"Development and strengthening of SEE NGOs REReP 2 5 NGO Cooperative Environmental Projects Scoring Sheet Instructions for Full Proposal"
Development and strengthening of SEE NGOs (REReP 2.5) NGO Cooperative Environmental Projects Scoring Sheet Instructions for Full Proposal Cooperative Grants GTZ Grants Evaluation Process General Points The attached Scoring Sheet is the document from which the Grants staff will calculate the ranking of a project proposal. The experts are asked to study the sheet and the following instructions carefully before starting the evaluation. The filled in and signed scoring sheets are to be sent back to the Grants staff. They are handled confidentially and kept in the department’s documentation. At the evaluation meeting, reviewers may be asked to explain their scores for various projects, especially ones within their areas of expertise. To prepare for this, we ask reviewers to write a brief statement concerning their opinion about each project under <Written Comments>. We hope you will be able to choose the most outstanding project within your topic of expertise and provide some written explanation about why you chose this one. Please organize your comments so that it is easy for you to share them during the discussion and clear for us. Before the evaluation, the reviewer must become familiar with the Call for Tender and Full Proposal Guidelines. Please study the attached copies of these documents carefully. The proposals should be evaluated according to the listed criteria in the guidelines, as well as on the requirements and limitations for project proposals listed in the guidelines. Scoring rates: Use the grading scale as follows: 0 - not acceptable 1 - poor/weak 2 - fair/average 3 - good 4 - excellent Important Note: The Projects are expected to contribute to a sustainable social development of the SEE Region. Further more the Through the supported projects NGOs are expected to contribute to the reconstruction process of the environmen in the SEE Region therefore the projects should identify and develop liknks with the other REReP Projects which are going on in the Region. Experts should keep these in mind during the proposal evaluation process. T: GTZ Grants/ Evaluation/scoring sheet instructions 1 July 9, 2002 A clear action plan (3a), clear and appropriate budget allocation (3b) are of great importance in judging the credibility and feasibility of the whole project. Therefore, if your score is zero for any of these criteria, the total score must be zero, and the proposal rejected. Please reserve zeros for very extreme situations! NGOs are encouraged to find Co funding for this projects. Co funding will be an added value to the quality of the proposal since this fact shoes that other donors have put some trust on this project or NGO. Co-funding should be proved by showing the other donnor’s commitment. What and how to deal with the form: First complete the boxes with information about the project (proposal number), country and amount requested. Chose the environmental topic or add a new one in the table. After giving your scores, please enter the total in the “Total” space, and then calculate the average (add up the scores and divide by the number of criteria you scored). Please show the average up to two digits (e.g. 3,36), and write this figure in the space for “Average". If you left any criteria blank because you have no knowledge on which to judge that specific criteria, do not count that as a zero, rather simply do not include that criteria as one that you scored. Once you have calculated your average score for a project, please complete the comment area and send the scoring sheet back to the REC. You’ll be asked to sign them during the meeting in Szentendre and leave them with the REC grants staff. ________________________________________________________________________________ Explanation of the evaluation criteria: 1. The project content 1. a. Demonstrates that the problem is clearly identified In this point the identification of the main problem addressed in the proposal is clarified. The identified environmental problem may be approached in different ways through the goals and objectives. The goals should be in accordance with "currently accepted environmental thinking" and address clearly the problem/s identified. There should be thorough justification of the chosen goals, preferably mentioning the alternative solutions (if any are known), and the reasons for choosing the presented option. The objectives should be achievable through the planned actions, taking into consideration the actual geographical, historical or social constraints in the given area. 1.b. Proposed solution demonstrates a regional environmental impact This criteria measures at what extend are the environment, the target groups and the SEE Region benefiting from the results of the project. Is the impact teangible and measurable? Priority is given to projects, which trigger further actions, or start some self-perpetuating process, or have a long term, sustainable effect. Under this point the appropriateness of the solution to the stated problem area is to be judged. The project was chosen to receive a small start up money because the concept paper describing it was judged to have region wide or transboundary impact. At this stage the question is whether the the full proposal prove this. 1.c. The method/ approach used is effective and ensures measurable results with clear indicators (quantitative/ qualitative). This criteria checks the effectiveness of the resourses used to achive the expected outcomes. Further more the proposal should describe the appropriate and objective measure of the progress and/or success of the project. Concrete, well defined indocators should be established, and partners should show a commitment to reach and report them qualtitatively and qualitatively. 1.d. Provides demonstrated follow up actions. The expected follow-up actions and positive consequences are very important points in evaluating the project proposal and ensuring the success of the project The NGOs must clearly explain some follow up activities which will take plase after the project is finished. T: GTZ Grants/ Evaluation/scoring sheet instructions 2 July 9, 2002 2. Cooperation/ Stakeholder involvement 2.a Proves that Regional Cooperation is feasible Proves/shows that cooperation is the best way to solve this environmental problem, rather than simply carrying out national projects. Since the Call is offered to NGO projects which address region wide environmental isues, this criteria should judge at what extend is explained by the NGOs that this environmental problem is best and the most feasible way addressed through cooperative effiorts of the NGOs from different countries. 2.b. Justifies the stakeholder involvement Although the REC only supports registered, non-governmental, non-profit organisations (NGOs) we are in favour of cooperation with other sectors of society, such as industry, local and central governments, academic institutions, private entrepreneurs, etc. These can participate in the projects as cooperative partners, co- sponsors, contracted workers, etc. The NGO applying for the grants must be the main beneficiary, but the project should enhance the mutual understanding and cooperation amongst the sectors, thereby strengthening the NGOs' role in civil society. The NGO outreach work and the community involvement should be considered at this point as well. 2.c. Justifies the involvement of the NGOs from CEE or beyond-CEE (if applicable!) These criteria should be scored only for the proposals, which involve CEE NGO partners. The NGOs should clearly define the CEE NGO role in the project and explain realistically the need of CEE or beyond contribution or expertise for the successful implementation of the project. The Expert involvement should be very well justified, the CV of the expert should be provided and their role in the project should be well defined. This contribution will be covered by the project and can be included in the budget of the SEE NGOs under consultancy. The type of expertise might be in a form of: - External expert; - Training on specific issues; - Exchange of experience (field trips in other countries for learning purposes) 3. Proposal quality The following criteria are intended to evaluate the proposal from the technical side. We must have a clear picture of the whole activity to be able to check the progress of the project and give assistance if necessary. 3.a. Demonstrates that the draft action plan is clear and feasible Action plan clearly describes actions to be taken by each partner individually and together and benefits of the cooperative efforts. The action plan must explain who will take what actions, and why. If one partner had much more responsibility than others for certain tasks, the proposal should justify the inequity. The proposal should articulate which actions will be taken together, and why it is important that they be done co-operatively. The action plan should describe the planned project step by step, indicating the important milestones, deadlines, dates of expected products, the people acting in respective phases of the projects, their jobs and roles in the project, etc. The action plan should be detailed, and appropriate for achieving the goals and tasks specified Note: If the action plan is not clear or is not appropriate for the goals, the total score should be zero, and the proposal rejected. 3.b. Justifies that the budget is cost-effective for the entire project and per partner The budget plan must be presented in the standard form published in the Guidelines. The budget justification should clarify all expected expenditures. It should be broken down according to the time schedule of the action plan, the respective budget items and by partners. It must be clear when the actual expenditure will be made and for what purpose. The cost effectiveness of the planned budget must be judged very carefully. The average price levels and average standards of a given country, the possible options (e.g. cheaper equipment options, etc.) should be considered. Over budgeting will result in rejection of the proposal. T: GTZ Grants/ Evaluation/scoring sheet instructions 3 July 9, 2002 The budget must ensure the successful implementation of the project. The expected inflation rate, etc. should be taken into consideration. The REC is not in the position to allocate additional support; the project must be completed within the awarded budget. A budget estimation that is too low may jeopardise the program. In general, a healthy balance between the budget lines is desirable. High proportion of salaries, consultant fees, or travelling costs, for example, needs sound justification. However, judgement on the budget structure is strongly dependant on the character of the project. Note: Unsatisfactory budget plan, ineffective cost allocation, or unrealistic budget estimation will lead to rejection of the proposal. 3.c. Strikes a balance between capacity-building and output-oriented activities Projects which deal with institutional strengthening/ capacity building/ developing strategic planning are encouraged although the project should make some balance between capacity building activities and output oriented activities. 4. NGO assessment 4.a. Ensures the capability of the involved NGOs to implement the project Capability of the NGOs to achieve goals and cooperate with partners (background of people involved, experience of NGOs, application complete, properly submitted, etc.) REC must have as much assurance as possible that the project will succeed, so the project must be evaluated on the personal/organisational capacity of the applicants. The capability can be judged by the CVs (resumes) of the project manager, participants and cooperative partners, the past experiences and activities of the organisation, the financial health of the organization, and the professional preparation of the project proposal. Professional knowledge and experience, as well as managerial skills and organisational features of the NGO should be seriously considered. 4.b. Explains the junior partner’s role and benefits (if applicable!) The call encourages the involvement of the NGOs with no big experience in project management to be part of it. This cooperation will assist the junior partners to learn from the more developed NGOs and enable them to contribute to different regional processes. The role of the Junior NGO Partners should be clearly defined and the way they will benefit from this project should be explained. T: GTZ Grants/ Evaluation/scoring sheet instructions 4 July 9, 2002