UKSPF Commissioning Round - Scoring Framework
This scoring framework details the gateway criteria, scoring matrix, and applications scoring weightings that will be used to assess applications received for Preston City Council's UKSPF Commissioning Round.
If you have any questions regarding this framework, please email UKSPF@Preston.gov.uk.
Download a copy of the UKSPF Commissioning Round - Scoring Framework (PDF, 310 KB)
Key Information
- Only applications which pass the Gateway Criteria will be assessed and scored as part of the matrix.
- Not all questions in the application form are scored. Please ensure you are aware of the scored questions and associated weighting detailed in this document. Where a question is not scored, assessors will still consider the response provided by the applicant as part of their review of the application form.
- All applications are considered and scored by a panel of officers at Preston City Council.
Gateway Criteria
Projects must pass all gateway criteria to be considered for selection. Applications that fail to meet any aspect of the Gateway Criteria will be rejected and will not be considered and assessed.
| Question |
|---|---|
1 | Is the applicant eligible to receive UKSPF? |
2 | Does the applicant's response describe an appropriate project for delivery against the project brief in which they are applying for funding? |
3 | Will all outputs and outcomes be delivered within the time-scale of the UKSPF? |
4 | Does the applicant's response provide relevant outputs and outcomes as set out in the project brief? |
5 | Has the applicant considered the funding available for their project is adequate for achieving the outputs and outcomes? |
6 | Has the applicant responded to all questions in the application? |
Scoring Matrix
The following matrix will be used to score the application forms that Preston City Council receives.
Score | Descriptor |
|---|---|
0 - No response provided | No response provided by the applicant. |
1 - Unsatisfactory | The response provided does not meet or comply with the requirements. Insufficient information provided to demonstrate that the applicant has one or more the following: relevant ability, understanding, experience, skills, resource required to effectively deliver the project. |
2 - Poor | Some description given, which may be unclear or inappropriate in parts, and/or information is inconsistent with the requirements of the project brief. The response provided leads to reservations about one or more of the following criteria: the applicant's relevant ability, understanding, experience, skills, resource required to effectively deliver the project. |
3 - Satisfactory | Satisfactory and mainly appropriate description provided and/or information is mainly consistent with the requirements of the prospectus. The response satisfactorily demonstrates some of the following criteria: relevant ability, understanding, experience, skills, and resources required to effectively deliver the project. |
4 - Good | Full description and appropriate response, which is fully relevant to, and meets the requirements of the project brief. The applicant provides evidence of relevant ability, understanding, experience, skills, resources to deliver the project. The applicant identifies factors that will offer potential added value. |
5 - Excellent | The response provided is fully relevant to and meets the requirements of the project brief. Exceptional evidence from the applicant of relevant ability, understanding, experience, skills, resources required to deliver the project. Response identifies factors that will offer potential added value and continuous improvement. |
Scored Questions and Weighting from Application Form
The following table sets out the weighting assigned to the scores for individual questions.
For example:
- For question 2.1, the maximum score that can be awarded is 5 (excellent). A weighting of 10% is then applied to the 5.
- For question 4.1, the maximum score that can be awarded is 5 (excellent). A weighting of 5% is then applied to the 5.
Application Form Question | Maximum Score | Weighting |
|---|---|---|
Section 2 - Project Summary | ||
2.1 - Project Description | 5 | 10% |
Section 3 - Project Delivery | ||
3.1 - Delivery of Outputs and Outcomes | 5 | 10% |
3.2 - Risk | 5 | 10% |
3.3 - Milestones and Project Plan | 5 | 10% |
Section 4 - Strategic Case | ||
4.1 - Project Aims | 5 | 5% |
4.2 - Project Objectives | 5 | 5% |
4.3 - Demand for the Project | 5 | 10% |
Section 5 - Economic Case | ||
5.1 - Requirement for Grant | 5 | 5% |
Section 7 - Management Case | ||
7.1 - Project Management | 5 | 15% |
7.2 - Previous Experience | 5 | 15% |
7.3 - Stakeholder Engagement | 5 | 5% |
TOTAL |
| 100% |
Share this page
