Judging process
The judging process is rigorous and thorough to ensure that all the entries receive full consideration and that the true winners are chosen.
PLEASE NOTE: Judges do not judge any categories that their company has been entered in and are obliged to declare that they have no conflicts of interest prior to judging.
The judging process is rigorous and thorough to ensure that all the entries receive full consideration and that the true winners are chosen.
Judges will take part in a judging conference call, where the winners will be decided. One expert per category will be asked to summarize the judges' comments and provide any additional input as required.
Judges have discretionary power to move submissions into alternative categories that they think may be more suitable.
All judges are required to sign a disclaimer form to keep information about entries and the final winners confidential.
The judging panel
The judges are carefully selected for their wealth of experience and expertise, as well as their absence of conflicts of interest. The list of judges will be announced shortly, and published on this page.
The judges are carefully selected for their wealth of experience and expertise, as well as their absence of conflicts of interest. The list of judges will be announced shortly, and published on this page.
Winners of the institutional asset management awards will be determined by votes from a selection of CIOs of foundations and endowments, as well as with input from the editorial teams of Money Management Report and Foundation & Endowment Report. Criteria will include information submitted with entries as well as direct experience with the manager, industry reputation and past performance.
PLEASE NOTE: Judges do not judge any categories that their company has been entered in and are obliged to declare that they have no conflicts of interest prior to judging.
