[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":3,"doc-seo-244521-105":53,"doc-detail-244521-en":126},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,14,19,24,29,34,39,44,49],{"id":8,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":11,"show_sort_weight":12,"slug":13},11,1,"Template","Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":15,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":16,"show_sort_weight":17,"slug":18},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":20,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":21,"show_sort_weight":22,"slug":23},14,"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":25,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":26,"show_sort_weight":27,"slug":28},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":30,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":31,"show_sort_weight":32,"slug":33},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":35,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":36,"show_sort_weight":37,"slug":38},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":40,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":41,"show_sort_weight":42,"slug":43},18,"Letters",30,"letters",{"id":45,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":46,"show_sort_weight":47,"slug":48},21,"Paper Templates",5,"papers-templates",{"id":50,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":51,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":52},158,"General","general-158",{"code":4,"msg":54,"data":55},"ok",{"site_id":56,"language":57,"slug":58,"title":59,"keywords":60,"description":61,"schema_data":62,"social_meta":119,"head_meta":121,"extra_data":123,"updated_unix":125},105,"en","watershed-project-prioritization-score-sheet-fiscal-year-2026","Watershed Project Prioritization Score Sheet - Fiscal Year 2026","","Project Prioritization Score Sheet – Fiscal Year 2026 for Utah’s Watershed Restoration Initiative (UWRI) provides a structured scoring framework for ranking and funding restoration projects. It defines policy and legal prerequisites, including support for UWRI’s three program legs and completion timing for NEPA or cultural resource clearances. The sheet establishes core-value scoring categories—water quality, water quantity, and watershed health and biological diversity—detailing decision criteria, maximum point allocations, and guidance for interpreting benefits and threats.",{"@graph":63,"@context":118},[64,80,101],{"@type":65,"itemListElement":66},"BreadcrumbList",[67,71,74,77],{"item":68,"name":69,"@type":70,"position":9},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":72,"name":10,"@type":70,"position":73},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/",2,{"item":75,"name":36,"@type":70,"position":76},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/forms/",3,{"item":78,"name":59,"@type":70,"position":79},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/watershed-project-prioritization-score-sheet-fiscal-year-2026/244521/",4,{"url":78,"name":59,"@type":81,"image":82,"author":87,"headline":59,"publisher":90,"fileFormat":93,"inLanguage":57,"description":61,"dateModified":94,"datePublished":95,"encodingFormat":93,"isAccessibleForFree":96,"interactionStatistic":97},"DigitalDocument",{"url":83,"@type":84,"width":85,"height":86},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/watershed-project-prioritization-score-sheet-fiscal-year-2026/244521.png","ImageObject",442,249,{"name":88,"@type":89},"Maya Linwood","Person",{"url":68,"name":91,"@type":92},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-23","2026-09-12",true,{"@type":98,"interactionType":99,"userInteractionCount":8},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":100},"ViewAction",{"@type":102,"mainEntity":103},"FAQPage",[104,110,114],{"name":105,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":107},"What are the policy and legal requirements before a project can be ranked or funded?","Question",{"text":108,"@type":109},"The project must support at least one of UWRI’s three legs, and NEPA or cultural resource clearance must be completed or scheduled before the tentative project start date. If either requirement is not met, the project should not be ranked or funded.","Answer",{"name":111,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":112},"How does the score sheet evaluate water quality benefits?",{"text":113,"@type":109},"It asks whether the project can improve or protect water quality, including reducing severe wildfire risk, reducing pollutants, and lowering nutrient or sediment loading. Extra points are indicated for watersheds supplying drinking water, and for areas adjacent to perennial water bodies, exceeding TMDLs, or identified as impaired.",{"name":115,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What factors are used to score watershed health and biological diversity?",{"text":117,"@type":109},"It evaluates overall impact on watershed health and resilience, awarding higher points for projects including more than one ecological community and for locations in ecological types valued for watershed health such as aspen, riparian, stream, wet meadow, or wetland sites.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":78,"og:type":120,"og:title":59,"og:site_name":91,"og:description":61},"article",{"robots":122,"canonical":78},"index,follow",{"doc_id":124,"site_id":56},244521,1789218231,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":127},{"doc_id":124,"user_id":128,"nickname":88,"user_avatar":129,"doc_module":9,"category_id":35,"category_name":36,"doc_title":59,"doc_description":61,"doc_content":130,"file_id":131,"file_url":132,"file_type":133,"file_size":134,"view_count":8,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":9,"is_downloadable":9,"audit_status":9,"page_count":135,"language":136,"language_code":57,"site_id":56,"html_lang":57,"table_of_contents":137,"faqs":138,"seo_title":139,"seo_description":61,"update_tm":125,"read_time":73},962084928432,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","WATERSHED.UTAH.GOV  \nProject Prioritization Score Sheet – Fiscal Year 2026  \nProject Name: ___________________________________________________________Region: _______________________________Database Project Number: __________  \nTotal Score (153 Points Possible):    \nNOTE: This score sheet should be used to guide Utah’s Watershed Restoration Initiative (UWRI) project prioritization decisions, but some interpretation may be necessary. Statewide prioritization/rankings by the UWRI leadership will weigh proposed project costs funded by the project proponent compared to requested partnership funds. For more information on past project submissions, samples of previously funded projects, other important WRI documents and for upcoming regional meeting dates [and times go to watershed.utah.gov](and times go to watershed.utah.gov)  \nPOLICY AND LEGAL REQUIREMENTS  \nDoes the project support at least one of the three legs of Utah’s Watershed Restoration Initiative?  \nUtah’s Watershed Restoration Initiative is a partnership-driven effort to conserve, restore and manage ecosystems in priority areas across the state to enhance Utah’s  \n● Watershed Health and Biological Diversity  \n● Water Quality and Yield for all Uses  \n● Opportunities for Sustainable Uses  \nYES • NO • If NO, do not Rank or Fund.  \nIf NEPA or a cultural resource clearance is required prior to project implementation, have these been completed or will they be completed before the tentative project starting date?  \nYES • NO • If NO, do not Rank or Fund.  \nProposals requesting funding for pre-implementation work only such as; NEPA, cultural resource clearances, stand exams, wildlife/botanical/ESA surveys, etc. should present their proposal to the regional team for general comments/suggestions only. These proposals DO NOT need to be ranked by the regional team using these ranking criteria. If the region receives multiple proposals of this type, general regional priority comments/ranking may be applied to the list if desired before forwarding on to WRI. Please select WRI-NEPA as a funding source for these proposals.  \nWRI funding requests should be limited to under $1,000,000 per proposal (or per year for multiyear proposals) and project footprint should be contained within no more than 4 contiguous HUC 10 watersheds. See map page for details [at wri.utah.gov](at wri.utah.gov)  \nUWRI CORE-VALUES CONSIDERATIONS WATER QUALITY AND YIELD FOR ALL USES  \nWATER QUALITY  \n\n| Does the project have the potential to improve or protect water quality? Benefits to water quality would include reducing the risk of severe wildfire, reductions in pollutants, nutrient loading and/or sediment loading. Higher scores should be given to projects within watersheds that supply drinking water to communities or include drinking water facilities. Watersheds immediately adjacent to perennial water bodies and riparian systems, exceeding TMDLs, or identified as impaired should also be awarded more points.\u003Cbr>Maximum points possible for this section-10 | 0 – 10 |\n| --- | --- |\n\nWATER QUANTITY  \n\n| Does the project have the potential to increase water quantity? Possible considerations may include; projects that show direct benefits to instream flows, expansion of hydric vegetation, are likely to turn intermittent channels to perennial, and /or increases in natural hydrologic storage capacity; changing grazing management, changes to the vegetation class, brush and/or weed management, soil modifications that can directly affect the water regime, etc.\u003Cbr>Maximum points possible for this section-10 | 0 – 10 |\n| --- | --- |\n\nWATERSHED HEALTH AND BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY  \nWATERSHED HEALTH  \n\n| Consider the project’s overall impact on the watershed’s health and resilience. Higher points should be awarded to projects that include more than one ecological community and/or projects that are located in an ecological type that contributes greater value to overall watershed health such as aspen, riparian, stream, wet meadow or we","cbCaijotBAP0tG4b","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaijotBAP0tG4b","pdf",214227,6,"English","# Project Prioritization Score Sheet – Fiscal Year 2026\n## Policy and Legal Requirements\n## UWRI Core-Values Considerations\n### Water Quality and Water Quantity\n### Watershed Health and Biological Diversity","[{\"question\":\"What are the policy and legal requirements before a project can be ranked or funded?\",\"answer\":\"The project must support at least one of UWRI’s three legs, and NEPA or cultural resource clearance must be completed or scheduled before the tentative project start date. If either requirement is not met, the project should not be ranked or funded.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the score sheet evaluate water quality benefits?\",\"answer\":\"It asks whether the project can improve or protect water quality, including reducing severe wildfire risk, reducing pollutants, and lowering nutrient or sediment loading. Extra points are indicated for watersheds supplying drinking water, and for areas adjacent to perennial water bodies, exceeding TMDLs, or identified as impaired.\"},{\"question\":\"What factors are used to score watershed health and biological diversity?\",\"answer\":\"It evaluates overall impact on watershed health and resilience, awarding higher points for projects including more than one ecological community and for locations in ecological types valued for watershed health such as aspen, riparian, stream, wet meadow, or wetland sites.\"}]","Watershed Project Prioritization Score Sheet - Fiscal Year 2026 | PDF"]