CED Application Reviewer Training Module 1: Introduction to CED Program and Application Review June 2012.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
DOs and DONTs Joan-Anton Carbonell Kingston University EC External Expert TEMPUS Modernising Higher Education TEMPUS INFORMATION DAY.
Advertisements

Maryland Higher Education Commission BRAC Higher Education Investment Fund Technical Assistance Meeting June 21, 2010.
Analyzing Student Work
EVALUATOR TIPS FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT WRITING The following slides were excerpted from an evaluator training session presented as part of the June 2011.
In Depth Panel Review Training. Activity: Mock Panel Review To evaluate the Need for Assistance, reviewers will consider the extent to which the application.
Panel Reviewer Training Overview 1 ANA Objective Panel Review Process Each year, ANA convenes panels of experts to objectively analyze and score eligible.
Partnership Assessment Ref ICMM Tool # 4
Placement Workshop Y2, Sem 2 Professional Practice Module (PPM)
Page 1 Marie Curie Schemes Science is not the whole story! (How to write a successful Marie Curie RTN Proposal) Siobhan Harkin.
Submission Writing Fundamentals – Part Webinar Series Leonie Bryen.
Alaska Native Education Program (ANEP) Technical Assistance Meeting September 2014 Sylvia E. Lyles Valerie Randall Almita Reed.
TRIBAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES PROGRAM (TCUP). Purpose of the Program To assist Tribal Colleges and Universities to: Build, expand, renovate, and equip.
Writing an Effective Proposal for Innovations in Teaching Grant
Reaching for Success Grant Writing Workshop November 20, 2014.
Enhancing Education Through Technology Round 9 Competitive.
COLLEGE SPARK WASHINGTON 2012 Community Grants Program LOI Webinar 9/27/2011 9:30 AM 9/28/2011 2:00 PM.
Grant Writing 101 – Part 2 Information and Tips for Preparing and Submitting a Grant Application Nancy Alexander, MBA Office of Sponsored Programs.
Grant Writing Workshop David Shillcutt, J.D
GRANT MANAGEMENT SEMINAR
COLLEGE SPARK WASHINGTON 2012 Community Grants Program Application Webinar 12/22/201110:00 AM 1/4/20122:00 PM.
IACT303 – INTI 2005 World Wide Networking Welcome and Introduction to Subject. Penney McFarlane The University of Wollongong.
Writing Grant Proposals. I. Cover letter II. Proposal Summary III. Organizational Description IV. Problem Statement V. Project Objectives VI. Methods.
Urban Innovation21 Small Business Grant Competition Supporting Small Business Growth in the Innovation Economy.
Pre-Review Orientation Conference Call Bureau of Health Workforce HRSA Health Careers Opportunity Program June 29 – July 1, am Review Administrator.
CED Application Reviewer Training Module 2: Objectives and Need for Assistance June 2012.
CED Application Reviewer Training Module 3: Business Plan June 2012.
Culture Programme - Selection procedure Katharina Riediger Infoday Praha 10/06/2010.
Reviewing the 2015 AmeriCorps Applications & Conducting the Review AmeriCorps External Review.
Internal Assessment.
Bullard Education Foundation Investing in Our Future Grants Fall 2012.
CED Application Reviewer Training Module 6: Budget and Budget Justification June 2012.
CED Application Reviewer Training Module 7: Bonus Points June 2012.
FY15 Rural Opioid Overdose Reversal Grant Program HRSA PRE-REVIEW CONFERENCE CALL.
Urban Innovation21 Small Business Grant Competition Supporting Small Business Growth in the Innovation Economy.
Focusing on Our Mission 2011 Grant Writing Workshop Adapted with permission from the Houston Affiliate of Susan G. Komen for the Cure®
Grant Writing 101 Information and Tips for Preparing and Submitting an Application Debbie Kalnasy Bryan Williams Office of Safe and Drug-Free School s.
Training Grant Program Capacity Building Grants
Stages of the verification process Information for panellists.
Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 National Training and Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreements (NCA) Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) HRSA Objective.
Grants to States to Support Oral Health Workforce Activities HRSA Pre-Review Conference Call April 14, 2015 U.S. Department of Health and Human.
1 HRSA Division of Independent Review The Review Process Regional AIDS Education and Training Centers HRSA Toni Thomas, MPA Lead Review Administrator.
Charter School 2015 Annual Finance Seminar Grant Management Office of Grants Fiscal September 11, 2015.
APPLICATION PANEL CHAIR ORIENTATION 2015Community Economic Development (CED) 2015 CED- Healthy Food Financing Initiative (HFFI) Grant Application Review.
ALASKA NATIVE/NATIVE HAWAIIAN INSTITUTIONS ASSISTING COMMUNITIES (AN/NHIAC) PROGRAM.
Research & Technology Implementation TxDOT RTI OFFICE.
Predominantly Black Institutions Program CFDA: A FY 2015 PREAPPLICATION WEBINAR Washington, DC July 14, :00 AM. – 12:00 PM, EDT July 14, 2015.
Methods of Administration MOA Element 1 Designation of State and Sub-State Level Equal Opportunity (EO) Officer.
Strengthening Applications September BHPr Application Review Criteria Detailed instructions/information about specific funding priorities will always.
Governor’s Grant Conference Grant Writing Basics.
 NSF Merit Review Criteria Intellectual Merit Broader Impacts  Additional Considerations Integration of Research & Education Broadening Participation.
CED Application Reviewer Training Module 4: Organizational Capacity June 2012.
1 Access to the World and Its Languages LRC Technical Assistance Workshop (Part 1) Access to the World and Its Languages I N T E R.
How To: A Process for Successful Partnerships. Partnership Definition A partnership IS: A written agreement between the parties. Mutual interest in, mutual.
Health Resources and Services Administration Division of Independent Review Objective Review Orientation Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students 1.
Stages of monitoring Information for panellists. Monitoring Occurs mid-way through the course of study Review panels consider how schools have implemented.
TTI Performance Evaluation Training. Agenda F Brief Introduction of Performance Management Model F TTI Annual Performance Review Online Module.
1 Voluntary and Community Sector Review Voluntary & Community Sector Review Grants Strategy Working Party Participative Session 28 September 2006 Appendix.
Cindy Collins ETEC 665 Grants for Technology Writing a Winning Proposal.
Enhancing Education Through Technology Round 8 Competitive.
Best Practices in CMSD SLO Development A professional learning module for SLO developers and reviewers Copyright © 2015 American Institutes for Research.
MODULE 4 FHIP NOFA – FACTOR 3. What will be covered in Module 3: Factor 3 - Maximum Points and Distribution for each sub-factor Factor 3 – Sub-factor:
FY2013 OneCPD+ TA NOFA Q & A Webcast U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) Community Planning & Development (CPD) July 15,
EuropeAid/152087/DD/ACT/LB Cultural activities 2016 Information Session 13 th June 2016.
ACF, Office of Child Care Tribal Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Visiting Program: Development and Implementation April 2016.
Look Beneath the Surface Regional Anti-Trafficking Program
Please send completed application form to:
External Peer Reviewer Orientation
Employee Performance Management System
FY18 Water Use Data and Research Program Q & A Session
2012 Annual Call Steps of the evaluation of proposals, role of the experts TEN-T Experts Briefing, March 2013.
Presentation transcript:

CED Application Reviewer Training Module 1: Introduction to CED Program and Application Review June 2012

CED Application Reviewer Training Module Outline  Module 1 includes: – An introduction to the program – Guidelines for application reviews and scoring – An overview of the application process – Tips on writing comments – Info on the application review schedule – Quiz questions to gauge what you’ve learned

CED Application Reviewer Training The CED Program  Provides technical and financial assistance to activities that contribute to community economic development and revitalization  Support creation of jobs through start-up or expansion of businesses  For 2012, as part of the Healthy Food Financing Initiative, special emphasis on efforts to address food deserts in low-income communities  Requirements specified in Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) published on April 6, 2012

CED Application Reviewer Training FY 2012 CED Awards  FY 2012 funds available for awards $27M  Maximum award level: $800,000  Length of Project or Project Period: – 36 months (3 years) for non-construction projects – 60 months (5 years) for construction jobs

CED Application Reviewer Training Application Review Guidelines  The FOA lists 6 criteria under which each application will be reviewed – Objectives and Need for Assistance – Business Plan – Organizational Capacity – Public Support – Budget and Budget Justification – Bonus Points

CED Application Reviewer Training Application Review Guidelines (cont.)  Review all information provided, regardless of where in the application it is presented  Applications that meet the requirements of the FOA and present the projects most likely to succeed should be score the highest  Assess whether the application proposes a “well- planned and viable” project and plans seem feasible and mutually reinforcing

CED Application Reviewer Training Scoring Applications  Scoring done on “extent to which” each criterion is addressed within the application – Use the full range of points as appropriate – Evaluation sub-criteria for a given criterion of the application are not designed to receive equal weight  Written descriptions of strengths and weaknesses, with application page numbers  Ensure that the scores are consistent with the written comments  Panel members must reach consensus  Score applications independently; don’t try to produce “winning” applications

CED Application Reviewer Training Scoring Applications (cont.)  When scoring applications, do not: – Award a perfect score to an application that has a stated weakness. – Award a zero score to an application that has a stated strength. – List weaknesses or strengths that are not part of the evaluation criteria. – Provide an applicant a score without sufficient evidence- based comments to justify it – Expect significant scoring differences to be approved.

CED Application Reviewer Training Application Review Process Reviewer Submitted to Chair Chair Submitted to PAM Priority Area Manager (PAM ) Approval Rejected by PAM Rejected by Chair

CED Application Reviewer Training The Panel Works as a Team  Panel members are expected to – Fully participate and contribute in order to work towards completing the review per the OCS schedule – Be prompt and fully prepared for all team scheduled conference calls – Be available to meet and respond to comments via as needed, including on weekends – Maintain objectivity and undertake a thorough, comprehensive analysis of applications – Fully consider and respect the opinions of others

CED Application Reviewer Training The Panel Works as a Team  Panel members must: – Develop panel summary reports by consensus – Not consider their work to be complete until the PAM approves all summaries – Solve problems through good communication – Maintain confidentiality – Ask for assistance from OCS, Team WilDon, and OGM when needed

CED Application Reviewer Training Reviewers’ Written Comments  When reviewing and scoring applications you must provide written comments in the ARM system  Comments justify the scores assigned to each application review criterion  Comments should: – Be detailed enough to summarize the main points of the application being reviewed – Note each application's strengths and weakness – Not include a mix of strengths and weaknesses

CED Application Reviewer Training Reviewers’ Written Comments  Comments must: – Be constructive, objective, and factual – Include application page numbers where you found the information referenced in your comments – Be complete sentences with proper grammar  PAMs may reject unacceptable comments

CED Application Reviewer Training Reviewers’ Written Comments  A comment is unacceptable if it: – Reflects generic, non-substantive opinions There is no way this organization can do this project. – Does not provide the basis for a conclusion The applicant identifies results and benefits. – Repeats the criteria without providing evidence The applicant’s service area has high unemployment.

CED Application Reviewer Training Reviewers’ Written Comments  A comment is acceptable if it: – Draws from the evaluation sub-criterion when articulating a basis for each conclusion; – Uses examples from the application to support each finding; AND – Provides the applicant with a sufficient rationale for the score Example: The applicant demonstrates the compelling need in the target area for the proposed community economic development project by explaining that the area’s unemployment rate is 43%, which is significantly higher than the state’s unemployment rate of 12% (p. 2).

CED Application Reviewer Training Application Review Schedule  Application reviews must be completed in accordance with the schedule established by OCS  Scores and summary comments must be submitted to the PAM via ARM by 9AM EDT by the established deadlines  Interim deadlines will be established through the application review process  More information about specific dates will be discussed on your first panel conference call

CED Application Reviewer Training Application Review Schedule (cont.)  Following the approval of all applications by the PAM, your panel will be contacted with instructions on how to return review materials to Team WilDon – Use the UPS box and return shipping label provided Signed Score Sheets Original, signed Conflict of Interest and Work Agreement forms Signed W9 and Honorarium Payment Voucher  Destroy any printed applications, notes from the application review and other confidential review materials at the conclusion of the review  Required forms are available from Team WilDon

CED Application Reviewer Training Module 1 Wrap-up  You have learned… – About the CED program – Our approach to reviewing applications – Basic guidelines for application reviews and scoring  What’s next? – Self-review quiz for Module 1 – Module 2: Objectives and Need for Assistance

CED Application Reviewer Training Self-Review Quiz 1.What is the purpose of the CED program? a)Provide grants to nonprofits b)Provide assistance for creating employment and business opportunities c)Provide funding to eliminate food deserts d)Provide construction and non-construction funding

CED Application Reviewer Training Self-Review Quiz 1.What is the purpose of the CED program? a)Provide grants to nonprofits b)Provide assistance for creating employment and business opportunities c)Provide funding to eliminate food deserts d)Provide construction and non-construction funding

CED Application Reviewer Training Self-Review Quiz 2.Reviewers should focus on what when reviewing applications? a)Whether the application is put together in the order specified by the FOA b)Whether the application proposes a “well-planned and viable” project c)Whether the application includes plans that seem feasible and mutually reinforcing d)B and C e)All of the above

CED Application Reviewer Training Self-Review Quiz 2.Reviewers should focus on what when reviewing applications? a)Whether the application is put together in the order specified by the FOA b)Whether the application proposes a “well-planned and viable” project c)Whether the application includes plans that seem feasible and mutually reinforcing d)B and C e)All of the above

CED Application Reviewer Training Self-Review Quiz 3.When scoring CED applications, you cannot: a)Ensure that the scores are consistent with the written comments b)Use the full range of points as appropriate c)Score applications independently d)List weaknesses that are not part of the evaluation criteria

CED Application Reviewer Training Self-Review Quiz 3.When scoring CED applications, you cannot: a)Ensure that the scores are consistent with the written comments b)Use the full range of points as appropriate c)Score applications independently d)List weaknesses that are not part of the evaluation criteria