{"text_format":"1","workbook":"xlsx","n_sheets":5,"sheets":["Narrative","FAQ ","Project Evaluation","Information","Graphical Output"],"not_rendered":{"charts":2,"images":1,"macros":1,"external_links":0,"defined_names":3,"comments":1,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900"}

{"sheet":"Narrative","index":0,"n_rows":31,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":31,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,0,0,9],[30,0,40,9],[2,8,7,9],[9,0,10,9],[12,0,18,9],[20,0,28,9],[29,1,29,9]]}
["Colorado Resilience Criteria \nAssessment Tool"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Contact Info"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"For questions, please contact:\nRob Pressly, Resiliency Program Manager\nColorado Resiliency Office\nrob.pressly@state.co.us\n(o) 303-866-3203 x7822\n(c) 720-437-1253"]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
["Purpose"]
["The resiliency prioritization criteria assessment tool was developed as part of the Colorado Resiliency Institutionalization Project completed by the Colorado Resiliency Office (CRO) between 2018 and 2019. The resiliency prioritization criteria assessment tool provides a method for State agencies, grant applicants, and other organizations to assess how well a project or program aligns with the nine State resiliency prioritization criteria defined in the Colorado Resiliency Framework. The tool can be used as guidance, to initiate conversations on ways projects can be enhanced to provide resiliency benefits, or can be incorporated into the evaluation process for State grant programs. The resiliency prioritization criteria assessment tool is included as an attachment to the Colorado Resiliency Playbook, which can be obtained through the CRO's website, www.coresiliency.com.\n\nState agencies:  The resiliency prioritization criteria assessment tool is meant to be a flexible tool that State grant program managers can employ in different ways to help State agencies and grant recipients incorporate resiliency principles into State funded or administered grant projects. As noted above, the tool can be incorporated into the evaluation process for State grant programs if the program currently includes the nine resiliency prioritization criteria in the evaluation or can be modified to include the criteria. If the evaluation process cannot be modified, consider providing the tool to grant applicants as guidance. The resiliency criteria assessment tool can be useful during the pre-application phase or even following a grant award to start conversations between grant applicants and State grant program managers to identify ways to modify a project to provide additional benefits or avoid negative impacts.\n\nThe tool can also be used to assess how well a grant program aligns with the resiliency prioritization criteria. Complete the questions in the Project Evaluation tab, considering the features, benefits, and impacts of the grant program as a whole."]
[]
["Directions for using the Resiliency Criteria Assessment Tool"]
["The Excel version of the resiliency criteria assessment tool is divided into three tabs. The Narrative tab includes an introduction to the tool, considerations for interpreting the tool's output, and an FAQ.\n\nClick the Project Evaluation tab at the bottom of the window to answer a series of questions related to each of the nine State resiliency criteria for an individual project or program. Use the drop-down menus in column C to enter your responses. In most cases, these are Yes or No questions; however, some questions have multiple response options. The responses under each criterion add up to a total of 10 points, with the highest overall total being 90 points. The total score will appear at the top of the form and will update automatically as responses are entered.\n\nTo see graphical representations of scores for each criterion, click the Graphical Output tab at the bottom of the window. The next section discusses considerations for interpreting these graphs."]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
["Considerations for Interpreting the Output from the Resiliency Criteria Assessment Tool"]
["The resiliency criteria assessment tool may be provided as guidance or may be included in the evaluation process for a grant program. Please contact the grant program administrator with questions regarding how the responses entered in this tool will be considered during the project evaluation process.\n\nThe responses to the questions under each of the resiliency criteria in the Project Evaluation tab can add up to a total of 10 points. Questions have not been weighted, so each of the questions under an individual criterion is worth the same number of points. In some cases, responses have been weighted (i.e., one response will be worth the total number of points associated with that question, while other responses to the question will be worth smaller percentages of the total). Questions with weighted responses are indicated by drop-down menus with numbered choices. Each time a response is changed in the Project Evaluation Tab, the score within the criteria category will be updated along with the overall score shown at the top of the worksheet.   \n\nThe Graphical Output tab includes a bar chart and pie chart breaking down the results. The bar chart shows the score under each criterion, out of a total of 10 points. A perfect evaluation score is 90 with the 9 criteria having a total possible score of 10 points each.\n\nThe percentages shown in the pie chart represent the percent contribution of responses under each criteria to the overall resiliency assessment value (with a total of 90 points possible). All of the questions under each resiliency criteria are worth 10 points. Therefore, responses to each question under criteria with a smaller total number of questions will be worth more than responses to questions under criteria with a larger number of questions."]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
["FAQs","What is Adaptive Capacity?"]
[{"$f":"+VLOOKUP(B30,'FAQ '!B2:C119,2,FALSE)","v":"Definition\nIncorporate flexibility, lessons learned, and transparency into and projects so that they can better accommodate both anticipated and unanticipated future events, including changing climatic, economic, and social conditions. Adaptive capacity includes skills, actions, and measures that increase people’s ability to make decisions at a variety of levels. It includes building flexibility, modularity, and redundancy into systems and services to ensure continuity under stress or shock. \n\nCriterion Purpose and Intent\nAdaptive capacity strengthens the ability of systems, people, and institutions to deal with changing conditions, either to accommodate negative impacts or to take advantage of positive ones. Building decentralized and responsive projects is critical for ensuring effectiveness and sustainability as things change.\nBy integrating these measures, projects can ensure that vital programs will continue to be effective regardless of the change that occurs. Measures can target social systems like education and healthcare, ecological systems like rivers and forests, and physical systems like highways and housing. The ultimate goal of this criterion is to ensure that in planning a project, consideration is given to future uncertainty and reducing future risk."}]

{"sheet":"FAQ ","index":1,"n_rows":13,"n_cols":3,"rows_kept":13,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[]}
["Item no","Question","Answer"]
[1,"What is Adaptive Capacity?","Definition\nIncorporate flexibility, lessons learned, and transparency into and projects so that they can better accommodate both anticipated and unanticipated future events, including changing climatic, economic, and social conditions. Adaptive capacity includes skills, actions, and measures that increase people’s ability to make decisions at a variety of levels. It includes building flexibility, modularity, and redundancy into systems and services to ensure continuity under stress or shock. \n\nCriterion Purpose and Intent\nAdaptive capacity strengthens the ability of systems, people, and institutions to deal with changing conditions, either to accommodate negative impacts or to take advantage of positive ones. Building decentralized and responsive projects is critical for ensuring effectiveness and sustainability as things change.\nBy integrating these measures, projects can ensure that vital programs will continue to be effective regardless of the change that occurs. Measures can target social systems like education and healthcare, ecological systems like rivers and forests, and physical systems like highways and housing. The ultimate goal of this criterion is to ensure that in planning a project, consideration is given to future uncertainty and reducing future risk."]
[2,"What are Co-Benefits?","Definition\nProvide solutions that address identified problems and create additional benefit beyond the original intended focus. Additional benefits could include mitigation, adaptation, cost-savings, increased equity, natural resource enhancement, etc.\n\nCriterion Purpose and Intent\nWhen planning or selecting projects, give preference to those that deliver not just the intended results, but also produce other desirable outcomes.  A team approach to evaluating proposals can be used to bring in a variety of perspectives from a range of stakeholders, helping you identify co-benefits. Considerations could include elements such as timeframe of effects (short, intermediate and long-term), geography (local, regional, national, and global), cost of implementation (cost-benefit), and how the project fits with the local context, broader policies, and local, regional, and state goals. Applying a holistic analysis of the consequences and outcomes of a potential project can help show where you can reap unintended benefits for the same level of effort and/or where you can find natural allies.\n\nResources\nJaimie Hicks Masterson, Philip Berke, Matthew Malecha, Siyu Yu, Jaekyung Lee and Jeewasmi Thapa. (2017) Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard Guidebook. Texas A&M University. Funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Coastal Resilience Center under Award Number: 00313690."]
[3,"What is Economic Benefit-Cost?","Definition\nMake financial investments that result in direct and indirect benefits to the community greater than the costs of producing them. Note that economic benefit-cost is broader than financial benefit-costs, which measures only the monetary costs and benefits of a project, not the wider effects beyond the project itself. Many programs that build resilience produce benefits beyond just paying for themselves.\nCriterion Purpose and Intent\nBenefit-cost analyses are used to show whether a project is “worth it”. Most commonly they are used to compare competing projects: which one delivers the best returns for money spent. Note that there is a difference between economic and financial benefit-cost analyses. A financial benefit-cost analysis is a narrower evaluation. For example, take upgrades to hospital facilities:\nA financial benefit-cost analysis may show that the hospital administration will recoup the costs of the upgrade with reduced maintenance costs and increased revenue from attracting more patients.\nA wider economic benefit-cost analysis could show that even if the hospital upgrade will not pay for itself, improved health outcomes of residents, and attraction of outside businesses to the area, may produce a net economic benefit to residents.\nNote also that this is not a social benefit-cost analysis. There may be many criteria beyond economics for accepting or rejecting a project, such as historic preservation, increasing social equity, beautification of a neighborhood or the environment. Economic benefits do not accrue to all social groups equally: it is necessary to go beyond the numbers to ask who benefits and how, and which groups are disadvantaged by a proposed change. Engaging a variety of stakeholders in the analysis can tease out who benefits and how, and to what extent stakeholders value those benefits.\nResources\nInstitute for Sustainable Communities. (2013) Vermont’s Roadmap to Resilience: Preparing for Natural Disasters and the Effects of Climate Change in the Green Mountain State. \nISET Participatory Cost Benefit Assessment"]
[4,"What is Harmonize with Existing Activity?","Definition\nCreate solutions that consider, expand, and leverage existing activities to reduce potential conflicts, maximize efforts, and best utilize resources. Harmonizing solutions with existing activities relies on the consideration of relevant plans, projects, and local resources that support success. It helps solidify a path forward, reduces redundancy with other efforts, and aligns the activity with a community’s goals. \n\nCriterion Purpose and Intent\nDuring the planning phases of a project, it is imperative to consider other plans, policies, or activities that may affect project implementation. This criterion is intended to ensure projects consider the current local efforts that may derail or support implementation. Projects should consider, for instance, a community’s Comprehensive Plan and other relevant plans, policies, completed efforts, and upcoming projects. In doing so, projects will be able to better identify a plausible path forward for successful implementation. This understanding also will allow projects to build upon any related efforts and utilize existing resources to more effectively and efficiently maximize outcomes.\nIn addition, this criterion will help projects remain aligned with a community’s goals and aspirations for the future. Aligning projects with a community’s values and culture helps create buy-in from local stakeholders. When projects are framed with the local community in mind, community members are more likely to take ownership and ensure continued success throughout the lifetime of the project. \n\nResources\n•\tColorado Department of Local Affairs and University of Colorado Denver. n.d. “Planning for Hazards: Land Use Solutions for Colorado.” Available at: https://planningforhazards.com/home \n•\tColorado Resiliency Office. 2015. “Colorado Resiliency Framework.” Available at: https://sites.google.com/a/state.co.us/coloradounited/resiliency-framework "]
[5,"What is High Risk and Vulnerability?","Definition\nProjects and programs recognize areas of high risk and identify vulnerable populations/communities, in particular critical services or populations that are at higher than average risk or would be particularly vulnerable if impacted. Interventions work to directly reduce risk to human well-being, physical infrastructure, and natural systems and address factors that contribute to social vulnerability through fostering development of social, human and financial assets. In assessing high risk and vulnerability, attention should be paid to areas where failure in one aspect of a system can lead to cascading failures, both physical and social, or where hard thresholds separate safety from catastrophic damages, for example overtopping a levee. \n\nCriterion Purpose and Intent\nProjects should be informed by a comprehensive understanding of how risk and vulnerability will affect human well-being, physical infrastructure, and natural systems. Ensuring that projects and strategies incorporate measures that reduce risk and vulnerability is key to protecting communities, livelihoods, and infrastructure. Programs may be located within one sector or area, but risk and vulnerability are often cross cutting and can occur at multiple levels (local, regional, state, etc.). Projects should include assessments of physical exposure and environmental hazards as well as factors that contribute to social vulnerability. Identifying contextual factors that place communities at risk can inform strategies and ensure that they are addressing relevant areas of risk and vulnerability. There are many factors that contribute to social vulnerability, some of which include income, ethnicity, gender, and age.\nResources\n•\tColorado Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan, Colorado Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/mars/colorado-natural-hazard-mitigation-plan \n•\tColorado Mitigation Best Practices, Colorado Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/mars/colorado-mitigation-best-practices"]
[6,"What is Innovation?","Definition\nAdvance new approaches and techniques that will encourage continual improvement serving as models for others in Colorado and beyond. Innovative systems are flexible and able to learn from experience. They allow space for trying out new ways of working, often in a decentralized manner, with variations being tried in different places and times. Innovative systems have few barriers to setting up pilot policies and programs, and existing barriers can be changed following clear procedures.\n\nCriterion Purpose and Intent\nIn view of the inherent uncertainty and change in the world, programs or policies that do not evolve, or are difficult to change, decrease the ability of people and organizations to respond to changing needs. Resilient systems have the ability to change how they are working in the face of new conditions, rather than being stuck in the same mode. For example, requirements that lock in certain principles – such as tax policy – may work well at first, but can handcuff policy makers when conditions change in the future, and make things worse.\n\nKey to innovation is the ability of an organization to systematically learn from its past experiences, and leverage this learning to inform future decision-making. Innovative organizations facilitate the generation, exchange, and application of new knowledge, and encourage people at all levels to come up with and try out new ideas. Resilient programs modify standards or norms based on emerging evidence, rather than seeking permanent solutions based on the status quo. To successfully accomplish this, rules and procedures should be flexible and modifiable. \n\nResources\n•\tLean Program, State of Colorado, https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/performancemanagement/lean-program \n•\tLean Model Tools and Methods, https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-yDiMcBmTmhdl9jTXlCUGIzVXc/view"]
[7,"What is Long-Term and Lasting Impact?","Definition\nProvide solutions that address the current needs of the community as well as the future needs of the community. Creating long-term and lasting impact requires projects that not only address existing problems, but also consider how projects will continue to succeed under changing climate conditions, fluctuations in economic vitality, and shifts in the political landscape. It enhances project benefits by providing sustainable improvements for both present and future generations. \n\nCriterion Purpose and Intent\nAt its most basic level, this criterion is meant to ensure that projects and strategies with short-term impacts that may shortly become obsolete are not funded. Planning for future benefits as well as present benefits is an important mindset to adopt when considering a project’s long-term and lasting impact. Creating long-term and lasting impact for projects ensures that resources are allocated responsibly. It creates resiliency by building a plan or system that adapts well to change. Changes in the current landscape could result from climate conditions, man-made or natural disasters, economic downturn, or shifting political priorities. Projects should make an effort to predict or forecast future events and community needs. To create long-term and lasting impact, projects must go beyond simply creating plans and systems that remain steadfast in these scenarios. Instead, projects should be designed such that they not only survive but also continue to thrive, enabling future generations to reap benefits as well. \n\nResources\n•\tColorado Department of Local Affairs and University of Colorado Denver. n.d. “Planning for Hazards: Land Use Solutions for Colorado.” Available at: https://planningforhazards.com/home  \n•\tColorado Resiliency Office. 2015. “Colorado Resiliency Framework.” Available at: https://sites.google.com/a/state.co.us/coloradounited/resiliency-framework"]
[8,"What is Social Equity?","Definition\nProvide inclusive processes and solutions that create opportunities for everyone, regardless of who they are or where they come from, to thrive through eliminating barriers, considering historical injustices, and engaging community leaders in decision-making. -Adapted from the Colorado Office of Health Equity definition of equity (https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/ohe)\n\nCriterion Purpose and Intent\nAs defined by the Colorado Office of Health Equity, equity is about environmental justice, creating systems where everyone can thrive, health, and transforming the built environment, as well as our institutions and systems. More equitable outcomes are not just a desired result of a project, but something that should be considered throughout the planning process, and this criterion is intended to support engagement of the community at key project milestones. Oftentimes members of communities that have been traditionally under-represented in project development are the same community members that could be disproportionately impacted by the project. Addressing equity in the planning, design, and implementation phases of a project supports checking our assumptions, framing data in the context of the community’s lived experience, fostering authentic community engagement, and supporting performance measurement and long-term evaluation of equity outcomes.\n\nResources\n●\tEquity Action Guide, Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/equity-action-guide\n●\tSweet Tools to Advance Equity, Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment\no\tChecking Assumptions to Advance Equity, https://drive.google.com/file/d/13lGpyKMMoxxIdXEn4pnrRJ0jvfO1UFEV/view\no\tAuthentic Community Engagement to Advance Equity, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d9g0NUzoytiZdtSPDK7Y0DMQUIIHUpFA/view\no\tFraming Data to Advance Equity, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ToIm5W5lp1w3zSQRvoOpwn4is1_smQdL/view\no\tMeasuring Performance to Advance Equity, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NggNvgF_b3Cr41woQuFPbkOS7_o5Fpfg/view\no\tDesigning Program Evaluation to Advance Equity, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Vv4UtvxwSMd67aEUpytCJRiZYFvn9w4L/view \n●\tEquity and Empowerment Lens, Multnomah County, Oregon, https://multco.us/diversity-equity/equity-and-empowerment-lens \n●\tSpectrum of Public Participation, International Association of Public Participation (IAP2), https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.iap2.org/resource/resmgr/pillars/Spectrum_8.5x11_Print.pdf\n●\tCommunity Resilience + Equity, Public Health – Seattle and King County, https://kingcounty.gov/depts/health/emergency-preparedness/Community-Resilience-Equity.aspx "]
[9,"What is Technical Soundness?","Definition\nProvide solutions that rely on verified research, reflect best practices, and have proven successful in similar context. Technical soundness elevates the integrity of the plan or project and increases the likelihood of achieving the desired outcome. \n\nCriterion Purpose and Intent\nWhen planning or selecting projects it is important to rely on solutions and methods that have been tested and have proven to work in similar regional context. Technical soundness lends validity to a plan or project. It provides valuable lessons learned and highlights best practices employed by other regional parties with similar climatic, economic, and social challenges. \nTechnical soundness provides evidence that enables decision-makers to establish a clear plan, assess indicators of success, and avoid potential mishaps. Project teams who employ technical soundness throughout planning will be better equipped to identify opportunities and assign resources accordingly to maximize benefits. In practice, it ensures that project resources are dedicated to the most effective and efficient activities and guarantees that each task clearly aligns with the overall project goals. \n\nResources\n•\tColorado Department of Local Affairs and University of Colorado Denver. n.d. “Planning for Hazards: Land Use Solutions for Colorado.” Available at: https://planningforhazards.com/home \n•\tColorado Resiliency Office. 2015. “Colorado Resiliency Framework.” Available at: https://sites.google.com/a/state.co.us/coloradounited/resiliency-framework\n•\tGothberg, June and Brian Molina. 2017. “Planning for Results: Technical Soundness Feedback.” National Technical Assistance Center on Transition. Available through the Colorado Department of Education at: https://www.cde.state.co.us/cdesped/powerpoint_ntact_webinar_2017-10-11"]
[10,"What are minor, moderate, and major benefits?","Minor - Benefits provided by the project would generally address issues or risks identified in other sectors, but these benefits are not quantifiable.\n\nModerate - The project has been designed to provide benefits or address an issue or risk in this sector. Benefits are quanitifiable .\n\nMajor - The project has been designed to provide benefits or address an issue or risk in this sector. These benefits are quantifiable, sustainable over the long-term, and would fully address an issue or risk."]
[11,"How do I edit the FAQ? (Admin Access Only - Requires Password)","To view the FAQ tab, right click on one of the tabs at the bottom of the window and select Unhide. In the pop-up window, click on FAQ. The FAQ tab will now be visible. To add a new question and answer, go to the bottom of the list of questions. In column A, enter the next number in the sequence. In column B, enter your question, and in column C, enter the answer. The new question and answer will automatically appear in the FAQ section of the Narrative tab. You can also edit the text of existing questions and answers in the FAQ.\n\nTo hide the FAQ tab again, right click on the FAQ tab and select Hide."]
[12,"What if the question in the tool is not applicable to the program or project being evaluated and how will it affect the score?","If the question is not applicable to the program or project the user can select 2-NA or 0-None from the dropdown list.  Questions that are answered with NA will have a value of zero. Having questions answered as NA will lower the criteria score and overall score.  However, the reviewer will know that the question is not applicable to the program or project because it is documented in the tool. If you select 2-NA or 0-None as an answer, describe why the question does not apply in the Notes column."]

{"sheet":"Project Evaluation","index":2,"n_rows":60,"n_cols":14,"rows_kept":60,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[55,0,57,0],[58,0,59,0],[54,0,54,2],[49,0,49,2],[1,0,1,3],[2,0,2,1],[3,0,5,0],[4,1,5,1],[4,3,5,3],[52,0,53,0],[47,0,48,0],[33,0,40,0],[41,0,42,0],[46,0,46,2],[43,0,43,2],[3,1,3,2],[6,0,6,2],[22,0,22,2],[28,0,28,2],[32,0,32,2],[29,0,30,0],[23,0,25,0],[15,0,21,0],[13,0,13,2],[7,0,10,0]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"+#REF!+#REF!+#REF!+#REF!+#REF!+#REF!+#REF!+#REF!+#REF!","v":{"$error":"#REF!"}}]
["Program Name"]
["Project ID/Name"]
["Criteria Category","Overall (Resilience Criteria) Assessment Value out of 90 ",null,{"$f":"SUM(Information!F10:F18)","v":0}]
[null,"Question",null,"Notes"]
[null,null,"Response"]
["1. ADAPTIVE CAPACITY – Include flexible and adaptable measures that consider future unknowns of changing climate, economic, and social conditions",null,null,{"$f":"+\"Category Score is \"&Information!F10&\".\"","v":"Category Score is 0."}]
["Uncertainty and Change","Are there measures included in the project that prepare for the following types of uncertainty and change, for example by building in redundancy or allowing for contingencies?  "]
[null,"Climatic","0 - No"]
[null,"Social/Political","0 - No"]
[null,"Economic","0 - No"]
["Resilient to Changes","Over the life of the project, can the project be adapted to climatic, social, and economic changes in the community?","0 - No"]
["Increasing Individual or Organizational Flexibility","Does the project develop skills, actions, and measures that increase the flexibility of individuals, organizations, or communities to respond to unanticipated changes?","0 - No"]
["2. CO-BENEFITS – Provide solutions that address problems across multiple sectors creating maximum benefit",null,null,{"$f":"+\"Category Score is \"&INT(Information!F11)&\".\"","v":"Category Score is 0."}]
["Co-benefits","Were stakeholders from other resiliency sectors consulted to identify potential co-benefits? (Note:  The State of Colorado defines six resiliency sectors including Community, Economic, Health and Social, Housing, Infrastructure, and Watersheds and Natural Resources.)","0 - No"]
["Targeted Sectors","Identify the extent of co-benefits for each resiliency sector (0-none, 1-minor, 2-moderate,  3-major)."]
[null,"Community","0 - None"]
[null,"Economic","0 - None"]
[null,"Health and Social","0 - None"]
[null,"Housing","0 - None"]
[null,"Infrastructure","0 - None"]
[null,"Watersheds and Natural Resources","0 - None"]
["3. ECONOMIC BENEFIT-COST – Make good financial investments that have the potential for economic benefit to the investor and the broader community both through direct and indirect returns",null,null,{"$f":"+\"Category Score is \"&INT(Information!F12)&\".\"","v":"Category Score is 0."}]
["Economic Benefits","Does the project have a positive economic benefit-cost ratio?","0 - No"]
[null,"Does the benefit-cost analysis include potential external costs to the community?","0 - No"]
[null,"Would economic benefits be equitably distributed?","0 - No"]
["Beneficiaries ","Does the project take into consideration the priorities of groups that would be benefited?","0 - No"]
["Sustainability","Can the project’s benefits be sustained during changing climatic, social, or economic conditions?","0 - No"]
["4. HARMONIZE WITH EXISTING ACTIVITY – Expand, enhance, or leverage work being done to build on existing efforts",null,null,{"$f":"+\"Category Score is \"&INT(Information!F13)&\".\"","v":"Category Score is 0."}]
["Other Similar Activities/Projects","Does the project build on similar related programs underway or recently ended?","0 - No"]
[null,"Is the project compatible with existing community activities, plans, or policies?  ","0 - No"]
["Stakeholders","Have the relevant stakeholders been consulted to maximize efforts or reduce potential conflicts in the program?","0 - No"]
["5. HIGH RISK AND VULNERABILITY – Ensure that strategies directly address the reduction of risk to human well-being, physical infrastructure, and natural systems",null,null,{"$f":"+\"Category Score is \"&INT(Information!F14)&\".\"","v":"Category Score is 0."}]
["Risk/Vulnerability Identified","Does the project identify areas of high risk or vulnerability?","0 - No"]
[null,"If yes, in what sectors do those risks or vulnerabilities occur?"]
[null,"Community","0 - No"]
[null,"Economic","0 - No"]
[null,"Health and Social","0 - No"]
[null,"Housing","0 - No"]
[null,"Infrastructure","0 - No"]
[null,"Watersheds and Natural Resources","0 - No"]
["Strategies to Address Risk","Does the project include strategies to address the identified risks and vulnerabilities?","0 - No"]
[null,"Do those strategies take into account the specific vulnerable populations/communities that will be impacted?","0 - No"]
["6. INNOVATION – Advance new approaches and techniques that will encourage continual improvement and advancement of best practices serving as models for others in Colorado and beyond",null,null,{"$f":"+\"Category Score is \"&INT(Information!F15)&\".\"","v":"Category Score is 0."}]
["Alter Previous Ways","Does the project incorporate new designs or methods that improve the way things have been done in the past?","0 - No"]
["Innovative Solutions","Does the project provide a new solution to an identified problem?","0 - No"]
["7. LONG-TERM AND LASTING IMPACT – Create long-term gains to the community with solutions that are replicable and sustainable, creating benefit for present and future generations",null,null,{"$f":"+\"Category Score is \"&INT(Information!F16)&\".\"","v":"Category Score is 0."}]
["Impact","Would this project have a long-term, positive impact?","0 - No"]
[null,"Is the project replicable?","0 - No"]
["8. SOCIAL EQUITY – Provide solutions that are inclusive with consideration to populations that are often most fragile and vulnerable to sudden impacts due to their continual state of stress",null,null,{"$f":"+\"Category Score is \"&INT(Information!F17)&\".\"","v":"Category Score is 0."}]
["Equity Impact Assessment ","Were groups that will benefit from the project and groups that will see no benefit or potentially suffer negative consequences as a result of the project identified?","0 - No"]
["Use of Resources","Does the project include resources to build community capacity (e.g., through partnerships, training, or funding)?","0 - No"]
["Accessibility","Is the project designed to be accessible for people with access or functional needs? (Note:  People with access and functional needs are defined as those who may have additional needs before, during, or after a disaster or emergency in functional areas, including but not limited to maintaining independence, communication, transportation, supervision, and/or medical care. For more information see the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s National Response Framework.)","0 - No"]
[null,"Are outreach materials/events related to the project accessible for people who speak another language or who have access or functional needs?","0 - No"]
["9. TECHNICAL SOUNDNESS – Identify solutions that reflect best practices that have been tested and proven to work in similar regional context",null,null,{"$f":"+\"Category Score is \"&INT(Information!F18)&\".\"","v":"Category Score is 0."}]
["Knowledge/Best Practices","Does the approach rely on current best practices in the field?  ","0 - No"]
[null,"Does the project incorporate design elements that minimize negative impacts on natural resources (e.g., climate and air quality, energy resources, land, water, ecosystems, etc.)?","0 - No"]
[null,"If the project is introducing a new design or method that goes beyond established best practice, is the approach based on studies that provide a road map for success?","0 - No"]
["Measurable Indicators","Does the project incorporate measurable indicators to assess performance and success (i.e., metric and timeline benchmarks)? ","0 - No"]
[null,"Are the indicators directly connected to the desired project outcomes?  ","0 - No"]

{"sheet":"Information","index":3,"n_rows":54,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":54,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[[52,0,53,0],[27,0,34,0],[35,0,36,0],[1,0,4,0],[9,0,15,0],[17,0,18,0],[46,0,47,0],[49,0,51,0]]}
["1. ADAPTIVE CAPACITY ",null,{"$f":"SUM(C2:C7)","v":0},null,null,0,"0 - No","0 - None"]
["Uncertainty and Change","Are there measures included in the project that prepare for the following types of uncertainty and change, for example by building in redundancy or allowing for contingencies?  ",null,null,null,1,"1 - Yes","1 - Minor"]
[null,"Climatic",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C9,1))=1,2,0)","v":0},null,null,2,"2 - NA","2 - Moderate",4]
[null,"Social/Political",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C10,1))=1,2,0)","v":0},null,null,null,null,"3 - Major"]
[null,"Economic",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C11,1))=1,2,0)","v":0}]
["Resilient to Changes","Over the life of the project, can the project be adapted to climatic, social, and economic changes in the community?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C12,1))=1,2,0)","v":0}]
["Increasing Individual or Organizational Flexibility","Does the project develop skills, actions, and measures that increase the flexibility of individuals, organizations, or communities to respond to unanticipated changes?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C13,1))=1,2,0)","v":0}]
["2. CO-BENEFITS",null,{"$f":"SUM(C9:C16)","v":0}]
["Co-benefits","Did you consult with stakeholders from other resiliency sectors to identify potential co-benefits? (Note:  The State of Colorado defines six resiliency sectors including Community, Economic, Health and Social, Housing, Infrastructure, and Watersheds and Natural Resources.)",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C15,1))=1,1/1.9,0)","v":0},null,"Graph Dataset"]
["Targeted Sectors","Identify the extent of co-benefits for each resiliency sector (0-none, 1-minor, 2-moderate,  3-major).",null,null,"1. ADAPTIVE CAPACITY",{"$f":"+C1","v":0}]
[null,"Community",{"$f":"+INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C17,1))/1.9","v":0},{"$f":"+SUM(C9:C16)","v":0},"2. CO-BENEFITS",{"$f":"+C8","v":0}]
[null,"Economic",{"$f":"+INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C18,1))/1.9","v":0},null,"3. ECONOMIC BENEFIT-COST",{"$f":"+C17","v":0}]
[null,"Health and Social",{"$f":"+INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C19,1))/1.9","v":0},null,"4. HARMONIZE WITH EXISTING ACTIVITY",{"$f":"+C23","v":0}]
[null,"Housing",{"$f":"+INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C20,1))/1.9","v":0},null,"5. HIGH RISK AND VULNERABILITY",{"$f":"+C27","v":0}]
[null,"Infrastructure",{"$f":"+INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C21,1))/1.9","v":0},null,"6. INNOVATION",{"$f":"+C38","v":0}]
[null,"Watersheds and Natural Resources",{"$f":"+INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C22,1))/1.9","v":0},null,"7. LONG-TERM AND LASTING IMPACT",{"$f":"+C41","v":0}]
["3. ECONOMIC BENEFIT-COST",null,{"$f":"SUM(C18:C22)","v":0},null,"8. SOCIAL EQUITY",{"$f":"+C44","v":0}]
["Economic Benefits","Does the project have a positive economic benefit-cost ratio?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C24,1))=1,2,0)","v":0},null,"9. TECHNICAL SOUNDNESS",{"$f":"+C49","v":0}]
[null,"Does the benefit-cost analysis include potential external costs to the community?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C25,1))=1,2,0)","v":0},null,null,null,{"$f":"SUM(G10:G18)","v":0}]
[null,"Would economic benefits be equitably distributed?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C26,1))=1,2,0)","v":0}]
["Beneficiaries ","Does the project take into consideration the priorities of groups that would be benefited?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C27,1))=1,2,0)","v":0}]
["Sustainability","Can the project’s benefits be sustained during changing climatic, social, or economic conditions?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C28,1))=1,2,0)","v":0}]
["4. HARMONIZE WITH EXISTING ACTIVITY ",null,{"$f":"IF(SUM(C24:C26)=9.999,10,SUM(C24:C26))","v":0}]
["Other Similar Activities/Projects","Does the project build on similar related programs underway or recently ended?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C30,1))=1,3.333,0)","v":0}]
[null,"Is the project compatible with existing community activities, plans, or policies?  ",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C31,1))=1,3.333,0)","v":0}]
["Stakeholders","Have the relevant stakeholders been consulted to maximize efforts or reduce potential conflicts in the program?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C32,1))=1,3.333,0)","v":0}]
["5. HIGH RISK AND VULNERABILITY",null,{"$f":"+IF(SUM(C28:C37)=9.99,10,SUM(C28:C37))","v":0}]
["Risk/Vulnerability Identified","Does the project identify areas of high risk or vulnerability?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C34,1))=1,1.11,0)","v":0}]
[null,"If yes, in what sectors do those risks or vulnerabilities occur?",{"$f":"+LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C35,1)","v":""}]
[null,"Community",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C36,1))=1,1.11,0)","v":0}]
[null,"Economic",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C37,1))=1,1.11,0)","v":0}]
[null,"Health and Social",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C38,1))=1,1.11,0)","v":0}]
[null,"Housing",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C39,1))=1,1.11,0)","v":0}]
[null,"Infrastructure",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C40,1))=1,1.11,0)","v":0}]
[null,"Watersheds and Natural Resources",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C41,1))=1,1.11,0)","v":0}]
["Strategies to Address Risk","Does the project include strategies to address the identified risks and vulnerabilities?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C42,1))=1,1.11,0)","v":0}]
[null,"Do those strategies take into account the specific vulnerable populations/communities that will be impacted?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C43,1))=1,1.11,0)","v":0},null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"+SUM(J28:J37)/10","v":0}]
["6. INNOVATION ",null,{"$f":"SUM(C39:C40)","v":0}]
["Alter Previous Ways","Does this project incorporate new designs or methods that improve the way things have been done in the past?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C45,1))=1,5,0)","v":0}]
["Innovative Solutions","Does the project provide a new solution to an identified problem?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C46,1))=1,5,0)","v":0}]
["7. LONG-TERM AND LASTING IMPACT",null,{"$f":"SUM(C42:C43)","v":0}]
["Impact","Would this project have a long-term, positive impact?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C48,1))=1,5,0)","v":0}]
[null,"Is the project replicable?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C49,1))=1,5,0)","v":0}]
["8. SOCIAL EQUITY",null,{"$f":"SUM(C45:C48)","v":0}]
["Equity Impact Assessment ","Did you assess which groups will benefit from and which will see no benefit or potentially suffer negative consequences as a result of the project?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C51,1))=1,2.5,0)","v":0}]
["Use of Resources","Does the project include resources to build community capacity (e.g., through partnerships, training, or funding)?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C52,1))=1,2.5,0)","v":0}]
["Accessibility","Is the project designed to be accessible for people with access or functional needs? (Note:  People with access and functional needs are defined as those who may have additional needs before, during, or after a disaster or emergency in functional areas, including but not limited to maintaining independence, communication, transportation, supervision, and/or medical care. For more information see the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s National Response Framework.)",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C53,1))=1,2.5,0)","v":0}]
[null,"Are outreach materials/events related to the project accessible for people who speak another language or who have access or functional needs?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C54,1))=1,2.5,0)","v":0}]
["9. TECHNICAL SOUNDNESS",null,{"$f":"SUM(C50:C54)","v":0}]
["Knowledge/Best Practices","Does the approach rely on current best practices in the field?  ",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C56,1))=1,2,0)","v":0}]
[null,"Does the project incorporate design elements that minimize negative impacts on natural resources (e.g., climate and air quality, energy resources, land, water, ecosystems, etc.)?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C57,1))=1,2,0)","v":0}]
[null,"If the project is introducing a new design or method that goes beyond established best practice, is the approach based on studies that provide a road map for success?",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C58,1))=1,2,0)","v":0}]
["Measurable Indicators","Do you have measurable indicators to assess performance and success (i.e., metric and timeline benchmarks)? ",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C59,1))=1,2,0)","v":0}]
[null,"Are the indicators directly connected to the desired project outcomes?  ",{"$f":"+IF(INT(LEFT('Project Evaluation'!C60,1))=1,2,0)","v":0}]

{"sheet":"Graphical Output","index":4,"n_rows":2,"n_cols":1,"rows_kept":2,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[22,0,23,7],[1,0,1,7],[0,0,0,7]]}
[{"$f":"+'Project Evaluation'!A2:D2","v":"Program Name"}]
[{"$f":"+\"Overall (Resilience Criteria) Assessment Value \"&INT('Project Evaluation'!D4)&\".\"","v":"Overall (Resilience Criteria) Assessment Value 0."}]