Gates Cambridge Scholarship: The Complete Application Guide

Read this first

How to use it

This is Guide 1 of 6, built like The Application Lab's Chevening series: a general guide, one guide per answer, and a Q&A. Use the guide bar at the top of the page.

1. Read sections 2 to 5 of this guide once, in order.
2. Build your thread on one page (section 5) before you draft a word.
3. Draft the four answers with guides 2 to 5.
4. Brief your referee (section 6) and prepare for interview (section 7) in parallel with drafting, not afterwards.
5. Use guide 6 to check any fact, then the final checklist (section 9) before you submit.

About the examples, and writing it yourself

Every example in this guide is invented: the people, universities, supervisors, organisations and numbers are fictional, built only to demonstrate technique. In your own application every name and figure must be real, accurate and something you can defend for two minutes without notes. Do not lift the structures sentence by sentence — a borrowed shape is easy to spot. Whatever the current AI policy on the Gates form and the University's application guidance says, write every answer yourself: the interview tests whether the person on screen is the person in the answers, and a polished line you cannot defend costs more than a plain one you can.

What this guide is based on

The Programme and Apply pages of gatescambridge.org, read on 21 October 2026. Dates and funding figures change each cycle, so confirm them on the live pages before you act; this guide's strategy is editorial reading, not an official statement from the Trust.

Snapshot

What Gates Cambridge is actually buying

Gates is not funding the best transcript. It is funding people it expects to improve other people's lives and to lead others in doing it. The site describes the programme as being for outstanding postgraduate students with "a potential for social leadership." Academic strength gets you nominated; the other three criteria decide who is selected. The Trust's mission is to build a network of future leaders committed to improving the lives of others, so read every criterion through one question: if we fund this person, who is better off in ten years because of them, and what did Cambridge add?

The four criteria, decoded

Which part of the application tests which criterion

The consequence is simple: every criterion is tested three times, by you, by a referee and by a panel. They must agree. A leadership story in Question 4 that your referee never mentions is a warning sign to the reader.

The CLICC values

The Trust published five core values in 2026, developed in 2025 after consulting Scholars and staff. They form the acronym CLICC. They describe the community you are joining, not a scoring sheet, so show them through what you have done rather than naming them.

Change restates the third criterion. The other four describe the culture the Trust values: caring, curious, outward-looking and inclusive.

Five things the site tells you that most applicants miss

1. Needs-blind means need is not evidence. Financial circumstances are not considered, so do not spend your 200 words explaining hardship. If your background shaped your commitment, use it as the reason you act, not as a plea.
2. You define "improving the lives of others." The Trust says it reads this broadly and lets applicants define it. Say in one clause what it means for you, then prove it.
3. The future counts as evidence. The criterion asks for past, current and future commitment. A credible plan is part of the answer, not an afterthought.
4. The scholarship is treated as a responsibility. The interview asks about the "opportunities and responsibilities" of a prestigious full-cost scholarship. Have a view.
5. Community is an expectation. Scholars get orientation, a welcome dinner, a Learning for Purpose professional development programme, an annual lecture, a gala, symposia, a Scholars' Room, a Scholars' Council and an alumni platform called Gates Connect. A Scholar who only studies is not what the programme is describing.

Eligibility, the traps and the timeline

You can apply if you hold citizenship of any country outside the UK and apply to a PhD, an MLitt or a one-year full-time postgraduate course at Cambridge. The FAQ adds that dual citizens of the UK and another country are eligible. Most avoidable rejections here come from the wrong course type or the wrong round, not from the profile.

Which courses count

The Eligibility page and the FAQ list slightly different exclusions, so treat both lists as binding and confirm your course in the University Course Directory before you spend a week on the application.

Questions applicants ask, answered from the site

Strategy: choose the course with the selection odds in mind

About two-thirds of awards go to PhD students. The site gives no success rates, so I cannot tell you the odds, but the split means a PhD applicant with a clear project and supervisor competes for the larger share of awards. That is a reason to ask whether a PhD fits your plans, not a reason to apply for one you cannot justify. Question 2 will expose a PhD chosen for the funding.

If you are applying to several courses, make each application a real case. The panel interviews you once, for one course, so a nomination for two will force you to choose.

The six eligibility traps

1. The wrong round. US citizens living in the US must apply in the October round. US citizens living or working abroad apply in the later round. Everyone else uses the later round.
2. An ineligible degree. MASt, MSt, PGDip and MBA are the common ones.
3. A part-time master's. Only the PhD can be part-time.
4. A course already under way. You cannot fund the remainder of it.
5. The wrong deadline. The funding deadline is the Course Funding Deadline in the Course Directory, not a date you assume.
6. Treating a late submission as fixable. Every document, including references, must be in by 11:59pm UK time on the date, and you cannot edit after submitting.

Timeline: which round are you in?

Applications for 2027/28 entry opened on 11 September 2026, and most applicants have until 8 December 2026 or 6 January 2027 to submit. From 21 October that is 48 or 77 days. There are two rounds, and the round is set by your citizenship and where you live, not by choice.

How to read the dates

• The "outcome" date is your interview invitation date. The FAQ says that is when applicants learn whether they are invited to interview. Panels then sit about six weeks later in the US round and about two weeks later in the main round.
• The main round leaves two weeks between invitation and interview. Do not wait for the email to start preparing. Start the interview preparation in section 7 as soon as you submit.
• Admission and funding are reviewed separately. You may get a course offer before you hear about funding. An admission offer does not mean you were nominated.
• You have 72 hours to accept. Decide in advance how you would weigh any other offer, so you are not deciding under pressure.
• There is no feedback. Gates cannot give feedback to unsuccessful applicants, including interviewed ones, and cannot issue recognition letters. Plan your own debrief if it goes the other way.

If you are a US citizen

US citizens resident in the United States must apply in October and are not eligible for the later round. The October 2026 deadline has passed, so if you missed it you would wait for the next cycle. US citizens who are studying or working overseas at the time of application use the later round.

If you are not sure which round applies

The Timeline page tells you to email info@gatescambridge.org with your details. All application questions go to that address first. The FAQ also says information webinars were due to start in summer 2026, so check the site and the Trust's social channels for sessions.

Working backwards from 8 December

If your Course Funding Deadline is 8 December, treat these as your real deadlines:

How the application works

You submit one combined application for admission and funding through the University's Graduate Application Portal, and Gates reads all of it. There are two filters: your academic department nominates a small number of applicants, then Gates interviews every nominee. The four short Gates answers are used to separate candidates who are already nominated.

The funnel

1. Combined application. You complete the admission section (course and College place) and the Gates Cambridge part of the funding section.
2. Departmental ranking. Each department nominates a small number of eligible applicants who meet all four criteria to a very high level. Admission is reviewed separately, so you may get an admission decision first.
3. Nomination. A relatively small share of applicants is nominated and invited to interview.
4. Interview. 25 to 30 minutes, in person or online, in front of one of four subject panels: Arts, Biological Sciences, Physical Sciences or Social Sciences.
5. Selection and offer. Panels select after interview. Offers go out by early February (US round) or early April (main round). You have 72 hours to accept.

What each part is for

Four things that follow

1. Win the department first. The site does not say whether departments read your four Gates answers when they rank applicants. Assume they may, and that they certainly read your admission documents. Invest in the admission personal statement, transcripts and academic referees as much as in the Gates answers.
2. Write for comparison. The Gates answers exist to separate people who are already good. Specific evidence of improving others' lives and of leadership will separate you, general ambition will not.
3. Expect the three sources to be read together. Gates has access to your full application. Your admission statement, the four answers and the reference should tell one story from different angles. Do not copy sentences between them.
4. Remember that the panel is academic and mixed. Each panel has experienced academics and practitioners and may include alumni and a Trust representative. Write for an intelligent reader outside your sub-field.

The golden thread: build it before you draft

The four answers are four views of one person, so decide the person before you write any of them. Gates readers see your admission statement, your four answers and your reference side by side. If they contradict each other, or tell four unconnected stories, you look like someone assembling a profile rather than someone with a direction.

The simplest way to keep one voice is to give each answer a different job:

Fill this in on one page first

The rules of the thread

1. One story per answer, two at most. Q3 and Q4 may draw on the same project only if each tells a different part: Q3 tells who benefited and why it matters to you, Q4 tells what you initiated and how you moved other people.
2. Past, present, future in Q3 and Q4. The criteria ask for all three. Q2, Q3 and Q4 each explicitly ask how the experience connects to your future plans, so the plan must be the same plan in all three.
3. Recurring names, not recurring sentences. The same organisation, mentor or community can appear in several answers. The same sentence cannot.
4. The reference must be able to confirm it. Every claim you most want believed should be something your Gates referee can speak to from first-hand knowledge.
5. Question 1 does not ask about the future, but your thread should reach it. One closing clause that points toward the course is enough.

Worked thread (invented)

This is the one-page thread for Wanjiru Kamau, an invented Kenyan applicant for a PhD in Plant Sciences. Every name and number is fictional.

Notice what the thread does for each answer. Q1 uses the assay, Q2 uses the gap and the supervisor, Q3 uses the 1,420 farmers and the reason she cares, and Q4 uses the three cooperatives. The same life, four different angles, no repeated story.

The PhD research proposal and the Gates Cambridge reference

For a PhD, the research proposal is the most detailed evidence you give Gates of why this course and why you, so write it as the proof behind Question 2. Gates requires PhD applicants to submit one. Most upload it as a compulsory admission document, and where the course application does not ask for one, it becomes a requirement of the Gates application. Applicants for other degrees do not need one.

What the proposal does for you

Expect the interview panel and your referee to probe it. You must be able to defend every claim for 10 minutes.

The supervisor question

The Criteria page expects PhD and most research MPhil applicants to contact a potential supervisor and to develop a research summary with them. The FAQ says Gates does not require a confirmed supervisor at submission, but advises that you research the department to make sure it can support your interests. Read those two together: make contact, and make it useful, even if you cannot get a firm commitment before the deadline.

Contacting a supervisor: a working method

1. Shortlist two or three. Read at least two recent papers by each. Know what they found.
2. Write once, in about 150 words. A specific subject line, one sentence on your work, one sentence on the connection to theirs, one question.
3. Attach a one-page summary and a short CV. Nothing longer.
4. Ask a question that can be answered. "Are you taking new students for 2027, and does this project fit?"
5. Follow up once after ten days. Then move on.
6. Treat a redirect as a gift. "You should talk to Dr Y" is a route into the right group.

Invented email (about 120 words)

Subject: Prospective PhD applicant: cassava virus diagnostics and your work on resistance genes

Dear Professor Hartley-Boyce,

I am a plant pathologist from Kenya preparing a PhD application to the Department of Plant Sciences for entry in 2027. Your 2025 paper on virus resistance genes in cassava connects to a question that came out of my field work on diagnostics: whether new virus strains are escaping the sequences that current tests rely on.

In three seasons I tested 1,420 farmers' fields with an assay I developed, and I hold sequence data from 96 infected samples. My one-page proposal and CV are attached.

Are you taking new PhD students for 2027, and would this project fit your group? I would welcome any suggestions before the 8 December deadline.

With thanks, Wanjiru Kamau

In real life, cite a real publication and say what it showed, in your own words.

How to read the replies

Do not

• Mass-email everyone in the department with the same text.
• Promise that Gates will pay for them, or ask for a guarantee of a place.
• Open with praise instead of a specific question.
• Send a 20-page CV.
• Wait until the week of the deadline.

Structure of the proposal

The length and format come from the department's own guidance and the portal, so follow those first. These are proportions, not word counts.

An opening paragraph that works (invented)

Cassava brown streak disease can destroy more than half of a smallholder's root harvest before symptoms appear in the leaves, and in East Africa the virus is evolving faster than the diagnostics designed to detect it. Current field tests rely on conserved genome regions, but we do not know whether the newest strains carry mutations in those regions. This project asks whether sequence variation in the capsid and polymerase genes of virus strains collected in western Kenya since 2018 predicts false negatives in the widely used rapid assays, and whether an assay built on the most stable sites would stay accurate for a decade. The answer would tell farmers and national programmes which tests to trust.

Practical points

• Gates does not cover bench fees or scientific equipment, and expects the academic department to cover core course costs. Make sure the work you propose is feasible within what your department can provide.
• Fieldwork: the Trust can consider allowing you to keep your normal maintenance allowance during fieldwork on a PhD, but it does not fund other fieldwork costs. Plan the budget accordingly.
• Keep the proposal and the admission statement consistent. They are read together.

Research proposal checklist

• I have read two recent papers by each potential supervisor and can say what they found

• I have written to at least two people in the department, once each

• My proposal states a gap, two or three questions and a method that can answer them

• A non-specialist can follow the first paragraph

• The timeline fits within four years

• The impact paragraph says who benefits, honestly

• I can defend every claim for 10 minutes

The Gates Cambridge reference

The Gates reference is a third, independent test of the four criteria, and it asks your referee to rank you, so the best referee is someone who can say "exceptional" and defend it. On top of the two academic references required for admission, you must arrange a separate reference that sets out how you meet the scholarship's criteria. It is used the same way as your four answers: to distinguish between candidates already nominated by their departments.

What the form asks your referee

• For an assessment of your suitability against the four criteria: intellectual ability, justification for the choice of course, commitment to improving the lives of others and leadership capacity.
• How highly they would rank you for a Gates Cambridge Scholarship.
• On what overall group they are basing the ranking.
• The size of that group.
• A rating: exceptional, strong, not strong or weak.

They may type or paste up to 4,000 characters into the online form, or upload a separate letter.

The ranking, the group and its size make it a comparison. "The best of 400 students I have taught in 12 years" says far more than "an outstanding student." A referee who rates you "strong" is telling the panel you are not exceptional, so choose someone who can honestly and specifically say more.

Who should write it

The site says to ask someone of appropriate standing, who can answer with authority and who understands the criteria, the competitiveness of the programme and Cambridge's academic standards. Typical choices:

• A current or former academic advisor who knows your personal qualities.
• A current or former employer.
• A senior member of an organisation where you volunteered.

One of your two academic referees can also write the Gates reference. That is fine if they know you well and write specifically about the Gates criteria, not a third academic reference. Do not ask a friend, a relative or anyone unable to speak to your suitability.

Choose with this test

A famous referee who barely knows you will lose to a less famous one who has watched you work for three years.

Matching referees to criteria

Three people, three jobs. This is the arrangement that works for most applicants.

If your strongest evidence of leadership and commitment comes from work outside university, your Gates referee should come from that world, such as an organisation director who saw it.

How to brief your referee

The site says it is essential that the Gates referee is fully briefed on the scholarship and its criteria, that they use specific examples, and that they stay focused on the criteria without rehashing a standard reference. Send a short pack at least four weeks before the deadline.

1. A cover note. What Gates Cambridge is, the four criteria, the ranking question and the deadline, with a link to the Criteria and How to apply pages.
2. Your thread. The three or four stories you hope they can speak to, and where each one happened in their presence.
3. Your CV. And any figures they might cite, so they cite them correctly.
4. A request for honesty. Ask whether they feel able to rate you highly. If not, find another referee.
5. A reminder schedule. Agree dates for a first draft, and send polite reminders at three weeks, one week and three days.

Do not write the reference for them. Give facts and let them use their own words. A reference that sounds like your answers is easy to spot and weakens both.

Invented briefing email (about 170 words)

Dear Dr Otieno,

Thank you for agreeing to support my Gates Cambridge application. Gates asks for a separate reference that is not a repeat of my academic references, and it will be used to compare me with other candidates the department has already nominated.

Gates judges four things: intellectual ability, my reasons for choosing the course, a commitment to improving the lives of others, and leadership. Because you directed the testing project, you are the only person who has seen the last two first-hand.

It asks you to rate me exceptional, strong, not strong or weak, to rank me, and to say which group you are ranking me against and how large it is. If you cannot honestly rate me highly, I would rather you tell me now.

I attach the criteria, my CV and a page of the three episodes I hope you can speak to. The deadline is 8 December at 11:59pm UK time, and I would be grateful for a draft by 20 November.

With thanks, Wanjiru

Weak versus strong referee statements

Reference checklist

• My Gates referee has seen my commitment and leadership first-hand

• They can name a group and a size for the ranking, and rate me "exceptional"

• I sent the briefing pack at least four weeks before the deadline

• They know not to repeat a standard academic reference

• Both academic referees and the Gates referee have a confirmed date to submit

• I have reminders set for three weeks, one week and three days before the deadline

The interview

The interview is 25 to 30 minutes with a subject panel, it tests all four criteria again, and it is the only stage where you can answer a follow-up question. Everyone invited has already been nominated by their department after what the site calls an incredibly competitive process, so you are being compared with other strong candidates and the panel is looking for the person who also fits the programme.

The facts

The four sections, and what each is testing

The time split is not published. As a planning guess, expect roughly 2 minutes for the welcome, 7 to 9 on Gates, 12 to 15 on academic and career plans, and 2 for closing.

What you must know cold

• The mission. A global network of future leaders committed to improving the lives of others.
• The criteria. All four, in your own words, with your evidence for each.
• The values. Compassion, Learning, Internationality, Community, Change. Know what each means to you.
• The programme. Around 70 awards a year, about 250 Scholars in residence, 1,700+ alumni from 116 countries, and the community events that Scholars run and attend.
• Your proposal and course. To the level of detail where you can draw it on a whiteboard.
• Your own file. Every number and name in your four answers.

The story bank

Build six stories before you practise. Each should be one minute and carry exact numbers. Tag each to the criteria it proves.

Have one story you did not put on the form. Panels often ask for another example.

Question bank with the thinking behind each

Section 2: Gates Cambridge

Section 3: Academic and career

Probing intellectual and ethical questions

The site says these have no right answers. The panel is watching how you think. Use four steps: take a position, give two reasons, face the strongest objection, and show you can update. Examples of the type: Should scholars trained abroad be expected to return? Who should decide which problems receive research funding? Is it fair for a scholarship to prize leadership experience? Can a technology be developed if it may be misused?

Two sample answers (invented)

"What are the responsibilities of a full-cost scholarship?" (about 110 words)

I see three. The first is to use the opportunity for the purpose it was given. Gates funds the whole cost of study because it expects the work to reach people beyond the degree, so my research has to be able to leave the lab. The second is to the others who applied: there are around 70 places and many equally able candidates, so I owe it to them to use mine well. The third is to the community. The Trust describes a place where Scholars support each other, so I want to give as well as receive. I would run a plant-health clinic for students from agricultural universities, because I wish I had had one.

"Should scholars trained abroad return home?" (about 150 words)

I think the better question is whether the knowledge returns, not only whether the person does. My own plan is to return to Kenya, because the testing service I describe needs someone the farmer cooperatives trust, and that took three years to build. But I would not make it a rule. A virologist who stays abroad and builds a sequencing partnership with African institutions might do more for cassava farmers than one who returns to a laboratory without reagents. The strongest objection is that without a duty to return, a scholarship funds a brain drain, and I take that seriously. So I would judge a scholar by what moves back: students trained, data shared, partnerships kept. I may be wrong about how far that can replace being physically there, and I would like to hear what Gates Scholars have found.

Why they work. Both give a view in the first sentence, offer reasons, admit a limit and stay concrete. Neither reads like a recital.

Preparation plan

On the day

1. Answer first, then evidence. One sentence of answer, then the proof, under 90 seconds.
2. Say "I" for your actions and "we" for the team, precisely.
3. Pause before a hard question. A two-second pause reads as thought.
4. If you do not know, say so and reason aloud. The panel tests how you think.
5. Do not recite. If it sounds like a paragraph from your form, break it up.
6. Use your closing time. Add one thing they have not heard, or ask a real question.

Good questions to ask the panel

Only ask what the website does not already answer. For example: What do Scholars from my field most often wish they had known before arriving? How do Scholars typically contribute to the community beyond their department? What do you hope the next cohort will take forward?

Common interview mistakes

• Reading from notes or reciting the form.
• Claiming more than your reference could confirm.
• No view on the responsibilities of the scholarship.
• Not being able to discuss your proposal in depth.
• Naming famous people you cannot discuss for two minutes.
• Answers longer than two minutes.
• Being negative about your home institution or country without a reason.

Interview checklist

• I can state the Gates mission, four criteria and five values in my own words

• I have six one-minute stories with exact numbers, and one not on my form

• I can explain my research or career plan in two minutes to a non-specialist

• I have a view on the responsibilities of a full-cost scholarship

• I have practised the four-step approach on at least three ethical questions

• I have done at least two mock interviews, one with someone outside my field

• My technology or travel is arranged, and I have a question to ask

Funding, community and what they signal

A Gates Cambridge Scholarship covers the full cost of study at Cambridge and adds discretionary funding for development, family and hardship, so the Trust is making a large, long-term bet on each person it selects. Read the funding as a statement of what Gates expects back: a Scholar who studies hard and joins a community that is meant to last a lifetime.

Core funding (2026-27 rates)

Discretionary funding (applied for, not automatic)

What is not covered

• Bench fees and the costs of scientific equipment or similar academic resources. The Trust expects the academic department to cover core course costs.
• A salary or another substantial scholarship may reduce or stop the standard maintenance allowance. Tell the Trust as soon as you are awarded other funding.

What the funding signals

The experience: what the Trust describes

The Experience page describes what you join beyond the degree. It is useful for your "what will I contribute" answer and for the interview.

The University page adds that about 20,000 students study at Cambridge, 7,500 of them graduates, half from overseas and more than 40 per cent women.

Turn this into a contribution plan

A strong applicant is ready with one concrete offer to the community. Use this three-line frame.

Keep it small, realistic and linked to your record. The Trust describes a community, not a stage.

Mistakes, the final checklist and your sources

The cheapest wins are in process and consistency, not in clever writing. Because Gates gives no feedback, you will not be told which one hurt you, so check this list before you submit.

Process and eligibility

The four answers

Consistency

Interview and mindset

If you spot a mistake before you submit

Fix it now. You cannot edit once you have submitted, so a typo you find on 9 December costs you more than the week you spent finding it. If you spot one after, email info@gatescambridge.org promptly and ask whether anything can be done, but plan as though nothing can.

Final checklist and working plan

If you do nothing else in the next seven days, confirm your round, fix your course, ask your referees and write the one-page thread. Everything later depends on those four.

Your next seven days (21 to 28 October)

1. Confirm your round and your Course Funding Deadline in the Course Directory. Email info@gatescambridge.org if you are unsure.
2. Confirm your course is eligible and that you can start in 2027/28.
3. Fill in the one-page thread from section 5.
4. If you are applying for a PhD, shortlist supervisors and send your first emails (section 6).
5. Shortlist your three referees and ask each one whether they can support you strongly and meet the date (section 6).
6. Start the admission application. The department's nomination is the first gate.

Working plan if your deadline is 6 January 2027

If you have until 6 January, do not let the holiday period decide your schedule. Referees travel and offices close in late December.

For 8 December, use the plan at the end of section 3.

The master checklist

Eligibility and process

• I am a citizen of a country outside the UK, and I know which round I am in

• My course is eligible, full-time (or a PhD), and not already under way

• I know my Course Funding Deadline and my referees' dates

• I have completed the admission section and the Gates funding section

The thread

• My one-page thread is filled in and consistent across all four answers

• Each answer uses a different story, or a different half of one

• Q2, Q3 and Q4 all point to the same future plan

The four answers

• Q1 (about 200 words, under 1,400 characters): the work behind the grades

• Q2 (about 200 words, under 1,400 characters): specific, passes the swap test

• Q3 (about 300 words, under 2,100 characters): commitment with duration, cost, outcome and a real "why"

• Q4 (about 300 words, under 2,100 characters): an obstacle, a decision, someone I moved, a lasting result

• Every number is exact and one I can defend

• Every name is real, correct and attached to something I did

PhD only

• My proposal states a gap, questions and a method, and fits in four years

• I have contacted potential supervisors

References

• Two academic referees and one Gates referee have agreed

• The Gates referee can rate me "exceptional" and name a group and size

• Each has been briefed and has a submission date before the deadline

Submission

• Two outsiders have read my answers, one from another field

• I have checked every name, figure and spelling

• I submitted at least a week early and confirmed every reference arrived

Interview

• I have a story bank, a view on responsibilities and a two-minute research explanation

• I have done two mock interviews

The final rule

Do not tell Gates you are a leader who improves lives. Give them a person, a decision, a number and a change, and let them reach the conclusion themselves.

Sources and official links

All Gates Cambridge pages below were opened and read on 21 October 2026. Dates, funding rates and application caps change each cycle, so confirm them on the live page before acting.

Other official pages this guide points you to:

• University Course Directory for your Course Funding Deadline.
• University Graduate Application Portal for the combined application.
• info@gatescambridge.org for any application question.

Notes on method

• The structure of this guide, a general strategy section followed by one section per answer with worked examples, follows the style of The Application Lab's free Chevening and Commonwealth guides.
• All applicants, organisations, supervisors, numbers and quotations in the worked examples are invented. They show technique and are not drawn from real applications.
• Statements about what Gates "wants" or what a strong answer "should" do are my reading of the pages above, not a statement by the Trust. The Trust gives no feedback and publishes no scoring sheet.