Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRFP Scoring MatrixScoring Matrix 1/10th of 1% p.1 SCORING MATRIX for the 2023 Request for Proposals (RFP) for Funding Through the 1/10th of 1% Mental Health and Chemical Dependency Sales Tax Total Score Applicant: ____________________________________________________________________ Project Title: __________________________________________________________________ Reviewer: ____________________________________________________________________ Date: ________________________________________________________________________ Proposal Details Eligible Points Reviewer’s Score 1. Applicant Profile and Qualifications Were the following items addressed? Purpose of organization Goals of organization History of organization Experience with mental health and/or chemical dependency Experience managing public funds Other qualifications Considerations for scoring: How well was this question answered? Was the answer clear? Would this organization be a strong steward of public funds? Does the applicant have adequate experience working with mental health and/or chemical dependency? Are they capable of managing public funds efficiently, accurately, and with accountability? Are they qualified to carry out the proposal? Does the applicant have any organizational weaknesses that need to be considered? 10 2. Project Description Summary Were the following items addressed? Summary of proposed project Description of how it will address mental health and/or chemical dependency in Kittitas County Considerations for scoring: How well was this question answered? Is it clear what the organization is proposing to do? How well will this project address mental health and/or chemical dependency within Kittitas County? Are there any potential unintended consequences of this project? 15 Scoring Matrix 1/10th of 1% p.2 3. County Priorities: Youth, veterans, the justice involved, and those at high risk of suicide Were the following items addressed? Did the applicant indicate which County priorities their project addresses? Is there a compelling description of how the priorities would be addressed? Considerations for scoring: How well was this question answered? Is there a clear and strong connection between the proposed project and the County priorities? How many priorities are addressed in this proposal? 15 4. Partnerships Were the following items addressed? Did the applicant list key partnerships for the project? Are the partners’ roles defined? Considerations for scoring: How well was this question answered? Is it clear how community partnerships are a part of the project? How many partnerships are listed? What kind of roles do they have in the project? Are there any key partners missing? 5 5. Gaps and Duplication in Services Were the following items addressed? Did the applicant describe how the project fills a gap in services? Did the applicant describe how the project isn’t a duplication of services? Considerations for scoring: How well was this question answered? Does the project fill a gap (or more than one) in the community? Is there a duplication of services present? If so, is the program different enough that it would still be valuable in offering another option for people seeking assistance? 10 6. Goals and Objectives Were the following items addressed? Did the applicant fill out at least two Goals and Objectives tables? Are the goals SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound)? Scoring Matrix 1/10th of 1% p.3 Did the applicant fill out the “Successful Benchmarks” grid? Considerations for scoring: How completely were the tables filled out? Are the project’s goals, strategies, and objectives clear? Do the goals clearly align with the project description and the County priorities? 15 Budget Narrative Eligible Points Reviewer’s Score 1. Funding Utilization Were the following items addressed? Is there a detailed description of how funds will be used for the project? Considerations for scoring: How well was this question answered? Is it clear how the funds will be spent to support the proposed project? Is the proposed use of funds appropriate to fulfill the project’s scope of work? 5 2. Other Support Were the following items addressed? Is there a description of other types of support for the project? Considerations for scoring: How well was this question answered? Is it clear how other types of support will be used for the project? What is the degree of other support? Are County funds the only resource for the project? Are there guaranteed or uncertain forms of support, or both? 5 3. Sustainability Were the following items addressed? Is there a description of how the project would or wouldn’t be sustained if the County funds were no longer available? Considerations for scoring: How well was this question answered? Is it clear how the funds affect the sustainability of the project? Can the project be sustained either fully or partially without County funds in the future? Are there any plans for future sustainability without County funds? 10 Scoring Matrix 1/10th of 1% p.4 4. Partial Funding Were the following items addressed? Is there a description of how the project would be impacted if only partial funds were awarded? Is there a description of how the proposal could be adjusted for partial funds? Considerations for scoring: How well was this question answered? Is it clear how partial funding would impact the project? Is the program scalable to the amount of funds received? Or is it an “all or nothing”? 5 Budget Template Eligible Points Reviewer’s Score Were the following items addressed? Is the budget worksheet filled out properly and completely? Are the details/justifications filled out for each line item? Considerations for scoring: Are the details/justifications adequate for each line item? Do the administrative costs exceed the maximum percentage? Do the budget details align with the project proposal? 5 TOTAL 100