F26AS00071 Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund: Habitat Conservation Plan Land Acquisition Grants

F26AS00071 Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund: Habitat Conservation Plan Land Acquisition Grants

The F26AS00071 Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund: Habitat Conservation Plan Land Acquisition Grants is a newly posted federal opportunity focused on land acquisition that complements approved habitat conservation plans for listed species. Department of the Interior posted the notice on August 24, 2026, and applications are due 2026-10-30. This page translates the official synopsis into a practical screening and preparation guide; the Grants.gov notice and attached Notice of Funding Opportunity remain controlling.

Established by Congress in fiscal year (FY) 1997, the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Land Acquisition Grant program was designed to reduce conflicts between the conservation of listed species and competing land uses on specific parcels of land associated with approved and permitted HCPs. Under this program, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) provides matching grants to State agencies in support of land acquisition projects that will conserve species habitat in perpetuity through fee simple acquisition or the acquisition of permanent conservation easements. FWS considers the use of Federal acquisition dollars by States for habitat protection associated with HCPs to be an important and effective mechanism to promote species recovery, prevent extinction, and preclude the need to list species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in the future. All land acquired through these grants complements, but does not replace, the mitigation, minimization, and/or monitoring commitments of the HCP. Thus, this work is additive to the conservation commitments entered into when HCPs are permitted and serves as a meaningful way to leverage non-Federal investment in species recovery and connect conservation lands across the landscape.

The strongest potential applicant is eligible state and territorial wildlife agencies coordinating acquisition projects with habitat conservation plans and local partners. Before drafting, confirm that the legal applicant, project geography, proposed activities, and submission route all satisfy the full announcement—not merely the short public synopsis.

Key Details

Program Purpose and the Work It Supports

At its center, this competition supports land acquisition that complements approved habitat conservation plans for listed species. The official description should be read as a set of boundaries: a proposal needs to advance the named public purpose, use an eligible mechanism, and produce outcomes that the agency can reasonably attribute to the award. A project that is worthwhile but only indirectly related should not be forced into this notice.

Established by Congress in fiscal year (FY) 1997, the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Land Acquisition Grant program was designed to reduce conflicts between the conservation of listed species and competing land uses on specific parcels of land associated with approved and permitted HCPs. Under this program, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) provides matching grants to State agencies in support of land acquisition projects that will conserve species habitat in perpetuity through fee simple acquisition or the acquisition of permanent conservation easements. FWS considers the use of Federal acquisition dollars by States for habitat protection associated with HCPs to be an important and effective mechanism to promote species recovery, prevent extinction, and preclude the need to list species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in the future. All land acquired through these grants complements, but does not replace, the mitigation, minimization, and/or monitoring commitments of the HCP. Thus, this work is additive to the conservation commitments entered into when HCPs are permitted and serves as a meaningful way to leverage non-Federal investment in species recovery and connect conservation lands across the landscape.

Turn that purpose into a short results chain. Name the problem or service gap, the people or resource affected, the funded activities, immediate outputs, and the change expected during the period of performance. Use current evidence and distinguish national context from the specific conditions in the proposed service area. Reviewers should not have to infer how a list of activities advances the program objective.

The opportunity is categorized under Environment. Treat those categories as navigation aids, not substitutes for the full scope. The attached announcement may define priorities, mandatory components, performance measures, allowable costs, and program-specific terminology more narrowly than the catalog label.

Eligibility and Partnership Fit

The synopsis identifies these applicant categories: State governments. Its additional eligibility language states: Only State and Territorial (hereafter, “State”) agencies that have entered into a cooperative agreement pursuant to section 6(c) of the ESA and have provided the information necessary for the annual renewal (reconfirmation) of their cooperative agreement are eligible to apply for funding. While funding may only be awarded to States, groups such as counties or conservation organizations may work with a State agency that has a cooperative agreement on conservation efforts that are mutually beneficial, as a subgrantee. To be considered for funding, the land proposed for acquisition must benefit at least one Federally listed included on an active section 10(a)(1)(B) permit. The specific parcel(s) of land proposed for acquisition with grant funds, or as non-Federal cost share, must be identified and sufficiently described to facilitate merit review based on the evaluation criteria listed in this Funding Opportunity. Parcels must be individually identified on the SF-429 and SF-429-B b in order to be eligible for funding but can be grouped and described for evaluation purposes at the property or transaction level. If specific properties are not yet identified, applicants may identify an area of land comprised of similar habitat type(s) and supporting a similar suite of species in which an estimated number of acres will be acquired. Applicants must include information on what procedure will be used to ensure that high-quality habitat is targeted for acquisition should funds be awarded.A property may not be submitted for funding consideration under both the HCP Land Acquisition Grant and Recovery Land Acquisition Grant Programs in the same fiscal year.Applications must include a statement of commitment to funding for, and implementation of, management of the habitat in perpetuity consistent with the conservation needs of the species.Projects must involve voluntary conservation efforts within the United States.An application cannot include FWS Full-Time Equivalent costs.Neither funding awarded through this opportunity, nor the associated non-Federal cost share, may be used to satisfy regulatory requirements of the ESA, including complying with a biological opinion under section 7, fulfilling Federal mitigation, minimization, and/or monitoring requirements of an HCP permitted under section 10, or any other Federal regulatory mitigation requirement (e.g., mitigation for Clean Water Act permits). State administrative costs must either be assumed by the State or included in the application in accordance with Federal requirements. Applications may not be submitted to cover administrative costs alone.Generally, only expenses incurred and budgeted during the period of performance are reimbursable; the period of performance begins with the effective date established at the time the grant is approved. However, a State may request reimbursement of pre-award costs for certain necessary expenses detailed in the grant application. Pre-award costs are those incurred prior to the approval of the grant where such costs are necessary to comply with the proposed period of performance. Such costs are allowable only if the grant is awarded, only to the extent that they would have been allowable if incurred after the date of the award, and only with the written approval of the awarding agency (2 CFR 200.458).

Create an eligibility memorandum before writing the narrative. Record the applicant’s legal name and entity type, registration status, geographic authority, relevant experience, and the exact passage supporting eligibility. If a lead organization needs a fiscal agent, government sponsor, institutional office, or tribal authorization, resolve that structure before entering the workspace.

Partners may add technical knowledge, trusted community relationships, facilities, data, or implementation reach. They do not cure an ineligible lead applicant. Define who will perform each task, control funds, own deliverables, manage data, and continue the work. Obtain letters only when they document a concrete commitment; generic endorsements rarely strengthen feasibility.

Because eligibility language can be detailed, do not reduce it to “nonprofits may apply” or another broad label. Check whether institutions of higher education, for-profit entities, individuals, tribes, state bodies, local governments, or foreign organizations have different conditions. Also review any limitation on the number of submissions, required designations, or invitation status in the full notice.

Funding, Scope, and Budget Design

The synopsis lists $10,000 to $26,000,000 per award, estimated total funding of $26,000,000, and 10 anticipated award(s). These figures are planning parameters, not promises. Congress, agency priorities, application quality, and negotiations can affect the number and size of awards.

Build the budget from the work plan. For every major cost, identify the activity it enables, the quantity and rate, the responsible party, and the resulting output. Personnel effort should agree with management responsibilities. Contracts and subawards should match the partner narrative. Equipment, travel, participant support, indirect costs, and construction require particular attention to the notice and federal cost principles.

The synopsis indicates that cost sharing is present. Still inspect the full announcement for voluntary match, leverage expectations, or program-income rules. Never promise partner contributions without written confirmation. If match is allowed, explain its source, valuation, availability, and connection to the project.

Choose a scope that can be delivered within the period of performance and award range. A smaller, coherent service area or research design is usually more credible than a national claim without staffing or access. Include time for startup, permissions, procurement, data agreements, participant recruitment, quality assurance, and closeout—not only direct delivery.

Evidence, Outcomes, and Evaluation

A persuasive need statement combines authoritative data with local evidence. Explain what the data measure, their date and limitations, and why the identified gap is actionable under this program. Do not describe communities only through deficits. Include relevant assets, existing programs, lived expertise, and lessons that shape the proposed approach.

Define outputs as countable products or services and outcomes as changes in behavior, capacity, condition, access, knowledge, safety, or system performance. Select a small set of measures tied to the agency’s purpose. For each, provide a baseline or method for establishing one, target, data source, collection frequency, responsible role, and plan for using findings.

Evaluation should support decisions rather than sit at the end of the proposal. State what the team needs to learn, how it will protect privacy, and what it will change if early evidence is weak. Research or technology projects should address comparison methods, technical performance, reproducibility, and adoption. Service projects should address reach, quality, retention, participant experience, and equitable outcomes.

Where work involves vulnerable people, sensitive locations, protected species, proprietary information, or human subjects, plan ethics and data safeguards early. Minimize collection, restrict access, set retention rules, and obtain necessary institutional or legal review. Do not include personally identifiable or security-sensitive information in public attachments.

How to Apply Through Grants.gov

1. Read the synopsis, full announcement, modification history, and every attachment on the official Grants.gov record. Search by opportunity number F26AS00071 if a link changes.
2. Confirm SAM.gov registration, Unique Entity Identifier, Grants.gov organization access, and Authorized Organization Representative roles. Registration can take longer than narrative drafting.
3. Open the application package in Grants.gov Workspace and inventory mandatory forms, assurances, certifications, and attachments. Assign an owner and internal deadline to each item.
4. Convert the selection criteria into a compliance matrix. Map every criterion to a narrative section, evidence source, attachment, and reviewer-friendly heading.
5. Draft the work plan, evaluation plan, staffing plan, and budget together. Reconcile dates, totals, job titles, partner roles, and performance targets across all documents.
6. Use the full notice’s file names, page limits, fonts, margins, and format rules. Remove hidden comments and track changes, verify PDFs, and avoid password protection.
7. Submit before 2026-10-30 and retain the tracking number, timestamp, and complete package. A workspace upload is not a submission until the authorized representative completes the final step.
8. Monitor Grants.gov and the agency contact channel for validation errors, amendments, clarifications, and award communications.

The contact listed in the synopsis is [email protected]. Ask narrow, notice-specific questions and do not request a prediction of competitiveness. Preserve written answers that materially affect compliance.

Preparation Timeline

During the first two days, complete the eligibility screen, download all files, confirm registrations, and decide whether to proceed. In the next week, settle the project model, leadership roles, partners, service area, evidence base, and budget assumptions. If those elements remain unstable, more prose will not fix the application.

Use the middle of the preparation period for narrative development, data validation, partner commitments, cost estimates, and review by program and finance staff. Run one “red team” review against the actual scoring criteria. Ask reviewers to identify missing evidence and contradictions rather than merely improve style.

Reserve the final days for compliance. Confirm attachment names, page counts, calculations, signatures, federal forms, accessibility, and portal validation. Compare the final package with the latest amendment. Submit early enough to correct a rejected file or account problem without relying on a deadline extension.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Using the synopsis as the entire rulebook. The synopsis is useful for screening, but the full announcement controls. Read attachments and amendments.

Starting before confirming eligibility. A polished proposal cannot overcome the wrong entity type, geography, designation, or application route.

Describing activity without a result. Meetings, purchases, training hours, and studies are outputs. Explain the public benefit and how it will be measured.

Building an aspirational budget. Costs must be allowable, allocable, reasonable, and connected to the work plan. Resolve indirect-cost treatment and match before submission.

Leaving partnerships vague. Name decision rights, deliverables, data duties, funds, and accountability. Align letters with the narrative.

Ignoring federal readiness. SAM.gov, UEI, Workspace roles, representations, and internal approvals are application dependencies, not post-award chores.

Submitting at the deadline. The recorded closing date is 2026-10-30. Use the time zone and exact time in the notice, not a local assumption.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is this opportunity currently open?

Yes. Grants.gov lists a posting date of 2026-08-24 and a response deadline of 2026-10-30. Check for amendments before submitting.

What is the opportunity number?

Use F26AS00071 to locate the authoritative record and application package.

How much can an applicant request?

The synopsis reports $10,000 to $26,000,000 per award. The full announcement may define tracks, periods, or budget rules that affect the appropriate request.

Is cost sharing required?

The synopsis marks cost sharing as required. Confirm this and any voluntary leverage rules in the full notice.

Can an individual or organization outside the United States apply?

Do not infer that from the subject alone. Use the applicant-type list and additional eligibility text in the notice. Federal sanctions, geography, registration, and program authority may also apply.

Where should questions go?

Use [email protected] for program questions and the appropriate Grants.gov or SAM.gov support desk for account problems.

Official Source and Final Check

Apply only through the official Grants.gov detail page for F26AS00071. Before authorization, verify four things one last time: the opportunity number on every form is correct; the application answers each scored criterion; the budget matches the narrative; and Grants.gov shows a completed, validated submission before the deadline.