Scientific Event Travel Grant Evaluation Criteria

This page contains information on how the Scientific Event Travel Grant will be evaluated by the grants panel

    1. Event Strategic Relevance and Professional Development (max 40 points)
  • Does the event align with AMI’s strategic objectives and contribute to the applicant’s professional growth?
  • Does participation in this event support AMI’s mission to advance applied microbiology for societal, environmental, or clinical benefit?
  • Does the event provide meaningful opportunities for networking, learning, or skill development?
  • Event Strategic Relevance (20 points)
    Highly Relevant – 20 pts
    Moderately Relevant – 10 pts
    Marginally Relevant – 5 pts
  • Professional Development (20 points)
    Significant Impact – 20 pts
    Moderate Impact – 10 pts
    Limited Impact – 5 pts
    1. Financial Need and Budget Appropriateness (including quotes) (max 30 points)
  • Does the applicant demonstrate a genuine financial need, and is the proposed budget reasonable and well justified?
  • Are costs proportionate to the scope and purpose of the event?
  • Are supporting quotes provided and appropriate to the funding request?

Financial Need (15 points)
Critical Need – 15 pts
Moderate Need – 10 pts
Minimal Need – 5 pts

Budget Appropriateness (15 points)
Fully Justified – 15 pts
Partially Justified – 10 pts
Poorly Justified – 5 pts

    1. Justification for Attendance (max 20 points)
  • Does the applicant clearly explain the importance of attending this event and its relevance to their work or research?
  • Is the justification compelling and supported by evidence of potential benefit or expected outcomes?

Event Importance (15 points)
Highly Impactful – 15 pts
Moderately Impactful – 10 pts
Limited Impact – 5 pts

Clarity of Justification (5 points)
Compelling – 5 pts
Adequate – 3 pts
Weak – 1 pt

 

    1. Supplementary Documents (max 10 points)
  • Are supporting documents complete, relevant, and persuasive (e.g., supervisor letter, event confirmation, quotes)?
  • Do they demonstrate endorsement, readiness, or suitability for participation?

Strong Support – 10 pts
Adequate Support – 6 pts
Limited Support – 3 pt

Scoring Guidelines

Total Possible Score: 100 Points

  • 80–100: Excellent — strongly meets all criteria; high priority for funding.
  • 60–79: Good — meets most criteria effectively; consider for funding.
  • 40–59: Fair — meets some criteria but needs improvement; lower priority.
  • Below 40: Poor — does not sufficiently meet criteria; not recommended.