Please Save this Booklet to Separate
Drive before beginning!
Grant Review Panel Rating Booklet
Save As
Print
2013-14
Funding Fiscal Yr:
Technical Assistance Provider-Centers of Excellence for Labor Market Research (CoE) –
Competitive Request for Applications
Division of Workforce and Economic Development
RFA Number:
13-305-004a
Panel Number:
03
Total Possible Score:
Application District:
Panelist Number:
Total Points Awarded:
100
0
Continue to Page 2 of Booklet
SCORE
Project Management Plan Narrative (20 points possible)
0
0
0
0
Reporting Requirements(5 points possible)
0
Overall Feasibility of the Project (15 points possible)
0
0
Response to Objectives (20 Points possible)
Annual Workplan (30 points possible)
Budget Worksheets (10 points possible)
Total Points (Out of 100 points possible)
Note: A score of at least 75 is required for an award
Once you have completed your panelist review and ratings:
Have the ratings for each section been automatically entered in the sections above?
Have the “Total Points” been automatically entered?
Have you entered the District name for the application that you just reviewed?
Did you remember to enter your assigned Panelist Number located in the
information email that you received?
Once you are satisfied that the rating booklet has been complete, please submit
using the button below.
You will then receive a confirmation that your booklet has been received.
Submit Rating Sheet Here
Reviewer No.
RFA#
13-305-002a
Page |2
1. Reponses to Objectives
MAXIMUM POINTS - 20
This section should at a minimum address the following required objectives. Does this section:
1. Identify regional and sectoral labor market demand signals, community colleges training capacity
information, and relative gaps? In collaboration with the network of CoEs, network lead
representatives; Statewide Sector and Deputy Sector Navigators; Regional Consortia Chairs; CCCCO;
community colleges; Employment Development Departments Labor Market information Division; the
California Workforce Investment Board and local WIBs, employers, and other workforce and labor
market entities.
2. Engage in local, regional, and/or statewide workforce discussions on the action planning to close
the gap?
3. Evolve the usefulness, development, and refinement of the statewide LaunchBoard as it expands to
include labor market information?
4. Provide consultation and technical assistance to community colleges or districts on the use of labor
market tools and vendors?
5. Maintain continuous accurate procedures on storage and usage of data sources and collaterals of
value to community colleges, districts, and CCCCO?
Does this section include how the lead representative for the CoE network will address each of the
following applicable objectives?
1. Build a decentralized team known for quality of service and relevancy around data. (Such as
aligning the goals, mission, and direction of a geographically dispersed group of independent
research professionals.)
2. Facilitate the alignment of the CoE Network, along the Doing what Matters for Jobs and the
Economy framework.
3. Advise the CCCCO on strategies to strengthen the performance of the CoE network as a provider of
technical assistance to the system?
4. Represent the collective CoE network at statewide discussions.
Did this section include additional features such as:
5. Describing proposed methodologies and solutions that will address the identified objectives.
6. Including descriptions of design and delivery systems, organizational structures, collaborative
structures should be included as part of the response.
7. Responding to legislature’s requirements in technical assistance and logistical support did they
provide a concrete enumeration of the ways the project will collaborate with CCCCO to support
career pathways into priority and emergent sectors important to regions?
8. Did they describe how the project will support industry sector strategies, regional economic
development, common metrics and accountability measures?
9. Did they propose an alignment with statewide LaunchBoard initiative, and the adoption of effective
workforce and economic development practices?
POINTS AWARDED:
Exceptional: 20
Above Average: 19-16
Average: 15
0
Below Average: 14-0
Continue to Page 3 of Booklet
Panelist No.
RFA#
Page |3
Panelist comments on stated need:
Please describe one strength substantiating Section 1:
Please describe one weakness of Section 1:
Continue to Page 4 of Booklet
Panelist No.
R F A # 13-305-004a
Page |4
2. Annual Workplan
MAXIMUM POINTS - 30
Each objective should be numbered, and begin on a new workplan form, and include corresponding activities,
timelines, responsible person(s), measurable outcomes and metric(s).
The objectives described in the workplan should be stated in measurable terms and at a minimum address all the
objectives identified in the specification although additional objectives may be added.
Objectives outlined in the workplan include:
1. Identify regional and sectoral labor market demand signals, community colleges training capacity
information, and relative gaps. In collaboration with the network of CoEs, network lead
representatives; Statewide Sector and Deputy Sector Navigators; Regional Consortia Chairs; CCCCO;
community colleges; Employment Development Departments Labor Market information Division; the
California Workforce Investment Board and local WIBs, employers, and other workforce and labor
market entities.
2. Engage in local, regional, and/or statewide workforce discussions on the action planning to close
the gap.
3. Evolve the usefulness, development, and refinement of the statewide LaunchBoard as it expands
to include labor market information
4. Provide consultation and technical assistance to community colleges or districts on the use of
labor market tools and vendors
5. Maintain continuous accurate procedures on storage and usage of data sources and collaterals of
value to community colleges, districts, and CCCCO
Objectives for lead representative for the CoE network must address each of the following:
1. Build a decentralized team known for quality of service and relevancy around data. (Such as
aligning the goals, mission, and direction of a geographically dispersed group of independent
research professionals.)
2. Facilitate the alignment of the CoE Network, along the Doing what Matters for Jobs and the
Economy framework.
3. Advise the CCCCO on strategies to strengthen the performance of the CoE network as a provider of
technical assistance to the system?
4. Represent the collective CoE network at statewide discussions.
Do the other required elements of the workplan accomplish the following:
1. Outline the major activities that will be required to meet the objectives and student success
outcomes. (Refer to Appendix C “Guidelines, Definitions, and allowable Expenditures” for guidance
on EWD Program specific limit.)
a. Does each major activity and task described in the workplan activities section clearly outline
what will be implemented to accomplish each of the projects objectives?
2. Specify timelines that determine starting and ending month of each activity? Are these realistic? (It
is not acceptable to make all activities yearlong [7/1/13-6/30/14]or to state “ongoing.”)
3. Responsible Persons. Have they identified by position, individual(s) responsible for completing
activities?
Continue to Page 4 of Booklet
Reviewer No.

RFA#
13-305-004a
Page |5
4.
The Project Director’s time does not exceed 100 percent between this and any other Chancellor’s Office
–issued grant or community college position.
5.
6.
Measurable outcomes clearly link objectives and activities in qualitative and quantitative terms.
If applicable, connections are described between the Chancellor’s Office-provided common
metrics and accountability measures, Student Momentum Points and/or Leading Indicators of
Curriculum Alignment to Labor Market Needs.
Note: Given that this is a Technical Assistance Provider RFA, each CoE will also be subject to the Quality
of Service Measures, using the evaluation tool that will be provided by the CCCCO.
7. Identify which of the CCCCO-provided Common Metrics and Accountability Measure(s) these
activities affect (see Appendix D) including Student Momentum Points and/or Leading Indicators of
Curriculum Alignment to Labor Market Needs, and place the corresponding number(s) in the
Metric” column.
POINTS AWARDED:
0
Exceptional: 30 Above Average: 29-26 Average: 25 Below Average: 24 - 0
Panelist Comments on Elements of Annual Workplan:
Please describe one strength noted in this Workplan Section 3:
Please describe one weakness within Workplan Section 3:
Continue to Page 6 of Booklet
Reviewer No.
RFA#
13-305-004a
Page |6
3. Budget Worksheets
MAXIMUM POINTS - 10
Note: Technical errors in the budget can be changed if the project is recommended for funding, as long as the
request does not exceed the maximum amount allowable.
Panelists, please refer to Appendix C - Guidelines, Definitions and Allowable Expenditures
The purpose of the Budget is to indicate whether the project is well planned and reasonable in scope.
1. Has the submitted application budget achieved that goal?
2. Has the Application Budget Detail Sheet been completed according to Guidelines in Appendix C?
3. Two application budget detail sheets are required within the application.
Budget Detail Sheets list the cost breakdown of each budget classification amount requested. It is
expected that this breakdown will be highly detailed in order for grant monitors to determine that all
expenditures are allowable.
4. The first detail sheet contains the cost breakdown of the grant award.
5. The second application budget detail sheet contains the cost detail of the match.
6. Do the Budget Detail Sheets adequately detail and correlate to the proposed project objectives and
Object of Expenditures Categories on the Application Budget Summary?
7. Were the funding request column totals from each of the two detail sheets placed into the
corresponding categories on the budget summary sheet? One for allocations and one for match?
8. Was the Application Budget Summary signed by the Sector Navigator/Responsible Administrator and
the District Chief Business Officer/Designee?
9. Do the indirect administrative costs (overhead) for the project stay within the four percent (4 %) of
the total direct costs and not exceed that amount?
10. The CoEs will set aside and pool no less than 6 percent of the face value of each of these seven
grants toward commonly-used advanced tools and licenses as well as logistical support deemed
most important to deliver on this function.
Upon award, the CoEs will collectively determine one lead representative for the entire CoE for Labor
Market Research network. This person will participate in the relevant statewide leadership activities
and serve as primary liaison for this technical assistance provider function to the system. Each of the
seven CoE grantees will set aside 2 percent of the face value of their award as a stipend for this lead
representative role.



POINTS AWARDED:
Exceptional: 10
Above Average: 9-8
Average: 7
0
Below Average: 6-0
Panelist Comments regarding the submitted Budget Worksheets
Please describe one strength within Section 3:
Please describe one weakness within Section 3:
Continue to Page 7 of Booklet
Reviewer No.
RFA#
13-305-004a
Page |7
4. Project Management Plan Narrative
MAXIMUM POINTS - 20
At a minimum, a 6-page narrative, an organizational Chart, a resume for key talent, and references are
required.

Does the project management plan narrative:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Describe the responsibilities and the amount of time the COEs Project director will be devoting to
the project activities?
Include an organizational chart for operating the project
Provide the Project Director’s Resume
Provide three references attesting to the Project Director’s productivity in labor market research and
decision support related to workforce and economic development.
Does a description of the Project Director’s professional experience include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.


Data collection/analysis/reporting
Sector or occupationally-specific industry scans
Educational supply/demand analysis
Convening/facilitating/project-managing communities of data to provide visibility on training and
pathway needs.
Experience with related data sources and data analysis tools and metholdologies.
Evaluation, recommendation, adoption, and deployment of new data related tools and methodologies.
Past successes in providing and consulting on workforce-related data to inform decision making, as well
as achieve a common set of goals based on data.
NOTE: Fee-for-service custom research is outside the scope of what is funded through this grant, though
CoEs are not precluded from doing so as long as grant goals are met.
Project Director as lead representative role which could distinguish the application
1.
2.
Does the Project Director have interest in the lead representative role? If so:
Does the person’s professional experience described include building a decentralized team known
for quality of service and relevancy around data, such as aligning the goals, mission, and direction of
a geographically disperse group of independent research professionals?
Description of depth and breadth of the Project Director’s professional network across educational entities
within the region and or state.
1. Are prior collaborations with the workforce system and an outreach plan to the following entities
included?
a. Regional community college CTE/EWD deans and institutional researchers
b. Regional consortia chairs
c. Sector Navigators and Deputy Sector Navigators
d. Regional entities/coordinators of economic and workforce development, employment, and wage
data
e. Chancellor’s Office staff
f. Industry specific tools vendors
Practices and Methodologies
1. A description is included of practices and methodologies the Project Director will employ to
provide critical data to the regional and/or statewide workforce development stakeholders.
POINTS AWARDED:
Exceptional: 20
Above Average: 19-16
Average: 15
0
Below Average: 14-0
Continue to Page 8 of Booklet
Reviewer No.
RFA#
13-305-004a
Page |8
Panelist Comments on Project Management Plan Narrative:
Please describe one strength substantiating Section 4:
Please describe one weakness regarding Section 4:
Continue to Page 9 of Booklet
Reviewer No.
RFA#
13-305-004a
Page |9
5. Reporting Requirements
MAXIMUM POINTS - 5
Each objective in the workplan should result in measurable outcomes that clearly link to the objectives and
activities.
1. Have the outcomes in the workplan been described in qualitative and quantitative terms?
2. Has this application addressed any performance outcomes unique to this project that will result
from the implementation of the objectives and activities listed in the annual workplan?
Was this project successful in:
1. Discussing projects progress against the identified outcomes form Appendix D: Common Metrics
and Accountability Measures?
2. Reporting on where gaps exist between labor market demand and training response – by
occupational types within regions and sector?
3. Reporting on the development, usefulness and refinement of the labor market information
provided in the statewide LaunchBoard across regions and sectors?
POINTS AWARDED:
0
Exceptional: 5 Above Average: 4 Average: 3 Below Average: 0-2
Panelist Comments on the Dissemination Plan:
Please describe one strength substantiating Section 5:
Please describe one weakness regarding Section 5:
Continue to Page 10 of Booklet
Reviewer No.
RFA#
13-305-004a
P a g e | 10
6. Overall Feasibility of the Project
MAXIMUM POINTS - 15
Overall Feasibility of the Project Maximum Points 15
This is not a category to be addressed separately in the application, but rather is an area rated on the
scoring sheet. The reviewers have an opportunity to consider whether the project is realistically
capable of attaining the required and proposed outcomes. Reviewers will consider the entire
application in the context of the RFA Specification to make a final overall appraisal of the project
proposal. The intent is to judge the cohesiveness and viability of the project.
POINTS AWARDED:
0
Exceptional: 15 Above Average: 14-13 Average: 12 Below Average: 11-0
Panelist Comments on Overall Feasibility:
Won’t you please take a moment to review your booklet?
Please make sure that you have entered ratings appropriate for each
section.
Are strengths and weakness comments completed for each section?
Do your comments support each section’s ratings?
Please Return to Front Page of Booklet
To submit this booklet,