1 / 13

Planning for Performance Measurement Workshop: Grant Proposal Review Guidelines

Join us to learn the basics of grant proposal review, identify key elements related to performance measures, and plan for the next review period. Workshop includes review assignments, group discussions, and reporting guidelines.

brian-hartman
Télécharger la présentation

Planning for Performance Measurement Workshop: Grant Proposal Review Guidelines

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Planning for Performance Measurement: Choosing the Right Performance Measures for the Right Program Presenters:Donald Johnson, DSG, IncStephen Gies, DSG, Inc

  2. Objectives • Participants will be able to identify proposal review basics • Participants will be able to identify critical proposal elements related to performance measures • Participants will be able to plan the next proposal review period and incorporate the performance measurement requirements

  3. Basics of Grant Review • Identify Review Team • Preliminary proposal Review • Evaluation Criteria • Discussion and Consensus • Final Scoring and Notifications

  4. Workshop Assignment • Two proposals to be reviewed • Review only two sections • Score individually • Discuss and come to consensus • Be prepared to report out

  5. Proposals • Proposal A – Shelbyville • Proposal B – Springfield

  6. Time Allotment • Individual reading of sections and notes – 20 minutes for both proposals • Small group discussions at table (5-7 members) – 20 Minutes • Report out – 20 Minutes

  7. Forms • Individual Scoring Form • Small Group Scoring Form

  8. Assignment – Part 1 • Individual reading of sections and notes – 20 Minutes for both proposals

  9. Assignment – Part 2 • Small group discussions at table (5-7 members) – 20 Minutes

  10. Assignment – Part 3 • Report out – 20 Minutes • Report outs should include: - Scoring - Consensus Comments

  11. Springfield • Coherent plan utilizing current research • Specifies a detailed and realistic goal • Reallocates resources rather than obtain new funding • Utilizes a validated screening assessment tool • Details a collaborative relationship with MOUs already in place • Differentiates mandatory from non-mandatory measures • More frequent data collection periods

  12. Shelbyville • Program details not clear and no discussion of current research • No validated instruments • Minimal levels of collaboration • No differentiation between mandatory and non-mandatory • Lacks a sufficient number of measures • Less frequent data collection periods

  13. Summary Key points in quality data collection plan for performance measurement: • Meet minimum requirements regarding all mandatory measures and two non-mandatory measures • Specify data collection instruments • MOUs have been undertaken to obtain needed data • Final Scoring and Notifications

More Related