Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
1 <br /> ORANGE COUNTY <br /> BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS <br /> ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT <br /> Meeting Date: September 19, 2017 <br /> Action Agenda <br /> Item No. 6-a <br /> SUBJECT: Review of Affordable Housing Bond Scoring Criteria <br /> DEPARTMENT: County Manager's Office and <br /> Department of Housing, Human <br /> Rights, and Community <br /> Development <br /> ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: <br /> Attachment 1: Scoring Criteria Travis Myren, 919-245-2300 <br /> Attachment 2: Summary of Scores by Sherrill Hampton, 919-245-2492 <br /> Project <br /> Attachment 3: 2016 Affordable Housing <br /> Bond Funds RFP #5228 <br /> Project Selection Narrative <br /> PURPOSE: To review and consider revisions to the scoring criteria used to evaluate affordable <br /> housing bond funding proposals. <br /> BACKGROUND: On June 6, 2017 the Board of County Commissioners awarded $2.5 million in <br /> affordable housing bond funds to projects that had submitted proposals through a request for <br /> proposal process. The County received six proposals from affordable housing providers. One <br /> of the proposals was incomplete, so five of the six proposals were scored using standard <br /> scoring criteria (Attachment 1). <br /> Based on the scoring criteria and available funds, four of the five remaining projects were <br /> recommended for funding. One of the projects submitted by EmPOWERment (606 Bynum <br /> Street) was not recommended for funding. The Board of Commissioners funded this project <br /> using other affordable housing funds appropriated in the Capital Investment Plan. <br /> During the discussion of the bond awards, the Board requested an analysis of the scoring <br /> criteria to determine why some projects scored higher than others. The following describes how <br /> the projects scored under each category as well as feedback from the Affordable Housing <br /> Coalition. A summary of scores by project is attached (Attachment 2) as well as a selection <br /> narrative (Attachment 3). Each project was scored using eight categories as described below. <br /> 1. Income Targeting and Special Needs <br /> The income targeting and special needs category awarded more points to projects that <br /> served lower income households. Up to twenty-five points were available to projects <br /> serving households with incomes under thirty percent (30%) of the area median income. <br /> All of the projects scored well for serving low income households. However, this category <br />