!!Who will do the job?

Let us estimate the work load of a certification process for META-Ts and META-MTs as sketched in the proposal above. Per year at least 1 META-MT and 2 META-Ts have to be certified - just to keep IMMA's status stagnating as is.

For each META-MT 100 client cases need to be reviewed, for each META-T 50 client cases. This means a minimum of 200 client cases to be reviewed per year. Estimated time for a quality review at least 15 minutes per case, this means at least 50 working hours for one or more reviewers.

!!!Scenario 1: Certification Committee

The natural solution for a Non Profit Organization: Competent volunteers - authorized by the BoD - do the job for free or a formal minimal compensation. In practice the Certification Committee has already several applications for META-MPEs pending since months - waiting for the Committee members to give feedback. How to make this a smoothly working solution?

!!!Scenario 2: Outsourcing of the review

There might be some MTs willing to do the job when reasonably paid. Let's say 50 USD per hour. So IMMA would spend 2 500 USD to get 200 client cases reviewed for 1 META-MT candidate and 2 META-T candidates per year. 2 500 USD is more than 10% of IMMA's revenues.

IMMA's Articles of Incorporation say that the corporation is not organized for the private gain of any person. As the circle of potential reviewers is limited to nowadays ca. 30 META-MTs the conflict with IMMA's non profit status is obvious.

Any ideas for a workaround which would be both legal and transparent?

!!!Scenario 3: Review by META-Health researchers

In general a database with client cases is a fascinating resource to do research. And research includes naturally also the review of client cases.  So what could be the drivers for a META-Health researcher?

a.) personal enthusiasm 
b.) official status as META-R (a new line?)
c.) economic advantage (e.g. producing META-Health media for the public)

a.) and b.) are typical non material drivers well known from open source communities. Regarding c.) IMMA would be able to support the work economically within the framework of public benefit. 

Regarding a new META-Health research line we're in fact starting from zero (although research is a specific purpose of IMMA since 2004). Any ideas regarding the development of META-Health research?

__What's your opinion? Who will do the job of reviewing at least 200 client cases per year on META-MT / META-T level as proposed in the new standards?__