1 / 11

Evaluating Ranking Criteria for NAWCA Small Grants in the Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture

This document discusses the implications of implementing a ranking system for NAWCA Small Grants within the Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture (LMVJV). With over $53 million in grant funds and $172 million in partner funds channeled towards conservation efforts across 530,000 acres, the potential impact of ranking proposals is significant. This analysis explores the relevance of ranking, the size of the task involved, and the best practices for evaluation. Additionally, it includes historical data on project funding since 2000 and recommendations for future grant ranking.

trula
Télécharger la présentation

Evaluating Ranking Criteria for NAWCA Small Grants in the Lower Mississippi Valley Joint Venture

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. N. A. Wetlands Conservation Act Small Grant Ranking • Keith McKnight, USFWS-LMVJV WGCPO Partnership Coordinator

  2. NAWCA Tab 3, sub 5 Relevance to the LMVJV • $53,660,000 grant funds • $172,000,000 partner funds • 530,000 acres

  3. NAWCA Standard Grants 2012-01 Cycle

  4. NAWCA Standard Grants 2012-01 Cycle 

  5. NAWCA Small Grants Ranking • To date, LMVJV has not provided ranks • DBHC requests that the LMVJV provide ranks for Small Grants • Ranks used at least twice during the process of developing a recommendation to the MBCC for $$

  6. NAWCA Small Grants Ranking – 3 Questions • What is the impact of ranking vs. not ranking? • How big is the job of providing ranks? • What are the best options for ranking, if that is what is decided?

  7. NAWCA Tab 3, sub 5 Small Grants History Since 2000: - 0.9 projects funded/yr - $658,663 grant funds Since 2008:

  8. NAWCA Small Grants Ranking • What is the impact of ranking vs. not ranking? • Would it have helped get a few more funded? • How big is “the job” of providing ranks? • On average, 2-3 proposals (max 8 pages written text) • What are the best options for ranking? • Don’t rank (status quo) • Ranked by LMVJV Advisory Team Members • Other?

  9. NAWCA Small Grants Recommendation • Refer the question to the LMVJV Advisory Team

More Related