Proposals will be scored by peer reviewers on five criteria.
The maximum number of points for each criterion is shown.
(1) Significance of the collection (35 points). Will
the materials be useful to users throughout the state? Does this project
focus on materials about Texas? Will the project provide an "advancement
of knowledge," rather than cleaning up general backlogs?
(2) Project Design (25 points). Is the project well
defined? Will access to the collection be sustainable beyond the grant
period? Does the project design reference commonly accepted standards
and practices?
(3) Availability (20 points). How will access to the
collection be provided? Will bibliographic records be available through
OCLC or the Internet? Will materials themselves be available through
an Internet connection, through interlibrary loan, through reciprocal
borrowing, or only on-site use? Will common interoperability standards
be used?
(4) Cost Effectiveness (15 points). How appropriate
are the chosen hardware, software, staffing, and service providers
for the project, given the cost of the project? Is the budget realistic?
Does the project proposal make effective use of the grant funds?
(5) Evaluation (5 points). How well has the applicant
designed and described the methodology to evaluate the project and
estimate the level of usage? Is the evaluation methodology appropriate
and effective?
|