01 · Purpose and award mechanism
The proposed inaugural Moonshot Prize is an inducement challenge: recognize an independently demonstrated advance in foundational learning that is affordable, usable by educators and reproducible in a second setting. It is not a lifetime-achievement honor. Existing evidence may support readiness, but the approved challenge must define the qualifying demonstration period.
Decision required before adoptionApprove the mechanism only after comparing a prize with direct grants and commissioning. Confirm that an unsolved, measurable challenge warrants a competition.
02 · Who may participate
Proposed participation includes educator-led teams, researchers, nonprofits and enterprises able to demonstrate lawful delivery and credible learning evidence. Team resources, nationality, institutional prestige or donor relationships should not substitute for merit. A representative must be authorized to act for the team; children participate only through approved research and safeguarding arrangements.
Decision required before adoptionConfirm eligible jurisdictions, legal eligibility, minimum representative age, team composition and local permissions before entry opens.
03 · The achievement to demonstrate
The working objective is improved reading proficiency over one academic year against a credible comparison, replication in a second setting and retention at six months. Report numeracy, participation, accessibility and full delivery cost separately. The primary measure, minimum meaningful effect, sample size and cost ceiling must be fixed and published before participants enter.
Decision required before adoptionAn independent education and evaluation panel must approve the numeric threshold, measurement instrument, population, baseline and power analysis. None is fixed by this draft.
04 · Evidence and independent verification
Require a preregistered evaluation protocol, documented comparison design, assessment adaptations, data provenance, missing-data and attrition handling, subgroup results and uncertainty. Independent evaluators should reproduce the analysis and inspect delivery. Preserve confidentiality and publish a de-identified evidence summary, including null or adverse findings.
Decision required before adoptionAppoint and fund the evaluator; approve access, verification budget and the protocol before testing begins.
05 · Assessment and decision
The shared four-question intake rubric is a screening aid. The learning challenge adds mandatory gates for valid learning evidence, safeguarding, replicability, educator usability and affordable delivery. Reviewers give written reasons. Scores inform deliberation; they do not automatically select a winner. A designated independent committee records the award recommendation and attribution.
Decision required before adoptionPublish the field-specific rubric, weights if used, threshold rules, quorum, tie procedure and final decision authority before the competition opens.
06 · Independence and conflicts
Funding does not purchase eligibility, finalist status, appointment or favorable review. Reviewers disclose employment, financial, supervisory, family and collaborative interests. A designated independent chair resolves conflicts, records recusals and appoints replacements. Donor relationship information is excluded from scientific review materials.
Decision required before adoptionAdopt conflict definitions, disclosure periods, recusal standards and independent complaints ownership. Do not appoint a donor as a judge of their own supported entry.
07 · Attribution and team contributions
Entries identify the people who made the contribution, collaborators, prior work, funders and relevant intellectual-property interests. Teams explain material contributions and obtain consent before naming individuals publicly. An award citation should recognize the verified work and accurately describe each recipient’s role.
Decision required before adoptionApprove team award-sharing, attribution disputes and posthumous participation rules.
08 · Safeguarding and participant voice
A qualified safeguarding lead reviews recruitment, local authorization, consent and assent, vulnerable participants, reporting channels and stop conditions. Educators and intended beneficiaries participate in assessing usability and benefit. Harm, compromised consent or unreliable evidence may suspend an evaluation.
Decision required before adoptionConfirm independent safeguarding oversight, ethics review where required, reporting response and incident escalation before any child-facing activity.
09 · Intellectual property and data
Proposed default: teams retain background intellectual property. Agree access for independent verification and publication of sufficient methods and results to support scrutiny. Any adoption licence must be explicit. Confidential source material, identifying participant data and commercially sensitive information are not published merely because a team enters.
Decision required before adoptionCounsel and participant representatives must approve entry terms, licensing, privacy, retention and data-sharing arrangements.
10 · Purse and resources
The current USD 1,000,000 illustration is a full-cycle planning budget, including USD 400,000 for awards. It is not a funded purse or an invitation to transfer money. Prize money, participant support, evaluation and operating costs must be secured and distinguished before launch.
Decision required before adoptionPublish approved amounts, payment conditions, full-cycle financing, recipient details, contingency and treatment of restricted funds.
11 · Participant and adoption support
Proposed support covers preparation, access needs, evidence development and adoption planning. Equal published conditions must govern support. Finalists should receive useful feedback and a clear statement of available resources. Follow-up may extend to years one, three and five under funded agreements.
Decision required before adoptionConfirm support amounts, selection, staff, delivery partners and reporting resources. The draft creates no entitlement to support.
12 · No-award and suspension rules
If no entrant meets the published standard, the institution should be able to withhold the award. Material safety failures, funding gaps or invalid evidence may require suspension. Participants receive the reasons and next procedural steps.
Decision required before adoptionApprove notice, suspension and cancellation terms, treatment of committed resources and unused award funds before entry.
13 · Corrections and research integrity
Provide a confidential route for substantiated concerns about attribution, conflicts, data reliability or misconduct. An independent person with no relevant conflict assesses the concern. Preserve records, allow an appropriate response and publish material corrections to public claims. Retraction or revocation requires an adopted policy and reasoned decision.
Decision required before adoptionAppoint the integrity lead and approve investigation authority, evidence handling and publication requirements.
14 · Procedural review
Participants should be able to raise a documented procedural error or undisclosed conflict without purchasing access. A separate, unconflicted reviewer considers the process. Disagreement with expert judgment alone need not create a new competition review.
Decision required before adoptionPublish submission windows, reviewer appointment, scope, response times and available remedies in the adopted rules.
15 · Calendar and communications
Publish a single schedule for nominations, eligibility screening, verification, finalist announcement and award. Dates follow readiness approval. Clearly distinguish an early expression of interest, an accepted entry, a finalist and a laureate. Journal publication, event attendance and donation confer none of these statuses.
Decision required before adoptionPublish confirmed calendar, time zones, official communications and change-notification procedures.
16 · Adoption and version control
This is a consultation document for the founding initiative, not adopted competition terms. Submitting an early inquiry does not signify acceptance of these proposed rules. The approved version must have a date, decision authority, version history and a stable public record.
Decision required before adoptionBoard authority, independent appointments, the completed rulebook, resources and safeguarding must be evidenced before the formal call opens.
Standards across future fields
The portfolio’s future fields require their own expert-designed rules. These evidence considerations are a roadmap, not open competitions.
Learning
Reading proficiency; credible comparison; retention; replication; accessibility and cost.
AI for Humanity
Independent task evaluation; reliability and misuse assessment; privacy; reproducibility; demonstrated human benefit.
Human Longevity
Appropriate clinical evidence; ethical approvals; safety; clinically meaningful outcomes; independent replication.
Planetary Regeneration
Baseline and counterfactual; additionality; lifecycle impacts; durability; independent measurement and verification.
Frontier Discovery
Original contribution; reproducible methods or independent confirmation; attribution; peer scrutiny; limits of inference.
Human Dignity
Rights and consent; community-defined benefit; accessibility; credible outcome evidence; distribution of harms and benefits.