Judging

Judges play a critical role in ensuring a fair, transparent, and high-quality evaluation of all hackathon entries. Their combined experience from the Bank of Epirus, Open Hackathon, and fields such as accessibility, technology, and fintech enables assessment from multiple professional and ethical perspectives.

The Judging Panel

A mixed Judging Panel of 9 members will be formed, including:

– 1 representative from the Bank of Epirus

– 1 representative from the Open Hackathon

– Accessibility experts

– Technology experts

– Fintech experts

Judges will be present in person on the final afternoon of the hackathon. Winners are determined through standardized scoring followed by deliberation among the judges.

Two Evaluation Tracks

Evaluation supports the two participation paths:

1. Open Topic – Innovation in Fintech

Teams that choose a general fintech theme and define their own problem and solution.

2. Specific EpirusBank Challenge

Teams that select a pre-published challenge from the Bank of Epirus and develop solutions aligned with real banking and operational needs.

All teams, regardless of track, are eligible for the monetary prizes and community/mentor-awarded titles.

Presentation Format

On Sunday, each team presents live before the Judging Panel.

– 6 minutes Present your solution and demo

– 3 minutes Q&A with the judges (each judge may ask up to 1 question)

Judging Criteria

Solutions will be evaluated to ensure they are relevant, innovative, functional, and inclusive. Judges will score each project across four categories:

1. Relevance & Impact

– Does it solve a meaningful real-world problem within the hackathon’s thematic areas?

– How measurable is the social or business impact of the solution?

2. Innovation & Future Readiness

– How original and future-oriented is the idea?

– Does it leverage the capabilities of Artificial Intelligence (AI) or other emerging technologies?

– Is it aligned with long-term digital transformation?

3. Functionality, Feasibility & Scalability

– Is there a working prototype (proof of concept)?

– How realistic is the proposed implementation and its scalability potential?

– Can it be integrated into existing ecosystems (banking, etc.)?

4. Ethics, Security & Inclusion

– Does the solution comply with principles of digital ethics, transparency, and personal data protection?

– Is it designed to be inclusive and accessible, ensuring user empowerment?

– Did the team demonstrate a spirit of collaboration, fair competition, and support toward other teams?

5. Presentation & Communication

– How effectively was the solution presented?

– Is the presentation clear, professional, and engaging for both technical and non-technical judges?

– Does it provide a coherent narrative: Problem → Solution → Impact?

Each category is scored. All categories are equally weighted.