Hillsborough County committee records consensus scores for two applicants under RFP2600133

Hillsborough County’s evaluation committee met by communications media to review proposals submitted under RFP2600133, the county’s 2026 Community Development Block Grant program for public facilities and affordable housing, and recorded consensus scores that will guide next steps in procurement. Lisa Deina, the project’s chief buyer, opened the meeting and said the session was being recorded and that procurement silence would remain in effect until the county posts a notice of intent to award or the solicitation is cancelled.

The committee—led during scoring by evaluation chair Wlette Houndser—considered four proposals from three applicants. After an initial review, the county’s affordable housing staff flagged two applications as unacceptable: A Kids Place of Tampa Bay, Inc. (priority two application only) and Sunrise Community, Inc. The two remaining acceptable proposals advanced to consensus scoring: A Kids Place (priority 1) and New Life Village.

The committee assessed each acceptable proposal across required scoring categories and recorded consensus totals. For A Kids Place (priority 1) the committee reported: national objective 15 points; activity timeline 6 points; development proposal and project readiness 5 points; performance capacity 15 points; performance of past subrecipients 12 points; leveraging 8 points; and financial capacity 18 points, with no bonus points for transit proximity, for a total consensus score of 79 points. Wlette Houndser confirmed the consolidated score during the meeting.

For New Life Village the committee characterized the proposed activity as rehabilitation and recorded the following consensus scores: national objective 5 points; activity timeline 6 points; development proposal and project readiness 3 points; performance capacity 15 points; past subrecipient performance 12 points; leveraging 4 points; financial capacity 14 points; plus location/bonus points that totaled five, for a consensus score of 69 points.

Committee members discussed documentation supporting readiness (for example, whether a purchase agreement or warranty deed was present) and differed slightly in how they interpreted evidence of site control; the record shows the committee resolved these differences through discussion to reach consensus scores. After recording the scores, Deina asked for the evaluation summary memorandum so she could finalize the scoring spreadsheet, print it for signatures and proceed with administrative steps. "I will complete the spreadsheet for the consensus scoring and print it for you so that I can obtain everyone's signature," she said.

Deina reiterated that procurement silence remains in effect during the county’s notice period and that the meeting recording will be posted once available. The committee adjourned after recording scores and confirming next administrative steps.