U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Office of Public and Indian Housing

Special Attention of: Notice PIH 96-51 (HUD)

Directors, Offices of Public

Housing; Administrators, Area Issued: July 22, 1996

Offices of Native American Expires: July 31, 1997

Programs

Cross References:

Subject: AMENDMENT AND REOPENING OF APPLICATION PERIOD AND PROCESSING

OF GRANT APPLICATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR (FY) 1996 PUBLIC HOUSING

DRUG ELIMINATION PROGRAM (PHDEP)

1\. PURPOSE. This notice supersedes Notice PIH 96-31 (HUD) dated May

22, 1996. This notice provides additional instructions for

processing grant applications submitted for funding under the FY

1996 PHDEP NOFA, published in the Federal Register July 10, 1996,

Amendment and Reopening of Application Period for PHDEP (Docket No.

FR-4003-N-02).

2\. APPLICABILITY.

A. This notice is applicable ONLY to those public housing

authorities (PHAs) and Indian housing authorities (IHAs)

submitting grant applications for FY 96 PHDEP grant program.

B. The term housing authority (HA) SHALL include PHAs and IHAs.

The term Field Office (FO) shall refer to local HUD Field

Offices or Area Office of Native American Programs (AONAPs).

3\. BACKGROUND.

A. On April 8, 1996 (61 FR 15674), HUD published a Notice of

Funding Availability (NOFA) announcing the availability of FY

1996 funding for the Public and Indian Housing Drug

Elimination Program. The NOFA, Amendment and Reopening of

Application Period, published in the Federal Register, July

10, 1996, (Docket No. FR 4003-N-02) makes two amendments to

the April 8, 1996 NOFA, and REOPENS the application period for

a period of 30 days.

PR: Distribution: W-3-1, R-3-1 (PIH), R-6, R-7, R-9

\(1\) The NOFA amends the April 8, 1996 NOFA to provide for the

final FY 1996 funding amount; and

\(2\) revises the grant award limit for the largest category of

housing authorities (50,000 units or more).

\(3\) For convenience of the reader, the entire FY 96 PHDEP

NOFA was republished.

B. Housing authorities whose applications were submitted by the

application deadline (June 14, 1996) under the April 8, 1996

NOFA ARE NOT REQUIRED to resubmit applications under the NOFA.

C. A housing authority whose application WAS TIMELY FILED UNDER

THE APRIL 8, 1996 NOFA, MAY SUBMIT an amended application or

a replacement application during the 30-day application

period. If submitting an amended or replacement application,

the housing authority MUST clearly identify that its previous

application filed under the April 8, 1996 NOFA is being

amended, or replaced in its entirety.

D. Housing authorities who submitted applications but WERE NOT

FILED by the June 14, 1996 deadline under the April 8, 1996

NOFA are now considered timely filed under the NOFA need not

re-apply.

E. Housing authorities whose applications WERE TIMELY FILED under

the April 8, 1996 BUT REJECTED will be notified by local field

offices and may re-apply under the NOFA published in the

Federal Register July 10, 1996.

F. All eligible public and Indian housing authorities are

eligible to apply under the NOFA.

4\. FUND ASSIGNMENT PLAN. The fund assignment plan for distributing

grant funds to be awarded under the FY 96 PHDEP will be in

accordance with Handbook 1830.4, REV-2, dated July 31, 1986.

5\. DEFINITIONS. The definitions for the PHDEP program are contained

in 24 CFR 761 of the \"Streamlined\" Consolidated Public and Assisted

Housing Drug Elimination Program final rule dated March 28, 1996.

6\. GRANT APPLICATION ELIGIBLE AND INELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES.

Eligible and ineligible activities under the FY 96 PHDEP are

described in Section I of the NOFA. Funding is available only for

public housing agencies and Indian housing authorities.

2

7\. GRANT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS.

A. To receive funding, housing authorities MUST submit a grant

application to HUD using a FY 96 PHDEP application kit as

described in Section II (Application Process) of the NOFA.

B. The NOFA provides information concerning the purpose,

applicant eligibility, available amounts, selection criteria,

financial requirements, management, and application

processing, including how to apply, how selections will be

made, and how applicants will be notified of results.

C. The application kit contains information on all exhibits and

certifications required under the NOFA. Applications were

provided to all Field Offices and housing authorities. For

additional applications contact (The DISC has about 300

applications in stock):

Aspen Systems

Drug Information and Strategy Clearinghouse (DISC)

Attn: Gary Ballinger

1600 Research Boulevard, STOP 3k

Rockville, MD 20850

Telephone Number (301) 251-5123

(For informational purposes: Gary Ballinger may be contacted

on HUD cc:mail address ASPENPOST and/or INTERNET E-MAIL

ADDRESS: GBallinger@ASPENSYS.COM)

8\. GRANT APPLICATION SELECTIVE RATING CRITERIA.

A. The number of points that an applicant receives will depend on

the extent to which the grant application is responsive to the

information requested in the selection criteria. An applicant

must receive a score of 70 points or more out of the maximum

of 100 points awarded under this NOFA competition to be

eligible for funding.

B. After applications have been scored, Headquarters WILL rank

the applications on a national basis. Awards WILL be made in

ranked order until all funds are expended.

3

9\. GRANT DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS.

A. HUD is distributing grant funds under the FY 96 PHDEP NOFA on

a national competition basis. Maximum grant award amounts are

computed on a sliding scale, using an overall maximum cap,

depending upon the number of public housing agency (PHA) or

Indian housing authority (IHA) units. For specific guidance

refer to Section 1(b) (2) of the NOFA.

B. The unit count includes rental, Turnkey III Homeownership,

Mutual Help Homeownership and Section 23 leased housing bond-

financed projects. Units in the Turnkey III Homeownership,

Mutual Help Homeownership and Section 23 bond-financed

programs are counted IF they have not been conveyed.

C. Eligible projects must be covered by an annual contributions

contract (ACC) or annual operating agreement (AOA) during the

period of the grant award.

\(1\) Public housing agencies.

\(a\) PHA-Owned Rental Housing Program. In accordance

with Notice 94-66 (PHA), Low Rent Public Housing

Program - Streamlined Operating Budget and

Financial Reporting Procedures, PHAs with fiscal

years beginning January 1, 1995 and after, ARE NOT

REQUIRED to submit an Operating Budget (Form HUD-

52564\) IF they have been determined, by HUD, to be

High or Standard performers under Public Housing

Management Assessment Program (PHMAP) and HAVE NOT

FAILED the PHMAP financial indicators.

\(b\) Those requesting subsidy must, however, submit Form

HUD-52723, Calculation of Performance Funding

System (PFS) Operating Subsidy and units are in the

header.

\(c\) PHAs (rental program) that are NOT REQUIRED to

submit a budget under the PHMAP criteria in Section

I(b)(2)(ii)(A) above AND not requesting operating

subsidy ARE NOT REQUIRED to submit Form HUD-52723.

\(d\) Unit counts MUST be confirmed with the local Field

Office prior to submission of the FY 96 PHDEP

application.

4

\(e\) For PHA-Owned Turnkey III Homeownership Program and

Section 23 Leased Housing Programs, PHAs ARE

REQUIRED to submit Form HUD-52564, in accordance

with Notice PIH 94-66 (PHA), and units in the

header (Top of the form).

\(f\) For purposes of the FY 96 PHDEP NOFA, PHAs ARE

REQUIRED to validate their unit counts with the

local Field Office as of April 1, 1996. Units

identified after this date will not be accepted.

\(2\) Indian housing authorities.

\(a\) As of January 1, 1995 Indian housing authorities

ARE NOT REQUIRED to submit Form HUD-52564, UNLESS a

corrective action order has been issued in

accordance with Notice PIH 94-72 (IHA) extended by

Notice PIH 95-65.

\(b\) For purposes of this NOFA Indian housing

authorities ARE REQUIRED to validate their unit

counts with the local AONAP, prior to submission of

the PHDEP application, to ensure the unit count

matches the data in the Management Information

Retrieval System (MIRS) for units in management as

of April 1, 1996. Units identified after this date

will not be accepted.

D. The amount computed above must be compared with the dollar

amount requested in the PHA/IHA application to make certain

the amount requested does not exceed the maximum grant award.

E. BASED UPON THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION I(b)(2)(i) THROUGH

\(iii\) OF THE FY 96 PHDEP NOFA, APPLICANTS THAT REQUEST FUNDING

THAT EXCEED THE ESTIMATED MAXIMUM GRANT AWARD AMOUNT PERMITTED

WILL BE REJECTED AND WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR ANY FUNDING.

10\. HUD REFORM ACT PROVISIONS.

A. The HUD Reform Act of 1989 prohibits any applicant from

gaining an advantage in the competition as a result of

receiving confidential information. The final rule, (24 CFR

part 4) \"Prohibition of Advance Disclosure of Funding

Decisions,\" which implements section 103 of the Reform Act,

specifically prohibits advance disclosure of the following:

5

\(1\) Information regarding an applicant\'s relative standing;

\(2\) The amount of assistance requested by any other

applicant;

\(3\) The identity of any other applicant;

\(4\) The number of applications; and

\(5\) Any other information contained in another application.

B. HUD employees who have SPECIFIC program questions, such as

whether particular subject matter can be discussed with

persons outside the Department, should contact Field Office

counsel, or Headquarters counsel for the program to which the

question pertains.

11\. FY 96 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATION OPTIONAL REVIEW PROCESS, AS AMENDED.

A. The Office of Resident initiatives (ORI) Grants Management

Handbook 7490.01 allows in situations where the Field Office

workload exceeds the resources available for a manageable and

efficient review process, an optional review process may be

used.

B. Headquarters HAS DETERMINED that an optional review process

will be used for processing FY 96 PHDEP grant applications.

\(1\) public housing authorities FY 96 PHDEP applications WILL

be reviewed and scored by panel members located at the

grant application center processing site, Office of

Public Housing, New York City, NY.

\(2\) Indian housing authorities (IHA) FY 96 PHDEP applications

WILL be reviewed and scored by panel members located at

the grant application center processing site, AONAPS,

Denver, CO

C. Screening and scoring the PHDEP grant application\'s Selection

Criteria 3.

\(1\) Prior to transmitting applications to the processing

center sites Field Offices/AONAPS WILL screen and score

each PHDEP grant application\'s Selection Criteria 3.

This INCLUDES any late applications.

6

\(2\) Due to workload requirements and staffing Field Office,

Directors, Office of Public Housing and Administrators,

AONAPs ARE AUTHORIZED to conduct one review per

application. The information will be duplicated for each

application.

D. Training materials WERE provided by the Office of the Deputy

Assistant Secretary for the Community Relations and

Involvement, Office of Crime Prevention and Security Division,

to local Field Offices/AONAPs.

E. Grant applications WILL be forwarded to the appropriate grant

application processing site.

F. Selection Criteria 1, 2 and 4 of the grant applications WILL

be scored at the designated grant application processing site.

G. Grant applications WILL be shipped to the processing sites, to

include applications that are late/rejected, and applications

that were determined to be ineligible FOR WHAT EVER REASON.

H. All tasks in this notice MUST be executed in accordance with

the schedule set forth in paragraph 22 of this notice.

12\. HEADQUARTERS RESPONSIBILITIES.

A. In order to complete the screening and scoring (Selective

Criterion 3) the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for

the Community Relations and Involvement, Office of Crime

Prevention and Security Division, PROVIDED PHDEP application

screening/scoring instructions and other related documents to

Field Offices/AONAPs.

B. Training for the reviewers at the grant application processing

center site WILL be conducted, as appropriate, by the Office

of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Community Relations

and Involvement, Office of Crime Prevention and Security

Division and ONAPs staff.

7

C. The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Community

Relations and Involvement, Office of Crime Prevention and

Security Division, and the Office of the Deputy Assistant

Secretary for Native Americans Programs WILL PROVIDE technical

assistance and guidance to the Grant Administrators (GA) at

grant application processing center sites. These sites are

located at the Office of Public Housing, New York City, NY,

and AONAPs, Denver, CO. Refer to paragraph 22 of this notice

for additional guidance.

13\. FY 96 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATION PROCESSING REQUIREMENTS.

A. The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Community

Relations and involvement, Office of Crime prevention and

Security Division, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary

for Native American Programs, local Field Office, Directors,

Office of public Housing and Administrators, AONAPs, WILL

ASSURE that the FY 96 PHDEP grant application process is

conducted in accordance with the procedures set forth in this

processing notice, the ORI Grants Management Handbook 7490.01,

and related HUD regulations, such as the PHDEP Final Rule (24

CFR 761), FY 1996 NOFA, notices, OMB Circular, handbooks, and

additional written guidance.

B. Chapter 2 of ORI Grants Management Handbook 7490.01 describes

the actions required in processing PHDEP grant applications by

the receiving Field Office and AONAPs.

\(1\) The handbook contains instructions for the administration

of grants awarded by the Assistant Secretary, Office of

public and Indian Housing.

\(2\) The handbook provides specific instructions on the grant

application processing, grant agreement execution

process, payment procedures, required reporting,

monitoring, grant extensions, grant closeout procedures,

etc.

C. Grant applications MUST be received at each designated Field

Office, ATTN: Director, Office of public Housing and/or

Administrator, AONAPs, in accordance with the NOFA and Chapter

2 of ORI Resident initiatives Grants Management Handbook

7490.01 with the following EXCEPTIONS AND ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE.

8

\(1\) Following receipt of grant applications and completing

the Application Master Log (Appendix A) the Director,

Office of Public Housing and Administrator, AONAPs will

fax the FY 1996 PHDEP Application Master Log to

Headquarters as follows:

\(a\) PHA APPLICATIONS: Office of Public Housing fax the

log to Headquarters, CPSD, Room 4112, fax number

\(202\) 401-7965, ATTN: Malcolm E. Main, telephone

\(202\) 708-1197, ext 4232 (CC:mail address for

Malcolm E. Main is PIHPOST2).

\(b\) IHA APPLICATIONS: AOHAPs fax the log to

Headquarters, East L\'Enfant Plaza, Suite 8204, fax

number (202) 755-0182, ATTN: Tracy Outlaw. The CC

mail address for Tracy C. Outlaw is PIHPOST2.

ONAPs must:

\(1\) Review and verify that the FY 96 PHDEP

Application Log information is correct prior

to submission to Headquarters CPSD; and

\(2\) Fax the final FY 1996 PHDEP Application Log to

Headquarters, CPSD, ATTN: Malcolm E. Main,

Room 4112, fax number (202) 401-7965,

telephone (202) 708-1197, ext 4232.

\(c\) FY 96 PHDEP grant application validation process.

\(1\) In order to validate grant application

information the Office of the Deputy Assistant

Secretary for the Community Relations and

Involvement, Office of Crime Prevention and

Security Division, will request, via cc:mail,

verification of the Application Master Log

information (Appendix A of this notice, with

instructions) from each Director, Office of

Public Housing and Administrator, AONAPs.

\(2\) Field Offices/AONAPs should refer to paragraph

22 of this notice for guidance regarding this

process.

9

\(2\) IF a Field Office/AONAPs receives an application not in

their jurisdiction by the application deadline date as

amended, the Field Office/AONAPs WILL ensure the

following actions take place:

\(a\) Log the date and time of receipt in the master log;

\(b\) Transfer the application to the appropriate Field

Office/AONAPs within 24 hours of receipt of the

application; and

\(c\) Notify the Field Office/AONAPs by telephone that

the application is being forwarded. Send designated

Field Office(s), via cc:mail, \"what actions were

taken\" with a copy to the appropriated personnel as

follows:

\(1\) CC:mail point of contact for Office of Public

Housing New York City, NY, is Jed Abrams

(CC:mail address for Jed Abrams is NYCPOST1);

and/or

\(2\) CC:mail point of contact for AONAPs, Denver,

CO, is Robert Harris (CC:mail address for

Robert Harris is DENPOST2).

\(3\) In all cases provide a copy of all

communication to Headquarters PHDEP

Coordinator Malcolm E. Main (CC:mail address

for Malcolm E. Main is PIHPOST2).

\(d\) The application is to be forwarded via OVERNIGHT

MAIL WITH A TRANSMITTAL MEMO to the Director,

Office of Public Housing and/or Administrator,

AONAPs as appropriate, ATTN: PHDEP Grants

Administrator.

\(e\) The Field Office/AONAPs receiving the application

WILL:

\(1\) Per instructions in this notice log in the

application according to the prior Field

Office/AONAPs receipt date and time.

\(2\) The Field Office/AONAPs shall attach any

appropriate documentation to the log.

10

D. In accordance with the NOFA published July 10, 1996, Amendment

and Reopening of Application Period, (Docket No. FR-4003-N-02)

applicants that deliver applications to Field Offices/AONAPs

after the deadline date and hour, August 9, 1996 AT 3:00 PM,

LOCAL TIME are INELIGIBLE APPLICANTS AND WILL BE IMMEDIATELY

NOTIFIED THAT THEIR APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED.

\(1\) Housing authorities whose applications were submitted by

the application deadline (June 14, 1996) under the April

8, 1996 NOFA ARE NOT REQUIRED to resubmit applications

under the NOFA.

\(2\) A housing authority whose application WAS TIMELY FILED

UNDER THE APRIL 8, 1996 NOFA, MAY SUBMIT an amended or a

replacement application during the 30-day application

period (July 10 - August 9, 1996). If submitting an

amended or replacement application, the housing authority

EST clearly identify that its previous application filed

under the April 8, 1996 NOFA is being amended, or

replaced in its entirety.

\(3\) Housing authorities whose applications WERE NOT filed by

the June 14, 1996 deadline under the April 8, 1996 NOFA

ARE NOW CONSIDERED TIMELY FILED under the NOFA need not

re-apply.

\(4\) Housing authorities whose applications WERE TIMELY FILED

under the April 8, 1996 BUT REJECTED will be notified by

local Field Offices/and AONAPs and may re-apply under the

NOFA published in the Federal Register July 10, 1996.

E. Grant applications SHALL be screened in accordance with

Chapter 2 of ORI Resident Initiatives Grants Management

Handbook 7490.01 for curable deficiencies and eligibility with

the following additional guidance.

\(1\) The basic procedures require the receiving Field

Office/AONAPs to screen, using Appendix B of this notice,

each application. The Office of the Deputy Assistant

Secretary for the Community Relations and Involvement,

Office of Crime Prevention and Security Division PROVIDED

a FOGA application checklist and reviewer instructions to

each Field Office/AONAPs to accomplish this task.

11

\(2\) Selection Criteria 3 of the PHDEP application SHALL BE

scored, using Appendix E of this notice, by the Field

Office/AONAPs having jurisdiction over the HA. The

screening and scoring (Selection Criteria 3 of the PHDEP

application) WILL be supervised and validated by each

Field Office and AONAPs FOGA.

\(3\) Due to workload and staffing requirements Field office,

Directors, Office of Public Housing and Administrators,

AONAPs ARE AUTHORIZED to conduct one review per

application for Selection Criteria 3.

\(4\) Field Office/AONAPS staff validating any of the screening

process SHALL NOT be the same person who scores a grant

application. Scoring information MUST be posted on both

scoring sheets.

\(5\) Field Offices/AONAPs WILL acknowledge receipt of all

grant applications received with a letter to the

applicant as outlined in ORI Resident Initiatives Grants

Management Handbook 7490.01, Chapter 2-4. This letter

must also include a required response date.

F. In connection with the NOFA and ORI Resident Initiatives

Grants Management Handbook 7490.01, the SMIRPH/MIRS Grants

Management Module will be used in the FY 96 PHDEP grant

cycle/process. The FOGA receiving the grant application WILL

be responsible for:

\(1\) Assuring initial grant application information (See Tab

1 of PHDEP application kit) on all applications is

entered into the computer system; and

\(2\) Information is entered for screens 1, 2, and 7 in the

Grants Management Module.

NOTE: FOR PURPOSES OF THIS PROCESS DO NOT DELETE ANY

INELIGIBLE APPLICATIONS FROM THE DATABASE AS

INSTRUCTED IN THE ORI GRANTS MANAGEMENT HANDBOOK AT

CHAPTER 2, 2-5.

G. The FOGA WILL validate the correctness of all information

entered into each of the required screens of the Grants

Management Module.

12

\(1\) If the databases ARE NOT complete the FOGA WILL be

required, in a timely manner, to make appropriate

corrections and resubmit the database to the processing

panel.

\(2\) The database MUST include the project summary on screen

7 at F3 and be no more than 4 to 5 brief sentences

describing the activities supported by the award.

\(3\) The summary WILL be taken from the DRUG\*\*\*\*.DBF and used

in Congressional notification. The FOGA will ensure that

the summary contains complete sentences.

H. For administrative purposes Field Offices/AONAPs WILL retain

one original FY 96 PHDEP grant application and send 2 (TWO)

IDENTICAL COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION with one score

sheet attached to each copy and related documents to the

appropriate processing site. A identical Selection Criteria

Score should be entered on each score sheet for each

application.

\(1\) The box being shipped WILL (but not limited to) contain

the following items:

\(a\) Transmittal letter. The transmittal letter shall

include a list of grant applications:

\(1\) Prepared for scoring; and

\(2\) Those not to be scored for whatever reason.

NOTE: EACH FIELD OFFICE/AONAPs MUST STATE AND

JUSTIFY WHY THE GRANT APPLICATION(S) WERE

NOT SCORED AND PROVIDE ALL DOCUMENTATION

RELATED TO THE APPLICATION(S).

\(b\) Grant application master log.

\(c\) Grant applications (Organized by HA Code).

\(d\) Copies of the grant application acknowledgment and

curable deficiency letters (Attached to each

application).

13

\(e\) Grant application screening checklist and Score

Sheets with Selection Criteria 3 score entered on

score sheets. (Attached to each application)

\(f\) Grant application correctable deficiency master

log.

\(g\) Diskette with the SMIRPH/MIRS Grants Management

databases (DRUG\*\*\*\*.DBF and DRUG\*\*\*\*.DBT (\*\*\*\*

Field Office Code) with the application information

for screens 1, 2, and 7 in the ORI, Grants

Management Module completed.

\(h\) Contact the Field Office/AONAPs Data Base

Administrator (DBA) for additional guidance.

I. Grant applications WILL be sent to the below processing center

sites for processing. Addresses and point of contacts are as

follows:

\(1\) Public housing authority FY 96 PHDEP grant applications

WILL be sent to:

HUD - New York State Office

Director, Office of Public Housing

ATTN: Grants Administrator: Jed Abrams

26 Federal Plaza, Suite 3237

New York, NY 10278-0068

Jed Abrams and Julie Fagan can be reached on Telephone

Number (212) 264-0903, ext 3768, 3719 or 3605. Office

hours: 8:30am - 5:00pm local time

\(2\) Indian housing authority FY 96 PHDEP grant applications

WILL be sent to:

HUD - Northern Plains Office of Native American Programs

Administrator, AONAPs, ATTN: Grants Administrator:

Tracy Outlaw

First Interstate Tower North,

633 17th Street

Denver, CO 80202-3607

Telephone Number (303) 672-5457

Office hours: 8:15am - 4:45pm local time

14

NOTE:

\(1\) GRANT APPLICATIONS MUST BE CONTROLLED AND ACCOUNTED

FOR AT ALL TIMES DURING THIS PROCESS.

\(2\) ALL APPLICATIONS WILL BE SENT \"OVERNIGHT MAIL\" TO

THE APPLICATION PROCESS SITE. FIELD OFFICES/AONAPs

MUST CHECK WITH THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER AND

MAIL ROOM SUPERVISOR FOR GUIDANCE REGARDING THIS

MATTER.

J. Field Offices/AONAPs WILL monitor and track all applications

and amendments by sending a urgent cc:mail to the appropriate

grant application processing site that states \"when\" and \"how\"

the applications were shipped and \"expected arrival date.\" The

following personnel are points of contact regarding this

matter:

\(1\) Jed Abrams, Office of Public Housing, NYC, NY (CC:mail

address for Jed Abrams is NYCPOST1); and/or

\(2\) Robert Harris, AONAPs, Denver, CO (CC:mail address for

Robert Harris is DENPOST2).

K. Coordination and oversight of the PHDEP grant application

process:

\(1\) Field Offices and AONAPs shall send a copy of all

cc:mails regarding this process to MALCOLM E. MAIN

(CC:mail address for Malcolm E. Main is PIHPOST2).

\(2\) Any violation in carrying out this notice may result in

funding delays or repeating the scoring and ranking

procedures.

\(3\) HUD Headquarters, in conjunction with the Office of

public and Indian housing comptroller, WILL AUDIT a

sample of Field Offices to validate the review process.

15

14\. SCORING OF FY 96 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATIONS.

A. Assignment of the Grant Administrator. Grant application

processing center site grant administrators (GAs) WERE

assigned to oversee the review process. One GA WAS assigned

to each selected site. The GAs WILL:

\(1\) Receive all grant applications and validate receipt based

on the application print-out from the Grants Management

Module reports and the hard copy of the PHDEP Application

Log.

\(2\) Coordinate and manage the FY 96 PHDEP grant application

review process.

\(3\) Identify reviewers for applications. Reviewers WILL be

selected from HUD staff from local and other Field

Offices/AONAPs.

\(4\) Work with data entry person at the processing panel

entering data in the Grants Management Module. Validate

data entry.

\(5\) The work load WILL be divided among panels of reviewers

with one or more grant panel leader(s) (GPL) assisting

the GA in overseeing the process.

\(6\) All reviewers WILL be trained in one training session by

the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the

Community Relations and Involvement, Office of Crime

Prevention and Security Division and ONAPs staff at the

beginning of the review process to assure consistency.

\(7\) Each grant application WILL be independently scored by

two individuals.

\(8\) Scores WILL be posted on the FY 96 PHDEP Scoring Sheets.

The GA or the GPL(s) WILL verify that all factors are

scored, math computations are correct, scoring sheets

reflect appropriate comments for score and are signed by

reviewer, and validate all data entry with the score

sheets.

\(9\) Scores WILL be entered into the Grants Management Module

at the grant application processing site.

16

15\. RANKING OF FY 96 GRANT APPLICATIONS.

A. After grant applications have been processed and scored, the

GA, Office of Public Housing, NYC, NY WILL provide a ranking

of the applications on a national basis to the Office of the

Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Community Relations and

Involvement, ATTN: Director, Office of Crime Prevention and

Security Division.

B. The awards WILL be made in ranked order until all funds are

awarded. In the event that two eligible applications receive

the same score, and both cannot be funded because of

insufficient funds, the application with the highest score in

selection criterion 3 \"The capability of the applicant to

carry out the plan\" will be selected.

C. If Selection Criterion 3, of the grant application, is scored

identically for both applications:

\(1\) The scores in Selection Criteria 1, 2, and 4 WILL be

compared in this order, one at a time, until one grant

application scores higher in one of the factors and is

selected.

\(2\) If, the grant application score is identically in all

factors, the grant application that requests less funding

will be selected.

D. All awards WILL be made to fund fully a grant application,

except as provided in section I.(b)(4) (Reduction of Requested

Grant Amounts and Special Conditions) under the NOFA.

E. The GA, Office of Public Housing, NYC, NY WILL PROVIDE to the

Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Community

Relations and Involvement, ATTN: Director, Office of Crime

Prevention and Security Division, all completed database files

with all grant application and scoring information for the FY

96 PHDEP grant applications award process.

F. A grant application MUST receive a score of 70 OR MORE POINTS

OUT OF THE MAXIMUM OF 100 POINTS AWARDED under this

competition to be eligible for funding.

17

16\. ACTIONS REQUIRED FOR SESSION OF FY 96 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATION

SELECTION DATA.

A. The FY 96 PHDEP Grants Management Module databases

DRUG\*\*\*\*.DBF and DRUG\*\*\*\*.DBT with all grant application and

scoring information completed MUST BE submitted to

Headquarters through standard procedures and guidance in this

notice for transmission of SMIRPH/MIRS databases.

B. The GA, Office of Public Housing, NYC, NY WILL ASSURE that

data entry on screens 1 through 7 of the module are validated

to be correct and complete before the database is sent to

Headquarters, OCRI, CPSD.

C. Grant application processing site GA, AONAPs, Denver, CO:

\(1\) The FY 96 PHDEP Grants Management Module databases

DRUG\*\*\*\*.DBF and DRUG\*\*\*\*.DBT with all grant application

and scoring information MUST be submitted to the GA

Office of Public Housing, NYC, NY.

\(2\) The GA, AONAPs WILL assure that data entry on screens 1

through 7 of the module are validated to be correct and

complete before the database is transmitted. Refer to

paragraph 11.C. of this notice for guidance.

D. Application completion Process.

\(1\) After completion of the application review process, the

GA, Office of Public Housing, NYC, NY/application

processing site supervisor WILL through standard

procedures TRANSMITS all SMIRPH/MIRS databases to the

Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the

Community Relations and Involvement, Attn: Director,

Office of Crime Prevention and Security Division.

\(2\) After validation by the Director, Office of Crime

Prevention and Security Division, will submit the

completed database to Office for the Deputy Assistant

Secretary for the Community Relations and Involvement for

final review and further process.

18

\(3\) The Office for the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the

Community Relations and Involvement will process the

award database to the Assistant Secretary for the Office

of Public and Indian Housing for review/awards.

17\. CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATIONS.

A. Based on information in the Grants Management Module

Congressional notifications for the Office of Public Housing

and ONAPs WILL be prepared by the GA, Office of Public

Housing, New York City, NY and submitted to the Office of the

Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Community Relations and

Involvement, ATTN:; Director, Office of Crime Prevention and

Security Division, for further process.

B. After review by the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary

for the Community Relations and Involvement, a memorandum will

be submitted by the Assistant Secretary, Office of Public and

Indian Housing that includes a listing of the grant awards to

the Assistant Secretary, Congressional and Intergovernmental

Relations, who will officially notify Congress.

C. After Congress has been notified the Office of the Deputy

Assistant Secretary for the Community Relations and

Involvement, Office of Crime Prevention and Security Division,

WILL notify Field Offices/ONAPs as to Congressional

notification release date.

18\. NOTIFICATIONS TO SELECTEES AND NON-SELECTEES.

A. The NYC processing site WILL prepare and forward a list, via

cc:mail, of selectee awards to the Office of the Deputy

Assistant Secretary for Native Americans Programs. The

Director, Office Crime Prevention and Security Division WILL

be responsible to distribute awards to each Director, Office

of Public Housing and Administrator, AONAP. THE AWARD LETTERS

WILL NOT BE SENT UNTIL:

\(1\) Field Offices/AONAPs receive the HUD-185 from

Headquarters; and

\(2\) Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations completes

the notification of Congress.

19

B. The NYC processing site WILL prepare and forward a list, via

cc:mail, of non-selected applicants who were not funded. Non-

selectees WILL be notified in writing at the same time as

funded grant applications. The Office of the Deputy Assistant

Secretary for the Community Relations and Involvement,

Director, Office of Crime Prevention and Security Division,

WILL PROVIDE, via cc:mail, all disapproval letters from the

Grants Management Module. The letters will be forward to each

Director, Office of Public Housing and Administrators, AONAP

for distribution.

C. An original signature copy of each award letter WILL be

provided to the Field Accounting Director (FAD) to reserve

grant funds.

19\. FY 96 PHDEP GRANT AGREEMENT PREPARATION AND PROCESS.

A. Form HUD-1044 with attached grant agreement and related forms

will be prepared in accordance with Chapter 4 of the ORI,

Grants Management Handbook 7490.01. Refer to timelines in

paragraph 22 of this notice.

B. Grant Agreement.

\(1\) A standardized grant agreement WILL be provided by The

Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the

Community Relations and Involvement, Director, Office of

Crime Prevention and Security Division, to Field

Offices/AONAPs to assist in this process. This agreement

is provided to Field Offices as a GUIDE ONLY.

\(2\) Field Offices/AONAPs MUST verify award amount and MAY

place any special conditions, such as LOCCS edits,

funding or programmatic restrictions necessary for

compliance or performance of the approved grant in

accordance with the NOFA.

C. The FY 96 PHDEP grant agreement MUST be executed in accordance

with the schedule set forth in paragraph 22 of this notice, as

amended. The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the

Community Relations and Involvement, Director, Office of Crime

Prevention and Security Division, WILL PROVIDE a recommended

grant agreement to Field Offices.

20

20\. APPLICATION DEBRIEFINGS.

A. After the completion of the scoring process the GA, Office of

Public Housing, New York City, NY, and AONAPs, Denver, CO.,

WILL provide via transmittal letter; a copy of scoring sheets

to each Field Office/AONAPs.

B. The GA, Office of Public Housing, New York City, NY and

AONAPs, Denver, CO MUST ensure, via transmittal letter, two

copies of the grant applications and scoring sheets, and any

related documents, per applicant, are sent (OVERNIGHT MAIL) to

HUD\' s DISC. The DISC will maintain a file copy of all grant

applications and score sheets and related documents. The

materials will be sent to the following address:

Aspen Systems

Drug Information and Strategy Clearinghouse (DISC)

ATTN: Gary Ballinger

1600 Research Boulevard, STOP 3k

Rockville, MD 20850

Telephone Number (301) 251-5123

(For informational purposes: Gary Ballinger may be contacted

on HUD cc mail address ASPENPOST and/or INTERNET E-MAIL

ADDRESS: GBallinger @ ASPENSYS.COM)

C. HUD\'s DISC will be available to provide feedback to those HAs

whose applications were not approved for funding.

D. This process MUST be executed in accordance with the schedule

set forth in paragraph 22 of this Notice.

21\. HUD FY 96 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATION REPORTS REQUIRED.

A. As in past years, to ensure that the program schedules are

adhered to and that applicants are not adversely affected, the

below listed monitoring and tracking report IS REQUIRED.

B. Field Offices and AONAPs SHALL PROVIDE the below specific

report to the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the

Community Relations and Involvement, ATTN: Director, Office of

Crime Prevention and Security Division, in the following

specific format for the FY 96 PHDEP:

\(1\) Date Office of Public Housing/AONAPs approval letters

were transmitted to applicants;

21

\(2\) Date the Office of Public Housing/AONAPs transmitted

executed grant agreements to FAD;

\(3\) Date funds were obligated by the FAD;

\(4\) Date Office of Public Housing/AONAPs entered FY 96 PHDEP

budget line items (BLIs) into LOCCS; and

\(5\) Any grantee that does not have access to LOCCS-VRS for

the FY 96 PHDEP as of the date of the report and what

actions were taken.

B. Each Director, Office of Public Housing and Administrator,

AONAPs, as appropriate, WILL SUBMIT this report, via cc:mail,

to The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the

Community Relations and Involvement, ATTN: Malcolm E. Main

(CC:mail Address PIHPOST2) Refer to paragraph 22 of this

notice regarding timeline.

22\. FY 1996 PHDEP GRANT PROCESS TIMETABLE. The Office of the Deputy

Assistant Secretary for the Community Relations and Involvement,

Director, Office of Crime Prevention and Security Division, Office

of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Native American Programs,

Field Offices and AONAPs MUST executed this process in accordance

with the below schedule. All required forms are attached as

appendixes.

NOTE: All tasks regarding the first phase (Steps 1-15) between

June 07 - July 12, 1996 were completed.

ACTION - 1ST PHASE OF APPLICATION PROCESS DEADLINE

AS AMENDED COMPLETION

DATE(S)

Headquarters staff

and GA grant application

processing center site

administrative time:

A. GA begins organization of

grant applications for review (WEDNESDAY)

process July 17, 1996

B. GA completes organization of

grant applications for review

process. Weekend staff workload (SUNDAY)

July 20-21, 1996. July 21, 1996

Headquarters, staff

train reviewers July 22, 1996

22

Review and scoring of

applications July 22, 1996

ACTION - SECOND PHASE OF APPLICATION

PROCESS

AMENDED APPLICATION DEADLINE DATE AUGUST 09, 1996

FOGAs fax final or corrected

Application Master

Log to Malcolm E. Main, (fax number

\(202\) 401-7965, CC:mail address

PIHPOST2) to Headquarters, CPSD

and/or ONAPs, as appropriate August 12, 1996

Headquarters, verifies

via cc:mail Application Master Logs August 12, 1996

(COB-based upon

local time)

FOGAs complete data entry of

applications in SMIRPH/MIRS Grants

Management Module August 12, 1996

FOGAs screen for technical

deficiencies and provide application

acknowledgement and, if applicable,

curable deficiencies letter to HAs August 12, 1996

FOs score selective criterion 3 August 12, 1996

IF APPLICABLE, END OF FIELD OFFICE

CURABLE PERIOD AUGUST 23, 1996

Final shipment of any amendments,

replacement or new applications.

FOGAs ships boxes to processing

sites containing the following items:

o Transmittal Letter

o Application Master Log

o Applications (Organized by HA

Code)

o Application Screening

and Score Sheets must be

attached to each

application with selection

criteria 3 score entered

on each score sheet

23

o Correctable Deficiency

Log with any curable

letters attached

to applications

o Diskette of application

information from the

SMIRPH/MIRS Grants

Management Module August 13, 1996

FOs send cc:mails to processing site

that states \"when\" and \"how\" the

applications were shipped and

\"expected arrival date\". August 13, 1996

Review and score

applications by processing sites August 15, 1996

ACTION - FINAL COMPLETION OF PHDEP

APPLICATION PROCESS, AS AMENDED

Post any corrections to the Data

entry in Grants Management Module

by data entry staff and validated

by GA August 16, 1996

Data entry completed in grants

Management Module and validated by GA August 16, 1996

Data base/award documents

transmitted to OCRI August 16, 1996

Prepare a decision memo

regarding award funding for the

Assistant Secretary August 19, 1996

Decision memo regarding award

funding submitted to Budget Division August 19, 1996

Headquarters, Assistant

Secretary, PIH makes final

approval of grant selections August 20, 1996

HEADQUARTERS\--CONGRESSIONAL

NOTIFICATIONS AUGUST 20, 1996

Headquarters sends Funds Obligation

document to FOs August 22, 1996

24

FY 96 PHDEP awards. FOs ensures

award letters (copy of award

letter to FAD to reserve funds),

disapproval letters and grant

agreements are transmitted to HAs August 23, 1996

GA ships boxes, with transmittal

letter and related documents to

include applications to DISC August 30, 1996

FAD completes reservation of

FY 96 PHDEP grant funds August 30, 1996

FY 96 PHDEP grant agreements

executed between HUD and HAs September 06,

1996

FOs enter activity budget line

items into LOCCS September 24,

1996

DISC prepares FY 96 PHDEP analysis

for CPSD, OCRI September 30,

1996

FY 96 PHDEP funds available

for grantees to draw down October 25, 1996

FOs submits FY 96 PHDEP Grant

Status Report to Headquarters October 31, 1996

25

For further information on the Public Housing Drug Elimination

Grant Program contact the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for

the Community Relation and Involvement, Director, Office of Crime

Prevention and Security Division, (ATTN: PHDEP Desk Officer: Malcolm E.

Main) Office of Public and Indian Housing, Department of Housing and

Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, S.W., Room 4112, Washington, D.C.

20410 on (202) 708-1197, ext 4232 and/or the Drug Information and

Strategy Clearinghouse on 1-800-578-3472.

Kevin Emanuel Marchman

Acting Assistant Secretary for

Public and Indian Housing

Attachments:

Appendix A: FY 1996 PHDEP Grant Application Master Log

Appendix B: FY 1996 PHDEP Grant Application Screening Field

Office Checklist

Appendix C: FY 1996 PHDEP Grant Application Correctable

Deficiency Master Log

Appendix D: FY 1996 PHDEP Grant Application Deficiency Letter

Appendix E: FY 1996 PHDEP Grant Application Instructions and

Score Sheet

26

APPENDIX A: APPLICATION MASTER LOG INSTRUCTIONS

All master logs must be accompanied with a copy of a calculator paper

tape, showing the total of all applications submitted.

The tape must have been cleared before the tabulations are imputed and

the tape must show the cleared symbol after the tabulations are totaled.

A copy of the tape must be copied on a blank page and attached to the

log.

The FOGA must by interring the symbol zero (0) and then totaling that

symbol. It will appear on most calculator tape\" as zero period plus

sign (0.+).

All master logs with incorrect tabulations totals will be returned.

Amendments must be logged on the master log.

APPENDIX A: FY 1996 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATION MASTER LOG

HA CODE PHA/IHA NAME DATE TIME LOGGED

IN BY: S

DE

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

TOTAL FUNDS REQUESTED \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

HUD FIELD
OFFICE\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

DATE SUBMITTED TO HEADQUARTERS:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBMITTED
BY:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

NOTE: LOG MUST BE TYPED

APPENDIX B: FY 1996 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATION FIELD OFFICE SCREENING

CHECKLIST

SECTION 1: FIELD OFFICE GRANT APPLICATION SCREENING CHECKLIST

HA
Name:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

HA Code:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Field
Office:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Requested Grant Term in Months:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\--

SECTION 2: FIELD OFFICE GRANT APPLICATION CHECKLIST

TABS COMPLETE ACTION

YES NO

1 \_\_\_ \_\_\_ Applicant Cover Letter

2 \_\_\_ \_\_\_ Applicant Data Input Form

3 \-\-- \-\-- SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance

4 \_\_\_ \_\_\_ SF-424a, Budget Information with budget narrative(s)

attached.

5 \_\_\_ \_\_\_ SF-424B, Assurances

6 \_\_\_ \_\_\_ First Selection Criteria

7 \_\_\_ \_\_\_ Second Selection Criteria

7A \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - Implementation Schedule/Activity timetable

7B \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - Personnel Position Descriptions (if

applicable)

8 \_\_\_ \_\_\_ Third Selection Criteria

9 \_\_\_ \_\_\_ Fourth Selection Criteria

9A \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - Summary of Written Resident Comments

9B \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - Letters of Commitment (if applicable)

10 \_\_\_ \_\_\_ Certifications

10A \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - RMC, RC and RO certification

10B \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - Drug treatment program certification

(Applicable only if applying for drug

treatment activities NOT prevention

activities)

10C \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - Law enforcement certification (Applicable only

if applying for law enforcement activities)

10D \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - Form HUD-50070 drug-free work place

certification

10E \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - Chief Executive Officer (CEO) certification

10F \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - HUD-50071 lobbying certification

10G \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - SL-LLL disclosure of lobbying activities

certification

10H \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - Debarment and Suspension Certification

10I \_\_\_ \_\_\_ - Form HUD-2880, Applicant Disclosures

2

SECTION 3. REVIEW OF FY 96 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATION

COMPLETE

YES NO ACTION

1\. \_\_\_ \_\_\_ A. Are all computations in the SF-424A (budget) and

budget narrative complete and correct?

\_\_\_ \_\_\_ B. Did the FO review the SF-424A and narrative to

check for duplication of funds with other HUD

programs? ANSWER YES OR NO.

\_\_\_ \_\_ C. If yes, were any duplication of funds found?

ANSWER YES OR NO. If Yes, explain what actions

were taken. (Review SF-424A and Tab 1)

2\. \_\_\_ \_\_\_ Did the FO verify the unit count? (Review Tab 1)

3\. \_\_\_ \_\_\_ Does the amount requested EXCEED THE MAXIMUM GRANT
AMOUNT

PERMITTED? In accordance with section I.(b)(2) of the

NOFA. If an error was identified, please explain actions

taken in specific comment section below.

4\. \_\_\_ \_\_\_ Did the applicant request funding for the activities

described in section I.(c)(1) through (6) of the NOFA, to

eliminate drug-related crime in housing owned by public

housing agencies that is not public housing assisted

under the United States Housing Act of 1937 and is not

otherwise federally assisted:

A. \_\_\_ \_\_\_ Did the applicant demonstrate that the

housing is located in a high intensity

drug trafficking area designated pursuant

to section 1005 of the Anti-Drug Abuse

Act of 1988; and

B. \_\_\_ \_\_\_ Did the applicant demonstrate that on the

basis of information submitted in

accordance with the requirements of

section I.(c)(9) of the NOFA, that drug-

related activity, and the problems

associated with it, at the housing has a

detrimental effect on or about the real

property comprising any public or other

federally assisted low-income housing.

3

SECTION 4. FIELD OFFICE SUMMARY OF ACTIONS

Were technical deficiencies noted:

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

Were curable technical deficiencies corrected:

Yes\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_ (Explain below)

Application fully acceptable:

Yes\_\_\_\_ No\_\_\_\_ (Explain)

4

Application screened by (print):
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Signature:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Date of
screening:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Verification:

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Date:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(FOGA Signature)

Specific comments: (Use additional paper if necessary)

5

APPENDIX C: FY 1996 PHDEP CORRECTABLE DEFICIENCIES MASTER LOG

DATE PHA/IHA NAME DATE TIME CORRECTIONS REC\'D.

COMMENTS

OF FO LOGGED IN BY:

LTR

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

HUD FIELD
OFFICE\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

DATE SUBMITTED TO
HEADQUARTERS:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBMITTED
BY:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

1

APPENDIX D: SAMPLE FY 1996 PHDEP FIELD OFFICE GRANT APPLICATION

DEFICIENCY LETTER

SAMPLE - ONLY

Applicant

Address

Dear Executive Director (Name):

Thank you for your recent application submission for the FY 1996

Public Housing Drug Elimination Program (PHDEP). The (Name of Local HUD

Field Office) has conducted the initial screening of your application.

Your submission was found technically deficient in the following areas:

(SAMPLE)

1\.

2\.

3\.

Please provide the additional information and/or corrected

certification(s) for the identified deficiencies within 14 days from the

date of this letter. Please submit your corrections to:

Name of Local Field Office

Address

Name of contact person

Phone Number

Fax Number

If you have any questions, please contact (Insert contact name and

phone number).

Thank you for your interest in the Department\'s programs.

Sincerely,

APPENDIX E: FY 1996 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATION SCORE SHEET

INSTRUCTIONS AND AUTHORIZED SCORE SHEET

Each reviewer will receive a number of assigned Public Housing Drug

Elimination Program (PHDEP) grant applications to review and score.

These applications will be listed on the assignment sheet accompanying

the applications. Please check to verify the receipt of all

applications listed and sign the sheet as confirmation. The reviewer is

responsible for the applications in your possession at all times.

Return each application to the grant administrator or panel leader as

you complete the review and scoring of each application. Please review

the applications in the order listed on your assignment sheet.

The applications are to be reviewed and scored according to the FY 96

NOFA, as amended, FY 96 application Processing Notice, as amended, and

any additional training instructions provided.

You must remember that all of the documents used during the process are

official documents and are subject to review. Therefore, all documents

must be legible and scorers must document decisions completely and

accurately.

STEP 1 RENEW AND SCORE THE APPLICATION:

A. The number of points that an application receives MUST depend on

the extent to which the application is responsive to the

information requested in the selection criteria.

B. As the reviewer scores each selective criterion they MUST post the

scores in Section 1 of the score sheet and initial the entry.

C. All scores issued by the reviewer must be justified in writing.

The written justification MUST indicate \"WHY\" the applicant \"DID

NOT\" receive the maximum allowable points for the particular

selection criteria factor. Appropriate entries/comments MUST be

made on any factor requiring a score.

D. The reviewer can use additional paper if necessary. All scores

MUST be justified and verified by a supervisor.

E. Each application submitted for a grant WILL be evaluated on the

basis of the following selection criteria set forth in the NOFA, as

amended.

1

STEP 2 REVIEW APPLICATION FOR INELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES AND COMMENTS

After you have finished reviewing and scoring all elements of each

factor, assure the following:

o All scoring and comment blocks are filled out. The comments

serve as the source for feedback to the applicants not funded,

as well as review by OIG audits.

o Comment on the following issues, if appropriate, and mark with

the appropriate letter in the upper right hand corner of the

score sheet:

JOINT APPLICANTS - \"J\" An applicant may submit only one

application under the NOFA. If a joint application has

been made note \"J\" on the first page of the score sheet.

EXCEPTION - \"J1.\" Housing authorities under a single

administration (such as one housing authority managing

another housing authority under contract or housing

authorities sharing a common executive director) may

submit a single application, even though each housing

authority has its own operating budget. If the applicant

is applying under this exemption, place a \"J1\" on the

first page of the score sheet.

INELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES - \"I\" If you identify any

ineligible activities listed in the grant, circle the

item in the text. List the activity and page number

under \"Ineligible Activities\" on the score sheet. Deduct

the amount of the funding required for the ineligible

item from the total requested budget to reflect total

approved budget. The Panel Leader will reconcile the

amount to be deducted with the second reviewer prior to

data entry.

ALCOHOL/PRESCRIPTION DRUGS - \"A\" OR \"P\" If the applicant

describes its primary substance abuse problem as alcohol

or prescription drug abuse, you are to note this on the

first page of the application. These activities will be

identified as ineligible and deducted as referenced

above.

2

o Enter grant amount requested minus, if applicable, the amount

of any ineligible activities to show a revised recommended

grant funding. If there are any activities that are not

clear, note them and request clarification prior to

recommending funding.

o Verify all scores with a hand calculator.

o All score sheets must be signed by the reviewer. The signature

certifies completion of the review and scoring process. It

also certifies the reviewer did not provide any technical

assistance to the applicant, did not discuss the application

with anyone who did, and did not have a relationship with the

applicant that could be considered a conflict of interest.

o Give the application package and the completed score sheet to

the grant administrator or panel leader. The grant

administrator or panel leader will initial the assignment

sheet next to the appropriate application to signify the

review is complete and the application has been returned to

them.

3

APPENDIX E: FY 1996 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATION SCORE SHEET

SECTION 1: FY 1996 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATION SCORE SHEET

(COMPLETED BY FIELD OFFICE)

FIELD OFFICE/AONAPs ENTRY:

HA
NAME:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

HA
CODE:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

FIELD
OFFICE/AONAPs:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SECTION 2: FY 1996 PHDEP FINAL SCORING INFORMATION (SELECTIVE

CRITERION 1, 2 AND 4 COMPLETED BY APPLICATION CENTER

PROCESSING SITE. SCORING OF SELECTIVE CRITERION 3

COMPLETED BY FO/AONAPs)

MAX POINTS SCORERS PANEL

PTS. AWARDED INITIALS LEADER

INITIALS

SELECTIVE CRITERION 1: 40

SELECTIVE CRITERION 2: 35

SELECTIVE CRITERION 3: 15

SELECTIVE CRITERION 4: 10

TOTAL 100

FUNDS REQUESTED: \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

RECOMMENDED FUNDING: \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

PROCESSING PANEL SCORER NAME:
(print)\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

PROCESSING PANEL SCORER
SIGNATURE:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

PROCESSING PANEL LEADER SCORE & FUNDING VERIFICATION:

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

(panel leader signature) (date)

1

SECTION 3. FINAL BUDGET DATA INPUT SHEET

(COMPLETED BY GRANT APPLICATION CENTER PROCESSING SCORER

AND/OR FIELD OFFICE/AONAPs, AS APPROPRIATE)

PROCESSING PANEL

HOUSING FIELD OFFICE/ SCORER ENTRY:

LINE AUTHORITY AONAPs ENTRY: FINAL ADJUSTMENT

BY

ITEM REQUESTED REQUESTED HUD REVIEWER

NO. ACTIVITIES AMOUNTS (IF APPLICABLE)

9110 Reimbursement of

Law Enforcement \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

9120 Employment of

Security Personnel

A. Contracted

Security Guards \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

B. HA Police

Departments \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(TOTAL 9120 BLI FUNDING) \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

9130 Employment of

Investigators \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

9140 Voluntary Tenant

Patrols \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

9150 Physical

Improvements \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

PROGRAMS TO REDUCE ILLEGAL DRUGS

9160 Drug Prevention \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

9170 Drug Intervention \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

9180 Drug Treatment \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

GRANT ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS

9190 Other Program Costs \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

TOTAL FUNDS REQUESTED \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

If applicable, processing panel scorer

total funding after adjustments \$\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2

SECTION 4. FY 1996 PHDEP GRANT APPLICATION INELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES

(APPLICATION CENTER PROCESSING SCORER ENTRY, AS

APPROPRIATE)

The reviewer MUST list any ineligible items by activity and cost

objective from budget and deduct from the requested funding amount. All

deductions MUST be justified with comment by the scorer and verified by

a panel leader.

INELIGIBLE REVIEWER

ACTIVITY AMOUNT TAB \# JUSTIFICATION FOR

OR COST DEDUCTED PAGE# DEDUCTION

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

====

SECTION 4A. IF APPLICABLE, SPECIAL CONDITIONS TO GRANT AGREEMENT.

(GRANT APPLICATION CENTER PROCESSING SCORER ENTRY)

3

1st SELECTIVE CRITERION - THE EXTENT OF THE DRUG-RELATED CRIME PROBLEM

IN THE APPLICANT\'S DEVELOPMENT OR DEVELOPMENTS PROPOSED FOR ASSISTANCE.

MAX 40

SUBFACTOR 1-A EXTENT TO WHICH DATA SHOWS FREQUENCY & NATURE OVER ONE

YEAR

HIGH (10-15) MED (5-9) LOW (0-4)

Provides best objective data Provides best objective data LIMITED or

NO evidence of

objective

data

CLEARLY outlines BASIC Outline

COMPLETE DETAILED Outlines description with

description with analysis of analysis with SOME types of

nature & frequency of crime. crime.

Documents crime stats & LIMITED or

NO problems associated

evidence of crime

stats.

CLEARLY defines drug SOME information on where, DID NOT

define activity Where, who, how & who, how & when drug

activity.

when.

Compares to community Compares to community LIMITED or

INCOM- PLETE

comparison.

CLEARLY documents & provides SOME additional info LIMITED or

NO additional info and Demonstrates LIMITED info additional

info

Demonstrates LINKAGES to linkages

problems associated with

crime.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS

AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBFACTOR 1-B EXTENT OF ANALYSIS & CLEARLY ARTICULATED NEED & STRATEGY

HIGH (4-5) MED (1-3) LOW (0)

CLEARLY analyzed data Analyzes data LIMITED or NO

evidence of analysis.

Draws conclusions on what SOME conclusions on NO conclusions on

what

needs to be addressed. what is needed. is needed.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4

SUBFACTOR 1-C PER CAPITA INCIDENCE OF ROBBERY & HOMICIDE IN COMMUNITY

POINTS

AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBFACTOR 1-D PER CAPITA INCIDENCE OF DRUG ARRESTS IN COMMUNITY

POINTS

AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

POINTS AWARDED FOR SELECTIVE CRITERION 1: 1-A

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

1-B

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

1-C

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

1-D

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

TOTAL:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

5

2nd SELECTIVE CRITERION - THE QUALITY OF THE PLAN TO ADDRESS THE CRIME

PROBLEM IN THE PUBLIC HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS PROPOSED FOR ASSISTANCE,

INCLUDING THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE PLAN INCLUDES INITIATIVES THAT CAN BE

SUSTAINED OVER A PERIOD OF SEVERAL YEARS.

MAX 35

SUBFACTOR 2-A PLAN CLEARLY DESCRIBES ACTIVITIES, COMPREHENSIVE

APPROACH?

HIGH (8-10) MED (4-7) LOW ((0-3)

CLEARLY demonstrates SOME relationship LIMITED or NO

evidence DISTINCT RELATIONSHIP be- of

relationship.

tween crime/problems &

strategy.

COMPREHENSIVE approach of Strategy provides Strategy focuses

on

MULTIPLE activities. approach with SOME SINGULAR

programs.

combination of programs.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS POINTS

AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBFACTOR 2-B BUDGET NARRATIVE & SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION PER ACTIVITY

HIGH (4-5) MED (2-3) LOW (0-1)

DETAILED budget narrative Basic budget narrative NO clear budget

with SUPPORTING DOCUMENTA- for each activity. narrative for

each

TION for each activity. activity.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINT

AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBFACTOR 2-C REALISTIC IN TIME, PERSONNEL & OTHER RESOURCES

HIGH (2) MED (1) LOW (0)

CLEARLY demonstrates Provides a plan for each NO realistic plan

realistic plan for EACH component. Each component

not

component. documented.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS

AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

6

SUBFACTOR 2-D OTHER ENTITIES INVOLVED IN PLANNING & IMPLEMENTING

PLAN

HIGH (2) MED (1) LOW (0)

CLEARLY documents involve- SOME evidence of involve- NO evidence

of

ment of local community in ment in design & implementa- involvement

in DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION of tion. design &

imple-

plan. mentation.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBFACTOR 2-E ACTIVITIES SUSTAINED, IDENTIFIES RESOURCES FOR

CONTINUATION

HIGH (2) MED (1) LOW (0)

CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES & Includes activities that may DOES NOT include

includes activities that be sustained over the years. activities that

can be

can be sustained over sustained.

the years.

IDENTIFIES resources for Identifies potential NO resources

identi- continuation. resources. fied.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBFACTOR 2-F PROVIDE TRAINING/JOBS/BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOW-

INCOME PERSONS

HIGH (2) MED (1) LOW (0)

CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES it will SOME training & jobs OR DOES NOT CLEARLY

state provide training & jobs OR business opportunities. it will

provide train- business opportunities for

ing & jobs or business lower income persons &

opportunities.

businesses.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

7

SUBFACTOR 2-G DEVELOPED PROCESS TO COLLECT & ANALYZE CRIME & WORKLOAD

HIGH (4-5) MED (1-3) LOW (0)

CLEARLY DEMONSTRATES a DESCRIBES process. DOES NOT CLEARLY

state

description of process to description of

process.

collect, maintain & analyze

crime and workload data for

calls for service at proposed

sites.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBFACTOR 2-H DEVELOPED EVALUATION PROCESS

HIGH (5-7) MED (2-4) LOW (0-1)

CLEARLY OUTLINES methodology LIMITED evaluation NO evidence of

eval-

to measure success based on methodology. uation process.

specific indicators.

Application discusses types Info generally collected Failed to relate

eval-

of info & methods for relates to crime prob- uation process to

analysis of crime problems at lems at proposed sites. assessment of

crime

problems at

proposed

sites.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

POINTS AWARDED FOR SELECTIVE CRITERION 2: 2-A\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2-B\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2-C\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2-D\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2-E\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2-F\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2-G\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

2-H\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

TOTAL\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

TOTAL:

8

3rd SELECTIVE CRITERION: THE CAPABILITY OF THE APPLICANT TO CARRY OUT

THE PLAN

MAX 15

SUBFACTOR 3-A HA\'S ADMINISTRATIVE CAPABILITY - PHMAP

HIGH (2) MED (1) LOW (0)

PHMAP indicators of \"A\" PHMAP indicators of at least PHMAP indicators

of

or \"B\". \"C\". \"D\" or lower.

CLEARLY demonstrates Demonstrates fair ability to Demonstrates lack

of

thru HUD reviews or manage HA. ability. Reviews

and

audits effective, audits with

unresolved

efficient management. findings.

CANNOT be designated a For troubled HA, must be Troubled HA,

meeting

troubled HA. achieving MOA goals. only some or none

of

MOA goals.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBFACTOR 3-B LAW ENFORCEMENT, SCREENING & LEASE ENFORCEMENT

HIGH (2) MED (1) LOW (0)

IMPLEMENTED THOROUGH IMPLEMENTED SOME practices & NONE IMPLEMENTED

practices and policies policies.

to effectively screen,

reduce vacancies, & evict

residents involved in

illegal drug activities.

DEMONSTRATED significant DEMONSTRATED some reduction NO impact on

reduction

reduction in crime or in crime. in crime in HA

maintained low level of properties.

crime.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

9

SUBFACTOR 3-C PAST THREE YEARS ADMINISTRATION OF GRANT PROGRAMS

HIGH (7-11) MED (4-6) LOW (0-3)

TIMELY execution of law DELAY in execution of law NO contract

executed

enforcement contracts. enforcement contract.

Tracked indicators to SOME success measured. LIMITED or NO

measure- measure programs success ments.

IMPLEMENTED per time- Applicant modified time- NO implemented on

time

table. tables with success. Requested

untimely ex-

tensions.

DEMONSTRATED within past SOME resident & community SOME resident &

FY, resident partici- participation. community

partici- pation & community in- pation.

volvement or partner-

ships.

Funds were obligated & Funds were obligated & Rarely obligated

&

expended consistent expended most of time per expended on time.

with workplan & time- plan. Rarely draws down

line. from LOCCS or

evidence

of co-mingling of

funds.

ALL reports complete SOME reports were late or SOME reports were

late

and submitted on time. incomplete, some results in incomplete,

lacked

crime reduction. results in crime

reduction.

Final DEP evaluation Final DEP

evaluation

reports are detailed & not submitted or

reflect significant sketchy & no

improve- improvement in goals or ment in

reduction in

crime reduction. crime.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

POINTS AWARDED FOR SELECTIVE CRITERION 3: 3-A \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3-B \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

3-C \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

TOTAL: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

10

3RD SELECTIVE CRITERION VERIFICATION BY LOCAL FIELD OFFICE/AONAP FOGAS:

1\. Selective criterion 3 Of the application was scored by one

reviewer.

2\. Score was posted in Section 2 of Scoring sheet for Selective

Criterion 3.

3\. Score sheet is complete. All scores issued by the reviewer was

justified in writing. The written justification indicates \"WHY\"

the applicant \"DID NOT\" receive the maximum allowable points for

the articular selection criteria factor. Appropriate

entries/comments WERE made on any subfactor requiring a score.

4\. An additional copy of the score sheet was produced and attached to

second application.

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

(Field Office/AONAP\'s Scorer - Print Name)

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

(Field Office Scorer/AONAPs Signature)

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

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

(Field Office/AONAP\'s FOGA Certification) (Date)

FIELD OFFICE/AONAPs FOGA COMMENTS:

11

4th SELECTIVE CRITERION - THE EXTENT TO WHICH TENANTS, THE LOCAL

GOVERNMENT AND THE LOCAL COMMUNITY SUPPORT AND PARTICIPATE IN THE DESIGN

AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ACTIVITIES PROPOSED TO BE FUNDED UNDER THE

APPLICATION.

MAX 10

SUBFACTOR 4-A PARTIES ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN DESIGN/IMPLEMENTATION OF PLAN

HIGH (2-3) MED (1) LOW (0)

CLEARLY DOCUMENTS extent SOME documentation in design LIMITED or NO

doc- community & government & implementation. umented

evidence.

were ACTIVELY involved

in design & implementa-

tion of plan (eg.,

minutes of mtgs., ltrs.

of commitment, in-kind

resources).

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBFACTOR 4-B EXTENT RELEVANT GOV\'T MET OBLIGATION OF COOP. AGREEMENT

HIGH (2-3) MED (1) LOW (0)

Provided Law Enforcement Provides Certification by Provides

Certification Certification by Chief Chief of Police.

by Chief of Police.

of Police.

CLEARLY DOCUMENTED acti- LIMITED documentation. NO documentation.

vities & obligations.

CLEARLY DESCRIBES DID NOT CLEARLY describe NOT described.

current level of current level.

law enforcement.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

12

SUBFACTOR 4-C RC INVOLVEMENT IN PLANNING/DEV/IMPLEM OF STRATEGY & DESIGN

HIGH (2) MED (1) LOW (0)

CLEARLY demonstrates & Provides SOME evidence. DID NOT demonstrate or

documents ACTIVE invol- document.

vement in planning &

development of

application & strategy.

Provides CLEAR SUMMARY of

each written comment and

HA\'s RESPONSE to & action

on each comment.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

SUBFACTOR 4-D PARTICIPATION IN LOCAL/ST/FED ANTI-DRUG EFFORTS

HIGH (2) MED (1) LOW (0)

DEMONSTRATED participa- DEMONSTRATED HA is FAILED to

demonstrate.

tion in local/st/fed undertaking or has

anti-drug efforts eg. participated.

weed & seed, operation

safe home, etc.

OR

Successfully coor- Successfully coordinating. Successfully

coordinating

dinating with local/

st or fed law enforcement.

REVIEWER\'S COMMENTS: POINTS AWARDED:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

POINTS AWARDED FOR SELECTIVE CRITERION 4: 4-A
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4-B \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4-C \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4-D \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

TOTAL: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

13