[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 77 (Thursday, April 21, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-9604]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: April 21, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





Department of Housing and Urban Development





_______________________________________________________________________



Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing



_______________________________________________________________________




Community Development Block Grant Program for Indian Tribes and Alaskan 
Native Villages; Notice
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing
[Docket No. N-94-3740; FR-3644-N-01]

 
Community Development Block Grant Program for Indian Tribes and 
Alaskan Native Villages, Notice of Fund Availability

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian 
Housing, HUD.

ACTION: Notice of fund availability for fiscal year 1994.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This Notice of Fund Availability (NOFA) announces HUD's 
funding for the Community Development Block Grant Program for Indian 
tribes and Alaskan native villages for Fiscal Year 1994. In the body of 
this document is information concerning the following:

    (a) The purpose of the NOFA, and information regarding 
eligibility, available amounts, and selection criteria;
    (b) Application processing, including how to apply and how 
selections will be made; and
    (c) A checklist of steps and exhibits involved in the 
application process.

DATES: Applications may be mailed to HUD, provided that they are 
postmarked no later than midnight on the deadline date: July 20, 1994. 
Applications that are physically delivered to HUD must be received by 
the appropriate HUD Field Office (FO) no later than the close of 
business July 20, 1994. Application materials will be available from 
each field ONAP.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Applicants should contact the HUD 
Field Office serving their geographic area:
Elton Jones, Chicago Office of Native American Programs, Housing and 
Community Development Division, 77 West Jackson Blvd., Chicago, 
Illinois 60604. Telephone (312) 353-1683.
Jules Valdez, Oklahoma City Office of Native American Programs, CPD 
Branch, Murrah Federal Building, 200 NW 5th St., Oklahoma City, OK 
73102-3202. Telephone (405) 231-5968.
Frank Padilla, Denver Office of Native American Programs, Housing and 
Community Development Division, First Interstate Tower North, 833 17Th 
St., Denver, CO 80202-3607. Telephone (303) 672-5465.
Gerald Hammon, Office of Native American Programs, Region IX, CPD 
Division, Two Arizona Center, Suite 1650, 400 N. Fifth Street, Phoenix, 
Arizona 85004-2361. Telephone (602) 379-4197.
Robert Barth, Office of Native American Programs, CPD Division, Program 
Management Team, (San Francisco) Phillip Burton Federal Bldg. and U.S. 
Courthouse, 450 Golden Gate Ave., P.O. Box 36003, San Francisco, CA 
94102-3448. Telephone (415) 556-9200.
Jeanne McArthur, Seattle Office of Native American Programs, CPD 
Division, Federal Office Building, 909 First Avenue, Suite 200 , 
Seattle, WA 98104-1000. Telephone (206) 220-5271.
Barry Bruninga, Anchorage Office of Native American Programs, 949 E. 
36th Avenue, Suite 401, Anchorage, AK 99508-4135. Telephone (907) 271-
4673.

    With general program questions, contact, Dom Nessi, Office of 
Native American Programs, Office of Public and Indian Housing, 
Department of Housing and Urban Development, Room 4140, 451 Seventh 
Street SW., Washington, DC 20410. Telephone (202) 708-1015. The 
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) number is (202) 708-2565. 
(These are not toll-free numbers.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Paperwork Requirements

    The information collection requirements contained in this notice 
have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget, under 
section 3504(h) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520), and have been assigned OMB control number 2506-0043.

Contents

I. Purpose and Substantive Description
    (a) Authority
    (b) Funding
    (c) Eligibility of Activities
    (d) Applicant Eligibility
    (e) Selection Criteria/Rating Factors
    1. RATING AND RANKING SYSTEM
    2. OVERALL THRESHOLDS
    A. Applicant-Specific Thresholds--Capacity and Performance
    (1) Capacity
    (2) Performance
    B. Community Development Appropriateness
    (1) Costs are Reasonable
    (2) The Project is Appropriate for the Intended Use
    (3) Project is Usable/Achievable within Two Years
    3. TIEBREAKERS
    4. GENERAL DEFINITIONS
    5. PROJECT DEFINITIONS, THRESHOLDS AND SELECTION CRITERIA
    A. Housing
    (1) Definition
    (2) General Thresholds
    (3) Rehabilitation
    a. Thresholds
    b. Grant Limits
    c. Selection Criteria
    (i) Project Need and Design
    (ii) Planning and Implementation
    (iii) Leveraging
    (4) Land to Support New Housing
    a. Thresholds
    b. Selection Criteria
    (i) Project Need
    (ii) Planning and Implementation
    (5) New Housing Construction/Direct Home Ownership Assistance
    a. New Construction
    (i) Thresholds
    (ii) Selection Criteria
    a New Construction under Section 248
    b Project Need and Design
    c Planning and Implementation
    d Leveraging
    b. Direct Homeownership
    (i) Thresholds
    (ii) Selection Criteria
    a Project Need and Design
    b Planning and Implementation
    c Leveraging
    B. Community Facilities
    (1) General Thresholds
    (2) Infrastructure
    a. Selection Criteria
    (i) Project Need and Design
    (ii) Planning and Implementation
    (iii) Leveraging
    (3) Buildings
    a. Thresholds
    b. Selection Criteria
    (i) Project Need and Design
    (ii) Planning and Implementation
    (iii) Leveraging
    C. Public Services
    (1) Thresholds
    (2) Selection Criteria
    a. Project Need and Design
    b. Planning and Implementation
    c. Leveraging
    D. Economic Development
    (1) Thresholds
    (2) Selection Criteria
    a. Project Viability
    b. Permanent F-T Job Creation
    c. Additional Considerations
II. Application Process
III. Checklist of Application Submission Requirements
IV. Corrections to Deficient Applications
V. Other Matters
    (a) Federalism Executive Order
    (b) Family Executive Order
    (c) Registration of Consultants
    (d) Prohibition of Advance Disclosure of Funding Decisions.

Purpose and Substantive Description

(a) Authority

    Title I, Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended 
(42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.); sec. 7(d) of the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3535(d)); 24 CFR part 571.

(b) Funding

    Amendments to Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act 
of 1974 have required that the allocation for Indian Tribes be on a 
competitive basis in accordance with selection criteria contained in a 
regulation promulgated by the Secretary after notice and public 
comment. The interim regulation containing the selection criteria was 
issued April 7, 1992.
    The Department has determined that only quality Indian Community 
Development Block Grant (ICDBG) projects are to be funded. Section 
571.100(b)(2) prohibits HUD field offices (FO) from funding 
applications that do not meet a serious need or which do not impact on 
the needs identified in the application. Accordingly, even if funds 
were available to fund a project based on its rating, if that project 
did not meet these criteria, it would not be funded. The funds would be 
used to fund the next highest ranking project or could be carried 
forward to the next funding cycle, if none of the lower ranking 
projects met a serious need or impacted on the needs identified in the 
application. All grant funds awarded in accordance with this NOFA are 
subject to the requirements of 24 CFR part 571.

Documentation and Public Access Requirements; Applicant/Recipient 
Disclosures: HUD Reform Act

    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 quarterly Federal 
Register notice of all recipients of HUD assistance awarded on a 
competitive basis. (See 24 CFR 12.14(a) and 12.16(b), and the notice 
published in the Federal Register on January 16, 1992 (57 FR 1942), for 
further information on these documentation and public access 
requirements.)
    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. (See 24 CFR subpart C, and the notice 
published in the Federal Register on January 16, 1992 (57 FR 1942), for 
further information on these disclosure requirements.)
    1. Allocations. The requirements for allocating funds to field 
offices responsible for program administration are found at 24 CFR 
571.101. Following these requirements, the allocation for FY 1994 is as 
follows:


Chicago.................................................      $3,231,000
Oklahoma................................................       8,299,000
Denver..................................................       6,929,000
Phoenix.................................................      19,680,000
Seattle.................................................       2,365,000
Anchorage...............................................       3,496,000
                                                         ---------------
    Total...............................................     $44,000,000
                                                                        

    2. Grant Ceilings. The authority to establish grant ceilings is 
found at 24 CFR 571.100(b). These grant ceilings are established for FY 
1993 funding at the following levels:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Region/field offices               Population       Ceiling  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region 5 (Chicago)........................              All     $300,000
Region 6 (OK City)........................              All      750,000
Region 8 (Denver).........................              All      800,000
Region 9 (Phoenix)........................          50,001+    5,000,000
                                              10,501-50,000    2,500,000
                                               9,001-10,500    2,000,000
                                                7,501-9,000    1,500,000
                                                6,001-7,500    1,000,000
                                                4,501-6,000      750,000
                                                3,001-4,500      650,000
                                                1,501-3,000      550,000
                                                    1-1,500      450,000
Region 10 (Seattle).......................              All      270,000
Anchorage.................................              All     500,000 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Imminent Threats. The criteria for grants to alleviate or remove 
imminent threats to health or safety that require immediate solution 
are described at subpart E of part 571. The following field offices are 
setting aside funds for imminent threats:
    Region 9 (Phoenix) $400,000. These funds will be available until 
the Phoenix Office receives its FY 1995 ICDBG allocation.
    Seattle $250,000. These funds will be available until Seattle 
completes the rating and ranking process for funds distributed under 
this NOFA.

(c) Eligibility of Activities

    Activities that are eligible for CDBG funds are identified at 24 
CFR Part 570 Subpart C. Both the National Affordable Housing Act (NAHA) 
(P.L. 101-625) and the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 
(the 1992 Act) (P.L. 102-550) amended Title I of the Housing and 
Community Development Act of 1974 (HCD Act). Various amendments made by 
these two recent acts are applicable.

(d) Applicant Eligibility

    To apply for funding in a given fiscal year, an applicant must be 
eligible as an Indian tribe or Alaskan native village, or as a tribal 
organization by the application submission date.
    ``Tribal organizations'' are permitted to submit applications under 
24 CFR 571.5(b) on behalf of eligible tribes or villages when one or 
more eligible tribe or village authorize the organization to do so 
under concurring resolutions. The Tribal organization must also be 
eligible under the Indian Self-Determination Act. If a tribe or tribal 
organization claims that it is a successor to an eligible entity, the 
FO must review the documentation to determine whether it is in fact the 
successor entity.
    Due to the unique governmental structure of Alaskan Native Villages 
there is on occasion more than one group that could be recognized as 
the governing body of an eligible entity as set forth at 24 CFR 571.5.
    On December 29, 1988, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) published 
a Federal Register Notice entitled ``Indian Entities Recognized and 
Eligible to Receive Services From the United States Bureau of Indian 
Affairs''. This Notice included an alphabetical listing of all Alaskan 
entities eligible to receive funding and services from the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs. Each entity listed qualified under one of the nine 
criteria set forth in the Notice. The Notice stated that an entity 
which qualified under criteria 1, 2, 3, 4, or 9 is also an ``Indian 
tribe'' under the definition of that term used for the purposes of the 
Indian Self-Determination Act. The criteria are:

    1. ``Tribes'' as defined or established under the Indian 
Reorganization Act (IRA) as supplemented by the Alaska Native Act.
    2. Alaska Native Villages defined in or established pursuant to 
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA).
    3. Village corporations defined in or established pursuant to 
ANCSA.
    4. Regional corporations defined in or established pursuant to 
ANCSA.
    9. Tribes which have petitioned to be acknowledged and have been 
determined to exist as tribes pursuant to 25 CFR Part 83. (A BIA 
regulation)

    The hierarchy for funding priority continues to be the IRA Village 
Council, then the Traditional Village Council, followed by the Village 
Corporation and the Regional Corporation. Since there may only be one 
application submitted for an ICDBG grant for each area within the 
jurisdiction of an entity eligible under 24 CFR 571.5, if a Village 
Corporation or Regional Corporation submits an application for an ICDBG 
grant for activities in the jurisdiction of one or more eligible tribes 
or villages, it must include a concurring resolution from each such 
tribe or village authorizing the submittal of the application. Each 
such resolution must also indicate that the tribe or village does not 
itself intend to submit an ICDBG application for that funding round.
    If possible, questions regarding eligibility determinations and 
related documentation requirements should be referred to the Anchorage 
FO prior to the deadline for submitting an application. (See 24 CFR 
571.5 for a complete description of eligible applicants.)

(e) Selection Criteria/Rating Factors

1. Rating and Ranking System
    Prior to the rating process, field offices will screen applications 
to ensure that they meet the acceptance criteria in 24 CFR 571.301(a). 
Field offices will review each application that passes the screening to 
ensure that each proposed project meets all of the requirements in 24 
CFR 571.302(a), as implemented by this NOFA.
    The field office will determine the proper category and component 
(e.g., Housing Rehabilitation) under which to rate each project. Each 
component is worth 100 points, which is the maximum that a project can 
receive.
    All projects that meet the acceptance criteria and threshold 
requirements will be reviewed and rated by a field office rating team 
of at least three voting members. The rating team will normally consist 
of representatives from the Indian CDBG staff. Voting members may be 
selected from other HUD divisions, such as the non-CPD portion of the 
Office of Indian Housing, and non-Indian CPD. The rating panel may 
solicit technical advice from experts such as attorneys, economists and 
cost analysts. Experts may be voting or non-voting members.
    After each of the applications has been rated, the projects will be 
ranked in order of the point totals they received, regardless of the 
rating category or component under which the points were awarded. 
Projects will be selected for funding based on their ranking, in 
accordance with the requirements of Secs. 571.100(b) and 571.302(c).
2. Thresholds
    The ICDBG regulation (24 CFR part 571) contains two types of 
general thresholds: those that relate to applicants, and those that 
address overall community development appropriateness. Project-specific 
definitions and thresholds will be addressed within the pertinent 
project selection criteria categories.
    Applicant thresholds focus on the administrative capacity of the 
applicant to undertake the proposed project(s), and on its past 
performance in the ICDBG and Housing programs. An applicant that has 
participated in the ICDBG program previously must have performed 
adequately. In cases of previously documented deficient performance, 
the applicant must have taken appropriate corrective action to improve 
its performance prior to submitting an ICDBG application to HUD.
    In order for the project(s) contained in applications that have 
passed the initial screening tests outlined in section 571.301 to be 
rated and ranked, field offices must determine that the proposed 
project(s) meets the community development appropriateness thresholds 
and: (a) Has costs that are reasonable, (b) is appropriate for the 
intended use, and (c) will normally be completed within two years.
    If an applicant fails to meet the applicant-specific thresholds, 
its application cannot be accepted for rating and ranking. Project(s) 
that do not meet the community development appropriateness or project-
specific thresholds will not be considered for funding.
A. Applicant-Specific Thresholds--Capacity and Performance
    (1) Capacity. The field office will assume, absent evidence to the 
contrary, that the applicant possesses, or can obtain the managerial, 
technical or administrative capability necessary to carry out the 
proposed project(s). The application should address who will administer 
the project(s) and how the applicant plans to handle the technical 
aspects of executing the project(s). If the field office determines, 
based on substantial evidence, that the applicant does not have or 
cannot obtain the capacity to undertake the proposed project(s), the 
project(s) will be rejected from further consideration.
    (2) Performance. If an applicant has participated in the ICDBG 
Program previously, the field office shall determine whether the 
applicant has performed adequately in grant administration and 
management. Where an applicant was found to be performing inadequately, 
the field office shall determine whether the applicant is following a 
schedule to correct performance, to which the applicant and HUD have 
agreed. In cases of previously documented deficient performance, the 
field office must determine that the applicant has taken appropriate 
corrective action to improve its performance.
    a. Community development. The applicant is presumed to be 
performing adequately unless the field office makes a performance 
determination to the contrary by monitoring.
    b. Housing assistance. The applicant is presumed not to have taken 
actions to impede the provision of housing assistance for low- and 
moderate-income members of the tribe or village. Any action that is 
known to HUD to prevent or obstruct the provision or operation of 
assisted housing for low and moderate income persons shall be evaluated 
in terms of whether it constitutes inadequate performance by the 
applicant.
    In addition, tribes have certain responsibilities and obligations 
to Indian Housing Authorities (IHAs), outlined in Article VIII of HUD's 
Model Tribal Ordinance. In instances where a tribe has established or 
joined an IHA, and has obtained housing assistance from HUD, its 
compliance with the resolution set forth in Article VIII will be a 
performance consideration.
    Applicants will not be held accountable for the poor performance of 
Indian Housing Authorities (IHAs). However, if inadequate performance 
is found to be a direct result of the applicant's action or inaction, 
the application will be rejected from further consideration. Applicants 
who are members of ``umbrella'' IHAs will be judged only on their 
individual performance and will not be held accountable for the poor 
performance of other tribes that are represented by the IHA.
    In the case of tribes that have not established or are not members 
of housing authorities, HUD will consider in making its determination, 
whether the tribe received CDBG funds for the provision of new housing, 
and if so: (i) whether the proposed units were constructed; (ii) 
whether housing assistance was provided to the beneficiaries identified 
in the application, and if not, why not; (iii) whether the tribe 
followed the provisions of its housing plan and procedures; and (iv) 
whether there were sustained complaints from tribal members regarding 
provision and/or distribution of CDBG housing assistance.
    c. Audits. This threshold requires the applicant to meet the 
following performance criteria:
    (i) The applicant cannot have an outstanding ICDBG obligation to 
HUD that is in arrears, or it must have agreed to a repayment schedule. 
An applicant that has an outstanding ICDBG obligation to HUD that is in 
arrears, or one that has not agreed to a repayment schedule, will be 
disqualified from the current competition and from subsequent 
competitions, until the obligations are current. If a grantee that was 
current at the time of application submission becomes delinquent during 
the review period, the application may be rejected.
    (ii) The applicant cannot have an overdue or unsatisfactory 
response to an audit finding(s). If there is an overdue or 
unsatisfactory response to an audit finding(s), the applicant will be 
disqualified from current and subsequent competition until the 
applicant has taken final action necessary to close the audit 
finding(s). The field office director may provide exceptions to this 
disqualification in cases where the applicant has made a good faith 
effort to clear the audit finding(s). Only when a satisfactory 
arrangement for repayment of the debt has been made, and payments are 
current, will an exception be granted when funds are due HUD.
B. Community Development Appropriateness
    The following criteria must be met by all applicants:
    (1) Costs are reasonable. The project(s) must be described in 
sufficient detail so that HUD can determine: (a) that costs are 
reasonable; and (b) that the funds requested from the CDBG program and 
all other sources are adequate to complete the proposed activity(ies) 
described in the application.
    (2) The project(s) is appropriate for the intended use.
    (3) The project(s) is usable or achievable in a timely manner, 
generally within a two-year period. The applicant must indicate its 
timetable for project implementation and completion. A period of more 
than two years is acceptable in certain circumstances, which are beyond 
the applicant's control. For example, a construction season may be 
limited by severe weather, or extra time may be required to coordinate 
different funding dates for other entities assisting the same project.
3. Tiebreakers
    When rating results in a tie among projects, field offices shall 
approve projects that can be fully funded over those that cannot be 
fully funded. When that does not resolve the tie, the following factors 
should be used in the order listed to resolve the tie:

A. Chicago Office

    (1) The application that benefits the highest percentage of low- 
and moderate-income persons.
    (2) The application that benefits the most low- and moderate-income 
persons.

B. Oklahoma City Office

    (1) The application that benefits the highest percentage of low- 
and moderate-income persons.
    (2) The applicant with the fewest active grants.
    (3) The application that benefits the most low- and moderate-income 
persons.

C. Denver Office

    (1) The application that benefits the highest percentage of low- 
and moderate-income persons.
    (2) The application that benefits the most low- and moderate-income 
persons.

D. Phoenix Office

    (1) The applicant with the fewest active grants.
    (2) The applicant that has not received a block grant over the 
longest period of time.
    (3) The application that benefits the highest percentage of low- 
and moderate-income persons.

E. Seattle Office

    (1) The applicant that has not received a block grant over the 
longest period of time.
    (2) The applicant that has received the fewest CDBG dollars since 
the inception of the program.
    (3) The application that benefits the highest percentage of low- 
and moderate-income persons.

F. Anchorage Office

    (1) The applicant that has not received a block grant over the 
longest period of time.
    (2) The application that benefits the highest percentage of low- 
and moderate-income persons.
    (3) The application that benefits the most low- and moderate-income 
persons.
4. General Definitions
    Adopt. To approve by formal tribal resolution, as defined at 24 CFR 
Part 571.4.
    Assure. To comply with a specific NOFA requirement. The applicant 
should state its compliance or its intent to comply in its application.
    Document. To supply supporting written information and/or data in 
the application, which satisfies the NOFA requirement.
    Leverage. Resources the grantee can use in conjunction with CDBG 
funds to achieve the objectives of the project. Resources include, but 
are not limited to: tribal trust funds, loans from individuals or 
organizations, state or federal loans or guarantees, other grants, as 
well as noncash contributions and donated services. Funds from any 
source must be documented by a written commitment and may be contingent 
on approval of the CDBG award. Resources will be counted only if they 
are currently available or will be available within 3 months of grant 
notification. If delays in the Federal funding process preclude an 
agency from making a firm funding commitment, resources will be counted 
if the agency issues a written statement indicating that it is 
extremely likely that the applicant will be funded within 6 months of 
the date of grant notification. Donated services will be accepted, 
provided: (1) the costs are demonstrated and determined necessary and 
directly attributable to the actual development of the project; and (2) 
comparable costs and time estimates are submitted which support the 
donation.
    Project Cost. Total cost to implement the project. Project cost 
includes both CDBG and non CDBG funds.
    Tribe. Indian tribe, band, group or nation, including Alaskan 
Indians, Aleuts, Eskimos and Alaskan native villages.
5. Project Definitions, Thresholds and Selection Criteria
A. Housing
(1) Definition
    Section 8 standards. Standards contained in the Section 8 Housing 
Assistance Payments Program--Existing Housing (24 CFR 882.109).
(2) General Thresholds
    Households that have been evicted from HUD housing within the past 
five years may not be assisted, except in emergency situations, which 
will be reviewed by field offices on a case-by-case basis.
(3) Rehabilitation
    a. Thresholds. (i) All applicants for housing rehabilitation grants 
shall adopt rehabilitation standards and rehabilitation policies, prior 
to submitting an application.
    (ii) Any units to be rehabilitated must be the permanent non-
seasonal residence of the occupant(s). The resident(s) must live in the 
unit at least nine months per year.
    (iii) Housing units slated for eventual replacement may only 
receive repairs essential for health and safety.
    (iv) The applicant shall provide an assurance that it will use 
project funds to rehabilitate HUD assisted units only where the tenant/
homeowner's payments are current or the tenant/homeowner is current in 
a repayment agreement that is subject to approval by the field office. 
The field office may grant exceptions on a case-by-case basis to the 
requirement that beneficiaries be current to permit housing 
rehabilitation in emergency situations.
    (v) Houses that have received comprehensive rehabilitation 
assistance from any CDBG or federal grant within the past 8 years 
cannot receive CDBG funds to make the same repairs if the repairs are 
needed as a result of abuse or neglect.
    b. Grant limits. Rehabilitation grant limits for each field office 
jurisdiction are as follows:

(i) Region 5 (Chicago)
$15,000
(ii) Region 6 (OK City)
15,000
(iii) Region 8 (Denver)
33,500
(iv) Region 9 (Phoenix)
25,000
(v) Region 10 (Seattle)
20,000
(vi) (Anchorage)
Lesser of $35/square feet or $25,000

    c. Selection Criteria. Applicants for housing rehabilitation 
projects will be rated based on the following:
    (i) Project Need and Design (45 points)
    a The percentage of CDBG funds committed to bring the housing up to 
standard condition as defined by the applicant. Standard condition is 
defined as adoption of standards at least as stringent as Section 8. 
Exceptions, which must be approved by the field office, may be made 
when local conditions make the use of Section 8 standards infeasible. 
For example, units may be too remote to make the provision of 
electricity and running water economically feasible, or Section 8 
standards may not be met for historic preservation reasons. In all 
cases, to be considered in standard condition, a home must be in safe, 
sanitary, and physically sound condition with all systems performing 
their intended functions.
    Administrative and technical assistance expenditures are excluded 
in computing the percentage of CDBG funds committed to bring housing up 
to standard condition. The percentage of CDBG funds not used to bring 
housing up to standard condition should be used for emergency repairs, 
demolition of substandard units, planning related to the particular 
project or another purpose closely related to the housing 
rehabilitation project. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Percentage of CDBG funds committed to bring housing up to            
                       standard condition                        Points 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 91-100%......................................................       25
2 81-90%.......................................................       10
3 80% and less.................................................       0 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    b The applicant's selection criteria give priority to the neediest 
households. ``Neediest'' is defined as households whose current 
residences are in the greatest disrepair in the project area, or very 
low-income households.
    1 Yes (10 points).
    2 No (0 points).
    c Documentation of project need with a housing survey of all of the 
units to be rehabilitated with CDBG funds. This survey should include 
standard housing data on each unit surveyed (e.g., age, size, type, 
rooms, type of heating). The survey should show the number of standard 
units, the number of substandard units suitable for rehabilitation with 
the deficiencies listed for each unit, and the number of substandard 
units unsuitable for rehabilitation. A definition of ``suitable for 
rehabilitation'' should be included. At a minimum, this definition 
should not include units that need only minor repairs, or units that 
need such major repairs that rehabilitation is structurally or 
financially infeasible.
    Submission of acceptable survey of deficiencies.
    1 Yes (10 points).
    2 No (0 points).
    (ii) Planning and Implementation (45 points).
    a Rehabilitation Policies including:
    1 Adopted rehabilitation standards. Adopted rehabilitation 
standards should be at least equal to Section 8 standards except that 
the field office can approve lesser standards as provided in Paragraph 
1(i). Tribes may submit their request for lesser standards prior to the 
application due date. If the request is submitted with the application, 
applicants should not assume automatic approval from the field office.
     Yes (5 points).
     No (0 points).
    2 Rehabilitation selection criteria. Rehabilitation selection 
criteria include property selection standards, cost limits, type of 
financing (e.g., loan or grant), homeowner costs and responsibilities, 
procedures for selecting households to be assisted, and income 
verification procedures.
     Maximum (11 points).
    The application contains all the selection criteria listed above.
     Moderate (5 points).
    The application does not contain all the selection criteria listed 
above, but a sufficient number to enable the project to proceed 
effectively; or the application contains all the selection criteria 
listed above, but in insufficient detail.
     Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    The submission does not meet the Moderate criteria.
    3 Project planning documents and applicable policies and 
procedures. Project planning documents include surveys, time schedules, 
and work priorities. Policies and procedures include: inspections, 
contractor payment (an inspection to ensure the work is successfully 
completed before the contractor is paid), household involvement in the 
rehabilitation (e.g., helping select the contractor and signing off on 
inspections), contractor selection, contractor forms, complaints, 
contract or dispute resolution, and repayment provisions for early 
sale, (i.e., before 5 years).
     Maximum (5 points).
    The application contains all the policies and procedures listed 
above, and they will enable the project to be effectively implemented.
     Moderate (3 points).
    The application contains some but not all of the policies and 
procedures listed above, and they are sufficient for the project to 
proceed effectively.
     Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    The submission does not meet the Moderate criteria.
    b Post rehabilitation maintenance policies, including counseling 
and training homeowners on maintenance.
    1 Maximum (7 points).
    The policy contains a well-planned counseling and training program. 
Training will be provided for assisted households, and provision is 
made for households unable to do their own maintenance (e.g., elderly 
and handicapped). The policy includes follow-up inspections after 
rehabilitation is completed to ensure the unit is being maintained.
    2 Moderate (4 points).
    The policy contains a well-planned home ownership maintenance 
training and counseling program.
    3 Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    The submission does not meet the Moderate criteria.
    c Quality of cost estimates. Cost estimates have been prepared by a 
qualified individual.
    1 Maximum (12 points).
    Costs must be documented on a per unit basis and must be justified. 
Applicants must include work write-ups based on tribal specifications 
or estimates by a qualified individual. Work write-ups state what needs 
to be done to correct the deficiency (e.g., provide an oil heater to 
correct a deficiency of an inadequate heating system). The tribal 
specifications state the quality and the dimensions of the improvements 
(e.g., the heating unit must be capable of putting out x BTU's in order 
to heat the unit to a temperature of 70 degrees when the outside 
temperature is 0 degrees).
    2 High ( 8 points).
    Cost estimates developed by a qualified individual have been 
prepared on each dwelling unit to be rehabilitated to determine the 
total rehabilitation cost. Costs to rehabilitate each house are 
documented by a deficiency list.
    3 Moderate (3 points).
    A qualified individual has prepared cost estimates only for the 
project based on surveys, but not for individual units.
    4 Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    The submission does not meet the criteria in paragraph 3.
    d Cost effectiveness of the rehabilitation program. This measures 
the efficiency of the expenditures that are made for housing 
rehabilitation, considering the needs of the unit. Projects should 
propose rehabilitation that is needed to bring units up to standard in 
the most efficient manner and at a reasonable cost. Cost savings may be 
realized through efforts such as energy conservation, or a partnership 
or affiliation with technical experts to develop an innovative 
approach.
    1 Rehabilitation project is cost effective (5 points).
    2 Rehabilitation project is not cost effective (0 points).
    (iii) Leveraging (10 points).
    Points under this component will be awarded based on the definition 
of ``leverage'' under General Definitions, and the following breakdown: 


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Non-CDBG % of project cost                     Points 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
25 and over....................................................       10
20-24..........................................................        8
15-19..........................................................        6
10-14..........................................................        4
5-9............................................................        2
0-4............................................................       0 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(4) Land to Support New Housing
    a. Thresholds. (i) The net usable acres acquired must not exceed 
the amount of property needed to construct the proposed houses 
utilizing prudent site design.
    (ii) Housing assistance needs must be clearly demonstrated, for 
example, with a survey or an IHA-approved waiting list.
    b. Selection Criteria. Applications for land purchase will be 
selected based on the following:
    (i) Project Need (40 points).
    a Maximum (40 points).
    The applicant has no suitable land to construct new housing and 
needed amenities (e.g., water and sewer) for new housing.
    b High (30 points).
    The applicant has land suitable for housing construction and 
infrastructure, but the land is officially dedicated to another 
purpose.
    c Moderate (25 points).
    The applicant will be acquiring land to construct new housing and 
to provide needed amenities (e.g., water and sewer) to both new housing 
and existing housing.
    d Low (15 points).
    The applicant will be acquiring land to construct amenities (e.g., 
water and sewer) for existing housing.
    e Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    The submission does not meet the criteria in paragraph d.
    (ii) Planning and Implementation (60 points).
    a Suitability of land to be acquired. A preliminary investigation 
has been conducted by a qualified entity independent of the applicant 
(e.g., BIA or IHS). Based on the preliminary investigation, the land 
appears to meet all applicable requirements, soil conditions appear to 
be suitable for individual and/or community septic systems, if 
appropriate, and the land has adequate drainage and access to water, 
electricity and community sewer collection systems. Land has adequate 
access, and appears to comply with environmental requirements. Land is 
available at a reasonable price. Future land development costs are 
expected to be consistent with other area subdivision costs 
(Subdivision costs include the cost of constructing each unit, plus the 
land, water and sewer service, electrical service, and roads required 
to serve the subdivision). The site complies with all applicable 
requirements.
    1 Yes (18 points).
    2 No (0 points).
    b Housing resources are committed at the time of project 
application.
    1 Conditional commitment or approvable application submitted. (5 
points).
    2 No Conditional commitment or approvable application submitted. (0 
points).
    c Availability/accessibility of supportive services and employment 
opportunities. Upon completion of construction, fire and police 
protection, road accessibility and utilities will be available to the 
site, and medical and social services, schools, employment 
opportunities, and shopping will be accessible from the site, i.e., 
according to the community's established norm.
    1 Yes (8 points).
    2 No (0 points).
    d Commitment that families will move into the new housing.
    1 Documented commitment from families that they will move into new 
housing. (5 points).
    2 No documented commitment. (0 points).
    e Land can be taken into trust or provisions have been made for 
taxes and fees. There must be a written assurance from the BIA that the 
land will be taken into trust within one year, or the applicant must be 
able to show the financial capability and commitment to pay the 
property taxes and fees on the land for the foreseeable future. This 
commitment should take the form of a resolution by the governing body 
indicating that the applicant will pay or guarantee that all taxes and 
fees on the land will be paid.
    1 Documentation that land can be taken into trust or provisions 
made for taxes and fees. (4 points).
    2 Inadequate or no documentation. (0 points).
    f A plan for any infrastructure needed to support housing to be 
developed. This includes a conditional commitment for funds to develop 
necessary water, sewer, electricity and roads to support the housing to 
be developed.
    1 Financial commitment provided or infrastructure is in place. (10 
points).
    2 A plan, but no financial commitment, is in place. (5 points).
    3 No financial commitment or plan. (0 points).
    g The extent to which the proposed site meets the applicant's 
housing needs. The application shows that the tribe has examined and 
assessed the appropriateness of alternative sites. The applicant 
submits comparable sales that show the cost is reasonable.
    1 Yes (10 points).
    2 No (0 points).
(5) New Housing Construction/Direct Home Ownership Assistance

a. New Construction

(i) Thresholds
    a New housing construction can only be implemented through a 
nonprofit organization that is eligible under Section 571.202 or a 
nonprofit organization serving the development needs of the communities 
of nonentitlement areas or as otherwise eligible under Section 
570.207(b)(3).
    b All applicants for new housing construction grants must document 
the following in their application:
    1 No other housing is available in the immediate reservation area 
that is suitable for the families to be assisted.
    2 No other funding sources can meet the needs of the household(s) 
to be served.
    3 Rehabilitation of the unit occupied by the family to be housed is 
not economically feasible, or the family to be housed is currently in 
an overcrowded unit (sharing unit with other household(s), or the 
family to be housed has no current residence.
    c All applicants for housing construction grants shall adopt 
construction standards and construction policies, prior to submitting 
an application. Applicants must identify the building code they will 
use to construct the unit(s). The building code may be a locally 
adopted tribal building code or a nationally recognized model code. If 
the code is a locally adopted code, it must regulate all of the areas 
and subareas identified in 24 CFR 200.925(b), and it must be reviewed 
and approved by the HUD field office. If the code is recognized 
nationally, it must be the latest edition of one of the codes 
incorporated by reference in 24 CFR 200.925(c).
    d Any units to be constructed must be the permanent non-seasonal 
residences of the recipient. The residents must live in the unit at 
least nine months per year.
    e The applicant shall assure that it will use project funds to 
construct units only where the tenant's/homeowner's payments are 
current or the tenant/homeowner is current in a repayment agreement 
that is subject to approval by the field office. The field office may 
grant exceptions, on a case-by-case basis, to the requirement that 
beneficiaries be current to permit new construction, in emergency 
situations.
(ii) Selection Criteria
    a New construction under Section 248 of the National Housing Act 
will be rated under the Direct Home Ownership Assistance Selection 
criteria. The New Construction thresholds will be used for Section 248 
New Construction.
    b Project Need and Design (45 points).
    1 The applicant either is not a member of an IHA, or the umbrella 
IHA to which it belongs has not provided assistance to the applicant in 
a substantial period of time, or the IHA serving the applicant has not 
received HUD Public and Indian Housing new construction or 
modernization assistance in a substantial period of time, due to a lack 
of funds. The period of time during which the IHA serving the applicant 
does not receive funding for inadequate or poor performance by the 
applicant does not count towards the period of time that no assistance 
has been provided by HUD.
     No assistance from IHA for 10 years or longer. (15 
points).
     No assistance from IHA for 6-9.9 years. (10 points).
     No assistance from IHA for 0-5.9 years. (0 points).
    2 Adopted housing construction policies and plan. The plan should 
include a description of the proposed subrecipient and its relationship 
to the tribe. In addition, the policies and plan should include:
     A selection system that gives priority to the neediest 
households. Neediest shall be defined as households whose current 
residences are in the greatest disrepair, or very low-income 
households, or households without permanent housing.
     A system effectively addressing long-term maintenance of 
the constructed units.
     Estimated costs and identification of the responsible 
entity for paying utilities, fire hazard insurance and other normal 
maintenance costs.
     Policies governing ownership of the units, including the 
status of the land.
     Description of a comprehensive plan or approach being 
implemented by the tribe to meet the housing needs of its members.
     Policies governing disposition or conversion to non-
dwelling uses of substandard units that will be vacated.
    --Acceptable policies and plan. (20 points).
    --Unacceptable policies and plan. (0 points).
    3 Beneficiary identification (all beneficiaries are low- and 
moderate-income.)
     Beneficiaries to be housed are identified. (10 points).
     Beneficiaries are not identified. (0 points).
    c Planning and Implementation (45 points).
    1 Occupancy Standards. The proposed housing will be designed and 
built according to adopted reasonable standards that govern the size of 
the housing in relation to the size of the occupying family (minimum 
and maximum number of persons allowed for the number of sleeping 
rooms); the minimum and maximum square footage allowed for major living 
spaces (bedrooms, living room, kitchen and dining room).
     Applicant has adopted reasonable occupancy standards. (10 
points).
     Applicant has no occupancy standards or standards are 
inappropriate. (0 points).
    2 Site Acceptability. This includes consideration of land control, 
access, utilities, infrastructure, physical characteristics, and 
whether the site is held in trust.
    The applicant has control of the land. The applicant has written 
assurance from the BIA that the land is (or will be) taken into trust 
within one year, or the applicant must be able to show the financial 
capability and commitment to pay the property taxes and fees on the 
land for the foreseeable future. This commitment should take the form 
of a resolution by the governing body within one year of the 
application deadline indicating that the applicant will pay or 
guarantee that all taxes and fees on the land will be paid.
    A preliminary investigation has been conducted by a qualified 
entity independent of the applicant (e.g., BIA or IHS). Based on the 
preliminary investigation, the land appears to meet all applicable 
requirements, soil conditions appear to be suitable for individual and/
or community septic systems, if appropriate, land has adequate drainage 
and accessibility to water, electricity and community sewer collection 
systems. Land has adequate access, and appears to comply with 
environmental requirements.
     Yes (15 points).
     No (0 points).
    3 Energy Conservation Design. The project is designed so that 
energy consumption will meet or exceed state conservation standards for 
similar units in the same general area. Special design features and 
methodology should be described in detail.
     Yes (5 points).
     No (0 points).
    4 Housing Survey. The survey should include all of the units in the 
service area for the new housing. The survey should include standard 
housing data on each unit surveyed (e.g., age, size, type, rooms, type 
of heating), as well as the components listed below.
    A Total number of existing housing units in the community.
    B Number of occupied units.
    C Number of vacant units (line A minus line B).
    D The number of standard units.
    E The number of substandard units suitable for rehabilitation with 
the deficiencies listed for each unit. A definition of ``suitable for 
rehabilitation'' should be included.
    F The number of substandard units unsuitable for rehabilitation.
    G Number of vacant units that are in standard condition available 
and affordable to low-and moderate-income families.
    H Number of Indian/native families living with other families 
resulting in overcrowded conditions.
    I Number of Indian/native families living in units which are below 
standard and that are not cost effective to rehabilitate.
    J Number of homeless Indian/native families.
    K Number of families living in below standard conditions (Lines H, 
plus I, plus J equal line K).
     Acceptable survey. (10 points).
     Unacceptable survey. (0 points).
    5 Cost effectiveness of new housing construction. This measures the 
efficiency of the expenditures. Projects should provide new units in 
the most efficient manner and at a reasonable cost. Cost savings may be 
realized through efforts such as the use of cost effective construction 
techniques, a partnership or affiliation with technical experts to 
develop an innovative approach, or a repayment provision.
     New Housing Construction is Cost Effective (5 points).
     New Housing Construction is not Cost Effective (0 points).
    d Leveraging. (10 points).
    Applicants must provide documentation of the amount and sources of 
additional funds. Sources may include private contributions including 
equity and loans, applicant and other non-CDBG governmental funding. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Non-CDBG % of project cost                      Points
------------------------------------------------------------------------
25 and over....................................................       10
20-24..........................................................        8
15-19..........................................................        6
10-14..........................................................        4
5-9............................................................        2
0-4............................................................       0 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Direct Home Ownership Assistance

(i) Thresholds
    a No other funding sources can meet the needs of the household(s) 
to be served.
    b The unit occupied by the family to be housed does not meet 
Section 8 standards, and rehabilitating the unit is not economically 
feasible, or the family to be housed currently is in an overcrowded 
unit (sharing unit with other household(s), or the family to be housed 
has no current residence.
    c Any units to be occupied must be the permanent non-seasonal 
residences of the recipient. The residents must live in the unit at 
least nine months per year.
    d The applicant shall assure that it will use project funds to 
provide direct homeownership assistance only where the tenant's 
payments are current or the tenant is current in a repayment agreement 
that is subject to approval by the field office. The field office may 
grant exceptions, on a case-by-case basis, to the requirement that 
beneficiaries be current to permit direct homeownership assistance in 
emergency situations.
(ii) Selection Criteria
    a Project Need and Design (45 points).
    1 Adopted housing policies and plan. The plan should include a 
description of the proposed subrecipient (if applicable) and its 
relationship to the tribe. In addition, the policies and plan should 
include:
     A selection system that gives priority to the neediest 
qualified households. Neediest may be defined as households whose 
current residences are in the greatest disrepair, very low- income 
households, or households without permanent housing.
     Description of a comprehensive plan or approach being 
implemented by the tribe to meet the housing needs of its members.
     Policies governing disposition or conversion to non-
dwelling uses of substandard units that will be vacated.
     A system effectively addressing long-term maintenance of 
the units.
     Estimated costs of utilities, fire hazard insurance and 
other normal maintenance costs.
     Policies governing ownership of the units, including the 
status of the land.
     The units will meet Section 8 standards or another 
standard approved by the field office.
    (a) The policies and plan are acceptable and contain all of the 
items listed above. (30 points).
    (b) The policies and plan contain only the first three items listed 
above, and they are acceptable. (20 points).
    (c) The policies and plan contain only the last four items listed 
above, and they are acceptable. (10 points).
    (d) The policies and plan do not meet the criteria of paragraphs a, 
b, or c. (0 points).
    2 Beneficiary identification. (All beneficiaries are low and 
moderate income.)
     Beneficiaries are identified. (15 points).
     Beneficiaries are not identified. (0 points).
    b Planning and Implementation (45 points).
    1 Occupancy Standards. The housing units will meet adopted 
reasonable standards that govern the size of the housing in relation to 
the size of the occupying family (minimum and maximum number of persons 
allowed for the number of sleeping rooms); the minimum and maximum 
square footage allowed for major living spaces (bedrooms, living room, 
kitchen and dining room).
     Applicant has appropriate occupancy standards. (13 
points).
     Applicant has no occupancy standards or standards are 
inappropriate. (0 points).
    2 Site Acceptability. This includes consideration of land control, 
access, utilities, infrastructure, physical characteristics, whether 
the site is held in trust, and available services, such as fire and 
police protection.
    The applicant or prospective homeowner has control of the land. 
Applicant has a written assurance from the BIA that the land is (or 
will be) taken into trust within one year, or the applicant must be 
able to show the financial capability and commitment to pay the 
property taxes and fees on the land for the foreseeable future.
    A preliminary investigation has been conducted by a qualified 
entity independent of the applicant (e.g., BIA or IHS). Based on the 
preliminary investigation, the land appears to meet all applicable 
requirements, soil conditions appear to be suitable for individual and/
or community septic systems, if appropriate, land has adequate drainage 
and accessibility to water, electricity and community sewer collection 
systems. Land has adequate access, and appears to comply with 
environmental requirements.
     Yes (20 points).
     No (0 points).
    3 Energy Conservation Design. The project is designed so that 
energy consumption will be no greater than that of similar units in the 
same general area. Special design features and methodology should be 
described in detail.
     Yes (6 points).
     No (0 points).
    4 Cost effectiveness of program. This measures the efficiency of 
the expenditures that are made for direct home ownership. Cost savings 
may be realized through efforts such as the use of cost effective 
construction techniques, a partnership or affiliation with technical 
experts to develop an innovative approach, provision of the least 
amount of assistance necessary for each homeowner to acquire the unit, 
or a provision for the homeowner to repay the tribe.
     Yes (6 points).
     No (0 points).
    c Leveraging. (10 points).
    Points under this component will be awarded based on the definition 
of ``leverage'' under General Definitions, and the following breakdown: 


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Non-CDBG % of project cost                      Points
------------------------------------------------------------------------
70 and over....................................................       10
60-69..........................................................        8
50-59..........................................................        6
40-49..........................................................        4
30-39..........................................................        2
0-29...........................................................       0 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Community Facilities

(1) General Thresholds
    a. The applicant shall describe the problem, the proposed project 
and the anticipated impact on the tribe/village if the problem is not 
solved immediately.
(2) Infrastructure
    a. Selection Criteria. Applications for Infrastructure will be 
evaluated based on the following:
    (i) Project Need and Design (60 points).
    a Meets an essential community development need by addressing a 
basic need that is critical to the orderly development of the community 
and to the provision of basic human services. (Example: water/sewer, 
waste disposal)
    1 Permanent solution. The project offers a long-term solution. (17 
points).
    2 Health and safety intermediate solution. The project responds to 
a health or safety problem by offering a solution which is not 
permanent (e.g., providing potable water from elsewhere). (15 points).
    3 Intermediate solution. The project responds to a problem which is 
not related to health or safety by offering a solution which is not 
permanent (e.g., providing a gravel road to a reservation where no road 
exists). (12 points).
    4 Inadequate solution. (0 points).
    b Benefits the neediest segment of the population, as identified 
below. Applications must include tribal, BIA, IHS or other 
documentation that:
    1 Maximum (22 points).
    More than 90 percent of the beneficiaries are low and moderate 
income (80 percent of area income).
    2 Moderate (13 points).
    75-89.9 percent of the beneficiaries are low and moderate income.
    3 Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    Less than 75 percent of the beneficiaries are low and moderate 
income.
    c Provides infrastructure that does not currently exist for the 
area to be served OR replaces an existing facility that no longer 
functions adequately to meet the current needs OR eliminates or 
substantially reduces a health or safety problem. If the project 
addresses a health and safety problem, the applicant must provide 
documentation consisting of a signed study or letter from a reliable 
independent authority (e.g., state health officials, state fire 
marshals, BIA, IHS, EPA) verifying that: (1) a threat to health and 
safety exists which has caused or has the potential to cause serious 
illness, injury, disease or death; and (2) the threat can be 
substantially eliminated if the CDBG project is funded.
    1 Maximum (21 points).
    The infrastructure does not exist or no longer functions, or does 
not meet health and safety standards. (Examples: there is no sewage 
treatment plant; paved roads do not exist or must be reconstructed due 
to severe deterioration.)
    2 Moderate (15 points).
    The infrastructure no longer functions adequately or does not meet 
current needs. (Example: capacity of existing sewage treatment plant is 
insufficient to meet the demands of area residents.)
    3 Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    The infrastructure does not meet the criteria of 1 or 2.
    (ii) Planning and Implementation (30 points).
    a A viable plan for maintenance and operation. The tribe must adopt 
a maintenance plan addressing maintenance, repair and replacement of 
items not covered by insurance, and operating resources, if applicable. 
The applicant must submit this plan. The plan must identify a funding 
source to assure that the facility will be properly maintained and 
operated. The resolution must identify the total annual dollar amount 
the tribe will commit, as well as the source and availability of funds, 
including evidence that funds will be available within sixty days of 
project completion. If an entity other than the Tribal Council commits 
to pay for maintenance and operation that entity must submit a letter 
of commitment which identifies the responsibilities the entity will 
assume and the amount of funds that will be provided annually to the 
project. Points will only be awarded if the field office is able to 
determine that the entity is financially able to assume the costs of 
maintenance and operation.

    1 Yes (15 points).

    2 No (0 points).

    b An appropriate and effective design, scale and cost. The 
applicant shows that it has proposed the most appropriate and cost 
effective approach to address its identified need(s). The applicant 
shows that it has considered initial construction and lifetime 
operation costs, as well as the use of existing facilities and 
resources, and alternatives, including method of implementation and 
cost. If only one approach is feasible, the applicant should explain 
why.

    1 Yes (15 points).


    2 No (0 points).

    (iii) Leveraging (10 points).

    Points under this component will be awarded based on the definition 
of ``leverage'' under General Definitions, and the following breakdown:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Non-CDBG % of project cost                      Points
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a 25+..........................................................       10
b 20-24........................................................        8
c 15-19........................................................        6
d 10-14........................................................        4
e 5-9..........................................................        2
f 0-4..........................................................       0 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(3) Buildings

a. Thresholds
    (i) Tribes proposing a facility which would provide health care 
services must assure the facility meets IHS requirements.
    b. Selection Criteria. Applications for Community Facilities will 
be evaluated based on the following:
    (i) Project Need and Design (60 points).
    a Benefits the neediest segment of the population, as identified 
below. Applications must include tribal, BIA, IHS or other 
documentation that:
    1 Maximum (28 points).
    More than 90 percent of the beneficiaries are low and moderate 
income (80 percent of area median).
    2 Moderate (18 points).
    75-89.9 percent of the beneficiaries are low and moderate income.
    3 Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    Less than 75 percent of the beneficiaries are low and moderate 
income.
    b Provides a building that serves a function that does not 
currently exist either within or outside (nearby) the community or 
reservation OR replaces an existing facility that no longer functions 
adequately to meet current needs. (Examples: health clinic; subsistence 
food processing facility, Alaska.)
    1 Maximum (15 points).
    The building does not exist or does not meet health and safety 
standards.
    2 Moderate (12 points).
    The building no longer functions adequately or does not meet 
current needs.
    3 Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    The building does not meet the criteria of 1 or 2.
    c Provides multiple uses or multiple benefits, or has services 
available 24 hours a day. The application must show that the proposed 
facility will house more than one broad category of activity. ``Broad 
category'' means a single activity or group of activities which serves 
a particular group of beneficiaries (e.g., senior citizens) or meets a 
particular need (e.g., literacy). No one category of activity will 
occupy more than 75 percent of the available space for more than 75 
percent of the time. The use of space must be actually committed and 
documented in writing. Multipurpose buildings do not automatically meet 
these criteria, nor do buildings that provide a variety of activities 
for one client group.
    1 Yes (3 points).
    2 No (0 points).
    d Meets an essential community development need by addressing a 
basic need that is critical to the orderly development of the community 
and to the provision of basic human services; OR eliminates or 
substantially reduces a health or safety problem. If the project 
addresses a health or safety problem, the applicant must provide 
documentation consisting of a signed study or letter from a reliable 
independent authority (e.g., state health officials, state fire 
marshals, BIA, IHS, EPA) verifying that: (1) A threat to health and 
safety exists which has caused or has the potential to cause serious 
illness, injury, disease or death; and (2) the threat can be 
substantially eliminated if the CDBG project is funded.
    1 Yes (14 points).

    2 No (0 points).

    (ii) Planning and Implementation (30 points).

    a A viable plan for maintenance and operation. The tribe must adopt 
a maintenance plan addressing maintenance, repair and replacement of 
items not covered by insurance, and operating resources, if applicable. 
The applicant must submit this plan. The plan must show that adequate 
funds are available for future replacements and identify a funding 
source to assure that the facility will be properly maintained and 
operated. The adopted resolution must identify the total annual dollar 
amount the tribe will commit, as well as the source and availability of 
funds, including evidence that funds will be available within sixty 
days of project completion. If an entity other than the Tribal Council 
commits to pay for maintenance and operation that entity must submit a 
letter of commitment which identifies the responsibilities the entity 
will assume and the amount of funds that will be provided annually to 
the project. Points will only be awarded if the field office is able to 
determine that the entity is financially able to assume the costs of 
maintenance and operation.

    1 Yes (15 points).

    2 No (0 points).

    b An appropriate and effective design, scale and cost. The 
applicant documents that it has proposed an appropriate and cost 
effective approach to address its identified need(s). The applicant 
documents that it has considered initial construction and lifetime 
operation costs, as well as the use of existing facilities and 
resources, and alternatives including, method of implementation and 
cost. If only one approach is feasible, the applicant should explain 
why.

    1 Yes (15 points).

    2 No (0 points).

    (iii) Leveraging (10 points).

    Points under this component will be awarded based on the definition 
of ``leverage'' under General Definitions, and the following breakdown:


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Non-CDBG % of project cost                      Points
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a 25+..........................................................       10
b 20-24........................................................        8
c 15-19........................................................        6
d 10-14........................................................        4
e 5-9..........................................................        2
f 0-4..........................................................       0 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Public Services

(1) Thresholds
    a. Public services activities may comprise no more than 15 percent 
of the total grant award. Such projects must therefore be submitted 
with one or more other projects, which must comprise at least 85 
percent of the total grant award. A public service project will be 
funded only if both the public service project itself and the other 
project(s) with which it is submitted rank high enough to be funded.
    (2) Selection Criteria. Applications for Public Services will be 
evaluated based on the following:
    a. Project Need and Design (45 points).
    (i) Meets an essential community development need by addressing a 
basic need that is critical to the orderly development of the community 
and to the provision of basic human services.
    a Yes (15 points).
    b No (0 points).
    (ii) Benefits the neediest segment of the population, as identified 
below. Applications must include tribal, BIA, IHS or other 
documentation that:
    a Maximum (27 points).
    More than 90 percent of the beneficiaries are low and moderate 
income (80 percent of area median).
    b Moderate (16 points).
    75-89.9 percent of the beneficiaries are low and moderate income.
    c Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    Less than 75 percent of the beneficiaries are low and moderate 
income.
    (iii) Provides a service(s) that will eliminate or substantially 
reduce a health or safety problem. The applicant must provide 
documentation consisting of a signed study or letter from a reliable 
independent authority (e.g., state health officials, state fire 
marshals, BIA, IHS, EPA) verifying that: (1) a threat to health and 
safety exists which has caused or has the potential to cause serious 
illness, injury, disease or death; and (2) the threat can be 
substantially eliminated if the CDBG project is funded.
    a Yes (3 points).
    b No (0 points).
    b. Planning and Implementation (45 points).
    (i) A viable plan for continuing provision of the service(s). The 
tribe must adopt a plan to address continuing provision of the 
service(s). The applicant must submit this plan. The plan must identify 
a funding source to assure that the public service(s) will be properly 
carried out. The resolution must identify the total annual dollar 
amount the tribe will commit, as well as the source and availability of 
funds, including evidence that funds will be available within sixty 
days of project completion.
    a Yes (15 points).
    b No (0 points).
    (ii) An appropriate and effective design, scale and cost. The 
applicant shows that it has proposed an appropriate and cost effective 
approach to address its identified need(s). The applicant shows that it 
has considered initial and long-term costs, as well as the use of 
existing services and resources, or has submitted an analysis from a 
qualified authority addressing alternatives, method of implementation 
and cost. If only one approach is feasible, the applicant should 
explain why.
    a Yes (15 points).
    b No (0 points).
    (iii) An innovative method of using the public service to resolve 
the problem (e.g., original treatment methods, program delivery system, 
or use of technology).
    a Yes (15 points).
    b No (0 points).
    c. Leveraging (10 points).
    Points under this component will be awarded based on the definition 
of ``leverage'' under General Definitions, and the following breakdown: 


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Non-CDBG % of project cost                      Points
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) 25+........................................................       10
(ii) 20-24.....................................................        8
(iii) 15-19....................................................        6
(iv) 10-14.....................................................        4
(v) 5-9........................................................        2
(vi) 0-4.......................................................       0 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Economic Development

(1) Thresholds
    a. Economic development assistance may be provided only when a 
financial analysis is done which shows public benefit commensurate with 
the assistance to the business can reasonably be expected to result 
from the assisted project, and the project has a reasonable chance of 
success. The applicant shall demonstrate the need for grant assistance 
by providing documentation to support a determination that the 
assistance is appropriate to implement an economic development project.
    b. All economic development projects must meet one of the national 
objectives. A general claim of cash flow or benefit to the tribe as a 
whole does not demonstrate low- and moderate-income benefit.
    (2) Selection Criteria. Applications for Economic Development 
projects will be evaluated based on the following:
    a. Project Viability. (55 points) The application will be rated on 
the adequacy and quality of the following subparts:
(i) Market analysis
    a Maximum (10 points).
    An independent third party feasibility/market analysis, generally 
not older than two years, which identifies the market and demonstrates 
that the proposed activities are highly likely to capture a fair share 
of the market.
    b Moderate (6 points).
    Feasibility/Market Analysis which identifies the market and 
demonstrates that the proposed activities are reasonably likely to 
capture a fair share of the market.
    c Low (0 points).
    The submission does not meet the criteria in paragraph b.
(ii) Management capacity
    a Maximum (10 points).
    A management team with qualifying specialized training or 
technical/managerial experience in the operation of a similar business 
has been identified. If the grant is approved, the business will hire 
the identified team or persons with similar training and experience. 
Applicants must submit job descriptions of key management positions as 
well as resumes showing qualifying specialized technical/managerial 
training or experience of the identified management team.
    b Moderate (6 points).
    A management team with qualifying general business training or 
experience will be hired if the grant is approved. Applicants must 
submit job descriptions of key management positions.
    c Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    The submission does not meet the criteria in paragraph b.
(iii) Organization
    a Maximum (8 points).
    1 The tribe or entity that will operate the business has an on-
going successful business enterprise. The applicant must describe this 
enterprise and provide documentation of its healthy financial condition 
(e.g., audited financial statements for the past three years); and
    2 The tribe or entity that operates the business has an acceptable 
business management system for project development and operation.
    b Moderate (5 points).
    The tribe or entity that will develop and operate the business has 
an acceptable business management system for project development and 
operation.
    c Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    The submission does not meet the criteria in paragraph b.
    (iv) Viability of the Business (excluding microenterprises). The 
viability of an economic development project will be determined by an 
analysis of financial and other project related information. Components 
of the financial analysis are: costs, sources of funds, cash flow 
projections and financial statements. The applicant must submit: a 
detailed cost summary, evidence of funding sources; five year operating 
or cash flow financial projections; and business financial statements 
for the most recent three year period. For start-up businesses, that 
are not owned by the grantee, current financial or net worth statements 
on principal business owners or officers are needed. Financial 
statements include the balance sheet, income statement and statement of 
retained earnings.
    The information derived from the analysis will be reviewed and 
compared to local or national industry standards to assess 
reasonableness of development costs, financial need, profitability, and 
risk as factors in determining overall project viability. In 
determining whether a project is viable, the field office will also 
consider current and projected market conditions and profitability 
measures such as cash flow return on equity, cash flow return on total 
assets and the ratio of net profit before taxes to total assets. 
Sources of industry standards include Marshall and Swift Publication 
Company, Robert Morris Associates, Dun and Bradstreet, the Chamber of 
Commerce, etc. Local standards may also be used.
    a Maximum (15 points).
    Based on the analysis, the project has excellent prospect of 
achieving viability.
    b Moderate (7 points).
    The project has an average prospect of achieving viability.
    c Low (0 points).
    The project has a minimal prospect of achieving viability.
    (v) Viability of the Microenterprise. Microenterprises employ five 
or fewer employees, including the entrepreneur. The viability of a 
microenterprise will be determined by an analysis of financial and 
other project related information. Components of the financial analysis 
are: costs, sources of funds, cash flow projections and financial 
statements. The applicant must submit: a detailed cost summary, 
evidence of funding sources; five year operating or cash flow financial 
projections and monthly projections until the cash flow is positive; 
and business financial statements for the most recent three year 
period. For start-up businesses, current financial or net worth 
statements on principal business owners or officers are needed. 
Financial statements include balance sheet, income statement and 
statement of retained earnings.
    In determining whether a project is viable the field office will 
also consider current and projected market conditions, profitability 
measures such as net profit to total assets ratio, as well as other 
information that the field office has that will have an effect on the 
project's potential viability.
    a Maximum (15 points).
    1 The project will generate income for the entrepreneur, over a 
minimum of five years, at or above 125 percent of the annual county 
average individual income; and
    2 Based on the analysis, the project has an excellent prospect of 
achieving viability.
    b Moderate (7 points).
    1 The project will generate income for the entrepreneur at or above 
100 percent of the annual county average individual income; and
    2 The project has an average prospect of achieving viability.
    c Unsatisfactory (0 points).
    The submission does not meet the criteria in paragraph b.
    (vi) Leveraging.
    Points under this component will be awarded based on the definition 
of ``leverage'' under General Definitions, and the following breakdown: 


------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Non-CDBG % of total project cost                   Points
------------------------------------------------------------------------
30%+...........................................................       12
20-29%.........................................................        8
10-19%.........................................................        4
Less than 10%..................................................        0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    b. Permanent Full-Time Equivalent Job Creation. Provide total 
number of permanent full-time jobs expected to be created and/or 
retained as a result of the project. Provide a summary of job 
descriptions and skills required. Identify the number and kind(s) of 
jobs expected to be available to low- and moderate-income persons. (30 
points).
    (i) CDBG cost per job.
    a Maximum (13 points). $15,000 or less.
    b Moderate (10 points). $15,001-25,000.
    c Low (7 points). $25,001-35,000.
    d Unsatisfactory (0 points). $35,001+.
    (ii) CDBG cost per job targeted to low- and moderate-income 
persons.
    a Maximum (13 points). $15,000 or less.
    b Moderate (10 points). $15,001-25,000.
    c Low (7 points). $25,001-35,000.
    d Unsatisfactory (0 points). $35,001+.
    (iii) Quality of jobs targeted to low- and moderate-income persons.
    a Maximum (13 points). $15,000 or less.
    b Moderate (10 points). $15,001-25,000.
    c Low (7 points). $25,001-35,000.
    d Unsatisfactory (0 points). $35,001+.
    a The jobs offer wages and benefits comparable to area wages and 
benefits for similar jobs, provide opportunity for advancement, and 
teach a transferrable skill; or
    b The employer commits to provide training opportunities (submit a 
description of planned training program).
    1 Yes (4 points).
    2 No (0 points).
    c. Additional Considerations. (15 points) A project must meet three 
of the following criteria to receive 15 points. Maximum 15 points.
    (i) Use, improve or expand members' special skills. Special skills 
are those that members have developed through education, training or 
traditional cultural experiences (e.g., technical expertise in 
electronic assembly; making traditional native crafts).
    a Yes (5 points).
    b No (0 points).
    (ii) Provide spin-off benefits beyond the initial economic 
development benefits to employees or to the community (e.g., create new 
investment opportunities in the area; provide a consumer product or 
service not currently available on or near the reservation, or provide 
an available consumer product or service at a significant reduction in 
cost).
    a Yes (5 points).
    b No (0 points).
    (iii) Provide special opportunities for residents of federally-
assisted housing (e.g., employ residents for maintenance services).
    a Yes (5 points).
    b No (0 points).
    (iv) Provide benefits to other businesses owned by Indians or 
Alaska natives (e.g., increase their sales).
    a Yes (5 points).
    b No (0 points).
    (v) Loan Repayment/Reuse of CDBG funds. If the business is not 
tribally owned at least 50% of the CDBG assistance to the business will 
be repaid to the grantee within a 10 year period. If the business is 
tribally owned, the tribe agrees within a 10 year period to use funds 
equal to 50% of the CDBG assistance for eligible activities that meet a 
national objective. These funds should come from the profits of the 
tribally owned business.
    a Yes (5 points).
    b No (0 points).

II. Application Process

    (a) An application package may be obtained from the HUD Field 
Offices of Indian Programs in the following geographic locations:

Region V--Chicago Office of Native American Programs, Housing and 
Community Development Division, 77 West Jackson Blvd., Chicago, 
Illinois 60604, Telephone: (312) 353-1684 (all states east of the 
Mississippi River, plus Iowa and Minnesota).
Region VI--Oklahoma City Office of Native American Programs, CPD 
Branch, Murrah Federal Bldg., 200 NW 5th Street, Oklahoma City, OK 
73102-3202. Telephone: (405) 231-5968 (Louisiana, Kansas, Oklahoma, 
and Texas, except West Texas).
Region VIII--Denver Office of Native American Programs, Housing and 
Community Development Division, CPD Staff, First Interstate Tower 
North, 833 17th Street, Denver, CO 80202-3607, Telephone: (303) 672-
5465 (Colorado, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah 
and Wyoming).
Region IX--Office of Native American Programs, Region IX, CPD 
Division, Two Arizona Center, Suite 1650, 400 N. Fifth Street, 
Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2361, Telephone: (602) 379-4197 (Arizona, New 
Mexico, Southern California, West Texas).
Office of Native American Programs, CPD Division, Program Management 
Team (San Francisco), Phillip Burton Federal Bldg. and U.S. 
Courthouse, 450 Golden Gate Ave., P.O. Box 36003, San Francisco, CA 
94102-3448, Telephone: (415) 556-9200 (Northern California and 
Nevada).
Region X--Seattle Office of Native American Programs, CPD Division, 
Federal Office Building, 909 First Avenue, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 
98104-1000, Telephone: (206) 220-5271 (Idaho, Oregon, Washington).
Anchorage Office of Native American Programs, CPD Division 949 E. 
36th Avenue, Suite 401, Anchorage, AK 99508-4135, Telephone: (907) 
271-4673 (Alaska).

    (b) Completed applications should be submitted to the appropriate 
HUD Field Office, listed above, from which application information and 
packages were obtained.
    The Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) number is (202) 
708-2565. (This is not a toll-free number.)
    (c) Applications may be mailed to HUD, provided that they are 
postmarked no later than midnight on the deadline date: July 20, 1994. 
Applications that are physically delivered to HUD must be received by 
the appropriate HUD Field Office no later than the close of business on 
July 20, 1994.

III. Checklist of Pre-application and Application Submission 
Requirements

    (a) Citizen participation. Prior to submitting an application, the 
applicant shall certify, by an official tribal resolution, that it has:
    1. Furnished residents with information concerning amounts of funds 
available and the range of activities to be undertaken;
    2. Held one or more public meetings to obtain the views of 
residents;
    3. Developed and published or posted a community development 
statement which gives affected residents an opportunity to review it 
and comment on it;
    4. Given residents an opportunity to review and comment on the 
applicant's performance under any active community development block 
grant;
    5. Considered public comments and, if the applicant deems it 
appropriate, modified the application accordingly; and
    6. Made the modified application available to residents.
    (b) Applicants shall submit an application to the appropriate field 
office. In accordance with the requirements of Section 571.300(f) the 
application should include:
    1. Standard Form 424;
    2. Community Development Statement which includes:
    A. Components that address the relevant selection criteria;
    B. A brief description or an updated description of community 
development needs;
    C. A brief description of proposed projects to address needs, 
including scope, magnitude, and method of implementing the project.
    D. A schedule for implementing the project (form HUD-4125);
    E. Cost information by project, including specific activity costs, 
administration, planning, and technical assistance, total HUD share 
(form HUD-4123); and
    3. A map showing project location, if appropriate;
    4. If the proposed project will result in displacement or temporary 
relocation, include a statement that identifies (A) the number of 
persons (families, individuals, businesses and nonprofit organizations 
occupying the property on the date of the submission of the application 
(or date of initial site control, if later); (B) the number to be 
displaced or temporarily relocated; (C) the estimated cost of 
relocation payments and other services; (D) the source of funds for 
relocation; and (E) the organization that will carry out the relocation 
activities.
    5. Citizen Participation. Certify, in the form of an official 
tribal resolution, that citizen participation requirements of section 
571.604 have been met;
    6. Form HUD-2880, Applicant/Recipient Disclosure/Update Report, as 
required under Subpart C of 24 CFR part 12, Accountability in the 
Provision of HUD Assistance.

IV. Corrections to Deficient Applications

    HUD will not accept unsolicited information from the applicant 
regarding the application after the application deadline has passed.
    HUD may advise applicants of technical deficiencies in applications 
and permit them to be corrected. A technical deficiency would be an 
error or oversight which, if corrected, would not alter, in either a 
positive or negative fashion, the review and rating of the application. 
Examples of curable technical deficiencies would be a failure to submit 
proper certifications or failure to submit an application containing an 
original signature by an authorized official. The field office also 
may, at its discretion, request information to resolve inconsistencies 
or ambiguities in the application.
    HUD will notify applicants in writing of any curable technical 
deficiencies in applications. Applicants will have 14 calendar days 
from the date of HUD's correspondence to reply and correct the 
deficiency. If the deficiency is not corrected within this time period, 
HUD will reject the application as incomplete.

V. Other Matters

    (a) Environmental Statement. A Finding of No Significant Impact 
with respect to the environment has been made in accordance with HUD 
regulations at 24 CFR part 50, which implement section 102(2)(C) of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. The Finding of No 
Significant Impact is available for public inspection between 7:30 a.m. 
and 5:30 p.m. weekdays in the Office of the Rules Docket Clerk, Office 
of the General Counsel, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
Room 10276, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410.
    (b) Federalism Executive Order. 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 the NOFA will provide financial assistance to Indian tribes and 
Alaskan native villages, none of its provisions will have an effect on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and the states or their 
political subdivisions.
    (c) Family Executive Order. The General Counsel, as the Designated 
Official for Executive Order 12606, The Family, has determined that the 
policies announced in this NOFA would not have the potential for 
significant impact on family formation, maintenance and general well-
being and thus is not subject to review under the Order.
    (d) Registration of Consultants. Section 13 of the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development Act contains two provisions dealing with 
efforts to influence HUD's decisions with respect to financial 
assistance. The first imposes disclosure requirements on those who are 
typically involved in these efforts--those who pay others to influence 
the award of assistance or the taking of a management action by the 
Department and those who are paid to provide the influence. The second 
restricts the payment of fees to those who are paid to influence the 
award of HUD assistance, if the fees are tied to the number of housing 
units received or are based on the amount of assistance received, or if 
they are contingent upon the receipt of assistance.
    Section 13 was implemented by final rule published in the Federal 
Register on May 17, 1991 (56 FR 22912). If readers are involved in any 
efforts to influence the Department in these ways, they are urged to 
read the final rule at 24 CFR part 86, particularly the examples 
contained in Appendix A of the rule.
    Any questions regarding the statute described above should be 
directed to the Director, Office of Ethics, Room 2158, Department of 
Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20410. Telephone: (202) 708-3815; TDD/Voice. (This is not a toll-free 
number.) Forms necessary for compliance with the rule may be obtained 
from the local HUD office.
    (e) Prohibition of Advance Disclosure of Funding Decisions. HUD's 
regulation implementing section 103 of the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 was published May 13, 1991 (56 FR 
22088) and became effective on June 12, 1991. That regulation, 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 the applications and in the 
making of funding decisions are restrained 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 who have questions should contact the HUD Office of 
Ethics (202) 708-3815. (This is not a toll-free number.) The Office of 
Ethics can provide information of a general nature to HUD employees, as 
well. However, a HUD employee who has specific program questions, such 
as whether particular subject matter can be discussed with persons 
outside the Department, should contact his or her Regional or Field 
Office Counsel, or Headquarters counsel for the program to which the 
question pertains.

    Authority: Title I, Housing and Community Development Act of 
1974, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.); sec. 7(d) of the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3535(d)); 
24 CFR 571.

    Dated: April 14, 1994.
Joseph Shuldiner,
Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing.
[FR Doc. 94-9604 Filed 4-20-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-33-P