pending assignment rental assistance meaning

U.S. Department of the Treasury

Looking for rental assistance.

Renters and landlords can find out what emergency rental assistance covers, how it works, and who’s eligible on the interagency housing portal hosted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

The Department of the Treasury (Treasury) is providing these frequently asked questions (FAQs) as guidance regarding the requirements of the Emergency Rental Assistance program (ERA1) established by section 501 of Division N of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Pub. L. No. 116-260 (Dec. 27, 2020) and the Emergency Rental Assistance program (ERA2) established by section 3201 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, Pub. L. No. 117-2 (March 11, 2021).

These FAQs apply to both ERA1 and ERA2, except where differences are specifically noted. References in these FAQs to “the ERA” apply to both ERA1 and ERA2. These FAQs will be supplemented by additional guidance. Grantees must establish policies and procedures to govern the implementation of their ERA programs consistent with the statutes and these FAQs. To the extent that these FAQs do not provide specific guidance on a particular issue, a grantee should establish its own policy or procedure that is consistent with the statutes and follow it consistently. Additions and changes to FAQs are tracked in a change log .

1. Who is eligible to receive assistance under the Act and how should a grantee document the eligibility of a household?

A grantee may only use the funds provided in the ERA to provide financial assistance and housing stability services to eligible households. To be eligible, a household must be obligated to pay rent on a residential dwelling and the grantee must determine that:

• one or more individuals within the household has qualified for unemployment benefits or experienced a reduction in household income, incurred significant costs, or experienced other financial hardship due, directly or indirectly, to the COVID-19 outbreak;
• one or more individuals within the household can demonstrate a risk of experiencing homelessness or housing instability; and
• the household has a household income at or below 80 percent of area median income.
• one or more individuals within the household has qualified for unemployment benefits or experienced a reduction in household income, incurred significant costs, or experienced other financial hardship during or due, directly or indirectly, to the coronavirus pandemic;
• the household is a low-income family (as such term is defined in section 3(b) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)). 2

While there are some differences in eligibility between ERA1 and ERA2, the eligibility requirements are very similar, and Treasury is seeking to implement ERA2 consistently with ERA1, to the extent possible, to reduce administrative burdens for grantees.

The FAQs below describe the documentation requirements for each of these conditions of eligibility. These requirements provide for various means of documentation so that grantees may extend this emergency assistance to vulnerable populations without imposing undue documentation burdens. As described below, given the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic, grantees may be flexible as to the particular form of documentation they require, including by permitting photocopies or digital photographs of documents, e-mails, or attestations from employers, landlords, caseworkers, or others with knowledge of the household’s circumstances. Treasury strongly encourages grantees to avoid establishing documentation requirements that are likely to be barriers to participation for eligible households, including those with irregular incomes such as those operating small businesses or gig workers whose income is reported on Internal Revenue Service Form 1099. However, grantees must require all applications for assistance to include an attestation from the applicant that all information included is correct and complete.

When documenting eligibility for households to receive housing stability services without any financial assistance, special considerations apply. The ERA1 statute specifies these services may be provided only to “eligible households,” meaning the household must meet all ERA1 eligibility requirements. When housing stability services represent the only ERA1 assistance a household will receive (i.e., no payments using ERA1 funds will be made either to the household, to the landlord, or to a utility provider), grantees are encouraged to rely on a household’s self-attestations for purposes of confirming eligibility. If all eligibility requirements are expressly addressed by the household’s self-attestation, the grantee is not required to collect additional income documentation, past due notices, or other eligibility-verification documents as described above or below. Further, the ERA2 statute does not restrict the provision of housing stability services to “eligible households.” As a result, grantees are not required to document a household’s eligibility if the grantee provides the household with no assistance other than housing stability services paid with ERA2 funds. However, for both ERA1 and ERA2, a grantee must collect any demographic or other information from the household needed to fulfill the grantee’s reporting obligations.

In all cases, grantees must document their policies and procedures for determining a household’s eligibility to include policies and procedures for determining the prioritization of households in compliance with the statute and maintain records of their determinations. Grantees must also have controls in place to ensure compliance with their policies and procedures and prevent fraud. Grantees must specify in their policies and procedures under what circumstances they will accept written attestations from the applicant without further documentation to determine any aspect of eligibility or the amount of assistance, and in such cases, grantees must have in place reasonable validation or fraud-prevention procedures to prevent abuse.

2 As of the date of these FAQs, the definition of “low-income families” in 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b) is “those families whose incomes do not exceed 80 per centum of the median income for the area, as determined by the Secretary [of Housing and Urban Development] with adjustments for smaller and larger families, except that the Secretary may establish income ceilings higher or lower than 80 per centum of the median for the area on the basis of the Secretary’s findings that such variations are necessary because of prevailing levels of construction costs or unusually high or low family incomes.”

Updated on July 6, 2022

Updated on May 7, 2021

2. How should applicants document that a member of the household has qualified for unemployment benefits, experienced a reduction in income, incurred significant costs, or experienced other financial hardship during or due to the COVID-19 outbreak?

A grantee must document that one or more members of the applicant’s household either (i) qualified for unemployment benefits; or (ii) (a) for ERA1, experienced a reduction in household income, incurred significant costs, or experienced other financial hardship due, directly or indirectly, to the COVID-19 outbreak or (b) for ERA2, experienced a reduction in household income, incurred significant costs, or experienced other financial hardship during or due, directly or indirectly, to the coronavirus pandemic. 3 If the grantee is relying on clause (i) for this determination, or if the grantee is relying on clause (ii) in ERA2, the grantee is permitted to rely on either a written attestation signed by the applicant or other relevant documentation regarding the household member’s qualification for unemployment benefits. If the grantee is relying on clause (ii) for this determination in ERA1, the statute requires the grantee to obtain a written attestation signed by the applicant that one or more members of the household meets this condition.

While grantees relying on clause (ii) in ERA1 must show financial hardship “due, directly or indirectly, to” COVID-19, grantees in ERA2 are also permitted to rely on financial hardship “during” the pandemic. It may be difficult for some grantees to establish whether a financial hardship experienced during the pandemic is due to the COVID-19 outbreak. Therefore, Treasury strongly encourages grantees to rely on the self-certification of applicants with regard to whether their financial hardship meets these statutory eligibility requirements. Further, because the standard in ERA2 is broader than the standard in ERA1, any applicant that self-certifies that it meets the standard in ERA1 should be considered to meet the standard for purposes of ERA2.

3 Treasury is interpreting the two different statutory terms (“the COVID-19 outbreak” and “the coronavirus pandemic”) as having the same meaning.

3. How should a grantee determine that an individual within a household is at risk of experiencing homelessness or housing instability?

The statutes establishing ERA1 and ERA2 both require that one or more individuals within the household can demonstrate a risk of experiencing homelessness or housing instability. Such a demonstration may include (i) a past due utility or rent notice or eviction notice, (ii) unsafe or unhealthy living conditions (which may include overcrowding), or (iii) any other evidence of risk, as determined by the grantee. Grantees may establish alternative criteria for determining whether a household satisfies this requirement, and should adopt policies and procedures addressing how they will determine the presence of unsafe or unhealthy living conditions and what evidence of risk to accept in order to support their determination that a household satisfies this requirement. A grantee may rely on an applicant’s self-certification identifying the applicable risk factor or factors, without further documentation, if other documentation is not immediately available.

Updated on August 25, 2021

4. The statutes establishing ERA1 and ERA2 limit eligibility to households based on certain income criteria. How is household income defined for purposes of the ERA? How will income be documented and verified?

Definition of Income : With respect to each household applying for assistance, grantees may choose between using the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) definition of “annual income” in 24 CFR 5.609  and using adjusted gross income as defined for purposes of reporting under Internal Revenue Service Form 1040 series for individual federal annual income tax purposes.

Definition of Area Median Income : For purposes of ERA1, the area median income for a household is the same as the income limits for families published by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(2), available under the heading for “Access Individual Income Limits Areas” . When determining area median income with respect to Tribal members, Tribal governments and TDHEs may rely on the methodology authorized by HUD for the Indian Housing Block Grant Program as it pertains to households residing in an Indian area comprising multiple counties (see HUD Office of Native American Programs, Program Guidance No. 2021-01, June 22, 2021).

Methods for Income Determination : The statute establishing ERA1 provides that grantees may determine income eligibility based on either (i) the household’s total income for calendar year 2020, or (ii) sufficient confirmation of the household’s monthly income at the time of application, as determined by the Secretary of the Treasury (Secretary).

If a grantee in ERA1 uses a household’s monthly income to determine eligibility, the grantee should review the monthly income information provided at the time of application and extrapolate over a 12-month period to determine whether household income exceeds 80 percent of area median income. For example, if the applicant provides income information for two months, the grantee should multiply it by six to determine the annual amount. If a household qualifies based on monthly income, the grantee must redetermine the household income eligibility every three months for the duration of assistance.

For ERA2, if a grantee uses the same income determination methodology that it used in ERA1, it is presumed to be in compliance with relevant program requirements; if a grantee chooses to use a different methodology for ERA2 than it used for ERA1, the methodology should be reasonable and consistent with all applicable ERA2 requirements. In addition, if a household is a single family that the grantee determined met the income requirement for eligibility under ERA1, the grantee may consider the household to be eligible under ERA2, unless the grantee becomes aware of any reason the household does not meet the requirements for ERA2. Finally, if multiple families from the same household receive funding under an ERA2 program, the grantee should ensure that there is no duplication of the assistance provided.

Documentation of Income Determination : Grantees in ERA1 and ERA2 must have a reasonable basis under the circumstances for determining income. A grantee may support its determination with both a written attestation from the applicant as to household income and also documentation available to the applicant, such as paystubs, W-2s or other wage statements, tax filings, bank statements demonstrating regular income, or an attestation from an employer. In appropriate cases, grantees may rely on an attestation from a caseworker or other professional with knowledge of a household’s circumstances to certify that an applicant’s household income qualifies for assistance.

Alternatively, a grantee may rely on a written attestation without further documentation of household income from the applicant under three approaches:

• Self-attestation Alone – Provided that a grantee’s policies and procedures permitted the use of self-attestation alone to establish income as of May 11, 2023, the grantee may rely on a self-attestation of household income without further verification if the applicant confirms in their application or other document that they are unable to provide documentation of their income. If a written attestation without further verification is relied on to document the majority of the applicant’s income, the grantee must reassess the household’s income every three months, by obtaining appropriate documentation or a new self-attestation. Income attestations should specify the monthly or annual income claimed by the household to ensure that the household meets the applicable ERA requirements and to enable appropriate reporting. Under this approach, grantees are encouraged to incorporate self-attestation to demonstrate income eligibility into their application form. Similarly, grantees may rely on self-attestations to demonstrate applicants’ financial hardship and risk of homelessness or housing instability as described above in FAQs 2 and 3 above. Thus, grantees may allow for self-attestation for income eligibility as specified above and are encouraged to allow self-attestation to demonstrate applicants’ financial hardship and risk of homelessness or housing instability as described above in FAQs 2 and 3 .
• Categorical Eligibility – If an applicant’s household income has been verified to be at or below 80 percent of the area median income (for ERA1) or if an applicant’s household has been verified as a low-income family as defined in section 3(b) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)) (for ERA2) in connection with another local, state, or federal government assistance program, grantees are permitted to rely on a determination letter from the government agency that verified the applicant’s household income or status as a low-income family, provided that the determination for such program was made on or after January 1, 2020.
• Fact-specific proxy  –  A grantee may rely on a written attestation from the applicant as to household income if the grantee also uses any reasonable fact-specific proxy for household income, such as reliance on data regarding average incomes in the household’s geographic area. 

Grantees also have discretion to provide waivers or exceptions to this documentation requirement to accommodate disabilities, extenuating circumstances related to the pandemic, or a lack of technological access. In these cases, the grantee is still responsible for making the required determination regarding the applicant’s household income and documenting that determination. Treasury encourages grantees to partner with state unemployment departments or entities that administer federal benefits with income requirements to assist with the verification process, consistent with applicable law.

Updated on May 10, 2023

5. ERA funds may be used for rent and rental arrears. How should a grantee document where an applicant resides and the amount of rent or rental arrears owed?

Grantees must obtain, if available, a current lease, signed by the applicant and the landlord or sublessor, that identifies the unit where the applicant resides and establishes the rental payment amount. If a household does not have a signed lease, documentation of residence may include evidence of paying utilities for the residential unit, an attestation by a landlord who can be identified as the verified owner or management agent of the unit, or other reasonable documentation as determined by the grantee. In the absence of a signed lease, evidence of the amount of a rental payment may include bank statements, check stubs, or other documentation that reasonably establishes a pattern of paying rent, a written attestation by a landlord who can be verified as the legitimate owner or management agent of the unit, or other reasonable documentation as defined by the grantee in its policies and procedures.

Written Attestation : If an applicant is able to provide satisfactory evidence of residence but is unable to present adequate documentation of the amount of the rental obligation, grantees may accept a written attestation from the applicant to support the payment of assistance up to a monthly maximum of 100 percent of the greater of the Fair Market Rent or the Small Area Fair Market Rent for the area in which the applicant resides, as most recently determined by HUD and made available at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/fmr.html . In this case, the applicant must also attest that the household has not received, and does not anticipate receiving, another source of public or private subsidy or assistance for the rental costs that are the subject of the attestation. This limited payment is intended to provide the most vulnerable households the opportunity to gather additional documentation of the amount of the rental obligation or to negotiate with landlords in order to avoid eviction. The assistance described in this paragraph may only be provided for three months at a time, and a grantee must obtain evidence of rent owed consistent with the above after three months in order to provide further assistance to such a household; Treasury expects that in most cases the household would be able to provide documentation of the amount of the rental obligation in any applications for further assistance.

6. ERA funds may be used for “utilities and home energy costs” and “utilities and home energy costs arrears.” How are those terms defined and how should those costs be documented?

Utilities and home energy costs are separately stated charges related to the occupancy of rental property. Accordingly, utilities and home energy costs include separately stated electricity, gas, water and sewer, trash removal, and energy costs, such as fuel oil. Payments to public utilities are permitted.

All payments for utilities and home energy costs should be supported by a bill, invoice, or evidence of payment to the provider of the utility or home energy service.

Utilities and home energy costs that are covered by the landlord will be treated as rent.

7. The statutes establishing ERA1 and ERA2 allow the funds to be used for certain "other expenses," as defined by the Secretary. What are some examples of these "other expenses"?

Under the statute establishing ERA1, funds used for “other expenses” must be related to housing and “incurred due, directly or indirectly, to the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak.” In contrast, the statute establishing ERA2 requires that “other expenses” be “related to housing” but does not require that they be incurred due to the COVID-19 outbreak.

For both ERA1 and ERA2, other expenses related to housing include relocation expenses (including prospective relocation expenses), such as rental security deposits, and rental fees, which may include application or screening fees. It can also include reasonable accrued late fees (if not included in rental or utility arrears), and Internet service provided to the rental unit. Internet service provided to a residence is related to housing and is in many cases a vital service that allows renters to engage in distance learning, telework, and telemedicine and obtain government services. However, given that coverage of Internet would reduce the amount of funds available for rental assistance, grantees should adopt policies that govern in what circumstances that they will determine that covering this cost would be appropriate. In addition, rent or rental bonds, where a tenant posts a bond with a court as a condition to obtaining a hearing, reopening an eviction action, appealing an order of eviction, reinstating a lease, or otherwise avoiding an eviction order, may also be considered an eligible expense.

All payments for housing-related expenses must be supported by documentary evidence such as a bill, invoice, or evidence of payment to the provider of the service. If a housing-related expense is included in a bundle or an invoice that is not itemized (for example, internet services bundled together with telephone and cable television services) and obtaining an itemized invoice would be unduly burdensome, grantees may establish and apply reasonable procedures for determining the portion of the expense that is appropriate to be covered by ERA. As discussed in FAQ 26 , under certain circumstances, the cost of a hotel stay may also be covered as an “other expense.”

Updated on March 16, 2021

8. Must a beneficiary of the rental assistance program have rental arrears?

No. The statutes establishing ERA1 and ERA2 permit the enrollment of households for only prospective benefits. For ERA1, if an applicant has rental arrears, the grantee may not make commitments for prospective rent payments unless it has also provided assistance to reduce the rental arrears; this requirement does not apply to ERA2.

9. May a grantee provide assistance for arrears that have accrued before the date of enactment of the statute?

Yes, but not for arrears accrued before March 13, 2020, the date of the emergency declaration pursuant to section 501(b) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5191(b).

10. Is there a limit on how many months of financial assistance a tenant can receive?

Yes. In ERA1, an eligible household may receive up to twelve (12) months of assistance (plus an additional three (3) months if necessary to ensure housing stability for the household, subject to the availability of funds). The aggregate amount of financial assistance an eligible household may receive under ERA2, when combined with financial assistance under ERA1, must not exceed 18 months.

In ERA1, financial assistance for prospective rent payments is limited to three months based on any application by or on behalf of the household, except that the household may receive assistance for prospective rent payments for additional months (i) subject to the availability of remaining funds currently allocated to the grantee, and (ii) based on a subsequent application for additional assistance. In no case may an eligible household receive more than 18 months of assistance under ERA1 and ERA2, combined.

11. Must a grantee pay for all of a household’s rental or utility arrears?

No. The full payment of arrears is allowed up to the limits established by the statutes, as described in FAQ 10 . A grantee may structure a program to provide less than full coverage of arrears. Grantees are encouraged to consider whether payments of less than the full amount of arrears may result in a significant disincentive for landlord participation in the ERA program. Moreover, consistent with FAQ 32 , grantees should consider methods for avoiding evictions for nonpayment or utility cutoffs in cases where arrearages are paid only in part.

12. What outreach should be made by a grantee to a landlord or utility provider before determining that the landlord or utility provider will not accept direct payment from the grantee?

Treasury expects that in general, rental and utility assistance can be provided most effectively and efficiently when the landlord or utility provider participates in the program. However, in cases where a landlord or utility provider does not participate in the program, the only way to achieve the statutory purpose is to provide assistance directly to the eligible household.

In ERA1, grantees must make reasonable efforts to obtain the cooperation of landlords and utility providers to accept payments from the ERA program. Outreach will be considered complete if (i) a request for participation is sent in writing, by mail, to the landlord or utility provider, and the addressee does not respond to the request within seven calendar days after mailing; (ii) the grantee has made at least three attempts by phone, text, or e-mail over a five calendar-day period to request the landlord or utility provider’s participation; or (iii) a landlord confirms in writing that the landlord does not wish to participate. The final outreach attempt or notice to the landlord must be documented. The cost of contacting landlords would be an eligible administrative cost.

ERA2 does not require grantees to seek the cooperation of the landlord or utility provider before providing assistance directly to the tenant. However, if an ERA2 grantee chooses to seek the cooperation of landlords or utility providers before providing assistance directly to tenants, Treasury strongly encourages the grantee to apply the same ERA1 requirements as described above.

13. Is there a requirement that the eligible household have been in its current rental home when the public health emergency with respect to COVID-19 was declared?

No. There is no requirement regarding the length of tenure in the current unit.

14. What data should a grantee collect regarding households to which it provides rental assistance in order to comply with Treasury’s reporting and recordkeeping requirements?

Treasury provided interim guidance to ERA1 grantees regarding reporting requirements covering the period January through May 2021. The interim guidance required grantees to report limited data elements for the first quarter of 2021, as well as monthly for April to August. A grantee’s failure to submit required reports to Treasury on a timely basis may constitute a violation of the ERA award terms.

Treasury has provided grantees with additional guidance regarding quarterly reporting requirements. Grantees are required to submit reports in accordance with the additional guidance beginning with the first quarter of 2021 for ERA1 and the second quarter of 2021 for ERA2, with the first reports under the additional guidance being due in October 2021.

ERA1 grantees will be required to submit monthly reports from September to December 2021, which will be consistent with monthly reports that were previously required for April to August.

Treasury’s Office of Inspector General may require the collection of additional information in order to fulfill its oversight and monitoring requirements. 6 Grantees under ERA1 must comply with the requirement in section 501(g)(4) of Division N of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, to establish data privacy and security requirements for information they collect; grantees under ERA2 are also encouraged to comply with those requirements. 7

The assistance listing number assigned to the ERA is 21.023.

6 Note that this FAQ is not intended to address all reporting requirements that will apply to the ERA but rather to note for grantees information that they should anticipate needing to collect from households with respect to the provision of rental assistance.

7 Specifically, the statute establishing ERA1 requires grantees to establish data privacy and security requirements for certain information regarding applicants that (i) include appropriate measures to ensure that the privacy of the individuals and households is protected; (ii) provide that the information, including any personally identifiable information, is collected and used only for the purpose of submitting reports to Treasury; and (iii) provide confidentiality protections for data collected about any individuals who are survivors of intimate partner violence, sexual assault, or stalking.

Updated on June 24, 2021

15. The statute establishing ERA1 requires that payments not be duplicative of any other federally funded rental assistance provided to an eligible household. Are tenants of federally subsidized housing, e.g., Low Income Housing Credit, Public Housing, or Indian Housing Block Grant-assisted properties, eligible for the ERA?

An eligible household that occupies a federally subsidized residential or mixed-use property or receives federal rental assistance may receive assistance in the ERA, provided that ERA1 funds are not applied to costs that have been or will be reimbursed under any other federal assistance. Grantees are required to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (which prohibits discrimination on the ground of race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (which prohibits discrimination because of disability in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance), and should evaluate whether their policies and practices regarding assistance to households that occupy federally subsidized residential or mixed-use properties or receive federal rental assistance comply with Title VI and Section 504. In addition, grantees are required to comply with the Fair Housing Act, which prohibits discrimination in housing because of race, color, national origin, sex (including gender identity and sexual orientation), religion, disability, and having, expecting, adopting, or fostering a child under the age of 18. With respect to ERA2, grantees must not refuse to provide assistance to households on the basis that they occupy such properties or receive such assistance, due to the disproportionate effect such a refusal could have on populations intended to receive assistance under the ERA and the potential for such a practice to violate applicable law, including Title VI, Section 504, and the Fair Housing Act.

If an eligible household participates in a HUD-assisted rental program or lives in certain federally assisted properties (e.g., using a Housing Choice Voucher, Public Housing, or Project-Based Rental Assistance) and the tenant rent is adjusted according to changes in income, the renter household may receive ERA1 assistance for the tenant-owed portion of rent or utilities that is not subsidized. Grantees are encouraged to confirm that the participant has already reported any income loss or financial hardship to the Public Housing Authority or property manager and completed an interim re-examination before assistance is provided.

Treasury encourages grantees to enter into partnerships with owners of federally subsidized housing to implement methods of meeting the statutory requirement to prioritize assistance to households with income that does not exceed 50 percent of the area median income for the household, or where one or more individuals within the household are unemployed as of the date of the application for assistance and have not been employed for the 90-day period preceding such date.

Pursuant to section 501(k)(3)(B) of Division N of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, and 2 CFR 200.403, when providing ERA1 assistance, the grantee must review the household’s income and sources of assistance to confirm that the ERA1 assistance does not duplicate any other assistance, including federal, state, or local assistance provided for the same costs.

Grantees may rely on an attestation from the applicant regarding non-duplication with other government assistance in providing assistance to a household. Grantees with overlapping or contiguous jurisdictions are particularly encouraged to coordinate and participate in joint administrative solutions to meet this requirement. The requirement described in this paragraph does not apply to ERA2; however, to maximize program efficacy, Treasury encourages grantees to minimize the provision of duplicative assistance.

16. In ERA1, may a Tribe or Tribally Designated Housing Entity (TDHE) provide assistance to Tribal members living outside Tribal lands?

Yes. Tribal members living outside Tribal lands may receive ERA1 funds from their Tribe or TDHE, provided they are not already receiving ERA assistance from another Tribe or TDHE, state, or local government.

17. In ERA1, may a Tribe or TDHE provide assistance to non-Tribal members living on Tribal lands?

Yes. A Tribe or TDHE may provide ERA1 funds to non-Tribal members living on Tribal lands, provided these individuals are not already receiving ERA assistance from another Tribe or TDHE, state, or local government.

18. May a grantee provide assistance to households for which the grantee is the landlord?

Yes. A grantee may provide assistance to households for which the grantee is the landlord, provided that the grantee complies with the all provisions of the statute establishing ERA1 or ERA2, as applicable, the award terms, and applicable ERA guidance issued by Treasury, and that no preferences (beyond the prioritization described in FAQ 22 ) are given to households that reside in the grantee’s own properties.

19. May a grantee provide assistance to a renter household with respect to utility or energy costs without also covering rent?

Yes. A grantee is not required to provide assistance with respect to rent in order to provide assistance with respect to utility or energy costs. For ERA1, the limitations in section 501(c)(2)(B) of Division N of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, limiting assistance for prospective rent payments do not apply to the provision of utilities or home energy costs.

20. May a grantee provide ERA assistance to homeowners to cover their mortgage, utility, or energy costs?

No. ERA assistance may be provided only to eligible households, which is defined by statute to include only households that are obligated to pay rent on a residential dwelling. However, homeowners may be eligible for assistance under programs using funds under the Homeowner Assistance Fund, which was established by Treasury under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021.

21. May grantees administer ERA programs by using contractors, subrecipients, or intergovernmental cooperation agreements?

Yes. Grantees may use ERA payments to make subawards to other entities, including non-profit organizations and local governments, to administer ERA programs on behalf of the grantees. The subrecipient monitoring and management requirements set forth in 2 CFR 200.331-200.333 will apply to such entities. Grantees may also enter into contracts using ERA payments for goods or services to implement ERA programs. Grantees must comply with the procurement standards set forth in 2 CFR 200.317-200.327 in entering into such contracts. Grantees are encouraged to achieve administrative efficiency and fiduciary responsibility by collaborating with other grantees in joint administrative solutions to deploying ERA resources.

22. ERA requires a prioritization of assistance for households with incomes less than 50 percent of area median income or households with one or more individuals that have not been employed for the 90-day period preceding the date of application. How should grantees prioritize assistance?

Grantees should establish a preference system for assistance that prioritizes assistance to households with incomes less than 50 percent area median income 8 and to households with one or more members that have been unemployed for at least 90 days. Grantees should document the preference system they plan to use and should inform all applicants about available preferences.

Treasury will require grantees to report to Treasury on the methods they have established to implement this prioritization of assistance and to publicly post a description of their prioritization methods, including on their program web page if one exists, by July 15, 2021.

8 For the definition of area median income, see FAQ 4 .

23. ERA1 and ERA2 both allow for up to 10 percent of the funds received by a grantee to be used for certain housing stability services. What are some examples of these services?

ERA1 and ERA2 have different requirements for housing stability services.

Under ERA1, these funds may be used to provide eligible households with case management and other services related to the COVID-19 outbreak, as defined by the Secretary, intended to help keep households stably housed.

Under ERA2, these services do not have to be related to the COVID-19 outbreak and the ERA2 statute does not restrict the provision of housing stability services to “eligible households.

For purposes of ERA1 and ERA2, housing stability services include those that enable households to maintain or obtain housing. Such services may include, among other things, eviction prevention and eviction diversion programs; mediation between landlords and tenants; housing counseling; fair housing counseling; housing navigators or promotoras that help households access ERA programs or find housing; case management related to housing stability; housing-related services for survivors of domestic abuse or human trafficking; legal services or attorney’s fees related to eviction proceedings and maintaining housing stability; and specialized services for individuals with disabilities or seniors that support their ability to access or maintain housing. Grantees using ERA funds for housing stability services must maintain records regarding such services and the amount of funds provided to them.

24. Are grantees required to remit interest earned on ERA payments made by Treasury?

No. ERA payments made by Treasury to states, territories, and the District of Columbia are not subject to the requirement of the Cash Management Improvement Act and Treasury’s implementing regulations at 31 CFR part 205 to remit interest to Treasury. ERA payments made by Treasury to local governments, Tribes, and TDHEs are not subject to the requirement of 2 CFR 200.305(b)(8)-(9) to maintain balances in an interest-bearing account and remit payments to Treasury.

25. When may Treasury recoup ERA funds from a grantee?

Treasury may recoup ERA funds from a grantee if the grantee does not comply with the applicable limitations on the use of those funds.

26. May rental assistance be provided to temporarily displaced households living in hotels or motels?

Yes. The cost of a hotel or motel room occupied by an eligible household may be covered using ERA assistance within the category of certain “other expenses related to housing” (as described in FAQ 7 ) provided that:

• the household has been temporarily or permanently displaced from its primary residence or does not have a permanent residence elsewhere;
• the total months of assistance provided to the household do not exceed the applicable time limit described in FAQ 10 ; and
• documentation of the hotel or motel stay is provided and the other applicable requirements provided in the statute and these FAQs are met.

The cost of the hotel or motel stay would not include expenses incidental to the charge for the room.

Grantees covering the cost of such stays must develop policies and procedures detailing under what circumstances they would provide assistance to cover such stays. In doing so, grantees should consider the cost effectiveness of offering assistance for this purpose as compared to other uses. If a household is eligible for an existing program with narrower eligibility criteria that can provide similar assistance for hotel or motel stays, such as the HUD Emergency Solutions Grant program or FEMA Public Assistance, grantees should utilize such programs prior to providing similar assistance under the ERA program.

27. May a renter subject to a "rent-to-own" agreement with a landlord be eligible for ERA assistance?

A grantee may provide financial assistance to households that are renting their residence under a “rent-to-own” agreement, under which the renter has the option (or obligation) to purchase the property at the end of the lease term, provided that a member of his or her household:

• is not a signor or co-signor to the mortgage on the property;
• does not hold the deed or title to the property; and
• has not exercised the option to purchase.

Homeowners may be eligible for assistance under programs using funds under the Homeowner Assistance Fund, which was established by Treasury under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021.

28. Under what circumstances may households living in manufactured housing (mobile homes) receive assistance?

Rental payments for either the manufactured home or the parcel of land the manufactured home occupies are eligible for financial assistance under ERA programs. Households renting manufactured housing or the parcel of land the manufactured home occupies may also receive assistance for utilities and other expenses related to housing, as detailed in FAQ 7 above. This principle also applies to mooring fees for water-based dwellings (houseboats).

29. What are the applicable limitations on administrative expenses?

Under ERA1, not more than 10 percent of the amount paid to a grantee may be used for administrative costs attributable to providing financial assistance and housing stability services to eligible households. Under ERA2, not more than 15 percent of the amount paid to a grantee may be used for administrative costs attributable to providing financial assistance, housing stability services, and other affordable rental housing and eviction prevention activities.

The revised award term for ERA1 issued by Treasury permits recipients to use funds provided to cover both direct and indirect costs. A grantee may permit a subrecipient to incur more than 10 or 15 percent, as applicable, of the amount of the subaward issued to that subrecipient as long as the total of all administrative costs incurred by the grantee and all subrecipients, whether as direct or indirect costs, does not exceed 10 or 15 percent, as applicable, of the total amount of the award provided to the grantee from Treasury.

Further, the revised award term for ERA1 no longer requires grantees to deduct administrative costs charged to the award from the amount available for housing stability services. Rather, any direct and indirect administrative costs in ERA1 or ERA2 must be allocated by the grantee to either the provision of financial assistance or the provision of housing stability services. As required by the applicable statutes, not more than 10 percent of funds received by a grantee may be used to provide eligible households with housing stability services (discussed in FAQ 23 . To the extent administrative costs are not readily allocable to one or the other of these categories, the grantee may assume an allocation of the relevant costs of 90 percent to financial assistance and 10 percent to housing stability services.

Grantees may apply their negotiated indirect cost rate to the award, but only to the extent that the total of the amount charged pursuant to that rate and the amount of direct costs charged to the award does not exceed 10 percent of the amount of the award.

Updated on March 26, 2021

30. Should grantees provide tenants the option to apply directly for ERA assistance, rather than only accepting applications for assistance from landlords and owners of dwellings?

For ERA1, Treasury strongly encourages grantees to provide an option for tenants to apply directly for funding, rather than only accepting applications for assistance from landlords and owners of dwellings. For ERA2, grantees are required to allow tenants to apply directly for assistance, even if the landlord or owner chooses not to participate, consistent with the statutory requirement for the funds to be used to provide financial assistance to eligible households.

See FAQ 12 for additional information on grantees providing assistance to landlords and tenants.

Added on May 7, 2021

31. How should grantees ensure that recipients use ERA funds only for permissible purposes?

Grantees should require recipients of funds under ERA programs, including tenants and landlords, to commit in writing to use ERA assistance only for the intended purpose before issuing a payment. Grantees are not required to obtain documentation evidencing the use of ERA program funds by tenants and landlords. Grantees are expected to apply reasonable fraud- prevention procedures and to investigate and address potential instances of fraud or the misuse of funds that they become aware of.

There may be instances when a landlord refuses to accept a payment from a tenant who has received assistance directly from a grantee for the purpose of paying the landlord. In these cases, the grantee may allow the tenant to use the assistance for other eligible costs in accordance with the terms of the grantee’s ERA programs.

32. Can grantees prohibit landlords from pursuing eviction for nonpayment of rent for some period after receiving ERA assistance?

With respect to landlords that receive funds under an ERA program for prospective rent or for rental arrearages, the grantee must prohibit the landlord from evicting the tenant for nonpayment of rent with respect to the period covered by the assistance.

In addition, with respect to landlords that receive funds for rental arrears, to promote the purpose of the program the grantee is encouraged to prohibit the landlord from evicting the tenant for nonpayment of rent for some period of time, consistent with applicable law.

In all cases, Treasury strongly encourages grantees to require landlords that receive funds under the ERA, as a condition of receiving the funds, not to evict tenants for nonpayment of rent for 30 to 90 days longer than the period covered by the rental assistance.

33. How can grantees work with other grantees to make their ERA programs consistent?

Treasury encourages grantees with overlapping or contiguous jurisdictions to collaborate to develop consistent or complementary terms of their ERA programs and to coordinate in their communications with the public, to minimize potential confusion among tenants and landlords regarding assistance. Treasury also encourages grantees to reduce burdens for entities seeking assistance from multiple grantees across different jurisdictions, including utility providers and landlords with properties in multiple jurisdictions.

34. Should a grantee require that a landlord initiate an eviction proceeding in order to apply for assistance under an ERA program?

35. how can era assistance be used to support an eligible household moving to a new home.

ERA funds may be used to provide assistance to eligible households to cover prospective relocation assistance, rent, and utility or home energy costs, including after an eviction. Treasury encourages grantees to provide prospective support to help ensure housing stability. See FAQ 7 (regarding qualifying relocation expenses) and FAQ 10 (regarding time limits on assistance).

Before moving into a new residence, a tenant may not yet have a rental obligation, as required by the statutes establishing ERA1 and ERA2. In those cases, Treasury encourages grantees to provide otherwise eligible households with an official document specifying the amount of financial assistance under ERA programs that the grantee will pay a landlord on behalf of the household (such as for a security deposit or rent) if the landlord and the household enter into a qualifying lease of at least six months. Such documentation may expire after a certain period, such as 60 to 120 days after the issuance date. Treasury encourages grantees to work with providers of housing stability services to help these households identify housing that meets their needs. For purposes of reporting to Treasury, grantees may consider these commitments to be an obligation of funding until their expiration.

36. What steps can ERA grantees take to prevent evictions for nonpayment of rent?

Treasury strongly encourages grantees to develop partnerships with courts in their jurisdiction that adjudicate evictions for nonpayment of rent to help prevent evictions and develop eviction diversion programs. For example, grantees should consider: (1) providing information to judges, magistrates, court clerks, and other relevant court officials about the availability of assistance under ERA programs and housing stability services; (2) working with eviction courts to provide information about assistance under ERA programs to tenants and landlords as early in the adjudication process as possible; and (3) engaging providers of legal services and other housing stability services to assist households against which an eviction action for nonpayment of rent has been filed.

Added on June 24, 2021

37. How can grantees promote access to assistance for all eligible households?

Grantees should address barriers that potentially eligible households may experience in accessing ERA programs, including by providing program documents in multiple languages, by enabling persons with disabilities to access the programs, and by conducting targeted outreach to populations with disproportionately high levels of unemployment or housing instability or that are low income.

Grantees should also provide, either directly or through partner organizations, culturally and linguistically relevant outreach and housing stability services to ensure access to assistance for all eligible households.

In accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) ERA grantees must ensure they provide meaningful access to their limited-English-proficiency (LEP) applicants and beneficiaries of their federally assisted programs, services, and activities. Denial of an LEP person’s access to federally assisted programs, services, and activities is a form of national-origin discrimination prohibited under Title VI and Treasury’s Title VI implementing regulations at 31 CFR Part 22. Meaningful access for an LEP person may entail providing language assistance services, including oral interpretation and written translation where necessary, to ensure effective communication regarding the ERA grantee’s programs, services, and activities. For more information regarding reasonable steps to provide meaningful access for LEP persons, please go to https://www.lep.gov and the ERA programs’ Promising Practices. See also Treasury’s published LEP guidance at 70 FR 6067 (Feb. 4, 2005).

38. May grantees obtain information in bulk from utility providers and landlords with multiple units regarding the eligibility of multiple tenants, or bundle assistance payments for the benefit of multiple tenants in a single payment to a utility provider or landlord?

Data-sharing agreements between grantees and utility providers or landlords with multiple units may reduce administrative burdens and enhance program integrity by providing information to validate tenant-provided information. Therefore, grantees may establish prudent information sharing arrangements with utility providers and landlords for determining household eligibility. Grantees may also establish reasonable procedures for combining the assistance provided for multiple households into a single “bulk” payment made to a utility or landlord. Grantees should ensure that any such arrangements (1) comply with applicable privacy requirements; (2) include appropriate safeguards to ensure payments are made only for eligible households; and (3) are documented in records satisfying the grantee’s reporting requirements, including, for example, the amount of assistance paid for each household.”

In addition, to speed the delivery of assistance, grantees may adopt policies and procedures enabling landlords and utility providers to receive assistance based on reasonable estimates of arrears owed by multiple households, before their application and documentation requirements are satisfied. Specifically, a grantee may provide for payments based on such estimates if (1) the landlord or utility provider certifies that its estimate is reasonable based on information available to it at the time, (2) the grantee requires the landlord or utility provider to collect all required documentation from recipient households  within six months, and (3) the landlord or utility provider agrees in writing to return to the grantee any assistance the landlord or utility provider receives that the household was ineligible for or for which the required documentation is not received within six months. Grantees are encouraged to limit such payments to a portion of the landlord’s or utility provider’s estimate (for example, 50 or 75 percent of the estimated amount) to limit the risk of providing funds that are used for an ineligible purpose and subsequently must be returned. If an estimated payment is subsequently found to have been used for an ineligible household or an ineligible expense, or if the required documentation is not timely submitted, the payment will be considered an ineligible use of ERA funds by the grantee.

In the case of a bulk utility payment made in accordance with this FAQ, a grantee may provide a utility provider up to nine months from the time the bulk payment was made to satisfy all documentation requirements if a moratorium preventing the shut-off of utilities was in effect in the grantee’s jurisdiction for at least one of the six months following the payment.

39. If ERA program funds are used for a security deposit for a lease, to whom should the landlord return the security deposit at the end of the lease?

Grantees should establish a policy with regard to the payment and disposition of security deposits, which should include a reasonable limit on the amount of a security deposit to be paid using ERA program funds. The amount of a security deposit should not exceed one month’s rent, except in cases where a higher amount is reasonable and customary in the local housing market. The treatment of security deposits is generally subject to applicable law and the rental agreement. In order to mitigate risks associated with the use of ERA program funds for security deposits, grantees should establish a minimum rental period, not less than four months, before a tenant is entitled to receive a returned security deposit that was paid for with ERA funds. To the extent that the security deposit is not returned to the tenant, it should be returned to the grantee.

40. May ERA assistance be used for rental or utility arrears after the tenant no longer resides in the unit?

In order to remove barriers a household may face in accessing new housing, a grantee may, at the tenant’s request, provide assistance for rental or utility arrears after an otherwise eligible tenant has vacated a unit. In addition to not engaging in further collection efforts regarding the arrears that are paid or related fees or expenses, as a condition to receiving payment, Treasury strongly encourages grantees to require the landlord or utility provider to agree not to pursue any further collection efforts against the household and ensure that any reports to credit agencies will confirm the matter’s resolution. In addition, grantees may consider requiring the landlord or utility provider to notify the tenant that payment has been received and that there will be no further collection efforts.

Added on August 25, 2021

41. May a grantee provide additional payments to landlords that enter into leases with eligible households experiencing circumstances that make it more difficult to secure rental housing?

Grantees may use ERA funds to pay for an additional rental payment required by a landlord as a condition to entering into a lease with a “hard-to-house” household that would not qualify under the landlord’s previously established, non-discriminatory, and lawful screening or occupancy policies. “Hard-to-house” applicants are those who, during the preceding 12 months, suffered an eviction; aged out of foster care or similar arrangements; were convicted of a criminal offense or released from incarceration; or experienced homelessness. The additional payment must be documented in the written lease agreement as additional rent and may not, in the aggregate, exceed one month’s rent (excluding the additional payment). Grantees should establish reasonable safeguards to ensure these additional rental payments do not incentivize landlords to adopt more stringent leasing policies and are otherwise compliant with any rent or security deposit restrictions imposed by state or local law.

42. May a grantee provide ERA funds to another entity for the purpose of making payments more rapidly?

To speed the delivery of assistance, grantees may enter into a written agreement with a nonprofit organization to establish a payment fund for the sole purpose of delivering assistance using ERA funds while a household’s application remains in process. A grantee may use such a process if:

• The process is reserved for situations in which an expedited payment could reasonably be viewed as necessary to prevent an eviction or loss of utility services that precludes employing the grantee’s standard application and payment procedures on a timely basis.
• The nonprofit organization has the requisite financial capacity to manage the ERA funds, such as being a certified community development financial institution.
• The nonprofit organization deposits and maintains the ERA funds in a separate account that is not commingled with other funds.
• The grantee receives all required application and eligibility documentation within six months.
• The nonprofit organization agrees in writing to return to the grantee any assistance that the household was ineligible for or for which the required documentation is not received within six months.
• Any funds not used by the nonprofit organization are ultimately returned to the grantee.

If a payment made by the nonprofit organization is subsequently found to have been used for an ineligible household or an ineligible expense, or if the required application and eligibility documentation are not timely submitted, the payment will be considered an ineligible use of ERA funds by the grantee. Any administrative expenses attributable to a payment fund should be considered in accordance with FAQ 29 .

43. Are landlords offered ERA payments subject to source-of-income protection laws?

A landlord’s failure to accept payments made using ERA funding might violate state or local source-of-income protection laws, depending on the jurisdiction’s laws.

Added on July 6, 2022  

44. May ERA grantees impose additional eligibility criteria, including employment or job-training requirements, as a condition of providing ERA assistance to households?

The statutes that authorize the ERA1 and ERA2 programs provide specific criteria for establishing a household’s eligibility. These eligibility requirements include financial hardship, risk of homelessness or housing instability, qualifying income, and an obligation to pay rent. While the statutes authorizing the ERA programs and Treasury’s policy guidance afford grantees discretion in structuring their programs, grantees do not have the authority to augment the ERA eligibility requirements by conditioning assistance on a tenant’s employment status, compliance with work requirements, or acceptance of employment counseling, job-training, or other employment services. To the extent that grantees would impose other eligibility criteria or would require tenants to be employed, accept employment services, or comply with work requirements, such additional requirements are not permissible.

45. If two grantees learn that they both provided rental or utility assistance to a household intended to cover the same months’ expenses, is one grantee required to recover its assistance payments from the household, landlord, or utility provider?

Grantees with overlapping or contiguous jurisdictions are encouraged coordinate to avoid duplicating assistance. However, there may be cases in which a grantee discovers that a household has received ERA assistance from multiple grantees intended to cover the same period of rent, utilities, rental arrears, or utility arrears. In such cases, the grantee may decline to recover its payment and instead recharacterize it as assistance covering a different period of eligible rental or utility expenses, if:

• the grantee documents, in accordance with ERA records requirements, which expenses its funds ultimately covered; and
• the grantee confirms that the household was eligible for all assistance it received, including ensuring that the total number of months of financial assistance received by the household does not exceed statutory limits, as described in FAQ 10.  

For example, if a state grantee and a local grantee both provided assistance to the same household intended to cover rental arrears arising from January and February, either the state grantee or the local grantee could recharacterize its assistance as covering rental arrears arising from March and April, if such grantee documents the rental arrears ultimately covered by its payment and confirms that the household was eligible for assistance with respect to all four months of arrears.

Added on July 6, 2022

46. What are eligible “other affordable rental housing and eviction prevention purposes” under the statute establishing ERA2?

The statute establishing ERA2 provides that a grantee may use any of its ERA2 funds that are unobligated on October 1, 2022, for “affordable rental housing and eviction prevention purposes, as defined by the Secretary, serving very low-income families (as such term is defined in section 3(b) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b))).” 1 However, in accordance with the ERA2 statute, prior to obligating any funds for such purposes, the grantee must have obligated at least 75 percent of the total ERA2 funds allocated to it for financial assistance to eligible households, eligible costs for housing stability services, and eligible administrative costs. These requirements are described below. 2

Eligible Uses of ERA2 Funds

Eligible Affordable Rental Housing Purposes. Eligible “affordable rental housing purposes” are expenses 3 for:

• the construction, rehabilitation, or preservation of affordable rental housing projects serving very low-income families;
• the acquisition of real property for the purpose of constructing, rehabilitating, or preserving affordable rental housing projects serving very low-income families;
• predevelopment activities that enable the construction, rehabilitation, or preservation of affordable rental housing projects serving very low-income families, including architectural and engineering design, planning, permitting, surveys, appraisals, and environmental review associated with an eligible project; and
• the operation of affordable rental housing projects serving very low-income families that were constructed, rehabilitated, or preserved using ERA2 funds. 4

For purposes of the definition above, affordable rental housing projects serve very low-income families only if:

• the household income of occupants of units funded by ERA2 funds is limited to the maximum income applicable to very low-income families, as such term is defined in section 3(b) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)); and
• such income limitation is imposed through a covenant, land use restriction agreement (LURA), or other enforceable legal requirement for a period of at least 20 years.

In addition, to be considered an affordable rental housing purpose serving very low-income families, an affordable rental housing project funded, in whole or in part, with ERA2 funds must conform to and meet the program regulations and other requirements of one or more of the types of assistance listed below. In other words, uses of ERA2 funds for an affordable rental housing purpose must be aligned with at least one of the following programs and must meet the requirements of that program along with the other conditions specifically set forth in this FAQ: 5

• Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (Treasury);
• HOME Investment Partnerships Program (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD));
• HOME-ARP Program (HUD);
• Housing Trust Fund Program (HUD);
• Public Housing Capital Fund (HUD);
• Indian Housing Block Grant Program (HUD);
• Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly (HUD);
• Section 811 Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities (HUD);
• Farm Labor Housing Direct Loans and Grants (U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA));
• Multifamily Preservation and Revitalization Program (USDA).

Eligible Eviction Prevention Purposes. Eligible “eviction prevention purposes” are defined in the same manner as housing stability services under FAQ 23; however, services provided with funds made available for eviction prevention purposes must serve very low-income families.

Cost Allocation . Grantees may use ERA2 funds as part of the financing for a mixed-income housing project if the total financing made up of ERA2 award funds does not exceed the total development costs attributable to affordable rental housing units serving very low-income families. 6 For example, if 25 percent of a project’s units will be reserved for very low-income families and 20 percent of the total costs of all housing units in the project are attributable to such reserved units, then ERA2 funds may be used to pay for up to 20 percent of the total development costs.

Form of Provision of Funds and Time of Obligation .  Grantees that use ERA2 funds for an eligible affordable rental housing purpose may provide such funds in the form of loans (including no-interest loans and deferred-payment loans), interest subsidies, grants, or other financial arrangements.  ERA2 funds may not be used to establish, provide financial support to, or invest in revolving loan funds or other structured funds.

Under the ERA2 statute, grantees may obligate funds only until September 30, 2025, and all obligations must be liquidated by the closeout date of the award in accordance with the Uniform Guidance, i.e., no later than 120 calendar days after September 30, 2025. 7 ERA2 funds are considered to be obligated upon the grantee’s approval 8 of the loan, interest subsidy, grant, or other financial arrangement, and such obligations are considered to be liquidated for the purpose of award closeout upon the grantee’s disbursement of the ERA2 funds.  Any proceeds or income a grantee receives after September 30, 2025, from loans, interest subsidies, or other similar financial arrangements made with ERA2 funds must be used for affordable rental housing purposes or eviction prevention purposes in accordance with this FAQ.

Obligation of 75 Percent of Allocated Funds

Treasury will calculate the 75 percent obligation threshold as (i) the total amount of ERA2 funds the grantee has obligated 9 for financial assistance to eligible households, eligible costs for housing stability services, and eligible administrative costs, divided by (ii) the grantee’s total ERA2 allocation, including any amounts reallocated to and excluding any amounts recaptured from the grantee.  For example, if a grantee voluntarily reallocated 50 percent of its total initial ERA2 allocation, and did not experience any other reallocation, it must obligate 75 percent of its post-reallocation amount (or 37.5 percent of its initial ERA2 allocation) to use its remaining ERA2 funds for eligible affordable rental housing and eviction prevention purposes.  If a grantee reaches the 75 percent threshold after October 1, 2022, it may begin using ERA2 funds for eligible affordable rental housing and eviction prevention purposes once it reaches the threshold.

Administrative Costs Attributable to Affordable Rental Housing and Eviction Prevention Purposes

The statute establishing ERA2 permits each grantee to use up to 15 percent of the total amount of ERA2 funds paid to it for eligible administrative costs.  Consistent with FAQ 29, any direct and indirect administrative costs must be allocated by the grantee to the provision of financial assistance, housing stability services, or other affordable rental housing and eviction prevention purposes.  Thus, a grantee’s administrative costs with respect to affordable rental housing and eviction prevention purposes may be paid with ERA2 funds only in an amount up to 15 percent of the grantee’s expenditures for these purposes.

1  As of the date of this FAQ, the definition of “very low-income families” in 42 U.S.C. 1437a(b) is “low-income families whose incomes do not exceed 50 per centum of the median family income for the area, as determined by the Secretary [of Housing and Urban Development] with adjustments for smaller and larger families, except that the Secretary may establish income ceilings higher or lower than 50 per centum of the median for the area on the basis of the Secretary’s findings that such variations are necessary because of unusually high or low family incomes.”  All references to “very low-income families” in this FAQ incorporate this definition.  The Department of Housing and Urban Development annually updates its calculations relevant to the definition of “very low-income families” at https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html .

2 Treasury’s reporting guidance will address the specific reporting and certification requirements associated with the uses of ERA2 funds described in this FAQ.

3 ERA2 award funds used for affordable rental housing and eviction prevention purposes will be subject to the applicable requirements set forth in the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), 2 CFR Part 200. Specifically, ERA2 grantees are required to comply with the applicable procurement standards set forth in 2 CFR §§ 200.317 through 200.327 when procuring goods and services for these eligible purposes, and the allowability of expenses related to affordable rental housing and eviction prevention purposes will be subject to the Cost Principles set forth in 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E.

4 Expenses for transitional housing (i.e., any dwelling that is intended to provide temporary housing to formerly homeless persons for a period up to 24 months) or emergency shelters are not considered “affordable rental housing projects” and therefore are not eligible “affordable rental housing purposes.”

5 For purposes of determining whether any expenses constitute affordable rental housing purposes under ERA2, in the event of a direct conflict between ERA2 requirements and requirements of a listed program to which a grantee will conform its affordable rental housing project, ERA2 requirements will prevail with respect to any portion of the project funded by ERA2 funds.  A direct conflict between program requirements occurs only when it is impossible to comply with the requirements of ERA2 and of the other program.  In contrast, if two sets of income or affordability-period requirements apply to the same units, there is no direct conflict; grantees must satisfy both by applying the more stringent requirements.

6  The specific units within a mixed-income housing project subject to the applicable income limitation may vary over time depending on operational needs, provided the units subject to the income limitation at any point do not materially differ from units funded by ERA2 funds.

7  See 2 CFR § 200.344.

8  Such approval occurs at the time of the execution of a written agreement or other legal instrument providing for the disbursement of ERA2 funds.

9  To determine whether a grantee has obligated ERA2 funds, Treasury will rely on the criteria set forth in section II.A of the ERA1 Reallocation Guidance originally published on October 4, 2021 and updated on March 30, 2022, available at https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Updated-ERA1-Reallocation-Guidance%203-30-%202022.pdf .

Updated on March 5, 2024

Added on July 27, 2022

• Skip to Nav
• Skip to Main
• Skip to Footer

COVID Rent Relief: Already Applied and Still Waiting? Here's What You (and Your Landlord) Can Do Now

Please try again

Leer en español

At the very last minute, California extended eviction protections for people who applied for the state's COVID-19 Rent Relief program by the deadline of March 31.

This means that if you're a tenant who applied for the program to receive help with your back rent — either in partnership with your landlord, or by yourself — the fact that you've applied will technically continue to protect you against eviction through June 30.

But more than half a million people have applied to the state’s emergency rent relief program — called  Housing Is Key — since it launched in March 2021, and fewer than half of those applicants have received payments , according to the state’s own dashboard.

So if you're one of those who've applied and are still waiting on your money, what can you practically do during this time? And what can your landlord do while you're waiting for news on your application? Read on.

Does this extension of eviction protections mean there's a statewide eviction moratorium again?

No. California's statewide moratorium on evictions expired last fall, on Sept. 30, 2021.

But the state's COVID Rent Relief program has afforded its own kind of eviction protections, which started on Oct. 1, 2021. That's because, since that date, any landlord wanting to evict a tenant for failing to pay rent as a result of COVID hardship needs to first apply for rental relief before continuing with an eviction lawsuit. And renters affected by COVID hardship can prevent an eviction from moving forward if they show they've applied for the rent relief program as a defense in court.

These protections would have expired on March 31 , but now have been extended through June 30 by California's new legislation — although that's only for people who applied for the rent relief program by March 31.

Several cities and counties across the state had their own rent-related eviction moratoriums that stayed in place after the state moratorium expired. See if your Bay Area county still has an eviction moratorium.

I applied for rent relief before March 31. Am I guaranteed to get the money?

The state says that " all eligible applications received on or before March 31, 2022, for rent or utilities owed between April 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022, will be paid. "

But, although the Department of Housing and Community Development maintains that their goal is to turn applications around in 30 days, the average wait time is much longer — four months, on average , according to a recent report by the National Equity Atlas.

The state says as long as you've submitted your application by March 31, you'll still be able to access your application after that date "to check the status, respond to tasks, and provide additional information requested by your case manager."

If I applied by the deadline, is there any chance my landlord could still try to evict me?

When the law is working as it should, if you filled out an application and hit “submit” on or before March 31, you should be protected from eviction under this law. But, that doesn’t mean the law always works as it should.

Some tenant attorneys and advocates have reported clients who submitted an application that was still under review but received an eviction notice anyway. Usually, this is because the landlord either was not aware the tenant had applied or was falsely claiming their tenant hadn't filed all the required documentation for the application.

In late March, the state attorney general’s office sent warning letters to 91 law firms representing landlords across the state, reminding them that filing false declarations is against the law.

“Filing false averments in court violates multiple state laws,” wrote Deputy Attorney General Hunter Landerholm, “as does maintaining such a case after learning that the declaration used to initiate it is false.”

The letter encouraged those law firms to “review” the eviction cases on file to “ensure that they comply with the law.”

Evictions are still happening, said Madeline Howard, senior attorney at the Western Center on Law and Poverty, “because the protections are imperfect. And it's really hard to enforce them without an attorney.”

Typically, a lawyer can help a tenant combat these claims. So, if you applied for rent relief on or before March 31 and the application is still pending, but you’re getting an eviction notice, contact a lawyer. Find a legal aid office near you.

If your landlord is asking for proof that you've applied to the rent relief program, Howard advises that you download your application document on the Housing Is Key website, and send that to them, to “make it very clear that you have applied.”

A key thing to remember: For most tenants in California, starting April 1, landlords will still be able to take their tenants to court and start eviction proceedings over missed rent. That's because this new state legislation means a landlord can't evict you for not paying rent you owed before March 31 — but it doesn't protect you from eviction for not paying rent after that date.

My city lets me apply for rent relief after March 31. Could I be evicted while waiting for funds?

If you apply for rent relief, the funds will come either from the state or your own county, depending on where you live. You also can be eligible for both. When you  applied through the state's COVID rent relief portal , you would have been directed to the right place to apply depending on your location, whether it's state assistance or local assistance.

The state's extension of eviction protections only applies to tenants who applied for rent relief on or before March 31. That means that if you live in a jurisdiction where your city or county is administering the rent relief program (and it’s not going through the state’s Housing Is Key program), and they allow you to submit an application for rent relief after April 1, you could still be evicted even if you’re waiting on rent relief from your city or county.

What if my landlord is threatening to evict me?

Howard said if you do get an eviction notice, "Please contact a legal aid office as soon as you can, because those cases move very, very quickly." Find a legal aid office near you.

Remember, since the official state eviction moratorium expired Sept. 30, 2021, renters affected by COVID hardship could prevent an eviction from moving forward if they presented their pending relief application as a defense in court — and this new extension of eviction protections means that'll now stay true through June 30.

"One of the problems with the statewide protections is they're very complicated and it's really hard for a tenant to use the state protections if they don't have an attorney," Howard said. "And most tenants who face eviction have to go to court without an attorney."

According to the ACLU, 10% of tenants have an attorney in court, compared with 90% of landlords .

Howard's colleague Lorraine López, senior attorney with the Western Center on Law and Poverty, recommends that you also look up community organizations and nonprofit legal services that assist tenants and access their information sheets, workshops and clinics to educate you about your rights in the event your landlord issues you with a legal notice. Find a legal aid office near you .

It's also critical that you don’t move out , said López. "We call this 'self-eviction,'" she explains, and said while "many tenants think that a notice is enough to evict them, in California a landlord needs to get a court order to remove you from your home."

So until a court has issued an order telling you to move? Don’t leave.

"In some cities and counties, a landlord can face not only criminal penalties if they forcibly remove you from your home without a court order, but also monetary penalties if the tenant files a lawsuit. The moment you leave, you lose many valuable protections and you may even end up with a judgment against you," said López.

If it's taking so long to process the claims, what happens if I'm still waiting by June 30?

If your application is still pending after this extension expires, yes: You could be evicted.

And it’s likely that many — tens of thousands of people — will find themselves in this category. Howard noted that an analysis of the rent relief program by the research group PolicyLink shows that at the current rate applications are being approved, some applicants will still be waiting for a decision at Thanksgiving .

That said, there are some things lawyers can do to help. If you find yourself in that situation — with a pending rent relief application and an eviction notice — you should contact a lawyer. Find a legal aid office near you .

Is there anything I can do to speed up my application?

"If you have an application in already and you're just waiting, I would suggest reaching out to HCD [the Housing and Community Development Department]," Howard said. She recommends calling the help line at (833) 430-2122.

If you’ve gotten a "pay or quit" eviction notice from your landlord, Howard recommends telling HCD you need them to expedite your application. The department operates off a prioritization list, and your application could be considered sooner if you’re in an emergency situation.

My county is rolling out its own eviction protections on April 1. Do they overrule the state's laws?

This is where things get really complicated.

If your local jurisdiction enacted eviction protections before Aug. 19, 2020, those protections are grandfathered in and will remain in place. This includes those passed in Alameda County, Oakland and the city of Los Angeles.

If your local jurisdiction enacted stronger local protections after that date, you are not grandfathered in. That means residents in San Francisco and Los Angeles County who would have been protected under new local regulations will no longer be protected.

If this strikes you as counterintuitive, you're not alone. Howard questions the "fundamental mismatch" in how California is effectively now "blocking these local protections that would have helped people for a time period that is not covered at all or addressed at all by the state law."

I missed the rent relief application deadline of March 31. Is there anything I can do?

It depends.

If you have not submitted an application to Housing Is Key, you will not be able to submit a new one after March 31.

If you’ve already submitted a Housing Is Key application, it’s possible the state may allow you to reapply for additional funds, including for prospective months.

If you live in a jurisdiction with its own rent relief program (like Sacramento, Oakland and Fresno), your local program may continue accepting applications beyond March 31.

That said, there may also be local resources that can help you with your rent. If you live in the Bay Area, call 311 to find out more.

What other financial assistance is available?

The CalFresh food program is California's version of the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which provides food benefits (also known as food stamps) to lower-income families. New CalFresh applicants can start their application online in English, Spanish or Chinese using the state’s official site, or by calling (877) 847-3663. You also can apply in person at your county’s designated CalFresh office.

The state says that if you receive assistance from its COVID-19 Rent Relief program, this won't disqualify you from any other state benefit assistance programs like CalFresh .

A version of this story was originally published on March 21, 2022. This story includes reporting from The Associated Press.

To learn more about how we use your information, please read our privacy policy.

• March 3, 2022: State of Waiting: California’s Rental Assistance Program One Month Before Expiration

State of Waiting: California’s Rental Assistance Program One Month Before Expiration

March 3, 2022 [updated march 7, 2022], our analysis of program data reveals that fewer than one in six applicants have received assistance thus far, while hundreds of thousands are still waiting, signaling the urgent need for policy fixes to deliver on the program’s promise and keep renters in their homes..

By Sarah Treuhaft, Alex Ramiller, Selena Tan, and Madeline Howard *

Already shouldering some of the worst housing affordability challenges in the nation, California’s low-income renters, predominantly people of color facing the additional burdens of systemic racism, were pummeled by the Covid-19 pandemic and its economic fallout. They disproportionately fell ill and lost family members to the disease, and many lost their jobs or suffered financially from reduced hours and incomes. School closures and a childcare shortage forced many working parents, especially women, to stay home and forego wages. And while California’s renters made tremendous sacrifices to keep current on rent — often incurring large debts to friends, family, and predatory lenders — many ended up falling behind. At the beginning of January 2022, 721,000 renter households in California owed their landlords an estimated $3.3 billion in back rent.

California’s Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) offers a pathway to clear rent debt that has accrued for low-income tenants impacted by the pandemic. After tremendous advocacy, Congress established a rental assistance program in December of 2020 — nine months into the pandemic — which has provided the state of California with $5.2 billion to operate emergency rental assistance programs. These resources are crucial to prevent evictions, displacement, and homelessness, and to ensure that smaller landlords can make their mortgage payments and stay in business. 

These programs have been a lifeline for struggling renters who are able to access them, but they have been riddled with challenges . Many renters vulnerable to eviction have struggled to complete complex applications . Those who do make it through the application process may wait months for their application to be reviewed. And those whose applications are approved face another lag time before they are actually paid. At every stage of the process, the very people and families the program intends to serve and protect are living with the stress of potential eviction, enduring landlord harassment, and losing their homes.

While most of California’s eviction protections expired in October 2021, limited protections remain for eligible renters who apply for rental assistance. However, these protections are expiring on March 31. This means that the hundreds of thousands of families still waiting for assistance will be at imminent risk of eviction unless California policymakers extend these protections. At the same time, the California Department of Housing and Community Development just announced that the program is scheduled to close on March 31 , so renters who are eligible for relief but have not yet been able to apply to the program will have no option to do so.

This brief, produced by the National Equity Atlas in partnership with Housing NOW! and Western Center on Law & Poverty, examines the performance of California’s statewide rental assistance program since its launch. The state program covers about 63 percent of the state’s population; the other 37 percent of California residents live in the  25 cities and counties that opted to administer their own programs. Our analysis is based on a dataset tracking all rental assistance applications submitted by renters to the program through February 23, 2022, which we obtained through a Public Records Act request. It includes anonymized individual case data with applicant demographics (race/ethnicity, income, and language of application), zip code, amount of rent and utilities requested and paid, and landlord participation in the application. It also includes detailed case status categories including “Application Complete: Pending Payment,” which is assigned to households that have been approved for payment but have not actually received funds and are still waiting for assistance. [1]  We used the 2015–2019 American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample to summarize rent burden, racial/ethnic demographics, and primary language, and Census Household Pulse Survey Data on rent debt to compare program applicants and beneficiaries to the likely population of renters in need of assistance.

Our key findings include the following:

• Only 16 percent of renters who have applied to the program have received assistance, either directly or through a payment to their landlord. Nearly half a million renters have submitted rental assistance requests but just 75,773 households have received their payments. 
• The majority of applicants are still waiting for their applications to be reviewed. Fifty-nine percent of applicants (289,020 households) are still awaiting a decision on their applications. Among those whose applications have been initially approved, the typical wait time for a response was three months (a median of 104 days). 
• Most renters whose applications have been approved are still waiting to be paid. As of February 23, 2022, 180,280 renter households have had their applications approved, but 104,507 of them (58 percent) have not yet received assistance. The median wait time between submitting an application and receiving payment is 135 days, indicating that it takes about a month for applicants to be paid even after approval. 
• The speed with which rental assistance is being distributed is improving over time but remains painfully slow. Households that applied for aid in March 2021 typically waited 181 days to receive aid payments, and households that applied in October 2021 typically waited 119 days.
• Most renters who received assistance have requested additional support. Among renter households who have received rental assistance, 90 percent of them (69,336 households) have reapplied to the program for additional support.
• Renters whose primary language is not English appear to be underrepresented in the program. About half (51 percent) of California’s severely cost-burdened renter households speak a language other than English at home, yet 88 percent of rental assistance applicants indicated that their primary language was English.
• Long-term policy solutions, funding, and infrastructure are needed to support California's economically vulnerable renters.  With 8,200 new applications submitted every week and 90 percent of rental assistance recipients requesting additional support, tenants’ ongoing need for financial relief due to pandemic-related economic hardship, and the number of indebted renters not yet reached by the program, the need for rental assistance will continue beyond March 31, 2022 (when the program is set to expire).

Our review of the program data reveals the need for urgent policy solutions to fulfill the promise of the state’s rental assistance program, eliminating pandemic-related rent debt for all low-income renters and ensuring that they can stay in their homes. For an equitable recovery, California policymakers need to extend statewide eviction protections without preempting local ones, streamline the application and approval processes and increase equitable access to relief funds, and institute a permanent program to support economically struggling renter households.   

Nearly half a million renter households have submitted applications for rental assistance

Since March 15, 2021, when the state began accepting rental assistance applications, nearly half a million renter households (488,094) have applied for relief through the program. Applications peaked in September 2021 just before California’s eviction moratorium ended, with 115,000 renters submitting applications that month. Since January, about 8,200 new renters have submitted applications every week.

Most renters who have applied for assistance are still awaiting a response

Among the half million program applications, the majority — 59 percent, representing 289,020 renter households — are still under review. Four percent (18,794 households) have been explicitly denied assistance, while the remaining 36 percent (180,280 households) have been approved. But just 16 percent of applicants (75,773 households) have actually received assistance.

On average, program applicants wait an average of three months (a median of 104 days) after submitting their applications to receive initial approval. Many renters wait longer: nearly 20 percent of applicants waited more than 150 days to receive initial approval, and 4 percent of applicants waited more than 210 days. [2]

Among renters whose applications have been approved, the majority are waiting to be paid 

While 36 percent of program applicants have been approved for relief, less than half of them have received any payment. This means that despite formal approval, 104,507 households are still awaiting assistance.

This reality of long delays in relief delivery to renters whose applications have been approved contrasts with the snapshot of program performance provided on the public Housing Is Key data dashboard, which stated that 183,856 households have been “served” as of February 23, 2022 . [3]

Source: California Covid-19 Rent Relief Program dashboard, February 23, 2022 Although we currently do not have data on the number of days between application approval and receipt of payment, we can examine the number of days between application submission and payment. For renters who have received assistance and have not requested additional support, the median time between submission and payment is 135 days. About 39 percent of recipients have waited more than 150 days to get paid. This implies that the typical renter waits three months just to receive an initial decision on their application, and then another month or more to actually receive aid.

The pace of delivering rental assistance has improved marginally over time. Whereas households that applied for aid in March 2021 waited an average of 181 days to receive aid payments, that figure declined to 119 days by October 2021. The program was delivering assistance most quickly in June and July, before the surge in applications in the fall.

The vast majority of tenants who received rental assistance have requested additional support

About 90 percent of renter households who have actually received funds from the state program (69,336 households) have reapplied to the program for additional funds. Given that applicants who are awaiting review or payment  have similar income levels as those who’ve received payment, and most of them are extremely low income, we would expect that these applicants will also require additional assistance after their initial payment.

Renters whose primary language is not English appear to be underrepresented in the applicant pool

Since the launch of California’s rental assistance program, low-income renters who’ve suffered job and income losses due to the pandemic have faced numerous challenges accessing relief. These include technological and language barriers, lack of access for tenants with disabilities, difficulty supplying the necessary documentation of income losses, difficulty communicating with landlords or obtaining documentation from them, and fear of landlord harassment/retaliation and deportation or other immigration-related consequences. 

To assess whether California’s rental assistance program is reaching renters with the greatest needs, we compared the racial/ethnic composition of applicants with that of severely cost-burdened renters (those who pay more than 50 percent of their household income for rent and utilities), a population that represents renters at risk of having pandemic-related rent debt. To approximate the statewide program's service area, we excluded from the severely rent-burdened reference group 11 counties and five additional cities that are within areas operating local rental assistance programs. (We also exclude the city of Signal Hill, because it is entirely contained within the Long Beach census geography.)

This analysis reveals that the demographics are similar across both groups, indicating that the statewide program appears to be representative of the renters hardest-hit by the pandemic rent debt crisis. One exception could be Asian and Pacific Islander renters, who might be underrepresented in the applicant pool.

Renters whose primary language is not English, particularly Spanish-speaking renters and Chinese-speaking renters, also appear to be underrepresented in the applicant pool. Among California renters who are extremely cost-burdened, 51 percent speak a language other than English at home, yet 88 percent of program applicants indicated that their primary language is English on the application form. A significant share of the state’s severely cost-burdened renters speak Spanish at home (32 percent), yet only 10 percent of applications were submitted by people who indicated that Spanish is their primary language.

Renters whose primary language is not English, particularly Spanish-speaking renters and Chinese-speaking renters, appear to be underrepresented in the applicant pool. Among California renters who are extremely cost-burdened, 51 percent speak a language other than English at home, yet 88 percent of program applicants indicated that their primary language is English on the application form. A significant share of the state’s extremely cost-burdened renters speak Spanish at home (32 percent), yet only 10 percent of applications were submitted by people who indicated that Spanish is their primary language.

The demographics of program recipients reflect the demographics of the applicant pool

The federal emergency rental assistance program is targeted to low-income renters experiencing negative financial impacts due to the pandemic, and thus is means-tested: applicants need to have incomes below 80 percent of the area median income in order to qualify for assistance. In addition, the state program has prioritized serving tenants who indicate that they are imminently facing eviction, either on their application or via email correspondence. [4]   Our analysis shows that the incomes of program applicants and recipients reflect the program’s targeting: well more than half of renters who apply to and are served by the program are extremely low income.

Examining the racial/ethnic composition of applicants compared with those who are approved for and receive payment, we see that the demographics are similar and the program itself appears to be serving applicants equitably by race/ethnicity.

California needs permanent policy solutions, funding, and infrastructure to support economically vulnerable renters

California’s statewide rental assistance program was initially allocated $3.07 billion by the federal government and received an additional $62 million in January when the Treasury began reallocating funds. Approximately $900 million in aid has been delivered to struggling renters and landlords, and another $1.15 billion is in the process of being delivered to applicants whose payments are pending. An additional $4.97 billion has been requested by households with applications still under initial review. That adds up to just over $7 billion in total requests to date, with 8,200 new requests coming in every week and 90 percent of aid recipients requesting additional support. The need continues to grow as we approach the end of the program on March 31. 

Recognizing the critical demand for additional funding to ensure all eligible renters who apply in time can receive assistance, California’s legislature passed a bill this month that allocates General Fund resources to state and local rental assistance programs.

This budget allocation fills an urgent need, especially given that many locally administered programs have already exhausted their funds. But it will not be sufficient to protect and stabilize all vulnerable households still reeling from the economic impacts of the pandemic. The program’s expiration date of March 31, 2022 is an artificial and arbitrary endpoint, as the need for rent relief is ongoing and still extensive, and many eligible renters have not yet applied. Despite the desire to return to normal, many renters continue to face Covid-related economic hardships. Recognizing the pandemic is not over, the state of New York and Los Angeles County have extended eviction protections through the end of 2022, and California should follow suit.

Urgent policy fixes are needed to realize the promise of California’s rental assistance program

When California’s eviction protections expire on March 31, 2022, tenants eligible for assistance who are still waiting to receive payment can face eviction in court — and many will. With application processing times lasting four months and beyond, tens of thousands of tenants are likely to still be waiting when these protections expire. If the legislature does not extend eviction protections, many Covid-impacted renters may lose their homes because of the application backlog, exposing families and communities to the cascading harms of housing precarity and homelessness. Even with temporary protections in place, every day of delay leaves families more vulnerable to eviction and unable to make financial plans. 

Some local governments, including Alameda County, Los Angeles County, Fresno, San Francisco, and Stockton have passed their own eviction protections for tenants who could not pay rent because of the economic impacts of Covid-19. Extending statewide eviction protections while allowing local governments the flexibility to meet the needs of their communities is the most effective way to stabilize vulnerable renters and keep them in their homes while assistance is distributed.  

The pandemic has deepened the harms of structural racism on communities of color , who have suffered disproportionate deaths, job losses, and housing instability. Continuing to conduct outreach to underrepresented communities of color is imperative to ensure that rental assistance dollars do not further exacerbate the racialized harms of the Covid-19 pandemic.

For California’s rental assistance program to be effective, California’s policymakers need to:   

Protect people from eviction by extending the state’s current eviction protections; 

Ensure local jurisdictions can enact and strengthen eviction protections;

Streamline the screening and payment process for rental assistance; 

Promote equity by increasing outreach to underrepresented renters; and

Fund the rental assistance program to ensure low-income tenants receive ongoing support.

* Madeline Howard is is a senior attorney at Western Center on Law & Poverty.  

Correction (March 7, 2022): The March 3, 2022 version of this report included a data error relating to the racial/ethnic composition of severely rent-burdened households in California due to incorrect weighting of the sample data. This incorrect data suggested that Latinx households were underrepresented in the statewide rental assistance program. We have corrected the data and we no longer find any underrepresentation of Latinx households, so we have updated the analysis of the data to reflect this (positive) new finding.

[1] The table below, provided directly from the Department of Housing and Community Development in response to a Public Records Act request, shows the number of cases across the 16 case status categories provided in the dataset. “Approved” applications in this analysis include all applications in the categories "Application Complete: Paid," “Application Complete: Pending Payment," and all Recertification categories. “Application Complete: Pending Payment” means the application is approved for payment and a request for payment has been made, but the applicant has not actually received funds. “Recertification” means that applicants have received payment and have requested additional assistance. Applications that are categorized as “Application Complete: Paid” and those that fall under any of the recertification categories represent tenants that have actually received assistance.

Detailed case categories

[2] This median wait time is for renters who have received initial approval but have not yet been paid.

[3] The slight discrepancy of the number served on the public dashboard and the total paid renter households reported here is due to the timing of the database pull and continual program activity.

[4] This is based on two sources of information: 1) a positive response to the question, “Has your landlord issued a Notice to Pay, an Eviction Notice, filed an Unlawful Detainer against you due to unpaid rent, or indicated they will be seeking to evict you?” on the rental assistance application; and 2) applicants who send information about a pending eviction to the [email protected] email box including documentation from the landlord or legal documents related to an unlawful detainer (the final stage of the eviction process).

Statewide Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP)

Hagale clic aquí para leer esta página web en español.

To learn more about the status of the Statewide Emergency Rental Assistance Program please review Public Counsel FAQ in your preferred language https://publiccounsel.org/ca-rent-relief / 

Tenants Together partners including Public Counsel , SAJE , Policy Link , Western Center on Law & Poverty , ACCE , Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angles , and Covington & Burling LLP were successful cuing the CA Dept of Housing Community & Development  operation of the Housing Is Key COVID-19 Emergency Rental Assistance Program

What eviction protections still exist if I have rent debt due to COVID?

• The statewide eviction protections for COVID rent payment ended September 30, 2021 (see visual below).
• Tenants who were actively applying to ERAP during October 1, 2021 – March 31, 2022, and received a 3 day “pay or quit” notice from their landlord must have responded within 15 days of receiving the eviction notice with proof of their ERAP application and case number.
• California normal rules about the eviction process applied. This means that a renter who received a 3-day eviction notice to “pay or quit” for rent due is in this period must respond to invalidate the notice OR pay rent owed within 3 days.
• There are very few local jurisdictions that have remaining COVID eviction moratorium. Please review LegalFAQ.org to see if you are eligible for local COVID eviction protections.

How will I be informed about the status of my ERAP application?

• Email address 
• Mailing address 
• Any 3rd party or other person the tenant listed in their application who helped them apply
• Housing Is Key Call Center: 833-430-2122
• Local Partner Network: 833-687-0967

Which tenants are covered by this ERAP settlment?

• Any tenant who applied to ERAP on or before March 31, 2022 AND still has a pending application or was denied on or after June 7, 2022 .
• Only for statewide ERAP – does not apply to local rental assistance programs run by a city or county
• Does NOT re-open the ERAP program to new applications 

How do I appeal denied or partial approval status on my ERAP application that I received since June 7, 2022?     

• Appeals process is now EXTENDED! Tenants have 30 days to appeal, or if not the denial notice will be considered final
• Portal will automatically open an appeals process on ERAP applications that retroactively received a partial denial, who were denied for “partial approval notice”
• Email:  [email protected]
• Phone: 833-430-2122
• Directly through the portal  

Help build power for renters' rights:

Sign up for Mission Local's free daily newsletter to stay informed about all goings-on in the Mission District and San Francisco.

Mission Local

Local news for a global city

How long does it take for Californians to receive rental assistance?

Share this:

• Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)

by CalMatters, CalMatters Network March 3, 2022

A new study says California has been able to send rent relief to only 16% of applicants, who have been waiting for months. The state questions the analysis, but according to its figures, only 41% of applicants have been granted financial relief.

According to a new analysis released today , only 16% of nearly half a million renters who applied for rent relief from the state of California have received their payment. And the clock is ticking: Under state law, landlords will be able to evict tenants who haven’t paid rent by April 1.

Of more than 488,000 households that have applied for assistance since the program launched in March 2021, about 180,000 have been approved. Four percent were denied and more than half of applicants are still waiting for a response, according to the study , compiled by National Equity Atlas, Housing Now, and the Western Center on Law & Poverty using state data.

But even most tenants whose applications were approved are still waiting for a check, according to the analysis. Of the 180,000 households whose applications were approved, only more than 75,000 households were paid. And they still need more help: 90% of those households have reapplied for more money.

The number of people paid, according to the study, is significantly lower than what is shown on the state’s public dashboard : 191,000 households “served” and $2.2 billion paid.

Monica Hernandez, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Housing and Community Development, disputed the report’s findings, saying the state dashboard has “the most up-to-date and accurate numbers.”

Of 467,000 completed applications to date, 191,000 payments, or 41%, have been made, he said, with more than $80 million being sent each week to more than 8,000 households.

The study authors said they stand by their analysis, which shows that $900 million has been paid (“application complete, paid” in state data), while another $1.15 billion has only been approved (“application complete, paid pending”).

“It doesn’t matter if you have a piece of paper saying it’s approved, you need the money,” said Madeline Howard, a senior attorney with the Western Center and a co-author of the report. “It does not reflect the experience of tenants who live this day to day.”

The study also found that applicants waited an average of more than three months to get an approval and another month to get paid — 135 days in total. However, waiting times have shortened: households that applied for help last March waited around six months to receive the payment, while those that applied in October faced a waiting time of just under four months.

In his emailed response, Hernandez said the wait time measure “does not take into account different rules that were enforced on different apps at different times” or “for incomplete, duplicate, or potentially fraudulent apps that we are now removing from the data”.

“It doesn’t matter if you have a piece of paper that says it’s approved, what they need is the money.” Madeline Howard, Senior Attorney at the Western Center on Law and Poverty

California received about $5.2 billion from the federal government to help renters stay in their homes and pay landlords. The state is in charge of managing about half of that, while 25 cities and counties manage the rest. The new study focuses on the state program, which covers nearly two-thirds of Californians.

In January, the state received $62 million in additional federal aid, or just 3% of the nearly $2 billion it requested in November. Still, California received a third of the funds reallocated by the US Treasury, which Hernandez said speaks to “federal officials’ confidence in our ability to distribute funds to households in need in a timely manner.” .

According to Hernandez, a budget bill passed by the Legislature in February that allocates money from the General Fund to state and local rent relief programs “means that all eligible applicants seeking assistance for costs filed and incurred on March 31 of 2022 or before, they will receive assistance.”

The new study is the most comprehensive look yet at how rent relief is faring in California.

The full data set was not released to the Western Center through the state’s Public Records Act until the center announced its intention to sue the Department of Housing and Community Development, which runs the program with the help of a private contractor . Repeated Public Records Act requests for the full data set had previously been denied. These groups have been tracking California’s rental and eviction relief efforts since the beginning.

CalMatters has requested similar data from the state through various Public Records Act requests and has been told repeatedly that the data does not exist.

“We don’t track data and create a report on the dates people applied and then received a response. What we do is we can look at the age of applications within the system and make sure that all applications are allocated by a certain date,” said Geoffrey Ross, deputy director of the housing department’s Federal Financial Assistance Division. CalMatters on October 11.

Hernandez said that statement was accurate at the time.

A state ban on evictions for nonpayment of rent went into effect at the start of the pandemic and has been extended multiple times. That protection ended last October, with one condition. Until March 31, landlords would not be able to evict tenants for nonpayment of rent until September 30, 2021, if they had applied for a rent exemption from the state. That extra layer of protection goes away on April 1.

“I’m really confused as to why we haven’t heard anything about extending eviction protections,” Howard said. “People are waiting. They don’t have the promised money.”

The state’s rent relief program continues to face other challenges that have persisted since its inception, according to another recent survey of 58 tenant organizations statewide by Tenants Together, an advocacy group. Ninety percent of respondents reported difficulty accessing the app, and 82% reported difficulty getting information about their apps.

The survey found that California’s most vulnerable renters, including non-English speakers , seniors and those on informal leases, continue to face the greatest obstacles to obtaining rent relief.

“I think there is a lack of understanding in the Legislature that people become homeless after being evicted from their homes,” said Shanti Singh, legislative and communications director for the group that conducted the survey.

This article was originally published by CalMatters

Join the Conversation

35 Comments

Do any state officials ever read these sites ?!! I mean come on!!! It’s no wonder they got sued, although from the looks of it, it hasn’t done much good… Who are the people in charge of this program and what right do they have to play God and decide who and when get what?! The money has been placed to help California’s renters in a crisis, three years later no one’s beens helped! Wow! Just freaking wow!

Do any state officials ever read these sites ?!! I mean come on!!! It’s no wonder they got sued, although from the looks of it, it hasn’t done much good… Who are the people in charge of this program and what right do they have to play God and decide who and when get what?! The money has been placed to help California’s renters in a crisis, three years later no one’s beens helped! Wow! Just fucking wow!

Approved pending payment since 8.9.23 No award letter no check.. Same run around as everyone else. When I call its ” be patient I can’t provide you with any information besides check your email and portal for updates ” Yea… Some “relief’ I’m very upset and don’t understand why these folks can’t be transparent. What a flippen joke! Shame on them!!

Next month, it will be a year since I applied. My application was under review for 10 months, and then 4 weeks ago the status finally changed to “Approved -pending assignment”. What does that mean, and how much longer am I going to have to wait? My landlord has been patient, but it’s wearing thin and this is causing lots of tension. I am so uncomfortable, and I feel like he thinks I’m lying about being approved. It has become a hostile environment and I am so worried that my son and I are not going to have any where to go pretty soon. I keep calling but they just tell me that they can’t give me a time frame for when the funds will be disbursed and to wait for the email. This is so frustrating. Is there any one I can call to expedite this?!

My name is Eliza Douglas I am a renter I filled out my application over a year ago I finally got approved 11 days ago is it going to take another year for my landlord to receive the check how long does it take!

I applied last December 2022 I still have not got one phone call or email. Their website says I’m still under review. But won’t tell me what is holding up my application from being accepted. I call every week get the same answer just wait just wait have to be patient absolutely frustrating and ridiculous. This is the worst program I’ve ever had to deal with

My tenant and I applied in Jan.and I have still not received any money. It has been 9 months now. Now my tenant still owes me another 26,000 on top of the 32,000 the state is paying. With no moratorium ending in sight she just keeps living rent free

He should work four them all he do not need a job on more from Christine I’m i’m you tried frying scared of him d He do not need to work at the the crown hotel 528 Valencia st

I have been approved since Feb 5 2022 and I still have not received my money . I call once a week and I’m told different things each time . 20% they tell me that there submitting my case for resolution and someone has to call me in 72hrs and I receive no call . My landlord has no more patience. This is so ridiculous, what can I do to relieve the payment that has been approved for 5months

I myself have applied for renters assistance on Nov 09, 2021. I was denied for no particular reason I appealed over two months ago and no response. I have sent all documents ask for and still no real response.

I rent a room from a patient 84 year old man. He only charges me 400.00 a month. I have promised him his back rent. I think he is starting not to believe me and I am afraid to lose my spot.

I know of a girl that made over 20 thousand dollars by submitting applications for people and splitting the money. My claim is 100% legit and I applied in September seems to be froze

In final review since beginning of January. “We have everything we need sir.We can’t give you any idea of how long it will take. Don’t call us we’ll email YOU. Laugh, Laugh, Chuckle chuckle (baby screaming in the background)” WTF?

I have been waiting now for over 8 months and ive been in qc review for 2 months and each time i call they give me the same dam answer with no time frame or any new information.Is this a dam scam or is the state stealing the funds that where ment for the people in need.I cant believe how state officials are treating us and most likely they are redirecting the funds to line there own dam pockets.No wonder crime is up and its getting worst too.So more banks will be robbed more homes will be robbed more smash and grabs will happen and you can blame our government for all that.Look at how many home invasions happened in the past 2 weeks trust me when i say its going to get worst.Great job housing is key your flooding our jails with your lack of help that the federal government promised us but your the ones who should be locked up for stealing our money.

The program is Tenant Based meaning if tenant doesn’t comply with necessary paperwork and the landlord complied with all documentation Housing is key will deny paying the landlord and all you get for your time and months and months of waiting is a big 0 in payments. BEWARE.

I have been waiting since November 6 months ago, first it said under review, then final review then conditionally approved then back to under review. For the last 2 months that I’ve been calling I am told it is in payment processing / pending payment, but the site says under review. A one cent deposit verified bank account by SoCal on April 6th a month ago and bill.com on the 13th all documents have been completed and approved for months now.

I applied in November 2021 and saw the process go from application accepted to document review in early April, then to Q & A approval, in late April. Finally, on May 1, I was APPROVED! I am now pending disbursement. I hope to get paid soon, but after reading some reviews, it kind of burst my bubble! Hope to be paid soon, because I need HELP NOW!

I applied in Aug 2021 (8 months) . Still in Pending Review. I’ve called every other week begging for them to tell me what I need to do to get it processed. They tell me they have everything. And it’ in Final Review. What does that mean? HELP!!!!!

I know of 1 person out of about 30 who have applied and actually received. I personally have been approved and still waiting for almost a year now. Who is in charge of releasing these funds and where are all the funds actually going? It doesnt seem like they are being distributed to those of us that are in need, applied and have approved and where do we go for answers? If its for US then it should be paid to US and immediately after approval. Yes, my landlord has been extremely patient and has agreed to become part of the process but promises, promises. WHERE oh WHERE has “our” money gone?

The crazy thing is the people that need it most and are being honest about their financial stress lose I know of so many people that lied and have received $33 racks $28 racks the list goes on They are buying cars living it up while single mothers are stressed waiting for the exact amount needed for rent and bills Us honest people will be the ones out on the street homeless due to greedy abuse the system liars.

Yea I’ve been waiting over a year now and I just found out that they not only denied me but they didn’t tell me until it was too late to do another app. Nothing but B.S. MANN!?!!

7 months I’ve been waiting….I also call often but they can never tell me anything either at housing is key.

ive been waiting 10 mo i call every day all they say is i cant give you a date or a time when we will pay out also talking to diffrent people is crazy they all say the same thing makes you wonder if this shit is a scam or they keeping the money for there self because its taking so long how long does a person reallly have to wait to get help that they offerd to help people and if they dont have the money to help they should let people no no just keep them waiting

I won’t be evicted but my landlord is making life hell. I am trying to get a high interest personal loan ( 35.99 percent interest) so I can give my landlord a good faith payment ( $2000) until my application is paid and processed. I called the information number given on HOUSING IS KEY and they have no information whatsoever, so don’t bother…. the current polical administration hasn’t helped only hindered AMERICAN’S more…. and I empathize with the people in Ukraine who we sent milliions in aide to HOWEVER, when will we help hard working AMERICAN’S FIRST?

I’m grateful my land lord and I are on ok terms considering how much back rent I owe him . It’s frustrating aying the waiting game ! Especially since I cannot get a hold of anyone and I don’t even know if my application has been approved! I would jus like some kind of communication to help my stress and worries . Every month is adding up more debt for me and all who are in the same situation, are anyone of those who are working the program in the same situation? I understand that they are swamped, they must be ! I understand that there’s a prossess for each application and I appreciate thier time. I would like to know if anyone of the many who work there try to look at our situation from where we stand ? It’s a hard thing to do but I hope someone can/ will . This has been deeply depressing I find it difficult to be social. My pride, Integrity, and independents has been very much affected like so many others . The application was difficult to find! Once I found the program application and began to fill it out half way through the application went blank and It took me back to sign in . I’m not sure what happend but I finished it and submitted it. Now when I check the status it said” not submitted ” its so frustrating! I uploaded all my documents and signed! Unable to reach anyone and no way of knowing if I’m waiting time, what do we do ? Please help.

I don’t know where you’ve been calling but they answer everytime I call and they reply to every email I send and even though I haven’t been paid yet they have been keeping me updated . My latest reply from them states the check should arrive in about four weeks . They will reply the same day and if not the very next day . You’re probably calling the wrong numbers .

Hello, What is the email address you are contacting because I need to contact these people asap

Please , please advise what # you are calling or atleast a responding email address because my story is same as 90%, get same generic answer everything, I call. I too know people frauding the system , have been paid & blew the $$. I’m honest & still in the cold. Please help me by providing contact #s & email addresses. Thank you so much. Email me at [email protected] Thanks again so much

If you are signing up using your phone I would try using a computer to sign up. My phone had issues with the application website so I used a laptop and it went smoothly . I submitted my application 2 days before they shutdown the application process. Status: application submitted and received for review.

8months 8 months 8months 8 months 8months 8 months 8months 8 months That’s how long I’ve been waiting for HELP!!! and no one knows why????

Sham program! Shame on them! We need this $$ to pay our bills! Waiting 5 months plus is not acceptable! Nobody at HOUSING IS KEY gives no answer to when applicant will get funded…People are loosing their homes because of this! Not fair!

The study behind the story on rent relief has a major flaw. The study is treating all applications as though they were submitted by the tenant when in reality these include both tenant and landlord applications. And I know for a fact that if a tenant does not submit an application after a landlord has submitted one, it is marked with the status of Application Waiting Review which constitutes over 25% of the total number of applications (including reapplications for additional funds). The program rules stipulate that if a tenant does not respond to the invitation to submit an application, which is sent automatically upon the landlord application, no further action is possible other than for the landlord to sue the tenant in court (good luck recovering any awarded judgement).

This program and it’s case workers are also not being transparent about their no reimbursement policy. Many of us have been exhausting life savings and credit cards to cover rent while waiting to be approved, acting in good faith. This program does not take that into account, does not reimburse renters and does not communicate that when applying. It only qualifies if you stop paying your rent while under the assurance that you have eviction protection. Which is now ending even though applicants are still waiting for approval. The process bankrupts applicants and has waited out many desperate renters until the program ends in March. All while asking for personal documentation such as rent ledgers, lease agreements and revealing to your landlord that you are applying and asking them to apply to help you save your home. Many landlords wish to evict so they can re-rent the unit at market value. Rent controlled units are valuable and it motivates them to decline the program.

This. Exactly this! Ive been waiting fir my additional fundings request to be approved since nov. 2021. As protections ended in California I , a single mother of 3 have been completely and I stress COMPLETELY broke trying to maintain rent while waiting fir approval. I rent from a slum lord. She recieved the tasks to verify over 2 weeks ago. When i asked her to complete them she brought up I pay bmr and that she could be charging way more to someone else. Im constantly stressed.

YES! My landlord wants me out its his only income and he is being understanding because I gave him the letter stating I applied for rent relief. He thinks I will eventually pay him my back rent. He also feels I may not and so June 31 IF IM NOT PAID BY THEN IM OUT. Even though I may have a job by then, I’m out. I was sent an email from my case worker stating I have 2 days to complete the updated task and mark the application complete. I DID SO… SO, how long now? I’m in California will I get paid before June 31? WHAT DO YOU THINK?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Leave a comment

We've recently sent you an authentication link. Please, check your inbox!

Sign in with a password below, or sign in using your email .

Get a code sent to your email to sign in, or sign in using a password .

Enter the code you received via email to sign in, or sign in using a password .

• Subscribe to our newsletter

Sign in with your email

Lost your password?

Try a different email

Send another code

Sign in with a password

By signing up, you agree to our Terms and Conditions.

• March 3, 2022: State of Waiting: California’s Rent Assistance Program One Month Before Expiration

State of Waiting: California’s Rental Assistant Program One Month Front Passing

Walking 3, 2022 [updated march 7, 2022], magnitude study in choose data reveals that fewer than one to six project have received get thus far, while hundreds of thousands are still waiting, ringing an urgent need with approach fixes to deliver on the program’s promise and keep renters into their homes..

By Sarah Treuhaft, Alex Ramiller, Selena Tan, and Madeline Howard *

Already thrust some of the worst housing reasonable challenges in the nation, California’s low-income renters, predominantly people of color facing the fresh burdens are systemic racism, were pummeled by the Covid-19 pandemic and its economic fallout. They disproportionately fell ill and lost house members to the disease, and many get their jobs or suffering financially from reduced hours and incomes. School closures and one childcare shortage forced many how parents, especially women, to stay home plus forego wages. And while California’s renters made tremendous sacrifices to keep current about rent — often incurring large debts to find, family, and predatory lenders — many end increase falling behind. At the beginning of January 2022, 721,000 hirer households in California owing his landlords certain appraised $3.3 trillion in back rent.

California’s Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) offers a pathway to clear rentals debt that has accrued for low-income tenants impacted by the pandemic. After tremendous advocacy, Congress established a rental assistance application in Dec of 2020 — nine year within the pandemic — which has provided the state away California through $5.2 milliard to operate emergency vermietungen assistance programs. Diese resources are crucial up prevent vacations, displacement, and homelessness, and to ensure ensure smaller landlords bottle make their mortgage payments also stay in business. 

Are programs have been a lifeline for struggling renters who are skilled to how them, but they have been riddled with challenges . Many renters vulnerable to eviction have struggled the total complex applications . Which who do produce it through an application process may wait hours for their application to be reviewed. And those whose applications become approved face another lagerung time before they are actually paying. At every stage of the process, the exceptionally people and families the program intends to serve additionally protections are living with the highlight out potential eviction, enduring landlord victimization, and losing their homes.

While most off California’s eviction protections expired in October 2021, limited protections remain forward eligible renters who apply for leasing support. However, these protections are passing for March 31. This signifies such the masses about thousands by families yet waiting for assistance will remain at imminent value on eviction unless Ca policymakers extend these protections. At the same time, the Carlos Department of Housing and Community Growth just announced that the program will scheduled toward close on Tramp 31 , so renters who are eligible for relief aber have did yet been able to apply until the program will have no option to do so.

Is writing, produced by of National Equity Atlas in partnership with Enclosures NOW! and Wester Center about Law & Poverty, examining of energy of California’s statewide rental assistance program because its launch. The state program covered about 63 percent of the state’s population; the other 37 percent of California residents alive included the  25 cities press counties such opted to administer their own show. Our data is based on an dataset tracking all rental assistance applications submitted by renters to this program durch February 23, 2022, which we obtained through a Public Records Act request. E include anonymized individual case data with applicant demographics (race/ethnicity, income, and language starting application), zip code, amount of renten and utilities requested and paid, press landlord participation to the application. It also includes detail case status categories including “Application Complete: Upcoming Payment,” which exists allotted to households that have been approved for payment but have not actually received funds and are nevertheless await for assistance. [1]  We used the 2015–2019 American Community Survey Publication Use Microdata Sample to review rent burden, racial/ethnic popular, and primary your, and Official Household Pulsed Survey Data on rent obligation the compare run applicants and your at the likely total of renters in need of assistance.

Our lock findings include the following:

• Only 16 percent of renters who have applying to the program are received assistance, either forthwith or over a payment to their landlord. Nearly half a million renters have submitted rental assistance requests but just 75,773 households have received their payments. 
• Aforementioned bulk from applicants are still waiting for their applications to live reviewed. Fifty-nine percent regarding applicants (289,020 households) will idle expected an decision for their applications. Among those its software have been initially approves, the typified hold time to a response was triple months (a mittelwert off 104 days). 
• Most renters whose applying do been approved are still waiting to be paid. As of February 23, 2022, 180,280 renter holiday have had their applications approve, still 104,507 of them (58 percent) have not yet received assistance. To median waiting time between submitting into application the receiving payment is 135 years, indicating that it takes about an monthly for candidates to be paid even afterwards approval. 
• The beschleunigen with whose rental assistance shall being distributed is improving over time but remains painfully slow. Households the uses on aid in March 2021 typically waited 181 days till receive aid payments, and households that applied in October 2021 typically waited 119 days.
• Most lessee who received assistance have requested optional support. Among lease households anybody are received rental assistance, 90 percent of them (69,336 households) have reapplied to this program by additional support.
• Lodgers her primary language is not English appear into be underrepresented within the run. About half (51 percent) of California’s seriously cost-burdened renter households speak a wording other than English toward home, yet 88 percent of rental assistance applicants indicated that they chief language was English.
• Long-term principle solutions, funding, press service are need to support California's inexpensive vulnerability renters.  With 8,200 new applications submitted either week and 90 percent of rental assistance recipients requesting additional support, tenants’ ongoing needing for financial relief outstanding to pandemic-related economic hardship, and the figure regarding indebted renters not but reached by the programs, the need for leasing user wants continue beyond March 31, 2022 (when the programme is select to expire).

Our review of the program data reveals to need for urgent policy solutions to fulfill the guarantee of the state’s rental assistance programs, eliminating pandemic-related rent debt for total low-income renters or ensuring that it can stay in my homes. For in equitable recovery, California policymakers need up extend statewide eviction protections without preempting local unit, streamline the application or approval processes and increase equitable zufahrt to relief funds, and institute an permanent program to support inexpensively struggling renter households.   

Nearly half a million renter holiday have submitted applying for leasing assistance

Since March 15, 2021, once the state commenced accepting rental assistance uses, nearness halve a million renter households (488,094) having applied for relief through the program. Applications peaked in September 2021 just before California’s eviction respite ended, with 115,000 rentals submitting fields ensure month. Since Java, about 8,200 new renters need submits applications every week. Posted by u/Negative_Mouse_5292 - 3 votes or 20 comments

Most renters who have applied for supports are still awaiting a response

Among the half million programs applications, the majority — 59 percent, representing 289,020 tenant families — are still under study. Four percent (18,794 households) possess been explicitly denied assistance, while the rest 36 percent (180,280 households) have been approved. But just 16 percent of applicants (75,773 households) have actually received assistance. Beginning July 1 nonetheless, ampere landlord may oust a tenant for non-payment of rent even if the tenant's rent relief pay is pending. Some local cities and ...

On average, program employee wait an average of three months (a medianer of 104 days) after submitting their applications to receive initializing approval. Many renters wait longer: nearly 20 percent of applying waited more than 150 days to receive initial authorization, both 4 prozentualer of applicants waited more than 210 days. [2]

Among renters whose applications have been approved, aforementioned preponderance are waiting to be paid 

While 36 percent of program applicants have been approved for relief, less than half in them have received any payout. This means that despite formal approval, 104,507 households are still awaiting assistance. Housing Is Press - The CA COVID-19 Mieten Ease program website shall available in ampere variety by languages to enhance serve hirers and landlords in need of relief. Avluisr.com is available in Learn, Learning, Rokan, Vietnamese, Chinese and Tagallo, and based until Google in 100 additional languages. Attend Avluisr.com or call 833-430-2122 for in-language assistance today. Their information is private, press your nation status wills none must asked. Apply today! | Facebook

This reality of long delays in relaxation delivery to tenants its applications have been approved contrasts with aforementioned snapshot of program performance provided on the public Housing Is Key data fascia, which stated this 183,856 households have been “served” more is February 23, 2022 . [3]

Source: California Covid-19 Rent Strain Program dashboard, February 23, 2022 Although we currently do not have data on who number of dates between application approval and check of payment, person can examine the number concerning days between application submission and checkout. For renters who have received assistance additionally may not requested add support, the median time between submission and get is 135 days. About 39 percentages of recipients have expect find than 150 days to get paid. This implies that and typifying renter waits three hours just to receive to beginning choice on their application, and then another month or more to what receive aid.

The pace of delivering vermietung get can enhanced marginally over time. Whereas households the useful for aid include March 2021 waited can average of 181 per toward maintain aid payments, the figure turned until 119 days by Occasion 2021. The program was delivering assistance most quickly in June and July, before the surge on applications in the fall.

And vast large about tenants who received rental relief have requested supplemental support

About 90 percent of renter households who have actually received funds from that state program (69,336 households) have reapplied to the program for additional funds. Given that applicants who are waiting check conversely payment  have similar income step as those who’ve received payment, and most off them have extremely low income, we would expect that those job desires also require additional assistance after their initial payment. Posted by u/alycatxx - 9 votes and 45 comments

Renters his primary language is not English showing to be underrepresented is of aspirant pool

Since and launch of California’s rental assistance program, low-income renters who’ve suffered position and income losses due till the ponta have faced numerous challenge accessing strain. These contain practical and language barriers, missing of access for tenants at physical, difficulty supplying the necessary documentation is income losses, difficulty communicating with landlords or get documentation with them, and fear of renter harassment/retaliation and deportation or other immigration-related consequences. 

To assess whether California’s rental assistance program lives achievable renters at the greatest needs, we contrast the racial/ethnic composition of applicants with that of hard cost-burdened renters (those who pay more than 50 prozentualer of their household generate for rent and utilities), an population that represents renters at risk of having pandemic-related mieten debt. To approximate the statewide program's service territory, we excluded from the severely rent-burdened reference group 11 counties or five addition cities that were within areas operating local rental assistance programs. (We also exclude the city out Signal Hill, because it is entirely contained within the Long Beach census geography.)

This analysis disclosures that the demographics are similar all both classes, indicating that the statewide schedule appears to be delegate of that renters hardest-hit by the pandemic rent debt crisis. First exception may be Asian and Relaxed Islander renters, who might be underrepresented inches the applicant pool.

Renters whose primary speech is not English, particularly Spanish-speaking renters and Chinese-speaking renters, also appear at be underrepresented in the candidates kitty. On Cereals renters who is extrem cost-burdened, 51 percent speak ampere language others than English at home, yet 88 percent of program applicants indicate that their primary language is English on and application form. A major share of the state’s severely cost-burdened renters speak Spanish at home (32 percent), moreover only 10 percent of applications were delivered via people who indicated that Spanish exists their primary language.

Renters whose primary language is not Anglo, particularly Spanish-speaking rent and Chinese-speaking renters, emerge to live underrepresented in the postulant pool. Among California renters who are extremely cost-burdened, 51 percent speaks a language other than English at home, yet 88 percent of program applicants indicated that yours primary english is English on which application form. A major share of the state’s extremely cost-burdened renters speaks Spanish at dear (32 percent), yet only 10 percent of applications were submitted by people who indicated that Spanish is own primary country.

One demographics of program recipients reflect the demographics of the applicant pool

The fed crisis rental help program is targeted to low-income renters experiencing negative financial impacts due in the pandemic, both thus is means-tested: applicants need to have incomes below 80 percent of the area median income in order to qualify for assistance. In addition, the state program has prioritized serv tenants who indicate that they are imminently facing eviction, either over their appeal or via email schriftenwechsel. [4]   Our analysis shows that the incomes of program apply and add reflect the program’s targeting: well more faster get of lodgers who apply for and are served by the how are extremely low income.

Inspect this racial/ethnic composition from applicants compared from those whoever are approved for and receive payment, ours perceive that the demographic are similar and which program itself appears to be serving applicants equitably by race/ethnicity.

California inevitably permanent policy show, promotion, and infrastructure go support economically vulnerable renters

California’s statewide renting assistance program was initially allocated $3.07 billion by the federal government and getting an additional $62 mill in Year available the Treasury began reallocating money. Roughly $900 million in aid has been delivered in struggling renters and landlords, real another $1.15 billion is in and process of being delivered to applicants whose payments belong pending. An additional $4.97 total has been requested by households with applications still lower initial review. That adds up to just over $7 milliard in absolute requests up date, with 8,200 new requests soon in every week the 90 percent of aid recipients requesting additional support. The need continues up grows as we approach aforementioned ends of who plan on Marsh 31. 

Recognizing and critical demand for additionally funding to ensure all eligible lessee who apply include time can receive helping, California’s council passed a bill this month that allocates General Fund capital to state and local mieter assistance programs.

This budget allocation fills a priority necessity, especially give that many locally maintained programs have already tired their funds. But it will did live sufficient to protect additionally stabilize all vulnerable households still reeling from the economic impacts out the pandemic. The program’s expiration date of March 31, 2022 is an artificial or ermessen ends, when the need for rent relief is ongoing and still large, and many eligible tenants have don yet applied. Despite the desire to return to normal, many renters continue at face Covid-related commercial distress. Recognize to pandemic is not over, the state of New Spittin and Loose Angeles Circuit have extended eviction protections through the end of 2022, both California should obey suit.

Urgent policy fixes are needed to realize the promise of California’s rental assistance user

Whenever California’s moving protections expire on Walk 31, 2022, tenants eligible for assistance who be still standing to receive einzahlung can face vacation inside court — and many will. With application machining times lasting four months and above, tens of thousands of tennant are likely on still be hold when these protections date. Supposing the legislature does not extend move protections, many Covid-impacted renters might lose their homes because of of application backlog, exposing families additionally communities to the cascading harms of housing precarity and housing. Even with temporary protections in place, every daylight of delay leaf families extra vulnerable till eviction the unable to making financial plans.  The CANDY COVID-19 Rent Relief program website is available in a variety of languages to best teach renter and landlords in need from relief....

Some local governments, including Alameda County, Los Angeles County, Fresno, San D, and Stockton have done their own eviction protectors for tenants who could not pay rent because in the economic impacts of Covid-19. Extending statewide eviction protections time allowing local governments the flexibility to meet and demands of their communities shall to most efficient way to stabilize vulnerable renters and keep them int their homes while assistance has distributed.  

The pandemic has deepened the harms of structural racism on communities of color , who have suffered disproportionate deaths, job losses, and housing instability. Continuing to behaving outreach to underrepresented communities of color is imperative to ensure that rental assistance dollars do not next exacerbate the racialized damage of the Covid-19 pandemic.

For California’s rental assistance program to be effective, California’s policymakers need to:   

Secure people of eviction by extending the state’s current eviction protections; 

Ensure local jurisdictions can enroll and strengthen eviction protections;

Rationalizing aforementioned screening and payment process for rental assistance; 

Promote equity the increasing outreach to underrepresented leasing; and

Fund the rental helps program to ensure low-income member receive running support.

* Madeline Howards is is a senior attorney at Western Center on Law & Poverty.  

Correction (March 7, 2022): The March 3, 2022 version of here report included a dating error relating to this racial/ethnic compilation out severely rent-burdened households in Kalifornia due to incorrect weighting of the sample data. Is incorrect data suggested that Latinx households were underrepresented in the statewide verleih assistance application. We have corrected the data and we no longer find anyone underrepresentation of Latinx households, so we have updated the analysis of the data to reflect this (positive) new finding.

[1] An table below, assuming directly from the Department of Housing and Community Development in response to a Public Records Act request, shows who number of cases across the 16 case states categories granted in the dataset. “Approved” applications in dieser analysis include all applications for the feature "Application Complete: Paid," “Application Completely: Pending Payment," and total Recertification related. “Application Total: Pending Payment” means the application is approved for payment and a seek available payment got been made, but the applicant possess doesn actually received funds. “Recertification” means that applicants must received checkout additionally have requested additional assistance. Applications the become categorized as “Application Finish: Paid” the those that fall down any of the recertification categories represent tenants that have basically received assistance.

Detailed cases categories

[2] This median wait zeitraum be for renting who have received initial approval but have not yet been paid.

[3] The slight discrepancy of the number served on the public dashboard and to total paid renter households reported here is due to the timing for the database yank and incessant program activity.

[4] This is based on double sources starting information: 1) a positive responses to the question, “Has your landlord issued a Notice to Pay, in Eviction Notice, filed an Unlawful Detainment against you due go unpaid vermietung, or indicated i will shall seeking to evict you?” on the vermieten assistance application; and 2) applicants who send information about a available clearing to the [email protected] email box including books by the landlord or legal documents related to an outlawed detainer (the final stage of one eviction process).

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS

A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. .

The new Individual Assistance updates only apply to disasters declared on or after March 22, 2024. Read about the updates.

The U. S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) Fiscal Year 2024 Port Security Grant Program

Download a PDF version of this webpage.

All entities wishing to do business with the federal government must have a unique entity identifier (UEI). The UEI number is issued by the system. Requesting a UEI using System for Award Management (SAM.gov) can be found at: https://sam.gov/content/entity-  registration .

Updates in Grant Application Forms:

The Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number was replaced by a new, non-proprietary identifier requested in, and assigned by SAM.gov. This new identifier is the Unique Entity Identifier.

Additional Information can be found on Grants.gov:  https://www.grants.gov/forms/forms-development/planned-uei-updates . 

Table of Contents

Program description.

• Assistance Listings Number
• Assistance Listings Title
• Funding Opportunity Title
• Funding Opportunity Number
• Authorizing Authority for Program
• Appropriation Authority for Program
• Announcement Type
• Program Category
• Program Overview, Objectives, and Priorities
• Performance Measures

Federal Award Information

• Available Funding for the NOFO:  $90,000,000
• Period of Performance:      36 months
• Projected Period of Performance Start Date(s): September 1, 2024
•  Projected Period of Performance End Date(s): August 31, 2027
• Projected Budget Period(s)
• Funding Instrument Type:     Grant

  Eligibility Information

• Eligible Applicants
•  Applicant Eligibility Criteria
•  Subawards and Beneficiaries
• Other Eligibility Restrictions
• Cost Share or Match

Application and Submission Information

• Key Dates and Times
• Agreeing to Terms and Conditions of the Award
•  Address to Request Application Package
• Requirements: Obtain a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) and Register in the System for Award Management (SAM)
• Steps Required to Obtain a Unique Entity Identifier, Register in the System for Award Management (SAM), and Submit an Application
• Electronic Delivery
• How to Register to Apply
• Create a login.gov account
• Submitting the Application
• Timely Receipt Requirements and Proof of Timely Submission
• Intergovernmental Review
• Funding Restrictions and Allowable Costs

  Application Review Information

•  Application Evaluation Criteria
• Review and Selection Process

Federal Award Administration Information

• Notice of Award
• Administrative and National Policy Requirements
•  Monitoring and Oversight

  DHS Awarding Agency Contact Information

• Contact and Resource Information
• Systems Information

 Additional Information

• Termination Provisions
• Program Evaluation
• Financial Assistance Programs for Infrastructure
• Report issues of fraud, waste, abuse

A.  Program Description

1.   issued by.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)/Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)/Grant Programs Directorate (GPD)  

2.   Assistance Listings Number

97.056 

3.   Assistance Listings Title

Port Security Grant Program

4.   Funding Opportunity Title

Fiscal Year 2024 Port Security Grant Program (PSGP)

5.   Funding Opportunity Number

DHS-24-GPD-056-00-99

6.   Authorizing Authority for Program

Section 102 of the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (Pub. L. No. 107-295, as amended) (46 U.S.C. § 70107)

7.   Appropriation Authority for Program

Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2024, Pub. L. No. 118-47, Title III, “Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery” 

8.   Announcement Type

9.   program category.

Preparedness: Infrastructure Security 

10. Program Overview, Objectives and Priorities

A.   overview.

The Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Port Security Grant Program (PSGP) is one of four grant programs that constitute DHS/FEMA’s focus on transportation infrastructure security activities. These grant programs are part of a comprehensive set of measures authorized by Congress and implemented by the Administration to help strengthen the nation’s critical infrastructure against risks associated with potential terrorist attacks. The PSGP provides funds to state, local, territorial, and private sector maritime partners to support increased port-wide risk management and protect critical marine transportation system infrastructure from acts of terrorism, major disasters, and other emergencies. Cumulative funding of PSGP since inception (2001) to present includes approximately $3,288,610,706 for approximately 4,800 grant awards dedicated specifically for enhancing maritime security capabilities throughout U.S. ports. 

For FY 2024, DHS is focused on the criticality of information sharing and collaboration to building a national culture of preparedness and protecting against terrorism and other threats to our national security. DHS and its homeland security mission were born from the “failures among federal agencies and between the federal agencies and state and local authorities to share critical information related to the threat of terrorism” prior to the September 11, 2001, attacks.  The threat profile has changed in the past two decades. We now face continuous cyber threats by sophisticated actors, threats to soft targets and crowded places, and threats from domestic violent extremists, who represent one of the most persistent threats to the nation today . Therefore, for FY 2024, DHS has identified two priority areas related to some of the most serious threats that recipients should address with their PSGP funds for enhancing maritime security. These two priority areas are enhancing cybersecurity and enhancing the protection of soft targets/crowded places. DHS also will continue to forge partnerships to strengthen information sharing and collaboration in each of these priority areas.

For FY 2023, 403 applications were received and 299 approved for funding. For a full list of recipients, please refer to Information Bulletin (IB) 490a .

b.   Goals, Objectives, and Priorities

Goals: The goal of PSGP is strengthened port-wide risk management and protection of critical surface transportation infrastructure from acts of terrorism, major disasters, and other emergencies.

Objectives: PSGP provides resources that support port authorities, facility operators, and state, local, and territorial agencies to meet the following objectives:

• Build and sustain core capabilities of maritime infrastructure systems in annual national priority areas, including for FY 2024 the priorities of enhancing cybersecurity and enhancing the protection of soft targets/crowded places.
• Address and close gaps identified in Area Maritime Transportation Security Plans and Facility Security Plans. 
• Implement a comprehensive and coordinated (all-inclusive) approach to address enduring security needs of communities that includes planning, training and awareness campaigns, equipment and capital projects, and exercises.

Priorities: Given the evolving threat landscape, it is incumbent upon DHS/FEMA to continuously evaluate the national risk profile and set priorities that help ensure appropriate allocation of scarce security dollars. In assessing the national risk profile for FY 2024, two areas warrant the most concern:

• Enhancing cybersecurity; and
• Enhancing the protection of soft targets/crowded places.

For more information about these priorities, see Section D.10.b.

Likewise, there are several enduring security needs that crosscut the homeland security enterprise. The following are second-tier priorities that help recipients implement a comprehensive approach to securing critical maritime transportation infrastructure: 

• Effective planning;
• Training and awareness campaigns;
• Equipment and capital projects; and

The table below provides a breakdown of these priority areas for the FY 2024 PSGP, showing both the core capabilities impacted, as well as examples of eligible maritime security project types for each area. More information on allowable investments can be found in the Funding Restrictions and Allowable Costs section below. As discussed in Section E, projects that sufficiently address one or more of the two National Priorities (enhancing cybersecurity or enhancing the protection of soft targets/crowded places) will have their final review scores increased by a multiplier of 20%.

FY 2024 PSGP Funding Priorities

All priorities in this table concern the Safety and Security and Transportation Lifelines.

National Priorities

Enduring Needs

c. Alignment to Program Purpose and the DHS and FEMA Strategic Plan 

Among the five basic homeland security missions noted in the  DHS Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2020-2024 , the PSGP supports the goal to Strengthen Preparedness and Resilience. 

The  2022-2026 FEMA Strategic Plan outlines three bold, ambitious goals in order to position FEMA to address the increasing range and complexity of disasters, support the diversity of communities we serve, and complement the nation’s growing expectations of the emergency management community. The PSGP supports Goal 3 to Promote and Sustain a Ready FEMA and Prepared Nation. We invite our stakeholders and partners to also adopt these priorities and join us in building a more prepared and resilient nation. 

11. Performance Measures

Performance metrics for this program are as follows:

• Percentage of funding allocated by the recipient to core capabilities to build or sustain the national priorities identified in the section above.

B.  Federal Award Information

1.   available funding for the nofo:                       $90,000,000, 2.   period of performance:                                         36 months.

Extensions to the period of performance are allowed. For additional information on period of performance extensions, please refer to the Preparedness Grants Manual (FM-207-23-001). 

3.   Projected Period of Performance Start Date(s):               September 1, 2024

4.   projected period of performance end date(s):                august 31, 2027, 5.   projected budget period(s) :                                                there will be only a single budget period with the same start and end dates as the period of performance. see 2 c.f.r. § 200.1 for definitions of “budget period” and “period of performance.”, 6.   funding instrument type:                       grant, c.  eligibility information, 1.   eligible applicants.

All entities subject to an AMSP, as defined by 46 U.S.C. § 70103(b), may apply for PSGP funding. Eligible applicants include but are not limited to port authorities, facility operators, and state, local, and territorial government agencies. A facility operator owns, leases, or operates any structure or facility of any kind located in, on, under, or adjacent to any waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Examples of facility operators include, but are not limited to terminal operators, ferry systems, bar/harbor pilots, and merchant’s exchanges. See the “Applications Submitted by Eligible Entities” section below for further detail.

2.   Applicant Eligibility Criteria

Pursuant to the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (MTSA), Pub. L. No. 107-295, as amended, DHS established a risk-based grant program to support maritime security risk management. Funding is directed towards the implementation of AMSPs, Facility Security Plans (FSP), and Vessel Security Plans (VSP) among port authorities, facility operators, and state and local government agencies that are required to provide port security services. In administering the grant program, national, economic, energy, and strategic defense concerns based upon the most current risk assessments available will be considered.

Port Area Definition

A Port Area is a location on a coast, shore, or inland waterway containing one or more harbors where vessels can dock and transfer people or cargo to or from land. For the purposes of the PSGP, eligible ports included those identified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Principal Port List (PPL), as well as unlisted ports which have the presence of MTSA-regulated facilities.

Applications Submitted by Eligible Entities

Subject to the information and exceptions in this section, an eligible entity may submit only one application within each Port Area. An application may contain up to five Investment Justifications (IJs). See Section D, below, for further instructions regarding IJs.

• An eligible entity operating multiple facilities, departments, subcomponents, or agencies within a single Port Area may choose to submit separate applications for facilities, departments, subcomponents, or agencies within it, but any such separate applications will be considered part of the same eligible entity for purposes of the cost-share requirements, as discussed later in this NOFO.
• If a single eligible entity chooses to have its components submit separate applications, each individual facility, department, subcomponent, or agency of that single eligible entity should submit no more than one application. For example, a police department should submit no more than one collective application. If an individual facility, department, subcomponent, or agency of an eligible entity submits more than one application for a single Port Area, FEMA reserves the discretion to consolidate the projects or determine which application(s) to approve or deny.
• Exception: “Hub and spoke” cybersecurity projects may affect a parent organization’s multiple eligible entities in multiple Port Areas. Such projects may be submitted within a primary Port Area for the project implementation. Proportionally, costs associated with entities or subcomponents that are not covered under an AMSP and are not instrumental to enhancing maritime security must not be included in the detailed budget worksheet or IJ and thereby prorating the cost of the project only to those facilities that are covered by the AMSP.

An application submitted by an otherwise eligible non-federal entity (i.e., the applicant) may be deemed ineligible when the person that submitted the application is not: 1) a current employee, personnel, official, staff, or leadership  of the non-federal entity; and 2) duly authorized to apply  for an award on behalf of the non-federal entity at the time of application.

Further, the Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) and Signatory Authority (SA) must be a duly authorized current employee, personnel, official, staff, or leadership of the recipient and provide an email address unique to the recipient at the time of application and upon any change in assignment during the period of performance . Consultants or contractors of the recipient are not permitted to be the AOR or SA of the recipient. It is the sole responsibility of the recipient to keep their points of contact for the organization up-to-date and accurate in all federal systems.

Compliance with Maritime Security Regulations

As a condition of eligibility, all PSGP applicants must be fully compliant with relevant Maritime Security Regulations (33 C.F.R. Parts 101-106). Any applicant who, as of the grant application deadline, has an open or outstanding Notice of Violation (NOV) will not be considered for PSGP funding if:

• The applicant has failed to pay the NOV within 45 days of receipt of the NOV and the applicant has failed to decline the NOV within 45 days of receipt of the NOV, resulting in the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) entering a finding of default in accordance with 33 C.F.R. § 1.07- 11(f)(2); or
• The applicant appealed the NOV pursuant to 33 C.F.R § 1.07-70 and received a final appeal decision from the Commandant, USCG, as described in 33 C.F.R. § 1.07-75, and failed to come into compliance with the terms of the final appeal decision within the timelines noted herein.

The local USCG Captain of the Port (COTP) will verify security compliance eligibility during the field review process. Eligibility does not guarantee grant funding..

Ferry Systems

Ferry systems are eligible to apply for FY 2024 PSGP funds. However, any ferry system electing to participate (e.g., submit an application) under the FY 2024 PSGP will not be eligible to participate (e.g., submit an application) under the FY 2024 Transit Security Grant Program (TSGP) and will not be considered for funding under the FY 2024 TSGP. Likewise, any ferry system that participates in the FY 2024 TSGP will not be eligible for funding under the FY 2024 PSGP. 

Subawards are prohibited under PSGP . Applicants are also prohibited from applying on behalf of other, separate entities. Notwithstanding this prohibition, however, community-based projects, to include planning, training, exercises, and port-wide cyber vulnerability assessments and cyber interoperability projects that may include multiple beneficiaries (e.g., a port authority hosts a large training session or exercise) in which the applicant applies for and administers the grant award are allowable. Only the eligible applicant is permitted to take ownership of PSGP-funded equipment and other non-consumables until disposition actions are required.

3.   Subawards and Beneficiaries

A.   subaward allowability.

Subawards are prohibited under the PSGP . Applicants are also prohibited from applying on behalf of other, separate entities. Notwithstanding this prohibition, however, community-based projects, to include planning, training, exercises, and port-wide cyber vulnerability assessments and cyber interoperability projects that may include multiple beneficiaries (e.g., a port authority hosts a large training session or exercise) in which the applicant applies for and administers the grant award are allowable. Only the eligible applicant is permitted to take ownership of PSGP-funded equipment and other non-consumables until disposition actions are required.

b. Beneficiaries or Participants

This NOFO and any subsequent federal awards create no rights or causes of action for any participant or beneficiary.

4. Other Eligibility Restrictions

A.   national incident management system (nims) implementation .

Prior to allocation of any federal preparedness awards, recipients must ensure and maintain adoption and implementation of NIMS. The list of objectives used for progress and achievement reporting is on FEMA’s website at https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/nims/implementation-training .

Please see the Preparedness Grants Manual for more information on NIMS.

5. Cost Share or Match

The FY 2024 PSGP has a cost-share requirement. The non-federal entity contribution can be cash (hard match) or third-party in-kind (soft match), with the exception of construction activities, which must be a cash (hard) match. In-kind contributions are defined as third-party contributions per 2 C.F.R. § 200.306. 

All applicants will be required to commit to the cost-share requirement of each project at the time of application. The required cost share is based on and calculated against the total of all PSGP funds awarded to an eligible entity as described in the “Applications Submitted by Eligible Entities” section above during this fiscal year within a single Port Area. For example, if an entity operates multiple facilities under the same UEI within the same Port Area and each facility requests projects exempt of cost share due to being $25,000 or less, FEMA will view these projects collectively for purposes of determining the appropriate cost share and a cost share will be required if the total exceeds $25,000. As a result, multiple components within a single eligible entity (i.e., port authority, facility operator, local government, or state government) are strongly encouraged to coordinate their applications if they apply separately (even if addressing multiple, disparate projects within the Port Area) for these cost share purposes.

Public-Sector Cost Share

All public sector and non-governmental, nonprofit PSGP award recipients—meaning recipients other than private, for-profit entities—must provide a non-federal entity contribution supporting 25% of the total of all project costs as submitted in the application and approved in the award. The non-federal contribution should be specifically identified for each proposed project. The non-federal contribution, whether cash or third-party in-kind match, has the same eligibility requirements as the federal share (e.g . , operational costs for routine patrols are ineligible, and operational costs for overtime to conduct an approved exercise may be eligible as part of the IJ) and must be justified as part of the project within the investment justification. For example, if the federal award for a public sector recipient requires a 25% cost share and the total project cost is $100,000, then:

• Federal share is 75% of $100,000 = $75,000
• Recipient cost share is 25% of $100,000 = $25,000

Because the statute at 46 U.S.C. § 70107(c)(1) states that the federal share shall not exceed 75% of the total cost, any application of the percentages that would result in a decimal will be rounded down in favor of the federal share not exceeding 75%, even if normal rounding standards would indicate rounding up in certain instances.

In accordance with Public Law 96-205, title VI, section 601, Mar. 12,1980 as amended, 48 U.S.C. § 1469a(d), and OMB Controller Alert CA-23-04, Waiving Matching Fund Requirements for Insular Areas (Feb. 6, 2023) agencies are required to waive any requirement for local matching funds for grants to an Insular Area under $200,000, when the match is otherwise required by law. Insular Areas include the U.S. territories of American Samoa, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. For the four Insular Areas, agencies may waive the requirement for matching where the local match amount otherwise required by law is $200,000 or greater. For amounts $200,000 or greater it is at the applicable program’s discretion to waive cost shares either in part or in total.

Private-Sector Cost Share

Private, for-profit PSGP award recipients must provide a non-federal entity contribution supporting 50% of the total of all project costs as submitted in the application and approved in the award.  The non-federal entity contribution should be specifically identified for each proposed project. The non-federal contribution, whether cash (hard) or third-party in-kind (soft), has the same eligibility requirements as the federal share (e.g . , operational costs for routine patrols are ineligible, and operational costs for overtime to conduct an approved exercise may be eligible as part of the IJ) and must be justified as part of the project within the IJ. For example, if the federal award for a private sector recipient requires a 50% cost share and the total project cost is $100,000, then:

• Federal share is 50% of $100,000 = $50,000 
• Recipient cost share is 50% of $100,000 = $50,000

Ultimately, the recipient is responsible for ensuring that it contributes the proper cost share to its actual project costs. If actual total project costs exceed the projected total project costs stated in the Federal Award, the recipient will not receive any additional federal funding and will be responsible for contributing additional funds above the required cost match. If actual total project costs are less than the projected total project costs stated in the federal award, the recipient will be responsible for contributing a cost match calculated as a percentage of those actual project costs. 

Cash and third-party in-kind matches must consist of eligible costs (i.e., same allowability as the federal share) and must be identified as part of the submitted detailed budget worksheet. A cash-match includes cash spent for project-related costs, while a third-party in-kind match includes the valuation of in-kind services. The cost match requirement for the PSGP award may not be met by funds from another federal grant or assistance program, or by funds used to meet matching requirements for another federal grant program, unless otherwise permitted by federal statute. Likewise, third-party in-kind matches used to meet the matching requirement for the PSGP award may not be used to meet matching requirements for any other federal grant program. Additionally, normal routine operational costs cannot be used as a cost match unless a completely new capability is being awarded and must be justified as “reasonable and necessary” to complete the project. Please see 2 C.F.R. § 200.306, as applicable, for further guidance regarding cost matching. 

Exceptions to the Cost Match Requirements

The following exceptions to the cost match requirement may apply:

• Port-wide planning, training, and exercises;
• Security camera systems with shared access;
• Response vessels; and
• Other maritime domain awareness systems.
• $25,000 or Less:  There is no matching requirement for grant awards where the total project cost for all projects under the award is $25,000 or less in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 70107(c)(2)(A). If multiple small projects for the same Port Area by the same entity (i.e., same UEI) are submitted totaling more than $25,000 under this exemption, a cost match is required to be demonstrated at the time of application. 
• Public Safety Personnel Security Zone Training:  There is no matching requirement for grants to train public safety personnel in the enforcement of security zones as defined by 46 U.S.C. § 70132 or in assisting in the enforcement of such security zones. Per 46 U.S.C. § 70132(d), the term “public safety personnel” includes any federal, state (or political subdivision thereof), territorial, or tribal law enforcement officer, firefighter, or emergency response provider.

Waiver Requests:  Requests for cost match waivers as outlined in 46 U.S.C. § 70107(c) may be considered for successful applicants only after awards have been made. Applicants must have demonstrated the ability to comply with the cost match requirement at the time of application and since being awarded the grant, have experienced significant financial constraints as outlined in DHS/FEMA Information Bulletin (IB) 376 , (i.e., specific economic issues preclude provision of the cost share identified in the original grant application). Cost share waiver requests that do not demonstrate new, post-award difficulties and cost share waivers submitted at the time of application will not be considered. Cost share waiver requests must comply with the process identified in IB 376 . 

D.  Application and Submission Information

1.   key dates and times, a.   application start date:                                                    04/16/2024, b.   application submission deadline:                                  06/24/2024 at 5 p.m. et.

All applications must  be received by the established deadline.  

FEMA’s Grants Outcomes System (FEMA GO) automatically records proof of timely submission and the system generates an electronic date/time stamp when FEMA GO successfully receives the application. The individual with the AOR role that submitted the application will also receive the official date/time stamp and a FEMA GO tracking number in an email serving as proof of their timely submission. For additional information on how an applicant will be notified of application receipt, see the subsection titled “Timely Receipt Requirements and Proof of Timely Submission” in Section D of this NOFO.

FEMA will not review applications that are received after the deadline or consider these late applications for funding . FEMA may, however, extend the application deadline on request for any applicant who can demonstrate that good cause exists to justify extending the deadline. Good cause for an extension may include technical problems outside of the applicant’s control that prevent submission of the application by the deadline, other exigent or emergency circumstances, or statutory requirements for FEMA to make an award. 

Applicants experiencing technical problems outside of their control must notify FEMA as soon as possible and before the application deadline. Failure to timely notify FEMA of the issue that prevented the timely filing of the application may preclude consideration of the award. “Timely notification” of FEMA means the following: prior to the application deadline and within 48 hours after the applicant became aware of the issue.

A list of FEMA contacts can be found in Section G of this NOFO, “DHS Awarding Agency Contact Information.”   For technical assistance with the FEMA GO system, please contact the FEMA GO Helpdesk at [email protected] or (877) 585-3242, Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM – 6:00 PM Eastern Time (ET). For programmatic or grants management questions, please contact your Preparedness Officer or Grants Management Specialist. If applicants do not know who to contact or if there are programmatic questions or concerns, please contact [email protected] , Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM ET.

c.   Anticipated Funding Selection Date:                             No later than August 23, 2024

D.  anticipated award date:                                                 no later than september 30, 2024, e.   other key dates:, 2.   agreeing to terms and conditions of the award.

By submitting an application, applicants agree to comply with the requirements of this NOFO and the terms and conditions of the award, should they receive an award.

3.   Address to Request Application Package

Applications are processed through the FEMA GO system. To access the system, go to https://go.fema.gov/ .

4. Requirements: Obtain a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) and Register in the System for Award Management ( SAM.gov) 

Each applicant, unless they have a valid exception under 2 CFR §25.110, must:

• Be registered in Sam.Gov before application submission. 
• Provide a valid UEI in its application.
• Continue to always maintain an active SAM registration with current information during the federal award process. Note: Per 2 C.F.R. § 25.300, subrecipients are NOT required to go through the full SAM registration process. First-tier subrecipients (meaning entities receiving funds directly from the recipient) are only required to obtain a UEI through SAM, but they are not required to complete the full SAM registration in order to obtain a UEI. Recipients may not make subawards unless the subrecipient has obtained and provided the UEI.

Lower-tier subrecipients (meaning entities receiving funds passed through by a higher-tier subrecipient) are not required to have a UEI and are not required to register in SAM. Applicants are also not permitted to require subrecipients to complete a full registration in SAM beyond obtaining the UEI.

5.   Steps Required to Obtain a Unique Entity Identifier, Register in the System for Award Management (SAM), and Submit an Application

Applying for an award under this program is a multi-step process and requires time to complete. Applicants are encouraged to register early as the registration process can take four weeks or more to complete. Therefore, registration should be done in sufficient time to ensure it does not impact your ability to meet required submission deadlines. Please review the table above for estimated deadlines to complete each of the steps listed. Failure of an applicant to comply with any of the required steps before the deadline for submitting an application may disqualify that application from funding.

To apply for an award under this program, all applicants must:

• Apply for, update, or verify their UEI number and Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the Internal Revenue Service; 
• In the application, provide an UEI number;
• Have an account with login.gov ;
• Register for, update, or verify their SAM account and ensure the account is active before submitting the application;
• Register in FEMA GO, add the organization to the system, and establish the AOR. The organization’s electronic business point of contact (EBiz POC) from the SAM registration may need to be involved in this step. For step-by-step instructions, see https://www.fema.gov/grants/guidance-tools/fema-go/startup ;
• Submit the complete application in FEMA GO; and
• Continue to maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times during which it has an active federal award or an application or plan under consideration by a federal awarding agency. As part of this, applicants must also provide information on an applicant’s immediate and highest-level owner and subsidiaries, as well as on all predecessors that have been awarded federal contracts or federal financial assistance within the last three years, if applicable.

Applicants are advised that FEMA may not make a federal award until the applicant has complied with all applicable SAM requirements. Therefore, an applicant’s SAM registration must be active not only at the time of application, but also during the application review period and when FEMA is ready to make a federal award. Further, as noted above, an applicant’s or recipient’s SAM registration must remain active for the duration of an active federal award. If an applicant’s SAM registration is expired at the time of application, expires during application review, or expires any other time before award, FEMA may determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive a federal award and use that determination as a basis for making a federal award to another applicant. 

Per 2 C.F.R. § 25.110(c)(2)(iii), if an applicant is experiencing exigent circumstances that prevents it from obtaining an UEI number and completing SAM registration prior to receiving a federal award, the applicant must notify FEMA as soon as possible by contacting [email protected] and providing the details of the circumstances that prevent completion of these requirements. If FEMA determines that there are exigent circumstances and FEMA has decided to make an award, the applicant will be required to obtain an UEI number, if applicable, and complete SAM registration within 30 days of the federal award date. 

6.   Electronic Delivery

DHS is participating in the Grants.gov initiative to provide the grant community with a single site to find and apply for grant funding opportunities. DHS encourages or requires applicants to submit their applications online through Grants.gov, depending on the funding opportunity.

For this funding opportunity, FEMA requires applicants to submit applications through FEMA GO.

7.   How to Register to Apply

•  General Instructions:  Registering and applying for an award under this program is a multi-step process and requires time to complete. Read the instructions below about registering to apply for FEMA funds. Applicants should read the registration instructions carefully and prepare the information requested before beginning the registration process. Reviewing and assembling the required information before beginning the registration process will alleviate last-minute searches for required information. The registration process can take up to four weeks to complete.  To ensure an application meets the deadline, applicants are advised to start the required steps well in advance of their submission. Organizations must have an UEI number, an EIN, and an active SAM registration to apply for a federal award under this funding opportunity.  
•  Obtain an UEI Number:   All entities applying for funding, including renewal funding, must have a UEI number. Applicants must enter the UEI number in the applicable data entry field on the SF-424 form.  For more detailed instructions for obtaining a UEI number, refer to:  SAM.gov    
•  Obtain Employer Identification Number  All entities applying for funding must provide an Employer Identification Number (EIN). The EIN can be obtained from the IRS by visiting:  https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/apply-f or-an-employer-identification-number-ein-online.   
•  Create a login.gov account:   Applicants must have a login.gov account in order to register with SAM or update their SAM registration. Applicants can create a login.gov account here:  https://secure.login.gov/sign_up/enter_email?request_id=34f19fa8-14a2-438c-8323-a62b99571fd3 .  Applicants only have to create a login.gov account once. For applicants that are existing SAM users, use the same email address for the login.gov account as with SAM.gov so that the two accounts can be linked. For more information on the login.gov requirements for SAM registration, refer to:  https://www.sam.gov/SAM/pages/public/loginFAQ.jsf .   

 Register with SAM:  All applicants applying online through FEMA GO must register with SAM. Failure to register with SAM will prevent an applicant from completing the application in FEMA GO. SAM registration must be renewed annually. Organizations will be issued a UEI number with the completed SAM registration.  For more detailed instructions for registering with SAM, refer to: https://apply07.grants.gov/help/html/help/Register/RegisterWithSAM.htm . Note: Per 2 C.F.R. § 25.200, applicants must also provide the applicant’s immediate and highest-level owner, subsidiaries, and predecessors that have been awarded federal contracts or federal financial assistance within the last three years, if applicable.

i. Additional SAM Reminders

Existing SAM.gov account holders should check their account to make sure it is “ACTIVE.” SAM registration should be completed at the very beginning of the application period and should be renewed annually to avoid being “INACTIVE.” Please allow plenty of time before the grant application submission deadline to obtain an UEI number and then to register in SAM. It may be four weeks or more after an applicant submits the SAM registration before the registration is active in SAM, and then it may be an additional 24 hours before FEMA’s system recognizes the information.

It is imperative that the information applicants provide is correct and current. Please ensure that your organization’s name, address, and EIN are up to date in SAM and that the UEI number used in SAM is the same one used to apply for all other FEMA awards. Payment under any FEMA award is contingent on the recipient’s having a current SAM registration.

ii.   Help with SAM

The SAM quick start guide for new recipient registration and SAM video tutorial for new applicants are tools created by the General Services Administration (GSA) to assist those registering with SAM. If applicants have questions or concerns about a SAM registration, please contact the Federal Support Desk at  https://www.fsd.gov/fsd-gov/home.do  or call toll free (866) 606-8220.

 Register in FEMA GO, Add the Organization to the System, and Establish the AOR: 

Applicants must register in FEMA GO and add their organization to the system. The organization’s electronic business point of contact (EBiz POC) from the SAM registration may need to be involved in this step. For step-by-step instructions, see https://www.fema.gov/grants/guidance-tools/fema-go/startup .

Note: FEMA GO will support only the most recent major release of the following browsers:

• Google Chrome 
• Internet Explorer
• Mozilla Firefox
• Apple Safari
• Microsoft Edge

Users who attempt to use tablet type devices or other browsers may encounter issues with using FEMA GO.  

8.   Submitting the Application

Applicants will be prompted to submit the standard application information and any program-specific information required as described in Section D. of this NOFO, in the subsection “Content and Form of Application Submission.” The Standard Forms (SF) may be accessed in the Forms tab under the https://grants.gov/forms/forms-repository/sf-424-family . Applicants should review these forms before applying to ensure they have all the information required.

After submitting the final application, FEMA GO will provide either an error message or a successfully received transmission in the form of an email sent to the AOR that submitted the application. Applicants using slow internet connections, such as dial-up connections, should be aware that transmission can take some time before FEMA GO receives your application.

For additional application submission requirements, including program-specific requirements, please refer to the subsection titled “Content and Form of Application Submission” under Section D of this NOFO.

9.   Timely Receipt Requirements and Proof of Timely Submission

All applications must be completed in FEMA GO by the application deadline. FEMA GO automatically records proof of timely submission and the system generates an electronic date/time stamp when FEMA GO successfully receives the application. The individual with the AOR role that submitted the application will also receive the official date/time stamp and a FEMA GO tracking number in an email serving as proof of their timely submission on the date and time that FEMA GO received the application.

Applicants who experience system-related issues will be addressed until 3:00 PM ET on the date applications are due. No new system-related issues will be addressed after this deadline. Applications not received by the application submission deadline will not be accepted.

10.   Content and Form of Application Submission

A. standard required application forms and information.

Generally, applicants have to submit either the non-construction forms (i.e., SF-424A and SF-424B) or construction forms (i.e., SF-424C and SF-424D), meaning that applicants that only have construction work and do not have any non-construction work need only submit the construction forms (i.e., SF-424C and SF-424D) and not the non-construction forms (i.e., SF-424A and SF-424B), and vice versa. However, applicants who have both construction and non-construction work under this program need to submit both the construction and non-construction forms. 

The following forms or information are required to be submitted via FEMA GO. The Standard Forms (SF) are also available at https://grants.gov/forms/forms-repository/sf-424-family

•   SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance
•   Grants.gov Lobbying Form, Certification Regarding Lobbying
•   For construction under an award, submit SF-424C, Budget Information (Construction) , in addition to or instead of SF-424A
• For construction under an award, submit SF-424D, Standard Assurances (Construction) , in addition to or instead of SF-424B
•   SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

b.   Program-Specific Required Forms and Information

The following program-specific forms or information are required to be submitted in FEMA GO : 

• Associated Investment Justification (IJs) template with detailed budget(s); and
• Associated Memoranda of Understanding (MOU)/Memoranda of Agreement (MOA).

i.    Priority   Investments

Cybersecurity

Cybersecurity investments must support the security and functioning of critical infrastructure and core capabilities as they relate to achieving target capabilities related to preventing, preparing for, protecting against, or responding to acts of terrorism at maritime infrastructure facilities. Additional resources and information regarding cybersecurity and cybersecurity performance goals are available through the  Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency ,  Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals , and the  National Institute of Standards and Technology .

Soft Targets and Crowded Places

Soft targets and crowded places are increasingly appealing to terrorists and other violent extremist actors because of their relative accessibility and the large number of potential targets. This challenge is complicated by the prevalent use of simple tactics and less sophisticated attacks. Segments of our society are inherently open to the general public, and by nature of their purpose do not incorporate strict security measures. Given the increased emphasis by terrorists and other violent extremist actors to leverage less sophisticated methods to inflict harm in public areas, it is vital that the public and private sectors collaborate to enhance security of locations such as transportation centers, cruise terminals, ferry systems/terminals, and similar facilities. Additional resources and information regarding securing soft targets and crowded places are available through the  Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency .

ii.   Investment Justification (IJ) 

As part of the FY 2024 PSGP application process, applicants must use the current Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved IJ template on Grants.gov to address each initiative being proposed for funding, including a project’s management and administration (M&A) costs. Applications submitted that do not use the OMB approved IJ template as provided will not be considered for funding. Applications with modified data fields, incomplete data fields, or are segmented into multiple attachments will not be considered for funding. A separate tab within the IJ template should be used for each proposed project. The detailed budget worksheet noted below is included in the IJ template. Please refer to the “Applications Submitted by Eligible Entities” language in Section C above regarding the limitations on the number of applications per eligible entity or facilities, departments, subcomponents, or agencies within a single eligible entity. No single application or IJ may include projects intended to be implemented in different Port Areas, subject to the provisions of this section, below.  Applicants may submit up to five IJs within a single application.   Due to limited available funds, applicants are encouraged to include a statement within the IJ project description identifying a minimum funding level for a project to be feasible in the event that a project can only be partially funded based on available funds. 

IJs must demonstrate how proposed projects address gaps and deficiencies in one or more of the core capabilities outlined in the National Preparedness Goal (the Goal). In the IJ, the applicant must demonstrate the ability to provide enhancements consistent with the purpose of the program and guidance provided by DHS/FEMA. PSGP projects must be both 1) feasible and effective at reducing the risks for which the project was designed; and 2) able to be fully completed within the 36-month period of performance. For information on the feasibility and effectiveness determination, please see the Review and Selection Process as outlined in this NOFO. 

For the purposes of a PSGP application, a Port Area is selected for funding based on the project location. Eligible entities that have facilities in multiple Port Areas should apply for projects based on the Port Area where the project/asset will be implemented, housed, or maintained, not the entity’s headquarters location. For entities submitting applications for a single project that spans multiple Port Areas, such as one patrol vessel that may be deployed outside of the primary Port Area, the project location is considered to be the Port Area that will see the most benefit from the project. Large projects that implement multiple components in multiple Port Areas, such as state agency purchases of multiple patrol vessels for multiple Port Areas, must be submitted as separate applications (e.g., State Police vessel project in Port Area #1 is one application; State Police vessel project in Port Area #2 is a separate application). All eligible and complete applications will be provided to the applicable COTP for further review. 

Applicants seeking to participate in large-scale regional projects requiring the purchase of services or equipment should directly reference this need in their applications. Applicants should specify their portion of the requested project funding and role in the project. Applicants should also note if their portion of a project can be completed independently of the large-scale regional project. Applicants are prohibited from applying for equipment or other non-consumables intended to be solely used by another agency.

Applicants will find the IJ template on Grants.gov in the “Related Documents” tab of the PSGP posting. This IJ template must be used for each project submitted. Applicants must provide information in the following categories for each proposed investment:

• Background; 
• Strategic and Program Priorities; 
• Impact; and 
• Funding/Implementation Plan. 

Applicants must use the following file naming convention when submitting an IJ as part of the FY 2024 PSGP: 

Name of Applicant_IJ Numbers (Example: XYZ Oil_IJ 1-3)

iii. Detailed Budget 

Detailed budget worksheets are incorporated within the PSGP IJ template. Applicants must use the IJ template provided. All applicants must complete the detailed budget worksheets for each corresponding project requested at the time of application. The detailed budget must be complete, reasonable, and cost-effective in relation to the proposed project and should provide the basis of computation of all project-related costs (including M&A costs) and any appropriate narrative. Review panels must be able to thoroughly evaluate the projects being submitted based on the information provided. Consequently, applicants must provide an appropriate level of detail within the budget detail worksheets to clarify what will be purchased and spent. Applications that do not include a detailed budget narrative will not be considered for funding. Detailed budgets often assist reviewers in determining what type of equipment or service is being purchased, which may assist in determining the effectiveness of a project. Additionally, a detailed budget must demonstrate the required cost share, either cash (hard) or third-party in-kind (soft), of the recipient based on the projected project cost. Applications failing to demonstrate the required cost share within the detailed budget will not be considered for funding.

Cash and third-party in-kind matches must consist of eligible costs (i.e., same allowability as the federal share), reasonable and necessary to complete the project, and must be identified as part of the submitted budget detail worksheet. A cash (hard) match includes cash spent for project-related costs while a third-party in-kind (soft) match includes the valuation of in-kind services. The cost match requirement for a PSGP award may not be met by funds from another federal grant or assistance program or funds used to meet matching requirements for another federal grant program. Likewise, third-party in-kind matches used to meet the matching requirement for the PSGP award may not be used to meet matching requirements for any other federal grant program. Please see Section C of this NOFO, and reference 2 C.F.R. § 200.306 as applicable, for further guidance regarding cost matching. 

iv.  MOU/MOA Requirement for Security Services Providers 

State and local agencies that are identified in the AMSP of their respective COTP/Federal Maritime Security Coordinator as providing security services to one or more MTSA regulated facilities within a Port Area may apply for PSGP funding. However, state, local, and territorial agencies that are not specifically identified in their respective AMSP but are otherwise required to provide port security services must have a signed MOU/MOA between the security service agency and the MTSA regulated facilities receiving these services within the applicant Port Area prior to receipt of PSGP funding  and must include an acknowledgement of the security services, roles, and responsibilities of all entities involved. This includes agencies or entities that are new to the port area or are newly participating in Area Maritime Security Committee activities but are not yet included in the AMSP. These entities must have an MOU/MOA with the respective MTSA regulated facility pending AMSP updates. This information must be maintained by the grant recipient and provided to DHS/FEMA upon request; or verification through the field review process that the agency is identified within the MOU/MOA as an entity that provides maritime security services or is otherwise required to provide port security services. The MOU/MOA must address the following points: 

• The nature of the security service that the applicant agrees to supply to the MTSA regulated facility (e.g., waterside surveillance, increased screening); 
• The roles and responsibilities of the MTSA regulated facility and the applicant during different Maritime Security levels;
• An acknowledgement by the MTSA regulated facility that the applicant is part of the facility’s security plan; and, 
• An acknowledgment that the applicant will provide semi-annual progress reports on project status to the local applicable Area Maritime Security Committee and/or COTP. 

The signed MOU/MOA for state or local agencies providing security services to regulated entities should be submitted with the grant application as a file attachment within  FEMA GO . A sample MOU/MOA can be found below. Applicants must use the following file naming convention for FY 2024 MOUs and MOAs: 

Name of Applicant_MOU (Example: Harris County_MOU)

See the appendix in Section H.5 of this NOFO for a sample MOU/MOA. The sample MOU/MOA demonstrates all of the elements required in the PSGP NOFO for acceptance for review as part of a grant application from a state or local agency providing security services to MTSA-regulated entities. 

v.   Sensitive Security Information (SSI) Requirements

A portion of the information that is routinely submitted in the course of applying for funding or reporting under certain programs or that is provided in the course of an entity’s grant management activities under those programs that are under federal control is subjected to protection under SSI requirements and must be properly identified and marked. SSI is a control designation used by DHS/FEMA to protect transportation security related information. It is applied to information about security programs, vulnerability and threat assessments, screening processes, technical specifications of certain screening equipment and objects used to test screening equipment, and equipment used for communicating security information relating to air, land, or maritime transportation. Further information can be found in 49 C.F.R. §§ 1520.1-15.20.19.

For the purposes of the PSGP, and due to the high frequency of SSI found in IJs, all IJs shall be considered SSI and treated as such until they have been subject to review for SSI by DHS/FEMA. This means that applicants shall label these documents as SSI in accordance with 49 C.F.R. § 1520.13. 

11. Intergovernmental Review 

An intergovernmental review may be required. Applicants must contact their state’s Single Point of Contact (SPOC) to comply with the state’s process under Executive Order 12372 (See https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12372.html ;  Intergovernmental Review (SPOC List) (whitehouse.gov) )

12. Funding Restrictions and Allowable Costs

Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements at 2 C.F.R. Part 200, unless otherwise indicated in the NOFO, the terms and conditions of the award, or the Preparedness Grants Manual. This includes, among other requirements, that costs must be incurred, and products and services must be delivered, within the period of performance of the award. See 2 C.F.R. § 200.403(h) (referring to budget periods, which for FEMA awards under this program is the same as the period of performance).

Federal funds made available through this award may be used for the purpose set forth in this NOFO, the Preparedness Grants Manual , and the terms and conditions of the award and must be consistent with the statutory authority for the award. Award funds may not be used for matching funds for any other federal awards, lobbying, or intervention in federal regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings. In addition, federal funds may not be used to sue the Federal Government or any other government entity. See the Preparedness Grants Manual for more information on funding restrictions and allowable costs.

a.   Prohibitions on Expending FEMA Award Funds for Covered Telecommunications Equipment or Services 

See the Preparedness Grants Manual for information on prohibitions on expending FEMA award funds for covered telecommunications equipment or services.

b.   Pre-Award Costs

Pre-award costs are not allowable and will not be approved, with the exception of costs resulting from pre-award grant writing services provided by an independent contractor that shall not exceed $1,500 per applicant per year.  

c.   Management and Administration (M&A) Costs 

M&A costs are allowed by the FY 2024 Annual Appropriation (Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2024, Pub. L. No. 118-47, Title III, “Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery,” Section 302). Recipients may use up to   5% of the amount of the award’s federal share for their M&A costs. M&A activities are those defined as directly relating to the management and administration of PSGP funds, such as financial management and monitoring. M&A expenses must be based on actual expenses or known contractual costs. Requests that are simple percentages of the award, without supporting justification, will not be allowed or considered for reimbursement. PSGP funds may be used for the following M&A costs:

• Management of the awarded fiscal years’ PSGP award; 
• Design and implementation of the awarded fiscal years’ PSGP submission meeting compliance with reporting/data collection requirements, including data calls;
• Information collection and processing necessary to respond to FEMA data calls;
• Domestic travel expenses related to PSGP grant administration (International travel is not an allowable cost under this program unless approved in advance by DHS/FEMA.); and
• Acquisition of authorized office equipment, including personal computers or laptops for PSGP M&A purposes.

M&A costs are not operational costs but are necessary costs incurred in direct support of the federal award or as a consequence of it, such as travel, meeting-related expenses, and salaries of full/part-time staff in direct support of the program. As such, M&A costs can be itemized in financial reports. Other M&A cost examples include preparing and submitting required programmatic and financial reports, establishing and/or maintaining equipment inventory, documenting operational and equipment expenditures for financial accounting purposes; responding to official information requests from state and federal oversight authorities, including completing the Civil Rights Evaluation Tool as required by DHS; and grant performance measurement or evaluation activities. 

If an applicant uses an outside consultant or contractor to provide pre-award grant writing services or post-award grant management services, the considerations and requirements in the “Authorized Use of Contractual Grant Writers And/Or Grant Managers” section below apply. 

d.   Indirect Facilities & Administrative (F&A) Costs

Indirect (F&A) costs (IDC) mean those costs incurred for a common or joint purpose benefitting more than one cost objective and not readily assignable to the cost objectives specifically benefitted, without effort disproportionate to the results achieved. IDC are allowable by the recipient and subrecipients as described in 2 C.F.R. Part 200, including 2 C.F.R. § 200.414. Applicants with a current negotiated IDC rate agreement who desire to charge indirect costs to a federal award must provide a copy of their IDC rate agreement with their applications. Not all applicants are required to have a current negotiated IDC rate agreement. Applicants that are not required to have a negotiated IDC rate agreement but are required to develop an IDC rate proposal must provide a copy of their proposal with their applications. Applicants who do not have a current negotiated IDC rate agreement (including a provisional rate) and wish to charge the de minimis rate must reach out to FEMA for further instructions. Applicants who wish to use a cost allocation plan in lieu of an IDC rate proposal must reach out to the FEMA Point of Contact for further instructions. As it relates to the IDC for subrecipients, a recipient must follow the requirements of 2 C.F.R. §§ 200.332 and 200.414 in approving the IDC rate for subawards. For information on procedures for establishing indirect cost rates, see the  Preparedness Grants Manual .

e.   Evaluation Costs

Evaluation costs are allowable. See Section H.2 “Program Evaluation” for more details.

f.    Other Direct Costs

Costs generally need to fit within one of the categories listed below to be allowable under this program. Applicants who have questions about whether a potential cost is allowable or not under this program should contact their Preparedness Officer.

Specific investments made in support of the funding priorities generally fall into one of the following allowable expense categories:

• Operational Activities;
• Equipment and Capital Projects;
• Training and Awareness Campaigns; and

The following provides guidance on allowable costs within each of these areas:

i.    Planning

Planning activities address the Soft Targets/Crowded Places; Cybersecurity; and Planning Priorities.

PSGP funds may be used for the following types of planning activities:

• Development or updating of port wide risk mitigation plan (PRMP), including the conduct of port security vulnerability assessments as necessary to support plan update/development;
• Development and enhancement of security plans and protocols within the Area Maritime Security Plan (AMSP), PRMP, and the Business Continuity and Resumption of Trade Plans (BCRTP) in support of maritime security and risk mitigation planning;
• Materials required to conduct planning activities noted in this section;
• Travel and per diem related to the professional planning activities noted in this section;
• Coordination and information sharing with fusion centers;
• Planning activities related to alert and warning capabilities;
• Conducting risk and resilience assessments on increasingly connected cyber and physical systems, on which security depends, using the Infrastructure Resilience Planning Framework and related CISA resources;
• Other port wide maritime security project planning activities, which emphasize the ability to adapt to changing conditions and be prepared to withstand, and recover from, disruptions due to emergencies with prior approval from FEMA; and
• Backfill, overtime, hiring of part-time temporary personnel, and contractors or consultants to assist with planning activities. Copies of PSGP-funded plans must be made available to FEMA and the U. S. Coast Guard (USCG) upon request.

ii.   Operational Activities

Operational Activities address the Soft Targets/Crowded Places Priority.

Explosive Detection Canine Teams (EDCTs)

Use of canines (K-9) for explosive detection is one of the most effective solutions for the detection of vehicle-borne IEDs. When combined with the existing capability of a port or ferry security/police force, the added value provided through the addition of a canine team is significant. EDCTs are a proven, reliable resource to detect explosives and are a key component in a balanced counter-sabotage program.

Eligibility for funding of EDCTs is restricted to:

• U.S. Ferry Systems regulated under 33 C.F.R. Parts 101, 103, 104, and the passenger terminals these specific ferries service under 33 C.F.R. Part 105;
• Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) regulated facilities; and
• Port authorities, port police, and local law enforcement agencies that provide direct layered security for these U. S. Ferry Systems and MTSA-regulated facilities, and are defined in an AMSP, Facility Security Plan (FSP), or Vessel Security Plan (VSP).

Applicants may apply for up to $450,000 ($150,000/year for three years) per award to support this endeavor. At the end of the grant period (36 months), recipients will still be responsible for continuing the heightened level of capability provided by the EDCT. A sustainment plan must be submitted with the applicant’s IJ to address the 12-month period beyond the period of performance of the award.

Eligible EDCT Costs

Funds for these EDCTs may not  be used to fund drug detection and apprehension technique training. Only explosives detection training for EDCTs will be funded. The PSGP EDCT funds may only be used for new or expanded  capabilities/programs and cannot be used to pay for existing K-9 teams, personnel, or K-9 training costs already supported by the port area. Repair and replacement of existing EDCT equipment is allowed. Eligible costs include:

• Contracted K-9 and handler providing services in accordance with PSGP guidance;
• Salary and fringe benefits of new full- or part-time K-9 handler positions;
• Training and certifications (travel costs associated with training for new or expanded full or part time agency handlers, and canines are allowable);
• K-9 and handler equipment costs;
• Purchase and train a new K-9 and handler for CBRNE detection; and
• K-9 maintenance costs including but not limited to veterinary, housing, and feeding costs.

Ineligible EDCT costs include, but are not limited to:

• Hiring costs, including costs associated with initial police academy training of new officers;
• Meals and incidentals associated with travel for initial certification;
• Vehicles modified to be used solely to transport canines; and
• Repair or replacement of unallowable equipment.

For additional information on EDCTs, see the Preparedness Grants Manual .

iii. Equipment and Capital Projects

Equipment and Capital Projects address the Soft Targets/Crowded Places; Cybersecurity; and Equipment/Capital Projects Priorities.

Equipment costs are allowed under this program. Please see the Preparedness Grants Manual for more information. Additionally, recipients that are using PSGP funds to support emergency communications equipment activities must comply with the SAFECOM Guidance on Emergency Communications Grants , including provisions on technical standards that ensure and enhance interoperable communications. For more information about SAFECOM, see the Preparedness Grants Manual .

Equipment Acquisition

PSGP funds must comply with FEMA Policy 207-22-0002, Prohibited or Controlled Equipment Under FEMA Awards . PSGP funds may be used for the following categories of equipment. A comprehensive listing of allowable equipment categories and types is found in the Authorized Equipment List (AEL).   Requests for vehicles of any type are subject to secondary review and approval by the National Review Panel. These costs include:

• Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for maritime security providers, such as ballistic protective body armor (not including uniforms);
• CBRNE response and remediation equipment for maritime security providers; 
• CBRNE decontamination equipment for direct maritime security providers and MTSA-regulated industry; 
• CBRNE detection-equipped patrol vehicles (not including armored personnel carriers or tow trucks), provided they will be used exclusively for port/facility CBRNE detection security operations. A CBRNE detection equipped patrol vehicle must include specifically identified, permanently mounted detection equipment; 
• Trailers (not vehicles) designed to carry maritime security equipment essential to maritime security, mitigation, and response (such as boat trailers, dive trailers, or mobile command trailers);
• Mobile Command Centers only when validated by the COTP as essential to address a specifically required capability outlined in the approved AMSP .  This does not include prime movers (tow-trucks), personnel carriers, or equipment transport vehicles;
• CBRNE detection-equipped and patrol watercraft vessel/small boat used to directly support maritime security for a facility or within a Port Area on a routine basis (CBRNE detection equipment requested with the watercraft/small boat in the IJ must be listed and also detailed in the budget). However, a vessel is not required to be CBRNE equipped;
• Marine firefighting vessels, provided they are outfitted with CBRNE detection equipment and are designed and equipped to meet NFPA 1925: Standard on Marine Fire-Fighting Vessels;
• Firefighting foam and Purple-K Powder (PKP) may be purchased by public fire departments that have jurisdictions in a port area and would respond to an incident at an MTSA regulated facility; MTSA facilities may also receive funding for this purpose. Funding will be limited to a one-time purchase based on a worst-case incident at the facility or facilities;
• Information-sharing technology; components or equipment designed to share maritime security risk information and maritime all-hazards risk information with other agencies (equipment must be compatible with generally used equipment);
• Maritime security risk mitigation interoperable communications equipment, including alert and warning capabilities;
• Terrorism incident prevention and response equipment for maritime security risk mitigation;
• Physical security enhancements, to include TWIC projects (e.g., card readers, fences, blast resistant glass, turnstiles, hardened doors, and vehicle gates) at maritime facilities;
• Portable fencing, closed-circuit televisions (CCTVs), passenger vans, minibuses, etc. to support secure passage of vessel crewmembers through a MTSA regulated facility;
• Equipment that enhances continuity capabilities, such as interoperable communications, intrusion prevention/detection, physical security enhancements, software and other equipment needed to support essential functions during a disruption to normal operations;
• Access control equipment and systems;
• Detection and security surveillance equipment; and
• Enhancement of Command-and-Control facilities
• Equipment for new personnel, such as personal protective equipment, is an allowable expense. Weapons and equipment associated with weapons maintenance/security (e.g., firearms, ammunition, and gun lockers) are not allowable.

Recipients may purchase maritime security equipment not listed on the AEL, but only  if they first seek and obtain prior approval  from FEMA.

Requirements for Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems   

For information on sUAS allowability, please see the  Preparedness Grants Manual .

Improvised Explosive Device (IED) and CBRNE Prevention, Protection, Response, Recovery Capabilities

Port areas should continue to enhance their capabilities to prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks employing IEDs, CBRNE devices, and other non-conventional weapons. Please refer to DHS Small Vessel Security Strategy (Apr. 2008) .

Sonar Devices

The four types of allowable sonar devices are: imaging sonar, scanning sonar, side scan sonar, and three-dimensional sonar. These types of sonar devices are intended to support the detection of underwater improvised explosive devices and enhance maritime domain awareness. The eligible types of sonar, and short descriptions of their capabilities, are provided below:

• Imaging Sonar:  A high-frequency sonar that produces “video-like” imagery using a narrow field of view. The sonar system can be pole-mounted over the side of a craft or hand-carried by a diver.
• Scanning Sonar:  Consists of smaller sonar systems that can be mounted on tripods and lowered to the bottom of the waterway. Scanning sonar produces a panoramic view of the surrounding area and can cover up to 360 degrees.
• Side Scan Sonar: Placed inside a shell and towed behind a vessel. Side scan sonar produces strip-like images from both sides of the device.
• Three-Dimensional Sonar:  Produces 3-dimensional imagery of objects using an array receiver.

Physical Security

Physical security is security measures that are designed to deny unauthorized access to facilities, equipment, and resources and to protect personnel and property from damage or harm (such as espionage, theft, or terrorist attacks). Physical security involves the use of multiple layers of interdependent systems and techniques. Physical security has been a focus of PSGP since the program’s inception in 2002. Primarily, physical security is intended to harden MTSA-regulated facilities against attacks. Law enforcement may contribute to physical security through patrols; however, patrol vessels generally enhance multiple core capabilities with a focus on CBRNE detection, deterrence, and response. Funding through PSGP for physical security projects should be only directed toward those projects that address identified MTSA required activities and identified in the entity FSP and/or the port area AMSP. Some examples of funded projects include TWIC-related equipment, fencing, lighting, gates, and CCTV. Physical security projects typically require EHP review prior to obligating PSGP funds.

Capital (Construction) Projects Guidance  

See the  Preparedness Grants Manual for more information about PSGP Capital (Construction) Projects Guidance.  

Controlled Equipment

For decades, the federal government has provided equipment to state, local, territorial, and tribal law enforcement agencies (LEAs) through federal grants. Some federal grant programs have assisted LEAs as they carry out their critical missions to keep the American people safe. The equipment acquired by LEAs through these programs includes administrative equipment, such as office furniture and computers. Some federal grant programs also may include military and military-styled equipment, firearms, and tactical vehicles provided by the federal government, including property covered under 22 C.F.R. Part 121 and 15 C.F.R. Part 774 (collectively, “controlled equipment”). 

However, not all equipment that is considered controlled equipment is allowable under the PSGP. As discussed further below, there are certain “prohibited equipment” that are not allowable under the PSGP. And for the procurement of certain controlled equipment that is allowable under the PSGP, there are additional submission requirements and reviews that must be met before DHS/FEMA will permit funding to be used for this purpose, including but not limited to the provision of policies and procedures in place to safeguard individuals’ privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties. 

DHS/FEMA will continue to collaborate with federal agency partners to ensure that there is a consistent and reasonable approach to the restrictions placed on controlled equipment expenditures while continuing to support these investments when there is a justifiable need. Further, DHS/FEMA will continue to maintain an awareness of the evolving policy developments related to controlled equipment expenditures and keep grant recipients up to date on future developments.

Grant funds under this program may not be used for the purchase of equipment not approved by DHS/FEMA. The purchase of weapons and weapons accessories, including ammunition, is not allowed with PSGP funds. Grant funds under this program must also comply with FEMA Policy 207-22-0002, Prohibited or Controlled Equipment Under FEMA Awards and may not be used for the purchase of the following equipment: 1) firearms; 2) ammunition; 3) grenade launchers; 4) bayonets; or 5) weaponized aircraft, vessels, or vehicles of any kind with weapons installed.

Cybersecurity Projects

PSGP funds may be used for projects that enhance the cybersecurity of:

• Access controls; 
• Sensors; 
• Security cameras; 
• Badge/ID readers; 
• Industrial Control System (ICS)/Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems; 
• Process monitors and controls (such as firewalls, network segmentation, predictive security cloud, etc.); and 
• Passenger/vehicle/cargo security screening equipment (cybersecurity assessments are allowable).

When requesting funds for cybersecurity, applicants are encouraged to propose projects that would aid in implementation of all or part of the Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity, Version 1.1 (the “Framework”) developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), or other similar sources. The Framework gathers existing international standards and practices to help organizations understand, communicate, and manage their cyber risks. For organizations that do not know where to start with developing a cybersecurity program, the Framework provides initial guidance. For organizations with more advanced practices, the Framework offers a way to improve their programs, such as better communication with their leadership and suppliers about management of cyber risks.

DHS’s Enhanced Cybersecurity Services (ECS) program is an example of a resource that assists in protecting U.S.-based public and private entities and combines key elements of capabilities under the “Detect” and “Protect” functions to deliver an impactful solution relative to the outcomes of the Cybersecurity Framework. 

Specifically, ECS offers intrusion prevention and analysis services that help U.S.-based companies and SLTT governments defend their computer systems against unauthorized access, exploitation, and data exfiltration. ECS works by sourcing timely, actionable cyber threat indicators from sensitive and classified Government Furnished Information (GFI). DHS then shares those indicators with accredited Commercial Service Providers (CSPs). Those CSPs in turn use the indicators to block certain types of malicious traffic from entering a company’s networks. Groups interested in subscribing to ECS must contract directly with a CSP in order to receive services. Please visit http://www.cisa.gov/enhanced-cybersecurity-services-ecs for a current list of ECS CSP points of contact.

“Hub and spoke” cybersecurity projects are allowable under PSGP for cybersecurity projects that span multiple port area facilities. Hub and spoke cybersecurity projects may affect a parent organization’s multiple eligible entities, and maritime security partners, in multiple port areas to provide a port-wide benefit. Such projects may be submitted within a primary Port Area for the project implementation. For example, an applicant in the Port of Houston may submit a hub and spoke project within the Houston/Galveston port area which includes system hardening throughout the organization’s facilities in Houston, Port Lavaca, and Corpus Christi. Proportionally, costs associated with entities or subcomponents that are not covered under an AMSP and are not instrumental to enhancing maritime security must not be included in the detailed budget worksheet or investment justification and thereby prorating the cost of the project only to those facilities that are covered by the AMSP. Following the example noted above, the applicant may not include costs associated with cybersecurity of their non-maritime facilities, such as a non-MTSA regulated facility located in San Antonio. Hub and spoke projects are limited only to the enhancement of maritime security as outlined in this section and may not include non-maritime systems or facilities. Please clearly identify hub and spoke projects as such within your IJ and consult your COTP to verify project applicability to enhancing maritime security.

Cybersecurity projects should address risks to the marine transportation system and/or Transportation Security Incidents (TSIs) outlined in the applicable AMSP, or priorities prescribed under applicable FSP or VSP, as mandated under the MTSA or the PRMPs. At the port level, examples of cybersecurity projects include but are not limited to projects that enhance the cybersecurity of access control, sensors, security cameras, badge/ID readers, ICS/SCADA systems, process monitors and controls (such as those that monitor flow rates, valve positions, tank levels, etc.), security/safety of the ship-to-port-to-facility-to-intermodal interface, and systems that control vital cargo machinery at the ship/shore interface (such as cranes, manifolds, loading arms, etc.), and passenger/vehicle/cargo security screening equipment.

Vulnerability assessments are generally not funded under PSGP. However, considering the evolving malicious cyber activity, the relative novelty of cybersecurity as a priority within the program, and the need to adopt best practices included in the voluntary Cybersecurity Framework, vulnerability assessments may be funded as contracted costs. Port-wide assessments are eligible and must demonstrate that the assessment includes port area partners and are necessary to be completed as a single project to ensure a comprehensive evaluation of port area cyber security vulnerabilities.  Personnel costs (other than M&A) are not an allowable expense for conducting these assessments.

CISA offers free resources to assist with initial assessments, please see https://www.cisa.gov/cyber-resource-hub for additional information. Applicants are encouraged to utilize free resources prior to requesting funds under this program.

Copies of completed cybersecurity assessments funded under PSGP that impact the maritime transportation system, lead to a “transportation security incident” (as that term is defined under 46 U.S.C. § 70101(6)), or are otherwise related to systems, personnel, and procedures addressed by the facility and vessel plan shall be made available to FEMA and/or the local COTP upon request. The results of these cybersecurity assessments may be designated as Sensitive Security Information (SSI) and may be used to inform national maritime cybersecurity assessments.

Where a vulnerability assessment has been completed either through contracts or qualified personnel to identify existing gaps and required mitigation efforts, mitigating projects may be funded that include purchase of equipment, software, and infrastructure designed to harden cybersecurity. Specific questions on conducting vulnerability assessments should be referred to the respective FEMA Preparedness Officer.

iv.  Training and Awareness Campaigns

Training and Awareness Campaigns address the Soft Targets/Crowded Places; Cybersecurity; and Training and Awareness Campaign Priorities. 

Port areas should assess their training and qualification requirements and coordinate training needs and qualification requirements of incident response personnel. Funding for personnel training is limited to those courses that are essential to enhance maritime security . A listing of courses that are currently approved for PSGP funding is included in the table below. 

Some training activities require EHP Review, including exercises, drills or trainings that require any type of land, water, or vegetation disturbance or building of temporary structures or that are not located at facilities designed to conduct training and exercises. Additional information on training requirements and EHP review can be found online at Environmental & Historic Preservation Grant Preparation Resources | FEMA.gov .

Funding for training courses not listed in the table below may be permitted on a case-by-case basis depending on the specific maritime security risk mitigation training needs of the eligible PSGP applicant. In such cases, an applicant will be required to explain in the IJ why none of the approved courses referenced in the table below satisfy the identified training need and must submit detailed course information for review and consideration by the local COTP field review team and the Nation Review Panel. 

Further, in accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 70107(c)(2)(C), no cost share is required to train public safety personnel in the enforcement of security zones under section 46 U.S.C. § 70132 or assisting the enforcement of such security zones. Per 46 U.S.C. § 70132(d), the term “public safety personnel” includes any federal, state (or political subdivision thereof), territorial, or tribal law enforcement officer, firefighter, or emergency response provider.

Trainings denoted with an asterisk (*) in the table below is exempt from cost share only to train public safety personnel who enforce security zones. Additional training of public safety personnel may be exempt if specifically identified by the COTP as exempt and necessary for enforcement or the assistance of enforcement of security zones as specified by 46 U.S.C. § 70132. Requests that fail to include a cost share for training that is not exempt from cost share requirements as outlined in 46 U.S.C. § 70132 will not be considered for funding. Training for public safety personnel who do not provide enforcement of security zones are not exempt from cost share. Training rosters and certificates must be provided to FEMA upon request. Please consult your COTP prior to requesting cost share exempt training for enforcement of security zones. Refer to Section C of this NOFO for more specific cost share information.

Seminars and workshops are not considered “Training,” however applicants wishing to host seminars or workshops with PSGP funding may be eligible for funding following the criteria set forth in the “Exercise” section of this guidance.

Approved PSGP Training Courses

National Training and Education Division

Federal-Sponsored

State-Sponsored

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC)

Awareness Campaigns

Program funds may be used for the development and implementation of awareness campaigns to raise public awareness of indicators of terrorism and terrorism-related crime and for associated efforts to increase the sharing of information with public and private sector partners, including nonprofit organizations. DHS currently sponsors or supports a number of awareness campaigns. Please review materials, strategies, and resources at  https://www.dhs.gov/dhs-campaigns before embarking on the development of an awareness campaign for local constituencies and stakeholders.

Note: DHS requires that all public and private sector partners wanting to implement and/or expand the DHS “If You See Something, Say Something®” campaign (“campaign”) using grant funds work directly with the DHS Office of Partnership and Engagement (OPE). This will help ensure that the awareness materials (e.g., videos, posters, trifolds, etc.) remain consistent with DHS’s messaging and strategy for the campaign and compliant with the initiative’s trademark, which is licensed to DHS by the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Coordination with OPE, through the campaign’s office ( [email protected] ), must be facilitated by the applicable FEMA HQ Preparedness Officer. 

Exercise activities address the Soft Targets/Crowded Places; Cybersecurity; and Exercises Priorities. 

Exercises funded under the PSGP typically include Seminars, Workshops, Tabletop, Functional, Drills, and Full-Scale exercises. PSGP-funded exercises must have a maritime security focus and include applicable documentation, after action reports, and improvement plans. See below for additional information.

Maritime entity training needs and qualification requirements of incident response personnel should be regularly tested through emergency exercises and drills. Exercises must test operational protocols that would be implemented in the event of a terrorist attack in the maritime environment in accordance with the Area Maritime Security Training Exercise Program (AMSTEP) or the TSA Intermodal Security Training Exercise Program (I-STEP) guidelines. AMSTEP or I-STEP exercises will follow the latest change in requirements contained in the Navigation and Inspection Circular (NVIC) 09-02. Exercises must be designed, developed and conducted consistent with the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) . Funding used for exercises will only be permitted for those exercises that are in direct support of a MTSA-regulated facility or a port area’s MTSA-required exercises ( see 33 C.F.R. § 105.220 for a facility and 33 C.F.R. § 103.515 for the AMSP). These exercises must be coordinated with the COTP and AMSC and be consistent with HSEEP. 

Some exercise activities require EHP Review, including exercises, drills or trainings that require any type of land, water, or vegetation disturbance or building of temporary structures or that are not located at facilities designed to conduct training and exercises. Additional information on training requirements and EHP review can be found online at Environmental & Historic Preservation Grant Preparation Resources | FEMA.gov .

Recipients are required to submit an After-Action Report/Improvement Plan (AAR/IP) for each PSGP-funded exercise to [email protected] , and the appropriate local COTP no later than 90 days after completion of the exercise conducted within the PSGP period of performance (POP). Recipients are reminded of the importance of implementing corrective actions iteratively throughout the progressive exercise cycle. Recipients are required to use the HSEEP AAR/IP template located at https://preptoolkit.fema.gov/web/hseep-resources/improvement-planning .

Recipients of PSGP funding for exercises should verify in progress reports the completion of the exercise(s), after-action report(s), improvement plan(s), and notifications made to [email protected] and the COTP.

PSGP funds may be used for the following exercise activities:  

• Funds Used to Design, Develop, Conduct, and Evaluate an Exercise.  This includes costs related to planning, meeting space, and other meeting costs, facilitation costs, materials and supplies, travel, and documentation. Exercises afford organizations the opportunity to validate plans and procedures, evaluate capabilities, and assess progress toward meeting capability targets in a controlled, low risk setting. Any shortcoming or gap identified, including those for children and individuals with disabilities or other access and functional needs, should be identified in an effective corrective action program that includes development of improvement plans that are dynamic documents, with corrective actions continually monitored and implemented as part of improving preparedness through the exercise cycle.
• Hiring of Full- or Part-Time Staff or Contractors/Consultants.  Full- or part-time staff may be hired to support exercise-related activities. Hiring of contractors/consultants must follow the applicable federal procurement requirements at 2 C.F.R. §§ 200.317-200.327. Such costs must be included within the funding allowed for program management personnel expenses, which must not exceed 10% of the total allocation. Dual compensation is never allowable, meaning, in other words, that an employee of a unit of government may not receive compensation from his or her unit or agency of government and from an award for a single period of time (e.g., 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.), even though such work may benefit both entities. Personnel hiring, overtime, and backfill expenses are permitted under this grant only to the extent that such expenses are for the allowable activities within the scope of the grant. 
• Overtime and Backfill Costs.  The entire amount of overtime costs, including payments related to backfilling personnel that are the direct result of time spent on the design, development and conduct of exercises are allowable expenses. These costs are allowed only to the extent the payment for such services is in accordance with the policies of the state or unit(s) of local government and has the approval of the state or the awarding agency, whichever is more restrictive. Dual compensation is never allowable.
• Travel.  Domestic travel costs are allowable as expenses by employees who are on travel status for official business related to the planning and conduct of exercise project(s). International travel costs are not permitted.
• Supplies.  Supplies are items that are expended or consumed during the course of the planning and conduct of the exercise project(s) (e.g., gloves, non-sterile masks, and disposable protective equipment).
• Other Items.  These costs include the rental of space/locations for exercise planning and executing, rental of equipment, etc. Recipients are encouraged to use free public space, locations, or facilities, whenever available, prior to the rental of space, locations, or facilities. These also include costs that may be associated with inclusive practices and the provision of reasonable accommodations and modifications to provide full access for children and adults with disabilities.

The National Exercise Program (NEP) serves as the principal exercise mechanism for examining national preparedness and measuring readiness. Recipients are strongly encouraged to nominate exercises into the NEP. For additional information on the NEP, please refer to http://www.fema.gov/national-exercise-program .

vi.  Maintenance and Sustainment Costs

Maintenance and sustainment related costs are allowed under this program only as described in this NOFO and the Preparedness Grants Manual .

vii. Construction and Renovation

Construction and renovation costs are allowed under this program. For construction costs to be allowed, they must be specifically approved by DHS/FEMA in writing prior to the use of any program funds for construction or renovation. Additionally, recipients are required to submit a SF-424C Budget and budget detail citing the project costs. All proposed construction and renovation activities must undergo an Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (EHP) review, including approval of the review from FEMA, prior to undertaking any action related to the project. Failure of a grant recipient to meet these requirements may jeopardize Federal funding. 

See the  Preparedness Grants Manual for additional information. 

viii.  Organization Costs

Allowable organization-related costs are limited to those activities associated with new and ongoing maritime security operations essential to the national priorities. All such activities must be focused exclusively on maritime security and coordinated with the local Captain of the Port (COTP). PSGP funding used for organizational costs will only fund immediate needs for personnel that will be directly engaged in maritime security activities. Allowable organization personnel costs include:

• Backfill, Overtime, Hiring of Full or Part-Time Personnel or Contractors/Consultants.  Full or part-time staff or contractors/consultants may be hired to support maritime-security-related activities and/or training conducted under this grant only to the extent that such expenses are for the allowable activities within the scope of the grant. Hiring of contractors/consultants must follow the applicable federal procurement requirements at 2 C.F.R. §§ 200.317-200.327. Salary and fringe benefit payments must be in accordance with the policies of the state or unit(s) of local government and have the approval of the state or awarding agency. Dual compensation is not allowable. That is, an employee of a unit of government may not receive compensation from their unit or agency of government AND from an award for a single period of time (e.g., 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.), even though such work may benefit both activities.  Limitations may apply for grant related activities. See specific guidance provided within this Manual for additional details on allowable organization costs (i.e., Training – Personnel costs are limited to backfill and overtime).
• Hiring new, full-time personnel to:
• Operate maritime security patrol vessels (first response agencies only);
• Staff a new or expanded interagency maritime security operation center;
• Support maritime security/counterterrorism efforts in the local Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) and/or fusion center; and
• Support credentialing access to a MTSA facility.
• Backfill and Overtime costs for existing personnel to:
• Operate patrol vessels in support of pre-planned, mission critical activities, as identified by the local COTP (not including routine patrol); and
• Attend approved maritime security training courses.
• Personnel or contracted costs to:
• Install, repair, and replace port security equipment acquired with FEMA preparedness grant funds. Note this does not include routine maintenance, such as oil changes and daily/weekly systems tests; and
• Management and administration (M&A) of projects funded under this program.
• Contracted costs to: 
• Provide approved training courses; and
• Provide warranty, maintenance, and service agreements for equipment purchased under this grant.

Organization costs will only be funded to address port (or facility) security needs as outlined in this NOFO. PSGP funding for new permanent or part-time personnel will not exceed the 36-month period of performance. Applicants must provide reasonable assurance that personnel costs can be sustained beyond the 36-month award period. A sustainment plan must be submitted with the applicant’s IJ to address the 12-month period beyond the period of performance of the award.

ix.    Authorized Use of Contractual Grant Writers and/or Grant Managers

A grant applicant may procure the services of a contractor to provide support and assistance for pre-award grant development services (grant writing) or post-award grant management and administrative services (grant management). As with all federal grant-funded procurements, grant writer or grant management services must be procured in accordance with the federal procurement standards at 2 C.F.R. §§ 200.317 – 200.327. See the Preparedness Grants Manual regarding Procurement Integrity, particularly the sections applicable to non-state entities that discuss organizational conflicts of interest under 2 C.F.R. § 200.319(b) and traditional conflicts of interest under 2 C.F.R. § 200.318(c)(1). States must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements of its non-federal funds, pursuant to 2 C.F.R. § 200.317, which also applies 2 C.F.R. §§ 200.321, 200.322, 200.323, and 200.327.

As applicable to non-state entities, DHS/FEMA considers a contracted grant writer to be an agent of the recipient for any subsequent contracts the recipient procures under the same federal award in which the grant-writer provided grant writing services. Federal funds and funds applied to a federal award’s cost share generally cannot be used to pay a contractor to carry out the work if that contractor also worked on the development of such specifications unless the original contract was properly procured and included both grant writing and grant management services in the solicitation’s scope of work. 

As applicable to all non-federal entities, regardless of whether an applicant or recipient uses grant writing and/or grant management services, the recipient is solely responsible for the fiscal and programmatic integrity of the grant and its authorized activities and expenditures. The recipient must ensure adequate internal controls, including separation of duties, to safeguard grant assets, processes, and documentation, in keeping with the terms and 

conditions of its award, including this NOFO, and 2 C.F.R. Part 200.

Grant Writers

Grant writing contractors may assist the applicant in preparing, writing, and finalizing grant application materials and assisting the applicant with handling online application and submission requirements in FEMA GO. Grant writers may assist in a variety of ways. Ultimately, however, the applicant that receives an award is solely responsible for all grant award and administrative responsibilities.

By submitting the application, applicants certify that all of the information contained therein is true and an accurate reflection of the organization and that regardless of the applicant’s intent, the submission of information that is false or misleading may result in actions by DHS/FEMA. These actions include but are not limited to the submitted application not being considered for an award, temporary withholding of funding under the existing award pending investigation, or referral to the DHS Office of the Inspector General.

To assist applicants with the cost of grant writing services, DHS/FEMA is permitting a one-time pre-award cost of no more than $1,500 per applicant per year for contractual grant writing services as part of the recipient’s M&A costs. This is only intended to cover costs associated with a grant writer and may not be used to reimburse the applicant for their own time and effort in the development of a grant application. Additionally, the applicant may be required to pay this fee with its own funds during the application preparation and submission period. If the applicant subsequently receives an award, the applicant may then request to be reimbursed once grant funds become available for that cost, not to exceed $1,500. If the applicant does not receive an award, this cost will not be reimbursed by the federal government. The applicant must understand this risk and be able to cover this cost if an award is not made.

If an applicant intends to request reimbursement for this one-time pre-award cost, it must include this request in its application materials , including in the budget detail worksheet for each IJ. Failure to clearly identify this as a separate cost in the application may result in its disallowance. This is the only pre-award cost eligible for reimbursement. Recipients must maintain grant writer fee documentation including, but not limited to, a copy of the solicitation, such as a quote request, rate request, invitation to bid, or request for proposals, if applicable; a copy of the grant writer’s contract agreement; a copy of the invoice or purchase order; and a copy of the canceled check or proof of payment. These records must be made available to DHS/FEMA upon request.

Consultants or contractors are not permitted to be the AOR or SA of the recipient.  Further, an application must be officially submitted by 1) a current employee, personnel, official, staff, or leadership  of the non-federal entity; and 2) duly authorized to apply  for an award on behalf of the non-federal entity at the time of application.

Grant Managers

Grant management contractors provide support in the day-to-day management of an active grant and their services may be incurred as M&A costs of the award. Additionally, recipients may retain grant management contractors at their own expense.

Consultants or contractors are not permitted to be the AOR or SA of the recipient.  The AOR is responsible for submitting programmatic and financial performance reports, accepting award packages, signing assurances and certifications, and submitting award amendments.

Restrictions Regarding Grant Writers and Grant Managers

Pursuant to 2 C.F.R. Part 180, recipients may not use federal grant funds to reimburse any entity, including a grant writer or preparer, if that entity is presently suspended or debarred by the Federal Government from receiving funding under federally funded grants or contracts. Recipients must verify that a contractor is not suspended or debarred from participating in specified federal procurement or non-procurement transactions pursuant to 2 C.F.R. § 180.300. FEMA recommends recipients use SAM.gov to conduct this verification. Further, regardless of whether any grant writer fees were requested, as applicable to non-state entities, unless a single contract covering both pre- and post-award services was awarded to the grant writer and procured in compliance with 2 C.F.R. §§ 200.317 – 200.327, federal funds cannot be used to pay the grant writer to provide post-award services. 

g.   Reprogramming Award Funds

Reprogramming award funds is permitted under this program only as described in this NOFO. Please also see Section C of this NOFO regarding cost-share requirements, including the implications if the project costs end up being less than what was applied for.

h.   Limitations on Funding 

As part of the PSGP application process, applicants must complete the approved Investment Justification (IJ) template on Grants.gov and included detailed budget sheets (incorporated into the IJ) provided addressing each initiative being proposed for funding. A single IJ should be submitted with each application. A corresponding detailed budget tab is included within the IJ and must be completed for each project, including the budget summary at the bottom of the form. Each project should represent the complete scope of work and materials required to achieve a single overall capability. For example, a project could be to procure a boat specifically designed and equipped as chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosives (CBRNE) detection, prevention, response, and/or recovery platform. The IJ for this example project should include the CBRNE equipment in the same IJ as the vessel. The corresponding detailed budget should include a description of the equipment (i.e., 24’ Response Vessel) and computation (i.e., 1 x $375,000, total $375,000; Vessel mounted Rad/Nuke detection device, 1 x $25,000, total $25,000).  Additionally, the total computation for the Total Project Cost, Federal Share, and non-Federal Share must be included in the detailed budget (i.e., Total $400,000; Federal Share $300,000; non-Federal Share $100,000). This demonstrates that the applicant and FEMA understand the level of Federal funding requested, as well as a commitment to the Cost Share required by the applicant to complete the project. (see “Cost-Share or Match” in Section C above).

In accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 70107(b)(2), PSGP funding for projects for the cost of acquisition, operation, and maintenance of security equipment or facilities to be used for security monitoring and recording, security gates and fencing, marine barriers for designated security zones, security-related lighting systems, remote surveillance, concealed video systems, security vessels, and other security-related infrastructure or equipment that contributes to the overall security of passengers, cargo, or crewmembers cannot exceed $1 million federal share per project . The $1 million per project limitation applies only to those projects funded under 46 U.S.C. § 70107(b)(2) and does not apply to projects funded under other provisions of Section 70107.

i.    Unallowable Costs 

Projects that do not provide a compelling maritime security benefit or have a direct nexus toward maritime security risk mitigation are not permitted. For example, projects that are primarily for economic or safety benefit (as opposed to having a direct maritime security risk mitigation benefit) are ineligible for PSGP funding. In addition, projects that provide a broad homeland security benefit (e.g., a communication system or fusion center for an entire city, county, state, etc.) as opposed to providing primary benefit to the port are ineligible for PSGP funding since these projects should be eligible for funding through other preparedness grant programs. The following projects and costs are considered ineligible for award consideration:

• Grant funds must comply with  FEMA Policy 207-22-0002, Prohibited or Controlled Equipment Under FEMA Awards , and may not be used for the purchase of the following equipment: firearms, ammunition, grenade launchers, bayonets, or weaponized aircraft, vessels, or vehicles of any kind with weapons installed; 
• Projects in which federal agencies are the primary beneficiary or that enhance federal property, including sub-components of a federal agency;
• Projects that study technology development for security of national or international cargo supply chains (e.g., e-seals, smart containers, container tracking or container intrusion detection devices);
• Proof-of-concept projects;
• Development of training;
• Projects that duplicate capabilities being provided by the Federal Government (e.g., vessel traffic systems);
• Business operating expenses (certain security-related operational and maintenance costs are allowable—see “Maintenance and Sustainment” and “Operational Costs” for further guidance);
• Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) card fees;
• Reimbursement of pre-award security expenses;
• Outfitting facilities, vessels, or other structures with equipment or items providing convenience rather than a direct security benefit. Examples of such equipment or items include but are not limited to office furniture, CD players, DVD players, AM/FM radios, TVs, stereos, entertainment satellite systems, entertainment cable systems and other such entertainment media, unless sufficient justification is provided. This includes weapons and associated equipment (i.e., holsters, optical sights, and scopes), including but not limited to, non-lethal or less-than-lethal weaponry including firearms, ammunition, and weapons affixed to facilities, vessels, or other structures;
• Standard issue uniforms (other than maritime security personal protective equipment [PPE]); 
• Expenditures for items such as general-use software, general-use computers, and related equipment (other than for allowable M&A activities, or otherwise associated) preparedness or response functions), general-use vehicles and licensing fees;
• Land acquisitions and right of way purchases;
• Funding for standard operations vehicles utilized for routine duties, such as patrol cars and fire trucks;
• Fuel costs (except as permitted for training and exercises);
• Exercise(s) that do not support maritime security preparedness efforts;
• Patrol vehicles and firefighting apparatus, other than those CBRNE detection equipped vehicles for port area and/or facility patrol or response purposes;
• Specialty vehicles such as trucks for towing boat trailers/equipment and armored personnel carriers; 
• Providing protection training to public police agencies or private security services to support protecting VIPs or dignitaries;
• Aircraft pilot training, including aircraft operations such as aircraft ditch training;
• Post incident investigation training;
• Basic or advanced dive training (except marine unit CBRNE detection/response dive training);
• Training for personnel not primarily assigned to maritime security activities or MTSA required security personnel (e.g., vessel patrol officers, facility security officers); and 
• Reimbursement for the maintenance and wear and tear costs of general use vehicles (e.g., construction vehicles) and emergency response apparatus (e.g., fire trucks, ambulances, repair, or cleaning of PPE, etc.).

j.    Indirect Costs

Indirect costs are allowable under this program. Please refer to the Preparedness Grants Manual for more information.

E.  Application Review Information

1.   application evaluation criteria, a.   programmatic criteria.

The PSGP uses a risk-based methodology for making funding decisions whereby each Port Area’s relative threat, vulnerability, and consequences from acts of terrorism are considered. This approach helps ensure that program funding is directed toward those Port Areas that present the highest risks in support of the Goal a secure and resilient Nation. Please refer to the  Preparedness Grants Manual  for further information on the Goal. PSGP will only fund those eligible projects that close or mitigate maritime security risk vulnerabilities gaps as identified in the applicable AMSP, FSP, VSP, and/or Port-wide Risk Management Plan (PRMP). Projects that enhance business continuity and resumption of trade within a Port Area will also be considered for funding. 

Projects submitted by a public sector applicant or projects otherwise certified by the USCG COTP as having a port-wide benefit (please see the cost match section of this NOFO for further information regarding what constitutes a port-wide benefit) will have their final scores increased by a multiplier of 10%.

FY 2024 PSGP applications will be evaluated through a three-part review and selection process that encompasses: 1) an Initial Screening; 2) a Field Review; and 3) a National Review. There are four core PSGP scoring criteria applied in each step of this process: 

i. Projects that support development and sustainment of the core capabilities in the Goal. 

• Projects are ranked and weighted based on alignment with core capabilities across the five mission areas of the Goal: Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery. A composite score is given to each project to determine a Port Area prioritized ranking of all reviewed projects. The following scale shall be used: 

0=None; 1=Minimal; 3=Moderate; 9=Significant/Gap Filled 

ii. Projects that address priorities outlined in the applicable AMSP, FSP, and/or VSP, as mandated under the MTSA and/or in an applicable PRMP. 

• AMSP priorities are the top three Transportation Security Incidents (TSIs) (as defined in 46 U.S.C. § 70101(6)) ranked and correspondingly weighted. Each IJ will be given a score (using the same scale as the National Priorities module) based on how well it addresses one or more TSIs within the context of the five mission areas of the Goal. The following scale shall be used: 

0=None; 1=Minimal; 3=Moderate; 9=Significant/Gap Filled

• COTPs may require proposed projects to be socialized with the COTP/Area Maritime Security Committee (AMSC) prior to applying. Applicants are encouraged to coordinate with the COTP/AMSC routinely to ensure their projects align with Port Area priorities.

iii. Projects that are eligible and feasible, based on the period of performance. In addition, a recipient’s past performance demonstrating competent stewardship of Federal funds may influence funding decisions.

• IJs should justify the scope, breadth, and cost of a project, as well as a timeline for completing the project as required within this NOFO. Projects failing to demonstrate these minimum funding considerations may be denied funding. The following scale shall be used: 

0=No Funding Recommended; 1=Funding Recommended

b.   Financial Integrity Criteria

Prior to making a federal award, FEMA is required by 31 U.S.C. § 3354, as enacted by the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019, Pub. L. No. 116-117 (2020); 41 U.S.C. § 2313; and 2 C.F.R. § 200.206 to review information available through any Office of Management and Budget (OMB)-designated repositories of governmentwide eligibility qualification or financial integrity information, including whether SAM.gov identifies the applicant as being excluded from receiving federal awards or is flagged for any integrity record submission.  FEMA may also pose additional questions to the applicant to aid in conducting the pre-award risk review. Therefore, application evaluation criteria may include the following risk-based considerations of the applicant: 

i.    Financial stability. 

ii.   Quality of management systems and ability to meet management standards.

iii.  History of performance in managing federal award. 

iv.  Reports and findings from audits.

v.   Ability to effectively implement statutory, regulatory, or other requirements.

c.   Supplemental Financial Integrity Criteria and Review

Prior to making a federal award where the anticipated total federal share will be greater than the simplified acquisition threshold, currently $250,000: 

i.    FEMA is required by 41 U.S.C. § 2313 and 2 C.F.R. § 200.206(a)(2) to review and consider any information about the applicant, including information on the applicant’s immediate and highest-level owner, subsidiaries, and predecessors, if applicable, that is in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (SAM), which is currently the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS).

ii.   An applicant, at its option, may review information in FAPIIS and comment on any information about itself that a federal awarding agency previously entered.

iii.  FEMA will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in FAPIIS, in making a judgment about the applicant’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 2 C.F.R. § 200.206.

2.   Review and Selection Process

Following the USCG COTP-led Field Review, DHS/FEMA will lead a National Review. The National Review encompasses 1) a review by a panel of subject-matter experts (SME) from DHS/FEMA and other federal partners that validates the USCG COTP-led Field Review results; and 2) a detailed administrative/financial review of applications recommended for funding. As part of the National Review, the SME panel will increase the score of any proposed project that sufficiently addresses one or more of the two National Priorities (enhancing cybersecurity or enhancing the protection of soft targets/crowded places) by 20%. Projects that are not dedicated to specifically enhancing a National Priority will not receive a score increase (e.g., a port area patrol vessel that is not solely dedicated to patrolling the soft target/crowded place or a camera replacement project that includes a cybersecurity software installation will not receive a 20% score increase). To be considered for a 20% score increase, projects must be submitted as distinct and standalone, and dedicated to supporting the national priority. 

As part of the National Review, the SME panel may also recommend partial funding for individual projects and eliminate others that are determined to be duplicative or require a sustained federal commitment to fully realize the intended risk mitigation. In addition, the SME panel will validate proposed project costs. Decisions to reduce requested funding amounts or eliminate requested items deemed inappropriate under the scope of the FY 2024 PSGP will take into consideration the ability of the revised project to address the National Priorities and whether it will achieve the intended risk mitigation goal. Historically, the PSGP has placed a high priority on providing full project funding rather than partial funding. 

Elements of the application considered during the National Review include the following as specified within this NOFO:

• Eligibility of an applicant;
• Allowable costs;
• Required cost share; and
• Alignment with program priorities.

Independent of the Field and National Reviews, a risk score will also be calculated for each Port Area in which an eligible entity applies for PSGP funding. A Port Area risk score will be calculated based on the relative threat, vulnerability, and consequences from acts of terrorism. The risk methodology used to calculate this score is focused on three elements:

• Threat – likelihood of an attack being attempted by an adversary; 
• Vulnerability – likelihood that an attack is successful, given that it is attempted; and 
• Consequence – effect of an event, incident, or occurrence.

The risk methodology determines the relative risk of terrorism faced by a given Port Area, considering the potential risk of terrorism to people, critical infrastructure, economic security, and national security missions. The analysis includes threats from domestic violent extremists, international terrorist groups, and individuals inspired by terrorists abroad. A risk and effectiveness prioritization will then be applied to the SME panel’s recommended list of projects for each Port Area. This analysis considers the following factors to produce a comprehensive national priority ranking of port security proposals:

• Relationship of the project to one or more of the National Priorities; 
• Relationship of the project to the local port security priorities; 
• Risk level of the Port Area in which the project would be located;
• Those Port Areas that have a measurable risk of at least 1% of the overall maritime security risk based on the comprehensive DHS/FEMA risk methodology would be prioritized above those with less than 1% of the overall risk; 
• To ensure that the most effective projects are funded, the risk and effectiveness prioritization could be limited by Port Area, based on the Port Area’s relative risk score; and 
• Effectiveness and feasibility of the project to be completed in support of the priorities highlighted above during the period of performance. 

Projects recommended for funding will also receive a detailed administrative/financial review to ensure compliance with all program requirements. As a part of this, applications will be reviewed to ensure there are no ineligible costs, there is an appropriate nexus to maritime security, etc. 

FEMA may place a risk-based funding cap on Port Areas to ensure a broad distribution of program funds among multiple Port Areas. This will ensure that minimally effective projects in the highest risk Port Areas are not funded ahead of highly effective projects in lower risk Port Areas; however, this does not guarantee that Port Areas with minimal risk scores will receive funding.  All funding recommendations will be provided to the inter-agency partners for concurrence. All final funding determinations will then be made by the Secretary of Homeland Security, who retains the discretion to consider other factors and information in addition to DHS/FEMA’s funding recommendations.

F.   Federal Award Administration Information

1.   notice of award.

Before accepting the award, the AOR and recipient should carefully read the award package. The award package includes the instructions on administering the grant award and the terms and conditions associated with responsibilities under federal awards.  Recipients must accept all conditions in this NOFO   and the  Preparedness Grants Manual   as well as any specific terms and conditions in the Notice of Award to receive an award under this program.

See the  Preparedness Grants Manual for information on Notice of Award.

FEMA will provide the federal award package to the applicant electronically via FEMA GO. Award packages include an Award Letter, Summary Award Memo, Agreement Articles, and Obligating Document. An email notification of the award package will be sent through FEMA’s grant application system to the AOR that submitted the application. 

Recipients must accept their awards no later than 60 days from the award date. The recipient shall notify FEMA of its intent to accept and proceed with work under the award through the FEMA GO system. 

Funds will remain on hold until the recipient accepts the award through the FEMA GO system and all other conditions of the award have been satisfied or until the award is otherwise rescinded. Failure to accept a grant award within the specified timeframe may result in a loss of funds.

2.   Administrative and National Policy Requirements

In addition to the requirements of in this section and in this NOFO, FEMA may place specific terms and conditions on individual awards in accordance with 2 C.F.R. Part 200.

In addition to the information regarding DHS Standard Terms and Conditions and Ensuring the Protection of Civil Rights, see the Preparedness Grants Manual for additional information on administrative and national policy requirements, including the following:

• Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (EHP) Compliance
•  FirstNet
•  National Incident Management System (NIMS) Implementation
•  SAFECOM

a.   DHS Standard Terms and Conditions

All successful applicants for DHS grant and cooperative agreements are required to comply with DHS Standard Terms and Conditions, which are available online at: DHS Standard Terms and Conditions .

The applicable DHS Standard Terms and Conditions will be those in effect at the time the award was made. What terms and conditions will apply for the award will be clearly stated in the award package at the time of award.

b.   Ensuring the Protection of Civil Rights

As the Nation works towards achieving the  National Preparedness Goal , it is important to continue to protect the civil rights of individuals. Recipients and subrecipients must carry out their programs and activities, including those related to the building, sustainment, and delivery of core capabilities, in a manner that respects and ensures the protection of civil rights for protected populations. 

Federal civil rights statutes, such as Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, along with  DHS and FEMA regulations, prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, limited English proficiency, or economic status in connection with programs and activities receiving  federal financial assistance from FEMA, as applicable. 

The DHS Standard Terms and Conditions include a fuller list of the civil rights provisions that apply to recipients. These terms and conditions can be found in the  DHS Standard Terms and Conditions . Additional information on civil rights provisions is available at  https://www.fema.gov/about/offices/equal-rights/civil-rights .

Monitoring and oversight requirements in connection with recipient compliance with federal civil rights laws are also authorized pursuant to 44 C.F.R. Part 7 or other applicable regulations.

In accordance with civil rights laws and regulations, recipients and subrecipients must ensure the consistent and systematic fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals, including individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied such treatment.

c. Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (EHP) Compliance

See the  Preparedness Grants Manual for information on EHP compliance.

d. National Incident Management System (NIMS) Implementation 

See the Preparedness Grants Manual for information about NIMS implementation.

e. Mandatory Disclosures

The non-Federal entity or applicant for a Federal award must disclose, in a timely manner, in writing to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity all violations of Federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the Federal award. (2 CFR 200.113)

Please note applicants and recipients may report issues of fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement, or other criminal or noncriminal misconduct to the  Office of Inspector General (OIG) Hotline . The toll-free numbers to call are 1 (800) 323-8603, and TTY 1 (844) 889-4357.

3.   Reporting

Recipients are required to submit various financial and programmatic reports as a condition of award acceptance. Future awards and funds drawdown may be withheld if these reports are delinquent. 

See the Preparedness Grants Manual for information on reporting requirements.

4.   Monitoring and Oversight

The regulation at 2 C.F.R. § 200.337 provides DHS and any of its authorized representatives with the right of access to any documents, papers, or other records of the recipient [and any subrecipients] that are pertinent to a federal award in order to make audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcripts. The right also includes timely and reasonable access to the recipient’s or subrecipient’s personnel for the purpose of interview and discussion related to such documents. Pursuant to this right and per 2 C.F.R. § 200.329, DHS may conduct desk reviews and make site visits to review project accomplishments and management control systems to evaluate project accomplishments and to provide any required technical assistance. During site visits, DHS may review a recipient’s or subrecipient’s files pertinent to the federal award and interview and/or discuss these files with the recipient’s or subrecipient’s personnel. Recipients and subrecipients must respond in a timely and accurate manner to DHS requests for information relating to a federal award.

See the Preparedness Grants Manual for information on monitoring and oversight.

G.  DHS Awarding Agency Contact Information

1.   contact and resource information, a.   program office contact.

FEMA has assigned region-specific Preparedness Officers for the PSGP. If you do not know your Preparedness Officer, please contact FEMA Grants News by phone at (800) 368-6498 or by email at [email protected] , Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM ET. 

  b.  FEMA Grants News

FEMA Grants News is a non-emergency comprehensive management and information resource developed by FEMA for grants stakeholders. This channel provides general information on all FEMA grant programs and maintains a comprehensive database containing key personnel contact information at the federal, state, and local levels. When necessary, recipients will be directed to a federal point of contact who can answer specific programmatic questions or concerns. FEMA Grants News can be reached by e-mail at [email protected] OR by phone at (800) 368-6498, Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM ET.

c.   Grant Programs Directorate (GPD) Award Administration Division

GPD’s Award Administration Division (AAD) provides support regarding financial matters and budgetary technical assistance. Additional guidance and information can be obtained by contacting the AAD’s Help Desk via e-mail at [email protected] .

d.   Equal Rights

The FEMA Office of Equal Rights (OER) is responsible for compliance with and enforcement of federal civil rights obligations in connection with programs and services conducted by FEMA and recipients of FEMA financial assistance. All inquiries and communications about federal civil rights compliance for FEMA grants under this NOFO should be sent to [email protected] .

e.   Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation

GPD’s EHP Team provides guidance and information about the EHP review process to recipients and subrecipients. All inquiries and communications about GPD projects under this NOFO or the EHP review process, including the submittal of EHP review materials, should be sent to [email protected] .

2.   Systems Information

A.   fema go .

For technical assistance with the FEMA GO system, please contact the FEMA GO Helpdesk at  [email protected] or (877) 585-3242, Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM – 6:00 PM ET.

H.  Additional Information

GPD has developed the Preparedness Grants Manual to guide applicants and recipients of grant funding on how to manage their grants and other resources. Recipients seeking guidance on policies and procedures for managing preparedness grants should reference the Preparedness Grants Manual for further information. Examples of information contained in the Preparedness Grants Manual include:

• Actions to Address Noncompliance
•  Case Studies and Use of Grant-Funded Resources During Real-World Incident Operations
• Community Lifelines
• Conflicts of Interest in the Administration of Federal Awards and Subawards
• Disability Integration
• National Incident Management System
• Payment Information
• Period of Performance Extensions
•  Procurement Integrity
• Record Retention
• Whole Community Preparedness
• ·Financial Assistance Programs for Infrastructure
•  Report issues of Fraud, Waste, and Abuse 
• Hazard Resistant Building Codes
• Other Post-Award Requirements

1.   Termination Provisions

FEMA may terminate a federal award in whole or in part for one of the following reasons. FEMA and the recipient must still comply with closeout requirements at 2 C.F.R. §§ 200.344-200.345 even if an award is terminated in whole or in part. To the extent that subawards are permitted under this NOFO, pass-through entities should refer to 2 C.F.R. § 200.340 for additional information on termination regarding subawards. Note that all information in this Section H.1 “Termination Provisions” is repeated in the  Preparedness Grants Manual .

a.   Noncompliance

If a recipient fails to comply with the terms and conditions of a federal award, FEMA may terminate the award in whole or in part. If the noncompliance can be corrected, FEMA may first attempt to direct the recipient to correct the noncompliance. This may take the form of a Compliance Notification. If the noncompliance cannot be corrected or the recipient is non-responsive, FEMA may proceed with a Remedy Notification, which could impose a remedy for noncompliance per 2 C.F.R. § 200.339, including termination. Any action to terminate based on noncompliance will follow the requirements of 2 C.F.R. §§ 200.341-200.342 as well as the requirement of 2 C.F.R. § 200.340(c) to report in FAPIIS the recipient’s material failure to comply with the award terms and conditions. See also the section on Actions to Address Noncompliance in the  Preparedness Grants Manual

b.   With the Consent of the Recipient

FEMA may also terminate an award in whole or in part with the consent of the recipient, in which case the parties must agree upon the termination conditions, including the effective date, and in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated. 

c.   Notification by the Recipient

The recipient may terminate the award, in whole or in part, by sending written notification to FEMA setting forth the reasons for such termination, the effective date, and in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated. In the case of partial termination, FEMA may determine that a partially terminated award will not accomplish the purpose of the federal award, so FEMA may terminate the award in its entirety. If that occurs, FEMA will follow the requirements of 2 C.F.R. §§ 200.341-200.342 in deciding to fully terminate the award. 

2.  Program Evaluation

Federal agencies are required to structure NOFOs that incorporate program evaluation activities from the outset of their program design and implementation to meaningfully document and measure their progress towards meeting agency priority goal(s) and program outcomes.

OMB Memorandum M-21-27 , Evidence-Based Policymaking: Learning Agendas and Annual Evaluation Plans, implementing Title I of the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-435 (2019) (Evidence Act), urges federal awarding agencies to use program evaluation as a critical tool to learn, improve equitable delivery, and elevate program service and delivery across the program lifecycle. Evaluation means “an assessment using systematic data collection and analysis of one or more programs, policies, and organizations intended to assess their effectiveness and efficiency.” Evidence Act, § 101 (codified at 5 U.S.C. § 311). 

As such, recipients and subrecipients are required to participate in a DHS-, Component, or Program Office-led evaluation if selected, which may be carried out by a third-party on behalf of the DHS, its component agencies, or the Program Office. Such an evaluation may involve information collections including but not limited to surveys, interviews, or discussions with individuals who benefit from the federal award program operating personnel, and award recipients, as specified in a DHS-, component agency-, or Program Office-approved evaluation plan. More details about evaluation requirements may be provided in the federal award, if available at that time, or following the award as evaluation requirements are finalized. Evaluation costs incurred during the period of performance are allowable costs (either as direct or indirect). Recipients and subrecipients are also encouraged, but not required, to participate in any additional evaluations after the period of performance ends, although any costs incurred to participate in such evaluations are not allowable and may not be charged to the federal award.

3.  Financial Assistance Programs for Infrastructure

A.  build america, buy america act.

Recipients and subrecipients must comply with the Build America, Buy America Act (BABAA), which was enacted as part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act §§ 70901-70927, Pub. L. No. 117-58 (2021); and Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers. See also 2 C.F.R. Part 184 and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Memorandum M-24-02, Implementation Guidance on Application of Buy America Preference in Federal Financial Assistance Programs for Infrastructure.

None of the funds provided under this program may be used for a project for infrastructure unless the iron and steel, manufactured products, and construction materials used in that infrastructure are produced in the United States.

The Buy America preference only applies to articles, materials, and supplies that are consumed in, incorporated into, or affixed to an infrastructure project. As such, it does not apply to tools, equipment, and supplies, such as temporary scaffolding, brought to the construction site and removed at or before the completion of the infrastructure project. Nor does a Buy America preference apply to equipment and furnishings, such as movable chairs, desks, and portable computer equipment, that are used at or within the finished infrastructure project but are not an integral part of the structure or permanently affixed to the infrastructure project.

For FEMA's official policy on BABAA, please see FEMA Policy 207-22-0001: Buy America Preference in FEMA Financial Assistance Programs for Infrastructure available at  https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_build-america-buy-america-act-policy.pdf   To see whether a particular FEMA federal financial assistance program is considered an infrastructure program and thus required to include a Buy America preference, please see  Programs and Definitions: Build America, Buy America Act | FEMA.gov. and https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_build-america-buy-america-act-policy.pdf

b.   Waivers 

When necessary, recipients (and subrecipients through their pass-through entity) may apply for, and FEMA may grant, a waiver from these requirements. 

A waiver of the domestic content procurement preference may be granted by the agency awarding official if FEMA determines that:

• Applying the domestic content procurement preference would be inconsistent with the public interest.
• The types of iron, steel, manufactured products, or construction materials are not produced in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available quantities or of a satisfactory quality.
• The inclusion of iron, steel, manufactured products, or construction materials produced in the United States will increase the cost of the overall project by more than 25%.

For FEMA awards, the process for requesting a waiver from the Buy America preference requirements can be found on FEMA’s website at:  "Buy America" Preference in FEMA Financial Assistance Programs for Infrastructure | FEMA.gov .

c.   Definitions

For BABAA specific definitions, please refer to the FEMA Buy America website at: “ Programs and Definitions: Build America, Buy America Act | FEMA.gov .”

Please refer to the applicable DHS Standard Terms & Conditions for the BABAA specific term applicable to all FEMA financial assistance awards for infrastructure. 

4. Report issues of fraud, waste, abuse

Please note, when applying to this notice of funding opportunity and when administering the grant, applicants may report issues of fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement, or other criminal or noncriminal misconduct to the Office of Inspector General (OIG) Hotline. The toll-free numbers to call are 1 (800) 323-8603, and TTY 1 (844) 889-4357.

5. Appendices

• PSGP Sample Memorandum of Understanding/Agreement (MOU/MOA) The sample MOU/MOA below demonstrates all of the elements required in the PSGP NOFO for acceptance for review as part of a grant application from a state or local agency providing security services to MTSA-regulated entities.

Memorandum of [Understanding / Agreement] 

Between [provider of layered security] and [recipient of layered security] 

Regarding [provider of layered security’s] Use of Port Security Grant Program Funds

• PARTIES . The parties to this Agreement are the [Provider of Layered Security] and the [Recipient of security service]. 
• AUTHORITY . This Agreement is authorized under the provisions of [applicable Area Maritime Security Committee (AMSC) authorities and/or other authorities]. 
• PURPOSE . The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth terms by which [Provider of security service] shall expend Port Security Grant Program project funding in providing security service to [Recipient of security service]. Under requested PSGP grant, the [Provider of security service] must provide layered security to [Recipient of security service] consistent with the approach described in an approved grant application. 

RESPONSIBILITIES : The security roles and responsibilities of each party are understood as follows:  (1) [Recipient of security service] 

Roles and responsibilities in providing its own security at each MARSEC level 

(2) [Provider of security service] 

[-An acknowledgement by the facility that the applicant is part of their facility security plan.] 

[-The nature of the security that the applicant agrees to supply to the regulated facility (waterside surveillance, increased screening, etc.).] 

[-Roles and responsibilities in providing security to [Recipient of security service] at each MARSEC level.]  

• POINTS OF CONTACT . [Identify the POCs for all applicable organizations under the Agreement; including addresses and phone numbers (fax number, e-mail, or internet addresses can also be included).] 
• OTHER PROVISIONS . Nothing in this Agreement is intended to conflict with current laws or regulations of [applicable State] or [applicable local Government]. If a term of this agreement is inconsistent with such authority, then that term shall be invalid, but the remaining terms and conditions of this agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 
• EFFECTIVE DATE . The terms of this agreement will become effective on [EFFECTIVE DATE]. 
• MODIFICATION . This agreement may be modified upon the mutual written consent of the parties. 
• TERMINATION . The terms of this agreement, as modified with the consent of both parties, will remain in effect until the grant end dates for an approved grant. Party upon [NUMBER] day’s written notice to the other party may terminate this agreement. 

APPROVED BY : Organization and Title

• Homeland Security Act of 2002: Report Together with Minority and Dissenting Views 222, Select Committee on Homeland Security: 107th Congress, U.S. House of Representatives (2002) (H. Rpt. 107-609).
•  Strategic Intelligence Assessment and Data on Domestic Terrorism, Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Homeland Security, June 2023.