WHC drew from the Conservation Fund’s expertise in the Logic Scoring of Preference method to develop a methodology for assigning point values to each criteria. Point values are based on first grouping similar criteria (also known as attributes) into branches and then assigning weights (values) first at the branch level, then to sub-branches of individual criteria.  
 

The scores provided in the Scoring Sheets provide a simplified way to evaluate individual criteria. Although there are some yes/no scoring criteria as well as some specific values (such as acreage), most of the criteria are evaluated against defined levels of achievement. For example, a reviewer can score a monitoring protocol as 0, 1, or 2 based on the following defined levels of achievement in the Scoring Sheet: 

0 =  No monitoring protocol or a protocol that is not relevant

1 = Monitoring protocol that is relevant but not scientifically rigorous

2 = Monitoring protocol that is both relevant and scientifically rigorous

Each selected score is associated with a specific point value that is awarded for the criteria. 

WHC developed the levels of achievement as well as the weight assigned to each by drawing on input from several Advisory Committees that included external conservation experts.