● Official Scoring Material · 100 Marks Total
Round 1mark scheme.
How Round 1 proposals are marked: 100 marks across seven categories. Start with the summary, then open any category to see what each band looks like.
- Total marks
- 100Across 7 categories
- Proposal length
- 250–1,000Words recommended · 1,200 max
- Evaluation
- AnonymousTo ensure complete fairness
- Next
- Top sixGo through to the finals
01 — Guidance
How entries are marked.
- Aim for well-rounded. Being solid in every category beats excelling in one or two.
- The descriptors are guides, not a checklist. They show what a top-band answer tends to look like; don’t let them box your idea in.
- Marked anonymously, with feedback and mark breakdowns later.
- 250–1,000 words (1,200 at most). Quality over length.
Questions about marking: jiescalantephilips@perse.co.uk.
02 — Matrix
Summary mark scheme.
The breakdown of all 100 marks across the seven evaluation categories for the Round 1 proposal.
| Category | Core Question & Description | Marks (/100) |
|---|---|---|
| Creativity and Innovation | Is your core idea innovative and original? | 20 |
| Feasibility (execution) | Could you realistically build, launch and operate this business in the real world? | 20 |
| Real world impact | Will your idea offer a measurable societal benefit beyond the school community? | 15 |
| Profitability and Business model | Is your business model able to generate a sustainable source of income? | 15 |
| Market and customer understanding | Does your product or service address your target customers’ problem? | 10 |
| Scalability and Growth Potential | Does your business have the potential to grow beyond a small operation? | 10 |
| Presentation | Are your ideas laid out in a clear, professional and persuasive manner? | 10 |
| Total Score | 100 | |
03 — Bands
Detailed performance bands.
Click a category to see what each band looks like.
1. Creativity and Innovation
20 marks
Is the core idea innovative and original?
| Exceptional | 17–20 | An idea that demonstrates a highly distinctive approach to solving a problem, or perhaps a twist on an existing idea viewed from a completely different angle. There should be no products or services on the market that exist like it. Innovation is integrated, not superficial. Idea should feel fresh, clever, or surprising. |
| Strong | 13–16 | Idea may be recognisable or discussed but with a meaningful, specific change (different audience, mechanism or model). Product or service should stand out from named competitors by bringing a clear benefit. |
| Good | 8–12 | A real improvement from existing companies, but less differentiation compared to higher graded categories. |
| Adequate | 4–7 | Largely a copy of an existing successful business with no clear improvements or directions. |
| Weak | 0–3 | No original changes, generic idea with nothing setting it apart. |
2. Feasibility (Execution)
20 marks
Could this idea be realistically built, launched and operated?
| Exceptional | 17–20 | Credible and concrete plan, practically and clearly achievable. Acknowledges advantages and disadvantages with realistic credible solutions to hardest obstacles. Acknowledges current market patterns and current movements. Clear operational plan. Should be able to plausibly start with current technology and limited funding. |
| Strong | 13–16 | Clear sense of the steps and resources needed; with minor gaps and assumptions. Operational plan is brief but clear. Risks are mentioned, solutions explored. May rely on nascent technologies or unproven ideas. |
| Good | 8–12 | General direction is plausible. Few or incorrect details. May rely on optimistic assumptions heavily. Suggested solutions, if present, are minimal or unrealistic. Judges can see the core idea may work, but only with major changes. |
| Adequate | 4–7 | Many barriers ignored (regulation, capital, technology). Infeasible to start company. Little considerations made and many unrealistic assumptions. |
| Weak | 0–3 | Fundamentally unbuildable as described in real world, poorly thought out, relies on something impossible. |
3. Real World Impact
15 marks
Does this idea convey a measurable societal benefit beyond the school community?
| Exceptional | 13–15 | A business idea that provides quantifiably profound benefits toward wider society, either by solving a seriously pressing issue or by targeting a mainstream spread of audience. |
| Strong | 9–12 | Positive impact is described, which clearly improves people’s lives or the environment. |
| Good | 6–8 | Plausible benefit, however, too generalised (“help the community”), without specifics. Perhaps idea is instead impactful but doesn’t meaningfully improve community conditions. |
| Adequate | 3–5 | Impact is minimal or benefits only the school itself. |
| Weak | 0–2 | No meaningful societal benefit or has net negative impact. |
4. Profitability and Business Model
15 marks
Can it generate a sustainable source of income?
| Exceptional | 13–15 | Clearly thought out: who is the target market, who pays, how much, how often, with justified pricing. Shows clear awareness of margins, repeating/recurring revenue streams and planned overhead costs. The model can sustainably run even under pessimistic conditions. |
| Strong | 10–12 | Revenue source, rough costs and picture are clear; financial sustainability is plausible under normal operating circumstances. |
| Adequate | 6–9 | Knows how it makes money but not fully thought out. Basic estimations of profit and revenue without detailed cost backing. |
| Weak | 3–5 | Vague planning (“we will sell ads”, “people will pay…”), with no real cost awareness. |
| Poor | 0–2 | No coherent planning proving that the business earns more than it spends. |
5. Market and Customer Understanding
10 marks
Does the proposal show understanding of their target market and customer?
| Exceptional | 9–10 | Specific, well-defined plan for customer acquisition. Target audience is precisely defined (age, behaviour, needs, motivations). Signs of significant thought or research on contextual situations of potential customer pain points, market size and trends, potential existing competitor solutions. Supported reasoning present with data and evidence. Named problem with precise and justifiable solution. Customer demand must be long term and stable. |
| Strong | 7–8 | Clear target customer with credible need, clear thought about existing solutions and logical reasoning. Potentially shallow in segmentation. Potentially needs are stated but not fully explored. Competitors stated and researched, but potentially surface level. Shows good overall understanding. |
| Adequate | 4–6 | A broad target audience is identified; need is stated but not evidenced nor analysed. Idea may rely on short-term exposure whilst offering an unreliable future. Little to no consideration of competition. Market reasoning existent but basic. |
| Weak | 2–3 | Vague or contradictory sense of who the customer is. Little/no thought and understanding about the existing market. Customer needs may be posited rather than reasoned. Clear misunderstandings in market research or competitor research. Weak fit into real world market. |
| Poor | 0–1 | No identified customer or thought about market. |
6. Scalability and Growth Potential
10 marks
Can it grow beyond a small operation?
| Exceptional | 9–10 | A clear, well thought out and actionable plan to growth (new locations, products, markets or adaptations to business models). Ambitions and future expansion path are clearly stated and planned out with evidence. Product/service has strong potential to expand across regions and customer segments. No major bottlenecks that may limit expansion. |
| Strong | 7–8 | Realistic growth direction identified and method thought out roughly. Growth plan exists, may need adjustment. Expansion is realistic but not effortless, difficult obstacles present. |
| Adequate | 4–6 | Some growth possible but inherently limited by model. Product is inherently slightly niche; idea has clear constraints on growth. Growth plan may be vague or incomplete. May struggle under larger demand. |
| Weak | 2–3 | Hard ceiling on size given business model / growth direction or method not specified. Little to no plan present. |
| Poor | 0–1 | Cannot grow beyond single micro-operation, no path to expansion. |
7. Presentation
10 marks
Is the proposal clear, professional and persuasive?
| Exceptional | 9–10 | Logical and professionally laid out pitch. Easy to follow, polished writing. Potentially includes diagrams or statistics to back up points. Concise with little to no unnecessary text. |
| Strong | 7–8 | Clean and well organised — minor lapses and unnecessary text but conveys message easily. |
| Adequate | 5–6 | Understandable but disorganised, unconvincing in some places. |
| Weak | 3–4 | Hard to follow, with key points buried deep or missing entirely. |
| Poor | 0–2 | Near undecipherable, clearly incomplete pitch. |