Notice

Annex F: Scoring Criteria

Updated 17 May 2024

This notice was withdrawn on 24 October 2024

The call has now closed.

1. Unlocking Space for Business Funding Call Scoring Criteria

1.1 Assessment of Applications 

Applications for project funding will be assessed by a Selection Panel which will consist of Government grant project management and technical experts, including from the programme’s delivery partners (Satellite Applications Catapult). The panel will assess the proposals according to the criteria listed below, considering the commitment of the organisations involved, the lead organisation, to the success of the project and the financial viability of the organisations involved. 

Assessment criteria section:

Scoring Criteria
0	No response is offered in respect of the criteria.
1	An incomplete or very poor response, which fails to address the criteria; and/or the response is not credible, with no evidence to support the claims made meaning there is no confidence of success; and/or the response is assessed as ‘low scoring’ against the scoring criteria shown in the table above.
2	A poor response which only partially addresses the criteria and would require significant revision to become acceptable; and/or very limited, and inadequate, evidence to support the claims made meaning low confidence of success; and/or the response is assessed as ‘low scoring’ against the scoring criteria shown in the table above.
3	An acceptable response which could have been expanded upon, with identified weaknesses correctable; and/or just sufficient evidence provided in support of the claims made meaning a reasonable confidence of success; and/or the response is assessed as ‘moderate scoring’ against the scoring criteria.
4	A good response which addresses the criteria well, with identified weaknesses readily correctable; and/or solid evidence provided in support of the claims made meaning a solid level of confidence of success; and/or the response is assessed as ‘moderate scoring’ against the scoring criteria.
5	A very good response which addresses the criteria very well with very few weaknesses; and/or good evidence provided in support of the claims made meaning a high level of confidence of success; and/or the response is assessed as ‘highest scoring’ against the scoring criteria.

Assessment criteria
1. Strategic Fit 20%	Proposals are expected to provide a description of your proposed pilot which includes a description of the current state of development or readiness of the idea. Proposals should demonstrate their strategic fit to the programme’s aim of expanding the use of satellite data and services, within the transport and logistics and/or financial services sectors. The UK Space Agency particularly welcomes applications from organisations who have not extensively used satellite data and services in their organisation before. High Scoring applicants will provide excellent, detailed evidence of how the proposal meets the scope section of the competition brief. The applicant will be able to describe the projects aims clearly and what benefits will be derived. Proposals will demonstrate a strong understanding of their idea including its use of satellite data and services. The project will also have a clear evaluation plan, that will show the projects success and how it will demonstrate impact. Applicants that are able to demonstrate how this solution will be used beyond the scope of the project will score better.
2. Feasibility 30%	Your project must address end-user challenges. Your proposal will detail the main technical challenges you are addressing. Explain: How you will address a challenge, what the innovation will provide and what environmental and commercial merit of the project has. High scoring applicants will provide a comprehensive proposal with a high probability of success, relying on evolution or deployment of existing and working technologies. Proposals will not contain weaknesses in the techniques and/or technologies to be employed but provide excellent commercial opportunities. Proposals will contain realistic project deliverables against the proposed timescales with strong consideration given to technical risks of the project. Proposals will include robust plans to demonstrate the performance or development of the innovation.
3. Project plan, methodology and risk management 20%	All projects must be well planned and connected to milestones, KPIs, key activities and dates. The emphasis throughout should be on practicality. Proposals must provide evidence that the technology works, can be made into a viable product and can achieve the proposed benefits. All projects will need to demonstrate that they have an effective structure in place for managing the administration of the grant requested and demonstrate that they have a sound approach to planning to achieve their programme aims on time and within budget. The main risks to the project must be identified provide evidence that these have been mitigated. High Scoring applicants will provide a detailed and workable breakdown of the proposed project milestones, KPIs, key activities and dates. The milestones will be defined using SMART criteria and be fully costed. A strong team will be identified and resourced to enable the project to deliver and Grant funding to be administered correctly. Evidence of good time management and clear and focused documentation of progress will be considered. Applicants will demonstrate an approach to risk and programme management that is aligned with industry best practice, and will detail in depth the main technical, commercial and environmental risks to the project’s success. Risks to the project will be clearly identified alongside costed and detailed mitigations, providing a clear picture of the practicality and viability of the proposal.
4. Value for money 20%	All projects will need to demonstrate that they represent value for money for the taxpayer. This is demonstrated by providing appropriate budgets allocated to appropriate tasks providing significant outputs with excellent value for money. Please note information from the finances section will be used to support the assessment of this question. Proposed milestones and associated payments stated in this section must match those entered in the project plan, methodology and risk management section of your application. Failure to do so will lead to your project being excluded from consideration. High scoring applicants will: demonstrate a cost-effective proposal, demonstrate the added value that the investment will bring, show that the proposed resource is sufficient to deliver in the proposed timelines, show that the proposed work, level of proposed effort and overall expense is fair, reasonable and will deliver a cost-effective outcome, present an appropriate amount of resource allocated to work packages make good use of existing project technology, outputs and partners to maximise value for money and speed of delivery, not demonstrate any financial red flags, use freely available data/platforms where possible
5. Benefit to the UK 10%	All projects will need to demonstrate that the investment sought from the UK government represents clear value for the UK public, through measurable benefits for the UK economy. High scoring applicants will provide excellent, detailed evidence of the benefits that the Government funding would enable them to provide to the UK economy, including UK-based employment and contract opportunities and links to wider government priorities e.g. Net Zero, Levelling Up. It will also include clear future plans for how the project may be continued beyond the scope of the funding period and integrated into the organisation. Outstanding responses will also have a clear channel for disseminating any findings/outputs with wider stakeholders’ groups.