Selection Guidelines Proposals will be evaluated and graded on a 100 point scale based on the criteria below.

Transcription

1 Selection Guidelines Proposals will be evaluated and graded on a 100 point scale based on the criteria below. Innovation Grant Application Scoring Matrix Application 10 Points Maximum Application is complete as required, with all sections filled out appropriately. Application is mostly complete, with most sections filled out appropriately. Fewer than 2 Multiple sections of the application is left blank and without explanation. Any section left blank has a reason attached to the application stating errors in completion. Most boxes are checked Multiple boxes are left unchecked or undecided. why it was left blank. All appropriate boxes have been checked accordingly All required signatures have been received. Application received on the due date and time. appropriately, except for one. All required signatures have been received. One or more signatures have not been received. The application lacks required information. Project Description 10 Points Maximum Clearly defined outcomes & expectations of project Outcomes & expectations of project are mostly clear No defined outcomes & expectations of project Complete summary of methods and and/or unrealistic Incomplete or lack of summary procedures used to achieve goals Summary of methods and of methods and procedures Sources for research used in procedures used to achieve goals used to achieve goals support of program objectives are are somewhat complete No sources for research used cited. Sources for research used in in support of program Objectives are specific & measurable support of program objectives objectives are cited. Outcomes clearly match objectives. are cited. Objectives are not specific and Objectives may be given, but lack measurable. specifics. Outcomes do not match Outcomes partly match objectives. objectives and/or are confusing. Revised 12/16/2013 Page 1 of 5

2 Collaboration 10 Points Maximum Collaboration between Collaboration between Collaboration between departments, personnel, groups is departments, personnel, departments, personnel, evident, and/or letters of support groups is somewhat clear groups is not evident are attached A clear partnership of two or more of the following groups is evident: community entity, faculty, staff, students, groups within college, other Effort to partner with one of these groups is evident: community entity, faculty, staff, students, groups within college, other Partners may be questionable. No effort is made to partner with another group for the project Project Timeline 10 Points Maximum Detailed timelines and milestones for the grant period are evident Timelines and milestones for the grant period are evident, but are Incomplete timelines and milestones for the grant Project activities are chronological in broad or vague period are evident order Project activities are not in Project activities are not in Project plans are realistic and feasible given the timeline chronological in order, but are evident chronological in order or not included at all Responsible groups/persons are listed along with each activity Project plans are mostly realistic and feasible given the timeline Project plans are unrealistic given the timeline Overview of anticipated obstacles to success and strategies for overcoming them are included (if they exist). Responsible groups/persons are listed along with each activity Responsible groups/persons are not listed Revised 12/16/2013 Page 2 of 5

3 Budget 10 Points Maximum Includes a specific amount requested, in which the total amount of award does not exceed $2,000 If total amount of award does exceed $2,000, an explanation is clear on how the remaining cost is to be covered Project budget utilizes the following categories if needed with brief narrative: Advertising, Technology, Equipment, Supplies, Materials, Services, Travel, Consultant Costs, Other Funding level appears reasonable to meet all project objectives Benefits out way the costs Other funding sources, including partner funding/in kind funding are noted (letters of support included if appropriate) if applicable. Includes a specific amount requested, in which the total amount of award does not exceed $2,000 If total amount of award does exceed $2,000, an explanation is not clear on how the remaining cost is to be covered Project budget does not include a complete itemized budget and brief narrative for all requested categories Funding level does not seem reasonable to meet all project objectives Benefits out way the costs Minimal funding sources are explained if applicable Includes a specific amount requested, in which the total amount of award exceeds $2,000, without explanation Project budget does not include a complete itemized budget and brief narrative for all requested categories Funding level appears unreasonable for all objectives Costs out way the benefits No funding sources are explained if applicable Sustainability 10 Points Maximum Project includes a complete overview of how the expected Overview of how the expected results will be sustained in years No overview of how the expected results will be results will be sustained in years beyond the grant period is sustained in years beyond the beyond the grant period to impact the future of the program. unrealistic or incomplete. grant period is provided. Revised 12/16/2013 Page 3 of 5

4 Evaluation/Assessment 10 Points Maximum Qualitative & Quantitative Qualitative & Quantitative Qualitative & Quantitative assessment of the project is clear assessment of the project is assessment of the project is Goals are clearly measurable and welldefined somewhat clear not provided Goals are not fully No measurable and well Expected results clearly defined measurable, but are defined defined goals evident Performance measures listed Expected results somewhat clear Expected results not provided Performance measures not clear Performance measures not included Overall Quality & Other Considerations 10 Points Maximum Overall quality of the proposal is excellent Overall quality of the proposal is good to average Overall quality of the proposal is poor or needs improvement Project seems promising for success Project has questionable potential Project has questionable Project has a high potential of being for success potential for success utilized by other institutions, replicated or sustained in the future. Project has an average potential of being utilized by other institutions, replicated or sustained in the future. Project has a low or limited potential of being utilized by other institutions, replicated or sustained in the future. Originality 10 Points Maximum Project is unique in its approach Project is somewhat unique Project is not unique Project uses creative solutions to challenges that exist Project uses somewhat creative solutions to challenges that exist Project does not use creative solutions to challenges that Project promotes innovative Project somewhat promotes exist ideas, work, products, designs, and collaborations innovative ideas, work, products, designs, and collaborations Project does not promote innovative ideas, work, products, designs, and collaborations Revised 12/16/2013 Page 4 of 5

5 Impact 10 Points Maximum Project provides great benefit to the Project provides some benefit to Project provides no clear college and benefiting the college and benefiting benefit to the college and partners/groups are presented partners/groups is briefly benefiting partners/groups clearly mentioned or not included are not included The target population of the The target population of the The target population of the project is defined and realistic project is partially defined project is not mentioned Either a large number of or unrealistic There are no real benefits to participants are benefitted or a Benefit to participants is limited participants few participants are benefitted to a small group or is not longlasting deeply The project strongly supports institutional goals and/or strategic areas of emphasis at the college. The project somewhat supports institutional goals and/or strategic areas of emphasis at the college or only broad goals are presented. The project offers no support to institutional goals and/or strategic areas of emphasis at the college. Total Score for Proposal: Proposal Decision: [ ] Fully Funded for $ [ ] Partially Funded for $ [ ] Proposal Not Funded Explanations/Comments: Revised 12/16/2013 Page 5 of 5