CONTENTS

Part I.  Competition Rules
1.  Purpose, Scope and Legal Basis
2.  Nomination Categories
3.  Cycle Structure and Calendar
4.  Application Procedure
5.  Composition of the Application File
6.  Registration Fees and Financial Separation
7.  Due Diligence and Verification
8.  Disqualification
9.  Finality of Decisions
Part II.  Participant Eligibility Criteria
10.  General Eligibility Standards
11.  Senior-Level Requirement
12.  Excluded Applicants
13.  Corporate and Institutional Nominees
14.  Evidence Standards
Part III.  Evaluation and Scoring Criteria
15.  Multi-Stage Selection Model
16.  Scoring Scale and Descriptors
17.  Weighted Criteria Matrix
18.  Definition of Each Criterion
19.  Calculation of the Final Score
20.  Short List Threshold
21.  Final Voting and Tie-Break
22.  Result Validation
Part IV.  Geography and Scale of Participation
23.  Geographic Coverage
24.  Volume of Participation
25.  Composition of the Jury Council
26.  Publication of Participation Statistics
Part V.  Final Provisions
27.  Relationship to the Governance Manual
28.  Amendments and Interpretation
Annex A.  Parameters Determined for Each Cycle

PART I

COMPETITION RULES

1. Purpose, Scope and Legal Basis
1.1. These Regulations consolidate, in a single instrument, the rules of the competition, the eligibility criteria applicable to participants, the criteria and methodology of evaluation, and the declared scope of participation of the Global 1000 Award (the "Award").
1.2. These Regulations are issued under the authority of the Organizing Committee pursuant to Sections 5.2 and 43 of the Institutional Governance Manual of the Award (the "Manual") and constitute an Annex to it.
1.3. These Regulations do not amend the Manual. In the event of any inconsistency, the Manual prevails.
1.4. The Award is an independent international professional recognition platform established under the laws of the State of Delaware, United States of America. It is a private, non-governmental framework and does not represent any state authority (Manual, Section 1).
1.5. These Regulations bind all applicants, nominees, members of the Jury Council, the Secretariat, and any third party participating in the nomination process.
1.6. These Regulations are of permanent application and contain no cycle-specific data. Parameters determined by the Organizing Committee afresh for each cycle are listed in Annex A and published separately before the opening of applications, without amendment of this instrument.

2. Nomination Categories
2.1. The Award comprises ten nomination categories:


2.2. An applicant may apply in more than one category only where each application is supported by a distinct evidentiary record. Duplicate applications within a single category are not admitted.
2.3. The Organizing Committee may introduce, merge, or withdraw a category. Any such adjustment is approved and published before the opening of applications for the cycle concerned and does not require amendment of these Regulations.
2.4. Where the number of admitted applications in a category is insufficient to permit meaningful comparative evaluation, the Organizing Committee may withdraw that category from the cycle. Fees paid in respect of a withdrawn category are refunded in full.

3. Cycle Structure and Calendar
3.1. The Award operates on an annual cycle. Each cycle proceeds through the following stages in the order stated:


3.2. The calendar of each cycle — the date on which each stage opens and closes — is approved by the Organizing Committee and published before the opening of applications. The calendar does not form part of these Regulations.
3.3. All deadlines expire at 23:59 (UTC) on the date published. Applications received after the closing date are not admitted to evaluation.
3.4. The Organizing Committee may extend the closing date once per cycle. Any extension is published on the official website and notified to registered applicants.
3.5. The order of stages set out in Clause 3.1 may not be varied. No stage may be omitted, and no nominee may enter a later stage without having passed each preceding one.

4. Application Procedure
4.1. The procedure consists of the following steps (Manual, Section 12):

1. Selection of the nomination category.
2. Completion of the official application form.
3. Submission of a professional biography.
4. Provision of documented evidence of the achievements relied upon.
5. Payment of the registration fee, where applicable.
6. Preliminary administrative review by the Secretariat.
7. Qualification screening and due diligence.
8. Admission to the evaluation stage.

4.2. Applications are submitted exclusively through the official channel designated by the Secretariat. Materials transmitted by any other means are not registered.
4.3. Applications may be submitted by the candidate personally (self-nomination) or by a third party with the candidate's documented written consent. Nomination without consent is not admitted.
4.4. The working language of the Award is English. Supporting documents in another language shall be accompanied by a translation; the Secretariat may require certification of the translation.
4.5. Admission to the evaluation stage does not constitute a finding on the merits and confers no entitlement to inclusion in the Short List.

5. Composition of the Application File
5.1. A complete application file comprises:

• the completed official application form;
• a professional biography, not exceeding two pages;
• confirmation of current position and organization (appointment letter, corporate registry extract, or equivalent);
• documented evidence of the achievements relied upon — quantified results, project documentation, audited or otherwise verifiable indicators;
• evidence of professional recognition, where relied upon: publications, patents, industry awards, speaking or advisory engagements;
• two professional references, with contact details, from persons not related to the candidate;
• a signed declaration of accuracy of the submitted information;
• a signed consent to the processing of personal data (Manual, Part VII).

5.2. Evidence shall relate to the assessment period of five years preceding the closing date of applications, save where the achievement relied upon is of a durable nature and its continuing effect is demonstrated.
5.3. The Secretariat may request clarification or additional documentation. Failure to respond within ten business days of the request results in the application being treated as incomplete and excluded from further consideration.

6. Registration Fees and Financial Separation
6.1. Participation in the Award may be subject to a registration fee covering administrative processing, verification, and documentation. The Organizing Committee determines the fees applicable to each cycle and publishes them, together with the categories to which they apply, before the opening of applications.
6.2. No fee may be introduced, increased, or extended to a new stage after applications for the cycle concerned have opened.
6.3. Fees are non-refundable once an application has been admitted to Phase II, save in the case of withdrawal of a category under Clause 2.4, where the fee is refunded in full.
6.4. Payment of any fee confers no advantage whatsoever in the evaluation, and non-payment of any optional fee is not a ground for exclusion from evaluation on the merits. Financial operations are structurally separated from Jury scoring, evaluation procedures, and result determination; no financial contribution influences an outcome (Manual, Section 39).
6.5. Sponsors and partners of the Award have no access to evaluation materials and take no part in scoring. A sponsor may not be nominated in a category which it sponsors, and no sponsorship may be linked to a nomination, a Short List placement, or a result.

7. Due Diligence and Verification
7.1. Every admitted application is subject to verification comprising identity confirmation, review of professional background, validation of publicly available information, and assessment of the credibility of the claims advanced (Manual, Section 13).
7.2. The Secretariat and the Compliance Function may contact the referees, the candidate's organization, and public registers for the purpose of verification.
7.3. Applications failing verification are excluded. The applicant is notified of the exclusion; the underlying assessment materials remain confidential.

8. Disqualification
8.1. Immediate disqualification may occur where (Manual, Section 14):

• the information submitted is false, materially incomplete, or misleading;
• a conflict of interest has not been disclosed;
• an attempt has been made to interfere with the evaluation, including lobbying of Jury members or the offering of any incentive;
• ethical standards have been violated;
• the eligibility criteria of Part II are not met;
• submitted materials have been altered after the commencement of evaluation.

8.2. Disqualification may be applied at any stage, including after the formation of the Short List and, where the grounds are established subsequently, after the announcement of results. In the latter case the Organizing Committee may revoke the status conferred (Manual, Section 33).
8.3. Fees are not refunded upon disqualification.

9. Finality of Decisions
9.1. Decisions rendered through the proper voting procedure are final, binding, and not subject to external appeal (Manual, Section 48.5).

PART II

PARTICIPANT ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

10. General Eligibility Standards
10.1. Only candidates meeting all of the following criteria may participate (Manual, Section 10):

• senior-level professional status, as defined in Section 11;
• a verifiable career history;
• measurable achievements, capable of documentary substantiation;
• documented leadership experience;
• compliance with the ethical standards of the Award.

10.2. The criteria are cumulative. Failure to satisfy any one of them precludes admission to evaluation.
10.3. There is no restriction on the basis of nationality, country of residence, gender, age, or organizational affiliation, save as provided in Section 12.

11. Senior-Level Requirement
11.1. The Award is exclusively intended for senior professionals, executive leadership, founders and co-founders, principal experts, and distinguished specialists (Manual, Section 11).
11.2. Senior-level status is established where the candidate satisfies at least two of the following indicators:


11.3. No single formal indicator is applied mechanically. The Organizing Committee assesses the candidate's achievements, roles, and recognition in their totality against the standard of Clause 11.2, applying the approach already adopted in respect of the Jury Council (Jury Selection and Appointment Policy, Clause 4.3).

12. Excluded Applicants
12.1. The following are categorically excluded (Manual, Section 11):

• junior-level professionals and students;
• candidates whose professional record cannot be verified;
• persons subject to an active sanction of the Award under Section 33 of the Manual;
• members of the Jury Council, of the Organizing Committee, and of the Secretariat, together with their immediate family members, in respect of any cycle in which they serve, such participation being incompatible with the conflict-of-interest regime of the Manual (Sections 25 and 46);
• persons in respect of whom there exist circumstances incompatible with the ethical standards of the Award.

13. Corporate and Institutional Nominees
13.1. Where a nomination category admits organizations, the applicant entity must demonstrate:

• lawful incorporation and not less than three years of operating history;
• verifiable performance indicators for the assessment period;
• absence of unresolved proceedings materially affecting reputation;
• a designated senior representative authorized to submit the application.

13.2. An organization is evaluated on the same criteria matrix as an individual, with the criterion descriptors applied at organizational level.

14. Evidence Standards
14.1. The burden of substantiating every claim rests on the applicant. Unsupported assertions are disregarded in scoring.
14.2. Evidence is assessed on a hierarchy of reliability:


14.3. Deliberate submission of unreliable evidence constitutes grounds for disqualification under Section 8.

PART III

EVALUATION AND SCORING CRITERIA

15. Multi-Stage Selection Model
15.1. The Award applies a four-phase evaluation architecture designed to ensure objectivity, independence, and merit-based outcomes (Manual, Section 15).


15.2. Only applications passing Phases I and II proceed to Jury evaluation.
15.3. Each nominee admitted to Phase III is scored independently by not fewer than three Jury members. Assignment of nominees to Jury members is made by the Secretariat on the basis of subject-matter relevance and the absence of any declared conflict of interest.

16. Scoring Scale and Descriptors
16.1. Evaluation is based on a quantitative scoring system. Each Jury member assigns a numerical value to each predefined criterion on a scale of 0 to 10 (Manual, Section 16).
16.2. Zero scores are permitted where a criterion is not met. Partial scores reflect the degree of compliance. To ensure that the same numerical value carries the same meaning across all Jury members, the following descriptors apply:


16.3. A Jury member awarding 0, 9, or 10 on any criterion shall record a short written justification in the evaluation form. Justifications form part of the audit trail and are not disclosed to the nominee.

17. Weighted Criteria Matrix
17.1. To ensure balanced evaluation, each criterion carries a weight. Weights are defined per nomination category and approved in advance (Manual, Clause 17.1). The following weighting is the standard weighting approved for each of the ten categories; it applies to a category unless the Organizing Committee approves a different weighting for that category before the opening of applications:


17.2. Any weighting differing from the standard weighting is published, together with the category to which it applies, before the opening of applications. No weighting may be altered once evaluation has commenced (Manual, Section 48.2).

18. Definition of Each Criterion18.1. Measurable Impact
The scale and verifiability of the results achieved: financial, operational, scientific, or social indicators directly attributable to the candidate. Assessment is directed to magnitude, evidential quality, and the candidate's personal causal contribution, rather than to the size of the organization in which the result arose.
18.2. Innovation
The originality of the approach, product, method, or model, and the extent to which it departs from established practice in the field. Novelty is assessed relative to the state of the field, not to the candidate's own prior work.
18.3. Strategic Influence
The effect of the candidate's work on the direction taken by the sector, market, profession, or public policy — including adoption of the candidate's methods by others, participation in standard-setting, and recognized thought leadership.
18.4. Leadership Competence
Demonstrated capacity to build, direct, and develop teams and organizations, evidenced by scale of responsibility, retention and progression of people, and the development of successors.
18.5. International Relevance
The extent to which the candidate's work is recognized, applied, or has effect beyond a single national market — cross-border operations, international recognition, and applicability of the results in other jurisdictions.
18.6. Scalability
The capacity of the result to be extended, replicated, or sustained at materially greater scale, and evidence that such extension has occurred or is credibly achievable.
18.7. Sustainability
The durability of the result over time and its environmental, social, and governance dimension, including whether the achievement continues to produce effect independently of the candidate's continued involvement.
18.8. Ethical Compliance
The integrity of the candidate's professional conduct, the absence of adverse regulatory, judicial, or reputational findings, and the accuracy and completeness of the information submitted to the Award.

19. Calculation of the Final Score
19.1. For each nominee and each Jury member:
Individual Score  =  Σ ( Criterion Score × Assigned Weight )
19.2. The Final Score of a nominee is the arithmetic mean of the individual scores of all Jury members who evaluated that nominee, expressed on a scale of 0 to 10 and rounded to two decimal places.
19.3. Where a Jury member has been recused, the scores of that member are excluded from the calculation and the mean is taken over the remaining members (Manual, Section 25).
19.4. Worked example (weights as per Section 17):


20. Short List Threshold
20.1. Following Phase III scoring, candidates are ranked by Final Score within each nomination category (Manual, Section 18).
20.2. The Short List comprises candidates who satisfy both of the following conditions:

• a Final Score of not less than 7.0 out of 10; and
• rank among the ten highest-scoring candidates in the category.

20.3. Where no candidate in a category attains the threshold, the Organizing Committee may declare the category without a winner for that cycle. The threshold is not lowered to produce a result.
20.4. Only Short List candidates proceed to final voting.

21. Final Voting and Tie-Break
21.1. Final voting is conducted through closed individual ballots. Voting is confidential, independent, non-collaborative, and recorded for internal audit purposes (Manual, Section 19).
21.2. In the event of equal Final Scores, the following sequential criteria apply (Manual, Section 20):

1. Higher score in the Measurable Impact criterion.
2. Higher score in the Innovation criterion.
3. Higher average ranking across all Jury members.
4. If equality persists, the Jury Chair confirms a procedural resolution on the basis of the pre-approved rules.

21.3. All tie-break decisions are documented and archived.

22. Result Validation
22.1. The Secretariat performs mathematical verification of the aggregated scores, followed by a procedural compliance check.
22.2. The Organizing Committee confirms that the evaluation followed the regulations, that no procedural violation occurred, and that scoring was completed independently (Manual, Section 21).
22.3. An official Final Protocol is issued. Only winners are publicly announced; the scores and rankings of other participants remain confidential.

PART IV

GEOGRAPHY AND SCALE OF PARTICIPATION

23. Geographic Coverage
23.1. The Award is international in scope. Participation is open to candidates from any jurisdiction, subject to applicable sanctions and export-control law binding upon the Award as a Delaware entity.
23.2. International representation is an institutional standard of the Award, and not an aspiration. In every cycle, participation shall represent not fewer than thirty countries. This figure is a floor established by the participation record of the Award; it is not a target, and exceeding it confers no advantage on any participant.
23.3. Applications are received across the following regions:

• North America;
• Latin America;
• Europe;
• the Middle East and Africa;
• Asia-Pacific;
• the Commonwealth of Independent States and Central Asia.

23.4. Where in a given cycle the standard of Clause 23.2 would not be met, the Organizing Committee shall record the fact in the Final Protocol together with the measures taken. The standard may not be met by admitting candidates who do not satisfy Part II.
23.5. No quota, reservation, or preference is applied by country or region. Geographic distribution is a consequence of the applications received and of merit-based evaluation, and is not a factor in scoring.
23.6. Where the criterion of International Relevance is applied (Clause 18.5), it assesses the reach and recognition of the candidate's work, and not the candidate's nationality or country of residence.

24. Volume of Participation
24.1. The number of applications received and admitted varies by cycle. Figures for a given cycle are established after its close and published under Section 26; they do not form part of these Regulations.
24.2. The following rules govern volume in every cycle:

• each of the ten categories is evaluated independently, and a candidate's standing in one category has no effect on any other;
• where the Organizing Committee sets a cap on the number of nominees admitted to Phase III in a category, admission is determined strictly by rank order of the qualification assessment, and no discretionary admission is permitted;
• the Short List comprises not more than ten candidates per category (Clause 20.2);
• one winner is determined per category, save where the Organizing Committee declares a category without a winner under Clause 20.3;
• the Short List threshold is not lowered, and no cap is raised, in order to produce a result.

24.3. The designation "1000" denotes the institutional standard of the Award and does not constitute a commitment to admit or recognize any particular number of participants in a given cycle.

25. Composition of the Jury Council
25.1. The Jury Council is composed of distinguished professionals representing, among other fields, academia, technology, business, creative industries, public service, and science (Jury Selection and Appointment Policy, Clause 3.1).
25.2. The formation of the Jury Council is guided by diversity of professional expertise across the nomination categories, international representation, independence from sponsors, partners, applicants, and any external stakeholder, and periodic rotation of membership (Policy, Clause 3.2; Manual, Section 28).
25.3. Membership is by appointment only. Candidates are not admitted through open enrollment, and each appointee must satisfy every criterion of Clause 4.2 of the Policy — demonstrated professional excellence, recognized expertise and professional authority, subject-matter relevance to the categories to be evaluated, integrity and ethical standing, analytical capability and independent judgment, and the absence of disqualifying conflicts of interest.
25.4. Appointment follows the five-step procedure of Clause 6.1 of the Policy — professional background review, experience validation, ethical assessment, conflict-of-interest screening, and formal approval by the Organizing Committee — and takes effect upon acceptance of the Code of Ethics and execution of the Conflict of Interest Declaration (Manual, Annexes 45 and 46).
25.5. Jury members are assigned to categories on the basis of subject-matter relevance and the absence of any declared conflict of interest. Each nominee is scored by not fewer than three Jury members (Clause 15.3).
25.6. The size of the Jury Council in a given cycle is determined by the number of categories and the volume of admitted applications. It is not fixed by these Regulations, and its composition, term of office, rotation, and termination are governed by the Policy.

26. Publication of Participation Statistics
26.1. Following the close of each cycle, the Award publishes aggregate statistics comprising the number of applications received, the number admitted to evaluation, the number of countries represented, and the number of winners by category.
26.2. Statistics are published in aggregate form only. No individual score, ranking, or the identity of any non-winning participant is disclosed (Manual, Sections 21.5 and 37).

PART V

FINAL PROVISIONS

27. Relationship to the Governance Manual
27.1. These Regulations consolidate and elaborate provisions of the Manual, in particular Part III (Sections 10–14), Part IV (Sections 15–21), and Sections 5, 38–40 and 48.
27.2. These Regulations do not amend the Manual. In the event of any inconsistency, the Manual prevails.
27.3. Terms defined in Section 2 of the Manual bear the same meaning in these Regulations.

28. Amendments and Interpretation
28.1. Amendments to these Regulations are adopted by the Organizing Committee and must preserve the independence of the Jury, the senior-only eligibility standard, the confidentiality regime, the multi-stage selection architecture, and the objectivity of the scoring methodology (Manual, Section 43).
28.2. No amendment affecting categories, weights, thresholds, or fees takes effect in respect of a cycle in which applications have already opened.
28.3. In the event of ambiguity, interpretation shall align with the principles of independence, meritocracy, and procedural integrity, and no interpretation may compromise the structural independence of evaluation (Manual, Section 44).
28.4. These Regulations enter into force on the date of their approval by the Organizing Committee.

ANNEX A

PARAMETERS DETERMINED FOR EACH CYCLE

A.1. These Regulations are of permanent application. The parameters listed below are determined by the Organizing Committee for each cycle and published before the opening of applications. Their determination does not amend these Regulations.


A.2. The following parameters are fixed by these Regulations and apply in every cycle. They may be altered only by amendment under Section 28, and no alteration takes effect in respect of a cycle in which applications have already opened.