1. Code of Conduct

All participants (developers, experts, mentors, etc.) are expected to follow the overall professional and ethical principles, including the principles for shared software of the ACM code of conduct, available here: https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics. Additional aspects to observe are: * No harassment, including personal attacks are allowed. * No spam via E-mail or via any of the Hackathon channels will be tolerated. Posts not relating to hackathons or tech will also be considered spam. * No recruiting for the participating organizations is allowed. Recruitment requests can be discussed with the organizing committee. * No illegal/pirated content is allowed. * Violations to the code of conduct imply team disqualification.

2. Evaluation

The projects shall be supported in a continuous manner and evaluated by the Juri in the meetups of the Hackathon as well as during the final event, based on an objective assessment template provided via Google docs by the coordinating team. For each criterium, each member of the Juri will also be requested to provide feedback.

As explained, the Hackathon is not a competition, so the aim of the assessment is inclusive and to provide a measurement of the effort of the teams. All teams will be provided with awards; and the grading serves the purpose of, in addition, providing best awards in the different categories. The teams will be provided with a report of the final evaluation, which includes averaged grades for each criterium.

Each member of the Juri is provided with an individual template for the evaluation and shall provide a grade between 1 (lower value) to 5 (higher value) to each criterium. The final grading is then the average of all Juri members.

2.1 Technical Project Evaluation Criteria

• Novelty: How novel are the results compared to related work? 20%
• Reusability: How easy is it for non-team members to replicate results? 30%
• Usability: How user-friendly is the developed solution? 30%
• Community Impact: In your opinion, how likely is this solution to be of interest to the community in the future? 20%

2.2 Skills Training Project Evaluation Criteria

• Novelty: How novel is this tool in comparison to others that are similar? 10%
• Reusability: How easy is it for non-team members to replicate results? 30%
• Reach: What is the reach of the tool in terms of community range, e.g. 10 persons, 100 persons? 30%
• Resources: How many trainers does the tool need? Would the training require specific equipment, software, etc.? 10%

• Quality: Quality of developed material (slides, documentation, etc.) in terms of language, graphics, etc. 20%

  2.3 Business Skills Training Project Evaluation Criteria

• Value proposition: Is the description clear? Is the product feasible and targets a real gap? How easily it can be duplicated? Is there a presence of potential substitutes for the product? 20%

• Market value: Is there a genuine need for the product or service? How well was the target market defined? What is the size and growth of the market? What is the consumers' willingness to pay for the product/service? 20%

• Creativity: Is the problem addressed in a novel and creative way? 10%

• Feasibility: Does the idea/proposal aspire towards clear, realistic, and achievable goals, while thinking big? Can it be implemented effectively? 20%

• Quality/Presentation: Does the proposal engage the audience? Level of graphical quality? Exciting pitch/report? 10%

• Sustainability: Does the proposal consider key EU sustainable goals, e.g., energy efficiency? Does it explain how it could break even or raise additional funding (economic sustainability)? Does it consider the different dimensions of financial and social sustainability in a conscientious manner? 10%

3. Roles and Responsibilities

3.1 Hackathon Co-Chairs

The Hackathon co-chairs are responsible for the overall organization and operationalization of the Hackathon and its different meetings, as well as for the development and maintenance of the different tools. The Chairs are the main contact point for all operational questions and concerns. The Chairs can be contacted via eu-iot-hackathon@fortiss.org.

3.2 EU-IoT Hackathon Organizing Committee

The EU-IoT Hackathon Organizing Committee is composed of representatives of each member of the EU-IoT consortium, and are responsible for the alignment with the overall goals of EU-IoT; support the Co-chairs in the dissemination and overall organization of the event.

3.3 Mentors

The Hackathon Mentors are elements of the EU-IoT consortium assigned to the different proposed projects. The Mentors have the following responsibilities: * Volunteer to lead 1 or more proposed projects * Serve as the primary technical and guidance contact for the team questions and respective project guidance * Add and manage the project information on the Hackathon Wiki * Assist the support of the project artifacts in the Hackathon GitLab account * Promote the project in the NGIoT community

3.4 Juri

The Juri are elements of the different RIAs, as well as from the EU-IoT Expert Group. The Juris follow the work of the teams via the different meetings; and shall have access to the different reports and presentations.

As the Hackathon is not a competitive event, the aim of the Juri is to assist in establishing an overall objective appreciation of the work of the different teams, assessing the potential to follow-up e.g., in Open Calls of the existing projects, etc. For that purpose, the Juri shall base the evaluation on offline formulars, templates which shall be provided via the Wiki in a transparent way.

3.5 Teams

• A team can be formed by 1 to 6 persons.
• Prizes are provided to teams, not individuals.
• Changes to the registered team need to be discussed with the organizing committee by sending a mail to eu-iot-hackathon@fortiss.org.

3.6 Submitting a Project

When submitting your project, please register it via "applicants". The description should have the following:

• Challenge domain where your project fits
• Project type (business, technical, training)
• team bio and names