NATIONAL RECOGNITION
The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
Administered by the Alliance for Performance Excellence on behalf of the U.S. Department of Commerce and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
2026 Award Criteria
The Criteria, Profile questions and scoring rubrics used to evaluate applicants.
2026 Edition of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Criteria
The 2026 Baldrige Award Criteria are organized around six Categories that both enable and reflect organizational performance, resilience, and long-term success. There are four to 12 Results and Process questions, also called Award Criteria, within each of the six Categories. Since these Criteria are used to evaluate a wide variety of organizations, it is important for evaluators to understand and consider your organization’s or community’s unique environment, which begins with your responses to a series of questions in the Organization/Community Profile.
Award Criteria overview
The Baldrige Award Criteria include an Organizational or Community Profile and six Categories. The Profile includes 18 context questions that seek important information relevant to the evaluation of the remaining six Criteria Categories — 12 Description questions and six Situation questions. The Profile questions are not evaluated independently but are used to better understand the applicant’s processes and results in the six Categories.
- Leadership
- Strategy
- Customer
- Organizational Intelligence (formerly Measurement, Analysis, and Knowledge Management)
- Workforce
- Operations
Within these Categories there is a combination of questions that ask for performance results and descriptions of key processes. Your process descriptions should be responsive to the Process Evaluation Rubric, demonstrating that the process is systematic, well-deployed, aligned and/or integrated with what is important to the applicant and to other processes, and has been improved based on evaluation.
Your results should be responsive to the Results Evaluation Rubric and show three to five years of trended data and include your performance against relevant comparisons. Because we are seeking to identify national role models, relevant comparisons are best-in-class or top decile/top quartile and competitors, where available. An organization does not need to demonstrate role-model performance in all areas to become a Baldrige Award recipient, but recipients usually demonstrate strength across many areas.
If you are unable to respond completely to a results or process question, you should explain why in the field provided. Missing information that is not explained is likely to impact your evaluation.
Full applications are due by July 1 at 8:00pm ET, submitted via an online portal.
Space limitations
- Organization/Community Profile questions: up to 3,000 characters, up to 3 charts/images.
- Results questions: up to 4,000 characters, up to 4 charts/images.
- Process questions: up to 3,000 characters, up to 3 charts/images.
Results Evaluation Rubric
The Results Evaluation Rubric assesses reported results across four areas: Levels, Trends, Comparisons, and Integration.
| Level | Levels (Le) | Trends (T) | Comparisons (C) | Integration (I) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Most relevant results demonstrate excellent performance. | Most results demonstrate sustained favorable trends or sustained high performance. | Most results demonstrate better than average performance with many achieving top quartile or better. | Most results reported for areas of organizational importance. |
| 3 | Many relevant results demonstrate good-to-excellent performance. | Many results demonstrate sustained favorable trends or sustained high performance. | Many results demonstrate better-than-average performance, with some approaching top quartile. | Many results reported for areas of organizational importance. |
| 2 | Some relevant results demonstrate good performance. | Some results demonstrate favorable trends or sustained high performance. | Some results demonstrate average performance using relevant comparisons. | Some results reported for areas of organizational importance. |
| 1 | Little or no relevant results reported and/or results demonstrate inconsistent or marginal performance. | Limited, inconsistent, or adverse trends. | Little or no relevant comparative data are provided. | Little or no results reported for areas of organizational importance. |
Relevant comparisons are (1) top decile/quartile and (2) against competitors, where available. For results responses containing charts, graphs, and tables: data must be across years, not quarters; axis scale values must be provided, otherwise data will be disregarded.
Process Evaluation Rubric
The Process Evaluation Rubric assesses processes across four areas: Approach, Deployment, Learning, and Integration.
| Level | Approach (A) | Deployment (D) | Learning (L) | Integration (I) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Most approaches are systematic. | Deployment to most work units is evident. | Most cycles of evaluation and improvement are fact-based. Instances of innovation, adoption of best practices, and sharing of refinements are evident. | Most approaches are aligned and integrated with strategic priorities and current and emerging organizational needs. |
| 3 | Many approaches are systematic. | Deployment to many work units is evident. | Many cycles of evaluation and improvement are fact-based. Refinements and best practices are shared with other work units. | Many approaches are aligned with organizational needs and strategic priorities. |
| 2 | Some approaches are systematic. | Deployment to some work units is evident. | Some cycles of evaluation and improvement are evident. | Some approaches are aligned with organizational needs. |
| 1 | Approaches are being established. | Deployment is beginning to be evident. | Improvements are based on reacting to problems. | Approaches operate independently. |
