Evaluation

Note: The following rubric can be used for either a team or individual project.  Team member responsibilities are listed under each category.  The total amount of points possible for providing both the needs assessment and the grant proposal is 80 points.

 

    Grant Writing Rubric

CATEGORY
3
(10 points per category)
2
(8 points per category)
1 
(5 points per category)
Needs Assessment
(Project Director)
  • Identifies specific need adequately  in 25-50 words
  • Statistics for local, state, or national situation is properly identified and referenced
  • Internal data was obtained without force or cohersion and is unbiased and repeatable
  • Statistical analysis of the data was accurately performed using the correct mathematical method having a sufficient sample size to test
  • Specific need is partially identified
  • Provides some statistics that are relevant to the research
  • Compliation of internal data has a minor amount of bias and a few errors when collecting data
  • Statistical analysis has minor errors in the mathematical method with a sufficient sample size to test
  • Specific need not identified or is too vague
  • No statistics provided
  • Internal data is missing, heavily biased, and non-repeatable
  • Statistical analysis uses incorrect mathmatical model or sample size is too small.
Grant Proposal -
Executive Summary
(Project Director)
 
  • Purpose of the document is clear and thorough
  • Provides a summary of all methods used, results to be obtained, and recommendations for funding
  • Conclusion is strong and reiterates the goal behind the plan
  • Purpose of the document is somewhat clear and has a few areas that need additional supporting research
  • Provides some of the methods used, and an incomplete listing of results to be obtained along with recommendations for funding
  • Conclusion is a summary of the procedures used and needs a more specific goal
  • Purpose of the document is unclear and incomplete
  • Provides a vague listing of methods used, has no information on the results obtained or recommendations for funding
  • Conclusion is weak and does not site a specific goal for the project
Grant Proposal -
Statement of Need
(Project Director)
  • Argument for performing research is strong, convincing, and is significant to solving the problem at hand
  • Provides more than seven instances of supporting documentation and references in the appropriate format
  • Factual information is accurate, and supports the reason for research
  • Argument has some strong points and lacks some cohesive support to the research project
  • Provides 4-7 instances of supporting documentation and references in the appropriate format
  • Factual information is somewhat accurate and complete
  • Argument is weak and does not provide a significant reason to perform the research
  • Provides less than four instances of supporting documentation and references in the appropriate format
  • Factual information is missing or has no connection to the research being performed
Grant Proposal -
Project Description
(Business Director)
  • Project plan is in a well-structured format
  • Provides a clear explanation of the methods to be used and the specific goals to be obtained
  • Desribes the major milestones to be achieved with a supporting schedule
  • Project plan has some areas that are not properly structured for the research being performed
  • Provides a clear explanation for some of the methods used and the majority of goals for the project
  • Describes the majority of the milestones for the project with a supportin schedule
  • Project plan has no structure or is deficient in many areas
  • Provides no information about the methods used or has vague goals
  • Describes only a few of the major milestones for the project and does not include a schedule for completion
Grant Proposal -
Budget
(Financial Manager)
  • Lists all possible funding sources with expected resouce allotments
  • Provides resonable and necessary expenditures for the proposed plan
  • Identifies potential pitfalls for excessive expenditures
  • Includes a complete bugetary schedule for the length of the program
  • Lists a few funding sources with minor errors in resorce allotments
  • Provides most of the resonable and necessary expenditures for the proposed plan
  • Identifies a few potential pitfalls for excessive expenditures
  • Includes a partial bugetary schedule for the inital phase of the program
  • Does not provide proper funding sources or has incorrect resource allotments
  • Expenditures are unreasonable or unnecessary
  • No propable expenditure overruns listed or identified
  • Schedule is vague, not within program limits, or has unrealistic timeline
Grant Proposal -
Organizational Information
(Project Manager)
  • Indicates organizational structure and level of authority within the organization
  • Provides a listing of all key personnel responsible for research, management, and oversight for the program
  • Describes all managment functions with information about staff qualifications and experience
  • Indicates the majority of organizational structure and authority levels with some positions yet to be determined
  • Provides a listing of the majority of key personnel responsible for research, management, and oversight for the program
  • Describes some of the management functions with partial information on staff qualifications and experience
  • No organizational structure provided or little infomation on levels of authority within the organization
  • Provides no listing of key personnel
  • Does not describe the management functions or provide information about staff qualifications and experience
Grant Proposal -
Conclusion
(Project Director)
  • Provides a summary statment with possible solutions based on the proposed research
  • Places the focus of the project on the required need and the relevancy of the research
  • Presents a "call to action" that requests the funding agency to support the project
  • Provides a summary statement of a few methods used and possible solutions based on the proposed research
  • Places the focus of the project on the required need but does not site the relevancy of the research
  • Presents the data with a vague request for support from the funding agency
  • Provides an incomplete summary with vague references to the proposed research
  • Places no focus on the required need
  • Does not request action from the funding agency to support the proposed research project
General Document Attributes
(Business Manager)
  • Written in an acceptable style with no errors
  • Uses research data that is acceptable and relevant to the proposed project
  • Written in an acceptable style with 1-3 errors
  • Uses research data that is somewhat relevant to the proposed research project
  • Written in an unacceptable style with several (>3) errors
  • Uses research data that has no connection to the proposed research project