Most Outstanding State Auxiliary Officer or Committee Member Judging Form JCI USA Most Outstanding State Auxiliary Officer or Committee Member Award Judging FormThe Most Outstanding State Auxiliary Officer or Committee Member Award recognizes a state-level leader who made significant contributions outside of executive officer roles through committee work, auxiliary positions, or appointed leadership. This award honors individuals who demonstrated initiative, accountability, collaboration, and impact while advancing the state organization’s goals and exemplifying the mission, vision, and values of JCI. Judges should evaluate nominees based on role effectiveness, leadership and initiative, impact on the state organization, engagement and collaboration, and exemplification of JCI values, as outlined in the JCI USA Awards Manual. Judges should evaluate nominees based on character and leadership traits, impact on others, service and involvement, inspiration to others, and alignment with JCI values, as outlined in the JCI USA Awards Manual. Judges should evaluate submissions based on innovation and agility, responsiveness to adversity, leadership and decision-making, impact on members and community, and alignment with JCI values, as outlined in the JCI USA Awards Manual.Judges Name(Required) First Last ChapterState(Required)Nominee Name(Required)Rating Scale (for all statements)Please choose a number 1-5 for all statements. 1 = Strongly Disagree \ 5 =Strongly AgreeAREA 1: ROLE EFFECTIVENESS & CONTRIBUTIONRate your agreement with each statement.The nominee clearly understood and fulfilled the responsibilities of their auxiliary or committee role.(Required)The nominee demonstrated accountability and follow-through on assigned tasks.(Required)The nominee contributed meaningfully to the work and outcomes of their committee or role.(Required)The nominee consistently met expectations associated with their position.(Required)AREA 2: INITIATIVE & LEADERSHIPRate your agreement with each statement.The nominee demonstrated initiative beyond the basic requirements of their role.(Required)The nominee contributed ideas, solutions, or leadership that improved outcomes.(Required)The nominee modeled professionalism and positive leadership behaviors.(Required)The nominee helped move work forward rather than waiting for direction.(Required)AREA 3: IMPACT ON THE STATE ORGANIZATIONRate your agreement with each statement.The nominee’s work had a clear and positive impact on the state organization.(Required)The nominee supported state goals related to programming, growth, or operations.(Required)The nominee helped strengthen state-level systems, projects, or initiatives.(Required)The nominee’s contributions added measurable or clearly described value.(Required)AREA 4: COLLABORATION & ENGAGEMENTRate your agreement with each statement.The nominee collaborated effectively with state officers, committee members, or volunteers.(Required)The nominee communicated clearly and constructively with others involved in their work.(Required)The nominee demonstrated engagement beyond their specific assignments when appropriate.(Required)The nominee showed commitment to the broader success of the state organization.(Required)AREA 5: EXEMPLIFICATION OF JCI VALUESRate your agreement with each statement.The nominee exemplified JCI values through their service and conduct.(Required)The nominee demonstrated ethical leadership, integrity, and professionalism.(Required)The nominee’s actions aligned clearly with the JCI mission and vision.(Required)The nominee served as a positive representative of JCI within the state organization.(Required)AREA 6: OVERALL ASSESSMENTRate your agreement with each statement.Overall, this nominee represents an outstanding State Auxiliary Officer or Committee Member deserving of national recognition.(Required)The nominee’s contributions exceeded expectations for a non-executive state leadership role.(Required)This nomination is competitive at a national level.(Required)I would strongly recommend this nominee for recognition in this category.(Required)REQUIRED JUDGE FEEDBACKStrengths(Required)What were the nominee’s greatest strengths and most impactful contributions in their role? Opportunities for Growth(Required)What areas could the nominee continue to develop or strengthen in future service? Overall Comments(Required)Judges Attestation(Required)I reviewed this submission in full. I evaluated this project/program fairly and objectively. I applied the scoring criteria consistently and without bias. I attest that the above statements are true.
