One package, 221 points, and no published cutoff for the general pool — Maryland

One application, one $5,000 fee, filed through Procorem

The Application Submission Package covers MBP, RHFP, LIHTC, HOME, PRHP, RHW, and HTF requests in a single document set. The application fee is "a single fee regardless of the number of resources (loans or LIHTC) requested" — $5,000 per project, with no fee at all for PRHP-only applications — due at or before submission, and retained by DHCD even if the application is unsuccessful. Submission runs through Procorem: "one complete electronic application, including attachments and exhibits," with documents "uploaded individually in the corresponding folder and clearly named" using a fixed naming convention. The Guide is explicit that "large PDFs containing multiple documents will not be accepted," and that no new project information may be submitted after the deadline unless DHCD itself requests clarification.

That Round 1 dataset spans eight counties (Allegany, Anne Arundel, Baltimore City twice, Caroline, Charles, Montgomery, St. Mary's, and Talbot) — real, published application-stage data, not award data; at the time it was published, DHCD had not yet completed threshold review or scoring on those ten applications. DHCD also reserves the right to redirect a project out of the competition into MBP outright if it determines, in its sole discretion, that the deal would be feasible on tax-exempt bond proceeds instead.

18 lettered exhibits behind three certifications — the exhibit checklist

The September 2026 Application Submission Package is organized into three parts: Part 1 (Application Form and Certifications), Part 2 (Mandatory Exhibits A through F, several with lettered or numbered sub-exhibits), and Part 3 (Optional Scoring Documentation, Exhibits G through R, required only for applicants claiming those specific points).

The financial-statement requirement in Exhibit D is not a formality: project sponsors, owners, guarantors, and any general partner or managing member with an ownership interest must all submit statements, and audited or reviewed statements are required for guarantors and developers/sponsors holding 25% or greater ownership — compiled statements are only acceptable for smaller ownership stakes or subsequent years.

The threshold gate: 14 numbered categories, each pass/fail

Chapter 3's Threshold Criteria run 3.1 through 3.14: development team requirements (previous project performance, credit history), occupancy requirements (income/rent restrictions, the definition of elderly housing, long-term use restrictions, relocation/displacement), marketing and tenant-selection policy, tenant services, units for persons with disabilities and persons experiencing homelessness, other financing commitments (lender/syndicator letters of intent), RHFP/RHW loan requirements, LIHTC award limits, underwriting standards, readiness to proceed and financial feasibility, site requirements, the market study, development quality thresholds, and — Section 3.14 — additional criteria that apply only in the competitive round. Every category is pass/fail; passing all of them (or securing a waiver under Chapter 5) is what earns a project entry into Chapter 4's scoring.

One threshold item is genuinely distinctive to Maryland and easy to underestimate: Section 3.2.3 requires that "all projects requesting competitive LIHTC, RHFP funds, and/or RHW must agree to at least forty (40) years of low-income occupancy restrictions, unless a structured fifteen (15) year transition to homeownership is presented and accepted." Non-competitive LIHTC and MBP-only projects need only agree to 30 years — the federal statutory floor. The 40-year figure is a state policy layered on top of, not identical to, the QAP's own separately-defined "Extended Use Period" (see Phase 9).

The Market Study threshold (Section 3.12) carries hard numeric caps that a self-prepared or generic study will not automatically satisfy. It must come from a DHCD-approved analyst or one on the NCHMA peer-review list, be no more than six months old at submission, and use DHCD's own "Multifamily Mapper" tool to generate a five-mile proximity report against properties already in DHCD's portfolio and processing pipeline.

221 points, no published cutoff for the general pool — except in three narrower tracks that do have one

Chapter 4's Competitive Scoring Criteria total 221 points across eight categories, plus State Bonus Points awarded outside that scale entirely. Unlike a QAP that sets a fixed minimum score to compete (Colorado's Threshold #1, for instance, sets 130/115/95-point floors by credit type), Maryland's Guide sets no minimum score for the general competitive pool at all. The only evidence of a cutoff anywhere in the document is indirect: Guide Section 6.1.1, defining what counts as a "substantial change" that can trigger cancellation after award, refers to a score drop sufficient "to lower the score below the cut-off score for the round in which the project was approved" — confirming a round-specific cutoff exists in practice, set by that round's actual competition, not published in advance in the QAP or Guide.

Three narrower tracks do publish fixed minimum scores. The Infill and Redevelopment Pool requires at least 145 total points, including at least 10 points within Developer Financial Capacity (4.1.3), and pool applicants "are not required to compete with the general pool" at all — they clear this separate bar instead, in exchange for a smaller $500,000 LIHTC cap, a $50,000/unit-up-to-$1,000,000 RHFP cap, a 12-unit minimum, one application per sponsor per round, and a mandatory pre-application meeting. The FHA Risk Sharing/MBP expedited track requires at least 92 total points, including at least 32 points in Development Team Experience (4.1.1, with no individual team member scoring more than 3 points below that category's maximum), at least 14 points in Developer Financial Capacity (4.1.3), and at least 14 points in Development Quality Standards (4.6) — a general, non-expedited MBP-only application must still clear 92 points under Section 6.2, without those specific sub-minimums. The Permanent Supportive Housing Set-Aside runs its own separate 256-point scale (adding up to 35 points for PSH unit count and percentage on top of the 221-point base categories), with sub-minimum floors of at least 40 of 74 points in 4.1, at least 4 of 8 in 4.3, and at least 20 of 33 in 4.6.

State Bonus Points sit entirely outside the 221-point scale and are awarded at DHCD's discretion for reasons ranging from geographic balance to time-sensitive federal opportunities to responses to natural disasters or market dislocations — but only "applications submitted in the round that were scored are eligible," and "a proposal must have scored at least one hundred and twenty (120) points prior to the award of State Bonus Points." No more than 10 points may go to any one project (15 for intergenerational, elderly, or permanent-supportive-housing projects), and no more than 20% of a round's competitive LIHTC and RHFP dollars may go to projects receiving them.

Rejection is not silent, but reconsideration is narrow

A competitive application that is incomplete or fails threshold is rejected outright, with written notice through the project's Procorem WorkCenter stating the reason. The sponsor has seven calendar days to request reconsideration in writing to the Director of Multifamily Housing; the request "may not include new or additional information" and must establish that DHCD made a mistake in its initial decision. DHCD responds within seven calendar days, and the Guide states plainly that this process "is not a contested case within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act or the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) 05.01.01." A rejected application may resubmit in a later round — with a new application fee.

A non-competitive application (MBP, non-competitive LIHTC) that fails threshold gets a materially longer runway: 30 calendar days to address the threshold letter's issues, extendable another 30 days with sufficient explanation, official withdrawal via Procorem if the deadline is missed, and a 60-calendar-day window after withdrawal to seek reinstatement by showing the outstanding issues were fixed. A $2,500 reinstatement fee applies to 4% LIHTC/MBP projects reinstated within that 60-day window; beyond it, a brand-new $5,000 application fee is required.

DHCD must also notify the political subdivision where the project sits (the municipal corporation, not the county, if the project is inside one) in writing upon receiving any application, including nine specified data points about the project and its financing, and give the subdivision 45 calendar days to comment — DHCD will consider those comments, but they are not stated as a veto over the application.