Prisons Scholarships
The deadline for submissions has been extended to 11:59pm (CEST) 26 March 2023
Do you need help with your scholarship application? Find out about our new mentor program. (APPLICATIONS NOW CLOSED)
Please note that those who have not previously received a scholarship will be prioritised.
For those interested in HCV care in prison settings globally including policy makers, clinicians, researchers, and people with lived experience of HCV and/or incarceration. This scholarship category is designed to facilitate attendance at the Prisons pre-conference workshop and the INHSU 2023 conference.
Applications are reviewed by three independent reviewers for each application according to the following scoring systems:
1). What are the key challenges for the delivery of health services in prisons in your (score 1-5). (Maximum 500 words)
- Very good (score 5) – The challenges for the delivery of health services in prisons in their country are well-articulated, and it is very clear that the participant has taken considerable effort to highlight challenges faced.
- Good (score 4) – The applicant has done a good job describing the challenges for the delivery of health services in prisons in their country.
- Average (score 3) – The applicant has outlined some of the challenges, but the response could have been more detailed.
- Below average (score 2) – The applicant has some description about the challenges, but the response lacks considerable detail.
- Poor (score 1) – The person has named what they believe to be the challenges, but the response lacks detail and is not well articulated.
2). Please explain your role in your organisation and why attending the INHSU conference and prisons workshop is relevant to you, and what do you hope to learn (score 1-5)? (Maximum 500 words)
- Very good (score 5) – The person is clearly doing important work focused on enhancing prison health services and they have done an excellent job at clearly articulating why attending this conference is important to them, and what they hope to learn.
- Good (score 4) – The person is clearly doing work focused on enhancing prison health services and they have done a good job at clearly articulating why attending this conference is important to them, and what they hope to learn.
- Average (score 3) – The person is doing work focused on enhancing prison health services but they could have done a better job clearly highlighting why attending this conference is important to them/what they hope to learn.
- Below average (score 2) – It is not clear how much work this person is doing with respect to enhancing prison health services, and they have could have done a better job clearly highlighting why attending this conference is important to them/what they hope to learn.
- Poor (score 1) – The person did not do a good job at clearly highlighting their role in their organization and what they are specifically doing to enhance prison health services. They did not do a very good job at clearly indicating why attending this conference is important to them/what they hope to learn.
3). Provide a brief outline, including examples, of how you will transfer the knowledge you learn at the conference and prisons workshop to your community (score 1-5)? (Maximum 500 words)
- Very good (score 5) – The applicant has clearly highlighted an innovative plan for the sharing of information and knowledge. They have provided concrete examples of how they will share conference learnings with their community.
- Good (score 4) – The applicant has highlighted a plan for the sharing of information and knowledge. They have provided an example of how they will share conference learnings with their community.
- Average (score 3) – The applicant has suggested some ways that they will share information with their community but provide little detail or any concrete examples for how they will achieve this.
- Below average (score 2) – The person has not really suggested ways that they will share the information with their community, and do not provide details of a plan or any concrete examples for how they will achieve this.
- Poor (score 1) – The applicant has not suggested ways that they will share the information with their community, and do not provide detail or any concrete examples for how they will achieve this.