Section 110.101  Application Evaluation for Competitive Planning Assistance Component

a)         Explanation of Application Ranking System

            Applicants will compete in a formalized ranking system. Applications will be ranked in 4 areas:  Problem Statement, Project Strategy, Work Plan/Budget, and Benefit to Low- and Moderate-Income Persons.  The Department will review applications for ranking and selection according to the criteria described in this Section.  The Department will then select projects for funding out of the top-ranking projects as determined under subsection (b)(2) until all available funds are expended.

b)         Criteria for Selection of Projects

1)         The analysis will evaluate project need, according to its impact on program benefit and benefit to low- and moderate-income persons utilizing the ranking system contained in subsection (c).

2)         Comparative Assessment of Applications

A)        The Department will initially screen and identify top ranking CDAP applications.  Projects will be ranked in the categories of maximum, moderate, minimum, or no rating as described in subsection (c).  Maximum ratings do not guarantee that a project will receive funding.  The Department will then conduct intensive evaluations, leading to the CDAP grant award decisions.  Department staff will analyze project characteristics including:

i)          a comparative assessment of projects – e.g., low- and moderate-income benefits, local contribution, etc.;

ii)         a verification of submitted application information;

iii)         a thorough analysis of the project's readiness to proceed; and

iv)        a determination of the applicant's previous efforts to address its problems.

B)        Actual funding levels will relate closely to the competitiveness of the proposed projects.  Applications will be comparatively ranked according to the criteria described in this subsection (b) to help determine the final funding levels.  The Department reserves the right to negotiate the final funding figures.

c)         Ranking Criteria

1)         Impact on Planning Needs

A)        An application shall receive a maximum rating if it has fully:

i)          Identified a specific problem and its cause or source, including information on persons affected, long-term consequences if no action is taken, and local efforts that have taken place to solve it.

ii)         Proposed a strategy which will lead to completion of the planning activity, including discussion of why it is the most appropriate approach and how it will benefit primarily low- to moderate-income persons.

iii)         Outlined specific activities, timeframes, costs, responsible parties, and outcomes, including an explanation of how they were determined and how the timeframe and budget are reasonable and appropriate.

B)        An application shall receive a moderate rating if the project only "moderately" addresses the criteria or does not fully meet any one of the criteria in subsection (c)(1)(A).

C)        An application shall receive a minimum rating if the project only "minimally" addresses the criteria or does not fully meet any one of the criteria in subsection (c)(1)(A).

D)        An application shall receive a "no rating" if it fails to fully meet the standards in subsection (c)(1)(A).

2)         Benefit to Low- and Moderate-Income Persons

A)        A maximum rating shall be received if 71-100 percent of the persons benefiting are low- to moderate-income.

B)        A moderate rating shall be received if 61-70 percent of persons benefiting are low- to moderate-income.

C)        A minimum rating shall be received if 51-60 percent of persons benefiting are low- to moderate-income.

D)        No benefit rating shall be received if fewer than 51 percent are low- to moderate-income persons.

(Source:  Added at 20 Ill. Reg. 7799, effective May 29, 1996)