California Department of EducationRevised 9/30/2015

Nutrition Services DivisionPage 1of 4

California Department of EducationRevised 9/30/2015

Nutrition Services DivisionPage 1of 4

Grant Application Evaluation Criteria

Team Nutrition Smarter Lunchrooms Movement of California

The California Department of EducationNutrition Services Division (NSD) will prescreen all applications to ensure that they contain the required documents and information. If an application does not include all appropriate information, the NSD will consider the application nonresponsive and will eliminate it from further evaluation.

TheNSD will use the following selection criteria to evaluate applications under this competition. The maximum score for all criteria is 200 points. Each criterion has a maximum score as indicated in parentheses.

School Food Authority Capacity (20 points)

Project Director (PD) /
  • Describes qualifications of the PD with an emphasis on grant management experience or relevant experience and skill that will ensure successful grant management

Organizational Capacity, Commitment and Motivation /
  • Describes the agency’s planned financial and administrative oversight for the grant
  • Provides the reasons for applying for the grant, such as any issues that the grant will address; the rationale for selecting the two school sites
  • Includes any additional information, such as the priorities of students, parents, school and cafeteria staff as well as those of the district and community and/or brief summary of any needs assessment or related data that indicates a need for funding

Leadership Team For Each School Site /
  • Includes at minimum, the district Food Service Director (FSD), school site principal, and the cafeteria manager
  • Identifies the PD as one of the members of the leadership team
  • Includes additional members on the leadership team such as community partners or other school staff, such as teachers
  • Addresses effective communication that will exist among the leadership team

Project Summary /
  • Provides a brief and clear overview of the project design for both school sites,such as the project vision or goals, desired outcomes, and a general action plan for both sites

Soundness or Merit of Project Design: (150 points)

The soundness of the project design is based on a total score for both of the school sites selected. Each school site section must identify three required SLM focus areas, which are listed on the SLM Self-assessment Scorecard. You can access the scorecard on the Smarter Lunchrooms Self-assessment Scorecard Web page at Two of these focus areas must relate to choice and the third to school synergy.

Justification /
  • Includes a clear rationale for selecting the focus areas and expected benefits of selecting them, such as any indications of success, if feasible

Goals and Objectives /
  • Aligns with selected SLM focus areas
  • Objectives are specific, measurable, realistic and achievable within the grant period

Nutrition Education Curriculum and Materials /
  • Identifiesappropriate nutrition education curriculum and materials that school site plans to use
  • Includes the use of U.S. Department of Agriculture or Institute of Child Nutrition (formerly National Food Service Management Institute) developed materials
  • Provides sound justification if using grant funds to develop or purchase materials

Nutrition Education Implementation /
  • Describes how implementation with students will occur in at least two grades in each of the selected school sites
  • Aligns the nutrition education with the two SLM focus areas related to choice
  • May include broader reach with students and/or a more comprehensive nutrition education program, such as sequential, standards-based nutrition education curriculum

Staff Training /
  • Describes how all key school site staff will be oriented to the project
  • Addresses how frontline staff will be provided training on the SLM principles and on their roles in the SLM focus areas at their site

Evaluation /
  • Indicates use of the SLM Self-assessment Scorecard and one method of measuring changes in student choice for the focus areas identified
  • Includes other appropriate methods and evaluation methods for SLM focus areas and nutrition education
  • Addresses how the evaluation methods will be used to measure achievement of the goals and objectives

Sustainability (5 points)

Rollout within the school sites and district /
  • Describes proposed expansion of SLM and aligned nutrition education within the selected schools and throughout the district
  • Includes consideration of how to integrate SLM into district local school wellness policies or other strategic plans
  • Includes discussion of plans to apply for recognition awards, such as the HealthierUS School Challenge: Smarter Lunchrooms award

Project Budget Appropriateness and Efficiency (25 points)

Expenditures /
  • Are realistic and allowable uses of funds
  • May include use of in-kind funds

Narrative /
  • Describes how funds will be spent and by whom
  • Shows consistency with SLM focus areas and nutrition education and project objectives and planned activities

Review and Selection Process

Following the initial screening process, the NSD will assemble a panel group to review and determine the technical merits of each application. The panel will evaluate the proposals based on how well they address the required application components. The panel members will recommend applications for consideration for a grant award based on the evaluation scoring.

The NSD reserves the right to award a grant to meet agency priorities, program balance, geographical representation, or project diversity. The NSD reserves the right to use this solicitation and competition to award additional grants in the next fiscal year should additional funds be made available through future appropriations.

Confidentiality

When an application results in an award, it becomes part of the record of NSD transactions, available to the public upon specific request. Information that the NSDdetermines to be of a confidential, privileged, or proprietary nature will be held in confidence to the extent permitted by law. Therefore, any information that the applicant wishes to have considered as confidential, privileged, or proprietary should be clearly marked within the application.

The NSD will not release to the public any application that does not result in an award. Applicants may withdraw their applications at any time prior to the final action therein.