01
procedural responsibilities
Materials, relationships, versions, timelines and disclosures
Selection & Public Notice
Maintain professional judgment with segregation of duties, six-stage selection, classification weighting and public dissent
The three lines of responsibility of procedure, professionalism and governance are mutually restricted and cannot be handled by the same role.
Programmers are responsible for qualifications, category, attribution, authorization, version and relationship statements; professional evaluators form independent opinions based on experience in the award, field, medium and method; governance body confirms the application of rules, completeness and final status of the process.
Comprehensive deliberation is used to address differences of opinion, exception scoring, evidence applicability, and category boundaries, and does not replace professional justification with a simple majority. The special evaluation of the award is also subject to the association's general expert access, avoidance and archival regulations.
02
professional responsibility
Works, practices, methods, contexts and contribution judgments
03
governance responsibilities
Rule application, result confirmation, objection handling and status determination
Six stages connect materials, professional opinions, public announcements and formal decisions into an evidence chain
- 01
Qualification verification
Confirm object, category, scope of work, authorship, authorization, and material integrity.
Form: Acceptance Record - 02
Expert matching
Judging tasks are assigned based on award, professional field, media and methodological experience.
Formation: Assignment and avoidance records - 03
independent review
The evaluators read the materials respectively, evaluate the results and write down the reasons for the scores or grades.
Formation: independent opinion - 04
Comprehensive review
Review differences of opinion, applicability of evidence, exceptions and award category boundaries.
Formation: Comprehensive Proposal - 05
Results announcement
Disclose necessary contents such as awards, objects, achievement titles, abstracts, and intended award status.
Formation: Publicity and Objection Record - 06
Decide to archive
Confirm the award decision, number, status, query content and process information.
Form: Official Honors File
The five honors share the same evaluation dimension, but use different weights according to the type of contribution.
The following proportions are used to establish stable boundaries for classification evaluation; annual rules can refine the evidence description while maintaining the consistency of award goals and total score structure. The reasons for the judgment must be recorded for each opinion, and the total score shall not be used as a substitute for professional explanation.
| Honour Category | Professional quality | Sufficient evidence | method value | public significance | lasting impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cultural legacy | 25% | 20% | 15% | 20% | 20% |
| Sports Humanities | 25% | 20% | 20% | 20% | 15% |
| artistic creativity | 30% | 15% | 25% | 15% | 15% |
| Cross-domain co-creation | 20% | 20% | 25% | 20% | 15% |
| youth growth | 25% | 15% | 25% | 15% | 20% |