FY2026 High Priority Program-Commercial Motor Vehicle (HP-CMV)

FY2026 High Priority Program-Commercial Motor Vehicle (HP-CMV)

This page is a historical reference for the FY2026 High Priority Program-Commercial Motor Vehicle (HP-CMV) grant, opportunity number FM-MHP-26-001. The program was run by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation. The official listing shows that the application deadline was June 17, 2026 at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time and that the opportunity was archived on July 17, 2026. Applications for this cycle are no longer being accepted. The FMCSA program pages reviewed for this update do not announce a subsequent HP-CMV cycle, so this entry does not invent a new deadline.

The archived listing remains useful for organizations planning a future application. It records the federal program’s purpose, eligible applicant classes, national priorities, budget scale, and the package that FMCSA required for this cycle. A future notice may change any of those details, so readers should use this page as a record of FY2026 requirements and check FMCSA and Grants.gov for a newly posted notice before preparing a new submission.

Key details

The amount needs careful reading. The official listing displays $56,500,000 as program funding, 55 expected awards, and $2,000,000 as the award maximum. It does not establish a $2,000,000 minimum award. The front matter and this table therefore describe the maximum, not a minimum, and do not imply that every selected project would receive the same amount. FMCSA also states that it would not require a matching share for FY2026 awards.

What HP-CMV funded

The objective of HP-CMV was to support, enrich, and evaluate commercial motor vehicle safety programs. FMCSA described a wide but defined set of public-safety uses: targeting unsafe driving by commercial and non-commercial vehicles in high-risk crash corridors; promoting the safe and secure movement of hazardous materials; improving the safety of goods and passenger transportation in foreign commerce; demonstrating technologies that improve CMV safety; supporting participation in the Performance Registration Information Systems Management (PRISM) program; improving safety data; and increasing public awareness and education on CMV safety.

The program was a competitive safety grant, not a general technology or business-development award. A credible project needed to connect a specific CMV safety problem to a defined intervention and measurable results. Examples from the notice’s priority structure include traffic enforcement in high-crash areas, work-zone safety, rural-road CMV safety, passenger-carrier safety, human-trafficking detection and prevention activities, drug and alcohol clearinghouse enforcement, criminal interdiction training connected with CMV inspections, compliance investigations, safety technology used for enforcement, and CMV safety research.

Applicants were expected to identify the priority or priorities addressed by the project and explain how the proposed work would reduce crashes, injuries, or fatalities or otherwise improve CMV safety. The notice also called for program evaluation and performance measures. A proposal that only described equipment purchases, without showing the safety problem, the reason for the requested equipment, the responsible staff, and the expected change, would not match the performance-based structure of the notice.

Who was eligible

The FY2026 notice listed these eligible applicant classes:

1. State government agencies, including agencies in the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
2. Local governments, including county, city, township, and special district governments.
3. Federally recognized Native American tribal governments.
4. Institutions of higher education, including public, state, and private institutions.
5. Nonprofit organizations with 501(c)(3) status with the Internal Revenue Service.

For-profit organizations and individuals were not eligible recipients. The notice also distinguished between applicant eligibility and project conditions. State and non-State entities could propose work related to enforcement and compliance with safety regulations, PRISM, and State Safety Data Quality. Institutions of higher education could request support for research or related efforts that supported national or State CMV safety work. MCSAP lead State agencies could request projects that augmented initiatives funded through the MCSAP formula grant, but those projects had to show that their objectives exceeded initiatives already approved in the State’s Commercial Vehicle Safety Plan.

FMCSA encouraged local law-enforcement agencies, local governments, federally recognized tribes, political jurisdictions, and other eligible entities to participate directly or in partnership with MCSAP lead agencies. A direct local law-enforcement application had to address the conditions in 49 CFR § 350.405. Non-law-enforcement applicants also had to certify compliance with the applicable conditions, while explaining any reason for exemption from requirements that did not apply to their work, such as direct responsibility for enforcement or access to a particular database. Eligible status alone did not guarantee that a project was responsive to a priority or ready for award.

What the FY2026 application required

The application had to be submitted electronically through Grants.gov. The applicant needed to complete the Grants.gov login process using the login.gov option, establish an E-Business Point of Contact to respond to registration emails, and establish at least one Authorized Organization Representative. The notice warned that Grants.gov registration usually takes two to four business weeks and that FMCSA would not excuse a late submission caused by incomplete registration or failure to meet Grants.gov requirements. Those steps mattered for the closed cycle and are worth retaining as preparation notes for any later notice, although a future program may alter them.

The project narrative was limited to 35 total pages per application, even when an application included more than one project. The narrative had to use the required formatting and include the following sections for each proposed project:

• An introduction describing the purpose, applicable HP-CMV priority, intended outcomes, and the applicant’s organizational capacity to administer the work.
• A problem statement with qualitative and quantitative evidence, the data source and source date, trend analysis, the targeted location, and an explanation of how the applicant collects and analyzes the data.
• A performance objective stated in measurable terms and tied to the problem baseline.
• A performance activity plan that explained the work, staffing, timing, and responsibilities.
• A performance measurement plan describing indicators and how results would be assessed.
• A monitoring plan covering data collection, reporting, and oversight.
• A budget narrative that explained the necessity, calculation, and allocation of each requested cost.

The application package also had to include the federal forms and supporting items specified in the notice. The core list was the SF-424 Application for Federal Assistance, SF-424A Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs, SF-424B Assurances for Non-Construction Programs, the Grants.gov Certification Regarding Lobbying form, and SF-LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities when applicable. Applicants also had to provide key contact information for the project or program manager, authorized organization representative, and financial official; use the Grants.gov attachment form; and include a current approved indirect cost rate agreement or a qualifying letter if claiming indirect costs. The package included a Title VI Program Compliance Plan and FMCSA Title VI Program Assurance for the current Federal Fiscal Year, subject to the notice’s review process.

The budget had to reconcile across the project narrative, budget narrative, SF-424, and SF-424A. Because no matching share was required, the SF-424 instructions directed applicants to enter zero for the matching amount. Costs needed to be necessary, reasonable, allocable, allowable, and rounded to whole dollars. If multiple projects were proposed, each required its own project narrative, budget narrative, line-item budget, and title, while the overall budget still had to reconcile across the application.

How an applicant would have prepared the submission

For the closed FY2026 cycle, a sensible preparation sequence was:

1. Confirm that the organization fit one of the listed applicant classes and determine whether the proposed work required coordination with the MCSAP lead State agency.
2. Select a focused HP-CMV national priority and document the safety problem with relevant crash, enforcement, inspection, PRISM, SSDQ, or other objective data.
3. Set a baseline and measurable performance objective. The notice encouraged SMART objectives and expected applicants to explain how progress would be measured.
4. Assign an authorized representative, project or program manager, financial official, and responsible implementation lead. Document legal authority, staff capacity, partner roles, and any required local law-enforcement or State coordination.
5. Draft the project narrative in the required order, keeping the problem, activities, measures, monitoring, and budget connected. If proposing research or technology, explain how deliverables and findings would be transmitted to FMCSA and used by safety stakeholders.
6. Build the budget narrative and federal forms together. Check that every cost has a corresponding activity, that each project total reconciles, and that indirect costs are supported by the required rate documentation.
7. Complete the Title VI materials and other applicable attachments, then upload the complete package through Grants.gov after the organization’s registrations and Authorized Organization Representative are ready.
8. Submit before the announced deadline and retain the confirmation. For FY2026, that deadline was June 17, 2026 at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time; it has passed and cannot be used for a new submission.

Historical status and future monitoring

The official listing identifies the opportunity as archived July 17, 2026. The FMCSA HP Grants page continues to describe the program and links to the FY2026 notice, but the material reviewed for this update does not announce a FY2027 HP-CMV opportunity or another open application window. Readers should not treat the archived FY2026 date as a live filing date, and they should not replace it with a guessed annual date. A future notice may use a different opportunity number, deadline, funding amount, priority structure, or application package.

For future monitoring, search FMCSA’s discretionary grant page and Grants.gov using both “High Priority Commercial Motor Vehicle” and the opportunity number when reviewing the FY2026 record. Check the listing’s status, version history, documents, and archive information. If FMCSA publishes a new cycle, compare its NOFO with this record before reusing any eligibility, award, deadline, or form information. Grants.gov registration should also be started well before a new deadline because the FY2026 notice stated that registration can take two to four business weeks.

Official links

• Archived FY2026 HP-CMV opportunity listing: https://simpler.grants.gov/opportunity/0d3aa4fb-2eb1-4902-b3ee-97d259e495e6
• FY2026 HP-CMV Notice of Funding Opportunity: https://files.simpler.grants.gov/opportunities/0d3aa4fb-2eb1-4902-b3ee-97d259e495e6/attachments/7f8ddf6d-d096-48b6-8134-3cb8d2906712/FY26_HP-CMV_NOFO.pdf
• FMCSA discretionary grant programs: https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/fy26grantfundingopportunities
• FMCSA HP Grants resource page: https://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/Grants/HighPriority.aspx

What the program is trying to fund

The FM-CMV High Priority grant sits in FMCSA’s broader High Priority mission family. The NOFO objective is broad but specific to CMV risk reduction:

• support and evaluate CMV safety programs,
• target unsafe driving in high-risk crash corridors,
• improve safe movement of hazardous materials,
• improve safety around foreign commerce goods and passenger movement,
• demonstrate CMV safety technology,
• support PRISM participation,
• support safety data quality improvement,
• grow public awareness and CMV safety education.

The opportunity is not just about one technology pilot. It is designed to fund practical safety projects where local implementation capacity, legal enforcement systems, data quality, and behavior change intersect. In many applications, a strong proposal is one that links a practical CMV problem (for example, crash cluster, enforcement gap, data quality weakness, or hazardous materials compliance issue) to a measurable change model and a reporting approach that FMCSA can evaluate.

For applicants, this is not a generic innovation-only grant. It is a public-safety operating grant design where outcomes and implementation are important as much as concept quality. That is visible in the NOFO’s emphasis on project narratives and reporting obligations.

Who this is for and who this is not for

The FMCSA listing and NOFO agree on a tight eligible set. The strongest candidate pool is government and mission-aligned nonprofit or educational entities:

1. State governments, including DC and U.S. territories.
2. County, city, township, and special district governments.
3. Federally recognized Native American tribal governments.
4. Public or state institutions of higher education.
5. Private higher education institutions.
6. Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) status.

For-profit entities and private individuals are not eligible recipients.

For State and non-State applicants, FMCSA expects clear alignment with State CMV safety priorities. The NOFO text indicates applications from non-State entities should align with priorities and often involve partnership or collaboration with MCSAP lead agencies, with practical reporting and implementation plans. If your institution is not State lead, your strongest path is usually partnership-based: local law enforcement agencies, universities, or nonprofits should include governance and a lead-state coordination narrative.

One useful practical framing:

• If you are a city, township, or university office, write the grant around a clearly bounded CMV safety outcome and a State-anchored execution plan.
• If your team is not primarily a law enforcement operator, include your exemption rationale for any parts of FMCSA condition (especially around law-enforcement roles) where requested.

Eligibility details you should treat as requirements, not suggestions

The NOFO lists conditions that determine whether your package can move forward at all. The following are non-negotiable checkpoints:

• Submit as an eligible applicant class listed above.
• Ensure the proposal is responsive to NOFO scope.
• Coordinate proposals requiring local implementation with the State lead context where relevant.
• Use required federal forms and formats exactly.
• Provide a complete budget narrative and project narrative.
• Provide an applicant with authority and staff capacity to administer the award.

The NOFO also requires explicit SF-424 package completion and standard federal forms. This is a technical eligibility condition, not a preference:

• SF-424 (Application for Federal Assistance)
• SF-424A (Budget Information)
• SF-424B (Assurances)
• Grants.gov Certification Regarding Lobbying
• SF-LLL when applicable
• full budget narrative
• complete project narrative

Missing any core document can move a submission into ineligibility status even if your idea is strong. If you are applying as a local or special district government, your completion checklist should include legal authority and role statements early, because that appears directly tied to review readiness.

Amount, scale, and competition shape

The official FMCSA page publishes key funding metadata:

• expected total amount: $56.5 million,
• expected number of awards: 55,
• minimum award shown in that listing: $2,000,000,
• no match requirement.

Because FMCSA states this as a FY competitive call, grant amounts vary by project design and selected set. The per-award ceiling is not explicitly published on the public summary pages we used for grounding, so this should be treated as “confirm at package level” during application development.

For application strategy:

• Design budgets around deliverables already accepted by your State safety implementation framework.
• Keep line items tied to measurable outputs (training sessions, enforcement tool support, public awareness activities, data collection, reporting infrastructure).
• Avoid oversized budget narratives: reviewers evaluate evidence of realism alongside mission fit.

The “expected awards” signal is competitive. In federal grants, this tends to mean your proposal competes against peers with similar scope, not with the whole applicant pool equally. You should explicitly score your own proposal on three questions before submission:

1. Is the project clearly within FM-CMV mission scope?
2. Is the budget proportional to measurable outputs?
3. Is reporting and implementation capacity explicit?

Application timeline and process (practical sequence)

To keep this operational, treat the application process as a sequence of gates:

1. Confirm eligibility and category: confirm your legal entity category is included.
2. Confirm State-context alignment: identify the relevant CMV safety plan, priority corridor, and coordinating lead.
3. Build team and governance: assign a single accountable project lead; include legal/finance roles.
4. Draft the required narrative around objective outcomes, not just activities.
5. Build compliance forms and required docs in Grants.gov-supported format.
6. Pre-submit dry run in Grants.gov to reduce last-minute conversion or attachment issues.
7. Submit before 5:00 p.m. ET on June 17, 2026.

A useful rule: if your package is not ready at least 4–6 business days before close, do not assume you can recover from unresolved form-level formatting issues. The NOFO indicates complete applications must meet timing and completeness criteria, and incomplete items can stall to ineligible.

Where this opportunity is best used (fit map)

It is strongest for entities that can show these capabilities:

• Safety program governance across jurisdictional boundaries.
• Partnership with State systems or enforcement partners where needed.
• Existing capacity to manage public-sector or federally funded reporting.
• Access to data from CMV safety systems or the ability to improve data quality and use outcomes.

Examples of strong fit projects:

• High-risk corridor enforcement enhancement that includes measurable safety compliance outcomes.
• PRISM participation upgrades with operational readiness and measurable state-local handoff.
• Safety awareness campaigns tied to specific driver-risk pathways and evaluation metrics.
• Hazardous materials safety initiative where reporting and training can be tracked in a defined quarter.

When in doubt, choose one pathway and keep it narrow. Broad “all-hazard” programs often fail scoring because reviewers cannot see immediate execution detail.

Application preparation strategy for a reviewer-grade submission

Write to reviewer expectations, not marketing goals. A strong application should include:

• Clear problem statement: where is the CMV safety gap? Is it an enforcement, education, technology, or data issue?
• Implementation logic: what will happen in each phase and who executes each task.
• Quantified target: define baseline, target, and method for verifying change.
• Evidence quality: use incident history, enforcement metrics, or data quality gaps with provenance.
• Coordination: demonstrate coordination with State or equivalent lead where relevant.
• Sustainable operations: show who owns implementation after award close.

The NOFO references 49 CFR Part 350 priorities and a broad performance orientation. That means your project should be both practical and measurable; vague language (“improve compliance culture”) needs conversion into concrete indicators (“reduce identified non-compliance cases,” “increase timely reporting completion,” “reduce unsafe driving indicators on priority routes,” etc.).

Also, because this is a federal safety grant, legal and administrative clarity matters:

• Identify legal authority and responsible personnel by title and signature path.
• Map reporting and documentation responsibilities.
• Ensure any partnership commitments are documented and not merely implied.

Common mistakes to avoid

1. Treating this as a single-activity grant and skipping the required federal forms.
2. Submitting before defining measurable performance goals and baselines.
3. Ignoring local-state coordination where implementation depends on jurisdiction context.
4. Underestimating budget narrative depth (narrative and budget must match).
5. Using generic outcome language without measurable evidence points.
6. Treating the opportunity as unrestricted innovation support rather than safety mission support.
7. Failing to plan for PRISM or SSDQ-linked reporting expectations.

If your package has these gaps, it may become ineligible despite good technical ideas.

FAQ

Is this grant only for large agencies?

No. The opportunity is open to several types of public entities and nonprofits, but all must fit one of the eligible classes and meet administrative requirements.

Can nonprofits apply directly?

Yes, if they are registered with 501(c)(3) status and meet NOFO and Grants.gov requirements.

Are for-profit firms eligible?

No. For-profit organizations and individuals are explicitly excluded.

Is there a matching requirement?

No matching share is required according to the listing used for this cycle.

What is the filing date and close date?

The published close date is June 17, 2026 at 5:00 p.m. ET; the opportunity is not an open-ended or year-round solicitation.

Does the NOFO accept multiple applications from the same applicant?

The source pages we used for this update discuss application-level completion requirements and competition details but do not state a universal “one application limit” in summary form. If your organization has multiple teams, align each submission strictly to a distinct eligible objective and confirm internal policy with the State lead or grant administrator before filing.

Can I use the grant for private enforcement equipment only?

Only if tied to FM-CMV mission and compliant with NOFO priorities and applicant restrictions. Pure commercial procurement without safety implementation outcomes is generally weak.

What to do next

1. Download the official FMCSA FY2026 opportunity page and the FMCSA-linked NOFO PDF.
2. Confirm your eligibility class and whether your legal authority allows application under this call.
3. Build a document package using the required federal forms.
4. Set a hard internal submission date at least 3 business days before the official close.
5. Use a review pass that checks every section in the complete application checklist.

For teams preparing now, use this as a “mission-first, compliance-complete” filing: even excellent ideas are delayed or disqualified if the package is not complete and aligned to the published NOFO criteria.

Official links and monitoring

• FMCSA FY2026 grant opportunity page: https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/fy26grantfundingopportunities
• Grants.gov listing for this opportunity number (accessed through the FMCSA/official listing context): https://www.grants.gov/search-results-detail/362449
• FY2026 HP-CMV NOFO PDF mirror on Grants.gov attachment host: https://files.simpler.grants.gov/opportunities/0d3aa4fb-2eb1-4902-b3ee-97d259e495e6/attachments/7f8ddf6d-d096-48b6-8134-3cb8d2906712/FY26_HP-CMV_NOFO.pdf
• FMCSA PRISM resource hub (support context): https://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/PRISM/home/Grants
• Support contact listed on official listing: Grants.gov Contact Center (1-800-518-4726; [email protected])