Purpose:

The purpose of these guidelines is to provide clarity and structure for jurors evaluating entries for the World Wellness Ranking. Jurors are expected to assess the overall wellness initiatives, programs, and contributions of organizations, individuals, or regions, based on their impact, innovation, and sustainability in promoting health and wellness globally.

1. Eligibility & Expertise:

• Juror Qualifications: Jurors should possess significant expertise in one or more of the following fields:

  • Public health

  • Wellness and fitness

  • Sustainable living

  • Mental health and emotional well-being

  • Nutrition and dietetics

  • Environmental health

  • Social wellness initiatives

• Conflict of Interest: Jurors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest (e.g., personal or professional associations with a candidate) before participating in the evaluation process. However, having a conflict of interest does not disqualify a juror from serving. Instead, it simply means they will be required to abstain from evaluating or voting on the specific candidate with whom they have a conflict. This ensures a fair and impartial assessment while allowing the juror to contribute to the overall process.

2. Evaluation Criteria:

Entries will be judged across several categories. Jurors should score each entry based on the following weighted criteria:

• Impact (40%):

  • How significant is the wellness initiative in improving the health and well-being of its target audience?

  • Evidence of measurable outcomes such as improved quality of life, reduced health risks, or better mental health.

  • Long-term benefits and sustainability of the initiative.

• Innovation (30%):

  • Does the initiative introduce new or unique approaches to wellness, health promotion, or disease prevention?

  • Creative use of technology, research, or community engagement in delivering wellness solutions.

• Sustainability (20%):

  • Is the initiative designed to be sustainable in the long term, both financially and environmentally?

  • Consideration of social, economic, and environmental impacts in maintaining the wellness initiative.

• Collaboration & Community Engagement (10%):

  • Level of community involvement, partnerships, and collaborations to support and amplify the wellness initiative.

  • How well the initiative engages various stakeholders (e.g., government, organizations, local populations) to foster wellness in the community.

3. Judging Process:

• Initial Screening: Each juror will be provided with a list of entries, including a brief description and relevant data. Jurors will be required to assess whether each entry meets the basic eligibility criteria.

• Full Evaluation: Jurors will then score entries based on the provided criteria, using a 1-10 scale for each category, with clear rationale for the score.

• Deliberation: After individual evaluations, jurors will participate in a panel discussion to deliberate and finalize rankings. Consensus is encouraged, but if needed, the panel will vote on contentious decisions.

• Final Rankings: The panel will determine the final ranking for each entry based on cumulative scores. Final rankings will be confidential until the official announcement.

4. Confidentiality & Integrity:

• Confidentiality: All information regarding the entries, discussions, and scoring process must remain confidential throughout the competition and after the results are published.

• Integrity: Jurors are expected to approach their evaluations with fairness, objectivity, and without bias. Decisions must be based on the merit of each initiative and its alignment with the wellness ranking’s values.

5. Ethical Considerations:

• Respect for Diversity: Ensure inclusivity and respect for cultural differences, regional contexts, and varied wellness approaches while evaluating.

• Data Integrity: Jurors should not rely on biased, incomplete, or misleading data when assessing entries. Transparency and truthfulness in reporting and evaluation are essential.

6. Feedback to Participants:

• Constructive Feedback: Jurors may be asked to provide feedback or recommendations for participants to help them improve their wellness programs.

• Feedback Format: Feedback should be clear, respectful, and objective, offering actionable insights for improvement.

7. Timeline & Commitment:

• Time Commitment: Jurors should be prepared to commit a specified amount of time during the judging period to review all entries, participate in deliberations, and finalize the rankings.

• Review Requirement: Expert Jurors are expected to review and vote on at least 70% of the postulations assigned to them by Wellness Certified, ensuring a fair and comprehensive evaluation process.

8. Appeals & Disputes:

• Dispute Resolution: If a juror or participant raises a dispute regarding the rankings, the World Wellness Ranking’s organizing committee will review the situation. In case of disagreements, a neutral third-party mediator will be appointed by Wellness Certified to resolve the issue.

• Final Decision: The World Wellness Ranking’s organizing committee has the final say in all matters related to the ranking process.

9. Expert Juror License and Logo Usage:

Wellness Certified will grant a limited license to use the exclusive WWR Expert Juror logo, which highlights the juror’s distinguished role as a wellness expert within the global community. The Expert Juror will be authorized to display this logo on their professional materials, website, and social media platforms. However, the use of this logo is subject to the guidelines established by Wellness Certified. These guidelines must be followed to ensure the integrity and appropriate representation of the WWR Expert Juror status. Compliance with these standards is essential to maintaining the exclusivity and credibility of the logo.

By adhering to these guidelines, jurors will ensure a fair, transparent, and effective evaluation process that accurately reflects the best of global wellness efforts.

World Wellness Ranking 2025 Expert Juror Guidelines