Rule 110-23-1-.08. Review of Grant Applications

Rule 110-23-1-.08. Review of Grant Applications

Eligible applications received during a competition period will be reviewed by a grant review committee appointed by the Commissioner. The grant review committee will determine the merit of each application and make a recommendation to the Commissioner as to whether such applicant shall receive a Quality Growth Grant. In determining whether an applicant shall receive a grant award, the grant review committee will consider the following factors:

1. (a) Degree to which the proposed project is consistent with accepted principles of quality growth as may be adopted by the Department from time to time;
2. (b) Likelihood that the project will provide a transferable model for other communities;
3. (c) Degree to which the project will advance regional cooperation or regional objectives;
4. (d) The magnitude of the needs (as compared with competing applicants) to be addressed by the project and the project's potential to effectively meet these needs;
5. (e) Project costs in relation to benefits derived; the number of people affected;
6. (f) Feasibility of the proposed strategy for carrying out the project, including: likelihood that the project can be successfully implemented as described; provision for adequate technical assistance to ensure quality work and/or good design; the reasonableness of the budget and proposed time table for carrying out the project; the degree to which permits, ordinances, necessary inter-jurisdictional agreements and other technical requirements have been identified and can reasonably be obtained; evidence that potential roadblocks to the project have been considered and measures to overcome these have been identified; and indication that key actors who will carry out the project are ready to proceed and demonstrate ability to make the project succeed;
7. (g) Evidence that the public or key stakeholders will be involved in the project, as appropriate;
8. (h) Degree to which the proposed project is consistent with the goals, policies and implementation strategy of the community's comprehensive plan;
9. (i) The applicant's demonstrated commitment to ongoing implementation of its comprehensive plan;
10. (j) Possible environmental impacts of the project;
11. (k) Evidence that the project is supported by elected officials and/ or citizens;
12. (l) Reliability of other funding commitments (i.e., city, county, schools, civic groups, other grants or loans, etc.);
13. (m) Degree to which alternative approaches and other resources for implementing the project were considered;
14. (n) In the case of joint applications, indication that all participating communities have committed resources to the project; and
15. (o) Other information submitted by the applicant and deemed relevant by the Department.

Authority: O.C.G.A. Sec. 50-8-8.

History. Original grant description entitled "Review of Grant Applications" submitted September 28, 2001.