PUC board backs a simple scoring rubric and short review window to speed 911 grant awards

Michael Berry shared a county grant-rubric example and an Excel scoring template the board could adapt for 911 grant evaluations. His example used an initial set of yes/no minimum-eligibility checks and a set of scored questions (1–5) across program priorities, producing numeric recommendations that board members could adjust based on available funding.

"We start off with... the application process and proposal requirements... as a starting point to meet a minimum requirement," Berry said, describing the county template and scoring spreadsheet he offered to adapt. Board members agreed that a concise rubric would promote consistency across cycles and avoid overly burdensome, program-specific questionnaires.

On timing, Matt Goetsch asked whether the review committee could deliver recommendations within 30 days; Branson said 30 days may be adequate but cautioned that reviews longer than 90 days risk overlapping grant cycles and complicating the process. The board agreed to try a shorter review window initially while preserving flexibility to expand the time if necessary.

Staff was tasked with drafting a rubric and circulating it to counsel and board members before the next regular meeting so the board could refine criteria and scoring ahead of the first application cycle.