Volunteering as a judge

informed icon

Informed created the Informed Peer Recognition Award (IPRA) to give due recognition to those colleagues who contribute to a substantive benefit for their service or community in the UK. We are seeking volunteer judges from all walks of life to participate in the inaugural award. No special experience or knowledge is required, and colleagues from across the information professions are encouraged to apply to take part in the judging process. In particular, we would like to invite participants from the public sector, school, and specialist library areas, to try and ensure a good mix of professional experience and knowledge in the judging teams. Training and administrative support will be provided to all judges, and more detailed information on the judging process and stages is available here and here. FAQs on other elements of the process, including planned timescales, are available on the Informed website here.

To volunteer to assist as a judge, please email nominations@theinformed.org.uk, with your name, and sector that you work in/have knowledge of.


Members of the Informed award management team (Elly O’Brien, Helen Murphy, Ian Clark, Jennie Findlay, Laura Ennis and Mobeena Khan) are not eligible to be nominated for this award. Volunteer judges however ARE eligible to be nominated for this award.



Judging criteria

  • Nominees must be based in the UK
  • Nominations must fall within one of the following categories:
    • Public Good – involvement in activities that will benefit the public
    • Service Improvement – developing a service that will provide users with a better experience, whether that be in a public or non-public service sector
    • Professional Involvement – working across the profession to improve an aspect of it for the benefit of others
  • Must have been involved in an activity that goes beyond their job. There can be work-based components, but not “just doing their job”, there has to be some element of going above and beyond.
  • Must have made a relevant difference (to their service/community)


Judging process/teams

  • Judging teams will be comprised of one administrator and two volunteer judges.
  • Judges will not “specialise” in particular subject areas – the criteria will be applicable to all categories and no sectoral knowledge is required to judge entries.
  • Teams will be formed by the coordinator, to try to create a mix of sector experience within teams.
  • Each judging team will create a shortlist of three candidates, from the total nominations allocated to their team.
  • The details of the three shortlisted candidates of each team will then be entered into the Initial Rankings Google Form.
  • Once all teams have input their top three choices, the full list of shortlisted candidates created by all teams will be opened to all judges to review.
  • All individual judges will rank their top three nominations, in descending order (using a Google Form
  • The nominee with the most votes in total will be declared the winner*. The second and third placed nominees will be “Honorable Mention” individuals.


*With the last-stage voting, votes will be weighted by the coordinator on collation of the final results, e.g. top choices will get three points, second choices will get two points, third choices will get one point. This will help to to avoid any possible deadlock situations.