[1]

Both applications look appealing in all aspects.  However, I vote for the Spanish bid for the location being close to most of the participants worldwide.

[2]

The advantages of Madrid for WL5:

travel convenience

cultural attractions in the city

well planned out funding from corporate sources

NGOs within Madrid plan to participate (WHO, Leish organization)

Advantages for Porto Gallinhas, Brazil for WL5:

Brazillian Leish infrastructure and coordination

Comparatively smaller site may allow for more peri-conference interaction on site

Relaxing beach setting

[3]

Although both Brazil and Spain are very attractive spots to organize a conference on leishmaniasis like WL5, I prefer it to happen in Brazil for the following reason:

Strong points for Brazil seem to be the following:

-        Leishmaniasis is a major disease in Brazil and thus Brazil has a larger cadre of scientists who are engaged in basic and translational research on leishmaniasis. Research on leishmaniasis is thus considered as mainstream in this country by the scientists and common population.

-        Proposed venue of the meeting is in the Northwest region of Brazil where leishmaniasis is prevalent and thus a meeting on leishmaniasis is much more meaningful and relevant to the indigenous people in this region (not considered as a neglected disease!).

-        The proposed dates for the meeting (middle of May as opposed to April proposed by Spain group) is much more suitable for international scientists who have other assignments such as teaching and grant writing etc. to attend although it is not clear what will be the expected weather in that region at that time.

-        The net expenses for the individual scientist to attend this meeting seem to be less as compared to that in Spain.

-        Meeting facilities and lodging seem to be very comparable between Spain and Brazil.

Weak points for Brazil seem to be the following:

-        The committee appears to be less organized than the Spanish committee.

-        The planning of the agenda is yet to be developed for the Brazilian group.

-        Ambiguity about travel funds and scholarships for students and fellows to attend this meeting.

-        Apparent ambiguity to identify definite funding resources to run this meeting by the Brazilian team.

-        Tourist facilities seem to be more attractive in Spain!

[4]

I think the better choice will be Madrid Spain. The major reason is this will be more centrally located making it easier and less expensive for travel from Europe, Middle East, Asia and Africa.

The overall cost for accommodation and meals will also likely be less expensive in Madrid.

Leishtrop in Madrid will likely be a major player in control of leishmaniasis world wide and this will be a good opportunity to have close interaction with the leishmania community.

Bottomline: There will be greater participation if the meeting is held in Madrid.

[5]

First of all, after careful analysis of both “bid”, I am for the Brazilian one.

About the places, both are very attractive destination, on one side a site and country (Brazil) where Leishmania is highly present and endemic, and on the side, where Leishmania have a great importance in regards to HIV/Leishmania, but this situation is very well under controlled and patients with both infections highly reduced in the last 10-15 years. Nevertheless, great sciences are performed in both countries.

But the site proposed by the Brazilian for the meeting will permit a better interaction with all the participants. Being in a localized area all day long will favor discussion and intellectual exchanges between colleagues. Whereas in Madrid, being in a big European city and having the meeting in a big congress building will render interaction a bit less attractive, as also people will have to move from their hotels in different parts of the city to reach the congress site… So I feel that potentially this will affect interaction and less direct participation of the scientists. In addition, it is clear that if the meeting is in Brazil, the greatest community from South America will come to that meeting. Already, Brazil per se will see a great number of young grad and postdoctoral trainees coming to the meeting. Whereas, this part of the world may be less keen to go to Spain, and may only attract main investigators over there.

In addition, it is clear that North American will also easily participate to the Brazilian meeting, and around the same could also goes to Spain. About European countries, they will for sure go to any of these destinations, but knowing European, they may favor Brazil. Scientists from India could be equally attracted by both destinations. Whereas, Australian and other Asian Countries will more easily reach Brazil then Spain. In the past, WorldLeish meeting has been hosted 3 out of 4 time by an European countries, and therefore selecting a more tropical area where Leishmania is greatly present such as Brazil, and where the scientific community is highly active in this field render this destination more logical. Also the Brazilian organizers have been quite active over the last few years to show their interest to organize the next WorldLeish meeting.

[6]

The places and infrastructures proposed by both candidates are extremely different but will probably be equally able to provide full support for a congress of the size of WL5.

As it is a beach resort, the place in Brazil may appear as less 'guaranteed' than the Palacio de Congressos in Madrid. However, the WL organized in Sicily was perfect and it also was a beach resort. Moreover, such a place may prove highly attractive for the public of WL. Room available in Brazil is reported to be for 1200 people but the resort website says 2500; that in Spain is for 1900. This should be taken into account in the final decision. The halls for poster presentations are not detailed by Brazil. The time-frame is detailed by the Spanish candidate but not by the Brazilian one.

Local organizers both comprise a high number of 'leishmaniac' scientists. The Spanish candidate expects to lend on a national association dedicated to the leishmaniases, as well as on a national Network of Institutes of Research in Tropical Diseases (RICET), which may prove to be efficient. However, the Brazilian candidate has not specified on which type of organization this would lend on. The Spanish candidate has also added a list of 'officials' that may contribute to the high standing of the event locally but not to the real objectives here, which are to organize a coherent and dynamic scientific event.

The rationale is well developed by both candidates. However, there is no doubt that this point is the major point that makes the difference between both: Brazil has indeed a very high endemicity of all forms of leishmaniases, a very long history of study of the disease and a very large community of scientists dedicated to the matter.

The registration fees are clearly more expensive in Spain than in Brazil, which is a plus for Brazil. On the other hand, the travel fees will be more expensive for Europeans to go to Brazil, but one may think that European labs may afford more expenses than South-American labs (?) (Editor’s note: This is not true). The time-frame, schedules and agenda are better detailed by the Spanish candidate than by the Brazilian one.

A clear plan of student grant requests is announced by the Spanish candidate but this remains vague from the Brazilian one.

Lodging is much easier in Brazil than in Madrid as it is all on one site, but this may prove more expensive for a category of attendants (e.g. students). A special price should perhaps be negotiated with the resort for the whole congress or for students only. It is unclear at which distance the other hotels which are cited remain from the resort where the congress will take place.

The excursion foreseen by the Brazilian candidate is not appealing, but the Spanish one does not cite any. By contrast, both organizers present highly attractive pre- and post-conference tours, although in extremely different styles (beaches versus museums…).

In total, my inclination would go to Brazil, partly because of the fact that all previous WL congresses have been organized in the Old World, and because the organization of WL5 in Brazil would allow a wide fraction of the South-American community to attend. However, the Brazilian candidate should specify a number of issues insufficiently detailed in their document (see above).

[7]

The two major strengths of the Brazilian Proposal are:

1. The strength of the organizing team: the local organizers listed as well as the individuals who will likely be included in the national scientific committee have a track record of organizing successful meetings that are well attended by international participants. In their proposal, they list several international conferences on Tropical disease related topics that have taken place in Recife. Although the Organizers from Spain are well respected scientists, they have created a new association that would not have been around for long enough before the meeting

2. The venue: A desirable meeting venue is one that offers a relaxed setting that facilitates interactions amongst participants. The descriptions of the Porto de Galinhas Beach conference venue suggest that it is just sufficiently remote to discourage straying from the meeting site but comfortable enough for relaxed interactions. The Madrid venue is undoubtedly comfortable and replete with desirable creature comforts; however, its location in the center of Madrid, surrounded by numerous distractions might provide little deterrent for conference participants to stray away from the meeting venue. 

Given that the estimated number of participants is approximately 1000, both venues have at least one meeting hall that can accommodate more than 1000 attendants.

[8]

Both proposals are highly qualified, sufficient and adequate experiences exist and sophisticated organizers are involved. Both countries have almost similar experiences on clinical management of leishmaniasis as well as leading research projects.

Comparing the Brazil with Spain's proposal, the following advantages are in favor of Spain:

• For most of the leishmaniasis endemic countries, Porto de Galinhas beach is too far in contrast to Madrid, considering air fare ticket and time duration. In addition, an extra transportation is needed for transferring from International airport of Recife to Porto de Galinhas beach. In the case of Madrid, it is more feasible, economical and shorter time needed to reach.

• In Spain's proposal, travel grants are allocated for 60 students which are highly important for developing countries.

• There are some beneficial points in the Brazil's proposal:

1.      Registration fees for Post Docs, similar to Technicians and student: this is important for your researchers.

2.      Facilities to pay cash in the meeting: some countries have difficulties to transfer the payment as well as having the credit card.

It is highly recommended that these two issues be included in Spain's proposal.

[9]

I will vote for Brazil, but with a rider that organizer should strive to allocate some fund as travel grants for students and invited speakers from developing countries.

Brazil will have major participation from most of the Latin American countries and north Americas. Participation from Europe may also be expected. However, my concerns are that, considering the constraints of organizers in raising funds, they have not made any commitment to provide travel grants to the faculty and students. In such a situation, many willing participants may not be able to travel so far on their own until some funding agency agrees to extend travel support. Though, those who can get travel grant will surely prefer to explore Latin Americas as a rare destination. Spain is a central place for all continents and subcontinents with easy air/ train connections. Also the organizers have claimed travel support to students from developing countries through European commission and other funding agencies. Nevertheless, European region has already hosted 3 Worldleish conferences, Asia has had one but Latin America has not yet hosted any such conference so far.

[10]

Both prepare the applications nicely. I feel their strong enthusiasm to organize WL5.The most important factor to evaluate applications for me is the “timing”. Early April is most suitable.

[11]

Latin America is widely endemic for leishmaniases, and holding WL in Brazil, for the first time in South America, has an important meaning.

[12]

My recommendation is that Worldleish5 be held in Brazil. This is based on the following evaluations:

[1] Place and approximate dates for a period of 4-5 days. Of the four previous Worldleish meetings, three have been held in Europe and one in Asia. There is a strong argument in favour of hosting the next meeting in Latin America given the global distribution of leishmaniacs. Approximate dates are similar.

[2] Local organizer(s). Both teams are very strong. No significant difference.

[3] Brief statement of rationale. Leishmaniasis is of clear relevance to both potential host countries, but in my view of greater public health significance in Brazil than in Spain.

[4] Management-Science. More detail provided in Spain proposal but it can be expected that similar will be provided by Brazil. Conference facilities slightly better in Spain. Overall no significant difference.

[5] Pre-meeting & meeting logistics. Registration fees for Brazil slightly less. Overall no significant difference.

[6] Financial sources & budget. Spain bid has more financial details for student support, although no reason to doubt that similar could be provided by Brazil. Overall no significant difference.

[7] Traveling/lodging/other services. Similar in most aspects. Transport links from the nearest airport to Madrid are better than to Porto de Galinhas, but should not be a problem in Brazil if, for example, coaches are organised for collection of participants. However, a major advantage of Brazil is that the meeting could be held in the hotel where most participants would be staying, as compared to a separate conference centre and many local hotels in Madrid (even if they are close). The opportunity for informal meetings with colleagues over breakfast, lunch and dinner, and in the evenings, as well as the opportunity to easily return to your room during the course of the day are significant positive factors. The general environment is also better – good outside space for meeting and relaxing. Clearly it is possible to host a meeting using a separate conference centre, and this is the model used by the very large congresses. However, the Worldleish conferences are medium sized meetings, so it is still possible to hold these meetings on a single site. If this can be achieved it is a major advantage to promoting scientific discussion and exchange. In my view this is of equal if not more importance than the formal presentations.

Conclusion. Overall the two bids are quite similar in most aspects. Spain has some marginal advantages in certain areas, but Brazil is significantly better against criteria 1, 3 and 7. Therefore, I am supporting the bid from Brazil. However, it is clear that the Spain bid is fully viable and a successful meeting can be hosted in Madrid if the majority of opinion favours that option.