Strengthening ties between the U.S. and Cyprus

Scores listed: 100 points (the notice's total wasn't found; check it).

Narrative limit: 3 pages (check the notice for what counts toward it).

1. Clarity of Impact on Priority Program Areas and Feasibility of Project (40 points, about 1 page)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 7): The applicant has made a clear explanation of how the project furthers (a) specific Priority Program Area(s) as referenced under Section A. The project idea is well developed, feasible, with project activities explained and quantified, and includes a reasonable implementation timeline.
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]

2. Organizational Capacity and Record on Previous Grants (5 points)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 7): The organization or individual has expertise in its stated field and has the internal controls in place to manage federal funds, including a financial management system and a bank account. A recipient’s timely reporting and high delivered impact demonstrated in the course of a previous grant with the Public Diplomacy Section will be considered.
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]

3. Media and Marketing Plan (15 points, about 0.5 pages)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 7): The individual or organization can articulate where, when, and how to engage the target audience over the course of their project through social media or media engagement, and can explain how they will engage social media or media to further the Priority Program Area(s) (Section A).
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]

4. Budget (10 points, about 0.5 pages)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 7): The budget justification is detailed. Costs are reasonable in relation to the proposed activities and anticipated results. The budget is realistic, accounting for all necessary expenses to achieve proposed activities.
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]

5. Monitoring and evaluation plan (15 points, about 0.5 pages)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 7): The applicant demonstrates an ability to measure program success against key indicators and identifies milestones to indicate progress toward goals outlined in the proposal. The program includes output and outcome indicators and shows how and when those will be measured.
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]

6. Self-sustainability (10 points, about 0.5 pages)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 8): The applicant’s plan for the continuation of the project and its positive impact on the Priority Program Area (Section A) beyond the grant period.
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]

7. Cost Sharing or Matching (5 points)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 8): The portion of project costs not paid by U.S. Federal funds and contributed instead by the applicant or a separate sponsor. Cost share is encouraged, but not required, and can include cash contributions, third-party in-kind services (such as volunteers’ time and donated venues), materials, or any combination thereof.
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]