BII Early Innovators Grant Evaluation

Applications must meet these two baseline criteria to proceed to the scoring phase.

• UCPH Affiliation: At least one founding team member is a current Bachelor, Master, or PhD student at the University of Copenhagen, or has graduated within the past 2 years at the time of application.
• Lighthouse Residency: The applicant is a Resident at UCPH Lighthouse or agrees to become one and maintain active engagement within the community for the duration of the grant.

Reviewers assign a score from 1 (Poor) to 10 (Exceptional) for each category.

1. Mission Alignment (25%)

Focus: Does the idea fall within the scope of Human Health, Planetary Health, Societal Resilience, or Quantum?

• 8–10 (Exceptional): The project is central to a BII focal area with a clearly demonstrated link to BII’s mission of benefiting people and society.
• 4–7 (Good): The project is relevant to a BII area, though the specific link could be more explicitly defined.
• 1–3 (Poor): The project has a weak or tenuous link to the BII focal areas.

2. Idea Articulation (10%)

Focus: The clarity and presentation of the solution and its objectives.

• 8–10 (Exceptional): The solution is expertly defined, easy to understand, and the objectives are precise and logical.
• 4–7 (Good): The idea is well-articulated, but the specific objectives may be slightly broad.
• 1–3 (Poor): The solution is poorly defined, making it difficult to understand the core concept.

3. Value & Innovation (15%)

Focus: The novelty of the approach and its potential to deliver social, cultural, or economic value.

• 8–10 (Exceptional): Offers a novel approach that differentiates itself from current standards; strong potential for measurable impact in its focal area.
• 4–7 (Good): Demonstrates awareness of existing solutions with a solid value proposition that adds value over current practices.
• 1–3 (Poor): Low innovation; similar to current methods with minimal potential for added value.

4. Validation Plan & Feasibility (25%)

Focus: The logic and realism of the proposed steps (e.g., prototyping, market exploration).

• 8–10 (Exceptional): Highly realistic plan with logical milestones achievable within the 12-month grant period.
• 4–7 (Good): Logical plan for validation that shows a good understanding of what is needed to progress the idea.
• 1–3 (Poor): Unclear objectives; the plan does not logically lead to solution validation.

5. Team Commitment (10%)

Focus: Are the applicants dedicating adequate time and resources to develop their idea?

• 8–10 (Exceptional): The team demonstrates a strong commitment to actively develop the solution and meet all proposed milestones during the grant period. They have allocated sufficient time and resources to ensure the project's success.
• 4–7 (Good): The team appears dedicated and ready to progress the solution, with a reasonable allocation of time for the project.
• 1–3 (Poor): Commitment level is unclear; the time or resources allocated appear insufficient to meaningfully develop the idea or hit milestones.

6. Financial Relevance & Realism (15%)

Focus: Whether the requested amount (up to DKK 100,000) is justified by the proposed activities.

• 8–10 (Exceptional): Budget is specific and every expense (materials, travel, equipment) is directly linked to a validation milestone.
• 4–7 (Good): Budget is generally relevant and reasonable for the proposed scope of work.
• 1–3 (Poor): Requested funding is vague or includes costs not related to solution validation.

How the Weighted Score is Calculated

The final score is a reflection of the project’s alignment with the BII Foundation’s mission and the feasibility of the proposed validation steps. Follow these three steps:

1. Assign Raw Scores Rate each of the five categories on a scale of 1 to 10 based on the qualitative descriptions in the matrix.

• 1–3: Poor (Lacks detail, low innovation, or weak alignment).
• 4–7: Good (Clear plan, research-based, and meets core requirements).
• 8–10: Exceptional (Highly innovative, excellent mission fit, and very realistic).

2. Apply the Weighting

Multiply your raw score for each category by its assigned percentage weight to get the Weighted Score for that section.

• Mission Alignment (25%): Raw Score × 0.25
• Idea Articulation (10%): Raw Score × 0.10
• Value and Innovation (15%): Raw Score x 0.15
• Validation Plan (25%): Raw Score × 0.25
• Team Commitment (10%): Raw Score × 0.10
• Financial Realism (15%): Raw Score × 0.15

3. Determine the Total Score

Add the five weighted scores together to reach the Total Weighted Score (out of a maximum of 10.0).

Reviewer Guidelines and Thresholds

• Minimum Threshold: Applications generally require a Total Weighted Score of 7.0 or higher to be recommended for funding.
• Financial Scrutiny: Because the total grant pool is capped at DKK 650,000, reviewers must ensure the requested amount (up to DKK 100,000) is strictly necessary for the validation activities described.
• Final Approval: Your recommendation based on this score will be forwarded to the BII Foundation for final approval.

Example Calculation:

If a project receives a 10 for Mission Alignment and a 6 for Financial Realism:

Mission Alignment: 10 × 0.25 = 2.5

Financial Realism: 6 × 0.15 = 0.9