Define the result
Consult educators and communities. Establish baselines, accessible participation, local permissions and a preregistered evaluation plan.
Proposed responsibility: Program lead + independent evaluatorThe proposed follow-through model connects verification, practical support and adoption. An award is a beginning; the public record should show what happens next.
Staff, partners, support amounts and reporting resources must be appointed, approved and funded. No program outcomes are represented as achieved.
Consult educators and communities. Establish baselines, accessible participation, local permissions and a preregistered evaluation plan.
Proposed responsibility: Program lead + independent evaluatorProvide agreed participant support, independent verification and a confidential safeguarding route. Record costs and adverse findings.
Proposed responsibility: Delivery team + safeguarding leadPublish the approved citation, contributors, evidence, limitations and reasons for recognition. Distinguish awards from support grants.
Proposed responsibility: Independent prize committeeDevelop educator training, implementation guidance, total-cost evidence and replication agreements with confirmed partners.
Proposed responsibility: Adoption lead + delivery partnersExamine retention, reach, cost, distribution of benefit and unintended consequences. Publish verified findings and corrections.
Proposed responsibility: Independent evaluator + governing authorityBaseline, comparison, observed change, uncertainty and durability of the result.
Educator use, replication, accessibility and who is reached—or left behind.
Full delivery costs, resource requirements, adverse effects and limits of the evidence.
No approved outcome records have been published. Proposed targets, attendance and publicity are not presented as demonstrated impact.