INTERNATIONAL SKATING UNION
Communication No. 1401
This Communication replaces ISU Communication No. 1327 with immediate effectSingle and Pair Skating – Ice Dancing – Synchronized Skating
ISU Judging System
Evaluation of judging and technical content decisions, penalties

I.

RULES

Article 22 of the 2006 Constitution foresees the implementation of an Officials Assessment
Commission (OAC) for the evaluation of judging and technical content decisions in Figure
Skating. In accordance with this Article 22, the Rules of Procedure for the OAC will be
determined by the Council, based on the Judging System and International Officials
categories decided by the Congress. The Special Regulations for Single & Pair Skating/ Ice
Dancing (Rule 430), and Synchronized Skating (Rule 825) contain certain Rules
concerning the evaluation of the performance of Judges, Referees and Technical Officials
at identified competitions. These Rules are the basis for the following Rules of Procedure:II.

Rules of ProcedureTo effectuate the above-mentioned Rules and within the power granted to it by theCongress, the ISU Council has decided upon the following Rules of Procedure andclarifications in regard of the selection criteria and procedure of the Officials Assessment
Commission (OAC). It is understood that the term “Assessment” so identified and used inthis Communication, refers to “Assessments” according to the Special Regulations forSingle and Pair Skating/Ice Dancing (Rule 430) and Synchronized Skating (Rule 825)
A) Identification of OAC Pool:
The ISU Council decided that ISU Referees and ISU Judges for Single and Pair Skating,Ice Dance and Synchronized Skating that fulfill the criteria outlined below, may be
included in the OAC Pool and may be requested to serve in this position in accordancewith sub-paragraph B) and C) below:a) The OAC Pool member shall be on the most current ISU Officials listing as an ISU
Referee or ISU Judge having been trained in the ISU Judging System and beavailable to attend educational seminars as directed by the Council. The OAC Pool
member must not have more than an “Assessment 1” for activity in the three fullyears previous to the appointment.
b) OAC Pool members must have the following skills relating to their OAC work:- ability to analyze competition data; ability to work quickly and in an
organized fashion;- good written English;
1-

be familiar with report writing;demonstrate an ability to remain objective in all officiating evaluation
matters.
c) The ISU Council may periodically revise the above-mentioned criteria based on theexperienced gained.
d) The OAC Pool will be identified for service during each “season” from July 1
through the following June 30.
e) The OAC Pool members who actually will be assigned to officiate in the OAC
function as per sub-paragraphs B) and C) below, cannot act in any other capacity at
the competitions they have been assigned to act as OAC member. No otherrestrictions apply to listed OAC Pool members, e.g. they may officiate in othercapacities (including judging) at previous or subsequent competitions but should
avoid doing so during the same season as much as possible. When assigning OAC
pool members to the competitions as per paragraph B) below, the Sports
Directorate will take into account the intentions of the pool members as to theirother international officiating assignments during the season.
f) The activity of OAC pool members actually officiating in this capacity at ISU
Events is counting in every season towards the Officials activity requirements asstated in the Special Regulations.
B) Appointment procedure for ISU Championships and senior Grand Prix of Figure
Skating events/Final and OAC members rules of conducta) In accordance with the Rules referenced in Paragraph I. above, for ISU
Championships and ISU Grand Prix of Figure Skating (senior) competitions thisevaluation shall take place, on site of the Events, immediately after the conclusionof each competition by 2 OAC members for each discipline assigned by the Sports
Directorate (hereafter called “assigned OAC members”).
b) To provide consistency among OAC evaluation in all competitions and a “transfer
of knowledge”, the assignments will be made in a manner so that if possible at least
one assigned OAC member per discipline will be in attendance having previous
experience in an OAC assignment.
c) The ISU President has the right to assign skating knowledgeable individuals(former international skaters or officials who are still member of a Member) as
observers of the work of the OAC on site. In addition, the ISU Secretariat and/or
consultants will administratively assist the OAC as required.
d) Each Single and Pair Skating/Ice Dance ISU Championship or Grand Prix of Figure
Skating (senior) competition shall be attended by at least three assigned OAC
members, two of whom must be available for Ice Dancing. For the World
Synchronized Skating Championships, 2 OAC Pool members from theSynchronized Skating discipline shall be assigned.
e) The assigned OAC members to an ISU Championships or Grand Prix of Figure
Skating event/Final shall be in attendance during the full duration of all events of
their respective discipline (Ladies, Men, Pairs or Ice Dance or Synchronized
Skating) observing the level of the skaters performance.
f) Even though the printouts given to the assigned OAC members do not reveal the
Judges names, the assigned OAC members must keep the data made available tothem strictly confidential and may not make any comments at any time except
when specifically and formally requested by the respective Technical Committee2and/or the Council and/or the Sports Directorate and/or the Director General and inany case the data shall not be disclosed to anybody else.
g) OAC Members will also review and check the Judges behavior whenmarking/scoring during the running competition, i.e. whether Judges markindependently, without help of another Judge, without using previous results orsimilar documents on their table at rink-side. Any report in this regard must be
submitted by the OAC Members to the Referee of the respective event
immediately, at latest before the conclusion of the competition.
h) OAC members shall accept that any work, research, information and/or decision(s)in regard to their work as a member of the OAC shall at all time remain
confidential.
i) OAC members shall not be in a position to be working directly or indirectly withany international skater(s) or coach who has the potential to participate in an ISU
Event for which they will be appointed.
j) Arrival at the competition as so assigned shall be on the day before thecommencement of the first official competitive event.
k) OAC members are assigned to evaluate the work of the Officials as they evaluatedthe actual performance of the skaters in the appointed competition. With this inmind, the OAC member should attend only one practice session of eachparticipating skater for the purpose of identifying the skater by name andappearance. It is not necessary and is not encouraged that OAC members attend
exhaustively all the practice sessions. Such activity is not productive and could
prejudice the member in their decisions in regard to actual performances. OAC
members shall not attend the Judges meeting or the Round Table Discussions andshall not attempt to influence the discussion content of the Round Table Discussion
Meeting by presenting directly or indirectly information to the Event Referee.
l) At no time must OAC members be available in the ice rink to sit with members of
the officials’ panel of the event they are assessing. It is recommended that OAC
members when attending any practice sessions shall use their discretion to remainaloof from participants, coaches and officials.
m) It is recommended that as may be physically possible in each event, that the OAC isseated as close as possible to the same site line as the judging panel.

3C) Assignment of OAC members for the ISU Junior Grand Prix of Figure Skating
series and World Challenge Cup for Juniors in Synchronized Skating
For the Junior Grand Prix of Figure Skating series and the World Challenge Cup for
Juniors in Synchronized Skating, the OAC evaluation shall take place as soon as possibleby 2 assigned OAC members for each competition and discipline (Single and Pair Skating,Ice Dance, Synchronized Skating). The Sports Directorate will assign the necessary
number of OAC members to perform the evaluation based on the available printouts andbased on video tapes (DVDs). The assigned OAC members will perform this task at theirrespective residence.

D) Judges Evaluation at other International Competitions
In such competitions there will be no guaranty for the availability and consistency oftechnology as available in ISU Events (i.e. video replay, DVD analysis, on-site OAC
personnel) and consequently there will be no checks and balances evident to assess these
Officials’ work. Furthermore, the main responsibility for such a review would rest to alarge part with the organizing Member. This could cause further problems especially inconsistency and credibility.
The events reviewed by the ISU appointed OAC will be 16 Grand Prix events, 4 ISU
Figure Championships, and 2 ISU Synchronized Skating Events for a total of 22 events.
With this coverage the Council safely assumes that the activity of most Judges in a season
would “enter the ISU radar” and come up for review in at least one of these events.
Given this situation and to insure that all officials are reviewed under equal conditions, theCouncil decided that a full individual evaluation of Judges scores not be undertaken at
International Senior/Junior Competitions. However, the Referee of an individual event
must continue to file a formal report reviewing the Judges activity in regard to ethics,
behavior, attendance at Round Table Discussion, use of English and the other generalized
reporting areas including but not limited to skating level, and over-all Judges marking.
In addition, the Referee of an International Competition (other than ISU Championships,
senior and junior Grand Prix and the World Challenge Cup for Juniors in Synchronized
Skating) may use the attached Form only for the Officials who in the opinion of theReferee have striking errors or many cases of serious errors. The Form will be copied by
the ISU Secretariat to the Official concerned as well as to his/her ISU Member. This will
make the Official aware of the potential error and allow the Official and his/her Member toreview the officiating capabilities of the Official and take, if necessary, corrective action.

4

E)

Mathematical Criteria to Identify Potential Anomalies

The following specific mathematical criteria to identify potential anomalies to be evaluatedby the assigned OAC members has been approved by the Council.
a) Element Sector Scores (Judges GOE)(i) For each element or section (section = parts of a Compulsory Dance) performed,
the computer calculates an individual trimmed mean of the Grade Of Execution(GOE), in which all Judges of the panel participate. With a panel of 10 and more
Judges, the two highest and the two lowest GOEs are ignored.
With a panel of less than 10 Judges, only the highest and the lowest GOE will beignored. The base value of the elements are not considered. The average score,calculated for the evaluation by the OAC is not identical with the trimmed
mean result which has been used for the competition result where only the(one) highest and the (one) lowest GOE will be ignored.
ii) For each Judge the computer calculates the deviation in elements. The
deviation of a Judge in one element is the absolute value (i.e. positive value) of thedifference between entered GOE and the trimmed mean of the GOEs. The deviation
points in elements will be separated towards the deviations in pluses and deviations
in minuses in two individual sums of the deviation of the individual elements.
Example: Short Program
Average of GOE of
Deviation
GOE
Judge A
Element 1
1.2
1
- 0.2
Element 2
-1.4
-2
- 0.6
Element 3
0
-1
- 1,0
Element 4
0.8
1,0
+ 0.2
Element 5
-1,8
0
+ 1.8
Element 6
0,2
2,0
+ 1.8
Element 7
2.2
1.0
- 1.2
Element 8
1.4
0
- 1.4
Deviation points in+ 3,8
elements (in pluses):
Deviation points in - 4,4elements (in minuses):
Total Deviation
8,2
A general “corridor of an acceptable number of deviation points” is given to eachindividual Judge. This “corridor” is based on the number of elements performed,
e.g. in a Short Program there are 8 required elements to perform. Each Judge mayvary in his/her decision with one (1) step as an average per element, which are 8
steps in total for the Short Program (8.0 as the deviation points maximum). Plusand minus deviations are added.
The above example indicates that there is an anomaly to be evaluated since the total
deviation of 8.2 exceeds the allowed corridor of 8.0.

5

With the above example, the Judge arrived
pluses:3,8 points

minuses :4,4 points

Total Deviation: 8,2

The same principle applies for Compulsory Dance(s) and for Original Dance. As
many elements or sections as performed and accepted, as many steps (max. pointsof deviation) are primarily acceptable.
iii) The same principle applies for Free Skating/Free Dance. As many elements asperformed and accepted, as many steps (max. points of deviation) are primarily
acceptable. The split in deviations towards pluses and minuses, as explained above,
will also be valid.

b) Program Components
For the five (5) Program Components respectively the four (4) for the Compulsory
Dance(s), the Judge’s corridor will be 1.50 points of deviation points in eachindividual Program Component (15,0%) of the maximum points per Component(10,0)), between the given score and the calculated Judges’ average, in total 7,50
points. Plus and minus deviations are subtracted.
Example: Short Program
Average

Component 1
Component 2
Component 3
Component 4
Component 5

Component Deviationof Judge
5,75
4,00
-1,75
5,85
4,00
-1,85
5,45
6,25
+ 0,806,00
7,75+ 1.75
5,55
7,00+ 1.45
Deviation points in -3,60
components (in pluses):+5,00
Deviation points incomponents (inminuses):
Total Deviation+1,40

With the above example, the Judge arrived
pluses:

5,00 points

minuses :3,60 points

Total Deviation: 1,40

hence the deviation of 1.4 is well within the allowed corridor of 7.5 and thisconstitutes no anomaly and no evaluation is required.

6F) Evaluation Materials
After each segment (i.e. Short Program, Free Skating, Compulsory Dance, Original Dance,
Free Dance) of an event, the assigned OAC members on site will receive the necessary
printouts that include the “Grade of Execution” (GOE) of every element and the points for
the Program Components from all Judges in a random sequence without any reference tospecific Judges’ names. Another printout given to the OAC only will highlight thepotential anomalies based on the criteria outlined under E) above. In addition, DVD/video
tapes of the competition will be available for review during the meetings of the OAC.

G) Time-line
a)

b)

c)

For ISU Championships and senior Grand Prix of Figure Skating events/Final, theassigned OAC members must review the event printout at the site of thecompetition in question within 24 hours of the last event being concluded. It is
understood that the assigned OAC members will have the advantage of attending
and observing the performances at the event using their appraisal as a comparison
to the actual scores print out. From the review, including the possibility ofreviewing the video tapes of the competition as may be necessary, any anomalies
shall be identified and a full report shall be prepared. Such report shall include inparticular the identification of anomalies that, in the opinion of the assigned OAC
must be considered as an error and consequently an “Assessment.”
For the Junior Grand Prix of Figure Skating series and the World Challenge Cup for
Juniors in Synchronized Skating, the evaluation shall take place as soon as possibleby 2 OAC members assigned by the Sports Directorate for each competition anddiscipline, i.e. Single and Pair Skating, Ice Dance, Synchronized Skating based on
the available printouts and based on video tapes (DVDs). (See item C) above).
The OAC report from the individual events including identified judging errors andcorresponding proposed “Assessments” together with any supporting
documentation (including DVD’s) as shall be deemed necessary shall be forwarded
by the assigned OAC members immediately to the ISU Secretariat. The Secretariat
in turn shall forward the report as soon as possible to the Technical Committee
concerned. The OAC panel in their report must focus on the identified anomalies in
the actual printed results of the event being evaluated. When preparing the report,
OAC panel members must refrain from any of the following:i. Criticism or questioning of the final result of the event (or part thereof). The
Panel shall review only the scores and identified anomalies as presented on theprint-out, respectively the way of scoring of any individual Judge (see sector
B. g)).
ii. Presenting written comments on subjects outside the sphere of the work of theOAC, such as but not limited to rule violations, opinions on the direction of
the sport discipline, individual skater ability.
iii. Input based on inter-action of information within the OAC report with persons
not directly involved in the process.
iv. Presenting continual dialogue and criticism regarding individual marking
when no anomaly can be perceived or “Assessment” warranted.
However, the OAC panel in their report should identify and support Judges outside
the corridor but who appear to be correct in their evaluation by exempting them

7

d)

e)

f)

g)

h)

i)

8

from an “Assessment” even if the scores concerned were outside the corridor andidentified in the computer print-out as an anomaly.
The Technical Committee shall review the OAC report within 7 days upon receipt
with particular attention to the anomalies relating to judging (with emphasis on
the errors, respectively proposed “Assessments” as identified by the assigned
OAC). In the time period between Technical Committee meetings, the TechnicalCommittee shall communicate through e-mail and/or conference calls in order toreach conclusions. The Technical Committee shall take immediate action to
propose an ”Assessment” should such be deemed necessary. “Assessments”
confirmed by the Technical Committees should be given without delay to the ISU
Secretariat and the confirmed “Assessment” will be communicated by the ISU
Secretariat to the Officials and their Members concerned. The Official concerned
may send his/her explanations to the respective Technical Committee through the
ISU Secretariat. Such explanations will however be considered only in case of an
accumulation of Assessments (see sub-paragraph i) below) and will be kept on fileby the ISU Secretariat.
A full report of the “Assessment” decisions shall be forwarded by the respective
Technical Committee to the Vice President Figure Skating and Sports Directorate
on a regular basis.
A composite report of the OAC activity in the full season shall be prepared by therespective Technical Committee in cooperation with the Sports Directorate for the
ISU Council in June/July of every season.
The assigned OAC members shall prepare a report for each competition in case ofidentified cases of serious errors relating to Technical Content decisions made by
the Technical Specialists and Technical Controller as well as related to decisions
taken by the Event Referee. The report for each competition shall be made available
without delay to the ISU Director General/Sports Directorate. The Sports
Directorate who may seek assistance from additional experts shall proceed with its
evaluation concerning the OAC reports as soon as possible in line with theapplicable Rules for “Assessment”.
If the Technical Committee (relating to judging) or the Sports Directorate (relating
to Technical Content decisions made by the Technical Specialists and TechnicalController and Event Referee decisions) disagree on any determination of serious
errors made by the assigned OAC members, the assigned OAC members must be
consulted. For unresolved cases, the Sports Directorate will take the final decisionby also seeking assistance from additional experts.
In the case that an accumulation of “Assessments”, in accordance with existing
rules (presently when reaching “Assessment 4”), results in the demotion orsuspension for the Officials concerned, the Officials shall be notified through the
ISU Secretariat about the possible outcome. The Official will have the right to ask
within 5 days upon receipt of the notification for a meeting, to be held as soon as
possible, to give his/her explanation for the relevant “Assessments" and, if
available, may use the respective video tapes to support his/her explanations
relating to judging errors in front of at least 3 members of the respective TechnicalCommittee. For Technical Content decisions made by the Technical Specialists andthe Technical Controller or decisions made by the Event Referee, such explanations
would be given to at least 3 Figure Skating members of the ISU Council.
Any travel, board and lodging or other expenses incurred by the Official(s)concerned relating to the explanation meeting will be for the Official’s account if
all the “Assessments”, despite the explanations received, are confirmed by therespective Technical Committee or Council after the meeting. The ISU will only
reimburse such expenses if at least one of the “Assessments” would be revoked.

H)

Performance Evaluations of Officials are not Disciplinary Decisionsa) Article 23 of the 2006 ISU Constitution identifies disciplinary-type matters as
being within the jurisdiction of the Disciplinary Commission (DC) anddistinguishes “performance evaluations” as not being disciplinary in nature.
b) More specifically, Paragraphs 8.b), and 8.c) of Article 23 explicitly state thatappointment of a person to an official position and the continued assignment ofthat person to such position is not a matter of right but a function entrusted tothe designated body or Official of the ISU, and further, that performance
evaluations of officials, including “Assessments”, warnings, criticism, letters ofadvice, as well as appointment or removal of ISU Officials from positions, are
not disciplinary but technical decisions. Officials’, appointments,“Assessments” and removals accordingly are not subject to the jurisdiction of
the ISU Disciplinary Commission or the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
c) For convenience the Special Regulations for Single and Pair Skating, Ice
Dancing and Synchronized Skating and this Communication, use certain
expressions from previous Special Regulations which if not clarified by aninterpretation of the Council, could be mistaken for a continuation of theformer ISU disciplinary procedures as applied to ISU officials. This applies tosuch words as "sanctions", "suspensions", "demotions", "penalties", etc. used inconnection with Officials appointments, “Assessments” or assignments.
d) The ISU Council has decided that these expressions as used in the Special
Regulations and in this Communication are to be distinguished from, and shallnot refer to, any type of disciplinary sanction for misconduct or violation of the
ISU Ethics Code, for example as such disciplinary-type references are used inRule 104, paragraph 16, Rule 125, paragraphs 4 & 5 and in new Article 23 of
the 2006 ISU Constitution.

Accordingly, decisions concerning the appointment, evaluation of performance orassignment of ISU Officials as foreseen by the new Paragraphs 8.b) and 8.c) of Article 23,of the 2006 ISU Constitution and this Communication may not be the subject of aComplaint made to the Disciplinary Commission or an appeal to the Court of Arbitrationfor Sport (CAS).

I ) Officials Remuneration for ISU Events
As indicated at time of adoption of the ISU Judging System during the 2004 Congress (seeISU Communication No. 1256, Paragraphs A.o) of Proposals Nos. 298 – 300) “All the
Officials who served at ISU Events (ISU Championships, ISU Grand Prix of Figure
Skating (senior and junior) shall receive compensation at the end of the season as decided
by the Council from time to time. In the case of a demotion or suspension, no money shallbe paid to the suspended Official/s for the whole season concerned.”
The ISU Council decided that the above-mentioned compensation due at the end of theseason shall be paid in addition to compensations paid immediately on site of the ISU

9Events. This procedure is applicable to all acting Technical Controllers, Technical
Specialists, Referees, Judges, assigned OAC members, Replay Operators and Data
Operators as follows:
1. On-site:
Senior Grand Prix of Figure Skating events and Final:
CHF 300 per event or Final
Junior Grand Prix of Figure Skating events and Final:
CHF 200 per event and Final
ISU Championships:
CHF 40 per day
2. After the season:
For Officials having officiated without demotion or suspension during the seasonat 3 ISU Events: Additional CHF 500
at 4 ISU Events: Additional CHF 600
at 5 ISU Events: Additional CHF 700
etc. (CHF 100 increment for each additional Event)As an example, an Official having officiated during a season at 4 ISU Events without any
suspension or demotion, would receive the following compensation:
1st Event on site Sr GP from organizer
2nd Event on site Sr GP from organizer
3rd Event on site Jr GP from organizer
4th Event on site Championships (max 8 days) from organizer

CHF 300
CHF 300
CHF 200
CHF 320

at end of season from ISU
Total season

CHF 600
CHF 1’720

Officials that after the procedure outlined under Section II. F above have been suspended
and/or demoted, will not receive the compensation after the season and must reimburse allcompensation moneys received at ISU Events during the season concerned to therespective organizing Members. Failing to do so will result in the Official not being
allowed to resume his/her officiating activity at ISU sanctioned competitions until theoutstanding reimbursement has been made.

Milano,Ottavio Cinquanta, President
July 19, 2006

Lausanne,10

Fredi Schmid, Director General

ATTACHMENT TO THE REFEREE’S REPORTSINGLE & PAIR SKATING, ICE DANCING & SYNCHRONIZED SKATINGINTERNATIONAL COMPETITIONSEVALUATION FORM FOR OFFICIALS HAVING MADE (IN THE OPINION OF THE
REFEREE) STRIKING/SERIOUS ERRORSThis Form is not applicable for ISU Championships, ISU Senior & Junior Grand Prix of Figure Skating Events andFinal, as well as for the Synchronized Skating World Challenge Cup for Junior since for these Events the provisions of
ISU Communication No 1401 apply.
The Referee should use this Form only for the Officials who (in the opinion of the Referee) have striking errors or manycases of serious errors.
This Form will be copied for information to the Official concerned as well as to his/her ISU Member.

Competition:
Place:

Date:

Category (Ladies, Men, Pairs, Dance,
SyS):

Junior/Senior

Referee:

ISU Member:

Official’s name:

ISU Member:

Segment

SP

FS

CD

OD

FD

Scores (or “calls” for elements/levels identified by Technical Panel members) under review (pleaseindicate wrong scores/calls):
Skater’s/Team’s
name

ISU
MemberElement/Component/l
Level with wrong
scores (calls)

Official’s
score(call)

Panel’strimmed mean

Referees
score(call)

Referee’s opinion of the Official’s work:

Date:

Referee’s Signature:1112