Imagine It. Formulate It. Make It.

Each competition product must contain one or more food-grade soybean-derived ingredients. Soy-derived ingredients must represent at least 10% by weight of the formulation, excluding added water.

Examples of eligible soybean-derived ingredients may include:

• Whole soybeans
• Edamame
• Soy flour
• Soy protein concentrate
• Soy protein isolate
• Textured soy protein
• Tofu
• Tempeh
• Soymilk
• Soymilk powder or solids
• Okara
• Soybean oil
• Soy lecithin
• Fermented soy ingredients
• Other approved food-grade soybean-derived ingredients

The competition organizers may review unusual or novel soybean ingredients before use. Meeting the 10% requirement alone is not sufficient. Soy must also make a meaningful contribution to the identity, performance or value of the food. A conventional food containing a small or token amount of soy simply to qualify will not be considered a strong competition entry.

The soy percentage should be calculated using the formulation weight excluding added water. For example, if a formulation contains:

• 30 g soy flour
• 170 g other dry or liquid ingredients
• 100 g added water

The soy percentage is calculated using the 200 g non-water portion:

30 ÷ 200 × 100 = 15% soy

The product would therefore meet the minimum soy requirement.

Competition organizers may request complete formulations to confirm eligibility.

No. A product containing 50% soy will not automatically score higher than a product containing 15% soy. Judges will evaluate how intelligently and effectively soy is used.

Teams should determine an appropriate soy level based on:

• Product quality
• Ingredient functionality
• Consumer acceptance
• Nutrition
• Processing
• Cost
• Market positioning

The objective is not simply to maximize soy content. The objective is to maximize the value created by using soy.

No. The competition is focused on food innovation, not exclusively on health or functional foods. A product does not have to provide a specific health benefit or make a nutrition or health claim.

A successful entry could simply be:

• More delicious
• More convenient
• More affordable
• Higher in protein
• Better textured
• More sustainable
• Easier to manufacture
• Better suited to a particular consumer
• A new cultural or culinary application
• A creative new use of soybean ingredients

Teams choosing to make nutrition or health-related claims must ensure those claims are scientifically and legally appropriate.

For this competition, innovation does not require creating a food category that has never existed before. Innovation may involve developing an entirely new food or meaningfully improving an existing food product.

Innovation may come from:

• Product concept
• Formulation
• Ingredient functionality
• Processing technology
• Nutrition
• Sensory quality
• Convenience
• Shelf life
• Sustainability
• Cost or affordability
• Packaging
• Target consumer
• Cultural relevance
• Market positioning
• Utilization of soybean ingredients
• Utilization of soybean coproducts
• Solving an unmet consumer need

For example, developing another pasta product would not automatically be considered innovative. However, a soy-based pasta could be innovative if the team demonstrates meaningful differentiation such as:

• Improved protein quality
• Better texture
• Improved sensory quality
• A novel processing approach
• Improved cooking quality
• Lower environmental impact
• A new consumer application
• Improved affordability
• A distinctive formulation
• Use of an underutilized soybean ingredient

Simply adding soy to an existing product without meaningful differentiation will not be considered sufficient innovation.

Participants must be currently enrolled Purdue University students and must remain enrolled throughout the competition. Both undergraduate and graduate students may participate.

Recommended team structure:

• Minimum of two students
• Maximum of four students
• At least two undergraduate students
• Up to two graduate students, provided the total team size does not exceed four students

Students may participate on only one competition team. Teams should include students with complementary backgrounds whenever possible.

Students from Food Science are encouraged to participate, but the competition is open to eligible students across Purdue University. Interdisciplinary teams are strongly encouraged.

Each team should have one faculty or staff advisor.

At least one faculty advisor should have appropriate technical expertise related to:

• Food science
• Food processing
• Food engineering
• Nutrition
• Ingredient science
• Culinary science
• Product development
• A closely related area

The second advisor may provide expertise in areas such as:

• Business
• Marketing
• Economics
• Consumer science
• Packaging
• Engineering
• Agriculture
• Entrepreneurship
• Other relevant disciplines

Faculty advisors provide guidance but should not perform the students' competition work.

All products must be prepared using appropriate food-safety practices.

Teams must:

• Use food-grade ingredients.
• Prepare competition products only in facilities approved by competition organizers.
• Complete any required laboratory or food-safety training before product preparation.
• Follow sanitation and safe food-handling procedures.
• Maintain appropriate temperature control.
• Follow safe storage and transportation procedures.
• Provide a complete ingredient list.
• Identify all major food allergens.
• Clearly identify soy as a major food allergen.
• Identify any additional allergens present in the product.
• Obtain approval before using novel, unusual or nontraditional ingredients.

Competition organizers reserve the right to prevent tasting of any product if its safety cannot be adequately established.

Students should not independently conduct formal human-subject research as part of the competition. Any consumer or sensory testing involving human participants must follow Purdue University requirements and must be approved or coordinated through the appropriate competition personnel before testing begins.

Informal product development and instructor/advisor evaluation must also follow competition food-safety guidance.

Teams should not assume that competition participation automatically authorizes human-subject research.

Before submitting a concept, teams should ask themselves:

1. What consumer need are we addressing?
2. What is innovative about our product?
3. Why are we using soy?
4. Does soy meaningfully improve or enable the product?
5. Would someone realistically buy and eat this food?

If your team has compelling answers to all five questions, you may have a strong competition concept.

25 points - Judges will evaluate:

• Appearance
• Aroma
• Flavor
• Texture
• Mouthfeel
• Overall acceptability
• Product performance
• Whether the finished product delivers the intended eating experience

A technically creative food must still be something consumers would reasonably want to eat.

• Creativity of the product concept
• Degree of innovation
• Meaningful differentiation from existing products
• Consumer problem or opportunity addressed
• Innovation in formulation, processing, nutrition, convenience, sustainability or market positioning

The product does not have to belong to a completely new food category. However, teams must demonstrate what is meaningfully new or improved.

• Why soy was selected
• Importance of soy to the product
• Function of soy in the formulation
• Effectiveness of soy incorporation
• Technical understanding of the soybean ingredient
• Whether the product creates a meaningful new or expanded use for soy
• Potential contribution to soybean demand or market opportunities

Higher soy content alone will not result in a higher score. Judges will evaluate the quality and value of soy utilization, not simply the percentage included.

• Clearly defined target consumer
• Consumer need
• Market opportunity
• Competing products
• Product differentiation
• Commercialization potential
• Realistic price positioning
• Potential for consumer adoption

Teams should be able to explain: Who will buy this product, why will they buy it, and why would they choose it over existing alternatives?

10 points - Judges will evaluate:

• Scientific rationale for the formulation
• Understanding of ingredient functionality
• Processing feasibility
• Reproducibility
• Food-safety considerations
• Manufacturing feasibility
• Product stability
• Quality-control considerations

5 points - Judges may consider demonstrated benefits related to:

• Nutrition
• Protein contribution
• Ingredient utilization
• Sustainability
• Reduced waste
• Utilization of soybean coproducts
• Affordability
• Resource efficiency
• Other meaningful food-system benefits

A nutrition or health claim is not required.

5 points - Judges will evaluate:

• Clarity
• Professionalism
• Understanding of the product
• Technical knowledge
• Ability to answer questions
• Product storytelling
• Effectiveness of the team's final presentation