| #### **UNIQUE MANDATE & SCOPE**
*"How is your group different from existing clubs and programs?"*
|
| (0) | **AUTO-FAIL** | The proposed student group **directly** **duplicates** a pre-existing group on campus and/or campus program. If the student group has an external affiliate, the mandate and scope of the affiliate directly duplicates a pre-existing group on campus and/or campus program.
|
| (2) | **FAIR** | The proposed student group demonstrates some overlap with pre-existing programs or groups on campus. The value proposed by the group would **over-saturate** a specific niche on campus.
|
| (4) | **GOOD** | The proposed student group demonstrates some overlap with pre-existing programs or groups on campus. The value proposed by the group would **complement** existing efforts to fill a specific niche on campus, but the niche could be addressed by a currently existing organization.
|
| (6) | **GREAT** | The proposed student group demonstrates some overlap with pre-existing programs or groups on campus. The value proposed by the group would complement existing efforts to fill a specific niche on campus, and **efforts would be enhanced** by an additional organization.
|
| (8) | **EXCELLENT** | The proposed student group demonstrates **no overlap** with pre-existing programs or groups on campus. The value proposed by the group would completely fill a specific niche not yet addressed on campus.
|
| #### **CAMPUS & COMMUNITY CONTRIBUTIONS**
*"How does your group interact with and create value for your members, campus, and city?"*
|
| (0) | **AUTO-FAIL** | The proposal **does not demonstrate a contribution** to or value for the University of Alberta campus or the greater Edmonton community. It only describes value for its individual members.
|
| (2) | **FAIR** | The proposal demonstrates a contribution to and value **for either** campus or the greater community, in addition to value for its individual members.
|
| (4) | **GOOD** | The proposal demonstrates a sufficient contribution to and value for campus **and** the greater community, in addition to value for its individual members. It describes a group that interacts with the campus community **rarely**.
|
| (6) | **GREAT** | The proposal demonstrates a sufficient contribution to and value for campus and the greater community, in addition to value for its individual members. It describes a group that interacts with the campus community on **a semi-regular basis**.
|
| (8) | **EXCELLENT** | The proposal demonstrates an **excellent** contribution to and value for campus and the greater community, in addition to value for its individual members. It describes a group that interacts with the campus community on **a regular basis**.
|
| #### **SUSTAINABILITY**
*"How will your group continue to operate and meet recognition requirements in future years?"*
|
| (0) | **INSUFFICIENT** | The proposal **fails to address all categories**, or fails to demonstrate, at minimum, sufficient understanding in all four categories.
|
| (1) | **FAIR** | The proposal addresses all categories, demonstrating a **sufficient** understanding: recruiting and retaining members, transitions and executive turnover, resolving conflict, and democratic electoral processes.
|
| (2) | **GOOD** | The proposal addresses all categories, demonstrating an **advanced** understanding in **two** topics: recruiting and retaining members, transitions and executive turnover, resolving conflict, and democratic electoral processes.
|
| (3) | **GREAT** | The proposal addresses all categories, demonstrating an **advanced** understanding in **three** topics: recruiting and retaining members, transitions and executive turnover, resolving conflict, and democratic electoral processes.
|
| (4) | **EXCELLENT** | The proposal addresses **all categories**, with an **advanced** understanding: recruiting and retaining members, transitions and executive turnover, resolving conflict, and democratic electoral processes.
|
| #### **FINANCES**
*"How will your group track and manage finances with integrity?"*
|
| (0) | **INSUFFICIENT** | The proposal **fails to address all categories**, or fails to demonstrate, at minimum, sufficient understanding in all four categories.
|
| (1) | **FAIR** | The proposal addresses all categories, demonstrating a **sufficient** understanding: the duties and responsibilities of officers, responsible and ethical asset management, the maintenance of financial records, and long-term financial welfare.
|
| (2) | **GOOD** | The proposal addresses all categories, demonstrating an **advanced** understanding in **two** topics: the duties and responsibilities of officers, responsible and ethical asset management, the maintenance of financial records, and long-term financial welfare.
|
| (3) | **GREAT** | The proposal addresses all categories, demonstrating an **advanced** understanding in **three** topics: the duties and responsibilities of officers, responsible and ethical asset management, the maintenance of financial records, and long-term financial welfare.
|
| (4) | **EXCELLENT** | The proposal addresses **all categories**, with an **advanced** understanding: the duties and responsibilities of officers, responsible and ethical asset management, the maintenance of financial records, and long-term financial welfare.
|
| #### **EVENTS & ENGAGEMENT**
*"How will your group host events that engages your membership and solidifies your group's campus identity?"*
|
| (0) | **INSUFFICIENT** | The proposal **fails to address all categories**, or fails to demonstrate, at minimum, sufficient understanding in all four categories.
|
| (1) | **FAIR** | The proposal addresses all categories, demonstrating a **sufficient** understanding: annual timeline and event frequencies, promotional strategies, event logistics, and event(s) relation to the group’s mandate.
|
| (2) | **GOOD** | The proposal addresses all categories, demonstrating an **advanced** understanding in **two** topics: annual timeline and event frequencies, promotional strategies, event logistics, and event(s) relation to the group’s mandate.
|
| (3) | **GREAT** | The proposal addresses all categories, demonstrating an **advanced** understanding in **three** topics: annual timeline and event frequencies, promotional strategies, event logistics, and event(s) relation to the group’s mandate.
|
| (4) | **EXCELLENT** | The proposal addresses **all categories**, with an **advanced** understanding: annual timeline and event frequencies, promotional strategies, event logistics, and event(s) relation to the group’s mandate.
|
| #### **MEMBERSHIP**
*"Students groups must be composed of (at least) ten student members."*
|
| (0) | **AUTO-FAIL** | The proposal petition **fails** to achieve the minimum of ten (10) student members, excluding the founder(s).
|
| (1) | **FAIR** | The proposal petition **succeeds** in garnering at least ten (10) student members, excluding the founder(s).
|
| #### **SELF-RELIANCE**
*"Student groups are student-led initiatives, and must be distinct from any external affiliates."* |
| (0) | **AUTO-FAIL** | The group is tied to an external organization, and is completely reliant in terms of group activities, finances, events, and leadership. The affiliate’s decision may override the group’s autonomy. The affiliate may benefit off the privileges of student groups independent of the club itself.
|
| (1) | **FAIR** | The group is completely independent and has no reliance on external organizations.
Or the group is tied to an external organization, but the group’s relationship with the external organization is in compliance with policies set by Student Group Services.
|