======================================================================
@@ STATE: ok
======================================================================
========================================================================
  DEMO MODE — FICTIONAL CDE. NOT YOUR DATA.
  CDE:       Riverbend Community Capital CDE, LLC (sample profile shipped with this package)
  Requested: $55,000,000 (illustrative figure, not your request)
  Every CDE-level score, ratio and recommendation below refers to
  this fictional CDE. Re-run with --cde and --requested-allocation
  for results about your own application.
========================================================================

======================================================================
  NMTC APPLICATION ANALYSIS
  CDE:   Riverbend Community Capital CDE, LLC
  Round: CY2025  |  Requested: $55,000,000
  Analyzed: <TIMESTAMP>
======================================================================
============================================================
PIPELINE ANALYSIS SUMMARY
============================================================
  Projects:        20
  Total QEI:       $   124,700,000
  Total Cost:      $   174,000,000
  Eligible (by project count): 85%

── Distress Concentration (share of pipeline QEI) ─────
  Deep/Severe:     57%  (✗ this tool's own ≥75% band — not a CDFI Fund threshold)
  LIC:             30%
  Non-LIC:         13%
  Native Area:     10%  (CDE-declared; not verified by this tool)

── Geographic Diversity ────────────────────────────────
  States:          19
  MSAs:            19
  Non-metro:       3%  (a share of QEI, not of QLICIs)
  Metropolitan:    97%
  Not determined:  0%  (0 project(s) — counted as neither)
  Question 22 asks what percentage of QLICIs the Applicant commits to deploy
  in Non-Metropolitan Counties. This is a share of QEI in the current pipeline,
  not that commitment, and Question 22 is not scored in Phase I.
  HHI:             586  (diverse)

── Sector Mix ──────────────────────────────────────────
  Sectors:         7
  Dominant:        healthcare
  High Priority:   68%
  Diversity Score: 88.3/100

── Impact Projections ──────────────────────────────────
  Jobs Created:    880
  Jobs Retained:   306
  Units Built:     234
  Sq Ft:           205,500
  Jobs/$MM QEI:    7.1

── Deal Economics ──────────────────────────────────────
  Total NMTCs:     $    48,633,000
  Investor Equity: $    40,365,390
  Leverage Loans:  $    84,334,610
  CDE Fees:        $     3,117,500
  QEI less fees:   $   121,582,500
============================================================

── Validation ──────────────────────────────────────────────────
[FAIL] eligibility_check
  ERROR: Project PRJ-S012 (Detroit Auto Parts Manufacturer) is NOT NMTC-eligible — tract 26163515700 does not qualify as a LIC
  ERROR: Project PRJ-S013 (Indianapolis Mixed-Use Community Hub) is NOT NMTC-eligible — tract 18097353300 does not qualify as a LIC
  ERROR: Project PRJ-S015 (St. Louis Community Solar Project) is NOT NMTC-eligible — tract 29510118600 does not qualify as a LIC
  WARN:  Only 87% of verified QEI is in eligible tracts. Flagged at this tool's own 90% screening band — not a CDFI Fund threshold. What is federal here is structural, not a scoring expectation: IRC §45D(d) requires each QLICI to be made in a qualified active low-income community business, which must be located in a Low-Income Community, and Treas. Reg. §1.45D-1(c)(5)(i) requires substantially all — at least 85 percent — of QEI proceeds to be invested in QLICIs. QEI attributed to ineligible tracts cannot count toward that test
[PASS] completeness_check
  WARN:  Pipeline QEI ($124,700,000) is 227% of requested allocation — a 1.2–1.5× pipeline is typical
[PASS] consistency_check
  All checks passed.

  2/3 checks passed

============================================================
  APPLICATION READINESS SCORE: 61.9/100  [C]
  [██████████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░] 61.9%
============================================================

Component Scores:
  Eligibility Quality             68.0/100
  Distress Concentration          58.2/100
  Geographic Diversity           100.0/100
  Impact Metrics                  38.2/100
  Validation Pass Rate            36.7/100
  Completeness                    80.0/100

  READINESS NARRATIVE WITHDRAWN (1.5.2). This tool no longer emits strengths,
  weaknesses or recommendations from the readiness composite, and none are
  offered in this release.

  WHAT WAS WITHDRAWN. Earlier versions read this composite's sub-scores and
  told a CDE to act on them: to increase deep/severe distress concentration to
  a target share, to add operating-business projects to raise a
  jobs-per-$1MM-QEI figure, and (withdrawn separately in 1.5.1) to expand its
  footprint to >=5 states. They also asserted strengths and weaknesses -- that
  a share was 'above average', that a concentration was 'below competitive
  threshold'.

  WHY. EVERY ONE OF THOSE TRIGGERS WAS A BAND THIS TOOL SET FOR ITSELF. The
  composite they weight is this tool's own unsourced house heuristic: the CDFI
  Fund publishes no readiness score, no such weighting and no grade, so none
  of the thresholds that fired those lines has a federal referent -- they are
  recorded HOUSE in this package's own constant registry. Restructuring a real
  pipeline is an expensive and sometimes irreversible act, and it was being
  instructed by arithmetic with nothing behind it. The measured case is on the
  record: following the withdrawn geographic advice moved a sample pipeline
  from Highly Qualified to Not Qualified under the Fund's own gate while this
  tool's grade did not change letter.

  YOU WERE NEVERTHELESS DOCKED, AND HERE IS THE ARITHMETIC. A tool may decline
  to advise. It may not deduct silently.

  ROWS WHOSE UNDERLYING QUANTITY THE CDFI FUND ALSO SCORES -- on its own
  basis, not this one:

      Eligibility Quality       68.0/100 at a 25% weight  ->  DOCKED  8.0 POINTS
          BASIS: this tool's own eligibility curve
          FUND: the eligible share reaches the Fund framework only as Pipeline
                Credibility's eligibility penalty, and LIC status itself is a
                STATUTORY GATE rather than a scored band. The 0-100 curve
                docking you here is this tool's.
      Distress Concentration    58.2/100 at a 25% weight  ->  DOCKED 10.4 POINTS
          BASIS: schema.TARGET_DISTRESS_THRESHOLDS (HOUSE)
          FUND: THE FUND SCORES DISTRESS, ON A DIFFERENT BASIS. Higher Distress
                Targeting and Deep Distress Commitment are scored against shares
                of QLICI dollars; this sub-score divides a share of QEI by that
                bar. The bands docking you here are this tool's, but the
                underlying quantity does move a Fund score -- in either
                direction.

      SUBTOTAL FOR THIS BLOCK: 18.4 POINTS.

  ROWS THAT ARE HOUSE BOOKKEEPING END TO END -- the Fund scores no
  corresponding quantity:

      Impact Metrics            38.2/100 at a 20% weight  ->  DOCKED 12.4 POINTS
          BASIS: schema.IMPACT_BENCHMARKS (HOUSE)
          FUND: The Fund scores whether outcomes are QUANTIFIED and THIRD-PARTY
                VALIDATED. It publishes no jobs-per-$1MM-QEI band, so no Fund
                quantity corresponds to the rate docking you here.
      Validation Pass Rate      36.7/100 at a 10% weight  ->  DOCKED  6.3 POINTS
          BASIS: this tool's own pass-rate curve
          FUND: An internal check of this tool's own input rules. It has no Fund
                analogue and is not part of any application.
      Completeness              80.0/100 at a  5% weight  ->  DOCKED  1.0 POINTS
          BASIS: this tool's own completeness curve
          FUND: An internal check that this tool's own fields are populated. It
                has no Fund analogue and is not part of any application.

      SUBTOTAL FOR THIS BLOCK: 19.7 POINTS.

      TOTAL DEDUCTION 38.1 POINTS of the 100-point readiness headline.

  THE BLOCKS ABOVE ARE NOT THE SAME CURRENCY AND MUST NOT BE TRADED OFF
  AGAINST EACH OTHER. A point recovered on a house bookkeeping row changes
  this tool's headline and nothing else. Worse, the two blocks can move in
  OPPOSITE directions: a measured sample pipeline that added a state and
  diluted its severe-distress share gained 2.1 readiness points here while its
  aggregate base score under this package's model of the Review Process FELL
  by a point, 78 to 77. THIS TABLE CANNOT TELL YOU WHICH TRADE IS WORTH
  MAKING, AND IT IS NOT TRYING TO -- it is an account of what this tool did to
  its own number, not a list of things to fix.

  NONE OF THAT IS A FINDING ABOUT YOUR APPLICATION. The deduction is this
  tool's own bookkeeping against its own bands. In particular the CDFI Fund
  does not score geographic breadth at all, so nothing in the headline's
  geographic term has a federal referent; do not treat this pipeline's
  footprint as a finding either way, and do not expand it to recover those
  points.

  WHERE THE SOURCED GUIDANCE IS. `intelligence.RecommendationEngine` is
  untouched. It never reads this composite -- it scores against the CY
  2024-2025 NMTC Program Review Process and cites the section behind every
  item it emits. Reach it with `Application.recommendations()` in Python, or
  open the Win Alignment Scorer page in the Streamlit app.

  IT IS NOT REACHED FROM HERE. Neither `nmtcapp analyze` nor the generated
  application documents run that engine, so neither now carries improvement
  guidance of any kind. That gap is stated rather than shipped quietly:
  reaching the sourced guidance is a separate call you have to make yourself.

Still emitted — NOT derived from the readiness composite:
  → Resolve validation error: Project PRJ-S012 (Detroit Auto Parts Manufacturer) is NOT NMTC-eligible — tract 26163515700 does not qualify as a LIC
============================================================
========================================================================
  DEMO MODE — FICTIONAL CDE. NOT YOUR DATA.
  CDE:       Riverbend Community Capital CDE, LLC (sample profile shipped with this package)
  Requested: $55,000,000 (illustrative figure, not your request)
  Every CDE-level score, ratio and recommendation below refers to
  this fictional CDE. Re-run with --cde and --requested-allocation
  for results about your own application.
========================================================================
[exit 0]

========================================================================
  1 VALIDATION CHECK(S) FAILED: eligibility_check
  This command exits 0 anyway: the exit code reports whether
  the ANALYSIS RAN, not what it found. Re-run with --strict to
  exit non-zero on a failed check, which is what a CI job or a
  wrapper script should use.
========================================================================
======================================================================
@@ STATE: partial
======================================================================
========================================================================
  DEMO MODE — FICTIONAL CDE. NOT YOUR DATA.
  CDE:       Riverbend Community Capital CDE, LLC (sample profile shipped with this package)
  Requested: $55,000,000 (illustrative figure, not your request)
  Every CDE-level score, ratio and recommendation below refers to
  this fictional CDE. Re-run with --cde and --requested-allocation
  for results about your own application.
========================================================================

======================================================================
  NMTC APPLICATION ANALYSIS
  CDE:   Riverbend Community Capital CDE, LLC
  Round: CY2025  |  Requested: $55,000,000
  Analyzed: <TIMESTAMP>
======================================================================
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  2 project(s) could not be location-verified and remain
  UNVERIFIED (no tract assigned): PRJ-S003, PRJ-S004
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
============================================================
PIPELINE ANALYSIS SUMMARY
============================================================
  Projects:        20
  Total QEI:       $   124,700,000
  Total Cost:      $   174,000,000
  Eligible (by project count): 75%

── Distress Concentration (share of pipeline QEI) ─────
  Deep/Severe:     49%  (✗ this tool's own ≥75% band — not a CDFI Fund threshold)
  LIC:             30%
  Non-LIC:         21%  (upper bound — includes unverified)
  Native Area:     10%  (CDE-declared; not verified by this tool)

── Geographic Diversity ────────────────────────────────
  States:          19
  MSAs:            19
  Non-metro:       3%  (a share of QEI, not of QLICIs)
  Metropolitan:    90%
  Not determined:  8%  (2 project(s) — counted as neither)
  Question 22 asks what percentage of QLICIs the Applicant commits to deploy
  in Non-Metropolitan Counties. This is a share of QEI in the current pipeline,
  not that commitment, and Question 22 is not scored in Phase I.
  HHI:             586  (diverse)

── Sector Mix ──────────────────────────────────────────
  Sectors:         7
  Dominant:        healthcare
  High Priority:   68%
  Diversity Score: 88.3/100

── Impact Projections ──────────────────────────────────
  Jobs Created:    880
  Jobs Retained:   306
  Units Built:     234
  Sq Ft:           205,500
  Jobs/$MM QEI:    7.1

── Deal Economics ──────────────────────────────────────
  Total NMTCs:     $    48,633,000
  Investor Equity: $    40,365,390
  Leverage Loans:  $    84,334,610
  CDE Fees:        $     3,117,500
  QEI less fees:   $   121,582,500
============================================================

── Validation ──────────────────────────────────────────────────
[FAIL] eligibility_check
  ERROR: Project PRJ-S012 (Detroit Auto Parts Manufacturer) is NOT NMTC-eligible — tract 26163515700 does not qualify as a LIC
  ERROR: Project PRJ-S013 (Indianapolis Mixed-Use Community Hub) is NOT NMTC-eligible — tract 18097353300 does not qualify as a LIC
  ERROR: Project PRJ-S015 (St. Louis Community Solar Project) is NOT NMTC-eligible — tract 29510118600 does not qualify as a LIC
  WARN:  2 project(s) lack eligibility data: PRJ-S003, PRJ-S004
  WARN:  Only 86% of verified QEI is in eligible tracts (of the 92% of QEI that could be verified; 8% is unverified). Flagged at this tool's own 90% screening band — not a CDFI Fund threshold. What is federal here is structural, not a scoring expectation: IRC §45D(d) requires each QLICI to be made in a qualified active low-income community business, which must be located in a Low-Income Community, and Treas. Reg. §1.45D-1(c)(5)(i) requires substantially all — at least 85 percent — of QEI proceeds to be invested in QLICIs. QEI attributed to ineligible tracts cannot count toward that test
  WARN:  Deep/severe distress concentration (49% of QEI) is below this tool's internal screening band of 50% (a house heuristic, not a CDFI Fund threshold). The published CY 2024-2025 severe-distress bar for full credit is 85% of QLICIs, which this tool does not compute — do not read the figure above as an answer to it
[PASS] completeness_check
  WARN:  Pipeline QEI ($124,700,000) is 227% of requested allocation — a 1.2–1.5× pipeline is typical
[PASS] consistency_check
  All checks passed.

  2/3 checks passed

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  UNVERIFIED PROJECTS IN PIPELINE
  2 projects unverified — locations could not be verified; eligibility-dependent components are lower bounds (unverified projects count in the denominator, never the numerator)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
============================================================
  APPLICATION READINESS SCORE: 57.6/100  [C]  (PARTIAL)
  [█████████████████░░░░░░░░░░░░░] 57.6%
  2 projects unverified — locations could not be verified; eligibility-dependent components are lower bounds (unverified projects count in the denominator, never the numerator)
============================================================

Component Scores:
  Eligibility Quality             60.0/100
  Distress Concentration          49.2/100
  Geographic Diversity           100.0/100
  Impact Metrics                  38.2/100
  Validation Pass Rate            36.7/100
  Completeness                    80.0/100

  READINESS NARRATIVE WITHDRAWN (1.5.2). This tool no longer emits strengths,
  weaknesses or recommendations from the readiness composite, and none are
  offered in this release.

  WHAT WAS WITHDRAWN. Earlier versions read this composite's sub-scores and
  told a CDE to act on them: to increase deep/severe distress concentration to
  a target share, to add operating-business projects to raise a
  jobs-per-$1MM-QEI figure, and (withdrawn separately in 1.5.1) to expand its
  footprint to >=5 states. They also asserted strengths and weaknesses -- that
  a share was 'above average', that a concentration was 'below competitive
  threshold'.

  WHY. EVERY ONE OF THOSE TRIGGERS WAS A BAND THIS TOOL SET FOR ITSELF. The
  composite they weight is this tool's own unsourced house heuristic: the CDFI
  Fund publishes no readiness score, no such weighting and no grade, so none
  of the thresholds that fired those lines has a federal referent -- they are
  recorded HOUSE in this package's own constant registry. Restructuring a real
  pipeline is an expensive and sometimes irreversible act, and it was being
  instructed by arithmetic with nothing behind it. The measured case is on the
  record: following the withdrawn geographic advice moved a sample pipeline
  from Highly Qualified to Not Qualified under the Fund's own gate while this
  tool's grade did not change letter.

  YOU WERE NEVERTHELESS DOCKED, AND HERE IS THE ARITHMETIC. A tool may decline
  to advise. It may not deduct silently.

  ROWS WHOSE UNDERLYING QUANTITY THE CDFI FUND ALSO SCORES -- on its own
  basis, not this one:

      Eligibility Quality       60.0/100 at a 25% weight  ->  DOCKED 10.0 POINTS
          BASIS: this tool's own eligibility curve
          FUND: the eligible share reaches the Fund framework only as Pipeline
                Credibility's eligibility penalty, and LIC status itself is a
                STATUTORY GATE rather than a scored band. The 0-100 curve
                docking you here is this tool's.
      Distress Concentration    49.2/100 at a 25% weight  ->  DOCKED 12.7 POINTS
          BASIS: schema.TARGET_DISTRESS_THRESHOLDS (HOUSE)
          FUND: THE FUND SCORES DISTRESS, ON A DIFFERENT BASIS. Higher Distress
                Targeting and Deep Distress Commitment are scored against shares
                of QLICI dollars; this sub-score divides a share of QEI by that
                bar. The bands docking you here are this tool's, but the
                underlying quantity does move a Fund score -- in either
                direction.

      SUBTOTAL FOR THIS BLOCK: 22.7 POINTS.

  ROWS THAT ARE HOUSE BOOKKEEPING END TO END -- the Fund scores no
  corresponding quantity:

      Impact Metrics            38.2/100 at a 20% weight  ->  DOCKED 12.4 POINTS
          BASIS: schema.IMPACT_BENCHMARKS (HOUSE)
          FUND: The Fund scores whether outcomes are QUANTIFIED and THIRD-PARTY
                VALIDATED. It publishes no jobs-per-$1MM-QEI band, so no Fund
                quantity corresponds to the rate docking you here.
      Validation Pass Rate      36.7/100 at a 10% weight  ->  DOCKED  6.3 POINTS
          BASIS: this tool's own pass-rate curve
          FUND: An internal check of this tool's own input rules. It has no Fund
                analogue and is not part of any application.
      Completeness              80.0/100 at a  5% weight  ->  DOCKED  1.0 POINTS
          BASIS: this tool's own completeness curve
          FUND: An internal check that this tool's own fields are populated. It
                has no Fund analogue and is not part of any application.

      SUBTOTAL FOR THIS BLOCK: 19.7 POINTS.

      TOTAL DEDUCTION 42.4 POINTS of the 100-point readiness headline.

  THE BLOCKS ABOVE ARE NOT THE SAME CURRENCY AND MUST NOT BE TRADED OFF
  AGAINST EACH OTHER. A point recovered on a house bookkeeping row changes
  this tool's headline and nothing else. Worse, the two blocks can move in
  OPPOSITE directions: a measured sample pipeline that added a state and
  diluted its severe-distress share gained 2.1 readiness points here while its
  aggregate base score under this package's model of the Review Process FELL
  by a point, 78 to 77. THIS TABLE CANNOT TELL YOU WHICH TRADE IS WORTH
  MAKING, AND IT IS NOT TRYING TO -- it is an account of what this tool did to
  its own number, not a list of things to fix.

  NONE OF THAT IS A FINDING ABOUT YOUR APPLICATION. The deduction is this
  tool's own bookkeeping against its own bands. In particular the CDFI Fund
  does not score geographic breadth at all, so nothing in the headline's
  geographic term has a federal referent; do not treat this pipeline's
  footprint as a finding either way, and do not expand it to recover those
  points.

  WHERE THE SOURCED GUIDANCE IS. `intelligence.RecommendationEngine` is
  untouched. It never reads this composite -- it scores against the CY
  2024-2025 NMTC Program Review Process and cites the section behind every
  item it emits. Reach it with `Application.recommendations()` in Python, or
  open the Win Alignment Scorer page in the Streamlit app.

  IT IS NOT REACHED FROM HERE. Neither `nmtcapp analyze` nor the generated
  application documents run that engine, so neither now carries improvement
  guidance of any kind. That gap is stated rather than shipped quietly:
  reaching the sourced guidance is a separate call you have to make yourself.

Still emitted — NOT derived from the readiness composite:
  → Resolve validation error: Project PRJ-S012 (Detroit Auto Parts Manufacturer) is NOT NMTC-eligible — tract 26163515700 does not qualify as a LIC
============================================================
========================================================================
  DEMO MODE — FICTIONAL CDE. NOT YOUR DATA.
  CDE:       Riverbend Community Capital CDE, LLC (sample profile shipped with this package)
  Requested: $55,000,000 (illustrative figure, not your request)
  Every CDE-level score, ratio and recommendation below refers to
  this fictional CDE. Re-run with --cde and --requested-allocation
  for results about your own application.
========================================================================
[exit 0]
Project PRJ-S003 geocoded to tract 36005011502, which is absent from the CDFI Fund eligibility table — leaving eligibility unverified rather than recording an indeterminate verdict
Location could not be verified for project PRJ-S004 (9500 S Grape St, Los Angeles, CA) — leaving eligibility unverified

========================================================================
  1 VALIDATION CHECK(S) FAILED: eligibility_check
  This command exits 0 anyway: the exit code reports whether
  the ANALYSIS RAN, not what it found. Re-run with --strict to
  exit non-zero on a failed check, which is what a CI job or a
  wrapper script should use.
========================================================================
======================================================================
@@ STATE: unavailable
======================================================================
========================================================================
  DEMO MODE — FICTIONAL CDE. NOT YOUR DATA.
  CDE:       Riverbend Community Capital CDE, LLC (sample profile shipped with this package)
  Requested: $55,000,000 (illustrative figure, not your request)
  Every CDE-level score, ratio and recommendation below refers to
  this fictional CDE. Re-run with --cde and --requested-allocation
  for results about your own application.
========================================================================

======================================================================
  NMTC APPLICATION ANALYSIS
  CDE:   Riverbend Community Capital CDE, LLC
  Round: CY2025  |  Requested: $55,000,000
  Analyzed: <TIMESTAMP>
======================================================================
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  ELIGIBILITY DATA UNAVAILABLE
  eligibility dataset could not be loaded (captured)
  Eligibility and distress figures below are UNVERIFIED and
  excluded from scoring. Do not use for application content.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
============================================================
PIPELINE ANALYSIS SUMMARY
============================================================
  Projects:        20
  Total QEI:       $   124,700,000
  Total Cost:      $   174,000,000
  Eligible (by project count): unverified

── Distress Concentration (share of pipeline QEI) ─────
  Deep/Severe:     0%  (✗ this tool's own ≥75% band — not a CDFI Fund threshold)
  LIC:             0%
  Non-LIC:         100%  (upper bound — includes unverified)
  Native Area:     10%  (CDE-declared; not verified by this tool)

── Geographic Diversity ────────────────────────────────
  States:          19
  MSAs:            19
  Non-metro:       0%  (a share of QEI, not of QLICIs)
  Metropolitan:    0%
  Not determined:  100%  (20 project(s) — counted as neither)
  Question 22 asks what percentage of QLICIs the Applicant commits to deploy
  in Non-Metropolitan Counties. This is a share of QEI in the current pipeline,
  not that commitment, and Question 22 is not scored in Phase I.
  HHI:             586  (diverse)

── Sector Mix ──────────────────────────────────────────
  Sectors:         7
  Dominant:        healthcare
  High Priority:   68%
  Diversity Score: 88.3/100

── Impact Projections ──────────────────────────────────
  Jobs Created:    880
  Jobs Retained:   306
  Units Built:     234
  Sq Ft:           205,500
  Jobs/$MM QEI:    7.1

── Deal Economics ──────────────────────────────────────
  Total NMTCs:     $    48,633,000
  Investor Equity: $    40,365,390
  Leverage Loans:  $    84,334,610
  CDE Fees:        $     3,117,500
  QEI less fees:   $   121,582,500
============================================================

── Validation ──────────────────────────────────────────────────
[PASS] eligibility_check
  WARN:  20 project(s) lack eligibility data: PRJ-S001, PRJ-S002, PRJ-S003, PRJ-S004, PRJ-S005 and others
  WARN:  Tract eligibility could not be verified for any project — no eligibility percentage can be computed. This is not a finding of ineligibility; restore eligibility data access and re-run.
  WARN:  Deep/severe distress concentration (0% of QEI) is below this tool's internal screening band of 50% (a house heuristic, not a CDFI Fund threshold). The published CY 2024-2025 severe-distress bar for full credit is 85% of QLICIs, which this tool does not compute — do not read the figure above as an answer to it
[PASS] completeness_check
  WARN:  Pipeline QEI ($124,700,000) is 227% of requested allocation — a 1.2–1.5× pipeline is typical
[PASS] consistency_check
  All checks passed.

  3/3 checks passed

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  ELIGIBILITY DATA UNAVAILABLE
  eligibility dataset could not be loaded (captured)
  score computed without eligibility verification (4 of 6 components)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
============================================================
  APPLICATION READINESS SCORE: 73.3/100  [B]  (PARTIAL)
  [█████████████████████░░░░░░░░░] 73.3%
  score computed without eligibility verification (4 of 6 components)
============================================================

Component Scores:
  Geographic Diversity           100.0/100
  Impact Metrics                  38.2/100
  Validation Pass Rate           100.0/100
  Completeness                    80.0/100

  READINESS NARRATIVE WITHDRAWN (1.5.2). This tool no longer emits strengths,
  weaknesses or recommendations from the readiness composite, and none are
  offered in this release.

  WHAT WAS WITHDRAWN. Earlier versions read this composite's sub-scores and
  told a CDE to act on them: to increase deep/severe distress concentration to
  a target share, to add operating-business projects to raise a
  jobs-per-$1MM-QEI figure, and (withdrawn separately in 1.5.1) to expand its
  footprint to >=5 states. They also asserted strengths and weaknesses -- that
  a share was 'above average', that a concentration was 'below competitive
  threshold'.

  WHY. EVERY ONE OF THOSE TRIGGERS WAS A BAND THIS TOOL SET FOR ITSELF. The
  composite they weight is this tool's own unsourced house heuristic: the CDFI
  Fund publishes no readiness score, no such weighting and no grade, so none
  of the thresholds that fired those lines has a federal referent -- they are
  recorded HOUSE in this package's own constant registry. Restructuring a real
  pipeline is an expensive and sometimes irreversible act, and it was being
  instructed by arithmetic with nothing behind it. The measured case is on the
  record: following the withdrawn geographic advice moved a sample pipeline
  from Highly Qualified to Not Qualified under the Fund's own gate while this
  tool's grade did not change letter.

  YOU WERE NEVERTHELESS DOCKED, AND HERE IS THE ARITHMETIC. A tool may decline
  to advise. It may not deduct silently.

  ROWS THAT ARE HOUSE BOOKKEEPING END TO END -- the Fund scores no
  corresponding quantity:

      Impact Metrics            38.2/100 at a 20% weight  ->  DOCKED 12.4 POINTS
          BASIS: schema.IMPACT_BENCHMARKS (HOUSE)
          FUND: The Fund scores whether outcomes are QUANTIFIED and THIRD-PARTY
                VALIDATED. It publishes no jobs-per-$1MM-QEI band, so no Fund
                quantity corresponds to the rate docking you here.
      Completeness              80.0/100 at a  5% weight  ->  DOCKED  1.0 POINTS
          BASIS: this tool's own completeness curve
          FUND: An internal check that this tool's own fields are populated. It
                has no Fund analogue and is not part of any application.

      SUBTOTAL FOR THIS BLOCK: 13.4 POINTS.

      TOTAL DEDUCTION 13.4 POINTS of the 100-point readiness headline.

  THE BLOCKS ABOVE ARE NOT THE SAME CURRENCY AND MUST NOT BE TRADED OFF
  AGAINST EACH OTHER. A point recovered on a house bookkeeping row changes
  this tool's headline and nothing else. Worse, the two blocks can move in
  OPPOSITE directions: a measured sample pipeline that added a state and
  diluted its severe-distress share gained 2.1 readiness points here while its
  aggregate base score under this package's model of the Review Process FELL
  by a point, 78 to 77. THIS TABLE CANNOT TELL YOU WHICH TRADE IS WORTH
  MAKING, AND IT IS NOT TRYING TO -- it is an account of what this tool did to
  its own number, not a list of things to fix.

  NONE OF THAT IS A FINDING ABOUT YOUR APPLICATION. The deduction is this
  tool's own bookkeeping against its own bands. In particular the CDFI Fund
  does not score geographic breadth at all, so nothing in the headline's
  geographic term has a federal referent; do not treat this pipeline's
  footprint as a finding either way, and do not expand it to recover those
  points.

  WHERE THE SOURCED GUIDANCE IS. `intelligence.RecommendationEngine` is
  untouched. It never reads this composite -- it scores against the CY
  2024-2025 NMTC Program Review Process and cites the section behind every
  item it emits. Reach it with `Application.recommendations()` in Python, or
  open the Win Alignment Scorer page in the Streamlit app.

  IT IS NOT REACHED FROM HERE. Neither `nmtcapp analyze` nor the generated
  application documents run that engine, so neither now carries improvement
  guidance of any kind. That gap is stated rather than shipped quietly:
  reaching the sourced guidance is a separate call you have to make yourself.

Still emitted — NOT derived from the readiness composite:
  → Restore eligibility data access (nmtc-mapper) and re-run the analysis — eligibility and distress cannot be verified right now
============================================================
========================================================================
  DEMO MODE — FICTIONAL CDE. NOT YOUR DATA.
  CDE:       Riverbend Community Capital CDE, LLC (sample profile shipped with this package)
  Requested: $55,000,000 (illustrative figure, not your request)
  Every CDE-level score, ratio and recommendation below refers to
  this fictional CDE. Re-run with --cde and --requested-allocation
  for results about your own application.
========================================================================
[exit 0]
nmtc-mapper eligibility data unavailable (eligibility dataset could not be loaded (captured)). Eligibility fields remain unverified; scoring will exclude the eligibility component.
======================================================================
@@ STATE: pre_enriched
======================================================================

======================================================================
  NMTC APPLICATION ANALYSIS
  CDE:   Riverbend Community Capital CDE, LLC
  Round: CY2025  |  Requested: $55,000,000
  Analyzed: <TIMESTAMP>
======================================================================
============================================================
PIPELINE ANALYSIS SUMMARY
============================================================
  Projects:        20
  Total QEI:       $   122,500,000
  Total Cost:      $   170,600,000
  Eligible (by project count): 100%

── Distress Concentration (share of pipeline QEI) ─────
  Deep/Severe:     87%  (✓ this tool's own ≥75% band — not a CDFI Fund threshold)
  LIC:             13%
  Non-LIC:         0%
  Native Area:     10%  (CDE-declared; not verified by this tool)

── Geographic Diversity ────────────────────────────────
  States:          19
  MSAs:            19
  Non-metro:       0%  (a share of QEI, not of QLICIs)
  Metropolitan:    0%
  Not determined:  100%  (20 project(s) — counted as neither)
  Question 22 asks what percentage of QLICIs the Applicant commits to deploy
  in Non-Metropolitan Counties. This is a share of QEI in the current pipeline,
  not that commitment, and Question 22 is not scored in Phase I.
  HHI:             592  (diverse)

── Sector Mix ──────────────────────────────────────────
  Sectors:         7
  Dominant:        healthcare
  High Priority:   65%
  Diversity Score: 91.8/100

── Impact Projections ──────────────────────────────────
  Jobs Created:    864
  Jobs Retained:   298
  Units Built:     234
  Sq Ft:           198,500
  Jobs/$MM QEI:    7.0

── Deal Economics ──────────────────────────────────────
  Total NMTCs:     $    47,775,000
  Investor Equity: $    39,653,250
  Leverage Loans:  $    82,846,750
  CDE Fees:        $     3,062,500
  QEI less fees:   $   119,437,500
============================================================

── Validation ──────────────────────────────────────────────────
[PASS] eligibility_check
  All checks passed.
[PASS] completeness_check
  WARN:  Pipeline QEI ($122,500,000) is 223% of requested allocation — a 1.2–1.5× pipeline is typical
[PASS] consistency_check
  All checks passed.

  3/3 checks passed

============================================================
  APPLICATION READINESS SCORE: 86.6/100  [A]
  [█████████████████████████░░░░░] 86.6%
============================================================

Component Scores:
  Eligibility Quality            100.0/100
  Distress Concentration         100.0/100
  Geographic Diversity           100.0/100
  Impact Metrics                  38.2/100
  Validation Pass Rate           100.0/100
  Completeness                    80.0/100

  READINESS NARRATIVE WITHDRAWN (1.5.2). This tool no longer emits strengths,
  weaknesses or recommendations from the readiness composite, and none are
  offered in this release.

  WHAT WAS WITHDRAWN. Earlier versions read this composite's sub-scores and
  told a CDE to act on them: to increase deep/severe distress concentration to
  a target share, to add operating-business projects to raise a
  jobs-per-$1MM-QEI figure, and (withdrawn separately in 1.5.1) to expand its
  footprint to >=5 states. They also asserted strengths and weaknesses -- that
  a share was 'above average', that a concentration was 'below competitive
  threshold'.

  WHY. EVERY ONE OF THOSE TRIGGERS WAS A BAND THIS TOOL SET FOR ITSELF. The
  composite they weight is this tool's own unsourced house heuristic: the CDFI
  Fund publishes no readiness score, no such weighting and no grade, so none
  of the thresholds that fired those lines has a federal referent -- they are
  recorded HOUSE in this package's own constant registry. Restructuring a real
  pipeline is an expensive and sometimes irreversible act, and it was being
  instructed by arithmetic with nothing behind it. The measured case is on the
  record: following the withdrawn geographic advice moved a sample pipeline
  from Highly Qualified to Not Qualified under the Fund's own gate while this
  tool's grade did not change letter.

  YOU WERE NEVERTHELESS DOCKED, AND HERE IS THE ARITHMETIC. A tool may decline
  to advise. It may not deduct silently.

  ROWS THAT ARE HOUSE BOOKKEEPING END TO END -- the Fund scores no
  corresponding quantity:

      Impact Metrics            38.2/100 at a 20% weight  ->  DOCKED 12.4 POINTS
          BASIS: schema.IMPACT_BENCHMARKS (HOUSE)
          FUND: The Fund scores whether outcomes are QUANTIFIED and THIRD-PARTY
                VALIDATED. It publishes no jobs-per-$1MM-QEI band, so no Fund
                quantity corresponds to the rate docking you here.
      Completeness              80.0/100 at a  5% weight  ->  DOCKED  1.0 POINTS
          BASIS: this tool's own completeness curve
          FUND: An internal check that this tool's own fields are populated. It
                has no Fund analogue and is not part of any application.

      SUBTOTAL FOR THIS BLOCK: 13.4 POINTS.

      TOTAL DEDUCTION 13.4 POINTS of the 100-point readiness headline.

  THE BLOCKS ABOVE ARE NOT THE SAME CURRENCY AND MUST NOT BE TRADED OFF
  AGAINST EACH OTHER. A point recovered on a house bookkeeping row changes
  this tool's headline and nothing else. Worse, the two blocks can move in
  OPPOSITE directions: a measured sample pipeline that added a state and
  diluted its severe-distress share gained 2.1 readiness points here while its
  aggregate base score under this package's model of the Review Process FELL
  by a point, 78 to 77. THIS TABLE CANNOT TELL YOU WHICH TRADE IS WORTH
  MAKING, AND IT IS NOT TRYING TO -- it is an account of what this tool did to
  its own number, not a list of things to fix.

  NONE OF THAT IS A FINDING ABOUT YOUR APPLICATION. The deduction is this
  tool's own bookkeeping against its own bands. In particular the CDFI Fund
  does not score geographic breadth at all, so nothing in the headline's
  geographic term has a federal referent; do not treat this pipeline's
  footprint as a finding either way, and do not expand it to recover those
  points.

  WHERE THE SOURCED GUIDANCE IS. `intelligence.RecommendationEngine` is
  untouched. It never reads this composite -- it scores against the CY
  2024-2025 NMTC Program Review Process and cites the section behind every
  item it emits. Reach it with `Application.recommendations()` in Python, or
  open the Win Alignment Scorer page in the Streamlit app.

  IT IS NOT REACHED FROM HERE. Neither `nmtcapp analyze` nor the generated
  application documents run that engine, so neither now carries improvement
  guidance of any kind. That gap is stated rather than shipped quietly:
  reaching the sourced guidance is a separate call you have to make yourself.
============================================================
======================================================================
@@ STATE: empty
======================================================================
{
  "geographic_concentration_label": "highly_concentrated",
  "hhi": 0.0,
  "meets_diversity_minimum": false,
  "metro_pct": 0.0,
  "metro_status_qei": {
    "metro": 0.0,
    "metro_projects": 0,
    "non_metro": 0.0,
    "non_metro_projects": 0,
    "undetermined": 0.0,
    "undetermined_projects": 0
  },
  "metro_undetermined_pct": 0.0,
  "msa_count": 0,
  "msas": [],
  "non_metro_pct": 0.0,
  "state_breakdown": {},
  "states": [],
  "states_count": 0,
  "total_qei": 0.0
}
