How will my application be assessed?
All applications are assessed by a panel of Council officers with expertise in energy efficiency, retrofit, and sustainability. Using the criteria below, each project will be scored with a rating from 1 to 4. Projects with a higher score will be prioritised for grant funding.
Please see grading criteria below.
Carbon, Community, Inclusion
|
Criteria |
Questions |
Key Considerations |
Score (1 to 4)* |
|
Expected carbon savings or energy reduction.
|
What is the anticipated carbon/energy saving? Is this a meaningful difference? |
Detailed carbon reduction calculations in tonnes of CO2 and/or kwH of energy use reduction. Calculations consider source and effectiveness of given method. |
|
|
Wider community engagement with project |
How does the project benefit and engage the ‘wider community’ in reducing carbon emissions?
|
Clear strategy to promote the project and encourage behaviour changes to reduce emissions. Project engages with a wide range of community members. |
|
|
Social Inclusion |
How does the project contribute to supporting a ‘low carbon, resource efficient, and socially inclusive’ economy?
|
Clear strategy for creating a lasting legacy of environmental, social, and economic improvement. The project’s alignment with social outcomes and its impact on community needs. The use of innovative methods or approaches to enhance social inclusion |
|
Planning a Successful Energy Project
|
Criteria |
Questions |
Key Considerations |
Score (1 to 4)* |
|
Readiness |
To what extent is the project ready for delivery? Has all the development and feasibility work been completed? What degree of technical work, including community engagement, has been undertaken to establish the viability of the proposal? |
Completion of feasibility work and obtained consent in principle from the landowner or landlord. Utilisation of expert knowledge in the planning and implementation phases of the project. Secured support from the local community and other interest groups, on the proposed project. |
|
|
Risk |
Have the key risks been identified? Are the risks manageable and have mitigation measures been developed? |
Key risks have been outlined, with a clear mitigation strategy to manage associated risks. |
|
|
Budget |
Is the proposed budget and associated costs reasonable? Have the minimum quotes been sought (e.g. three quotes for projects above £5,000)? Are there any sources of external funding? |
Reasonable budget breakdown of itemised elements to be funded through grant. Minimum quotes been sought and provided. Clearly demonstrates applicant has considered or is receiving match-funding. Sufficient resources in place to deliver the project. |
|
Delivering an Energy Project
|
Criteria |
Questions |
Key Considerations |
Score (1 to 4)* |
|
Delivery Plan |
Is there a clear plan to implement the project, supported by a timetable of milestones? |
Project plan clearly sets out delivery timescales and requirements, and is likely to be delivered within 1 to 2 years (larger projects have 2 years to complete) |
|
Applicant experience
|
Criteria |
Questions |
Key Considerations |
Score (1 to 4)* |
|
Relationship with the local community |
Does the applicant have relevant experience working with the local community or any experience in community energy projects? |
Relevant experience of working with the local community where the proposed project is located or in delivering this type of project. |
|
*Scores range 1 (low), to 4 (high), where:
- Does not meet the minimum key considerations, little to no detail of the project.
- Meets the minimum key considerations, but only describes some details.
- Meets the minimum key considerations, clearly explains reasoning, and provides evidence to support the project.
- Goes beyond the minimum key considerations, detailed explanation and evidence to support the project, demonstrates an innovative approach.
