Inside the Judging Room
How We Judge
Most award programmes don't tell you how they judge. We will. Full transparency on how TOYP 2026 winners are chosen.
Five Criteria
The Judging Framework
Every nominee — regardless of category — is evaluated against five universal criteria. Together they ensure a rigorous, fair assessment across wildly different fields of achievement.
C1
Impact & Outcomes
What measurably changed because of this person? Judges evaluate the breadth, depth, and durability of real-world outcomes — not intentions or plans.
Strong (7–8)
Benefited 1,000–9,999 people with documented evidence from a credible source.
Outstanding (9–10)
Benefited 10,000+ people OR transformational impact on 1,000+ people, verified by a third party.
Common Misconception
Self-reported numbers without third-party corroboration score one band lower. Judges need external proof.
C2
Leadership & Initiative
Would this have happened without them? Judges look for evidence that the nominee initiated, drove, and sustained the work — not just participated in it.
Strong (7–8)
Led a team, navigated obstacles, and delivered results in a challenging context.
Outstanding (9–10)
Built something from zero, overcame documented significant resistance, or created a new field.
Common Misconception
Job title and seniority are NOT evidence of leadership. Judges look at what you actually did, not your rank.
C3
Innovation & Originality
Is there something genuinely new here? Judges distinguish between doing something well (execution) and doing something that did not previously exist (innovation).
Strong (7–8)
Solved a problem others failed to solve, or adapted a solution to a new context.
Outstanding (9–10)
Created something that did not previously exist, now adopted by at least one independent entity.
Common Misconception
Doing something well is not innovation. But adapting something that worked elsewhere to solve Singapore's specific problem might be.
C4
Sustainability & Legacy
Does the impact continue beyond the nominee? Judges evaluate whether structures, systems, or successors are in place to carry the work forward.
Strong (7–8)
Structures operating independently for 1–3 years with clear documentation.
Outstanding (9–10)
3+ years of independent operation with a named successor and institutional continuity.
Common Misconception
Future intentions don't score. Judges only evaluate what has already been built, institutionalised, or handed to a successor.
C5
Inspiration & Role Modelling
Has this person demonstrably inspired others to act? Judges look for named individuals whose behaviour changed as a direct result of the nominee's example.
Strong (7–8)
Evidence that multiple people changed their behaviour or career path because of the nominee.
Outstanding (9–10)
Named individuals who publicly credit the nominee as the reason they took action, with documented evidence.
Common Misconception
Popularity and media coverage are not evidence of inspiration. Judges look for named individuals who changed their behaviour because of you.
Key Principles
Blind Review Policy
Judges assess only what is written in the nomination form.
They may not consider employer, school, wealth, gender, race, religion, social media presence, or JCI connections.
Social media following does NOT influence scoring — by written policy.
Judges must recuse themselves if they personally know the nominee.
JCI Singapore reserves the right to independently verify all information.
Ready to Apply?
Nominate a Changemaker
Now that you know how we judge, nominate someone who meets the standard — or apply yourself.
Nominations close · 31 May 2026