"It is time for us to go to the people rather than ask the people, especially the poor, to come to us."
Jury Deliberation Report for Portable Playground
The Jury Deliberation Report for Portable Playground Category is now available for downloading. Here are some excerpts from the report:
Prior to the Jury Deliberation scheduled last December 05, 2008 at Room 101 of the University Hotel in UP Campus, Diliman, Quezon City, the jury panel agreed that eligible entries will be judged on the following criteria and scoring weights:
Criterion # 1: Appropriate and safe play spaces (max. of 25 points)
The design should provide adequate spaces for appropriate and safe play experiences of children and create opportunities for teaching children the value of environmental responsibility.
Criterion # 2: Mobility (max. of 25 points)
The playground unit should be mobile and transportable to other areas of available open space in a community.
Criterion # 3: Cost-effectiveness & Sustainable Construction (max. of 25 points)
The playground unit should be cost effective and should be built using sustainable construction materials and techniques. Designers should consider use of local materials, tools/equipment and labor and construction methods, durability and ease of maintenance and repair.
Criterion # 4: Socio-cultural sensitivity & Affordability (max. of 25 points)
The design should be socio-culturally sensitive and affordable, has high possibility of being constructed by people’s organizations like SHEC and SAPSPA.
The jury shall select winning designs and designate First, Second, and Third Award according to the following standard:
First Award – with at least a final score of 90 points
Second Award – with at least a final score of 80 points
Third Award – with at least a final score of 70 points
If necessary, the mobility (criterion 2) score will be used as the tie-breaker. The jury may also decide to give out special awards for some entries.
The jury also applied the following rules in selecting eligible entries:
1. Late submissions on the date of the deadline (i.e. those received after 5:00pm of Nov.28) shall have point deductions from the entry’s total score. For every 30 minutes of late submittal, 1.0 point shall be deducted. For example, the if the entry was submitted at 6:45pm and garnered a total score of 83.75 points, 4.0 points will be deducted and its final score would be 79.75 points.
2. Entries submitted after the Nov.28 deadline will be disqualified.
3. Entries that did not conduct the required community area visit will have a deduction of 10 points from their total scores.
4. The Secretariat Committee will examine the boards for compliance to competition guidelines and rules and for every non-compliance, 1 point will be deducted from the total score.
III. Jury Deliberation Process
The judging process consisted of the following steps:
1. Before actual jury review, the Secretariat Committee examined all submissions to ascertain whether they complied with submission and presentation board layout requirements and procedural rules, and noted compliance of the proposed designs to space requirements.
2. At the start of the jury review sessions, selected resource persons and community representatives were invited for a discussion of the entries’ merits. All qualified entries were displayed and seen also by the group and their comments were solicited to be considered by the jury in their deliberations.
3. For the first round of jury review, each jury member scored the entries according to the four criteria (outlined in part II). Each entry’s scores were averaged to obtain the total score. All entries with an average total score of 60.0 points and higher comprised the semi-finalists’ pool that advanced to the second round.
4. For the second round of jury review, previous total scores were disregarded and each entry (in the finalists’ pool only) was scored by the jury panel unanimously. Ample time was given to the jury panel for deliberation. (The discussion from this deliberation formed part of the jury comments on winning and notable entries.)
5. Because the total scores of all the finalists did not reach the First, Second, and Third Award standards, the jury decided to give out special citations or Jury Awards. From the finalists’ pool, the jury selected three winning designs and awarded the following Jury Awards:
Best in Mobility / Transportability
Best Visual Appeal for Children
Most Potentially-Implementable Design
6. After the winning designs were selected, the envelopes containing the winners’ names were opened by the Secretariat Committee and the contents read to the jury.
7. Winning designers were notified through email on December 9, 2008 by the Secretariat Committee. Awarding ceremonies will be organized by TAO-Pilipinas on December 16, 2008.