One cycle.
Four ways in.
Three cities.
This is the hub for the 2026 GQC programme: how the six months run, which track to choose, what the Learning Experience actually asks of you, and where the live chapters take place. If you only read one page besides Eligibility, read this one.
From open call to the GQC Medal.
Choose the door that matches the work, not the prize.
Software, machine learning, data or hardware against a defined problem. Jurors run the prototype. You write an honest technical note and an ethics page. Past work: clinic triage, school-district energy models.
A message, a campaign or a service design. Judges look for a named audience, a behaviour you intend to change, and evidence that anyone moved. Past work: quiet-hours libraries, peer-counselling lines, refill schemes.
Twenty-four teams nominated by partner schools, alumni and former finalists. They skip the open round and present to the senior jury at the Global Final, after a compressed Learning Experience.
City winners and wildcards — twenty-four teams — in New York on 5–6 December for the Founder’s Prize, Research Prize, Impact Prize and the GQC Medal.
Not a crash pitch camp.
Shortlisted teams join the Learning Experience: framing in weeks 1–2, primary and secondary research in weeks 3–5, intervention design in weeks 6–8, defence rehearsal in weeks 9–10, then the city showcase. Cohorts are capped so mentors can read. Every team receives two structured written critiques before they fly. The six-minute pitch is the last artefact, not the first.
What “good” looks like by August is not a polished deck. It is an evidence pack a stranger can audit, a prototype or campaign artefact a stranger can use, and a team that can say what the evidence does not support. That standard is the same in Hong Kong, London and New York; the rubric is published in full.
GQC is venture-building plus a learning experience, not a science-fair qualifier. If you are choosing among ISEF, Conrad, FIRST and others, start with The Field. If you are choosing among our own pages, the next three to read are Eligibility, Judging, and the track that matches your work.
Optional critique of a one-page brief. Independent of judging.
Universities, civic bodies and industry benches that stage each city.
Who writes the brief, who scores, how conflicts are handled.
What we issue and how anyone can verify it.