All submissions are put through pre-screening
The Pre-Screening phase is a filtering process that scores the submissions on the same criteria as the Evaluation Panel, taking forward the suitable submissions to the final Evaluation stage – allowing a more efficient use of the Panel’s time.
The output of pre-screening is then forwarded to Evaluation Panel
The Members of the Panel are selected for independence and professional credibility, and to have a mix of professions and experiences drawn from both the public and private sectors. It is expected that this mix of breadth and depth would facilitate discussions, significantly enhance the evaluation process, and allow all members to contribute to the process.
- Each submission will be scored by all members present at respective Evaluation Panel meetings
- Scoring is done as a group as follows:
- Review. Each member first reads the submission privately and formulates their own thoughts on it.
- Share. In this step, some questions or perspectives on clarity are shared among Members. Care is taken to avoid value judgements that would bias the thinking of other Members. The propensity for “Group Think” (convergence of a group’s perspective, sometimes being led by a single person) is the concern that is guarded against.
- Rate. After discussion, each member will then give their scores independently and privately.
Please click here to see the Evaluation Panel 2015 Report
Please click here to see the Evaluation Panel 2014 Report
Please click here to see the Evaluation Panel 2013 Report
Please click here to see the Evaluation Panel 2012 Report
When evaluation exercises are completed, the Evaluation Panel then moves on to selecting the awardees for the programme. In considering the amount of the Grant to be awarded, the Panel would consider the nature of the idea/project, the practicality of the Plan outlined in the submission and associated costs, and, in particular, the elements of the cost that would take the project to the “proof of concept” point.
A key aspect of the Grant Award stage is the conduct of internet searches of all submissions proposed for Award. Where similar ideas or projects are identified, the Panel would engage in a deliberation to achieve final agreement.
Criteria and Scoring
|Innovativeness of the project submissions||Project proposals must indicate whether it is recombination, fusion, integration, replication or refinement of existing technologies with improved value, enhanced efficiency or cost reduction.|
|Scalability/Exportability||The project proposal should indicate the potential for growth of the product or service and ultimately the organisation.|
|Competency of the Project Team or Individual||Project teams should consist of qualified and technically competent members / institutions with respect to technical and commercialization aspects. Roles and responsibility of collaborators involved in the project should be clearly defined. Involvement of consultants in the project should be justified and with details submitted.|
|Credibility of project proposal||The project proposal must be clear, accurate and consistent with the objectives of the i2i competition and the Innovation Financing Facility. It must have achievable milestones and methodologies (to be in the timeline in the submission form) that can be completed within the agreed/given time frame.|
|Appropriateness of methodology||The applicant must provide sufficient information or evidence on the appropriateness of the chosen methodology (new or established methods/techniques). This should outline the sequence of proposed actions and identify these actions as numbered stages, steps and phases (explained in the justification details of the timeline).|
|Commercialization Prospect/ Economic Sustainablilty||The project should indicate clearly the expected outcome and demonstrate potential for commercialization, or in the case of social projects, some level of economic sustainability.|
|Societal benefits (only relevant to social initiatives)||The project proposals must clearly describe the socio-economic benefits to the community. The proposals must also describe the community chosen and their involvement in the project.|
Each criterion was rated on a scale of 1-10 by the Evaluation Panel in their deliberations. The final scores were then tallied using pre-determined weightings for each criterion. You can refer to last year’s Evaluation Report for the criteria weightings.