Team Excellence Award Nomination Form

The Team Excellence Award was established in 2026 to honor communications and marketing teams that deliver exceptional results through collaboration and bold, new ideas.

This award celebrates teams with diverse strengths and exceptional leadership that produce exemplary work. Nominated teams should demonstrate clear strategic alignment with the college, creativity and measurable impact.

Successful nominations will illustrate how the team has solved challenges, produced high-quality communications and marketing, and achieved meaningful outcomes for their organization and audiences. Nominations should address both results and processes, with a special emphasis placed on accomplishments within the past year.

Eligibility Guidelines

Teams must consist of two or more people.
Team members may come from a single department or span college departments.
A nominated team must an institutional member of NCMPR in good standing at the time of nomination.
NCMPR board of directors' institutions are not eligible for this award during the board member's tenure on the board.
Teams that have previously won the award are eligible to win the award again after ten years.

Team Excellence Award Nomination

Person Submitting Nomination

Name *

Title *

Institution *

Address *

Address 2

City *

State/Province *

Zip/Postal Code *

Phone *

Email *

About the Nominee

District *

Institution *

State/Province *

Team overview: Team name (or description)? *

Team composition: List team members and titles, identify lead(s) and note in-house vs. contracted roles. *

Work summary: List specific projects or initiatives from this year that demonstrate the team’s excellence. *

Strategy: Identify goals, target audiences, key messages and rationale for the approach. *

Execution: What was the timeline and scope (duration, channels, deliverables, scale)? *

Collaboration and challenges: How did the team collaborate, and what challenges did they overcome together? *

Impact and learning: Summarize outcomes, benchmark comparisons, lasting value/innovation, and key lessons learned.

Is there anything else about this nominee that should be considered by the committee in reviewing the nomination?

Please respond to the following: * Required Field

There are errors that need correction above