Kind request to review my Application

So happy to be on this platform.

Please, I would appreciate some guidance on my application. I am applying as an exceptional leader under the OC2 and OC3. Currently, I am the Founder of a STEM organization with offices in Nigeria, Ghana, Ethiopia, USA. We hope to expand markets to the UK, hence my reason to obtain a GTV. Kindly see evidence presented:-

Mandatory Criteria

  1. Speaking Engagements:- Here I hand-picked the 14 relevant keynote & center stage speaking engagements in the UK, USA, Canada and Nigeria addressing edtech investments, application of artificial intelligence in education and simulation tools, data science and hands-on workshop conferences on STEM Integration tools for educators in the classroom. I created a table that showed the title of speaking, organizers of the conferences and event size (between 200 - 590). I shared screenshots of these engagements where they displayed my talk, and published my profile on the event websites.

2. International Awards & Recognition:- Here I hand-picked 30 awards and recognitions that were an extremely competitive process, with so many candidates sharing impressive evidence of influence, technology impact and thought leadership. All awards were with embedded news links, screenshots from the organizer websites and reputable media agencies in the USA, UK, Nigeria, Canada, Germany and Australia.

3. News Articles & Feature:- Here I hand-picked a collection of specific media features from reputable TV, newspapers and blog sources with over 100,000 viewership on a monthly basis that has recognized my work, social impact and milestones in AI, Data Science, STEM Education. I ensured to embed the external links to reflect the reliability of the source. Each line has three screenshots and a paragraph speaking on what the feature was about.

4. Panel Expertise:- Here, i first talked about being a technical program expert on peer-reviewed initiatives with 3 leading engineering committees. Through this, I supported and reviewed over 75 grant funding of potential new initiatives between $10,000 - $610,000 seed grant for services and products that provided significant benefit to members, the public, the technical community, customers, and which had lasting impact on XXXX or its business processes. I also shared screenshots of grants I approved and my name as a member committee from the website. Second work on this was serving as a panel chair to review conference papers for XXXX. I showed a dashboard of papers I approved, drafted technical requirements for conference presentations, managed a pool of 21 peer-reviewers, 10 session chairs and executed the technical aspect of the conference. Then I shared a link of the media announcement where I and 10 peer-reviewers were acknowledged as Conference advisors. The last two pages had reference letters from the Board-elect of the both conferences/initiatives

Optional criteria 2

5. Reference letters:- This was a merged reference letter received from a VP of xxx Academy of Sciences where I served as mentor from 2018 to date. She ensured to highlight how this is a structured program and how I propelled aspiring girls’ scientists to solidify project prototypes through my continued support. The second letter was from an event organized who was invited to serve on the London tech stage. She ensured to talk about the speaking engagement and how I further supported budding omen technologists after the summit with resource tools and career opportunities in tech.

6. International Contributions:- This is a bit tricky because in my last application, I misconstrued this part and did not give elaborate details.

I split this into different parts.

  • I first talked about why mentoring was important, how I was part of a leaky unemployment pipeline and how I hoped to pay it forward by joining XXXX. I talked about how I was selected as a mentor, how many hours I gave, how many women and girls and their different geographical locations. Screenshots showed were an email that celebrated my mentorship contributions, matching with a mentee and a 3-year mentorship badge for consistency with AnitaB.org
  • Second category was serving as a Judge at the world’s largest global tech competition for girls, how many applications I reviewed within xxx days and my judge dashboard that showed all my reviews. The second was a review of 120+ submissions of edtech startups that are revolutionizing education where winners received a prize fund of 25,000 USD. Here I showed my judge badge and certificate.
  • Third category was also a structured mentoring program I have been involved with since 2020. I talked about the rigorous process of selecting mentees, how they are matched to mentors with similar interests and hours I gave. Evidence provided here was a mentor feedback epistle in appreciation of impact made and a mentor I assisted who was later selected for OYW due to her project in reimagining education with AI.
  • Fourth category was serving as an Incubator advisor for xxxx. A digital ecosystem of incubation programs that provides the right tools and guidance to early-stage entrepreneurs to develop their ventures around the world. Here I talked about a visually impaired solution startup owned by two visually impaired couples in Romania and how I supported their product process and architecture. Shared screenshots were the product process diagram I created, screenshot of my mentor dashboard, email exchange where I reviewed their FPs and a TV interview of the couples with xxxx viewership achieved since publication.
  • Fifth category was also a mentoring program with xxxx Academy of Science (to buttress earlier reference letters received from the organization). I showed my mentor dashboard, how all teams i worked with made it to the finals. Teams I worked with, how I got into the program.

7. Leadership contribution on Tech policy:- Here I elucidated how I started off contributing to analyzing Nigeria’s existing technology policy, sustainable development goals (SDGs) and government outcome statements as a subject-matter expert on technology issues. I split this into three categories: Technical Policy Contributor at AU xxx, yyyy and Adjunct Faculty Lecturer at xxxx. In each of the three, I extended screenshots of my nominations to serve on the visioning boards and panels, outcome statements where my contributions were made and what fellows achieved to present as outcome statments. I also attached a reference letter from one of the organizations that acknowledged the milestones and contributions as policy experts with AU

Optional Criteria 3

8. Founder’s validation of business:- So here I just showed company registrations, contractual agreements, payslips and how I fall into x% of high percentile as Founder in my space by comparing data on payscale and glassdoor (i ensured to put these screenshots).

9. Commercial Success & Evidence: - First talked about what inspired the creation of my establishment, milestones and market expansions. There I sub-categorized this in different categories.

  • Our recognition as the 100 Most Scalable and Innovative edtech Solution in the World in 2023, spoke about the selection process, newspaper announcements and screenshots of our products and the 3rd-party feature on the organization feature of our work.
  • Case Study Feature of Work by Forbes Science Council and UNOSSG and basis of this alongside the viewership
  • Revenue Growth in the last three years by sharing revenue dashboard and how I championed sales growth through partnerships,
  • Sales lead generated through dashboard data and portfoilis closed out in the last two years
  • Impact investment by a government and an AI edtech led organization

Final document was Letter from an Impact Investor, San Jose (to buttress OC3) who talked about our sales record, why they were inspired to invest and sales outcome.

I would really appreciate all the assistance. My last application was all juxtaposed, shabby and guess I was “too sure of myself” which led to issues.

Thank you so much.

1 Like

Hi @uzychirpy considering this is re-attempt, could you also highlight what are you doing differently in each criteria this time versus last time? What was the TN feedback and how have you incorporated it?

Oh thank you so much.

So my LORs, Personal statements and MC1 was okay. They said I abundantly presented evidences and recognition. However, I selected OC1 and OC2.

For OC1, they advised i share patents, IPs etc. that depicts originality (which we do not have yet).

For the, OC2 the feedback was:
For OC2, It is not clearly demonstrated how the Global Thinkers Mentors, Cherie Blair Foundation for Women, AnitaB.org, NYAS example demonstrates how the applicant mentored consistently over time as part of a structured mentoring programme with selection criteria and how their efforts were pertinent to tech and also significant enough to both advance the sector and gain them recognition. No context is provided for the Technovation Girls example to understand how many competitors were involved in the competition and how this effort was notable and impactful in advancing the sector.

For OC2, the Tech Women, Vital Voices, Goldman Sach 10,000 Women fellowship,
Leap Africa fellowship, Yunus & Youth fellowship, Barack Obama Young Africa
Leadership programme, IBM badges and certificates evidence demonstrates training or
support for the applicant and often their business rather than how the applicant made a
significant contribution that advanced the sector and gained them recognition for it.

The latter was actually not relevant to share. It was totally my fault.

The difference is replacing OC1 for OC3.
For OC2, I ensured to give an intro of the mentoring program and veracity. Here I said how many hours I each contributed, shared dasboards, mentee successes s feedbacks, career acceleration. For the Judges aspect, I now included how many application i reviewed, hours given, the nature of the projects and the Judge recognition badges/emails

@uzychirpy understood! So if it’s only about OC3:

  1. Salary document is not an evidence considered in OC3 as per TN guidelines. You may want to move this to MC.

  2. The support letter + self documentation of the company, its revenue, growth, Clients, market expansion, etc looks good.

  3. You might need one more evidence here if you love the salary document out of this criteria

1 Like

Thank you so much for this, @pahuja .

Can you kindly suggest what more supporting documents to include when I move salary information to MC1?
I mean supporting examples of a non-technical (business) candidate and as a Founder .

Thank you!

You can split salary and equity holding document and company registration/company related documents.

Do you have any customer side of documents? Partnership documents, testimonials?

How is your company a product-led company? What specific tech skill are you selecting? Are you a business or technical applicant? You may have some evidence but the assessor needs to be sure you fit into the digital technology GTV track. It would also help know know the feedback on your initial application.

Yes @pahuja
So i did a separate document showing registrations, article of association, organization binding documents in countries we operate to connect my tie to the company. Is this adequate?

@Francisca_Chiedu I founded a product-led organization (an e-learning platform for educators and schools working on science and engineering PBLs).

So you will have 3 OC3 evidence?

  • company registration etc
  • one letter
  • one self documentation?

Looks fine to me if your contribution and the impact is clearly demonstrated and significant.

1 Like

Thank you so much, @pahuja !
I do appreciate this.

1 Like