Readiness and Capacity (6 points available)
Project Timeline and Capacity (4 points)
4 - Exceeds expectations
Project timeline is detailed and articulates milestones for each phase of work and pre-work to be completed. Timeline is clear that the project will be completed by October 31, 2026. Staff and partner roles are clearly articulated for each phase of work. Identifies major risks to project completion. Project team has substantial experience in managing similar grants and projects. Jurisdiction has identified and addressed capacity limitations. Letters of support and/or financial commitments are provided by all project partners and some key stakeholders. Jurisdiction has identified and confirmed other sources of funding to leverage for the project.
3 - Meets expectations
Project timeline provides general information related to each phase of work and pre-work that will have been completed. Timeline is clear that the project is likely to be completed by October 31, 2026. Staff and partner roles are generally articulated for each phase of work. Identifies major risks to project completion. Project team has demonstrated experience in managing similar grants and projects. Jurisdiction has identified and addressed capacity limitations. Letters of support are provided by all project partners and some key stakeholders. Some partners have provided financial commitments. Jurisdiction has identified and confirmed other sources of funding to leverage for the project.
2 - Meets some expectations
Project timeline is vague or incomplete. Unclear that the project will be completed by October 31, 2026. Staff and partner roles are not clearly articulated for each phase of work. Does not identify major risks to project completion. Capacity appears too limited for the proposed project. Letters of support have not been provided by all project partners or key stakeholders. No partners have provided financial commitments. Jurisdiction has not identified or confirmed other sources of funding to leverage for the project.
1 - Does not meet expectations
Project timeline does not provide sufficient information about each phase of work. No evidence that the project will be completed by October 31, 2026. Staff and partner roles are not clearly articulated for each phase of work. Does not identify major risks to project completion. Capacity appears very limited for the proposed project. No letters of support have not been provided by project partners or key stakeholders. No partners have provided financial commitments. Jurisdiction has not identified or confirmed other sources of funding to leverage for the project.
Broad, Sustained Support (2 points)
2 - Exceeds expectations
Jurisdiction has documented support from community leadership (e.g., elected officials), stakeholders, and key project partners. Jurisdiction has identified and provided links and/or documentation for all relevant adopted plans, policies, financial or in-kind commitments, letters of support, or other supporting information. Any challenges that have been identified in getting support for the project have been planned for or addressed.
1.5 - Meets expectations
Jurisdiction has documented support from community leadership (e.g. elected officials), stakeholders, and key project partners. Jurisdiction has identified and provided links and/or documentation for some combination of adopted plans, policies, financial or in-kind commitments, letters of support, or other supporting information. Any challenges that have been identified in getting support for the project have been planned for or addressed.
1 - Meets some expectations
Jurisdiction has limited support from community leadership (e.g. elected officials) and stakeholders. Jurisdiction has identified and provided links and/or documentation for some combination of adopted plans, policies, financial or in-kind commitments, letters of support, or other supporting information. Any challenges that have been identified in getting support for the project have been planned for or addressed.
0.5 - Does not meet expectations
Jurisdiction does not have documented support from community leadership (e.g. elected officials) and stakeholders. Jurisdiction has not identified or provided links and/or documentation for plans, policies, financial or in-kind commitments, letters of support, or other supporting information. Any challenges that have been identified in getting support for the project have not been planned for or addressed.
Impact on Housing Needs (8 points available)
Addressing Affordable Housing Needs, Targeted Populations, and Intended Impact (4 points)
8 - Exceeds expectations
Jurisdiction clearly identifies households that will be served and how the project fills a gap proportional to the affordable housing needs of the community, based on current or the best available data and/or needs assessment. Project ensures long-term affordability with a deed restriction or other regulatory agreement. Mixed-income projects will apply long-term affordability mechanism(s) to designated affordable units.
6 - Meets expectations
Jurisdiction generally identifies households that will be served and how the project fills a gap proportional to the affordable housing needs of the community, based on current or best available data and/or needs assessment. Project ensures long-term affordability with a deed restriction or other regulatory agreement. Mixed-income projects will apply long-term affordability mechanism(s) to designated affordable units.
4 - Meets some expectations
Jurisdiction does not clearly identify households that will be served or how the project fills a gap proportional to the affordable housing needs of the community, based on current or the best available data and/or needs assessment. Long-term affordability mechanism is proposed but unclear or results are uncertain. Mixed-income projects will only apply long-term affordability mechanism(s) to designated affordable units.
2 - Does not meet expectations
Jurisdiction provides minimal or no information identifying households that will be served or how the project fills a gap proportional to the affordable housing needs of the community, based on current or the best available data and/or needs assessment. No long-term affordability mechanism is proposed.
Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (8 points available)
Community Engagement Process (4 points)
4 - Exceeds expectations
Jurisdiction has engaged in (or plans to engage in) a robust community engagement process. (e.g. multiple ways for community to participate; a clear plan for involving diverse, marginalized, and vulnerable populations; proposes working with community navigators). Jurisdiction has described how they will continue to engage the public over the course of the project.
3 - Meets expectations
Jurisdiction has engaged in (or plans to engage in) a general community engagement process (e.g. public meetings; some efforts to market to diverse, marginalized, and vulnerable populations). Jurisdiction has described how they will continue to engage the public over the course of the project.
2 - Meets some expectations
Jurisdiction has engaged in (or plans to engage in) a limited community engagement process that does not include details on outreach to diverse, marginalized, and vulnerable populations. Jurisdiction has briefly described how they will continue to engage the public over the course of the project.
1 - Does not meet expectations
Jurisdiction has not engaged in (or does not plan to engage in) a community engagement process and does not identify how they will reach out to diverse, marginalized, and vulnerable populations. Jurisdiction has not described how they will continue to engage the public over the course of the
project.
Community Benefits (4 points)
4 - Exceeds expectations
Jurisdiction clearly describes a variety of co-benefits (in addition to statutorily required benefits) that will be provided or supported during and after the project is completed. It is clear that the community benefits provided/supported are integrated into the project and it is clear that targeted and
diverse/historically marginalized/underserved populations will be the main recipients.
3 - Meets expectations
Jurisdiction describes a few co-benefits (in addition to statutorily required benefits) that will be provided or supported during and after the project is completed. It is clear that community benefits provided/supported are integrated into the project but unclear that targeted and diverse/historically marginalized/underserved populations will be the main recipients.
2 - Meets some expectations
Jurisdiction describes limited co-benefits ((in addition to statutorily required benefits) that will be provided or supported during and after the project is completed. It is unclear that community benefits provided/supported are integrated into the project and unlikely that targeted and diverse/historically marginalized/underserved populations will be the main recipients.
1 - Does not meet expectations
Jurisdiction describes no co-benefits (in addition to statutorily required benefits) that will be provided or supported during and after the project is completed.
Sustainable Development Patterns (16 points available)
Project Location (8 points)
- Rural and rural resort counties, as well as small towns (approx. 3 miles), should, at a minimum, be located within existing development patterns to meet project location expectations.
- Adjacent is considered to be two blocks.
8 - Exceeds expectations
Project meets more than one of the locational requirements: within or adjacent to a downtown area, a core business district of a municipality, a transit-oriented development, or that include onsite early childhood care and education services. Efficient land use practices are being incorporated into the project (e.g., maintaining street grids, adaptive reuse, compact building design, contributing to walkable neighborhoods).
6 - Meets expectations
Project is located within existing development patterns and meets one of the locational requirements: within or adjacent to a downtown area, a core business district of a municipality, a transit-oriented development, or that include onsite early childhood care and education services. Efficient land use practices are being incorporated into the project (e.g., maintaining street grids, adaptive reuse, compact building design, contributing to walkable neighborhoods).
4 - Meets some expectations
Project is located within existing development patterns or includes early childhood education. Some efficient land use practices are being incorporated into the project (e.g., maintaining street grids, adaptive reuse, compact building design, contributing to walkable neighborhoods).
2 - Does not meet expectations
Project is located outside of existing development patterns and does not include early childhood education.
Proximity to Amenities and Services (4 points)
4 - Exceeds expectations
Project is within (1/4 mile) of alternative transportation options and in close proximity to employment and educational opportunities, grocery stores, etc.
3 - Meets expectations
Project is within (1/2 mile) of alternative transportation options and in close proximity to employment and educational opportunities, grocery stores, etc.
2 - Meets some expectations
Project is within (3/4 mile) of alternative transportation options and with limited access to employment and educational opportunities, grocery stores, etc.
1 - Does not meet expectations
Project is more than a mile from alternative transportation options and with limited access to employment and educational opportunities, grocery stores, etc.
Sustainable Land Use Practices (4 points)
4 - Exceeds expectations
The jurisdiction has implemented fifteen or more land use best practices.
3 - Meets expectations
The jurisdiction has implemented ten or more land use best practices.
2 - Meets some expectations
The jurisdiction has five or more of the land use best practices.
1 - Does not meet expectations
The jurisdiction has fewer than five of the land use best practices.