The Division of Outdoor Recreation presented survey results to the Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Advisory Council on Aug. 6, 2025, showing overall council satisfaction of 3.8 out of 5 and lower confidence from applicants in fairness and clarity.

Why it matters: The division said published rubrics and standardized motions should make reviews more transparent and reduce complaints about favoritism and rush decisions, steps that affect which projects receive grants and how quickly contracts are issued.

Division grant administrator Rachel Toker told the council she and staff ran matched surveys of council members and applicants and found differences in perceptions. "Only 44% felt that the method was fair and comprehensive," she said, and she described other common applicant concerns as "budgeting bottleneck, budget creation, gathering documents, limited staff capacity, and time constraints." Toker said applicant-facing changes planned for the next cycle include a standardized scoring rubric, motion templates for the council, a prescoring meeting and a new onboarding packet and webinars.

Toker said the division will offer a unified budget template, designed to carry budget line items into reimbursement forms and to list required documentation. She said the template will include volunteer spreadsheets and other attachments so applicants enter information once and reduce errors during reimbursement.

Council members and staff endorsed more annotated guidance for applicants. Patrick Morrison, recreation program director, said an annotated sample application that shows what reviewers expect would help close the gap between program questions and applicant submissions. "What we're looking for?" he asked. "An annotated sample application...give more definition of what we're actually looking for."

Several council members urged improved scheduling and more time for reviewers. Toker acknowledged the turnaround is short for this cycle and said staff would try to lengthen review windows in future cycles and to use a staff timekeeper to keep meetings on schedule.

Toker also said the division will share anonymized written council comments from the survey with members who requested them. "We can remove the names of people and get that sent out," she said.

The division plans quarterly applicant webinars and office hours for 15-minute consultations linked from applications. Toker cautioned that a prefilled "strong application" template risks being copied; she asked the council for feedback on whether and how to provide sample language without encouraging rote copy-and-paste.

Toker said the division will coordinate with legal staff to finalize prescreening steps and that the program guide will be revised before the next grant cycle. The council did not take formal action at the meeting; staff said the changes will be implemented administratively and presented for counsel in future meetings.

A smaller note in the presentation: 34 applicants responded to the applicant survey; 91% said they had applied before but 34% still reported confusion from conflicting guidance.

The council will see the rubric and motion templates during the next review cycle and staff said they will circulate the anonymized comments and the onboarding materials to applicants in advance of the next application round.