ced application reviewer training module 1: introduction to ced program and application review june...

CED Application Reviewer TrainingModule 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


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


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


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


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


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


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.


Application Review Process

Reviewer

Reviewer

Reviewer

Submitted to Chair

Chair

Submitted to PAM

PriorityArea

Manager(PAM)

Approval

Rejected by PAM

Rejected by Chair


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 email as

needed, including on weekends– Maintain objectivity and undertake a thorough,

comprehensive analysis of applications– Fully consider and respect the opinions of others


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


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



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



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.



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).


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


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


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


Self-Review Quiz

1. What is the purpose of the CED program?a) Provide grants to nonprofitsb) Provide assistance for creating employment and business

opportunitiesc) Provide funding to eliminate food desertsd) Provide construction and non-construction funding


Self-Review Quiz

1. What is the purpose of the CED program?a) Provide grants to nonprofitsb) Provide assistance for creating employment and

business opportunitiesc) Provide funding to eliminate food desertsd) Provide construction and non-construction funding


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 FOAb) Whether the application proposes a “well-planned and

viable” project c) Whether the application includes plans that seem

feasible and mutually reinforcingd) B and Ce) All of the above


Self-Review Quiz

3. When scoring CED applications, you cannot:a) Ensure that the scores are consistent with the written

commentsb) Use the full range of points as appropriatec) Score applications independentlyd) List weaknesses that are not part of the evaluation

criteria

ced application reviewer training module 1: introduction to ced program and application review june...

Documents

application processtips

application reviews

application page numbersensure

chairced application

ced awardsfy

perfect score

length of project

consensusscore applications