2015 phase i review form · web viewfor example, a market analysis estimating future customer...

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review Form

Business Strategy

Products, Services and Investment Criteria (Qs. 14-16).

1. Does the Applicant clearly explain the rates, terms, and flexible features for each financial product it intends to offer in Q.14 (b)?Note: If the Applicant provides a range for any of the rates and terms (e.g. interest rates range from 2 to 4 percent, rates will not exceed 4%), only select Option A if the Applicant specifies what circumstances would dictate the specific rates or terms to borrowers or investees. Note: If an Applicant’s financial product is structured with multiple financial notes (e.g., an A or B note, or an A, B, and C note, etc.), only select Option A if the rates and terms of the financial notes are discussed on a blended basis.

A. Yes, all rates, terms, and flexible features for each of the intended financial products are clearly explained

B. Most rates, terms, and flexible features for each of the intended financial products are clearly explained

C. Some rates, terms, and flexible features for each of the intended financial products are clearly explained, but most are not

D. No, none of the rates, terms, and flexible features for each of the intended financial products are clearly explained

E. Not Applicable; the Applicant intends to engage solely in either the purchase of loans from other CDEs and/or in the provision of FCOS.

Please provide at least one sentence justification.

2. Will the Applicant’s intended NMTC financial products clearly offer better rates and terms than what is typically offered by the Applicant (or Controlling Entity) and better rates and terms than what is offered by other financial institutions or investors in the Applicant’s service area (i.e. market comparable)? (See Q.14(b))Note: If the Applicant (or its Controlling Entity) does not offer non-NMTC financial products, then the Applicant was only required to compare its intended NMTC financial products to those offered in the Applicant’s service area. Therefore, the Applicant should only be evaluated based on the comparison to its service area in the response choices below. A. All intended financial products described will clearly offer better rates and terms than what is typically offered by the Applicant (or its Controlling Entity) AND better rates and terms than market comparables for all intended financial products.

B. Some of the intended financial products described will offer better rates and terms than the Applicant (or its Controlling Entity) OR better rates and terms than market comparables.

C. None of their financial products will offer better rates and terms. D. Not Applicable; the Applicant intends to engage solely in either the purchase of loans from other CDEs and/or in the provision of FCOS.



3. For each financial product the Applicant intends to offer, does the Applicant provide an example that clearly illustrates how the intended product will be used to finance a projected NMTC investment identified in Q. 17(d) and/or Table A5? (See Q.14(b), Q.17(d), and Table A5) A. Yes, for each and every financial product the Applicant intends to offer, the Applicant provides an example that clearly illustrates how the product will be used to finance a projected NMTC investment.

B. No, for some or all of the financial product(s) the Applicant intends to offer, the Applicant fails to provide an example that clearly illustrates how the product will be used to finance a projected NMTC investment.

C. Not Applicable; the Applicant intends to engage solely in either the purchase of loans from other CDEs and/or in the provision of FCOS.


4. If the Applicant selected greater than 0% in Q. 13(b)(ii): Rate the likelihood that those second-tier CDEs will pass along the NMTC benefits to their borrowers or investees in the form of more favorable rates and terms. (See Q. 14(c))

A. Highly Likely, Applicant’s strategy ensures that NMTC benefits will be passed on to borrowers or investees in the form of more favorable rates and termsB. Probably, Applicant’s strategy will probably result in NMTC benefits being passed on to borrowers or investees in the form of more favorable rates and terms C. Possibly, Applicant’s strategy may result in NMTC benefits being passed on to borrowers or investees in the form of more favorable rates and terms D. Unlikely, Applicant’s strategy is unlikely to result in NMTC benefits being passed on to borrowers or investees in the form of more favorable rates and terms E. Not Applicable

Please provide at least one sentence justification. This review question may be pre-populated with “Not Applicable” based on the Applicant’s response in the Allocation Application.

5. What did the Applicant select in Q.15? A. B. C. D. E. F. Not Applicable; the Applicant intends to engage solely in either the purchase of loans from other CDEs and/or in the provision of FCOS.


Phase I 2019 NMTC Review FormThis review question will be pre-populated based on the Applicant’s response in the Allocation Application.

6a. If the Applicant selected greater than 0% in Q.13(b)(iii): what percentage of the proceeds from loan purchases will be invested in QLICIs in Q.16? A. At least 95% of proceeds invested in QLICIs B. Between 90-94% of proceeds invested in QLICIs C. Between 86-89% of proceeds invested in QLICIs D. 85% or less of proceeds invested in QLICIs E. Not Applicable


6b. If the Applicant selected greater than 0% in Q.13(b)(iii): will the QLICIs the Applicant intends to purchase include rates, terms, and/or conditions that would not be possible without the benefit of an NMTC Allocation?

A. Yes B. No C. Not Applicable


Projected Business Activities (Qs. 17-18 and Exhibit A)

7. If the Applicant selects “A single or discrete number of investments” in Q. 17(c) : Evaluate the likelihood of the Applicant’s proposed project(s) will be completed within the identified timelines based on the risks described by the Applicant (e.g. source of leverage debt, permits, site control, etc.) (See Q. 17(d) and Table A5).

A. Based on the described risks, Applicant’s proposed project(s) are likely to be completed within the identified timelines. B. Based on the described risks, Applicant’s proposed project(s) will possibly be completed within the identified timelines. C. Based on the described risks, Applicant’s proposed project(s) are unlikely to be completed within the identified timelines. D. Not Applicable; the Applicant selected “general pipeline” in Q. 17(c)


8. If the Applicant selects “A single or discrete number of investments” in Q. 17(c): Based on the information provided by the Applicant, will all investment(s) close in a timely manner? (See Q. 17(d))

A. All investment(s) will close by June 2022 B. All investment(s) will close by June 2023

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review FormC. All investment(s) will close by June 2025D. All investment(s) are unlikely to close by June 2025E. Not Applicable; the Applicant selected “general pipeline” in Q. 17(c)


9. If the Applicant selects “general pipeline” in Q. 17(c): Does the Applicant provide all necessary details in describing its overall pipeline of activities in Q. 17(d)? Note: The necessary details the Applicant must provide are:

Total number of businesses or CDEs already identified and total dollar amount of NMTC financing/investment (e.g. QEI and QLICI amount) to be provided.

If the Applicant has selected more than one activity type or business type, an indication of what portion of the Applicant’s pipeline activities falls into different business types (e.g. community facilities, retail, industrial) and activity types (e.g. loans to QALICBs, investments in CDEs, loan purchases from CDEs, etc.)

A. Description of overall pipeline of activities in Q. 17(d) includes all necessary details (listed above)B. Description of overall pipeline of activities in Q. 17(d) is missing some necessary detail(s) (listed above)C. Description of overall pipeline of activities in Q. 17(d) lacks all necessary details (listed above)D. Not Applicable; the Applicant selected “A single or discrete number of investments” in Q. 17(c)


10. If the Applicant selects “general pipeline” in Q. 17(c): Does the information provided by the Applicant in Table A5 align with the Applicant’s narrative in Question 17(d)?

Note: In your evaluation, focus on the following factors:

Do the total Applicant QEIs for all the proposed transactions listed in Table A5 match the total dollar amount of NMTC financing (e.g. QEI and QLICI amount) to be provided in Q. 17 and allocation requested in Q.1?

Do the business types (e.g. community facilities, retail, industrial) and activity types (e.g. loans to QALICBs, investments in CDEs, loan purchases from CDEs, etc.) of the proposed transactions in Table A5 align with Applicant’s description in Q. 17 regarding what portion of the Applicant’s pipeline falls into different activity or business types?

A. All the information provided in Table A5 aligns with the narrative in Question 17(d).B. Some of the information provided in Table A5 aligns with the narrative in Question 17(d).C. None of the information provided in Table A5 aligns with the narrative in Question 17(d). D. Not Applicable; the Applicant selected “A single or discrete number of investments” in Q. 17(c)

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review FormPlease provide at least one sentence justification.

This review question may be pre-populated with “Not Applicable” based on the Applicant’s response in the Allocation Application.

11. If the Applicant selects “general pipeline” in Q. 17(c): Based on the descriptions of each project in Table A5 and Question 17(d), is it likely that the Applicant will be able to meet its deployment projections in Tables A1-A4? ( See Q. 17(d), Tables A1-A4, and Table A5)

A. YesB. PossiblyC. NoD. Not applicable; the Applicant selected “A single or discrete number of investments” in Q. 17(c)


12. If the Applicant selects “general pipeline” in Q.17(c) : Rate the likelihood that the Applicant’s strategy for identifying borrowers, investees, and other customers in Low-Income Communities will result in the business type(s) (e.g. community facilities, retail, industrial) and activity type(s) (e.g. loans to QALICBs, investments in CDEs, loan purchases from CDEs, etc.) described in its general pipeline? (Q.17(d) and Table A5) A. Highly likely; the Applicant’s strategy is highly likely to result in the business and activity types described in Q.17 and Table A5.

B. Probably; the Applicant’s strategy will probably result in the business and activity types described in Q.17 and Table A5.

C. Possibly; the Applicant’s strategy may possibly result in the business and activity types described in Q.17 and Table A5.

D. Unlikely; the Applicant’s strategy is unlikely to result in the business and activity types described in Q.17 and Table A5 OR Applicant did not identify a strategy

E. Not Applicable; the Applicant selected “A single or discrete number of investments” in Q. 17(c)


Prior Performance (Qs. 19-20 and Exhibit B) Notes for Review Form Questions 13 and 14: Track records of individuals (e.g. principals, board members, and other management individuals)

cannot be considered in this section.

You must consider collectively the information provided in Q. 19, Q. 20, and Exhibit B. Please consult the Reviewer Calculation Worksheet for how to determine the calculations for the following questions.

Reviewers must consider financing activity listed in Exhibit B, column “2019 YTD” as a full year of activity when evaluating this question.

Reviewers must not consider any information related to activities closed after September 5, 2019 when evaluating the Applicant’s track record.


13. Between 2014 and 2019 YTD, how many years of DIRECT or INDIRECT financing activity does the Applicant (or Controlling Entity) present in Tables B1-B4 (and Questions 19 & 20), collectively?Note: The reviewer should pick the highest response that best reflects the Applicant’s track record. For example, if the Applicant has less than 2 years of DIRECT financing activity, but 5 or more years of INDIRECT financing activity, then the response should be “B,” not “D.” A. 5 or more years of DIRECT financing activities B. 3-4 years of DIRECT financing activities OR 5 or more years of INDIRECT financing

activities C. 2 years of DIRECT financing activities OR 3-4 years of INDIRECT financing activities D. Less than 2 years of DIRECT financing activities OR less than 3 years of INDIRECT financing activities


14. How many years of DIRECT financing does the Applicant (or Controlling Entity) present in Tables B1-B3 (and Question 19)?Note: Do not include financing noted in Table B4 and Question 20. A. 5 or more years of providing DIRECT financing B. 3-4 years of providing DIRECT financing C. 2 years of providing DIRECT financing D. Less than 2 years of providing DIRECT financing


Prior Performance and Projected Business Activity (Q. 17-20 and Exhibits A and B)

15. Considering the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs in Q. 13(b) and proposed business type(s) (e.g. community facilities, retail, industrial) and activity type(s) (e.g. loans to QALICBs, investments in CDEs, loan purchases from CDEs, etc.) in Q. 17 and Table A5, evaluate whether the Applicant’s (or Controlling Entity’s) track record described in Q. 19 and Q. 20 includes similar business and activity types. (See Q. 17, Qs. 19-20, and Table A5).

A. Track record is similar to all proposed business and activity types. B. Track record is similar to most of the proposed business and activity types. C. Track record is similar to only some of the proposed business and activity types. D. Track record is similar to none of the proposed business and activity types.


16. Compare the dollar amount of capital deployed in Tables B1-B3 with the Applicant’s projected deployment in Exhibit A. (See also Q. 17). Notes:


Please consult the Reviewer Calculation Sheet on how to determine the calculations for this question.

For the purposes of this question, evaluate the track record referenced in the “Totals (2014 – 2019 YTD)” columns in Tables B1-B3.

The reviewer should pick the highest response that best reflects the Applicant’s track record. For example, if the Applicant’s track record of DIRECT financing represents less than 50% of projected NMTC deployment AND it has a track record of INDIRECT financing that is greater than 90% of projected NMTC deployment, then the response should be “B,” not “D.”

A. Highly Favorable - historical DIRECT financing referenced in Table B1-B3 is 90% or more of the projected NMTC deploymentB. Favorable - historical DIRECT financing referenced in Table B1-B3 is 70% - 89% of projected NMTC deployment OR historical INDIRECT financing is 90% or greater of projected NMTC deployment.C. Somewhat Favorable - historical DIRECT financing referenced in Table B1-B3 is 50% - 69% of projected NMTC deployment OR historical INDIRECT financing is 70% - 89% of projected NMTC deployment.D. Unfavorable - historical DIRECT financing referenced in Table B1-B3 is less than 50% of projected NMTC deployment OR historical INDIRECT financing is less than 70% of projected NMTC deployment.


Notable Relationships (Q. 23)

Note: Notable relationships exist when the Applicant, its Affiliates, or its personnel would receive financial benefits from the QALICB(s) financed with the Applicant’s QLICIs. “Added value” means the Applicant’s relationships will create benefits (i.e. cost savings, lower fees) for QALICB(s) or unaffiliated end-users, such as tenant businesses, or residents in Low-Income Communities. If notable relationships do exist, please read the response to Q. 25 before evaluating this question and pay particular attention to the resulting outcomes, such as lower lease rates in Q. 25(a)(8), attributable to these relationships.

17. Do the notable relationships described by the Applicant (if any) provide clear benefits (e.g. cost savings, lower fees) to QALICB(s) or unaffiliated end-users, such as tenant businesses, or residents of Low-Income Communities? (See Q.23(f))

A. The Applicant answered “No” to Q. 23(a) – Q. 23(e) B. Yes, all notable relationships listed in Q. 23(a) – Q. 23(e) provide clear benefits to QALICB(s) or unaffiliated end-usersC. No, some of the notable relationships listed in Q. 23(a) – Q. 23(e) do not provide clear benefits to QALICB(s) or unaffiliated end-users


Phase I 2019 NMTC Review FormPriority Points – Track Record

Track record of servicing disadvantaged businesses and communities with QLICI and non-QLICI related activities (Qs. 19 and 20, Exhibit B)

Note: Only the activities of the Applicant or its Controlling Entity should be considered in this section. The track records of principals, board members and other management individuals are not relevant for this section.

Note: Reviewers must consider any financing activity listed in the column “2019 YTD” as a full year when evaluating this question.

18. How many years of experience does the Applicant have providing capital and/or technical assistance to Disadvantaged Businesses and Communities (DBCs) (See Qs. 19 and 20, Tables B1-B4 )

A. 5 or more years B. 3-4 years C. Less than 3 years


19. What percentage of the Applicant’s dollar volume of direct financing activities have been provided to DBCs? (See Tables B1-B4)

Note: The reviewer must consider collectively the information provided in Tables B1-B4. A. 70% or more of the Applicant’s total DIRECT dollar volume of activities has been directed to DBCs

B. 60% or more of the Applicant’s total DIRECT dollar volume of activities has been directed to DBCs

C. 50% or more of the Applicant’s total DIRECT dollar volume of activities has been directed to DBCs

D. Greater than 0% and less than 50% of the Applicant’s total DIRECT dollar volume of activities has been directed to DBCs

E. The Applicant has no experience of providing capital and/or technical assistance to DBCs



Community Outcomes

Targeting Areas of Higher Distress (Q. 24)

20. Did the Applicant respond “Yes” to Question 24(a)?A. YesB. No

Please provide at least one sentence justification. This review question will be pre-populated based on the Applicant’s response in the Allocation Application. Do NOT change pre-populated review questions.

21. Will the Applicant’s strategy for prioritizing QLICIs in areas marked by the specific indicators of distress in Q. 24 be effective? (See Q. 24(b))

A. Yes, Applicant’s strategy is likely to be effectiveB. Unsure if the Applicant’s strategy will be effective


Community Outcomes (Q. 25) In this section, the reviewer will evaluate the Applicant’s track record and projected community outcomes. Outcomes will be evaluated collectively, but to facilitate your review, the outcomes have been grouped into four categories. Each grouping contains similar evaluation questions. Within each outcome group, evaluation must not be influenced simply by the total number of outcomes selected in that grouping, unless otherwise noted in the instructions for that group (e.g. Job-Related Community Outcomes). The score for each community outcome grouping will be averaged in the final section score and all groupings will be weighted equally.

A. Job-Related Community Outcomes: Note: For Q. 25(a), Applicants that select (1) Job Creation/Retention as an outcome are also required to provide a response for both (2) Quality Jobs and (3) Accessible Jobs. The reviewer must consider collectively the narrative responses for all three Job-Related Community Outcomes. Also, the reviewer must consider whether jobs created and retained represent both Quality Jobs and/or Jobs Accessible to LIPs or LIC residents to determine if the jobs created will have a significant and meaningful impact on the communities the Applicant serves. If the Applicant did not select any of the three Job-Related Community Outcomes, then the response to questions in this section must be Not Applicable.

22. Did the Applicant quantify the projected outcomes in the Job-Related Community Outcomes grouping? (See Q.25(a))

A. All projected Job-Related Community Outcomes were quantifiedB. Some of the projected Job-Related Community Outcomes were quantifiedC. None of the projected Job-Related Community Outcomes were quantified

D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select Job-Related Community Outcomes



23. Evaluate the methods that the Applicant used to quantify the projected community outcomes selected in the Job-Related Community Outcomes grouping. (See Q.25(a))Note: A method is the procedure the Applicant used to obtain the numbers for quantifying its projections for each selected community outcome. For example, using XYZ modeling software to estimate the number of construction jobs; calculating projected jobs created based on similar projects previously financed by the Applicant; or obtaining projected outcome data from the project sponsor or business, etc.

A. All methods used to quantify projected Job-Related Community Outcomes are sound and clearly explained

B. Some of the methods used to quantify projected Job-Related Community Outcomes are sound and clearly explained

C. None of the methods used to quantify projected Job-Related Community Outcomes are sound and clearly explained

D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select Job-Related Community Outcomes.


24. Evaluate the metrics the Applicant used to validate the reasonableness of their quantified projections for Job Creation/Retention and Quality Jobs Outcomes.

Note: A metric is a function or ratio that the Applicant used to validate the reasonableness of the quantified projections for each selected outcome. For example, X square feet of commercial real estate development results in the creation of Y full-time construction jobs; charter schools create X Full Time Equivalent jobs for every Y students; etc. (See Q. 25(a))

Note: Only select “A” if the Applicant provided a third-party metric as well as the third party source for their quantified projections.

Note: Do not consider Accessible Jobs in your evaluation of metrics as this is not required for Accessible Jobs.

A. All of the Applicant’s metrics were obtained from or informed by third-party sources for all quantified projections within Job Creation/Retention (e.g. permanent, construction jobs, etc) and Quality Jobs Outcomes.

B. Some of the Applicant’s metrics were obtained from or informed by third-party sources for the quantified projections within Job Creation/Retention and Quality Jobs Outcomes OR their metrics were only obtained from or informed by the Applicant’s track record.

C. Applicant did not provide metrics for Job Creation/Retention nor Quality Jobs Outcomes.




25. Will the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 likely result in the projected Job-Related Community Outcomes in Question 25(a)?Note: In evaluating this review question, please only consider Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17. Do not consider the Applicant’s track record of past investments as this is evaluated in a later review question. A. Yes; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 are likely to result in the projected Job-Related Community Outcomes in Question 25(a).

B. Possibly; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 may result in the projected Job-Related Community Outcomes in Question 25(a).

C. No; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 are unlikely to result in the projected Job-Related Community Outcomes in Question 25(a).



26. Evaluate the extent to which jobs created or retained by the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs will represent quality jobs. For example, jobs that provide living wages; benefits such as health insurance or retirement plans; and/or opportunities for training and advancement. (See Q.25(a)) A. Most of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs will represent quality jobs.

B. Some of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs will represent quality jobs.

C. None of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs will represent quality jobs.



27. Evaluate the extent to which jobs created or retained by the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs will be targeted and/or accessible to people who face barriers to employment (e.g. Low-Income Persons (LIPs), residents of Low-Income Communities (LICs), people with lower levels of education, longer term unemployed, ex-convicts, etc.) (See Q.25(a))

A. Most of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs will be targeted and/or accessible to people who face barriers to employment.

B. Some of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs will be targeted and/or accessible to people who face barriers to employment.

C. None of the jobs created or retained by the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs will be targeted and/or accessible to people who face barriers to employment.

D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Job-Related Community Outcomes

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review FormPlease provide at least one sentence justification.

This review question may be pre-populated with “Not Applicable” based on the Applicant’s response in the Allocation Application.

28. Evaluate whether the Applicant’s track record of producing Job-Related Community Outcomes is similar in type and quantity to those it projects to achieve with an NMTC allocation. (See Q.25(a))Note: Only select “A” if the Applicant quantified the community outcomes in its track record. For example, in the last five years, the Applicant states its investments have generated a total of X number of jobs accessible for LIPs. A. All Job-Related Community Outcomes selected in this grouping are supported by the Applicant’s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes.

B. Only some of the Job-Related Community Outcomes selected in this grouping are supported by the Applicant’s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes.

C. None of the Job-Related Community Outcomes selected in this grouping are supported by the Applicant’s track record OR the track record is not similar in type or quantity to projected outcomes.

D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Job-Related Community Outcomes.

Please provide at least one sentence justificationThis review question may be pre-populated with “Not Applicable” based on the Applicant’s response in the Allocation Application.

B. Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities (LICs) Outcomes Note: If the Applicant selected one or more of the following outcomes in Q. 25(a): (1) Commercial Goods or Services to Low-Income Communities, (2) Community Goods or Services to Low-Income Communities and/or (3) Healthy Food Financing, the reviewer must consider collectively these narrative responses. If the Applicant did not select any of the three Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes, then the response to questions in this sub-section must be Not Applicable. Note: Within this outcome group, evaluation must not be influenced simply by the total number of outcomes selected; an Applicant should not be evaluated differently whether it selects only one or all three Goods and Services to Low-Income Communities Outcomes.

29. Did the Applicant quantify the projected outcomes in the Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes grouping? (See Q.25(a))

A. All projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes were quantifiedB. Some of the Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes were quantified C. None of the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes were quantified

D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the three Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes

Please provide at least one sentence justificationThis review question may be pre-populated with “Not Applicable” based on the Applicant’s response in the Allocation Application.

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review Form30. Evaluate the methods that the Applicant used to quantify the projected community

outcomes selected in the Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes grouping. (See Q. 25(a))Note: A method is the procedure the Applicant used to obtain the numbers for quantifying its projections for each selected community outcome. For example, a market analysis estimating future customer demand; third-party verification of project sponsor projections of patient visits to a community health center, etc.

A. All methods used to quantify projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are sound and clearly explained

B. Some of the methods used to quantify projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are sound and clearly-explained

C. None of the methods used to quantify projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are sound and clearly-explained



31. Evaluate the metrics the Applicant used to validate the reasonableness of their quantified projections for Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes.

Note: A metric is a function or ratio that the Applicant used to validate the reasonableness of the quantified projections for each selected outcome. For example, X number of classrooms with an average Y children per classroom results in Z number of children served by early education programs; X full-time primary care doctors equals Y patient visits per year, etc. (See Q.25(a))


A. All of the Applicant’s metrics were obtained from or informed by third-party sources for all quantified projections within Goods and Services for Low-Income Community Outcomes.

B. Some of the Applicant’s metrics were obtained from or informed by third-party sources for the quantified projections within Goods and Services for Low-Income Community Outcomes OR their metrics were only obtained from or informed by the Applicant’s track record.

C. Applicant did not provide metrics for any of their selected outcomes.

D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes.


32. Will the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 likely result in the projected Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes in Question 25(a)?


Note: In evaluating this review question, please only consider Applicant’s PROPOSED QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17. Do not consider the Applicant’s track record of past investments as this is evaluated in a later review question.

A. Yes; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 are likely to result in the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes in Question 25(a).

B. Possibly; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 may result in the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes in Question 25(a).

C. No; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 are unlikely to result in the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes in Question 25(a).



33. Will the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs increase the provision and access of commercial goods or services (e.g. restaurants, retail, pharmacies), fresh and healthy food options (e.g. grocery stores), and/or community goods or services (e.g. healthcare, social services, educational, cultural) to Low-Income Persons (LIPs) and/or residents of Low-Income Communities (LICs). (See Q.25(a))

A. Yes; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs are likely to increase the provision and access of commercial goods or services, fresh and healthy food options, and/or community goods or services for LIPs and LIC residents.

B. Possibly; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs may increase the provision and access of commercial goods or services, fresh and healthy food options, and/or community goods or services for LIPs and LIC residents.

C. No; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs are unlikely to increase the provision and access of commercial goods or services, fresh and healthy food options, and/or community goods or services for LIPs and LIC residents.

D. Not Applicable; the Applicant did not select any of the three Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes.


34. Evaluate the Applicant’s track record of producing Goods and Services for Low-Income Communities Outcomes similar in type and quantity to those it projects to achieve with an NMTC allocation. (See Q.25(a))Note: Only select “A” if the Applicant quantified the community outcomes in its track record. For example, in the last five years, the Applicant states its investments in health care facilities have resulted in X number of patient visits; investments in educational facilities have resulted in Y number of low income students served; or investments in retail have resulted in creation of Z square feet of grocery store space in a food desert. A. All projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are supported by the Applicant’s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes.

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review Form B. Only some of the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are supported by the Applicant’s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes.

C. None of the projected Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes are supported by the Applicant’s track record or the track record is not similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes.

D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select any of the Goods and Services for LICs Outcomes.


C. Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Note: If the Applicant selected either one or both of the following outcomes in Q. 25(a): (1) Financing Minority Businesses and (2) Housing Units, the reviewer must consider collectively these narrative responses. If the Applicant did not select either of these outcomes, then the response to questions in this sub-section must be Not Applicable. Note: Within this outcome group, evaluation must not be influenced simply by the total number of outcomes selected; an Applicant should not be evaluated differently whether it selects only one of these outcomes or both outcomes (Financing Minority Businesses and Housing Units).Note: Minority Businesses is a collective term referencing Minority-owned or Minority-controlled businesses, as defined in the NMTC Allocation Application Glossary of Terms.

35. Did the Applicant quantify the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units (number of units, percent of affordable units) Outcomes to be financed? (See Q.25(a))

A. All projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes were quantifiedB. Some of the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes were quantifiedC. None of the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes were quantified

D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select either the Financing Minority Businesses or Housing Units Outcomes.


36. Evaluate the methods that the Applicant used to quantify the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes. (See Q.25(a))

Note: A method is the procedure the Applicant used to obtain the numbers for quantifying its projections for each selected community outcome. For example, reviewing the QALICB’s organizational charts to determine if the QALICB is minority owned or controlled, analyzing QALICB pro formas to determine number of housing units to be built, etc.

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review Form A. All methods used to quantify the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes are sound and clearly explained

B. Some of the methods used to quantify the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes are sound and clearly-explained

C. None of the methods used to quantify the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes are sound and clearly explained



37. Will the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 likely result in the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes in Question 25(a)?

Note: In evaluating this review question, please only consider Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17. Do not consider the Applicant’s track record of past investments as this is evaluated in a later review question.

A. Yes; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 are likely to result in the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes in Question 25(a).

B. Possibly; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 may result in the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes in Question 25(a).

C. No; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 are unlikely to result in the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes in Question 25(a).



38. Will the Applicant’s projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes clearly benefit Low-Income Persons (LIPs) and/or residents of Low-Income Communities (LICs)? (See Q.25(a))

Note: Location in a LIC is not sufficient to demonstrate benefit to LIPs/LIC residents. Examples of clearly benefiting LIPs and residents of LICs includes (but not limited to):

Financing Minority Businesses – QLICI will finance expansion of minority-owned manufacturing plant, which will result in the hiring of X number of Low-Income Persons.

Housing Units – QLICI will finance construction of mixed-use development that will include X number of apartments, of which Y will be affordable to Low-Income Persons

A. Yes; the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes will clearly benefit LIPs or residents of LICs

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review Form B. Possibly; the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units

Outcomes may have some benefit to LIPs or residents of LICs

C. No; the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes will have little or no benefit to LIPs or residents of LICs

D. Not Applicable; the Applicant did not select either the Financing Minority Businesses or Housing Units Outcomes.


39. Evaluate the Applicant’s track record of Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes similar in type and quantity to those it projects to achieve with an NMTC allocation. (See Q.25(a))

Note: Only select “A” if the Applicant quantified the community outcomes in its track record. For example, in the last five years, the Applicant states its investments have generated a total of X housing units for LIPs. A. All projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes are

supported by the Applicant’s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes

B. Only some of the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes are supported by the Applicant’s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes

C. None of the projected Financing Minority Businesses and/or Housing Units Outcomes are supported by the Applicant’s track record or the track record is not similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes



D. Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes Note: If the Applicant selected one or more of the following outcomes in Q. 25(a): (1) Flexible Lease Rates and/or (2) Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes, the reviewer must consider collectively these narrative responses. If the Applicant did not select either of these outcomes, then the response to questions in this sub-section must be Not Applicable. Note: Within this outcome group, evaluation must not be influenced simply by the total number of outcomes selected; an Applicant should not be evaluated differently whether it selects only one of these outcomes or both outcomes (Flexible Lease Rates and Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes).

Note: the Applicant should only include Real Estate Activities where the tenant/lease arrangement is between a QALICB and a third party. A QALICB offering a favorable lease rate to an Affiliate is not an acceptable example of offering Flexible Lease Rates in Question 25(a) (8).

40. Did the Applicant quantify the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes? (See Q.25(a))

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review FormNote: It is not sufficient for the Applicant to merely state the number of pipeline projects that will produce specific environmental outcomes.

A. All projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes were quantifiedB. Some of the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes were quantifiedC. None of the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes were quantified

D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select either Flexible Lease Rates or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes.


41. Evaluate the methods that the Applicant used to quantify the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes. (See Q.25(a))

Note: A method is the procedure the Applicant used to obtain the numbers for quantifying its projections for each selected community outcome. For example, analyzing QALICB pro forms to determine future lease rates, comparing contaminants before and after construction, etc. A. All methods used to quantify the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes are sound and clearly explained

B. Some of the methods used to quantify the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes are sound and clearly-explained

C. None of the methods used to quantify the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes are sound and clearly explained

D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select either Flexible Lease Rates or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes


42. Evaluate the metrics the Applicant used to validate the reasonableness of their quantified projections for Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes. (See Q.25(a))

Note: A metric is a function or ratio that the Applicant used to validate the reasonableness of the quantified projections for each selected outcome. For example, a new community facility was constructed using LEED standard will reduce energy consumption by X%, saving non-profit tenants Y dollars on utility bills. (See Q. 25(a))


Note: Do not consider Flexible Lease Rates in your evaluation of metrics as this is not required for Flexible Lease Rates.

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review Form A. All of the Applicant’s metrics were obtained from or informed by third-party

sources for all quantified projections within Environmental Sustainable Outcomes.

B. Some of the Applicant’s metrics were obtained from or informed by third-party sources for the quantified projections within Environmental Sustainable Outcomes OR their metrics were only obtained from or informed by the Applicant’s track record.

C. Applicant did not provide any metrics for Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes.

D. Not Applicable, the Applicant did not select Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes.


43. Will the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 likely result in the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes in Question 25(a)?

Note: In evaluating this review question, please only consider Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17. Do not consider the Applicant’s track record of past investments as this is evaluated in a later review question.

A. Yes; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 are likely to result in the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes in Question 25(a).

B. Possibly; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 may result in the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes in Question 25(a).

C. No; Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17 are unlikely to result in the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes in Question 25(a).



44. Will the Applicant’s projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes clearly benefit Low-Income Persons (LIPs) and/or residents of Low-Income Communities (LICs)? (See Q.25(a))

Note: Location in a LIC is not sufficient to demonstrate benefit to LIPs/LIC residents. Examples of clearly benefiting LIPs and residents of LICs includes (but not limited to):

Flexible Lease Rates – QLICI will result in reduced rental rates for a nonprofit social service provider, and the lease savings will allow the nonprofit to serve X additional LIC residents.

Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes – QLICI will finance remediation of a brownfield site, which will result in X number of LIC residents no longer exposed to environmental hazards.

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review Form A. Yes; the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable

Outcomes will clearly benefit LIPs or residents of LICs

B. Possibly; the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes may have some benefit to LIPs or residents of LICs

C. No; the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes will have little or no benefit to LIPs or residents of LICs

D. Not Applicable; the Applicant did not select either Flexible Lease Rates or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes.


45. Evaluate the Applicant’s track record of producing Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes similar in type and quantity to those it projects to achieve with an NMTC allocation. (See Q.25(a))

Note: Only select “A” if the Applicant quantified the community outcomes in its track record. For example, in the last five years, the Applicant states its investments have resulted in X% reduction in energy costs for Y number of low income residents. A. All projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes

are supported by the Applicant’s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes.

B. Only some of the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes are supported by the Applicant’s track record of achieving community outcomes that are similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes.

C. None of the projected Flexible Lease Rates and/or Environmentally Sustainable Outcomes are supported by the Applicant’s track record or the track record is not similar in type and quantity to projected outcomes



Tracking Community Outcomes (Q.25b))Note: In this section, the reviewer must consider collectively the narrative responses for all of the outcomes selected in Q. 25(a).

46. Based on the Applicant’s track record and description of how it will document community outcomes that will result from the Applicant’s QLICIs, will the Applicant be able to effectively track all the community outcomes selected in Q. 25(a)? (See Q. 25(b)) A. Yes, Applicant describes a thorough track record and a robust methodology

(procedures/systems) for tracking all projected community outcomes B. No, Applicant does not describe a thorough track record or a robust methodology

(procedures/systems) for tracking all projected community outcomes



Community Accountability and Involvement (Q. 26)

47. Evaluate the extent to which Low-Income Community (LIC) representatives on the Applicant’s Advisory and/or Governing Board participate in the following areas: 1) setting the Applicant’s investment parameters, 2) formulating the Applicant’s pipeline of investments, and 3) approving the Applicant’s investment decisions. (see Q.26(a)) A. LIC Representatives on the Advisory and/or Governing Board play a role in all three of

these areas B. LIC Representatives on the Advisory and/or Governing Board play a role in some of these areas

C. LIC Representatives on the Advisory and/or Governing Board do not play a role in any of these areas

48. Based on the Applicant’s process (including the role of LIC representatives on the Advisory and/or Governing Board) for determining if a proposed investment aligns with Low-Income Community priorities, how likely will proposed investments align with these priorities? (See Q.26a)

A. Highly Likely

B. Probably

C. Possibly

D. Unlikely


49. Evaluate the extent of the Applicant’s track record of project-specific community engagement with a variety of Low-Income Community stakeholders in its past investment decisions (simply consulting with the Advisory Board is NOT an example of community engagement)? (see Q.26(b))

Note: For this review question, ONLY evaluate an Applicant’s track record of community engagement (e.g. consulting with Local Government; local economic development agency, or Chamber of Commerce); not what the Applicant is currently doing or plans to do.

A. Applicant demonstrates an extensive track record of community engagement in past investment decisions

B. Applicant demonstrates some track record of community engagement in past investment decisions

C. Applicant demonstrates no track record of community engagement in past investment decisions


50. How likely is it that the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs will contribute to a broader community or economic development strategy or plan (e.g. neighborhood revitalization plan, county or state economic development plans, etc.)? (See Q. 26(c))

Phase I 2019 NMTC Review FormNote: Community and economic development strategies are often outlined in a formal plan approved and adopted by a neighborhood, community group, State or local government (e.g. economic development agency). To the extent such plans exist, the Applicant, in order to score highly, needs to discuss how its projects fit into the priorities and goals outlined by those plans. If the Applicant intends to make NMTC investments in areas that do not have a formal plan or planning process, the Applicant should discuss other methods it used to ensure alignment with the community’s strategic priorities. For example, some rural communities may not have a formal plan, but the Applicant can demonstrate alignment with the community’s priorities by meeting with local business and civic leaders, attending town council meetings, partnering with local organizations, among other methods. A. Highly Likely B. Probably C. Possibly D. Unlikely


Other Community Benefits (Q. 27)Note: For the purposes of evaluating Question 48, the reviewer should only consider whether or not the QLICIs will catalyze other private investments in low-income communities. DO NOT include private capital leveraged within the NMTC transaction structure or outside the structure during a simultaneous closing. Private investment does not include additional local, state, or federal subsidies (government grants, bond financing, tax-increment financing, historic tax credits, etc.). However, examples of additional private investment that can be discussed by the Applicant include, but are not limited to:

If the Applicant’s pipeline investments are part of or coordinated with local economic development plans, the Applicant may discuss the expected additional private investments (e.g., new businesses opened, new housing developed, etc.) included in such plans.

Applicants may discuss the projected number of indirect jobs or additional dollar value of economic activity projected to be created as a result of the NMTC investment based on economic impact modeling software (e.g. IMPLAN, RIMS, etc.).

Applicants may also discuss the ability of Operating Businesses financed to attract subsequent private investment from other sources after the initial QLICI was made.

51. Considering the Applicant’s (or Controlling Entity’s) track record of past investments catalyzing additional non-NMTC related private investment as well as the Applicant’s proposed QLICIs described in Table A5 and Question 17, how likely is it that the Applicant’s proposed investments will result in additional private investment beyond the initial project investment(s)? (See Q.27) A. Highly Likely B. Probably C. Possibly D. Unlikely



Based on your review of the application, would you recommend that this organization receive an allocation of NMTCs from the CDFI Fund? Yes No

Justification (not more than three sentences):

Panel Issues (please be specific and if possible reference particular answer numbers when justifying concerns below):1. Are there elements to the business strategy that may be questionable according to IRS

regulations? No Yes, Comments:

2. Are there QLICI activities checked in Q. 13(b) that you would recommend not be given an allocation or alternatively, boxes that were not checked that you believe should have been (e.g. the Applicant will first purchase the loan portfolio of its affiliate CDE and then re-lend to QALICBs, but did not check purchases of loans from other CDEs)?

No Yes, Comments:

3. Do you feel the Applicant inappropriately claimed “Priority 2” points under Q. 22 of the application?

No Yes, Comments:

4. Do you feel that there are any other critical items, not otherwise addressed in any other section of your scoring review or written comments, which the panel needs to take into consideration (e.g. material concerns related to the Applicant’s ability to manage and/or raise QEIs for an NMTC allocation)?

No Yes, Comments:

2015 phase i review form · web viewfor example, a market analysis estimating future customer...

Documents