U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Preparedness Grant Programs
FEMA/Grant Programs Directorate
Homeland Security Grant Program and
UASI Non-profit Security Grant Program
Major FY 2015 Highlights and Changes

PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: In FY 2015 all grant programs, with exception of the Emergency Management
Performance Grant program, will have a 36-month period of performance. This compares to the 24-month period
of performance that has been in place since FY 2012.

Urban Areas: 28 UASI jurisdictions are funded for FY 2015 based on Congressional direction to limit Urban Area
Security Initiative (UASI) funding to 85% of the total risk. This compares to 39 UASI jurisdictions that were funded
in FY 2014.

HOMELAND SECURITY STRATEGIES: Updates to the State and Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies are no
longer required.

FUNDING DOCUMENT TITLE AND FORMAT: The Department Of Homeland Security issued grant alert 15-03,
replacing the Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) template with the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)
template. The new template changes the format and information contained in the previous FOA.

UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, COST PRINCIPLES, AND AUDIT REQUIREMENTS: The Department of
Homeland Security adopted 2 C.F.R. Part 200. Now that DHS has adopted 2 C.F.R. Part 200, these new
regulations will apply to all new Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant awards that are made on
or after December 26, 2014.
1
Projected FY 2015 Grant Timeline
03/04/2015
04/02/2015
28 Days
FY 2015
Appropriation
Enacted
Notice of Funding
Opportunity (NOFO)
Release
05/19/2015
47 Days
07/23/2015
09/30/2015
65 Days
Applications
submitted to
FEMA
Final
Allocations
Announced
Awards processed
on rolling basis
through end of
fiscal year
2
FY 2015 Risk Methodology
 FEMA utilizes a comprehensive risk methodology to determine the eligibility and target allocations for the State
Homeland Security Program and the Urban Area Security Initiative. In addition, the Port Security Grant Program,
Transit Security Grant Program, and Operation Stonegarden use elements of risk, in conjunction with TSA, USCG, and
CBP analysis, to determine eligibility and funding amounts.
 There are no structural changes to the risk formula for FY 2015. However, the following policy changes were
implemented:
 New policy now allows for downward threat level movement, if warranted—which reflects the dynamic Homeland
threat environment.
 The criteria used to determine Level 1/Level 2 status of critical infrastructure was modified
 Defense Industrial Base list was updated by DOD
 All data has been refreshed to reflect the most current data available.
 The FY 2015 risk validation process for State Homeland Security Program and Urban Area Security Initiative took place
in March 2015
 The risk validation process is mandatory
 FEMA heard from over 40 States and urban areas during the process
 FEMA also conducted two risk webinars to provide training on the risk validation process
 One Urban Area Risk Profile updated to account for mis-located CI/KR site
3
FY 2015 State Homeland Security Program and
Urban Area Security Initiative Risk Formula
Relative Score
Threat
(30%)
Vulnerability
(20%)
x
Domestic &
International
Terrorism
x
Targeted Infrastructure
Index
(10%)
Consequence
(50%)
Population Index
(30%)
Population
Density
x
Population
+
Attacks,
Disrupted Plots,
& Threat
Reporting
Known or
Suspected
Terrorist
Presence
Census
Border Index
(10%)
+
+
Commuters
+
Visitors
International
Borders
Economic Index
(13%)
Gross Domestic
Product
National Infrastructure
Index
(5%)
Level 1 Count
+
Border Crossings
+
+
International
Waters
+
Level 2 Count
+
Military Personnel
National Security Index
(2%)
+
DIB Count
4
FY 2015 State Homeland Security Program
Program Overview
 Purpose: The Homeland Security Grant Program is the primary funding
mechanism for building and sustaining national preparedness capabilities. The
Homeland Security Grant Program is comprised of three interconnected grant
programs: State Homeland Security Program, Urban Area Security Initiative,
and Operation Stonegarden.
 Eligibility: The State Administrative Agency is the only entity eligible to apply
for and administer FY 2015 Homeland Security Grant Program funds.
FY 2014
$401,346,000
FY 2015
$402,000,000
Program Highlights
 The $402 million allocation is based on funding the Tribal Homeland Security Grant Program at $10 million and Operation
Stonegarden at $55 million (funding for these programs is carved out of the SHSP allocation).
 Allocated funding for the FY 2015 State Homeland Security Program is increased 0.4% compared to FY 2014.
 The State and territory minimums were calculated based on funding numbers for all appropriated dollars under the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended (State Homeland Security Program, Urban Area Security Initiative, Operation
Stonegarden, Tribal Homeland Security Grant Program, Non-profit Security Grant Program).
 Three-year period of performance will apply.
5
FY 2015 Urban Area Security Initiative
Program Overview
 Purpose: The Homeland Security Grant Program is the primary funding
mechanism for building and sustaining national preparedness capabilities. The
Homeland Security Grant Program is comprised of three interconnected grant
programs: State Homeland Security Program, Urban Area Security Initiative,
and Operation Stonegarden.
 Eligibility: The State Administrative Agency is the only entity eligible to apply
for and administer FY 2015 Homeland Security Grant Program funds.
FY 2014
$587,000,000
FY 2015
$587,000,000
Program Highlights
 The explanatory statement accompanying the FY 2015 DHS appropriations bill limits Urban Area Security Initiative funding
to urban areas representing 85% of nationwide risk.
 “Consistent with the 9/11 Act, FEMA shall conduct risk assessments for the 100 most populous metropolitan areas prior
to making Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grant awards. Because most of the cumulative national terrorism risk to
urban areas is focused on a relatively small number of cities, it is expected that UASI funding will be limited to urban
areas representing up to 85 percent of such risk and that resources will continue to be allocated in proportion to risk.”
 The 28 urban areas identified for FY 2015 funding represent 85% of nationwide risk according to the DHS risk formula. 39
were funded last year.
 Three year period of performance will apply.
6
FY 2015 Operation Stonegarden
Program Overview
 Purpose: Operation Stonegarden is intended to enhance cooperation and
coordination among Federal, State, territorial, tribal, and local law enforcement
agencies in a joint mission to secure the United States borders along routes of
ingress from international borders to include travel corridors in States bordering
Mexico and Canada, as well as States and territories with international water borders
 Eligibility: Eligible applicants include local units of government at the county level
and federally-recognized tribal governments in the States bordering Canada
(including Alaska), southern States bordering Mexico, and States and territories with
international water borders
FY 2014
$55,000,000
FY 2015
$55,000,000
Program Highlights
 There are no proposed changes to eligibility or program priorities.
 Three year period of performance will apply.
FY 2014 Information
 21 States applied for funding in FY 2014
 Distribution of FY 2014 allocations – 86.4% to the Southwest, 9.8% to the Northern, and 3.8% to the Coastal Border Regions
 Total number of Counties funded in:
FY 2014: 140
FY 2013: 126
FY 2012: 121
FY 2011: 111
FY 2010: 102
7
FY 2015 Operation Stonegarden
 Eligible Applicants:
– Same as FY 2014
– Local units of government at the county level or equivalent and Federally-recognized tribal governments in
the 39 States and territories bordering Canada, southern States bordering Mexico, and States and territories
with international water borders.
States and Territories
Alabama
Massachusetts
Pennsylvania
Alaska
Michigan
Rhode Island
Arizona
Minnesota
South Carolina
California
Mississippi
Texas
Connecticut
Montana
Vermont
Delaware
New Hampshire
Virginia
Florida
New Jersey
Washington
Georgia
New Mexico
Wisconsin
Hawaii
New York
Puerto Rico
Idaho
North Carolina
U.S. Virgin Islands
Louisiana
North Dakota
American Samoa
Maine
Ohio
Guam
Maryland
Oregon
Northern Mariana Islands
8
FY 2015 Nonprofit Security Grant Program
Program Overview
 Purpose: The Non-Profit Security Grant Program provides funding support for target
hardening activities to nonprofit organizations that are at high risk of terrorist attack
and located within one of the 28 UASI-eligible urban areas
 Eligibility: The State Administrative Agency is the only entity eligible to apply for FY
2015 Non-Profit Security Grant Program funds on behalf of nonprofit organizations as
described under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt
from tax under section 501(a) of such Code
FY 2014
$13,000,000
FY 2015
$13,000,000
Program Highlights
 There are no proposed changes to eligibility or program priorities
 The $13 million minimum allocation amount for FY 2015 NSGP is the same as last year
 Three-year period of performance will apply.
FY 2014 Information
 A total of 687 IJs were submitted to FEMA requesting over $47.8 million in Federal funding
 100% (24 out of 24) of eligible States applied
 100% (39 out of the 39) of eligible UASI urban areas applied
 At least one application from each submitting urban area advanced to the Federal review
 A total of 279 applications advanced to the Federal review requesting over $19.7 million in Federal funding
 182 applications were funded under FY 2014 Non-Profit Security Grant Program
FOUO
Embargoed Until 11:00 AM 4/2/2015
9
Grant Reporting

Grants Reporting Tool (GRT)
•
Biannual Strategy Implementation Report (BSIR) (June and December)

Payment and Reporting System (PARS)
•
Quarterly Financial Status Reports (FSR) completed on SF-425
•
SF-425 is also known as Federal Financial Report

ND Grants
•
Recipients must submit performance reports using the SF-PPR on a semiannual basis in the ND Grants
system.
•
The SF-PPR can be accessed online at http://www.na.fs.fed.us/fap/SF-PPR_Cover%20Sheet.pdf.
•
The SF-PPR must report the performance measures for Fusion Centers using the annual Fusion Center
Assessment Program managed by the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) and reported to
DHS/FEMA.
10
Key Reporting Requirement Dates
• Programmatic SF-PPR and BSIR
Reporting Period
Report Due Date
January 1 – June 30
July 30
July 1 – December 31
January 30
• Financial SF-425
Reporting Period
Report Due Date
October 1 – December 31
January 30
January 1 – March 31
April 30
April 1 – June 30
July 30
July 1 – September 30
1111
11
OTHER REQUIREMENTS
 Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC)Membership
 National Incident Management System (NIMS) Implementation
 Registration with SAM and DUNS
 Compliance with SAFECOM mandatory
 EOPs must be updated every two years
 THIRA must be completed using the URT by Dec. 31, 2015
 SPR must be completed using the URT by Dec. 31, 2015
 CPG 101 v2 Compliance will be reported through the URT
 EHP
Pre-Decisional / FOUO Embargoed
Until 4/1/2015
12
EHP Compliance
Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation
(EHP) Compliance

All projects funded with Federal grant dollars (including cost share) must comply with EHP
laws, regulations, and Executive Orders.

An EHP review is an analysis of pertinent project information to determine whether a project
may have the potential to impact environmental or cultural resources.
•
Complex projects will typically require more information to reach a determination.
•
FEMA may be required to consult with the relevant State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE), and others to determine impacts to sensitive resources.

The EHP review must be completed by FEMA before initiating any work on any FEMA
funded project, even if a previous award/year/program/project has an approved EHP
review.

EHP reviews should be part of the project planning cycle so that projects can be informed by
the results of the review.

Grantees are responsible for completing the EHP Screening Form and providing all relevant
EHP materials to GPD via the GPD-EHP Mailbox at GPDEHPinfo@dhs.gov.

Grant funds may be used for preparation of EHP documentation (e.g. environmental
assessments).
13
Extension Review Process
 The extension review process was initiated to evaluate the grantee’s request to extend
awards beyond the initial Period of Performance (POP), in support of Information
Bulletin (IB) #379. Only those requests that are determined to have met the criteria
set forth in IB #379 will be approved for an extension.
 Due to the complexity of the extension review process, it typically takes 70 days for the
package to be reviewed and the grantee to be notified of the final extension.
 Given the lengthy extension process, grantees should submit any request no less than
120 days prior to the end of the period of performance.
14
Questions?
15