Project Group Available funding Minimum award amount per application Maximum award amount per application Minimum match funding amount Group 1: Emerging Building Technology and Approaches for Existing Buildings $4,000,000 $500,000 $2,000,000 $0 Group 2: Emerging Technology Pilots for Zero Net Energy New Buildings $4,000,000 $0 Group 3: Approaches to Achieve California’s Zero Net Energy Buildings Goals $1,000,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $0 Group 4: Zero Net Energy Models by Climate Zone for Multifamily and Commercial Buildings $1,000,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $0 Group 5: Integrated Demand-Side Management Demonstrations to Achieve Maximum Efficiency $6,000,000 9,000,000 $2,000,000 $5,000,000 20% of the Energy Commission requested amount Group 6: Large-Scale, Community-Wide Demonstrations to Achieve Zero Net Energy $15,000,000 20% of the Energy Commission requested amount Match Funding Requirement For Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 Match funding is not required. However, applications that include match funding maywill receive additional points during the scoring phase. For Groups 5 and 6: Match funding is required in the amount of at least 20% of the requested Energy Commission project funds. Applicants that provide more than this amount maywill receive additional points during the scoring phase (See Part IV). “Match funds” include: (1) “cash in hand” funds; (2) equipment; (3) materials; (4) information technology services; (5) travel; (6) subcontractor costs; (7) contractor/project partner in-kind labor costs; and (8) “advanced practice” costs. Match funding sources
0% Not Responsive The response fails to address the criteria. The omissions, flaws, or defects are significant and unacceptable. 10-30% Minimally Responsive The response minimally addresses the criteria. The omissions, flaws, or defects are significant and unacceptable. 40-60% Inadequate The response addresses the criteria. There are one or more omissions, flaws, or defects or the criteria are addressed in a limited way that results in a low degree of confidence in the proposed solution. 70% Adequate The response adequately addresses the criteria. Any omissions, flaws, or defects are inconsequential and acceptable. 80% Good The response fully addresses the criteria with a good degree of confidence in the applicant’s response or proposed solution. There are no identified omissions, flaws, or defects. Any identified weaknesses are minimal, inconsequential, and acceptable. 90% Excellent The response fully addresses the criteria with a high degree of confidence in the applicant’s response or proposed solution. The applicant offers one or more enhancing features, methods, or approaches that exceed basic expectations. 100% Exceptional All criteria are addressed with the highest degree of confidence in the applicant’s response or proposed solution. The response exceeds the requirements in providing multiple enhancing features, a creative approach, or an exceptional solution. Scoring CRITERIA The Project Narrative (Attachment 4) must respond to each criterion below, unless otherwise indicated. Any estimates of energy savings or GHG impacts must be calculated as specified in the References for Calculating Electricity End-Use, Electricity Demand, and GHG Emissions (Attachment 12). Scoring Criteria Maximum Points Technical Merit and Need Provides a clear and concise description of the goals, objectives, technological or scientific knowledge advancement, and innovation in the proposed project. Explains how the proposed project will lead to technological advancement and breakthroughs that overcome barriers to achieving the state’s statutory energy goals. Summarizes the current status of the relevant technology and/or scientific knowledge, and explains how the proposed project will advance, supplement, and/or replace current technology and/or scientific knowledge. 20