8-PY2026 HOME, HOME-ARP, CHDO Evaluation Scoring Sheet.pdf

PROPOSER

NAME

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Total

Possible (Up To)

Total

1. ORGANIZATONAL INFORMATION, CAPACITY AND EXPERIENCE

Award up to 15 points based upon the organization’s capacity to carry out the proposed activity and the organization’s relevant experience with similar projects and HOME and/or HOME-ARP funding.

(Preference will be given to proposals with similar experience serving special needs populations with support services and sustainable property management oversight strategies)

5 pts = 2+ years’ experience 10 pts = 3+ years’ experience 15 pts = 5+ years’ experience

2. PERFORMANCE OF PAST SUBRECIPIENTS – Most recent project within last three (3) Program Years

– SCORE PAST SUBRECIPIENTS ONLY (Score Provided by AHS) Projects met all accomplishments with no funds returned and timely close-out (= up to 9 pts)

*For the most recent project within the previous three (3) program years:

Project accomplishments unmet (=deduct 3 points) Delayed or untimely project(s) Closing (=deduct 3 points) Grant funds returned for reallocation on incomplete or completed project(s) (=deduct 3 points)

Quarterly reporting on time (=2 pts); Reporting late/No reporting (= 0pts) 2

Monitoring & compliance issues, findings or concerns.

No findings or concerns ( = 4 pts) Compliance issues resolved (=2 pts) Unresolved findings or concerns (= 0 pts)

3. EXPERIENCE OF NEW PROPOSERS – SCORE NEW PROPOSERS

Project Team has:

• 5+ years project grant experience in Hillsborough County (= 15 pts)

• 3+ years project grant experience in Hillsborough County/other local government or another agency (=10 pts)

• 2+ years project grant experience in Hillsborough County ( = 8 pts)

• 2+ years project grant experience with other local government or another agency (= 4 pts)

PY 2026 HOME and HOME-ARP Scoring Sheet

Possible (Up To)

Total

4. PROJECT TIMELINE

Proposal provides detailed timeline for expenditures. Preliminary schedule includes:

• Permitting and approvals from federal, state, or local agencies.

• Time frames for any contemplated requests for other federal, state or local resources.

• Timeline of initiation, construction phasing, completion and opening of proposed project.

• Additional major milestones and the proposed major responsibilities.

• Timeline ensures proposed project commences within 12 months and is completed and occupied within two (2) years of executed funding agreement.

Specific details, major project requirements, major milestones, begin & complete dates (= 10 pts) General timeline (non-specific) details (= 6 pts) / Timeline (minimal) details (= 3 pts) No timeline (= 0 pts)

5. ABILITY TO PROCEED / SHOVEL READY PROJECT

_____ Evidence of Site Control

Recorded title/executed lease/purchase contract (= 5 pts);

Option to Purchase/Option to Lease / Local Government Resolution (= 2 pts)

_____The project provides homeownership assistance benefiting extremely low, low-, low- to moderate income persons ONLY. Points will be awarded only in the AMI category where the most persons are to be served:

0-30% AMI (= 5 pts) 31-50% AMI (= 4 pts) 51-80% AMI (= 3 pts) > 80% AMI (= 0 pts)

6. CONSTRUCTION FEATURES – GREEN ENERGY DESIGN

Award 0 to 5 points based upon what green energy features are outlined in the project description. Green energy features can include energy star appliances, low-e-windows, low flow toilets, insulation, heating & air conditioning, energy conservating strategies, recycling deconstruction materials, etc.

No features = 0 pts 1 to 6 features = 3 pts 7+ features = 5 pts

7. MARKET STUDY

The significance of the project to the beneficiaries, root cause and project unit mix are supported by a recent market study. Details in the market study should be checked for applicability to true and current economic conditions and need within the community.

8. LEVERAGING (Score Provided by AHS)

To what degree is the Proposer leveraging dollars for this project.

50% or more of the project is leveraged by non-County funds (=20 pts) 40-49% of the project is leveraged by non-County funds (= 16 pts) 30-39% of the project is leveraged by non-County funds (= 12 pts) 20-29% of the project is leveraged by non-County funds (=8 pts) 10-19% of the project is leveraged by non-County funds (=4 pts) Less than 10% of the project is leveraged by non-County funds (= 0 pts)

Possible (Up To)

Total

9. FINANCIAL CAPACITY (Score Provided by OMB)

The following questions will be considered by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to determine the financial capacity of the proposer:

• Did the proposer provide audited financial statements along with the accompanying audit?

• Did the proposer provide an opinion letter and notes to the statements for the two most recent audit periods?

• Are the proposer’s audited financial statements recent enough to provide insight into the organization's current financial position?

• Does the proposer show financial oversight and internal controls?

• Can the proposer achieve income stability by demonstrating capacity to generate income?

• Does the proposer show responsible stewardship of resources it has received?

• Are there adequate management practices in place for financial reporting?

• Is the proposer able to carry out its mission in a stable and effective way that will ensure project completion?

10. BONUS (Score Provided by AHS)

Proposed activity is located within 1 mile of mass transit service

Proposed activity is located within a Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area (NRSA)

TOTAL POINTS 110