QUICK LINKS Click here for more DAS links

Information Technology

Pooled Technology Program Funding -- Fiscal Year 2006

Criteria for Evaluating Projects
Ranking Criteria Maximum Points

Section I: Proposal

Statutory or Other Requirements
If the answer to these criteria is "no," the point value is zero (0). Depending upon how directly a qualifying project or expenditure may relate to a particular requirement (federal mandate, state mandate, health-safety-security issue, or compliance with an enterprise technology standard), or satisfies more than one requirement (e.g. it is mandated by state and federal law and fulfills a health and safety mandate), 1-20 points awarded. 		20
Impact on Iowa's Citizens
  • Minimally directly impacts Iowa citizens (0-5 points).
  • Moderately directly impacts Iowa citizens (6-10 points).
  • Significantly directly impacts Iowa citizens (11-15 points).
 15
Customer Service Improvements
  • Minimally improves customer service (0-3 points).
  • Moderately improves customer service (4-6 points).
  • Significantly improves customer service (7-10 points).
 10
Process Reengineering
  • Minimal use of information technology to reengineer government processes (0-3 points).
  • Moderate use of information technology to reengineer government processes (4-6 points).
  • Significant use of information technology to reengineer government processes (7-10).
10
Timeline
  • The timeline contains several problem areas  (0-2 points).
  • The timeline seems reasonable with few problem areas  (3-4 points).
  • The timeline seems reasonable with no problem areas  (5 points).
 5
Funding Requirements
  • The funding request contains questionable items (0-3 points).
  • The funding request seems reasonable with few questionable items (4-6 points).
  • The funding request seems reasonable with no questionable items (7-10 points).
10
Source Funds
How much of the total project cost would be absorbed by your agency?
  • 0% (0 points)
  • 1%-12% (1 point)
  • 13%-25% (2 points)
  • 25%-38% (3 points)
  • 39%-50% (4 points)
  • over 50% (5 points)
 5
Evaluation
  • The financial analysis contains several questionable entries and provides minimal financial benefit to citizens (0-8 points)
  • The financial analysis seems reasonable with few questionable entries and provides a moderate financial benefit to citizens (9-16 points)
  • The financial analysis seems reasonable with no questionable entries and provides a maximum financial benefit to citizens (17-25 points)
 25

Maximum Possible Points:

 100