Loading...
04 Attachment 1 - Community Grant Scoring Rubrics Los Gatos Community Grant Scoring Rubrics o New Project Grants for Non-Profit Organizations o 2-year Sustaining Grants for On-going Projects for Non-Profit Organizations o Innovation Grants for Individual Community Members Attachment 1 Los Gatos Community Grant Scoring Rubric – New Project Grants for Non-Profit Organizations Criteria 5 points Exemplary 3-4 points Good 1-2 points Needs Improvement 0 points (disqualifying if received in any one category) Evidence not demonstrated Score Innovation Project represents the implementation of a new insight or idea that has not been piloted previously Project represents local implementation of emerging innovation or trend not previously piloted in Los Gatos Project represents the adoption of a change, addition, or variation to an already established program in Los Gatos No innovation described. Project reproduces or continues an already established program in Los Gatos. Sustainability Evidence presented that the project can be sustained locally beyond the grant period without additional funding necessary from the Town Project is temporary, designed to end when the grant ends with meaningful rational of ending explained. Plans for future are stated as assumptions without supporting evidence. Project is not designed to be temporary, but no meaningful plans for future beyond funding term appear in proposal. Community Impact Target audience/population clearly defined. Strong presentation of the meaningful positive impact to the target audience/population provided with evidence or data specific to Los Gatos. Target audience/population generally well defined. Sufficient presentation of meaningful positive impact to the target audience/population provided with general evidence or data although specific to Los Gatos. Target audience/population very broadly defined. Presentation of positive impact based on realistic assumptions despite gaps in evidence Target audience/population not sufficiently defined. Proposal lacks demonstration of meaningful impact to target audience/population Organizational Background Applicant demonstrates it has significant experience or expertise in the field as it relates to completing the project. Applicant demonstrates it has adequate experience or knowledge in the field as it relates to completing the project or expertise in a related field that Applicant has gaps in experience or knowledge as it relates to the proposal but demonstrates that it can reasonably bridge gaps to successfully accomplish project Applicant does not demonstrate the experience or knowledge to complete the project would transfer to the project Approach Proposal clearly explains the scope, steps, methods and intended results of the project with logical and systematic detail Proposal adequately explains the scope, steps, methods and intended results of the project in general terms Proposal explains the general scope and intended results but lacks detail of the project steps and methods Proposal lacks sufficient detail to convey the scope or intended results of the project Budget Analysis Strongly detailed and realistic budget with sound use of funds. Any funding necessary above the limit of the grant is both accounted for and secured through commitments from other means. Realistic budget with general detail to show responsible use of funds. Any funding necessary above the limit of the grant is accounted for with reasonable certainty or commitment. Budget generally appears to support the project activities as described although there are gaps in detail. Applicant has realistic opportunity to secure necessary funding above the limit of the grant even if commitment from those sources is not certain Described proposal is not supported by the budget. Budget does not comply with application guidelines. No reliable source is presented to provide any necessary funding beyond the limit of the grant. Feasibility Project, personnel, available resources, and timeline are realistic and congruent with project descriptions and outcomes. High likelihood of project being achievable based on information presented. Deficiencies or overestimations exist in project, personnel, available resources or timeline within tolerable range. Outcome appears achievable despite some gaps or leaps. Project, personnel, timeline or resources as described expose weaknesses in the proposal that will leave gaps. Project outcome’s ability to be achieved is questionable at the level proposed, but likely will be achievable at a smaller level. Insufficient information about personnel, resources, project or timeline to gauge feasibility. Assessment/Evaluation Clear definition of success of program. Clear picture of how data will be collected to demonstrate degree to which outcomes are met. Good understanding of anticipated specific results of success, but plan lacks details about data or methods. Success difficult to ascertain, flawed by untestable outcomes, inappropriate methods, or lack of useful data collection. Evaluation plans missing or unusable. Los Gatos Community Grant Scoring Rubric Cont. – New Project Grants for Non-Profit Organizations (Draft) Alignment to target Council/Town Priority (if stated by Council) +3 points Strong, specific, and direct alignment +2 points General alignment +1 point Broad, indirect or coincidental alignment Does the applicant owe the Town any reports or obligations from a previous community grant? YES/NO If Yes, all previous obligations must be met before grant can be awarded. Total Score (40 point scale, +0-3 incentive points) Los Gatos Community Grant Scoring Rubric – 2-year Sustaining Grants for On-going Projects for Non-Profit Organizations Criteria 5 points Exemplary 3-4 points Good 1-2 points Needs Improvement 0 points (disqualifying if received in any one category) Evidence not demonstrated Score Past Project Performance Organization has provided exemplary additional positive results building upon past Community Grant cycles Organization has provided steady and reliable positive results consistent with past Community Grant cycles Organization has produced fewer positive results compared to past Community Grant cycles within a realistic range based on situations outside of the organization’s control Organization failed to produce reasonable results compared to past Community Grant cycles due to situations within the immediate control of the organization. Continuing Community Need and Impact Analysis of community need supported with evidence and data from the last year. Strong presentation of the meaningful positive impact to the target audience/population provided with evidence or data specific to Los Gatos. Analysis of community need supported with evidence and data from the past two to three years. Sufficient presentation of meaningful positive impact to the target audience/population provided with general evidence or data although specific to Los Gatos. Analysis of community need supported with evidence and data that is older than four years. Presentation of positive impact to target audience/population based on realistic assumptions despite gaps in evidence Analysis of community need is lacking or sufficiently outdated. Proposal lacks demonstration of meaningful impact to target audience/population Organizational Capacity Organization maintains ample staffing, resources, facilities, community connections, and knowledge base to continue the project. High likelihood of project being achievable based on information presented. Organization demonstrates that it can continue current project level despite any new gaps in staffing, resources, facilities, or community connections. Outcome appears achievable despite some gaps or leaps. Organization has developed significant gaps in staffing, resources, facilities, or community connections, but demonstrates that it can continue the project in a reduced capacity that achieves results at a smaller level. Organization no longer has the staffing, resources, facilities, or community connections to continue with the project. Los Gatos Community Grant Scoring Rubric (cont.) – 2-year Sustaining Grants for On-going Projects for Non-Profit Organizations (Draft) Does the applicant owe the Town any reports or obligations from a previous community grant? YES/NO If Yes, all previous obligations must be met before grant can be awarded. Total Score (30 point scale) Approach Analysis Proposal clearly explains the scope, steps, methods and intended results of the project with logical and systematic detail Proposal adequately explains the scope, steps, methods and intended results of the project in general terms Proposal explains the general scope and intended results but lacks detail of the project steps and methods Proposal lacks sufficient detail to convey the scope or intended results of the project Budget Analysis Strongly detailed and realistic budget with sound use of funds. Any funding necessary above the limit of the grant is both accounted for and secured through commitments from other means. Realistic budget with general detail to show responsible use of funds. Any funding necessary above the limit of the grant is accounted for with reasonable certainty or commitment. Budget generally appears to support the project activities as described although there are gaps in detail. Applicant has realistic opportunity to secure necessary funding above the limit of the grant even if commitment from those sources is not certain Described proposal is not supported by the budget. Budget does not comply with application guidelines. No reliable source is presented to provide any necessary funding beyond the limit of the grant. Assessment/Evaluation Clear definition of success of program. Clear picture of how data will be collected to demonstrate degree to which outcomes are met. Good understanding of anticipated specific results of success, but plan lacks details about data or methods. Success difficult to ascertain, flawed by untestable outcomes, inappropriate methods, or lack of useful data collection. Evaluation plans missing or unusable. Los Gatos Community Grant Scoring Rubric – Innovation Grants for Individual Community Members Criteria 5 points Exemplary 3-4 points Good 1-2 points Needs Improvement 0 points (disqualifying if received in any one category) Evidence not demonstrated Score Innovation Project represents the implementation of a new insight or idea that has not been piloted previously Project represents local implementation of emerging innovation or trend not previously piloted in Los Gatos Project represents the adoption of a change, addition, or variation to an already established program in Los Gatos No innovation described. Project reproduces or continues an already established program in Los Gatos. Sustainability Evidence presented that the project can be sustained locally beyond the grant period without additional funding necessary from the Town Project is temporary, designed to end when the grant ends with meaningful rational of ending explained. Plans for future are stated as assumptions without supporting evidence. Project is not designed to be temporary, but no meaningful plans for future beyond funding term appear in proposal. Community Impact Strong presentation of positive impact to community based on robust evidence of need. Sufficient presentation of positive impact to community based on reliable observations of need. Presentation of positive impact to community somewhat lacking or based on realistic assumptions. Proposal lacks demonstration of meaningful positive impact to community or is based on unsupported assumptions. Applicant’s Background Applicant demonstrates they have significant experience, expertise, or resource connections as it relates to completing the project. Applicant demonstrates they have adequate experience, knowledge, or resource connections that would translate to completing the project Applicant has gaps in experience, knowledge, or resource connections as it relates to the proposal but demonstrates they can reasonably bridge gaps to successfully accomplish project Applicant does not demonstrate the experience, knowledge, or resource connections to complete the project Approach Proposal clearly explains the scope, steps, methods and intended results of the Proposal adequately explains the scope, steps, methods and intended results of the Proposal explains the general scope and intended results but lacks detail of the Proposal lacks sufficient detail to convey the scope or intended results of the project Alignment to target Council/Town Priority (if stated by Council) +3 points Strong, specific, and direct alignment +2 points General alignment +1 point Broad, indirect or coincidental alignment New applicant incentive +2 points for an applicant that has never received a Community Grant from the Town Does the applicant owe the Town any reports or obligations from a previous community grant? YES/NO If Yes, all previous obligations must be met before grant can be awarded. Total Score (35 point scale +0-5 incentive points) project with logical and systematic detail project in general terms project steps and methods Feasibility High likelihood of project being achievable based on information presented. Outcome appears achievable despite some gaps or leaps. Project outcome’s ability to be achieved is questionable at the level proposed, but likely will be achievable at a smaller level. Insufficient information to gauge feasibility or project is unrealistic as presented. Assessment/Evaluation Clear definition of success of program. Clear picture of how data will be collected to demonstrate degree to which outcomes are met. Good understanding of anticipated specific results of success, but plan lacks details about data or methods. Success difficult to ascertain, flawed by untestable outcomes, inappropriate methods, or lack of useful data collection. Evaluation plans missing or unusable.