Grassland LIP Grants: Project Selection Process

How will grassland proposals be selected for funding?

To fund the best projects, allot funds most effectively, and provide the greatest ecological benefit for our at-risk species, DEC will rank proposals through a three-stage process that considers both quantitative and qualitative factors, placing each proposal into a priority funding level. The cost effectiveness of a proposal will be determined by the number of grassland bird species that can be protected through grant funding. (A sample pre-application and proposal scoring are shown in Appendix B - Page 17.)

STAGE 1- PRE-APPLICATION QUANTITATIVE SCORING:

All pre-applications received will be scored by the DEC program coordinator (the coordinator) using quantitative criteria specific to grassland bird ecology. In addition to the basic information provided by an applicant in the Pre-application, data relating to these criteria will be gathered by Audubon NY from the 2^nd New York State Breeding Bird Atlas (BBA) surveys and through current high-definition aerial photography of New York State. These data will be used to calculate a point score for each of the following criteria:

Diversity: Number of species from the at-risk species list documented as possibly, probably or confirmed breeding in the Breeding Bird Atlas block(s) in which the proposed project is located. The Breeding Bird Atlas is a state-wide comprehensive survey that will show the distribution of bird species that breed in New York State.

Score:

For endangered, threatened or special-concern species - each species present x 15 points.
For non-listed species - each species present x 5 points

Colonization Potential: Number of additional species (not identified above) from the at-risk species list documented as possibly breeding (or higher) in the BBA blocks contiguous to the one in which the proposed project is located. These neighboring species would serve to colonize the subject parcel after habitat management.

Score:

For endangered, threatened, or special concern species - each species present x 9 points.
For non-listed species - each species present x 3 points

Size: Acreage to be enhanced or maintained. The greater the contiguous acreage, the better for grassland birds.

Score:

Less than 10 acres - number of acres x 0.5 points
10-25 acres - number of acres x 1 points
26-50 acres - number of acres x 1.1 points
51-100 acres - number of acres x 1.2 points
100 or more acres - number of acres x 1.5 points

Perimeter/Area Ratio: This ratio is calculated by comparing the perimeter, or edge, of a parcel to the area, or interior. Interior habitat is preferable for many grassland bird species as there are generally fewer disturbances, predators and social parasites, such as the brown-headed cowbird, which lays its eggs in the nests of other birds, in an interior location as opposed to on the edge of a parcel. Therefore, a low perimeter/area ratio has greater habitat value. This is another way of considering the shape of a grassland parcel. Thus, a perfectly square parcel is preferable to a long and thin rectangular one of the same area.

Score:

Good: Perimeter/Area less than to 0.01 = 25 points
Neutral: Perimeter/Area greater or equal to 0.01 and less than 0.025= 0 points
Bad: Perimeter/Area equal to or greater than 0.025 = -25 points

Surrounding Beneficial Landscape Ratio: This is a measure of the suitability of the surrounding habitat for grassland birds. If a project site is adjacent to other grasslands or other non-forested or developed habitat, it increases the value of the parcel to the target species, increasing the score for the project. For this score, habitat within one kilometer of the edge of the parcel will be considered.

Score:

Good: Beneficial area/Total area is equal to or greater than 0.45 = 10 points
Neutral: Beneficial area/Total less than 0.45 and greater than 0.25 = 0 points
Bad: Beneficial area/Total less than or equal to 0.25 = -10 points

Based on the above criteria, a total number of points will be tallied. Scores that total below the sum of 50 will be categorized as "Low," scores between 50 and 100 will be categorized as "Medium," and scores greater than 100 will be categorized as "High." Pre-applications categorized as "Low" will be returned to the applicant with an accompanying letter and will not be considered further. Pre-applications categorized as "Medium" and "High" will move on to the Stage 2 qualitative evaluation.

Audubon NY will work with landowners whose pre-applications are categorized as "Medium" and "High" (scoring 50 points and higher under Stage 1) to develop a "draft" SMP. Development of the SMP may require DEC or Audubon NY to visit the proposed property site.

A state expert review panel will evaluate each draft SMP in the Stage 2 evaluation process identified below.

STAGE 2 - QUALITATIVE EVALUATION OF DRAFT SITE-MANAGEMENT PLANS:

The proposed project, as described in the draft SMP, will be evaluated by a panel of expert State staff using their best professional judgment to assess a project in each of the following three categories:

Project Conservation Benefit: Will the proposed project significantly improve ecological conditions for the target species at the site?

Threats Assessment: If the project is not done, what is the probability that the site will become crop land, developed or otherwise become unsuitable for the target species?

Feasibility of Success: How likely is it that the project will be successful in accomplishing its stated goals?

Each member of the review panel will individually rate each proposal in three qualitative categories as "High," "Medium," or "Low." An overall rating will be assigned for each category based on a simple plurality of the team.

STAGE 3- METHOD OF AWARD AND ASSIGNMENT OF FUNDING PRIORITIES:

Combining the quantitative and qualitative scores

Once DEC has finished the quantitative scoring and qualitative evaluation for all eligible proposals, projects will be classified into priority levels according to the following matrix:

Quantitative Score	Qualitative Score High	Qualitative Score Medium	Qualitative Score Low
High (100+)	Priority 1	Priority 3	Priority 5
Medium (50 - 100)	Priority 2	Priority 4	Priority 6
Low (Less than 50)	N/A¹	N/A	N/A

¹ N/A = proposals that were ranked "Low" during the Quantitative Scoring will not be considered for selection

Projects classified as Priority Levels 1 through 3 will automatically be awarded a grant as long as funding allows. If the funding is insufficient to fund all Priority Level 1-3 projects, projects will be selected for funding in descending priority (i.e., beginning with Priority Level 1, then 2, then 3) until funding is exhausted.
Projects classified as Priority Level 4 will be considered individually and will be funded only if the total amount awarded for Priority 1 through 3 projects for that year is 10 percent or less of the total available funds remaining for the Program.
If there is insufficient funding to pay for all Priority Level 3 projects, they will be selected in descending project score. In the unlikely event that two projects receive the same score and sufficient remaining funds remain to fund only one of the projects, DEC will decide which project to fund based on the cost efficiency of the projects and the need for the protection of specific species cited in the projects.
Project proposals that are not funded in Priority Level 4 and those in Priority Levels 5 through 8, will be returned to the applicant with an explanation of why they were not selected. Landowners may revise their unfunded proposals and resubmit them during the next open application period.