§ 8407. Selection Criteria for NOFA Applicants.
25 CA ADC § 8407BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
Barclays Official California Code of Regulations Currentness
Title 25. Housing and Community Development
Division 1. Housing and Community Development
Chapter 7. Department of Housing and Community Development Programs
Subchapter 20. Federal Emergency Shelter Grants Program
25 CCR § 8407
§ 8407. Selection Criteria for NOFA Applicants.
NOTE: See Executive Order N-66-20 (2019 CA EO 66-20), issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, relating to procedures and conditions for the allocation of funds pursuant to Public Law 116-136.
(a) All applications made pursuant to section 8404 (a) (5) will be evaluated using the criteria below and ranked according to subdivision (b) below. Where applications requesting funds for more than one program are permitted in the NOFA, each program will receive a separate score for each rating factor, and the point scores will be averaged to calculate a final point score for each rating factor.
(1) Applicant Experience - 20 points
(A) Length of experience implementing the proposed Eligible activity or activity similar to the proposed activity.
(B) For applicants who have received funding in the State's ESG program in the past three years, a maximum of 20 points will be deducted for the following:
1. Whether the Department has terminated or disencumbered ESG grant funding;
2. Whether the applicant has any unresolved monitoring findings in ESG that pose a substantial risk to the Department;
3. Whether the applicant has submitted annual reports in a timely manner for ESG grants.
(2) Need for Funds - 10 points
Need for funds based on whether the application activity and subpopulation targeting, if any, meets a high need for the community as identified by the Continuum of Care, in a manner that is consistent with the requirements of section 8409. The Continuum of Care shall provide data and analysis to support the need, including but not limited to HMIS data and data from the most recent point-in-time count published by HUD.
(3) Program Design - 20 points
Quality of the proposed program in delivering Eligible activities to participants consistent with the Written Standards of the Continuum of Care, and Core Practices as set forth under section 8409. In making determinations under this rating factor, the Department may examine such things as Continuum of Care Written Standards for the activity; provider guidelines governing activity operations; program rules for clients; and the reasonableness of program staffing patterns and the activity budget relative to program design, target population, and local conditions.
(4) Impact and Effectiveness - 30 points
Using HMIS data from the most recent ESG contract year, applications will be evaluated based on an evaluation of project and system-wide impact and effectiveness utilizing project level and system-wide performance outcomes for ESG Eligible activities or similar activities implemented within the past three years, based on data which is reasonably available. Performance measures for each ESG activity and for each Continuum of Care Service Area will be identified in the Action Plan and based on the metrics used by HUD in programs such as ESG and the Continuum of Care. The Department may require documentation to verify the accuracy of the data provided by the applicant. Such documentation shall be provided upon the request of the Department.
(5) Cost Efficiency - 10 points
Using HMIS data from the most recent ESG contract year, applications will be evaluated based on the average cost per exit to permanent housing based on the total ESG project budget and the number of exits to permanent housing. The Department may require documentation to verify the accuracy of the information provided by the applicant. Such documentation shall be provided upon the request of the Department.
(6) State Objectives - 10 Points
The Department may award each application up to 10 points for addressing one or more State Objectives as identified in the Action Plan and NOFA. The Department's selection of State Objectives will be based on one or more of the following:
(A) Federal funding priorities, as publicly announced by HUD;
(B) State funding priorities as publicly announced by the Governor or Department Director; and
(C) Housing and community development needs or objectives as identified in the Action Plan.
(b) Applications evaluated under subdivision (a) will be ranked as follows:
(1) Within each regional allocation, applications will be ranked in descending order and awarded the amount requested in the application or a revised amount if necessary to conform to funding limits in the NOFA. In the event of a tie between applicants within a regional allocation, funds will be awarded to the applicant who scored the most points in the Impact and Effectiveness rating factor.
(2) ESG funds remaining in a regional allocation may be made available for the highest ranked unfunded applications in the other regional set-asides, according to their total application score. Remaining funds may also be set-aside for distribution in the next NOFA.
(3) When there are insufficient funds to fully fund the next highest ranked unfunded application, this application may be partially funded if the funded activities can be adequately performed with the remaining ESG allocation.
Note: Authority cited: Section 50406(n), Health and Safety Code. Reference: 24 C.F.R. 576.202.
1. New section filed 7-14-2004; operative 8-13-2004 (Register 2004, No. 29).
2. Amendment of section heading, repealer and new section and amendment of Note filed 2-25-2016; operative 4-1-2016 (Register 2016, No. 9).
3. Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-66-20 (2019 CA EO 66-20), dated May 29, 2020, relating to procedures and conditions for the allocation of funds pursuant to Public Law 116-136, due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
This database is current through 10/9/20 Register 2020, No. 41
25 CCR § 8407, 25 CA ADC § 8407
|End of Document||© 2020 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.|