Teacher Grant Evaluation Rubric
5 – Meets Criteria Fully, 3 – Meets Criteria, 1 – Does Not Meet Criteria
Difficult to understand, uses educational jargon - 1 pt.
Somewhat clear, some questions unanswered - 3 pts.
Clearly written, easily understood by layman, fully self-explanatory, clear connection between why the project is important & how the requested funding would help in executing the project - 5 pts.
# of Students Benefitting
One Classroom or one yr – 1 pt.
Grade Level, cross-curric-ular – 3 pts.
Building Wide, multiple yrs use – 5 pts.
Objectives are clear and measurable
Objectives/goals mentioned and not measurable – 1 pt.
Objectives /goals outlined, but not measurable – 3 pts.
Objectives/goals are clear and measurable – 5 pts.
Objectives are tied to Comprehensive School Improvement Plan/Building Goals
Brief Mention/Not specific – 1 pt.
Good explanation, but not specific – 3 pts.
Specific Building Goal/CSIP objective noted in grant & explanation is clear – 5 pts.
Little evidence of how project will be evaluated - 1 pt.
Some explanation of evaluation, but not specific - 3 pts.
Explanation of planned evaluation techniques clear, includes plan to report back to Foundation - 5 pts.
Above & Beyond
Not a new idea or expansion of current programs - 1 pt.
Somewhat new, innovative - 3 pts.
Unique, problem-solving, enhances education - 5 pts.
Overall cost, no itemization – 1 pt.
Some detail – 3 pts.
Itemized budget provided – 5 pts.