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.