Accessibility Project Evaluation Process

We are mindful that preparing grant proposals requires significant time and effort and we thank you for taking the time to submit a proposal. We received 118 project proposals and ultimately selected 16 projects for funding with the help of a review committee comprised of representatives from leading organizations in the disability community. Selecting the successful projects was difficult as we received many excellent applications. We have prepared the following general notes and feedback for your consideration.

How were submissions reviewed?

Four project features we felt were particularly important:

  • Project theme
  • Anticipated impact to the disability community
  • Project viability
  • Organizational Capacity

 

We used the following guidelines and point system to guide the review of each application:

  1. Increasing accessibility for people with disabilities

Does the Proposal have clearly defined, innovative and reasonable accessibility outcomes for people with disabilities?

 

  1. Why is the project needed?

Does the Proposal clearly identify an important issue for people with disabilities and does it offer a good proposal to address the issue?

 

  1. Number of persons with disabilities that will be impacted

Does the Proposal contain realistic projections as to how many people with disabilities the project will benefit?

 

  1. Project’s lasting impact

Does the Proposal show how the project will result in long-term/continuing accessibility improvements for people with disabilities?

 

  1. Measuring the project’s success

Does the Proposal have a reasonable outcome evaluation plan? Does the Outcome Logic Model work?

 

  1. Community support

Does the Proponent have the 2 required letters of support from other community groups? Do the letters show strong support of the project?

 

  1. Project implementation

Is the time frame for implementation realistic?

 

  1. Project budget

Is the project budget reasonable and showing clearly how funds will be used?

 

  1. Organization’s workplan

Does the Proponent organization have a comprehensive, well-designed and achievable workplan that appears reasonably likely to result in the successful completion of the project?

 

  1. Organization’s capacity

Does the Proponent organization have the experience and capacity to complete the project successfully?

 

The review committee also wanted to ensure there was diversity regarding the region, disability focus, and accessibility initiative type among all the projects.

 

Who was on the review panel?

First-round review:

  • Disability Alliance BC

We selected 43 applications.

Second-round review:

  • The Social Planning and Research Council of British Columbia (SPARC BC)
  • Community Legal Assistance Society
  • Inclusion BC
  • The British Columbia Aboriginal Network on Disability Society (BCANDS)
  • Disability Alliance BC

We selected 16 applications.

 

Some common themes from unsuccessful applications:

  • Incomplete application forms or missing documents
  • Ineligible projects or organizations
  • Multiple submissions from one organization
  • Insufficient information supporting the project