Evaluation

If the application is determined to be complete and meets the threshold criteria, it will enter the ranking and rating process against other applications in that round. CDFA staff will rank all complete applications in accordance with the criteria contained in the most current MOD.

Prior to scoring, the authority shall evaluate applications using the Federal and State Thresholds (listed on page and criteria below:

  • All projects shall conform to the goal of the state enabling legislation described in RSA 162-L:12 and to the primary objective as described in 42 U.S.C. 5301(c) of the federal act, which is to benefit mainly low- and moderate-income persons and households without excluding low-income persons and households; and
  • To determine whether an activity meets a national objective, the criteria in 24 CFR 570.483 shall be used (which is outlined in Chapter 2 of this Guide).

Grantee Capacity Assessment
To evaluate an applicant’s capacity and performance to carry out a proposed community development project, the following conditions shall apply:

  • For prior grantees, the applicant’s present capacity to undertake a new program shall be evaluated as well as the applicant’s prior performance by using the following criteria:
    – There have been a significant number of failed projects or monitoring findings that raise questions about applicant capacity; or
    – There has been a monitoring finding that significant corrective actions are necessary to protect the integrity of the project funds, and those corrective actions are not, or will not be implemented within 30 days.
  • Whether the applicant currently has more than $250,000 in unspent and obligated CDBG funds;
  • The efforts made by such an applicant to provide housing for low- and moderate-income households generally.

Sub recipient Financial Review
CDFA will underwrite the sub recipient to determine whether CDBG funds are needed and that the project can or will be carried out by the applicant or nonprofit sub-grantee.

Where a revolving loan fund is proposed for economic development activities, the applicant’s or sub recipient’s ability to administer the fund shall be evaluated by using the following criteria:

  • Evidence of a long-term capability including but not limited to a contract with a bank or administering agency to provide such service; and
  • A written plan for the re-use of the recaptured loan funds.

The evaluation shall result in one or more of the following actions:

  • A request for clarifying information;
  • Limited modifications to the proposed project;
  • Reduced funding;
  • Elimination of activities that do not meet the national objective or are ineligible;
  • Elimination of activities that do not support the principal activity;
  • Denial of funding for the project for clear failure to comply with one or more of the criteria; or
  • CDFA may not move forward with rating and ranking an application or withhold unallocated funds, require return of unexpended funds, or require return of program income.
  • Scoring of the application.

SCORING OF PUBLIC FACILITY, HOUSING AND EMERGENCY GRANT APPLICATIONS
Applications shall be awarded points based on the following factors:

Application Scoring: Maximum Score
Community Needs: 70
Project Specific Needs: 340
Maximum TOTAL Score: 410

Community Needs
Data to be used to establish the Community Need scores will be found on the CDFA Website no later than January 1st 2020. Up to 70 points. Data are gathered from a variety of sources, including the US Census Bureau, NH Department of Health and Human Services, NH Housing Finance Authority, and the NH Office of Strategic Initiatives.

Project Specific Needs
A score of 50 points shall be awarded for the application showing the greatest need and impact when compared to the other applications in the same subcategory; the remaining applications shall receive fewer points according to the following point values:

Need and Impact Points
Showing the greatest need and impact: 50
Substantial: 40
Moderate: 25
Minimum: 10
None: 0

Area Benefit
Up to 50 points shall be awarded, based on the percentage of low and moderate income persons or households, residing in the target or service area at the time of application, whether or not such persons or households directly benefit by using either:
1. A statistically valid survey that meets the requirements
2. Census data most closely corresponding to the target area, or service area where applicable.
3. The points awarded for this category shall equal the percentage of low- and moderate-income households in the project area minus 10 points. No score shall be above 50 points or less than 0 points.

Direct Benefit
Up to 50 points shall be awarded on the basis of the percentage of funds requested which shall provide a direct benefit to low and moderate income persons or households based on the following point values:

SCORING OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANTS
Applications shall be scored and shall receive no less than 265 points if the application is a business loan or real estate development project, or 250 points if the application is a public facilities infrastructure grant in support of economic development or a grant to a nonprofit, in order to be considered for a final grant award.

The application shall propose and document the public benefit to be achieved as a result of the project.

Minimum Underwriting Standards
CDBG funds that are intended to be used for economic development financing in New Hampshire must meet basic minimum underwriting standards that are based on the following criteria:
• HUD minimum standards for investments
• Business loan underwriting standards

CDBG funds are investments made by the public and as a result carry with them unique requirements and expectations that reflect a defined public policy value. As a result, the statewide minimum standards defined in this document are used to evaluate all CDBG economic development investments. These standards are constructed to provide regional underwriting autonomy at a local level while maintaining a statewide minimum standard.

HUD minimum standards for investments
The Economic Development Entity is required to complete underwriting that proves the following guidelines as stated in HUD CFR 570.482 Appendix A, specifically that:
(i) That project costs are reasonable;
(ii) That all sources of project financing are committed;
(iii) That to the extent practicable, CDBG funds are not substituted for non-Federal financial support;
(iv) That the project is financially feasible;
(v) That the return on the owner’s equity investment will not be unreasonably high; and
(vi) CDBG funds are disbursed on a pro rata basis with other finances provided to the project.

The EDE must retain records in accordance with record retention requirements, to include, at a minimum, the following: (1) Financial statements of the business for a minimum of the past three (3) years from the date of submittal of the application; (2) Payment terms of the suppliers to the business; (3) Payment terms of the business to its buyers; (4) Current inventory; (5) Payroll cycle; (6) Inventory cycle; (7) Aging of receivables; (8) Balance due and payment terms of subordinated officer debt; (9) Detailed listing of sales and general administrative costs; and (10) Any other documentation that exists to provide the information needed to evaluate the financial indicators of a specific business

A summary of the Underwriting is required with the application and must be submitted on Form – Underwriting Summary (Appendix C).

Economic Development Entity Threshold Indicators
Applications proposing an Economic Development Entity (EDE) as a sub recipient shall be eligible to receive up to 155 points but must receive a minimum of 75 points in order to be scored further.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email