Excellence in Planning Award

Statement about the award

Recognizes excellent planning processes, including meaningful and effective community engagement, for small and large jurisdictions across the state. The focus of the award is longer-range planning for a region, community, or large subarea of a community. The award recognizes an excellent application of planning and engagement principles and the achievement of outcomes that support the AICP Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. This is differentiated from the award specific to innovation, which recognizes novel approaches to key issues, or implementation, which recognizes successful actualization of the vision and goals of a plan.

Qualifying projects

• Community or regional visioning
• Comprehensive planning work
• Concept plans, master plans, subarea plans, and corridor plans
• Development code and zoning updates
• Downtown plans
• Economic development planning and strategy
• Equity and social justice planning
• Historic preservation plans
• Housing planning and policy analysis
• Natural Hazard planning or policy analysis
• Natural resource plans
• Revitalization plans
• Transportation or transit plans
• Urban design standards or guidelines
• Other projects are not listed but otherwise meet the criteria.

Who is eligible

• Any organization may apply - up to two awards will be granted.
  • Plans for small jurisdictions
    • Plans for a Small city: Fewer than 24,999 people.
    • Plans for a Small county: Fewer than 59,999 people
  • Plans for large jurisdictions
    • Plans for a Large city: More than 25,000 people
    • Plans for a Large county: More than 60,000 people

Proposed Criteria

The nominated plan or project must demonstrate how it meets the following criteria:

• Meeting broad community needs and providing a suitable solution (40 points): How does the nominated plan or project recognize, balance, and integrate conflicting community needs and goals? Does the project provide an appropriate approach to an issue?
  • Scoring:
    • Did the project produce creative solutions to contentious issues that balanced competing needs and goals?
    • Did the project recognize and weigh challenging tradeoffs between community needs and goals, even if some needs or goals were prioritized over others?
• Impactful research or analysis (30 points): Did the in-depth research or analysis conducted for the project shape the planning process or recommendations? Is the research or analysis understandable by laypeople?
  • Scoring
    • Did the research and analysis conducted for the project influence the outcomes of the planning process?
    • How accessible and understandable is the research and analysis to decision-makers and community members?
• Community engagement process (30 points): How does the nominated plan or project engage with the community meaningfully, especially amplifying the voices of community members who participate in planning processes less frequently?
  • Scoring:
    • Did the engagement meaningfully influence the conclusions and recommendations of the plan or project?
    • How well did the process engage populations historically underrepresented in planning processes in that community?
    • Was the plan adopted by the community, if applicable?

Other criteria that we considered but think may be too much or might be optional.

• Exemplifying the ideals of the Oregon Planning System Goals: How does the project exemplify the goals of Oregon’s Statewide Planning System?
• Outstanding application of planning principles: How does the nominated plan or project meet and exceed sound planning principles and practices?

Other requirements for eligibility

• Regional projects or plans that extend beyond Oregon may be eligible, but must have a substantial nexus to planning in Oregon.
• Nominees must be members of the Oregon Chapter of the American Planning Association