First-round nomination packages consist of a statement of intent and a statement of the nominee's alignment with AGU values. Neither statement should exceed 400 words in length or include individually identifying information about the nominee. For an example of how to de-identify information, click here.

• Statement of Intent

The statement should highlight those characteristics that make the nominee a good match for the award, specifically as they relate to the award’s primary criteria/scope.

• Statement of Nominee Alignment with AGU Values

The statement should outline the degree to which the nominee aligns with AGU values.

First-round nomination packages are reviewed anonymously by the selection committee. Nominators whose nominee is moved to the second round of review will be asked to submit additional materials.

During the first round of review, nominees are evaluated based on their alignment with the primary criteria/scope of the award and their alignment with AGU values. The identities of nominees are not shared with the selection committee at this stage to promote fair scoring and reduce bias during the evaluation process.

During the second round of review, the selection committee uses a standard rubric to evaluate the nominee’s alignment with the award’s primary criteria and AGU , as well as the quality of the nomination package.

Second-round nomination materials should be submitted as unencrypted, watermark-free PDFs through the nomination portal. A complete round-two nomination package consists of the following items (note that letterhead is preferred):

• Nomination Letter

A nomination letter containing the nominator’s name, title, institution, and contact information detailing how the nominee meets the selection criteria.

• CV

The nominee’s curriculum vitae, that includes the candidate’s name, address, email, history of employment, degrees, research experience, honors, memberships, and service to the community (committee work, advisory boards, etc.).

• Supporter Questionnaire

Nominator’s will task three supporters with answering a questionnaire about the nominee’s alignment with the spirit of the award. Nominators will do this in the nomination portal.

Supporters will be required to answer the following prompts about the nominee. Each response should not exceed 400 words in length.

• Please comment on the quality and impact of the nominee’s work on their field.
• To what extent does the nominee's work reach a broad or traditionally underrepresented audience?
• Please comment on the originality/innovative nature of the nominee’s work.
• Please comment on the nominee's alignment with AGU values.
• Bibliography (Optional)

A selected bibliography that states the total number and types of publications and the number published by AGU. The bibliography should include papers that encompass the candidate’s overall research and scientific contributions. Rather than selecting the most recent publications, nominators are encouraged to choose those that best support the argument for this honor.

• Supporting Files (Optional)

Supporting files, such as books, articles, newspaper articles, speeches, etc., that illustrate the nominee’s effectiveness in communicating geosciences to non-scientific audiences.

The selection committee’s final awardee recommendation reports are given to the Council Leadership Team (CLT) to certify the evaluation process.