Instructional Innovation Grant Rubric

The Center for Integrated Professional Development grant reviewers (or designated external reviewers) will evaluate applications based on the following criteria:

	Met	Not Met
Project Overview and outcomes	The project clearly identifies specific pedagogical needs or innovations. The project outcomes are specific, achievable, and measurable.	The project does not provide clear overview or uses vague languages to describe it. The project outcomes are not specific, achievable, or measurable.
Assessment	The method of assessment is clearly articulated and relevant to student learning.	The method of assessment is unclear or irrelevant to student learning.
FITE Dimensions	The project is aligned with one or more of the FITE dimensions.	The project is not aligned with the FITE dimensions.
Equity:	The reflection on the project's impact on students from diverse backgrounds is thoroughly discussed.	The reflection on the project's impact on students from diverse backgrounds is superficial or unclear.
Dissemination	The project outcomes can be shared with the campus community.	The project outcomes cannot be shared with the campus community.
Sustainability	Discuss the impact on students beyond one class or a semester.	The project cannot impact students beyond one class or a semester.
Additional Support	Additional support from IT or other support units is clearly stated and the statement of support is provided.	Additional support from IT or other support units is not clearly stated.
Budget	Itemized amounts for expenses are all listed and reasonable. External financial support is clearly articulated.	Itemized amounts for expenses are not listed or reasonable. External financial support is not clearly articulated.