ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXY
1
Exemplary
(4 points)		Good
(3 points)		Promising
(2 points)		Developing
(1 points)		No Evidence
(0 points)		Points
2
Clarity and Organization
The submission is well-organized, easy to follow, and communicates key points.

Writing is clear, concise, and free of grammatical errors.		Generally well-organized with minor areas of confusion or lack of clarity.

Writing is mostly clear and concise with minor errors		Organization and clarity are lacking, with several areas difficult to follow.

There are some errors in grammar and punctuation, and it occasionally distracts from understanding.		Poorly organized and unclear. Difficult to understand the main points.

There are frequent errors in grammar, punctuation, or structure making it difficult to read and understand.		The nomination letter/information is not well organized and full of grammatical errors/poor writing style.
3
Relevance to Award
Category		Thoroughly addresses the award category. Highly relevant, and meets all criteria.Mostly addresses the category with minor gaps.Partially addresses the category with significant gaps or misunderstandings of the award criteria.Does not address the category. Submission is largely irrelevant or misunderstands the award criteria completely.Not relevant to the award category
4
Impact & EffectivenessThere is evidence of a strong, measurable impact on the intended audience or field.

All outcomes and claims are supported by data.		Some impact, moderately effective in achieving its goals.

Only some outcomes and claims are supported by data.		Minimal evidence of impact or effectiveness.

Little evidence of outcomes and claims supported by data.		There is little to no documentation of impact and effectiveness.No evidence of overall impact and effectiveness
5
Practice and InnovationThere is evidence of innovation being implemented that builds on best practices.

Best practice and innovative ideas are both apparent but lack a cohesive relationship between the two.

There is evidence of either best practices OR innovation, but not both
Best practices or innovation are vaguely referenced but one is missing and the other lacks evidence.
No evidence of innovation or best practices.
6
Connection to SAAL's
Mission & Values		Incorporates all of SAAL’s mission & values while connecting the nominee’s actions and achievements to them.A strong connection to mission and values, but only some of the sections are clearly linked to nominees' actions and achievements.While there is some connection to mission and values, the nomination lacks depth and specificity.There is little to no evidence of connection to SAAL’s mission and value.No evidence of a connection to SAAL’s mission and values.
7
Total:
8
9
10
Application Questions:
11
Describe in no more than 500 words why your nominee should receive this award. Strong nominations will align with one or more of SAAL's core values of Curiosity, Community, Equity and Responsibility (see SAAL website for descriptions).
12
You may include one additional supporting document for your nomination (ex: report, visualization, photo, video, etc.) This is optional and please be mindful of length for those reviewing nominations.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100