Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process

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 Panel

After 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. Only applicants scoring in the top 20% may move to the finalist interview round. Note the budget will be reviewed for cost reasonableness, but will not be weighed in the evaluation criteria.


Evaluation Criteria
Weight
Problem statement, project description, and hypothesis - Applicants will be judged on their articulation of the problem and how the intervention will address the problem through the prevention or response 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 addressing GBV and lead to improved environmental outcomes?

c) Does the applicant specify the types of GBV that will be addressed and how they will be addressed?

d) How will the intended output of this intervention be valuable to beneficiaries, USAID, and other stakeholders?

e) Is this intervention plausible given the timeframe and budget allotted?
30%
Contextual awareness, human-centered, and sensitivity - 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) Does the applicant describe how the proven or promising approach to address GBV will be adapted and integrated into the local context?

c) Has this intervention considered the specific needs and everyday lives of the people who will be affected?

d) 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?

e) Does the applicant have a safeguarding policy that addresses GBV?
20%
Partnership plan and organizational capacity - Applicants will be judged on the degree to which their partnership model demonstrates the ability to leverage the diversity of expertise required for successfully implementing interventions that address the intersection of GBV and the environment.

a) Does the applicant demonstrate a strong partnership model that leverages the capacity, expertise, and existing relationships across relevant environmental organizations, gender and GBV organizations/experts, indigenous peoples organizations, and/or local communities?

b) Does the applicant clearly describe the roles and responsibilities of each partner?

c) What experience do the partners bring to this intersection of GBV and environmental programming?

d) Do the key personnel have the requisite expertise and experience to successfully implement this intervention?
20%
Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) - 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) Does the applicant clearly describe indicators that will be used to evaluate GBV and environmental outputs or outcomes?

b) Does the applicant indicate a reasonable timeframe to achieve gender and environmental outcomes?

c) Does the applicant detail how the data and learning will be used to identify what interventions are and are not working and adapt program design?

d) How will learning and evidence be shared with stakeholders?
20%
Pathway to integration - 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 and 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?
10%

3) Finalist Interviews:

Finalists will be phone or video interviewed by a panel of USAID staff and affiliated partners. Prior to the interview, finalists will be required to submit a short PowerPoint presentation on their project, environmental assessment form, organizational assessment form, and initial gender assessment form. 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. 
Competitions for Development

The information provided on this website is not official U.S. Government information and does not represent the views or positions of the U.S. Agency for International Development or the U.S. Government.