Community Development Financial Institutions Fund; CDFI Target Market Assessment Methodologies, 63852-63854 [2022-22767]
Download as PDF
63852
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2022 / Notices
Notice and request for
comments.
ACTION:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
FMCSA announces its plan to submit
the Information Collection Request (ICR)
described below to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for its
review and approval. This ICR will
enable FMCSA to document the burden
associated with the marking regulations,
‘‘Marking of Self-Propelled CMVs and
Intermodal Equipment.’’ These
regulations require marking of vehicles
and intermodal equipment by motor
carriers, freight forwarders, and
intermodal equipment providers (IEPs)
engaging in interstate transportation and
motor carriers that transport hazardous
materials (HM) in intrastate
transportation.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be
received on or before November 21,
2022.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAMain. Find this information
collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under
30-day Review—Open for Public
Comments’’ or by using the search
function.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stacy Ropp, Compliance Division, DOT,
FMCSA, West Building, 6th Floor, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590–0001; 609–661–2062;
Stacy.Ropp@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Commercial Motor Vehicle
Marking Requirements.
OMB Control Number: 2126–0054.
Type of Request: Renewal of a
currently approved ICR.
Respondents: Freight-carrying
commercial motor carriers, passengercarrying commercial motor carriers, and
intermodal equipment providers.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
895,485 total respondents (861,643
freight-carrying motor carriers; 17,167
intrastate hazardous materials
transporting motor carriers; 15,114
passenger-carrying motor carriers; and
1,561 IEPs).
Estimated Time per Response: 26
minutes [12 minutes to affix USDOT
Number + 14 minutes for affixing a
carrier’s name].
Expiration Date: October 31, 2022.
Frequency of Response: On occasion.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
7,196,938 total hours (4,907,276 hours
spent by freight-carrying motor carriers;
239,666 hours spent by intrastate
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:50 Oct 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
hazardous materials transporting motor
carriers; 47,645 hours spent by
passenger-carrying motor carriers; and
2,002,351 hours spent by IEPs). All of
these entities spent these hours marking
their commercial motor vehicles (CMVs)
with a USDOT number and motor
carrier information.
Background:
The Secretary of Transportation
(Secretary) is authorized to require
marking of vehicles and intermodal
equipment by motor carriers, freight
forwarders and IEPs engaging in
interstate transportation based on the
authority of 49 U.S.C. 31133(a)(8) and
31133(a)(10). The Secretary has
delegated authority pertaining to the
marking of CMVs pursuant to FMCSA at
49 CFR 1.87(f). The Agency’s regulation
governing the marking of CMVs is
codified at 49 CFR 390.21.
Vehicle marking requirements are
intended to ensure that FMCSA, the
National Transportation Safety Board,
and State safety officials are able to
identify motor carriers and correctly
assign responsibility for regulatory
violations during inspections,
investigations, compliance reviews, and
crash studies. These marking
requirements will also provide the
public with beneficial information that
could assist in identifying carriers for
the purposes of commerce, complaints
or emergency notification. The marking
requirements apply to motor carriers,
freight forwarders, and IEPs engaging in
interstate transportation and motor
carriers that transport HM in intrastate
transportation. The Agency does not
require a specific method of marking as
long as the marking complies with
FMCSA’s regulations. The increase of
6,023,243 estimated annual burden
hours (7,196,938 proposed estimated
annual burden hours ¥1,173,695
approved estimated annual burden
hours) is due to adjustments in
respondent and response estimates and
updated information regarding industry
population for all four carrier/entity
types.
Public Comments Invited: You are
asked to comment on any aspect of this
information collection, including: (1)
whether the proposed collection is
necessary for the performance of
FMCSA’s functions; (2) the accuracy of
the estimated burden; (3) ways for
FMCSA to enhance the quality,
usefulness, and clarity of the collected
information; and (4) ways that the
burden could be minimized without
reducing the quality of the collected
information.
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Issued under the authority of 49 CFR 1.87.
Thomas P. Keane,
Associate Administrator, Office of Research
and Registration.
[FR Doc. 2022–22784 Filed 10–19–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Community Development Financial
Institutions Fund; CDFI Target Market
Assessment Methodologies
Notice and Request for
Comment.
ACTION:
The Community Development
Financial Institutions Fund (CDFI
Fund), Department of the Treasury,
requests comments from the public
regarding the pre-approved Target
Market assessment methodologies that
entities applying for Certification as a
Community Development Financial
Institution (CDFI) may use to assess
whether the recipients of an entity’s
Financial Products or Financial Services
are members of a pre-approved Target
Market. Capitalized terms found in this
notice are defined in the regulations that
govern the CDFI Program.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before December 19, 2022
to be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions on the website for
submitting comments. In general, all
comments will be available for
inspection at www.regulations.gov.
Comments, including attachments and
other supporting materials, are part of
the public record. Do not submit any
information in your comments or
supporting materials that you consider
confidential or inappropriate for public
disclosure.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michelle Dickens, Program Manager,
Office of Certification Policy and
Evaluation, CDFI Fund, U.S.
Department of the Treasury, 1500
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20220 or by phone at (202) 653–
0300. Other information regarding the
CDFI Fund and its programs may be
obtained through the CDFI Fund’s
website at https://www.cdfifund.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To be a
Certified CDFI, an entity must
demonstrate that it serves at least one
eligible Target Market (either an
Investment Area or a Targeted
Population). In addition, it must direct
at least 60% of both the number and
dollar volume of arm’s-length, onSUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2022 / Notices
balance sheet Financial Products to one
or more eligible Target Market
components. Under the current policies
and CDFI Certification Application,
Applicants must describe and seek
approval for each assessment
methodology they have used and intend
to use to confirm financing activity to
their identified Target Market(s). Only
those Target Market assessment
methodologies that have been approved
by the CDFI Fund may be used when
compiling Target Market data.
In an effort to increase transparency
and reduce burden through a revised
CDFI Certification Application, https://
www.cdfifund.gov/sites/cdfi/files/202210/CDFI_Certification_Application_
Preview_Final_10322.pdf, the CDFI
Fund intends to publish a list of preapproved Target Market assessment
methodologies that Applicants and
Certified CDFIs may use and rely upon
to demonstrate that they are serving
their identified Target Market(s).
Through the revised application and
Annual Certification and Data
Collection Report (ACR), Applicants
and Certified CDFIs will select from a
drop-down menu the options in the
methodology list that they used for each
of their Target Market components (i.e.,
Investment Area (IA), Low Income
Targeted Population (LITP), or Other
Targeted Population (OTP).
The proposed list of pre-approved
Target Market assessment
methodologies, which may be found on
the CDFI Fund website
(www.cdfifund.gov), reflects the primary
assessment methods that have been
approved by the CDFI Fund and are
most commonly used by a majority of
currently Certified CDFIs, but may not
be a comprehensive list of all the
assessment methodologies previously
approved by the CDFI Fund. Because
the CDFI Fund, to this point, has not
specifically tracked approved Target
Market assessment methodologies (and
in part as a result of documentation
system changes), the CDFI Fund may
previously have considered and even
approved a Target Market assessment
method unique to a specific Applicant
or Certified CDFI that does not appear
on the proposed list.
Applicants that use one of the preapproved options will no longer be
required to describe the assessment
process used to confirm financing
activity to their Target Market(s) as part
of the Certification Application or a
Target Market modification. If an
Applicant or Certified CDFI seeks to use
an alternative or modified Target Market
assessment method, it will be permitted
to submit a service request through
AMIS for consideration of that process
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:50 Oct 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
to the CDFI Fund. If new assessment
methodologies are approved, the CDFI
Fund intends to update the list of preapproved methodologies as appropriate,
so that any newly approved
methodologies may be available to other
Applicants and Certified CDFIs as well.
Approved CDFI Fund Target Market
assessment methodologies must be used
exactly as approved unless and until
modification of the method is
authorized by the CDFI Fund. To use an
alternative or modified Target Market
assessment method when compiling
Target Market data for the CDFI
Certification Application, the new
method must be approved by the CDFI
Fund prior to submission of the
application. Failure to use an approved
assessment methodology (or maintain
required documentation, as noted in the
list) may result in the termination of a
Certified CDFI’s certification.
Through this Request for Comment
(RFC), the CDFI Fund seeks feedback
from the public on the proposed list of
pre-approved Target Market assessment
methodologies. The CDFI Fund also
seeks any additional information
beyond the questions below that
members of the public believe would
assist in establishing policies and
procedures related to the Target Market
assessment methodology. The CDFI
Fund intends to consider the feedback
received through this RFC prior to
establishing a final list of pre-approved
Target Market assessment
methodologies.
I. Pre-Approved Target Market
Assessment Methodologies
a. Do each of the listed Target Market
assessment methodologies, if used,
provide sufficient confidence as to the
level at which an Applicant or Certified
CDFI is serving an Investment Area,
LITP, or OTP? If no, please identify the
methodology, the reason it may
inaccurately capture the level of service
to an Applicant’s or CDFI’s Target
Market, and how the methodology could
be strengthened.
b. Are there assessment
methodologies the CDFI Fund
previously allowed but that do not
appear in the proposed list of preapproved Target Market assessment
methodologies? If yes, please describe
any such methodology and indicate the
date on which the methodology was
approved by the CDFI Fund.
c. Are there additional assessment
methodologies the CDFI Fund should
consider that it may not have previously
approved, but that would serve to
provide sufficient confidence as to the
level at which an Applicant or Certified
CDFI is serving a Target Market? If yes,
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63853
please provide the following
information for each proposed
methodology:
• The applicable Target Market type
(IA/LITP/OTP)
• Data Collected (e.g. data fields, time
period, reporting level)
• Model/Method design (e.g.
mathematical equations, relationship
between data fields, etc.)
• Documents reviewed (e.g. contracts,
agreements, white paper, etc.)
• The step by step process used to
collect the data and review any
documents or run the model and
process its results
• If proposing a programmatic proxy,
the step by step process used to
compare programmatic data to CDFI
Fund definitions (e.g. income sources,
income thresholds, etc.)
• Any record keeping process
• The process for updating any
methodology dependent on underlying
data changes.
d. What standards should the CDFI
Fund use in its decision making to
approve or disapprove a proposed
assessment methodology?
e. The CDFI Fund also will continue
to allow, in the absence of
documentation of an individual’s actual
income, an organization’s use of
assessment methodologies that treat a
Financial Product recipient’s
participation in an income-based
program as a proxy to determine that
individual’s status as a member of a
Low-Income Targeted Population. For a
program to be an eligible proxy, the
income limits of the program must align
with the CDFI Fund’s definition of LowIncome.
In addition, the use of any
programmatic proxy as an assessment
methodology that is not previously preapproved by the CDFI Fund must be
submitted to and approved by the CDFI
Fund prior to submission of an
application for CDFI Certification.
Because the CDFI Fund has not
historically tracked all approved
programmatic proxy assessment
methodologies, the CDFI Fund requests
organizations that currently use, or seek
to use, a programmatic proxy not listed
among the proposed assessment
methodologies, submit as part of this
Request for Comment information on
the programmatic proxy. Doing so will
enable the CDFI Fund to make a
determination on the eligibility of that
programmatic proxy prior to the
finalization of the pre-approved
methodologies. In addition to the
information requested above, please also
provide the step by step process the
organization used to compare
programmatic data to CDFI Fund
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
63854
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2022 / Notices
definitions (e.g. income sources, income
thresholds, etc.).
f. The CDFI Fund also is considering
whether to include as a pre-approved
assessment methodology the use of a
geography-based proxy to identify
members of a Low-Income Targeted
Population in the absence of
documentation of an individual’s actual
income. One such approach would be to
identify eligible areas based on the share
of households in the area that earn less
than 80 percent of the Area Median
Income (AMI), such that for a Financial
Product or Financial Service delivered
to a resident of the area there would be
a reasonably high likelihood that the
resident would be determined to be lowincome.
For example, setting a 70 percent
threshold for Low-Income households
in a census tract block group (as
determined by Low to Moderate Income
Population by Block Group https://
hudgis-hud.opendata.arcgis.com/
datasets/HUD::low-to-moderate-incomepopulation-by-block-group/about data
from the Department of Housing and
Urban Development) as the proxy would
capture approximately 34 million of the
134 million Low-Income persons
residing in the United States. In
addition, approximately 8 million
higher-income individuals also live in
such block groups and effectively would
be treated as Low-Income by such a
proxy. There is, however, a significant
overlap of block groups with high levels
of Low-Income households and block
groups located within an Investment
Area (where an investment delivered to
a higher-income resident is already an
eligible Target Market Financial
Product). Approximately 32 million
Low-Income individuals captured by a
70-percent threshold proxy are also
located within an Investment Area,
along with 7.5 million higher-income
individuals. By contrast, approximately
1.6 million Low-Income individuals
captured by such a proxy as well as 478
thousand higher-income individuals are
located outside of an Investment Area.
Setting a lower threshold for the
proxy would capture a higher share of
the nation’s Low-Income population,
but similarly would effectively treat as
members of an LITP a larger number of
individuals who would not otherwise be
considered Low-Income. Setting a
higher threshold, on the other hand,
would increase the likelihood that a
resident of the geographic proxy is
actually Low-Income, but would further
limit the utility of the proxy by
capturing an even smaller share of the
total U.S. Low-Income population.
Based on a 70 percent threshold, a list
of all qualifying block groups can be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:50 Oct 19, 2022
Jkt 259001
found on the CDFI Fund website, here
https://www.cdfifund.gov/programstraining/certification/cdfi/certificationpra. Note that the income status of these
block groups is based on data from the
2011–2015 American Community
Survey (ACS). If the CDFI Fund
determines that residence in an eligible
geography is an acceptable proxy for
assessing an individual’s Low-Income
status, the data upon which the CDFI
Fund will rely for this purpose will be
updated periodically based upon the
most recent data available from the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban
Development.
i. Should the CDFI Fund establish a
geographic proxy for Low-Income status
as an approved Target Market
assessment methodology, such that a
Financial Product or Financial Service
delivered to a resident of a qualifying
block group would be deemed delivered
to an LITP, even if the proxy might
overestimate the share of LITP
borrowers served by an Applicant or
Certified CDFI?
ii. Alternatively, should the CDFI
Fund accept the use of such a proxy
only when other methodologies are
unavailable (e.g., documentation of
actual income or borrower participation
in another program with income-based
eligibility restrictions)?
iii. If the share of Low-Income
households in a census tract block
group is an acceptable proxy for LITP
status, is 70 percent an appropriate
qualifying threshold to maintain the
integrity of the CDFI Certification? If no,
what is an appropriate threshold?
iv. Are there guardrails the CDFI Fund
could place on such a proxy to limit
opportunities for abuse of the proxy,
e.g., an entity that chooses to use the
proxy because it will allow it to
represent more activity as directed to an
LITP than would otherwise qualify? If
yes, describe those guardrails? If the
CDFI Fund allows the use of a
geographic LITP proxy, should it also
require users of the proxy to obtain an
attestation from a Financial Product or
Financial Services recipient that their
income is below 80 percent of the area
median family income?
g. Should a Financial Product
delivered to a business, not owned by a
member of a Targeted Population or
located in an Investment Area, that is
providing jobs, products, or services to
a Targeted Population or Investment
Area, be deemed delivered to a Target
Market? If yes, are there assessment
methodologies for end users, other than
those already included in the list that
the CDFI Fund should consider? What
are those assessment methodologies?
Should approval of any such
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
methodology associated with jobs to a
Targeted Population or located in an
Investment Area be dependent on
standards for a livable wage or other
quality job metrics?
h. Current standards for identifying
members of a Native American and
Native Alaskan OTP include an
assessment that an individual has
‘‘maintained Tribal affiliation or
community attachment.’’ The CDFI
Fund’s proposed assessment
methodologies state that a financing
entity may assess a recipient’s Tribal
affiliation or community attachment via
the collection of a government-issued or
tribal government-issued photo
identification. Are there other methods
the CDFI Fund should deem entities can
use to assess such status, and in
particular an individual’s ‘‘community
attachment’’ to a Native population?
What are those methods and describe
them?
II. General Target Market Verification
Questions for Public Comment
a. Is there additional information that
the CDFI Fund should consider related
to Target Market assessment
methodologies? If so, please describe.
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 4701 et seq.; 12
CFR 1805; Public Law 116–260.
Jodie L. Harris,
Director, Community Development Financial
Institutions Fund.
[FR Doc. 2022–22767 Filed 10–19–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–70–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of Foreign Assets Control
Notice of OFAC Sanctions Action
Office of Foreign Assets
Control, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of the
Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets
Control (OFAC) is updating the
identifying information on its Specially
Designated Nationals and Blocked
Persons List (SDN List) for one entity
whose property and interests in
property subject to U.S. jurisdiction are
blocked pursuant to Executive Order
13224.
DATES: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section for applicable date(s).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
OFAC: Andrea Gacki, Director, tel.:
202–622–2490; Associate Director for
Global Targeting, tel.: 202–622–2420;
Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.:
202–622–2480; Assistant Director for
Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202–622–4855;
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 202 (Thursday, October 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63852-63854]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-22767]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund; CDFI Target
Market Assessment Methodologies
ACTION: Notice and Request for Comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (CDFI
Fund), Department of the Treasury, requests comments from the public
regarding the pre-approved Target Market assessment methodologies that
entities applying for Certification as a Community Development
Financial Institution (CDFI) may use to assess whether the recipients
of an entity's Financial Products or Financial Services are members of
a pre-approved Target Market. Capitalized terms found in this notice
are defined in the regulations that govern the CDFI Program.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 19, 2022
to be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions on the website for
submitting comments. In general, all comments will be available for
inspection at www.regulations.gov. Comments, including attachments and
other supporting materials, are part of the public record. Do not
submit any information in your comments or supporting materials that
you consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Dickens, Program Manager,
Office of Certification Policy and Evaluation, CDFI Fund, U.S.
Department of the Treasury, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC
20220 or by phone at (202) 653-0300. Other information regarding the
CDFI Fund and its programs may be obtained through the CDFI Fund's
website at https://www.cdfifund.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To be a Certified CDFI, an entity must
demonstrate that it serves at least one eligible Target Market (either
an Investment Area or a Targeted Population). In addition, it must
direct at least 60% of both the number and dollar volume of arm's-
length, on-
[[Page 63853]]
balance sheet Financial Products to one or more eligible Target Market
components. Under the current policies and CDFI Certification
Application, Applicants must describe and seek approval for each
assessment methodology they have used and intend to use to confirm
financing activity to their identified Target Market(s). Only those
Target Market assessment methodologies that have been approved by the
CDFI Fund may be used when compiling Target Market data.
In an effort to increase transparency and reduce burden through a
revised CDFI Certification Application, https://www.cdfifund.gov/sites/cdfi/files/2022-10/CDFI_Certification_Application_Preview_Final_10322.pdf, the CDFI Fund
intends to publish a list of pre-approved Target Market assessment
methodologies that Applicants and Certified CDFIs may use and rely upon
to demonstrate that they are serving their identified Target Market(s).
Through the revised application and Annual Certification and Data
Collection Report (ACR), Applicants and Certified CDFIs will select
from a drop-down menu the options in the methodology list that they
used for each of their Target Market components (i.e., Investment Area
(IA), Low Income Targeted Population (LITP), or Other Targeted
Population (OTP).
The proposed list of pre-approved Target Market assessment
methodologies, which may be found on the CDFI Fund website
(www.cdfifund.gov), reflects the primary assessment methods that have
been approved by the CDFI Fund and are most commonly used by a majority
of currently Certified CDFIs, but may not be a comprehensive list of
all the assessment methodologies previously approved by the CDFI Fund.
Because the CDFI Fund, to this point, has not specifically tracked
approved Target Market assessment methodologies (and in part as a
result of documentation system changes), the CDFI Fund may previously
have considered and even approved a Target Market assessment method
unique to a specific Applicant or Certified CDFI that does not appear
on the proposed list.
Applicants that use one of the pre-approved options will no longer
be required to describe the assessment process used to confirm
financing activity to their Target Market(s) as part of the
Certification Application or a Target Market modification. If an
Applicant or Certified CDFI seeks to use an alternative or modified
Target Market assessment method, it will be permitted to submit a
service request through AMIS for consideration of that process to the
CDFI Fund. If new assessment methodologies are approved, the CDFI Fund
intends to update the list of pre-approved methodologies as
appropriate, so that any newly approved methodologies may be available
to other Applicants and Certified CDFIs as well.
Approved CDFI Fund Target Market assessment methodologies must be
used exactly as approved unless and until modification of the method is
authorized by the CDFI Fund. To use an alternative or modified Target
Market assessment method when compiling Target Market data for the CDFI
Certification Application, the new method must be approved by the CDFI
Fund prior to submission of the application. Failure to use an approved
assessment methodology (or maintain required documentation, as noted in
the list) may result in the termination of a Certified CDFI's
certification.
Through this Request for Comment (RFC), the CDFI Fund seeks
feedback from the public on the proposed list of pre-approved Target
Market assessment methodologies. The CDFI Fund also seeks any
additional information beyond the questions below that members of the
public believe would assist in establishing policies and procedures
related to the Target Market assessment methodology. The CDFI Fund
intends to consider the feedback received through this RFC prior to
establishing a final list of pre-approved Target Market assessment
methodologies.
I. Pre-Approved Target Market Assessment Methodologies
a. Do each of the listed Target Market assessment methodologies, if
used, provide sufficient confidence as to the level at which an
Applicant or Certified CDFI is serving an Investment Area, LITP, or
OTP? If no, please identify the methodology, the reason it may
inaccurately capture the level of service to an Applicant's or CDFI's
Target Market, and how the methodology could be strengthened.
b. Are there assessment methodologies the CDFI Fund previously
allowed but that do not appear in the proposed list of pre-approved
Target Market assessment methodologies? If yes, please describe any
such methodology and indicate the date on which the methodology was
approved by the CDFI Fund.
c. Are there additional assessment methodologies the CDFI Fund
should consider that it may not have previously approved, but that
would serve to provide sufficient confidence as to the level at which
an Applicant or Certified CDFI is serving a Target Market? If yes,
please provide the following information for each proposed methodology:
The applicable Target Market type (IA/LITP/OTP)
Data Collected (e.g. data fields, time period, reporting
level)
Model/Method design (e.g. mathematical equations,
relationship between data fields, etc.)
Documents reviewed (e.g. contracts, agreements, white
paper, etc.)
The step by step process used to collect the data and
review any documents or run the model and process its results
If proposing a programmatic proxy, the step by step
process used to compare programmatic data to CDFI Fund definitions
(e.g. income sources, income thresholds, etc.)
Any record keeping process
The process for updating any methodology dependent on
underlying data changes.
d. What standards should the CDFI Fund use in its decision making
to approve or disapprove a proposed assessment methodology?
e. The CDFI Fund also will continue to allow, in the absence of
documentation of an individual's actual income, an organization's use
of assessment methodologies that treat a Financial Product recipient's
participation in an income-based program as a proxy to determine that
individual's status as a member of a Low-Income Targeted Population.
For a program to be an eligible proxy, the income limits of the program
must align with the CDFI Fund's definition of Low-Income.
In addition, the use of any programmatic proxy as an assessment
methodology that is not previously pre-approved by the CDFI Fund must
be submitted to and approved by the CDFI Fund prior to submission of an
application for CDFI Certification.
Because the CDFI Fund has not historically tracked all approved
programmatic proxy assessment methodologies, the CDFI Fund requests
organizations that currently use, or seek to use, a programmatic proxy
not listed among the proposed assessment methodologies, submit as part
of this Request for Comment information on the programmatic proxy.
Doing so will enable the CDFI Fund to make a determination on the
eligibility of that programmatic proxy prior to the finalization of the
pre-approved methodologies. In addition to the information requested
above, please also provide the step by step process the organization
used to compare programmatic data to CDFI Fund
[[Page 63854]]
definitions (e.g. income sources, income thresholds, etc.).
f. The CDFI Fund also is considering whether to include as a pre-
approved assessment methodology the use of a geography-based proxy to
identify members of a Low-Income Targeted Population in the absence of
documentation of an individual's actual income. One such approach would
be to identify eligible areas based on the share of households in the
area that earn less than 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI),
such that for a Financial Product or Financial Service delivered to a
resident of the area there would be a reasonably high likelihood that
the resident would be determined to be low-income.
For example, setting a 70 percent threshold for Low-Income
households in a census tract block group (as determined by Low to
Moderate Income Population by Block Group https://hudgis-hud.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/HUD::low-to-moderate-income-population-by-block-group/about data from the Department of Housing and
Urban Development) as the proxy would capture approximately 34 million
of the 134 million Low-Income persons residing in the United States. In
addition, approximately 8 million higher-income individuals also live
in such block groups and effectively would be treated as Low-Income by
such a proxy. There is, however, a significant overlap of block groups
with high levels of Low-Income households and block groups located
within an Investment Area (where an investment delivered to a higher-
income resident is already an eligible Target Market Financial
Product). Approximately 32 million Low-Income individuals captured by a
70-percent threshold proxy are also located within an Investment Area,
along with 7.5 million higher-income individuals. By contrast,
approximately 1.6 million Low-Income individuals captured by such a
proxy as well as 478 thousand higher-income individuals are located
outside of an Investment Area.
Setting a lower threshold for the proxy would capture a higher
share of the nation's Low-Income population, but similarly would
effectively treat as members of an LITP a larger number of individuals
who would not otherwise be considered Low-Income. Setting a higher
threshold, on the other hand, would increase the likelihood that a
resident of the geographic proxy is actually Low-Income, but would
further limit the utility of the proxy by capturing an even smaller
share of the total U.S. Low-Income population.
Based on a 70 percent threshold, a list of all qualifying block
groups can be found on the CDFI Fund website, here https://www.cdfifund.gov/programs-training/certification/cdfi/certification-pra. Note that the income status of these block groups is based on data
from the 2011-2015 American Community Survey (ACS). If the CDFI Fund
determines that residence in an eligible geography is an acceptable
proxy for assessing an individual's Low-Income status, the data upon
which the CDFI Fund will rely for this purpose will be updated
periodically based upon the most recent data available from the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development.
i. Should the CDFI Fund establish a geographic proxy for Low-Income
status as an approved Target Market assessment methodology, such that a
Financial Product or Financial Service delivered to a resident of a
qualifying block group would be deemed delivered to an LITP, even if
the proxy might overestimate the share of LITP borrowers served by an
Applicant or Certified CDFI?
ii. Alternatively, should the CDFI Fund accept the use of such a
proxy only when other methodologies are unavailable (e.g.,
documentation of actual income or borrower participation in another
program with income-based eligibility restrictions)?
iii. If the share of Low-Income households in a census tract block
group is an acceptable proxy for LITP status, is 70 percent an
appropriate qualifying threshold to maintain the integrity of the CDFI
Certification? If no, what is an appropriate threshold?
iv. Are there guardrails the CDFI Fund could place on such a proxy
to limit opportunities for abuse of the proxy, e.g., an entity that
chooses to use the proxy because it will allow it to represent more
activity as directed to an LITP than would otherwise qualify? If yes,
describe those guardrails? If the CDFI Fund allows the use of a
geographic LITP proxy, should it also require users of the proxy to
obtain an attestation from a Financial Product or Financial Services
recipient that their income is below 80 percent of the area median
family income?
g. Should a Financial Product delivered to a business, not owned by
a member of a Targeted Population or located in an Investment Area,
that is providing jobs, products, or services to a Targeted Population
or Investment Area, be deemed delivered to a Target Market? If yes, are
there assessment methodologies for end users, other than those already
included in the list that the CDFI Fund should consider? What are those
assessment methodologies? Should approval of any such methodology
associated with jobs to a Targeted Population or located in an
Investment Area be dependent on standards for a livable wage or other
quality job metrics?
h. Current standards for identifying members of a Native American
and Native Alaskan OTP include an assessment that an individual has
``maintained Tribal affiliation or community attachment.'' The CDFI
Fund's proposed assessment methodologies state that a financing entity
may assess a recipient's Tribal affiliation or community attachment via
the collection of a government-issued or tribal government-issued photo
identification. Are there other methods the CDFI Fund should deem
entities can use to assess such status, and in particular an
individual's ``community attachment'' to a Native population? What are
those methods and describe them?
II. General Target Market Verification Questions for Public Comment
a. Is there additional information that the CDFI Fund should
consider related to Target Market assessment methodologies? If so,
please describe.
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 4701 et seq.; 12 CFR 1805; Public Law 116-260.
Jodie L. Harris,
Director, Community Development Financial Institutions Fund.
[FR Doc. 2022-22767 Filed 10-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-70-P