1)

Project, while sound, was not a potential model

2)

Educational, social or other public need was not clearly documented or expressed; expected outcomes were missing or weak.

3)

Evaluation strategy was weak; measured milestones but was not aligned to customers.

4)

Matching funds were unavailable or ineligible.

5)

Partnerships and community involvement weak or did not appear viable.

6)

The narrative told one story, the budget told another.

7)

Project of interest to a single organization only.

8)

Project did not sufficiently address the issue of disparities of access; concerns of end-users not sufficiently addressed.

9)

Inadequate knowledge of existing local infrastructure. Poor coordination with local organizations.

10)

Technical quality of the project was poor, proposed technology was inappropriate, or the project was technology driven (technology for technology’s sake).