Solar for Schools: Readiness Score Estimator

The thing most districts don't know

Selection at Step 1 is a 96-point score, not a queue. Submitting on the first day scores exactly the same as submitting on the last day. And roughly 60 of those 96 points cost nothing, they are decisions about sequencing, one phone call, and one document.

What that means for you: take the full window. Get the score right rather than getting it in early. The part that is first-come-first-served is Step 2, the full grant application due 4 January 2027, that one rewards being early.

Score your district

Eight criteria, straight from the RFP's evaluation rubric. Answer honestly, the point is to see where the free points are.

What system size maximizes your grant

The grant rate steps down as systems get bigger. Most districts don't realize this and leave money on the table.

Find your district

Selecting your district fills in the state finance figures for you. Everything below stays editable.

ANTC per pupil unit

In Xcel electric territory?

All-in cost ($/W DC)

Construction plus development, interconnection and soft costs. Not the construction price alone.

Is the building in Minneapolis?

Minneapolis runs a city cost-share program on top of the state grant.

Anticipated Green Zone status

Check the map

Prior Solar for Schools grants ($)

Cumulative across every grant the district has ever received.

System size	Grant rate	Grant	Grant per watt	What limits it

Biggest grant, or best rate? They are usually different sizes.

What Step 1 actually asks for

None of this requires you to hire anyone or commit any money.

Item	Effort
Project ID from Commerce, one email per building	Free, permanent, carries across rounds forever
24 months of electricity use at the identified meter	Commerce publishes a fill-in grid; only one actual bill is required
Xcel territory: describe utility communications	No filing yet — Xcel signs nothing and no application number is needed at this stage
Signature from an authorized representative	Superintendent or business manager. No board resolution needed for a standard application, only for a grant-cap petition
Curriculum plan with named staff	A district-level plan is acceptable
Roof age, condition, warranty status	Facilities knows this already
System size determination	Locked here. Hard to change later
Funding structure	Funding does not need to be secured

The real schedule driver in this table is the CERTs consultation (covered in the scoring section above) — book it early, the calendar fills. Nothing in this table is a board matter, and no interconnection application is filed or fee paid at this stage: that happens after the grant is awarded, once a developer is selected, as a milestone during the 24-month grant contract term.

of 96 points

Answer the questions →

Email yourself a copy (optional — nothing is sent anywhere but your own inbox)

What we'd do, and what it costs you

We run the sizing analysis and hand you the memo. No cost, no obligation, and you keep it whether or not we ever work together.

Said plainly, because you'll find out anyway: if your district runs an RFP for this project, we intend to bid it. Helping with the sizing analysis doesn't and shouldn't change that, disclose our involvement and hold us to the same standard as every other bidder. Commerce requires competitive procurement here regardless of how the project is financed, so there is no version of this where anyone gets sole-sourced.

We are based in south Minneapolis; we have not yet delivered a Minnesota project, our school solar work so far is in Connecticut. What we can offer today is the grant analysis, and you can judge it on its own merits.

Sources. Scoring rubric: RFP COMM-SFS09-20260202, Section VI.B, Table 4. Grant rates and caps: Minnesota Department of Commerce, “Learn More About the Grant” (rate chart amended February 4 2026). Size and building-ownership limits: Minn. Stat. 216C.375 subd. 5. Procurement, reimbursement and PPA rules: Commerce Comprehensive Q&A (Attachment 8). Round 2 dates: Commerce, “Complete Readiness Assessment.” Step 1 vs. Step 2 requirements: RFP §V. Post-award interconnection timing: Exhibit D, Sample Grantee Duties; Minnesota Distributed Interconnection Process, April 2025.

This estimator reproduces Commerce's published rubric and rate chart as an aid. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Department of Commerce, and the Department's determination governs. Grant figures use an assumed installed cost and a standard Minnesota production estimate; your real numbers depend on your metered consumption, because a system may not exceed 120% of the building's annual use.

Prepared by Green Harp Holdings LLC d/b/a Green Harp Consulting · connor@greenharp.consulting · mnschoolsolar.greenharp.consulting · as of July 30, 2026