STATE LIHTC RESEARCH

Hawaii
QAP scoring guide.

Hawaiʻi Housing Finance and Development Corporation (HHFDC) · 2026 QAP

Browse all states ↗

● Verified guideChecked Sep 12, 2026View source QAP ↗

THE POINT TABLE

Competitive scoring

23 categories

null — the QAP and its companion documents contain no statement of historical winning scores or recent award data; this is the 2026 (future) funding round.

Select a category to read its scoring criteria.

Criterion 1. LIHTC and HHFDC Resource – Efficiency and Leveraging

10 pts

1A (0-5 pts): scored on the ratio of [(Federal LIHTC Request x 10) + HHFDC Permanent Financing Request] / Number of LIHTC Units — lowest ratio in the round gets 5 pts, highest gets 0, others prorated. 1B (0-5 pts): same numerator ratio divided by Total Project Cost, scored the same relative way.

Criterion 2. County Adjuster

2 pts

Scored on each county's 60%/4-person MTSP income limit; the county with the lowest limit gets 2 pts, highest gets 0, others prorated between.

Criterion 3. Reasonableness of Development Costs

12 pts

New Building / Existing-Building-not-used-for-housing projects only (Existing Building used for housing = 0 pts): 0-6 pts based on lowest-to-highest total development cost per residential square foot, plus 0-6 pts based on lowest-to-highest total development cost per unit, each scored proportionally within the round's cost range.

Criterion 4. Applicant's Readiness

24 pts

HHFDC's assessment of whether serious project issues (financing, land use/zoning, utilities, budget) are resolved: (A) schedule/budget reasonableness — up to 8 pts; (B) discretionary approvals (Ch. 343 HRS, land use/zoning, 201H, etc.) — up to 8 pts; (C) ministerial approvals/construction drawings/completed studies — up to 8 pts.

Criterion 5. Tenant Services and Amenities

4 pts

Tenant services and amenities that enhance project livability (HHFDC discretionary evaluation).

Criterion 6. Project-Based Rental Assistance Subsidies

4 pts

Project receiving new project-based rental assistance (e.g., RD 515, HUD Section 8 PBRA) resulting in tenants paying ~30% of income toward rent; 0 pts if none, up to 4 pts scaled by percentage of units subsidized (4 pts if 100%).

Criterion 7. State/Local Government Financing

5 pts

Below-market permanent loan or grant from a State/local agency other than HHFDC: 2 pts for $10,000-$79,999/unit committed; 5 pts for $80,000+/unit committed (commitment letter/government action required).

Criterion 8. State or County Government Owned Land

5 pts

Project is on land leased from a State or County agency (incl. HHFDC) that owned the property prior to the application date.

Criterion 9. Energy Efficiency and Green Building

4 pts

Architect-certified compliance with one of: EPA Energy Star v3 (Certified = 1 pt only), Enterprise Green Communities (Certified 1 / Silver 2 / Gold 3 / Platinum 4), USGBC LEED for Homes v4 (Certified 1 / Silver 2 / Gold 3 / Platinum 4), or HD&C/NAHB National Green Building Standard (Bronze 1 / Silver 2 / Gold 3 / Emerald 4). Only one category may be elected; electing more than one voids all points.

Criterion 10. Project Location and Market Demand

6 pts

Location scoring: urban core = 3 pts, urbanized area = 2 pts, master planned community = 1 pt, rural district near jobs/medical/education = 1 pt (choose one); PLUS up to 3 additional pts for proximity (≤0.5 mi) to mass transit — Oahu rail/high-frequency bus (≥5 buses/hr) = 3 pts or any-frequency bus = 1.5 pts; neighbor islands ≥3 buses/hr = 3 pts or any-frequency bus = 1.5 pts.

Criterion 11. Developer and Property Management Experience

10 pts

(A) Development team's demonstrated ability to meet application terms/conditions — up to 6 pts (HHFDC may add/subtract for past performance). (B) LIHTC projects placed in service by Applicant/affiliate nationally: none=0, 1-5=0.5, 6+=1. (C) LIHTC projects placed in service in Hawaii by Applicant: none=0, 1-3=0.5, 4+=1. (D) LIHTC projects managed by the Management Agent nationally: none=0, 1-5=0.5, 6+=1. (E) LIHTC projects in Hawaii managed by the Management Agent: none=0, 1-3=0.5, 4+=1.

Criterion 12. Length of Affordability Commitment

7 pts

Points for extending beyond the minimum extended-use period: 45-49 yrs=2, 50-54 yrs=3, 55-60 yrs=4, 61+ yrs=5, Perpetuity=6 (table max shown is 6; criterion is labeled 0-7). Perpetuity electors must submit a reserve/capital-improvement funding plan not reliant on further HHFDC resources.

Criterion 13. Available and Minimum Unit Sizes

5 pts

Up to 3 pts for larger-unit mix (1 pt each for: ≥20% of units are 1BR; 20-39% are 2BR+; ≥40% are 2BR+); plus 2 pts for new-construction compliance with minimum unit square footages (Studio 300 SF, 1BR 360 SF, 2BR 520 SF, 3BR 720 SF, 4BR 880 SF, interior finish-to-finish measurement).

Criterion 14. Special Housing Needs

2 pts

1 pt for agreeing to accept state-coordinated referrals (10% of units) for the proposed project; 2 pts if also extending the commitment to at least one existing project the Applicant controls.

Criterion 15. Percentage of Income Targeted Units

10 pts

Sliding scale by set-aside election: Average Income of 51% AMI or Original set-aside of 30% of units at ≤30% AMI = 10 pts; Average Income 54% or 40% of units at ≤40% AMI = 6 pts; Average Income 57% or 50% of units at ≤50% AMI = 2 pts.

Criterion 16. Involvement of a Qualified Non-Profit Organization

2 pts

0 or 2 pts: project involves a Section 42-qualified non-profit that owns an interest and materially participates throughout the Extended Use Period, electing the non-profit set-aside, with specified documentation (Articles of Incorporation, 501(c)(3) letter, Form 990, Hawaii physical office, vendor compliance certificate).

Criterion 17. Opportunity for Home Ownership

1 pts

0 or 1 pt: owner offers tenants a right of first refusal to purchase under IRC §42(i)(7), supported by a feasibility analysis and homeownership-offering plan.

Criterion 18. Qualified Census Tract

1 pts

0 or 1 pt: project is in a Qualified Census Tract and redevelops existing housing contributing to a concerted community revitalization plan, with supporting explanation and government letter of interest/agreement.

Criterion 19. Historic Nature

1 pts

0 or 1 pt: project preserves the historic nature of an existing building listed on a national or state historic registry.

Criterion 20. Census Tracts with Concentrated Wealth

1 pts

Scored on the poverty rate of the project's census tract relative to other applications in the round — lowest poverty-rate tract gets 1 pt, highest gets 0, others prorated (multi-tract projects scored on the highest-poverty tract).

Criterion 21. Loan Repayment

1 pts

0 or 1 pt: applications proposing full RHRF loan repayment within the committed affordability period earn 1 pt; applications not requesting RHRF automatically earn 1 pt.

Criterion 22. State Conveyance

1 pts

0 or 1 pt: Applicant agrees to offer to sell the project to a state agency at fair market value (third-party appraisal) no later than 3 years before the end of the extended use period, reflected in the Restrictive Covenant.

Criterion 23. Need for Rehabilitation

0 pts

-2 to 0 points: a penalty/discount criterion — HHFDC scores between -2 and 0 based on how much the rehabilitation will materially improve residents' quality of life; new construction projects automatically receive 0 (no penalty, no bonus).

Scoring source

2026 QAP (HHFDC), Section III.D "Criteria Point System," Criteria 1-23, pp. 10-20 (threshold requirements at Section III.A-B, pp. 4-10; 4%-credit/bond exemption from scoring at Section III.C, p. 10). Companion document: 2026 Reference Guide (HHFDC), Section 2 "Hula Mae Multi-Family Bond Program Criteria," Minimum Thresholds and Criteria 1-13, pp. 10-17 (separate scoring rubric for HMMF bond-financed 4% deals).

MODEL ASSUMPTIONS

Underwriting parameters

2026 QAP (HHFDC), Section III.B "Minimum Thresholds," Item 8 "Contractor Profit Limitation" (pp. 7-8), Item 9 "Debt Service Ratio" (pp. 8-9, incl. vacancy/reserve/escalation assumptions at 9.e), and Item 12 "Developer Fee" (pp. 9-10). Fees at Section V "Fees" (p. 22) and Section VI.I "Fees" (p. 29). Companion document: 2026 Reference Guide (HHFDC), Section 2 "Hula Mae Multi-Family Bond Program Criteria" — Bond Financing Limitation (p. 10), and Section 3 "Rental Housing Revolving Fund Program Overview" — Debt Coverage Ratio definition (p. 19).

OPERATING ASSUMPTIONS

Utility allowance

Preferred method: not specified

HHFDC LIHTC Compliance Manual (Rev. April 2024), Section 2.6 "Utility Allowances," pp. 2-10 to 2-12 (mirrors 26 CFR §1.42-10(b)(4)); incorporated by reference in the 2026 QAP, Section VI "Compliance Monitoring Plan" (p.22) and Section V.H "Reporting Requirements" (p.28), which require "a copy of the applicable schedule, report or model used to calculate the utility allowance" with each Annual Report.

YOUR NEXT STEPS

Development guides for Hawaii

PHASE 1Site sourcing and screening PHASE 2Site control and due diligence PHASE 3Entitlement pathway election PHASE 4Program election (9% vs. 4% vs. hybrid)PHASE 5Rents, income limits, and the operating pro forma PHASE 6Cost, construction type, and the labor package PHASE 7Filed together, governed apart: Hawaii's LIHTC capital stack PHASE 8One Consolidated Application, one February deadline, and a rejection that follows you to every other HHFDC program PHASE 9No deadline exhibit, no restated 10 percent test — Hawaii's post-award clock is federal, and it crosses an ocean PHASE 10Construction through placed-in-service, HHFDC's cost-certification review, and getting to Form 8609 PHASE 11Compliance, Year 15, and Hawaii's 45-year extended-use floor -- not 55

Use the LIHTC feasibility checklist →