Awards

The M B Shapiro Award is a late-career award for clinical psychologists who have achieved eminence in the profession. The award is given in honour of the late M B Shapiro.

Cut-off criterion:

• Nominees and candidates must be full members of the DCP

Criteria

1. Outstanding and widely recognised contribution to the development of Clinical Psychology.
2. Significant impact on the knowledge, policy and/or practice of clinical psychology.
3. Significant innovation in developing clinical psychological knowledge, policy and/or practice, in clinical psychology.
4. Significant leadership/management involvement and influence with at least two of the following, professional bodies/governmental bodies/service delivery organisations/higher education institutions in the development of clinical psychology.

Evidence of whether these criteria are met may include some or all, of the following:

• High number of research and/or professional and/or policy publications in high-quality outputs which have a significant impact,
• Providing leadership and management involvement and influence that has enhanced the development of clinical psychology normally in at least two of the following organisational contexts, professional bodies/government bodies/service delivery organisations/higher education institutions.
• A significant contribution to challenging social inequalities through management, practice, or research, working to improve access and inclusivity for marginalised communities,
• Other forms of dissemination, e.g., book authoring, policy and guidance documents, keynote, or invited conference presentations,
• Applying for and securing funding that leads to work which advances psychological knowledge and practice.

This evidence should be supported by the online application, CV and comments by the referees.

How to apply

Submit your nomination

Please note:

• Nominees and candidates must be Full Members of the DCP.
• Candidates can self-nominate.
• Nominees should be made aware that their names have been put forward.
• In the absence of any nominees being forthcoming, committee members reserve the right to make nominations themselves.

Referees:

• As part of the decision-making process, two referees (names and contact details) of good standing should be put forward by the nominee or candidate. This will help the Awards Committee evaluate the nominee's contribution to the profession and whether they are of good standing.
• In addition to the two referees provided, the committee will choose another referee with expertise relevant to the work of each candidate.
• Referees who work with nominees - or for the same organisation – should not usually be put forward and, in the event of seeking a third referee, will usually not be approached by DCP.

Individual DCP Executive Committee members will not be approached as referees for candidates.

The May Davidson Award is defined as an award for clinical psychologists who have made an outstanding contribution to the development of clinical psychology within the first 10 years of their work as a qualified clinical psychologist.

This award is given in honour of the late May Davidson.

Cut-off criteria:

Completed less than 10 years (full-time or equivalent) since qualification as a Clinical Psychologist.

Consideration will be mainly given to work undertaken by candidates during and just after their clinical training, although work carried out prior to their training may be taken into account.

Nominees and candidates must be full members of the DCP.

Criteria

1. Strong contribution to the development of clinical psychology and recognition for that contribution in their field of work.
2. Significant impact on the knowledge, policy and/or practice of clinical psychology in their field of work.
3. Significant innovation in developing clinical psychological knowledge, policy and/or practice of clinical psychology in their field of work.
4. Good level of involvement and influence normally in at least two of the following organisational contexts: organisational contexts, professional bodies/government bodies/service delivery organisations/higher education institutions.

Evidence may include some or all, of the following:

• In applying these criteria, consideration is made of the nominee's field in terms of the ease or difficulty of making an impact,
• Engagement and influence in professional, government, service, and educational bodies regarding policy advice, and/or practice guidance, and or service delivery.
• A significant impact (adoption of suggested developments) in their field of work.
• Significant innovation (work that is curiosity-led and creative) in their field of work.
• A significant contribution to challenging social inequalities through management practice or research, working to improve access and inclusivity for marginalised communities,
• Research/Professional publications in good quality journals many of which as first authors,
• Other forms of dissemination, e.g., book authoring, policy and guidance documents, conference presentations,
• Applying for and securing funding that leads to work which advances psychological knowledge and practice.
• Receipt of early/mid-career awards and/or other indicators of recognition.

This evidence should be supported by the application, CV, and comments by the referees.

How to apply

Submit your nomination

Please note:

• Nominees and candidates must be Full Members of the DCP.
• Candidates can self-nominate.
• Nominees, if not self-nominated, should be aware that their names have been put forward.
• In the absence of any nominees being forthcoming, committee members reserve the right to make nominations themselves.
• Referees who work with nominees - or for the same organisation – should not usually be put forward and, in the event of seeking a third referee, will usually not be approached by DCP.

Referees

• As part of the decision-making process, two referees (names and contact details) of good standing should be put forward by the nominee or candidate. This will help the Awards Committee evaluate the nominee's contribution to the profession and whether they are of good standing.
• In addition to the two referees provided, the committee will choose another referee with expertise relevant to the work of the candidate.
• Referees who work with nominees - or for the same organisation – should not usually be put forward and, in the event of seeking a third referee, will usually not be approached by DCP.

Cut-off criteria:

Nominees should either be close to completing accredited training as a Clinical Psychologist or have recently qualified (within two years) at the time of nomination.

Nominations should refer to research work carried out by a trainee during their clinical training usually as part of completing coursework (usually a thesis).

Much of the work should have been carried out by the nominee although it is expected that at this career stage supervisor input would have played an important role.

Candidates must have applied to join the DCP by the time of an application being submitted.

Criteria

The quality and/or impact of the research should be regarded in one or more of the following ways:

• the research has achieved publication in one or more recognised peer-reviewed journals,
• the research makes an original contribution to either theory or method,
• the research has the potential to have an impact on participating or relevant NHS service/s, charities, or the wider population/area that formed the focus of the work,
• the research demonstrated the significant involvement of Experts by Experience,
• the research has been presented at conferences and has attracted positive social media and/or media attention,
• the work has been used or has the potential to be used to inform policy or professional practice as relevant to clinical psychology,
• the work is an exemplar of contemporary scientific practice shown through its rigour and adherence to open science practices.

How to apply:

Submit your nomination

Supporting evidence to be supplied:

• A supporting statement from the research supervisor and a senior member of the training programme where the nominee is a trainee.
• A one-page summary including reasons for nomination
• Any publications or presentations relating to the thesis, or those planned.

Please note:

• The originality of the work, and how much of the work has been done by the nominee - although it is expected that at this career stage supervisor input would have played an important role.
• Nominees must be Full Members of the DCP.
• Candidates can self-nominate.
• Nominees, if not self-nominated, should be aware that their names have been put forward.
• In the absence of any nominees or candidates being forthcoming, committee members reserve the right to make nominations themselves.
• Referees who work with nominees - or for the same organisation – should not usually be put forward and, in the event of seeking a third referee, will usually not be approached by DCP.

Referees

• As part of the decision-making process, two referees (names and contact details) of good standing, at least one of whom should not be involved in the supervision of the work, should be put forward by the nominee or candidate. This will help the Awards Committee evaluate the nominee's contribution to the profession and whether they are of good standing.
• In addition to the two referees provided, the committee may choose another referee with expertise relevant to the work of the candidate.

Cut-off criteria:

Nominees should either be close to completing accredited training as a Clinical Psychologist or have recently qualified (within two years) at the time of nomination.

Nominations should refer to activities/work carried out by a trainee during their clinical training and may refer to a single high-impact activity or a range of different activities.

Examples of work/activities that might be considered include contribution to the work of professional bodies, service development projects, and work that supports the wellbeing of other members of the society.

The work might span both activities conducted within the geographical area where the training took place or might also involve contribution to professional practice at a national level.

Much of the work should have been carried out by the nominee although it is expected that at this career stage supervisor input would have played an important role.

Candidates must have applied to join the DCP by the time of an application being submitted.

Criteria

The quality and/or impact of the activity/work should be regarded as outstanding in one or more of the following ways:

•  the activities have made a significant or/and original contribution to practice in a designated area,
• the activities have the potential to make a significant contribution to the relevant NHS service/s, charities, or the wider population/area that formed the focus of the work,
• the work/activity has attracted positive social media and/or media attention,
• the work or activities have been published in professional journals or magazines or book chapters,
• the work has been used or has the potential to be used to inform policy or professional practice as relevant to clinical psychology.

How to apply

Submit your nomination

Supporting evidence to be provided:

• A supporting statement from the research supervisor and a senior member of the training programme where the nominee is a trainee.
• A one-page summary including reasons for nomination
• Any publications or presentations relating to the thesis, or those planned

Please note:

• The originality of the work, and how much of the work has been done by the nominee - although it is expected that at this career stage supervisor input would have played an important role.
• Nominees must be Full Members of the DCP.
• Candidates can self-nominate.
• Nominees, if not self-nominated, should be aware that their names have been put forward.
• In the absence of any nominees or candidates being forthcoming, committee members reserve the right to make nominations themselves.
• Referees who work with nominees - or for the same organisation – should not usually be put forward and, in the event of seeking a third referee, will usually not be approached by DCP.

Referees

• As part of the decision-making process, two referees (names and contact details) of good standing, at least one of whom should not be involved in the supervision of the work, should be put forward by the nominee or candidate. This will help the Awards Committee evaluate the nominee's contribution to the profession and whether they are of good standing.
• In addition to the two referees provided, the committee may choose another referee with expertise relevant to the work of the candidate.

M. B. Shapiro Award

• 2023: Dr Andy Tyerman
• 2022: Professor Michael Barkham
• 2021: Professor Pauline Slade
• 2020: Professor Jonathan Evans
• 2018: Annie Mitchell
• 2016: Professor Gillian Hardy
• 2015: Professor Paul Gilbert
• 2014: Professor Barbara Wilson
• 2013: Professor Glynis Murphy
• 2012: Professor Graham Turpin
• 2011: Professor Tony Lavender
• 2010: Professor Elizabeth Kuipers
• 2009: Professor Til Wykes
• 2008: Professor Stephen Morley
• 2007: Professor Nick Tarrier
• 2006: Professor Bob Woods
• 2005: Professor Chris Brewin
• 2004: Professor Dave Hemsley
• 2003: Professor Phillipa Garety
• 2002: Professor Glenys Parry
• 2001: David Shapiro
• 2000: Mary Boyle
• 1999: Mark Williams
• 1998: No Awards Presented
• 1997: John Teasdale
• 1996: Geoff Shepherd
• 1995: Jim Orford
• 1994: Martin Herbert
• 1993: Bill Yule
• 1992: Janet Carr
• 1991: Ed Miller
• 1990: Fraser Watts
• 1989: John  Hall
• 1988: Andrew Mathews
• 1987: Jack Ingham
• 1986: Ralph Maguire
• 1985: Elizabeth Warrington
• 1984: Monte Shapiro

May Davidson Award 

• 2023: Associate Professor Judith Johnson
• 2022: Dr Felicity Waite / Dr Filippo Varese
• 2021: Dr Christopher Taylor
• 2020: Dr Esther Cole
• 2018: Richard Meiser-Stegman
• 2016: Dr Vaughan Bell
• 2015: Dr Kevin Dyer
• 2014: Dr Stephen Weatherhead
• 2013: No award presented
• 2012: Dr Richard Brown
• 2011: Dr Warren Mansell
• 2010: Dr Cathy Creswell
• 2009: Dr Samantha Cartwright-Hatton
• 2008: Dr Daniel Freeman
• 2007: Dr Emily Holmes
• 2006: Dr Willem Kuyken
• 2005: Dr Edward Watkins
• 2004: Dr Linda Clare and Dr Emmanuelle Peters (joint winners)
• 2003: Dr Sunny Kalsy
• 2002: Dr Tony Morrison
• 2001: Dr Jonathan Evans and Dr Peter Kinderman (joint winners)
• 2000: Dr Timothy Dalgleish
• 1999: No Award Presented
• 1998: Dr Gillian Haddock
• 1997: Dr Paul Chadwick
• 1996: Dr Rachel Bryant Waugh
• 1995: Dr Til Wykes
• 1994: No Award Presented
• 1993: Dr Simon Baron-Cohen
• 1992: Dr Michael Barkham
• 1991: No Award Presented
• 1990: Dr Richard Bentall
• 1989: Dr David Clark
• 1988: Dr Louise Wallace
• 1987: Dr Mark Williams
• 1986: Dr Barbara Wilson
• 1985: Bernard Kat

Pre Qualification Award

• 2023: No award
• 2022: Liam Myles
• 2021: Meltem Osman, Homen Chow, Chelsea Church and Kevin Beckles
• 2020: Miss Claire Douglas
• 2016: Jay McNeil
• 2015: Olivia Fakoussa, Lindsay Aikman and Lealah Hewitt (joint winners)
• 2014: Dr Tania Bosqui & Eleanor Hambly (joint winners)
• 2013: No Award Presented
• 2012: Dora Bernardes and Laura Onens (joint winners)
• 2011: Dr Anna Adlam and Dr Jo Daniels (joint winners)
• 2010: Makala Balls

CPF Award (discontinued in 2017)

• 2016: Dr Katrina Scior, Dr Janice Williams and John King (joint winners)
• 2015: Emma Williamson and Kathy Taylor (joint winners)

Trainee Research Excellence Award

• 2023: 2023 Dr Alex Lau-Zhu
• 2022: Gregg Harry Rawlings (previously known as Trainee Research Award - Most Original Thesis) 
• 2020: Serene Hadj Hammou (previously known as Trainee Research Award - Most Original Thesis)