# data[].attributes.body
I suggest asking CEAL members to provide descriptions of case studies in each area prior to the meeting so they can be featured.

# data[].attributes.body
The aims for CAM and the questions that we are answering for this outline are not the same- For example, the first question is does the flow of the session promote cross CEAL collaborations? Its not a goal for CAM at this point. If it is a conference goal then it needs to be added under objectives. How many collaborations came out of the last conference? I am curious. Facilitated working groups in my experience is how this happens.

Is it a goal to highlight CEAL impact, if so, then we need to make that an objective.

# data[].attributes.body
I am wondering if we can get long-term vision information from NIH ahead of time..when they open back up? If a vision is articulated in the meeting that we are unaware of, will we shift course during the meeting?

Topics need to be driven by the objectives. So, either we change the objectives or the topics.

Consider moving the evidence synthesis up. I think we need to do this on day 1 because this is the component that gets us to impact. What do we collectively know should be front and center to inform how we frame impact in CER.

# data[].attributes.body
The EPIS Framework is helpful for thinking through all phases of implementation planning and could easily be aligned with an emphasis on engagement

# data[].attributes.body
Is it possible to add some discussion of mechanisms in both engagement and implementation science?

# data[].attributes.body
Well, I am not sure if this could fit into the agenda, but if there could be some exercises that encourage people to meet and visit with attendees from other CEAL program areas, that might be helpful? Dosage would likely not be high enough to form a lasting relationship, but could be a beginning? Pretty often at meetings like this when there is a break, people use the time to check messages or respond to work, rather than visiting with one another.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the high level descriptions allude to these goals; however, people tend to collaborate with people they know and like. It can be difficult to get to know people from other CEAL programs when the meeting schedule is very full. It is human nature to sit with people we already know at meetings like this and strengthen our existing relationships - especially as our state-wide team is very spread out.

# data[].attributes.body
Day 1 : Consider Day 1 ; for example - AZ CEAL is limited to 5 total attendees - so we would benefit from networking time with other CEALs on that Day 1 instead of meeting just us in our little group which is not representative of our statewide team - so consider making Day 1 a Market of Ideas activity ( round tables of programs where people move around for 15-20 minutes - they can choose 3-4 programs) from table to table - where all programs can roam and meet the teams they want to meet ? Just a thought.

# data[].attributes.body
I am struggling to see the flow of the sessions. If implementation science want to be used, can we divide sessions can be separated in:

·. 1. Intervention / Evidence-Based Practice

2. Implementation Strategies

3. Context / Setting

4. Adopters / Stakeholders/Community

5. Process / Implementation Outcomes

6. Sustainability / Maintenance

7. Evaluation / Impact/Dissemination

# data[].attributes.body
Day 2, Session 2's - maybe focus on how are CEnR principles are addressed through the implementation process

# data[].attributes.body
I struggling to see the flow from the CAM objectives to the sessions. I wonder if we could strengthen the flow by asking CPC member to take on an objective and map it across the days using a similar template (panel, breakout sessions, etc.)