California Air Resources Board

Background

California Climate Investments is a statewide initiative that puts billions of Cap‑and‑Trade dollars deposited into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) to work towards reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, strengthening the economy, and improving public health and the environment. Senate Bill (SB) 862 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Chapter 36, Statutes of 2014) requires CARB to develop guidance on reporting and quantification methods for all State agencies that receive appropriations from the GGRF. Quantification methods are designed to estimate the GHG benefits and co-benefits from funded projects.

The Sustainable Agricultural Lands Conservation (SALC) Program from the California Strategic Growth Council (SGC), administered by the Department of Conservation, is part of the California Climate Investments portfolio and has the mission of protecting agricultural lands susceptible to development. CARB has developed the Agricultural Lands Conservation Easement Quantification Methodology to estimate GHG emission reductions and co-benefits associated with agricultural land conservation projects for the SALC Program. This methodology evaluates the impact of conserving agricultural lands that are at risk of conversion to more intensive uses, particularly residential or urban development.

The SALC quantification methodology estimates benefits from avoided loss of soil organic carbon, reducing utility use, and avoided vehicle miles traveled (VMT) at the project level. The VMT portion accounts for avoided future VMT per household and assumes that conversions to development will lead to increased vehicle usage due to more dispersed development patterns. VMT is obtained from the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) data and the California Statewide Travel Demand Model (CSTDM) when MPO data is unavailable. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) framework is used to convert VMT to VMT per household for emissions estimation and calculates VMT based on trip generation.A census block data classification method was developed to distinguish rural and urban areas.

This contract will explore and evaluate new data sources and methodologies to estimate VMT or any other measure that will capture the connection between dispersed development patterns and land conservation, such as spatial metrics of land use change, connectivity indices, or accessibility analyses. These efforts aim to improve the precision and validity of the quantification methodology by evaluating its current approach and integrating additional variables and insights.

Objective

The objective of this contract is to evaluate the methods used to estimate VMT per household in rural and urban areas in the SALC quantification methodology. The contract will begin with a comprehensive review of existing approaches for assessing the benefits of agricultural land conservation. It will then identify opportunities to improve the accuracy and validity of current VMT estimates and propose recommendations for their integration into the SALC quantification methodology. The contractor is expected to outline a clear strategy for updating the methodology accordingly.

Scope of Work

Task 1: Literature and methodologies review

The contractor will conduct a comprehensive review of existing methodologies used to estimate the benefits of agricultural land conservation projects. This review will assess data sources, modeling approaches, and key assumptions, comparing them with SALC’s current quantification methodology. The comparison should highlight each approach’s strengths, limitations, and opportunities. The contractor will also identify critical variables needed to accurately quantify conservation benefits, such as the impact of development patterns on travel behavior, emissions avoidance, and agricultural land use. By assessing how land conservation efforts mitigate development-driven impacts (e.g., soil organic carbon, electricity use, vehicle usage), the review will ensure that the methodologies effectively capture the full scope of benefits associated with land conservation.The contractor must evaluate the feasibility of integrating new data sources, such as transportation models, geospatial analysis, or land-use change projections. Specifically, within the geospatial analysis component, the contractor should explore tools or datasets that improve consistency in identifying acres at risk of conversion by accounting for landscape features that prevent development.

Interim Deliverable

• A report summarizing findings from existing methodologies, including description, assumptions, variables, and data sources. A table comparing the SALC quantification methodology to similar approaches must be included. Data sources and methodologies must be accompanied by references.

Task 2: Evaluation of VMT methodology

In this task, the contractor will conduct a review focused on the VMT estimation methods and data sources used in the SALC quantification methodology. This analysis will identify opportunities for improvement and explore alternative data sources and methodologies to enhance the accuracy of SALC’s VMT estimates. Proposed data sources must be open-source and free of charge. The SALC methodology compares hypothetical VMT generated by homes built in agricultural areas versus those in nearby urban areas. If VMT per household is found to be an inadequate metric for representing land conservation and dispersed development patterns, the contractor should propose a more suitable alternative. Any recommended methodology should include a detailed description of its assumptions, data sources, analytical methods, and guidelines on the appropriate update frequency (e.g., annually or aligned with Census data releases).

Interim Deliverable

• A report evaluating the current VMT estimation methods and data sources in the SALC quantification methodology. This report should compare SALC’s approach with alternative methodologies, highlighting strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement.

Task 3: Implementation and scenario analysis

Building on the deliverables from Task 2, the contractor will implement the recommendations from either an enhanced or alternative methodology for estimating VMT reductions. To evaluate improvements in the SALC quantification methodology, the contractor will collaborate with CARB staff to conduct scenario analyses across different risk-of-conversion categories. This process will compare the previous and proposed methodologies, assessing the sensitivity of each variable to determine the impact of the updates. Additionally, the contractor will explore pathways to validate GHG reductions resulting from the SALC quantification methodology. This may include analyzing cases where agricultural land was converted to housing and tracking how travel behavior and VMT patterns changed in those communities over time.

Interim Deliverable

• A step-by-step guide outlining how the recommended methodology can be integrated into the SALC quantification framework.
• Perform a validation and sensitivity analysis for the SALC quantification methodology.

Task 4: Expanding recommendations to the quantification methodology

Building on the deliverables from Task 1 and additional resources, the contractor will explore opportunities to enhance the SALC quantification methodology beyond avoided VMT, aiming to provide a more comprehensive and precise evaluation of land conservation benefits. These improvements will further strengthen the methodology’s role in quantifying the benefits of sustainable development planning. Potential areas for refinement may include:

• Update the methodology’s approach to estimate reductions in rural and urban household utility consumption.
• Evaluate how agricultural land conservation and urban development affect disadvantaged and low-income communities.
• Develop a validation approach for GHG reduction estimates that incorporates real-world monitoring, empirical data comparisons, and scenario modeling.
• Expand the methodology to account for climate resilience benefits, such as reduced exposure to extreme weather events, improved ecosystem services, and long-term sustainability.

Interim Deliverable

• A comprehensive report of the proposed improvements to the SALC quantification methodology, including the justification for each recommendation, implementation steps, required data sources and analytical techniques, and potential policy implications and recommendations for CARB’s consideration.

Minimum Expectations and Application Process and Requirements

Information on required material and process during the preproposal phase and expectations on the contract are found on the Solicitation landing page.

Timeline

This project is anticipated to be completed in 24 months from the start date. Cost shall not exceed $300,000.

Scoring Criteria

Responsiveness to the goals and objectives outlined in the pre-proposal solicitation(20 points)

Proposers should demonstrate an understanding of the California Climate Investments’ policy objectives, research needs, and the SALC quantification methodology. The pre-proposal should outline a robust methodology for reviewing agricultural land conservation benefits, evaluating VMT estimation methods, and providing recommendations to improve accuracy and validity. Additionally, it should incorporate equity considerations by assessing the SALC quantification methodology’s impact on disadvantaged and low-income communities.

Policy relevance/benefits to the state(5 points)

The pre-proposal should describe how the project will advance California Climate Investments objectives by improving quantification methodologies to more accurately GHG emission reductions and co-benefits. Specifically, the proposal should detail how the project will enhance current quantification approaches to better capture the emissions benefits associated with land conservation, avoided development, reduced VMT, and provide benefits to disadvantaged communities and low-income communities.

Previous work (15 points)

The proposers must demonstrate relevant expertise in land-use planning, urban development, transportation and mobility analysis, sustainability, and climate policy. To enhance the project’s scope and impact, they are encouraged to: (1) incorporate a multidisciplinary team that brings diverse expertise and perspectives, (2) include members from various universities, non-academic institutions, or community-based organizations, and (3) include one or more members who will contribute significantly to the project (e.g., a principal investigator, co-principal investigator, or co-investigator, contributing 25% or more of their time) who have not worked with CARB in the past 5 years.

Technical merit (25 points)

The pre-proposal demonstrates technical strengths through its comprehensive review of existing VMT estimation methods, providing a robust foundation for assessing the benefits of agricultural land conservation, and its connection with urban development. Proposers should clearly demonstrate the logic and feasibility of their methodology and technical approach, outlining the step-by-step process for completing major tasks and ensuring the successful execution of deliverables. The pre-proposal should also explain how the proposed methods are robust and how the results will be validated.

Level and quality of effort to be provided(15 points)

The pre-proposal clearly outlines a project timeline to ensure the study objectives are met. It details how the team organization, work plan, and project management approach will support the timely completion of tasks and deliverables. The pre-proposals will be evaluated based on the supervision and oversight strategy to keep the project on schedule, ensuring steady progress and a well-balanced allocation of time and resources across key activities, including research, evaluation, analysis, report preparation, and meetings, supporting an efficient and well-managed execution of the project.

Cost effectiveness (20 points)

The pre-proposal cost will be evaluated for its alignment with the project scope, feasibility within the budget, and efficient resource distribution across tasks. Reviewers will assess whether the budget ensures timely completion of deliverables without excess spending. Pre-proposals that incorporate cost-saving measures, resource optimization, and recommend additional improvements to the SALC quantification methodology are preferred.

Scoring Criteria Scoring Guidance

91-100 points. Exceptionally strong. The submission is technically strong, meets stated research objectives, is cost-effective, and has a high potential to be successfully completed.

81-90 points. Strong. The submission is technically sound.

71-80 points. Mixed. The submission has either strong technical merit or strong policy significance, but not both.

61-70 points. Weak. The submission is not sufficiently linked to the needs of the Board and offers limited technical merit.

60 points or below. Unacceptable. The submission is not linked to the interests or needs of the Board and lacks technical merit.