Stage 4 Planning Grant Evaluation Rubric

Proposed School Name:Proposal Reviewer:Date Reviewed:

Section / Incomplete or Insufficient (0) / Partially Meets Expectations (1) / Fully Meets Expectations (2) / Score
Budget and Finance / The primary revenue and expenses assumptions are not clear or reasonable, and alignment with the mission, goals and academic program is not clear. The school has not requested money from other sources. The school has weak contingency plans in the case that there are revenue shortfalls or expense overages. The plan for budget development is not clear. Financial policies and procedures are incomplete.None, or only some, of the questions in this section were answered and with a low level of specificity. / Most of the primary revenue and expenses assumptions are clear and reasonable, and reflect some alignment with the mission, goals and academic program. The school has requested money from other sources, but hasn’t yet received any other funding. The school has some contingency plans in the case that there are revenue shortfalls or expense overages, but these are not substantive or realistic. The school has a plan for budget development but the delineations between board and administrative responsibilities are not clear. Some financial policies and procedures are in place, but they are not complete. All of the questions in this section were answered but with varying degrees of specificity. / The primary revenue and expenses assumptions are clear and reasonable, and reflect alignment with the mission, goals and academic program. The school has successfully raised money from other sources. The school has solid contingency plans in the case that there are revenue shortfalls or expense overages. The school plan for budget development involves an appropriate balance of roles between the board and administration. The financial policies and procedures reflect a strong understanding of healthy fiscal management, including separation of duties, internal controls, etc. All questions in this section were answered with a high level of specificity.
Budget Documents / It is hard to assess the assumptions in the attached budget and the rationale behind most of the numbers is not clear. It is difficult to determine whether the budget is aligned with the mission, goals, and academic program. Many budget assumptions do not accurately reflects the needs of a startup school. The budget setup does not align with the CDE chart of accounts, nor does it reflect an understanding of school finance. Many revenue and expense estimations are not conservative enough. / It is easy to assess some assumptions in the attached budget, but rationale behind some of the numbers is not clear. The budget is somewhat aligned with the mission, goals, and academic program. Some budget assumptions do not accurately reflect the needs of a startup school. The budget setup generally aligns with the CDE chart of accounts and reflects an understanding of school finance. Some revenue and expense estimations are not conservative enough. / The attached budget is assumption-based so it is easy to understand the rationale behind the numbers. The budget is aligned with the mission, goals, and academic program, and accurately reflects the needs of a startup school. The budget setup aligns with the CDE chart of accounts and reflects an understanding of school finance. Estimations of revenue and expenses are appropriately conservative.
Enrollment Information / The founding team has made very little effort in the way of community outreach in order to make the community aware of the school or there has been no focus on reaching diverse student populations. The proposal includes some plans for future efforts, but they are not specific. The school has Intent to Enroll forms from less 35% of the projected 1st year enrollment.None, or only some, of the questions in this section were answered and with a low level of specificity. / The founding team has made some outreach efforts to make the community aware of the school, including a strong focus on reaching diverse student populations. The school has already conducted one meeting or attended one outreach events. The proposal includes concrete plans for future efforts, including at least two upcoming meetings or events. The school has Intent to Enroll forms from at least 35% of the projected 1st year enrollment.All of the questions in this section were answered but with varying degrees of specificity. / The founding team has already conducted significant outreach efforts to make the community aware of the school, including a strong focus on reaching diverse student populations. The school has already conducted three meetings or attended three outreach events. The proposal includes concrete plans for future efforts, including at least two upcoming meetings or events. The school has Intent to Enroll forms from at least 35% of the projected 1st year enrollment.All questions in this section were answered with a high level of specificity.
Planning Grant Goals / The identified goals do not directly support the development of a strong school design and charter application. / The founders have identified goals that directly support the development of a strong school design and charter application, but the goals are not SMART and/or they are not short-term goals. / The founders have identified short-term (3 month) SMART goals that directly support the development of a strong school design and charter application.
Planning Grant Budget / The planning grant budget does not align with the goals identified in the previous section. It includes unallowable expenses and/or estimated costs are unreasonable. / The planning grant budget partially aligns with the goals identified in the previous section. It includes allowable expenses and estimated costs are reasonable and broken down for line-items over $500. / The planning grant budget aligns with the goals identified in the previous section. It includes allowable expenses and estimated costs are reasonable and broken down for line-items over $500.
Report from Stage 3 Planning Grant / The founding group submitted a final report on the previous planning grant received, but it was neither comprehensive nor timely. / The founding group submitted a final report on the previous planning grant received, but it was either not comprehensive or it was late. / The founding group submitted a comprehensive and timely final report on the previous planning grant received.
Overall Professionalism and Cohesiveness / The planning grant does not adequately address grant requirements; attachments are missing or incomplete; there are considerable spelling and/or grammatical errors; the application lacks overall cohesiveness. / The planning grant partially addresses the grant requirements; attachments are included but not always complete; there are some spelling and/or grammatical errors; the application is partially cohesive. / The planning grant addresses the grant requirements; all attachments are included and complete; there are no spelling and/or grammatical errors; the application is cohesive.
TOTAL SCORE
TOTAL POSSIBLE
(Only 12 points are possible if a school did not receive a
Stage 2 or 3 Planning Grant.) / 14
PERCENTAGE
(Grant proposal must receive 80% or higher to be funded.) / %

1