Configuration

Scoring Criteria

Manage the weighted criteria used to evaluate and prioritize project proposals.

Criteria6evaluation dimensions

Total weight100%must equal 100%

Scored69finalized projects

In progress2being evaluated

Each project proposal is evaluated against these criteria during the scoring phase. Assessors rate every criterion on a 1–5 scale. The weighted score (0–100) determines the proposal’s position in the priority ranking queue.

Strategic and plan alignment

Strength of linkage to the CDP, LDIP, AIP, and current municipal priorities.

Priority #1 25% weight 1–5 rating scale

25%

Weight

Urgency and public need

Severity, service gap, and urgency of the problem the proposal addresses.

Priority #2 20% weight 1–5 rating scale

20%

Weight

Beneficiary reach and equity

Scale of benefit and inclusion of vulnerable or underserved sectors.

Priority #3 20% weight 1–5 rating scale

20%

Weight

Technical readiness

Feasibility, site readiness, supporting studies, and implementation capacity.

Priority #4 15% weight 1–5 rating scale

15%

Weight

Financial viability

Cost reasonableness, fund eligibility, and affordability within fiscal constraints.

Priority #5 10% weight 1–5 rating scale

10%

Weight

Sustainability and risk

Long-term maintainability, resilience, and exposure to delivery risks.

Priority #6 10% weight 1–5 rating scale

10%

Weight

Rating Scale Reference

Rating	Label	Description
5	Excellent	Fully meets or exceeds the criterion with strong evidence and no gaps.
4	Very Good	Substantially meets the criterion with minor areas for improvement.
3	Satisfactory	Adequately meets the criterion but with noticeable gaps or limitations.
2	Fair	Partially meets the criterion; significant concerns or missing elements.
1	Poor	Fails to meet the criterion or provides insufficient evidence.