How we score peatland restoration grant applications 2025

This is a competitive grant scheme.  All projects will also be scored for a number of key questions from the application form.  Projects will then be prioritised according to the scoring and funding allocated.

Essential criteria

These must be met by an application so that it can proceed to scoring:

• The proposal must address one or more of the National Peatland Action Programme six priorities
• The peatland must be in Wales, with only the Welsh element of any cross-border proposals considered
• The request from NRW is for between £10,000 - £250,000
• Evidence is included of the applicant having delivered at least one peatland restoration project in the last decade or has provided written confirmation of technical support from a partner who has experience of delivering peatland restoration on the ground and can provide technical support

Applications will be scored, ranked and will be considered together in the relevant panel(s).

Overall, we will be looking to build a balanced portfolio of projects which together address the National Peatlands Action Programme themes, provide a balance between geographical areas and between development and delivery projects.

We will conduct proportionate due diligence checks on all applicants. NRW's financial assessment is completed by NRW's grants team. It is tailored based on the partner type, includes standard due diligence checks and is proportionate based on value and risk. We cover: 

• Know your applicant
• Financial health
• Other sources of funding
• Areas of special concern
  
  

Our assessment questions

1. Is the value of the grant request between £10,000 - £250,000? If 'No', do not proceed.
2. Is the peatland area being restored in Wales? If 'No', do not proceed.
3. Is there a clear understanding of how the project aligns to this grant programme? If 'No', do not proceed.
4. Has evidence been included of the applicant having delivered at least one peatland restoration project in the last decade or written confirmation has been provided of technical support from a partner who has experience of delivering peatland restoration on the ground and can provide technical support? If 'No', do not proceed.
5. Is the project good value - does it deliver the right activities, outputs and outcomes? If the project is delivering peatland restoration, what is the cost per hectare? (Cost per hectare = £ total project cost/hectares restored).
6. Have the relevant permissions or consents been obtained or applied for? Or if consents not yet obtained is there a clear plan for securing? (You should detail consents applied for or how you will obtain any outstanding consents required – such as preapplication correspondence with consenting body. Consents and permissions from NRW need to be applied for separately from any grant application and will follow the usual timescales).
7. Is the proposal founded on good quality evidence? How well has the identified evidence been used to inform the design of the proposal?
8. Are the anticipated outcomes and outputs realistic?
9. Have they clearly set out how they will measure progress against outcomes?
10. How will the outcomes be maintained after the project has ended? Has the external partner considered ongoing costs and how will they will be funded and is it reasonable?  
11. If NRW is not able to fund this project what are the implications? Would there be serious repercussions if we didn't support it or would the project go ahead anyway?
12. Are the activities noted in the project plan realistic, achievable and in line with the aims of the project i.e. could they deliver on the outcomes identified?
13. Are the timescales/ claim periods realistic and deliverable? All project costs need to be claimed by 31 March 2026.
14. Does the project have sufficient governance, proportionate to its size and risk, to achieve delivery?
15. Are risks appropriately identified and do they have appropriate mitigation measures in place?
16. Who are the other partners engaged in this project and are they relevant and appropriate?
17. How well does the proposal consider how people from diverse backgrounds and all abilities are given the opportunity to take part in project?
18. How well does the proposal consider, use and promote the Welsh language?
19. Are the detailed costings on the uploaded project costs breakdown reasonable and achievable?
20. What is the quality of the proposal as a whole?
    
    

How we score evidence