Judging Criteria

    Judging Criteria

    PRSA Colorado Gold Pick Awards

    Explanation of Judging Process:

    While judging each Gold Pick entry, please keep in mind that the Colorado Gold Pick awards focus on recognizing excellence in public relations, and are therefore not limited to one winner in each category.

    The judging scale for Campaigns and Components is based on a 40-point scoring scale, with points given to four categories in campaigns: research, planning, execution and evaluation; and four categories in components: planning/content, creativity/quality, technical excellence and results.

    Component Media Relations entries do not require a Technical Excellence criterion for judging. Total scores for award designation should be based upon a total point count of 25, noted on the score sheets provided.

    Judges should be seasoned public relations and marketing professionals, with four years or more of practice and/or their APR. Three judges, at least one with 10 years or more of practice or an APR designation, must judge each entry. Professionals with a wealth of experience in specific category topics should judge entries in that category. Conversely, judges who have little experience in an entry’s category topic should instead seek out submissions that reflect their area of expertise.

    Please read the entry in its entirety before assigning a score to each of the categories listed below, keeping in mind the criteria provided below in addition to the questions listed on the judging score sheet. After reading the entry, assign a score in each of the four categories per entry; then total the scores to come up with a final number for the total score.

    While multiple awards will win a Gold or Silver Pick in a given category, our Grand Gold Pick award annually goes to the “best in show” campaign entry that receives the highest overall score.  If you believe the entry to be deserving of consideration for this award, please mark “yes” where indicated at the bottom of the judging sheet. 

    Thanks again for your time and invaluable assistance!


    How thorough and valuable was the research that was conducted? Was the situation adequately and accurately analyzed? Were the research methods appropriate for the situation and/or budget? Did research help to re-define the situation in any way? How was the research relevant to shaping the planning process? How did the research help define the audience(s) or the situation? What hypotheses were drawn as a result of the research findings? 

    How did the plan correlate to the research findings? What was the overall strategy for the program? What were the specific objectives, tactics and budget set for the program? Who were the target audiences? What materials were used? How was the budget set, and how were staff time and resources allocated? Did the plan reach its creative potential? How thorough was the plan? How original was the strategy?

    How was the plan executed and what were the results? Were there any difficulties encountered? If so, how were they handled? Were financial, personnel and other resources used effectively? Was the program completed on time and within budget? How appropriate were the tactics to achieving objectives and executing strategy? How creative were the tactics? How integrated were the various tools with one another?

    What method(s) of evaluation were used? Did the results of the program relate to research findings and/or hypotheses? Do results tie back to stated objectives? To what degree did the program meet its objectives? Were the results of the program measured effectively? How successful was the organization in achieving its objectives? Were there continuous opportunities for learning and program refinement?



    Are the objectives for the use of the particular tactic clear and concise? Was the object or goal of the entry thoughtfully considered, clearly stated and attainable? Was the audience identified? Was a clear strategy stated or implied?


    Do messages tie to objectives? Is content substantive, understandable, consistent and appropriate for the stated audience? How is the entry unique? How is the tool used imaginatively to achieve program goals?

    Technical Excellence

    Do graphic or communications elements set the entry apart? Is production quality superior, based on budget and scope of the project?

    ** Media Relations entries do not require a Technical Excellence criterion for judging.  Total scores for award designation should be based upon a total point count of 25.**


    What effort was made to assess whether the measurable objective(s) or stated goal was met? Did the entry meet its stated intent? Are there other indicators of success, quantitative or qualitative, in meeting objectives?

    Award Designations:

    Entries that average total points in the following ranges will merit these awards:


    36-40      Gold Pick
    32-35      Silver Pick

    Components – Non Media Relations

    32-40   Gold Pick
    29-31   Silver Pick

    Components – Media Relations

    20-25   Gold Pick
    17-19   Silver Pick


    Contact: Dustin Moody at jdustinmoody@gmail.com or James Cullen at james.cullen@ogilvy.com.