Recognition · Sustained Commitment

The Chardi Kala Youth Seva Award.

An annual recognition for Sikhiyasis who have already begun the work — quietly, durably, often without being asked — and who could use modest support to continue. Named for Chardi Kala, the Sikh principle of ever-rising spirits in adversity. Awarded by nomination from local Sangats and partner institutions; not by self-application.

I. The Principle

Most awards in the youth-development sector reward potential. They look for the impressive young person at the start of their arc — well-presented, articulate, with a future in front of them — and offer support to launch that future. Sikhiyas does not run that kind of award. We are not in the business of identifying the next generation of impressive Sikhs.

The Chardi Kala Award is structurally different. It looks for Sikhiyasis who have already begun the work — typically without much fanfare, often in their own communities, sometimes in conditions of real difficulty — and asks: what would help this person continue. The award rewards durability, not promise. It supports the longer arc, not the launch.

The principle behind this design is the principle that names the award itself. Chardi Kala — ever-rising spirits — is not naive cheerfulness. It is the deliberate refusal to let circumstance define one's interior horizon. The young Sikhs we are looking for are the ones whose circumstance has, in some real way, asked them to lower their horizon — and who have not. We notice them. We say so. We help them keep going.

II. Who The Award Recognises

Chardi Kala Award recipients are typically — though not exclusively — Sikhiyasis whose situations include:

• Continuity through adversityMaintaining sustained Seva commitment through periods of personal hardship — illness, family loss, financial pressure, displacement — without making the hardship the centre of their own narrative
• Quiet leadershipHolding a local Sangat, a study circle, a small Langar operation, or a community-based service activity over years, without seeking external recognition or institutional career-building from the work
• Returning to the workSikhiyasis who, after a paused or interrupted engagement with their practice, have found their way back and have been present in the work for at least eighteen months since
• Bridging across differenceSustained Seva work in mixed-community contexts, particularly in geographies where doing the work requires patient bridge-building rather than dramatic action
• Carrying institutional weight without institutional supportHolding meaningful work that is not yet sufficiently resourced — early-stage social enterprises, pioneering local stewardship projects, first-of-their-kind study circles — where the absence of institutional infrastructure is genuinely a constraint on continuing

These are illustrative situations, not eligibility tests. The selection panel is given latitude to recognise the right kinds of sustained commitment in their cycle, and the right kinds change from year to year.

III. Eligibility

• MembershipDeclared Sikhiyasi (Tier One) for at least eighteen months
• EngagementDemonstrated sustained Seva work — through Sikhiyas programmes, in the recipient's local Sangat, or in their own initiative — for at least two years
• AgeOpen to Sikhiyasis aged 18 to 45, the standard Sikhiyas age band
• GeographyOpen globally — recipients may be based in India, in any diaspora geography, or in transitional locations
• NominationAward is by nomination only. Self-application is not accepted. See Section VI for the nomination route.

Friends & Allies (Tier Two) are not eligible for the Chardi Kala Award itself, which is structurally a Sikhiyasi recognition. The parallel recognition pathway for Friends, where it applies, runs through partner movements' own award structures.

IV. What The Award Provides

Award terms are deliberately modest, and deliberately useful. The structure is the same across all recipients in a given cycle, with adjustment only for geography-specific cost differences:

• GrantAn annual unrestricted grant — the amount published each cycle in the Patrons Letter, sized for genuine relevance to a young person's circumstances rather than ceremonial inadequacy
• Mentor pairingYear-long pairing with a senior mentor — typically a senior practitioner from the relevant programme domain or a partner-organisation lead — who provides structured support without supervisory authority
• Programme priorityPriority consideration for the next cycle of any Sikhiyas programme the recipient wishes to engage with — Seva placement, exchange, study circle convener role
• Convener invitationStanding invitation to convener gatherings (study circle, exchange, or programme-relevant) for the year of the award and the year following
• Annual Sangat invitationTravel and participation costs covered for attendance at the annual Sikhiyas Sangat at the Kangra campus, for one year of the recipient's choosing within five years of the award
• Recognition within the communityThe recipient's name and a short citation included in the Patrons Letter and in the annual Sangat printed materials. No external publicity, no press release, no social media, no fundraising appeal built around the recognition.

The deliberate restraint on external publicity is part of the award's working architecture, not an oversight. Awards that exist for the publicity quickly become about the publicity. Chardi Kala recipients are recognised within the Sikhiyas community because that recognition is what supports continued work. Beyond that community, the work itself is the publication.

V. Number Of Awards

Each cycle, the Patrons Council confirms the number of Chardi Kala Awards to be made. Current programme size is six to ten recipients per year globally, deliberately small. The numbers grow modestly as the programme matures, and may stay flat for years if the cohort of obviously-deserving nominees in a given cycle does not warrant expansion. We would rather under-award in a thin year than dilute the recognition by over-awarding.

VI. The Nomination Route

The Chardi Kala Award operates on a deliberate institutional choice: nominations only, no self-applications. The reason is principled. The young people the award is looking for are typically not the young people who present themselves for awards. The work they do is precisely the work that does not get nominated unless someone else, who has watched it for years, takes the trouble to put it forward.

Three routes to nomination, each operating on a different annual cycle:

Route One — Local Sangat Nomination

Local Sikhiyas Sangats — through their study circle conveners, regional coordinators, or recognised senior Sikhiyasi members — may nominate a Sikhiyasi from within or adjacent to their Sangat. Nominations open in early February and close mid-April each year. The nomination is a written document of approximately 1,000–1,500 words covering the nominee's sustained work, the situation in which they have done it, what continued support might mean for them, and three references from people who can speak to the work.

Route Two — Partner Institution Nomination

Implementing partner institutions (EduCARE, RISHEE, CIEEL) and recognised partner organisations within and beyond the GlobalPEACE network may nominate a Sikhiyasi who has worked with them substantially. Same window, same nomination format. Partner-institution nominations are particularly useful for Sikhiyasis whose work has been distributed across geographies or institutions in ways that make single-Sangat visibility difficult.

Route Three — Patron Discretionary Nomination

Up to two awards per cycle may be made by Patron Council discretionary nomination, drawing on Sangats and circumstances that the formal nomination routes have missed. The discretionary route exists because no formal nomination process catches every deserving recipient, and the institutional discipline of acknowledging that openly matters.

VII. Selection

Nominations are reviewed by a selection panel convened annually. The panel includes: one Sikhiyas Director, one Patron, one senior Sikhiyasi from outside the Director-Patron line (rotating annually), one external practitioner from the recipient's likely programme domain, and one previous Chardi Kala recipient where available. Panel deliberations are confidential, decisions are by panel consensus, and findings are issued as written citations rather than scored rankings.

Panel review begins in May, recipient announcements are made in late June, grant disbursement and mentor pairing begin in early July, and the recipient's award year runs through the following June. The annual Sangat in November includes — for those recipients who wish — a brief presentation of their work to the gathered community. The presentation is voluntary; no recipient is required to make their work public.

VIII. What This Award Will Not Do

• It will not be made into a public-facing competition. Nominations and deliberations are confidential.
• It will not be conditional on subsequent obligations to Sikhiyas. Recipients are not required to take on additional Sikhiyas roles, attend specific events, or use the grant in particular ways. The grant is unrestricted because the work it supports is the recipient's own, not Sikhiyas's.
• It will not be used as a fundraising vehicle. We do not solicit donations to fund the award; the award is funded through the standard fee economics of the Sikhiyas cohort programmes, like every other supporting infrastructure.
• It will not be used to brand-build for Sikhiyas. The recipient's name appears in internal community materials. External media coverage, where it occurs, is the recipient's own decision in their own time.
• It will not become a lifetime achievement award. The maximum number of times any one Sikhiyasi may receive the award is two, with at least three years between awards.

IX. When Recognition Cannot Continue

Recognition is given in good faith, on the basis of sustained work demonstrated to the date of nomination. It is not given as a permanent inheritance, and there are circumstances — rare, bounded, and specifically defined — in which the institution may withdraw it. This section sets out, in writing, the architecture under which withdrawal can occur, so that the discipline operates honestly when it has to, and so that recipients understand from the start that the recognition is held under terms.

The principle is the same one that runs across the rest of Sikhiyas: the role is entrusted, not possessed. Recognition is the institutional acknowledgement of work carried under that entrusting. Where the entrusting is broken in a sustained or material way, the recognition that was given for it cannot continue without becoming dishonest.

The Four Grounds

The grounds for withdrawal are limited to four specific situations. Each is narrow and substantive, designed to capture genuine breakdowns of the entrusting relationship without becoming a tool for punishing inconvenient recipients.

• Safeguarding violationCredible findings of harm caused by the recipient to a person within or adjacent to Sikhiyas programmes, established through the Independent Ombudsperson's process. This is the most serious ground and the one most likely to result in full withdrawal.
• Financial misconductMisappropriation of award funds, misrepresentation of the work the award was intended to support, or material breach of the unrestricted-grant good-faith assumption under which the grant was disbursed.
• Material harm to the workConduct, public or private, that demonstrably damages the people the recipient was serving, the institutional relationships through which the work was being done, or the safety and dignity of subsequent cohort members or recipients in the same programme stream. During any active placement period, the definition of "the work" is wider — the community is the workplace, as set out in the contracted-role discipline on the Seva Placements page.
• Sustained refusal of engagementExtended, documented refusal to engage in good faith with the standard institutional relationship the award creates — mentor pairing, annual check-ins, post-cycle conversation — in circumstances where the recipient has had the opportunity to address concerns being raised and has elected not to.

What Is Explicitly Not A Ground

Worth stating directly, because withdrawal mechanisms in other institutions have, on occasion, drifted into instruments of factional pressure or factional silencing. The grounds for withdrawal of a Chardi Kala Award do not include any of the following:

• Disagreement with Sikhiyas leadership on programme direction, institutional decisions, or strategic choices
• Public criticism of Sikhiyas, of the Directors, of partner institutions, or of the wider Sikh institutional landscape made by the recipient in their own voice
• Divergence in the recipient's own life path from the work the award originally recognised — including a change of profession, a change of geography, a change of personal circumstances, or any other life decision the recipient is entitled to make
• Personal-life choices in the recipient's own private and home contexts that do not affect the work itself or the people it serves. The personal-life carve-out is real, and it is honoured. (During active placement the definition is wider as noted above; outside active placement, personal life is the recipient's own.)
• Falling out of regular contact with Sikhiyas after the award year. The award does not create a perpetual engagement obligation, and silence on the recipient's part is not, by itself, a ground for any institutional response.

The Process

Where one of the four grounds is suspected to apply, the process unfolds in four stages, each of them designed to take the matter seriously while protecting the recipient's dignity.

1. Concern raisedEither to the Scholarships & Awards Office or directly to the Independent Ombudsperson. Concerns may be raised by anyone — a fellow recipient, a Mentor, a community member, an institutional partner, or the recipient themselves — and are received in confidence.
2. Recipient notifiedIn writing, with the specific concern named, and with reasonable time (typically 30 days) to respond. The notification is not an accusation; it is the formal opening of a conversation that may or may not lead anywhere.
3. ConversationBetween the recipient and two senior practitioners — typically a Director and a Patron, or where appropriate a senior alumnus and a Patron. The conversation is structured to genuinely hear the recipient's account, recognising that the situation that produced the concern often has context the institution does not yet hold.
4. Independent reviewBy a withdrawal panel including the Ombudsperson, one Patron, and one external reviewer not previously involved with the recipient. The panel issues a written finding to the recipient and to the Patron Council. Findings are by panel consensus, not majority vote, and are confidential to the recipient and the Council.

The Range Of Possible Findings

A withdrawal panel finding may recommend any of four outcomes, calibrated to the substance of the situation:

• ContinuationThe concern is found not to constitute one of the four grounds, or the recipient's response and explanation resolve the matter. The award stands. No further institutional action.
• Supported continuationThe award stands but with structured remediation — additional mentor support, specific commitments from the recipient, a check-in cadence over the following year. Used where the concern was real but the relationship is recoverable.
• Suspension of programme priorityThe award stands, but the convener invitations, programme priority, and continuing-engagement elements of the award are suspended. The grant funds already disbursed are not clawed back. Used in serious cases where the institutional relationship needs distance but the recognition itself remains valid for the work originally honoured.
• Full withdrawalThe award is formally withdrawn. The recipient's name is quietly removed from internal recognition lists. Grant funds already disbursed are not clawed back unless misappropriation is the established ground. No public statement is made about the withdrawal.

Full withdrawal is rare. It is reserved for the most serious situations — typically safeguarding findings, established financial misconduct, or sustained material harm of the kind that the institutional relationship cannot reasonably continue with. Where full withdrawal occurs, the process is held privately and the recipient is treated with whatever dignity the circumstances permit.

The Underlying Principle

The withdrawal architecture exists for a structural reason. Awards that have no withdrawal mechanism end up either rewarding the wrong people forever — which corrodes the award's credibility for everyone — or going quietly unenforced when problems arise, which corrodes the institutional integrity behind the award. Both of these are worse than having the mechanism in writing from the start.

What protects this architecture from misuse is the Independent Ombudsperson's binding role in the review panel. The Ombudsperson sits structurally outside the Director line and is the institutional safeguard against any factional or personal-pressure use of the withdrawal mechanism. Where you encounter a withdrawal mechanism without an analogous independent role, treat the mechanism with caution. Ours has one because the discipline of fairness requires it.

X. A Word On Receiving Recognition

Receiving a Chardi Kala Award is not, in our tradition, a moment for personal celebration. It is closer to a moment for Ardas — for gratitude that the work has been sustained, for prayer that the next year's work continues to find what it needs. Recipients are gently asked, on receiving the citation, to consider what their own next year's Vand Chhako looks like in light of what has just been received. This is an invitation, not a requirement, and it is offered in private rather than as a public test.

The deepest recognition any Sikhiyasi can receive is, of course, not an institutional award. It is the simple knowledge that the work has been useful, has been continued, and has been carried by the Guru through circumstances that did not always make the carrying easy. The Chardi Kala Award exists, in the end, to point at that deeper recognition — by acknowledging publicly, in writing, that we have noticed.