§ 1291.25 - Scoring methodologies.

§ 1291.25 Scoring methodologies.

Cross Reference

Link to an amendment published at 87 FR 32969, June 1, 2022.

(a)

(1) Written scoring methodologies. A Bank shall establish a written scoring methodology for its General Fund and for any Targeted Fund setting forth the Bank's scoring point allocations as required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, scoring criteria adopted pursuant to the requirements of §§ 1291.26 and 1291.27, as applicable, and related definitions. The scoring methodology for each Fund may be different. A Bank shall not adopt scoring points allocations or scoring criteria for its General Fund and any Targeted Funds except as specifically authorized under this paragraph (a)(1) and §§ 1291.26 and 1291.27, respectively.

(2) Scoring points allocations -

(i) General Fund. A Bank shall allocate 100 points among all of the scoring criteria adopted by the Bank for its General Fund pursuant to § 1291.26. The scoring criterion for targeting in § 1291.26(d) shall be allocated at least 20 points. The remaining scoring criteria shall be allocated at least 5 points each, except that if a Bank adopts the scoring criterion for home purchase by low- or moderate-income households in § 1291.26(c) as an optional scoring criterion, the Bank may allocate fewer than the full 5 points to it, with the remainder of such points allocated to one or a combination of the other scoring criteria in § 1291.26 other than to the scoring criterion for Bank district priorities in § 1291.26(h). If a Bank adopts a scoring criterion under its Bank district priorities for housing located in the Bank's district, the Bank may not allocate points to the scoring criterion in a way that excludes all out-of-district projects from its General Fund.

(ii) Targeted Funds. A Bank shall allocate 100 points among all of the scoring criteria adopted by the Bank for each Targeted Fund pursuant to § 1291.27. A Bank may not allocate more than 50 points to any one scoring criterion for a Targeted Fund.

(3) Fixed-point and variable-point scoring criteria. A Bank shall designate each scoring criterion as either a fixed-point or a variable-point criterion, defined as follows:

(i) Fixed-point scoring criteria are those that cannot be satisfied in varying degrees and are either satisfied or not, with the total number of points allocated to the criterion awarded by the Bank to an application meeting the criterion; and

(ii) Variable-point criteria are those where there are varying degrees to which an application can satisfy the criteria, with the number of points that may be awarded to an application for meeting the criterion varying, depending on the extent to which the application satisfies the criterion, based on a fixed scale or on a scale relative to the other applications being scored. A Bank shall designate the targeting scoring criterion in § 1291.26(d) as a variable-point criterion.

(b) Satisfaction of scoring criteria. A Bank shall award scoring points to applications to a particular Fund based on satisfaction of the scoring criteria in the Bank's scoring methodology for that Fund.

(c) Scoring tied applications. A Bank shall establish and implement, as necessary, a scoring tie-breaker policy to address the case of two or more applications to its General Fund or any Targeted Fund receiving identical scores in the same AHP funding round and there is insufficient AHP subsidy to approve all of the tied applications but sufficient subsidy to approve one of them. A Bank shall meet the following requirements in establishing its scoring tie-breaker policy:

(1) The Bank shall consult with its Advisory Council prior to adoption of its policy;

(2) The Bank shall adopt the policy in advance of an AHP funding round and include it in its AHP Implementation Plan;

(3) The policy shall include the methodology used to break a scoring tie, which may differ for each Fund, and which shall be drawn selected from the particular Fund's scoring criteria adopted in the Bank's AHP Implementation Plan;

(4) The scoring tie-breaker methodology shall be reasonable, transparent, verifiable, and impartial;

(5) The scoring tie-breaker methodology shall be used solely to break a scoring tie and may not affect the eligibility of the applications, including financial feasibility, or their scores and resultant rankings;

(6) The Bank shall approve a tied application as an alternate pursuant to § 1291.28(b) if the application does not prevail under the scoring tie-breaker methodology, or if the application is tied with another application but requested more subsidy than the amount of AHP funds that remain to be awarded, if the Bank has a written policy to approve alternates for funding under the applicable Fund; and

(7) The Bank shall document in writing its analysis and results for each use of the scoring tie-breaker methodology.

[83 FR 61231, Nov. 28, 2018, as amended at 87 FR 32969, June 1, 2022]