Grading

criteria

Excellent

Competent  

Developing

Weak

Logic

Model and

Objectives

5pts 

A clear and concise logic model that clearly identifies all components of the program theory/work plan

(4.5-5)

A sufficient logic model is provided identifying program components,

needs improvement for

clarity (4)

A logic model is offered but is lacking in clarity in some way  (3.5)

An insufficient or no logic model is provided (0.5-3)

Timeline and Budget

5pts 

Budget is thorough and reasonable, within RFP parameters, and clearly accounts for all activities. (4.5-5)

Budget is reasonable and within RFP parameters but needs some improvement to be complete (4)

Budget is lacking in specificity and unclear as to whether it accounts for

all necessary program activities (3.5) 

Budget is unclear or insufficient, falls out of RFP parameters, or is missing too many components (0.5-3)

Process evaluation

5pts

Measures are specific, measurable, and directly tied to the program theory. The process evaluation plan is complete and thoroughly considered.

(4.5-5)

Measures are reasonably tied to the program theory. The process evaluation plan is solid but needs some improvements to be fully complete. (4)

Measures are proposed but do not clearly track with the program theory or need revision in order to be informative (3.5)

The process evaluation plan is insufficient for the purpose, or the measures chosen are not relevant according to the program theory. (0.5-3)

Effects evaluation

5pts

Measures are specific, measurable, and directly tied to the change theory. The effects evaluation plan is complete and thoroughly considered. (4.5-5)

Measures are reasonably tied to the change theory. The effects evaluation plan is solid but needs some improvements to be

fully complete. (4)

Measures are proposed but do not clearly track with the change theory or need revision in order to be informative (3.5)

The effects evaluation plan is insufficient for the purpose, or the measures chosen are not relevant according to the change theory. (0.5-3)

Academic writing quality and

APA

5pts 

Excellent academic writing quality. Concise scholarly tone, well organized, uses appropriate vocabulary and standard English. Clear, logical, and coherent flow.

Strong skill, proper APA.

(4.5-5)

Good writing quality. Professional tone, well organized and rarely strays from appropriate vocabulary or standard English. Clear and logical flow. (4)

Acceptable writing quality. Communicates ideas, but lacks professional or academic tone.

Organization, clarity, and flow need improvement. Strays from standard English and/or writing quality interferes with comprehension. (3.5)

Inadequate writing quality. Inappropriately casual, not organized clearly or lacks clarity..

Strays from standard English. The writing quality is in the way of understanding the argument. (0.5-3)

Peer Review

5pts

 High quality, specific, and critical feedback offered that addresses all areas of the paper (4.5-5)

Sufficient feedback offered that addresses the paper but may focus more on positive than constructive critique (4)

Incomplete or inactionable feedback provided, or feedback does not indicate comprehension of the paper (3.5)

Peer review is inadequate or missing entirely (0.5-3)

Total points earned (out of 30)

Late adjustment (-10% or 3pts  for each day late unless other arrangements were made) 

Final grade

A: 90-100% (27-30 points) / B: 80-89% (24-26 points) / C: 70-79% (21-23 points) / BC below 70% (20.5 points or below)