1

Planning Grant Program: Frequently Asked Questions

Please Note: The Principal Representative and Responsible Administrator contacts in Section A of the application must be two different people with different email addresses in order for the application to be accepted. The Principal Representative and Chief Elected Official can be the same person.

IHOP is the shorthand name for the Planning Grant Program in DOLA’s online grant portal system. IHOP stands for Innovative Housing Planning Grant Program.

Municipalities, counties, and city/counties are eligible to apply for and receive funds. Housing authorities and other nonprofit organizations are not eligible on their own but can partner with municipalities and counties.

A minimum of 25% local match of the total project cost is required. An applicant experiencing financial hardship may request a reduced level of matching funds and must consult with their DOLA Regional Manager before submitting their application about a reduced match. Local match can include financial commitment from partners (e.g., COGs, housing authorities). In-kind match (e.g., staff time) does not count towards the match requirement. Program staff relies on input from the Regional Managers on match reduction requests. However, final decisions on local match are made after a thorough team discussion and have to be approved by DOLA leadership.

Approximately $6,816,000 is available for awards. Individual Planning Grant Program awards are expected to be approximately $50,000-$200,000. There is not a predetermined award limit. Note: DOLA will fund and expects to see thoughtful community and stakeholder engagement and communication process plans as part of strategy development.

No. All funds must be spent by June 30, 2024.

Awards cannot be used to cover administrative expenses (such as funding salaries for existing staff).

Recipients should check U.S. Treasury guidance on the DOLA website and consult their own legal counsel. Guidance to date seems to show that ARP funds may leverage other federal funds but not all federal funds will allow leveraging ARP funds. Please contact DOLA staff with any questions about matching funds.

No. Communities not intending to apply to the Incentives Grant Program may still apply to and be competitive for the Planning Grant Program. However, the application for a Planning Grant Program award must include plans to pursue at least one of the qualifying
strategies listed in the program guidelines for the Incentives Grant Program. This list of qualifying strategies is the same list for determining eligibility for the Incentives Grant Program.

Yes, but not on their own. Housing assessments and related studies are important tools to help communities better understand their housing needs. They’re also an opportunity to ensure strategies are developed to align with data and ensure equitable outcomes.
However, housing needs assessments are not considered a qualifying strategy on their own for a community to access the Incentives Grants; Planning Grant Program applicants must bundle a housing needs assessment request with one or more qualifying strategies.

Yes, this type of inventory can be done (and is encouraged) as long as the project also includes one of the qualifying strategies. A suggested strategy that aligns with a vacant property inventory is creation of an expedited development review process for acquiring or repurposing underutilized commercial property that can be rezoned to include affordable housing units.

No. The funds must be used to inform and develop strategies that would qualify a municipality or county to apply for an Incentives Grant (or make them more competitive). Local governments should contact their DLG Regional Manager or DOH Regional Development Specialist to discuss funding opportunities for pre-development planning work for a specific affordable housing development project.

The intent of the "Official Action" section of the application is to confirm that the elected body 1) is aware of and 2) approves of the intent to apply for grant funds (and the proposed project therein). Official action could be a motion by the Board that is made and approved in meeting minutes. Another option is where authorization has been delegated. Some jurisdictions will give a Town/City/County Manager the authority to submit applications up to a certain dollar amount without going to the Board; in that case you would submit the authorization. For Planning Grants, applicants are encouraged to submit a formal Resolution if possible because the elected body must eventually adopt
the code or policy changes that are proposed in the application. Elected officials may approve of staff pursuing grant funding in general but DOLA wants to ensure the elected officials support the specific strategies in the application.

Evidence of official action needs to be submitted at the time of application. If the local government requires a formal hearing, then the hearing needs to be conducted before application submittal.

  • No aspect of the program precludes multi-jurisdictional applications.
  • The lead applicant needs to be a local government (county or municipality).
  • Overall, DOLA is supportive of multi-jurisdictional applications that are well thought-out and are composed of eager participants.
  • Here are some considerations to think about with a multi-jurisdictional application:
    • Is there evidence that this group has done similar projects together? Are all participants willing? What happens if after awarding, one of the local governments is no longer interested in participating?
    • Who plans to be the fiscal agent? This should be specified in the application.
    • In the application, DOLA will want to see evidence of support among all parties involved and a plan for coordination. This could look like letters of support from all participating local governments, as well as a letter of intent to enter into an
      MOU if awarded.
    • DOLA will likely make any awards contingent on a formal collaborative agreement (e.g., MOU) that outlines expectations of consultant time, outcomes, etc.
    • Is the plan to hire one consultant team to work with every local government? Then the lead local government would pay the invoices and manage the consultant, checking in with the cooperating local governments, etc.
    • If the plan is to hire multiple consultants, then it may make sense to have separate applications (one for each local government).
    • Each local government has to adopt their regulatory changes through their own
      public process.

You have to upload your budget as an XLS Excel file (i.e., the older Excel file type) for it to be accepted in the portal. You should be able to save/down-grade the budget template from an XLSX to an XLS file in Excel. With the file open in Excel, click on the “Save as” option and select “Excel 97-2003 Workbook (*.xls)” from the drop-down menu. The file transition shouldn't harm your data.

  • It may be okay for a local government grantee to use a previously engaged consultant from a different project (e.g., general land use code update) on the IHOP Planning Grant work. 
  • There needs to be a nexus between the previously procured/ongoing work (e.g., general land use code update) and the work that will be funded by the IHOP grant. Similarly, the consultant needs to be appropriate and qualified for the IHOP work.
  • If a local government applies and is awarded a grant, DOLA would specify on the IHOP contract that the local government will work with the previously engaged qualified consultant for this work, if the local government followed its own procurement rules when selecting the consultant for the original project.
  • The local government needs to provide DOLA with documentation of their original procurement process for getting the consultant as part of awarding and contracting documentation. The documentation must clearly explain that because a qualified consultant was retained recently to do similar work, it's not necessary for the local government to rebid the work.
  • It will be important for the consultant to give the work completed under the IHOP contract a different project number (for invoice purposes) that delineates the IHOP contract work from the original work. DOLA will look for this (as well as work dates) when reviewing reimbursement requests. Invoices need to be clear on which line items apply to the IHOP contract work. It's the responsibility of the local government grantee to ensure that reimbursement request documentation clearly shows what applies to the grant contract and what doesn't. For example, if there's a consultant invoice with multiple project numbers, the local government should redact or otherwise strike the work that's not relevant for the IHOP grant.

HB21-1271’s definition of “affordable housing” does include specific income limits. Planning Grant Program grantees need to ensure that their adopted strategies align with the definition of affordable housing in the bill. However, DOLA recognizes that local governments have the authority to locally adopt a tailored definition of affordable (or attainable, workforce, etc.) housing based on local economic context and housing need; a locally adopted definition of affordable housing may include AMI limits that slightly differ from those in HB21-1271. DOLA does not interpret this to conflict with the intent of HB21-1271 to remove barriers and provide incentives to support affordable housing development. For local governments that do not have a locally adopted definition of affordable housing, HB21-1271’s income limits of up to 80% AMI for rental and up to 140% AMI for ownership should be used when adopting qualifying strategies.

This form should be used to report problems or issues with this website. Questions pertaining to a program or service provided by DLG should be addressed to contact information located on the specific program pages.

Was this content helpful?