Policy for Reporting on Awardees and Minimum Nominee Criteria

Here’s what you can read from this page:

1. 1. Reporting Facility for Concerns About Awardees
2. 2. Minimum Basic Criteria for Nominees
3. 3. Enforcement and Feedback Mechanism
4. 4. Reporting Form

The following policies apply to all nominees for awards administered by The World’s Best Awards. These must be read along with all other policies, terms, and conditions related to the awards including the following:

• Disclaimer
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service
• About The World’s Best Awards
• About The World’s Best Book Awards
• Policy for Reporting on Awardees and Minimum Nominee Criteria
• General Award Nomination Policies
• AI Usage Policy for Awards

1. Reporting Facility for Concerns About Awardees

To ensure the integrity of our awards and the values we uphold, we provide a reporting mechanism for individuals and organizations to raise concerns about awardees. The following guidelines govern this facility:

1.1 Submission Process

• Reports can be submitted through our online platform via a designated form at the bottom of this page.
• Submissions must include detailed information, including:
  • The nature of the concern.
  • Supporting evidence or references.
  • Reporter’s contact details (optional but recommended for follow-up).

1.3 Review Procedure

• The report will be forwarded to at least three (3) neutral, randomly picked people who will assess the report impartially and thoroughly, relying on documented evidence and verifiable facts.
• If the three (3) assessors determine that the reported breach warrants action, then the awardee will be removed from the official list of winners. This decision will be final and binding.
• However, if at least one (1) of the assessors did not find the reported breach as warranting action, the report will be dismissed and no further action will be taken on the awardee’s award.

1.4 Notification and Communication

• An automated notification will inform the awardee of the retraction, without detailing the rationale.
• If nominees opt to pay a once-off upfront fee of 10,000 Australian dollars at the time of their nomination, they will be entitled to a detailed explanation of any retraction. However, payment of this fee does not influence the neutrality of the review process.
• By paying the fee, nominees also agree to absolve and free The World’s Best Awards, The World’s Best Magazine, the awards judges, and all involved parties from any legal, financial, administrative, or other claims or complaints related to the award process or decisions.

1.5 Transparency and Confidentiality

• All reports will be treated confidentially to protect the integrity of the process and the privacy of reporters and awardees.
• While we strive to protect the anonymity of reporters, it cannot be guaranteed in cases where disclosure is required by law, court order, or similar procedural obligations, particularly in matters involving public safety or order. In such instances, we will disclose only the necessary information and inform the reporter beforehand where feasible.

1.6 Appeals and Reviews

• Decisions made by the review committee are final and cannot be appealed.
• To maintain the neutrality and efficiency of the process, no further engagement with the reporter or awardee regarding the decision will occur unless explicitly stated under the terms of the nomination.

2. Minimum Basic Criteria for Nominees

Nominees must meet the following minimum criteria to ensure they reflect the values of our awards:

2.1 Ethical Standards

• Compliance with Laws and Regulations: Nominees must not have ongoing violations of laws or industry regulations related to their work.
• Social Responsibility: Demonstrate adherence to ethical practices, including respect for human rights, diversity, and inclusivity.
• Environmental Sustainability: Show commitment to reducing environmental impact, where applicable.
• No Significant Unresolved Public Controversies: Nominees with unresolved ethical concerns may be excluded unless evidence of corrective action is provided.

2.2 Achievement-Driven Standards

• Alignment with Award Goals: Contributions must align with the purpose of the award (e.g., advancing innovation, addressing global challenges, promoting social good).
• Demonstrable Impact: Provide measurable outcomes or evidence of positive contributions (e.g., peer-reviewed publications, policy changes, adoption of solutions by communities).
• Innovation and Leadership: Showcase originality, leadership, or a transformative approach in their field relevant to the award category nominated for.

2.3 Transparency

• Clear Reporting of Achievements: Nominees must submit a concise summary of their work, methodologies, and outcomes.
• Acknowledgment of Collaborations: Recognize partnerships and shared efforts where applicable.

3. Enforcement and Feedback Mechanism

• Nominees and awardees are encouraged to self-report any significant changes in their ethical or professional status.
• Feedback from the public, nominees, and experts will be periodically reviewed to refine these policies.

By establishing these policies, we aim to uphold the highest standards of fairness, transparency, and accountability while celebrating exemplary achievements.

4. Reporting Form

Do you think one of our awardees does not deserve the award they received? Let us know by completing the form below.