A note on the ratings:
To quote the SAFER description on what each of these ratings mean:
A GOOD seismic performance rating would apply to buildings and other structures whose performance during a major seismic disturbance is anticipated to result in structural and nonstructural damage and/or falling hazards that would not significantly jeopardize life. Buildings and other structures with a GOOD rating would represent an acceptable level of earthquake safety, such that funds need not be spent to improve their seismic resistance to gain greater life safety.
A FAIR seismic performance rating would apply to buildings and other structures whose performance during a major seismic disturbance is anticipated to result in structural and nonstructural damage and/or falling hazards that would represent low life hazards. Buildings and other structures with a FAIR seismic rating would be given a low priority for expenditures to improve their seismic resistance and/or to reduce falling hazards so that the building could be reclassified GOOD.
A POOR seismic performance rating would apply to buildings and other structures expected to sustain significant structural and nonstructural damage and/or result in falling hazards in a major seismic disturbance, representing appreciable life hazards. Such buildings or structures either would be given a high priority for expenditures to improve their seismic resistance and/or to reduce falling hazards so that the building could be reclassified GOOD, or would be considered for other abatement programs, such as reduction of occupancy.
A VERY POOR seismic performance rating would apply to buildings and other structures whose performance during a major seismic disturbance is anticipated to result in extensive structural and nonstructural damage, potential structural collapse, and/or falling hazards that would represent high life hazards. Such buildings or structures either would be given the highest priority for expenditures to improve their seismic resistance and/or to reduce falling hazards so that the building could be reclassified GOOD, or would be considered for other abatement programs, such as reduction of occupancy.