How we score peatland restoration grant applications

This is a competitive grant scheme.  All projects will be scored for a number of key questions from the application form.  Projects will then be prioritised according to the scoring and funding allocated.

Essential criteria

These must be met for an application to proceed to scoring:

• The grant request is between £10,000 and £250,000.
• The peatland must be in Wales, with only the Welsh element of any cross-border proposals considered.
• The proposal must address one or more of the six National Peatland Action Programme priorities.
• Evidence is included of the applicant having delivered at least one peatland restoration project in the last decade, or has provided written confirmation of technical support from a partner who has experience of delivering peatland restoration on the ground, and who can provide technical support.

Applications will be scored and ranked, and will be considered together in the relevant panel or panels. Overall, we will be looking to build a balanced portfolio of projects which together address the National Peatlands Action Programme themes, provide a balance between geographical areas and between development and delivery projects.

We will conduct proportionate due diligence checks on all applicants. NRW’s financial assessment is completed by our Grants team. It is tailored based on the partner type, includes standard due diligence checks and is proportionate based on value and risk. We cover:

• Know your applicant
• Financial health
• Other sources of funding
• Areas of special concern
  
  

Our assessment questions

1. Is the value of the grant request between £10,000 and £250,000? If 'No', do not proceed.
2. Is the peatland area being restored in Wales? If 'No', do not proceed.
3. Is there a clear understanding of how the project aligns with the National Peatlands Action Programme, specifically addressing one or more of its six priorities? If 'No', do not proceed.
4. Has the applicant provided evidence of having delivered at least one peatland restoration project within the last decade, or alternatively, written confirmation of technical support from a partner or contractor who can evidence relevant experience of having delivered peatland restoration on the ground? If 'No', do not proceed.
5. Is the project good value, that is, does the project deliver the right activities, outputs and outcomes? If the project is delivering peatland restoration, what is the cost per hectare? (cost per hectare = £ total project cost/hectares restored)
6. Have the relevant permissions or consents been obtained or applied for? Or if consents not yet obtained is there a clear plan for securing?
7. Is the proposal founded on good quality evidence? How well has the identified evidence been used to inform the design of the proposal?
8. Are the anticipated outputs and outcomes realistic?
9. Have they clearly set out how they will measure progress against outcomes?
10. How will the outcomes be maintained after the project has ended? Has the external partner considered ongoing costs and how they will be funded and is it reasonable? 
11. If NRW is not able to fund this project, what are the implications? Would there be serious repercussions if we didn't support it or would the project go ahead anyway?
12. Are the activities noted in the project plan realistic, achievable and in line with the aims of the project, that is, could they deliver on the outcomes identified?
13. Are the timescales and claim periods realistic and deliverable? All project costs need to be claimed by 31 March 2027.
14. Does the project have sufficient governance, proportional to its size and risk, to achieve delivery?
15. Are risks appropriately identified and do they have appropriate mitigation measures in place?
16. Who are the other partners engaged in this project, and are they relevant and appropriate?
17. How well does the proposal consider how people from diverse backgrounds and all abilities are given the opportunity to take part in project?
18. How well does the proposal consider, use, and promote the Welsh language?
19. Are the detailed costings on the uploaded project costs breakdown reasonable and achievable?
20. What is the quality of the proposal as a whole?
    
    

How we score evidence