For those categories in the proposal ranking system that have a possible point range, the following shall be used to assign the points.

ITEM #1:

The proposal clearly demonstrates the applicant's understanding of the project work included in the RFP.

POINTS	EVALUATION
20	Demonstrates clearly a complete understanding of the project work
15	Demonstrates an understanding of the major elements of project work
10	Demonstrates a minimal understanding of major elements of project work
5	Demonstrates a poor understanding of the project work
0	Demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the project work

ITEM #2:

Principle project personnel must meet the minimum professional qualifications required for the project.

For this item the score will be either "10" or "0". There is no range.

ITEM #3:

The applicant demonstrates successful experience in carrying out similar types of project work.

POINTS	EVALUATION
20	Demonstrates a great deal of experience in successfully completing this type of project work
15	Demonstrates successful experience in similar project work
10	Demonstrates only limited experience in similar project work
5	Demonstrates experience that could only be considered "similar" in the broadest of interpretations
0	Demonstrates no experience even remotely related to the project work

ITEM #4:

Understanding of the applicable Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines is evident.

POINTS	EVALUATION
20	Evidence of thorough understanding of the applicable standards and guidelines
15	Evidence of understanding of the applicable standards
10	Evidence of minimal understanding of the applicable standards
5	Evidence of extremely limited understanding of the applicable standards and guidelines
0	Evidence of no understanding of the applicable standards and guidelines

ITEM #5

The Subgrantee is a minority organization or firm or is primarily devoted to serving disable persons or is owned by a disabled person.

For this item the score will either be "10" or "0". There is no range of points.

ITEM #6:

The proposal demonstrates the existence of an adequate financial management and accounting system to insure appropriate expenditure of federal funds.

For this item the score will either be "10" or "0". There is no range of points.

ITEM #7:

Proposed budget is sufficient to insure successful completion of the project work, and each cost is reasonable and necessary.

ITEM #8:

On similar projects the applicant performed the work in accordance with the subgrant agreement

POINTS	EVALUATION
10	For its two (2) most recently completed subgrant projects the applicant met all requirements of the subgrant agreement, including submission of products in accordance with the project schedule, unless the SHPO's approval for an amended project schedule was obtained and adequate justification for any delays was demonstrated. Additionally, the draft products submitted required only a reasonable amount of revision, and final products met the requirements of the subgrant agreement.
0	For its two (2) most recently completed subgrant projects the applicant did not meet all requirements of the subgrant agreement, including submission of products in accordance with the project schedule. A pattern of delinquent progress reports and late submission of draft products without request for extensions, and/or the draft products submitted required more than a reasonable amount of revision.