How can we improve learning outcomes for refugees and displaced people under 24?
Former President, Chobani Foundation and Chobani Ventures
Director of Development, T.H. Chan Harvard School of Public Health
Founder & CEO, Epic Foundation
Professor, Esther and Harold E. Edgerton Career Development Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and DMSE Faculty Fellow in Archaeological Materials, MIT
Senior Director, Social Innovation Partnerships, Save the Children
President, University of the People
Solve judges will consider a few key dimensions as the evaluate a heterogeneous group of proposals submitted for each challenge. In addition to the criteria outlined below, judges will evaluate how proposals are uniquely appropriate for the Solve community by considering how they integrate technology, rely on cross-sector partnerships, and/or utilize the MIT community.
Judges will evaluate each proposal for their innovation, discovery, and originality to prioritize the most additive solutions, rather than rewarding traditional thinking or encyclopedic knowledge.
1 - Concept exists - no unique application
2 - Concept partially exists - some unique application
3 - Concept partially exists - unusual or imaginative application
4 - Entirely novel concept - challenges existing paradigm
Judges will evaluate each proposal’s economic, social, political, legal, and technical feasibility to ensure winning solutions are implementable.
1 - Infeasible economically, socially, politically, legally, or technically; Potential concerns and barriers not addressed
2 - Questionably feasible economically, socially, politically, legally, or technically; Potential concerns and barriers insufficiently addressed
3 - Likely feasible economically, socially, politically, legally, and technically; Potential concerns and barriers partially addressed
4 - Feasible economically, socially, politically, legally, or technically; Potential concerns and barriers fully addressed
Judges will evaluate each proposal’s projected impact to identify which solution best meets the stated goals and objectives of each challenge. For example, for Learn challenges, impact may be evaluated based on the projected number of children reading at grade level.
NOTE: Proposals should clearly define both their projected impact and their monitoring and evaluation metrics.
1 - Impact and benefits unclear
2 - Limited benefits; minimal impact
3 - Modest benefits; moderate impact
4 - Large-scale benefits; high-impact
Judges will evaluate the quality of presentations, including the quality of writing, use of graphics and visual elements, and any inclusion of compelling artistic representations. Proposals that are well-presented will be favored.
1 - Unclear; lacks persuasiveness and visual appeal
2 - Somewhat clear, persuasive, and visually appealing
3 - Clear, persuasive, and visually appealing
4 - Highest-quality; very clear, persuasive, and visually appealing