¾ÅÖÝÓ°Ôº

Eligibility

Individuals named in any of the following roles during the nomination and judging period are not eligible to nominate, or be nominated:

• RSC Prize Committee members
• RSC Subject Community Presidents
• RSC Prize Committee members
• Trustees of the ¾ÅÖÝÓ°Ôº
• ¾ÅÖÝÓ°Ôº staff 

Nominators:

• Only RSC members can nominate for this prize.
• Nominees may NOT nominate themselves.

Nominees:

• The prize is open to nominees working in the UK and Ireland only.
• Nominees should be a mid-career scientist (for further details, see information below and in the ‘Guidelines for Nominators’ section).
• Nominees can only be considered for one of our Research & Innovation Prizes in any given year. In a case where a nominee is nominated for more than one prize independently, RSC staff will ask the nominee which prize they would like to be considered for.
• We will not consider nominations of deceased individuals.

Career stage guidance

• After fully taking account of any time away from research, career breaks or interruptions, nominees will typically have no more than 20 years of full-time equivalent professional experience at the closing date for nominations.
  • We define this as experience gained as part of a career working in scientific research, excluding time spent in full-time education. For example, experience studying as a postgraduate (PhD) student is not included, but this does include experience working as e.g. a post-doctoral researcher, or working in research in industry.
  • Nominators will be asked to provide details of the nominee's professional experience, in relation to the above criteria (see ‘Guidelines for Nominators’). The Prize Committee will consider this information in relation to the eligibility criteria, and they have the discretion to consider any nomination for a different prize under their remit.
• We particularly encourage nominations of disabled people, those who work part-time, or whose career has spanned a break for any reason – for example, a period of parental or adoption leave, caring responsibilities, long-term illness, family commitments, or other circumstances. We understand that these can impact a nominee’s career in different ways, and encourage nominators to use the space provided on the nomination form to explain the nature and impact of the nominees’ individual circumstances (see 'Guidelines for Nominators' for further details).

General information

• When nominating previous RSC prize winners, please remember that a person cannot be awarded twice for substantially the same body of work.
• Nominees should only be nominated once for this prize in any given prize cycle. In cases where we receive more than one nomination for the same nominee, only one nomination will go forward to judging.
• Since 2023, we have been trialling a process where all unsuccessful nominations will automatically rollover once, to be considered for the next round of the prize, unless the nominee's circumstances have changed to make them ineligible. This means that:
  • All nominations submitted for the first time for a 2024 prize will be considered for a 2025 prize. We strongly encourage nominators to update their nomination between cycles when the nomination window is open.
  • The RSC Prize Committee will review the outcomes from the trial in July 2025.

Submitting your nomination

Please use our online nominations system to submit the following information:

• Your name, contact details, and RSC membership number (please contact the RSC Membership team if you do not know your membership details).Your RSC membership must be confirmed at the point of nomination – it is not sufficient to have a membership application in process. The identity of nominators is not made known to our judging panels. The RSC reserves the right to amend nominations if necessary to ensure the anonymity of the nominator.
• Your nominee's name and contact details.
• An up to date CV for the nominee (no longer than one A4 side, 11pt text) which should include a summary of their education and career, and a maximum of 5 relevant publications or patents.
• Information relating to your nominee’s career and professional experience, which will be shared with the committee. Before doing so, RSC staff will always seek consent from the nominee in cases where special category data is mentioned. Please make sure that you provide enough information for the committee to understand the nature and impact of any time away from research.
  • Date (month and year) of the start of their career working in scientific research.
  • Details (dates and time periods) of any part-time work, time away from research, career breaks or interruptions – for example, parental/adoption leave, caring responsibilities, long-term illness, family commitments, etc.
  • Any other circumstances not captured above – for example, long-term conditions, disabilities, etc., that you would like the committee to be aware of and consider.
• A short citation describing what the nominee should be awarded for. This must be no longer than 250 characters (including spaces) and no longer than one sentence.
• A supporting statement (up to 750 words) addressing the selection criteria. Our guidance for nominators page has more information on writing this supporting statement.
• A statement (up to 100 words) describing how your nominee has contributed more broadly to the scientific community. A list of possible examples is outlined in the ‘selection criteria’ tab.
• References are not required for this award and will not be accepted.

The RSC reserves the right to rescind any prize if there are reasonable grounds to do so. All nominators will be asked to confirm that to the best of their knowledge there is no impediment, relating to professional conduct, to their nominee receiving this prize. All prize winners will be asked to sign the RSC’s Code of Conduct Declaration for Recognition.

Our selection committees base their evaluations on the overall quality of relevant contributions and achievements by nominees, in relation to the selection criteria listed below.

The scientific content of any supporting publications, as described in the supporting statement, is much more important than publication metrics or the identity of the journal in which it is published.

The selection committee will consider the following aspects of nominations for this prize:

• Originality of research
• Impact of research
• Quality of publications and/or patents and/or software
• Innovation
• Professional standing
• Collaborations and teamwork
• Other indicators of esteem indicated by the nominator    

In an instance where multiple nominees are judged equally meritorious in relation to the above criteria, judging panels have the flexibility to use information provided by the nominator on the nominee’s broader contribution to the chemistry community as an additional criterion.

Examples of relevant contributions could include, but are not limited to:

• Involvement with ¾ÅÖÝÓ°Ôº member groups/networks
• Teaching/demonstrating
• Effective mentorship
• Service on boards, committees or panels
• Leadership in the scientific community
• Peer-reviewer
• Promotion of diversity and inclusion
• Advocacy for chemistry
• Public engagement and outreach

Sir Gilbert Thomas Morgan (1872-1940) provided a bequest to establish the Corday-Morgan Prizes in memory of his parents, Thomas Morgan and Mary-Louise Corday. A condition of his bequest, upheld to this day, is to keep their graves in good repair with flowers placed on 4^th June each year. 

Sir Gilbert Morgan was the first Director of the Government Chemical Research Laboratory, and a dedicated academic and industrial chemist, as well as a passionate teacher. Born in Essendon in Hertfordshire, Gilbert studied at the Finsbury Technical Institute, where he developed interests in azo dyes and rare earth metals, fields which had a major impact on his later career. His first industrial experience, working for Read Holliday and Sons in Huddersfield, allowed him to study a wide variety of chemical problems. While working there Morgan produced a best-selling dye, Titan Como Blue, and discovered a clear amber resin, later to be commercialised by Baekeland as a component in the first synthetic plastics.

After working in industry for a number of years, Morgan returned to study at the Royal College of Science in London, with subsequent promotion. There, as throughout his career, his interests were wide-ranging, and as well as his primary research into the diazo-reaction, Morgan also researched compounds from carbohydrates to terpenes. It was during this time that his involvement with the Chemical Society began, firstly as Editor of the Journal and then Secretary.

In 1912 the Royal College of Science, Dublin, appointed Morgan as Chair of ¾ÅÖÝÓ°Ôº, where he returned to research in an area of early interest to him: high pressure reactions. When the First World War began, Morgan helped to rebuild the British Dye Industry, and worked closely with the Chemical Warfare Committee. As the Mason Professor at Birmingham in 1919, Morgan dedicated himself to inspiring and teaching his students, as well as undertaking all the administrative work involved in the role. 

The Government Chemical Research Laboratory appointed Morgan as the first Director in 1925. There he instigated three long-term research projects with industrial applications, but simultaneously encouraged fundamental research, and the laboratory under his leadership was a demonstration of how pure and applied research could be brought together.

Morgan was honoured with a knighthood in 1937, and served as President of the Chemical Society and the Society of Chemical Industry.

The prizes were established in 1949. In 2021, the purposes of this Trust were amended, and remaining monies were combined with other generous bequests and donations to become part of the RSC Recognition Fund.