[Federal Register: May 20, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 97)]
[Notices]
[Page 27679-27719]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20my03-170]
[[Page 27679]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Department of Housing and Urban Development
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for the Research Studies on
Homeownership and Affordable Lending Fiscal Year (FY 2002); Notice
[[Page 27680]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-4778-N-01]
Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for the Research Studies on
Homeownership and Affordable Lending Fiscal Year (FY 2002)
AGENCY: Office of Policy Development and Research, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of funding availability (NOFA).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Purpose of the NOFA. The purpose of this NOFA is to fund
technical studies that will guide development of public policy to
increase affordable lending, reduce downpayment constraints, and
promote homeownership, especially for low- and moderate-income and
minority families and in geographical areas which have been underserved
by the mortgage finance system. HUD particularly seeks studies that
will provide empirical basis for its regulation and monitoring of two
Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs)--Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
including the effects of such regulation and monitoring on affordable
lending in the primary mortgage market. Specific topics of interest
include:
1. Homeownership
a. Factors underlying the increase in homeownership during the
1990s and policy implications for the current decade;
b. Accounting for the remaining income and racial disparities in
homeownership rates, and policy approaches that could remove barriers
for prospective low-income and minority homeowners; and
c. Supply constraints and regulatory barriers that impact
homeownership opportunities and could potentially impair the
effectiveness of affordable lending programs.
2. Affordable Lending
a. Determinants of problems faced by low-income and minority
families in accessing mortgage credit;
b. Determinants of downpayments;
c. The role of major mortgage market institutions such as Fannie
Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Housing Administration, and depository
institutions in increasing credit access for low- and moderate-income
and minority families and their communities; and
d. Effects on targeted populations of setting alternative levels of
the GSE affordable housing goals and defining the goals in alternative
ways.
Available Funds. $570,000 from HUD's FY 2002 research and
technology appropriation. HUD anticipates funding 15 to 20 studies on
these topics; studies will be funded through cooperative agreements, up
to a maximum of $40,000.
Eligible Applicants. Academic and not-for-profit institutions
located in the U.S., state and local governments, and federally
recognized Indian tribes are eligible to apply. For-profit businesses
also are eligible; however, they are not allowed to earn a fee or
profit.
Application Deadline. July 21, 2003.
Match. None required.
Additional Information
I. Application Due Date, Further Information and Technical Assistance
Application Due Date. Your completed application is due on or
before July 21, 2003.
Address for Submitting Applications. All applications must be
either mailed or sent via overnight/express mail delivery, addressed
to: Department of Housing and Urban Development, Financial Institutions
Regulation Division, Office of Policy Development and Research, 451
Seventh St., SW., Room 8212, Washington, DC 20410.
Application Submission Requirements. New Security Procedures. HUD
has implemented new security procedures that affect application
submission procedures. Please read the following instructions carefully
and completely. HUD will not accept hand-delivered applications.
Applications may be mailed using the United States Postal Service
(USPS) or may be shipped via one of the following delivery services:
DHL, Falcon Carrier, FedEx, United Parcel Service (UPS), or United
States Postal Service Express Mail. No other delivery services are
permitted into HUD Headquarters without escort. You must, therefore,
use one of these carriers.
Mailed Applications. Your application will be considered timely
filed if your application is postmarked on or before 12 midnight on the
application due date and received by the designated HUD office on or
within fifteen (15) calendar days of the application due date. All
applicants must obtain and save a Certificate of Mailing showing the
date when the application was submitted to the USPS. The Certificate of
Mailing (which is USPS Form 3817) will be your documentary evidence
that your application was timely filed.
Applications Sent by Overnight/Express Mail Delivery. If your
application is sent by overnight delivery or express mail, your
application will be timely filed if it is received before or on the
application due date, or when you submit documentary evidence that your
application was placed in transit with the overnight delivery/express
mail service by no later than the application due date. Due to new
security measures, you must use either USPS express mail or one of four
carrier services that do business with HUD headquarters regularly.
These services are DHL, Falcon Carrier, FedEx, and UPS. Delivery by
these services must be made during HUD's headquarters business hours,
i.e., between 8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. eastern time, Monday through
Friday.
Other Transmission Methods. Only applications submitted via mail or
one of the express carrier services identified above will be accepted.
Facsimile, e-mail, or other types of transmission are not acceptable.
For Further Information. You may contact: Dr. John Gardner,
Financial Institutions Regulation Division, at the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, Financial Institutions Regulation
Division, Office of Policy Development and Research, 451 Seventh St.,
SW., Room 8212, Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) 708-0614,
extension 5868, or Mr. Patrick Tewey, Grants Officer, extension 4098
(these are not toll-free numbers). Hearing- and speech-impaired persons
may access the above telephone number via TTY by calling the toll-free
Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
II. Amount Allocated
Approximately $570,000 from HUD's FY 2002 Research and Technology
appropriation will be available to fund research studies proposals in
FY 2002. Cooperative agreements will be awarded on a competitive basis
according to the Rating Factors described in Section VII(D). HUD
anticipates awarding 15 to 20 cooperative agreements ranging up to
$40,000 each. Applications exceeding this amount (unless the excess is
provided through cost-sharing) will be deemed to be non-responsive.
III. Program Description; Eligible Applicants; Eligible Activities
(A) Program Description. Background.
(1) General Goals and Objectives. Homeownership. HUD invites
proposals for studies of:
(i) Homeownership changes during the 1990s, particularly models
that explain national and local trends in home buying, and policy
implications of the changes;
[[Page 27681]]
(ii) How economic, demographic, and other factors influence gains
and losses in homeownership across metropolitan and rural housing
markets;
(iii) Factors that enable low-income families to stay in their
homes;
(iv) House price changes and associated impacts on affordability;
(v) Effects of supply constraints, including zoning or other types
of regulations, that restrict housing supply and could create barriers
to homeownership and lessen the impacts of targeted affordable housing
programs; and
(vi) Issues related to immigrant homeownership, the causes of
racial gaps in homeownership, and other important policy issues and
topics related to homeownership. These studies should provide diverse
insights on homeownership across local housing markets, which will help
HUD identify the best vehicles to advance its future homeownership
strategies to close existing gaps in homeownership.
Affordable Lending. HUD invites proposals for studies of:
(i) The effects on lower-income families of the increase in low-
downpayment mortgage programs and the growth of affordable lending
during the 1990s, and particularly the programs of Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac;
(ii) The role of major mortgage market institutions such as Fannie
Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Housing Administration, and depository
institutions in increasing credit access for low- and moderate-income
and minority families and their communities;
(iii) The extent to which low-downpayment initiatives have
furthered affordable lending and homeownership;
(iv) Effects on targeted populations of setting alternative levels
of the GSE affordable housing goals and defining the goals in
alternative ways; and
(v) Barriers that limit access to credit for low-income and
minority families and families in inner cities and low-income
neighborhoods.
(2) Background on Homeownership. Promoting homeownership has been a
long-standing goal of HUD. Underlying this goal is the belief that
homeownership is an important aspiration of many American families and
that homeownership confers advantages to the homeowner family as well
as to society at large. An owned home can provide a decent and safe
living environment and is an important source of wealth accumulation.
The wealth accumulated from homeownership has made possible the funding
of college education of children and a secure retirement for many
American families. The homeownership rate is at a record high, not only
for the entire population, but also for the major minority groups in
the nation. Even with the current high homeownership rates, many
American families who do not yet own a home continue to aspire for
homeownership. Homeownership studies are part of an ongoing agenda at
HUD to increase opportunities for homeownership for low-income and
minority households.\1\ HUD recently sponsored studies of the benefits
of homeownership \2\ and the impact of the GSE housing goals on
homeownership.\3\ HUD's Office of Policy Development and Research
recently published staff research on homeownership issues.\4\ HUD has
an ongoing study on the determinants of homeownership gaps among low-
income and minority borrowers and neighborhoods.\5\ The studies under
this Request for Applications will complement these other studies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In this NOFA, ``low-income households'' refers generally to
households with incomes below 80 percent of area median income.
Details appear in HUD's regulation on its oversight of Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac, at 24 CFR part 81.
\2\ Robert Dietz and Donald R. Haurin, ``The Social and Private
Consequences of Homeownership.'' Report submitted to the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy
Development and Research, May 15, 2001, Grant P-CHI-00615.
\3\ Brent Ambrose, Thomas Thibodeau, and Ken Temkin, An Analysis
of the Effects of the GSE Affordable Goals on Low- and Moderate-
Income Families. Conducted under contract by the Urban Institute for
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of
Policy Development and Research, April 2002.
\4\ Recent examples include ``First-Time Homebuyers: Trends From
The American Housing Survey,'' U.S. Housing Market Conditions, 3rd
Quarter 2001, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Office of Policy Development and Research, November 2001; and
``Changing Importance of Unmarried Women as Homebuyers: Trends From
The American Housing Survey,'' U.S. Housing Market Conditions, 4th
Quarter 2001, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Office of Policy Development and Research, February 2002.
\5\ A HUD-funded study, ``Homeownership Gaps Among Low-Income
and Minority Borrowers and Neighborhoods,'' is being conducted by
Abt Associates under contract C-OPC-21895 Task Order 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Background on Affordable Lending. Growth of Affordable Lending
During the 1990s. Economic expansion and lower mortgage rates
substantially improved housing affordability during the 1990s. These
underlying economic developments were enhanced by new and expanded
affordable lending programs developed by primary mortgage market
originators, private mortgage insurers, nonprofits, and Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac. During the 1990s, FHA also continued to offer its low-
downpayment program that was particularly attractive to low-income and
minority first-time homebuyers. As a result of initiatives in both the
conventional and government markets, many young, low-income, and
minority families who were closed out of the housing market during the
1980s re-entered the market during the 1990s. However, many households
still lacked the financial resources and earning power to take
advantage of housing opportunities in recent years. Several trends
contributed to the reduction in the real earnings of young adults
without college education over the last 15 years, including
technological changes that favored white-collar employment, losses of
manufacturing jobs, and wage pressures exerted by globalization. Fully
45 percent of the nation's population between the ages of 25 and 34
have no advanced education and are therefore at risk of being unable to
afford homeownership. This is especially true of African Americans and
Hispanics, who have lower average levels of educational attainment than
whites.
HUD's Secondary Mortgage Market Regulatory Role. Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) in the secondary
mortgage market, are the two largest sources of housing finance in the
United States. They play a dominant role in determining the nature and
volume of affordable lending activities in the primary mortgage market.
They provide funding for additional mortgage lending by purchasing
loans from mortgage lenders and holding purchased loans in portfolio.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac also issue mortgage-backed securities (MBS),
which are then sold in the capital markets to a wide variety of
investors.
In 1992, Congress enacted the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial
Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 (FHEFSSA). This act established the
current regulatory structure for the GSEs. One important aspect of this
legislation required the Secretary of HUD to establish annual
affordable and geographic goals for the GSEs' purchases of mortgages.
Under this authority, the Secretary initially set goals for 1993-95
(referred to as the ``transition period''), raised them for 1996-2000,
and raised them again for 2001-03. The three broad goals include:
1. A low- and moderate-income goal, which focuses on families with
below-median incomes;
2. An underserved areas goal, targeted to low-income and minority
census tracts in metropolitan areas and counties in non-metro areas;
and
[[Page 27682]]
3. A special affordable goal, directed to very low-income families
and low-income families in low-income areas.
Congress also expressed concern in 1992 about an ``information
vacuum'' with regard to the activities of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Thus, FHEFSSA required the GSEs to submit loan-level data to the
Secretary about their mortgage purchases, including detailed
information on borrower, property, and mortgage characteristics. It
also required HUD, after taking proprietary considerations into
account, to make the loan-level data submitted by the GSEs available to
interested parties in the form of a public use database. The studies to
be funded under this NOFA will further this mission of providing state-
of-the-art research on the affordable lending efforts of Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac.
Previous and Ongoing PD&R Research. The Financial Institutions
Regulation Division of the Office of Policy Development and Research
(PD&R) has conducted considerable internal research on affordable
lending in recent years, and it has contracted for or provided grants
for additional research.
Specifically, the Division inaugurated a series of studies, Working
Papers in Housing Finance, which has resulted in the publication of 16
reports to date. The most recent papers are ``The GSEs' Funding of
Affordable Loans: A 2000 Update,'' by Harold L. Bunce, and ``Black and
White Disparities in Subprime Mortgage Refinance Lending,'' by Randall
M. Scheessele, both published in April 2002, and ``Goal Performance and
Characteristics of Mortgages Purchased by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
1998-2000,'' by Paul B. Manchester, published in May 2002.
In 1997, the Division funded grants for 11 studies on various
aspects of the GSEs' mortgage purchase activities. These studies
provided useful background information for the reconsideration of the
housing goals in 2000. Five of these studies were published in PD&R's
journal Cityscape, Volume 5, Number 3 (2001), and four more were
published in Cityscape, Volume 6, Number 1 (2002). The other two
studies have been published in professional journals.
Examples of recent contract studies funded by the Financial
Institutions Regulation Division include three studies by the Urban
Institute: A Study of the GSEs' Single Family Underwriting Guidelines
(February 1999); Subprime Markets, the Role of the GSEs, and Risk-Based
Pricing (March 2002); and, An Analysis of the Effects of the GSE
Affordable Goals on Low- and Moderate-Income Families (May 2002). In
addition, Abt Associates wrote A Study of Multifamily Underwriting and
the GSEs' Role in the Multifamily Market (August 2001). Additional
studies are underway.
(4) Background on Relevant Data Sources. HUD anticipates that a
variety of mortgage and housing market data sources may be used,
including the 1990 and 2000 censuses, Home Mortgage Disclosure Act
(HMDA) data, American Housing Survey, Panel Survey of Income Dynamics,
Survey of Consumer Finance, Survey of Residential Finance, and
databases on mortgages insured by the Federal Housing Administration
and mortgages purchased or securitized by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
among others. For example, the Census 2000 long-form data on family
incomes and housing characteristics provide an important data source
for examining issues covered by this solicitation. HUD anticipates that
these studies will be among the first to utilize these newly available
Census data to examine issues related to homeownership and affordable
lending. The American Housing Survey offers a consistent longitudinal
sample to study homeownership and affordable lending issues through
2001.
The GSEs have provided HUD with loan-level data on each of their
mortgage transactions since the beginning of 1993. From this database,
HUD has extracted a Public Use Data Base for each calendar year from
1993 through 2001. The single-family component of the Public Use Data
Base is structured as three separate loan-level data files including
fields such as the loan amount, the census tract location of each
property backing a GSE mortgage acquisition, demographic
characteristics of these tracts, loan-to-value ratio, degree of
affordability, demographic information on the borrower, loan purpose
(refinance/purchase), and whether the property is owner-occupied.
(B) Eligible Activities.
Below you will find a listing of major topics and questions on
which HUD seeks information. HUD is interested in high-quality research
that offers a unique contribution to the literature on affordable
lending and homeownership.
[sbull] Your study may combine descriptive and analytical
approaches.
[sbull] Your study may identify or measure the factors associated
with particular outcomes and the underlying causes of particular
outcomes.
[sbull] You may describe and analyze the impacts of existing
policies, and in this case your proposal should highlight the policy
implications of the potential findings of your proposed research,
particularly with respect to affordable lending and homeownership
policies that have been successful in underserved markets.
[sbull] Your methodology may include statistical techniques,
econometric estimation, application of geographic information systems
(GIS) techniques, case studies, or critical review of the present state
of knowledge and meta-analysis of existing studies. In each case, the
methodology must reflect the state-of-the-art in the respective
discipline.
[sbull] If your study is empirical, your final report must include
a succinct discussion of the literature related to the issue being
analyzed that provides background for the methodology of the study and
a useful context for identifying the analytical and policy
contributions of the study.
(1) Studies on Homeownership.
(a) Changes in Homeownership Rates. The release of the 2000 Census
data (short and long form data) now presents an opportunity to study
changes in homeownership over the past decade (1990-2000), at both the
national and local levels. Similarly, the recent release of the 2001
American Housing Survey offers the opportunity to study homeownership
changes over the past 10-15 years with that database as well. The 1990s
was a decade that saw a great emphasis on promoting homeownership.
Significant housing policy measures such as the setting of quantitative
goals for GSE purchase activity were implemented in this decade. There
was a greater emphasis in the 1990s on promoting homeownership among
first-time homebuyers, low-income families, minority families, and
families living in underserved areas. Research under this sub-topic
includes, but is not limited to, the following:
(i) What are the general policy implications of the changes in
homeownership rates in the decade 1990-2000 and specific implications
arising from the pattern of changes across regions, locations, income
groups, racial and ethnic groups, groups such as the elderly and the
disabled, and household types?
(ii) Are there significant differences in the homeownership rates
of recent immigrant groups compared with non-immigrants? What is the
pattern of homeownership rate changes for particular immigrant groups?
What factors influence the greater likelihood of homeownership among
certain recent immigrant groups compared with other recent immigrant
groups?
(iii) What factors are responsible for the changes in homeownership
rates
[[Page 27683]]
experienced between 1990 and 2000? What is the relative importance of
different factors, such as demographic factors (age composition and
household composition of the population, cultural background, etc.);
economic factors (income and wealth, interest rates, house prices and
their appreciation); and public policy factors, in determining the
changes in homeownership rates?
(iv) What changes were seen in the home value of owner-occupied
homes over 1990-2000 (or some similar recent period)? What patterns may
be discerned from the changes in home value? Was there greater home
value appreciation in certain regions and locations? Did home value
changes vary by the minority status of owner-occupants or the minority
composition of the tract? Did these results hold after certain relevant
factors were controlled for?
(v) How have recent changes in house prices (as measured by repeat
sales and other house price indexes) affected the affordability of
homeownership, in the nation as a whole, in particular regions and
metropolitan areas, and for particular groups such as minorities and
immigrants?
(vi) What have been the changes in homeownership in rural areas
over the decade, 1990-2000? What have been the changes in home values
in rural areas over 1990-2000? What factors explain these changes?
(vii) How has the geography of homeownership changed between 1990
and 2000? Has there been greater suburbanization of homeownership over
this period? What was the nature of homeownership gains in our inner
cities in terms of the types of homes owned, home values, and income
and racial/ethnic characteristics of homeowners? (viii) Did minority
homeowners live in more segregated or less segregated neighborhoods in
2000 than in 1990? How has the degree of integration changed over this
period?
Many of these research topics could be addressed using the 1990 and
2000 Census data (short and long forms).\6\ While homeownership data
are available in the short form data, home value is available only in
the long form data. Longer-term comparisons may be made using data from
the Censuses before 1990. The Census data may be supplemented with
other databases such as the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data,
the American Housing Survey data (including the geocoded version of
that database), or other national or local databases. Tract-level
analyses may be conducted using these multiple databases. In addition,
there are several available measures of house prices and their change
that could be used for this analysis (e.g., NAR median house price
series, Freddie Mac's repeat sales index, AHS and Census home value
information).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Applicants should take note of changes in minority
categorization, metropolitan area specification, etc. that became
effective with the 2000 Census.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Sustaining Homeownership and Wealth-Accumulation for Low- and
Moderate-Income and Minority Families.\7\ While increasing numbers of
low- and moderate-income and minority families have achieved the
American Dream of homeownership, sustaining the Dream has sometimes
presented enormous challenges. The difficulty in making mortgage,
insurance, tax and utility payments on time has put many households on
the brink of foreclosure or other hardship. Many benefits of
homeownership such as gains from price appreciation accrue only after a
certain period of sustained homeownership. Thus, ensuring that new
homeowners can sustain their homeownership is integral to realizing the
American Dream of homeownership as a public policy goal. Even with
sustained homeownership, the wealth accumulated in home equity can be
dissipated through refinances that overtap equity. In recent times,
many households have engaged in such refinances, and often repeatedly.
Low-income and elderly households are particularly affected by such
transactions. Refinance counseling to educate homeowners of the
possibility of erosion in accumulated wealth in the home through
refinances is seen as necessary. Research related to sustaining
homeownership for low- and moderate-income and minority families
includes, but is not limited to, the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ ``Families'' and ``households'' are also used
interchangeably here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) What has been the recent experience of low- and moderate-income
and minority households with respect to sustained homeownership? How
many low- and moderate-income and minority households have sustained
homeownership for several years?
(ii) Have low- and moderate-income and minority families built
assets (wealth) through homeownership? Have refinances resulted in
erosion of accumulated housing wealth? What has been the level of
appreciation in the values of the homes that low- and moderate-income
and minority households have owned for different time horizons (but at
least eight years)? How is the home value appreciation distributed
across different locations (e.g., regional, urban versus suburban,
neighborhoods) and population groups (e.g., different racial groups and
their neighborhoods)? What are the policy implications of these
developments?
(iii) What factors can be identified as being associated with
sustained homeownership among low- and moderate-income and minority
families? What is the relative importance of the socio-economic
characteristics of these families, the role of institutions (such as
special mortgage lending programs and homeownership and refinance
counseling programs), and the state of the economy (local and national)
in helping sustain homeownership among low- and moderate-income and
minority families?
(iv) How many low- and moderate-income and minority households
failed to sustain homeownership in spite of having wanted to remain
homeowners? What were the causes of failure to sustain homeownership?
Can failure to sustain homeownership be reliably predicted using
available data sets?
(v) What housing adjustments and non-housing adjustments have
homeowners, on the brink of losing their homes, made in order to
sustain homeownership? Has housing counseling made a difference?
(vi) Are difficulties with sustaining homeownership associated more
with certain types of mortgages? If so, are mortgage characteristics
responsible for the difficulties; or are the characteristics of the
households (who are more likely to use such mortgages), their housing
units, or neighborhoods, responsible?
(vii) What role have non-profit organizations, such as Community
Development Corporations (CDCs), faith-based organizations and HUD-
approved counseling agencies \8\ played in helping sustain
homeownership? What types of programs of these institutions (such as
financial counseling, job training, providing micro-finance and
assistance with renovations) have been most effective in helping
sustain homeownership?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ HUD-approved housing counseling agencies are listed on the
Internet at http://www.hud.gov/offices/hsg/sfh/hcc/hccprof14.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Longitudinal panel data, such as the AHS (panel of non-mover
sample), Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), Panel Study
of Income Dynamics (PSID) and the National Longitudinal Surveys (NLS),
are examples of databases that could be used to address these topics.
Other special purpose databases may also be available. Case studies on
[[Page 27684]]
homeownership experiences may be used where appropriate.
(c) Barriers to Homeownership. Aspiration for homeownership is
widespread among American families who are not yet owners. Many such
families perceive barriers that prevent them from becoming homeowners.
Financial barriers, including down payment and credit constraints, are
faced by many households. Other barriers to homeownership include
discrimination and information barriers. Studying the nature and
significance of these barriers is a first step towards designing
policies to remove, minimize, or overcome these barriers. Research on
barriers to homeownership includes, but is not limited to, the
following:
(i) What are the main barriers to homeownership that American
families currently face?
(ii) What is the relative importance of homeownership barriers such
as financial barriers, poor credit history, information barriers,
discrimination barriers, lack of availability of affordable housing
stock, and lack of personal capacities to manage homeownership? What is
the relative importance of these barriers for different population
groups such as minorities, the elderly, the disabled, and first-time
homebuyers?
(iii) To what extent is a downpayment constraint a barrier to
homeownership? What are the common sources of downpayment for American
homebuyers? Is homeownership for persons below a certain age related to
parental wealth? What roles do family gifts and gifts from others play
in opening up homeownership opportunities for young, low-income, and
minority families?
(iv) Are homeownership rates among minority groups in particular
locations related to some measure of the degree of discrimination that
the minority groups face at those locations? Researchers may use long-
range panel data like the PSID to address some of these questions.
Researchers may also use the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF), AHS,
HMDA data, and other databases.
(v) To what extent do housing supply constraints affect
homeownership? For example, do zoning or other types of regulations
that restrain housing supply tend to create barriers to homeownership
through their effects on housing prices? Are there barriers and supply
constraints specifically in underserved neighborhoods that lessen the
impacts of targeted affordable housing programs?
(d) Promoting Homeownership. There are a number of programs and
policies aimed at promoting homeownership in the U.S. Some of these
directly address the barriers to homeownership mentioned above. The
mortgage finance industry clearly has a vital role to play in promoting
homeownership. The role of secondary mortgage market institutions,
including the GSEs, in promoting homeownership is of critical interest.
FHA has played a major role in the first-time homebuyer market. It is
important to study the role played by these institutions in the past
and present, as well as their potential role in promoting homeownership
in the future. Many first-time homebuyers with low-income, as well as
other buyers, have benefited from the efforts of non-profit
organizations such as Community Development Corporations (CDCs) and
faith-based organizations. The efforts of these institutions include
promoting innovative homeownership programs, such as sweat-equity
programs, rent-to-own programs and co-operative forms of ownership, and
providing micro-finance and homeownership counseling to households. HUD
has worked with non-profit organizations in promoting homeownership
through a number of its programs, including the Self-Help Housing
Opportunity Program (SHOP). HUD's Homeownership Voucher Program
specifically addresses the downpayment constraint that low-income
households face. Research related to promoting homeownership includes,
but is not limited to, the following:
(i) What has been the role of secondary mortgage market
institutions in promoting homeownership? What role have the GSEs
(including Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Federal Home Loan Banks), and the
Federal Housing Administration played in promoting homeownership? Has
the introduction of quantitative housing goals for Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac in 1993 directly increased homeownership among low- and
moderate-income households and among households in underserved
areas?\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The Urban Institute has recently completed a report for HUD,
``An Analysis of the Effects of the GSE Affordable Goals on Low- and
Moderate-Income Families.'' The study is a significant first step in
addressing this issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) How has the purchase activity of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
with respect to mortgages obtained by low-income, minority or first-
time homebuyers changed over the recent years? Can these changes be
seen as being beneficial to the promotion of homeownership among these
groups?
(iii) What is the evidence on the effectiveness of pre- and post-
purchase homeownership counseling programs of HUD-approved counseling
agencies, and programs sponsored by FHA, the GSEs and other
organizations? Does homeownership counseling adequately address
homeowners' decisions to refinance?
(iv) What is the role of manufactured housing in promoting
homeownership through providing affordable housing? Are first-time
homebuyers, low-income households, and minority households more likely
to achieve homeownership through purchasing manufactured housing? What
are the barriers (such as financial, technological, informational and
attitudinal) to homeowners achieving homeownership through buying
manufactured homes?
(v) What has been the role of non-profits, Community Development
Corporations (CDCs) and faith-based organizations in promoting
homeownership? What types of programs of these institutions have been
most effective in increasing homeownership? What constraints do these
institutions face in promoting homeownership in their communities? What
is the scope for HUD programs (existing and new) to help overcome some
of these constraints?
Researchers may use the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Public Use Data
Base (PUDB), HMDA data, case studies, AHS, and other databases in
addressing these research areas.
(2) Studies on Affordable Lending.
(a) Studies on Barriers to Credit Access. Barriers to credit access
include limited savings to make a downpayment, insufficient income to
afford the requisite monthly payments, high debt burdens, and an
inadequately documented or poor credit history. In some or many cases,
obtaining credit to purchase a home may not be realistic, and such
families may need to rent for a time to build their savings, increase
their incomes, reduce their debts, and establish a satisfactory credit
history. However, in many other cases, credit may be obtainable if
lenders adopt more flexible underwriting guidelines and devote
additional time to reviewing applications that do not qualify under the
automated underwriting programs commonly in use in today's mortgage
market.
An additional barrier to obtaining credit is the fear and
uncertainty about the buying process and the risks of ownership. To
overcome this, a number of programs have been developed to enhance
education about the credit process in recent years, including Freddie
Mac's ``Don't Borrow Trouble'' campaign. Also, despite progress in
recent years, there is evidence that discrimination in mortgage lending
[[Page 27685]]
continues to exist.\10\ Disparities in treatment between borrowers of
different races and neighborhoods of different racial makeup have been
well documented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Recent studies include What We Know About Mortgage Lending
Discrimination in America, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, September
1999, and All Other Things Being Equal: A Paired Testing Study of
Mortgage Lending Institutions, report prepared by The Urban
Institute for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, April 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUD seeks information on these various barriers to credit access
and feasible steps that might be taken to improve such access among
minorities and other groups that have traditionally had difficulty in
obtaining credit. Study topics include, but are not limited to, the
following:
(i) The effectiveness of credit education programs established by
various participants in the mortgage process in recent years.
(ii) The nature and adequacy of lender reviews of mortgage
applications that don't qualify for approval under automated
underwriting.
(iii) The effects on savings for down payments of various policy
initiatives in recent years, such as Individual Development Accounts
(IDAs), under which participants' savings in restricted accounts are
matched by outside sources, and under which these matching funds can
only be withdrawn for program-specified purposes, such as to put a down
payment on a home.
(b) Impacts of Broad Initiatives to Promote Affordable Lending. HUD
is interested in quantitative studies of the impacts of broad
initiatives to promote affordable lending. Data sources for such
studies are listed above in section III (A)(4), but other databases may
also yield useful insights.
These studies could utilize econometric techniques to evaluate
these questions. An example of this type of study is a recent report
prepared for HUD by the Urban Institute. This report, authored by Brent
Ambrose, Thomas Thibodeau, and Ken Temkin, is titled An Analysis of the
Effects of the GSE Affordable Goals on Low- and Moderate-Income
Families. The report presented several theoretical models and developed
empirical analyses relating to the relationships among GSE market
shares and interest rates, financing for target groups, and
homeownership.
Study topics could include, but are not limited to, the following:
(i) Factors accounting for changes in GSE market shares over time.
(ii) Effects of HUD's GSE affordable housing goals on homeownership
rates for underserved groups and areas targeted by the goals.
(iii) Relationship between GSE market share in specific
metropolitan areas and the homeownership rate for targeted groups in
those areas.
(c) Evaluation of Specific Affordable Lending Programs. In addition
to the quantitative studies outlined in the previous section, HUD seeks
information on the effects, costs, and benefits of various affordable
lending programs developed in the 1990s. Programs that could be
analyzed include, but are not limited to, the following:
(i) Freddie Mac's affordable lending programs. Information on these
programs is available from Freddie Mac's Web site and from its Annual
Housing Activity Reports (AHARs) submitted to HUD.
(ii) Fannie Mae's affordable lending programs. With respect to
Fannie Mae, information is available on Fannie Mae's Web site and from
its AHARs submitted to HUD.
(iii) Programs of primary mortgage market lenders.
(iv) Programs of primary mortgage market insurers, including
private insurers and the Federal Housing Administration (FHA).
(d) Studies on Down Payments. Several studies have suggested that
the greatest barrier to affordable lending is not the inability to make
monthly mortgage payments; rather it is the lack of sufficient
resources to make the initial down payment. While FHA has traditionally
been the main source of low-downpayment loans for first-time
homebuyers, data suggest that conventional lenders increased their low-
downpayment lending during the latter half of the 1990s. Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac began offering less-than-five-percent down payment programs
during that period. There has been little recent research on the
determinants of down payments and on the characteristics of
conventional low-downpayment loans originated during the mid-to-late
1990s. Research is particularly needed on the relationship between the
new conventional programs and first-time homeownership. Are these
conventional and GSE low-downpayment programs providing an avenue for
cash-constrained families to obtain first-time homeownership, along the
same lines that FHA has been doing? Topics, issues, and questions that
could be analyzed include:
(i) Market sectors (e.g., FHA, depositories, the GSEs) that provide
substantial numbers of low-downpayment mortgages for low-income and
minority families and for first-time homebuyers.
(ii) Characteristics that differentiate between low-income and
minority borrowers who are able to make substantial down payments and
those who are not able to do so.
(iii) The GSEs' role in the low-downpayment mortgage market. Do
their low-downpayment loans go to low-income and minority homebuyers?
To first-time homebuyers?
(iv) Comparisons of the down payment characteristics of mortgages
originated in the entire primary conventional mortgage market and
mortgages purchased by the GSEs.
(v) In order for HUD to define the GSE housing goals in precise
terms and set the goals at specific levels, HUD is seeking research
that will determine whether the goals affect supply in the market.
Specifically, HUD is interested in a model that can provide
quantitative estimates of the impact of setting the goals at various
levels on the financial condition of the GSEs and on targeted outcomes.
IV. Cooperative Agreement Structure; Publication of Studies
The awards will be structured as cooperative agreements, in order
to provide latitude to researchers to proceed independently, but with
opportunity for HUD to provide comments at appropriate points in the
research. As detailed below, HUD's participation in the research will
include review and comment on the detailed study design, review and
comment on the draft final report, and organizing and participating in
a seminar on the research. If you believe that a greater extent of HUD
involvement in your project would be advantageous for the successful
accomplishment of your research objectives, please include in your
project description/narrative a discussion of the desired HUD resources
and the rationale. (This is item 6 in the list of application items
provided in section VI.A, below.) Formal commitments regarding this
aspect of the cooperative agreement would then become a matter for
negotiation prior to award.
The technical study plan portion of your application (see item 3 in
Section VI(A)(5) below) must include provisions for the following work
steps to be performed by you and by HUD:
(a) You must submit a detailed study design, comprising identified
research issue(s), a technical proposal, and methodological approach.
This will be due no later than six weeks from the
[[Page 27686]]
date of award, unless you indicate a specific rationale for a different
schedule. HUD will provide comments to you on the study design.
(b) You must submit a draft report to HUD no later than twenty (20)
weeks prior to the scheduled ending date of the project. HUD will
provide comments on the draft report, which may include comments of
peer reviewers engaged by HUD.
(c) Travel to Washington (or another location, as mutually agreed)
to present the study, at a time to be arranged with HUD
representatives, subsequent to submission of the draft final report.
Your project budget must include provision for this.
(d) You must submit a final report taking account of the comments.
A cost-reimbursement award based on the negotiated budget is
anticipated.
A payment schedule based on the completion of project milestones
will be established in negotiation. An amount equal to 20 percent of
the total amount of the cooperative agreement will be withheld and paid
by HUD only after the final project report has been received and
accepted by HUD.
The terms and conditions of the cooperative agreement will include
restrictions against release of work products, quotation or
paraphrasing from work products, or disclosures of interim findings
prior to 60 days after HUD acceptance of your final report except with
HUD approval. Thereafter, recipients are free to publish without HUD
approval. The present provisions of OMB-Circular A-110, and HUD
regulations at 24 CFR part 84 subpart C shall govern the right to
intellectual or intangible property developed as a result of a
recipient's performance under a cooperative agreement.
V. Program Requirements.
(A) Threshold Requirements.
(1) Eligible Applicants. Academic and not-for-profit institutions
located in the U.S., state and local governments, and federally
recognized Indian tribes are eligible to apply under this NOFA. For-
profit firms also are eligible; however, they are not allowed to earn a
fee (i.e., no profit can be made from the project). Federal agencies
and federal employees are not eligible to submit applications.
(2) Compliance with Fair Housing and Civil Rights Laws.
(a) With the exception of federally recognized Indian tribes and
their instrumentalities, all applicants and their subrecipients must
comply with all Fair Housing and Civil Rights laws, statutes,
regulations, and Executive Orders as enumerated in 24 CFR 5.105(a). If
you are a federally recognized Indian tribe, you must comply with the
non-discrimination provisions enumerated at 24 CFR 1003.601, as
applicable.
(b) If you, the applicant:
(i) Have been charged with a systemic violation of the Fair Housing
Act alleging ongoing discrimination;
(ii) Are a defendant in a Fair Housing Act lawsuit filed by the
Department of Justice alleging an on-going pattern or practice of
discrimination; or,
(iii) Have received a letter of non-compliance findings under title
VI, section 504, or section 109, and if the charge, lawsuit, or letter
of findings has not been resolved to HUD's satisfaction before the
application deadline stated in this NOFA, then you may not apply for
assistance under this NOFA. HUD will not rate and rank your
application. HUD's decision regarding whether a charge, lawsuit, or a
letter of findings has been satisfactorily resolved will be based upon
whether appropriate actions have been taken to address allegations of
on-going discrimination in the policies or practices involved in the
charge, lawsuit, or letter of findings.
(3) Conducting Business In Accordance With Core Values and Ethical
Standards. Entities subject to 24 CFR parts 84 and 85 (most non-profit
organizations and state, local and tribal governments or government
agencies or instrumentalities that receive federal awards of financial
assistance) are required to develop and maintain a written code of
conduct (see Sec. Sec. 84.42 and 85.36(b)(3)). Consistent with
regulations governing specific programs, your code of conduct must:
prohibit real and apparent conflicts of interest that may arise among
officers, employees, or agents; prohibit the solicitation and
acceptance of gifts or gratuities by your officers, employees, and
agents for their personal benefit in excess of minimal value; and,
outline administrative and disciplinary actions available to remedy
violations of such standards. If awarded assistance under this NOFA,
you will be required, prior to entering into a cooperative agreement
with HUD, to submit a copy of your code of conduct and describe the
methods you will use to ensure that all officers, employees, and agents
of your organization are aware of your code of conduct.
(B) Program Requirements.
(1) Number of Proposals and Topics. A particular author or group of
co-authors may submit separate research proposals on more than one
topic, but no more than one award will be made to any one such author
or group of co-authors.
You may address more than one of the technical study topic areas
within your proposal or submit separate applications for different
topic areas. Projects need not address all of the objectives within a
given topic area. While you will not be penalized for not addressing
all of the specific objectives for a given topic area, if two
applications for technical study in a given topic have equal scores,
HUD will select the applicant whose project addresses the most
objectives.
(2) Period of Performance. The period of performance may not exceed
18 months from the time of award.
(3) Conflict of Interest. You must include information in your
proposal concerning any past and current relationships that you and any
other individuals, contractors, subcontractors or consultants proposed
to be involved in the work may have with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.
Substantial conflict of interest may be a basis for HUD disapproval of
a proposed investigator's involvement.
If your study bears in any way on the role or activities of
financial institutions, you will be required upon the completion of
your work to provide to HUD a succinct statement summarizing any past
or current relationships between project personnel (either individually
or through their institutions), and Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac. In any
subsequent public release of the research by the Office of Policy
Development and Research, either through formal publication or
otherwise, this statement will be included, to inform readers of the
nature and extent of any such relationships.
(4) Existing Resources. HUD technical studies funds may not replace
existing resources dedicated to any ongoing project.
(5) Protection of Human Subjects. Human research subjects must be
protected from research risks in conformance with Federal Policy for
the Protection of Human Subjects, codified by HUD at 24 CFR part 60.
(6) Ensuring the Participation of Small Businesses, Small
Disadvantaged Businesses, and Women-Owned Businesses. HUD is committed
to ensuring that small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, and
women-owned businesses participate fully in HUD's direct contracting
and in contracting opportunities generated by HUD cooperative agreement
funds. Too often, these businesses still experience difficulty
accessing information and successfully bidding on federal contracts.
State, local, and tribal governments are required by 24 CFR 85.36(e),
and non-profit recipients of assistance by 24 CFR 84.44(b), to take all
necessary affirmative steps in contracting for purchase of goods or
[[Page 27687]]
services to assure that minority firms, women's business enterprises,
and labor surplus area firms are used when possible.
(7) Additional Non-Discrimination Requirements. You, the applicant,
and your subrecipients must comply with the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.) and title IX of the Education
Amendments Act of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.)
(8) Prohibition Against Lobbying Activities. Applicants for funding
under this NOFA are subject to the provisions of section 319 of the
Department of Interior and Related Agencies Appropriation Act for
Fiscal Year 1991 (31 U.S.C. 1352) (the Byrd Amendment) and to the
provisions of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-65,
approved December 19, 1995).
The Byrd Amendment, which is implemented in regulations at 24 CFR
part 87, prohibits applicants for federal contracts and grants from
using appropriated funds to attempt to influence federal executive or
legislative officers or employees in connection with obtaining such
assistance, or with its extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or
modification. The Byrd Amendment applies to the funds that are the
subject of this NOFA. Therefore, applicants must file a certification
stating that they have not made and will not make any prohibited
payments and, if any payments or agreement to make payments of non-
appropriated funds for these purposes have been made, a form SF-LLL
disclosing such payments must be submitted.
The Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-65, approved
December 19, 1995), which repealed section 112 of the HUD Reform Act,
requires all persons and entities who lobby covered executive or
legislative branch officials to register with the Secretary of the
Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives, and file reports
concerning their lobbying activities.
VI. Application Submission Requirements
(A) Applicant Information.
Your application must contain the items listed in this section VI,
as follows:
(1) A transmittal letter (limited to one page) which identifies the
purpose for which the technical study program funds are requested, the
dollar amount requested, and the applicant or applicants submitting the
application. If two or more organizations are working together on the
project, a primary applicant must be designated.
(2) Checklist and submission table of contents (see Appendix A).
(3) Name of primary applicant and any sub-recipients (such as
consortium associates, partners, subcontractors, joint venture
participants, or others contributing resources to your project), with
contact information (i.e., name, mailing address, and telephone number
of principal contact person) for each.
(4) An abstract (limited to two pages) containing the following
information: The project title, the names and affiliations of all
investigators, and a summary of the research problem and study design
as described in the project narrative.
(5) A project narrative (limited to a total of 25 pages) that
discusses your qualifications and your study plan and addresses the
following topics, which correspond to the rating factors for award of
funding as stated in section VII(D), below. The narrative statement
must be organized in sections numbered in accordance with this outline:
1. Applicant and organizational qualifications, including
qualifications of the principal investigator and key personnel,
experience in managing similar projects, and past performance in
managing project funds. See the discussion of Rating Factor 1 in
section VII(D).
2. The problem to be addressed. See Rating Factor 2.
3. Technical study plan, including study design, quality assurance
mechanisms, and project management plan. See Rating Factor 3; also see
section IV, above.
4. Statement of non-HUD resources to be applied, if any. See Rating
Factor 4.
5. Statement on coordination, self-sufficiency, and sustainability
of your work. See Rating Factor 5. Any pages in excess of the 25-page
limit will not be read.
(6) Discussion of desired HUD resources, if applicable. See section
IV.
(7) Conflict of interest disclosure. See section V(B)(3).
(8) You may provide attachments, appendices, bibliography, or other
relevant materials that support your project narrative, but these must
not exceed 20 pages in the aggregate. Any pages in excess of this limit
will not be read.
(9) The resumes of the principal investigator and other key
personnel. Resumes shall not exceed three pages each and are limited to
information that is relevant in assessing the qualifications of key
personnel to conduct and/or manage the proposed technical studies.
(10) Indirect Cost Rate Agreement, if available. Applicants that
have established indirect cost rate agreements shall provide a copy of
the agreement from their cognizant Federal agency. The cognizant agency
is the Federal agency responsible for negotiating.
(B) Standard Forms, Certifications and Assurances.
You, the applicant, are required to submit signed copies of the
following forms, certifications, and assurances:
(i) Application for Federal Assistance (HUD-424);
(ii) Applicant Assurances and Certifications (HUD-424-B);
(iii) Detailed Budget (HUD-424-CB);
(iv) Detailed Budget Worksheet (HUD-424-CBW);
Note that the thoroughness, clarity, and coherence of the budget
information that you provide on the Detailed Budget Worksheet will be
evaluated under Rating Factor 3, item 4. You must thoroughly document
and justify all budget categories and costs and all major tasks, for
yourself and any sub-recipients contributing resources to the project.
Your budget should include the cost of travel to Washington for at
least one investigator to meet with HUD representatives or participate
in a research seminar or symposium.
(v) If required, the Disclosure Form Regarding Lobbying (SF-LLL).
See the first paragraph under ``certifications'' on page 2 of form HUD-
424. See also section V(B)(8) above;
(vi) Disclosure/Update Report (HUD-2880);
(vii) Acknowledgment of Application Receipt (HUD-2993); and
(viii) Client Comments and Suggestions (HUD 2994).
Copies of these standard forms, with instructions as applicable,
are appended to this NOFA.
VII. Application Selection Process
(A) Program Threshold Requirements. HUD will review your
application to determine whether it meets all of the program threshold
requirements described in section V(A) above. Only applications that
meet all of the threshold requirements will be eligible to be rated and
ranked.
(B) Rating. Applications that meet all of the threshold
requirements will be eligible to be scored and ranked, based on the
total number of points allocated for each of the rating factors
described below. Your application must receive a total score of at
least 70 points to remain in consideration for funding.
(C) Ranking and Selection. Selection of award recipients will be
based on the ranking of aggregate scores, within the limits of funding
availability. Awards may be made to two or more recipients proposing
work on a particular topic, if deemed to be in the best interests of
the government. HUD reserves the right to
[[Page 27688]]
select applications out of rank order to achieve balance among the
topics selected for funding.
(D) Rating Factors. The factors for rating and ranking applicants,
and maximum points for each factor, are provided below. The maximum
number of points to be awarded is 100.
Rating Factor 1: Capacity of the Applicant and Relevant Organizational
Experience (30 Points)
Points will be awarded under the following three sub-factors, based
on the extent to which your proposal indicates that you have the
ability and organizational resources necessary to implement
successfully your proposed activities in a timely manner. The rating of
you, the ``applicant,'' will include any sub-recipients that will
contribute resources to the project. In rating this factor, HUD will
consider and award points based on the extent to which your application
demonstrates:
(1) That the principal investigator and key personnel are capable
and qualified to accomplish the proposed research, based on their
education/training and previous completed research. (15 points.)
Qualifications to carry out the proposed study will be evaluated based
on the academic background of personnel, relevant publications, and
recent (within the past 10 years) research experience relevant to the
type of work proposed. Publications and research experience are
considered relevant if they required the acquisition and use of
knowledge and skills that can be applied in the planning and execution
of the technical study that is proposed.
(2) That the project manager(s) have demonstrated ability to manage
this research, based on past performance in managing similar projects.
(10 points.) Points will be awarded based on demonstrated ability to
successfully manage your study in such areas as personnel management,
project management, data management, quality control, community study
involvement (if applicable), and report writing, as well as overall
success in project completion (i.e., projects completed on time and
within budget). You should also demonstrate that your project would
have adequate administrative support, including clerical and
specialized support in areas such as accounting and equipment
maintenance, as relevant.
(3) That the primary applicant and any sub-recipients are capable
of managing project funds, based on past performance. (5 points.)
Points will be awarded based on the extent of demonstrated ability to
account for funds appropriately as well as on timely use of funds
received either from HUD or from other Federal, state, or local
programs, or private programs. HUD may consider information at hand or
available from public sources such as, but not limited to, newspapers,
Inspector General or Government Accounting Office Reports or Findings,
and/or hotline complaints that have been proven to have merit.
Rating Factor 2: Need/Extent of the Problem (10 Points)
Points will be awarded based on the extent to which your proposal
establishes that your proposed research will address documented
problems, target areas or target groups. In responding to this factor,
you should document in detail how your project would make a significant
contribution towards achieving some or all of HUD's stated goals and
objectives for one or more of the topic areas described in section III
(A).
Rating Factor 3: Soundness of Technical Study Approach (50 Points)
Points will be awarded based on the quality of the technical study
plan portion of your application, under the following four sub-factors.
Specific components that will be evaluated include the following:
(1) Soundness of the study design. (30 points.) The thoroughness
and feasibility of your project description/study design, and the
extent to which it reflects a comprehensive understanding of the
relevant technical literature. It should clearly describe how your
study builds upon the current state of knowledge for your focus area.
If possible, your study should be designed to address testable
hypotheses, which are clearly stated. Your study design should be
statistically based, with sufficient data to provide an adequate test
of your stated hypotheses. The study design should be presented as a
logical sequence of steps or phases, with individual activities or
tasks described for each. You should identify any important ``decision
points'' in your study plan, and you should discuss plans for data
management, analysis and archiving.
(2) Quality assurance mechanisms. (10 points.) The adequacy of
quality assurance mechanisms that will be integrated into your project
design to ensure the validity and quality of the results. Areas to be
addressed include acceptance criteria for data quality, procedures for
selection of samples/sample sites, sample handling, measurement and
analysis, and any standard/nonstandard quality assurance/control
procedures to be followed. Documents (e.g., government reports, peer-
reviewed academic literature) that provide the basis for your quality
assurance mechanisms should be cited.
(3) Project management plan. (8 points.) The extent to which your
schedule for the completion of major activities, tasks and
deliverables, and your budget, confirm that there will be adequate
resources (e.g., personnel, financial) to carry out your study design
successfully within the proposed time frame, taking account of timing
requirements stated in section IV, above.
(4) Budget proposal. (2 Points) Two points will be awarded if your
budget proposal on the HUD-424CB thoroughly estimates all applicable
direct and indirect costs and is presented in a clear and coherent
format as provided in section VI (B). One point, or no point, will be
awarded if your budget proposal is deficient in these regards, based on
the degree of deficiency.
Rating Factor 4: Leveraging of Resources (5 Points)
You are encouraged to demonstrate that the effectiveness of HUD's
funds will be increased by securing other public and/or private
resources or by structuring the project in a cost-effective manner,
such as integrating the project into an existing study. Resources may
include funding or in-kind contributions (such as services, facilities
or equipment) allocated to the purpose(s) of your project. Staff and
in-kind contributions should be given a monetary value. Larger
commitments of this kind will be awarded more points under this rating
factor.
You should provide evidence of leveraging/partnerships by attaching
to your application letters of firm commitment, memoranda of
understanding, or agreements to participate from those entities
identified as partners in the project efforts. Each letter of
commitment, memorandum of understanding, or agreement to participate
must include the organization's name, proposed level of commitment
(with monetary value) and responsibilities as they relate to specific
activities or tasks of your proposed program. The commitment must also
be signed by an official of the organization legally able to make
commitments on behalf of the organization.
Rating Factor 5: Coordination, Self-Sufficiency and Sustainability (5
Points)
(1) The extent to which you have coordinated your activities with
other organizations that have been or are in
[[Page 27689]]
the process of conducting similar or related work.
(2) Evidence that your proposed study builds upon the existing body
of related work and it does not significantly duplicate work that is
currently being conducted, or has been conducted, by other
organizations (to the extent that this can be ascertained).
(3) The extent to which your project will help generate practical
solutions that can be implemented on the local or national level for
increasing homeownership and/or improving housing affordability for
low- and moderate-income families, minority families, and families in
underserved geographical areas.
(E) Adjustments to Funding.
(1) HUD reserves the right to fund less than the full amount
requested in your application to ensure the fair distribution of the
funds and that the purposes of this program are met.
(2) HUD will not fund any portion of your application that is not
eligible for funding under specific program statutory or regulatory
requirements; does not meet the requirements of this NOFA; or that may
be duplicative of other funded programs or activities from previous
years' awards or other selected applicants. Only the eligible portions
of your application (including non-duplicative portions) may be funded.
(3) Purchase or lease of equipment having a per unit cost in excess
of $5,000 will not be funded unless prior written approval is obtained
from HUD.
(4) If funds remain after funding the highest-ranking applications,
HUD may fund all or part of the next highest-ranking application in a
given program. If you, the applicant, turn down an award offer, HUD
will make an offer of funding to the next highest-ranking application.
If funds remain after all selections have been made, remaining funds
may be available for other competitions for each program where there is
a balance of funds.
(5) In the event HUD commits an error that, when corrected, would
result in selection of an otherwise eligible applicant during the
funding round of this NOFA, HUD may select that applicant when
sufficient funds become available.
(F) Audit.
Grantees/applicants that expend $300,000 or more in a year in
federal awards shall have a single or program-specific audit conducted
for that year in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. Grantees/
applicants shall ensure that their most recent completed audit has been
submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse for review by HUD (refer
to harvester.census.gov/sac/). Grantees that do not have such an audit
or are not subject to OMB Circular A-133 will be asked to provide a
copy of their organization's most recent audit or other evidence that
financial controls are in place before an award can be finalized.
VIII. Corrections, Debriefing
(A) Corrections to Deficient Applications. After the application
due date, HUD may not, consistent with its regulations in 24 CFR part
4, subpart B, consider any unsolicited information you, the applicant,
may want to provide. HUD may contact you to clarify an item in your
application or to correct technical deficiencies. HUD may not seek
clarification of items or responses that improve the substantive
quality of your response to any rating factors. In order not
unreasonably to exclude applications from being rated and ranked, HUD
may contact applicants to ensure proper completion of the application
and will do so on a uniform basis for all applicants. Examples of
curable (correctable) technical deficiencies include failure to submit
the proper certifications or failure to submit an application that
contains an original signature by an authorized official. In each case,
HUD will notify you in writing by describing the clarification or
technical deficiency. HUD will notify applicants by facsimile (FAX) or
by USPS, return receipt requested. Clarifications or corrections of
technical deficiencies in accordance with the information provided by
HUD must be submitted within 14 calendar days of the date of receipt of
the HUD notification. (If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or
Federal holiday, your correction must be received by HUD on the next
day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday.) If the
deficiency is not corrected within this time period, HUD will reject
the application as incomplete and it will not be considered for
funding.
(B) Applicant Debriefing. Beginning not less than 30 days after the
awards for assistance are announced in the Federal Register, and for at
least 120 days after awards for assistance are announced, HUD will
provide any requesting applicant with a debriefing on their
application. All requests for debriefing must be made by the principal
investigator for the proposed study or by the authorized official whose
signature appears on the HUD-424 or his or her successor in office.
Submit your request to Mr. Patrick Tewey, who may be reached at (202)
702-0614, extension 4098 (this is not a toll-free number). Information
provided to you during your debriefing will include, at a minimum, the
final score you received for each rating factor, final evaluator
comments for each rating factor, and the final assessment indicating
the basis upon which assistance was provided or denied.
IX. Findings and Certifications
(A) Federalism Impact. Executive Order 13132 (captioned
``Federalism'') prohibits, to the extent practicable and permitted by
law, an agency from promulgating a regulation that has federalism
implications and either imposes substantial direct compliance costs on
state and local governments and is not required by statute, or preempts
state law, unless the relevant requirements of section 6 of the
Executive Order are met. This NOFA does not have federalism
implications and does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on
state and local governments nor preempt state law within the meaning of
the Executive Order.
(B) Accountability in the Provision of HUD Assistance.
Section 102 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development
Reform Act of 1989 (HUD Reform Act) and the regulations in 24 CFR part
4, subpart A contain a number of provisions that are designed to ensure
greater accountability and integrity in the provision of certain types
of assistance administered by HUD. On January 14, 1992 (57 FR 1942),
HUD published a notice that also provides information on the
implementation of section 102. HUD will comply with the documentation,
public access, and disclosure requirements of section 102 with regard
to the assistance awarded under this NOFA, as follows:
(1) 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 5-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.
(2) Disclosures. HUD will make available for public inspection for
5 years all applicant disclosure reports (HUD Form 2880) submitted in
connection with this NOFA. Update reports (also reported on HUD Form
2880) will be made available along with the applicant disclosure
reports, but in no case for a period of less than three
[[Page 27690]]
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.
(3) Publication of Recipients of HUD Funding. HUD's regulations at
24 CFR part 4 provide that HUD will publish a notice in the Federal
Register to notify the public of all decisions made by the Department
to provide:
(i) Assistance subject to section 102(a) of the HUD Reform Act;
and/or,
(ii) Assistance provided through grants or cooperative agreements
on a discretionary (non-formula, non-demand) basis, but that is not
provided on the basis of a competition.
(C) Section 103 HUD Reform Act. HUD will comply with section 103 of
the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 and
HUD's implementing regulations in subpart B of 24 CFR part 4 with
regard to the funding competition announced today. These requirements
continue to apply until the announcement of the selection of successful
applicants. HUD employees involved in the review of applications and in
the making of funding decisions are limited by section 103 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 section 103 and subpart B of 24 CFR part
4.
Applicants or employees who have ethics related questions should
contact the HUD Ethics Law Division at (202) 708-3815 (this is not a
toll-free number). For HUD employees who have specific program
questions, such as whether particular subject matter can be discussed
with persons outside HUD, the employee should contact the appropriate
Field Office Counsel.
(D) Paperwork Reduction Act Statement. The information collection
requirements in this NOFA have been approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The OMB control number is 2528-0228. Under the
Paperwork Reduction Act, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless the collection displays a valid control number.
(E) Environmental Requirements. This NOFA does not direct, provide
for assistance or loan and mortgage insurance for, or otherwise govern
or regulate, real property acquisition, disposition, leasing,
rehabilitation, alteration, demolition, or new construction, or
establish, revise or provide for standards for construction or
construction materials, manufactured housing, or occupancy. In
accordance with 24 CFR 50.19(b)(1) of HUD regulations, activities under
this program are categorically excluded from environmental review under
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321), and are
not subject to environmental review under the related laws and
authorities.
(F) Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers. The Federal
Domestic Assistance number for this program is 14.506.
X. Authority
These cooperative agreements are authorized under sections 501 and
502 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 1701z-1
et seq.).
Dated: May 9, 2003.
Christopher Lord,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and Research.
BILLING CODE 4210-62-P
[[Page 27691]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.005
[[Page 27692]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.006
[[Page 27693]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.007
[[Page 27694]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.008
[[Page 27695]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.009
[[Page 27696]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.010
[[Page 27697]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.011
[[Page 27698]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.012
[[Page 27699]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.013
[[Page 27700]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.014
[[Page 27701]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.015
[[Page 27702]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.016
[[Page 27703]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.017
[[Page 27704]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.018
[[Page 27705]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.019
[[Page 27706]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.020
[[Page 27707]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.021
[[Page 27708]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.022
[[Page 27709]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.023
[[Page 27710]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.024
[[Page 27711]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.025
[[Page 27712]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.026
[[Page 27713]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.027
[[Page 27714]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.028
[[Page 27715]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.029
[[Page 27716]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.030
[[Page 27717]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.031
[[Page 27718]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.032
[[Page 27719]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20MY03.033
[FR Doc. 03-12458 Filed 5-19-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-62-C