Attachment 4
SECTION 319 – SHORT TERM PROJECT PROPOSAL EVALUATION FORM
PROPOSAL NO.
Project Type: Urban ____ Agriculture_____ Education Only_____ OSTDS (Septic) _____
Other (describe) _____
PROJECT NAME:
AMOUNT REQUESTED: $
TOTAL PROJECT VALUE: $
LEAD AGENCY:
REVIEWER:
Description
1. Project is located in a developing or adopted BMAP area and contributes to reductions
required in the BMAP.
Yes
No
2. Effectiveness of BMPs.
Staff should use their best professional judgment to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the BMP
(e.g., how effectively do the load reductions of the project contribute to the achievement of the load
allocations in the BMAP/Watershed Plan, or reduce overall impairments to a water body or
protect Outstanding Florida Waters, etc.).
3.
4.
Minimal or no effectiveness (0-50)
Moderately effective (51-100)
Very effective (101-150)
Project measures BMP effectiveness through appropriate means (e.g., monitoring, surveys,
etc.). Score will be based on how thorough an evaluation of the project can be made with
the measures used. Points will be added if the measures provide additional pertinent
information (e.g., not only project effectiveness is measured but effectiveness of each
treatment process in the BMP is measured, such as individual treatment trains).
Note: Monitoring is required for all construction projects.
Project includes a related education component.
Field days, training workshops, demonstrations (0-20)
Score
Score
(0-120)
Score
(0-150)
Score
(0-100)
Score
0-80)
(provide up to 20 points based on what is offered)
Includes training programs, manuals etc. (0-20)
(provide up to 20 points based on what is offered)
Percent/number of target audience educated (0-20)
(provide up to 20 points based on how large and how appropriate the audience is)
Appropriateness of and type of education materials (0-20)
(provide up to 20 points based on how effective in reaching target audience)
5.
6.
7.
Section 319 funds are supplemented by other funding. Match funds as % of total project
cost (319 + match) equal.
40% (0 points)
41 to 50% (10)
51 to 60% (20)
61 to 70% (30)
>70% (40)
Number of contributors providing match as indicated in the budget table.
2 entities (8)
4 entities (23)
3 entities (15)
5 or more entities (30)
Project is designed to reduce the pollutant(s) of concern in a verified impaired waterbody.
For multiple parameters (where each parameter is listed), complete for each parameter,
for up to three parameters. Score for each parameter equals 0.6 x percentage. Item 7
score = sum of scores for up to 3 parameters.
Score
(0-40)
Score
(0-30)
Score
(0-180)
Description
Score
Pts/Pollutant
Score (0-60) Pollutant
Score (0-60) Pollutant
Score (0-60) Pollutant
8.
Score
Project is designed to reduce Total Suspended Solids or Sediments.
Score = 0.6 x percentage for TSS or Sediment reduction (use higher percentage of the two) (0-60)
Score
9. The total value of the proposed project is cost-effective.
(Projects will be evaluated as the total dollar cost per lb pollutant removed as compared to other
(0 - 60)
projects proposed).
10. The grant portion of the proposed project is cost-effective.
(Projects will be evaluated by grant dollar cost per lb pollutant removed compared with other
projects proposed).
11. Innovative use of technologies/BMPs/other.
(Staff should use their best professional judgment to determine score, where treatment trains are
highly valued. 60 points should only be awarded for projects utilizing new technologies not often
seen in applications. Zero points should be awarded for typical projects not utilizing a treatment
train, such as a single pond).
12. Local government (or partner providing at least 10% match) has implemented
stormwater utility or other recurring dedicated fee (must be described in proposal).
No stormwater utility or other fee (0)
Stormwater utility or other fee ERU < $4.30/month (10)
Stormwater utility or other fee ERU > $4.30/month (20)
13. The project is in a low-income area and may be considered an environmental justice
project.
At least 51% of the project’s benefit is received by a special designation area. (20
points)
At least 51% of the project’s benefit is received by an area with median income at
50% or less of the area’s median income. (20 points)
At least 51% of the project’s benefit is received by an area with median income
between 80% and 50.1% of the area’s median income. (10 points)
Total Score:
COMMENTS:
Score
(0 - 60)
Score
(0-60)
Score
(0-20)
Score
(0-40)
To be
inserted