June 2016 Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) Discretionary Notice of Funding Availability
For Services to Native Americans and Migrant Seasonal Farm Worker Populations
Application Questions & Scoring Criteria
Applicant Name:______
Notes: (1) For items that require the Applicant to attach an exhibit detailing an answer, the response must be limited to no more than two pages 8x11 and is to be in a font size of at least 10 point, except for questions 1.1, 1.2 and 3.2 which do not have a page limitation and questions 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, and 5.6 which can be up to three pages. . The exhibit is to include a header with the applicant name and the specific question being addressed, including the number (i.e. “4.1”) and letter (i.e., “a.”) of the question.
(2) When responding to questions related to experience, description must include the exact nature of the experience. Express the number of years of experience in years and months. If the experience includes a time-frame of 6 months or greater, round the response up. If it is less than six months, do not round. Specifically: 1 year and 5 or fewer months would be considered 1 year, and 1 year 6 or more months would be considered 2 years.
(3) Points related to descriptions of processes will be based on the degree to which the processes conform to generally accepted standards such as Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) or Projects in a Controlled Environment (PRINCE2). Use of these specific standards is not required; however descriptions should evidence an ordered process.
All applicants must complete all Parts of the Application Questions.
Part 1: Organization Capacity
Section / Rating Criteria / Question / Scoring Mechanism / Maximum Points / Score (TDHCA use only) /1.1 / State or federally funded grant programs currently administered directly by applicant. / In the table below, list all current state or federally funded grant programs greater than $50,000 administered directly by the applicant and the number of years administering the grant (indicate each grant source only once). Add additional pages as necessary. / State or federally funded grant programs administered:
Note: A maximum of 60 points will be assigned.
· 6-9 years: 6 points per grant
· 3-5 years: 3 points per grant
· Less than 3 years: 0 points / 60
(Continue chart for 1.1 on additional pages if needed. Clearly label any additional pages with the question number on it.)
Section 1.1
Section / Rating Criteria / Question / Scoring Mechanism / Maximum Points / Score (TDHCA use only) /
1.2 / Number of significant monitoring findings and disallowed costs identified in monitoring reviews of federal and state funded programs. / In the table below, list all federal and state funded programs administered in the past 24 months as identified in question 1.1.
Only the most recent monitoring report will be considered for point deductions.
Provide copies of the most recent monitoring reports for all programs listed, including those programs funded by TDHCA. If the grant has not been monitored, provide information explaining such.
Provide follow-up response from funding entity of resolution of monitoring findings.
Note: If monitoring report is not attached and explanatory information is not provided, 15 points will be deducted per grant. Also explain if follow-up response from funding entity of resolution of monitoring findings has not be released.
Significant findings are those which identify issues including, but not limited to, fraud, waste, abuse, financial irregularity, or significant non-compliance with either federal rules, State regulations/rules including but not limited to OMB Circulars or Uniform Grant Management Standards. / For each monitoring report, determine:
a. Monitoring report had significant findings: -20 points deduction per grant program
b. Monitoring Report had disallowed costs in excess of $100 (significance based on other than minor administrative error): -30 points deduction per grant program.
c. Monitoring report had no significant findings and no disallowed costs: 0 points deduction. / (points to be deducted based on review)
Section 1.2 (Instruction: Please provide copies of the most recent monitoring reports. If the grant has not been monitored in the past 24 months, provide a document from the funding source to that affect. Scan all monitoring reports into one document and include a cover page labeled as “Documents in response to Question #1.2” and number each page consecutively. The numbering can be hand written at the bottom of each page.)
Disallowed Costs / page #s in the attachment where report is located /
(Continue chart for 1.2 on additional pages if needed. Clearly label any additional pages with the question number on it.)
Section / Rating Criteria / Question / Scoring Mechanism / Maximum Points / Score (TDHCA use only) /1.3 / Applicant’s history of being on a modified cost reimbursement method of payment for TDHCA Community Affairs Division funded programs, a contract sanction whereby reimbursement of costs incurred by a Subrecipient is made only after the Department has reviewed and approved backup documentation provided by the Subrecipient to support such costs. / Has the applicant been placed on a modified cost reimbursement basis of payment for TDHCA CA funded programs during the past 3 years?
Response: check yes or no,
Yes ___
No ___ / · Yes, during the past 3 years: -50 point deduction
· No, not during the past 3 years: 0 point deduction / -50
1.4 / Financial Accounting Method used to account for funds and report to funding sources. / Indicate which of the Financial Accounting Method listed below is used to track grant(s). Enter an X next to the applicable response:
Computerized Financial Software:___
Microsoft Excel:___
Manual ledger:___
Other. ___Explain: ___ / Method:
· Computerized Financial Software: 40 points
· Microsoft Excel or manual ledger: 0 points
· Manual ledger: -40 point deduction / 40
Part 2: Financial Information
Section / Rating Criteria / Question / Scoring Mechanism / Maximum Point Deduction / Score (TDHCA use only) /2.1 / Findings, questioned costs, disallowed costs, or deficiencies or concerns identified in the Audit or End-of-Year Financial statements. / Submit the latest audit in its entirety. Also include management letters and responses to management letters. / Three Scoring Areas:
1. Audit Findings for current audit period
• Audit with no findings: -0 points
• Audit with one or more significant findings (Note that significant findings can deem an application ineligible: -100 points
2. Disallowed Costs for current audit period
• No disallowed costs: 0 points
• Disallowed costs (significance based on other than minor administrative error): -50 points
3. Deficiencies or Concerns for current audit period
• No deficiencies or concerns: 0 points
• Deficiencies or Concerns: -20 points / -170
2.2 / The applicant's financial health as shown by the ratio of CSBG Discretionary funds to agency’s current fiscal year budget. / Submit Financial Statements as of the end of the organization’s most recent fiscal year.
Amount of CSBG-D funds requested: Response: ______
What is applicant's agency’s total current fiscal year budget?
Response: ______
Response: Ratio = ______
(Funds requested/Current Budget) / CSBG-D to Budget Ratio:
• CSBG-D funds make up 20% of current budget →-0 pts
• CSBG-D funds make up 20-30% of current budget: → -15 pts
• CSBG-D funds make up 31-40% of current budget → -30 pts
• CSBG-D funds make up 41% + of current budget → -50 pts / -50
Part 3: Efficiency
Section / Rating Criteria / Question / Scoring Mechanism / Maximum Points / Score (TDHCA use only) /3.1 / Administrative versus programmatic costs proposed for CSBG grant. / In the table below, provide information on the costs that are proposed to be charged to the CSBG grant.
Administrative costs include those expenses related to management staff such as the executive director, accounting staff, human resource staff, administrative personnel, and overhead costs related to same staff.
Programmatic costs relate to staff costs of persons carrying out the “deliverables” of the NOFA, such as caseworkers, and the overhead costs related to program staff carrying out those activities.
Direct service costs relate to costs for direct services to clients such as tuition assistance. / Percentage of CSBG costs budgeted for programmatic costs:
86-100%: 30 points
70-85%: 20 points
50-69%: 10 points
Less than 50%: 0 points / 30
Section 3.1
Proposed CSBG Budget / Format for Answer / Answer (Enter answer below) /a. Administrative costs, including salaries and fringe and overhead related to administrative staff (for example Ex Dir, CFO, admin staff) / Dollar figure
b. Programmatic costs, including salaries and fringe and overhead related to program staff (for example homeless service liaison) / Dollar figure
c. Indirect costs (for applicants with an approved Indirect Costs Rate Plan) / Dollar figure
d. Direct client costs for client assistance such as tuition. / Dollar figure
e. Total CSBG budget requested / Dollar figure a.+b.+c.+d.
f. Percentage of CSBG costs budgeted for programmatic costs and direct client assistance costs / Percentage
(b.+d.)/e.
Section / Rating Criteria / Question / Scoring Mechanism / Maximum points / Score (TDHCA use only) /
3.2 / Evaluation of Proposed Project / In the table below, indicate how your organization will implement the initiative and evaluate progress on accomplishing what is proposed in the CSBG Discretionary NOFA Application.
Refer to response to question 5.1-5.3 and 5.6. / Evaluation of Programs: Review plan to evaluate project and award points as follows:
Evaluation plan should include, but not be limited to, identification of the tasks, steps to accomplish tasks, evaluation, frequency of evaluation, and a timeline.
· Award up to 10 points if the tasks clearly set forth activities that will lead to accomplish what is proposed in the application.
· Award up to 10 points if the steps to be taken to achieve the tasks are clearly delineated .
· Award up to 10 points if the process used to evaluate the initiative is comprehensive.
· Award up to 5 points if frequency for when evaluation will occur is reasonable for the tasks.
· Award up to 10 points for the timeline. If timeline was not comprehensive or the time allotted to achieve results may be insufficient , award 0 points. Consider if each major and smaller tasks were identified in the timeline and if the time allotted appears reasonable. / 45 /
Section 3.2 Evaluation Process - Itemize each task, enter a yes or no in either the major task or minor task column, identify the steps to accomplish the task, briefly describe process to evaluate project, frequency of evaluation, and a timeline. Enter one row per task. Note: Applicants may attach a separate document with additional details related to the processes to be utilized to evaluate the project; however, identify the question # and task #.
Section 3.2
Task # / Task Description / Steps to Accomplish Task / Brief Description of Evaluation Processes for Initiative / Frequency for evaluation to occur / Timeline for Task(months and year) /
Part 4: Experience
Note: all activities must be targeted to Native Americans and/or migrant seasonal farm workers. Refer to page 7 of NOFA for a detailed description of the project to be funded.
Indicate the target population to be served with an X: ____ Native American or ____ Migrant Seasonal Farm Workers. Applicant can only propose to serve one of the target populations per application. If Applicant wishes to serve both, a separate application must be submitted.
4.1 / Education and experience of key staff.
Facilities and staffing. / On an attached exhibit titled “(Name of Applicant) Response to Section 4.1”, provide the following information. Please use the item text as headers for provided information:
a. Provide a description of the education of the executive director, program/project director, and case worker that will be administering the proposed project.
b. Provide a description of the relevant experience of the executive director, program/project director, and case worker that will be administering the proposed project.
c. Provide information on the facility(ies) and staffing (location staffing) to be used for the proposed project. / In assigning points, reviewer will consider the depth to which items are described:
a. Education: 6 points for each key staff person that has a bachelor’s or master’s degree; 8 points for each key staff person that has a doctorate’s degree. A maximum of 24 points may be awarded per key staff person.
b. Experience: 4 points for 1 year of experience, 8 points for 2-4 years, 10 points for 5-7 years, and 12 points for 8+ years. A maximum of 36 points may be awarded.
c. Award 10 points per facility, a maximum of 20 points may be awarded. / 80
4.2 / Target population currently served / On an attached exhibit titled “(Name of Applicant) Response to Section 4.2”, provide the following information. Please use the item text as headers for provided information:
a. Does your organization primarily target the Native American or Migrant Seasonal Farm worker population? Response: Yes or No
b. If yes, organization targets Native American or Migrant Seasonal Farm worker populations, describe which population is targeted and the types of services provided.
c. If no, the organization does not target Native American or Migrant Seasonal Farm worker, describe what population(s) is targeted? What types of services does your organization provide? / In assigning points, reviewer will consider population targeted by applicant and services offered:
a. Yes = 40 points
No = 0 points
b. For those primarily serving the target populations, description of services provided.
Maximum of 10 points for comprehensive relevant services.