(a) The following 100 point scale shall be used to evaluate and rank Projects eligible for funding under the SRAFPF Grant Program. The evaluator shall award points based on how strongly the Application addresses each criterion.
(b) Projects shall be evaluated for the first 25 points based on the Project specific criteria below. The most appropriate evaluation criteria for the type of Project being proposed (hazardous fuel reduction, fire prevention planning, or fire prevention education) shall be chosen. For Projects proposing multiple distinct Project types (e.g. hazardous fuel reduction and fire prevention education), each Project type shall be evaluated independently, and the average of those scores for the first 25 points shall be taken.
(1) Hazardous fuel reduction criteria, 25 points:
(A) Is the geographic scope of the Project, including the number of Habitable Structures in the SRA that will benefit, clearly defined?
(B) Are the goals, objectives and outcomes of the Project well-defined?
(C) Does the Project provide a clear rationale for how the Project will benefit Habitable Structures within the SRA? Are additional assets at risk clearly identified? This includes Habitable Structures and vital community infrastructure including, but not limited to, domestic and municipal water supplies, power lines, communication facilities, and community centers.
(D) Is the scale of the Project appropriate to achieve the stated goals, objectives and outcomes?
(2) Fire prevention planning criteria, 25 points:
(A) Is the geographic scope of the Project, including the number of Habitable Structures that will benefit, clearly defined?
(B) Does the Project propose to assess risks to residents and Habitable Structures in the SRA and prioritize Projects to systematically treat that risk over time?
(C) Is the Project compatible with and build upon previous wildfire prevention planning efforts?
(D) Does the Project identify a diverse group of key stakeholders to collaborate with throughout the planning process? Does this group include local, state and federal officials?
(E) Does the planning process contain pathways for community involvement such as public meetings or presentations at community events?
(3) Fire prevention education criteria, 25 points:
(A) Does the Project identify the specific message of the education program and how it relates to reducing the risk of wildfire to owners of Habitable Structures in the SRA?
(B) Is the target audience of the education program and the mode of information distribution well defined?
(C) Will the education program raise awareness of homeowner responsibilities of living in a fire prone environment?
(D) Does the education program include information on actions that can be taken to increase the preparedness of residents and Habitable Structures in the SRA for wildfire?
(E) What is the expected outcome of the education in terms of increased or changed public awareness about wildfire?
(c) Criteria for all Projects, 75 points:
(1) Relationship to Strategic Plans, 20 points: Does the proposed Project support the goals and objectives of the California Strategic Fire Plan, the local CAL FIRE Unit Fire Plan, a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), or other long term planning document?
(2) Degree of Risk, 15 points:
(A) Is the proposed Project located within an area designated as moderate, high, or very high fire hazard severity zone as identified by the latest FRAP maps?
(B) Is the proposed Project located within the wildland urban interface in close proximity to Habitable Structures at risk to damage from wildland fire?
(3) Community Support, 15 points:
(A) Does the Project propose matching funds or in-kind contributions that will extend the impact of the proposed Project?
(B) Does the proposed Project include plans for external communications such as planned press releases, Project signage, community meetings or field tours?
(C) Does the proposed Project include a plan to maintain the Project after the grant period has ended?
(D) Does the proposed Project work with other organizations or agencies to address fire hazard reduction at the landscape level?
(4) Project Implementation, 10 points:
(A) Is the timeline for Project implementation and completion reasonable and achievable and are seasonal operating restrictions taken into account?
(B) Does the Project include milestones to measure the Project's progress?
(C) Does the Project include measurable outcomes to evaluate the Project's success?
(D) If applicable, how shall the requirements of CEQA be met?
(5) Budget, 10 points:
(A) Does the proposed budget clearly show how the grant funds shall be spent to support the goals and objectives of the Project?
(B) Are the per unit costs reasonable for the activity in the proposed geographic area?
(C) Is the total cost appropriate for the size, scope, and anticipated benefit of the Project?
(D) Are the proposed Administrative Costs clearly shown to be necessary for successful Project implementation?
(E) Are the Administrative Costs to be paid by the FPF grant less than 12% of the grant request?
(6) Administration, 5 points:
(A) Does the Project proponent have experience successfully delivering the type of Project proposed?
(B) If not, has the Project proponent partnered with an organization that can support their Project as proposed?
(C) Does the Project proponent identify who shall be responsible for tracking Project expenses and maintaining Project records?
Credits
Note: Authority cited: Sections 4111, 4212 and 4214, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 4102, 4112, 4113, 4114, 4214, 4740 and 4741, Public Resources Code.
