FY 2010 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) GRANT PROGRAM Investment Justification Scoring Worksheet State/Local/Tribe Amount Requested No Yes No 0 1 2 3 4 Score0 0 1 2 3 4 Score0 II. Overall (Total of 4 possible points) = The applicant satisfactorily described what will be implemented and accomplished in this Investment = The applicant fully described what will be implemented and accomplished in this Investment = The applicant satisfactorily addressed identified deficiencies and needs within their facility assessment = The applicant fully addressed identified deficiencies and needs within their facility assessment = The applicant partially addressed identified deficiencies and needs within their facility assessment = The applicant did not certify that a facility assessment had been conducted 3. How well did the applicant address identified deficiencies and needs within their facility assessment? = The applicant did not certify that a facility assessment had been conducted = The applicant poorly addressed identified deficiencies and needs within their facility assessment = The applicant partially described what will be implemented and accomplished in this Investment = The applicant did not describe what will be implemented and accomplished in this Investment III. Needs Assessment (Total of 4 possible points) I. Applicant Information (Unscored) 1. Did the applicant provide all of the required information? The applicant did not provide all of the required information 2. How well did the applicant describe, at a high level, what will be implemented and accomplished in this Investment? = The applicant did not describe what will be implemented and accomplished in this Investment = The applicant poorly described what will be implemented and accomplished in this Investment The applicant did provide all of the required information The applicant did not provide all of the required information Investment Name Scoring Legend Did Not Poorly Partially The applicant provided no response Construction or Renovation Investment The FY 2010 EOC Scoring Worksheet below will be used by the State Administrative Agency (SAA) to review and score FY 2010 EOC competitive applications consistent with the guidelines provided in the FY 2010 EOC Investment Justification and Selection Criteria as well as ensure consistency with programmatic requirements. SAAs will receive a separate, Excel-based FY 2010 EOC Scoring Worksheet upon the release of the FY 2010 Emergency Operations Center Grant Program Guidance and Application Kit. Each applicant’s final score along with the SAA’s prioritization will be used to populate the Excel-based FY 2010 EOC Prioritization of Investment Justifications, also provided to SAAs as a separate attachment, which will be used to determine the applicants that will advance to the Federal review process and make funding recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland Security. Satisfactorily Fully The applicant's response is incomplete and does not address all of the required information The applicant's response is complete but minimally addresses all of the required information The applicant's response is complete and moderately addresses all of the required information The applicant's response is complete and fully addresses all of the required information FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2010 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) GRANT PROGRAM INVESTMENT JUSTIFICATION SCORING WORKSHEET FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2010 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) GRANT PROGRAM INVESTMENT JUSTIFICATION SCORING WORKSHEET IV. Investment Impact (Total of 6 possible points) pact (Total of 6 possible points) 4. Did the applicant describe how the Investment will enhance emergency management capabilities? 0 = The applicant did not describe how the Investment will enhance emergency management capabilities 1 = The applicant poorly described how the Investment will enhance emergency management capabilities 2 = The applicant partially described how the Investment will enhance emergency management capabilities 3 = The applicant satisfactorily described how the Investment will enhance emergency management capabilities 4 = The applicant fully described how the Investment will enhance emergency management capabilities Score 0 = The applicant did not describe how the Investment will enhance emergency management capabilities 5. Did the applicant address impact of the Investment on population/risk? 0 = No, the applicant did not address impact of the Investment on population/risk 1 = Yes, the applicant addressed impact of the Investment on population/risk Score 0 = No, the applicant did not address impact of the Investment on population/risk 6. Did the applicant describe how the proposed Investment will be accomplished in a cost effective manner? 0 = No, the applicant did not describe how the proposed Investment will be accomplished in a cost effective manner1 = Yes, the applicant described how the proposed Investment will be accomplished in a cost effective manner Score = No, the applicant did not describe how the proposed Investment will be accomplished in a cost effective manner 0 V. Pre-Existing Planning (Total of 9 possible points) 7. Did the narrative describe any pre-existing planning efforts that have taken place relative to the deficiencies noted in the facility assessment? 0 = No, the narrative did not describe any pre-existing planning efforts1 = Yes, the narrative described pre-existing planning efforts Score 0 = No, the narrative did not describe any pre-existing planning efforts 8. For FY 2010, a comprehensive facility assessment must comprehensively address three priority areas: • Architectural plans developed • Permits are in place • Proposed Investment explanation, including design criteria to address the identified hazards and threats Do the deficiencies mentioned in the facility assessment address all three aforementioned priority areas? 0 = The applicant addressed none of the three facility assessment priority areas1 = The applicant addressed one of the three facility assessment priority areas 2 = The applicant addressed two of the three facility assessment priority areas 3 = The applicant addressed all three of the facility assessment priority areas Score 0 = The applicant addressed none of the three facility assessment priority areas 9. Does the applicant describe how the Facility Assessment and Hazard –Resistance Guidance was utilized as part of the pre-existing planning? 0 = No, the applicant does not describe how the Facility Assessment and Hazard –Resistance Guidance was utilized as part of the pre-existing planning 1 = Yes, the applicant does describe how the Facility Assessment and Hazard –Resistance Guidance was utilized as part of the pre-existing planning Score = No, the applicant does not describe how the Facility Assessment and Hazard –Resistance Guidance was utilized as 0 part of the pre-existing planning FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2010 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) GRANT PROGRAM INVESTMENT JUSTIFICATION SCORING WORKSHEET 0 1 2 3 4 Score0 0 1 Score0 0 1 2 Score0 0 1 Score0 No Yes No 0 1 2 3 4 Score0 VI. Funding Plan (Total of 4 possible points) VII. Funding Sources (Total of 4 possible points) = The applicant did not describe any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment No, a supplemental funding description was not provided (please proceed to question 16) = The applicant satisfactorily described any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant fully described any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment Yes, a supplemental funding description was provided (please proceed to question 15) No, a supplemental funding description was not provided (please proceed to question 16) 15. How well did the applicant describe any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment? = The applicant poorly described any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant partially described any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant did not provide funding requests that are reasonable and justified by direct linkages to activities outlined in the Investment = The applicant provided funding requests that were reasonable and justified by direct linkages to activities outlined in the Investment = The applicant did not describe any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment 13. Did the applicant complete and attach the SF 424C form? = No, the applicant did not complete and attach the SF 424C form = Yes, the applicant completed and attached the SF 424C form = No, the applicant did not complete and attach the SF 424C form 14. Was a supplemental funding description provided (Unscored)? = The applicant did not describe any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = The applicant poorly described any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = The applicant partially described any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = The applicant did not describe any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = The applicant satisfactorily described any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = The applicant fully described any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = No (please proceed to question 13) = The applicant did not provide funding requests that are reasonable and justified by direct linkages to activities outlined in the Investment = The applicant did provide funding requests, but there were no direct linkages to activities outlined in the Investment 11. Did the applicant provide a funding plan? 10. How well did the applicant describe any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment? = No (please proceed to question 13) 12. Did the applicant make funding requests that are reasonable and justified by direct linkages to activities outlined in the Investment? = Yes (please proceed to question 12) 0 1 2 3 4 Score0 0 1 Score0 0 1 2 Score0 0 1 Score0 No Yes No 0 1 2 3 4 Score0 VI. Funding Plan (Total of 4 possible points) VII. Funding Sources (Total of 4 possible points) = The applicant did not describe any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment No, a supplemental funding description was not provided (please proceed to question 16) = The applicant satisfactorily described any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant fully described any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment Yes, a supplemental funding description was provided (please proceed to question 15) No, a supplemental funding description was not provided (please proceed to question 16) 15. How well did the applicant describe any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment? = The applicant poorly described any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant partially described any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant did not provide funding requests that are reasonable and justified by direct linkages to activities outlined in the Investment = The applicant provided funding requests that were reasonable and justified by direct linkages to activities outlined in the Investment = The applicant did not describe any additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment 13. Did the applicant complete and attach the SF 424C form? = No, the applicant did not complete and attach the SF 424C form = Yes, the applicant completed and attached the SF 424C form = No, the applicant did not complete and attach the SF 424C form 14. Was a supplemental funding description provided (Unscored)? = The applicant did not describe any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = The applicant poorly described any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = The applicant partially described any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = The applicant did not describe any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = The applicant satisfactorily described any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = The applicant fully described any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment = No (please proceed to question 13) = The applicant did not provide funding requests that are reasonable and justified by direct linkages to activities outlined in the Investment = The applicant did provide funding requests, but there were no direct linkages to activities outlined in the Investment 11. Did the applicant provide a funding plan? 10. How well did the applicant describe any current activities that have taken place relative to rectifying the deficiencies or needs identified in the assessment? = No (please proceed to question 13) 12. Did the applicant make funding requests that are reasonable and justified by direct linkages to activities outlined in the Investment? = Yes (please proceed to question 12) FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2010 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) GRANT PROGRAM INVESTMENT JUSTIFICATION SCORING WORKSHEET 0 1 2 3 4 Score0 0 1 Score0 0 1 2 3 Score0 0 1 2 Score0 = The response did not describe management team roles and responsibilities, governance structure, and necessary subject matter expertise required to fulfill both objectives IX. Project Management (Total of 2 possible points) VIII. Investment Challenges (Total of 4 possible points) = The response did not describe management team roles and responsibilities, governance structure, and necessary subject matter expertise required to fulfill both objectives = The response described the management team roles and responsibilities governance structure, and subject matter expertise required to fulfill one of the two objectives (management OR implementation) = The response described the management team roles and responsibilities, governance structure, and subject matter expertise required to fulfill both objectives (management AND implementation) = The applicant's response did not fulfill any of the three aforementioned areas of emphasis = The applicant's response fulfilled one of the three aforementioned areas of emphasis = The applicant's response did not fulfill any of the three aforementioned areas of emphasis = The applicant's response fulfilled all three aforementioned areas of emphasis = The applicant's response fulfilled two of the three aforementioned areas of emphasis 19. The applicant should describe, at a high-level, the roles and responsibilities of the management team, governance structures, and subject matter expertise required to both manage AND implement the Investment. Did the response fulfill both of these objectives (management AND implementation)? 18. In addressing Investment challenges, applicants should fulfill the following three objectives: • List and describe the necessary steps and stages that will be required for successful implementation of the Investment • Identify areas of possible concern or potential pitfalls in terms of Investment implementation • Explain why those areas present the greatest challenge to a successful Investment implementation = The applicant provided a satisfactory rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant provided an excellent rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant did not provide a rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment 17. Were potential Investment challenges identified with an indication of a probability of occurrence? Did the applicant's response fulfill all three objectives? 16. Was a rationale provided as to why the requested FY 2010 EOC Grant Program funding is sufficient for the implementation and sustainment of the Investment? = The applicant did not provide a rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant provided a poor rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = No, Investment challenges were not identified with an indication of probability of occurrence = Yes, Investment challenges were identified with an indication of a probability of occurrence = The applicant provided a fair rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = No, Investment challenges were not identified with an indication of probability of occurrence 0 1 2 3 4 Score0 0 1 Score0 0 1 2 3 Score0 0 1 2 Score0 = The response did not describe management team roles and responsibilities, governance structure, and necessary subject matter expertise required to fulfill both objectives IX. Project Management (Total of 2 possible points) VIII. Investment Challenges (Total of 4 possible points) = The response did not describe management team roles and responsibilities, governance structure, and necessary subject matter expertise required to fulfill both objectives = The response described the management team roles and responsibilities governance structure, and subject matter expertise required to fulfill one of the two objectives (management OR implementation) = The response described the management team roles and responsibilities, governance structure, and subject matter expertise required to fulfill both objectives (management AND implementation) = The applicant's response did not fulfill any of the three aforementioned areas of emphasis = The applicant's response fulfilled one of the three aforementioned areas of emphasis = The applicant's response did not fulfill any of the three aforementioned areas of emphasis = The applicant's response fulfilled all three aforementioned areas of emphasis = The applicant's response fulfilled two of the three aforementioned areas of emphasis 19. The applicant should describe, at a high-level, the roles and responsibilities of the management team, governance structures, and subject matter expertise required to both manage AND implement the Investment. Did the response fulfill both of these objectives (management AND implementation)? 18. In addressing Investment challenges, applicants should fulfill the following three objectives: • List and describe the necessary steps and stages that will be required for successful implementation of the Investment • Identify areas of possible concern or potential pitfalls in terms of Investment implementation • Explain why those areas present the greatest challenge to a successful Investment implementation = The applicant provided a satisfactory rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant provided an excellent rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant did not provide a rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment 17. Were potential Investment challenges identified with an indication of a probability of occurrence? Did the applicant's response fulfill all three objectives? 16. Was a rationale provided as to why the requested FY 2010 EOC Grant Program funding is sufficient for the implementation and sustainment of the Investment? = The applicant did not provide a rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = The applicant provided a poor rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = No, Investment challenges were not identified with an indication of probability of occurrence = Yes, Investment challenges were identified with an indication of a probability of occurrence = The applicant provided a fair rationale relative to additional funding sources that will be utilized for implementation and/or continued sustainment of the Investment = No, Investment challenges were not identified with an indication of probability of occurrence FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2010 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) GRANT PROGRAM INVESTMENT JUSTIFICATION SCORING WORKSHEET 0 1 2 3 Score0 0 = The description fulfilled none of the three aforementioned objectives 20. A description of major milestones should fulfill three objectives: • Identify the planned start date associated with the identified milestone • Identify the planned completion date when all actions related to the milestone will be completed and overall milestone outcome is met • List any relevant information that will be critical to the successful completion of the milestone. Did the description of the major milestones fulfill all 3 objectives? = The description fulfilled all three aforementioned objectives = The description fulfilled none of the three aforementioned objectives = The description fulfilled one of the three aforementioned objectives = The description fulfilled two of the three aforementioned objectives Did the description of the major milestones fulfill all three objectives? X. Milestones (Total of 3 possible points) Total Score Total Investment Justification Score: Based on a possible score of 40, this Investment Justification scored a FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2010 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER (EOC) GRANT PROGRAM INVESTMENT JUSTIFICATION SCORING WORKSHEET 0 1 2 3 Score0 0 = The description fulfilled none of the three aforementioned objectives 20. A description of major milestones should fulfill three objectives: • Identify the planned start date associated with the identified milestone • Identify the planned completion date when all actions related to the milestone will be completed and overall milestone outcome is met • List any relevant information that will be critical to the successful completion of the milestone. Did the description of the major milestones fulfill all 3 objectives? = The description fulfilled all three aforementioned objectives = The description fulfilled none of the three aforementioned objectives = The description fulfilled one of the three aforementioned objectives = The description fulfilled two of the three aforementioned objectives Did the description of the major milestones fulfill all three objectives? X. Milestones (Total of 3 possible points) Total Score Total Investment Justification Score: Based on a possible score of 40, this Investment Justification scored a