Strategy to Scope of Work Logic Model, Review Committees Kate Dobler-Allen, Regional Coordinator 4700 W. White Mountain Blvd; Suite B1 Lakeside, Az Navajo/Apache Regional Partnership Council December 10, 2008

Development of the RFGAs  Develop timelines  Develop the Scope of Work from the Funding Plan  Logic Model

RFGAs: What are the Statutory Requirements?  RFGA’s must be posted for a minimum of six weeks.  When an RFGA is “on the street” (i.e. posted) all questions about the RFGA must be submitted in writing.  When applicable to all potential applicants, Frequently Asked Questions will be posted on the FTF website.

Requirements Continued  A pre-application conference is held at least 21 days before the RFGA close date.  If any clarifications of or corrections to the RFGA arise, then a formal written RFGA amendment will be issued and posted to the FTF website.

Requirements Continued  No late applications shall be accepted.  There are no exceptions.  Late submissions are not fair to those applicants that were received on time and thus an immediate challenge to the process could result

Requirements Continued  From the time the RFGA is posted until awards are made, the entire RFGA process is confidential.  Everyone involved in the acceptance, review and discussion of grant applications will be required to sign a confidentiality/conflict of interest form.

Requirements Continued  Grant applications must be reviewed by at least three peers of the applicant or other qualified individuals.  Grant applications are reviewed solely on the evaluation criteria listed in the RFGA.  Review committees will reach a consensus on scores and comments for each application.

Requirements Continued  An evaluator/reviewer who fails to disclose contact with a representative of an applicant or who fails to provide accurate information on the confidentiality/conflict interest form is subject to a penalty of at least $1,000, but no more than $10,000.  A person who intentionally or knowingly participates in an award of a grant pursuant to a scheme or artifice to avoid the requirements of ARS is guilty of a class 4 felony and is also personally liable for the recovery of all public monies paid, plus 20% of the amount and legal interest from the date of payment and all costs and damage arising out of the violation.

Final Requirements  After the initial review, further clarification questions may be sent to those applicants who have been deemed susceptible for funding.  Review comments shall be made public no later than thirty days after award.

Selecting and Training the Reviewers  The Regional Partnership Councils can determine the members of the application review committee.  Remember the conflict of interest and confidentiality element are critical for the review process.

Selecting the Reviewers  The Review Committee  Generate a list of potential reviewers – more than you may need and if your have Regional Partnership Council members interested they can be on your list. There are “pros & cons” to various ways you may choose to make up your review committee.  Think about the number of potential applications you may receive – this will determine if you need multiple review teams or single review teams.

Selecting the Reviewers  The Review Committee  Consensus is easier and can happen sooner with less rather than more review committee members (must have at least 3)  Large Number of expected applications (more than 40)  May require multiple review teams  May require multiple meetings to ensure each team meets to reach consensus on their applications  Smaller Number of expected applications (less than 40)  May only require 1 review team; may require 2 days

Selecting the Reviewers  The Review Committee  If your Regional Partnership Council is having a formal “subcommittee” to review grant applications, then that is subject to Open Meeting Law; however, the review can be discussed in Executive Session (per grant statute).  An RFGA review committee meeting is not subject to Open Meeting Law if only held to review applications and not established as a formal Regional Partnership Council workgroup/subcommittee.

Training the Reviewers  The Review Committee -Training  Conduct a meeting with your Review Committee members to:  Provide the Reviewers with an overview of the review process  Explain the intent of your Regional Partnership Council RFGA  Provide the Reviewers with a copy of the RFGA  Provide the Reviewers with a scoring “rubric” tool  Provide the Reviewers with score sheets  Provide the Reviewers with copies of applications  Before the Reviewers leave with applications  We must receive a signed copy of the conflict of interest/confidentiality form

Recommendations  The review committees make recommendations to the Regional Partnership Councils.  The Regional Partnership Councils accept/modify/deny the recommendations.  Each Regional Partnership Council makes recommendations to the Board  The Board accepts/modifies/denies recommendations.

A Final Thought  Statutory requirements, guidelines and procedures are important and are in place to protect the public as well as First Things First Staff, Regional Partnership Councils and the Board