U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

H O U S I N G

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Special Attention of: Notice H 94-45 (HUD)

All Regional Administrators,

Directors, Office of Regional Issued: 2/1/94

Housing; Managers, Category A Expires: 2/28/95

and Category B Offices; and
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Field Office Housing Development Cross References:

Division Directors, Category A Handbook 4571.2 Disabled

Category B Offices Handbook 4571.3 REV-1 Elderly

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Subject: Fiscal Year 1994 Policy for Capital Advance

Authority Assignments, Instructions and Additional

Program Requirements for the Section 202 and

Section 811 Capital Advance Programs, Section 202

and Section 811 Application Processing and

Selection Instructions, Processing Schedule.

1\. PURPOSE. This Notice transmits for Fiscal Year 1994:

A. Major Changes to Fiscal Year 1994 Application/Selection

Process

B. Instructions to Regional and Field Offices Regarding the

Elimination of Headquarters Role in the Selection Process

for Fiscal Year 1994 Applications (ATT. 3 and 4)

C. Section 202/811 Processing Schedule

D. Field Office Allocations for Section 202 (ATT.1)

E. Regional Office Allocations for Section 811 (ATT.1a)

F. Regional Minority Business Enterprise Goals

G. Section 811 Program Modifications (ATT.2)

H. Section 811 Program Initial Screening (ATT.2A)

I. Section 811 Revised Technical Review Sheets (ATT.2B)

J. Workshop Instructions (ATT.2C)

K. Section 811 Funding Notification Letter (ATT.2D)

L. Section 202 Application Processing and Selections (ATT.3)

M. Section 811 Application Processing and Selections (ATT.4)

N. Congressional Notification Memorandum Format (ATT.5)

This Notice should be used in conjunction with the Interim

Rules (Parts 889 or 890), the appropriate Federal Register Notice

of Fund Availability, and Handbook 4571.2 - Section 811

Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities or Handbook

4571.3 REV-1 - Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

HMEE: Distribution : W-3-1, W-2(H), W-3(H), (FHEO)(ZAS)(PD&R), W-4(H),
R-1,

R-2, R-3, R-3-1, R-3-1(H)(RC), R-3-3, R-6, R-6-1,

R-6-2, R-7, R-7-1, R-7-2, R-8, R-8-1

Previous Editions Are Obsolete HUD 21B (3-80)

GPO 871 902

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2

Major changes are as follows:

\- The modifications outlined in Attachments 3 and 4 of this

Notice eliminate Headquarters role in the selection process

for Fiscal Year 1994 Section 202 and Section 811

applications.

\- Sponsors applying for a Section 202 or Section 811 fund

reservation who have received a Section 202 or Section 811

fund reservation within the last three funding cycles are

NOT required to submit the following:

\- Articles of Incorporation, constitution, or other

organizational documents;

\- By-laws;

\- IRS tax exemption ruling

Instead, these Sponsors must submit the project number of

the last appropriate application selected (202 if applying

for 202 or 811 if applying for 811) and the field office to

which it was submitted. If there have been any

modifications or additions to the subject documents,

Sponsors must indicate such, and submit the new material.

\- Application packages can be obtained from the appropriate

Field Offices or the new Multifamily Housing Clearinghouse,

Post Office Box 6424, Rockville, Maryland 20850. The

telephone number is 1-800-955-2232. A checklist of steps

and exhibits involved in the application process will be

included in the application package.

2\. FISCAL YEAR 1994 CAPITAL ADVANCE AUTHORITY ASSIGNMENTS

a\. Fair Share Factors. Although not subject to the

Section 213(d) requirements, formulae are still used

for allocating Sections 202 and 811 funds. The

allocation formulae for the elderly and the disabled

categories were developed to reflect the \"relevant

characteristics of prospective program participants\",

as specified in 24 CFR 791.402(a). Each formula

consists of the following.

Elderly Housing Formula

The allocation formula for FY 1994 is different from

that used previously. In prior years, the allocation

formula (based on 1980 Census data) included as a

measure the number of one and two person elderly renter

households with incomes at or below Very-low Income

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3

Limit (regardless of housing conditions) and the total

number of elderly renter households. However, because

the 1990 Census Summary Tape File, number 4 data needed

to produce the exact formula are not yet available, the

Department has had to rely on other similar 1990 Census

data to develop a new formula.

The allocation formula for the FY 1994 Section 202

capital advance funds consists of one data element: a

measure of the number of one and two person elderly

renter households with incomes at or below the

Department\'s Very-low Income Limit (50 percent of area

median family income, as determined by HUD, with an

adjustment for household size), which have housing

deficiencies. The counts of elderly renter households

with housing deficiencies were taken from a special

tabulation of the 1990 Decennial Census prepared for

the Department as part of the Comprehensive Housing

Affordability Strategy (CHAS) program. These counts

are produced from the same base data as that used to

produce the Summary Tape File, number 4 series so the

resulting needs calculations are very close to those

that would have derived using the previous formula.

The FY 1994 formula focuses the allocation on targeting

the funds based on the unmet needs of elderly renter

households with housing problems.

The allocations for metropolitan and nonmetropolitan

portions of the field office jurisdictions reflect the

definitions of metropolitan areas, as defined by the

Office of Management and Budget effective June 30, 1993

and published in OMB Bulletin No. 93-17.

Housing for Persons with Disabilities Formula

The allocation formula for Section 811 funds consists

of two data elements from the 1990 Decennial Census:

\(1\) the number of non-institutionalized persons age 16

or older with a work disability and a mobility or

self-care limitation and (2) the number of

non-institutionalized persons age 16 or older having a

mobility or self-care limitation but having no work

disability.

The fair share factors were developed by taking the sum

of the number of persons in each of the two elements

for each state, or state portion, of each Field Office

jurisdiction as a percent of the sum of the two

elements for the total United States. The resulting

percentage for each Field Office is then adjusted to

reflect the relative cost of providing housing among

the Field Office jurisdictions. The adjusted needs

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4

percentage for each Field Office is then multiplied by

the total amount of capital advance available

nationwide. In most cases the allocation to the Field

Office level did not allow sufficient funds to allow

for feasible project sizes or meaningful competition.

Therefore, the Department has decided to allocate the

capital advance authority at the Regional level by

summing the applicable Field Office allocations to

their respective Regional totals.

Formulae Calculation Procedures

The data elements for each formula were compiled for

every State or State portion of each Field Office

jurisdiction taken as a percent of the applicable total

number of such households (Section 202) or a percent of

the sum of the two elements (Section 811) for the total

United States. In the case of Section 202, it also was

aggregated separately by metropolitan (metro) and

nonmetropolitan (nonmetro) areas. Further, the basic

factors were adjusted to take into consideration the

relative differences in the costs of providing housing

among the Field Offices\' jurisdictions.

b\. Programs Fund Assignments. Based upon Field Office

comments, transfers between metro and nonmetro areas

were accommodated as long as the overall nonmetro

allocation met the Congressionally-mandated 15 percent

minimum for nonmetro areas nationwide. Such transfers

were permitted for known soft market areas or where

experience indicated a lack of eligible sponsors. No

changes were made in the Section 811 allocations.

The issuance of the HUD-185, Regional Fund and Contract

Authority Assignment, and the subsequent subassignment

by the Region (HUD-185.1) will be made when all of the

selections for the FY 1994 program are finalized.

3\. FIELD OFFICE ALLOCATIONS.

a\. Elderly Housing Allocations.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform

Act of 1989 (HUD Reform Act) provides that allocations

of funds be made to the smallest practicable areas

consistent with the delivery of assistance through

meaningful competition. The HUD Reform Act also states

that program funding under Section 202 shall be

allocated in a manner that ensures selections of

projects of sufficient size to accommodate facilities

for supportive services appropriate to the needs of the

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5

population to be served. In order to meet the intent

of the Reform Act, the following rules will apply to

the FY 1994 Section 202 allocations.

\(1\) Field Offices are required to establish allocation

areas only for the respective metro and nonmetro

assignments of capital advance authority for the

entire Field Office jurisdiction. Therefore, all

applications received from metropolitan areas will

compete against each other and all applications

from nonmetro areas will compete against each

other.

\(2\) There is a minimum proposal size of 40 units and a

maximum of 125 units for projects in metro areas.

In the nonmetro areas, there is a minimum proposal

size of 5 units and a maximum of 125 units per

application. Field Offices may NOT establish their

own minimum or maximum application sizes.

For Fiscal Year 1994, not less than 15 percent of

the available funds are to be allocated for

non-metro areas.

Where the Field Office allocation in either the

metro or nonmetro areas is less than 125, the

maximum proposal size will be limited by the

allocated amount. Among other requirements, to be

considered responsive to the NOFA, an applicant

must not request a larger number of units than

permitted for the respective metro and/or nonmetro

areas designated in the NOFA and must not exceed

the maximum number of units per application as

established herein. (see Attachment 1)

b\. Allocations for Section 811 Housing for Persons with

Disabilities.

The allocations for Section 811 housing for persons

with disabilities are not subject to the Section 213(d)

requirements including the control on nonmetro funding

and the requirement for a formula allocation.

Accordingly, there will not be any division of funding

between metro and nonmetro areas. We will, however,

continue funding the program on a formula basis.

Due to the limited funding for the Section 811 program,

and the resulting problem of achieving project

feasibility if the funds were allocated to the Field

Offices, Section 811 funds will be allocated to the

Regional Offices as they have been for the past five

fiscal years. Although the competition for funding

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

6

will be Region-wide, Field Offices will review the

applications and participate in the rating process.

Selection, however, will be made on the basis of

Regional rank order. (see Attachment 1A)

c\. Field Office Funding Notifications. This paragraph

expands on Paragraph 2-1 and Appendix 5 of Handbook

4571.3 REV-1. and Paragraph 2-1 of Handbook 4571.2.

All Field Offices shall issue Funding Notifications for

Section 202 and Section 811 in accordance with this

paragraph and the above Handbook references. See

Attachment 2C of this Notice for Section 811 Funding

Notification instructions.

The revised funding notification formats in Attachment

2D shall be used by all Field Offices with no

deviations. If a Field Office proposes to combine the

Section 202 and Section 811 funding notifications,

prior approval of Headquarters is required.

Although previous advertising requirements have been

eliminated, Offices must notify potential applicants by

following the instructions in Handbook 4571.3 REV-1 and

Attachment 2C of this Notice.

4\. CHAS CERTIFICATION. Each applicant is to submit a

certification by the jurisdiction in which the proposed

project is to be located that the application is consistent

with the jurisdiction HUD-approved CHAS for FY 1994. The

certification is to be signed by the unit of general local

government if it is required to have, or has, a complete

CHAS. Otherwise the certification may be made by the State,

or if the project will be located in a unit of general local

government authorized to use an abbreviated strategy, by the

unit of general local government if it is willing to prepare

such a CHAS.

All CHAS certifications must be made by the public official

responsible for submitting the CHAS to HUD. All CHAS

certifications must be submitted as part of the application

by the application submission deadline set forth in the

NOFA, except as follows: The required CHAS must be

submitted more than 60 days before the application

submission deadline, since HUD has 60 days to review and

approve the CHAS. Where the certification of consistency is

permitted to be submitted after the application submission

deadline, the CHAS must be submitted for approval in time

for the certification to be made by the later date. In no

event will an application be considered if the CHAS has not

been submitted for approval by the application submission

deadline.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

7

However, if the required certification is to be made by a

unit of general local government with respect to an

abbreviated CHAS, and the CHAS has been submitted to HUD by

the application submission deadline but has not yet been

approved by HUD, the application deadline will not be

applied to the certification for consistency. Instead, the

application must include a written statement from the public

official responsible for submitting the CHAS that the

jurisdiction has submitted an abbreviated CHAS for FY 1994

for HUD approval and that the application is consistent with

the CHAS. If HUD approves the CHAS, the required

certification that the application is consistent with a

HUD-approved CHAS for Fiscal Year 1994 must be submitted before

June 30, 1994. An application will not be selected for

funding unless the CHAS is approved and the required

certification is made by June 30, 1994. The CHAS regulations

are published in 24 CFR part 91.

5\. SPONSOR\'S EXPERIENCE IN CONTRACTING WITH MINORITY AND

WOMEN-OWNED BUSINESSES. The Fiscal Year 1994 NOFA requires

sponsors to include a summary of the total amount awarded in

each of the two categories for the preceding three years and

the percentage that amount represents of the total contracts

awarded by the sponsor in the relevant time period.

6\. FIELD OFFICE WORKSHOPS. To the extent possible, experienced

program and technical staff should conduct the

workshops in order to provide the guidance needed,

particularly by new program participants. Therefore, if at

all possible, the person(s) who attended program training

should be actively involved.

Since first time applicants may have difficulty with the

complexity of the Section 202 and 811 programs, offices are

urged to conduct pre-workshops (to be held prior to the

start of the regularly scheduled session) for first time

applicants. These applicants should attend the pre-workshop

and remain for the regular session.

Particular emphasis should be placed on the differences in

the application requirements for the Section 202 and Section

811 programs.

7\. REPORTING. Under separate cover, Regional Offices will be

sent instructions and a Data Diskette containing a DBASE III

Plus file structured to record all required information for

FY 1994 projects, plus files configured to print out the

three lists (i.e., (1) initial selections, (2) approvable,

but unfunded, applications and (3) applications which failed

to meet the threshold score of 50 points).

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

8

8\. MINORITY BUSINESS ENTERPRISE GOALS. The Department

encourages participation of the Minority Business Enterprise

(MBE) sector in HUD programs. Therefore, MBE goals

(expressed in dollars and units) have been established as

set forth below. A minority Sponsor is one in which more

than 50 percent of the board members are minority (i.e.,

Black, Hispanic, Native American, Asian Pacific, Asian

Indian, or Hasidic Jewish). The Regional Administrators

and Field Office Managers are expected to encourage

participation by minority Sponsors.

\(1\) Section 202 Elderly Housing:

MBE Goals

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Region Units Dollars

\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

I 39 \$ 2,911,729

II 305 \$ 23,767,544

III 138 \$ 8,589,180

IV 326 \$ 17,256,424

V 207 \$ 12,912,518

VI 158 \$ 7,885,082

VII 26 \$ 1,396,373

VIII 17 \$ 871,744

IX 312 \$ 22,881,179

X 21 \$ 1,400,527

\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

1549 \$ 99,872,300

\(2\) Section 811 Housing for Persons with Disabilities:

MBE Goals

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Region Units Dollars

\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

I 4 \$ 279,235

II 32 \$ 2,446,424

III 26 \$ 1,553,656

IV 78 \$ 3,944,973

V 31 \$ 1,859,290

VI 39 \$ 1,900,801

VII 4 \$ 222,889

VIII 4 \$ 89,207

IX 44 \$ 3,299,603

X 4 \$ 190,822

\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

266 \$ 15,786,900

9\. NOTIFICATION TO PROGRAM APPLICANTS. A copy of this Notice

shall be included in all Application Packages. Sponsors

must be advised that all applications submitted under the FY

1994 program must be in conformance with this Notice as well

as the appropriate Federal Register Notice of Fund

Availability, Handbooks and Field Office Funding

Notification.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

9

To this end, Fiscal Year 1994 applications must follow the

format provided in the Section 202 or Section 811

Application Package, which is in accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-511).

10\. PROCESSING SCHEDULE.

In accordance with the schedule included in the Announcement

of Fund Availability published in the Federal Register, the

following processing schedule has been developed. It is not

mandatory that Field Offices maintain this schedule at all

times. However, the underscored dates and actions are

specific deadlines which must be met:

Application Deadline May 3, 1994

Initial Screening Completed May 18, 1994

Expiration of 14 day period for

submission of missing application items June 1, 1994

Technical Processing Completed June 22, 1994

Notification of Technical rejects June 24, 1994

End of 14 day appeal period for

Technical Rejects July 8, 1994

Convene Field Office Rating Panels July 14, 1994

Field Offices submit lists of

selections and other approvable

applications to Regional Offices July 18, 1994

Regional Offices complete funding

selections and initiate fund reservation

actions. Final selection data diskette

and transmittal memorandum submitted

to Headquarters. July 25, 1994

Regional Offices submit Congressional

Notification Memorandum to Office of

Congressional and Intergovernmental

Affairs, Headquarters. July 27, 1994

Funding Announcements Completed Aug. 3, 1994

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

10

11\. RELEASE OF SECTION 202 AND SECTION 811 RATINGS AND RANKINGS.

Release of information regarding selections or nonselections

is prohibited until after funding announcements are made.

Field Offices may not release selection letters until

authorized to do so by Headquarters. It is the policy of

the Department to operate an open selection system. In line

with this policy, release of rating and ranking information

to Section 202/811 applicants or their authorized

representatives is permitted, but only after the release of

selection letters. If rating sheets or technical review

sheets are requested, they may also be released. However,

the name of the reviewer may be deleted from the copy

released to the applicant.

The above information may also be released to any member of

the public requesting such information under the Freedom of

Information Act (FOIA). The handling of such requests shall

be the same as for other FOIA requests.

12\. HUD Reform Act Provisions. As required by the HUD Reform

Act, the Department will publish the funding decisions in

the Federal Register at the conclusion of the funding cycle.

Field Office staff also are reminded that the HUD Reform Act

prohibits advance disclosure of funding decisions. Also see

24 CFR Part 12 which was published in the Federal Register

on March 14, 1991.

Programmatic questions concerning the FY 1994 Section 202

and Section 811 programs may be discussed with the Headquarters

Production Branch staff (FTS 202-708-2866). Questions concerning

MIPS should be directed to Eva Lantz, Housing Information and

Statistics Division, (FTS 202-755-7460 extension 111).

Questions concerning Section 202 and Section 811 Capital

Advance or Project Rental Assistance Contract Authority should be

directed to the Funding Control Division (FTS 202-708-2750).

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Assistant Secretary for Housing

\- Federal Housing Commissioner

Attachments

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

1

ATTACHMENT 1

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

FISCAL YEAR 1994 ALLOCATIONS FOR SUPPORTIVE

HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY

FISCAL YEAR 1994 SECTION 202 ALLOCATIONS

\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* GRAPHICS MATERIAL IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT OMITTED \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2

ATTACHMENT 1

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

FISCAL YEAR 1994 SECTION 202 ALLOCATIONS

\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* GRAPHICS MATERIAL IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT OMITTED \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3

ATTACHMENT 1

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

FISCAL YEAR 1994 SECTION 202 ALLOCATIONS

\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* GRAPHICS MATERIAL IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT OMITTED \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4

ATTACHMENT 1

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

FISCAL YEAR 1994 SECTION 202 ALLOCATIONS

\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* GRAPHICS MATERIAL IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT OMITTED \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5

ATTACHMENT 1A

FISCAL YEAR 1993 ALLOCATION FOR SUPPORTIVE HOUSING

FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

CAPITAL

REGION ADVANCE UNITS

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

I \$ 8,714,817 121

II \$ 22,768,105 305

III \$ 16,738,362 280

IV \$ 31,171,649 615

V \$ 26,794,525 449

VI \$ 14,990,460 314

VII \$ 5,869,593 113

VIII \$ 2,583,448 52

IX \$ 24,127,484 345

X \$ 4,110,557 69

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

National Total \$157,869,000 2663

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

6

ATTACHMENT 2

SECTION 811 PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS

The following represent the changes to the Section 811 program.

Since revisions to Handbook 4571.2 have not been completed to

incorporate the major changes to the program which were outlined

in Attachment 2-1 of Notice H 93-45, they are repeated here.

Changes or clarifications to the program from FY 1993 to FY 1994

are in bold-faced type.

1\. Applicant Eligibility. Section 603 of the Housing and

Community Development Act of 1992 (HCD Act of 1992) amended

Section 811 of the NAHA by expanding the definition of

private nonprofit organization in Section 811(k)(6) to

include public and unincorporated institutions or

foundations. It also requires such organizations to have

received tax-exempt status under section 501(c)(3) of the

Internal Revenue Service Code of 1986. (Temporary clearance

to receive section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status is not

possible.) The Section 811 Program was not previously

limited to nonprofits with Section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt

status. The same requirements apply to the Owner except

that the Owner must be incorporated.

2\. Site Issues. Sites under control and sites identified will

be evaluated using the same review factors. However,

applications with sites identified will now have to

specifically include information on how the site will

promote greater housing opportunities for minorities and any

other information on the suitability of the site for persons

with disabilities.

If, in the case of a site identified, the evidence provided

in the site description is not sufficient to lead to the

conclusion that the Sponsor will have site control within

six months, the application will be rejected.

If evidence of site control is rejected, the project is

still eligible to receive points for suitability of site,

but falls into Category B. If the site is rejected, the

application also must be placed in Category B but receives

no points for suitability of site.

Sponsors must provide the specific street address of the

site, even if it is an identified site. This was required

in FY 1993 but many Sponsors still only described a general

area. This year, if the Sponsor proposes one or more

condominium units, the unit number(s) must also be provided.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

7

To compete in Category A, Sponsors proposing scattered site

projects must provide acceptable evidence of site control

for ALL proposed sites which, upon completion of

environmental reviews, must be found approvable.

Sponsors submitting applications with site control where the

site or the evidence is found unacceptable will have their

applications moved to Category B provided they indicated in

their applications that they would be willing to seek

alternate sites. If only the evidence is found

unacceptable, the Sponsor may still receive points for

Criteria 2 (b) and (c). However, if the site is found to be

unacceptable, the application is not to be awarded any

points for Criteria 2 (b) and (c).

Sites that are identified (not under control of the Sponsor)

are NOT to receive an environmental review. However, if the

Field Office happens to have certain knowledge about an

identified site that would result in rejection of the site,

(e.g., it is located next to other housing for persons with

disabilities), the application is to be rejected on the

basis that it is unlikely that the Sponsor will be able to

obtain site control within six months of fund reservation.

The reason for treating Sponsors who submit applications

with site control where the site is unacceptable differently

from Sponsors who submit applications with identified sites

where the site is unacceptable (move to Category B as

opposed to reject the application), is that the Department

can be more reasonably assured that Sponsors who were able

to obtain site control during the application preparation

period will be able to obtain site control within six months

of fund reservation than are Sponsors who were only able to

identify sites during this period. The statute requires

that the Department have \"reasonable assurances that the

applicant will own or have control of an acceptable site for

the proposed housing not later than six months after

notification of an award for assistance\".

3\. Davis-Bacon Act. Labor standards have been amended as

they relate to Section 811 housing. Instead of applying

to housing designed for use by 12 or more persons with

disabilities, they now apply to housing containing 12

or more units. Since a group home is considered as one

unit, the labor standards do not apply. Group homes

funded in Fiscal Year 1994 will not be covered by the

labor standards. Independent living facilities with 12

or more units are covered by the standards.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

8

4\. Maximum Person Limits. The maximum number of persons

with disabilities in an independent living facility is

changed to allow 24 persons for all disability types.

Consequently, independent living facilities for persons

with chronic mental illness are no longer capped at 20

persons.

5\. Supportive Services. The review of supportive services

no longer includes a review by HUD staff of the

appropriateness of the services for the proposed

occupancy group. State/local agency review and a

completed certification are still required.

A modification has been made in the required letter of

intent. A Sponsor must obtain one or more of the

following:

a\) a letter from a funding source committing funds;

b\) a letter of intent from a Community Mental Health

Center, for instance, to provide services to

project residents; or

c\) a letter from a service provider stating that

project residents will be eligible to access

available services in the community.

If the Sponsor will be the sole service provider, using

its own funds to provide the services, a letter from

the Sponsor indicating its capability and commitment to

either provide or ensure provision of the supportive

services for the life of the project is required.

The service plan should be rated based on the needs of

the tenants as demonstrated in the application.

Applications for populations requiring less intensive

services should not be rated down if an elaborate

services package is not included in the application.

For example, accessibility may be the principal need of

persons with physical disabilities in becoming

independent in the community. High functioning persons

with mental disabilities in independent living

facilities may require only occasional support in

combination with existing community services.

6\. Lead-Based Paint. Although the NOFA deleted the

following, \"In the case of a structure built or

rehabilitated prior to 1978 that is proposed to be

developed as an independent living facility, a

statement from the Sponsor indicating that it has

inspected the structure for defective paint surfaces\",

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

9

it is still required by the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning

Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. 4821-4846) and implementing

regulations at 24 CFR Part 35 (except as superseded in

890.260 (f)(2)). However, 24 CFR Part 35 is being

revised. Field Offices will be advised of any changes

in the requirements that will impact the program.

7\. Exceptions to Project Size Limits. The information the

Sponsor must supply if it is requesting an exception to

the project size limits has been put back into the NOFA

and the Application Package with some modifications:

a\. The Sponsor may request an exception to the

project size limits only if the Sponsor has site

control and the project is to be rehabilitated;

b\. The Sponsor must indicate why the particular site

was selected;

c\. The Sponsor must demonstrate that the size of the

project is consistent with State and/or local

policies governing similar facilities for the

proposed population; and,

d\. The Sponsor must provide a statement that it is

willing to have its application processed at the

project size limit should HUD not approve the

exception.

8\. Miscellaneous. If a Sponsor proposes a scattered site

project that will consist of a group home(s) and an

independent living facility(ies), a separate

application must be submitted for each facility type.

This change was made to facilitate more accurate

recordkeeping for statistical purposes.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

10

ATTACHMENT 2A

SECTION 811 CAPITAL ADVANCE PROGRAM

APPLICATION FOR FUND RESERVATION

INITIAL SCREENING REVIEW CHECKLIST FORMAT

Instructions:

1\. The MHR shall check all applications to determine if the

exhibits are complete, missing or incomplete. NOTE: During

initial screening, the contents of the exhibits are not to

be reviewed; only the inclusion of the material.

2\. If an exhibit or part of an exhibit is missing, it should be

identified on the review sheet.

3\. When completed, the MHR shall draft a letter to the Sponsor

either acknowledging receipt of a complete application or

identifying missing exhibits or parts of exhibits.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project Sponsor:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project Location:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project No.: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ No. of
Units/Residents:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

INITIAL SCREENING SUMMARY

Date Received for Screening:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Date Screening Completed:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Application is complete.

Date of acknowledgement letter: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

OR

Application is incomplete.

Date of deficiency letter (attach copy): \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Date of response to deficiency letter: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Date Application Placed into Technical Processing:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Signature of MHR) Date

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

11

ATTACHMENT 2A, pg.2

Section 811 - Application for Fund Reservation

Initial Screening Review Checklist

Multifamily Housing Representative

Sponsor Name:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
Location:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project No.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The following Exhibits must be checked for completeness by

the Multifamily Housing Representative.

EXHIBIT NO. COMPLETE INCOMPLETE MISSING

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

1 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2a \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2b \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2c \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2d \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

6 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

7 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

8 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

9 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

10 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

11 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

12 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

13 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

14 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

15 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

16 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

17 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

18A \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

18B \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

19a \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

19b \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

19c \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

19d \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

19e \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

19f \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

19g \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

19h \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

20a \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

20b \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

20c \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

12

ATTACHMENT 2A pg.3

EXHIBIT NO. COMPLETE INCOMPLETE MISSING

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

20d \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

21a \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

21b \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

21c \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

21d \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

21e \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

21f \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

NOTE: If Sponsor is not applying for a group home to be licensed

as an intermediate care facility, put N/A for Exhibits 21a

through 21f.

After review of the Exhibits for completeness, check one of

the following:

1\. To complete the application review, the following

information must be requested from the Sponsor:

Information Requested

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. The application is complete.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Signature of MHR Date

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

13

ATTACHMENT 2B

SECTION 811 CAPITAL ADVANCE

APPLICATION FOR FUND RESERVATION

TECHNICAL PROCESSING REVIEW AND FINDINGS MEMORANDA FORMATS

Instructions:

1\. The attached contains 8 separate suggested memoranda formats

for use by the reviewing disciplines during technical

processing at the fund reservation stage. The memoranda

formats provide for:

\- the assignment of recommended ranking points by the

reviewing discipline for the Section 811 Rating Panel.

\- identification of all required findings and applicable

program instructions.

\- identification of substantive comments by the reviewer.

2\. If the reviewing discipline discovers that an exhibit or

part of an exhibit is missing which was not identified

during initial screening, the MHR should be immediately

notified. The MHR shall telephone the Sponsor and request

the missing information to be submitted within 10 days from

the date of the telephone call. The MHR shall also request

this information on the same day by certified mail.

3\. Review Disciplines Summary: MHR shall complete the

following:

Reviewing Office Recommendation 1/

Acceptable Not Acceptable

MHR \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

AE&C \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

VAL \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

EMAS \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

FH&EO \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

HM \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Counsel \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

CPD \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

1/ If an application receives a \"not acceptable\" recommendation,

it should not be considered by the Rating Panel.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

14

SECTION 811

TECHNICAL PROCESSING REVIEW AND FINDINGS MEMORANDUM

MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REPRESENTATIVE (MHR)

MEMORANDUM FOR: Director, Housing Development Division

FROM:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_,
MHR

SUBJECT: Technical Processing Review and Findings Memorandum

Sponsor\'s Name:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
Location:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project No.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Proj. Type/# of Struct.: \_\_\_\_\_\_ \# of Units per Struct.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The subject application has been reviewed and the MHR\'s

findings are as follows:

1\. The proposed facilities and intended occupants are eligible

under the Section 811 program.

Yes \_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_ If No, the application must be rejected.

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. The Sponsor has previous experience in developing and/or

operating housing, medical or other facilities, such as, but

not limited to, rehabilitation centers, clinics, day care or

treatment centers and/or the provision of services to

persons with disabilities, the elderly, families or minority

groups, preferably, but not necessarily, among those in the

low- and moderate-income categories.

Yes \_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_ If No, the application must be rejected.

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

15

(Technical Processing - MHR) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3\. The Sponsor/Co-Sponsor submitted a board resolution stating

a specific dollar amount sufficient to cover the required

minimum capital investment.

Yes \_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_ If No, was a board resolution provided

by another organization to furnish these

funds or a combination thereof?

Yes \_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_ If No, the application must be rejected.

If Yes, name of organization \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4\. The Sponsor submitted properly executed Exhibits including

Certifications.

Yes \_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_ If No, the application must be rejected.

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5\. The likelihood that the Sponsor will have site control (if

not already in control of a site) within six months of

receiving a notice of Section 811 Capital Advance.

Yes \_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_ If No, the application must be rejected.

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

6\. Did the State/local agency certification indicate that the

provision of supportive services is well designed to meet

the special needs of the persons with disabilities the

housing is intended to serve?

Yes \_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_ If No, the application must be rejected.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

16

(Technical Processing - MHR) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

7\. Did the State/local agency certification indicate that the

proposed facility is consistent with the agency\'s

plans/policies governing the development and operation of

facilities to serve the proposed population?

Yes \_\_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_\_ If No, and the agency will be a major

funding or referral source for the proposed project, the

application must be rejected.

NOTE: Any application that must be rejected based on a \"No\"

response to any of the above questions, must be rated. However,

the application will not be ranked. The applicant will not be

notified of the rejection until technical processing has been

completed.

RATING FACTORS

1\. In determining the Sponsor\'s ability to develop and operate

the proposed housing on a long-term basis, consider:

(42 points maximum)

\(a\) The scope, extent and quality of the Sponsor\'s

experience in providing housing or related services to

those proposed to be served by the project and the

scope of the proposed project (i.e., number of units,

services, relocation costs, development, and operation)

in relationship to the Sponsor\'s demonstrated

development and management capacity (32 points

maximum)

Recommended rating:

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

17

(Technical Processing - MHR) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(c\) The extent of local community support for the Sponsor\'s

activities, including previous experience in serving

the area where the project is to be located, and

Sponsor\'s demonstrated ability to enlist volunteers and

local funds (10 points maximum).

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3\. In determining the adequacy of the provision of supportive

services, and of the proposed facility, consider the

following: (20 points maximum)

\(a\) The extent to which the Sponsor has demonstrated that

the identified supportive services will be provided on

a consistent, long-term basis - strength of commitments

to fund or provide the supportive services or

indications of the availability of supportive services

to project residents. (10 points maximum).

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(b\) The quality of the services implementation plan (10

points maximum)

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

18

(Technical Processing - MHR) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

In summary, the subject application is acceptable.

Yes \_\_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Signature of MHR Date

NOTE: ALL OF THE EXHIBITS WERE REVIEWED TO DETERMINE THE

ABOVE FINDINGS.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

19

SECTION 811

TECHNICAL PROCESSING REVIEW AND FINDINGS MEMORANDUM

ARCHITECTURAL, ENGINEERING, AND COST BRANCH (A&E)

MEMORANDUM FOR: Director, Housing Development Division

FROM: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, Chief,
Architectural,

Engineering and Cost Branch

SUBJECT: Technical Processing Review and Findings Memorandum

Sponsor\'s Name:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
Location:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project No.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Proj. Type/# of Struct.: \_\_\_\_\_\_ \# of Units per Struct.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The subject application has been reviewed and Architectural,

Engineering and Cost\'s findings are as follows:

RATING FACTORS

3\. In determining adequacy of the provision of supportive

services and of the proposed facility, consider:

(5 points maximum)

\(c\) The extent to which the proposed design will meet any

special needs of persons with disabilities the housing

is intended to serve and will accommodate the provision

of any necessary on-site services for the proposed

residents (5 points maximum).

NOTE: If the proposed population does not have any

special needs requiring special design features and

there will not be any on-site services, give the

application the full 5 points.

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

20

(Technical Processing - A&E) continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The application is acceptable from an Architectural,

Engineering and Cost viewpoint.

Yes \_\_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Signature of MHR Date

NOTE: EXHIBITS 1, 19, AND 20 WERE REVIEWED TO DETERMINE THE

ABOVE FINDINGS.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

21

SECTION 811

TECHNICAL PROCESSING REVIEW AND FINDINGS MEMORANDUM

VALUATION BRANCH

MEMORANDUM FOR: Director, Housing Development Division

FROM: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, Chief Appraiser,
Valuation Branch

SUBJECT: Technical Processing Review and Findings Memorandum

Sponsor Name:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
Location:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project No:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Proj. Type/# of Struct.: \_\_\_\_\_\_ \# of Units per Struct.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The subject application has been reviewed and Valuation\'s

comments are as follows:

The Sponsor has: site control \_\_\_\_ or identified a site
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.

NOTES: 1) If the Sponsor did not submit either evidence of

site control or an identified site, the application must be

rejected. The application will still be rated as a whole but

will not be ranked. The applicant will not be notified of the

rejection until technical processing has been completed.

2\) If the Sponsor is proposing a scattered-site project with

some sites under control and some identified, the application

must be treated as a site identified application, rated under

Criterion 2 (b) and (c) and, if approvable, placed in Category

B.

RATING FACTOR

2\. In determining the need for supportive housing for persons

with disabilities in the area to be served, the extent to

which the Sponsor has site control, and the suitability of

the site, consider: (25 points maximum)

\(b\) Proximity or accessibility of the site to shopping,

medical facilities, transportation, places of

worship, recreational facilities, and other necessary

services for the intended occupants, adequacy of

utilities and streets (site control projects only),

freedom of the site from adverse environmental

conditions (site control projects only) and

compliance with the site and neighborhood standards.

(10 points maximum)

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

22

(Technical Processing - Valuation) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The following additional findings have been made:

\(1\) The number of units and bedroom sizes are marketable.

Yes \_\_\_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(2\) The proposed site is located outside the 100-year

floodplain (or 500-year floodplain if ICF).

Yes \_\_\_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_\_\_ If No, the 8-step process must

be initiated.

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

NOTE: Six steps of the 8-step process identified in

24 CFR Part 50.4 must be completed, if an application

is recommended for funding.

\(3\) The Form HUD-92013-E has been reviewed and is

acceptable.

Yes \_\_\_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

23

(Technical Processing - Valuation) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(4\) For applications with site control only, the proposed

project meets Environmental Assessment requirements,

including Compliance Findings (including SHPO

comments and HUD\'s historic finding) set forth in

attached Form HUD-4128 or 4128.1, as appropriate.

Yes \_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_ N/A \_\_\_\_\_\_

If No, the application shall NOT be rejected. It

shall receive 0 points for Criterion 2 (b) and (c)

and be placed into Category B, provided it meets all

other requirements and scores at least 50 points.

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(5\) Is the site located in a floodway, Coastal High

Hazard Area, and/or within a designated Coastal

Barrier (Coastal Barrier Resources Act P.L. 97-348)?

Yes \_\_\_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_\_\_

If Yes, the site must be rejected. The application

shall receive 0 points for Criterion 2 (b) and (c).

If an application with evidence of site control, it

shall also be placed in Category B.

\(6\) If the proposed site is an RTC property, was the

Transaction Screen Checklist or Phase I Environmental

Site Assessment Submitted?

Yes \_\_\_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(7\) The proposed construction or rehabilitation is or

will be permissible under applicable zoning

ordinances or regulations.

Yes \_\_\_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

24

(Technical Processing - Valuation) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

In summary, the subject application is: Acceptable

Not

Acceptable

Explain:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Signature or Appraiser) Date

Attachment: Form HUD-4128 or 4128.1, as appropriate, with

supporting documentation.

NOTE: EXHIBITS 1, 18, AND 19 WERE REVIEWED TO DETERMINE

THE ABOVE FINDINGS.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

25

SECTION 811

TECHNICAL PROCESSING REVIEW AND FINDINGS MEMORANDUM

ECONOMIC & MARKET ANALYSIS

MEMORANDUM FOR: Director, Housing Development Division

FROM:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_,
Director, Economic &

Market Analysis

SUBJECT: Technical Processing Review and Findings Memorandum

Sponsor Name:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
Location:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project No.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Proj. Type/# of Struct.: \_\_\_\_\_\_ \# of Units per Struct.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The subject application has been reviewed and EMAS\'s

findings are as follows:

1\. Taking into consideration the information available,

including the Sponsor\'s evidence of need, current and

anticipated housing market conditions in assisted housing

for persons with disabilities and comments from the FmHA,

is there sufficient demand for the number and type of

units proposed?

Yes No

If No, the application is a technical reject and is to be

given zero (0) points on rating criterion 2 (a) below.

Explain basis for the finding:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. The proposed location is acceptable and desirable for

persons with disabilities taking into consideration the

proximity or accessibility of public facilities, health

care and other necessary services to the intended

occupants.

Yes No

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

26

(Technical Processing - EMAS) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

NOTE: EMAS should complete this question only if it has

available relevant information on the site and location.

RATING FACTOR

2\. (a) If a determination has been made that there is a need

for additional supportive housing for persons with

disabilities in the area to be served, the project is

to be awarded 8 points. If not, the project is to be

awarded 0 points. Awarding of points between 0 and 8

points is not permitted.

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Based on the EMAS review, the application is:

Acceptable Not Acceptable

Explain:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Signature of Economist) Date

NOTE: EXHIBITS 1, 17, 18, AND 19 WERE REVIEWED TO DETERMINE

THE ABOVE FINDINGS.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

27

SECTION 811

TECHNICAL PROCESSING REVIEW AND FINDINGS MEMORANDUM

FAIR HOUSING & EQUAL OPPORTUNITY (FHEO)

MEMORANDUM FOR: Director, Housing Development Division

FROM: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_,
Director, Fair Housing

and Equal Opportunity

SUBJECT: Technical Processing Review and Findings Memorandum

Sponsor
Name:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
Location:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
No.:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Proj. Type/# of Struct.: \_\_\_\_\_\_ \# of Units per Struct.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO)

has reviewed the subject application in accordance with the

rating criteria as outlined in this Handbook and applicable

notices and in accordance with applicable civil rights

requirements. FHEO\'s recommended ratings and comments on the

acceptability of the application are as follows:

1\. Based on the application submission, even without the

benefit of a site visit, the proposed site meets site and

neighborhood standards.

Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_

If No, without proper justification, site is rejected and

application receives no points for Criterion 2 (b) and

(c). In addition, if an application with site control, it

is placed in Category B.

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. Sponsor is in compliance with civil rights laws and

regulations, i.e., there is no pending Department of

Justice civil rights suit, or outstanding finding of

non-compliance with civil rights statutes, executive orders,

or regulations (as a result of formal administrative

proceedings), or Secretarial charge under the Fair Housing

Act which has not been resolved; and, there has not been a

deferral of the processing of applications from the

Sponsor.

Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

28

(Technical Processing - FHEO) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3\. The Sponsor\'s Certifications are acceptable in connection

with compliance with civil rights laws, regulation,

Executive Orders, and equal opportunity requirements.

(NOTE: FHEO shall accept the Certifications unless

there is documented evidence to the contrary.)

Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

NOTE: Any application that would require rejection based on a

\"No\" response in any of the above questions (with the exception

of question #1) must be rated. However, the application will

not be ranked. The applicant will not be notified of the

rejection until technical processing has been completed.

RATING FACTORS

1\. In determining the Sponsor\'s capacity to develop and

operate the proposed housing on a long-term basis,

consider: (8 points maximum)

\(b\) The scope, extent and quality of the Sponsor\'s

experience in providing housing or related services

to minority persons or families (5 points maximum).

NOTE: If the Sponsor has no previous housing

experience, all relevant supportive services

experience should be examined.

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(c\) The scope, extent and quality of the Sponsor\'s

experience in providing opportunities for minority

and women-owned business enterprises participation

(3 points maximum).

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

29

(Technical Processing - FHEO) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. In determining the need for supportive housing for persons

with disabilities in the area to be served, the extent to

which the Sponsor has site control, and the suitability of

the site, consider: (7 points maximum)

\(c\) Suitability of the site from the standpoint of

promoting a greater choice of housing opportunities

for minority disabled persons. (7 points maximum)

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The following additional findings have been made:

\(1\) The project addresses a low participation rate and an

identified need for housing for very low income

minority disabled persons.

Yes\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(2\) Based upon data submitted in Exhibit 10, the Sponsor

indicates ties to the minority community.

Yes\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(3\) The Sponsor\'s project is consistent with the

affirmatively furthering fair housing provisions of

the jurisdiction\'s CHAS certification.

Yes\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

30

(Technical Processing - FHEO) - continued

Project No.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(4\) For projects with relocation indicated, is the

information submitted in Exhibit 8 acceptable?

Yes\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_ Not Applicable \_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(5\) The Sponsor submitted the required racial and ethnic

data on the persons/businesses to be displaced.

Yes\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_ Not Applicable

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The subject application is acceptable from a FHEO

viewpoint.

Yes\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_

Explain:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Signature of FHEO Reviewer) Date

NOTE: EXHIBITS 1, 8, 9, 10, 13, 17, AND 18 WERE REVIEWED TO

DETERMINE THE ABOVE FINDINGS.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

31

SECTION 811

TECHNICAL PROCESSING REVIEW AND FINDINGS MEMORANDUM

MANAGEMENT

MEMORANDUM FOR: Director, Housing Development Division

FROM: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_,
Director, Housing

Management Division

SUBJECT: Technical Processing Review and Findings Memorandum

Sponsor
Name:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
Location:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
No.:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Proj. Type/# of Struct.: \_\_\_\_\_\_ \# of Units per Struct.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The Housing Management Division has reviewed the subject

application according to outstanding instructions and the

findings are as follows:

RATING FACTORS:

1\. In determining the Sponsor\'s ability to develop and operate

the proposed housing on a long-term basis, consider: (32

points maximum)

\(a\) The scope, extent and quality of the Sponsor\'s

experience in providing housing or related services

to the persons proposed to be served by the project

and the scope of the proposed project (i.e., number

of units, services, relocation costs, development,

and operation) in relationship to the Sponsor\'s

demonstrated development and management capacity.

(32 points maximum).

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

NOTE: In arriving at recommended ratings,

consideration must be given to evidence

provided by the Sponsor that it has

organizational continuity and will be able

to continue its support to the project for

at least 40 years.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

32

(Technical Processing - HM) - continued

Project No.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3\. In determining adequacy of the provision of supportive

services and of the proposed facility, consider:

(20 points maximum)

\(a\) The extent to which the Sponsor has demonstrated that

the identified supportive services will be provided

on a consistent long-term basis - strength of

commitments to fund or provide the supportive

services or indications of the availability of

necessary supportive services to project residents.

(10 points maximum)

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(b\) The quality of the services implementation plan. (10

points maximum)

Recommended rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The following additional findings have been made:

\(1\) Housing Management\'s experience with the Sponsor has

been satisfactory, if self-management or identity of

interest management is proposed.

Yes\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_ Not applicable

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

33

(Technical Processing - HM) - continued

Project No.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(2\) Is project likely to affect adversely other

HUD-insured and assisted housing?

Yes\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_ If yes, application must be

rejected.

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The subject application is acceptable from a Housing

Management viewpoint.

Yes\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_

Explain:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Signature of HM Reviewer Date

NOTE: EXHIBITS 1, 10, 11, 12, 15, 19 WERE REVIEWED TO

DETERMINE THE ABOVE FINDINGS.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

34

SECTION 811

TECHNICAL PROCESSING REVIEW AND FINDINGS MEMORANDUM

FIELD OFFICE COUNSEL

MEMORANDUM FOR: Director, Housing Development Division

FROM: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, Field
Office Counsel

SUBJECT: Technical Processing Review and Findings Memorandum

Sponsor
Name:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
Location:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
No.:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Proj. Type/# of Struct.: \_\_\_\_\_\_ \# of Units per Struct.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The subject application has been reviewed and the Field

Office Counsel\'s comments are as follows:

1\. The Sponsor is an eligible nonprofit entity, no part of the

net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private

party and which is not controlled by or under the direction

of persons seeking to derive profit or gain therefrom.

Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. The Sponsor has the necessary legal authority to sponsor

the project, to assist the Owner and to apply for the

capital advance.

Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3\. The Sponsor has an IRS tax exemption ruling, a blanket

exemption with the Sponsor specifically named in the list,

or a copy of the letter from the national/parent

organization to the IRS requesting that the Sponsor be

included under its blanket exemption.

Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

35

(Technical Processing - Counsel) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4\. The Sponsor has submitted documentary evidence of site

control which does not contain restrictive covenants or

reverter clauses unacceptable to HUD.

Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_ N/A\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5\. The Sponsor\'s board has adopted a resolution which:

\(a\) Certifies that no officer or board member of the

Sponsor, or of the Owner when formed, has or will be

permitted to have any financial interest in any

contract or in any firm or corporation that has a

contract with the Owner in connection with the

construction or operation of the project, procurement

of the site or other matters whatsoever. (NOTE:

This prohibition, as to the Sponsor\'s officers or

board, does not apply to any management or supportive

service contract entered into by the Owner with the

Sponsor or its nonprofit affiliate.)

Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(b\) Lists all the Sponsor\'s duly qualified and sitting

officers and directors, their titles, and the

beginning and ending date for each of their term of

office.

Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_\_\_

Comments:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

36

(Technical Processing - Counsel) - continued

Project No. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

NOTE: If the answer to any item is checked \"No,\" with the

exception of Question #4, Counsel will check \"not acceptable\"

below and the application will be rejected.

RECOMMENDATION:

The subject Application is acceptable.

The subject Application must be rejected for the

following reason(s):

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Signature of Field Office Counsel) Date

NOTE: EXHIBITS 1, 2, 14, AND 18 WERE REVIEWED TO DETERMINE THE

ABOVE FINDINGS.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

37

SECTION 811

TECHNICAL PROCESSING REVIEW AND FINDINGS MEMORANDUM

COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT (CPD)

RELOCATION REVIEW

MEMORANDUM FOR: Director, Housing Development Division

FROM: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, Director,
Community

Planning and Development

SUBJECT: Technical Processing Review and Findings Memorandum

Sponsor Name:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
Location:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project
No.:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Proj. Type/# of Struct.: \_\_\_\_\_\_ \# of Units per Struct.:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

The subject application has been reviewed with regard to

displacement and acquisition and finds the following:

1\. (a) Sponsor has completed the information required

by Exhibit 8, Data on Project Occupancy,

Displacement and Real Property Acquisition.

Yes No

\(b\) Sponsor has identified persons occupying the

property on the date of submission of the

Application (or initial site control, if

later)

No. not to be No. to be

Displaced Displaced

Households (families

and individuals) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Business and Nonprofit

Organizations \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Farms \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Totals \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

38

(Technical Processing - CPD) continued

Project No.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2\. (a) Estimated costs for relocation and real property

acquisition, if applicable, are reasonable.

Yes No

\(b\) The source of funding for such costs has been

identified.

Yes No

\(c\) There is a firm commitment to provide funds for

relocation costs (Section 811 funds or other

sources).

Yes No

3\. Organization to administer relocation has been

identified.

Yes No

4\. Certification of compliance with Relocation and real

property acquisition requirements has been provided.

Yes No

In view of the above, the proposal is acceptable to

Community Planning and Development.

Yes\_\_\_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_\_ If no, identify the conditions

for acceptability.

Conditions, if any, for approval:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Signature of CPD Reviewer) Date

NOTE: EXHIBITS 1, 8, AND 18 WERE REVIEWED TO DETERMINE THE

ABOVE FINDINGS.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

39

ATTACHMENT 2C

WORKSHOP INSTRUCTIONS

The Regional/Field Office will send a Notification of Funding

(using the notification format in Attachment 2D of this Notice)

regarding the date, time and place of the workshop to the

following:

\- Disabled and minority media, and minority and other

organizations involved in housing and community

development within the Office\'s jurisdiction;

\- Groups with a special interest in housing for persons with

disabilities, including State and local disability

agencies (e.g., Department of Mental Health and

Developmental Disabilities);

\- The applicable State single point of contact (Executive

Order 12372) and chief executive officers of appropriate

units of State/local government in all instances where

there is a Comprehensive Affordability Strategy (CHAS).

In addition, the following must be notified, where feasible:

\- Trade association journals;

\- Associations representing persons with disabilities;

\- State agencies, such as departments of human resources;

\- Fair housing groups (the names and addresses of such

organizations and groups shall be provided to the PC&R

staff by the Equal Opportunity Division Directors).

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

40

ATTACHMENT 2D

FUNDING NOTIFICATION FOR FISCAL YEAR \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SECTION 811 SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

CAPITAL ADVANCE PROGRAM

The Department of Housing and Urban Development will accept

applications from nonprofit organizations for rental or

cooperative housing under the Section 811 Capital Advance

Program for Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities

subject to the following:

Units Capital Advance

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

This represents the funding available for Region
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.

Applicants must not request more units than available and must

not exceed the program limits for housing for persons with

disabilities.

Appropriate filing information is contained in an Application

Package which may be obtained from the Multifamily Housing

Clearinghouse, P.O. Box 6424, Rockville, MD. 20850, telephone

1-800-955-2232.

This office will conduct a workshop on
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_(date)\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ at

\_\_(time)\_\_\_ for interested applicants to explain the Section 811

program and to discuss application procedures. The facility

for the workshop is accessible to individuals with

disabilities. The VOICE/TDD telephone number is
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.

APPLICATIONS MUST BE RECEIVED BY (TIME) AND (DATE). IF MAILED,

APPLICATIONS MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE FIELD OFFICE NO LATER THAN

THE FOREGOING DEADLINE. APPLICATIONS RECEIVED AFTER THE TIME

AND DATE SPECIFIED WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

41

ATTACHMENT 2D

FUNDING NOTIFICATION FOR FISCAL YEAR \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SECTION 202 SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY

CAPITAL ADVANCE PROGRAM

The Department of Housing and Urban Development will accept

applications from nonprofit organizations for rental or

cooperative housing under the Section 202 Capital Advance

Program for Supportive Housing for the Elderly subject to the

following:

Units Capital Advance

METROPOLITAN AREA: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

NONMETROPOLITAN AREA: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

This represents the funding available for the \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Field/Regional Office. Notwithstanding the maximum number of

units identified above, HUD has established a maximum unit

limitation per individual application for 125 units (including

manager\'s unit) in both the metropolitan and nonmetropolitan

areas. Additionally, a minimum unit limitation per individual

application of 40 units in metropolitan areas and 5 units in

nonmetropolitan areas has been established.

Appropriate filing information is contained in an Application

Package which may be obtained from the Multifamily Housing

Clearinghouse, P.O. Box 6424, Rockville, MD. 20850, telephone

1-800-955-2232.

This office will conduct a workshop on \_\_\_\_\_\_(date)\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
at

\_\_(time)\_\_ for interested applicants to explain the Section 202

program and to discuss application procedures. The facility

for the workshop is accessible to individuals with

disabilities. The VOICE/TDD telephone number is
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.

APPLICATIONS MUST BE RECEIVED BY (TIME) AND (DATE). IF MAILED,

APPLICATIONS MUST BE RECEIVED IN THE FIELD OFFICE NO LATER THAN

THE FOREGOING DEADLINE. APPLICATIONS RECEIVED AFTER THE TIME

AND DATE SPECIFIED WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

42

ATTACHMENT 3

Fiscal Year 1994 Policy for Section 202

Application Processing and Selections

The modifications outlined below eliminate the need for

rating and technical review documents being forwarded to

Headquarters for review and ultimate final selection of

applications.

Selection lists and lists of unfunded but approvable

applications will not come to Headquarters prior to completion

of the selection and announcement process.

Funding allocations will be distributed to Regional

Offices in the near future. Responsibility for maintaining the

assigned metro-nonmetro split accompanies the allocations. It

is imperative that the Regional Offices maintain their assigned

metro/nonmetro split as funding selections are made. If funds

are shifted between Field Offices, Regional Offices must make

every effort to preserve the integrity of the Field Office

allocations. Regional Offices shall submit to Headquarters one

final selection list. Residual funds not used by the Regional

Offices must be identified in the transmittal memorandum of

final selection lists; these funds will be recaptured by

Headquarters.

The responsibility for coordinating Congressional

Notification of selected applicants with the Office of

Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs has been

transferred from Headquarters to the Regional Offices. See

Attachment 5 for current Congressional notification memorandum

format.

Funding announcements will be issued by Regional Offices.

Responsibility for notification to State Point of Contact

of nonaccommodation has been transferred from Headquarters to

the Regional Offices.

SPECIFIC PARAGRAPHS OF HANDBOOK 4571.3-REV-1 WHICH ARE

BEING WAIVED TO ACHIEVE THE ABOVE ARE:

1-13. A. 5. Delete \"and submit selection recommendations to

Headquarters\". Substitute \"Regional Offices are responsible

for funding selections\".

1-13. A. 6. Delete Paragraph.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3-11. Delete the following: \"COPIES OF ALL TECHNICAL REJECT

LETTERS SHALL BE SENT TO HEADQUARTERS, ATTENTION: HOUSING FOR

THE ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED PEOPLE DIVISION (HMEE).\" In

addition, delete the following: \"In either case, copies of the

letters to the Sponsors shall be sent to Headquarters as

specified above.\"

3-45. C. Delete \"Submissions to Headquarters.\" Substitute,

\"Comment Review.\"

3-45. C.1. Delete \"and attach a copy of the comments\"

3-45. C.2. Delete \"Headquarters\". Substitute, \"Regional

Office\". Headquarters notification to State Point of Contact

of nonaccommodation is transferred from Headquarters to Regional

Offices.

3-50. B. 5. Delete \"with a copy to the Office of Elderly and

Assisted Housing, Room 6112, 451-7th Street, SW, Washington, DC

20410.\" In addition, Delete \"WITH A COPY TO HEADQUARTERS,

ATTENTION: OFFICE OF ELDERLY AND ASSISTED HOUSING (ROOM 6130).\"

3-50. B. 6b. Delete \"Copies of all reinstatement and

confirmation of rejection letters shall be sent to the Office

of Elderly and Assisted Housing (HMEE), Room 6130.\"

3-55. D. Delete Paragraph. Substitute, \"If the Regional

Office review reveals that a Field Office has violated or is

inconsistent with any outstanding instructions, the Regional

Office shall take corrective action prior to final selections.

Such items should be noted and maintained in the application

file.\"

3-56. A. 4d. Delete Paragraph. Substitute \"Any unused funds

remaining after following all of the above procedures must be

noted on the final selection list transmittal memorandum.

These funds will be recaptured by Headquarters.\"

3-56. B. Delete Paragraph.

3-57. A. Delete Paragraph. Substitute, \"Regional Offices

shall submit to Headquarters one final selection list with

transmittal memorandum in accordance with the processing

schedule found as item 10 of this Notice. Offices shall use

the data diskette provided by Headquarters. The list shall

include final selections in rank order by Field Office and by

metropolitan and nonmetropolitan allocation area. The

transmittal memorandum shall identify any unused funds for

recapture by Headquarters.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

NOTE: In no case may projects with technical deficiencies

(such as unacceptable site, ineligible Sponsor, lack of site

control, etc.) be considered by Field or Regional Office panels

for selection.\"

3-57. B. Delete \"the Regional Office must submit to

Headquarters\". Substitute, \"the Regional Office shall maintain

the following in the application file for post audit review\".

3-57. C. Delete Paragraph.

3-57. D. Delete Paragraph. Substitute, \"As Field Office

selections may not completely match the metropolitan and

nonmetropolitan distribution initially provided, Field Office

selection recommendations may be made predicated on the

assumption that the appropriate funds will be transferred by

the Regional Offices.\"

3-57. D. 2. Delete \"which are necessary to cover the Field

Office selections\"

3-58. Delete Paragraph. This Paragraph is waived for the

selection process only. These functions will be evaluated at

post audit review.

3-60. A. 1. Delete \"The office of Elderly and Assisted

Housing\". Substitute, \"Regional and Field Offices\". See

Attachment 5 for current memorandum format.

3-60. B. Delete Paragraph.

3-63. A. Delete \"Upon notification from Headquarters that the

notification letters can be issued, the\". Substitute,

\"Nonselection letters may be released following notification to

selected applicants. The\".

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

ATTACHMENT 4

Fiscal Year 1994 Policy for Section 811

Application Processing and Selections

The modifications outlined below eliminate the need for

rating and technical review documents being forwarded to

Headquarters for review and ultimate final selection of

applications.

Selection lists and lists of unfunded but approvable

applications will not come to Headquarters prior to completion

of the selection and announcement process.

Funding allocations will be distributed to Regional

Offices in the near future. Regional Offices shall submit to

Headquarters one final selection list. Residual funds not used

by the Regional Offices shall be identified in the transmittal

memorandum of final selection lists, these funds will be

recaptured by Headquarters.

The responsibility for coordinating Congressional

notification of selected applicants with the Office of

Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs has been

transferred from Headquarters to the Regional Offices. See

Attachment 5 for current Congressional notification memorandum

format.

Funding announcements will be issued by Regional Offices.

Responsibility for notification to State Point of Contact

of nonaccommodation has been transferred from Headquarters to

the Regional Offices.

SPECIFIC PARAGRAPHS OF HANDBOOK 4571.2 WHICH ARE BEING

WAIVED TO ACHIEVE THE ABOVE ARE:

1-12. A. 5. Delete \"and submit selection recommendations to

Headquarters\". Substitute \"Regional offices are responsible

for funding selections.\"

1-12. A. 6. Delete Paragraph

3-6. Delete Paragraph.

3-7. Delete Paragraph.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3-8. C. Delete \"recommended to Headquarters\". Substitute

\"considered\".

3-8. E. Delete Paragraph. Substitute \"If there are adverse

comments on applications:\".

3-8. E.1. Delete \"and attach a copy of the comments\".

3-8. E.2. Delete \"Headquarters\". Substitute, \"Regional

Office\".

3-14. Delete \"and a copy of the notification shall be mailed

to the Housing for Elderly and Handicapped People Division in

Headquarters\".

3-52. Delete Paragraph.

3-56. B. 3d. Delete Paragraph. Substitute, \"Any unused funds

remaining after following all of the above procedures must be

noted on the final selection list transmittal memorandum.

These funds will be recaptured by Headquarters.\"

3-56. C. Delete Paragraph.

3-56. E. Delete Paragraph. Substitute, \"If the regional

Office review reveals that a Field Office has violated or is

inconsistent with any outstanding instructions, the Regional

Office shall take corrective action prior to final selections.

Such items should be noted and maintained in the application

file.\"

3-57. A. Delete Paragraph. Substitute, \"Regional Offices

shall submit to Headquarters one final selection list with

transmittal memorandum in accordance with the processing

schedule found as item 10 of this Notice. Offices shall use

the data diskette provided by Headquarters. The list shall

include final selections in rank order for Category A and

Category B. The transmittal memorandum shall identify any

unused funds for recapture by Headquarters.

NOTE: In no case may projects with technical deficiencies

(such as unacceptable service plan description, ineligible

Sponsor, inability to meet minimum capital investment, etc.) be

considered by Field or Regional Office panels for selection.\"

3-57. B. Delete \"Regional Office must submit to Headquarters\".

Substitute, \"the Regional Office shall maintain the following

in the application file for post audit review\".

3-57. C. Delete Paragraph.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3-57. D. Delete Paragraph. Substitute, \"Any outstanding

State comments (EO 12372) not to be accommodated and/or local

adverse comments on any application on the final selection list

must be noted and maintained in the application file for post

audit review.\"

3-57. E. Delete Paragraph.

3-57. F. Delete Paragraph.

3-58. A. Delete Paragraph. This Paragraph is waived for the

selection process only. These functions will be evaluated at

the post audit review.

3-58. B. Delete Paragraph.

3-58. C. Delete Paragraph.

3-60. A. 1. Delete \"The Office of Elderly and Assisted

Housing.\" Substitute, \"Regional and Field Offices\". See

Attachment 5 for current memorandum format.

3-60. B. Delete Paragraph.

3-62. Delete \"NOTE:\" Substitute, \"NOTE: Nonselection letters

may be released following notification to selected applicants\".

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

ATTACHMENT 5

HUD NOTIFICATION

MEMORANDUM FOR: William J. Gilmartin, Assistant Secretary for

Congressional and Intergovernmental

Relations, L

FROM:

SUBJECT: Section 202 Housing for the Elderly
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Section 811 Housing for Disabled Persons \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(check appropriate)

Project
Number:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Contact
Person:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Phone
Number:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project Location/Zip
Code\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

AWARD NOTIFICATION:

Total Units:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Total Award:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Project Summary: The above project has been selected for

funding under the Section \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Program.

HUD Contact:

=================================================================

Congressional District:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Senators Names
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Representatives Names
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Please furnish a release date to the HUD Field Office.

Name: (F.O. Hsg. Develop. Dir.)
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Phone
Number:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_