Selection Criteria and Format for the Personnel Preparation Competitions CFDA 84.325

SELECTION CRITERIA AND FORMAT FOR THE PERSONNEL PREPARATION COMPETITIONS CFDA 84.325

Part III of the application form requires a narrative that addresses the selection criteria that will be used by reviewers in evaluating individual proposals. Applications are more likely to receive favorable reviews by panels when they are organized according to the format suggested below. This format was published in the FEDERAL REGISTER as an appendix to the program regulations, and it addresses all the selection criteria used to evaluate applications required by regulations. If you prefer to use a different format, you may wish to cross-reference the sections of your application to the selection criteria to be sure that reviewers are able to find all relevant information.

The selection criteria that will be used to evaluate applications submitted to the Personnel Preparation competitions are the selection criteria for new grants required by the EDGAR general selection criteria menu. The maximum score for all of the criteria is 100 points.

An abstract, not to exceed two pages, must include: (a) the title of the program, (b) the name of the Absolute Priority, and (c) the CFDA Number (e.g., 84.325D). The abstract must precede the application narrative of all applications and must include the following information:  Purpose of the project; disability addressed by the project; age group (e.g., 0-3, preschool, elementary school, middle school, high school, secondary transition, and postsecondary); geography (e.g., rural, suburban, urban); proposed outcomes; and names/affiliations of key collaborators.

For Personnel preparation applications, the abstract must also include, as appropriate, (a) the degree or credential that individuals will receive upon completion of the program (e. g., State certification or licensure, State endorsement, professional licensure)); (b) name of Focus Area; (c) description of program offered (e. g., on-campus, off-campus, distance learning, Personnel preparation Schools, hybrid); (d) number of students who will complete the program; and (e) percent of total annual funding designated for student support.

(a) Need for project (20 points)

(1) The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project.

(2) In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknesses; or

(ii) The extent to which the proposed project will prepare personnel for fields in which shortages have been demonstrated.

(b) Quality of project services (20 points)

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for eligible project participants who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the personnel preparation to be provided by the proposed project reflect up‑to‑date knowledge from research and effective practice;

(ii) The extent to which the training or personnel preparation services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of those services;

(iii) The likelihood that the services to be provided by the proposed project will lead to improvements in the skills necessary to gain employment or build capacity for independent living.

(iv) The extent to which the personnel preparation to be provided by the proposed project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners for maximizing the effectiveness of project services; and

(v) The extent to which the personnel preparation services to be provided by the proposed project involve the use of efficient strategies, including the use of technology, as appropriate, and the leveraging of non project resources.

(c) Quality of project personnel (20 points)

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factor:

(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel.

(d) Quality of the management plan (10 points)

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks; and

(ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed project.

(e) Adequacy of resources (10 points)

(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project.

(2) In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the lead applicant organization;

(ii) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project; and

(iii) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the number of persons to be served and to the anticipated results and benefits;

(f) Quality of project evaluation (20 points)

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project;

(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and qualitative data to the extent possible; and

(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes.