| Criteria 1 : Communication Use language in written form effectively to express issues in health sciences. | Excellent 25 points | Very Good 21.25 points | Satisfactory 18.75 points | Unsatisfactory 16.25 points | Unsatisfactory 13.75 points | Absent 0 points |
| Spelling. Grammar, Punctuation | < 2 errors, language is clear and precise. | Few errors (3-5 errors) | Some errors (6-10 errors) | Many errors (10-15 errors) Degrades reading. | Insufficient effort. (>15 errors) | O.M.G. |
| APA style | Correct in all aspects, no errors | Nearly correct in all aspects 1-2 errors | Mostly correct 2-4 errors | Many APA inconsistencies 5-10 errors | APA style Mostly not used, degrades reading. >10 errors | No evidence that APA has been used. |
| Technical health related writing | Use of health related vocabulary is sophisticated and correct. Sentences vary in structure and length. Writing is clear and technical. | Use of health related vocabulary is specific and appropriate. Sentences vary in structure and length. Writing is clear and technical. | Use of health related vocabulary is used properly although sentences may be simple. and/or Writing is somewhat clear and technical. | Use of health related vocabulary is infrequent. and/or Writing lacks clarity and technical writing is poor. Style may be too conversational/colloquial. | Health related vocabulary is not used or used incorrectly and/or Writing is confusing and technical writing is poor. Style may be too conversational/colloquial | Health related vocabulary absent. and/or Writing is not at the college level. |
| Criteria 2: Critical thinking Apply appropriate methods to solve problems. Select and conduct appropriate analyses related to Health Sciences | Excellent 75 points | Very Good 63.75 points | Satisfactory 56.25 points | Unsatisfactory 48.75 points | Unsatisfactory 41.25 points | Absent 0 points |
| Executive Summary | Purpose of proposal is clearly stated. Answers the who, what (problem), where, when, how (design) and why. Makes a convincing argument/proposal as to why this should be funded. | Purpose of proposal is stated. Answers the who, what, where, when, how (method) and why. | Purpose of proposal is clearly stated. | Purpose of proposal is stated but is not clear. | Purpose of the proposal is not discernable. | Absent. |
| Statement of Need | Concisely explains research problem, or deficiency in literature that needs to be solved. Describes the question that needs to be answered. Provides convincing, clear, and logical argument. | Explains research problem, or deficiency in literature that needs to be solved. The question that needs to be answered may not be clear. | Alludes to question that needs to be answered but lacks clarity. | Research problem, or deficiency in literature is barely described | No research problem, or deficiency in literature is described. | Absent. |
| Methodology/Design | Method is appropriate and a clear explanation of the proposed research design is provided. | Method is appropriate but explanation of the proposed research design is inadequately described | Method is appropriate but explanation of the proposed research design is inadequately described and is confusing. | Explanation of the proposed research design is only barely described or method is inappropriate. | Explanation of the proposed research design is alluded to but not named or design is incorrect. | Absent. |
| References | References are appropriate to the project, scholarly and not popular. There are a minimum of 6 scholarly journal articles. | References are scholarly and not popular but may not be entirely appropriate. There are a minimum of 6 scholarly journal articles. | References are scholarly and not popular but they may not be appropriate or there may be less than 6 journal articles listed (minimum is 6 JOURNAL articles). | References are scholarly and not popular but they may not be appropriate or there may be less than 4 journal articles listed (minimum is 6 JOURNAL articles). | References are not scholarly. | Absent. |
| Conclusions | Concisely and appropriately describes conclusions which may be drawn or what will be added to the body of exiting knowledge. | Briefly addresses conclusions which may be drawn or what will be added to the body of exiting knowledge. | Inadequately describes conclusions which may be drawn or what will be added to the body of exiting knowledge. | Inadequately describes conclusions which may be drawn or what will be added to the body of exiting knowledge. Demonstrates lack of understanding of potential findings. | Fails to describe conclusions or how findings what will be added to the body of exiting knowledge. | Absent. |
| Overall Score | Excellent | Very Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory |
| | 405 or more | 360 or more | 315 or more | 0 or more |
nyrema1
grant_proposal_rubric.xlsx
