Federal Register, Volume 59 Issue 113 (Tuesday, June 14, 1994)

[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 14, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-14344]

[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: June 14, 1994]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part III

Department of Housing and Urban Development

_______________________________________________________________________

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing
Commissioner

_______________________________________________________________________

Notice of Funding Availability for Preservation Support Grants and
Notice of Paperwork Submission
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing
Commissioner
[Docket No. N-94-3762; FR-3613-N-01]

NOFA for Preservation Support Grants and Notice of Paperwork
Submission

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.

ACTION: Notice of funding availability and paperwork submission.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This NOFA announces the availability of up to $6 million in
funding for Preservation Support Grants, to promote the ability of
residents of eligible low-income housing to: (1) Participate
meaningfully in the preservation process established by the Emergency
Low Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987 (ELIHPA) and the Low-Income
Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA);
and (2) affect decisions about the future of their housing. This NOFA
also serves to assist the Secretary in discharging the obligation to
notify qualified purchasers of the availability of properties for sale
and otherwise facilitate the coordination and oversight of the
preservation program. A portion of the unobligated funds from the
Preservation Technical Assistance NOFA published September 3, 1992 (57
FR 40570), is made available under this NOFA.
Eligible applicants may apply for a Preservation Support Grant in
one of two categories. First, Outreach and Training Grants are
available to resident-controlled or community-based nonprofit
organizations with experience in resident education and organizing to
conduct community-, city-, or county-wide outreach to identify,
organize, and deliver training to residents of eligible low-income
housing. Second, Preservation Activity Grants are available to State
and local government agencies and nonprofit intermediaries to perform
activities that further the preservation program in their
jurisdictions. These activities may include outreach, training, and
organizational development of unorganized tenants. In a separate NOFA,
the Department has solicited applications from intermediaries to
administer direct technical assistance grant funds to resident and
community groups (FR-3473, published April 6, 1994, at 59 FR 16366).
This document includes information about eligible applicants, the
level of funding available, and HUD's processing of applications, as
well as the selection criteria for grant applicants.

DATES: The expedited deadline for submission of comments on the
paperwork burden associated with this NOFA is: June 24, 1994.
The deadline for submission of applications is August 15, 1994.
Applications must be physically received in the Preservation Division,
Department of Housing and Urban Development, room 6284, 451 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410, by 4:30 p.m., EST, on or before the
due date.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the information collection requirments should
refer to the proposal by name and should be sent to: Joseph F. Lackey,
Jr., OMB Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive
Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.
Upon request, Preservation Support Grant application packages may
be obtained from the Multifamily Housing Clearinghouse, P.O. Box 6424,
Rockville, MD 20850, telephone number: 1-800-955-2232. Please refer to
FR-3613 when requesting an application package.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Malone, Director, Office of
Preservation and Property Disposition, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, room 6284, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410;
telephone (202) 708-3555. To provide service for persons who are
hearing- or speech-impaired, this number may be reached via TDD by
dialing the Federal Information Relay Service on 1-800-877-TDDY (1-800-
877-8339) or 202-708-9300. (Except for the TDD number, telephone
numbers are not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

The information collection requirements contained in this NOFA have
been submitted, for expedited processing, to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980
(44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). No person may be subjected to a penalty for
failure to comply with these information collection requirements until
they have been approved and assigned an OMB control number. The OMB
control number, when assigned, will be announced by separate notice in
the Federal Register. Any applicant that completes an application
before the OMB control number is assigned may have to modify that
application in accordance with changes in the application package that
are requested by OMB and agreed to by HUD.
Public reporting burden for the collection of information
requirements contained in this rule are estimated to include the time
for reviewing the instructions, searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information. Information on the estimated public
reporting burden is provided under the Preamble heading, Other Matters.
Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of
this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this
burden, by June 24, 1994, to the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Rules Docket Clerk, 451 Seventh Street, SW., room 10276,
Washington, DC 20410-0500; and to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk
Officer for HUD, Washington, DC 20503.

Introduction

On July 13, 1993, the Department published a draft Notice of
Funding Availability (58 FR 37819), specifically inviting public
comments on the Department's proposed methodology for implementing the
provisions of section 312 of the Housing and Community Development Act
of 1992 (1992 HCDA), which added sections 251-257, the Low-Income
Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (LIHPRHA).
The comment period expired on August 28, 1993. The Department received
a total of 26 comments. Two comments were from legal/advocacy
organizations, eight from low income housing organizations which are
involved in development of and advocacy for affordable housing, nine
were from tenant organizations, three were from community development
corporations, two from community service organizations, one from a
local agency and one from an individual housing consultant.
This NOFA addresses section 254 of LIHPRHA. Comments received
relating to the other added sections were addressed in an earlier NOFA
directed at those sections and published on April 6, 1994 (59 FR 3473).
The first section of this NOFA is a discussion of the public comments
on the section 254 aspects of the draft NOFA and of modifications made
in response to the comments and as a result of additional HUD
consideration. The actual NOFA follows the discussion of public
comments and begins with the section designated ``II. Purpose and
Substantive Description.''

I. Public Comments

A. Priorities

Five commenters recommended that local resident-controlled groups
with experience in organizing receive highest funding priority. The
rationale behind these comments was that assistance to organize by a
tenant-led coalition at the local level enables tenants to share
experiences and provide peer support. Also, one commenter stressed that
organizing and training sponsored by local tenant coalitions protect
against ``sham'' nonprofit purchasers. The Department agrees with these
comments and is giving preference to local resident-controlled groups.
Organizations that receive Outreach and Training grants are required to
demonstrate that they have at least two years experience in resident
organizing and education. Under the Preservation Activity Grant
category, the Department also will give priority consideration to State
and local government agencies and intermediaries that propose to
provide outreach and training and organizational development to
unorganized tenants.
One commenter suggested that in awarding Outreach and Training
grants, HUD should give priority to the local nonprofit entity most
trusted or most likely to be trusted by the tenants. Factors cited by
the commenter that could be used as a measure of trust included
languages spoken by staff, ethnicity, positive history in the immediate
neighborhood, and whether the nonprofit entity has a rural/urban/
suburban focus. The Department believes that establishing a trusting
relationship between recipients and providers of the activity is an
important aspect of a program. However, assessing the level of trust is
judgmental and requires an insight about the relationship between a
nonprofit organization and tenants that would be difficult for HUD
staff to readily discern. The Department believes that a trusting
relationship will evolve when the parties become acquainted, begin to
work together, and plan successful programs.
Two commenters suggested that under the Outreach and Training
grants, organizing should be given priority over education and
training. However, if the purpose of the application is to provide
training, one commenter suggested that preference should be given to
applicants planning training for resident groups and community-based
nonprofit purchasers (as opposed to owner entities, appraisers, and
financial institutions), because resident groups and community-based
nonprofit purchasers generally have fewer resources. Also, it was
suggested that this preference be implemented through a point system
published in the NOFA. Under the Outreach and Training grant category,
HUD will require that successful applicants restrict provision of
training to resident groups and community-based nonprofit purchasers.
However, under the Preservation Activity Grants category, grantees may
use funds to train and educate other groups, such as appraisers,
financial institutions, and owners.

B. Allocation of Funds

The Department received eleven comments recommending that a
majority of the Preservation Support Grant funds be set aside for
resident outreach and training that would involve leadership
development, training, and ongoing support instead of for the provision
of information on LIHPRHA and ELIPHA (without organizational
development, training, and support). Eight commenters suggested that,
at a minimum, 60 percent of the funds should be reserved for outreach
and training. Another commenter advised that the Department allocate 50
percent for each type of Preservation Support Grant, with a mid-year
review for reallocation.
The Department will allocate 50 percent of the Preservation Support
Grant funds to Outreach and Training grants and 50 percent to
Preservation Activity grants. This equal division of the allocation
will maximize opportunities for the Department to produce newly
organized tenant groups, because HUD will give preference, under the
Preservation Activity grant program, to State or local government
agencies or intermediaries that submit applications for outreach and
training and the organizational development of tenants. By including
outreach and training and organizational development for tenants as
preferred activities under Preservation Activity grants, the Department
will be able to ensure that unorganized tenants will be reached if they
live in areas where eligible local tenant controlled groups or
community-based nonprofit organizations do not exist.
One commenter suggested that Outreach and Training grants be
allocated in the $50,000 to $150,000 range annually for up to three
years. The Department agrees that grant amounts should be limited. The
Department will award Outreach and Training grants commensurate with
the scope and size of the market served and the level of outreach and
training described in the application. The maximum amount an applicant
may receive for an Outreach and Training grant will be $150,000
annually, up to a maximum, if warranted, of $450,000 over a three-year
period.
The Preservation Activity grant will be available for, among other
activities, outreach and training and organizational development for
tenants who live in areas where community-based nonprofit organizations
or local resident-controlled groups do not exist. Because applicants
applying for Preservation Activity Grants may propose an activity that
is regional or national in scope and that would require a high level of
funding to be effective, the Department believes that the maximum
amount an applicant may receive for a Preservation Activity Grant
should be $500,000 for proposals that are national in scope, and
$250,000 for proposals aimed at the regional, State or local level.
This NOFA addresses funding levels in detail for each category in
Section II.D.
Two commenters stated that HUD should have two funding rounds
annually for Preservation Support Grants, with one-year grant awards
renewable for up to three years. The Department has determined that the
size of Preservation Support Grants does not merit the task of scoring,
ranking, and awarding grants biannually; it is more cost-effective to
announce the availability of funds on an annual basis. Further,
Preservation Support Grants are awarded on a competitive basis and
cannot be renewed without a new round of competition. However, HUD will
accept Outreach and Training grant applications that propose activities
designed to be completed over a three-year period. Such proposals, if
funded, would receive incremental funding as described in Section II.C
of the NOFA.
Six commenters claimed that basing fund allocation solely on active
Notices of Intent (NOIs) and Plans of Action (POAs) is skewed because
this basis does not directly correlate with preservation sales
activity. Another commenter claimed that HUD's records are not fully
accurate because the basis for the allocation is program volume--
specifically, the sum of ``active Notices of Intent plus the number of
Plans of Action submitted for the State''--so allocations may be
distorted. HUD will allocate grant funds in accordance with the
selection process described in Section IV of this NOFA. The number of
active Notices of Intent and Plans of Action will not be the
determining factor.
Another commenter stated that the allocation under this NOFA should
be made according to eligible projects, not by activity level. However,
HUD will award grants based on proposed activities, not according to
eligible projects. The commenter further stated that the allocation
should include transition rule project owners who have not filed an
NOI. This comment relates to Title II projects, where owners were not
required to file NOIs prior to the 1992 HCDA. Such projects will be
eligible under the provisions of this NOFA.

C. Eligible Activities

One commenter suggested that organizations applying for
Preservation Activity Grants should not be limited by the definition of
eligible intermediaries in the NOFA. The commenter claimed that
preservation activities, such as LIHPRHA training, technical
assistance, data gathering, and clearinghouse functions, can be
performed by an organization that does not have experience in grant
allocation and administration and has not previously served a wide
geographic area. Community-based nonprofits with experience in
education on LIHPRHA and ELIPHA, for example, would be competent to
perform these activities. The Department will limit eligibility for
Preservation Activity Grants to eligible intermediaries and will adhere
to the definition of intermediary used in the July 13, 1993, NOFA,
because it is consistent with section 255(d) of the 1992 HCDA.
This commenter also stated that while preference should be given to
locally based groups, it should be possible for community-based groups
to apply for resident outreach and training grants for a multicounty
area, if a local group is not available. The Department agrees and has
indicated in Section III.C of the NOFA that priority will be given to
established local resident-controlled groups. Next in order of
preference will be established community-based nonprofit organizations,
and, thirdly, city-wide, county-wide or multi-county coalitions of
resident groups applying for Outreach and Training Grants. Further,
community action, legal service, and fair housing counseling agencies;
State and local government agencies; and intermediaries that apply for
Preservation Activity Grants to initiate outreach and training and the
organizational development of tenants will receive priority funding
under that category.
This commenter also stated that organizations should be able to do
both resident organizing and preservation activities, and that the
eligible activities should include legal and financial research on
properties. The Preservation Activity Grants, which will provide
funding for legal and financial research studies on eligible
properties, also will include outreach and training and organizational
development training for tenants as an eligible and priority activity.
If all funds are not awarded to eligible applicants in one grant
category, the Department will utilize unused funds from one grant
category to fund acceptable applications for the other, as indicated in
Section III.A of the NOFA.
Four commenters suggested that the Department clarify that Outreach
and Training Grants are available to support residents in projects
where the owner is not selling. Two commenters want Outreach and
Training Grants available where an owner has made no decision yet, but
is eligible under ELIPHA or LIHPRHA. The Department agrees, and has
stated in Section III.D of this NOFA, that eligible projects include
any Preservation property, regardless of whether an owner has filed a
Notice of Intent.
A commenter proposed that HUD fund the production of information
materials, such as pamphlets, posters, displays, and videos that can be
used for resident outreach and training. The commenter said that some
of these materials already exist, having been produced in States with a
high level of activity. However, HUD could make them widely available
to assistance providers. This would avoid potentially duplicative
efforts nationwide and will assure distribution of accurate
information. The Department accepted this proposal and has included a
provision under the Preservation Activity Grant program for creating
informational materials about the Preservation process for nationwide
distribution as an eligible activity. (See Section III.F of the NOFA
for further details.)

D. Other

Nineteen commenters stated that because of the size of the Outreach
and Training Grant program, and because the activities should be
nonproject specific, HUD should administer that program. The Department
agrees and will administer the awarding and monitoring of both
categories of the Preservation Support Grants program.
One commenter recommended that the Department eliminate the set-
aside for Preservation Support Grants and allow intermediaries to apply
for an amount up to the entire State allocation to be used for Direct
Assistance or Preservation Support Grants, with a maximum of $60,000
for training, outreach, and preservation activities. Beyond that, the
commenter suggested that intermediaries be allowed to propose
activities most appropriate for their jurisdictions. The law provides
for two separate grant categories under Preservation Support Grants and
identifies specific purposes for each one. The intent of the statute is
to allow interested resident groups an opportunity to participate in
the preservation process. While the point raised here is valid, the
Department must adhere to the specifics of the law. Also, the
opportunity for a resourceful resident-controlled group, which may have
access to other supplemental funds to combine with a HUD award to
organize and educate tenants, should not be thwarted by the elimination
of the set-aside for Preservation Support Grants.
One commenter said that HUD should change the Outreach and Training
applicant definition to include a network of advocacy people or other
qualified organizations, not just resident-controlled or resident-based
nonprofits. They stressed that the requirement that the applicant be a
resident-controlled or community-based group was too restrictive and
would prohibit certain tenant groups from participating in the
preservation process. They further questioned the need for the
applicant's board to be resident-controlled and recommended that the
requirement be deleted. The Department appreciates the concerns
expressed; however, the requirement is statutory and cannot be deleted.
One commenter proposed that the NOFA add criteria to ensure that
each community-based organization applicant has an established
mechanism to guarantee responsiveness to tenants. The Department
rejects this suggestion because it believes it would be a burdensome
requirement and difficult to implement and measure. The same commenter
suggested that tenants and other organizations working on these issues
in the community also should have a chance for input on the application
and award. The Department disagrees with this comment. It is unclear
how and when the commenter intended that tenants and other
organizations would comply with this requirement. Also, it is illegal
for HUD to disclose advance information about the applicants in a
competitive grant process.
Finally, this commenter suggested that HUD, as grant administrator,
should provide notice of the application to all nonprofit and tenant
organizations working on preservation in the relevant jurisdiction and
to national and regional groups, and that there should be a limited
time period for other qualified groups to submit a competing
application. The Department believes that this recommendation will
delay decisionmaking and create excessive administrative burdens.
However, under section 102 of the HUD Reform Act, HUD will publish the
names of the recipients of assistance under this NOFA in the Federal
Register.
One commenter stated that this NOFA should have similar
accountability language in Outreach and Training Grant applications as
in the Direct Assistance Grant applications. The Department has
modified the language defining eligible applicants for Outreach and
Training Grants and Preservation Activity grants. The eligibility
requirements now reflect accountability similar to that expected of
Direct Assistance Grant applicants.
Three commenters stated that because the best Outreach and Training
providers will not always be local entities and the statute requires
local entities, the NOFA should be clear that Preservation Activity
Grants should be available for Outreach and Training by regional/
statewide providers. The commenter added that Statewide organizations
should be eligible to receive Outreach and Training grants where there
is a lack of local activity.
The Department is limiting applicants applying for Outreach and
Training grants to local resident-controlled, community-based, city-
wide, county-wide, or multi-county providers, which is consistent with
the statute. However, community action, legal service, and fair housing
counseling agencies; State or local government agencies; and local,
regional, State, and national intermediaries can apply for a
Preservation Activity Grant to conduct outreach and training and
organizational development training for tenants where no local
resident-controlled group or community-based organization exists. With
respect to awards made under this category, the Department will give
preference to eligible regional, State, and local intermediaries over
national nonprofit organizations.
Three commenters stated that HUD should more clearly define what
are eligible activities for State and local governments and nonprofit
intermediaries using Preservation Support Grants. In addition,
commenters suggested that the term ``deemed appropriate'' should be
clarified. Another commenter stated that the NOFA should contain a
broader list of specific activities or examples of ``other activities''
that further the intent of the preservation programs. The Department
agrees with this comment and, in Section III.F of the NOFA, has
clarified and broadened the list of eligible activities for
Preservation Activity grants.
One commenter offered that HUD should clarify that resident-
controlled and community-based nonprofits are treated equally. Three
commenters stated that an overwhelming majority of funding for
Preservation Support Grants should be made available to resident-
controlled organizations. The Department is giving priority to local
resident-controlled groups that apply for Outreach and Training grants,
because the statute clearly indicates tenants/residents as the intended
beneficiaries of this assistance. In cases where no experienced local
resident-controlled group or community-based nonprofit organization
exists, or where one exists, but does not apply or has applied, but its
application was disapproved, then community action, legal service, and
fair housing counseling agencies; State and local government agencies;
or national nonprofit intermediaries may apply for a Preservation
Activity Grant and receive priority consideration to conduct outreach
and training and organizational development of the tenants.
Five commenters stated that HUD should give preferences to Outreach
and Training applicants in the following order: applicants in which the
decisionmaking body is made up entirely of HUD-assisted residents,
those with a majority of HUD-assisted residents, those with a majority
of low-income community members, community-based applicants, and
regionally based applicants. Organizations with no direct experience
should be acceptable where there is no other applicant. One commenter
stated that HUD should spell out a clear priority to maximize funds to
resident-controlled coalitions. Another commenter said that priority
should be for groups with at least three years of organizing experience
demonstrating board and staff accountability to resident groups. The
Department will give preference for Outreach and Training grants to
local resident-controlled groups with at least two years of organizing
experience. The priorities will be reflected in the rating process
described in Section IV.C of the NOFA.
One commenter said that Outreach and Training grants should be
reviewed and selected separately from Preservation Activity grants,
with separate allocations. The Department agrees and has developed a
separate selection process for each of the Preservation Support Grant
categories. This commenter also recommended that intermediaries
administering Direct Assistance Grants should also be able to apply to
do Other Purpose activities; this is especially important in geographic
areas where there are not many experienced entities.
Intermediaries that are eligible to apply to administer Direct
Assistance Grants are also eligible to apply for Preservation Activity
grants. However, intermediaries selected to administer Direct
Assistance Grants, by statute, ``may not provide other services to
grant recipients that are the subject of the grant application and may
not receive payment, directly or indirectly, from the proceeds of
grants they have approved.'' Therefore, administering intermediaries
may not also apply to perform outreach and organizational development
activities for resident groups that may receive technical assistance
funds through the Resident Capacity or Predevelopment Grants that the
intermediary is administering.
Another commenter contended that potential purchasers should be
able to receive these grants when no other qualified applicant has
expressed an interest in the activity. In other words, potential
purchasers would be considered grantees of last resort. The Department
believes that the statute clearly identifies eligible applicants for
Preservation Support grants; the program is not opened to potential
purchasers.
Two commenters stated that Outreach and Training recipients should
not be able to seek an ownership interest in the project. They claim
that such a policy would avoid conflicts of interest with potential
landlords, while enabling residents to organize independently. The
Department agrees with this comment and believes that such a policy
would restrict grantees from also benefitting as potential purchasers
who could receive a direct assistance grant, and certain incentives
under ELIPHA or LIHPRHA, thereby becoming a double recipient of HUD's
Preservation program.
One commenter stated that HUD should allocate unused funds from the
1992 NOFA according to the 90/10 percent formula: i.e., 90 percent to
Direct Assistance Grants and 10 percent to Preservation Support grants.
Another commenter suggested that HUD clarify the exact amount of funds
available from the 1992 NOFA and how they will be divided. The
Department has divided the allocation of unused funds from the 1992
NOFA according to the 90/10 percent formula: 90 percent to Technical
Assistance Grants and 10 percent to Preservation Support Grants.
Three commenters said that more of the unused funds from the 1992
NOFA should be available for Outreach and Training Grants. Another
suggested that all unobligated 1992 NOFA funds be allocated to Outreach
and Training grants. The Department will allocate the portion of the
unused 1992 NOFA funds designated for Preservation Support Grants using
a 50/50 percent formula: 50 percent for Outreach and Training grants
and 50 percent for Preservation Activity grants. Again, the reason for
the equal allocation is to allow the Department to maximize the level
of assistance to, and expand the number of, newly organized tenant
groups, through the provision of outreach and training and
organizational development under Preservation Activity grants. One
commenter also suggested that HUD issue a separate NOFA for Outreach
and Training Grants. The Department is publishing one NOFA for both
categories of Preservation Support Grants because it is more cost-
effective and efficient.
One commenter contended that more money should be made available
for Preservation Support Grants because a great majority of at-risk
projects in the commenter's State are not organized. Some residents are
even unaware that they live in HUD-assisted buildings; few have heard
of LIHPRHA or ELIPHA and even fewer are aware of HUD's Technical
Assistance Grants.
The statute provides that of any amount made available for these
purposes in any appropriations act, 90 percent shall be set aside for
use in accordance with Direct Assistance Grants and 10 percent shall be
set aside for use in accordance with Preservation Support Grants.
However, the Department will give preference to a Preservation Activity
Grant applicant that shows it will take specific steps to inform and
organize potential eligible low-income tenants who are unlikely to be
unaware of the Preservation program (see Section IV.C(2) of this NOFA).
One commenter objected to large national contracts for Outreach and
Training grants. The commenter suggested that $5 million currently set
aside for additional national training should be put into Outreach and
Training grants and administered in a separate NOFA, stating that a
previous contract of $1.5 million to provide training around the
country was ineffective and that small, local contracts are much better
than a large national contract. The commenter further contended that
most resident learning is hands-on, not in hotel workshops. The
Department will administer the Preservation Support Grant program and
will award Outreach and Training grants only to local resident-
controlled or community-based nonprofit organizations that demonstrate
their experience and ability to organize and educate the residents, or
to city, county, or multi-county providers. Where no local resident-
controlled or community-based nonprofit organizations exists, or where
one exists, but does not apply or has applied, but its application was
disapproved, HUD will accept applications to conduct outreach and
training from community action, legal service, and fair housing
counseling agencies; State and local government agencies; nonprofit
intermediaries; or other groups that can demonstrate that they have
three or more years of experience dealing with tenant issues and a
capacity to undertake organizing unorganized tenants.

II. Purpose and Substantive Description

A. Authority and Background

The funding made available under this NOFA is authorized by section
312 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (Pub. L. 102-
550, approved October 28, 1992) (1992 HCDA), in order to provide
outreach and training to eligible resident groups and to assist the
Department in carrying out its responsibilities under the Emergency
Low-Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987 (Pub. L. 100-242, section
201 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987, approved Feb.
5, 1988) (ELIHPA) or the Low-Income Housing Preservation and Resident
Homeownership Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-625, section 601 of the National
Affordable Housing Act (NAHA), approved November 28, 1990) (LIHPRHA).
This NOFA combines funding authorized for FY 1993 and FY 1994 in
section 312 of the 1992 HCDA. Funds announced by this NOFA will include
amounts authorized in 1992 that remain unobligated from the
Preservation Technical Assistance Grant Program, resulting in up to a
total of $6 million available under this NOFA.
The origins of LIHPRHA are in ELIHPA. The purpose of ELIHPA was to
preserve low-income affordability restrictions on certain HUD-insured
or assisted multifamily projects. ELIHPA authorized the use of
incentives to encourage owners to retain low-income affordability
restrictions or to transfer the property to purchasers who would agree
to retain those restrictions. The fundamental principles underlying
ELIHPA were that the low-income housing should be preserved for the
intended beneficiaries and that owners should be guaranteed a fair and
reasonable return on their investments.
ELIHPA was intended to be a temporary measure that would allow
Congress time to fashion a permanent program for the preservation of
existing low-income housing projects. This permanent program is
LIHPRHA, which replaced ELIHPA except to the extent that section 604 of
NAHA provides a transition option for certain owners. The Department's
regulations implementing these statutory provisions were published as
an interim rule at 57 FR 11992 (April 8, 1992), and were revised in
interim rules at 57 FR 57312 (December 3, 1992), 58 FR 4870 (January
15, 1993), and 58 FR 3384 (July 13, 1993, including requirements in
this NOFA that were imposed by Title III of the 1992 HCDA). All
references in this NOFA to sections 248.1 through 248.183 are to those
sections as set out in these interim rules.

B. Allocation Amounts

The purpose of this NOFA is to make $6 million in grant funds
available to eligible applicants to perform resident outreach and
training, organizational development, education activities, and
preservation assistance activities. These funds will be allocated
equally between Outreach and Training Grants and Preservation Activity
Grants. One million dollars ($1 million) of these grant funds are from
unobligated funds from fiscal year 1992 Preservation Technical
Assistance Grant funds. Both grant categories are described below.

C. Grant Categories

There are two types of Preservation Support Grants: (1) Outreach
and Training Grants; and (2) Preservation Activity Grants.
Outreach and Training Grants are available for established
community, city-wide, county-wide, or multi-county coalitions of
resident-controlled groups or community-based nonprofit organizations
with experience in resident education and organizing, to identify and
organize residents of eligible low-income housing.
Preservation Activity Grants are available to community action,
legal service, and fair housing counseling agencies; State and local
government agencies; and State, regional, or national nonprofit
intermediaries, for the purpose of conducting outreach and training and
organizational development for unorganized tenants or carrying out
other proposed activities, described in Section III.F of this NOFA,
that further the preservation program in their jurisdictions.

D. Grant Amounts

(1) Outreach and Training Grants. HUD will accept Outreach and
Training applications that propose a term of from one to three years.
The Department will limit the grant amount to $450,000 for successful
applications that propose three-year activities. The maximum annual
distribution for such grants will be $150,000, which must be obligated
or expended by the grantee prior to the distribution of additional
funds. Day-to-day draw-down limits and procedures will be described in
the application package.
Outreach and Training grants will be awarded in amounts reflective
of the overall program design, capacity, and need, as measured by the
criteria in Section IV.C of this NOFA.
(2) Preservation Activity Grants. At the regional, State, and local
levels, the Department will make a one-time award, not to exceed
$250,000, for proposals designed to address outreach and training and
organizational development for tenants or other types of Preservation
activities. Applicants applying for Preservation Activity grants that
propose outreach and training and organizational development for
tenants, or other eligible preservation activities that are national in
scope and require a high level of funding to be effective, may receive
a one-time award in an amount not to exceed $500,000. However, the
Department will give preference to eligible regional, State, and local
intermediaries over national nonprofit organizations. A national
nonprofit organization must document its ability to accomplish proposed
tasks on a national level and describe what resources it has to carry
out the activity effectively and with success. Grantees in receipt of
Section 254 funds may not use these funds to replace local or regional,
public or private funding initiatives that are already in place.
The level of funding will be commensurate with the described level
of complexity of activities, geographic scope, and number of potential
participants. Activities must be completed in a timely manner and may
not, in any case, exceed a three-year period.
The Department may terminate the grant if a grantee fails to
complete the task within a reasonable time period. In determining the
reasonableness of the time period, HUD will consider the complexity of
the activity and the resources available to accomplish the task.

III. Eligibility Information

A. General

Preservation Support Grants are meant to fund activities that will
further the Preservation process and are carried out by: local
resident-controlled or community-based nonprofit organizations, in the
case of Outreach and Training grants; and community action, legal
service, and fair housing counseling agencies; State and local
government agencies; and State, regional or national intermediaries, in
the case of Preservation Activity grants. Resident-controlled groups
are comprised primarily of residents living in HUD-assisted projects.
Outreach and Training grant applications will be reviewed
separately from Preservation Activity grant applications. However, if
all funds are not awarded to eligible applicants in one grant category,
the Department will have the option to utilize unused funds from that
grant category to fund acceptable applications for the other. The
Department will give priority to resident-controlled and community-
based organizations that apply for Outreach and Training Grants. In
competitive situations where resident outreach and training activities
are proposed under both categories of the Preservation Support Grant
(e.g., a local government or non-community-based nonprofit organization
proposing a resident outreach and training program within the same
jurisdiction as the resident-controlled group), applications from a
Preservation Activity Grant applicant will only be considered in the
balance of a jurisdiction not served by an Outreach and Training Grant
recipient.
Grantees will be selected based on eligibility thresholds;
applicant type, capacity, and experience; and jurisdictional needs, as
described below in this NOFA.

B. Eligible Recipients

Eligible recipients of Outreach and Training and Preservation
Activity grants will be tenants living in eligible Title II or Title VI
projects. In addition, funds provided in this NOFA may be available to
provide assistance to tenants living in property disposition projects
that are subject to section 203(c)(2)(D) of the Housing and Community
Development Amendments of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 1701z-11), as amended by
section 101(b) of the Multifamily Housing Property Disposition Reform
Act of 1994 (108 Stat. 342; Pub. L. 103-233, approved April 11, 1994).

C. Eligible Applicants--Outreach and Training Grants

An organization applying to do resident outreach and training must
demonstrate that it is a nonprofit organization, has at least two years
of experience in resident organizing and education, and is either
resident-controlled with a majority of the board consisting of
residents of HUD-assisted housing or is a community-based organization
(CBO) that meets the definition of a CBO in 24 CFR 248.101, with a
majority of its activities taking place at the community level.
Applications from newly formed resident-controlled groups and CBOs that
have applied for tax-exempt status under section 501(c) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 on or before the date of application may be
considered as long as the organization is approved before the effective
date of the grant agreement. Also, newly formed and otherwise eligible
organizations may submit joint applications with eligible organizations
that are tax-exempt.
Priority will be given to local resident-controlled groups. Next in
order of preference will be established community-based organizations
and, thirdly, city-wide, county-wide, or multi-county coalitions of
resident groups with a majority (51 percent or more) of Board
participation by HUD tenants and that can provide documentation that
they have experience working with ELIPHA and/or LIHPRHA programs. Where
there is no application from such groups, community action, legal
service, and fair housing counseling agencies; State and local
government agencies; and intermediaries may apply for Preservation
Activity grants to initiate outreach and training and the
organizational development of tenants.

D. Eligible Activities--Outreach and Training Grants

Outreach and Training Grants are available for the following
activities:
Identifying residents and resident groups living in
eligible preservation projects. Eligible projects include any property
that is or could become available for sale and meeting the definition
of ``eligible low-income housing'' at 24 CFR 248.101 or 248.201,
regardless of whether an owner has filed a Notice of Intent.
Providing outreach and training to tenants identified by
local Field Offices where HUD staff may not be available to perform
such tasks due to budgetary constraints. These activities could include
attending Preservation Capital Needs Assessment (PCNA) exit
conferences, obtaining translation of the owner's Notice of Intent,
providing other service where needed for PCNA exit conferences, or
attending other resident meetings.
Organizing residents of eligible low-income housing to
participate effectively in the preservation process.
Performing outreach, training, and counseling, which may
include sound housing management, maintenance, and financial
management, to residents and resident groups living in eligible
preservation projects.
Delivering project-based, community-, city-, or county-
wide training programs on ELIHPA, LIHPRHA, resident participation, and
forms of resident homeownership options.

E. Eligible Applicants--Preservation Activity Grants

(1) Description of applicants. HUD will accept applications from
community action, legal service, and fair housing counseling agencies;
regional, State, and local government agencies; nonprofit
intermediaries; or other groups that can demonstrate that they have
both three or more years of experience dealing with tenant issues and a
capacity to undertake organizing unorganized tenants. A national
nonprofit organization must have at least five years of similar
experience. Eligible applicants fall into one of the following
categories:
(1) State and local housing agencies. This category includes public
housing agencies, community redevelopment agencies, other agencies that
administer a community's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
(CHAS), and State housing finance authorities.
(2) Regional, State, and local nonprofit organizations that must
have been in existence for at least three years prior to the date of
application and either are classified as exempt organizations under
section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or are otherwise
a tax-exempt entity.
(3) National nonprofit intermediaries that have been in existence
for at least five years prior to the date of application and are
classified as exempt organizations under section 501(c)(3) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986. An intermediary applying for
Preservation Activity Grant funds must:
Have as a central purpose of its organization the
preservation of low-income housing and the prevention of displacement
of low- and moderate-income residents;
Not receive direct Federal appropriations for operating
support;
Meet the standards of fiscal responsibility established in
OMB Circulars A-110 and A-122 or, if a State or local agency, 24 CFR
part 85 and OMB Circular 87; and
Have a record of service to low-income individuals or
community-based nonprofit housing developers in multiple communities.
(2) Limitations on Intermediaries. Intermediaries that are eligible
to apply to administer Technical Assistance Grants may be eligible to
apply for a Preservation Activity Grant pursuant to the following
prohibition. Intermediaries selected to administer Technical Assistance
Grants, pursuant to Section 255(a) of the 1992 HCDA, ``may not provide
other services to grant recipients that are the subject of the grant
application and may not receive payment, directly or indirectly, from
the proceeds of grants they have approved.'' Therefore, administering
intermediaries may not also apply to perform outreach and
organizational development for tenants, or other types of Preservation
support activities for resident groups that receive technical
assistance funds through the Resident Capacity or Predevelopment Grants
that the intermediary is administering.
Also, unlike intermediaries that are eligible to administer Direct
Assistance grants, those intermediaries applying for Preservation
Activity Grants may not serve as pass-through intermediaries. That is,
they are limited to using grant funds to carry out eligible grant
activities and may not administer the allocation of HUD grant or loan
funds.

F. Eligible Activities--Preservation Activity Grants

Preservation Activity grants will be available to:
Provide outreach and training and organizational
development for ``unorganized'' tenants, as provided by resident-
controlled groups and CBOs under the Outreach and Training category in
Section III.C of this NOFA, if no experienced local resident-controlled
group or community-based nonprofit organization exists or one exists,
but does not apply or has applied, but HUD disapproved its application;
Provide outreach and training to tenants identified by
local Field Offices where HUD staff may not be available to perform
such tasks due to budgetary constraints. These activities could include
attending Preservation Capital Needs Assessment (PCNA) exit
conferences, obtaining translation of the owner's Notice of Intent,
providing other service where needed for PCNA exit conferences, or
attending other resident meetings.
Undertake pilot programs that assist HUD field staff to
expedite the preservation process or otherwise conserve staff
resources;
Streamline the preservation process via the activities
described in this Section;
Educate parties outside the Department (including, but not
limited to appraisers, financial institution officials, State and local
government officials, community groups, and owner entities) about the
preservation process;
Establish preservation clearinghouses as a resource to
resident organizations, community groups, and potential purchasers;
Create informational materials about the preservation
process for nationwide distribution;
Perform legal and financial research studies on eligible
properties; and
Provide support activities that would otherwise further
the Preservation program established under ELIHPA and LIHPRHA.

G. Ineligible Activities--Both Categories

Activities ineligible for funding under either category (Outreach
and Training or Preservation Activity) of Preservation Support grants
include:
Purchase of land or buildings or any improvements to land
or buildings;
Entertainment, including associated costs such as food and
beverages, but not including refreshments and supplies for
organizational meetings;
Payments of fees for lobbying services;
Activities funded from other sources;
Activities already being performed outside the scope of
this NOFA; and
Activities completed prior to the date funding is approved
under this NOFA.

IV. Selection Process

A. Screening

The Multifamily Preservation Division staff in Headquarters will
screen each application to determine whether it meets the technical
requirements for application submission contained in this NOFA and the
application package. If the application meets the technical
requirements, it will be reviewed and ranked according to the selection
criteria in Section IV.C of the NOFA. After screening the application,
the Preservation Division will fax information about the applicant and
application, such as name, project number, and experience the applicant
identifies it has with HUD and the Preservation Program, to the Chief,
Loan Management Division, in the HUD Field Office with jurisdiction
over the applicant's geographical area. The Loan Management staff will
review the information and provide comments about the information and
the extent of its experience, if any, with the organization. Within
sixty days from the application deadline, the Preservation Division
will notify an applicant of its selection or rejection. Grantees will
be required to sign a grant agreement.

B. Threshold Review--Correction of Deficient Applications

(1) Threshold Review. The Department will perform a threshold
review of the applications to ensure completeness and will request
applicants to correct any nonsubstantive deficiencies. Nonsubstantive
deficiencies are those that are not integral to the application's
review, such as a certification.
(2) Revisions. If an application is found to be deficient in a
nonsubstantive manner, the Department will inform the applicant of such
deficiency within 15 days after the application deadline and the
applicant will have seven days to submit revisions. If an application
is substantively deficient at the time of application deadline, the
application will be rejected.

C. Selection Criteria

HUD will review each Preservation Support Grant application and
assign up to 100 points in each category (Outreach and Training Grants
and Preservation Activity Grants), in accordance with the criteria
described in this Section.
In competitive situations where resident outreach and training
activities are proposed under both categories of Preservation Support
Grants (e.g., a local government or non-community-based nonprofit
organization proposing a resident outreach and training program within
the same jurisdiction as the resident-controlled group), applications
from a Preservation Activity Grant applicant will only be considered in
any part of a jurisdiction not served by an Outreach and Training Grant
recipient.
After rating, the Department will rank the applications according
to score and will fund them in rank order, reserving the option, if
needed, to establish a minimum score of 60 points for funding. Grants
will be awarded based upon the highest scores, which represent the best
overall assessment of the potential of the proposed work activities for
achieving the principal objective of this competition: to promote the
ability of residents to participate meaningfully in the preservation
process and to enable State or local housing agencies or intermediaries
to conduct outreach and training and organizational development for
unorganized tenants and undertake other activities that further
preservation programs.
Applications that pass the technical threshold review will be rated
as follows:
(1) Outreach and Training Grants. Under this category, the
Department will require successful applicants to restrict provision of
outreach and training to resident groups and community-based nonprofit
purchasers. In addition, local resident-controlled groups will receive
priority rating over community-based organizations and city-wide,
county-wide, or multi-county coalitions of resident groups.
(a) Capacity is reflected in the qualifications or capabilities of
the applicant (maximum points: 50). The capability of the applicant to
conduct community-, city-, or county-wide outreach and training
programs to identify and organize residents of eligible low-income
housing within a reasonable time period, within budget, and in an
effective manner, as demonstrated through past performance. In
assigning points for this criterion, HUD will consider:
Direct Experience. An applicant under this category must
provide documentation that they have experience working with ELIPHA
and/or LIHPRHA programs. The applicant or key staff must show that it
has at least two years of experience in this area of work to receive
points under this criterion. An applicant also may demonstrate this
experience by the participation of or affiliation with board members or
consultants. The Department will rate the application according to the
degree to which the applicant describes its ability to organize
residents and conduct educational workshops or describe how it will
obtain such experience. This criterion will be measured by previous
experience and success in outreach, recruitment, counseling,
organizational development, and training (* * * up to 20 points).
Preservation Experience. The degree of knowledge,
experience, and expertise the applicant can show that it has, or will
obtain, with ELIHPA and/or LIHPRHA programs, to ensure compliance with
relevant program requirements and to enable newly organized tenant
groups to participate in these Preservation programs. This criterion
will be measured by previous experience (* * * up to 20 points).
Management Capacity. The extent to which the applicant can
ensure through its organization and management plans that the activity
for which it applied will be well-managed; carried out in a timely
manner; and protected from waste, fraud, or other abuse of funds, based
on past performance with similar programs (* * * up to 5 points).
Fiscal Responsibility. The ability of the applicant or key
staff to handle, manage, and account adequately for financial resources
and to use acceptable financial control procedures, demonstrated
through past performance of the applicant entity or key staff with
Federal, State, or local funds, or an explanation of how such
capability will be obtained (* * * up to 5 points).
(b) Level of Resident Participation in the Organization. Priority
will be given to established resident-controlled groups and nonprofit
community-based organizations that have a majority (51 percent or more)
of Board participation by tenants in HUD-assisted project(s) (maximum
points: 20). HUD will rate the applications on a scale that gives the
highest number of points to organizations with the highest number of
HUD-assisted tenants on the Board.
(c) Need. The degree of need for the proposed outreach and training
programs to identify and organize tenants of eligible low-income
housing, demonstrated by the number of eligible projects in the
community (maximum points: 15). In measuring this criterion, HUD will
consider the number of eligible projects in the area and the number of
tenants that the applicant identifies that would benefit from the
activity.
(d) Program Quality and Feasibility. The comprehensiveness of the
proposed plan and the potential of the applicant for developing a
successful and effective program (maximum points: 15). HUD will
consider the extent to which the proposed program represents a sound,
comprehensive, and responsive plan for developing outreach and training
efforts, organizing tenants, and providing housing counseling. Program
quality will be evaluated in terms of whether the proposed program
activities meet the Outreach and Training program objective.
(2) Preservation Activity Grants. Under this category, the
Department will give preference to eligible regional, State, and local
intermediaries over national nonprofit organizations. Also, the
Department will give priority to any applicant that shows its intention
to initiate outreach and training and the organizational development of
low-income tenants where no resident-controlled or community-based
organization exists. Organizations such as community action, legal
service, and fair housing counseling agencies must demonstrate that
they have three or more years experience dealing with tenants and the
capacity to undertake tenant organization. Regional, State, and local
government agencies will be required to document their ability to
implement the proposed activity on a regional level, and intermediaries
that propose to undertake outreach and training and organizational
development for tenants or carry out other proposed support activities
on a national level must demonstrate their ability to accomplish such
tasks.
(a) Capacity is the qualification or capabilities of the applicant
to develop and implement: Successful and effective outreach and
training and organizational development for tenants; and other
Preservation support activities, as described in Section III of this
NOFA (maximum points: 50).
Preservation Experience. The degree of knowledge,
experience, and expertise the applicant can show that it has, or will
obtain, with ELIHPA and/or LIHPRHA programs, to ensure compliance with
relevant program requirements and enable newly organized tenant groups
to participate in these preservation programs. This criterion will be
measured by previous experience (* * * up to 20 points).
Direct Experience. The applicant or key staff must show
that it has at least three years of experience in the area of work for
which it is applying, or describe how it will obtain such experience.
This criterion will be measured by previous experience and success in
the applicable activity (* * * up to 20 points).
Management Capacity. The extent to which the applicant can
ensure through its organization and management plans that the activity
for which it applied will be well-managed; carried out in a timely
manner; and protected from waste, fraud, or other abuse of funds, based
on past performance with similar programs (* * * up to 5 points).
Fiscal Responsibility. The ability of the applicant or key
staff to handle, manage, and account adequately for financial resources
and to use acceptable financial control procedures, demonstrated
through past performance of the applicant entity or key staff with
Federal, State, or local funds, or an explanation of how such
capability will be obtained (* * * up to 5 points).
(b) Jurisdictional Needs. This criteria will be based on the
Department's determination of how well the applicant addresses specific
unmet needs in the jurisdiction. This assessment will be based on the
number of current preservation cases in the Multifamily Preservation
Processing System (MPPS). The Department will also take into
consideration the number of applications received from that
jurisdiction. This assessment may include availability of Department-
sponsored or other training for residents and other groups (maximum
points: 20 points).
(c) Program Quality and Feasibility. The comprehensiveness of the
proposed plan and the potential of the applicant for developing a
successful and effective program (maximum points: 30). HUD will
evaluate the extent to which the proposed program: represents a sound,
comprehensive, and responsive plan for developing any of the activities
described in Section III.F of this NOFA and meets the Preservation
Activity Grant Program objective.
Commitment. The extent of the applicant commitment and
responsiveness to the needs and problems of the tenants (* * * up to 10
points).
Outreach, Recruitment, and Selection Activities. The
level, nature, and comprehensiveness of proposed outreach, recruitment
(including specific steps to be taken to attract potential eligible
participants who are unlikely to be aware of the program), and
selection strategies, as measured by: (i) the extent to which the
applicant has developed special outreach efforts to recruit eligible
low-income tenants; and (ii) the extent to which the proposed
participant selection system supports these efforts (* * * 20 points).

V. Grant Application Process

A. Application Packages

Upon request, Preservation Support Grant application packages are
available from the Multifamily Housing Clearinghouse, P.O. Box 6424,
Rockville, MD 20850, telephone number: 1-800-955-2232. Please refer to
FR-3613 when requesting an application package.
For other questions about the Preservation program, please contact
the Preservation Division, Room 6284, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202)
708-2300, or the contact numbers at the beginning of this NOFA.

B. Deadline for Submission

Applications for Preservation Support Grants must be physically
received by the Multifamily Preservation Division no later than 4:30
p.m. (EST), on August 15, 1994. No facsimiles will be accepted. Any
application received after that time will not be accepted for
processing and will be returned to the applicant. Any revisions made in
accordance with Section IV.B(2) of this NOFA may be transmitted by
facsimile; however, the original revision must be subsequently
submitted by mail or in person.

C. Submission Requirements

An applicant must provide a completed application, including the
following, as applicable:
(1) OMB Standard Forms 424 and 424B;
(2) Summary of proposed activities and jurisdiction;
(3) Information about the applicant, including its history, its
staff and qualifications, and its experience;
(4) Summary of plan to carry out proposed activities;
(5) Evidence of tax-exempt status, if applicable;
(6) Certification that assistance provided under this NOFA will not
be used to supplant or duplicate other resources for the proposed
activities. For purposes of this paragraph, ``other resources'' means
resources provided from any source other than under this NOFA;
(7) Other disclosures, certifications, and assurances (including
Drug-Free Workplace certification), as required under the law and this
NOFA;
(8) Certification that the applicant and any of its affiliates do
not have, and will not seek, an ownership interest in any developments
that are to be assisted with these funds; and
(9) Other information and materials as may be described in the
application kit.

VI. Other Matters

Public Reporting Burden

The information collection requirements contained in this notice
have been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The Department
has determined that the following provisions contain information
collection requirements.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
x x
Number of respondents Frequency of response Hours per response = Burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
120.................... 1 6 720
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Environmental Impact

In accordance with 40 CFR 1508.4 of the regulations of the Council
on Environmental Quality and 24 CFR 50.20(b) of the HUD regulations,
the policies and procedures contained in this notice relate only to
technical assistance and, therefore, are categorically excluded from
the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act.

Federalism Impact

The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under section 6(a)
of Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has determined that the policies
contained in this notice will not have substantial direct effects on
States or their political subdivisions, or the relationship between the
Federal government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. As a result,
this notice is not subject to review under the Executive Order 12612.

Family Executive Order

The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under Executive
Order 12606, The Family, has determined that this notice does not have
potential for significant impact on family formation, maintenance, and
general well-being, and, thus, is not subject to review under the
Order. No significant change in existing HUD policies or programs will
result from promulgation of this notice, as those policies and programs
related to family concerns.

Section 102 of the HUD Reform Act: Documentation and Public Access
Requirements; Applicant/Recipient Disclosures

Documentation and public access requirements. HUD will ensure that
documentation and other information regarding each application
submitted pursuant to this NOFA are sufficient to indicate the basis
upon which assistance was provided or denied. This material, including
any letters of support, will be made available for public inspection
for a five-year period beginning not less than 30 days after the award
of the assistance. Material will be made available in accordance with
the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and HUD's implementing
regulations at 24 CFR part 15. In addition, HUD will include the
recipients of assistance pursuant to this NOFA in its quarterly Federal
Register notice of all recipients of HUD assistance awarded on a
competitive basis. (See 24 CFR 12.14(a) and 12.16(b), and the notice
published in the Federal Register on January 16, 1992 (57 FR 1942), for
further information on these documentation and public access
requirements.)
Disclosures. HUD will make available to the public for five years
all applicant disclosure reports (HUD Form 2880) submitted in
connection with this NOFA. Update reports (also Form 2880) will be made
available along with the applicant disclosure reports, but in no case
for a period less than three years. All reports--both applicant
disclosures and updates--will be made available in accordance with the
Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and HUD's implementing
regulations at 24 CFR part 15. (See 24 CFR part 12, subpart C, for
further information on these disclosure requirements.)

Section 103 HUD Reform Act

HUD's regulation implementing Section 103 of the Department of
Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3537a),
codified as 24 CFR part 4, applies to the funding competition announced
today. The requirements of the rule continue to apply until the
announcement of selection of successful applicants.
HUD employees involved in the review of applications and in the
making of funding decisions are limited by 24 CFR part 4 from providing
advance information to any person (other than an authorized employee of
HUD) concerning funding decisions, or from otherwise giving any
applicant an unfair competitive advantage. Persons who apply for
assistance in this competition should confine their inquiries to the
subject areas permitted under 24 CFR part 4.
Applicants who have questions should contact the HUD Office of
Ethics (202) 708-3815 (voice/TDD). (This is not a toll-free number.)
The Office of Ethics can provide information of a general nature to HUD
employees, as well. However, a HUD employee who has specific program
questions, such as whether particular subject matter can be discussed
with persons outside the Department, should contact his or her Regional
or Field Office Counsel, or Headquarters counsel for the program to
which the question pertains.

Section 112 of the Reform Act

Section 112 of the HUD Reform Act added a new section 13 to the
Department of Housing and Urban Development Act (42 U.S.C. 3537b).
Section 13 contains two provisions dealing with efforts to influence
HUD's decisions with respect to financial assistance. The first imposes
disclosure requirements on those who are typically involved in these
efforts--those who pay others to influence the award of assistance or
the taking of a management action by the Department and those who are
paid to provide the influence. The second restricts the payment of fees
to those who are paid to influence the award of HUD assistance, if the
fees are tied to the number of housing units received or are based on
the amount of assistance received, or if they are contingent upon the
receipt of assistance.
Section 13 was implemented by 24 CFR part 86. If readers are
involved in any efforts to influence the Department in these ways, they
are urged to read part 86, particularly the examples contained in
Appendix A of the rule.
Any questions about the rule should be directed to the: Office of
Ethics, room 2158, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410-3000. Telephone: (202) 708-
3815 (voice/TDD). (This is not a toll-free number.) Forms necessary for
compliance with the rule may be obtained from the local HUD office.

Prohibition Against Lobbying Activities

The use of funds awarded under this NOFA is subject to the
disclosure requirements and prohibitions of section 319 of the
Department of Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for
Fiscal Year 1990 (31 U.S.C. 1352) (the ``Byrd Amendment'') and the
implementing regulations at 24 CFR part 87. These authorities prohibit
recipients of federal contracts, grants, or loans from using
appropriated funds for lobbying the Executive or Legislative branches
of the federal government in connection with a specific contract,
grant, or loan. The prohibition also covers the awarding of contracts,
grants, cooperative agreements, or loans unless the recipient has made
an acceptable certification regarding lobbying. Under 24 CFR part 87,
applicants, recipients, and subrecipients of assistance exceeding
$100,000 must certify that no federal funds have been or will be spent
on lobbying activities in connection with the assistance.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4101 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).

Dated: May 24, 1994.
Nicolas P. Retsinas,
Assistant Secretary for Housing--Federal Housing Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 94-14344 Filed 6-13-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-27-P