Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process
Judging for the RISE Challenge will be staged across:
1) An eligibility screen3) An expert judging panel3) Finalist interviews
Applicants will be required to participate across three stages, as needed, in order to be selected as a winner.
1) Eligibility Screen
Prospective competitors should read the eligibility criteria to confirm their entries will be reviewed by the judges. The eligibility review will be internally conducted by the Catalyst team.
2) Expert Judging PanelAfter an internal eligibility screen, expert judges from among USAID’s Missions and Bureaus and affiliated partners will review the remaining applications and assess them against the judging criteria. All decisions will be final and not subject to review. Each eligible submission will be assessed and judged for inclusion in the challenge. It is important to read and understand the judging criteria to appropriately complete the answers in the entry form.
There are five judging criteria, ranked in order of priority. The judging panel will assess each eligible application across these weighted technical criteria, and recommend the up to the top 20% of submissions to be invited for finalist interviews. Note the budget will be reviewed for cost reasonableness, but will not be weighed in the evaluation criteria.
1) Intervention rationale (30%) - Applicants will be judged on their articulation of the challenge, hypothesis for change and rationale for how their intervention will prevent or respond to GBV in environmental programming.
a) Does the applicant demonstrate a clear, evidence-driven understanding of the problem?
b) Is there a clear, evidence-driven rationale for why the applicant believes the intervention will be effective in preventing or reducing GBV?
c) How will the intended output of this intervention be valuable to beneficiaries, USAID and other stakeholders?
d) Is this intervention plausible given the timeframe and budget allotted?
2) Contextual awareness, human-centered approach or design, and sensitivity (20%) - Applicants should describe and demonstrate an awareness of the local context in which their intervention operates, how they intend to meet their target population where they are at, and the measures in place to protect and collect sensitive information.
a) How does this intervention demonstrate an understanding of the local context? Has the team conducted a needs assessment and gender analysis (if so, they should be scored more highly)? Has the team developed partnerships that will furnish access or reduce barriers to sensitive and effective contextual and human-centered engagement?
b) Has this intervention considered the specific needs and everyday lives of the people who will be affected?
c) What measures are in place to protect any sensitive data or information (or the sources of that information) as well as the providers of that information as it is collected through the implementation process?
3) MEL (20%) - Given the nascency of the evidence base at this nexus, applicants will be judged on how their proposal will advance the international community’s understanding of challenges and potential interventions at the intersection of GBV and environmental programming.
a) What indicators will your intervention use to evaluate outputs?
b) How will this intervention translate data into accessible and actionable insights for the evidence base?
c) How will learning and evidence be shared with stakeholders?
4) Partnership plan and organizational capacity (20%) - Applicants will be judged on the degree to which their partnership model demonstrates the ability to leverage the diversity of expertise required for successfully innovating new interventions to challenges at the intersection of GBV and the environment. This includes proposed engagement with specific partners, including environmental organizations, gender-based violence organizations, women’s and girls’ organizations, indigenous communities/groups, youth, and other vulnerable populations and local groups. Partnerships with research, academic, or evaluation organizations with the capacity to support evidence collection are also highly encouraged.
a) How will the partnership’s management plan credibility leverage existing work across the team?
b) What experience do the partners bring to this intersection of GBV and environmental programming?
c) Do the key personnel have the requisite expertise and experience to successfully implement this intervention?
d) What is the organization’s GBV safeguarding policy?
5) Pathway to integration (10%) - Applicants should demonstrate a plan for understanding how this intervention can be applied in new contexts beyond the initial application.
a) How can this intervention be tailored to fit the needs of new contexts, geographies?
b) How can this intervention be generalized into a broader organizational or sectoral policy?
c) What is the potential for this intervention to become sustainable or replicated in future programming?
3) Finalist Interviews:
Finalists will be phone or video interviewed by a panel of USAID staff and affiliated partners. These interviews will address the above-referenced illustrative questions across the criteria, and present an opportunity for finalists to respond to any questions, feedback, or concerns highlighted during the judging panel stage. In addition, the Finalists’s budgets will be reviewed in detail for cost reasonableness.
We will make every effort to schedule the interviews at a reasonable time for both the competitor and USAID staff. Given the short timeframe, we ask that you be flexible and available for a phone or video-interview during the weeks of October 23- November 1, 2019. This interview must be completed in order to become a challenge winner.