N.M. Admin. Code § 19.1.3.12
Factor | Level 4 | Level 3 | Level 2 | Level 1 |
Serves purposes of the Natural Heritage Conservation Act | Clearly serves all purposes | Clearly serves multiple purposes | Clearly serves one purpose and may serve others | Questionable if any purposes are adequately served |
Extent of matching cash and in-kind financial support | Applicant/Partner provide more than 75% of project costs | Applicant/Partner provide 50 to 75% of project costs | Applicant/Partner provide 25 to 49% of project costs | Applicant/Partner provide less than 25% of project costs |
Qualifications and ability of applicant and partners to complete and maintain proposed project | Substantial past experience and continuing capability to do proposed work and follow-up | Demonstrated completions of similar work and is fully structured to do similar work | Demonstrates some past ability and basic documented qualifications and infrastructure | Indicates uncertain capability or has no prior experience and necessary infrastructure |
Degree of fostering existing conservation plans, strategies and initiatives (PSIs) specified in the cycle announcement | Project has substantial relation to most PSIs and directly fosters several | Project clearly fosters multiple PSIs and directly relates to several | Project has clear relation to one PSI and possible service to others | Project has uncertain relation to any PSIs or no clear degree of fostering |
Potential for benefits at landscape or ecosystem scale | Substantial landscape and ecological scale benefits are evident in completed work | Substantial landscape or ecological scale benefits are evident in completed work | Desired scale benefits are evident, but are judged minimal | No clear benefits are evident at desired scale |
Potential for improved public access to outdoor recreation opportunities on or off project site | Multiple enhanced recreation opportunities are evident, including hunting and fishing | Some enhanced outdoor recreation opportunities are evident and have prospect for growth | Some enhanced outdoor recreation opportunities are evident but are limited | Proposal has no discernible outdoor recreation elements |
Potential economic benefits of completed project | Project has multiple economic benefits at multiple scales | Project has some economic benefits locally and broader | Project shows economic benefits, at least locally | Project has no discernible economic benefits |
Complementary or strategic values through proximity to other ongoing or completed conservation actions, including any priority areas formally identified by the committee | Project is within a priority area or directly links to nearby completed or ongoing conservation actions and provides added heritage values | Project is within a priority area but has limited relationship to other conservation actions that will provide synergistic heritage values | Project is not within a priority area but has proximity to other actions that may provide synergy or economy of scale or cost effectiveness | Project has no proximity to other conservation endeavors and is not otherwise distinctive as a starting point |
Degree of readiness to start and complete project on timely schedule | Readiness and time schedule are clear and background work is complete; timely execution is essentially assured | Readiness and time schedule are clear and reasonable to the project, but could experience some delay | Readiness and time schedule are clear, but have acknowledged or likely delays inconsistent with the nature of the project | Readiness and completion scheduling is unspecified, unclear or uncertain |
Degree and extent of partner involvement | Multiple entity project where reasonable partnering is included with clear and substantive involvement and contribution | Multiple entity project where reasonable partnering is included beyond minimal but is not extensive | Single or multiple entity project where partnering is included, but is minimal | Single entity project with no partner involvement when such partnership is possible and advised |
Likely long-term success and sustainability | Project is well-described and accomplishable with substantive provisions for sustained maintenance and routine outcome assurance | Project is well-described and accomplishable with basic provisions for sustained maintenance and periodic outcome assessment | Project is inherently achievable but contains limited provisions for maintenance over the long-term | Project appears basically achievable, but long-term outcome is questionable or uncertain |
N.M. Admin. Code § 19.1.3.12