Utah Admin. Code R650-302-6 - Method and Formula for Determining Infrastructure Grant Amounts
(1)
(a) The
division shall use a weighted scoring system to enable the advisory committee
to analyze, advise, and make recommendations to the division regarding the
award of an infrastructure grant and infrastructure grant amount.
(b) The application shall include the scoring
system.
(c) The scoring system
shall assess and value general categories, including:
(i) needs of the community where the project
will be physically located;
(ii)
economic impact, including the potential to increase area tourism;
(iii) recreational access and
value;
(iv) project readiness;
and
(v) whether the project is
located within an underserved or underprivileged community.
(2) The division shall
distribute the infrastructure grant applications among the advisory committee
members and ensure that each application is reviewed and scored by members of
the advisory committee.
(3) The
division shall use the average of the scores to create a prioritization matrix
ranking the infrastructure grant applications.
(4) The division shall convene the advisory
committee to review the ranked infrastructure grant applications.
(5) In determining infrastructure grant
awards, advisory committee members shall:
(a)
use the prioritization matrix referenced in Subsection (3) to rank the
applications; and
(b) review all
but the lowest ranked applications, as determined by a threshold determined by
the division.
(6) An
advisory committee member may move the advisory committee to review a
low-scoring application that was not scheduled to receive consideration by the
advisory committee.
(7) An advisory
committee member may move the advisory committee to vote to recommend a
infrastructure grant be awarded.
(8) The advisory committee may prioritize
projects:
(a) that conform to the criteria and
eligibility as outlined in the program guide;
(b) that are likely to increase visitation to
the project area;
(c) that will
serve an underserved or underprivileged community;
(d) that will further the goal of providing
geographic distribution of recreation infrastructure throughout the
state;
(e) that are for trails that
are accessible to all members of the public, including trails that are usable
with adaptive equipment.
(f) that
are for trail segments that complete trail gaps;
(g) that will add to connect trails for a
more extensive trail network;
(h)
that will enhance an outdoor recreation amenity that draws tourists;
or
(i) where project applicants
have coordinated with the local tourism office to market the project as a
tourism attraction.
(9)
The division shall provide a synopsis of each project proposed in each
application and each reviewer shall have access to all scored
evaluations.
(10) In accordance
with available funds, the advisory committee shall advise and make
recommendations to the division regarding proposals for funding.
(11) The advisory committee shall forward
recommendations for infrastructure grant awards to the executive director, who
shall approve infrastructure grants to be awarded after consulting with the
division director.
(12) If an
infrastructure grant recipient declines an awarded infrastructure grant, the
division may give the funding to another high-scoring application upon a
recommendation from the advisory committee and approval of the division
director and executive director.
(13) The division shall notify the
infrastructure grant applicant of the funding decision within two weeks of the
executive director's final decision.
(14) The division shall notify each
successful infrastructure grant applicant of expected contractual
requirements.
(15) The division
shall notify each infrastructure grant applicant who was unsuccessful in
obtaining an infrastructure grant award that the applicant's application was
unsuccessful.
(16) A copy of the
reviewers' written comments, with reviewers' names redacted, shall be provided
to rejected infrastructure grant applicants upon request.
Notes
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.