Business Strategy Products, Services and Investment Criteria (Qs. 14-16). 1. Does the Applicant clearly explain the rates, terms, and flexible features for each financial product it intends to offer in Q.14 (b)? Note: If the Applicant provides a range for any of the rates and terms (e.g. interest rates range from 2 to 4 percent), only select Option A if the Applicant specifies what circumstances would dictate the specific rates or terms to borrowers or investees. Note: If an Applicant s financial product is structured with multiple financial notes (e.g., an A or B note, or an A, B, and C note, etc.), only select Option A if the rates and terms of the financial notes are discussed on a blended basis. A. Yes, all rates, terms, and flexible features for each of the intended financial products are clearly explained B. Most rates, terms, and flexible features for each of the intended financial products are clearly explained C. Some rates, terms, and flexible features for each of the intended financial products are clearly explained, but most are not D. No, none of the rates, terms, and flexible features for each of the intended financial products are clearly explained 2. Will the Applicant s intended financial products clearly offer better rates and terms than what is typically offered by the Applicant (or Controlling Entity) and offered by other financial institutions or investors in the Applicant s service area? (See Q.14(b)) A. Yes, all financial products described will clearly offer better rates and terms. B. No, it is unclear whether all of the financial products described will offer better rates and terms OR the Applicant does not provide these comparables. 3. For each financial product the Applicant intends to offer, does the Applicant provide an example of how the product will be used to finance a projected NMTC investment identified in Q. 17(c)? (See Q.14(b) and Q.17(c)) A. Yes, Applicant provides an example for each financial product it intends to offer B. No, Applicant does not provide an example for each financial product it intends to offer Page 1
4. If the Applicant selected greater than 0% in Q. 13(b)(ii): Rate the likelihood that those second-tier CDEs will pass along the NMTC benefits to their borrowers or investees in the form of more favorable rates and terms. (See Q. 14(c)) A. Highly Likely, Applicant s strategy ensures that NMTC benefits will be passed on to borrowers or investees in the form of more favorable rates and terms B. Probably, Applicant s strategy will probably result in NMTC benefits being passed on to borrowers or investees in the form of more favorable rates and terms C. Possibly, Applicant s strategy may result in NMTC benefits being passed on to borrowers or investees in the form of more favorable rates and terms D. Unlikely, Applicant s strategy is unlikely to result in NMTC benefits being passed on to borrowers or investees in the form of more favorable rates and terms E. Not Applicable 5. What did the Applicant select in Q.15? A. B. C. D. E. This review question will be pre-populated based on the Applicant s response in the Allocation Application. Do NOT change pre-populated review questions. 6. If the Applicant selected greater than 0% in Q.13(b)(iii): what percentage of the proceeds from loan sales will be invested in QLICIs in Q.16? A. At least 95% of proceeds invested in QLICIs B. Between 90-94% of proceeds invested in QLICIs C. Between 86-89% of proceeds invested in QLICIs D. 85% or less of proceeds invested in QLICIs E. Not Applicable Projected Business Activities (Qs. 17-18 and Exhibit A) 7. If the Applicant selects A single or discrete number of investments in Q. 17(b): Evaluate the feasibility (e.g. ability to secure all necessary financing/subsidies, sustainability of the QALICB) of the Applicant s proposed project(s). A. Based on the identified risks, the reviewer is confident that all investments proposed by the Applicant are feasible. Page 2
B. Based on the identified risks, the reviewer is confident that some of the investments proposed by the Applicant are feasible. C. Based on the identified risks, the reviewer is not confident that any of the investments proposed by the Applicant are feasible OR the Applicant did not identify any risks D. Not Applicable; the Applicant selected general pipeline in Q. 17(b) 8. If the Applicant selects A single or discrete number of investments in Q. 17(b): Based on the information provided by the Applicant, will all investment(s) close in a timely manner? A. All investment(s) will close by March 2020 B. All investment(s) will close by March 2021 C. All investment(s) will close by March 2023 D. All investment(s) are unlikely to close by March 2023 E. Not Applicable; the Applicant selected general pipeline in Q. 17(b) 9. If the Applicant selects general pipeline in Q. 17(b): Does the Applicant provide all necessary details in describing its overall pipeline of activities? Note: The necessary details the Applicant must provide are: Total number of businesses or CDEs already identified and total dollar amount of NMTC financing/investment (e.g. QEI and QLICI amount) to be provided. Indication of what portion of the Applicant s pipeline falls into different business and activity types (e.g. community facilities, retail, industrial, investments in CDEs, loan purchases from CDEs, etc.) The extent to which the Applicant intends to invest interest, dividends or other profits received from QLICIs into additional QLICIs, and the timeline for doing so. A. Description of pipeline of activities includes all necessary details (listed above) B. Description of pipeline of activities is missing some necessary detail(s) (listed above) C. Description of pipeline of activities lacks all necessary details (listed above) D. Not Applicable; the Applicant selected A single or discrete number of investments in Q. 17(b) 10. If the Applicant selects general pipeline in Q. 17(b): Does the Applicant provide the necessary details for each sample transaction in its pipeline? Note: The necessary details for each sample transaction the Applicant must provide are: Total project cost; Total QEI and QLICI to be provided by the Applicant; Underwriting status; Projected closing date; and Page 3
Phase I 2017 NMTC Review Form The planned uses of financing (e.g. construction of new facility, new equipment purchase, reimbursement of previously incurred costs to developer or Project Sponsor, etc.) A. Sample transactions include all necessary details (listed above) B. Sample transactions are missing some necessary details (listed above) C. Sample transactions lack all necessary details (listed above) D. Not Applicable; the Applicant selected A single or discrete number of investments in Q. 17(b) 11. If the Applicant selects general pipeline in Q. 17(b): Based on the necessary details provided for each sample transaction (e.g. underwriting status, projected closing date), is it likely that the Applicant will be able to meet its deployment projections in Tables A1-A3? (Q. 17(c) and Tables A1-A3)? A. Yes B. Possibly C. No D. Not Applicable; the Applicant selected A single or discrete number of investments in Q. 17(b) 12. If the Applicant selects general pipeline in Q.17(b): Rate the likelihood that the Applicant s strategy for identifying borrowers, investees, and other customers in Low-Income Communities will result in the types of NMTC investments (e.g. community facilities, manufacturing, mixed use, etc.) described in its general pipeline? (Q.17(c)) A. Highly Likely; the Applicant s strategy is highly likely to result in the types of NMTC investments described in Q.17 B. Probably; the Applicant s strategy will probably result in the types of NMTC investments described in Q.17 C. Possibly; the Applicant s strategy may possibly result in the types of NMTC investments described in Q.17 D. Unlikely; the Applicant s strategy is unlikely to result in the types of NMTC investments described in Q.17 OR Applicant did not identify a strategy E. Not Applicable; the Applicant selected A single or discrete number of investments in Q. 17(b) Prior Performance (Qs. 19-20 and Exhibit B) Notes for Review Form Questions 13 and 14: Track records of individuals (e.g. principals, board members, and other management individuals) cannot be considered in this section. Page 4
Phase I 2017 NMTC Review Form You must consider collectively the information provided in Q. 19, Q. 20, and Exhibit B. Please consult the Reviewer Cheat Sheet for how to determine the calculations for the following questions. If the Applicant has included financing activity in the column 2017 YTD, reviewers must consider that information when evaluating this question. Reviewers must not consider any information related to activities closed after May 2, 2017 when evaluating the Applicant s track record. 13. Between 2012 and 2017 YTD, how many years of DIRECT or INDIRECT financing activity does the Applicant (or Controlling Entity) present in Tables B1-B4 (and Questions 19 & 20), collectively? Note: The reviewer should pick the highest response that best reflects the Applicant s track record. For example, if the Applicant has less than 2 years of DIRECT financing activity, but 5 or more years of INDIRECT financing activity, then the response should be B, not D. A. 5 or more years of DIRECT financing activities B. 3-4 years of DIRECT financing activities OR 5 or more years of INDIRECT financing activities C. 2 years of DIRECT financing activities OR 3-4 years of INDIRECT financing activities D. Less than 2 years of DIRECT financing activities OR less than 3 years of INDIRECT financing activities 14. How many years of DIRECT financing does the Applicant (or Controlling Entity) present in Tables B1- B3 (and Question 19)? Note: Do not include financing noted in Table B4 and Question 20. A. 5 or more years of providing DIRECT financing B. 3-4 years of providing DIRECT financing C. 2 years of providing DIRECT financing D. Less than 2 years of providing DIRECT financing Prior Performance and Projected Business Activity (Q. 17-20 and Exhibits A and B) 15. Considering the Applicant s proposed QLICIs in Q. 13(b) and proposed business/project types (e.g. community facilities, retail, industrial, and mixed-use real estate) in Q. 17, evaluate whether the Applicant s (or Controlling Entity s) track record described in Q. 19 and Q. 20 includes similar financing activities, including business/project types. (See Q. 17 and Qs. 19-20). A. Track record is similar to all proposed financing activities. B. Track record is similar to most of the proposed financing activities. C. Track record is similar to only some of the proposed financing activities. D. Track record is similar to none of the proposed financing activities. Page 5
16. Compare the dollar amount of capital deployed in the past five years (Exhibit B) with the Applicant s projected deployment in Exhibit A. (See also Q. 17 and Qs. 19-20). Notes: Please consult the Reviewer Cheat Sheet on how to determine the calculations for this question. For the purposes of this question, the past five years references the Totals (2012 2017 YTD) columns in all the tables in Exhibit B. The reviewer should pick the highest response that best reflects the Applicant s track record. For example, if the Applicant s track record of DIRECT financing represents less than 50% of projected NMTC deployment AND it has a track record of INDIRECT financing that is greater than 90% of projected NMTC deployment, then the response should be B, not D. A. Highly Favorable - Most recent 5-year historical DIRECT financing is 90% or more of the projected NMTC deployment B. Favorable - Most recent 5-year historical DIRECT financing is 70% - 89% of projected NMTC deployment OR most recent 5-year historical INDIRECT financing is 90% or greater of projected NMTC deployment. C. Somewhat Favorable - Most recent 5-year historical DIRECT financing is 50% - 69% of projected NMTC deployment OR most recent 5-year historical INDIRECT financing is 70% - 89% of projected NMTC deployment. D. Unfavorable - Most recent 5-year historical DIRECT financing is less than 50% of projected NMTC deployment OR most recent 5-year historical INDIRECT financing is less than 70% of projected NMTC deployment. Notable Relationships (Q. 23) Note: Notable relationships exist when the Applicant, its Affiliates, or its personnel would receive financial benefits from the QALICB(s) financed with the Applicant s QLICIs. Added value means the Applicant s relationships will create benefits (i.e. cost savings, lower fees) for unaffiliated end-users, such as QALICBs, tenant businesses, or residents in Low-Income Communities. If notable relationships do exist, please read the response to Q. 25 before evaluating this question and pay particular attention to the resulting outcomes, such as lower lease rates in Q. 25(a)(8), attributable to these relationships. 17. Do the notable relationships described by the Applicant (if any) provide clear benefits (e.g. cost savings, lower fees) to unaffiliated end-users, such as QALICBs, tenant businesses, or residents of Low-Income Communities? (Q.23(f)) A. The Applicant answered No to Q. 23(a) Q. 23(e) B. Yes, all notable relationships listed in Q. 23(a) Q. 23(e) provide clear benefits C. No, not all of the notable relationships listed in Q. 23(a) Q. 23(e) provide clear benefits Page 6
Priority Points Track Record Track record of servicing disadvantaged businesses and communities with QLICI and non-qlici related activities (Qs. 19 and 20, Exhibit B) Note: Only the activities of the Applicant or its Controlling Entity should be considered in this section. The track records of principals, board members and other management individuals are not relevant for this section. 18. How many years of experience does the Applicant have providing capital and/or technical assistance to Disadvantaged Businesses and Communities (DBCs) (Qs. 19 and 20, Tables B1-B4) A. 5 or more years B. 3-4 years C. Less than 3 years 19. What percentage of the Applicant s dollar volume of direct financing activities have been provided to DBCs? (Tables B1-B4) Note: The reviewer must consider collectively the information provided in Tables B1-B4. A. 70% or more of the Applicant s total DIRECT dollar volume of activities has been directed to DBCs B. 60% or more of the Applicant s total DIRECT dollar volume of activities has been directed to DBCs C. 50% or more of the Applicant s total DIRECT dollar volume of activities has been directed to DBCs D. Greater than 0% and less than 50% of the Applicant s total DIRECT dollar volume of activities has been directed to DBCs E. The Applicant has no experience of providing capital and/or technical assistance to DBCs Page 7
Targeting Areas of Higher Distress (Q. 24) Phase I 2017 NMTC Review Form Community Outcomes 20. Did the Applicant respond Yes to Question 24(a)? A. Yes B. No This review question will be pre-populated based on the Applicant s response in the Allocation Application. Do NOT change pre-populated review questions. 21. Will the Applicant s strategy for prioritizing QLICIs in areas marked by the specific indicators of distress in Q. 24 be effective? (See Q. 24(b)) A. Yes, Applicant s strategy is highly likely to be effective B. Unsure if the Applicant s strategy will be effective C. No, Applicant s strategy is unlikely to be effective Community Outcomes (Q. 25) In this section, the reviewer will evaluate the Applicant s track record and projected community outcomes. Outcomes will be evaluated collectively, but to facilitate your review, the outcomes have been grouped into four categories. Each grouping contains similar evaluation questions. Within each outcome group, evaluation must not be influenced simply by the total number of outcomes selected in that grouping, unless otherwise noted in the instructions for that group (e.g. Job-Related Community Outcomes). The score for each community outcome grouping will be averaged in the final section score and all groupings will be weighted equally. A. Job-Related Community Outcomes: Note: For Q. 25(a), Applicants that select (1) Job Creation/Retention as an outcome are also required to provide a response for both (2) Quality Jobs and (3) Accessible Jobs. The reviewer must consider collectively the narrative responses for all three Job-Related Community Outcomes. Also, the reviewer must consider whether jobs created and retained represent both Quality Jobs and/or Jobs Accessible to LIPs or LIC residents to determine if the jobs created will have a significant and meaningful impact on the communities the Applicant serves. If the Applicant did not select any of the three Job-Related Community Outcomes, then the response to questions in this section must be Not Applicable. 22. Did the Applicant quantify the projected outcomes in the Job-Related Community Outcomes grouping? A. All projected Job-Related Community Outcomes were quantified B. Some of the projected Job-Related Community Outcomes were quantified C. None of the projected Job-Related Community Outcomes were quantified D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Job-Related Community Outcomes Page 8
23. Evaluate the methods that the Applicant used to quantify the projected community outcomes selected in the Job-Related Community Outcomes grouping. Note: A method is the procedure the Applicant used to obtain the numbers for quantifying its projections for each selected community outcome. For example, using XYZ modeling software to estimate the number of construction jobs; calculating projected jobs created based on similar projects previously financed by the Applicant; or obtaining projected outcome data from the project sponsor or business, etc. (See Q.25 (a)) A. All methods used to quantify projected Job-Related Community Outcomes are sound and clearly explained B. Some of the methods used to quantify projected Job-Related Community Outcomes are sound and clearly explained C. None of the methods used to quantify projected Job-Related Community Outcomes are sound and clearly explained D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Job-Related Community Outcomes. 24. Evaluate the metrics that the Applicant used to quantify the projected community outcomes for Job Creation/Retention and Quality Jobs. Do not consider Accessible Jobs in your evaluation of metrics. Metrics are not required for Accessible Jobs. Note: A metric is the numerical basis the Applicant used to validate the reasonableness of the quantified projections for each selected outcome. It is the numerical function or ratio used to verify the Applicant s projections are reasonable. For example, X square feet of commercial real estate development results in the creation of Y full-time construction jobs; charter schools create X Full Time Equivalent jobs for every Y students; etc. (See Q. 25(a)) A. All metrics used to quantify projected Job Creation/Retention and Quality Jobs are sound and clearly explained B. Some of the metrics used to quantify projected Job Creation/Retention and Quality Jobs are sound and clearly-explained C. None of the metrics used to quantify projected Job Creation/Retention and Quality Jobs are sound and clearly explained D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select Job Creation/Retention and Quality Jobs. 25. Will the Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 likely result in the projected Job- Related Community Outcomes in Question #25(a)? A. Yes; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 are likely to result in the projected Job-Related Community Outcomes in Question #25(a). Page 9
B. Possibly; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 may result in the projected Job- Related Community Outcomes in Question #25(a). C. No; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 are unlikely to result in the projected Job-Related Community Outcomes in Question #25(a). D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Job-Related Community Outcomes. 26. Evaluate the extent to which jobs created or retained by the Applicant s proposed QLICIs will represent quality jobs. For example, jobs that provide living wages; benefits such as health insurance or retirement plans; and/or opportunities for training and advancement. A. Most of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant s proposed QLICIs will represent quality jobs. B. Some of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant s proposed QLICIs will represent quality jobs. C. None of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant s proposed QLICIs will represent quality jobs. D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Job-Related Community Outcomes. 27. Evaluate the extent to which jobs created or retained by the Applicant s proposed QLICIs will be targeted and/or accessible to people who face barriers to employment (e.g. Low-Income Persons (LIPs), residents of Low-Income Communities (LICs), people with lower levels of education, longer term unemployed, ex-convicts, etc.) A. Most of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant s proposed QLICIs will be targeted and/or accessible to people who face barriers to employment. B. Some of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant s proposed QLICIs will be targeted and/or accessible to people who face barriers to employment. C. None of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant s proposed QLICIs will be targeted and/or accessible to people who face barriers to employment. D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Job-Related Community Outcomes 28. Evaluate the Applicant s track record of producing Job-Related Community Outcomes similar in type and quantity to those it projects to achieve with an NMTC allocation. Note: Only select A if the Applicant quantified the community outcomes in its track record. For example, in the last five years, the Applicant states its investments have generated a total of X number of jobs accessible for LIPs. Page 10
A. All Job-Related Community Outcomes selected in this grouping are supported by the Applicant s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes. B. Only some of the Job-Related Community Outcomes selected in this grouping are supported by the Applicant s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes. C. None of the Job-Related Community Outcomes selected in this grouping are supported by the Applicant s track record or the track record is not similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes. D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Job-Related Community Outcomes. Please provide at least one sentence justification B. Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities (LICs) Outcomes Note: If the Applicant selected one or more of the following outcomes in Q. 25(a): (1) Commercial Goods or Services to Low-Income Communities, (2) Community Goods or Services to Low-Income Communities and/or (3) Healthy Food Financing, the reviewer must consider collectively these narrative responses. If the Applicant did not select any of the three Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes, then the response to questions in this sub-section must be Not Applicable. Note: Within this outcome group, evaluation must not be influenced simply by the total number of outcomes selected; an Applicant should not be evaluated differently whether it selects only one or all three Goods and Services to Low-Income Communities Outcomes. 29. Did the Applicant quantify the projected outcomes in the Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes grouping? (See Q.25(a)) A. All projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes were quantified B. Some of the Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes were quantified C. None of the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes were quantified D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes Please provide at least one sentence justification 30. Evaluate the methods that the Applicant used to quantify the projected community outcomes selected in the Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes grouping. Note: A method is the procedure the Applicant used to obtain the numbers for quantifying its projections for each selected community outcome. For example, a market analysis estimating future customer demand; third-party verification of project sponsor projections of patient visits to a community health center, etc. (See Q. 25(a)) A. All methods used to quantify projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are sound and clearly explained B. Some of the methods used to quantify projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are sound and clearly-explained C. None of the methods used to quantify projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are sound and clearly-explained Page 11
D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes 31. Evaluate the metrics that the Applicant used to quantify the projected community outcomes in the Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes grouping. Note: A metric is the numerical basis the Applicant used to validate the reasonableness of the projected outcomes. It is the numerical function or ratio used to verify the Applicant s projections are reasonable. For example, X number of classrooms with an average Y children per classroom results in Z number of children served by early education programs; X full-time primary care doctors equals Y patient visits per year, etc. (See Q.25(a)) A. All metrics used to quantify projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are sound and clearly explained B. Some of the metrics used to quantify projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are sound and clearly explained C. None of the metrics used to quantify projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are sound and clearly explained D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes 32. Will the Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 likely result in the projected Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes in Question #25(a)? A. Yes; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 are likely to result in the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes in Question #25(a). B. Possibly; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 may result in the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes in Question #25(a). C. No; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 are unlikely to result in the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes in Question #25(a). D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes 33. Will the Applicant s proposed QLICIs increase the provision and access of commercial goods or services (e.g. restaurants, retail, pharmacies), fresh and healthy food options (e.g. grocery stores), and/or Page 12
community goods or services (e.g. healthcare, social services, educational, cultural) to Low-Income Persons (LIPs) and/or residents of Low-Income Communities (LICs). (See Q.25(a)) A. Yes; Applicant s proposed QLICIs are likely to increase the provision and access of commercial goods or services, fresh and healthy food options, and/or community goods or services for LIPs and LIC residents. C. Possibly; Applicant s proposed QLICIs may increase the provision and access of commercial goods or services, fresh and healthy food options, and/or community goods or services for LIPs and LIC residents. D. No; Applicant s proposed QLICIs are unlikely to increase the provision and access of commercial goods or services, fresh and healthy food options, and/or community goods or services for LIPs and LIC residents. E. Not Applicable; the Applicant did not select any of the three Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes. 34. Evaluate the Applicant s track record of producing Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes similar in type and quantity to those it projects to achieve with an NMTC allocation. (See Q.25(a)) Note: Only select A if the Applicant quantified the community outcomes in its track record. For example, in the last five years, the Applicant states its investments in health care facilities have resulted in X number of patient visits; investments in educational facilities have resulted in Y number of low income students served; or investments in retail have resulted in creation of Z square feet of grocery store space in a food desert. A. All projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are supported by the Applicant s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes. B. Only some of the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are supported by the Applicant s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes. C. None of the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are supported by the Applicant s track record or the track record is not similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes. D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes. C. Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Note: If the Applicant selected either one or both of the following outcomes in Q. 25(a): (1) Financing Minority Businesses and (2) Housing Units, the reviewer must consider collectively these narrative responses. If the Applicant did not select either of these outcomes, then the response to questions in this sub-section must be Not Applicable. Note: Within this outcome group, evaluation must not be influenced simply by the total number of outcomes selected; an Applicant should not be evaluated differently whether it selects only one of these outcomes or both outcomes (Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units). Page 13
35. Did the Applicant quantify the projected Minority Businesses and Housing Units (number of units, percent of affordable units) to be financed? (See Q.25(a)) A. All projected Minority Businesses and Housing Units to be financed were quantified B. Some of the projected Minority Businesses and Housing Units to be financed were quantified C. None of the projected Minority Businesses and Housing Units to be financed were quantified D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select either the Financing Minority Businesses or Housing Units Outcomes. 36. Evaluate the methods that the Applicant used to quantify the projected Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units Outcomes. Note: A method is the procedure the Applicant used to obtain the numbers for quantifying its projections for each selected community outcome. For example, reviewing the QALICB s organizational charts to determine if the QALICB is minority owned or controlled, analyzing QALICB pro formas to determine number of housing units to be built, etc. (See Q.25(a)) A. All methods used to quantify the projected Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units Outcomes are sound and clearly explained B. Some of the methods used to quantify the projected Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units Outcomes are sound and clearly-explained C. None of the methods used to quantify the projected Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units Outcomes are sound and clearly explained D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select either the Financing Minority Businesses or Housing Units Outcomes. 37. Will the Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 likely result in the projected Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units Outcomes in Question #25(a)? A. Yes; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 are likely to result in the projected Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units Outcomes in Question #25(a). B. Possibly; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 may result in the projected Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units Outcomes in Question #25(a). C. No; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 are unlikely to result in the projected Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units Outcomes in Question #25(a). D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select either the Financing Minority Businesses or Housing Units Outcomes. Page 14
38. Will the Applicant s projected Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units clearly benefit Low- Income Persons (LIPs) and/or residents of Low-Income Communities (LICs)? Note: Location in a LIC is not sufficient to demonstrate benefit to LIPs/LIC residents. Examples of clearly benefiting LIPs and residents of LICs includes (but not limited to): Financing Minority Businesses the business will employ LIPs and/or residents of the LIC AND/OR provide goods/services to LIPs and/or residents of the LIC Housing Units the project will result in affordable housing units for LIPs and/or LIC residents A. Yes; the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes will clearly benefit LIPs or residents of LICs B. Possibly; the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes may have some benefit to LIPs or residents of LICs C. No; the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes will have little or no benefit to LIPs or residents of LICs D. Not Applicable; the Applicant did not select either the Financing Minority Businesses or Housing Units Outcomes. 39. Evaluate the Applicant s track record of Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units similar in type and quantity to those it projects to achieve with an NMTC allocation. (See Q.25(a)) Note: Only select A if the Applicant quantified the community outcomes in its track record. For example, in the last five years, the Applicant states its investments have generated a total of X housing units for LIPs. A. All projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units are supported by the Applicant s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes B. Only some of the projected Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units are supported by the Applicant s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes C. None of the projected Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units are supported by the Applicant s track record or the track record is not similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select either the Financing Minority Businesses or Housing Units Outcomes. D. Additional Community Development Outcomes Note: If the Applicant selected one or more of the following outcomes in Q. 25(a): (1) Flexible Lease Rates, (2) Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes, and (3) Other, the reviewer must consider collectively these narrative responses. Page 15
If the Applicant did not select any of the three Additional Community Development Outcomes, then the response to questions in this sub-section must be Not Applicable. Note: Within this outcome group, evaluation must not be influenced simply by the total number of outcomes selected; an Applicant should not be evaluated differently whether it selects only one or all three Additional Community Development Outcomes. 40. Did the Applicant quantify the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes? (See Q.25(a)) A. All projected Additional Community Development Outcomes were quantified B. Some of the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes were quantified C. None of the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes were quantified D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Additional Community Development Outcomes. This review question may be pre-populated with Not Applicable based on the Applicant s response in the 41. Evaluate the methods that the Applicant used to quantify the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes. Note: A method is the procedure the Applicant used to obtain the numbers for quantifying its projections for each selected community outcome. For example, analyzing QALICB pro formas to determine future lease rates, comparing contaminants pre and post construction, etc. (See Q.25(a)) A. All methods used to quantify the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes are sound and clearly explained B. Some of the methods used to quantify the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes are sound and clearly-explained C. None of the methods used to quantify the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes are sound and clearly explained D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Additional Community Development Outcomes This review question may be pre-populated with Not Applicable based on the Applicant s response in the 42. Evaluate the metrics that the Applicant used to quantify the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes. Note: A metric is the numerical basis the Applicant used to validate the reasonableness of the projected outcomes. It is the numerical function or ratio used to verify the Applicant s projections are reasonable. For example, X% reduction in rent for an early childhood education center results in Y number of additional children enrolled; Silver LEED certification would result in about Y% reduction in energy costs for LIP end-users, etc. (Q.25(a)) A. All metrics used to quantify the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes are sound and clearly explained B. Some of the metrics used to quantify the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes are sound and clearly-explained Page 16
C. None of the metrics used to quantify the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes are sound and clearly explained D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Additional Community Development Outcomes This review question may be pre-populated with Not Applicable based on the Applicant s response in the 43. Will the Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 likely result in the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes in Question #25(a)? A. Yes; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 are likely to result in the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes in Question #25(a). B. Possibly; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 may result in the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes in Question #25(a). C. No; Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in Question #17 are unlikely to result in the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes in Question #25(a). D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Additional Community Development Outcomes This review question may be pre-populated with Not Applicable based on the Applicant s response in the 44. Will the Applicant s projected Additional Community Development Outcomes clearly benefit Low- Income Persons (LIPs) and/or residents of Low-Income Communities (LICs)? Note: Location in a LIC is not sufficient to demonstrate benefit to LIPs/LIC residents. Examples of clearly benefiting LIPs and residents of LICs includes (but not limited to): Flexible Lease Rates the project will provide reduced rent or lease payments to local businesses or non-profits serving LIPs and/or LIC residents. Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes remediation of environmental contamination of project location will eliminate illness among LIPs and/or LIC residents; building a water treatment plant that provides clean and safe water for LIPs and/or LIC residents. A. Yes; the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes will clearly benefit LIPs or residents of LICs B. Possibly; the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes may have some benefit to LIPs or residents of LICs C. No; the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes will have little or no benefit to LIPs or residents of LICs D. Not Applicable; the Applicant did not select any of the three Additional Community Development Outcomes. Page 17
This review question may be pre-populated with Not Applicable based on the Applicant s response in the 45. Evaluate the Applicant s track record of producing Additional Community Development Outcomes similar in type and quantity to those it projects to achieve with an NMTC allocation. (See Q.25(a)) Note: Only select A if the Applicant quantified the community outcomes in its track record. For example, in the last five years, the Applicant states its investments have resulted in X% reduction in energy costs for Y number of low income residents. A. All projected Additional Community Development Outcomes are supported by the Applicant s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes. B. Only some of the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes are supported by the Applicant s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes. C. None of the projected Additional Community Development Outcomes are supported by the Applicant s track record or the track record is not similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Additional Community Development Outcomes This review question may be pre-populated with Not Applicable based on the Applicant s response in the Tracking Community Outcomes (Q.25b)) Note: In this section, the reviewer must consider collectively the narrative responses for all of the outcomes selected in Q. 25(a). 46. Based on the Applicant s track record and description of how it will document community outcomes that will result from the Applicant s QLICIs, will the Applicant be able to effectively track all the community outcomes selected in Q. 25(a)? (See Q. 25(b)) A. Yes, Applicant describes a thorough track record and robust methodology (procedures/systems) for tracking all projected community outcomes B. No, Applicant does not describe a thorough track record or robust methodology (procedures/systems) for tracking all projected community outcomes Community Accountability and Involvement (Q. 26) 47. Evaluate the extent to which Low-Income Community (LIC) representatives on the Applicant s Advisory and/or Governing Board participate in setting the Applicant s investment parameters, formulating the Applicant s pipeline of investments, and approving the Applicant s investment decisions. (see Q.26(a)) A. LIC Representatives on the Advisory and/or Governing Board play a significant role in these areas B. LIC Representatives on the Advisory and/or Governing Board play a minor role in these areas C. LIC Representatives on the Advisory and/or Governing Board play no role in these areas Page 18
48. Based on the Applicant s process (including the role of LIC representatives on the Advisory and/or Governing Board) for determining if a proposed investment aligns with Low-Income Community priorities, how likely will proposed investments align with these priorities? (See Q.26a) A. Highly Likely B. Probably C. Possibly D. Unlikely 49. Evaluate the extent of the Applicant s track record of project-specific community engagement with a variety of Low-Income Community stakeholders in its past investment decisions (simply consulting with the Advisory Board is NOT an example of community engagement)? (see Q.26(b)) Note: For this review question, ONLY evaluate an Applicant s track record of community engagement; not what the Applicant is currently doing or plans to do. A. Applicant demonstrates an extensive track record of community engagement in past investment decisions B. Applicant demonstrates some track record of community engagement in past investment decisions C. Applicant demonstrates no track record of community engagement in past investment decisions 50. How likely is it that the Applicant s proposed QLICIs will contribute to a broader community or economic development strategy or plan (e.g. neighborhood revitalization plan, county or state economic development plans, etc.)? (See Q. 26(c)) Note: Community and economic development strategies are often outlined in a formal plan approved and adopted by a neighborhood, community group, local government, or state. To the extent such plans exist, the Applicant, in order to score highly, needs to discuss how its projects fit into the priorities and goals outlined by those plans. If the Applicant intends to make NMTC investments in areas (e.g. rural communities) or activities, such as financing smaller QLICIs or non-real Estate activities like equipment and working capital, which often do not have a formal plan or planning process, the Applicant can nevertheless score highly if it discusses the other methods it will use to ensure alignment with the community s strategic priorities. For example, some rural communities may not have a formal plan, but the Applicant can demonstrate alignment with the community s priorities by meeting with local business and civic leaders, attending town council meetings, partnering with local organizations, among other methods. A. Highly Likely Page 19
B. Probably C. Possibly D. Unlikely Phase I 2017 NMTC Review Form Other Community Benefits (Q. 27) Note: For the purposes of evaluating Questions 51 and 52, the reviewer should only consider whether or not the QLICIs will catalyze other private investments in low-income communities. DO NOT include private capital leveraged within the NMTC transaction structure or outside the structure during a simultaneous closing. Private investment does not include additional local, state, or federal subsidies (bond financing, tax-increment financing, historic tax credits, etc.). However, examples of additional private investment that can be discussed by the Applicant include, but are not limited to: If the Applicant s pipeline investments are part of or coordinated with local economic development plans, the Applicant may discuss the expected additional private investments (e.g., new businesses opened, new housing developed, etc.) included in such plans. Applicants may discuss the projected number of indirect jobs or additional dollar value of economic activity projected to be created as a result of the NMTC investment based on economic impact modeling software (e.g. IMPLAN, RIMS, etc.). Applicants may also discuss the ability of Operating Businesses financed to attract subsequent private investment from other sources after the initial QLICI was made. 51. Does the Applicant provide specific examples of the Applicant s (or Controlling Entity s) past investments catalyzing additional non-nmtc related private investment? (See Q.27) A. Yes, the Applicant provides specific examples of the Applicant s (or Controlling Entity s) past investments catalyzing additional non-nmtc related private investment. B. No, the Applicant did not provide specific examples of the Applicant s (or Controlling Entity s) past investments catalyzing additional non-nmtc related private investment. 52. Considering the Applicant s proposed QLICIs described in the Business Strategy section (Q. 17), how likely is it that the Applicant s proposed investments will result in additional private investment beyond the initial project investment(s)? (See Q.27) A. Highly Likely B. Probably C. Possibly D. Unlikely Page 20
Based on your review of the application, would you recommend that this organization receive an allocation of NMTCs from the CDFI Fund? Yes No Justification (not more than three sentences): Panel Issues (please be specific and if possible reference particular answer numbers when justifying concerns below): 1. Are there elements to the business strategy that may be questionable according to IRS regulations? No Yes, Comments: 2. Are there QLICI activities checked in Q. 13(b) that you would recommend not be given an allocation or alternatively, boxes that were not checked that you believe should have been (e.g. the Applicant will first purchase the loan portfolio of its affiliate CDE and then re-lend to QALICBs, but did not check purchases of loans from other CDEs)? No Yes, Comments: 3. Do you feel the Applicant inappropriately claimed Priority 2 points under Q. 22 of the application? No Yes, Comments: 4. Do you feel that there are any other critical items, not otherwise addressed in any other section of your scoring review or written comments, which the panel needs to take into consideration (e.g. material concerns related to the Applicant s ability to manage and/or raise QEIs for an NMTC allocation)? No Yes, Comments: Page 21