Frequently asked questions

Q. Can you advise on how to balance the entry narrative across the four criteria? Are the criteria equally weighted in the assessment scoring?

A. It is important to ensure that an entry narrative supports all four of the Prizes’ criteria. All are equally weighted in the scoring process.

Q. In order to be able to verify the benefits of the work in society, should the entry narrative have specific pointers to guide assessors in verifying what has been achieved?

A. In addition to quantitative and qualitative evidence of the positive and beneficial impact of the work, it can be useful, especially if the subject matter may be considered less ‘tangible’, for the entry to include references which signpost outside partnerships and organisations who can provide further comments on the quality and impact of the work.

Q. Is there a preferred format for the entry?

A. As per entry guidelines, an entry narrative should be no more than 10 A4 pages in length. The design format is left flexible and a standard Word document is acceptable, with the majority of entries in this format. Some institutions choose to submit a more design based publication. This is equally acceptable but not necessary. The most important focus of any entry, regardless of style, should be the extent to which the narrative and evidence submitted meets each of the criteria on which the Prizes are judged. Entries may include relevant illustrations or figures/tables that add to understanding of the work.  

Q. The guidance asks that the institution be referred to without naming it. Would that apply also to a high-profile Centre within it?

A. The aim of this guidance is to help reviewers to take a more neutral and independent approach. It is accepted that certain fields of work, particularly the more specialised, may be readily identified with a particular institution and if the work is being done by a named centre there is no objection to its formal title being named (but without the name of the host institution).

Q. How far back in time should the narrative go, in terms of long-established track record versus more recent work?

A. It is important that an entry should establish its track record as an overall context, but it is not necessary to describe its history in detail over decades. Reviewers will be interested in what has been happening in the last few years up to and including the present, the future sustainability of the work and where it is going.

Q. Should references or testimonials be included in the narrative, to point reviewers towards particular contacts?

A. References in the text of the narrative which clarify external partnerships or collaborations central to the work are helpful to reviewers.  Individual letters of reference should not be submitted or attached to an entry. As part of the assessment process, the Trust will itself seek opinion of the standing and impact of the work from national or international sources knowledgeable about the field of the entry.

Q. Is the second stage set of independent, external reviewers (by Readers) part of the technical review or separate?

A. It is separate. All entries are extensively reviewed over a six month period, first by our Readers panel of independent expert assessors (with each entry looked at by two specialists and one generalist). Where there is evidence of the Prizes criteria being sufficiently addressed, entries are referred on to specialist and technical sources before a longlist is passed on for review by our Further Education and Higher Education Panels and then finally the Awards Council who agree a shortlist to be shared with No.10 and then on to the King for approval. All reviewers are asked to consider carefully the extent to which entries meet each of the Prizes scheme criteria:

• Quality and Excellence
• Innovation and Distinctiveness
• Impact and benefit to the university or college
• Impact and benefit to the wider world

Q. If an entry is sent in before the deadline is it read sooner by reviewers and thereby given more time for review?

A. No. Assessment commences for all entries after the closing date.

Q. How many entries does the Trust normally receive in a Prizes round?

A. On average, 100+ entries are received each Round and an average of twenty-one Prizes are awarded.

Q. The criteria say that the awards are not for small groups or individuals. Can you give a bit more guidance?

A. The group of colleagues leading the work may be of any size. However, the entry must come from the institution (or the legal lead institution where there is a partnership) and be endorsed by its head. The Prize is unique in that it recognises the institution, rather than a specific individual or group. 

Q. If staff have already received personal recognition by a national honour such as an OBE would this be an advantage, a disadvantage or irrelevant?

A. Receipt of a national honour by a staff member as an individual is not relevant. The entry will be judged solely against the set criteria.

Q. How important are the subject categories in which the awards are made, or are the Prizes allocated to categories after being decided?

A. There are no pre-determined or set subject categories or ‘quotas.’ Entries are encouraged from any area, provided they meet the four Prizes criteria. Prize-winning subjects are classified solely for transparency purposes after the awards have been granted.

Q. Can an entry be for a project that benefited or transformed the whole institution, rather than a particular department?

A. Yes it can. All entries are submitted in the name of the institution as a whole and Prizes are awarded to the institution as a whole and not to particular departments, groups or individuals (irrespective of the source of the work submitted).

Q. How often are unsuccessful entries reworked successfully in a later round?

A. Occasionally an area of work registers enough substantive and qualitative change in the period following an unsuccessful entry to achieve recognition.

Q. Do higher education and further education entries stand an equal chance of winning a Prize?

A. Yes. Institutions of higher and further education have an equal and open opportunity to enter the scheme, and there have been many winners from both categories during the history of the scheme.