Criteria and weights
| Criterion | Weight | Minimum for an award |
|---|---|---|
| Suitability for the stated need | 20% | 4 / 5 |
| Evidence of benefit in use | 25% | 4 / 5 |
| Usability and everyday burden | 20% | 4 / 5 |
| Clear information and informed choice | 15% | 3.5 / 5 |
| Accessibility and inclusion | 10% | 3.5 / 5 |
| Reliability and support | 10% | 3.5 / 5 |
The overall score must be at least 85 out of 100. Ratings are weighted against the maximum of five for each criterion.
Rating anchors
| Rating | Basis |
|---|---|
| 0 | No assessable support |
| 1 | Serious gaps or unsuitable support |
| 2 | Partial support with important weaknesses |
| 3 | Adequate support within a limited use |
| 4 | Strong, relevant support with limitations clearly addressed |
| 5 | Exceptionally complete and convincing support |
Half-point ratings reflect a position between adjacent anchors.
Independent assessments and the chair
Three reviewers provide distinct product/evidence, human-factors/use and information/inclusion perspectives. Their initial assessments are independent. A separate chair considers differences and records the final criterion ratings and reasons. A further opinion is obtained if material disagreement or specialist uncertainty remains.
Award conditions
At least two initial recommendations must support recognition, all numerical minimums must be met and no material concern may remain unresolved. The score cannot override an issue of identity, authority, evidence integrity, safety or information. There are no paid upgrades or ranked award levels.
Reading feedback
Read the criterion reasons with their evidence references and the product assessed. The result concerns the submitted use, not every use or competing product. The public citation is a concise account; detailed applicant feedback remains private.
Reading the criterion reasons
| Detail | What it explains |
|---|---|
| Product and use | The version, users and task considered |
| Evidence references | The files and findings supporting the conclusion |
| Rating and reason | Why the material meets the stated rating anchor |
| Limits or concerns | Conditions that restrict the conclusion or need resolution |
| Next action | Any public-detail check, correction or appeal route relevant to the result |