­

2019 Global Field Experience Financial Award (GFEFA) Application Assessment Rubric

All proposals are reviewed by the GFEFA committee, comprised of faculty and staff in the RSPH with significant global health experience and experience supervising students conducting summer field work. Each application is read and evaluated by at least 2 committee members using a standard score sheet. Based on scores, application decisions will be: 1) accept with no revisions; 2) accept with minor revisions to discuss with faculty member; 3) revise and resubmit; or 4) reject.

NOTE: Proposals are evaluated against the criteria not against one another. However, proposals accepted with no revisions will receive higher funding than those that require revisions and resubmission.
 

The evaluation criteria are:

Score = 0 if an item is missing
Score = 1 if few (0-1) of the items are met
Score = 2 if some of the items (2-3) are met, but many are unclear
Score = 3 if most (3-4) of the criterion are met, but are unclear
Score = 4 if most (4-5) of the criterion are met; a few are unclear
Score = 5 if all of the criterion are met clearly
 
CriteriaScore
     1. The application demonstrates the project’s implications for public health.___/5
  1.     The applicant provides a thorough statement of the significance of the proposed work.
  1.     There is ample evidence of organizational support, communication, planning and preparation with host site.
  1.      Project goals align with the needs/assets of the host organization.
  1.     There is a clear value added by this project for the host organization and the population(s) served.
  1.     There is evidence of a brief literature review or other indication that the student can appreciate the impact of their project within a larger context.
     2. The project objectives are achievable.___/5
  1.      Research question or project scope is well defined.
  1. Timeline is appropriate for meeting objectives.
  1.      Budget is detailed, there is evidence of consultation or research to determine costs, sources for in-country estimates are cited, and estimated costs are congruent with the resource needs of the project or research proposed.
  1.      Deliverables are well defined.
  1.      Objectives are SMART.
     3. The project methods are appropriate.___/5
  1.      Provides a clear explanation of the proposed methods.
  1.     Risks are identified and risk mitigation is addressed.
  1.      There is evidence of consideration of fieldwork ethics and human subjects research protections.
  1.     Evidence of a “plan B” should the first tool or methodological approach lack feasibility once in-country input is received.
  1.     The proposed methods are congruent with the project goals.
4.Student demonstrates capacity to meet project objectives.
___/5
  1.     Student has the necessary training (class work or experience) to execute the work.
  1.     There is a specific role for the student to perform in the GFE. The roles of other project personnel are described and the student clearly offers a unique contribution.
  1.      There is evidence of self-reflection and humility in planning for one’s GFE.
  1.     The proposed experience augments the student’s professional development
  1.     Information on the student’s résumé supports their preparation for the GFE.
  
TOTAL SCORE___/20