Review and Selection Process. The Project Narratives of SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. Decisions to fund a grant are based on the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers. The results of the peer review are advisory in nature. The program office and approving official make the final determination for funding based on the following: • Individual awards over $250,000 are approved by the Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council; • Availability of funds; • Equitable distribution of awards in terms of geography (including urban, rural, and remote settings) and balance among populations of focus and program size; • Submission of any required documentation that must be submitted prior to making an award; and • SAMHSA is required to review and consider any information about your organization that is in the Federal Award Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). In accordance with 45 CFR 75.212, SAMHSA reserves the right not to make an award to an entity if that entity does not meet the minimum qualification standards as described in section 75.205(a)(2). If SAMHSA chooses not to award a fundable application in accordance with 45 CFR 75.205(a)(2), SAMHSA must report that determination to the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (XXX) [currently, FAPIIS]. You may review and comment on any information about your organization that a federal awarding agency previously entered. XXXXXX will consider your comments, in addition to other information in FAPIIS in making a judgment about your organization’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed as described in 45 CFR 75.205 HHS Awarding Agency Review of Risk by Applicants.
Review and Selection Process. SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. Decisions to fund a grant are based on: • the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers; • when the individual award is over $150,000, approval by XXXX’s National Advisory Council; • availability of funds; • equitable distribution of awards in terms of geography (including urban, rural and remote settings) and balance among populations of focus and program size; and • In accordance with 45 CFR 75.212, SAMHSA reserves the right not to make an award to an entity if that entity does not meet the minimum qualification standards as described in section 75.205(a)(2). If XXXXXX chooses not to award a fundable application, SAMHSA must report that determination to the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (XXX) [currently the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)].
Review and Selection Process. The County reserves the sole right to exercise its judgment concerning the selection and review of the contents of the Responses submitted pursuant to this WOS and to determine which Respondent best serves the interests of the County. As a result of this WOS, the County may:
Review and Selection Process. SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. For those programs where the individual award is over $100,000, applications also must be reviewed by the appropriate National Advisory Council. Decisions to fund a grant are based on: x the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers and, when applicable, approved by the Center for Mental Health Services’ National Advisory Council; x availability of funds.
Review and Selection Process. A team consisting of qualified experts will review all applications. The review process will include the following:
Review and Selection Process. For detailed information on the review and selection process, please refer to Appendix V, Review and Selection Process.
Review and Selection Process. A team consisting of qualified, unbiased experts will review all applications. The review process will include the following: Applications will be screened to determine eligibility for further review using the criteria detailed in Section III, Eligibility Information, of this solicitation. An evaluation rubric will be developed by HHS, which will consist of critical elements identified in Section V, Application Review Information, of this solicitation. This evaluation rubric will be used by qualified, unbiased experts in their review of all applications. Applicants will receive a score of up to 200 points. The objective review panel may include federal reviewers and/or non-federal reviewers. The results of the objective review of applications by qualified experts will be used in conjunction with the other factors noted in the FOA (See Section II. 7, Factors Affecting Application Selection) to determine the technical merit of the applications and advise the approving HHS official. Final award decisions will be made by a HHS program official. In making these decisions, the HHS program official will take into consideration: the regulatory requirement that there be at least two types of Navigators in each Marketplace and that one of these Navigators be a community and consumer-focused nonprofit; populations the applicant expects to serve; ranking of the applicant based upon recommendations of the review panel; reviews for programmatic and grants management compliance, to include performance under a current Navigator award; pre-award business review; the reasonableness of the estimated cost to the government and anticipated results; and the likelihood the proposed cost will result in the benefits expected. Successful applicants will receive one cooperative agreement award. Unsuccessful applicants will be advised by letter or electronic mail (sent to the individual signing the application on behalf of the organization) that its application will not be held for further consideration or be funded. The decision not to award a grant, or to award a grant at a particular funding level, is discretionary and is not subject to appeal to any OPDIV or HHS official or board.
Review and Selection Process. The NOFO may indicate who reviews the applications (e.g., USAID personnel, representatives from the local American embassy, host governments, or private sector individuals) and note that the AO makes the final selection.
Review and Selection Process. Applications will be reviewed in three phases
Review and Selection Process. Please see Section 5.3 of HRSA’s SF-424 R&R Application Guide. This program does not have any funding priorities, preferences or special considerations.
