[Retracted] The Performance Appraisal System of Country Well-Facilitated Farmland Based on AHP-Object Metatopological Model

Table 3

The range of values of the classical domain of construction performance of well-facilitated farmland projects.

Indicators	The range of values
	Excellent (N1)	Good (N2)	Fair (N3)	Poor (N4)
Degree of project necessity (points)	(95, 100)	(90, 95)	(85, 90)	(80, 85)
Degree of procedural compliance (points)	(95, 100)	(90, 95)	(85, 90)	(80, 85)
Degree of fitness for performance objectives (points)	(95, 100)	(90, 95)	(85, 90)	(80, 85)
Degree of project necessity (points)	(95, 100)	(90, 95)	(85, 90)	(80, 85)
Capital availability rate (%)	(95, 100)	(90, 95)	(85, 90)	(80, 85)
Unit area investment amount (yuan/hm-2)	(1, 2)	(2, 3)	(3, 4)	(4, 5)
Task completion rate (%)	(90, 100)	(80, 90)	(70, 80)	(60, 70)
The soundness of management system (points)	(90, 100)	(80, 90)	(70, 80)	(60, 70)
Clarity of quality standards (points)	(90, 100)	(80, 90)	(70, 80)	(60, 70)
Effectiveness of control measures (points)	(90, 100)	(80, 90)	(70, 80)	(60, 70)
Deviation rate of fund expenditure (%)	(1, 10)	(10, 15)	(15, 30)	(30, 60)
Normality of expenditure (points)	(90, 100)	(80, 90)	(70, 80)	(60, 70)
Completion rate of well-facilitated farmland (%)	(90, 100)	(80, 90)	(70, 80)	(60, 70)
Road accessibility rate (%)	(95, 100)	(90, 95)	(85, 90)	(80, 85)
Irrigation coverage rate (%)	(85, 100)	(75, 85)	(65, 75)	(40, 65)
Land leveling rate (%)	(85, 100)	(75, 85)	(65, 75)	(40, 65)
Acceptance pass rate (%)	(95, 100)	(90, 95)	(85, 90)	(80, 85)
Increase in grain production per mu (kg·hm^−2)	(100, 150)	(50, 100)	(20, 50)	(0, 20)
Increase in annual income per capita (yuan·hm^−2)	(1.5, 2)	(1, 1.5)	(0.5, 1)	(0.1, 0.5)
Water-saving rate of the project (%)	(80, 100)	(60, 80)	(40, 60)	(10, 40)
Degree of ecological improvement (points)	(95, 100)	(85, 95)	(75, 85)	(50, 75)
Public satisfaction (%)	(97, 100)	(92, 97)	(87, 92)	(80, 87)
Beneficiaries’ compliance rate (%)	(95, 100)	(85, 95)	(75, 85)	(50, 75)