Data

General Issues
Health
Social Welfare
Location
Ottawa
Ontario
Canada
Scope of Influence
National
Files
Final Report
Links
Citizens’ Reference Panel on Pharmacare in Canada
Start Date
End Date
Ongoing
No
Time Limited or Repeated?
A single, defined period of time
Purpose/Goal
Make, influence, or challenge decisions of government and public bodies
Approach
Consultation
Research
Spectrum of Public Participation
Consult
Total Number of Participants
35
Open to All or Limited to Some?
Limited to Only Some Groups or Individuals
Recruitment Method for Limited Subset of Population
stratified
General Types of Methods
Deliberative and dialogic process
General Types of Tools/Techniques
Facilitate dialogue, discussion, and/or deliberation
Facilitate decision-making
Specific Methods, Tools & Techniques
Citizens' Reference Panel
Civic Lottery
Sortition
Deliberation
Multi-criteria Decision Analysis
Legality
Yes
Facilitators
Yes
Facilitator Training
Professional Facilitators
Face-to-Face, Online, or Both
Face-to-Face
Types of Interaction Among Participants
Discussion, Dialogue, or Deliberation
Ask & Answer Questions
Information & Learning Resources
Expert Presentations
Decision Methods
General Agreement/Consensus
Communication of Insights & Outcomes
Public Report
Primary Organizer/Manager
MASS LBP
Type of Organizer/Manager
For-Profit Business
Non-Governmental Organization
Academic Institution
Funder
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Type of Funder
Academic Institution
Staff
Yes
Volunteers
No

CASE

Citizens’ Reference Panel on Pharmacare in Canada

First Submitted By Scott Fletcher, Participedia Team

Most Recent Changes By Scott Fletcher, Participedia Team

General Issues
Health
Social Welfare
Location
Ottawa
Ontario
Canada
Scope of Influence
National
Files
Final Report
Links
Citizens’ Reference Panel on Pharmacare in Canada
Start Date
End Date
Ongoing
No
Time Limited or Repeated?
A single, defined period of time
Purpose/Goal
Make, influence, or challenge decisions of government and public bodies
Approach
Consultation
Research
Spectrum of Public Participation
Consult
Total Number of Participants
35
Open to All or Limited to Some?
Limited to Only Some Groups or Individuals
Recruitment Method for Limited Subset of Population
stratified
General Types of Methods
Deliberative and dialogic process
General Types of Tools/Techniques
Facilitate dialogue, discussion, and/or deliberation
Facilitate decision-making
Specific Methods, Tools & Techniques
Citizens' Reference Panel
Civic Lottery
Sortition
Deliberation
Multi-criteria Decision Analysis
Legality
Yes
Facilitators
Yes
Facilitator Training
Professional Facilitators
Face-to-Face, Online, or Both
Face-to-Face
Types of Interaction Among Participants
Discussion, Dialogue, or Deliberation
Ask & Answer Questions
Information & Learning Resources
Expert Presentations
Decision Methods
General Agreement/Consensus
Communication of Insights & Outcomes
Public Report
Primary Organizer/Manager
MASS LBP
Type of Organizer/Manager
For-Profit Business
Non-Governmental Organization
Academic Institution
Funder
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Type of Funder
Academic Institution
Staff
Yes
Volunteers
No

A four day deliberative event on drug funding in Canada.


Note: the following entry is a stub. Please help us complete it.


Problems and Purpose

A Citizens' Reference Panel was convened by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research to review provincial and federal policies on drug coverage and to consider alternative funding models to improve access to pharmaceuticals. The panel was tasked with issuing a public report with its recommendations to be shared with the federal health minister and her provincial and territorial counterparts.[1]

Background History and Context

Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities

Participant Recruitment and Selection

10,000 invitations were sent, out of which 35 participants were selected using a Civic Lottery (stratified random sampling).[2]

Methods and Tools Used

What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation

Influence, Outcomes, and Effects

Analysis and Lessons Learned

See Also

Reference Panels

References

[1] Claudia Chwalisz, The People's Verdict: Adding Informed Citizen Voices to Public Decision-Making (London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2017), 82. Available at https://www.sipotra.it/old/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/THE-PEOPLE’-S-VERDICT.pdf

[2] Chwalisz, The People's Verdict, 82.

External Links

Official site: https://www.crppc-gccamp.ca/

Notes