Manage risk
 with confidence

Award Force is independently certified and audited, including SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO 27001:2022 certification, with documentation available to support formal vendor evaluation and internal review.
Key actions across your program are recorded, and incident logs are retained and reviewed. This enables organisations to reconstruct decisions, verify how processes were applied, and demonstrate consistent and accountable program management.

Yes. Access permissions ensure individuals see only the information relevant to their role.
Managers access the programs they oversee; judges view only assigned submissions; entrants manage their submissions through a dedicated portal and financial data is appropriately restricted.

Award Force provides structured decision control. With more than 30 permission sets, you can precisely assign roles and control who can create, view, edit or delete elements across your program. You can configure workflows, lock entries at critical stages, and require information before progression.

Judges can declare conflicts of interest and abstain from scoring where required. Judging activity is recorded, enabling consistent and accountable program management.

Yes. Organisations running multi-region programs can select one of the six available data hosting regions and apply consistent governance controls across all programs. Central oversight can be maintained while allowing local program managers to operate within defined permissions and workflows.

Payment and order activity are recorded as part of your program’s activity history. The dashboard provides visibility into fee collection, including charts showing issued invoices by currency with downloadable CSV and PNG exports, as well as the estimated total value of in-progress entry fees in your default currency.
Comprehensive exports across payments and users support transparent reporting, and financial data access is restricted appropriately.

Because key actions, scoring activity and configuration changes are recorded, organisations can review the full history of an entry or judging round. This supports objective review, helps clarify how outcomes were determined and protects the program credibility.

Dashboards, structured and custom exports and filtered reporting views allow organisations to present clear, evidence-based summaries of participation, judging progress, financial performance and outcomes. As a result, governance oversight can be achieved without manual data consolidation.

Yes. Workflows, permissions, review stages and structural controls can be adjusted as programs expand in volume, geography or complexity. This allows governance frameworks to mature alongside program growth rather than requiring system replacement.