1. The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
Baldrige Performance Excellence Program |

2. About the Award
Presidential award created by Public Law in 1987
Highest level of national recognition for performance excellence
Traditionally presented by the President of the United States
The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, created by Public Law in 1987, is the highest level of national recognition for performance excellence that a U.S. organization can receive. The award promotes
awareness of performance excellence as an increasingly important element in U.S. competitiveness and
the sharing of successful performance strategies and information on the benefits of using these strategies.
The President of the United States traditionally presents the award.

3. Why Apply? Improve performance and achieve world-class results
Seek “the most cost-effective, value-added business audit available anywhere”
Objectively clarify your organization’s strengths and weaknesses
Many organizations apply for the Baldrige Award with the goal of increasing their rate of organizational improvement and innovation.
Baldrige applicants consistently identify many benefits of applying. The evaluation process for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award was called “the most cost- effective, value-added business audit available anywhere” by Bob Barnett, a former executive vice president of Motorola, Inc., an award recipient in manufacturing.
Applying enhances the self-assessment process by helping to start or to speed up an organization’s internal improvement journey and by improving morale and communication.

4. This year’s [Baldrige Award] recipients have shown how quality, innovation, and an unending quest for excellence help strengthen our nation and brighten the future of all Americans. —President Barack Obama
Additional quote:
“It amazes me that U.S. businesses spend so much money on ‘how-to’ books and coursework to teach leaders how to build successful organizations. My recommendation: implement the Baldrige-based Criteria in your business. No other single document can help build a long-term successful organization.”
—Jerry Rose, vice president of Cargill, Inc., and former president of 1999 and Baldrige Award recipient Sunny Fresh Foods, Inc. (now Cargill Kitchen Solutions)

5. The Feedback Report: Your Greatest Benefit
Written assessment of strengths/ opportunities for improvement
Compiled by a team of expert examiners
Key themes (summary)
Organization-specific comments
Individualized scoring information
Scoring distribution
Many Baldrige Award applicants cite the feedback report as the most significant benefit of applying. The feedback report is a detailed, individualized, written assessment of your organization’s strengths and opportunities based on the Baldrige Award application. The report is compiled by a team of experts, Baldrige examiners, who have both sector/industry knowledge and Criteria knowledge.
The Key Themes section is the “executive summary,” a synthesis of your organization’s most significant, cross-cutting strengths and opportunities for improvement relating to the organization’s processes and results.
Comments: For each Criteria item, the report provides around six detailed, actionable strengths and opportunities for improvement. The comments are specific to your organization and can help it prioritize its improvement efforts.
Individual Scoring Range: The feedback report provides a percentage scoring range for each item, allowing your organization to determine its relative strengths and opportunities for improvement.
Scoring Distribution: Feedback reports also include a scoring distribution that contains the percentage of applicants that scored in each of the eight individual scoring bands. This helps to provide a context for the total score relative to other organizations. In addition, feedback reports include information on your organization’s performance in relation to the median scores for other applicants.

6. Eligibility Categories
Manufacturing
Service
Small business
Education
Health care
Nonprofit
Organizations apply for the award in one of the six eligibility categories:
manufacturing
service
small business (manufacturing or service)
education (for-profit and nonprofit)
health care (for-profit and nonprofit)
nonprofit, including charities and government agencies
Up to 18 awards may be given annually across the six categories.
A variety of considerations affect an organization’s eligibility, so it is best to review the eligibility requirements on the Web site or to contact the Baldrige Program if you have specific questions about your organization’s eligibility.
Most organizations first need to win a top-level award from a program that is a member of the Alliance for Performance Excellence. This system allows applicants to achieve readiness for the national Baldrige Award through early, “local” reviews.

7. Eligibility Conditions
Headquartered in the United States
Existed for one year
Operational practices available for examination
Able to share information on Baldrige Criteria categories
Other requirements specific to sector
To be eligible for the Baldrige Award,
Your organization must be headquartered in the United States and must have existed for one year.
The operational practices associated with all of your major organizational functions must be available for examination in the United States or its territories.
Your organization must also be able to share information on the seven Criteria for Performance Excellence categories at your U.S. facilities and at the Quest for Excellence® Conference.
There are other requirements specific to each sector, so check the Baldrige Web site for details.

8. Eligibility Conditions
In the past 5 years:
Top-level award from an Alliance for Performance Excellence member program, or
National process and results band numbers total 8 or higher, or
National program site visit or
≥ 25% of the workforce outside the home state
No Alliance program available
Additional eligibility conditions established in 2012 focus most organizations on first winning a top- level award from a program that is a member of the Alliance for Performance Excellence. This network of Baldrige-based state, local, regional, and industry award programs serves as a feeder system for the national Baldrige Award.
This system allows applicants to achieve readiness for the national Baldrige Award through early, “local” or industry-based reviews. Even before the 2012 change in national eligibility rules, 54 of the past 71 Baldrige Award recipients had first been state award recipients.
Organizations now need to meet one of these criteria:
Between 2008 and 2012,
received the top award from a member of the Alliance, or
applied for the national Baldrige Award between, and the total of the process and results band numbers assigned in the feedback report was 8 or higher, or
received a site visit OR
Has more than 25% of its workforce located outside its home state
Has no Alliance award program available to serve it

9. Baldrige Award Calendar
February
Early eligibility certification
April
Eligibility certification
May
Award applications due
June–November
Applications reviewed
November
Award recipients announced
Award ceremony Quest for Excellence Conference
The award process begins with eligibility certification in March and April and continues through the final meeting of the Judges’ Panel in November.
The award recipients are announced at the end of November.
The President of the United States traditionally presents the awards. The ceremony is held in conjunction with the Quest for Excellence Conference in April.
Award recipients present their best practices and lessons learned at Quest.

10. How to Apply 1. Certify Your Eligibility 2. Submit an Application
Respond to the Baldrige Criteria (50 pages)
Application fee (sliding scale)
Site visit fee, if selected (sliding scale)
6 categories
Nomination of examiner
Fee: $360
Applying for the Baldrige Award is a two-step process.
You first submit an eligibility certification package. In eligibility certification, your organization self-certifies that it meets the eligibility requirements for the award and provides background information related to its organizational structure, locations, workforce, customers, competitors, and suppliers.
Organizations apply in one of six eligibility categories: manufacturing businesses (for-profit only), service businesses (for-profit only), small businesses, either manufacturing or service, with 500 or fewer employees (for-profit only), education organizations (for-profit and nonprofit, public and private), health care organizations (for-profit and nonprofit), or nonprofit organizations (including government entities).
Organizations pay a nonrefundable eligibility processing fee of $360.
Organizations that file an early eligibility package may select a senior staff member to serve on the Baldrige Board of Examiners. Nominees for this seat must not have served previously as an examiner for the Baldrige Award).
The second step is to submit an award application that responds to the questions in the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence.
For the 2012 award cycle, application fees range from $4,200 to $18,000, depending on the organization’s and sector. For example, the fee for a health care business with more than 500 employees is $7,500. The fee for a public school district is $4,200. The fees cover some of the expenses associated with reviewing applications and developing feedback reports.
Applicants that are selected for a site visit pay additional fees.

11. Review of Award Applications
The review of applications begins with Independent Review and Consensus Review.
Independent Review and Consensus Review (June–August)
During Independent Review, examiners review an application individually, identifying the applicant’s strengths and opportunities for improvement, and score the application.
During Consensus Review, a team of examiners evaluates each applicant. The team members share observations about the applicant from their Independent Reviews, using a secure software system and the telephone, and they reach consensus on the applicant’s strengths, opportunities for improvement, and score. The team prepares a report that reflects its shared viewpoints on the applicant’s performance.
If the applicant is not selected for a site visit, the consensus report becomes the basis for the feedback report. If the applicant is selected for a site visit, the team uses the consensus report as a planning document and identifies issues to clarify and verify on-site.
Site Visit Review (October)
By visiting the applicant’s site, a Site Visit Team (six to eight examiners) clarifies uncertain points in the application, verifies that the information in the application is correct, and gain additional information that may impact the evaluation of the applicant.
The team revises the consensus report based on findings from the site visit.
The judges use this report to decide whether to recommend the applicant as an award recipient to the director of NIST and the Secretary of Commerce.
Judges’ Review and Recommendations (November)
After the site visits, the judges review the site visit reports, discuss their questions with the leaders of the site visit teams, and then select applicants to recommend as award recipients.
Judges do not deliberate on applicants with which they have a conflict of interest.
After the meeting, the chair of the Judges’ Panel submits the recommendations for award recipients to the director of NIST, who then presents them to the Secretary of Commerce.

12. Role-Model Determination
Purpose of determination
Records check
The Secretary of Commerce and the director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) are responsible for determining if an applicant would be an appropriate role model and, therefore, should be selected as a Baldrige Award recipient. The purpose of this determination is to preserve the award’s integrity.
To assist in role-model determination, NIST checks records of potential award recipients to ensure compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. The checks include Internal Revenue Service (IRS) records, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) records, and court records.

13. Board of Examiners Volunteers “Backbone” of Baldrige Program
Evaluate award applications
Serve as ambassadors
The examiners are volunteers and serve without compensation. Their contributions cannot be overstated; without them, carrying out the mission of the Baldrige Program would be impossible.
Examiners evaluate award applications. Their written analyses and scores are the basis for the selection of award recipients and the content of feedback reports.
The Judges’ Panel is part of the Board of Examiners. This panel reviews applicants at each stage of the award process, selects applicants to move forward in the process, and ultimately recommends applicants to receive the award.
In addition to their application-review responsibilities, board members serve as representatives and ambassadors of the Baldrige Program and contribute significantly to the program through outreach and educational activities.

14. Applications by Award Category13
’12*
’11
’10
’09
’08
’07
’06
Manufacturing -- 1 2 3
Service 4 5
Small business 7 8
Education 10 9 11 16
Health care 15 25 40 54 42 43 45
Nonprofit 14
Total 22 39 69 83 70 85 84 86
Here are some historical data on the number of Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award applicants across sectors from 2005 through 2012.
Applications increased sharply in 2006, when the Baldrige Program conducted a pilot program for nonprofits, leading to the addition of the nonprofit category in 2007.
The strongest market continues to be health care, which makes up over 50% of the applicant base and has done so for several years.
The decline in applications in 2009 reflected the struggling economy. The decline was most noticeable in the nonprofit sector, where many organizations (e.g., charities and government organizations) saw a decline in donations and shrinking budgets.
In 2012, new eligibility rules limited applicants mainly to organizations that had received the top award from a state Baldrige-based program. The number of applications decreased to the targeted level of 39, but the numbers of organizations selected for Site Visit Review and recommended for the award were similar to numbers in previous years. The new rules therefore effectively limited applicants to those who were “award-ready” and directed other organizations to the state programs.
Of the 39 applicants in 2012, the judges selected 12 to move on to Site Visit Review. This group included 1 manufacturer, 1 service organization, 2 small businesses, 5 health care organizations, 1 education organization, and 2 nonprofits.
In November 2012, four organizations were announced as Baldrige Award recipients: Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control (manufacturing), MESA (small business), North Mississippi Health Services (health care), and City of Irving, Texas (nonprofit).
*New eligibility rules in effect.

15. Scoring of Applications, 1988–2007
Band
1988/89
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
0-125
2.8 2 1
7.2
13.2 12 8 10 9
18.6
35.8 30 24 28 43
52.6 34 40 47 50 33
19.6
14.2 18 19 14
2.1
Band*
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
0-250 6 3 4 13 11 17 15 7 22 23 27 16 29 37 32 41 25 31 35
2004
2005
2006
2007
0-275 5 20
Scoring of Applications, –2007
Before 2008, applicants received one scoring band for both process and results items. This slide shows the percentage of those 1988-to-2007 applicants in scoring bands by year.
It has been extremely rare for an organization to score in the two highest bands, with more than about 750 points. This is because all organizations, no matter their level of maturity, have opportunities for improvement and refinement in their processes and results.
% of applications in scoring band.
*Scoring bands changed.

16. Scoring of Applications, 2008–2013
Process Band
’08
’09
’10
’11
’12
’13
Results Band
0–150 5 6 4
0–125 18 21 16 13 8
151–200 10 3
126–170 34 29 27 17 14
201–260 23 28
171–210 26 30 37 36
261–320 47 50 39 45
211–255 15 19
321–370 22
256–300
371–430 2 1
301–345 9
431–480
346–390
481–550
391–450
This pattern has held since 2008 as well. Since 2008, applicants have received two score bands: one representing their organizational maturity in the process categories of the Criteria (Leadership; Strategic Planning; Customer Focus; Measurement, Analysis, and Knowledge Management; Workforce Focus; and Operations Focus), and one representing their organizational maturity in the Results category.
Typically, the scoring band for process has been higher than results, as it often takes multiple cycles of learning and improvement to refine the processes that lead to exceptional results.

17. Median Scoring Ranges, 2013
As mentioned, feedback reports include information on applicants’ median scores. A spider, or radar, chart depicts an applicant’s performance in contrast to the median scores for other applicants.
The spider chart here shows the median scores for all 2012 award applicants. The five possible rings on the spider chart, starting from the outside of the circle working in (numbers 5 through 1 are marked on the chart), represent a scoring range. The first ring represents the scoring range of 10–25%, the second ring 30– 45%, the third ring 50–65%, the fourth ring 70–85%, and the fifth ring 90– 100%.
The red line indicates the actual median score for each Criteria item after Consensus Review in From this chart, you can see that the median scores for items 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2, 4.1, 4.2, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1, and 6.2 are in the third ring, or 50–65%. The median scores for the other items all fell in the second ring, or 30–45%.
The blue line shows median scores for the 12 applicants that received site visits in
Each feedback report contains a similar spider chart depicting the performance of that particular applicant in contrast to all other applicant scores.

18. Award Recipients: Manufacturing
3M Dental Products Division (1997)
ADAC Laboratories (1996)
Armstrong Building Products Operations (1995)
AT&T Transmission Systems Business Unit (1992)
The Bama Companies, Inc. (2004)
Boeing Airlift & Tanker Programs (1998)
Cadillac Motor Car Company (1990)
Cargill Corn Milling North America (2008)
Clarke American Checks, Inc. (2001)
Corning Telecommunications Products Division (1995)
Dana Corporation—Spicer Driveshaft Division (2000)
Eastman Chemical Company (1993)
Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies (2009)
IBM Rochester (1990)
Baldrige Award recipients are shown on this slide and the following six slides.
Former award recipients continue to share with fellow recipients and with other organizations that want to learn. They meet once or twice each year to learn from each other and to discuss how they can help the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program.
They also continue to share knowledge of the Criteria and information with the public about their best practices.
(continued on next slide)

19. Award Recipients: Manufacturing
KARLEE Company, Inc. (2000)
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control (2012)
MEDRAD, Inc. (2003, 2010)
Milliken & Company (1989)
Midway USA (2009)
Motorola CGISS (2002)
Motorola, Inc. (1988)
Nestlé Purina PetCare Co. (2010)
Solar Turbines Inc. (1998)
Solectron Corporation (1991 and 1997)
STMicroelectronics—Region Americas (1999)
Sunny Fresh Foods, Inc. (2005)
Texas Instruments Defense Systems & Electronics Group (1992)
Westinghouse Commercial Nuclear Fuel Division (1988)
Xerox Corp. Business Products & Systems (1989)
Zytec Corporation (1991)
(continued from previous slide)

20. Award Recipients: Service
AT&T Consumer Communications Services (1994)
AT&T Universal Card Services (1992)
BI (1999)
Boeing Aerospace Support (2003)
Caterpillar Financial Services Corp. U.S. (2003)
Dana Commercial Credit Corporation (1996)
DynMcDermott Petroleum Operations (2005)
Federal Express Corporation (1990)
GTE Directories Corporation (1994)
Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation (1997)
Operations Management International, Inc. (2000)
Premier Inc. (2006)
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C. (1992, 1999)
Xerox Business Services (1997)
(continued from previous slide)

21. Award Recipients: Small Business
Ames Rubber Corporation (1993)
Branch-Smith Printing Division (2002)
Custom Research Inc. (1996)
Freese and Nichols Inc. (2010)
Globe Metallurgical Inc. (1988)
Granite Rock Company (1992)
K&N Management (2010)
Los Alamos National Bank (2000)
Marlow Industries, Inc. (1991)
MESA (2006, 2012)
(continued from previous slide)

22. Award Recipients: Small Business
MidwayUSA (2009)
Pal’s Sudden Service (2001)
Park Place Lexus (2005)
PRO-TEC Coating Company (2007)
Stoner, Inc. (2003)
Studer Group (2010)
Sunny Fresh Foods (1999)
Texas Nameplate Co., Inc. (1998, 2004)
Trident Precision Manufacturing, Inc. (1996)
Wainwright Industries, Inc. (1994)
Wallace Co., Inc. (1990)
(continued from previous slide)

23. Award Recipients: Education
Chugach School District (2001)
Community Consolidated School District 15 (2003)
Iredell–Statesville Schools (2008)
Jenks Public Schools (2005)
Kenneth W. Monfort College of Business (2004)
Montgomery County Public Schools (2010)
Pearl River School District (2001)
Pewaukee School District (2013)
Richland College (2005)
University of Wisconsin–Stout (2001)
(continued from previous slide)

24. Award Recipients: Health Care
Advocate Good Samaritan Hospital (2010)
AtlantiCare (2009)
Baptist Hospital, Inc. (2003)
Bronson Methodist Hospital (2005)
Heartland Health (2009)
Henry Ford Health System (2011)
Mercy Health System (2007)
North Mississippi Medical Center (2006)
North Mississippi Health Services (2012)
Poudre Valley Health System (2008)
Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital Hamilton (2004)
Saint Luke’s Hospital of Kansas City (2003)
Schneck Medical Center (2011)
Sharp HealthCare (2007)
Southcentral Foundation (2011)
SSM Health Care (2002)
Sutter Davis Hospital (2013)
(continued from previous slide)

25. Award Recipients: Nonprofit
City of Coral Springs, Florida (2007)
City of Irving, Texas (2012)
Concordia Publishing House (2011)
U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC; 2007)
Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program Clinical Research Pharmacy Coordinating Center (2009)
Nonprofit organizations became eligible for the Baldrige Award in 2007.

26. For More Information Criteria booklets and free Criteria content
Self-assessment tools
Organizational assessments
Training, conferences, and executive education
Award recipient profiles
Case studies
Connections to the Baldrige community
Baldrige Performance Excellence Program |
(301)