The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has issued a 60-day notice in the Federal Register, seeking public comments on the extension of its Grants Reporting Tool (GRT) information collection. Published on February 11, 2026, in Volume 91, Number 28, this notice invites input from the general public under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The GRT serves as a web-based platform for state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) grant recipients to fulfill reporting obligations for FEMA's preparedness grants. This development underscores FEMA's ongoing efforts to streamline grant monitoring while ensuring statutory compliance. It highlights the balance between efficient data collection and reducing administrative burdens on recipients, potentially affecting how federal funds for homeland security and emergency management are tracked and utilized.
Background on the Grants Reporting Tool
The GRT is a digital system managed by FEMA's Grant Programs Directorate (GPD). It facilitates reporting for a suite of preparedness grants, including the Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP), the Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP), the Tribal Homeland Security Grant Program (THSGP), and the Emergency Management Performance Grant Program (EMPG). These programs provide funding to SLTT entities to enhance capabilities in preventing, preparing for, protecting against, and responding to terrorism and other hazards.
Established to meet federal mandates, the GRT collects data such as annual investment justifications and biannual progress reports. According to the notice, this information allows FEMA to evaluate grant applications, monitor performance, manage fund flows, and close out grants effectively. The system supports FEMA's statutory requirement under Title XX of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which authorizes the DHS Secretary, through the FEMA Administrator, to provide such grants. Section 2022 of the Act further requires FEMA to review grants every two years and mandates annual reports from recipients on fund usage.
Additional legal foundations include Title 2 CFR part 200, which sets uniform administrative requirements for federal awards, and acts like the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006, the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977, and the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. These laws collectively authorize FEMA's administration of programs like EMPG and emphasize the need for accountable reporting.
Key Players and Processes Involved
FEMA, part of the Department of Homeland Security, leads this initiative through its Resilience Grants Technology Directorate. Richard Moore, identified as the GRT System Owner, serves as the primary contact for further information. The notice also directs inquiries to FEMA's Information Management Division.
SLTT governments, including State Administrative Agencies (SAAs) and directly eligible entities, are the primary respondents. The notice estimates 81 respondents, generating 162 responses annually. These entities use the GRT to submit FEMA Form FF-207-FY-22-121, known as the Biannual Strategy Implementation Report (BSIR). This form captures progress on grant-funded activities, ensuring alignment with program goals.
The extension process adheres to the Paperwork Reduction Act, which requires agencies to minimize paperwork burdens while ensuring data utility. FEMA's notice solicits comments on the necessity, accuracy, quality, and burden minimization of the collection. Submissions must be made via regulations.gov under Docket ID FEMA-2025-0245 by April 13, 2026, and will be posted publicly without changes.
Legal Precedents and Political Context
The GRT's framework draws from established legal precedents in federal grant management. For instance, 2 CFR part 200 provides a standardized approach to cost principles and audits, influencing how FEMA structures its reporting requirements. The Homeland Security Act of 2002, particularly sections 2003 and 2004, mandates oversight of funds for states and high-risk urban areas, with DHS granted full access to related information.
Politically, this extension occurs amid broader discussions on federal efficiency and disaster preparedness. FEMA's grants portfolio has evolved since the post-9/11 era, with programs like HSGP addressing terrorism threats and EMPG focusing on all-hazards emergency management. Perspectives vary: FEMA emphasizes the tool's role in accountability and performance monitoring, as stated in the notice: 'The purpose of the GRT collection is to satisfy FEMA's statutory requirement to monitor the use of FEMA grant funds.' Recipients might view it as an administrative necessity but could highlight burdens, estimated at 2,471 total annual hours and $130,741 in costs. No direct political forces are cited in the notice, but extensions like this often reflect bipartisan priorities for transparent federal spending.
Implications for Grant Management
In the short term, the extension maintains continuity for SLTT recipients, ensuring uninterrupted reporting for ongoing grants. It could lead to refinements based on public comments, potentially incorporating technological improvements to reduce burdens.
Long-term implications include enhanced federal oversight of preparedness funding, which totals billions annually across these programs. Effective reporting through GRT helps FEMA allocate resources efficiently, as evidenced by its use in evaluating investment justifications. However, challenges persist in balancing data needs with respondent burdens, especially for smaller tribal or local entities with limited resources.
Different perspectives emerge without endorsement: Grant administrators may appreciate the web-based system's efficiency over manual processes, while critics could argue it adds layers of bureaucracy. The notice's burden estimates—zero for operations, maintenance, capital, or start-up costs—suggest FEMA views the tool as cost-effective, though the federal government's annual cost is projected at $1,281,820.
The proposed extension of FEMA's Grants Reporting Tool represents a routine yet critical step in federal grant administration. Key takeaways include the tool's role in complying with multiple statutes and its focus on minimizing paperwork. Moving forward, public comments could shape the final approval, potentially leading to adjustments in reporting frequency or format. Ongoing debates may center on integrating advanced technologies to further ease burdens, while ensuring robust monitoring of funds for national security and emergency readiness. Challenges include adapting to evolving threats and maintaining equity among diverse SLTT recipients.
