:;Rf79лx{i32ӎtTiV)Tmll~v݋JUNCԚS"XpuH9Jy1ʧiqN KOA\e<+duعJ 5Tlln/c{wA붘yliW5s2Ƽ1G;rH Zpi_Tmlv^hJ杆q5.(Y}vDOɉն)BOȨbk|4_wjђ \6 yJ<'Q>VN@ W :a"ƣ7$<YsY?GNmaa&jA@H@5#X'UN~ZVm10A[q<-847K?ʧ@@@@@Yۈ"    <[,G@@@@@/@6      vQ{@@@@@ ߿!     ~@@@@@do#j     lgG@@@@Yۈ"    <[,G@@@@@/@6      vQ{@@@@@ ߿!     ~@@@@@do#j     lgG@@@@Yۈ"    <[,G@@@@@/@6      vQ{@@@@@ ߿!     ~@@@@@do#j     lgG@@@@Yۈ"    <[,G@@@@@/@6     kjSIENDB` iH@H Normal'CJOJQJ\^J_HaJmH sH tH 6@6 Heading 1$@& 5\]@@@ Heading 2$$@&a$5CJ\aJ$>@> Heading 6$@&^ 5CJ\6 @6 Heading 9 $@& 6\]<A@< Default Paragraph Font>B@> Body Text$a$5CJ\]aJ0L@0 DateOJQJ\^JaJ4P@4 Body Text 2 56],@", Header  9r , @2, Footer  9r .U@A. Hyperlink >*B*ph48P'(QR[\ a b l m FOP^_`a;<DE6 7 ` a !!""x%y%%%''`)a)))****.+/+o+p+z.{...//?////[00001122W4X4e4f455667 7p7q777777777 8 81858000000000000X00)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)00` 0` 0 0 0 0` 09  09  09  09  09  09  09  09  09 0` 0` 000 000000000000000000 000000000000 00000000 000000 000000 000000 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000 00000000000000 0000@0@0@0 0,,TTTWa-4<%%3;4< "#$&'3<!=M48X#'72858u%7772858333P7778 80858 User&C:\Users\User\Documents\Angela Ten.docUser)C:\Users\User\Documents\WebAngela Ten.docUser)C:\Users\User\Documents\WebAngela Ten.docUser)C:\Users\User\Documents\WebAngela Ten.docUser)C:\Users\User\Documents\WebAngela Ten.docOQ n$Y4CZ_^N!,ch ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh pp^p`OJQJo(h @ @ ^@ `OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh PP^P`OJQJo(hhh^h`.h 88^8`OJQJo(hL^`L.h  ^ `.h  ^ `.hxLx^x`L.hHH^H`.h^`.hL^`L.h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh pp^p`OJQJo(h @ @ ^@ `OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(oh PP^P`OJQJo(Y4COQ _^N                           @48P@UnknownG:Ax Times New Roman5Symbol3& :Cx ArialK"Frutiger 45 Light?5 :Cx Courier New;Wingdings"qh[&F.b2082qUserUserOh+'0d   , 8DLT\ssUserfserserNormalUserl6erMicrosoft Word 9.0@G@H@u .՜.+,D՜.+,, hp|  ob8  Title 8@ _PID_HLINKSA <?http://www.ipda.org.uk/ ucetlogo  !"#$%&'(*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`acdefghijklmnopqstuvwxy{|}~Root Entry Fu Data )hp1TablebWordDocument.PSummaryInformation(rDocumentSummaryInformation8zCompObjjObjectPoolu u   FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q