| (a) To be eligible for review, each application must
be submitted by the specified deadline with all required components
and all necessary authorization signatures.
(b) Agency staff will review each application for the
following:
(1) legal eligibility of the institution to participate
in a grant program and appropriate authorizing signature;
(2) conformance to the federal and state regulations
pertaining to grants;
(3) inclusion of unallowable costs;
(4) errors in arithmetic or cost calculations;
(5) submission of all required forms;
(6) compliance with submission procedures and deadlines;
and
(7) relevance and appropriateness of the project design
and activities to the purpose of the grant program.
(c) Agency staff will raise issues and questions regarding
the needs, methods, staffing and costs of the applications. Staff
will also raise concerns regarding the relevance and appropriateness
of the project design and activities to the purpose of the grant program.
Staff comments will be sent to the review panel with the applications
for consideration by the panel.
(d) Applicants will be sent a copy of the staff comments
to give applicants an opportunity to respond in writing. Applicants
may not modify the proposal in any way; however, applicants' responses
to staff comments will be distributed to the panel.
(1) Applications with significant errors, omissions,
or eligibility problems will not be rated. Applications in which the
project design and activities are not relevant and appropriate to
the purpose of the grant program will be ineligible.
(2) Agency staff will be available to offer technical
assistance to reviewers.
(e) The agency may use peer review panels to evaluate
applications in competitive grant programs.
(1) Peer reviewers may include professionals, citizens,
community leaders, and agency and library staff to evaluate grant
applications. Peer reviewers must have appropriate training or service
on citizen boards in an oversight capacity and may not evaluate grant
applications in which there is, or is a possible appearance of, a
conflict of interest.
(2) The agency staff will distribute selected applications
to reviewers and will provide written instructions or training for
peer reviewers. Reviewers must complete any training prior to reviewing
applications.
(3) The reviewers will score each application according
to the review criteria and requirements stated in the grant guidelines.
(4) Each evaluation of an application for competitive
grants shall be appropriately documented by the peer reviewer conducting
the evaluation. The documentation shall include the scores assigned
by the peer reviewer. The peer reviewer may also include comments
that may be shared with the applicant.
(f) Applications will be scored using the following
process:
(1) The peer reviewers will review all complete and
eligible grant applications forwarded to them by agency staff and
complete a rating form for each. Each reviewer will evaluate the proposal
in relation to the specific requirements of the criteria and will
assign a value, depending on the points assigned to each criterion.
(2) No reviewer who is associated with an applicant
or who stands to benefit directly from an application will serve on
the review panel for the grant program in which the application is
submitted for that grant cycle. Any reviewer who is associated with
a potential applicant in the respective category must inform the agency
and their organization about a potential conflict of interest. Any
reviewer who feels unable to evaluate a particular application fairly
may choose not to review that application.
(3) Reviewers will consider and assess the strengths
and weaknesses of any proposed project only on the basis of the documents
submitted. Considerations of geographical distribution, demographics,
type of library, or personality will not influence the assessment
of a proposal by the review panel. The panel members must make their
own individual decisions regarding the applications. The panel may
discuss applications, but the panel's recommendations will be compiled
from the individual assessments, not as the result of a collective
decision or vote.
(4) Reviewers may not discuss proposals with any applicant
before the proposals are reviewed. Agency staff is available to provide
technical assistance to reviewers. Agency staff will conduct all negotiations
and communication with the applicants.
(5) Reviewers may recommend setting conditions for
funding a given application or group of applications (e.g., adjusting
the project budget, revising project objectives, modifying the timetable,
amending evaluation methodology, etc.). The recommendation must include
a statement of the reasons for setting such conditions. Reviewers
who are ineligible to evaluate a given proposal will not participate
in the discussion of funding conditions.
(6) Reviewers will submit their evaluation forms to
the agency. In order to be counted, the forms must arrive before the
specified due date.
|
