Intake & Screening
Structured submission forms collect consistent information. Eligibility decisions are documented with rationale before expert review begins. Ineligible entries are excluded from assignment automatically.
Competitions that hold up to scrutiny, cycle after cycle.
From the open call through judging rounds to the winner announcement, competitions need structure that holds up to scrutiny. The platform runs the whole arc without spreadsheets, email coordination, or manual tracking.
Built for innovation challenges, hackathons, design competitions, pitch competitions, and student competitions.
How it works
From intake to final decision.
Competitions are configured in defined phases. Configuration can be adjusted after submissions open, but once a review phase begins and reviewers start submitting evaluations, the platform locks the phase to protect decision integrity.
Each track includes structured review phases with scheduled windows, assigned rubrics, and controlled advancement rules. Reviewers see only what they are assigned. Phases open and close at defined times. Advancement happens only after required reviews are completed.
The result is clarity for staff, predictability for reviewers, and no manual coordination behind either.
- Create multiple review phases per track
- Define open and close dates with precision
- Attach reusable evaluation rubrics to each phase
- Save and update configuration with full audit logging
This is where structure becomes enforceable. Programs are not managed through reminders and spreadsheets. They are governed through defined configuration.
Built for structured execution
Competitions move through clearly defined stages. From submission intake to eligibility screening, expert evaluation, and advancement, each step builds on the one before.
Staff keep oversight. Reviewers work within their assigned scope. Decisions move forward only when the criteria are met.
Every submission enters through structured forms, moves through documented eligibility screening, and is assigned to expert reviewers by defined rules. Review activity is time-bound and rubric-driven. Advancement is controlled by phase logic, not manual coordination. The result is a process you can defend, cycle after cycle.
Expert Review
Reviewers evaluate submissions within defined phases using reusable rubrics. Reviews can be drafted and submitted within scheduled windows. Scoring and commentary are recorded with full traceability.
Advancement & Outcomes
Submissions advance only after required reviews are completed. Finalists and winners are selected within a governed workflow, with audit-ready documentation of every decision.
Built for the realities of competitions.
A competition puts your name on the winner. It needs more than a way to collect entries. It needs structure, credibility, and continuity.
Structured for complexity
Competitions often run several categories as tracks, with expert judges and more than one round. The platform supports all of it without relying on manual coordination or memory.
Defensible decision-making
Every eligibility decision, review, score, and advancement is recorded. Audit trails, role-based access, and locked review phases protect the integrity of the outcome. When the decision is final, a branded program page showcases finalists and winners without a separate website project.
Year-over-year continuity
Start rubrics, submission forms, and program structures from AI drafts you edit, then reuse and refine them. Each cycle builds on the last instead of starting from scratch.
From open call to final decision without spreadsheets or heroics.
Run competitions that stand up to scrutiny, cycle after cycle.