736-055-0010 Standards and Criteria for Project Selection As federal historic preservation monies subject to state discretion become available for allocation, office staff will review grant requests on file and, using the following standards and criteria, select projects for offers of grant. The criteria will be used to prioritize projects for funding. It is important to understand that projects do not compete with the criteria, but instead compete with each other for available funds. The criteria are used to prioritize project applications for funding. Selected projects may be offered all or part of the federal funds requested. (1) Acquisition Projects. Because the expense of appraisals and other procurement requirements tends to make projects that result in the acquisition of properties less cost effective than development projects, acquisition projects will only be considered as a means to save properties from loss or destruction. Acquisition projects that result in public or private nonprofit ownership of properties will receive priority consideration over projects that result in private ownership. Staff will also take into account those criteria for development projects which reasonably apply to acquisition projects when selecting acquisition projects. (2) Development Projects. Staff will take into account the following criteria when selecting projects for the development of historic properties: (a) Project Readiness — some proposed projects have more highly developed plans, more matching funds available, and are in other ways more ready to proceed than other projects. Staff will review information supplied by project proponents and categorize each project according to readiness as follows: (A) Primary — includes projects which are well along in the planning stages, have readily available matching funds, and will be able to proceed immediately upon an offer of grant. (B) Secondary — includes projects which have some planning completed and/or some but not all matching funds available. Projects in this category must be able to proceed in a reasonable amount of time if a grant offer is made. (C) Possible — includes projects that don’t fit into the above two categories. These are projects where a starting date is unsure, matching funds are unsure, etc. (b) Relative Significance of the Property — though all properties must be listed in the National Register to be eligible for grant funding, some properties are of comparatively greater significance than others. Proposed projects will be compared to each other for level of local, statewide or national significance; rarity of type; and similar criteria of significance when funding selections are made. In historic districts, properties are rated by their significance to the district as primary, secondary, contributing, and noncontributing. Noncontributing properties are not eligible for grant assistance. (c) Visibility and Educational or Interpretive Potential — the degree to which projects inform, educate, and otherwise lend themselves to public benefit and enjoyment will be considered when funding selections are made. In addition, the following criteria will be applied with regard to archeological development projects: (A) Project has a clear research design. (B) Project benefits statewide inventory efforts and site survey files. (C) Project promotes the preservation of archeological sites. (D) Project increases data for understanding prehistory, settlement patterns, land use, population, land adaptation, etc.; or project data recovery is applicable to restoration needs. (E) Project fosters public awareness of archeological values and reduces vandalism. (F) Project benefits Native Americans by increasing the awareness of their history and culture. (G) Project perpetuates cultural traditions of Native Americans. (d) Significance of Work to be Performed — The significance of development work to be performed will be considered in this descending order of priority: (A) The work is essential to the saving of the property from loss or destruction. (B) The work preserves or restores the researched and documented historical authenticity and appearance of the property. (C) The work betters the economic viability of the property. (e) Impact on Other Properties (“Ripple Effect”) — the degree to which projects may stimulate improvement to nearby or similar kinds of properties of historical value will be considered. For example, improvements to one property in a neighborhood frequently encourage nearby owners to improve their properties as well. Or, a project that demonstrates ways to retain, enhance, or use a kind of property may encourage owners of similar kinds of properties elsewhere to take similar action. (f) Ratio of Match — though minimum matching ratios are established for federal grant funds, some project proponents are able to exceed the minimum requirement. Because federal historic preservation funds are limited, and because higher ratios of match enable these funds to accomplish more, the ratio of match available will be considered. (g) Quality of Previous Work — whether or not previous preservation work performed by or on behalf of the proponent, if any, was performed in accordance with standards of preservation practice such as the “Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Preservation Projects,” and was adequately planned and documented, will be considered. If previous work was grant-assisted, the proponent’s ability to administer grant funds will also be taken into account. (h) Geographic Distribution — federal historic preservation monies will be distributed in general proportion to the distribution of identified historical resources statewide and the number of people who may potentially benefit from them. Because an important project in one location may require substantial funding, this does not mean that monies will necessarily be distributed equitably in any one fiscal year, though an effort to do so will be made. If does mean, however, that monies will be reasonably distributed throughout the state over a ten-year period. (3) Survey and Planning Projects: It is the long-range objective of the State Historic Preservation Office to compile a comprehensive inventory of all properties in the state which may be of historical significance, and also to complete enough inventory information about prehistoric sites to predict probable location of these sites. Pending availability, federal funds are allocated by the office for surveys to compile these inventories, and also to plan development projects (though it is better to include planning as part of development projects). When allocating these funds, staff will take the following criteria into account: (a) Survey Projects: (A) Need — the completeness of previous surveys and the degree to which the proposed survey will expand inventory information will be evaluated. (B) Probability — the likelihood that the survey area contains prehistoric or significant historic resources will be evaluated. Surveys of areas with potentially greater numbers of higher concentrations of resources will receive higher priority, other factors being equal, than surveys of areas of lesser numbers or concentration of resources. (C) Scope — the comprehensiveness of the proposed survey will be evaluated. Surveys that include the identification of all historic as well as prehistoric resources in a given area and surveys to identify all of one kind of resource (for example, all wooden barns before 1940) in a large area (such as a large metropolitan center or an entire county) will receive priority over surveys to identify limited kinds of resources in limited areas, if enough grant money is available to undertake the larger project. (D) Sponsorship — generally, recognition of the proposed survey for land-use planning purposes by the appropriate unit or units of local government will be regarded as a precondition to the award of survey funds. In addition, provision to make the survey results (except archeological site information) available to the public at the local level will always be regarded as a precondition to funding. (E) Objective and Procedure — the proposed project’s research design, methodology, procedure, organization, and duration will be evaluated for clarity, completeness and feasibility. It is important to note that the intent of survey funding is to assist projects with beginning and ending dates and clearly defined statements of purpose, rather than to fund ongoing programs. (F) Matching Share and Administration — the nature and amount of matching share will be evaluated for accountability and facility of administration. Also, the survey project proponent’s ability to keep administrative records will be evaluated. It is preferred that all survey projects be sponsored by and administered through units of local government. (b) Planning Projects — the criteria which apply to Development Projects above will be applied to the selection of planning projects. Generally, planning funds will be awarded only when an especially important or complex project requires a lengthy planning process before construction can begin, or the nature of the project entails no construction or tangible development. Otherwise, the project planning costs should be included in Acquisition and Development grant costs. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 390 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 358.612 & 358.617 History: PR 3-1981, f. & ef. 2-26-81