Entries shall be judged according to the following criteria:  

Opportunity and Empowerment Award  

1. Challenges or barriers. What obstacles, whether physical, natural, social, financial, political, or a  combination thereof, were faced and addressed by the nominated effort? What is the extent of  these challenges or other adversarial conditions, and what steps were undertaken to meet the  difficult circumstances? What steps have been taken to build momentum and public support? Detail any changes, derailments, or improvements throughout the implementation phase. What  were the funding challenges or support for this effort? What were the political changes, if any, that  affected, for better or worse, the effort’s long-term positive impact?  
2. Available resources. What resources were available and how were these resources (financial,  personnel, consultants, etc.) managed, leveraged, and deployed?  
3. Results. Describe in detail how the plan, project or program achieved measurable outcomes.  Examples of outcomes include: the number of jobs created and retained; improvement in  education outcomes (i.e., graduation rates); the number of affordable housing units created or  preserved; a disaster mitigation plan; a decline in the homeless, crime, and/or poverty rates. In  addition, explain how outcomes are sustained and proved to be cost effective over time. The  submission must include baseline data, beginning and end dates, detailed budget, and a  description of savings and outcomes. For projects leveraging HUD funding, such as HOME and  CDBG, or other financing tools (i.e., Low-Income Housing Tax Credit), explain how the submission  exceeds the basic requirements of these programs to achieve results.  
4. Equity. Explain how the submission clearly addressed social equity through the planning process  and civic engagement efforts. Describe the specific activities and efforts incorporated into the plan,  program, or project that advance social equity goals. How involved was the public — particularly  historically underrepresented groups — in the planning process from the initial stage to the  implementation stage and beyond? Explain how the results of the plan, project, or program  enhanced the quality of life for vulnerable populations, including the homeless, older persons,  persons with a disability, low-income individuals and families, and veterans.  
5. Transferability. How, and to what extent, has the submission served as an example for other  localities working to address challenges? How does the program provide useful prescriptive  measures for other communities addressing a similar challenge? How well does the submission  demonstrate that the project overcame challenges to implement a successful program where the results are sustained over time?

Optional Criteria. Please note these criteria are mandatory for Chapter level Application. They are only optional for Section level awards. 

6. Planning. Explain how the submission addresses a real-world challenge in the community as  identified by an existing comprehensive, regional or neighborhood plan. How did the program or  project integrate or maintain the cultural context and social fabric of the community? What specific  role did planners play in achieving these results? How was the planning process sustained through  the implementation stage and beyond? How involved were community residents, civic and  advocacy groups, private, nonprofit, and philanthropic organizations throughout the planning  stage and beyond?  
7. Innovation. Describe how the submission involved an innovative or forward-looking approach  that effectively addressed various community-wide needs and/or solved a perplexing problem.  

Daniel Burnham Award for a Comprehensive Plan Award

1. Originality and innovation. How does the entry present a visionary approach or innovative concept  to address needs? How did the planning process in this context broaden accepted planning  principles within the context of the situation?  
2. Quality. How is the plan state-of-the-art in terms of presentation and methodology? Identify  what makes this plan exceptional or stand out compared to other comprehensive plans.  
3. Promotion of Planning. What was the role, significance, and participation of planners? What is the  connection between the effort’s success and increased awareness in the community of planners  and planning?  
4. Effectiveness and Results. How did your entry address the need or problem that prompted its  initiation? Be explicit about how the results have made a difference in the lives of the people  affected. State the positive or unintended outcomes. Convey the level of effectiveness your entry  can have over time.

Optional Criteria. Please note these criteria are mandatory for Chapter level Application. They are only optional for Section level awards.  

5. Engagement. How were various public interests involved and the extent of that involvement?  Competitive entries demonstrate a strong effort to solicit input from those who historically have  been left out of the planning process. How was public and private support obtained?  

Implementation Award 

1. Challenges or barriers. What obstacles, whether physical, natural, social, financial, political, or a  combination thereof, were faced and addressed by the nominated effort? What is the extent of  these challenges or other adversarial conditions, and what steps were undertaken to meet the  difficult circumstances? What steps have been taken to build momentum and public support? Detail any changes, derailments, or improvements throughout the implementation phase. What  were the funding challenges or support for this effort? What were the political changes, if any, that  affected, for better or worse, the effort’s long-term funding? 
2. Available resources. What resources were available and how were these resources (financial,  personnel, consultants, etc.) managed, leveraged, and deployed?  
3. Originality and innovation. How does the entry present a visionary approach or innovative concept  to address needs? How did the planning process in this context broaden accepted planning principles within the context of the situation?  
4. Effectiveness. What is the level of consistency of this implementation effort since its start? How  was the need or problem addressed that prompted its initiation? How have the results made a  difference in the lives of the people affected? What is the level of effectiveness the entry can have  over time?  
5. Transferability. How, and to what extent, has the submission served as an example for other  localities working to address challenges? How does the program provide useful prescriptive  measures for other communities addressing a similar challenge? How well does the submission  demonstrate that the project overcame challenges to implement a successful program where the  results are sustained over time? 

Optional Criteria. Please note these criteria are mandatory for Chapter level Application. They are only optional for Section level awards.  

6. Engagement. Explain how various public interests were involved and the extent of that  involvement? How was public and private support obtained? What was the role, significance, and  participation of planners?  

Resilience and Sustainability Award

1. Originality and innovation. Identify how the strategy builds upon best practices and identifies innovative  approaches for addressing a community’s specific needs or reducing its risks. How does the initiative  improve recovery efforts if a disaster does strike, or address cascading disasters or stresses (i.e., landslides  result from excessive rains, public health emergencies create economic stress)? 
2. Effectiveness and results. Demonstrate how the initiative has strengthened the resiliency of the  community. Identify what benchmarks were used to determine success and be explicit about how the  results have made a difference in the lives of people affected. How has this initiative increased resident  understanding and awareness about potential disasters, as well as the roles and responsibilities of individual  community members, along with the community as a whole, in helping to mitigate the severity of potential  disasters? How has this initiative positioned the community for a stronger, more resilient future?

Optional Criteria. Please note these criteria are mandatory for Chapter level Application. They are only optional for Section level awards.  

3. Integration. Describe how the strategy integrates or augments existing planning efforts within the  community, county, or region such as corresponding comprehensive or master plans or other related  initiatives. Explain how the effort or initiative can be adapted or applied by other jurisdictions and  supports the broader needs of the community and surrounding region.
4. Engagement. Describe how the strategy uses an inclusive planning process and engages diverse partners  and stakeholders, and/or breaks down institutional or structural barriers to facilitate decision making so all  community members’ voices are represented. Describe what steps were taken to build momentum and  support for your entry. Explain how planners helped facilitate outcomes that gained support for planning  practices. 

Transportation Planning Award

1. Planning and innovation. What are the critical transportation elements which lessen or mitigate  adverse impacts from development and everyday living? What was the role of planning or planners  involved in the development process?  
2. Challenges or barriers. What obstacles, whether physical, natural, social, or a combination thereof,  were faced and addressed by the nominated effort? What is the extent of these challenges or other adversarial conditions, and what steps were undertaken to meet the difficult circumstances?  
3. Effectiveness and results. How does the entry address the need or problem that prompted its  initiation? How have the results made a difference in the lives of the people affected? What level  of effectiveness can the entry have over time?  
4. Transferability. How, and to what extent, has the submission served as an example for other  localities working to address challenges? How does the program provide useful prescriptive  measures for other communities addressing a similar challenge? How well does the submission  demonstrate that the project overcame challenges to implement a successful program where the  results are sustained over time?

Optional Criteria. Please note these criteria are mandatory for Chapter level Application. They are only optional for Section level awards.  

5. Compatibility. How does transportation planning integrate into community planning? How does  the entry connect to both the environment and the economy?  
6. Engagement. What was the public education and participation process? How was support  generated?  

Planning Excellence Award

1. Originality and innovation. Describe how your entry addresses a known community need or challenge, and better positions the community for a stronger, more equitable future for all. Identify any tools, resources, or skills that helped to advance the effort within the community. Demonstrate how this effort compliments or builds upon existing planning efforts and supports the overall planning goals of the community. Explain how this effort also helps move the planning profession forward?
2. Methodology and transferability. Explain the process, budget, and project timeline for the nominated effort. Identify how planning and/or planners were instrumental in this effort. Share how the community is kept updated and informed of progress and implementation of the effort. Demonstrate how your effort can be applied in other communities and the methodology used to help advance the value of planning.
3. Engagement. Address what steps have been taken to build momentum and public support for your entry. Share how all community members were involved, including those who historically have been left out of the planning process. How did planners help facilitate bringing together competing community interests for the betterment of the whole community? Describe stakeholder involvement and how the entry brought together elected leaders, public, private, and non-profit stakeholders, and community members. Identify, if applicable, any unique strategic partnerships or funding sources that were used to help move the effort forward.
4. Effectiveness and results. Provide measurable results or how success will be tracked. What are the long-term outcomes generated or expected from the effort? Convey the level of effectiveness your entry can have over time or be a catalyst to future efforts. Be explicit about how the results have made a difference in the lives of those who live in the community. How has this entry positioned the community for a stronger, more resilient and equitable future?

Grassroots Initiative Award

1. Effectiveness and results. State how your entry addressed the need or problem in a visionary or innovative manner that prompted its initiation, or increased the understanding of the planning process or impacts, or raised public awareness of one planning topic or issue, within a budget not exceeding $200,000. Be explicit about how the results have made a difference in the lives of the people affected. Convey the level of effectiveness your entry can have over time.
2. Engagement. Explain how various public interests were involved and the extent of that involvement. Competitive entries demonstrate a strong effort to solicit input from those who have been historically left out of the planning process. Describe the level of collaboration between leadership and competing interests. Explain how those affected were brought into the planning process for this initiative.

Optional Criteria. Please note these criteria are mandatory for Chapter level Application. They are only optional for Section level awards.  

3. Education. Establish that your entry has encouraged community leaders to revise their opinions about the varied uses and broad applications of the planning process, or the initiative has been effective in formulating and implementing plans and ideas in support of good planning. State the influence your entry has had on public awareness beyond those immediately affected. Identify the level of influence and effectiveness achieved within different segments of the community.

Urban Design Award

1. Originality and innovation. Document how your entry presents a visionary approach or innovative  concept to address needs. Explain how the use of the planning process in this context broadened  accepted planning principles within the context of the situation.
2. Compatibility. Demonstrate how your entry integrates and supports the overall planning goals of  the neighborhood or community. 
3. Effectiveness and results. Describe how your entry has made a difference in the lives of the people  affected. Convey the level of effectiveness your entry can have over time.
   
   Optional Criteria. Please note these criteria are mandatory for Chapter level Application. They are only optional for Section level awards.
     
4. Engagement. Explain how various public interests were involved and the extent of that  involvement. Describe the level of collaboration between leadership and competing interests.  Explain how those affected were brought into the planning process for this initiative. 

Planning Firm Award (private sector)

1. Quality. Demonstrate consistent quality of the firm’s work and its recognition by the general public  or those who practice or sponsor planning, teach planning, or develop communities. Elements of  quality include graphic design, content, evidence of implementation by clients. 
2. Influence. Detail the firm’s positive influence on the direction and professional advancement of  planning, for example promoting new technologies, collaboration among other design disciplines,  innovations in practice, and advances in the art and science of planning. Identify the number of  planners on staff.  
3. Outreach and Engagement. Demonstrate the firm’s efforts and skills in engaging stakeholders and  resolving community conflicts with positive outcomes. Demonstrate responsiveness to the client  and the various elements of the community in the planning process and willingness to incorporate  ideas and suggestions from the community.
   
   Optional Criteria. Please note these criteria are mandatory for Chapter level Application. They are only optional for Section level awards.
    
4. Ethical Practice. Explain how the firm consistently upholds and champions the highest standards of  ethics in terms of the public trust and guiding and educating its staff on the importance of ethics.

Planning Agency Award (public sector)

1. Quality. Demonstrate consistent quality of the agency’s work. Describe how the agency’s program  of work has elevated awareness about planning and built community support for planning. Describe  the number of staff, their various roles, and if any members have specific certifications.
2. Outreach and engagement. Demonstrate the agency’s efforts and skills in engaging community  members, business leaders and other stakeholders, and in resolving community conflicts with  positive outcomes. Describe efforts undertaken to engage community members, especially those  often overlooked, in planning processes.  
3. Innovation. Describe how the agency has addressed concerns or issues within the community in a visionary or innovative manner. Specify how planning principles have been observed, especially in  consideration of the agency’s effects on other public objectives.
   
   Optional Criteria. Please note these criteria are mandatory for Chapter level Application. They are only optional for Section level awards.  
   
4. Implementation. Describe the program of work that has resulted in identified and meaningful  outcomes that raise the quality of life for all citizens. Demonstrate the connection between  planning and implementation with tools such as capital budgets.

Advancing Diversity and Social Change in Honor of Paul Davidoff Award

1. Social and economic. Describe how your entry addresses the needs of at-risk individuals or populations that society typically overlooks. How have your entry’s efforts advanced or sustained sound, ethical, and inclusionary planning within the planning field, within a specific community, or in society at large?
2. Engagement. Explain how various stakeholders and community members were engaged in the planning process. How were typically hard-to-reach populations included in the planning process? Detail any non-traditional engagement efforts used to obtain community input. Share how challenges such as limited accessibility and digital divides were addressed.
3. Effectiveness & results. Specify how your entry has had a positive impact on the lives of those it was intended to help. Indicate how these efforts have touched a wider audience, helped increase diversity and inclusiveness within the planning field, or in helping support diverse populations. Share how this effort has elevated the value and importance of planning within the community.

Academic Award  

1. Purpose. What was the purpose of the project, program, or research? What was learned in the research or project, or what has been achieved by this program?
2. Research and resources. For a project or research, please detail what and how research was completed to prepare for producing the final product. What resources were available to the faculty to prepare the paper or document?
3. Challenges. Please describe the challenges during the project, program, or research.
4. Results. What was the basis for the paper or the project? What was the final outcome? How was the final product used? How did your entry address the need or problem that prompted its initiation in real-world planning practice? Be explicit about how the results have generated or might generate perspective benefits or inspirations to the current planning practice. State the positive or unintended outcomes. Convey the level of effectiveness your entry can have over time.

Communications Initiative and Outreach Award

1. Challenges or barriers. What obstacles, whether physical, natural, social, or a combination thereof, were faced and addressed by the nominated effort? What is the extent of these challenges or other adversarial conditions, and what steps were undertaken to meet the difficult circumstances?
2. Originality and innovation. Describe how your entry engaged audiences in planning using innovative or unique communication approaches. How does the program use new ideas or combine tools to address a demonstrated need for planning information or education within the community? How does the entry have potential application for others and how use of the components and methodology would further the cause of good planning?
3. Effectiveness and results. State how your entry addressed the need or problem that prompted its initiation. Be explicit about how the results make a difference in the lives of the people affected now and in the future. Show how your entry has built support for planning and increased the understanding of planning principles and the planning process. Provide measurable results if possible or appropriate.State how your entry achieved its desired outcomes. Convey the level of effectiveness your entry can have over time.
4. Participation. Explain how various public interests were involved and how your entry obtained public and private support. Competitive entries demonstrate a strong effort to solicit input from those who historically have been left out of the planning process. Clarify the role, significance, and participation of planners. Demonstrate the connection between the effort’s success and increased awareness in the community of planners and planning.

Planning Landmark and Planning Pioneer Awards

The following criteria will be used in evaluating Planning Landmark and Pioneer awards. 

Planning Landmark 

1. Historical significance. What is the nomination’s historical significance in terms of at least one of the following: being a pioneering work or a documented first; being historically significant, unique, and outstanding; having initiated a new direction in planning that has had a lasting effect or other impact; or having impact on California planning, cities, or regions during a broad range of time, space, or both time and space? Nominated landmarks contributions must be at least 25 years old as of the submittal deadline.
2. State significance. What effect or impact did the nominated landmark have on planning in California as a whole? What is the nominated landmark’s state importance and influence in helping create communities or other places of lasting value throughout California?

Planning Pioneer 

1. Historical significance. What are the nominated individual’s innovations or new models that directly influenced the future of California Planning? How have the nominated individual’s innovations or new models significantly and positively redirected planning practice, education, theory, or organization? Nominated individual’s contributions must be at least 25 years old as of the submittal deadline.
2. State significance. What effect or impact did the nominated individual have on planning in California as a whole?