Strategy to Scope of Work Logic Model, Review Committees

1. Strategy to Scope of Work Logic Model, Review Committees Navajo/Apache Regional Partnership Council December 10, 2008 Kate Dobler-Allen, Regional Coordinator 4700 W. White Mountain Blvd; Suite B1 Lakeside, Az 85929 kdallen@azftf.gov www.azftf.gov 928-532-5041

2. Development of the RFGAs • Develop timelines • Develop the Scope of Work from the Funding Plan • Logic Model

3. RFGAs: What are the Statutory Requirements? • RFGA’s must be posted for a minimum of six weeks. • When an RFGA is “on the street” (i.e. posted) all questions about the RFGA must be submitted in writing. • When applicable to all potential applicants, Frequently Asked Questions will be posted on the FTF website. www.azftf.gov

4. Requirements Continued • A pre-application conference is held at least 21 days before the RFGA close date. • If any clarifications of or corrections to the RFGA arise, then a formal written RFGA amendment will be issued and posted to the FTF website. www.azftf.gov

5. Requirements Continued • No late applications shall be accepted. • There are no exceptions. • Late submissions are not fair to those applicants that were received on time and thus an immediate challenge to the process could result www.azftf.gov

6. Requirements Continued • From the time the RFGA is posted until awards are made, the entire RFGA process is confidential. • Everyone involved in the acceptance, review and discussion of grant applications will be required to sign a confidentiality/conflict of interest form. www.azftf.gov

7. Requirements Continued • Grant applications must be reviewed by at least three peers of the applicant or other qualified individuals. • Grant applications are reviewed solely on the evaluation criteria listed in the RFGA . • Review committees will reach a consensus on scores and comments for each application. www.azftf.gov

8. Requirements Continued • An evaluator/reviewer who fails to disclose contact with a representative of an applicant or who fails to provide accurate information on the confidentiality/conflict interest form is subject to a penalty of at least $1,000, but no more than $10,000. • A person who intentionally or knowingly participates in an award of a grant pursuant to a scheme or artifice to avoid the requirements of ARS 41-2701 is guilty of a class 4 felony and is also personally liable for the recovery of all public monies paid, plus 20% of the amount and legal interest from the date of payment and all costs and damage arising out of the violation. www.azftf.gov

9. Final Requirements • After the initial review, further clarification questions may be sent to those applicants who have been deemed susceptible for funding. • Review comments shall be made public no later than thirty days after award. www.azftf.gov

10. Selecting and Training the Reviewers • The Regional Partnership Councils can determine the members of the application review committee. • Remember the conflict of interest and confidentiality element are critical for the review process. www.azftf.gov

11. Selecting the Reviewers • The Review Committee • Generate a list of potential reviewers – more than you may need and if your have Regional Partnership Council members interested they can be on your list. There are “pros & cons” to various ways you may choose to make up your review committee. • Think about the number of potential applications you may receive – this will determine if you need multiple review teams or single review teams. www.azftf.gov

12. Selecting the Reviewers • The Review Committee • Consensus is easier and can happen sooner with less rather than more review committee members (must have at least 3) • Large Number of expected applications (more than 40) • May require multiple review teams • May require multiple meetings to ensure each team meets to reach consensus on their applications • Smaller Number of expected applications (less than 40) • May only require 1 review team; may require 2 days www.azftf.gov

13. Selecting the Reviewers • The Review Committee • If your Regional Partnership Council is having a formal “subcommittee” to review grant applications, then that is subject to Open Meeting Law; however, the review can be discussed in Executive Session (per grant statute). • An RFGA review committee meeting is not subject to Open Meeting Law if only held to review applications and not established as a formal Regional Partnership Council workgroup/subcommittee. www.azftf.gov

14. Training the Reviewers • The Review Committee -Training • Conduct a meeting with your Review Committee members to: • Provide the Reviewers with an overview of the review process • Explain the intent of your Regional Partnership Council RFGA • Provide the Reviewers with a copy of the RFGA • Provide the Reviewers with a scoring “rubric” tool • Provide the Reviewers with score sheets • Provide the Reviewers with copies of applications • Before the Reviewers leave with applications • We must receive a signed copy of the • conflict of interest/confidentiality form www.azftf.gov

15. Recommendations • The review committees make recommendations to the Regional Partnership Councils. • The Regional Partnership Councils accept/modify/deny the recommendations. • Each Regional Partnership Council makes recommendations to the Board • The Board accepts/modifies/denies recommendations. www.azftf.gov

16. A Final Thought Statutory requirements, guidelines and procedures are important and are in place to protect the public as well as First Things First Staff, Regional Partnership Councils and the Board www.azftf.gov