"We have a purchase option — is that enough for a Full-Application, and what does MBOH actually need before we can call this site 'controlled'?"
"Land or Property Control" is defined broadly, and due later than a developer might expect
MBOH's defined term is "Land or Property Control," not "site control," and its definition is broad by design: "legally binding documentation of title or right to possession and use of the property, or the right to acquire title or right to possession and use of the property, for purposes of the Project, including but not limited to documentation of fee ownership, lease, buy/sell agreement, option to purchase or lease, or other right, title or interest that will allow the Owner to acquire Proof of Ownership for purposes of Carryover" (2027 QAP Appendix A). Unlike Colorado's QAP, which explicitly excludes a seller's Letter of Intent from qualifying, Montana's definition does not name any excluded instrument — an option or a buy/sell agreement squarely qualifies, and this research found no QAP language barring a well-drafted LOI, though a bare, non-binding LOI would likely fail the "legally binding" requirement on its own terms.
Land or Property Control is Full-Application Item 4 (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2) — it is not required at Pre-Application. That timing matters: a developer can file a Pre-Application in April on a site under negotiation, then has until the August Full-Application deadline to convert that negotiation into a legally binding instrument. The risk that timing creates is the one this guide's Phase 1 already flags — the general project location cannot change after Pre-Application without a Board waiver (2027 QAP Section III.F.1) — so a site-control failure between April and August is a much harder problem than a site-control failure before April, since there generally isn't a fallback site to pivot to inside the same cycle.
Market study: two tiers, a strict six-month clock, and named pass/fail targets
9% Credit Pre-Applications require a Mini-Market Study and Summary Sheet (full studies are also accepted in place of the mini version); 4% Pre-Applications for an Inducement Resolution need neither a fee nor a Mini-Market Study (2027 QAP Section VI.A.1; III.A.2). Every Full-Application — 9% or 4% — requires a Full Market Study, a Market Analyst Certification Form, and a Market Study Summary Sheet (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Items 13–15).
| Requirement | Detail |
|---|---|
| Author | Prepared and signed by a disinterested third-party analyst |
| Freshness | Completed within six months prior to the Application submission date |
| Physical inspection | Market analyst must physically inspect the market area within one year of the Application |
| Methodology standard | Must adhere to the minimum requirements in MBOH's Mini/Full Market Study Requirements document, available on MBOH's website or the application platform |
| Vacancy Rate target | At or below 7% |
| Absorption Rate target | Less than 5 months |
| Rent-below-market target | Proposed Project rents at least 10% below adjusted market rents |
This research located the Mini/Full Market Study Requirements document only as an Excel file distributed through MBOH's application-process page, not as an independently reviewable public PDF — its detailed methodology could not be verified in this pass and should be pulled directly from MBOH or the BuildersPatch platform before relying on it.
Narrative references to the Market Study in the Development Evaluation Criteria section must cite the specific page and paragraph being relied on (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 22.b) — a documentation discipline worth building into any due-diligence workflow rather than treating as an afterthought once the narrative is drafted.
Appraisal, CMA, and a narrower identity-of-interest concept than CTCAC's
An Appraisal or Comparative Market Analysis (CMA) is required at Full-Application, prepared by "an independent professional entity that is qualified to prepare the report," and must meet MBOH's own Appraisal checklist (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 16); MBOH's site lists that checklist as an Excel file with macros, last updated July 17, 2024. A CMA may substitute for a full appraisal when an appraisal is not feasible, and — as covered in Phase 1 — neither is required at all for a site within the exterior boundaries of an Indian reservation, given documentation of that location (Item 16.d).
This is a place where Montana's QAP diverges structurally from states with a CTCAC-style acquisition identity-of-interest rule, and the difference is worth stating precisely rather than assumed away. The QAP does define "Identity of Interest," but only in the context of an Applicant's relationship to an In-Process Project — the repeat-award restriction Phase 4 of this guide covers, that a first-time 9% sponsor with an unfinished prior award needs an Experienced Developer partner to receive a second (2027 QAP Section II.A; Appendix A). That defined term does not extend to acquisition transactions between related parties. What does apply to a related-party acquisition is the QAP's general Related Party disclosure rule: Applicants and Owners "must disclose all transactions with Related Parties," and MBOH "may reduce Developer Fees, Builder Profit or other Soft Costs on Projects involving Related Party transactions" — a discretionary remedy applied after disclosure, not a mandatory second appraisal, extra certification, or below-market-value cap the way some states impose (2027 QAP, Underwriting Assumptions and Limitations section). A Related Party is broadly defined to include family relationships and any business relationship permitting "significant influence" over the other party (2027 QAP Appendix A).
One number the appraisal or CMA does feed directly: for the Soft-Cost-to-Hard-Cost Ratio calculation, "land value" is defined as "the highest value of what is shown in a comparative market analysis, appraisal or arm's length sale," and that value is added to the ratio's denominator regardless of whether the land was donated, leased, purchased, or otherwise acquired (2027 QAP Appendix A). A donated or below-market acquisition does not get to use its actual price for this calculation — it uses the highest of the three values.
Rehabilitation and acquisition/rehabilitation deals: a Capital Needs Assessment and a relocation plan, not a separate rehab track
Montana does not run a materially different application track for Rehabilitation or Acquisition/Rehabilitation deals the way some states do — the same Full-Application checklist applies, with a handful of items that only trigger for rehab. A Capital Needs Assessment (CNA) is required for every Rehabilitation Application, built on the USDA Rural Development Capital Needs Assessment template or a similar form, covering a minimum 15-year projection of every capital item to be replaced, refinished, repaired, upgraded, or otherwise rehabilitated, itemized by unit number, and prepared by a qualified professional entity (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 32). The CNA itself has its own freshness clock, separate from the market study's: it must be less than one year old as of the Application submission date, or carry a documented update within the most recent six months.
Zoning documentation gets a lighter path for these deals: Acquisition/Rehabilitation and Rehabilitation Projects can satisfy the zoning requirement by documenting that the Project will not require a change in zoning, rather than by producing affirmative city/county documentation of compliance the way New Construction must (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 5.b). Utilities documentation is similarly narrowed for these deal types — a letter or email from the utility provider addressing the expected additional load and the provider's ability to meet it, rather than the fuller documentation New Construction requires (Item 6.c).
Any Application proposing Rehabilitation or replacement of existing Units must also include a preliminary relocation plan addressing the logistics of moving tenants out during construction, temporary housing, the probable length of displacement, and the process for returning tenants to their original or replacement Units on completion (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 33) — this is a Uniform Relocation Act-adjacent obligation baked directly into the Full-Application checklist, not a separate compliance step layered on afterward.
The rest of the diligence file: utilities, public notice, and the fee sequence
Utilities documentation — a letter or email from each relevant provider (water, sewer, electricity, and gas/propane/garbage as applicable) confirming availability, capacity for the added load, and proximity — cannot be older than 18 months from the Application date, and MBOH may require an updated version at its discretion (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 6).
Public Notice to the community is its own Full-Application requirement, separate from the Local Involvement scoring item Phase 1 covers: the Applicant must release a public notice — a newspaper box ad, attendance at a neighborhood meeting, a social media post to three community group pages, or another MBOH-acceptable form — within 90 days of the Full-Application due date, using specific notice language the QAP itself provides verbatim, including the Project's unit count, bedroom mix, and target population (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 24). Broadband infrastructure is a related, easy-to-miss deliverable: it's required for all New Construction and Rehabilitation Projects, with a waiver available only on a documented, justified basis (Item 21).
| Fee | Amount | Due |
|---|---|---|
| 10% Test underwriting fee | $1,500 | With 10% Cost Certification paperwork |
| IRS Form 8609 fee | $3,000 | With 8609 paperwork |
As Phase 4 of this guide already flags, this fee schedule is dated September 1, 2023 — over two years older than the 2027 QAP it prices. Confirm current amounts with MBOH before budgeting a diligence package.
Where this goes wrong
- Assuming Montana requires site control at Pre-Application the way some states do. "Land or Property Control" is a Full-Application item, not a Pre-Application one (2027 QAP Section VI.A.1–2) — but the project's general location still locks in at Pre-Application, so a site that isn't genuinely controllable shouldn't be Pre-Applied on in the first place.
- Treating a bare, non-binding Letter of Intent as adequate Land or Property Control. The QAP's definition requires "legally binding documentation" of title or the right to acquire it (2027 QAP Appendix A) — an unsigned or non-binding LOI does not obviously meet that bar even though the QAP, unlike Colorado's, does not name LOIs as an explicit exclusion.
- Ordering the Full Market Study too early. It must be completed within six months of the Application submission date, with a physical market-area inspection within one year (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 13) — a study finished eight months before Full-Application submission is stale on its face.
- Missing the Vacancy Rate, Absorption Rate, or below-market-rent targets and assuming the study still 'passes.' MBOH's own named targets are 7% or below vacancy, under 5 months' absorption, and Project rents at least 10% below adjusted market rents (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 13.c) — a study that misses these is a real threshold risk, not a stylistic concern.
- Assuming Montana runs a CTCAC-style mandatory identity-of-interest appraisal or cost-certification regime for related-party acquisitions. The QAP's only defined 'Identity of Interest' term governs repeat In-Process Project awards, not acquisitions; a related-party acquisition instead falls under the general Related Party disclosure rule, where MBOH's remedy is discretionary fee/cost reduction, not a mandatory second appraisal (2027 QAP Appendix A; Underwriting Assumptions and Limitations).
- Using the actual (possibly donated or below-market) acquisition price for the Soft-Cost-to-Hard-Cost Ratio's land-value input. The QAP requires the highest of the CMA, appraisal, or arm's-length sale value regardless of how the land was actually acquired (2027 QAP Appendix A).
- Treating a CNA prepared more than a year before submission as compliant without an update. The QAP requires the CNA to be under one year old as of the Application date or to carry a documented update within the most recent six months (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 32.e).
- Assuming a Rehabilitation deal needs the same zoning documentation package as New Construction. Acquisition/Rehabilitation and Rehabilitation Projects can instead document that no zoning change is required (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 5.b).
- Letting utilities documentation age past 18 months before submission. MBOH treats that as the outer freshness limit and can require an even more current version at its discretion (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 6.d–e).
- Missing the 90-day Public Notice window ahead of the Full-Application deadline, or using notice language that doesn't track the QAP's required content. Both the timing and the substance (unit count, bedroom mix, target population, tax-exemption status) are specified directly in the QAP (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 24).
- Skipping a relocation plan because the deal is acquisition-only rather than 'true' rehab. Any Application proposing Rehabilitation or replacement of existing Units triggers the preliminary relocation plan requirement, regardless of how the deal is otherwise structured (2027 QAP Section VI.A.2, Item 33).
- HUD
- LIHTC
- State QAPs
- IRS § 42
- Housing Finance Agencies
