Transparency & Judging

A participant’s score should reflect the evaluation made by the judge for that performance.

If an administrative, technical, or other error requires a correction, that correction should be documented and authorized through an appropriate procedure.

YAGP is working to make the process for documenting and communicating any such corrections as clear and transparent as possible.

The integrity of competition results is fundamental to our organization.

Judging should be based on the participant’s performance and the established judging criteria — not on personal relationships, nationality, appearance, school affiliation, or other personal circumstances.

YAGP recognizes that professional relationships within the dance community can sometimes create a potential conflict of interest. This is why clear procedures for disclosure and, where appropriate, recusal are an important part of our transparency initiative.

A professional relationship with a participant, teacher, or school may create a potential conflict of interest.

YAGP is developing clearer procedures for:

identifying potential conflicts;

requiring appropriate disclosure;

determining when recusal is appropriate;

protecting the independence of the judging process.

Our goal is to ensure that participants and families can understand not only who is judging, but also how potential conflicts are handled.

No. YAGP does not require participants to lose weight in order to participate or succeed in the competition.

We recognize that discussions about weight and body image can be particularly sensitive for young dancers.

Professional development should focus on technique, strength, coordination, musicality, artistry, and health — not on achieving a particular body weight or a single “ideal” body type.

Any report of inappropriate comments about a participant’s body or weight should be taken seriously and can be submitted confidentially to YAGP.

Height and weight information is not collected as a criterion for judging a dancer’s artistic or technical performance.

This information is collected in connection with dancers who are being considered for scholarship opportunities and placement at professional ballet schools.

YAGP works with leading ballet schools and professional training institutions around the world. These institutions may have their own requirements and considerations when evaluating a dancer for admission to a professional training program. Such requirements can reflect the specific physical demands, training environment and partnering practices of professional ballet education.

In this context, YAGP may be asked to provide basic physical-development information to the schools concerned.

This is fundamentally different from using height or weight to determine a dancer’s competition score.

A dancer’s height or weight is not a measure of artistic talent, technical achievement or competitive worth.

At the same time, because these are young dancers, YAGP recognizes that physical-development information is sensitive and must be handled responsibly. Such information should never be interpreted as establishing an “ideal” body weight for ballet or as a recommendation that a young dancer should lose weight.

Our goal is to ensure that the transition from competition to professional training is handled with the same principle that guides our work with young dancers generally:

health, appropriate development and long-term wellbeing must come before performance.

NO.

YAGP welcomes dancers from different countries, cultures, and backgrounds.

Judging is based on the quality of the individual performance and the established judging criteria, not on race, ethnicity, or nationality.

At the same time, any specific report of discriminatory behavior should be taken seriously and reviewed individually, based on the available evidence and circumstances.

A competition score and a qualification or invitation to Finals are not necessarily the same thing.

Under YAGP’s published rules, a score below the usual Finals threshold does not necessarily prevent a dancer from being invited at the judges’ discretion, while a high contemporary score does not automatically guarantee a Finals invitation.

This means that participants should distinguish between:

score → placement → qualification/invitation.

YAGP believes that explaining this distinction clearly is essential to understanding competition results.

Yes.

YAGP’s published rules provide for judges’ discretion in certain circumstances. A dancer who does not reach the usual score threshold may still be invited based on the judges’ recommendation.

Conversely, achieving a particular score in contemporary does not automatically guarantee a Finals invitation.

These provisions are part of the published competition rules and are intended to give the judging panel appropriate professional discretion.

No.

Master classes are an educational component of the YAGP experience. Participation in a master class does not itself determine a dancer’s competition score.

YAGP considers these to be two distinct functions:

Education is education.
Judging is judging.

Personal or professional familiarity should not provide a participant with an advantage in judging.

Because the international dance community is relatively interconnected, YAGP recognizes the importance of having clear conflict-of-interest procedures rather than relying solely on individual judgment.

The goal is to ensure that professional relationships do not compromise the independence or perceived integrity of the evaluation process.

Yes.

YAGP has established a confidential channel through which participants, parents and teachers can raise concerns.

Reports may relate to:

judging procedures;

potential conflicts of interest;

discrimination;

inappropriate treatment of minors;

inappropriate comments about appearance or weight;

other serious concerns involving participant welfare.

Whenever possible, reports should include specific information that can help an objective review.

YAGP has developed an independent mechanism for reviewing serious complaints, separate from ordinary event administration.

This distinction is important.

A disagreement with a competition result is not necessarily the same as a report alleging that a rule, judging procedure, safeguarding principle, or conflict-of-interest policy was violated.

Different concerns require different forms of review.

Yes.

One of the key elements of the YAGP transparency initiative is independent professional review of judging-related processes.

The purpose is not simply to confirm that YAGP is right.

The purpose is to identify weaknesses, improve procedures, and make the system more reliable and transparent.

We believe that a strong organization should be willing to examine its own processes independently.

YAGP considers participant safety and wellbeing a fundamental responsibility.

This includes respectful communication and responsible treatment of sensitive issues such as appearance, body image, and weight.

YAGP has developed a Wellbeing & Safeguarding Charter and training for judges and staff addressing:

working with minors;

professional ethics;

cultural differences;

body image;

appropriate communication;

conflicts of interest.

Because social media arguments rarely provide a reliable way to establish facts.

Our preferred approach is:

Listen → Document → Review → Respond.

YAGP does not believe that people should be attacked or silenced simply because they express criticism.

At the same time, there is an important difference between a person’s experience, an allegation, an interpretation, and an independently established fact.

We believe serious claims deserve serious review rather than an immediate social-media argument.

Not simply through statements.

YAGP intends to increase public access to information including:

participant statistics;

countries and schools represented;

scholarships;

competition results;

Finals information;

judging panels;

aggregate feedback and survey results;

information about improvements made to policies and procedures.

Yes.

If someone believes they experienced discrimination, inappropriate treatment, a conflict of interest, or a procedural problem, they should be able to provide information confidentially.

Specific details are particularly helpful, including:

event and date;

category;

relevant circumstances;

names or roles of people involved, where appropriate;

documents or other supporting material.

Confidentiality can protect a person who comes forward, but it does not replace the need for careful review of the information provided.

Absolutely.

No large international organization should assume that its policies and procedures can never be improved.

Transparency does not mean claiming that mistakes never happen.

It means being prepared to:

listen → review → correct → explain.

We believe accountability is strengthened when an organization is willing to acknowledge areas where its processes can become better.

YAGP has developed a long-term Transparency & Trust Initiative focused on:

Transparent Judging
Conflict of Interest
Independent Review
Confidential Complaints
Wellbeing & Safeguarding
Public Statistics
Regular Reporting
Education & Training

These measures are intended to make the organization’s processes easier for participants, parents, and teachers to understand.

The goal is not to win an argument on social media.

The goal is to create a system in which participants and families do not have to guess how decisions are made.

YAGP welcomes legitimate questions and constructive criticism.

When concerns are raised, our responsibility is to listen, examine the facts, improve where necessary, and communicate clearly.

Transparency is not about saying that everything is perfect.
It is about making the process visible, accountable, and continually better.