Award Nomination Form Template (Canada)
Updated on August 9, 2026
An award nomination form is submitted by someone other than the candidate: a colleague, manager, or client puts a name forward for recognition. That's materially different from a self-submitted award application, because the nomination collects personal information about someone who may not know it's being submitted — a situation Canadian privacy law addresses through its consent and accountability principles.
The common free version of this form is just a nomination text box. This template adds what the process actually needs: who is nominating, their relationship to the nominee, any conflict of interest, and a data notice covering information collected about a third party.
Tap any highlighted blank in the document below and type straight into it.Free — no sign-up, no watermark
Award Nomination Form
This nomination is submitted to on for the .
Award criteria
- Judging criteria:
- Submission deadline:
Nominator
- Name:
- Role / department:
- Relationship to nominee:
Conflict-of-interest disclosure:
Nominee
- Name:
- Role / department:
Nomination narrative
Data notice
This nomination includes personal information about the nominee submitted by someone other than the nominee. will notify the nominee that this information was collected, at the latest by the time they become a finalist. This information will be used for judging purposes and retained for .
Nominator
Date:
Record who is nominating, not just who is nominated
A nomination is only as credible as its source. Recording the nominator's name, role, and relationship to the nominee lets a judging panel weigh the nomination appropriately.
Ask about conflicts of interest directly
A manager nominating a direct report isn't automatically disqualifying, but disclosing it lets the judging panel account for it and keeps the process defensible.
Tell the nominee their information was collected
PIPEDA's accountability and openness principles expect organizations to be transparent about what personal information they hold and why, even when it wasn't collected directly from the individual. A nomination process that never tells the nominee any of this sits uneasily with that expectation.
In practice, this usually means notifying the nominee once they become a finalist, rather than only finding out at a public announcement, and being clear that a nomination process exists and how the resulting information is used.
Allow self-nomination as an explicit choice, not a workaround
Some programmes allow a candidate to nominate themselves through the same form; others don't. Stating the rule explicitly avoids the odd case of someone technically completing a 'nomination' about themselves when the programme never intended that route.
Judge on substance, not on volume
A candidate on a large, vocal team will naturally attract more nominations than an equally deserving candidate on a small or quiet one. Judging on the strongest nomination narrative against the published criteria keeps the process aligned with its actual purpose.
Decide how multiple nominations for the same person are handled
Popular candidates often receive more than one nomination in a cycle. Deciding upfront whether these are merged, treated as a supporting signal for the strongest narrative, or simply deduplicated avoids an inconsistent, ad hoc decision when it actually happens.
Set a retention period for unsuccessful nominations
Because a nomination form holds personal data about someone who didn't submit it, a clear retention and disposal practice matters: how long unsuccessful nominations are kept, who can access them, and when they're deleted. A stated retention period is both good data hygiene and consistent with the general expectation under Canadian privacy law that personal information isn't kept longer than needed for the purpose it was collected.
Section-by-section guide
- Nominator details
- Identifies who is submitting the nomination and their relationship to the nominee.
- Conflict of interest
- Asks the nominator to disclose any personal or reporting relationship that could affect impartiality.
- Nominee details
- Identifies the person being nominated.
- Nomination narrative
- The case for the nomination, matched to the published judging criteria.
- Data notice
- States when and how the nominee will be told their data was collected.
Canadian compliance notes
Be transparent with the nominee about the data collected
PIPEDA's openness principle expects organizations to be clear about what personal information they hold and why, including information collected from a third party rather than the individual.
Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada — Consent
How to complete the nomination
- Add nominator details. Enter the nominator's name, role and relationship to the nominee.
- Disclose any conflict of interest. State any reporting or personal relationship that could affect impartiality.
- Add nominee details. Enter the name and role of the person being nominated.
- Write the nomination narrative. Explain the case for the nomination against the published judging criteria.
Frequently asked questions
Can someone nominate themselves using this form?
Only if the programme explicitly allows it. This template includes a self-nomination toggle so the rule is stated on the form rather than left ambiguous.
Do we have to tell the nominee they've been nominated?
It's not spelled out as a specific rule the way it is under some other countries' privacy laws, but PIPEDA's openness and accountability principles expect organizations to be transparent about personal information they hold, including when it comes from a third party. Notifying the nominee once they become a finalist is a common, defensible approach.
Does the nominator's identity have to be disclosed to the nominee?
Not necessarily — you can tell the nominee they were nominated and how the data will be used without naming the nominator, particularly if confidentiality was requested.
Does a nominator need to disclose a personal relationship with the nominee?
Yes. It doesn't disqualify the nomination, but disclosing it lets the judging panel weigh the nomination appropriately.
Should the candidate with the most nominations automatically win?
No. Judge on the substance of the strongest nomination narrative against the published criteria, not on how many nominations were submitted.
What if the same person is nominated multiple times?
Decide the rule in advance — whether multiple nominations are merged, counted as a signal of support, or deduplicated — rather than deciding it ad hoc once it happens.
How long should we keep nomination records for candidates who don't win?
Set a stated retention period rather than letting nominations accumulate indefinitely — this is both good data hygiene and consistent with Canadian privacy law's general expectation about retention.
Can the nominee object to being nominated?
Yes — being nominated doesn't obligate anyone to take part, and a nominee who would rather not be considered should be able to say so and have the nomination withdrawn without any negative consequence.
Related templates
Disclaimer
This template and guide are for general information only. They are not legal or privacy advice, and no lawyer or the Office of the Privacy Commissioner has reviewed or approved them. Confirm your organization's own PIPEDA or provincial privacy-law obligations for information collected about a third party before using this form.
