1. 2012-13 SVPGT Grant Round Finalist Presentations
Investment Committee Guidelines
Presentations and site visits are supplemental to, but just as vital as, the final proposal.
The presentation is the time for follow up, clarification of details from the proposal, and
other questions.
Your purpose as an evaluator is to provide honest reaction in a constructive manner to
the person’s efforts, using the evaluation guides provided.
Please use the following guidelines when evaluating the final proposals:
1. Read the final proposal.
2. Compare and contrast details from the Letters of Inquiry and the Final Proposals.
3. Make a list of questions you have regarding these details. Is there anything that
didn’t match? Is there info missing? Do you need clarification? Bring your
questions to the evaluation so you can ask them if they are not answered for you
by the presenter.
4. Educate yourself. Is there a term in the final proposal that you’re not familiar
with? Look it up. Are you unfamiliar with nonprofit/industry jargon? Research
the context of any unfamiliar phrases. Any preparations you make to better
inform yourself about the finalists’ services, programs, mission, and values will
only lead to a stronger funding decision. Also, any SVP lingo (capacity building,
collective action, etc.) that you need clarification on, please don’t hesitate to ask
staff. It’s important to understand SVP’s mission, vision, and values to make the
best funding decision.
5. Complete the scoring tool or rubric to help organize your thoughts.
Presentation basics:
 As a good audience member, please silence cell phones and don’t interrupt the
speaker. There will be time for Q&A following each presentation.
 Presentations will be a maximum of 30 minutes long with 10 minutes for Q&A.
Finalists will have a few minutes to set-up slide show presentations.
 Regarding Q&A: Please be mindful that we have limited time for each finalist to
present. Write down questions that you have during the presentation. If the
presenter has not answered the question by the conclusion of the presentation,
please ask it, but be succinct and respectful.
 Types of questions to ask during Q&A:
o Fact clarification (budget, program operations, outcomes, etc.)
o SVP fit- questions that help to clarify if the finalist understands the
Investor/Investee partnership with SVP model.
o Board/staff buy-in

2.  Avoid:
o Leading questions. Allow finalist to demonstrate their expertise on
their organization and their understanding of SVP by asking open-ended,
explorative questions.
o Stating your opinion. This is not time for committee evaluation, so save
opinions or judgments for the Investment Committee funding decision
meeting.
o Unrealistic expectations- details the presenter couldn’t possibly know
off the cuff or wasn’t instructed by SVP to prepare.
o Rose colored glasses- even if you are a fan, be willing to see all sides
and ask questions that lead to truth, pretty or not.
 In a good talk, the speaker understands his or her audience and the purpose for
the talk. The presentation is well organized, delivered so all can understand, and
accompanied by clear, supporting visuals.
 The visuals should be clear, uncluttered and serve to support the presentation.
Text should be sufficiently large to be read by those in the back row. Good use of
graphics can do an excellent job of helping to explain complex material and break
up what might otherwise be a fairly tedious succession of text-only, bulleted lists.
Judicious use of color.
The following should be considered:
1. The Investee articulates a clear & realistic vision
A vision describes “what an organization wants to be; this implies a strong value
proposition and description of an end state”. It should articulate specific
community characteristics that should change, and describe what a healthier
community would look like. It answers the question “What do we want our
community to be and what does it look like?”
2. The Investee’s strategy supports their vision
A strategy describes how an organization will make its vision reality. It explains
how the organization will utilize resources to realize the outcomes described in
the vision. It answers the question “How will we accomplish our vision?”
3. The Investee’s vision is compelling and the programmatic outcomes
support the vision. Is the vision compelling to you? Regardless of how well an
investee articulates its vision, does it matter to you? Do you care about the social
outcome the investee has articulated? Are the investee’s programmatic
outcomes—they work they actually do—consistent with that vision? This criterion
is similar to the “wow” factor used by many new grant committees.
A rubric will be provided for committee members at the presentations.