Current through Register 2024 Notice Reg. No. 38, September 20, 2024
(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?
1. New section
filed 8-15-2016; operative 10-1-2016 (Register 2016, No.
34).
Note: Authority cited: Sections
4111,
4212
and
4214,
Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections
4102,
4112,
4113,
4114,
4214,
4740
and
4741,
Public Resources Code.