Species Project Evaluation Criteria
Time on the Ground
General information about evaluating the time a species project has been on the ground can be found in the Project Start Date section. Although individual project Scoring Rubrics should be consulted for specific requirements, generally species projects require a full breeding season. It is important to note that the time periods associated with breeding seasons vary by species and location, so Scoring Rubrics do not provide a specific amount of time. Reviewers use their professional knowledge to assess if the duration has been sufficient to provide conservation value. As a result, a full year is recommended to ensure sufficient time on the ground.
Locally Appropriate
General information about how to determine if a specific species is native to the region is provided in the Locally Appropriate section. With the exception of the Invasive Species project type, all other species projects are determined to be locally appropriate if the targeted species are native to the region. Targeting of any native species designates a project as locally appropriate so inclusion of a non-native species (e.g. honey bees) in a list of targeted species does not negate other native species that are listed. The project can still earn points for the work done to address native species if information and documentation for the native species is included throughout the project (i.e., habitat needs, monitoring, etc. are all addressed for the native species).
When noting the targeted species, make sure the targeted species or group of species is specific. Reviewers can only award points for consistent information presented throughout the application. If information and documentation is only presented for one species out of five being targeted, then points will only be awarded for that one species consistently represented. If one species is not consistently represented throughout the application, the project is unlikely to qualify.
Habitat Needs Addressed
Applicant understanding
Documentation requiredHabitat/life cycle needs do not need to be added if they are already available in the area. For example, an existing pond can address the water need for deer (provided it is accessible and banks are not too steep for access etc.)
Design Considerations
Applicant understandingDocumentation requiredSpecies Management
Applicant understandingDocumentation requiredPopulation Management
This criterion recognizes population management efforts designed to accomplish specific goals (such as increasing genetic diversity or improving health by reducing overconsumption of resources). Generalized population “support” efforts, such as habitat conservation or enhancement or the creation of nesting structures, are not recognized under this criterion as they are recognized elsewhere in the review.
Specific Threat to the Species
Applicant understandingActions to target these specific threats can play an important role in conservation. In order to earn points for this criterion, the specific threat must be listed in the application and a description of the actions being taken to address the threat should be included. Considerations to address general threats, such as providing habitat components or supporting populations, are not recognized through this criterion as they are recognized elsewhere in the review.
Baseline Data
Applicant understanding Documentation requiredMonitoring Protocol
Applicant understandingSee the Monitoring Protocol section for habitat projects. A species monitoring protocol is relevant if it would inform assessment of the species (instead of the habitat).
Monitoring Implementation
Documentation requiredEvaluation of Monitoring
See the Evaluation of Monitoring section for habitat projects.
Connectivity
Applicant understandingConnectivity of species’ habitats and coordinated management of species provide additional conservation value. Refer to specific Scoring Rubrics for details on how connectivity is assessed for each project type.
