the project be easily replicated beyond the initial scope or area of initial concern (e.g. training, planning or some other document asset that can be implemented elsewhere)? In to allow for better differentiation between proposal scores, the scale that was applied to scores was changed in 2017 () and will also be applied in 2018. However, the scoring statements have been modified from the 2017 Agree” to Disagree” scale in order to help reduce “Completely “Completely subjectivity while evaluating projects (). Figure 7: 2017 SHSP Criteria Value Function Changes Breakout Group #2: Grant Topics Breakout Group #2 Activities: Discuss and provide recommendations for grant topics 1) vs. “Regional” “Non-Regional” scoring; 2) interoperability projects scoring; 3) cyber security projects scoring; 4) minimum and maximum award amounts; and 5) open discussion on other funding topics. Recommendations Move the risk and benefit criteria to regional criteria. Move criterion to non-regional criteria. Interoperability projects should continue to be scored on regional criteria by the State Interoperability Executive Committee (SIEC). security projects should be scored on regional criteria by the Cyber Security Program Manager of the Office of Public Safety and Homeland Security. Maintain the $10,000 minimum, and %10 of total grant funds available maximum on allowable funding requests.
the project be easily replicated beyond the initial scope or area of initial concern (e.g. training, planning or some other document asset that can be implemented elsewhere)? In to allow for better differentiation between proposal scores, the scale that was applied to scores was changed in 2017 () and will also be applied in 2018. However, the scoring statements have been modified from the 2017 “Completely Agree” to “Completely Disagree” scale in order to help reduce subjectivity while evaluating projects (). Figure 7: 2017 SHSP Criteria Value Function Changes Breakout Group #2: Grant Topics Breakout Group #2 Activities: Discuss and provide recommendations for grant topics 1) “Regional” vs. “Non-Regional” scoring; 2) interoperability projects scoring; 3) cyber security projects scoring; 4) minimum and maximum award amounts; and 5) open discussion on other funding topics. Recommendations Move the risk and benefit criteria to regional criteria. Move criterion to non-regional criteria. Interoperability projects should continue to be scored on regional criteria by the State Interoperability Executive Committee (SIEC). security projects should be scored on regional criteria by the Cyber Security Program Manager of the Office of Public Safety and Homeland Security. Maintain the $10,000 minimum, and %10 of total grant funds available maximum on allowable funding requests.
2018-Public-Safety-Stakeholders-Workshop-Proceedings.docx