To ensure the Achievement Awards program continues to reflect the excellence and evolving needs of our scientific community, the IFT Board of Directors is continuously reviewing the program’s relevance and impact. Over the 85+ years of IFT’s history, awards have been added, others retired, and updates to criteria, review processes, and award cycles have been made to maintain continuous improvement to the program and respond to juror, nominee, nominator, and overall member input. 

IFT’s mission is to connect global food system communities to promote and advance the science of food and its application. Our Achievement Awards are an essential part of that mission, celebrating individuals and teams who have made extraordinary contributions to science, technology, applications, and service within the global food system.  

To ensure we are meeting that objective, as well as fulfilling the pledge we’ve made to members and stakeholders to continuously improve the awards process, we closely track engagement trends, nomination rates, and feedback from jurors, nominees, and nominators. Over the past 10 years, data and input have revealed opportunities to strengthen the program, which the IFT Board of Directors and staff have promised to address as a natural extension of the Awards and Fellows Task Force work initiated in 2022. 

As such, for IFT-sponsored awards the Board has approved: 1) increased honoraria; and 2) improved schedules to increase awareness and participation across awards and ensure a positive juror, nominator, and nominee experience. We are actively engaging our 7 award partners to evaluate the increased honoraria and award schedule and to approach adjustments in a collaborative manner. Ongoing partnership is essential to the continued success of the awards and ensures shared investment in program excellence.  

This FAQ document provides background information, community insights, and data behind the updates. 

For IFT-sponsored awards the Board has approved: 1) increased honoraria; and 2) improved schedules to increase awareness and participation across awards and ensure a positive juror, nominator, and nominee experience. 

For awards granted with partners such as IFT Sections, IFT Divisions, Peer Associations, and Honor Societies, any updates to awards must be made in tandem. We are actively engaging our award partners to evaluate the increased honoraria and award schedule and to approach adjustments in a collaborative manner. Ongoing partnership is essential to the continued success of the awards and ensures shared investment in program excellence.

No. These updates apply solely to the Achievement Awards program. The IFT Fellows program will continue as is.

Yes. To uphold IFT Board of Directors’ fiduciary responsibilities to Membership, we’ve undergone a legal audit to ensure IFT’s compliance with recent executive orders. Adjustments have been made to criteria where necessary. To review award criteria, please visit Achievement Awards - IFT.org.

In addition to the data and insights shared throughout this Q&A, stakeholders regularly provide thoughtful recommendations to enhance the awards process and criteria. These contributions have directly supported ongoing improvements, most recently, updates to the award cycles and criteria to ensure the highest quality nominations. 

Feedback from award jurors has also played a significant role. The use of rubrics and juror calibration meetings helps ensure consistency in nominee evaluations. These tools have evolved in response to juror input, with the introduction of calibration meetings in 2023 receiving particularly positive feedback. While no system is ever perfect, these refinements reflect a strong commitment to fairness, clarity, and continuous improvement. 

In 2022, the IFT Board of Directors appointed the Awards and Fellows Task Force (AFTF) to identify and implement enhancements to the program as part of its commitment to continuous improvement. That same year, the AFTF introduced several enhancements based on both quantitative data and qualitative input gathered through 1) member listening sessions and 2) survey results from key stakeholders, such as volunteer jurors. These improvements were designed to enhance the experience of nominators, nominees, and volunteer jurors while preserving the prestige of the program. They went into effect in 2022 and continue to be refined in alignment with the Board’s ongoing commitment to program excellence.  
 
Enhancements include: 

• Updated criteria and eligibility: Program criteria and eligibility were updated to reflect the varied perspectives and experiences across our global, interdisciplinary community. 

• Three-year eligibility window: As part of our eligibility screening process, individuals may only receive an IFT Achievement Award once every three years. This rule helps ensure broader recognition across the IFT community. 

• Adoption of RhythmQ: We implemented RhythmQ, a technology platform specializing in awards management and scoring, to streamline the nomination, application, evaluation, and scoring processes. 

• Self-nomination option: Members can now self-nominate for both Achievement Awards and Fellow recognition, increasing opportunities for everyone within the IFT community. 

• Simplified nomination process: The revised process gives nominees more opportunity to showcase their qualifications. Nominators only submit the nominee’s name and contact information. Nominees then complete the application based on the specific award criteria and may engage their nominator through reference letters, where applicable. 

• Comprehensive nomination guides: Improved nomination guides offer detailed instructions for nominees and referees, helping strengthen submissions and clarify expectations for applications. 

• Enhanced jury training: Jurors receive comprehensive training designed to promote fair evaluation of all nominees.  

• Minimum nomination threshold: A minimum of three nominations is now required for an award to be granted. This helps maintain the prestige and competitiveness of the program by ensuring a robust candidate pool.  

• Live jury deliberation meetings: In addition to jurors independently scoring applicants, each award jury now participates in a live deliberation meeting to discuss scores and collectively determine recipients. These meetings foster thoughtful conversation and lead to more robust decision-making. 

To better honor the time, talent, and excellence these awards celebrate, the IFT Board has approved an increase in honoraria for IFT-funded awards to $5,000—up from the current range of $2,000–$3,000. 

Please note: The Collaborative Research Grant in honor of Marcel Loncin remains unchanged at $50,000.  

Data-driven insights, along with feedback from nominators, nominees, and volunteer jurors, confirm that a refreshed approach to timing and award cycles is merited.  

While nominations have increased over the years commensurate with the growth of our awards program, we’ve seen a plateau over the past ten years despite strategic efforts on the part of our staff and member volunteers—including refining criteria, enhancing marketing, and introducing technology improvements.  

Additionally, a total of 24 awards received 2 or less nominations during this time: 

• 3 awards received 0 nominations during a cycle
• 4 awards received 1 nomination during a cycle
• 17 awards received 2 nominations during a cycle 

In addition to nomination data, we annually survey volunteer jurors, nominators, and nominees. Feedback has been overwhelmingly positive about the Achievement Awards process over the past three years. 

At the same time, there is juror frustration around being appointed to an awards jury but not getting the opportunity to serve when minimum participation thresholds aren’t met. A minimum three-nomination threshold was approved in the past by the IFT Board of Directors in agreement with partners to maintain the competitiveness, prestige, and integrity of IFT’s Achievement Awards. Likewise, nominees and nominators are similarly disappointed when awards are not given due to low nominations in any given cycle due to an award’s specialized focus.  

All of this input was used when considering opportunities to improve our Achievement Awards.

IFT currently administers 17 total awards. Of these, 12 awards are on an annual cycle and 5 awards are on a biennial cycle. 

Awards have evolved over time, with new ones added and others retired. For the most recent review, we analyzed data for each award over their past five cycles —whether given annually or biennially. To determine optimal award frequency, we focused on the natural patterns of nominations. (Details on these data patterns are provided below.) 

Based on data analysis, for IFT-sponsored awards the following cycle has been approved by the Board of Directors: 

• Awards with an average of 9+ nominations over their past 5 cycles → Awarded annually (4 awards). 

• Awards with an average of 4–9 nominations over their past 5 cycles → Awarded biennially (5 awards). 

• Awards with an average of fewer than 4 nominations over their past 5 cycles → Awarded triennially (8 awards).  

For awards granted with IFT partners, we are actively evaluating the increased honoraria and award schedule to approach adjustments in a collaborative manner. Ongoing partnership is essential to the continued success of the awards and ensures shared investment in program excellence.

Thresholds were composed based on the following to maintain the competitiveness, prestige, and integrity of the recognition process: 

• Awards with an average of 9+ nominations over their past 5 cycles (Annually Awarded): Awards receiving more than 9 nominations annually represent significant community interest. By awarding these annually, we ensure they continue to reflect the natural patterns of nominations. 
   
• Awards with an average of 4–9 nominations over their past 5 cycles (Biennially Awarded): For awards with steady but moderate nomination levels, a biennial cadence helps preserve the distinction and visibility of the recognition. This also ensures that the time and effort of award jurors, nominators, and nominees is respected and well spent, minimizing instances where awards go ungranted due to insufficient nominations under the current cadence. 
  

• Awards with an average of fewer than 4 nominations over their past 5 cycles (Triennially Awarded): Nominations for these awards are relatively low, often due to their specialized focus. Shifting to a triennial cycle helps preserve the value and visibility of these honors, while also respecting the time and effort of jurors, nominators, and nominees—especially when participation thresholds aren’t consistently met on an annual or biennial basis. While the participation threshold for all awards is set at 3 nominees, for this evaluation a threshold of 4 nominations was used to provide cushion often needed by juries to ensure a sustained, representative pool of candidates is built between cycles. This leads to a cadence that ensures the ability of a jury to grant the award and a positive experience for nominees and nominators. 
  

Note: The numbers in parentheses indicate the average number of nominations the award received over its past 5 cycles. In addition, you’ll see the award’s previous frequency indicated at the end of each line. 

Annually Awarded (Averaged 9+ nominations over their past 5 cycles) 

• Outstanding Young Scientist Award in honor of Samuel Cate Prescott (12.8) - previously annual 

• Research and Development Award (11) - previously annual 

Biennially Awarded (Averaged 4–9 nominations over their past 5 cycles) 

• Collaborative Research Grant in honor of Marcel Loncin (5.25) - previously biennial 

• Outstanding Partnership Award in honor of Myron Solberg (4.4) - previously biennial 

• International Food Security Award in honor of Bor S. Luh (4.8) - previously annual 

• Achievements in Microbial Research for Food Safety in honor of Gerhard J. Haas (4.6) - previously annual 

Triennially Awarded (Averaged fewer than 4 nominations over their past 5 cycles) 

• Distinguished Lipid and Flavor Science Award in honor of Stephen S. Chang (3) - previously biennial 

• Food Ingredient Safety Award in honor of Bernard L. Oser (1.75) - previously biennial 

• Distinguished Service Award in honor of Calvert L. Willey (3.4) - previously annual 

• Include Award in honor of George Washington Carver (2.4) - previously annual 

• Public Health Award in honor of Babcock-Hart and Gilbert A. Leveille (3) – currently annual 
• Sensory & Consumer Sciences Award (2.8) - currently annual 
• Food Packaging Award in honor of Don Riester, Rees Davis, and Aaron Brody (3.8) - currently annual 
• Humanitarian Award for Service to the Science of Food in honor of Elizabeth Fleming Stier (3.4) - currently biennial 
• Distinguished Career Award in honor of Carl R. Fellers (9) - currently annual 
• Lifetime Achievement Award in honor of Nicolas Appert (13.2) – currently annual
• Excellence in Education Award in honor of William V. Cruess (4.6) - currently annual

These enhancements are designed to elevate the Achievement Awards program and ensure it continues to recognize excellence in a meaningful and sustainable way. Key benefits include: 

• Increased honoraria for IFT-funded awards to honor the time, talent, and excellence recognized by the awards. 
  

• Better alignment with nomination trends, supporting a more robust and consistent awards experience for jurors, nominators, and nominees. 
  

• Improved likelihood of meeting the minimum 3-nomination threshold, ensuring awards can be conferred as intended. 
  

• Reduced time and effort spent by jurors, nominators, and nominees, particularly for awards with a specialized focus. These often have lower participation levels that prevent awards from reaching the jury stage and being awarded. 
   

Yes. Both positive and negative impacts were discussed at length. 

Upon discussion and reflection, and based on data and feedback from jurors, nominators, and nominees, these shifts increase individual benefits, offer an improved jury, nominator, and nominee experience, and resolve frustrations that had arisen in the Achievement Awards process. 

In addition, updates: 

• Create the opportunity to increase honoraria. 

• Allow for increased attention and celebration of award recipients through both marketing and award ceremonies. 

• Ensure IFT Achievement Awards remain competitive and prestigious. 

To share more of the conversation that led to these improvements, the goal of the IFT Achievement Awards program is to celebrate individuals and teams who have made extraordinary contributions to science, technology, applications, and service within the global food system. If that is our goal, we want to ensure juries have ample nominations to consider scientific contributions with the highest innovation and impact. Furthermore, in order to ensure the standards outlined in our jury-informed award criteria are upheld, juries must have ample opportunity to weigh the contributions of a competitive field of applications. 

From the nominee and nominator perspective, creating a data-driven award cycle gives time to pool the contributions, experiences, and impacts required by the award criteria (especially for awards with very specialized scientific requirements), as well as ensuring participant thresholds are met, allowing nominees to be honored and recognized.   

Reviewing the nomination data indicates that updated award cycles match the reality of current nomination cycles and awards granted. Shifting awards with lower nominations (often due to their specialized focus) to a biennial and triennial cycle helps preserve the value and visibility of these honors, while also respecting the time and effort of jurors, nominators, and nominees. 
 

The implementation timeline includes: 

• Now – Early July 2025: Ongoing collaboration with partners to confirm award cadences and honoraria updates for awards granted collaboratively by IFT and partners. 
  

• Early July 2025: Confirmation and announcement of honoraria and adjusted award cycles, in partnership with award partners. 
  

• Late 2025: Applications open for the 2026 award cycle, including confirmed honoraria and award cadences.

Seven achievement awards are given in conjunction with partners, including IFT Sections, IFT Divisions, Peer Associations, and Honor Societies. We are actively engaging our award partners to evaluate the award cycle and support cadence adjustments in a collaborative manner. Their ongoing partnership is essential to the continued success of the awards and ensures shared investment in program excellence. Additionally, we are working with our partners to determine honoraria for their specific awards.

IFT is committed to continuous improvement and transparency in how we recognize excellence across our community. The Achievement Awards program is evaluated annually, using data and stakeholder input to guide decisions. These updates are part of an ongoing process—not a one-time adjustment—to ensure the program remains relevant and impactful. Adjustments are made once representative data is collected, as well as with the intention to minimize adjustments required at any given point in time.  

A Member Informational Session was held on June 30, where we reviewed this information and provided a platform for members to ask questions. 

If you couldn’t join us live—or if you’d like to revisit the conversation—the recording is available here: 

IFT Member Informational Session  

Passcode: #k5g5Dfj 

Please reach out to the IFT Achievement Awards Program team at awards@ift.org to ask questions or learn more about the process. We appreciate the engagement and dedication of our members as we take thoughtful, data-informed steps to ensure the future strength and sustainability of the IFT Achievement Awards program.