What people usually ask before they nominate
Most public questions start with the same few points: can a neighbour be nominated, does the nominee need to know, and what kind of story helps the judging process. The short answer is yes, ordinary people can be nominated, but the nomination needs to show real help, a clear context and enough detail for the panel to read it properly.
A good nomination is not just praise. It explains what the person did, who benefited, where the help happened, and why that help mattered. If the story is about a teacher, carer, volunteer, neighbour or first responder, the strongest entries usually describe repeated effort, calm action under pressure, or steady service that others noticed in daily life.
- Use the nominee’s full name if known.
- Describe the act of help in plain wording.
- Say who was affected and how.
- Add dates, places or community details where possible.
How the nomination is read and checked
Once a nomination lands with the programme team, it is checked for basic completeness and fit. That means the story is read, the details are compared for consistency, and any missing consent or privacy points are noted before it moves further. The aim is not to make the form complicated, it is to make the public record accurate and fair.
Public questions often ask whether a nomination can be changed after sending. Yes, updates can be made where needed, especially if a spelling fix, extra evidence or a clearer explanation is required. If a nomination mentions sensitive matters, the team looks carefully at how much should be shared and what should stay private.
- Check that the nominee can be identified correctly.
- Keep the story focused on the helpful act itself.
- Leave out gossip, insults or speculation.
- Include only evidence that supports the nomination.
Consent, privacy and sensitive details
Questions about consent come up often, and they matter. A nomination should not place a person in the public eye without thinking through permission and privacy. If the nominee is alive and reachable, consent is normally sought or recorded in line with the programme process. If the person cannot give consent directly, the submission needs to be handled with extra care and the private details kept limited.
The privacy side is simple in principle, but careful in practice. Personal contact details, home addresses, medical information and other sensitive facts are not treated as public content. When a nomination refers to a difficult family matter, a health issue or a vulnerable person, the judging file should contain only what is necessary for assessment. The public version must stay cleaner than the internal record.
- Do not share more than the nomination needs.
- Keep children’s details especially limited.
- Use respectful wording, even in hard cases.
- Ask for consent before sharing a full public story.
What happens after you submit a question
After submission, public questions are sorted into the relevant part of the programme workflow. Some are simple clarifications about eligibility or wording. Others ask how to update a nomination, how the judging criteria work, or what happens if the nominee has not been informed yet. The team reviews these points against the same programme rules each time, so the guidance stays consistent across provinces.
We do not promise a fixed reply window here, because the work depends on the volume and the detail of each case. What matters is that the question is attached to the right nomination record, or to the right stage of the process, so nothing gets lost. If a question affects consent or privacy, it is treated as a priority issue in the queue, because those points shape what can be shared publicly.
- General questions are grouped by topic.
- Nomination updates are matched to the existing file.
- Privacy matters are separated from public-facing copy.
- Judging queries go to the review side of the process.
Judging criteria in plain language
People often ask what the judges look for. In plain terms, the panel wants a nomination that is believable, specific and relevant to community help. A strong entry shows effort that matters to others, not just a one-off compliment. It should explain the role the person played, what changed because of that help, and why the story deserves attention in a national programme.
The criteria are not about status or money. They are about impact, consistency, sincerity and the quality of the evidence. A nomination can be short and still strong if the facts are clear. It can also be long and still fail if it wanders, repeats itself or leaves the panel guessing. The best public questions usually focus on those basics before the form is sent.
- Impact on a real community or group.
- Clear facts, not broad claims.
- Evidence that supports the story.
- Good fit with the purpose of the awards programme.
Help with updates, corrections and follow-up questions
After a nomination has been sent, follow-up questions may still arise. A spelling correction, a better description of the nominee’s work, or a note about missing consent can all be handled as part of the same public question process. The programme team also fields questions from people in Gauteng, the Western Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, the Eastern Cape, Limpopo, Free State, North West and Mpumalanga, so the language needs to stay clear for everyone.
Pricing for public questions is handled as part of the programme enquiry process, and the approach depends on what is being requested. Some questions are part of standard nomination support, while others involve more detailed review work tied to privacy, sensitive information or evidence checks. The important part is that the scope is clear before anything is updated or resubmitted.
- Use our contact form for nomination-linked questions.
- State the nominee name and province where relevant.
- Say whether the note is an update, correction or new question.
- Keep the message focused on the issue at hand.
Key facts
| Service type | Public questions for a nomination-based awards programme |
|---|---|
| Location | Braamfontein, Johannesburg |
| Coverage | Open to nominations across South Africa |
| Key topics | Eligibility, consent, privacy, review, updates and judging criteria |
| Process | Question review, file matching, clarification and programme guidance |
| Contact route | our contact form on our contact page |
