Skip to main content


Applications for grant funding are assessed by a panel led by Welsh Government.

We assess all applications against the following criteria:

  • strategic fit
  • wellbeing
  • management
  • affordability
  • match funding
  • deliverability
  • monitoring and evaluation
  • promotion

Each criterion has a set of weighted questions that applications must provide evidence for.


Applications are scored based on the quality of evidence provided for each criterion.

Most criteria are scored between 0 and 5:

  • 5 = outstanding evidence
  • 4 = very good evidence
  • 3 = good evidence
  • 2 = adequate evidence
  • 1 = poor evidence
  • 0 = no evidence

The following criteria are scored on separate scales:

  • affordability
  • match funding


Affordability is scored on total scheme cost as follows:

  • 5 = less than £0.1m
  • 4 = £0.1m to £0.24m
  • 3 = £0.25m to £0.49m
  • 2 = £0.5m to £0.99m
  • 1 = £1m to £1.49m
  • 0 = £1.5m and above

Match funding

Match funding is scored on the percentage available as follows:

  • 5 = 40% and above
  • 4 = 30% to 39%
  • 3 = 20% to 29%
  • 2 = 10% to 19%
  • 1 = 1% to 9%
  • 0 = 0% 


Panel members calculate application scores as follows:

  1. evidence for each question is scored against the criterion's scale
  2. this score is multiplied by the question’s weighting value
  3. weighted scores are added together to give the total application score

Panel members then meet to compare individual scores and agree a consensus. 

Assessment criteria

Applications must provide evidence for all questions in each criterion. Score weightings are given alongside each question.

Strategic fit

Does the scheme demonstrate a sound case for change? Does the scheme fit with policies and plans? Weighting: 5

Does the scheme meet the relevant capital grant objectives outlined in the guidance? Weighting: 10


Does the scheme maximise contribution to the Wales Transport Strategy ambitions, which are linked to the well-being goals? Weighting: 10

Does the scheme offer value for money? Weighting: 5


Is the scheme deliverable and have milestones been explained? Have the delivery risks been identified and mitigated? Weighting: 5


What is the total scheme cost to Safe Routes in Communities? Weighting: 4

Match funding

What percentage of match funding is available? Weighting: 4


How will the scheme be procured? Is it viable? Does the contract length fit with the grant terms and conditions? Weighting: 3

Monitoring and evaluation

Does the proposal include a plan for monitoring and evaluation? Weighting: 3


Does the proposal include plans to encourage people to travel more sustainably? Weighting: 3