A multidisciplinary group of experts will serve on a Judging Panel and review eligible submissions to recommend up to 16 winners, plus ranked alternates. Judges will evaluate submissions independently based on four equally weighted judging criteria. A total of 20 points can be earned, five points for each criterion. The Judging Panel will make one collective recommendation for HHS consideration, including recommended winners and ranked alternates.
Judging criteria
Judging criteria
Practical impact for target audience
Defines a specific target audience and addresses a meaningful information gap related to Lyme and tickborne disease diagnostics. Evaluates the degree to which the content is appropriate for the audience’s needs, level of health literacy, and real-world context in which it will be used.
Clarity and usability over complexity
The content focuses on user experience, translating complex diagnostic information into clear, accessible, and easy-to-understand content. Evaluates the degree to which the material is well-structured, actionable, and usable in real-world settings (e.g., clinical use, patient education, community sharing).
Lived experience and authenticity
Reflects real-world patient, caregiver, or clinician perspectives with authenticity. Evaluates the degree to which lived experience meaningfully informs the framing, design, and content of the material, helping ensure it resonates with and is useful to real communities.
Data over dogma
Presents diagnostic information responsibly, including appropriate explanation of tickborne disease testing limitations, uncertainty, and emerging science, without misleading claims, and grounded in information from federal sources (e.g., HHS, NIH, CDC, FDA, and gov/.mil sites) and peer-reviewed literature. Citations should adhere to the Associated Press Stylebook (AP Style).