There is no “standard” process for grant review, although there are common principles:
What follows is a protocol for reviewing the “Fund for Rural America” proposals to the AgStar Fund (this is not necessarily the format AgStar uses, but it is a process that is commonly used, especially for federal grants).
1. Each reviewer will assess each of the assigned proposal using the criteria and assigning points as indicated below.
§ Full points may not be assigned if any weaknesses are noted.
§ Strengths & weaknesses should be noted by including direct reference to the proposal
§ Comments should be combined into a single list
§ Scores should be recorded separately at the end of the review, and an average score computed.
§ $10,000 maximum
§ Operating support, program support, technical assistance, or equipment requests only
§ No excluded activities
§ 8-10 pts. –Demonstrates significant impact on needs of region
§ 4-7 pts.—Shows moderate impact on needs in region
§ 0-3 pts. –Impact is basically similar to what is already available in community
§ 15-20 pts. –Immediate and primary impact on target groups
§ 8-14 pts.—Indirect or delayed impact on target groups
§ 0-7 pts. –Impact is not primarily on target groups
§ 15-20 pts. –Both outcomes and evaluation are clear and achievable
§ 8-14 pts.—Either outcome or evaluation are clear and achievable, but not both
§ 0-7 pts. –Both outcomes and evaluation are problematic
§ 15-20 pts. –Resources, personnel, and responsibilities are adequate and appropriate
§ 8-14 pts.—Some of resources/personnel/responsibilities are not justified
§ 0-7 pts. –Responsibilities, resources and personnel are not adequately explained or justified.
§ 15-20 pts. –Project clearly aligned with mission and community
§ 8-14 pts.—Project aligned with mission or community but not both
§ 0-7 pts. –Alignment with mission or community is unclear or missing
§ 8-10 pts. –Budget is adequate and appropriate
§ 4-7 pts.—Some of budget is not justified
§ 0-3 pts. –Budget is not adequately explained or justified.
____/ Meets Requirements
____/20 Measured Outcomes
____/20 Fit with Priorities
© 2005 A.J.Filipovitch
Revised 29 October 2008