Department of Public Safety
Office of Justice Programs
Crime Victim Services
June, 2016
To gain a variety of perspectives and
experiences that can inform the grant
making process
&
make the granting process transparent, fair,
and as free from influence and bias as
possible.
 Governmental
and community-based
stakeholders
 Advocates
 Subject matter experts
 Community members
Thank you!
Your time and
expertise are
appreciated.
 Learn
more about what makes a strong
proposal
 Better understanding of OJP funded
crime victim services
 Have a voice in the
process
Being a grant reviewer is one
of the best ways to learn how
to write a good proposal!

Read and rate proposals prior to the grant review. Start
early – it may take longer than you anticipate.

Keep proposals and scores confidential – this is not
public information UNTIL grants are awarded.

Thoroughly understand the information requested in
the Request for Proposal (RFP) and assess each
proposal’s strengths and weaknesses.

Report any conflict of interest to OJP and refrain from
scoring proposals in which you have a conflict.

Show up to the review on time, participate, and stay for
the entire review.

Read OJP’s Request for Proposal.

Become familiar with:
• The goals of the RFP
• The requirements of the proposals
• The scoring criteria and point allocations


Read and understand the Application Review
Form.
Make sure to set aside enough time to review each
of your proposals thoroughly. This is NOT a quick
process. Most reviewers spend an hour or more
per proposal.
 Complete
an initial read-through of each
applicant’s proposal but don’t score them
this time.
 Use
this initial read through of the
proposals to get a sense of what the
proposals are about and how they are
organized.
 Re-read
each proposal and begin
scoring.
 Make
sure to record proposal strengths
and weaknesses on the Review Form.
 Try
to provide helpful comments.
 Everyone
scores differently – that’s ok! Just
make sure to be consistent in your scores.
 Only
score a proposal based on the
information provided – don’t assume
anything or add information you may know.
 Score
proposals against the criteria in the
RFP– not against the other proposals.
 No
fractions or decimals – whole number
scores only please.
 Make
sure all information required in the RFP is
contained in the proposal.
 You
can deduct points for a disorganized
proposal but make sure your score is primarily
based on the quality and clarity of the
responses.
 Just
having an answer to each question in the
RFP does not justify a high score.
 Scores
of a perfect 100 should be rare – this
means there were no weaknesses in the
proposal.
 Just
as rare is a score of 0 – this means there are
no strengths in the proposal.
 If
you do feel like a score of 100 or 0 are
warranted, please document your justifications
completely.
 Proposals
should make a strong case for
funding and show compelling need.
 Proposals
should:
 reflect best practices
 demonstrate effective collaboration with
other agencies & criminal justice partners
 effectively address the needs of crime
victims



Submit your scores for each proposal via the
Survey Monkey link provided in your review
packet cover letter.
Declare you have viewed this PowerPoint, and you
have no conflicts of interests with the proposals in
your packet.
Attend the in-person grant review
• Arrive on time & be ready to discuss the proposals.
• Make sure your Rating Sheets are complete and legible.
• Grant reviews usually last 3-4 hours – please plan
according so you can stay till the end.
For more information or questions please
contact the Minnesota Department of
Public Safety, Office of Justice Programs
Chris Anderson
Chris.anderson@state.mn.us
651-201-7302