FY2016 Community Compass NOFA U.S. Department o f Housing and Urban Development (HUD)

1. FY2016 Community Compass NOFAU.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) May 18, 2016

2. Presenters Heidi Joseph, Office of Native American Programs Office of Public and Indian Housing Ken Rogers, Technical Assistance Division Office of Community Planning and Development Steven Shepherd, Office of Economic Resilience Office of Community Planning and Development

3. Agenda • Overview of Community Compass • Funding and Awards • Key Changes from 2015 • Rating Factors • Application Submission Requirements

4. Important Notes • This webinar assumes that viewers have read the 2016 Community Compass NOFA. It is intended to be an overview; as such, we focus on key information and do not cover every NOFA requirement in detail. • Items in red on this PowerPoint are new and/or different, so please pay particular attention to them. 4

5. What is Community Compass? • HUD’s integrated TA and capacity building initiative • Designed to help HUD customers manage and deliver programs effectively • Equips customers with knowledge, skills, tools, capacity, and systems • Cross-agency approach • Successful applicants are awarded funds to develop and provide TA and training to HUD customers • “Customers” are recipients of HUD funding, including state and local grantees, PHAs, owners and managers of HUD-assisted housing, CoCs, non-profit grantees, HMIS leads, HUD-approved housing counseling agencies and counselors, states, Tribes, and TDHEs

6. Table of Categories, Programs and Topics, and Funding Sources • Related programs and topics are grouped together in Categories • These are areas that HUD expects to focus TA, but they’re not all-inclusive • May be overlap among categories, programs, and topics • Funding sources are identified for each category

7. Table of Categories, Programs and Topics, and Funding Sources • Applicants must refer to this Table for: • Rating Factor 1 • Funding sources identified on one-page summary • Capacity/interest chart • Applicant staff list • Subcontractor and consultant list 7

8. Table of Categories, Programs and Topics, and Funding Sources Example of information in Table of Categories, Programs and Topics, and Funding Sources

9. Eligible Activities • FY2016 Community Compass Eligible Activities • Needs Assessments • Direct TA and Capacity Building Engagements • Tools and Products • Self-Directed and Group Learning (training) • Knowledge Management • Data Analysis, Reporting, and Performance Measurement • NAHASDA Allocation Formula Administration and Negotiated Rulemaking and Consultation Support • Described in detail in Section I.A.1.b of the NOFA

10. How it works • Awards made via cooperative agreements • Significant government involvement • Fees prohibited; awardees cannot receive reimbursement for more than actual costs incurred • HUD’s demand-response model for TA activities: • TA need is identified by HUD or customer • HUD tasks TA activity to awardee (i.e., TAProvider) based on skill set, expertise, and other considerations • TA Provider prepares a work plan for review and approval by HUD • TA Provider works with HUD staff leads to carry out the assignment • TA Coordination • HUD may assign multiple TA Providers to work collaboratively on the same assignments

11. Funding: Approximately $58 Million • $25 million for Departmental TA includes: PIH $8.55M; CPD $7M; Housing $2.85M; Cross-Cutting $6.6M • $5.5 million for Native American Housing TA includes: Minimum of $3.5 million for national or regional organizations representing Native American housing interests (including $2 million for national organization as authorized under section 703 of NAHASDA), and $2 million open to all other eligible applicants

12. Award Information • Estimated Award Minimum: $250,000 (covers 3-year project period) • Estimated Maximum Award: $20,000,000 (covers 3-year project period) • Total Awards: Approximately 20 awards

13. Key Changes from FY2015 • “Table of Categories, Programs and Topics, and Funding Sources” in Section I.A.1.a was expanded with 3 new categories (Youth Homelessness; Preservation, Tenant Participation, and Capacity Building; and Policy Development and Research) and new Programs and Topics within existing categories • New funding sources: MAHRA and Fair Housing • Facsimile requirement (HUD-96011) was removed • Additional information required in one-page application summary

14. Key Changes from FY2015 • Capacity/interest chart required • Excel templates available on Grants.gov • Rating Factor information has changed • Scoring re-weighted among the 3 Rating Factors • Code of Conduct must be on file with HUD • New threshold requirement

15. Code of Conduct Requirement • Applicants are required to develop and maintain a written Code of Conduct • If an applicant’s Code of Conduct is not on file with HUD, the applicant must submit its Code of Conduct with its NOFA application • Check to see if your Code of Conduct is on file with HUD: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/administration/grants/conduct: 15

16. Threshold Requirements • 3 threshold requirements to highlight: • Must be an eligible applicant • Applicant’s organization and/or staff cannot be listed as subcontractor or consultant on another application • Must submit narrative response to each of the 3 Rating Factors • Any applicant that doesn’t pass these threshold requirements will notbe reviewed and will not be eligible for an award under the NOFA. 16 16

17. Application Criteria: Rating Factors

18. Rating Factor Scoring Changes

19. Rating Factor 1: Capacity of Applicant • 1.A. Experience and Expertise in TA Programs and Topics (21 points) • Applicants must clearly describe experience and expertise in the categories, programs, and topics mentioned in the Table in Section I.A.1.a. • Clearly state category(s) and program(s)/topic(s) • Can consolidate description of expertise and experience that crosses programs/topics /categories • May describe experience or expertise in programs or topics not listed, but: • Must directly relate to a program or topic area (e.g., Neighborhood Stabilization Program) • Must describe its relevance to one or more of the programs or topics listed in the table • McKinney-Vento, NAHASDA, and MAHRA applicants must describe experience and expertise in the relevant categories

20. Rating Factor 1: Capacity of Applicant • 1.A. Experience and Expertise in TA Programs and Topics, cont’d • Experience and Expertise: Broad and diverse, as well as targeted • Applicant rated higher if: • Experience and expertise in programs or topics in more than one of the categories (exception for applicants in Native American Housing and Community Development category) • Experience and expertise in more than one program or topic within a category 20

21. Rating Factor 1: Capacity of Applicant • 1.A. Experience and Expertise in TA Programs and Topics, cont’d • Include only experience between May 2011 and the publication date of the NOFA • More experience will receive more points • Experience of less than 1 year will not count towards total experience • Information in this section should be supported by applicant’s list of staff and list of subcontractors/consultants 21 21

22. Rating Factor 1: Capacity of Applicant 1.B. Past Performance (21 points) • 1.B.i. Eligible Activities (3 points) • List eligible activity categories in which applicant has conducted activities between May 2011 and the publication date of the NOFA • Simple table (example in the NOFA) • Eligible Activity categories: • Needs Assessment • Direct TA and Capacity Building Engagements • Tools and Products • Self-Directed and Group Learning • Knowledge Management • Data Analysis, Reporting, and Performance Measurement • NAHASDA Allocation Formula Administration and Negotiated Rulemaking and Consultation Support

23. Rating Factor 1: Capacity of Applicant 1.B. Past Performance (21 points) • 1.B.ii. Recent Engagements (9 points) • Example of each of the eligible activity categories identified in the “Eligible Activities” section (1.B.iii) • Must include: • Challenge, gap, or issue that the TA was designed to address • Recipient(s) or customer(s) of the TA • Time period during which the TA was provided (must be between May 2011 and publication date of the NOFA) • How the TA was provided, including any challenges encountered • Quantifiable accomplishments or results of the TA 23

24. Rating Factor 1: Capacity of Applicant 1.B. Past Performance (21 points) • 1.B.ii. Recent Engagements (9 points) • Only one example for each eligible activity category • If multiple eligible activities took place during a single engagement with the same entity, the applicant can use that engagement to describe all of the eligible activities • Beneficiary of the TA cannot be a HUD office division, such as a HUD Regional, Field, or Headquarters office • Important: The letters of reference in section 1.B.iii should come from the customers/recipients of the work described in the “Recent Engagements” section (1.B.ii). 24 24

25. Rating Factor 1: Capacity of Applicant 1.B. Past Performance (21 points) • 1.B.iii. Letters of Reference (4 points) • Two letters of reference from customers that received the technical assistance described in Rating Factor 1, Section 1.B.ii. “Recent Engagements” • Formatting requirements • Must include descriptions of: • Services or TA provided • Quantifiable results or accomplishments from services or TA provided • How results/accomplishments were evaluated • Testament to customer’s experience working with applicant, including whether work was completed on time, with a high level of quality, and was responsive to customer needs • Important: The letters of reference in section 1.B.iii should come from the customers/recipients of the work described in the “Recent Engagements” section (1.B.ii). 25 25

26. Rating Factor 1: Capacity of Applicant 1.B. Past Performance (21 points) • 1.B.iv. Performance Evaluation (5 points) • Feedback from federal or non-federal employees who have worked with the applicant between May 2011 and the publication date of the NOFA • Provide name and contact information for three employees who can answer targeted questions about the applicant’s past performance while providing TA and administering awards • Standardized questionnaire with objective measures of the applicant’s performance • When available, significant findings on oversight and performance reviews conducted by HUD staff, HUD’s Inspector General, or other non-HUD auditing organizations will be considered 26 26 26

27. Rating Factor 1: Capacity of Applicant 1.C. Award Management (13 points) • Required qualifications and experience of key personnel responsible for: • Financial management of award • Management of assignments, work plans, and reporting to HUD • Compliance with Federal and HUD requirements • Contingency/backup procedures • Step-by-step internal processes for: • Managing financial awards • Responding to assignments • Reporting TA outcomes • Procuring, managing, overseeing, and paying subcontractors and consultants 27 27 27 27

28. Rating Factor 2: Soundness of Approach • 3 Subfactors: • Demonstrated understanding of capacity issues facing entity(s) (10 points) • TA approach to address capacity issues (12 points) • Addressing multiple entities (3 points) • 4 entities: • City • Continuum of Care • Public Housing Authority • Tribal Housing Department • Choose one or more entities, up to 4

29. Rating Factor 2: Soundness of Approach • Applicants that wish to be considered for: • McKinney-Vento TA & National Data Analysis Project: Must address CoC • NAHASDA TA: Must address TDHE • PHA Administrative Receivership and Recovery: Must address PHA • An applicant that addresses the City must respond to multiple issues presented, not just a single issue or program • Must address all elements for each entity • May need to make assumptions in order to craft a complete response

30. Rating Factor 2: Soundness of Approach • Scoring will be based on: • Demonstrated understanding of capacity issues (10 points) • Description of all capacity issues facing the entity • How issues are interrelated, where applicable • Description of potential impact on administration of affordable housing and community development programs 30

31. Rating Factor 2: Soundness of Approach • Scoring will be based on: • b. TA approach to address capacity issues (12 points) • Degree to which TA approach is linked to the capacity issues • Degree to which there is a clear and logical rationale for TA approach proposed • Degree to which TA approach utilizes existing, relevant HUD TA resources • Degree to which TA approach would likely result in improved program administration or implementation and is consistent with HUD program requirements • Degree to which the skills, experience, and expertise of the team are appropriate 31

32. Rating Factor 2: Soundness of Approach • Scoring will be based on: • c. Addressing multiple entities (3 points) • Applicants successfully addressing more than one entity will earn up to 3 additional points, with maximum points awarded for addressing all 4 entities • Exception for applicants that address only the Tribal Housing Department 32

33. Rating Factor 3: Achieving Results a. Intended results of TA approach and sustainability over time (8 points) This subfactor is based on the applicant’s response for Rating Factor 2 and information in the Community Snapshot. Applicants should provide the following in their response: • Intended results of the TA approach described in response to Rating Factor 2, which can be short-term and longer-term • Recommendations TA provider would make to entity(s) in order to sustain TA results over the long term (e.g., after TA period ends)

34. Rating Factor 3: Achieving Results b. Tracking performance and results (6 points) • This subfactor does not refer to Rating Factor 2 or the Community Snapshot. Applicants should provide the following in their response: • Description of applicant’s performance management processes: • Types of goals, outcomes, and key milestones used for TA engagements • How the goals, outcomes, and milestones are determined • How progress toward goals, outcomes, and milestones is tracked • Description of applicant’s processes or policies for ensuring accountability for achieving goals, outcomes, or milestones: • How often performance or progress is evaluated • Steps taken to improve performance when milestones, goals, or outcomes are not met

35. Rating Factor 3: Achieving Results c. Problem-solving to achieve results (6 points) • This subfactor does not refer to Rating Factor 2 or the Community Snapshot. Applicants should provide the following in their response: • Describe a previous TA engagement in which unforeseen circumstances changed the project scope, forcing the applicant to change its approach: • Short description of the engagement or project • Description of the unforeseen circumstances and how those circumstances changed the scope of the project • Description of how the applicant adjusted its TA plan to ensure that the changing needs of the customer were adequately addressed • Description of the ultimate outcomes/accomplishments of the TA engagement 35

36. Application Deadline & Key Information • Application deadline: July 19, 2016 • Applicants must allow sufficient time for acceptance by Grants.gov • Read the Community Compass NOFA carefully: • Section IV. Application & Submission Information, especially B. Content and Form of Application Submission • Section V. Application Review Information, especially A. Criteria • Award announcement expected in late September 2016. Multiple awards will be made, and it is possible that award announcements will be staggered.

37. Application Submission Requirements • Content (See Section IV.B. Content and Form of Application Submission) • Various forms • One-page application summary • Capacity/interest chart • Narrative response • Threshold: Must submit a narrative response to all 3 Rating Factors • 2 letters of reference • Staff list • Subcontractor/consultant list • Indirect Cost Rate attachment • Code of conduct, if not already on file with HUD: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/administration/grants/conduct • Note: Four suggested templates available on Grants.gov

38. Application Submission Requirements • Form and Format (See Section IV.B. Content and Form of Application Submission) • Page limit, font size • Clarity and organization • Prohibition on materials not specifically requested • Only submit one application • A complete submission will consist of the application signed by an authorized official of the applicant, and it will contain all relevant sections of the application as described in the NOFA. 38

39. Application Submission Requirements • SAM Registration Requirement: Applicants must be registered with SAM before submitting their application, and they must maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times during which they have an active federal award or an application under consideration by HUD. • DUNS Number Requirement: Applicants must provide a valid DUNS number in their application. Go to http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform to obtain a DUNS number for free.

40. Community Compass Application Resources • Sign up for email notifications at www.grants.gov • Review Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) document at www.grants.gov • Read HUD’s “General Section to HUD's Fiscal Year 2016 Notice[s] of Funding Availability for Discretionary Programs” • HUD’s website for grants: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/administration/grants/fundsavail/nofa16/gensec

41. Questions? • Submit questions about the NOFA via email to: communitycompass@hud.gov • All questions will receive an email response. • Disclaimer: In the event of any conflicts concerning information in this document and the 2016 Community Compass NOFA No.: FR-6000-N-06; the NOFAwill prevail.