Grant Review Matrix
The Robertson County Economic Development Board’s Experience Robertson County Tourism Grants are awarded based on funds available, quantity of requests received and grant matrix scoring. Total grant requests may exceed allocated funding budget, and proposed projects may not be funded and/or not fully funded. The Robertson County Economic Development Board reviews and scores grant applications based on the priority criteria listed below.
If you have any questions related to the review and scoring process, contact sarah@growinrobertson.com.
un
Criteria |
Scale of 0 to 5, with 0 being unacceptable and 5 being most acceptable |
Score |
|||
| Missing 0 Points | Fair 1-2 Points | Good 3-4 Points | Excellent 5 Points | ||
| Alignment with RCEDB grant program goals (developing Tourism as an economic driver; increasing tourism-related economic impact; promoting the county’s Tourism brand “Experience Robertson County”) | Unclear and/or does not align | Vague and/or offers limited alignment | Clearly defined and offers satisfactory alignment | Clearly defined and highly aligns | |
| Tourism impact (economic impact of drawing non-residents to spend taxable dollars in our county on lodging, dining, shopping, etc.) | Unclear or no impact to tourism development or tourism-related revenue | Limited impact to tourism development or tourism-related revenue | Satisfactory impact to tourism development or tourism-related revenue | High impact to tourism development or tourism-related revenue | |
| Clear plan for assessment and resources available for final report | Unclear or no plan and/or resources for tracking and reporting data | Limited plan with at least one method and/or resource for tracking and reporting data | Satisfactory plan with multiple methods and/or resources for tracking and reporting data | Excellent plan with multiple methods and/or resources for tracking and reporting data | |
| Budget/P&L is clear and accurate | Unclear or not submitted | Vague and/or yields concerns related to sustainability | Clear and reflects satisfactory sustainability | Clear and reflects sustainable growth | |
| Collaboration (involving other city, county and regional partners) | No collaboration | Vague and/or limited collaboration | Clear collaboration at local city and county level | Clear collaboration at local city, county and beyond | |
| If prior grant recipient, the quality of their application submission, reimbursement request and final reporting | Unutilized awarded funds with no status update communication | Incomplete, unclear and/or undocumented submissions | Clear and accurate submissions | Thorough documentation and multiple methods used to communicate impact of funding | |
| Total Score | |||||