Submission & Judging

Preparing your Submission

Submissions should include:

Presentation slides
Link to demo
Link to public GitHub repo - don’t forget to add your AI usage doc.

Optional:

Architecture diagrams
Mockups
Technical documentation
Videos

Your presentation should explain:

The challenge
The user
The solution
How Open Payments was used
Key learnings

Your demo should show:

A working demonstration and recording of the payment flow, clearly showing:

Payment request
Authorization
Payment execution
Successful completion

Submission & Review Process

Code, demo, and presentation submissions happen first. From that point, reviews run in parallel across two tracks so that code, demos, and presentations are all checked before Round 1 judging begins.

Step by step

Step 1 - Code, demo, and presentation

All teams push their final code into their GitHub public repository. No further code changes after this point. Demos and presentations are shared with the judging panel.

Follow these steps to submit your project.

Make your GitHub repository public - Your code needs to be visible to the reviewers, so make sure your repository’s visibility is set to Public before you submit.
Share your repository link.
Make sure your repository contains all your code - The repository must include everything you wrote during the hackathon - all code, no partial uploads or code left only on someone’s local machine. Make sure you push all your branches to main.
Make sure your submission contains the requirements from AI guidelines for hackathons - The ‘AI guidelines for hackathons’ require some extra files and folders to be submitted, disclosing AI usage.
Demo videos and presentations should also be submitted at this time according to the instructions shared with you.

Step 2 - Technical mentors begin code review

Technical mentors move to the mentors’ room, so they can discuss if there are questions. They review each team’s repository directly.

Step 3 - Presentation practice

In parallel to the technical review, participants will be able to practice their presentations.

Judging Criteria

This is an example of Interledger Open Payments Hackathon judging criteria:

Criteria	What we’re looking for
Problem Definition	Is the challenge clear and meaningful?
Use of Open Payments	Does the project demonstrate a working payment flow?
User Experience	Does the solution create value for users?
Technical Quality	Does the prototype work reliably?
Presentation	Can the team clearly explain what they’ve built and why it matters?
Inclusion	How does this solution make payments easier, more accessible, or more inclusive for underserved users?
Innovation	How creative and original is this solution’s approach to payments?
Impact	What difference could this solution make for users or communities, and how clearly is that explained?

Suggested Methodology for Judging

Round 1

Every team presents to a judging panel. The time limit for the pitch (including demo) is 5 minutes. You will present to a panel with a minimum of 2 judges. Once all teams have presented, the judges deliberate and select the teams to progress to Round 2, based on each team’s cumulative score against the judging criteria.

Round 2

The teams progressing to Round 2 are announced and immediately present their solutions to a new judging panel, which includes representatives. The time limit for the pitch in Round 2 (including demo) is also 5 minutes. Once all Round 2 presentations are complete, the judging panel convenes to select the overall award winners. All participants are then invited back into the auditorium for the winners’ announcement. After the judges’ winners are announced, participants can vote for their favorite solution for a Community Award.