18242 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND

URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR–4175–N–01]

Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)

for the Revitalization of Severely

Distressed Public Housing (HOPE VI);

Fiscal Year 1997

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant

Secretary for Public and Indian

Housing, HUD.

ACTION: Notice of funding availability

(NOFA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 1997.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

availability of approximately $447.5

million in funding for the Revitalization

of Severely Distressed Public Housing,

hereafter referred to as the HOPE VI

program, as provided in the

Departments of Veterans Affairs and

Housing and Urban Development, and

Independent Agencies Appropriations

Act, 1997. The 1997 Appropriations Act

continued funding of the HOPE VI

program for the purpose of enabling the

demolition of obsolete public housing

developments or portions thereof, the

revitalization (where appropriate) of

sites (including remaining public

housing units) on which such

developments are located, replacement

housing that will avoid or lessen

concentrations of very low-income

families, Section 8 tenant-based

assistance, and for providing

replacement housing and assisting

tenants to be displaced by the

demolition. The HOPE VI program will

fund demolition, the capital costs of

reconstruction, rehabilitation and other

physical improvements, the provision of

replacement housing, management

improvements, resident self-sufficiency

programs, and tenant-based assistance.

This NOFA contains information on

eligible applicants, program

requirements, evaluation factors, and

application submission requirements,

solely for the funding of revitalization

and replacement programs with or

without demolition. Information about

the funding for Section 8 tenant-based

assistance, and for demolition without

revitalization, will be provided by

separate notices.

DATES: Applications must be received at

HUD Headquarters and the Field Office

on or before 4 p.m. eastern time, except

as expressly provided below, on July 18,

1997. The application deadline for each

original application delivered to HUD

Headquarters is firm as to date and

hour, except as expressly provided

herein. Public housing agencies (PHAs)

should take this into account and

submit applications as early as possible

to avoid the risk brought about by

unanticipated delays or delivery-related

problems. In particular, PHAs intending

to mail applications must provide

sufficient time to permit delivery on or

before the deadline date. HUD will

disqualify and return to the applicant

any application that it receives after the

deadline date and time.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, HUD

will accept any application, the original

of which was delivered to a U.S. Post

Office or private mailer for expedited

delivery, properly addressed to HUD

Headquarters and fully paid for, no later

than 12 noon local time on the day

before it was due at HUD, for scheduled

delivery prior to the deadline

established above. If an application

arrives at HUD Headquarters after the

deadline date and time, and the

applicant wishes to make a case that it

delivered the application for expedited

delivery on time, the applicant must

document with an official receipt from

the Post Office or private mailer that the

application was received by 12 noon

local time on the day before it was due

at HUD.

ADDRESSES: An original of the

completed application must be received

at HUD Headquarters, 451 Seventh

Street, SW, Room 4138, Washington, DC

20410, Attention: Director, Office of

Public Housing Investments. Two

copies of the completed application

must also be received at the appropriate

HUD Field Office. Applications may be

hand-delivered or mailed. HUD will not

accept facsimile (fax), COD, or postagedue applications.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Milan Ozdinec, Director, Office of

Urban Revitalization, Department of

Housing and Urban Development, 451

Seventh Street, SW, Room 4142,

Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202)

401–8812 (this is not a toll free number).

Hearing-or speech-impaired individuals

may access this number via TTY by

calling the Federal Information Relay

Service at 1–800–877–TDDY, which is a

toll-free number. The NOFA is also

available on the HUD Home Page at the

World Wide Web at http://

www.hud.gov. HUD will also post

frequently asked questions and answers

on the Home Page throughout the

application preparation period.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Continuing Objectives of, and Changes to,

the HOPE VI Program

II. Substantive Description

A. Authority

B. Eligible Applicants

C. Definition of Obsolete Development

D. Fund Availability

E. Limitations on Grant Amount

F. Other Grant Limitations

G. Technical Assistance

H. Failure to Proceed

I. Total Development Costs

J. Site and Neighborhood Standards

K. Eligible Activities and Costs

III. Curable Technical Deficiencies

IV. Program Threshold Criteria

A. Obsolescence

B. Need for Funding

C. Lessen Concentration

D. Fair Housing

V. Application Evaluation Factors

A. Urgency of Need for Revitalization

B. Lessen Isolation of Low-Income

Residents

C. Encourage Resident Self-Sufficiency

D. Property Management

E. Local Impact

F. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing

G. Community and Partnerships

H. Capability and Readiness

I. Efficient Utilization of Federal Funding

J. Feasibility and Sustainability

K. Proposal Coherence and Integrity

VI. Application Submission Requirements

A. Summary Statement of Plan and

Objectives

B. Existing Conditions

C. Urgency of Need for Revitalization

D. Description of Physical Revitalization

Plan

E. Applications for New Construction

F. Self-Sufficiency Component

G. Operation and Management Principles

H. Local Impact

I. Capability and Readiness

J. Community and Partnerships

K. Resources

L. Program Financing and Sustainability

M. Grant Limitations

N. Need for Funding

O. Section 8 Cost Comparison

P. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing

Q. Required Certifications

VII. Application Processing and Grant

Administration

A. Application Evaluation

B. Reduction in Requested Grant Amount

C. Corrections to Deficient Applications

D. Notification of Funding Decisions

E. Grant Agreement/ACC Amendment

VIII. Applicability of Program Requirements

IX. Applicability of Other Federal

Requirements

X. Findings and Certifications

I. Continuing Objectives of, and

Changes to, the HOPE VI Program

In the Omnibus Consolidated

Rescissions and Appropriations Act of

1996 (Pub. L. 104–134; approved April

26, 1996) (OCRA), Congress continued

efforts to deal with obsolete and

severely distressed public housing

which had been previously funded

under the name ‘‘Urban Revitalization

Demonstration’’ or ‘‘URD,’’ and

popularly referred to as ‘‘HOPE VI.’’

OCRA made significant changes to

HOPE VI by, among other things,

expanding eligibility to all PHAs and

eliminating various restrictive features
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices 18243

of previous URD legislation. The

Departments of Veterans Affairs and

Housing and Urban Development, and

Independent Agencies Appropriations

Act, 1997 (Pub. L. 104–204; approved

September 26, 1996) (the 1997

Appropriations Act) eliminates certain

mandated selection criteria contained in

OCRA and prohibits HUD from utilizing

rating preferences which grant

competitive advantage in awards to

settle litigation or pay judgments. The

1997 Appropriations Act also provides

that fiscal year (FY) 1997 funds

appropriated for this program shall not

be used for any purpose that is not

authorized in the U.S. Housing Act of

1937, and the HUD Appropriations Acts

for fiscal years 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996,

and 1997.

In the FY 1996 NOFA for the HOPE

VI program (published on July 22, 1996

(61 FR 38024)), HUD identified certain

elements of public housing

transformation as key to HOPE VI, and

sought to select applications which

would further that transformation, as

follows:

• Changing the physical shape of

public housing.

• Establishing positive incentives.

• Enforcing tough expectations.

• Lessening concentrations of

poverty.

• Forging partnerships.

HUD believes that the FY 1996

funding process was successful in

selecting applicants likely to achieve

radical transformations, from some of

the most obsolete and distressed

projects in the entire inventory to

models of community revitalization.

However, as the program evolves it

should also encompass appropriate

revitalization strategies at obsolete and

distressed developments where

revitalization may be accomplished

without extensive demolition, and more

economical rehabilitation strategies may

be available.

HOPE VI was originally conceived as

a demonstration program which would

promote fundamental changes in the

way PHAs developed and administered

public housing, and in the way HUD

related to those PHAs. It has succeeded

remarkably in those respects. Now,

however, there is a reduced need for

HUD to ‘‘jump start’’ demolition and

revitalization. With major efforts

underway in all the largest and most

troubled PHAs, some of which may be

at their capacity for simultaneous

development projects, HUD may

appropriately turn to a broader group of

developments. HOPE VI is the sole

source of substantial and concentrated

capital assistance to PHAs of all sizes

and characteristics whose level of

formula modernization funding cannot

support revitalization or major

reconfiguration of an obsolete

development. Capable authorities which

nevertheless have inadequate funds to

prevent properties from becoming

distressed should not be excluded from

HOPE VI funding. This was certainly

one purpose of Congress when, in FY

1996, the eligibility restrictions to the

program were eliminated.

Notwithstanding this widening focus,

HOPE VI is not returning to the Major

Reconstruction of Obsolete Projects

(MROP) program. The essential

requirement of HOPE VI remains that

each revitalization effort promise a

transformation of the physical site and

the social dynamics of life for lowincome residents at that site, or in any

off-site replacement housing.

Throughout the HOPE VI selection

and grant administration processes,

HUD is placing even greater emphasis

on plan designs, program management

structures, performance measures, and

the timely expenditure of grant funds,

which will make public housing

disciplined to perform with similar

efficiency as the private sector. HUD

will implement an aggressive approach

to ensure quality and promptness in the

HOPE VI program. HUD will contract

with one or more private program and

construction management entities to

assure that HOPE VI development

activities are carried out in an

expeditious and cost-effective manner

and that grantees are producing quality

products. Each grantee will have to

demonstrate that its HOPE VI team is

capable of administering a major

revitalization effort and that the team is

ready to proceed immediately upon

receipt of the grant. Should a PHA fail

to make this demonstration to the

satisfaction of HUD and its program

oversight manager, HUD will direct

corrective actions as a condition of

retaining the grant. HUD’s program

oversight contractor will also represent

HUD in such on-site inspections as HUD

deems necessary to assure quality

design and construction.

Each grantee will also be held to strict

schedules and performance measures.

HUD will require grantees to execute

construction contracts within a

specified period. Failure to obligate

construction funds within this

timeframe will result in the withdrawal

of grant funds. Once the revitalization

has commenced, each grantee will also

be held to interim performance goals

and may be required to complete

physical activities within four years of

execution of the grant agreement. HUD

will take into consideration those delays

caused by factors beyond the control of

the grantee when enforcing these

schedules. The precise schedules and

performance measures will be set forth

in the HOPE VI grant agreement.

HUD has also factored into the design

of this FY 1997 NOFA considerations

relating to section 202 of OCRA (42

U.S.C. 1437l note) known as the

Mandatory Conversion Program.

Congress there indicated that the cost

and effectiveness of revitalization

should be compared with those

respective elements of tenant-based

assistance. This is a relevant inquiry,

particularly in rationing the scarce

resource of revitalization dollars.

Finally, Congress has eliminated the

FY 1996 statutory selection criteria and

has directed the elimination of other

selection criteria utilized by HUD in FY

1996.

For all these reasons, HUD has

modified the FY 1996 NOFA. While the

overall performance goals remain those

set forth in FY 1996, this FY 1997

NOFA has been revised to better select

those applicants which can most

promptly and effectively use HOPE VI

dollars to make a significant positive

change in the life of each resident and

the life of the neighborhood.

Demolition is not a required

component of this FY 1997 HOPE VI

competition. HUD recognizes that the

elimination of this requirement and the

broadening of the definition of

obsolescence may encourage even more

applicants to apply than in the FY 1996

round. Applicants are cautioned that the

preparation of a serious HOPE VI

application is time-consuming and

expensive and may generate local

expectations which cannot be met if

funding is not awarded. Only a fraction

of the FY 1996 applicants were funded.

Changes in this year’s NOFA are

intended to widen the definition of who

may be assisted, but will not alter the

fact that only applicants with strong

showings of need, capability, vision,

and impact will be selected. Potential

applicants are encouraged to conduct a

thorough and realistic up-front analysis

of their chances before preparing an

application.

Among the more significant revisions

are the following:

• HUD has determined to use a

definition of ‘‘obsolete’’ derived from

the MROP authorizing statute, with

modifications for program consistency

with section 202 of OCRA and current

practice.

• This NOFA continues to use as a

rating factor the relative urgency of

pursuing revitalization at each site.

HUD has carefully considered

comments it has received to the effect

that by expanding program eligibility,
18244 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices

Congress intended that all obsolete sites

should be given equal consideration and

that local standards of distress should

govern, not national ones. HUD has

concluded, however, based on statutory

language and context, that the aims of

the HOPE VI program must continue to

include the elimination of the nation’s

most severely distressed developments

and immediate attention to those

developments offering the worst quality

of life for their residents and neighbors.

Nonetheless, HUD has reformulated the

relevant rating factor so as more clearly

not to reward PHAs whose bad

management is creating or exacerbating

distress, nor penalize PHAs which may

have managed to preserve relatively

decent living conditions even as distress

grows imminent. Moreover, an

applicant whose needs are pressing, but

not yet overwhelming, may still receive

funding based on a particularly strong

showing on other rating factors, while a

PHA with an enormously distressed

site, but little vision or capacity will not

be selected.

• Grants will be limited in amount to

applicable Total Development Cost

(TDC) limits, plus amounts for selfsufficiency and for excess demolition

costs, as more fully described in Section

II.E. below. While HUD recognizes that

different PHAs face different situations,

and that a successful revitalization may

require expenditures in excess of cost

limits, prior program experience has

established the difficulties in

distinguishing among necessary,

optional, and excessive costs. The risk

of inadvertently rewarding excess or

penalizing thrift increases where rating

factors encourage expansive visions of

what will be accomplished. Given the

flexibility of modernization funding

under current law, HUD believes it is

fairer to fund a predictable amount with

HOPE VI dollars and allow PHAs to

provide or arrange for such additional

funding as they may prudently require.

Demolition costs are allowed separately,

however, because they depend on the

size and type of existing structures, and

will not vary with the ambition of the

applicant.

• An applicant’s need for funding

must be demonstrated as a threshold

matter, with reference to its overall

capital needs and resources.

• A Section 8 cost comparison is

included, and applicants will be rated

on the degree to which their proposed

expenditure of Federal funds exceeds

that which would be incurred under a

scenario of demolition with Section 8

replacement. This factor, derived from

section 202 of OCRA and its

implementing notice (published in the

Federal Register on September 26, 1996

(61 FR 50632)), will favor applicants

with cost-efficient strategies. The

NOFA’s methodology for measuring this

factor is essentially similar to that

contained in the section 202 notice, but

is worded so as to apply more directly

to, and permit more exact comparisons

between, fact patterns expected under

this NOFA.

HUD has not included an explicit

requirement, found in HUD’s section

202 implementing notice, that

applicants who ‘‘fail’’ the Section 8 cost

comparison demonstrate special

circumstances why revitalization is

desirable. This FY 1997 HOPE VI NOFA

as a whole contains various threshold

and evaluation criteria which, if

satisfied, constitute such special

circumstances, and on which an

applicant must score highly to be

selected for funding. A special section

tracking the language from the section

202 notice directly would be

duplicative.

• An applicant may target for

revitalization a development for which

demolition has already commenced or

occurred even if tenant-based assistance

for relocation or replacement has

already been awarded by HUD. HUD

does not want to encourage authorities

to preserve obsolete or distressed

housing, in hopes of securing HOPE VI

assistance in the future. A PHA which

in good faith decided to demolish, in

connection with the FY 1996 funding

round or otherwise, should not be

penalized by being excluded from this

competition.

• HUD has eliminated the

categorization of PHAs by size, and has

set a grant(s) limit of $35,000,000 per

authority. The FY 1996 results

demonstrated that size categories were

not necessary to obtain a fair

distribution, which occurred naturally

under the rating system used. Smaller

authorities may have large obsolete

developments, and other factors in this

year’s NOFA will disfavor a PHA which

requests an inflated grant amount.

• This NOFA takes into explicit

consideration the extent to which a

proposal will affirmatively further fair

housing. While this objective flows

directly from HOPE VI concepts of

transformation and revitalization, HUD

wishes both to emphasize the

importance to all applicants of giving

civil rights obligations explicit

consideration, and to discipline its own

attention to this factor. HUD has also

emphasized the importance it attaches

to carrying out the HOPE VI program in

ways that directly benefit persons with

disabilities. Developments constructed

or rehabilitated with HOPE VI funds

must meet the accessibility

requirements contained in various civil

rights statutes. In addition, HUD

strongly encourages PHAs to develop

housing that is ‘‘visitable’’ by persons

with mobility impairments. In view of

these priorities, HUD is asking

applicants through various parts of this

NOFA to address these issues in their

applications.

• For FY 1997, Congress did not

separately fund Section 8 tenant-based

assistance for replacement housing, but

included it within the $550 million

appropriated for HOPE VI. HUD will set

aside, and award through a separate

process, funding for Section 8 tenantbased assistance for replacement

housing with respect to units which are

to be or have been demolished, but for

which the PHAs are not seeking and

have not been awarded ‘‘hard’’

replacement funding. PHAs are strongly

encouraged to plan strategically and

utilize Section 8 replacement to a

considerable degree.

HUD has set aside up to $30 million

for demolition grants alone, a reduction

from FY 1996, and will also award these

funds by a separate process. Having

utilized FY 1996 funding to address a

number of expensive demolition

situations for which PHA funding was

unavailable, and having no indication as

yet that section 202 of OCRA will

generate immediate demolition

decisions in the absence of hard

replacement housing, HUD believes the

lesser amount will suffice to address

critical demolitions which would

otherwise be impossible, while

concentrating scarce funding on critical

housing preservation and reconstruction

efforts.

Promoting Comprehensive Approaches

to Housing and Community

Development

HUD is interested in promoting

comprehensive, coordinated approaches

to housing and community

development. Economic development,

community development, public

housing revitalization, homeownership,

assisted housing for special needs

populations, supportive services, and

welfare-to-work initiatives can work

better if linked at the local level.

Toward this end, HUD in recent years

has developed the Consolidated

Planning process designed to help

communities undertake such

approaches.

In this spirit, it may be helpful for

applicants under this NOFA to be aware

of other related HUD NOFAs that have

recently been published or are expected

to be published in the near future. By

reviewing these NOFAs with respect to

their program purposes and the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices 18245

eligibility of applicants and activities,

applicants may be able to relate the

activities proposed for funding under

this NOFA to the recent and upcoming

NOFAs and to the community’s

Consolidated Plan.

The list of NOFAs related to housing

revitalization that HUD expects to

publish in the Federal Register within

the next few weeks include the

Comprehensive Improvement

Assistance NOFA; the Lead-based Paint

Hazard Reduction NOFA, the Public

Housing Demolition NOFA, and the

Notice of Funding for the Section 8

Rental Certificate and Voucher

Programs. Additionally, HUD’s NOFA

for the Community Outreach

Partnership Centers, published in the

Federal Register on March 20, 1997 (62

FR 13506), included HOPE VI projects

in the list of HUD priority areas for

which points will be awarded to an

applicant whose research and outreach

agenda is related to a HUD priority area.

To foster comprehensive, coordinated

approaches by communities, HUD

intends for the remainder of FY 1997 to

continue to alert applicants to upcoming

and recent NOFAs as each NOFA is

published. In addition, a complete

schedule of NOFAs to be published

during the fiscal year and those already

published appears under the HUD

Homepage on the Internet, which can be

accessed at http://www.hud.gov/

nofas.html. Additional steps on NOFA

coordination may be considered for FY

1998.

For help in obtaining a copy of your

community’s Consolidated Plan, please

contact the community development

office of your municipal government.

II. Substantive Description

A. Authority

The funding made available under

this NOFA is provided by the

Departments of Veterans Affairs and

Housing and Urban Development, and

Independent Agencies Appropriations

Act, 1997 (Pub. L. 104–204; approved

September 26, 1996) (the 1997

Appropriations Act), under the heading

‘‘Revitalization of Severely Distressed

Public Housing.’’

B. Eligible Applicants

PHAs that own or operate public

housing units are eligible to apply.

Indian Housing Authorities are not

eligible to apply.

C. Definition of Obsolete Development

For purposes of this competition, an

‘‘obsolete’’ public housing development

or portion thereof is defined as one:

1. (a) Which has design or

marketability problems resulting in

vacancy of more than 10 percent of the

units not due for funded, on-schedule

modernization; or (b) Which has an

occupancy density or building height

that is significantly in excess of that

which prevails in the neighborhood in

which the project is located, a bedroom

configuration that could be altered to

better serve the needs of families

seeking occupancy in dwellings of the

public housing agency, significant

security problems in and around the

project, or significant physical

deterioration or inefficient energy and

utility systems; and

2. For which the cost of redesign,

rehabilitation or reconstruction

(including any costs for lead-based paint

abatement activities) exceeds 70 percent

of the total development cost limits for

new construction of similar units in the

area.

D. Fund Availability

This NOFA announces the availability

of at least $447.5 million in funding for

the Revitalization of Severely Distressed

Public Housing, hereafter referred to as

the HOPE VI program, as provided in

the 1997 Appropriations Act. The 1997

Appropriations Act provided $550

million in funding for the HOPE VI

Program. HUD will reserve $2.5 million

for technical assistance. Up to $70

million will be set aside and awarded

pursuant to a separate funding process

for Section 8 tenant-based assistance.

Up to $30 million will be set aside and

awarded pursuant to a separate funding

process for HOPE VI demolition-only

grants.

Any FY 1997 funds which are

reserved but not awarded under the

Section 8 and demolition award

processes, together with any FY 1996

funds which are not obligated in

accordance with their initial

reservation, will be (1) added to the

funds made available hereunder; (2)

awarded pursuant to this NOFA to the

most highly rated applicant(s) which

did not initially receive funding; (3)

utilized for amendment funding; or (4)

carried over to a subsequent competitive

funding round. A PHA may both apply

for ‘‘hard’’ revitalization/replacement

funding under this NOFA and

replacement housing under the Section

8 award process, but may not be

awarded duplicate funding (replacing

the same units) under the two processes.

E. Limitations on Grant Amount

A PHA may submit one or two

separate applications in response to this

NOFA so long as the total amount

requested in one or both applications

does not exceed $35 million. Each

application submitted by a PHA is

limited in amount to the sum of the

following three components:

The sum of (a) TDCs up to, but not to

exceed 100 percent of, HUD’s published

TDC limits for the costs of demolition

and new construction multiplied by the

number of public housing Replacement

Units (as defined in Section II.K.3.a of

this NOFA); and (b) 90 percent of such

TDC limits multiplied by the number of

public housing units to be substantially

rehabilitated; but in no event to exceed

$25,000,000. HUD’s most recent TDC

limits were issued as PIH 96–15 (HA) on

April 3, 1996. Total Development Cost

is defined as those costs for planning

(including proposal preparation),

administration, site acquisition,

construction and equipment, interest

and carrying charges, relocation,

demolition, on-site streets and utilities,

non-dwelling facilities, a contingency

allowance, insurance premiums, off-site

facilities, any initial operating deficit

and other costs necessary to develop the

project. The maximum total

development cost excludes costs funded

from donations.

2. No more than $5,000 per unit,

based on the higher of (a) the number of

currently occupied units in the project

to be revitalized; or (b) the number of

Replacement Units (as defined in

Section II.K.3.a of this NOFA) after

revitalization, as an allowance for a selfsufficiency program.

3. A percentage of the actual,

necessary, and reasonable cost for the

demolition of the targeted existing

development or any portion thereof. The

percentage shall be derived from a ratio,

the denominator of which is the total

number of units being demolished and

the numerator of which is the difference

between the total number demolished

and the number of Replacement Units.

For example, if a 100 unit development

is to be demolished and 75 Replacement

Units are to be constructed, the

applicant would be eligible for 25

percent of demolition costs under this

component. Costs includable hereunder

are resident relocation, demolition,

environmental remediation and site

restoration to an unimproved state.

This Section (II.E.) is intended solely

as a limit on grant amount, and does not

vary HUD TDC rules applicable to

public housing developments. A grantee

may spend additional sums on resident

self-sufficiency using donations, HUD

funds made available for that purpose,

or other PHA funds. A grantee may

spend more than TDC limits on costs of

physical revitalization where permitted

by HUD in accordance with 24 CFR

941.306 (as issued in an interim rule

published on July 22, 1996 (61 FR

38014, 38019)), so long as it funds the
18246 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices

excess costs with non-HOPE VI funds.

However, if an applicant seeks HOPE VI

funds as permitted herein to

supplement a prior uncompleted HOPE

VI, Development, MROP or

Comprehensive Improvement

Assistance Program (CIAP) grant, the

per unit grant limitations set forth

herein will apply to the sum of all such

targeted grant funds. For example, an applicant which had

previously received $15 million from

HUD specifically to address a 600 unit

development (with 50 percent

occupancy), but had not yet done so,

could now apply for a HOPE VI grant.

If the applicant proposed to construct

300 Replacement Units at an average

TDC of $80,000, the maximum HOPE VI

grant would be 300 times $85,000 or

$25.5 million (TDC plus $5,000/unit),

minus the $15 million already in hand,

which equals $10.5 million, plus the

cost of demolishing the 300 unreplaced

units.

An applicant must document

compliance with this provision in

Exhibit M (Grant Limitations).

F. Other Grant Limitations

1. As stated in Section II.E. above, a

PHA may submit one or two separate

applications in response to this NOFA

so long as the total amount requested in

both applications does not exceed $35

million. Each application may request

funds for only one public housing

development. Contiguous developments

will be considered one development for

all purposes in this NOFA. If a PHA

submits two applications, each

application will be reviewed separately.

There is no minimum or maximum

number of housing units for which

funds may be requested in a single

application. 2. A PHA may not request

replacement funding for units for which

the PHA has already been awarded prior

‘‘hard’’ replacement funding from HUD.

An applicant must document

compliance with this provision in

Exhibit M (Grant Limitations), and must

disclose all prior ‘‘hard’’ replacement

assistance received from HUD with

respect to the targeted development. 3. PHAs with previous HOPE VI

grants may not seek FY 1997 HOPE VI

funding to supplement the previous

grants in treating the units covered by

the original grants. Such PHAs may,

however, seek FY 1997 HOPE VI

funding to demolish, revitalize or

replace units in the same development

that were not targeted units under the

previous HOPE VI grant. A PHA which

received prior years’ HOPE VI funding

in an amount less than requested, but

which has not yet had a revitalization

plan approved at the reduced funding

level, will not be deemed in this award

process to have yet targeted any

particular units, and thus may apply for

supplemental funding. 4. PHAs with previously-awarded

Development, MROP or CIAP funding

that they believe to be inadequate for

the revitalization of a targeted

development, with insurance proceeds

attributable to the development, or with

previously-awarded HOPE VI funds

subject to the limitation in paragraph 3

above, may apply for supplemental

funding under this NOFA. HUD will

evaluate these applications under the

rating factors established by this NOFA.

PHAs must demonstrate that funding

already available to them is insufficient

to assure a sustainable revitalization,

and/or that the portion of a

development that would be

unaddressed by other funding in itself

would qualify for a HOPE VI grant. An

applicant that submits an application

for an existing HOPE VI site (pursuant

to the limitations in Section II.F.3. of

this NOFA, above) that make a case now

that the existing HOPE VI site is no

longer sustainable, pursuant to this

section, are cautioned that the existing

HOPE VI grant may be subject to

withdrawal if FY 1997 HOPE VI funds

are not awarded.

While such PHAs may receive grants

of up to $35 million as provided in

Section II.E. of this NOFA, in addition

to previously received funds, they may

not do so if the total of grant funds

would violate the per unit limitations

set out in Section II.E.1.

An applicant must document

compliance with this provision in

Exhibit M (Grant Limitations), and must

disclose all prior grant assistance

received from HUD (HOPE VI,

Development, MROP, or CIAP, or

insurance proceeds) with respect to the

targeted development. 5. PHAs may use HOPE VI funds in

conjunction with any other funds

available to the PHA, so long as the use

of HOPE VI funds complies with the

requirements set forth in this NOFA,

and the Grant Agreement and ACC

Amendment to be executed with HUD;

the use of other funds complies with

any applicable restrictions; and the

proposed use of all funds complies with

section 102(d) of the HUD Reform Act

of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3531 note) and HUD’s

subsidy layering guidelines, including

those found in 24 CFR part 4.

G. Technical Assistance

In accordance with the 1997

Appropriations Act, up to $2.5 million

may be used by HUD for technical

assistance to be provided directly or

indirectly by grants, contracts, or

cooperative agreements, including

training and cost of necessary travel for

participants in such training, by or to

officials and employees of HUD and

PHAs and to residents. Technical

assistance does not include assistance

regarding how to draft any applications.

H. Failure to Proceed

In the event that an applicant selected

to receive HOPE VI funding does not

proceed in a manner consistent with its

application, HUD may withdraw any

unobligated balances of funding and

make this funding available subject to

applicable law, in HUD’s discretion, to

the next highest ranked applicant that

was not selected for funding in the most

recently conducted HOPE VI selection

process or combined with funding

under an upcoming competitive

selection process. Failure to proceed

with respect to obligated funds will be

governed by the terms of the Grant

Agreement or ACC amendment, as

applicable.

I. Total Development Costs

1. If the average per unit costs

attributable to TDC (see definition in

Section II.E.1 of this NOFA) of the

applicant’s program is below 70 percent

of HUD’s published TDC limits, the

development is not eligible for this

program. For these calculations an

applicant should include all costs

included in Section II.E.1 of this NOFA,

including demolition, remediation and

relocation.

An applicant must document

compliance with this provision in

Exhibit M (Grant Limitations).

2. If the average per unit hard costs of

rehabilitation falls between 70 and 90

percent of TDC, rehabilitation must be

shown to be a viable, cost effective

option by the application.

3. The total development cost paid

from HUD funds for units to be

rehabilitated may not exceed 90 percent,

and the total development cost for

newly constructed units paid from

HOPE VI funds may not exceed 100

percent, of HUD’s published TDC limits.

Applications should include

information on any anticipated costs

above TDC limits to be funded from

non-HOPE VI funds. Selection of an

applicant which includes an anticipated

request for approval for excess TDC

costs to be paid for from non-HOPE VI

funds does not constitute approval of

such TDC excess (note Section II.E.3.

above). Instead, the selected applicant

will need to obtain written approval

from HUD for TDC excesses in

accordance with 24 CFR 941.306 or

make the necessary program changes to

conform to TDC guidelines. HUD will
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices 18247

not select for funding any application

which does not make a plausible case

that it can meet the standards set forth

in 24 CFR 941.306. HUD will more

favorably consider those applicants that

propose cost effective programs under

the Feasibility and Sustainability

evaluation factor (Section V.J. of this

NOFA).

J. Site and Neighborhood Standards

HOPE VI grantees must ensure that

their revitalization proposals and

replacement housing plans for the

targeted development(s) will avoid or

lessen concentrations of very lowincome families by creating a mixedincome community or by expanding

assisted housing opportunities in

nonpoor and nonminority

neighborhoods. Since HUD intends to

fund only those applications under this

program that demonstrate the capacity

to alleviate distressed conditions at the

targeted development and in the

surrounding neighborhood, replacement

housing under HOPE VI which is

located on the site will not require

independent approval under site and

neighborhood standards. Units that are

not located at the targeted development

and in the immediate neighborhood will

be subject to site and neighborhood

standard rules stated in or made

applicable by the Grant Agreement.

K. Eligible Activities and Costs

HOPE VI proposals will typically

include an array of activities and

funding sources. The following

limitations apply solely to activities to

be funded with HOPE VI grant funds.

Eligible expenditures are those

eligible under sections 8 and 14 of the

U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.

1437f, 1437l) (1937 Act). PHAs must use

assistance under this HOPE VI program

for demolition and/or the physical

improvement and/or replacement of

public housing and for associated

management improvements.

1. Eligible Activities

a. Total or partial demolition of

buildings or disposition of property

(subject to the requirements of section

18 of the 1937 Act (42 U.S.C. 1437p)).

b. Capital costs of major

reconstruction, rehabilitation, and other

physical improvements (including

energy retrofits) and improvements to

assure greater accessibility and

visitability for persons with disabilities

(subject to TDC limitations).

c. Capital costs of replacement

housing, including homeownership

housing (subject to TDC limitations).

d. Management improvements for the

reconstructed development.

e. Planning and technical assistance.

f. Programs designed to help residents

gain employment and attain selfsufficiency.

2. Eligible Costs

a. Capital costs may include related

administrative and relocation costs

necessary for reconstruction,

rehabilitation, demolition, or

acquisition of land for replacement

housing.

b. Physical improvement costs may

include those necessary to provide

community facilities primarily intended

to facilitate the delivery of selfsufficiency programs and economic

development opportunities for residents

of the targeted development.

c. Administrative costs may include

the annual premium of lead-based paint

insurance incident to approved

revitalization work while work is in

progress.

3. Interpretive and Cautionary Issues

a. Replacement Units. HOPE VI funds

awarded under this NOFA may directly

support only housing units which are

rehabilitated or which replace

demolished or disposed units, and

which are for use in accordance with

the U.S. Housing Act of 1937 and

appropriations acts incorporated by

reference therein by the amendment to

section 14 of the Act at section 201 of

the FY 1996 Appropriations Act (42

U.S.C 1437l; Pub. L. 104–134, approved

April 26, 1996; 110 Stat. 1321–277).

Rental units will be deemed

Replacement Units and qualify for

operating subsidy only if they are to be

placed under Annual Contributions

Contract and operated in accordance

therewith. Homeownership units will be

deemed Replacement Units only as

specified in the Urban Revitalization

heading of the 1993 Appropriations Act

(Pub. L. 102–389; approved October 6,

1992); that is, if they meet the statutory

requirements of the Section 5(h)

program (42 U.S.C. 1437c(h)); the HOPE

II program (42 U.S.C. 12871–80; Pub. L.

101–625, secs. 421–31; 104 Stat. 4079,

4162–72); or the HOPE III program (42

U.S.C. 12891–98; Pub. L. 101–625, secs.

441–48; 104 Stat. 4079, 4172–80); or are

made available through housing

opportunity programs of construction or

substantial rehabilitation of homes

meeting essentially the same eligibility

requirements as the Nehemiah program.

HOPE VI funds may not directly support

mixed-finance units which are not

themselves to be placed under ACC.

b. While applicants are encouraged to

propose HOPE VI plans with broad

community revitalization features,

HOPE VI funds not used for demolition

may be expended only to construct, or

for uses which directly and principally

benefit, Replacement Units and other

public housing. Where other units or

nonhousing uses will also benefit from

the expenditure, a reasonable proration

to other fund sources is required. For

instance, where housing authority

property is to be transferred and

improved for a nonreplacement use

such as middle-income housing, the

transfer should be at appraised value

and the cost of improvement must be

borne by other funds. Notwithstanding

the foregoing, HUD may permit a

temporary or permanent use of HOPE VI

funds to benefit non-Replacement Units

so long as the purposes are eligible

under the FY 1997 Appropriations Act

and HUD determines that such use

serves a commensurate social benefit,

materially enhances the social and

physical environment of the

Replacement Units, other public

housing units and their residents, and is

no more than necessary to accomplish

such purposes. For instance, HUD could

permit HOPE VI funds to be used to

improve a site before transferring part of

the site or individual lots (at improved

value) for middle-income housing, and

could additionally permit the costs of

improvement to be written off or

converted to a soft loan, where the

middle-income units would provide

economic diversity to the site and the

cost writedown was reasonable and

necessary to attract middle-income

residents to the site.

c. Where a plan contemplates the

receipt of program-related income prior

to grant closeout (e.g., from sale of

homeownership Replacement Units, or

the disposition of improved land), such

income must be reflected in the HOPE

VI budget and used for a program

purpose.

III. Curable Technical Deficiencies

The requirements of this NOFA must

be satisfied in order for HUD to select

an application for funding. If an

applicant does not satisfy the technical

requirements below, after the process

for the correction of deficiencies

described in Section VII.C. of this NOFA

has been carried out, HUD cannot select

the applicant for participation.

A. The applicant must include

evidence in Exhibit J.1.e of the

application (Community and

Partnerships) that at least one public

meeting has been held to notify

residents and community members of

the proposed activities described in the

application.

B. The applicant must include all

certifications and submissions required

as Exhibit Q of the application.
18248 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices

C. Applications that propose new

construction of replacement housing

must include Exhibit E of the

application.

IV. Program Threshold Criteria

Section IV of this NOFA identifies

criteria which must be satisfied by each

application in order for it to be selected.

HUD will determine whether each

criterion has been satisfied, based on the

information submitted in accordance

with specific requirements of Section VI

of this NOFA. Applicants must submit

the information described in Section VI

of this NOFA; applicants must not

respond directly to the criteria in

Section IV. If HUD determines that an

application fails to satisfy one or more

threshold criteria, HUD may not select

that application for funding.

In addition to the specified threshold

criteria, HUD expects every applicant

selected to generally satisfy each

application evaluation factor. It is a

general threshold criterion for selection

that an applicant must score at least

some points (i.e., more than zero) on

every evaluation factor identified in

Section V of this NOFA. Further, an

applicant must receive at least 15 of 25

possible points under the Feasibility

and Sustainability (V.J.) evaluation

factor.

A. Obsolescence

A development targeted by an

application must be ‘‘obsolete’’ as

defined in Section II.C. of this NOFA,

except that an applicant need not make

a showing of obsolescence with respect

to any portion of the development

which has already been approved by

HUD for demolition, whether or not

such demolition has already begun or

occurred.

HUD will consider the entire

application, and particularly Exhibit B

(Existing Conditions) when evaluating

this criterion.

B. Need for Funding

An applicant which owns or operates

250 or more public housing dwelling

units must establish that it cannot, using

currently available and reasonably

foreseeable funding from HUD, meet its

long term capital needs for its entire

public housing inventory and still

accomplish the demolition,

revitalization and/or replacement

proposed in its application, in the

absence of HOPE VI funding in the

general amount requested. This criterion

may be satisfied if a Comprehensive

Grant Program (CGP) agency’s total

capital needs, as shown in its latest

physical needs assessment, exceed by

more than 10 percent the work it

expects to be able to fund over the next

5 years. A CGP agency should use its

most recent HUD approved 5-year

action plan to make this determination.

A PHA which owns or operates fewer

than 250 public housing dwelling units,

and thus does not receive CGP funds, is

not held to this threshold requirement.

HUD will consider the entire

application, and particularly Exhibit N

(Need for Funding) when evaluating this

criterion.

C. Lessen Concentration

Off-site Replacement Units must

avoid or lessen concentrations of very

low-income families. On-site units are

not subject to this flat statutory

requirement, but must nevertheless

ensure, in accordance with the various

evaluation factors, that after a

reasonable investment and time, the site

will not constitute an excessive

concentration of very low-income

families.

HUD will consider the entire

application, and particularly Exhibits

D.6 and D.7, when evaluating this

criterion.

D. Fair Housing

HUD will use the following standards

to assess compliance with civil rights

laws for the threshold review. In making

this assessment, HUD shall review

appropriate records maintained by the

Office of Fair Housing and Equal

Opportunity, e.g., records of monitoring,

audit, or compliance review findings,

complaint determinations, or

compliance agreements. If the review

reveals the existence of any of the

following, the application will be

rejected.

1. There is a pending civil rights suit

against the applicant instituted by the

Department of Justice.

2. There is an outstanding finding of

noncompliance with civil rights statutes

(the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601–

19); title VI of the Civil Rights Act of

1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d–2000d–4);

section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of

1973 (29 U.S.C. 794); the Age

Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C.

6101–6107); and the Americans with

Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 1201

et seq.)), Executive Orders, or

regulations as a result of formal

administrative proceedings, unless the

applicant is operating under a HUDapproved compliance agreement

designed to correct the area of

noncompliance, or is currently

negotiating such an agreement with

HUD.

3. There is an unresolved Secretarial

charge of discrimination against the

applicant issued under section 810(g) of

the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3610),

as implemented by 24 CFR 103.400.

4. There has been an adjudication of

a civil rights violation in a civil action

brought against the applicant by a

private individual, unless the applicant

is operating in compliance with a court

order designed to correct the area of

noncompliance, or the applicant has

discharged any responsibility arising

from such litigation.

5. There has been a deferral of the

processing of applications from the

applicant imposed by HUD under Title

VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the

Attorney General’s Guidelines (28 CFR

50.3), or the HUD Title VI regulations

(24 CFR 1.8) and procedures, or under

section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of

1973 or HUD’s section 504 Regulations

(24 CFR 8.57).

HUD will consider Exhibit P when

evaluating this criterion.

V. Application Evaluation Factors

Section V of this NOFA describes the

evaluation factors that HUD will use to

review applications. Each application

will be evaluated based upon its merits

determined pursuant to the factors set

forth below. Applications will be

selected for award in accordance with

Section VII of this NOFA. HUD will

consider the entire application, as a

whole, when applying these factors.

Applicants must submit the information

described in Section VI (Application

Submission Requirements) of this

NOFA; applicants must not respond

directly to the factors in Section V

(Application Evaluation Factors) of this

NOFA. Instances in which specific

exhibits correspond to specific

evaluation factors are noted in both

Sections V and VI of this NOFA.

A. Urgency of Need for Revitalization

[15 Points]

HUD will consider the degree of

distress at a site and the imminence of

greater distress in the absence of

immediate intervention. HUD will also

consider the extent to which such

distress is attributable to or exacerbated

by the development’s obsolescence,

rather than factors more immediately

within the control of applicant, and is

potentially remediable by the

applicant’s revitalization plan.

Maximum consideration will be given to

sites at which the immediate

obsolescence of physical design and

condition make it virtually impossible

to provide decent, safe, and sanitary

housing at a reasonable cost to the

applicant despite all reasonable current

management and maintenance efforts.

HUD will also give consideration,

however, to the degree of imminence of
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices 18249

such obsolescence and consequent

distress at developments which have

not yet reached such condition.

If a targeted development already has

been vacated for demolition or

disposition, or has been demolished or

disposed of pursuant to HUD approval

granted in 1995 or thereafter, HUD will

apply this evaluation factor to the

conditions which existed as of the date

of HUD approval.

HUD will consider the entire

application, and particularly Exhibit C

(Urgency of Need for Revitalization);

Exhibit B (Existing Conditions); and

Exhibit N (Need for Funding) when

evaluating this criterion.

B. Lessen Isolation of Low-Income

Residents [25 Points]

A successful HOPE VI effort requires

the replacement of isolated

concentrations of very low-income,

nonworking families with more

integrated and diverse urban settings

where nonworking families are in daily

contact with working families and

working society. HUD will consider the

extent to which the applicant proposes

to place or maintain public housing in

well-functioning neighborhoods or

promote mixed-income communities

where public housing once stood alone,

thereby ending the social and economic

isolation of public housing residents,

increasing their access to quality

municipal services, and increasing their

access to job information and mentoring

opportunities. HUD will consider the

extent to which the physical design

would lessen the isolation and

stigmatization of the development and

its low-income residents. HUD will also

consider features of the surrounding

community which would enrich the

lives of public housing residents within

the development, such as educational

institutions, transportation and

employment opportunities. HUD will

also consider the extent to which

operational and management principles

will promote economic and social

diversity.

If an applicant proposes demolition

with replacement in part through

tenant-based assistance, HUD will also

consider the degree to which the PHA

intends to provide counseling and other

assistance, directly or through an

intermediary, to help families receiving

tenant-based assistance to move to

nonpoverty neighborhoods.

HUD will consider the entire

application, and particularly Exhibits

B.3, B.4, and B.5 (Existing Conditions);

Exhibits D.6 and D.7 (Description of

Physical Revitalization Plan), and

Exhibit F (Self-Sufficiency Component)

when evaluating this factor.

C. Encourage Resident Self-Sufficiency

[20 Points]

With welfare reform, no revitalization

effort can succeed if it does not make

provisions for assisting low-income

residents to achieve long-term selfsufficiency (i.e., independence from

supportive governmental programs not

provided to the general populace,

primarily income support) where

possible. An applicant should

demonstrate that it has a feasible,

coherent, realistic strategy for helping

residents become wage-earners. Overall,

HUD will consider the extent to which

the objectives of the self-sufficiency

plan are results-oriented, with

measurable goals and outcomes; and the

degree to which the program is

sustainable and is likely to enable

residents to become self-supporting.

HUD will consider such factors as the

overall quality of the self-sufficiency

plan; the integration of the plan with the

development process; the

appropriateness of scale, type, and

delivery of the plan to meet the

identified needs of residents; the degree

of resident training, employment, and

contracting planned; the degree to

which service providers have made

commitments to provide services or

funding; the experience of proposed

service providers; the extent of effective

use of technology; the involvement of

educational institutions and business

partners; and the extent to which

residents are expected to invest in their

own futures.

HUD will also consider the extent to

which proposed operating and

management principles will

complement the self-sufficiency

program and reward the efforts of

residents.

HUD will consider the entire

application, and particularly Exhibit F

(Self-Sufficiency Component) and

Exhibit G (Operation and Management

Principles) when evaluating this factor.

D. Property Management [15 Points]

HUD will consider the extent to

which the housing authority has

evaluated the obstacles that prevented

good management and other

management problems that led to the

distress or obsolescence of the targeted

development, and the new plan for

management that will protect against

similar problems of the past and

promote efficient and economical

management.

HUD will consider the entire

application, and particularly Exhibit G

(Operation and Management Principles)

when evaluating this factor.

E. Local Impact [25 Points]

HUD will consider the degree and

magnitude of positive change that the

entire package of activities described in

the application (including both eligible

activities to be conducted by the

applicant and complementary activities

by other entities, such as CDBG

investments or educational initiatives)

will have on the affected public housing

community, the surrounding

neighborhood, and on the entire city or

town. In this context, HUD will consider

the community’s need for such change

as measured by objective indicia of

social distress, criminal incidents,

housing need, and similar factors. HUD

will consider the extent to which a

physical plan demonstrates attention to

preserving and enriching the urban

fabric. HUD will also consider the

extent to which the infusion of HOPE VI

dollars will leverage other resources,

including municipal expenditures,

charitable contributions, and private

debt and equity. HUD will also consider

the extent to which the proposal

improves, where applicable, the safety

and security of residents through the

implementation of anti-crime measures

and the installation of physical security

or design enhancements. HUD will

consider the relative impact a proposed

revitalization will have on its

surrounding community, not the

magnitude of the program in relation to

other applications.

HUD will consider the entire

application, and particularly Exhibit B

(Existing Conditions), Exhibit D

(Description of the Physical

Revitalization Plan), and Exhibit H

(Local Impact) when evaluating this

factor.

F. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing

[20 Points]

HUD will consider the extent to

which the applicant has demonstrated

that it has affirmatively furthered fair

housing, or will do so by its actions in

connection with this application. HUD

will consider the extent to which

actions already taken by the applicant

have removed or overcome, and, where

applicable, the extent to which actions

to be taken in connection with this

application will remove or overcome the

consequences of prior practices or usage

which were discriminatory or which

tended to limit participation by persons

of a particular race, color or national

origin. HUD will also consider the

extent to which the applicant’s previous

actions, or actions taken in connection

with this application, promote the

provision of public housing

opportunities for disabled persons. (See
18250 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices

Section VI.P. of this NOFA for examples

of specific actions).

In accordance with the provisions of

the 1997 Appropriations Act, no

appropriated funds shall be used

directly or indirectly for the purpose of

granting a competitive advantage in

awards to settle litigation or pay

judgments in court cases affecting

applicants for this program. HUD will

not, when reviewing applications under

this NOFA, award extra points, for

example, to any PHA involved in a

consent decree mandating desegregation

of the PHA’s public housing.

HUD will evaluate all applications,

and particularly Exhibit B (Existing

Conditions), Exhibit D (Description of

Physical Revitalization), Exhibit G

(Operation and Management Principles),

and Exhibit P (Affirmatively Furthering

Fair Housing) when evaluating this

factor.

G. Community and Partnerships [20

Points]

HUD will consider the entire

application, and particularly Exhibit J

(Community and Partnerships), when

evaluating this factor.

1. Resident Support/Involvement (5

Points)

HUD encourages full and meaningful

involvement of residents and members

of the communities to be affected by the

proposed activities. HUD will consider

the extent of resident consultation in

shaping the application, the level of

resident support for the proposed

activities, the continued involvement

and participation by the affected public

housing residents, and the proposed

involvement of residents in

management of revitalized or

replacement units.

2. Community Support/Involvement (5

Points)

HUD will consider the extent of

involvement by local public, private,

and nonprofit entities and community

representatives in the preparation of the

application, the level of enthusiasm for

the plan in the larger community, and

the extent to which the activities

proposed in the application are

coordinated with other revitalization

plans within the community.

3. Partnerships (5 Points)

This evaluation factor recognizes the

importance of a PHA not just seeking

endorsements and vendor relationships

with others, but actively enlisting other

stakeholders who are vested in the

revitalization effort, including public

and private nonprofit and for-profit

entities with experience in the

development and/or management of

low-and moderate-income housing,

those that are skilled in the delivery of

services to residents of public housing,

educational institutions, foundations,

banks, and other organizations.

HUD will consider the extent to

which applications propose to develop

partnerships to facilitate revitalization,

the strength of commitments from

potential partners to participate in the

revitalization plan, and the experience,

capability, and local importance of

proposed partners.

If a PHA is also a redevelopment

agency or otherwise has citywide

responsibilities, HUD will consider the

city’s redevelopment or other functional

area to be a separate partner with which

the housing authority function is

partnering, where appropriate.

4. EZ/EC Involvement (5 Points)

Points will be given to an application

whose targeted development is

principally located in a Federallydesignated Empowerment Zone (EZ) or

Enterprise Community (EC), and which

demonstrates coordination with and

support of the Strategic Plan for such

EZ/EC.

H. Capability and Readiness [25 Points]

HUD will consider the ability and

capacity of a PHA and any identified

partners to promptly begin and

effectively carry out the revitalization

and replacement activities it has

proposed. HUD will likewise consider

the extent to which an applicant with

any outstanding grants from HUD of

substantial capital funds under the

HOPE VI, MROP, Development or CIAP

programs is on schedule or, if behind

schedule, has resolved all major issues

and has been making good progress in

the last 6 months.

HUD will separately evaluate the

demonstrated capability and track

record of the PHA and its team to plan,

implement, adapt and manage the selfsufficiency program over a multi-year

period.

HUD will separately evaluate the

demonstrated capability and track

record of the PHA and its team to

provide property management and

marketing of the kind which will be

required by the applicant’s proposal.

HUD will look at the capacity of the

team presented by the applicant,

including, as relevant, both PHA

employees and partners and contractors

who have been procured and who are

demonstrably committed to the plan. A

PHA which cannot currently

demonstrate full capacity in this fashion

will be evaluated on the likelihood that

it can acquire such capacity. Where a

PHA plans to utilize partners and/or

contractors, it should demonstrate that

it will provide an appropriate balance of

oversight and autonomy.

HUD will consider the entire

application and particularly information

provided in Exhibit I (Capability and

Readiness) when evaluating this factor.

I. Efficient Utilization of Federal

Funding [10 Points]

HUD will consider the relative cost to

the Federal Government of the proposed

plan as opposed to demolishing the

targeted development and replacing it

with Section 8 tenant-based assistance,

as determined in accordance with the

Federal Register notice of September

26, 1996 (61 FR 50632). A plan which

is less costly will receive full points

under this evaluation factor; more costly

plans will receive fewer points. HUD

will also evaluate the extent to which

housing authorities have proposed

budgets that demonstrate efficiency in

spending. Applications with new

construction and rehabilitation costs

that are less than applicable TDC limits

will be favorably considered.

HUD will consider the entire

application, and particularly Exhibit O

(Section 8 Cost Comparisons) when

evaluating this factor.

J. Feasibility and Sustainability [25

Points]

HUD will consider the need and

market for the revitalized and/or

replacement units of the type and size

proposed; whether the proposed

program activities are likely to be

accomplished within a reasonable time

and expense; and whether the proposed

activities are sustainable based on

realistic budgets. Included in this

analysis, HUD will evaluate the level

and firmness of commitments for

private and public funds upon which

the proposal relies.

HUD will consider the entire

application, and particularly Exhibit B

(Existing Conditions), Exhibit D

(Description of Physical Revitalization),

Exhibit K (Resources), and Exhibit L

(Program Financing and Sustainability)

when evaluating this factor.

K. Proposal Coherence and Integrity [15

Points]

HUD will consider the entire

application when determining the

extent to which the proposed activities

are likely to accomplish the program

plan and objectives as outlined in

Exhibit A (Summary Statement of Plan

and Objectives). HUD will consider the

extent to which information and

strategies provided in each of Exhibits

D–P are coherent and consistent with
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices 18251

each other, and whether the application

proposes a comprehensive, realistic, and

effective solution to the current

problems at the development and in the

neighborhood as described in Exhibit B

(Existing Conditions).

VI. Application Submission

Requirements

This Section VI of the NOFA

describes all of the items to be included

in an application. All applications must

include all information requested unless

otherwise specifically noted.

HUD reviewers will use the

information provided in the application

to evaluate each application in

accordance with the evaluation factors

described in Section V of this NOFA.

Notwithstanding that certain

application submission requirement

sections of the application correspond

to specific evaluation factors, reviewers

will consider and evaluate the

application as a whole during the

evaluation process.

Each application must consist of

Exhibits A–Q that correspond directly to

Sections VI.A.–VI.Q. listed below. For

ease of review, each application must

include a table of contents directing the

reader to the page number upon which

each exhibit begins. To help expedite

review of the applications, please

assemble in the order given in Section

VI of this NOFA. Please mark each

exhibit with an appropriately lettered

tab and number each page of the

application sequentially. If an exhibit is

not applicable for any reason, provide

an explanation of its inapplicability to

the application under the tab for such

exhibit.

Each application must be limited to a

total of 75 (81⁄2 by 11 inch) pages of

narrative text utilizing double spacing

and margins of preferably 1 inch, but no

smaller than 1⁄2 inch. HUD strongly

recommends that applicants utilize a

Courier 11 point font or equivalent. Page

limits do not include such charts, maps

and illustrations as are useful and

necessary to illuminate the required

narrative, nor do they include required

or requested attachments such as letters

of support or opposition, or

certifications. Videos are not an

allowable submission. Adherence to the

page limit is mandatory; in reviewing an

application, HUD will not consider any

information on pages that exceed the

limits. Applicants are encouraged to be

concise and need not utilize the full

page limit.

A. Summary Statement of Plan and

Objectives

All applicants must provide a

narrative Exhibit A which summarizes

the overall revitalization plan and sets

forth what the applicant proposes to

accomplish thereby. The narrative

should include: (1) A statement

describing the planned long-term

impact the redevelopment will have on

the current and future residents of the

development and the neighborhood, and

(2) A list of measurable goals and an

estimate of when the goals are to be

achieved. HUD will use information

from Exhibit A both to orient readers

and to evaluate specific factors for

which goals are set in this section.

B. Existing Conditions

All applicants must provide an

Exhibit B that responds to all items in

this section plus any others which the

applicant deems relevant to the heading

and intended use. HUD will use

information from Exhibit B primarily to

evaluate the Urgency of Need for

Revitalization (V.A), Lessen Isolation of

Low-Income Residents (V.B), Local

Impact (V.E), Affirmatively Furthering

Fair Housing (V.F.), and Feasibility and

Sustainability (V.J) factors. HUD will

use items 2 through 4, below, to

determine whether the application

meets the threshold criterion for

obsolete housing (IV.A).

The applicant must provide the

following information in a narrative

plus the map required under Paragraph

1.c. below:

1. Description of Current Development

a. An identification of the targeted

development and neighborhood. State

the complete street address (including

zip code) of the targeted development.

b. The total number of current units,

by bedroom distribution, separately

identifying vacant and occupied units.

c. A map of the current site.

2. Indicators of Physical Obsolescence

a. The cost of redesign, rehabilitation,

or reconstruction per unit as compared

with TDC.

b. Structural deficiencies (e.g.,

settlement of earth below the building

caused by inadequate structural fills,

faulty structural design, or settlement of

floors).

c. Substantial deterioration (e.g.,

severe termite damage or damage caused

by extreme weather conditions) or other

design or site problems (e.g., severe

erosion or flooding).

d. Design and site deficiencies (e.g.,

high density, building height, unit

configuration or indefensible space).

e. Major system deficiencies (e.g.,

peeling and chipping lead-based paint,

lack of reliable and reasonably efficient

heat and hot water, major structural

deficiencies, electrical system not

satisfying code requirements, poor site

conditions, leaking roof, deteriorated

laterals and sewers, or high number of

plumbing leaks).

f. Deficiencies with respect to

accessibility for persons with

disabilities as regards both individual

units, entrance ways and common areas.

3. Neighborhood Characteristics

a. Physical condition and

characteristics of the neighborhood,

including the percentage of the

population in the neighborhood that

lives in the targeted development and

the percentage that lives in other

assisted housing developments nearby.

b. Land use and economic activity,

including density and structure types as

compared to the development proposed

for funding.

c. Demographic data such as income

levels and minority concentration.

d. Environmental conditions that may

jeopardize the suitability of the site or

a portion of the site and its housing

structures for residential use. These

conditions may be determined by either

a HUD-related environmental review, in

accordance with 24 CFR part 50 which

was previously conducted in connection

with earlier assistance, or another

assessment of conditions that, in the

opinion of the applicant, may jeopardize

suitability of the site.

e. Deficiencies in the neighborhood

that revitalization could ameliorate.

f. Assets in the neighborhood which

will assist revitalization.

4. Demographic Indicators

For the following elements, applicants

must provide the most current

information that relates as specifically

as possible to the targeted site. If site

information is not available, applicants

must indicate whether information

provided pertains to the development,

neighborhood, city, census tract, or

other demographic area.

a. Average income as a percentage of

area median. Include the percentage of

families with public assistance income,

earned income, and social security

income at the targeted development.

b. Statistical information on the

incidence of crime, including the

following: frequency of criminal acts of

various types per 1,000 persons

(including drug-related activities),

number of lease terminations or

evictions for criminal activity, average

number of police calls to the

development per month, and the

average monthly incidence of vandalism

to PHA property in dollars.

c. Vacancy rate of units not in funded,

on-schedule modernization; historical

marketing and occupancy data.
18252 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices

5. Effect on the Neighborhood

Applicants must describe how the

physical, neighborhood, and

demographic conditions of the obsolete

development, or portions thereof, affect

the residents of the surrounding

neighborhood, the greater community,

and city.

C. Urgency of Need for Revitalization

The applicant should set forth in a

narrative why it is urgent that it receive

the funding sought and pursue the

revitalization proposed. The applicant

should refer to information contained in

Exhibit B (Existing Conditions) and

Exhibit N (Need for Funding), together

with such other information as is

relevant and helpful. If a targeted

development already has been vacated

for demolition or disposition, or has

been demolished or disposed of

pursuant to HUD approval granted in

1995 or thereafter, describe the

conditions which existed as of the date

of HUD approval.

D. Description of Physical Revitalization

Plan

HUD will use information from

Exhibit D primarily to evaluate the

Lessen Isolation of Low-Income

Residents (V.B.), Local Impact (V.E.) and

Feasibility and Sustainability (V.J.)

factors. HUD will use information in

Exhibits D.6 and D.7 to evaluate the

Lessen Concentration threshold

criterion (IV.C.) and the Lessen Isolation

of Low-Income Residents (V.B.) and

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing

(V.F.) factors. Applicants must describe

the extent of the physical revitalization

and/or replacement activities proposed,

including the following, as appropriate:

1. The extent of any proposed demolition/

disposition and identification of the units to

be demolished.

2. The changes in the sizes and shapes of

units and other changes in the use of interior

space, including any reduction in the number

of units due to reconfiguration or changes in

bedroom mix.

3. Any community space alterations,

improvements, or additions.

4. Any proposed on-site housing

construction, including number, type, and

bedroom distribution of units, and whether

the new units will be for rental or

homeownership. Indicate clearly the units

proposed as public housing Replacement

Units.

5. For any reconfiguration, community

space alterations or improvements, or on-site

housing construction, describe how

accessibility for persons with disabilities to

individual units, community spaces and

buildings will be assured.

6. Any proposed off-site housing

construction, including number, type, and

bedroom distribution of units, and whether

the new units will be for rental or

homeownership. Indicate clearly the units

proposed as public housing Replacement

Units. Any applicant proposing to create offsite Replacement Units MUST use census

data to describe how such housing will avoid

or lessen concentrations of very low-income

families.

7. The number of any Section 8 certificates

to be used for replacement or relocation

housing, and whether those certificates are

existing or are to be requested under the

separate Section 8 notice. Include a

description of counselling or other assistance

that will be provided to residents receiving

tenant-based assistance as relocation or

replacement housing to enable them to move

to areas of lower poverty if they so choose.

8. Any site acquisition necessary or

proposed, the purpose of the acquisition, and

how that acquisition is proposed to be

financed.

9. Any non-housing structures.

10. Infrastructure and site improvements to

be constructed.

11. A description of any physical anticrime measures and/or installation of

physical enhancements (e.g., defensible

space).

12. A statement of the design objectives

and considerations motivating the plan.

13. Detail other revitalization activities or

land use plans underway or planned in the

neighborhood(s) that the revitalization plan

would affect. Provide reference to and maps

indicating the location of activities and

resources identified in the city’s or State’s

Consolidated Plan or Federally-designated

Empowerment Zone or Enterprise

Community Strategy (if applicable) in

relationship to the development. Describe the

current or projected impacts of these

community-wide activities on residents of

the development(s).

14. If available, provide postrevitalization

site and neighborhood maps and/or

illustrative design illustrations.

E. Applications for New Construction

In accordance with section 6(h) of the

U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.

1437d), the PHA may engage in new

construction only if the PHA

demonstrates to the satisfaction of the

Secretary that the cost of new

construction in the neighborhood where

the PHA determines the housing is

needed is less than the cost of

acquisition or acquisition and

rehabilitation in such neighborhood.

Therefore, every application that

includes new construction must be

accompanied by a narrative Exhibit E

that contains the information described

in either paragraphs 1 or 2 of this

section, below. If HUD cannot approve

new construction under section 6(h) of

the 1937 Act, HUD will reject the

application.

1. A PHA comparison of the costs of

new construction (in the neighborhood

where the PHA proposes to construct

the housing) and the costs of acquisition

of existing housing or acquisition and

rehabilitation in the same neighborhood

(including estimated costs of lead-based

paint testing and abatement).

2. A PHA certification, accompanied

by supporting documentation, that there

is insufficient existing housing in the

neighborhood to develop housing

through acquisition of existing housing

or acquisition and rehabilitation.

F. Self-Sufficiency Component

HUD will use information from

Exhibit F primarily to evaluate the

Encourage Resident Self-Sufficiency

(V.C.), Capability and Readiness (V.H.),

and Feasibility and Sustainability (V.J.)

factors.

A program of self-sufficiency may

include, but is not limited to: child care,

of a type that provides sufficient hours

of operation and serves appropriate ages

as needed to facilitate parental access to

education and job opportunities;

employment training and counseling,

such as the Step-Up program, that may

include job training, job preparation and

counseling, job development and

placement, and follow-up assistance

after job placement; computer skills

training; education, including remedial

education, literacy training, completion

of secondary or postsecondary

education, assistance in the attainment

of certificates of high school

equivalency, and the integration of

modern computer technology into the

education program; transportation as

necessary to enable any participating

family member to receive available

services or to commute to his or her

place of employment; partnerships with

local businesses that will provide job

placements for residents who complete

adult education and job training

programs; substance/alcohol abuse

treatment and counseling; health care

services; and developing a strategy to

establish on-site credit union(s) to

provide financial and economic

development initiatives to residents.

The credit union shall support the

normal financial management needs of

the community (i.e., check cashing, and

any other services and resources,

including case management) that are

determined to be appropriate in

assisting eligible residents.

1. Describe the strategic vision, and

the objective and measurable goals, of

the self-sufficiency component, and

describe how they will be measured and

met through the self-sufficiency

program.

2. Describe how the self-sufficiency

plan will be managed in order to

achieve efficiency, economy and

accountability. Identify capabilities and

track records of responsible individuals

or partners.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices 18253

3. Provide a brief description of each

service that is expected to be made

available for residents. For each service,

to the extent that providers are

identified, indicate the name of the

service provider and the experience of

that provider. If providers are not

identified, describe the process the PHA

will use to identify providers. Describe

the location of the service provision, the

timing of the service provision and how

it relates to the development schedule,

how long the service will be provided

to residents, and whether the service

will be available to residents that will

remain on site, are moved off site, and/

or are in relocation sites.

4. Describe the analysis and any

consultation with residents that the

PHA employed to determine the needs

upon which the self-sufficiency program

was based and that will be used to

reevaluate service needs in the future.

5. Describe how residents will be

selected to participate in services.

6. In addition to the narrative, attach

letters from service providers that

commit to provide services to residents.

7. Describe plans to provide on-thejob training, employment, and

contracting opportunities to residents

during implementation of the

revitalization plan.

G. Operation and Management

Principles

HUD will use information from

Exhibit G primarily to evaluate the

Lessen Isolation of Low-Income

Residents (V.B.), Encourage Resident

Self-Sufficiency (V.C.), Property

Management (V.D.) and Feasibility and

Sustainability (V.J.) factors.

For application purposes, the PHA

should assume that Congress will make

permanent the program modifications

continued by the 1997 Appropriations

Act. However, PHAs will be required, if

selected, to conform their proposals to

current law.

Applicants must describe those

management and operational problems

that led to the distress or obsolescence

of the targeted development.

Applicants must describe the manner

and extent to which the proposed

operation and management principles

will:

1. Achieve efficient and effective

property management and maintenance

through private management or other

management improvements;

2. Lead to a range of incomes in the

subject development including

substantial numbers of working

families;

3. Reward work and promote family

stability through positive incentives

such as income disregards and ceiling

rents. PHAs may establish ceiling rents

and may institute earned income

disregards for FY 1997;

4. Provide greater safety and security

by instituting tough screening

requirements and enforcing tough lease

and eviction provisions, including the

‘‘One Strike and You’re Out’’ policy in

the Housing Opportunity Program

Extension Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–120;

approved March 28, 1996);

5. Promote economic and

demographic diversity through a system

of local preferences (Congress has

suspended all Federal preferences for

FY 1997); and

6. Encourage self-sufficiency by

utilizing lease requirements that

promote community service and/or

transition from public housing.

H. Local Impact

HUD will use information from

Exhibit H primarily to evaluate the

Local Impact (V.E.) factor.

Applicants must describe the extent

to which the revitalization plan as a

whole will significantly address the

indicators of obsolescence and distress

described in Exhibit B (Existing

Conditions) and contribute to positive

change for residents of the development

and the surrounding community.

Applicants should address anticipated

physical, social and economic changes

for both public housing residents and

existing neighbors.

I. Capability and Readiness

HUD will use information from

Exhibit I to evaluate all of the factors

and particularly Capability and

Readiness (V.H.). Applicants must

provide a narrative that includes the

following information:

1. Describe progress made under any

previously-awarded HOPE VI,

development, and/or modernization

funding which is still open or was

closed out within the last two years, and

explain any factors which have caused

delay or unsatisfactory performance.

2. Provide the PHA’s overall and

modernization scores under the Public

Housing Management Assessment

Program (PHMAP), 24 CFR part 901, as

most recently assigned by HUD.

3. Provide a brief summary of the

PHA’s most recent fiscal audit and any

outstanding HUD monitoring findings.

4. Provide an organizational chart that

indicates the proposed PHA staffing of

the revitalization program. Describe the

qualifications of the PHA’s key staff

who will be responsible for the

oversight of the program.

5. Describe any prior experience of

the PHA or its staff in financing,

leveraging, and partnership activities.

6. Describe how the PHA proposes to

procure any necessary partners or

service providers. If any have already

been procured, describe them fully,

including the nature of the organization,

qualifications, the respective

responsibilities and obligations of each

party, the proposed financial

relationship (i.e., the basis and source of

compensation to nonapplicant parties),

and the procurement process used to

select the partner or provider. If the

proposed development is to be

implemented by a third party developer,

include a written commitment by the

developer stating eligibility for and

experience in developing, constructing,

and managing the proposed activities in

this application. HUD warns PHAs

against procuring partners other than in

compliance with applicable laws and

HUD procurement regulations, or after

waivers thereof have been granted.

Please refer to 24 CFR part 941, subpart

F, published in the Federal Register on

May 2, 1996 (61 FR 19708, 19714), for

guidance on procurement of developer

partners for mixed-finance

development; all other partners are to be

procured in accordance with 24 CFR

85.36.

7. Describe factors that will ensure

that implementation of the program can

begin quickly if the application is

approved for an award.

J. Community and Partnerships

All applicants must provide a

narrative Exhibit J plus any pertinent

letters as provided below. HUD will use

information from Exhibit J primarily to

evaluate the Community and

Partnerships (V.G.) factor. HUD will use

information in Exhibit J.1.e, below, to

determine whether the resident

consultation requirement of the Curable

Technical Deficiencies (Section III.A.)

portion of this NOFA has been met.

Exhibit J should contain the following

information:

1. Resident Support/Involvement

a. Describe the level of participation

and/or consultation with residents

throughout the PHA in the preparation

of the application.

b. Explain how the PHA would

continue the involvement and

participation by the affected public

housing residents after grant award.

c. Describe any planned roles for

residents in the management and

operation of the revitalized and

replacement units and the

developments of which they are a part.

All applicants must attach the

following:
18254 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices

d. Any letters from residents in

support of or opposition to the proposed

plan or any component element.

e. Evidence that at least one public

meeting has been held to notify

residents and community members of

the proposed activities described in this

application. The meeting may be a

regularly scheduled PHA board meeting.

Evidence must include the notice

announcing the meeting, how the notice

was distributed, and a copy of the signin sheet. An application must contain

such evidence that a public meeting

took place in order to be selected for

participation.

2. Community Support/Involvement

All applicants must respond to this

item.

a. Describe the level of participation

and/or consultation in the preparation

of the applic÷tion by community

organizations and institutions, agencies

of local and State government,

businesses, nonprofit corporations,

social service providers, philanthropic

organizations, educational institutions,

and other entities. Discuss how the PHA

would continue to involve these entities

and groups if the application is selected.

b. Provide any letters, resolutions, or

other available documentation in

support of, or objection to, the physical

as well as the self-sufficiency

component of the proposed demolition,

and the revitalization and/or

replacement of units.

c. Describe how the PHA plans to

coordinate with any other revitalization

activities or land use plans underway or

planned in the neighborhood(s) that the

revitalization plan would affect.

d. If the revitalization plan calls for

changes in streets or other

infrastructure, provide a letter of

commitment from the unit of general

local government to provide the

resources necessary to carry out those

activities.

3. Partnerships

a. Describe plans to accomplish the

revitalization through a proposed

partnership with one or more entities.

b. Identify and provide any

commitments from potential partners to

participate in the revitalization.

c. Describe how the use of the

partnership will enhance the PHA’s

ability to accomplish the revitalization.

4. EZ/EC Involvement

If the targeted development is within

a Federally-designated Empowerment

Zone or Enterprise Community, provide

evidence of this location and that the

PHA has an established relationship

with the EZ/EC administrative body that

was established before the publication

of this NOFA, and that the proposed

revitalization activity is consistent with

and supportive of the Strategic Plan for

the Federally-designated Empowerment

Zone or Enterprise Community. In order

to receive the maximum points,

applicants must demonstrate that the

HOPE VI proposal is a part of a preexisting economic development or

revitalization strategy and must provide

a letter of endorsement from the EZ or

EC governing body.

K. Resources

Applicants must provide as Exhibit K

a list of all of the individuals and

organizations from which they have

received evidence of financial or other

support for the proposed activities. Next

to each source, applicants must list the

dollar figure associated with the

resource to be provided, including the

dollar value of any in-kind services or

materials to be provided, if known. Next

to the dollar figure, applicants must

indicate the application page number of

letters of support or commitments for

contributions. The letters must describe

the nature of the support and/or

resource to be provided, the dollar value

of the donation, if available, any

conditions attached to the commitment,

and the date that the resource will be

made available. Applicants must

include letters that provide resources for

capital costs, self-sufficiency programs,

and all other activities of the program.

Applicants may attach letters as part of

Exhibit K, and/or in Exhibit F.6 (selfsufficiency support), Exhibit J.2.b

(community support), or Exhibit J.3.b

(partner support).

L. Program Financing and Sustainability

HUD will use information provided in

Exhibit L primarily to evaluate the

Feasibility and Sustainability (V.J)

factor. (Note: the term ‘‘construction’’

refers to both rehabilitation and new

construction). All applicants must

provide an Exhibit L that contains the

following:

1. A narrative description of the

proposed legal/financial structure of the

entire development and, if appropriate,

any phases. Describe how the PHA

proposes to manage the proposed

development and maintain programs on

a long term basis, given the resources

projected to be available for the

development.

2. A Market Analysis which

demonstrates the marketability and long

term feasibility of the proposed

development and its compatibility with

the surrounding community(ies).

Ideally, and particularly where the

feasibility may reasonably be doubted,

as where middle-income

homeownership is proposed in a

currently low-income neighborhood, the

analysis should be prepared by an arm’s

length third party with acknowledged

expertise and experience in the field,

and should include anticipated costs of

units, compatibility of unit types,

market conditions and demand, market

values of community dwellings by type

and bedroom size, and services

immediately available (or proposed to

be available) to residents and the

community.

3. A commencement and completion

schedule, by phases if any.

4. An estimated budget (Form HUD–

52825–A, HOPE VI Budget, Parts I and

II) showing uses of HOPE VI and other

funding for the revitalization plan. Part

I of the form will indicate the general

uses of funds, and Part II breaks each

individual use into specific activities.

5. If this application is for a mixed

financed development, a separate

schedule must be attached showing ALL

of the Sources and Uses of funds

required for implementation.

6. Specifically describe all financial

sources, the provider, and the timing for

availability of these sources. In the

event that a source(s) is NOT available

for expenditure at the commencement of

construction, describe the method of

providing for these funds on an interim

basis. (Such may be the case with the

availability of Low Income Housing Tax

Credits, in which case a ‘‘bridge’’ loan

may be appropriate.) If the proposed

development is phased, provide this

information for each phase.

a. Provide letters of commitment

signed by an authorized person

providing these funds for all sources.

b. Non-Hope VI funds provided by the

PHA must be committed by the

Executive Director as authorized by the

PHA Board.

7. Provide a preliminary construction

budget from schematics or other

preliminary plans for the proposed

development (and each phase) which

includes all hard and soft costs

(itemized) required for completion. The

qualifications of the person preparing

the budget (preferably an architect or

engineer) should appear over his or her

signature validating the budget.

8. Provide a detailed annual operating

pro forma cash flow statement for a 5-

year period for the proposed

development and each phase thereof.

M. Grant Limitations

Applicants must demonstrate

compliance with various limitations

through the following separate

schedules. All representations should

refer to and be substantiated by budget
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices 18255

documents provided in Exhibit L

(Program Financing and Sustainability).

1. Restate the funding requested

under this NOFA and demonstrate that

the grant amount is calculated in

accordance with Section II.E. of this

NOFA. The applicant must disclose all

unexpended HUD capital grants and

insurance proceeds targeted to the

development.

2. Identify all replacement housing

assistance (development funds) and

Section 8 funds previously awarded by

HUD with respect to the targeted

development, and identify the units

addressed thereby.

3. Demonstrate that the average per

unit cost of the applicant’s program is

above 70 percent of HUD’s published

TDC limits. For these calculations,

include all costs listed in 24 CFR

941.103, including those for demolition,

remediation, and relocation.

N. Need for Funding

HUD will use the information

provided in Exhibit N primarily to

evaluate the Urgency of Need for

Revitalization evaluation factor (V.A.),

and the Need for Funding threshold

criterion (IV.B.). If the applicant PHA

owns or operates more than 250 public

housing units, demonstrate that its total

capital needs, as shown in its latest

physical needs assessment, exceed by

more than 10 percent the work it

expects to be able to fund over the next

5 years. A CGP agency should use its

most recent HUD approved 5-year

action plan to make this determination.

O. Section 8 Cost Comparison

This exhibit details the required

methodology for the cost comparison

between public housing and Section 8

assistance and will be used to evaluate

the Efficient Utilization of Federal

Funding rating factor (V.I.). Applicants

must provide, using the methodology

described below, two figures: the overall

monthly cost per unit for revitalizing

and operating the targeted development,

and the monthly cost per unit for

demolishing the targeted development

and providing affected residents with

tenant-based assistance. The calculation

for continuing the development as

public housing will include both the

costs for revitalizing and operating the

public housing units. Please show, stepby-step, the calculations made to arrive

at the figures and include sufficient

details to demonstrate that the

methodology was correctly used.

The estimated cost of the

revitalization and operation as public

housing shall be calculated as the sum

of total operating, revitalization, and

accrual costs, expressed on a monthly

per public housing unit basis for the

first month after stabilized occupancy is

achieved. For purposes of this

comparison, any Replacement Units

including homeownership units will be

deemed public housing.

The development’s operating cost (all

overhead costs prorated to the

development, including PHA oversight

of a private owner or manager, where

applicable) and including utilities and

utility allowances, shall be expressed as

total operating costs per month, divided

by the number of occupied units after a

reasonable vacancy allowance.

Operating costs shall be the applicant’s

best realistic estimate for the first month

after stabilized occupancy.

The total cost of revitalization for the

development (public housing units

only) shall be the HUD funds (HOPE VI,

CGP, CIAP, MROP or Development)

required by the applicant’s

revitalization plan, but not including

direct expenditures for self-sufficiency

efforts. Total revitalization cost should

include only that portion of demolition,

remediation and relocation costs which

is attributable to occupied units which

will be replaced with hard units under

the revitalization plan. (That is, if it will

cost $5 million to demolish and relocate

residents from a 600 unit development

with 500 occupied units, of which only

400 units are to be replaced, then $4

million is attributed to the Replacement

Units and $1 million should be

excluded from total revitalization cost.)

This total revitalization cost is

converted into a monthly per public

housing unit basis by dividing the total

cost by the number of public housing

units to be provided for after

revitalization and dividing this figure by

180 (i.e., 15 years of months, where 15

results from an assumed life of 20 years

for the capital investment amortized by

a 3 percent annual rate of real interest

to account for the cost of undertaking

the capital improvements up front). For

example, if the total HUD-funded

revitalization cost of the development

described above is $31 million and its

occupancy by households after

revitalization is to be 400 public

housing units, its monthly per unit

revitalization cost will be $417 (i.e., $30

million divided by 400, for a per unit

cost of $75,000, and then divided by 180

for a per unit monthly cost of $417).

The monthly per occupied unit cost of

accrual (i.e., replacement needs) will be

estimated by using the HUD-funded

revitalization cost, then multiplying that

figure by .02 (representing a fifty year

replacement cycle), and dividing this

product by 12 to get a monthly cost. For

example, if the HUD-funded

revitalization cost is $75,000 per unit,

then the estimated monthly cost of

accrual per occupied unit is $125 (the

result of multiplying $75,000 by .02 and

then dividing by 12).

The overall current cost for

continuing the development as public

housing is the sum of its monthly

operating cost per public housing unit,

its monthly revitalization cost per

public housing unit, and its estimated

monthly accrual cost per public housing

unit. For example, if the operating cost

per unit month is $350 and the

revitalization cost is $417 and the

accrual cost is $125, the overall monthly

cost per occupied unit is $892.

The estimated cost of providing

tenant-based assistance under Section 8

for an equivalent number of households

shall be calculated as the amortized

demolition cost of the existing site, plus

the unit-weighted averaging of the

monthly Fair Market Rents for units of

the applicable bedroom size plus the

administrative fee applicable to newly

funded certificates during the year used

for calculating public housing operating

costs (e.g., the administrative fee for

units funded in FY 1995 and FY 1996

is the monthly administrative fee

amount in column C of the notice

published in the Federal Register on

January 24, 1995 (60 FR 4764, 4765)).

For example, if the replacement

development will have 200 twobedroom public housing units and 200

three bedroom public housing units,

and if the Fair Market Rent in the area

is $600 for two-bedroom units and is

$800 for three-bedroom units, and if the

administrative fee comes to $46 per

unit, then the per unit monthly cost of

tenant based assistance is $746 ($700 for

the unit-weighted average of Fair Market

Rents, or 200 times $600 plus 200 times

$800, with the sum divided by 400, plus

$46 for the administrative fee). To this

must be added the demolition,

remediation, and relocation costs of the

entire existing site, converted to a

monthly per occupied unit basis by

dividing the total cost by the number of

occupied units, then dividing again by

180. The total cost used should be the

same as under the revitalization plan if

100 percent demolition is planned

there; if partial demolition is planned,

the PHA should use its best estimate of

what 100 percent demolition would

cost. In the example given above, the

demolition of the 600-unit development

would cost $10,000 per occupied unit,

for an add-on of $56 per month in

addition to the $746 Section 8 cost.

This Section 8 cost would then be

compared to the cost of continuing the

public housing development—in the

example of this section, the public

housing cost of $892 monthly per unit
18256 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices

would be greater than the Section 8 cost

of $802 monthly per unit.

P. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing

While HUD will use information from

Exhibit P primarily to evaluate the Fair

Housing threshold criterion (IV.D.),

Exhibit P is also the vehicle for

applicants to describe any or all of the

following, which relate to Application

Evaluation Factor V.F. The applicant

must submit an Exhibit P that describes

any or all of the following:

1. The extent to which the applicant

has affirmatively furthered fair housing

and the actions it has already taken, or

plans to take through this application to

accomplish this objective. These actions

may include but are not limited to, the

following examples:

a. Those actions which contribute

toward the reduction of concentrations

of low-income persons who are

protected under the Fair Housing Act.

Examples of such actions include:

(1) Mobility counseling programs and

clearinghouses which offer housing

opportunities both within and outside

of high-poverty areas;

(2) Outreach programs targeted at

groups within the eligible population

that would not ordinarily consider

applying for units located in heavily

racially concentrated areas;

(3) Outreach programs targeted at

landlords with housing opportunities

located outside of low-income

concentrated areas;

(4) The implementation of site

selection policies which give priority to

sites located outside of minority and

low-income areas; and

(5) The promotion of accessible

homeownership opportunities and

accessible rental housing in its

jurisdiction.

b. Those actions which increase the

supply of accessible and visitable

housing available to low-income

persons with disabilities and insure

accessibility for persons with

disabilities to all aspects of the program.

‘‘Accessible housing’’ means that the

unit is located on an accessible route

(36’’ clear passage) and, when designed,

constructed, altered, or adapted, can be

approached, entered, and used by an

individual with physical disabilities.

Visitability restricts itself to two areas of

a unit: (1) At least one outside entrance

is at grade (no step(s)), and (2) all

interior and exterior doors provide a 32′′

clear passage.

c. Actions which are communitywide

or metropolitanwide in scope. Such

actions may include mobility

counseling programs, relocation

advisory services, affirmative marketing

and advertising programs, and other

actions that may employ public and

private resources to address fair housing

problems.

2. Actions taken, or, if applicable, to

be taken through this application, to

overcome the consequences of prior

discriminatory practices or usage which

have or may have tended to exclude

persons of a particular race, color, or

national origin, or to promote the

provision of public housing

opportunities for persons with

disabilities. Such actions may include:

a. Compliance with the provisions of

Voluntary Compliance Agreements,

contracts, and other legally binding

documents, where applicable; or

b. Actions taken without any kind of

legally binding order which have

changed previous discriminatory

management, tenant selection and

assignment or maintenance practices.

Consistent with the provisions of the

1997 HUD Appropriations Act, no

applicant shall describe actions

connected with the implementation of

the provisions of any consent decree

settling litigation relating to the

desegregation of public housing or

related matters.

3. Actions already taken, or, if

applicable, to be taken through this

application, to provide housing

opportunities for persons with

disabilities. Such actions may include

implementation of a Needs Assessment

and Transition Plan or other actions

which increase, for persons with

disabilities, accessibility to both the

units and to other opportunities to

participate in the PHA’s programs and

activities. Such actions may also

include any actions taken to modify

services, policies, and practices

identified through the self-evaluation

processes required by 28 CFR 35.105 or

24 CFR 8.51.

Q. Required Certifications

Each applicant must submit an

Exhibit Q that includes all of the

following letters and forms, fully

executed and dated. Submission of all of

the following letters and forms is a

requirement of this NOFA.

1. As the first page of the application,

submit an SF–424, Application for

Federal Assistance. This form must

include the Housing Authority Code,

provide the name of the targeted

development, list all activities proposed

in the application (demolition,

revitalization, replacement, Section 8)

and the amount of funds requested for

each. This form must be signed by the

Executive Director of the PHA.

2. A letter from the Chief Executive of

the applicable jurisdiction in support of

the application.

3. Form HUD–52820–A, PHA Board

Resolution for Submission of HOPE VI

Application.

4. A certification by the public official

responsible for submitting the

Consolidated Plan under 24 CFR part 91

that the proposed activities are

consistent with the approved

Consolidated Plan of the State or unit of

general local government within which

the development is located.

5. Certification for a Drug-Free

Workplace (Form HUD–50070) in

accordance with 24 CFR 24.630.

6. Form HUD 2880, Recipient

Disclosure/Update Report. This report

provides disclosures required by section

102 of the HUD Reform Act of 1989

(Pub. L. 101–235; approved December

15, 1989). Implementing regulations in

24 CFR part 4 require PHAs that seek

assistance from HUD for a specific

activity to make the disclosures required

under 24 CFR 4.9.

7. Anti-Lobbying Certification for

Contracts, Grants, Loans and

Cooperative Agreement (Form HUD–

50071). In accordance with section 319

of the Department of Interior and

Related Agencies Appropriations Act for

Fiscal Year 1990 (31 U.S.C. 1352) (the

Byrd Amendment) and the

implementing regulations in 24 CFR

part 87, the PHA must certify that no

Federally-appropriated funds have been

paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of

the PHA, for influencing or attempting

to influence an officer or employee of

any agency, or a member of Congress in

connection with the awarding of any

Federal contract, the making of any

Federal grant or loan, the entering into

of any cooperative agreement, and the

extension, continuation, renewal,

amendment, or modifications of any

Federal contract, grant, loan, or

cooperative agreement. (The rule also

requires disclosure from the PHA if

nonappropriated funds have been spent

or committed for lobbying activities, if

those activities would be prohibited if

paid with appropriated funds.)

VII. Application Processing and Grant

Administration

A. Application Evaluation

Awards under this NOFA will be

made through a selection process that

will award grants to the most

meritorious applications based upon

points as provided below.

HUD will preliminarily review, rate

and rank each application, including

those applications from prior HOPE VI

planning grant recipients which are for

the same development as their planning

grant, on the basis of the evaluation

factors set forth in Section V of this
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices 18257

NOFA. A final review panel will then

review the scores of all applications

whose preliminary score is above a base

score established by HUD, using the

same evaluation factors set forth in

Section IV of this NOFA. HUD intends

to set the base scores so that

applications requesting a total of

approximately $900 million are

advanced to the final review stage. The

HOPE VI program, following

Congressional direction, has heretofore

incorporated a progression from

planning grants to implementation

grants. HUD has not given any rating

preference to prior planning grant sites;

however, in order to preserve program

continuity and obtain full consideration

of sites in which HUD has made an

investment of HOPE VI funds, HUD will

review all such applications in the

second review stage. Such applications

will not receive special consideration

during the panel review stage and will

be reviewed in both stages of the

selection process according to the

evaluation factors set forth in Section V

of this NOFA.

The review panel will assess each of

the applications advanced to final

review and will assign the final scores.

HUD will select for funding the most

highly rated applications up to available

funding. HUD, in its discretion, may

choose to select a lower-rated

approvable application over a higherrated application in order to (1) Increase

the level of national geographic

diversity of applications selected under

this NOFA, or (2) implement an

exemplary, innovative or unique

revitalization plan whose approach

would otherwise be inadequately

represented in the pool selected, and

which HUD determines is a

revitalization model which should be

tested for the benefit of future efforts.

HUD may establish a panel of experts

with whom to consult for advice on

elements of the applications that are

within their expertise. Such experts will

be advisors and will not conduct any

part of the selection of grantees.

B. Reduction in Requested Grant

Amount

HUD may select an application for

participation in the HOPE VI program

but grant an award pursuant to such

application in an amount lower than the

amount requested by the applicant, or

adjust line items in the proposed grant

budget within the amount requested (or

both), if it determines that partial

funding is a viable option, and:

1. The amount requested for one or

more eligible activities is not supported

in the application or is not reasonably

related to the service or activity to be

carried out;

2. An activity proposed for funding

does not qualify as an eligible activity

and can be separated from the budget;

3. The amount requested exceeds the

total cost limitation established for a

grant;

4. Insufficient funds are available to

fund the full amount; or

5. Providing partial funding will

permit HUD to fund one or more

additional qualified PHAs.

C. Corrections to Deficient Applications

HUD will evaluate each application

against the evaluation factors in Section

V of this NOFA. Upon completion of the

evaluation, if HUD determines that a

PHA failed to submit any of the items

listed in Section III of this NOFA, or if

the application contains a technical

mistake, such as an incorrect signatory,

or is missing any other information that

does not affect evaluation of the

application, HUD may notify the PHA in

writing and by facsimile (fax) that the

PHA has 14 calendar days from the date

of HUD’s written notification to submit

or correct any of the specified items.

The PHA will have no opportunity to

correct deficiencies other than those

identified in HUD’s written notification,

or otherwise to supplement or revise its

application. If any of the items

identified in HUD’s written notification

is not corrected and submitted within

the required time period, the

application will be ineligible for further

consideration.

D. Notification of Funding Decisions

HUD will not notify applicants as to

whether they have been selected to

participate until the announcement of

the selection of all recipients under this

NOFA. HUD will provide written

notification to applicants that have been

selected to participate and to those that

have not been selected. HUD’s

notification of award to a selected

applicant will constitute a preliminary

approval by HUD subject to the

completion of a subsidy layering review

pursuant to 24 CFR 941.10(b), HUD’s

completion of an environmental review

of the proposed sites in accordance with

24 CFR part 50, and the execution by

HUD and the recipient of a Grant

Agreement and/or ACC Amendment.

Selection for participation (preliminary

approval) does not constitute approval

of the proposed site(s). Each proposal

will be subject to a HUD environmental

review, in accordance with 24 CFR part

50, and the proposal may be modified

or the proposed sites rejected as a result

of that review. Each application must

contain the certification included in the

PHA Board Resolution for Submission

of HOPE VI Application (form HUD

52820–A), submitted under Exhibit Q.3,

that the applicant will assist HUD in

complying with environmental review

procedures. Under that certification, the

applicant/recipient may not acquire,

rehabilitate, convert, lease, repair, or

construct a property, or commit HUD or

local funds to these activities, until

HUD approves the site.

E. Grant Agreement/ACC Amendment

After HUD selects a PHA to receive an

award pursuant to this NOFA, it will

enter into a Grant Agreement and/or

ACC Amendment, as determined

appropriate by HUD, with the recipient

setting forth the amount of the grant and

applicable rules, terms, and conditions,

including sanctions for violation of the

agreement. Among other things, the

agreement/amendment will provide that

the recipient agrees to the following:

1. To carry out the program in

accordance with the provisions of this

NOFA, applicable law, the approved

application, and all other applicable

requirements, including requirements

for mixed finance development, and

section 202 of OCRA if applicable;

2. To comply with such other terms

and conditions, including

recordkeeping and reports, as HUD may

establish for the purposes of

administering, monitoring, and

evaluating the program in an effective

and efficient manner, including full

cooperation with HUD’s program

oversight contractor;

3. That HUD will require the grantee

to demonstrate that the team assembled

to implement the HOPE VI program has

a strong management and development

track record and has the capability to

commence and carry out a quality HOPE

VI program. If the grantee fails to make

this demonstration to the satisfaction of

HUD and its program oversight

manager, HUD will direct corrective

actions as a condition of retaining the

grant; and

4. That HUD will require each grantee

to execute a construction contract

within 18 months (or a period specified

in the Grant Agreement). Failure to

obligate funds will result in the

enforcement of default remedies up to

and including withdrawal of funding.

5. That each grantee will have

established interim performance goals

and must complete the physical

component of the HOPE VI

revitalization within 4 years of

execution of the grant agreement. The

Secretary shall enforce this requirement

through default remedies up to and

including withdrawal of funding that

the PHA has not obligated. HUD will
18258 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices

take into consideration those delays

caused by factors beyond the control of

the grantee when enforcing these

schedules.

The Grant Agreement will set forth

the precise schedules of the HOPE VI

program and will also provide program

rules, describe requirements for

implementation of the revitalization

plan, and provide any special

conditions on the grantee, as applicable.

VIII. Applicability of Program

Requirements

The development to be revitalized is

a public housing development.

Accordingly, certain activities under the

revitalization plan are subject to

statutory requirements applicable to

public housing developments under the

U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (the 1937 Act),

other statutes, and the ACC. Within

such restrictions, HUD seeks innovative

solutions to the long-standing problems

of obsolete developments. In order to

satisfy any particular statutory

requirement, a Grantee may take

measures as described in implementing

regulations or, upon request to HUD for

a different approach, as otherwise

approved in writing by HUD. In the

event that a program regulation or

requirement conflicts with a

requirement established in this NOFA,

the NOFA requirement prevails.

The recipient must conduct the

following activities, which may be

undertaken with HOPE VI grant funds,

in accordance with the cited program

requirements or otherwise with HUD’s

written approval, consistent with the

1997 Appropriations Act and this

NOFA:

A. Demolition and disposition activity

under the grant must be conducted in

accordance with 24 CFR part 970;

B. Public housing development

activity (including on-site

reconstruction as well as off-site

replacement housing) must be

conducted in accordance with 24 CFR

part 941, including mixed finance

development in accordance with

subpart F (published in the Federal

Register on May 2, 1996 (61 FR 19708,

19714)). HUD will distribute the MixedFinance ACC Amendment to the

recipients.

C. Replacement housing activity using

Section 8 rental certificates must be

conducted in accordance with 24 CFR

part 882, 887, and 982, as applicable;

D. Replacement housing activity with

units acquired or otherwise provided for

homeownership under section 5(h) of

the 1937 Act must be conducted in

accordance with 24 CFR part 906;

E. Replacement housing activities

provided through housing opportunity

programs of construction or substantial

rehabilitation of homes must be

conducted in accordance with 24 CFR

part 280 (the Nehemiah Program);

F. Rehabilitation and physical

improvement activities must be

conducted in accordance with 24 CFR

968.112 (b), (d), (e), and (g)–(o), 24 CFR

968.130, and 24 CFR 968.135 (b) and

(d). These provisions were published in

the Federal Register on March 5, 1996

(61 FR 8712, 8738), and are included in

the May 1, 1996 codification of the Code

of Federal Regulations.

G. The administration and operation

of units must be in accordance with all

existing public housing rules and

regulations.

PHAs may request, for the revitalized

development, a waiver of HUD

regulations (that are not statutory

requirements) governing rents, income

eligibility, or other areas of public

housing management to permit a PHA to

undertake measures that enhance the

long-term viability of a development

revitalized under this program.

IX. Applicability of Other Federal

Requirements

A. Flood Insurance

In accordance with the Flood Disaster

Protection Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 4001–

4128), HUD will not approve

applications for grants providing

financial assistance for acquisition or

construction (including rehabilitation)

of properties located in an area

identified by the Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA) as having

special flood hazards, unless:

1. The community in which the area

is situated is participating in the

National Flood Insurance program (see

44 CFR parts 59 through 79), or less

than one year has passed since FEMA

notification regarding such hazards; and

2. Where the community is

participating in the National Flood

Insurance Program, flood insurance is

obtained as a condition of approval of

the application.

B. Coastal Barrier Resources Act

In accordance with the Coastal Barrier

Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3501), HUD

will not approve grant applications for

properties in the Coastal Barrier

Resources System.

C. Fair Housing Requirements

Recipients must comply with the

requirements of the Fair Housing Act

(42 U.S.C. 3601–19) and the regulations

in 24 CFR part 100; Executive Order

11063 (Equal Opportunity in Housing)

and the regulations in 24 CFR part 107;

the fair housing poster regulations in 24

CFR part 110; and Title VI of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d)

and the regulations in 24 CFR part 1.

D. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of

Age or Handicap

Recipients must comply with the

prohibitions against discrimination on

the basis of age pursuant to the Age

Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C.

6101–07) and the regulations in 24 CFR

part 146; the prohibitions against

discrimination against, and reasonable

modification, accommodation, and

accessibility requirements for, persons

with disabilities under section 504 of

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C.

794) and the regulations in 24 CFR part

8; the Americans with Disabilities Act

(42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.) and regulations

issued pursuant thereto (28 CFR part

36); and the Architectural Barriers Act

of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4151) and the

regulations in 24 CFR part 40.

E. Employment Opportunities

The requirements of section 3 of the

Housing and Urban Development Act of

1968 (12 U.S.C. 1701u) (Employment

Opportunities for Lower Income Persons

in Connection with Assisted Projects)

and the regulations in 24 CFR part 135

apply to this program.

F. Minority and Women’s Business

Enterprises

The requirements of Executive Orders

11246, 11625, 12432, and 12138 apply

to this program. Consistent with HUD’s

responsibilities under these orders,

recipients must make efforts to

encourage the use of minority and

women’s business enterprises in

connection with funded activities.

G. OMB Circulars

The policies, guidelines, and

requirements of OMB Circular Nos. A–

87 (Cost Principles Applicable to

Grants, Contracts and Other Agreements

with State and Local Governments) and

24 CFR part 85 (Administrative

Requirements for Grants and

Cooperative Agreements to State, Local,

and Federally-Recognized Indian Tribal

Governments), as modified by 24 CFR

941, subpart F relating to the

procurement of partners in mixedfinance developments, apply to the

award, acceptance, and use of assistance

under the program by PHAs, and to the

remedies for noncompliance, except

when inconsistent with the provisions

of the 1997 Appropriations Act, other

Federal statutes, or this NOFA.

Recipients are also subject to the audit

requirements of OMB Circular A–128

implemented at 24 CFR part 44. Copies

of OMB Circulars may be obtained from
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices 18259

E.O.P. Publications, room 2200, New

Executive Office Building, Washington,

DC 20503, telephone (202) 395–7332

(this is not a toll-free number). There is

a limit of two free copies.

H. Drug-Free Workplace

Applicants must certify that they will

provide a drug-free workplace, in

accordance with the Drug-free

Workplace Act of 1988 and HUD’s

implementing regulations at 24 CFR part

24, subpart F.

I. Debarred or Suspended Contractors

The provisions of 24 CFR part 24

apply to the employment, engagement

of services, awarding of contracts,

subgrants, or funding of any recipients,

or contractors or subcontractors, during

any period of debarment, suspension, or

placement in ineligibility status.

J. Conflict of Interest

1. In addition to the conflict of

interest requirements in 24 CFR part 85,

no person who is an employee, agent,

consultant, officer, or elected or

appointed official of the PHA and who

exercises or has exercised any functions

or responsibilities with respect to

activities assisted under an HOPE VI

grant, or who is in a position to

participate in a decisionmaking process

or gain inside information with regard

to such activities, may obtain a financial

interest or benefit from the activity, or

have an interest in any contract,

subcontract, or agreement with respect

thereto, or the proceeds thereunder,

either for himself or herself or for those

with whom he or she has family or

business ties, during his or her tenure or

for one year thereafter.

2. HUD may grant an exception to the

exclusion in paragraph (1) of this

section on a case-by-case basis when it

determines that such an exception will

serve to further the purposes of the

revitalization demonstration and the

effective and efficient administration of

the revitalization program. HUD will

consider an exception only after the

applicant or recipient has provided a

disclosure of the nature of the conflict,

accompanied by an assurance that there

has been public disclosure of the

conflict and a description of how the

public disclosure was made, and an

opinion of the applicant’s or recipient’s

attorney that the interest for which the

exception is sought would not violate

State or local laws. In determining

whether to grant a requested exception,

HUD will consider the cumulative effect

of the following factors, as applicable:

a. Whether the exception would

provide a significant cost benefit or an

essential degree of expertise to the

revitalization program that would

otherwise not be available;

b. Whether an opportunity was

provided for open competitive bidding

or negotiation;

c. Whether the person affected is a

member of a group or class intended to

be the beneficiaries of the activity, and

the exception will permit such person to

receive generally the same interest or

benefits as are being made available or

provided to the group or class;

d. Whether the affected person has

withdrawn from his or her functions or

responsibilities, or the decisionmaking

process, with respect to the specific

activity in question;

e. Whether the interest or benefit was

present before the affected person was

in a position as described in paragraph

1 of this section;

f. Whether undue hardship will result

either to the applicant, recipient, or the

person affected when weighed against

the public interest served by avoiding

the prohibited conflict; and

g. Any other relevant considerations.

K. Labor Standards

Where HOPE VI funds provide

assistance with respect to low-income

housing (including Section 8 housing)

that will be subject to a contract for

assistance under the U.S. Housing Act

of 1937, Davis-Bacon or HUDdetermined wage rates apply to

development or operation of the

housing to the extent required under

section 12 of the Act. Under section 12,

the wage rate requirements do not apply

to individuals who: perform services for

which they volunteered; do not receive

compensation for those services or are

paid expenses, reasonable benefits, or a

nominal fee for the services; and are not

otherwise employed in the work

involved (24 CFR part 70). In addition,

if other Federal programs are used in

connection with the revitalization

program, labor standards requirements

apply to the extent required by such

other Federal programs, on portions of

the development that are not subject to

Davis-Bacon rates under the U.S.

Housing Act.

L. Lead-Based Paint Testing and

Abatement

Any property assisted under the

revitalization program established under

this NOFA is covered by the Lead-Based

Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42

U.S.C. 4821 et seq.) and is therefore

subject to 24 CFR part 35; 24 CFR part

965, subpart H; and 24 CFR 968.110(k).

Tenant-based assistance provided to

PHAs under this program will be subject

to 24 CFR 982.401 and 24 CFR part 35.

M. Relocation

1. The requirements of the Uniform

Relocation Assistance and Real Property

Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 and

government-wide implementing

regulations at 49 CFR part 24 apply to

this program.

2. Temporary Relocation. The

recipient must provide each resident of

an eligible property, who is required to

relocate temporarily to permit work to

be carried out, with suitable, decent,

safe, and sanitary housing for the

temporary period, and must reimburse

the resident for all reasonable out-ofpocket expenses incurred in connection

with the temporary relocation,

including the costs of moving to and

from the temporarily occupied housing

and any increase in monthly costs of

rent and utilities.

X. Findings and Certifications

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection

requirements of this NOFA (including

Forms HUD–52825–A and HUD–52820–

A required by Sections VI.L.1.a and

VI.N.3 of this NOFA) have been

submitted to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) for review in

accordance with the emergency

processing procedures of the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–

3520) and 5 CFR 1320.13. An agency

may not conduct or sponsor, and a

person is not required to respond to, a

collection of information unless the

collection displays a valid control

number. The OMB control number,

when assigned, will be announced by

separate notice in the Federal Register.

B. Environmental Review

A Finding of No Significant Impact

with respect to the environment has

been made in accordance with HUD

regulations at 24 CFR part 50,

implementing section 102(2)(C) of the

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332). The Finding of

No Significant Impact is available for

public inspection and copying between

7:30 am and 5:30 pm weekdays at the

Office of the Rules Docket Clerk, 451

Seventh Street, SW, Room 10276,

Washington, DC 20410.

C. Impact on the Family

The General Counsel, as the

Designated Official for Executive Order

12606, The Family, has determined that

the policies announced in this NOFA

will not have the potential for

significant impact on family formation,

maintenance, and general well-being

within the meaning of the order. No

significant change in existing HUD
18260 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 71 / Monday, April 14, 1997 / Notices

policies and programs will result from

the issuance of this NOFA, as those

policies and programs relate to family

concerns. To the extent that there is

impact on the family, revitalization

under this program can be expected to

support families by enabling lowincome families to live in decent, safe,

and sanitary housing.

D. Federalism Impact

The General Counsel, as the

Designated Official under section 6(a) of

Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has

determined that this NOFA will not

have substantial, direct effects on States,

on their political subdivisions, or on

their relationship with the Federal

Government, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities between

them and other levels of government.

While this NOFA offers financial

assistance to units of general local

government, none of its provisions will

have an effect on the relationship

between the Federal Government and

the States, or the States’ political

subdivisions.

E. Accountability in the Provision of

HUD Assistance

Section 102 of the Department of

Housing and Urban Development

Reform Act of 1989 (HUD Reform Act)

and the final rule codified at 24 CFR

part 4, subpart A, published on April 1,

1996 (61 FR 1448), contain a number of

provisions that are designed to ensure

greater accountability and integrity in

the provision of certain types of

assistance administered by HUD. On

January 14, 1992, HUD published, at 57

FR 1942, a notice that also provides

information on the implementation of

section 102. The documentation, public

access, and disclosure requirements of

section 102 are applicable to assistance

awarded under this NOFA as follows:

Documentation and public access

requirements. HUD will ensure that

documentation and other information

regarding each application submitted

pursuant to this NOFA are sufficient to

indicate the basis upon which

assistance was provided or denied. This

material, including any letters of

support, will be made available for

public inspection for a five-year period

beginning not less than 30 days after the

award of the assistance. Material will be

made available in accordance with the

Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C.

552) and HUD’s implementing

regulations at 24 CFR part 15. In

addition, HUD will include the

recipients of assistance pursuant to this

NOFA in its Federal Register notice of

all recipients of HUD assistance

awarded on a competitive basis.

Disclosures. HUD will make available

to the public for five years all applicant

disclosure reports (HUD Form 2880)

submitted in connection with this

NOFA. Update reports (also Form 2880)

will be made available along with the

applicant disclosure reports, but in no

case for a period less than three years.

All reports—both applicant disclosures

and updates—will be made available in

accordance with the Freedom of

Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and

HUD’s implementing regulations at 24

CFR part 15.

F. Section 103 of the HUD Reform Act

HUD’s regulation implementing

section 103 of the Department of

Housing and Urban Development

Reform Act of 1989, codified as 24 CFR

part 4, applies to the funding

competition announced today. The

requirements of the rule continue to

apply until the announcement of the

selection of successful applicants. HUD

employees involved in the review of

applications and in the making of

funding decisions are limited by part 4

from providing advance information to

any person (other than an authorized

employee of HUD) concerning funding

decisions, or from otherwise giving any

applicant an unfair competitive

advantage. Persons who apply for

assistance in this competition should

confine their inquiries to the subject

areas permitted under 24 CFR part 4.

Applicants or employees who have

ethics related questions should contact

the HUD Office of Ethics (202) 708–

3815. (This is not a toll-free number.)

For HUD employees who have specific

program questions, such as whether

particular subject matter can be

discussed with persons outside HUD,

the employee should contact the

appropriate Field Office Counsel, or

Headquarters counsel for the program to

which the question pertains.

G. Prohibition Against Lobbying

Activities

The use of funds awarded under this

NOFA is subject to the disclosure

requirements and prohibitions of

section 319 of the Department of Interior

and Related Agencies Appropriations

Act for Fiscal Year 1990 (31 U.S.C.

1352) (the Byrd Amendment) and the

implementing regulations in 24 CFR

part 87. These authorities prohibit

recipients of Federal contracts, grants,

or loans from using appropriated funds

for lobbying the executive or legislative

branches of the Federal Government in

connection with a specific contract,

grant, or loan. The prohibition also

covers the awarding of contracts, grants,

cooperative agreements, or loans unless

the recipient has made an acceptable

certification regarding lobbying. Under

24 CFR part 87, applicants, recipients,

and subrecipients of assistance

exceeding $100,000 must certify that no

Federal funds have been or will be spent

on lobbying activities in connection

with the assistance.

H. Catalog of Federal Domestic

Assistance

The Catalog of Federal Domestic

Assistance program number is 14.864.

Dated: March 27, 1997.

Kevin Emanuel Marchman,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Public and

Indian Housing.

[FR Doc. 97–9547 Filed 4–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4210–33–P