New Mexico Administrative Code › Title 2 - PUBLIC FINANCE › Chapter 110 - LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANTS › Part 2 - SMALL CITIES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT › Section 2.110.2.19 - APPLICATION REVIEW AND EVALUATION PROCESS

Current through Register Vol. 35, No. 13, July 16, 2024
A. Upon receipt of an application, division
				staff will review for eligibility, completeness, feasibility, and compliance
				and ensure that all other funding necessary to make the project functional is
				in place. Applications not meeting the criteria will be returned to the
				applicant and will not be considered for funding.
B. Applications will be forwarded to
				appropriate state agencies for technical review and comment. Review agencies
				may include, but are not limited to, the environment department, department of
				transportation, department of health, state engineer's office, agency on aging
				and long term services, economic development department, state fire marshal and
				governor's commission on disability.
C. An eligible applicant will be allowed to
				make a presentation to the council and division staff at the official hearing.
				Testimony related to the application will be presented by an official or
				designee of the applicant who may be assisted by technical staff.
D. Community infrastructure, housing, public
				facility capital outlay, emergency, and Colonias rating criteria: The following
				rating criteria will be used to evaluate and score CDBG applications for the
				community infrastructure, housing, public facility, capital outlay, emergency,
				and Colonias categories.
(1)
Description and need
- (10 points) the more severe the need as
				documented in the application, the higher the score.
(2)
Benefit to low and moderate income
				beneficiaries and appropriateness
- (20 points) extent to which the CDBG
				application:
(a) documents the number and
				percentage of low and moderate income beneficiaries, also include race and
				gender; or
(b) addresses the
				prevention or removal of slum or blighting conditions; or
(c) addresses conditions that pose a serious
				and immediate threat to the health and welfare of the community (for emergency
				applications only).
(3)
Leveraging
- (10 points) extent to which state, local and other
				public resources, in addition to the required match, will be used by the
				applicant for the proposed project.
(4)
Citizen participation
- (10
				points) extent to which the applicant evidences opportunity for citizen
				activities related to the proposed project:
(a) (10 points) has provided four or more
				citizen activities;
(b) (7 points)
				has provided three citizen activities;
(c) (5 points) has provided two citizen
				activities.
(5)
Planning
- (10 points) extent to which:
(a) (3 points) applicant has adopted a local
				ICIP, which has qualified for publication in the most recent state published
				prior to the CDBG application deadline. Evidence of the adopted ICIP for the
				current year must be provided as part of the application;
(b) (3 points) project has qualified for
				publication in the most recent state ICIP prior to the CDBG application
				deadline and applicant has selected CDBG as one of its possible funding
				sources. Evidence of such publication identifying the project and selecting
				CDBG funds as a possible funding source must be provided with
				application;
(c) (1 point) project
				shows consistency with applicant's comprehensive plan;
(d) (1 point) applicant has adopted a drought
				contingency plan, setting in place various drought management stages and
				accompanying restrictions on water use;
(e) (1 point) applicant has adopted a water
				conservation ordinance, setting in place various methods for conserving potable
				water;
(f)(1 point) applicant has
				implemented a water conservation ordinance, accompanied by evidence of
				exercising at least two various methods for conserving potable water.
(6)
Feasibility/readiness
- (20 points) extent to which the project is
				technically and economically feasible and ready to be implemented;
(a) (5 points) necessary real property or
				easements acquired;
(b) (5 points)
				professional services contract executed;
(c) (5 points) completed plans,
				specifications, bid documents, or preliminary engineering reports;
				and
(d) (5 points) completed
				environmental review process.
(7)
Cost benefit
- (10 points)
				the amount of funds requested divided by the number of direct low and moderate
				income beneficiaries of the project; the lower the ratio, the higher
				score.
(8) Asset management plan -
				(maximum of 10 points).
(a) (1 point)
				attendance within the last three years at an asset management training that
				includes the five core components as described in the international
				infrastructure asset management model;
(b) (2 points) development of an asset
				management plan that includes some, but not all, of the five core
				components;
(c) (10 points)
				development of a complete asset management plan with all five core
				components.
(9)
Council application scoring
- (10 points) Each member of the
				council shall be allowed to award up to 10 points per application in the
				application rating process, with one point for a low priority, five points for
				a medium priority and 10 points for a high priority project based on the
				criteria used for rating. The points will be averaged by totaling the
				individual member scores and dividing by the number of members who scored the
				project.
(10)
Additional
				Colonias criteria
-When submitting a Colonias applicant shall prove
				documentation of the Colonias designation and documentation that the project
				shall address one of the following conditions:
(a)lack of potable water; or
(b)lack of an adequate sewage system;
				or
(c)lack of safe, sanitary
				housing.