Each criterion for a project will receive a base score of 0-10. The base score is then multiplied by the criterion weight (shown in parentheses), which yields the score for that criterion. The total application score is the sum of all criteria scores. FWP staff review and rank OHV applications with input from the Off-Highway Vehicle Advisory Committee.

1. Safety and Ethics Education. The degree to which the project supports OHV ethics and safety educational needs pertinent to the statewide program. The degree to which the project meets OHV educational needs and the level at which this objective is clearly stated. In addition, the degree to which the application successfully outlines educational goals for the project. (Weight = 4).



2. Resource Enhancement and Protection. The degree to which to project enhances and/or protects natural resources, considers avoidance of problem areas or mitigates unavoidable damage to the resources. Examples include such things as rehabilitation of trail areas damaged by use or natural catastrophes, soil erosion control, avoidance of wet areas or critical wildlife habitat, bridges or fords to reduce stream impacts, etc. (Weight = 4).



3. Safety. The degree to which the project addresses “user hazards” and the level at which it outlines how these hazards will be eliminated (Weight = 3).



4. Linkages. The degree to which the project provides linkages between existing trails, trail systems, greenways, scenic byways or other natural, cultural, historical and recreation areas (Weight = 2).



5. Access. The degree to which the project site is easily accessible to the general public, or in the case of an educational project, the degree to which the information is easily accessible to the general public (Weight = 2).



6. Benefit To Most. The degree to which the project provides for a recreational opportunity to a wide variety of individuals, greatest number of compatible recreation purposes, or unique or innovative corridor-sharing techniques (Weight = 2).



7. Quality Of Application. This criterion in an incentive to write an excellent, complete application as described in the entire application package (Weight = 2).



8. ADA and Special Needs. The degree to which the project addresses access by special-needs groups, such as senior citizens. Alternatively, the degree to which the project addresses the needs of people with disabilities—as covered by the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (Weight = 1).



9. Noxious Weeds. The degree to which the weed plan is comprehensive. The plan should include such things as a map of weed distribution, a list of control strategies, a schedule for implementing controls, and an indication of who will be in charge of weed control—both now and in the future (Weight = 1).