Guardian kite crest icon

therecruitmentjunction.co.uk

Independent public-interest mirror, run by The Reasonable Adjustment

CJA Awards – Frequently Asked Questions

Straightforward answers about the Criminal Justice Alliance Awards, what they check, what they don’t, what fairness looks like and how the awards interacted with the evidence already available on The Recruitment Junction.

This FAQ is designed for nominees, staff, service users and journalists who want clarity on how awards processes work in practice.

Back to CJA Awards hub Open TRJ evidence archive

Questions and Answers

Do the CJA Awards independently verify organisations?

Not fully. The Criminal Justice Alliance Awards primarily rely on nominations submitted by partner organisations, staff and allies. Unless a concern is directly sent to the awards team, they will not know about issues such as:

  • Safeguarding disputes
  • Equality Act concerns or reasonable adjustment failures
  • GDPR breaches or blocked communication channels
  • Contradictory public funding statements

Do the CJA Awards consider safeguarding concerns?

Not by default. There is no published process requiring the panel to check safeguarding records, complaints or whistleblowing evidence for shortlisted nominees.

This is one of the key reasons this FAQ exists.

Can service users submit evidence to the awards panel?

Yes, but only if they know where to send it. The CJA does not openly publish a dedicated “submit evidence” route for people who are not part of the organisation being nominated.

Did the panel have access to the TRJ evidence archive?

The archive was publicly available before the 2025 awards ceremony, including:

  • Public funding evidence showing more than £134,000 from Newcastle City Council
  • PDFs of contradictory public statements
  • Records of blocked email addresses during GDPR and Equality Act requests
  • A full safeguarding timeline

Whether the panel reviewed this material is unknown. There is no published decision log.

Do awards organisations factor in Equality Act compliance?

Not formally. Awards tend to evaluate outputs and partnership success, not whether an organisation failed to make reasonable adjustments or treated disabled service users fairly.

Are the awards meant to be a measure of an organisation’s overall ethics?

No. Awards recognise selected examples of “good practice,” not the full operational picture. This is why independent public-interest mirrors like this one exist — to supply the missing context.

What should nominees expect in terms of transparency?

Nominees should expect the following at minimum:

  • Award criteria that include integrity, safeguarding and honest public communication
  • A clear conflict-checking process
  • An avenue for service users to provide evidence

What should service users do if they believe a nominee has issues the awards should know about?

They can:

  • Email the CJA directly with the evidence.
  • Provide clear URLs to public records, PDF evidence or timelines.
  • Use whistleblowing protections if relevant.

Why is this FAQ hosted on a shadow domain?

Because The Recruitment Junction blocked emails, deleted data and refused to correct inaccurate public funding statements while a disabled service user attempted to exercise legal rights. This site ensures the public record remains permanently accessible regardless of attempts to silence, downplay or erase key timelines.

This includes contributions from both The Reasonable Adjustment and Ki-Ki.

Related CJA Awards pages