[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 36, Volume 1]
[Revised as of July 1, 2003]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 36CFR72.50]

[Page 389-390]
 
              TITLE 36--PARKS, FORESTS, AND PUBLIC PROPERTY
 
      CHAPTER I--NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
 
PART 72--URBAN PARK AND RECREATION RECOVERY ACT OF 1978--Table of Contents
 
         Subpart D--Grant Selection, Approval and Administration
 
Sec. 72.50  Grant selection criteria.

    Source: 45 FR 71723, Oct. 29, 1980. Redesignated at 46 FR 34329, 
July 1, 1981; correctly redesignated at 46 FR 43045, Aug. 26, 1981, 
unless otherwise noted.


    (a) Recovery Action Program grant selection criteria. The following 
criteria will be used in evaluating Recovery Action Program grant 
applications and in deciding priorities for funding:
    (1) Degree of need for funds to develop a Recovery Action Program 
and an ongoing planning process, including the size and complexity of 
the community's problems, deficiencies in existing planning, and in the 
capability of the community to initiate and sustain continuing planning 
efforts.
    (2) Degree of the community's commitment to systematic planning, 
including financial, personnel and time resources already devoted to 
planning or committed for the future.
    (3) Extent to which current park and recreation planning is 
integrated with overall community planning or would be better integrated 
as a result of the grant, including use of other Federal or State funds 
for related planning purposes.
    (4) Appropriateness and efficiency of the planning program's work 
elements (scope, timing, methodology, staffing and costs) in relation to 
the basic requirements for Recovery Action Programs contained in subpart 
B, Secs. 72.10 through 72.18 (45 FR 15456).
    (b) Rehabilitation Grant Selection Criteria. The following criteria 
will be used to evaluate and rank Rehabilitation proposals:
    (1) The Federal UPARR investment per person served by the entire 
system; relationship between the size of the community and the amount of 
grant funds requested. Highest priority will be given to proposals with 
lower per capita costs in relation to recreation benefits provided.
    (2) Providing neighborhood recreation needs. Higher priority will be 
given to proposals serving close-to-home recreation needs, lower 
priority to those serving area or jurisdiction-wide needs.
    (3) Condition of existing recreation properties to be rehabilitated, 
including the urgency of rehabilitation and the need to maintain 
existing services.
    (4) Improvement in the quality and quantity of recreation services 
as a result of rehabilitation, including improvements at specific sites 
and overall enhancement of the recreation system.
    (5) Improvement of recreation service to minority and low to 
moderate income residents, special populations, and distressed 
neighborhoods.
    (6) Proposal's consistency with local government objectives and 
priorities for overall community revitalization.
    (7) Neighborhood employment opportunities created.
    (8) State participation in the proposal, including financial and 
technical assistance.
    (9) Private participation by both the non-profit and for-profit 
sectors in the proposal, including contributions of financial 
assistance.
    (10) Jurisdiction's commitment to implementing its overall Recovery 
Action Program.
    (c) Innovation Grant Selection Criteria. The following criteria will 
be used to evaluate and rank Innovation proposals:
    (1) Degree to which the proposal provides a new, unique or more 
effective means of delivering a recreation service that can serve as a 
model for other communities.
    (2) Degree of citizen involvement in proposal conceptualization and 
implementation.
    (3) Degree to which the proposal may lead to a positive, systemic 
change in how park and recreation services are provided. Extent to which 
the proposal creates opportunities for new partnerships between the 
people affected, private interests within the community, and public 
agencies (e.g., Mayor's Office, Recreation Department, Board of 
Education, Planning Department, social service agencies).

[[Page 390]]

    (4) Degree of commitment of community and proposal participants to 
continue the long term program objectives, including commitments to 
continue funding after the requested Federal grant money is no longer 
available. Extent of private resources committed to providing funds or 
in-kind services for continuing operation and maintenance of projects.
    (5) Degree to which proposal managers use the Federal funds to 
leverage greater public or private investments (in the form of services 
and materials, as well as dollars).
    (6) Degree to which the proposal provides potential coordination 
with other community, State and Federal programs of community 
development and those providing recreation to the target population 
(e.g., public and private non-profit, education programs, CETA for 
employment, HUD programs).
    (7) Extent of improvement in the quality and quantity of recreation 
services as a result of the Innovation project.
    (8) Degree to which the proposal ties in with goals, priorities and 
implementation strategies expressed in the local park and recreation 
Recovery Action Program.
    (9) Degree to which the proposal leads to a transfer of a recreation 
role traditionally performed by a public entity, to quasi-public or 
private non-profit interests. This degree means the degree to which the 
private sector can take full responsibility, supplement, or fill the 
gaps in public recreation services, management or operation; either 
through a transfer of funding responsibility, or an exchange of 
technique or method approaches which may prove to be more effective 
under the private sector. This should in no way alter the public sector 
responsibility to continue to provide and/or monitor good quality 
recreation facilities and services.
    (10) Degree to which a proposal benefits disadvantaged community 
populations and/or those areas within a distressed community which have 
the greatest recreation deficiencies.
    Note: Innovation proposals for the adaptive reuse of non-recreation 
areas or structures, through rehabilitation for recreation should also 
address rehabilitation selection criteria, particularly the criteria 
covering Federal investment per person served and the degree to which 
the proposal would serve close to home recreation needs.