Oregon Community Development Block Grant Program 2018 Annual Action Development September 22, 2017

Transcription

1 Oregon Community Development Block Grant Program 2018 Annual Action Development September 22, 2017 Becky Baxter and Fumi Schaadt Program Policy Coordinator Economic Development Division

2 Updates Topic of Discussion Status of 2018 Annual Action Plan Continuing discussion: Pre-agreement costs Annual Application Period Age and Expenditure Ratio Proposal of Program Adjustments Public Works- Continued Community Facilities focus on project priority Micro-Enterprise

3 Updates Timeline for the submittal of 2018 Annual Action Plan is being extended to Spring 2018 CDBG AAD will have more time to meet (2 more meetings) Target completion November for submittal to IFA Board at December 2017 E-application progress info

4 Pre-Agreement Costs What does Pre-Agreement cost activities mean? Costs that can be incurred after a state award is made but prior to the execution of the grant contract between the state and the city or county (recipient). When does the Pre-Agreement work need to start? During project development. What are eligible activities under Pre-Agreement? Usually it would only be those activities that are exempt from environmental clearance.

5 Pre-Agreement Costs Steps What are the steps? Applicant discusses pre-agreement activities with the state. Applicant submits pre-agreement costs with application. The application must describe the pre-agreement costs within the project description and show the costs in the project budget. Applicant is awarded CDBG funds; receives award letter Applicant (Recipient) executes Determination of Exemption Recipient can now begin to incur costs based on the Pre- Agreement.

6 Pre-Agreement Costs Pros & Cons Pros Eligible and pre-approved costs can begin to be incurred after award but prior to contract execution. Allow a project to be able to continue to move forward. Cons Risk of conducting activities that may be outside the Pre- Agreement. Risk of recipient choosing not to sign contract and costs now incurred may not be reimbursed.

7 Approximate time :10 months before applying for CDBG Project Development Project Identified Contact BizOr Discuss Project budget Identify funding need and source of funding Identify need of preagreement cost Pre-Agreement Cost Visual Timeline Approximate time :2 months After submittal of Application Application threshold review Scoring Decision of award HUD s required completion time : 2 yrs. Counter starts from the contract execution date Approximate time :2 months Grant Contract Execution Contract sent out to Awardees Contract received from Awardees (60 days) BizOr signed contract CDBG Application Period Open Securing other needed funding for the project Initiating Intake process Upon receiving invitation to apply complete the application and submit by application deadline Declare in the application the request for Preagreement cost with detail activities and cost Approximate time: 3 months before CDBG application deadline Award and Grant Contract (BizOr Awardees) Release of award letter Contract Development (internal DOJ) 4-6 weeks Approximate time: 1-2 months from award to completion of contract after review by DOJ Pre-Agreement cost covering these time between Award to contract execution Approximate coverage time: approx. 4 months Project Implementation to Closeout

8 Visualizing Application Timeline CDBG PROGRAM HUD CONTRACT CDBG PROGRAM YEAR START EXPECTED TO EXECUTION YEAR END TIME PROJECT DEVELOPMENT INNITIATED INTAKE FORM SUBMITTED APPLICATION DEADLINE - JUNE 30 AWARD NOTICE 1 Oct 1 Nov 1 Dec 1 Jan 1 Feb 1 Mar 1 Apr 1 May 1 Jun 1 Jul 1 Aug 1 Sep 1 Oct 1 Nov 1 Dec OTHER FUND NECESSARY FOR PROJECT SECURED APPLICATION ROUND OPEN APPLICATION RATING AND RANKING CONTRACT OUT TO AWARDEES GRANT CONTRACT EXECUTED 2 years project completion deadline start Period when a pre-agreement cost can be utilized (approximate coverage time: 2 months)

9 Setting Application deadline Proposing to set the application deadline to June 30 of each year Projection of award around middle of August Projection of HUD grant agreement is middle of September Create a consistent timeline for applicant Minimal time difference between state award and HUD contract execution Ability to remain within required 15 months obligation time Decision:

10 Age and Expenditure Policy Adjust age and expenditure policy Currently a project must be meeting certain expenditure ratios based on the age of the award. Propose age / expenditure policy revision Option One: Administratively close out of current project before being eligible to apply Option Two: 95% funds drawn (3?) months prior to application submission Discussion and other possible options

11 Scoring Enhancements and Suggestions Rework on the no recent CDBG award Recent CDBG Awards No awards from Business Oregon in the past 6 or more years No awards from Business Oregon in the past 5 years No awards from Business Oregon in the past 4 years No awards from Business Oregon in the past 3 years Maximum Points 10 points 8 points 6 points 4 points

12 Scoring Enhancements and Suggestions Financing Financing: Streamlining fund leveraged vs. amount requested (do we need both?) If no, brainstorm suggestion of a different approach in enhancing the scoring for utilization of CDBG as GAP funding: CDGB per capita impact Reducing CDBG maximum grant threshold Match requirements

13 Scoring Public Works (Continued) Project Need language Public Works Score The proposed project is the best available solution, based upon an analysis of other alternatives. Application should provide the details of the analysis. 5 (What specific solution options were considered and why was the proposed solution selected?) The Applicant provide a detailed project budget that is adequate and reasonable to complete the project and appropriately following Program Policies and Definitions in Chapter 5 of the Method of Distribution 5 Applicant provides a project work plan to achieve completion of the project. Work plan is reasonable and realistic to successfully complete. Application provides details of the identified steps, reflecting how the project will be completed 5 within the project completion time line. Applicant needs to provide an analysis and determination of the projects cost reasonableness. (Cost of project construction estimate and costs expected for annual operations (breakdown of specific estimates: electricity, chemicals, hours of personnel, etc.) and maintenance, whether or not this project creating cost savings once complete) 5 Applications for construction and final engineering (architectural services) will be evaluated on the overall project and engineering feasibility. Engineering feasibility reports, final engineering designs, and project cost estimates will be 5 reviewed by the Application Ranking Team and, if needed, a professional engineer s opinion will be obtained. Rate schedule is updated and ready for adoption or revised rate schedule has been adopted. (PW only) 5 TOTAL 30

14 Community Facilities Minimal changes to community facilities. Focus on project development Incentivize through scoring Possible changes in priorities Fire stations other funding options. Libraries area to be served and meeting national objective

15 Community Facilities Need & Solution Scoring Essential Other - Homelessness/ Comm Libraries- Hunger/Safety Services Comm Center The reasonable likelihood the proposed project will meet a national objective: provide principal benefit to low- and moderate-income persons; or address a situation of particular urgency that poses a threat to community health and welfare The proposed project is the best available solution, based upon an analysis of other alternatives. Application should provide the details of the analysis. (What specific solution options were considered and why was the proposed solution selected?) The Applicant provide a detailed project budget that is adequate and reasonable to complete the project and appropriately follows Program Policies and Definitions in Chapter 5 of the Method of Distribution Applicant provides a project work plan to achieve completion of the project. Work plan is reasonable and realistic to successfully complete. Application provides details of the identified steps, reflecting how the project will be completed within the project completion time line Applicant needs to provide an analysis and determination of the projects cost reasonableness. (Cost of project construction estimate and costs expected for annual operations (breakdown of specific estimates: electricity, chemicals, hours of personnel, etc.) and maintenance, whether or not this project creating cost savings once complete) Applications for construction and final engineering (architectural services) will be evaluated on the overall project and engineering feasibility. Engineering feasibility reports, final engineering designs, and project cost estimates will be reviewed by the Application Ranking Team and, if needed, a professional engineer s opinion will be obtained. The facility will be of adequate size to provide the proposed level of service. (CF only) The facility will not duplicate other services provided in the area. (CF only) Core Points (max) TOTAL

16 Community Facilities Core Priority Scoring Project Category Project Type Maximum Points Possible Projects that reduce Homeless Shelters, Food Banks, Shelters for victims of domestic violence 80 homelessness and hunger or pertain to life threatening situations Essential community Shelters/workshops for people with disabilities, Health Clinics, Mental 60 services Health treatment centers, Drug and Alcohol treatment facilities, Fire Stations, Senior Centers, Head Start facilities Other community projects Libraries, Community Centers, Family Resource Centers 45 Note: Combination facility will not be considered two separate projects and the applicant will only be eligible for the maximum grant associated with the highest use of the facility. Applications will be rated and ranked based upon the highest use of the facility. Use is defined as clients served. If the number of clients served by each type of facility included in the combination facility are equal, the highest use will be determined by the facility type that most closely meets HUD s priority of ending chronic homelessness and hunger. For a combination Senior Center/Food Bank facility, up to 10 additional points may be granted, based on the ratio of use of the facility, for a maximum of 70 points. Financial need will remain at 20 points.

17 Micro-Enterprise Scoring Remaining the same with different grouping Project Need Project Need The reasonable likelihood the proposed project will principally benefit to low- and Micro Enterprise Assistance moderate-income persons; or address a situation of particular urgency that poses a threat 5 to community health and welfare. The proposed project is the best available solution, based upon an analysis of other alternatives. Application should provide the details of the analysis. The Applicant provide a detailed project budget that is adequate and reasonable to complete the project and appropriately following Program Policies and Definitions in 5 Chapter 5 of the Method of Distribution. Applicant provides a project work plan to achieve completion of the project. Work plan is reasonable and realistic to successfully complete. Application provides details of the identified steps, reflecting how the project will be completed within the project completion time line. Applicant needs to provide an analysis and determination of the projects cost reasonableness TOTAL 25

18 Micro-Enterprise Scoring Remaining the same with different grouping Project Priority New Maximum Possible Points Project Category Project Type Split Microenterprise 3 or more communities Need & Solution: 55 Assistance participating in microenterprise assistance project. Microenterprise Assistance Microenterprise Assistance 2 communities participating in microenterprise assistance project. 1 community participating in microenterprise assistance project. Need & Solution: 30 Need & Solution: 15

19 Next meeting Set the next meeting time (end of October) Topic: More on general scoring improvements (Public Works and others) Complete the: Housing Rehabilitation program design Application Process adjustments Policy adjustments