Judges play a critical role in ensuring a fair, transparent, and high-quality evaluation of all hackathon entries. Their combined experience across accessibility, technology, banking, and inclusive design enables assessment from multiple professional and ethical perspectives.

The Judging Panel

A mixed Judging Panel of 9 members will be formed, including:

• Accessibility experts
• Technology experts
• Business experts
• Inclusive design / disability community representatives
  
  

Judges will be present in person on the final afternoon of the hackathon. Winners are determined through standardized scoring followed by deliberation among the judges.

Two Evaluation Tracks

Evaluation supports the two participation paths:

1. Option #1 – Open Challenge on Accessibility
Teams that choose the open theme and define their own accessibility problem and solution, drawing on areas such as education, healthcare, work, entertainment, or everyday essentials, for any target group (hearing, speech, visual, mental, physical, or temporary impairments).

2. Option #2 – Pick a Challenge
Teams that select one of the 16 published challenges — submitted by real individuals and communities — and develop a solution aligned with the specific problem and “how might we” question described in that challenge.

All teams, regardless of track, are eligible for the monetary prizes and community/mentor-awarded titles.

Presentation Format

On Sunday, each team presents live before the Judging Panel.

• 6 minutes – Present your solution and demo
• 3 minutes – Q&A with the judges (each judge may ask up to 1 question)

Judging Criteria

Solutions will be evaluated to ensure they are relevant, innovative, functional, and inclusive. Judges will score each project across five categories:

1. Relevance & Impact

• Does it solve a meaningful real-world accessibility problem, whether from the open theme or a specific challenge?
• How measurable is the impact on the daily life, independence, or inclusion of the target users?

2. Innovation & Future Readiness

• How original and future-oriented is the idea?
• Does it leverage the capabilities of Artificial Intelligence (AI) or other emerging technologies?
• Is it aligned with long-term digital accessibility and inclusion goals?

3. Functionality, Feasibility & Scalability

• Is there a working prototype (proof of concept)?
• How realistic is the proposed implementation and its scalability potential?
• Can it be integrated into existing ecosystems (devices, public services, banking, etc.)?

4. Ethics, Security & Inclusion

• Does the solution comply with principles of digital ethics, transparency, and personal data protection?
• Is it designed with and for the people it aims to serve, ensuring genuine accessibility and user empowerment rather than assumptions about their needs?
• Did the team demonstrate a spirit of collaboration, fair competition, and support toward other teams?

5. Presentation & Communication

• How effectively was the solution presented?
• Is the presentation clear, professional, and engaging for both technical and non-technical judges?
• Does it provide a coherent narrative: Problem → Solution → Impact?

Each category is scored. All categories are equally weighted.