ELIGIBILITY: Open to APA members and non-members. The award is given for group achievement and may be made to a planning agency, planning team or firm, community group, or local authority. There are no limits on the size of jurisdiction.

CRITERIA:
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.

Transferability. Illustrate how the nominated comprehensive plan has potential application for others and how use of your entry's components and methodology would further the cause of good planning.

Quality. Competitive entries will represent excellence of thought, analysis, writing, and graphics throughout the plan, regardless of budgetary limitations. Indicate how available resources were used in a thoughtful and ethical process.

Comprehensiveness. Specify how planning principles have been observed, especially in consideration of your entry's effects on other public objectives.

Public participation. 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 historically have been left out of the planning process. Show how the nominated plan obtained public and private support.

Role of planners. 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.

Implementation strategy. Address what steps have been taken to build momentum and public support for following and implementing the plan.

Effectiveness and results. State how your entry addressed 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. Convey the level of effectiveness your entry can have over time.

ELIGIBILITY: Nominees should show how they have overcome difficult community issues. The strategy should employ a variety of actions that maximize increased choice and opportunity. To the maximum extent possible, submissions should involve formal community planning efforts and include physical improvements or interventions (though the latter is not required). The strategy submitted should have been in effect a minimum of three years. Open to APA members and non-members.

CRITERIA:
Planning. Explain the role of planners and the planning process in achieving results. How did the submission relate to existing plans (comprehensive, regional, and neighborhood)? What role did planners play in achieving the results? How was the planning process important to subsequent implementation? Finally, how involved in the plan were specific groups and individuals from private, nonprofit, and public perspectives, particularly those who may have been left out of similar efforts in the past?

Results. State how your entry addressed and documented the need for increased economic employment, education, or housing choice or mobility among low- and moderate-income residents in a cost-effective and quality manner. Include the end date, detailed cost and funding data, and when the results were implemented. Information must be included describing how the nominated effort has exceeded any minimum requirements imposed by the source or sources of grants, loans, or other funding, whether government or private, obtained and used by the program, project, or effort.

Innovation. Document how your entry presents a visionary approach or innovative concept to address needs. How is it innovative for the locality and innovative nationally for a given field or program or practice? For projects using HOPE VI funds, describe how the nomination builds on existing HOPE VI requirements.

Transferability. Illustrate how the nominated comprehensive plan has potential application for others. What indicates that the approach can be applied elsewhere? Describe how the project uniquely addressed and overcame challenges that are common to contemporary projects.

ELIGIBILITY: There are no restrictions on the size of jurisdiction. Open to APA members and non-members.

CRITERIA: Each nomination must address all of the following criteria in addition to the specific requirements (if any) listed for each category:

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.

Transferability. Illustrate how the nominated comprehensive plan has potential application for others and how use of your entry's components and methodology would further the cause of good planning.

Quality. Competitive entries will represent excellence of thought, analysis, writing, and graphics throughout the plan, regardless of budgetary limitations. Indicate how available resources were used in a thoughtful and ethical process.

Comprehensiveness. Specify how planning principles have been observed, especially in consideration of your entry's effects on other public objectives.

Public participation. 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 historically have been left out of the planning process. Show how the nominated plan obtained public and private support.

Role of planners. 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.

Implementation strategy. Address what steps have been taken to build momentum and public support for following and implementing the plan.

Effectiveness and results. State how your entry addressed 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. Convey the level of effectiveness your entry can have over time.

ELIGIBILITY: Open to APA members and non-members.

ELIGIBILITY: Open to APA members and non-members.

CRITERIA:
Education. Establish that your entry has encouraged community leaders to revise their opinions about the varied uses and broad applications of the planning process. State the influence your entry has had on public awareness beyond those immediately affected.

Collaboration. Describe the level of collaboration between leadership and competing interests. Explain how those affected were brought into the planning process for this initiative.

ELIGIBILITY: Open to APA members and non-members. Nominated efforts should have been in continuous effect for a minimum of three (3) years.

CRITERIA:
Sustained improvement. Indicate the level of consistency of this implementation effort since its start. Detail any changes, derailments, or improvements throughout the implementation phase.

Funding. Identify funding challenges or support for this effort. Report any political changes that might affect, for better or worse, the effort's long-term funding.

Community acceptance and support. Describe how the longevity of this effort has increased the community's appetite for planning and the pursuit of similar initiatives. Clarify the extent that this effort's sustained success has been achieved beyond its general audience.

Environmental planning and impacts. Address how the nominated effort identified, evaluated, and addressed potential beneficial and adverse consequences of implementing a project, development, or program on the surrounding environment.

ELIGIBILITY: Open to APA members and non-members.

CRITERIA:
Originality. Document how the program uses new ideas or combines tools to address a demonstrated need for planning information or education within the community.

Quality. Competitive entries will represent excellence of thought, analysis, writing, and graphics throughout the plan, regardless of budgetary limitations. Indicate how available resources were used in a thoughtful and ethical process.

Education. Show how the program has increased the understanding of planning principles and the planning process. Explain how the results have been measured and internalized.

Transferability. Illustrate how the entry has potential application for others. Describe how widespread application would be in the interest of the planning profession.

Effectiveness and results. Specify the extent that the program, if directed to adults or designed as a general education effort, has been effective in implementing plans and ideas. Show how the program has furthered the cause of sound planning. Provide measurable results if possible or appropriate (for example, pre- and post-outreach effort poll results).

ELIGIBLITY: Open to APA members and non-members.

CRITERIA:
Planning and innovation. Efforts to sustain places should address a wide range of issues and also meet specific needs. What elements are addressed by the nominated effort in terms of lessening and mitigating adverse impacts from development and everyday living? What was the role of planners in helping to facilitate these efforts? In what other way does the plan or planning effort address the social aspect of a community from aging to minority populations? How does the effort reflect changes in the planning process that integrate measurable indicators to gauge effectiveness? (See Measurability below)

Plan compatibility. How is sustainability integrated into the corresponding comprehensive or master plan, district or special-use plan, city recreational plan, economic development plan, capital improvement program, zoning ordinances, or other related initiative? Describe how the sustainability efforts undertaken support the broader needs of the community and surrounding region or address community-wide objectives.

Citizen participation. What was done to ensure the widest variety of resident and stakeholder participation in the plan and planning process? What steps were taken to inform affected residents and ensure collaboration with decision-makers, service providers, and business leaders during the planning process? What efforts were made to engage underrepresented populations such as minorities, youth, and moderate-and-low-income residents?

Collaboration and partnerships. What strategic partnerships or alliances were developed to help meet the goals and objectives of the nominated effort? What formal and informal steps were taken to engage community leaders and local officials so as to gain broad public support for the plan and its implementation? How have partnerships changed the working dynamic and expanded the support for planning in general?

Transferability. Describe how the nomination's efforts can be adopted and implemented by other jurisdictions.

Measurability. How is success measured and determined? Describe the metrics or evaluation methods being used to gauge success and measure improvements?

Social and economic concerns. How does the nominated effort address not only a community's physical realm, but also its social and economic concerns and issues? How have efforts to improve a community's quality of life been integrated into older neighborhoods and brownfields?

ELIGIBILITY: Open to firms which employ planners whose practice includes a significant amount of planning projects.

CRITERIA:
Influence. The firm's positive influence on the direction and professional advancement of planning, for example promoting new technologies, innovations in practice, and advances in the art and science of planning.

Collaboration. Evidence of fostering a collaborative environment that encourages open communication and teamwork across skills and disciplines should be highlighted.

Quality. Demonstration of consistent quality of the firm's work and its recognition by those who practice or sponsor planning, teach planning, develop communities, and the general public. Elements of quality include graphic design, content, evidence of implementation by clients.

Ethical Practice. Evidence that the firm consistently upheld and championed the highest standards of ethics in terms of the public trust and guiding and educating its staff on the importance of ethics.

Outreach and Engagement. Demonstration of effort and skill 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.

ELIGIBLITY: Open to APA members and non-members.

CRITERIA:
Planning and innovation. Hazard mitigation efforts should identify fully the full range of a community's natural and other hazards and describe how these can be addressed effectively in order to minimize loss of life and property. What elements are addressed by the nominated effort in terms of both addressing risks to existing development and steering new development to less hazardous locations? What was the role of planners in helping to facilitate these efforts? Does the plan anticipate social equity issues that may result from either hazard mitigation efforts or a failure to address mitigation needs?

Interactivity of hazards. Frequently, one hazard, such as flooding, can directly or indirectly exacerbate other hazards, such as landslides in steep terrain. How does the plan anticipate these cascading impacts and address them in ways that will achieve some positive synergy among hazard mitigation efforts?

Foresight. Opportunity often knocks in strange ways during disasters. In what ways does the plan anticipate unique opportunities for both advancing and implementing hazard mitigation in light of new lessons learned as a result of disasters? In what ways does it establish and support procedures for properly identifying and learning those lessons?

Plan compatibility. How is hazard mitigation integrated into the corresponding comprehensive or master plan, district or special-use plan, city recreational plan, economic development plan, capital improvement program, zoning ordinances, or other related initiatives? Describe how the hazard mitigation efforts undertaken support the broader needs of the community and surrounding region, particularly for hazards with wider regional impacts, or address community-wide objectives. If the hazard mitigation plan is multijurisdictional, explain what mechanisms exist for translating its initiatives into implementation efforts for individual participating communities.

Citizen participation. What was done to ensure the widest variety of resident and stakeholder participation in the plan and planning process? What steps were taken to inform affected residents and ensure collaboration with decision makers, property owners, and business leaders during the planning process? What efforts were made to engage underrepresented populations such as minorities or moderate- and low-income residents?

Collaboration and partnerships. What strategic partnerships or alliances were developed to help meet the goals and objectives of the nominated effort? What formal and informal steps were taken to engage community leaders, emergency managers, and local officials so as to gain broad public support for the plan and its implementation? How have partnerships changed the working dynamic and expanded the support for planning in general?

Transferability. Describe how the nomination's efforts can be adopted and implemented by other jurisdictions.

Measurability. How is success measured and determined? Describe the metrics or evaluation methods being used to gauge success and measure improvements.

Social and economic concerns. How does the nominated effort address not only the physical impacts of natural and other hazards, but also the social and economic impacts upon a community that result from disasters and other hazard-related events?

ELIGIBILITY: Open to APA members and nonmembers.

CRITERIA:
Support of planning. How did the nomination re-assert the importance of planning as a tool for improving human settlements and environmental management? How did these efforts serve as a means of slowing the rate of slum formation, mitigating hazards, and building safe and inclusive settlements? Describe how this nomination encouraged governments at all levels to design their planning systems in relation to these priorities.

Social and economic value. Illustrate how this nomination worked with or educated donor agencies and other bodies to recognize that effective planning and appropriate regulation of urban development can contribute to poverty alleviation by creating economic opportunities and sustaining assets.

Collaboration. How has this nomination engaged other professionals, civil society organizations and private sector stakeholders to contribute their knowledge and skills to enhance our efforts at capacity-building for practitioners, politicians and engaged citizens and to work with planners locally and globally to make settlements everywhere more harmonious and sustainable.

ELIGIBILITY: Open to APA members and nonmembers.

CRITERIA:
Challenges or barriers. What obstacles, whether physical, natural, political, 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?

Available resources. Identify what resources (financial, personnel, consultants, etc.) were available and how they were managed, leveraged, and deployed.

Progress and positive effects. Describe the lasting effects the effort has had or is likely to have on planning in the community. Be explicit about how the effort removed or mitigated the barriers and obstacles. How has or will the effort shape the future in the community or locale?

ELIGIBILITY:
Open to APA members and non-members.

CRITERIA:
Advocacy & Diversity: Describe to what extent the nomination's efforts address the needs of those that society typically overlooks or populations underrepresented in the planning process. How have these efforts advanced or sustained sound, ethical, and inclusionary planning within the planning field, within a specific community, or in society at large?

Effectiveness & Results:
Specify how the nomination 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.

ELIGIBILITY: Individuals may not self-nominate and cannot earn their living as planners. APA membership is not required.

CRITERIA:
Support of planning and planners. Illustrate how the nominee's work has increased the understanding of the planning process. Indicate how the nominee has shown a clear understanding of, and support for, the role of planners in public life.

Effectiveness and results. Describe the extent that the nominee has been effective in formulating and implementing plans and ideas in support of good planning. Identify the level of influence and effectiveness achieved by the nominee within different segments of the community.