USDA NIFA KMB-32361: Smith-Lever Special Needs Competitive Grants Program (Historical Reference)

USDA NIFA KMB-32361: Smith-Lever Special Needs Competitive Grants Program (Historical Reference)

Historical status

The FY 2026 Smith-Lever Special Needs Competitive Grants Program is closed. The application deadline was 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on June 1, 2026. USDA’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) currently lists funding opportunity USDA-NIFA-KMB-32361 as “Closed” on the program page. That page does not announce a subsequent funding-year Notice of Funding Opportunity or a replacement deadline. This entry is therefore a historical reference, not an open application listing.

The closed status matters for planning. A reader should not treat the June 1 date as a future submission opportunity, assume that a late application can be accepted, or reuse the FY 2026 application number for a later round without checking NIFA and Grants.gov. If NIFA announces another competition, its new notice may change the funding year, application system, deadline, matching rules, or required attachments. Until that happens, the FY 2026 requirements below describe the last published cycle only.

At a glance

The figures in this table come from NIFA’s FY 2026 opportunity listing and the revised full announcement. The revised announcement identified approximately $459,564 in available funding but did not commit USDA to a particular number of awards. The original page displayed a 50% percent-of-applications-funded estimate, but that is not a promise of funding and should not be used to forecast an individual proposal’s result.

What the program funded

SLSNCGP supported innovative, education-based Extension approaches to disaster preparedness and potential responses to natural, human-made, or technological disasters and disaster threats. NIFA described the public purpose in terms of preparing for, responding to, recovering from, and mitigating disasters. The program was aimed at practical education and applied Extension delivery rather than an unrestricted research award or a personal fellowship.

The FY 2026 notice connected disaster work to food and agriculture systems and the quality of life of communities. A project could develop educational programs, resource deliverables, or demonstration activities. NIFA also encouraged projects that could be replicated, scaled, or transferred to other states and regions. Proposals could add to or build on web-based material in the Extension Disaster Education Network (EDEN) Resource Dashboard, with applicants encouraged to coordinate with EDEN when that fit the project.

The notice required each project to focus on disasters, address at least one Topical Area, and use at least one Strategy. The five Topical Areas were Agriculture; Natural Resources; Community and Economic Development; Family and Consumer Sciences; and 4-H and Youth Development. The five Strategies were Program and Resource Development; Exercise and Training; Communications; Disaster Planning; and Professional Development and Capacity Building.

That structure gave applicants room to address different hazards and audiences, but it did not make every disaster-related idea eligible. A proposal needed to show a specific public need, an Extension-based way to address it, and a credible path from activities to results. Examples of eligible work described by the notice include workshops, curricula and resource guides, tabletop or simulation exercises, train-the-trainer programs, technical assistance, needs assessments, hazard-specific planning, communications, and outcome measurement. The project still had to explain why the chosen topic and strategy fit the disaster context.

Eligibility and matching

Only 1862 Land-grant Institutions in the 50 states and the listed U.S. territories could submit an application for FY 2026. NIFA named American Samoa, Guam, Micronesia, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands in the eligible geography. An eligible individual institution, independent branch campus, or branch institution of a state system could submit work principally for its own students or faculty and managed primarily by its own personnel.

The applicant did not have to perform every activity alone. The notice allowed an eligible 1862 institution to partner with other Land-grant Institutions, including 1890 and 1994 institutions, non-Land-grant Institutions, and nongovernmental organizations in the state or region. An award recipient could subcontract with an otherwise ineligible organization when that organization was necessary for the project. Those partnership options did not remove the requirement that the submitting applicant itself be eligible, and duplicate or multiple submissions were not allowed.

The standard matching rule was substantial: applicants had to provide matching contributions equal to 100% of the federal funds awarded. The revised NOFO specified that the match had to come from non-federal sources at the applicant institution. In-kind and third-party contributions were not allowed for this program, so partner contributions could not simply be counted as the applicant’s required match.

The notice also listed exceptions and special rules. It said no match was required for 1994 Land-grant Institutions and Hispanic-Serving Institutions, although the applicant eligibility language should still be checked carefully against the applicable notice. It listed a 50% matching requirement for Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, with possible waiver consideration. It also stated that NIFA would waive local matching requirements under $200,000 for American Samoa, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands under the cited statutory authority. An institution considering a future round should confirm any exception directly with NIFA rather than carrying forward an old budget assumption.

Funding and project period

FY 2026 standard grants ranged from $20,000 to $115,000. The project period for a standard grant could run from 12 to 36 months. The notice’s tentative project start date was September 15, 2026, so a FY 2026 applicant would have built its milestones and spending plan around that date if funded. That start date was a planning assumption in the closed notice, not evidence that a later cycle is open.

The total amount available was approximately $459,564. NIFA expressly said that USDA was not committed to funding a particular application or making a specific number of awards. A practical budget therefore needed to connect each requested cost to a defined activity, audience, output, and outcome. The request also needed a defensible institutional matching plan. A project that required partner match, treated federal dollars as the full budget, or used a generic disaster narrative would have faced avoidable eligibility or review problems.

What the FY 2026 application required

The last published notice required electronic submission; no other method or response was accepted. The application package was available through Grants.gov under USDA-NIFA-KMB-32361. There was no letter of intent. The following sequence describes the closed cycle and is useful only as a checklist for a future notice that retains similar requirements.

1. Confirm institutional eligibility and appoint the responsible project staff. The applicant needed to be an eligible 1862 Land-grant Institution, and project directors needed active eRA Commons accounts. The organization needed a Signing Official and Project Director designated in eRA Commons. If one person held both roles, the notice required separate eRA Commons accounts for those roles.

2. Complete registrations early. The organization needed active System for Award Management (SAM) registration, a Unique Entity Identifier, eRA Commons registration, and a finalized Grants.gov registration. The NOFO warned that registration could take six weeks or longer and that creating an eRA Commons account could take up to two weeks. Registration had to be complete before submission; waiting until the final days would have created a material submission risk.

3. Find the opportunity by its funding opportunity number. The FY 2026 instructions directed applicants to search Grants.gov for USDA-NIFA-KMB-32361, download the application package, and use the version of the NIFA Grants Application Guide included with that package. The NOFO controlled if it conflicted with the general guide.

4. Build the core forms and narrative. The Project Summary had to be 250 words or less and identify the project description, total requested amount, and whether the proposal was a new submission or resubmission. The Project Narrative could not exceed 10 pages, including the logic model, project timeline, tables, and figures. It had to use one-inch margins, single-line spacing, and 12-point Times New Roman. Applications over the page limit could be returned without review.

5. Address the required narrative sections. The notice asked for an introduction and problem statement; rationale and significance; goals, objectives, and intended outcomes; activities; evaluation; roles and responsibilities; a logic model; and a project timeline. Outcomes needed to be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and timely, including who would benefit and how many people would be reached. The narrative also needed to explain how outputs would be communicated to EDEN, the broader Cooperative Extension System, USDA NIFA, or other stakeholders.

6. Add the required attachments. Attachments had to be in PDF format. The package included a bibliography and references cited, a Conflict of Interest form, a Data Management Plan, and any applicable commitment letters. The Data Management Plan could not exceed two pages. Partner commitment letters had to be signed by the partner’s Authorized Representative and describe concrete roles. A resubmission also needed a response to the previous review summary. The notice warned applicants not to add unrelated attachments or extra narrative to work around the page limit.

7. Document the budget and matching source. The budget justification needed to explain the federal request, identify matching sources and the entity providing the match, and show how spending supported the project goals. A written pledge agreement was not required, but applicants remained subject to federal documentation, valuation, and reporting rules. The institution should have completed an administrative review before submission and retained records of any Grants.gov or eRA support correspondence.

Review priorities

NIFA used administrative screening before scientific peer review. Proposals that met the administrative requirements were evaluated against five 20-point criteria: potential for advancing disaster education; project implementation; evaluation; key persons and organizational support; and budget. This made the application more than a narrative exercise. The project needed to be relevant, feasible within 12 to 36 months, measurable, properly staffed, and cost-effective.

The strongest planning questions were concrete: What hazard or threat affects the named community? Which Topical Area and Strategy are being used? What will Extension staff deliver, to whom, and through which channel? What changes will be measured? Who owns evaluation and fiscal oversight? Which partners have defined responsibilities? How will the material be shared beyond the original service area? Those questions remain useful for a future round, but the answer must be updated against the next official NOFO if NIFA opens one.

Where to check for a future cycle

The authoritative starting point is NIFA’s Smith-Lever Special Needs Competitive Grants Program page, which currently identifies USDA-NIFA-KMB-32361 as closed and provides the program contact. NIFA lists the program contact mailbox as SM.SLSNCGP@usda.gov. When a future notice is announced, verify the new funding opportunity number, funding year, deadline, eligible applicant categories, matching exceptions, registration system, and attachment list before preparing a proposal.

This page keeps the FY 2026 deadline because it documents a real closed competition. It does not claim that the program accepts late submissions or that a subsequent funding-year round has been announced.