6510.1

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

CHAPTER 3. REVIEW FOR PROGRAM PROGRESS

3-1. INTRODUCTION.

a\. Timely implementation of CDBG projects is a vital concern. The

emphasis on timely implementation has been expressed by

Congress in Section 104(d) of the statute and in

reauthorization and appropriation hearings. The governing

regulations for review of substantial progress in carrying out

the community development program are found in 24 CFR 570.909

(e)(1) Please note that 24 CFR 570.909 (e)(2) relating to HAP

progress is discussed in Chapter 7 of this Handbook.

b\. This Chapter outlines the review of the GPR required to

determine whether the grantee is apparently implementing its

approved programs, projects, and activities in a timely manner.

c\. The analysis of the grantee\'s program progress in the GPR is

conducted at two levels. They are:

\(1\) An analysis of a grantee\'s overall program progress; and

\(2\) An analysis of individual component activities.

d\. The program progress reviews are based upon an evaluation of

the GPR expenditures data. The reviews provide the Area Office

with a preliminary analysis of a grantee\'s program progress;

they do not provide final evidence, per se, of poor

performance.

Because the review findings are preliminary in nature, it is

essential that the Area Office conduct monitoring and other

follow-up actions with the grantee to verify the validity of

and to ascertain the context of the original GPR reviews. In

conducting additional analysis of issues identified through the

GPR review process, the Area Office should evaluate the

following types of information:

\(1\) The accuracy of the expenditure data reported in the GPR;

\(2\) Whether there were any extenuating circumstances

affecting the grantee\'s program or particular activities;

\(3\) Whether any of the activities or programs identified as

\"slow moving\" are likely to be completed within a

reasonable period of time; and

\(4\) The extent to which the grantee has already identified

the problem areas and is undertaking corrective actions.

e\. The results of any final analysis of a grantee\'s program

progress should be compared with that of other recipients of

comparable size with similar activities and grant amounts,

pursuant to 24 CFR 570.909 (e)(1).

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

3-1 8/81

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

6510.1

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

3-2. RECONCILIATION OF GPR EXPENDITURE WITH LETTER OF CREDIT

DRAWDOWNS.

a\. Conducting the Review.

\(1\) Before starting an analysis of a grantee\'s overall

program progress based upon the data in the GPR, the

reviewer should verify the accuracy of the financial

information provided in the GPR. The grantee\'s Letter

of Credit drawdown information is a means of testing the

overall accuracy of the information provided in the GPR

Status of Funds Report form, HUD 4950.3. The reviewer

should complete the worksheet in Exhibit 3a. at the end

of this Chapter. In completing the worksheet, the

reviewer should compare Total Expenditures reported by

the grantee in the Status of Funds Report (the sum of

line 8: columns (b+f+j) with the grantee\'s reported

cumulative entitlement Letter of Credit drawdown.

\(2\) If the Total Expenditures reported in the GPR Status of

Funds Report for all approved CDBG Entitlement grants is

within 95% to 105% of the grantee\'s entitlement Letter

of Credit drawdown, the reviewer should consider the

GPR\'s information on expenditures acceptable for

purposes of the GPR review. Note that there may be some

difference between the Total GPR Expenditures and the

Letter of Credit because the GPR Expenditures represent

both cash disbursements and any net amounts owed for

goods and services received, whereas the Letter of

Credit represents cash disbursements only.

\(3\) If the Total Expenditures reported in the GPR Status of

Funds Report for all approved CDBG Entitlement grants is

not within 95% to 105% of the grantee\'s entitlement

Letter of Credit, the reviewer shall first attempt to

reconcile the differences. The reviewer should consider

the following factors when reconciling reported GPR

expenditures with Letter of Credit drawdowns:

\(a\) Check to determine if one or more CDBG grants had

been previously reported as complete in a prior

GPR. If so, add to the total expenditures the

amounts for any such years and determine if this

brings the total expenditures to an acceptable

level.

\(b\) Check to determine if the grantee has received

(and reported) program income or Section 108 Loan

Guarantee proceeds. If so, determine whether this

sufficiently accounts for the difference between

expenditures and drawdowns.

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

8/81 3-2

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

6510.1

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

\(c\) Check the Area Office\'s records of Letter of

Credit drawdowns to determine if the grantee had

made a particularly large drawdown just before or

just after (within 3 weeks) the date of the GPR

that could account for a sufficient portion of the

difference.

b\. Notifying the Grantee. If after making reasonable adjustments,

the reviewer is not able to reconcile the GPR statement of

total expenditures with the Letter of Credit Drawdowns, the

Area Office shall notify the grantee of the apparent

discrepancy and request that the grantee provide an explanation

for the difference. Normally, it would not be appropriate to

continue with the reviews in Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of this

Handbook until any such discrepancy has been resolved.

3-3. ANALYSIS OF GRANTEE\'S OVERALL PROGRAM PROGRESS.

a\. Using the worksheet contained in Exhibit 3b at the end of this

Chapter, the reviewer should calculate an equivalent number of

program years\' funds which remain unexpended, using the

information in the GPR Status of Funds Report form, HUD 4950.3.

This calculation provides an overall measure of a grantee\'s

progress. It also takes into account variations in grant size

over a period of time and provides a basis of comparison from

one grantee to another.

b\. A grantee which has 1.25 or more equivalent years of unexpended

CDBG Entitlement program funds, based upon the calculation in

Exhibit 3b. shall be compared with other CDBG entitlement

recipients of comparable size with similar activities and grant

amounts pursuant to 24 CFR 570.909 (e) (1). Normally, a

grantee which has 1.25 or more equivalent years of unexpended

CDBG entitlement program funds should be considered to have an

apparent lack of substantial progress.

3-4. REVIEW OF INDIVIDUAL COMPONENT ACTIVITIES FOR AN APPARENT

LACK OF SUBSTANTIAL PROGRESS.

a\. Purpose. This review focuses on the individual component

activities reported on in the GPR Project Progress form, HUD

4950.2, column (c). There are two reasons for reviewing

individual component activities for an apparent lack of

substantial progress. They are:

\(1\) To highlight those component activities which are \"slow

moving.\" Once individual \"slow moving\" activities have

been identified appropriate corrective actions can be

scheduled and undertaken to bring about the successful

completion of those activities; and

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

3-3 8/81

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

6510.1

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

\(2\) To identify similar or generic types of component

activities, e.g. rehabilitation, acquisition, street

paving, etc., which show a trend of being \"slow moving\"

over several of the grantee\'s approved program years.

The identification of similar types of \"slow moving\"

activities over several program years suggests that there

may be institutional problems in the grantee\'s

administration of those activities. Such a situation

would indicate that the grantee must either make

institutional changes in the way it administers that type

of component activity, e.g. rehabilitation, acquisition,

street paving, etc., or the grantee should consider

decreasing or eliminating continued funding for that

particular type of component activity.

b\. Relationship to Review for Overall Program Progress.

\(1\) A grantee which was determined to have an apparent

overall lack of substantial progress as described in

paragraph 3-3. above, is also likely to have individual

component activities which show an apparent lack of

substantial progress. Identifying individual activities

along with the overall assessment should provide the

grantee with direction on where it should focus its

attention.

\(2\) On the other hand, a grantee may show satisfactory

overall program progress and still have individual

component activities which show an apparent lack of

substantial progress. Good overall progress may mask a

continuing lack of capacity to carryout certain types of

component activities. Identifying such activities will

help the grantee undertake appropriate actions.

c\. Conducting the Review. The reviewer should analyze the GPR

Project Progress form, HUD 4950.2 and complete the worksheets

contained in Exhibits 3c, 3d, and 3e at the end of this

Chapter. In conducting this review, the reviewer should

complete a separate worksheet for each program year reported on

in the GPR. The reviewer should apply the review thresholds

for the applicable program year discussed in d. below and list

each component activity which fails to meet the threshold.

d\. Thresholds to be Used for Review of Individual Component

Activities.

\(1\) Program Year is 3 or More Years Old. For each program

year which is three (3) years old or older, list each

component activity reported in column (c) of the Project

Progress form, HUD 4950.2, which does not show 100% of

its current estimated costs (column d) as expended

(column e) for that

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

8/81 3-4

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

6510.1

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

component activity. Use the review worksheet found in

Exhibit 3c.

\(2\) Program Year is 2 Years Old. For each program year which

is two (2) year old, list each component activity

reported in the Project Progress form, HUD 4950.2, which

shows less than 50% of its current Estimated Costs

(column d) as expenditures (column e) for that component

activity. Use the review worksheet found in Exhibit 3d.

\(3\) Program Year is 1 Year Old.

\(a\) For the program year which is one (1) year old as

of the date of the GPR, analyze the GPR Status of

Funds Report form, HUD 4950.3, for that program

year. Determine if 25% or less of the Total

Estimated Project Costs (line 4a column a/e/i) has

been shown as expended (line 4a column b/f/j). If

YES, then:

\(b\) Analyze each individual component activity listed

on the Project Progress form, HUD 4950.2, for that

program year. List on the worksheet each component

activity which shows \$0.00 funds expended (column

e). Use the review worksheet found in Exhibit 3e.

e\. Analysis of Identified Component Activities. Once the reviewer

has identified those individual component activities which do

not meet the applicable review threshold, the reviewer should:

\(1\) Review any optional narrative the grantee may have

provided with the GPR Project Progress forms which

describe the problems encountered for the identified

activities and the corrective actions the grantee has

taken or plans to take to overcome the problems

identified.

\(2\) Analyze the completed review worksheets for all program

years and determine whether or not there is a pattern of

similar or generic types of component activities which

show an apparent lack of substantial progress in two or

more program years.

f\. Apparent Lack of Substantial Progress. An individual component

activity which does not meet the applicable review thresholds

shall for initial review purposes, be considered to lack

apparent substantial progress.

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

3-5 8/81

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

6510.1

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

3-5. NOTIFYING THE GRANTEE.

a\. After completion of the substantive reviews of the GPR, the

Area Office shall follow the general instructions in Chapter 11

of this Handbook, \"Resolving Determinations of Apparently

Unsatisfactory Performance,\" as supplemented by the following

more specific guidance pertaining to the reviews for program

progress.

b\. If there are findings of apparent lack of substantial progress,

the Area Office should verify, either through monitoring or

follow-up correspondence, the information in the GPR

c\. The Area Office shall inform the grantee of the results of the

review. The grantee should be requested to respond with its

assessment of the Area Office\'s determination(s).

d\. If the grantee disagrees with the Area Office\'s determinations

or would like to provide additional information, the grantee

should be encouraged to provide such additional information and

in particular the following:

\(1\) data which corrects the expenditure data originally

provided in the GPR;

\(2\) evidence of extenuating circumstances adversely affecting

the progress of the program or activities;

\(3\) evidence that additional, substantial progress win be

made within a reasonable period of time.

Note that \"unliquidated obligations\" as reported in the

GPR Project Progress and Status of Funds Report forms

represent grant amounts which are obligated, i.e. under

contract or other transaction the grantee is legally

required to pay, but which have not yet been expended.

Where there are program progress questions, the Area

Office should determine the extent of \"unliquidated

obligations\" and the extent to which such \"unliquidated

obligations\" may be expected to be expended; or

\(4\) evidence that the grantee has already identified the

problem areas and has undertaken corrective or remedial

actions.

e\. If the grantee agrees with the Area Office\'s determination(s),

the grantee should provide a description of the corrective

actions, milestones, and timetables it deems appropriate to

resolve the problems.

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

8/81 3-6

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

6510.1

Exhibit 3a

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

SUGGESTED REVIEW: RECONCILIATION OF 1. Grantee
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

TOTAL GPR EXPENDITURES WITH LETTER 2. CDBG
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

OF CREDIT DRAWDOWNS 3. Reviewer \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4\. Date \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

A. TOTAL EXPENDITURES \$ AMOUNT SHOW IN GPR (GPR form

HUD 4950.3, line 8)

Program Year 1975 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Program Year 1976 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Program Year 1977 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Program Year 1978 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Program Year 1979 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Program Year 1980 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Program Year 19\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Program Year 19\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Program Year 19\_\_ + \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

TOTAL EXPENDITURES \$ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

B. TOTAL LETTER OF CREDIT DRAWDOWNS \$
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(as of date of GPR)

C. Is A within 95% to 105% of B? \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Yes) (No)

D If NO to question C., can the

TOTAL EXPENDITURES/DRAWDOWNS be

reconciled to within 95% to 105%

of the other? \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Yes) (No)

Consider adjustments due to:

a\. Grants previously reported as complete.

b\. A Section 108 Loan Guarantee.

c\. Program income as reported in GPR.

E. If NO to question D. above, the reviewer shall request the grantee

to reconcile the discrepancy.

F. COMMENTS:

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

1 8/81

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

6510.1

Exhibit 3b

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

GRANTEE PERFORMANCE REPORT: SUGGESTED REVIEW FOR

OVERALL PROGRAM PROGRESS

ALL PROGRAM COSTS

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

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* GRAPHICS MATERIAL IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT OMITTED \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

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

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

2 8/81

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

6510.1

Appendix 3b

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

GRANTEE PERFORMANCE REPORT: SUGGESTED REVIEW FOR OVERALL PROGRAM
PROGRESS

ALL PROGRAM COSTS

(Appendix 3b)

INSTRUCTIONS:

Calculate the number of year of Unexpended funds using the GPR

\"Status of Funds Report: form, HUD 4950.3, by completing the

table provided in appendix 3b and following the instructions

below:

a\. In column (A) of the table, list the appropriate CDBG Entitlement

Program Year found in item 2. of the HUD Form 4950.3.

b\. In column (B) of the table, \"Total Estimated Costs,\" list

the \"TOTALS - Total Estimated Costs\" for the appropriate

Program Year found on line 8 of HUD Form 4950.3.

c\. In column (C) of the table, \"Total Expenditures,\" list the

\"TOTALS - Expenditures\" for the appropriate Program Year

found on line 8 of HUD Form 4950.3.

d\. In column (D) of the table, \"Total Unexpended Costs,\"

calculate the amount of Total Unexpended Costs by subtracting

column C from column B of this form, i.e. (D=B-C).

e\. In column (E) of the table, \"Number of Years of Unexpended

Funds\" is computed for each Program Year by dividing column

D by column B, i.e. (E=D/B).

f\. Compute a Total Number of Years of Unexpended Program Years

funds in One 5. of the table by finding the sum of all

numbers in column (E) of the table.

g\. If the sum in line 5. is equal to one (1) or more, then

the grantee\'s number of years of unexpended funds exceeds

the review threshold. The reviewer should check YES.

h\. Provide any additional comments in item 8. of the table.

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

3 8/81

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

6510.1

Exhibit 3c

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

GRANTEE PERFORMANCE REPORT:

SUGGESTED REVIEW OF INDIVIDUAL

COMPONENT ACTIVITIES

GRANT WHICH IS 1 YEAR OLD

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

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* GRAPHICS MATERIAL IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT OMITTED \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

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

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

4 8/81

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

6510.1

Exhibit 3d

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

GRANTEE PERFORMANCE REPORT: SUGGESTED REVIEW OF INDIVIDUAL

COMPONENT ACTIVITIES

GRANT WHICH IS 2 YEARS OLD

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

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* GRAPHICS MATERIAL IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT OMITTED \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

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

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

5 8/81

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

6510.1

Exhibit 3e

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

GRANTEE PERFORMANCE REPORT: SUGGESTED REVIEW OF INDIVIDUAL

COMPONENT ACTIVITIES

GRANT WHICH IS 3 YEARS OLD OR OLDER

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

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* GRAPHICS MATERIAL IN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT OMITTED \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

\* \*

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

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

6 8/81