U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 
FISCAL YEAR 2009 

HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM 

GUIDANCE AND APPLICATION KIT 

NOVEMBER 2008 


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Title of Opportunity: FY 2009 Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) 

Funding Opportunity Number: DHS-09-GPD-067-1958 

Federal Agency Name: FEMA Grant Programs Directorate (GPD) 

Announcement Type: Initial 

Dates: Completed applications must be submitted no later than 11:59 PM EDT, 
March 20, 2009. 

Additional overview information: The Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 HSGP contains 
significant improvements based upon continued outreach to HSGP stakeholders and 
partners. In addition, the risk assessments that form the basis for eligibility under HSGP 
have been maintained and refined. Following are some of the key changes impacting 
FY 2009 HSGP as compared to previous year programs. 

HSGP Priorities 

Priorities for this year continue to further narrow the focus through the risk-based 
funding and the capability-based planning process that DHS began four years ago. 
FY 2009 HSGP will focus on the following objectives as its highest priorities. 

Priorities for all programs in HSGP: 

• 
Addressing Capability Requirements and Measuring Progress in Achieving the 
National Preparedness Guidelines 
• 
National Priority: Strengthen Planning and Citizen Preparedness Capabilities - 
Strengthening Preparedness Planning 

SHSP Priorities: 

• 
National Priority: Strengthen Information Sharing and Collaboration Capabilities - 
Maximizing Information Sharing via the National Network of Fusion Centers 

• 
National Priority: Strengthen Medical Surge and Mass Prophylaxis -Developing 
and Enhancing Health and Medical Readiness and Preparedness 
Capabilities 
UASI Priorities: 

• 
National Priority: Strengthen Chemical, Biological, Radiological/Nuclear, and 
Explosive (CBRNE) Detection, Response, and Decontamination Capabilities Strengthening 
IED Attack Deterrence, Prevention, and Protection 

Capabilities 

• 
National Priority: Strengthen Chemical, Biological, Radiological/Nuclear, and 
Explosive (CBRNE) Detection, Response, and Decontamination Capabilities Strengthen 
Preventive Radiological/Nuclear Detection Capabilities 

• 
National Priority: Strengthen Information Sharing and Collaboration Capabilities - 
Maximizing Information Sharing via the National Network of Fusion Centers 

i 


• 
National Priority: Strengthen Medical Surge and Mass Prophylaxis -Developing 
and Enhancing Health and Medical Readiness and Preparedness 
Capabilities 
Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Activities Priorities: 

• 
National Priority: Strengthen Chemical, Biological, Radiological/Nuclear, and 
Explosive (CBRNE) Detection, Response, and Decontamination Capabilities Strengthening 
IED Attack Deterrence, Prevention, and Protection 

Capabilities 

• 
National Priority: Strengthen Chemical, Biological, Radiological/Nuclear, and 
Explosive (CBRNE) Detection, Response, and Decontamination Capabilities Strengthen 
Preventive Radiological/Nuclear Detection Capabilities 

• 
National Priority: Strengthen Information Sharing and Collaboration Capabilities - 
Maximizing Information Sharing via the National Network of Fusion Centers 

At least 25 percent of FY 2009 HSGP funding (State Homeland Security Program 
[SHSP], Urban Areas Security Initiative [UASI], Metropolitan Medical Response System 
[MMRS], and Citizen Corps Program [CCP]) must be collectively allocated to the 
Strengthening Preparedness Planning Priority noted above through planning, training 
and exercise activities (see Part I for additional information). 

HSGP Allocation Methodology 

In FY 2009, DHS is providing all States and Urban Areas with targeted allocations 
based on the Department’s relative risk assessment in advance of the Investment 
Justifications for SHSP and UASI funding. The purpose of this information is to 
increase grantee program management effectiveness by identifying funding availability 
in the initial stages of the grant process as well as to increase grantee accountability. 
States and Urban Areas should focus their Investments based on the targeted allocation 
and submit applications for up to 110 percent of the targeted allocation. Subsequently, 
when determining the final allocation, DHS may increase or decrease the targeted 
SHSP and UASI allocations by up to 10 percent based on the results of the 
effectiveness analysis (see Part II for additional information). 

Optional Cost Share 

In FY 2009, there is an optional cost share that will provide a bonus in the effectiveness 
analysis (see Investment Justification Outline in Part IV.B for additional information). 

Personnel Costs 

As directed by the Personnel Reimbursement for Intelligence Cooperation and 
Enhancement (PRICE) of Homeland Security Act (Public Law 110-412), all personnel 
and personnel-related costs, including those for intelligence analysts, are allowed up to 
50 percent of SHSP and UASI funding without time limitation placed on the period of 
time that such personnel can serve under the grant. These guidelines are not 
retroactive to previous fiscal years of HSGP funding (see Part IV.E.4 for additional 
information). 

ii 


Critical Emergency Supplies 

In furtherance of DHS’ mission, critical emergency supplies, such as shelf stable food 
products, water, and basic medical supplies are an allowable expense under SHSP. 
Prior to allocating grant funding for stockpiling purposes, each State must have FEMA’s 
approval of a viable inventory management plan, an effective distribution strategy, 
sustainment costs for such an effort, and logistics expertise to avoid situations where 
funds are wasted because supplies are rendered ineffective due to lack of planning (see 
Part VI.B.5.13 for additional information). 

iii 


CONTENTS 


Contents........................................................................................................................ 1 
Part I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION......................................................... 2 
Part II. AWARD INFORMATION .................................................................................. 19 
Part III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION .......................................................................... 26 


A. Eligible Applicants................................................................................. 26 


B. Cost Sharing .......................................................................................... 26 


C. Restrictions ............................................................................................ 26 
Part IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION ...................................... 27 


A. Address to Request Application Package ........................................... 27 


B. Content and Form of Application ......................................................... 27 


C. Submission Dates and Times ............................................................... 33 


D. Intergovernmental Review .................................................................... 34 


E. Funding Restrictions............................................................................. 34 


F. Other Submission Requirements ......................................................... 42 
Part V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION ........................................................ 44 


A. Review Criteria....................................................................................... 44 


B. Review and Selection Process ............................................................. 44 


C. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates .................................... 45 
Part VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION.................................................46 


A. Notice of Award ..................................................................................... 46 


B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements ............................. 47 


C. Reporting Requirements ....................................................................... 55 
Part VII. FEMA CONTACTS.........................................................................................59 
Part VIII. OTHER INFORMATION – HSGP Allowable Costs ..................................... 63 


1 



PART I. 


FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION 


The Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) is comprised of four interconnected 
grant programs: 

• 
State Homeland Security Program (SHSP) 
• 
Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) 
• 
Metropolitan Medical Response System (MMRS) 
• 
Citizen Corps Program (CCP) 
The HSGP is one tool among a comprehensive set of measures authorized by 
Congress and implemented by the Administration to help strengthen the Nation against 
risks associated with potential terrorist attacks. 

The purpose of this package is to provide: (1) an overview of the HSGP and (2) the 
formal grant guidance and application materials needed to apply for funding under the 
program. The package outlines DHS management requirements for implementation of 
a successful application. The package also reflects changes called for in the 
Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law 11053) 
(hereafter “9/11 Act”) and the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and 
Continuing Appropriations Act of 2009 (Public Law 110-329). 

Table 1 provides a quick overview of the programs included in FY 2009 HSGP. 

Table 1. FY 2009 Homeland Security Grant Program Overview 

FY 2009 HSGP Program Overview 
State Homeland 
Security Program 
(SHSP) 
SHSP supports the implementation of State Homeland Security 
Strategies to address the identified planning, organization, equipment, 
training, and exercise needs for acts of terrorism and other 
catastrophic events. In addition, SHSP supports the implementation 
of the National Preparedness Guidelines, the National Incident 
Management System (NIMS), and the National Response Framework 
(NRF). 
Urban Areas 
Security Initiative 
(UASI) Program 
UASI program funds address the unique planning, organization, 
equipment, training, and exercise needs of high-threat, high-density 
Urban Areas, and assist them in building an enhanced and 
sustainable capacity to prevent, protect against, respond to, and 
recover from acts of terrorism. 

2 



FY 2009 HSGP Program Overview 
Metropolitan 
Medical 
Response 
System (MMRS) 
Program 
The MMRS program supports the integration of emergency 
management, health, and medical systems into a coordinated 
response to mass casualty incidents caused by any hazard. 
Successful MMRS grantees reduce the consequences of a mass 
casualty incident during the initial period of a response by having 
augmented existing local operational response systems before the 
incident occurs. 
Citizen Corps 
Program (CCP) 
The Citizen Corps mission is to bring community and government 
leaders together to coordinate the involvement of community 
members and organizations in emergency preparedness, planning, 
mitigation, response, and recovery. 

Federal Investment Strategy 

The HSGP is an important part of the Administration’s larger, coordinated effort to 
strengthen homeland security preparedness. The HSGP implements objectives 
addressed in a series of post-9/11 laws, strategy documents, plans, and Homeland 
Security Presidential Directives (HSPDs). 

DHS expects our State, local, and tribal partners – including recipients of HSGP 
grants – to be familiar with this national preparedness architecture and to 
incorporate elements of this architecture into their planning, operations and 
investments. Additional information may be found at: 

http://www.dhs.gov/xprepresp/publications. 

Funding Priorities 

Based upon ongoing intelligence analysis, extensive security reviews, and 
Congressional direction, DHS has once again focused the bulk of its available grant 
dollars on risk-based investment. Risk will be evaluated at the Federal level using a 
risk analysis model developed by DHS in conjunction with other Federal entities.

 Risk is defined as the product of three principal variables: 

• 
Threat – the likelihood of an attack occurring 
• 
Vulnerability – the relative exposure to an attack 
• 
Consequence – the expected impact of an attack 
The risk model used to allocate HSGP funds considers the potential risk of terrorism 
to people, critical infrastructure, and economic security to estimate the relative risk of 
terrorism faced by a given area. In evaluating risk, DHS considers the populations in 
a particular area that could be at risk, the concentration of people in the area, and 
specific characteristics of their location that might contribute to risk, such as 
Intelligence Community assessments of threat, proximity to nationally critical 
infrastructure, and the economic impact of an attack. In considering threat, DHS 
uses the Intelligence Community’s best assessment of areas of the country and 
potential targets most likely to be attacked. For vulnerability and consequence, DHS 

3 



considers the expected impact and consequences of successful attacks occurring in 
specific areas to people, the economy, nationally critical infrastructure, and national 
security facilities. 

DHS places a very high priority on ensuring that all HSGP applications reflect robust 
regional coordination and demonstrate an investment strategy that institutionalizes 
regional integration. This priority is a core component in the Department’s statewide 
grant programs and UASI. 

HSGP Priorities 

Priorities for this year continue to further narrow the focus through the risk-based 
funding and the capability-based planning process that DHS began four years ago. 
FY 2009 HSGP will focus on the following objectives as its highest priorities. 

1. Addressing Capability Requirements and Measuring Progress in Achieving 
the National Preparedness Guidelines. DHS will continue in FY 2009 to tie 
together the performance of preparedness programs (via grants, training, 
exercises, technical assistance, planning, etc.) with established priorities and 
objectives of the National Preparedness Guidelines, target capabilities, and joint 
Federal-State assessments. The preparedness cycle allows for adjustments 
based upon evolving risks and capabilities. The Target Capability List (TCL) 
Implementation Project is in the process of updating target capabilities into 
usable frameworks with performance classes and objectives to guide evaluations 
and assessments. The Comprehensive Assessment System (CAS) is under 
development to assess compliance with the broad national preparedness system 
as described under Subtitle C of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management 
Reform Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-295) (PKEMRA), including NIMS, the NRF, 
the TCL, and the performance of training, exercises, and operations. 
Measuring Progress: As part of the FY 2009 HSGP Investment Justifications, 
applicants are also asked to establish specific capability-based outcomes 
associated with all proposed Investments. Proposals should be aligned with the 
National Priorities of the National Preparedness Guidelines and must outline 
measurable outcomes that will be tracked and accomplished during 
implementation. Grantees should reference the TCL, dated September 2007, the 
supplemental Target Capability Implementation Frameworks, where appropriate, 
and applicable national plans and strategies to develop concrete, measurable 
outcomes, and milestones, while preserving the necessary flexibility to meet 
unique State and Urban Area operational requirements outlined in their SPR or 
Urban Area homeland security strategy. After funds are awarded, grantees are 
required to report on progress made toward achieving the identified outcomes for 
each Investment as part of the regular grant reporting process. Performance 
measure data submitted through grant reporting will be reviewed and validated 
through programmatic monitoring by DHS. 

4 



These outcomes should support both capability development and strategic, 
operational, and tactical-level planning. For interoperable emergency 
communications-related Investments, applicants should demonstrate how the 
outcomes support implementation of their respective Statewide Communication 
Interoperability Plan (SCIP) and align to the objectives of the National 
Emergency Communications Plan (NECP).1 The outcomes should include a 
minimum number of quantitative and qualitative measures necessary to 
demonstrate achievement with regard to developing and enhancing health and 
medical readiness and preparedness capabilities. These measures should be 
drawn, where applicable, from the TCL and from supplemental Target Capability 
Implementation Frameworks. 

2. National Priority: Strengthen Planning and Citizen Preparedness 
Capabilities. 
Strengthening Preparedness Planning. This provision also supports the 
Planning Annex to HSPD-8, National Preparedness. State and local jurisdictions 
must engage in comprehensive national and regional planning processes that 
seek to enhance emergency management capabilities through strengthened 
national and regional relationships and the allocation of resources toward 
preparedness planning. As indicated in the Planning Annex, coordinated, 
comprehensive plans should be developed that cover prevention, protection, and 
response activities for specific planning scenarios. 

In order to develop these plans, applicants are strongly encouraged to develop 
plans in a manner consistent with the principles and doctrine outlined in 
Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101, Producing Emergency Plans: A Guide 
for All-Hazard Operations Planning for State, territorial, Local and Tribal 
Governments (Interim). 

However, within these plans, specific activities may be implemented in support of 
the following areas: 

• 
Linking operational needs identified in plans to resource allocation. 
Applicants should use grant funds to institutionalize a capabilities-based 
planning process that defines, documents, analyzes, adjusts, and 
approves capability requirements that drive resource allocation. 

• 
Fixing shortcomings in existing plans. Areas of paramount concern 
are: Mass Evacuation and Sheltering, with particular emphasis on 
1 The FY 2007 HSGP required States to develop and submit a Statewide Communication Interoperability 
Plan (SCIP). All SCIPs were approved by DHS in April 2008. The National Emergency Communications 
Plan (NECP), which was informed by the SCIPs, is available at: 
www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1217529182375.shtm. 

5 



Regional Operations planning, special needs populations2 and citizen 
preparedness; Statewide Communication Interoperability Plans and 
Tactical Interoperable Communications Plans; Logistics planning; 
Resource/Commodity Management, with particular emphasis on National 
Incident Management System (NIMS); standardized mechanisms and 
processes to describe, inventory, mobilize, dispatch, track, and recover 
resources over both the lifecycle and regional or national scope of an 
incident, taking into account both at-risk and host jurisdictions/states; 
CIKR Protection, with particular emphasis on Explosive Device Response 
Operations; Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment; Health and 
Medical Services for Catastrophic Events; and long term recovery. Once 
these shortcomings have been addressed, they should be integrated into 
capabilities-based plans that address all hazards and all threats. 
Additional shortcomings should be identified by the applicant in addition to 
these requirements as warranted. 

• 
Building regional planning processes and planning communities. 
The primary focus is to establish processes for planning, preparedness, 
data exchange, and operational resource and asset management among 
regional planning partners. Activities should ensure that preparedness 
planning networks are fully integrated with other key planning efforts such 
as Continuity of Operation Plans (COOP), Area Maritime Security Plans 
(AMSPs) for port areas and Buffer Zone Plans (BZPs) for CIKR resources, 
and community preparedness planning conducted by governmental and 
non-governmental entities through the Citizen Corps Council. This should 
include drawing clear linkages in an appendix or annex to emergency 
operations plans as appropriate. Additionally, applicants should clearly 
address the linkages between Fusion Centers and the State Emergency 
Operations Centers and develop the necessary protocols and procedures 
to ensure connectivity and support, as appropriate. 

• 
Enhancing continuity of operations planning. Applicants should 
leverage HSGP funding to establish effective continuity plans and 
programs in an effort to enhance the ongoing delivery of essential 
functions by State, local and tribal governments during all hazards. 
Actionable measurable items include developing staffing and guidance 
based on continuity priorities from the National Continuity Programs 
Directorate and described in the National Continuity Policy Implementation 
Plan (NCPIP). Measurable items include: providing State, territorial, and 
local government continuity testing, training, and exercises; offering 
continuity planning and program guidance; conducting continuity 
education and outreach; providing mechanisms and make available 
annual meetings for State and local continuity working groups or other 
2 See CPG-301: Emergency Management Planning Guide for Special Needs Populations as a reference 
in addressing this issue. 

6 



forums; offering and/or providing continuity guidance and outreach 
through State and/or territorial Continuity Working Groups (CWGs); and 
providing guidance and offer assistance, as required, to conduct and/or 
support train-the-trainer continuity courses for State, territorial, and local 
governments. 

• 
Including the private sector in preparedness planning activities. 
States and Urban Areas should include private sector entities in their 
preparedness planning process, building public-private partnerships where 
appropriate to more effectively prevent, protect against, respond to, and 
recover from major events. In particular, States and Urban Areas should 
engage with private sector entities as provisions for the voluntary private 
sector preparedness, accreditation, and certification program called for in 
the 9/11 Act are finalized in order to ensure that personnel have a 
comprehensive understanding of preparedness capabilities residing in 
their region. 

3. National Priority: Strengthen Chemical, Biological, Radiological/Nuclear, 
and Explosive (CBRNE) Detection, Response, and Decontamination 
Capabilities. 
Strengthening IED Attack Deterrence, Prevention, and Protection 
Capabilities. This priority supports the policy outlined in HSPD-19, Combating 
Terrorist Use of Explosives in the United States, by emphasizing the need for 
States and Urban Areas to take a more proactive approach to reducing the threat 
of a terrorist explosive attack. This year’s priority is expanded to include 
capabilities in support of existing national protocols intended to promote early 
detection, identification, or interdiction of CBRN material which may be used in 
combination with explosives to create enhanced weapons such as a radiological 
dispersal device (RDD). States and Urban Areas should continue progress from 
2008 by implementing programs to enhance public and private sector IED 
awareness and reducing critical infrastructure/key resource (CIKR) and soft 
target explosive attack vulnerabilities. Doing so will increase the likelihood that 
terrorist planning activities are recognized and reported, and deter attacks by 
reducing the attractiveness of potential targets. Additional programs, such as 
implementing multi-jurisdiction explosive attack planning that ensure bomb squad 
and SWAT integration, will ensure State and Urban Areas coordinate preventive 
and protective actions during steady-state and threat-initiated environments. 
Finally, grantees should enhance explosive device pre-detonation response 
operations so that bomb squads have the necessary tools to diagnose and 
defeat actual devices. These mitigation capabilities will serve to further prevent 
any attempted attack from achieving terrorist objectives. 

In support of this effort, the DHS Office for Bombing Prevention (OBP) is 
dedicated to enhancing and coordinating the Nation’s ability to deter, prevent, 
and protect against IED attacks. OBP maintains multiple programs designed to 

7 



support State and Urban Areas in explosive attack prevention and protection 
planning, analyzing explosive device mitigation capabilities, determining training 
and equipment requirements, improving IED awareness, and facilitating the 
sharing of terrorist IED techniques, tactics, and procedures through TRIPwire. 
Grantees are encouraged to work closely with OBP (in addition to their Program 
Analyst and FEMA Region) to ensure State and local initiatives sufficiently 
address IED threats. For more information, please contact OBP via 
obp@dhs.gov. To register for a TRIPwire account, go to http://www.tripwiredhs.
net. 

Activities to strengthen explosive attack deterrence, prevention, and protection 
capabilities should be undertaken in coordination with the statewide CIKR 
protection program, which States were required to establish in FY 2007 in 
support of the NIPP. Additional information to support the implementation of the 
NIPP is available at http://www.dhs.gov/nipp/. 

4. National Priority: Strengthen Chemical, Biological, Radiological/Nuclear, 
and Explosive (CBRNE) Detection, Response, and Decontamination 
Capabilities. 
Strengthen Preventive Radiological/Nuclear Detection Capabilities. The 
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) plays an essential role in developing 
and implementing a multi-layered defensive strategy, with domestic and 
international programs and systems to protect the Nation from 
radiological/nuclear (rad/nuc) attacks by terrorists. Grantees are encouraged to 
work closely with DNDO when developing or enhancing preventive rad/nuc 
detection programs and to ensure that programs are effectively integrated into 
current and future Federal capabilities. 

DNDO supports the development of comprehensive preventive rad/nuc detection 
capabilities across State, local and tribal communities by developing the 
necessary training, equipment test reports, exercise support, information sharing 
capabilities, and analytical tools to create a fully integrated operating 
environment. These resources include: providing rad/nuc technical reachback 
support to Federal, State, local and tribal operators; development of standardized 
training curricula and response protocols; conducting comprehensive 
assessments of existing radiation detection technology to inform application and 
acquisition; providing program development tools and guidance for immediate 
application by policy makers and operators; and the development of a robust 
national situational awareness and analysis capability through the Joint Analysis 
Center (JAC). Such resources can be used by State, local and tribal entities to 
build or enhance a comprehensive preventive rad/nuc detection program, or to 
develop specific preventive rad/nuc detection capabilities in areas such as device 
and material detection and response (providing rad/nuc material characterization 
to responders), Commercial Vehicle Inspection, special events screening, small 
maritime craft monitoring, fixed infrastructure protection, and urban area security. 

8 



Additional information about DNDO and the support DNDO will provide to 
grantees may be found at: 
http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/editorial_0766.shtm. 


5. National Priority: Strengthen Information Sharing and Collaboration 
Capabilities 
Maximizing Information Sharing via the National Network of Fusion 
Centers. This priority reflects the policy outlined in the National Strategy for 
Information Sharing (NSIS) by supporting the establishment of and continued 
support for a national network of fusion centers to facilitate effective nationwide 
information sharing between local, State, and Federal partners. 

Effective prevention efforts depend on the ability of all levels and sectors of 
government, as well as private industry, to collect, analyze, disseminate, and use 
homeland security- and crime-related information and intelligence. In support of 
these efforts, designated State and Urban Area fusion centers must prioritize the 
allocation of SHSP and UASI grant funding to meet identified levels of baseline 
capabilities as outlined in the Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) Global Justice 
Information Sharing Initiative’s (Global) Baseline Capabilities for State and Major 
Urban Area Fusion Centers, a supplement to the Fusion Center Guidelines, 
located at http://www.it.ojp.gov/documents/baselinecapabilitiesa.pdf. 

In support of this priority, the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) is 
dedicated to supporting the development and enhancement of State and local 
information sharing activities, and maintains multiple programs and initiatives 
designed to directly support State and Urban Area initiatives. Therefore, in 
support of this National Priority, States and Urban Areas should continue to 
advance information sharing and fusion center efforts through the effective 
implementation and operation of activities that relate to this priority, including the 
following: 

• 
Coordination and Integration of Multi-disciplinary Partners. To further 
advance and strengthen information sharing efforts, multi-disciplinary 
partners—including law enforcement, the fire service, health security, and 
critical infrastructure and key resource (CIKR) partners—are encouraged 
to fully engage in the fusion process. DHS I&A has begun work on a Fire 
Service Intelligence Enterprise, a Health Security Intelligence Enterprise, 
and CIKR initiatives, in addition to its work supporting Law Enforcement, 
to advance collaboration and greater information sharing among all levels 
of government and key multi-disciplinary players within fusion centers and 
the greater information sharing and fusion processes. 
• 
Coordination and Integration with DHS Component Strategic Mission 
Priorities. The effective coordination and integration of on-going national 
9 



homeland security efforts and component strategic mission priorities and 
activities—including border security, trafficking of illicit materials, and 
maritime enforcement—is essential to the successful implementation of a 
national network of fusion centers. Therefore, DHS I&A is encouraging 
fusion centers to coordinate and integrate their information sharing efforts 
with regional and/or local strategic component efforts, including Area 
Maritime Security Committees (AMSCs) and their respective Area 
Maritime Security Plans (AMSPs), DHS Border Enforcement Security 
Task Forces, Integrated Border Enforcement Teams, and FEMA Regional 
Offices. 

• 
Information Sharing to Support Response and Recovery Efforts. 
Effective information sharing and communication occurs across the 
preparedness spectrum, including prevent, protect, respond, and recover 
mission areas. Therefore, effective information sharing and 
communication between fusion centers and Emergency Operations 
Centers (EOCs) prior to, during, and after an incident is essential to the 
successful response and mitigation of man-made or naturally occurring 
incidents. This communication supports the timely and accurate response 
to an event and ensures that all appropriate information is in the hands of 
the responders who need it. In support of this effort, DHS I&A and FEMA 
are encouraging that fusion centers and EOCs formally plan, train on, and 
exercise their communication and information sharing processes, in 
coordination with the respective FEMA Regional Offices and Federal 
Preparedness Coordinators (FPCs). 

Grantees are encouraged to work closely with DHS I&A to leverage available 
resources through the joint DHS/DOJ Fusion Process Technical Assistance 
Program as well as available DHS personnel and technologies—including 
deployed I&A Intelligence Operations Specialists and the Homeland Secure Data 
Network (HSDN)—to support fusion centers analytic collaboration and 
information sharing activities. 

6. National Priority: Strengthen Medical Surge and Mass Prophylaxis. 
Developing and enhancing health and medical readiness and preparedness 
capabilities. State and local grantees should consider preparedness efforts that 
emphasize biological attack detection (bio collection), mass casualty incident 
response, and counter-measure stockpiling and distribution. The Office of Health 
Affairs (OHA) leads the Department’s role in developing and supporting a 
scientifically rigorous, intelligence-based biodefense and health preparedness 
architecture to ensure the security of our Nation in the face of all hazards. 
Grantees are encouraged to work closely with OHA, in addition to their FEMA 
Program Analyst and FEMA Region, when developing or enhancing medical 
surge and mass prophylaxis programs in response to biological threats and for 
public health and medical preparedness. For more information, please visit 

10 



http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/editorial_0880.shtm or contact OHA at 

oha@dhs.gov. 

Consolidation of Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention-oriented Activities 

Per the 9/11 Act and the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing 
Appropriations Act of 2009 (Public Law 110-329), FY 2009 HSGP will not contain a 
separate line-item Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program (LETPP). As is 
clear in this year’s overarching HSGP priorities, a significant need for law enforcement 
terrorism prevention exists. As a result, States are also required to ensure that at least 
25 percent of their SHSP award funds and 25 percent of their UASI award funds are 
dedicated towards law enforcement terrorism prevention-oriented planning, 
organization, training, exercise, and equipment activities. 

Inclusion of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Providers 

DHS requires State and local governments to include emergency medical services 
(EMS) providers in their State and Urban Area homeland security plans. In accordance 
with this requirement, and as States, territories, localities, and tribes complete their 
application materials for the FY 2009 HSGP, DHS reminds our homeland security 
partners of the importance for proactive inclusion of various State, regional, and local 
response disciplines who have important roles and responsibilities in prevention, 
deterrence, protection, and response activities. Inclusion should take place with respect 
to planning, organization, equipment, training, and exercise efforts. Response 
disciplines include, but are not limited to: governmental and nongovernmental 
emergency medical, firefighting, and law enforcement services; public health; hospitals; 
emergency management; hazardous materials; public safety communications; public 
works; and governmental leadership and administration personnel. 

DHS/FEMA’s Grants Reporting Tool (GRT) will continue to be utilized for grantees to 
report and for DHS to track, on a biannual basis, homeland security funding provided to 
response disciplines. If no State or local funding is provided to EMS, the State should 
be prepared to demonstrate that related target capabilities have been met or identify 
more significant priorities. 

Homeland security partners should examine how they integrate preparedness activities 
across disciplines, agencies, and levels of government, including State, territory, local, 
and tribal units of government. A cohesive planning framework should be incorporated 
that builds and implements homeland security initiatives which leverage DHS resources, 
as well as other Federal, State, territory, local, and tribal resources. Specific attention 
should be paid to how all available preparedness funding sources can be effectively 
utilized in a collaborative manner to support the enhancement of capabilities. 

Governance 

The FY 2009 HSGP re-emphasizes the importance of creating or utilizing existing 
governing bodies to act on this guidance and coordinate grant resources. Examples 
include: State Senior Advisory Committees, Urban Area Working Groups, Area Maritime 
Security Committees, Citizen Corps Councils, and Metropolitan Medical Response 

11 



System Steering Committees. As a reminder, the membership of the Senior Advisory 
Committee must, at a minimum, include the following State officials directly responsible 
for the administration of FEMA GPD grants and Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) and Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) 
cooperative agreements: the State Administrative Agency (SAA), ASPR Hospital 
Preparedness Program Coordinator, and CDC Public Health Emergency Preparedness 
Program Director. In addition, program representatives from the following entities 
should be members of the committee: State Homeland Security Advisor (if this role is 
not also the SAA); State Emergency Management Agency Director; State Public Health 
Officer; State Public Safety Officer (and SAA for Justice Assistance Grants, if different); 
State Court Official; State EMS Director; State Trauma System Manager; State 
Communications Officer (NECP, etc.); State Citizen Corps POC; Urban Area POC; 
United States Coast Guard Area Command or Captain of the Port; Senior Members of 
the Regional Transit Security Working Group; Senior Security Officials from Major 
Transportation Systems; and the Adjutant General. 

Additional Program Detail 

1. State Homeland Security Program. 
The State Homeland Security Program 
(SHSP) is a core assistance program that provides funds to build capabilities at the 
State and local levels and to implement the goals and objectives included in State 
Homeland Security Strategies and initiatives in the State Preparedness Report. 
Activities implemented under SHSP must support terrorism preparedness by 
building or enhancing capabilities that relate to the prevention of, protection from, or 
response to, and recovery from terrorism in order to be considered eligible. 
However, many capabilities which support terrorism preparedness simultaneously 
support preparedness for other hazards. Grantees must demonstrate this dual-use 
quality for any activities implemented under this program that are not explicitly 
focused on terrorism preparedness. 

Use of SHSP funds must be consistent with and supportive of implementation of the 
State Homeland Security Strategy and State Preparedness Report. Linkages 
between specific projects undertaken with SHSP funds and strategic goals and 
objectives will be highlighted through regular required reporting mechanisms, 
including the Biannual Strategy Implementation Report (BSIR). 

2. Urban Areas Security Initiative. 
Since its inception in FY 2003, the intent of the 
UASI program has been to enhance regional preparedness in major metropolitan 
areas. The UASI program directly supports the National Priority on expanding 
regional collaboration in the National Preparedness Guidelines and is intended to 
assist participating jurisdictions in developing integrated regional systems for 
prevention, protection, response, and recovery. The FY 2009 UASI program 
continues this mission by providing financial assistance to address the unique multidiscipline 
planning, organization, equipment, training, and exercise needs of high-
threat, high-density Urban Areas, and to assist them in building and sustaining 
12 



capabilities to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from threats or acts 
of terrorism. 

The FY 2009 UASI program is intended to enhance regional preparedness efforts. 
Urban Areas must use these funds to employ regional approaches to overall 
preparedness and are encouraged to adopt regional response structures whenever 
appropriate. UASI program implementation and governance must include regional 
partners and should have balanced representation among entities with operational 
responsibilities for prevention, protection, response, and recovery activities within 
the region. In some instances Urban Area boundaries cross State borders. States 
must ensure that the identified Urban Areas take an inclusive regional approach to 
the development and implementation of the FY 2009 UASI program and involve the 
contiguous jurisdictions, mutual aid partners, port authorities, rail and transit 
authorities, campus law enforcement, State agencies, Citizen Corps Council(s), and 
MMRS jurisdictions in their program activities. 

Activities implemented under UASI must support terrorism preparedness by building 
or enhancing capabilities that relate to the prevention of, protection from, or 
response to terrorism in order to be considered eligible. However, many capabilities 
which support terrorism preparedness simultaneously support preparedness for 
other hazards. Grantees must demonstrate the dual-use quality for any activities 
implemented that are not explicitly focused on terrorism preparedness. 

Pursuant to changes required by the 9/11 Act, eligible FY 2009 UASI candidates 
were determined based on an analysis of relative risk of the 100 most populous 
Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), as defined by the Office of Management and 
Budget. MSAs are used by DHS to determine eligibility for participation in the 
program. Part II of this Guidance shows a table of Urban Areas selected for 
possible FY 2009 funding. Geographical areas queried do not equate to minimum 
mandated membership representation of an Urban Area, nor does this guarantee 
funding for geographical areas queried. Urban Area Working Groups (UAWGs) 
must continue to take a regional approach to membership but are not required to 
expand or contract existing Urban Area participation to conform to MSA composition 
as a result of this legislative change. Detailed information on MSAs is publicly 
available from the U.S. Census Bureau at 
http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/metrodef.html. 

UASI Program Requirements 

The SAA will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the fiduciary and 
programmatic administration requirements of the FY 2009 UASI program. 

• 
Identify Points of Contact. The SAA must confirm a specific point of contact 
(POC) with the designated Urban Area. The SAA POCs are responsible for 
identifying and coordinating with the POC for the UAWG. This information must 
be provided to FEMA with the grant application. SAAs must work with existing 
Urban Areas to ensure that information for current POCs is on file with FEMA. 
13 



• 
Define the Urban Area. For new Urban Areas, the SAA POC, in coordination 
with the candidate Urban Areas, must define the Urban Area, as it will apply to 
the FY 2009 UASI program. The identified city or combined entity represents the 
candidate Urban Area eligible to apply for funding under the FY 2009 UASI 
program. For those Urban Areas with a combined entity, that area represents 
the minimum area that must be part of the defined Urban Area. The definition of 
the Urban Area is limited to jurisdictions contiguous to the geographic area used 
to determine eligibility, or those jurisdictions in that area which have established 
formal mutual aid agreements. States may request a waiver for this limitation for 
regions previously established by Executive Order, law, or compact. For the 
purposes of the FY 2009 UASI program, the Washington, D.C. Urban Area will 
consist of the National Capital Region (NCR) as set forth in 10 U.S.C. 
§2674(f)(2). In coordination with the UAWG, the SAA POC may redefine the 
geographic boundaries of an existing Urban Area, as it will apply to the FY 2009 
UASI program. The SAA POC must notify FEMA of this change. 
• 
Establish the UAWG. Membership in the UAWG must provide either direct or 
indirect representation for all the jurisdictions and response disciplines (including 
law enforcement) that comprise the defined Urban Area. It must also be 
inclusive of local MMRS and Citizen Corps Council representatives. The SAA 
POC must ensure that appropriate representation for the defined Urban Area is 
included per this guidance. FEMA strongly encourages that, wherever possible, 
previously established local working groups should be leveraged for this purpose 
to ensure that UASI resources are managed in the most efficient and effective 
manner possible. The UAWG may also support State efforts to develop the 
State Preparedness Report, particularly as it relates to UASI activities. An 
overview of the UAWG structure and a list of members and their associated 
jurisdictions must be provided to FEMA along with the grant application. Urban 
Areas must notify the SAA of any updates to the UAWG structure or 
membership, of which the SAA must thereafter provide notification to FEMA. 
• 
Governance. The identified jurisdictions in Part II of this Guidance package 
represent the candidate Urban Areas eligible to apply for funding. The UAWG 
will be responsible for coordinating the development and implementation of all 
program initiatives. States and Urban Areas must consider including counties 
within which the cities reside, contiguous jurisdictions, MSAs, operational areas, 
and mutual aid partners, as appropriate, in the governance process. 
In keeping with sound project management practices, the UAWG must ensure 
that its approach to critical issues such as membership, governance structure, 
voting rights, grant management and administration responsibilities, and funding 
allocation methodologies are formalized in a working group charter or other form 
of standard operating procedure related to the UASI governance. The charter 
must also outline how decisions made in UAWG meetings will be documented 
and shared with UAWG members. This charter must be on file with FEMA prior 

14 



to drawing down FY 2009 UASI funding and must be available to all UAWG 
members to promote transparency in decision-making related to the UASI 
program. 

• 
Urban Area Homeland Security Strategy. Urban Areas must utilize their Urban 
Area Homeland Security Strategy as the basis for requesting funds to support 
Investments identified in the Investment Justification. There must be a clear 
correlation between the goals, objectives, and priorities identified in the Urban 
Area Homeland Security Strategy and FY 2009 UASI program activities. In 
addition, the Urban Area Homeland Security Strategy must also be consistent 
with and supportive of the State Homeland Security Strategy and the State 
Preparedness Report. 
All Urban Areas receiving funding in FY 2009 must have an approved Urban 
Area Homeland Security Strategy. Any new Urban Areas must develop a 
strategy and submit it to FEMA for review and approval prior to drawing down 
UASI funds. This requirement includes prior Urban Areas that were not Urban 
Areas in either FY 2007 and/or 2008, but that were selected again as Urban 
Areas for FY 2009. For new Urban Areas, strategy development technical 
assistance is available. Please consult your SAA for requesting assistance 
services from FEMA. 

UASI Allocation of funds 

The use and allocation of all grant funds available through the FY 2009 UASI 
program must focus on the Investments identified in the Urban Area’s Investment 
Justification and the implementation of the validated Urban Area Homeland Security 
Strategy. The use of funds must also be consistent with the State Homeland 
Security Strategy, the State Preparedness Report, the National Preparedness 
Guidelines, TCL, and UASI program guidelines. Funds used to support Citizen 
Corps related efforts, such as citizen preparedness, volunteer participation, and the 
integration of nongovernmental resources should be coordinated with Citizen Corps 
Councils. 

The UAWG, in coordination with the SAA POC, must develop a methodology for 
allocating funding available through the UASI program. The UAWG must reach 
consensus on all UASI funding allocations. If consensus can not be reached within 
the 45-day time period allotted for the State to obligate funds to subgrantees, the 
SAA must make the allocation determination. The SAA must provide written 
documentation verifying the consensus of the UAWG, or the failure to achieve 
otherwise, on the allocation of funds and submit it to FEMA immediately after the 45day 
time period allotted for the State to obligate funds to subgrantees. 

Any UASI funds retained by the State must be used in direct support of the Urban 
Area. States must provide documentation to the UAWG and FEMA upon request 
demonstrating how any UASI funds retained by the State would directly support the 
Urban Area. 

15 



3. Metropolitan Medical Response System 
The MMRS program provides funding to States to support the integration of local 
emergency management, health and medical systems into a coordinated and 
sustained local response capability to a mass casualty incident. 

The responsibilities of the SAA are to: 

• 
Ensure the “MMRS Leadership” (see below) shall be fully represented on the 
Urban Area Working Group in cases where a MMRS grant is awarded and a 
UASI program exists. 
• 
Ensure all neighboring MMRS subgrantees shall actively and demonstratively 
collaborate to develop a regional plan that supports the MMRS mission in that 
region in cases where MMRS subgrantees are located adjacent to one another. 
• 
Prepare an Investment Justification that clearly identifies the size of the 
populations included in the planning and operational areas supported by the 
MMRS grant. 
MMRS subgrantees shall: 

• 
Establish and support a designated leadership (“MMRS Leadership”), such as a 
Steering Committee or leadership position(s), to act as the designated POCs for 
program implementation. 
• 
Integrate local emergency management, health and medical systems with their 
Federal and State counterparts through a locally established multi-agency, 
collaborative planning framework. 
• 
Promote regional coordination of mutual aid with neighboring localities. 
• 
Regularly validate the subgrantee’s local emergency response capability to a 
mass casualty incident by means of an exercise or other validation means. 
MMRS Collaboration 

MMRS subgrantees are encouraged to collaborate with local, regional, and State 
health and medical partners, such as Medical Reserve Corps Units and Citizen 
Corps Councils, as well as leverage other Federal programs, such as the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary for Preparedness 
and Response (DHHS-ASPR) Hospital Preparedness Program and Emergency 
Systems for Advance Registration of Volunteer Health Professionals (ESAR-VHP), 
Center for Disease Control and Prevention Cities Readiness Initiative and Strategic 
National Stockpile, to coordinate and support plans, processes and strategies 
related to, but limited to: Continuity of Government; Continuity of Operations; 
Equipment and Supplies Procurement; Fatality Management; Forward Movement of 
Patients; Hospital Evacuation; Interoperable Communications; Patient Tracking; 
Pharmaceutical and Medical Supply Management and Distribution; Public 
Education; Outreach and Information; Recruiting Volunteers; and Training. 

16 



4. Citizen Corps Program. The Citizen Corps mission is to bring community and 
government leaders together to coordinate the involvement of community members 
and organizations in emergency preparedness, planning, mitigation, response, and 
recovery. 
The FY 2009 Citizen Corps Program (CCP) funds provide resources for States and 
local communities to: 

• 
Bring together the appropriate leadership to form and sustain a Citizen Corps 
Council. 
• 
Develop and implement a plan and amend existing plans, such as EOPs, to 
achieve and expand citizen preparedness and participation. 
• 
Conduct public education and outreach. 
• 
Ensure clear alerts/warnings and emergency communications with the public. 
• 
Develop training programs for the public, for both all-hazards preparedness and 
volunteer responsibilities. 
• 
Facilitate citizen participation in exercises. 
• 
Implement volunteer programs and activities to support emergency responders. 
• 
Involve citizens in surge capacity roles and responsibilities during an incident in 
alignment with the Emergency Support Functions and Annexes. 
• 
Conduct evaluations of programs and activities. 
CCP Program Requirements 

All grant recipients must register their Citizen Corps Council on the Citizen Corps 
website (http://www.citizencorps.gov/) and manage their program and contact 
information located on the site. 

• 
State responsibilities. Citizen preparedness and participation must be 
coordinated by an integrated body of government and nongovernmental 
representatives. States and local government recipients and sub-grantees of 
HSGP funds, including Urban Areas, must have such a body to serve as their 
Citizen Corps Council with membership that includes, but is not limited to: 
representatives from emergency management, homeland security, law 
enforcement, fire service, medical services/public health or their designee, 
elected officials, the private sector (especially privately owned critical 
infrastructure), private nonprofits, nongovernmental organizations (including faith-
based and community-based organizations), and advocacy groups for special 
needs populations. Representatives from existing Citizen Corps programs, to 
include Volunteers in Police Service (VIPS), Medical Reserve Corps (MRC), 
Community Emergency Response Team (CERT), Neighborhood 
Watch/USAonWatch, Fire Corps, and affiliates should also be included on these 
Citizen Corps Councils. Furthermore, Citizen Corps Councils should include a 
MMRS representative, where applicable. 
Senior Advisory Committees (SACs) and Urban Area Working Groups (UAWGs) 
may serve as Citizen Corps Councils if the appropriate representatives are 

17 



members, to include the State/UASI Citizen Corps Program Manager(s) and 
nongovernmental members. SAAs must coordinate all citizen involvement in 
emergency preparedness, planning, mitigation, response, and recovery funded 
with any source of HSGP funds with the State agency currently responsible for 
the administration of Citizen Corps. A listing of current State Citizen Corps 
Program Managers is available by visiting http://www.citizencorps.gov/councils/ 
and selecting “State Citizen Corps Program Managers.” 

State Citizen Corps Program Managers must also continue to provide program 
management via the administrative section of the Citizen Corps website, 
http://www.citizencorps.gov, to include managing the approval process for local 
Citizen Corps Councils, CERT programs, managing administrative section 
passwords for local users, and managing calendar events, subscribers, and e-
mails to local Councils. 

The community preparedness section(s) of State Homeland Security Strategies, 
policies, guidance, plans (including Emergency Operation Plans (EOP), the State 
Preparedness Report, and Investment Justification), and evaluations must be 
reviewed by the body serving as the State Citizen Corps Council and must 
include considerations for government/nongovernmental collaboration, and 
community preparedness and participation, including citizen involvement in 
preparedness and response. Nongovernmental representatives are expected to 
evaluate closely the functional areas of warnings, emergency public information, 
evacuation, mass care, resource management from nongovernmental sources, 
unaffiliated volunteer and donations management, and nongovernmental 
resource integration (goods and personnel) to support each emergency support 
function in the EOP. 

• 
Coordination. The SAA must coordinate the financial, programmatic, and 
administrative issues relating to the Citizen Corps mission with the State Citizen 
Corps Program Manager. Furthermore, the SAA must share the community 
preparedness information submitted in the State’s BSIR with the State Citizen 
Corps Program Manager. The State Citizen Corps Program Manager must also 
participate in the FEMA required monitoring process. 
Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Activities. As noted previously, the 9/11 
Act did not create a separate LETPP grant program but rather made it a component 
of SHSP and UASI. The Department values and places an emphasis on law 
enforcement terrorism prevention and protection-oriented activities and therefore 
requires that States ensure that at least 25 percent of their SHSP award funds and 
at least 25 percent of their UASI award funds are dedicated towards law 
enforcement terrorism prevention-oriented planning, organization, training, exercise, 
and equipment activities. 

18 



PART II. 

AWARD INFORMATION 


This section summarizes the award period of performance and the total amount of 
funding available under the FY 2009 HSGP, describes the basic distribution method 
used to determine final grants awards, and identifies all eligible applicants for FY 2009 
funding. 

Award Period of Performance 

The period of performance of this grant is 36 months. Extensions to the period of 
performance will be considered only through formal requests to FEMA with specific and 
compelling justifications why an extension is required. 

Available Funding 

In FY 2009, the total amount of funds distributed under the HSGP will be 
$1,714,300,154. The available funding is summarized in the table below. 

HSGP Programs FY 2009 Funding 
State Homeland Security Program $861,265,000 
Urban Areas Security Initiative $798,631,250 
Metropolitan Medical Response 
System $39,831,404 
Citizen Corps Program $14,572,500 
Total $1,714,300,154 

The specific information regarding funding allocations for the four HSGP programs are 
detailed below. 

States and Urban Areas should apply for 110 percent of the targeted SHSP and UASI 
allocation. 

1. FY 2009 SHSP Allocations. 
FY 2009 SHSP funds will be allocated based on risk 
and anticipated effectiveness upon completion of the application review process. 
Each State will receive a minimum allocation under SHSP using the thresholds 
established in the 9/11 Act. All 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico 
will receive 0.365 percent of the total funds allocated for grants under Section 2004 
of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. §101 et seq.), as amended by the 
9/11 Act, for SHSP. Four territories (American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana 
Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands) will receive a minimum allocation of 0.08 
19 



percent of the total funds allocated for grants under Section 2004 of the Homeland 
Security Act of 2002, as amended by the 9/11 Act, for SHSP. 

The following table identifies the targeted SHSP allocations based on DHS’ relative 
risk assessment. States should focus their Investments based on the targeted 
allocation and submit applications for up to 110 percent of the targeted allocation. 
Subsequently, when determining the final allocation, DHS may increase or decrease 
the targeted SHSP allocations by up to 10 percent based on the results of the 
effectiveness analysis. 

FY 2009 SHSP Target Allocations 

State 
SHSP Target 
Allocation 
Law Enforcement 
Terrorism Prevention 
Activities Minimum 
Alabama $10,612,000 $2,653,000 
Alaska $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
American Samoa $1,328,000 $332,000 
Arizona $13,181,000 $3,295,250 
Arkansas $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
California $104,586,000 $26,146,500 
Colorado $11,286,000 $2,821,500 
Connecticut $9,861,000 $2,465,250 
Delaware $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
District of Columbia $10,754,000 $2,688,500 
Florida $35,236,000 $8,809,000 
Georgia $20,786,000 $5,196,500 
Guam $1,328,000 $332,000 
Hawaii $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Idaho $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Illinois $33,212,000 $8,303,000 
Indiana $12,018,000 $3,004,500 
Iowa $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Kansas $7,154,000 $1,788,500 
Kentucky $9,111,000 $2,277,750 
Louisiana $15,305,000 $3,826,250 
Maine $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Maryland $17,100,000 $4,275,000 
Massachusetts $16,350,000 $4,087,500 
Michigan $20,359,000 $5,089,750 
Minnesota $11,647,000 $2,911,750 
Mississippi $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Missouri $11,353,000 $2,838,250 
Montana $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Nebraska $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Nevada $8,921,000 $2,230,250 
New Hampshire $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
New Jersey $26,391,000 $6,597,750 
New Mexico $6,060,000 $1,515,000 

20 



State 
SHSP Target 
Allocation 
Law Enforcement 
Terrorism Prevention 
Activities Minimum 
New York $113,222,000 $28,305,500 
North Carolina $15,466,000 $3,866,500 
North Dakota $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Northern Mariana Islands $1,328,000 $332,000 
Ohio $23,294,000 $5,823,500 
Oklahoma $7,306,000 $1,826,500 
Oregon $8,493,000 $2,123,250 
Pennsylvania $28,795,000 $7,198,750 
Puerto Rico $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Rhode Island $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
South Carolina $8,531,000 $2,132,750 
South Dakota $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Tennessee $12,236,000 $3,059,000 
Texas $62,168,000 $15,542,000 
U.S. Virgin Islands $1,328,000 $332,000 
Utah $6,470,000 $1,617,500 
Vermont $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Virginia $20,710,000 $5,177,500 
Washington $18,791,000 $4,697,750 
West Virginia $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Wisconsin $10,108,000 $2,527,000 
Wyoming $6,060,000 $1,515,000 
Total $861,265,000 $215,316,250 

2. FY 2009 UASI Allocations. 
FY 2009 UASI funds will be allocated based on risk 
and anticipated effectiveness upon completion of the application review process. 
Eligible candidates for the FY 2009 UASI program have been determined through an 
analysis of relative risk of terrorism faced by the 100 most populous metropolitan 
statistical areas in the United States, in accordance with the 9/11 Act. Based on that 
analysis, the eligible candidates have been grouped into two tiers according to 
relative risk. Tier 1 includes the seven highest risk areas and will be allocated 55 
percent of the total UASI funding available; Tier 2 includes the other 55 candidate 
areas and will be allocated the remaining 45 percent of the total UASI funding 
available. The tier approach was employed to allow applicants with a similar level of 
risk to compete for funding on a level playing field. The following candidates are 
eligible to apply for funding under the FY 2009 UASI program. 
The following table identifies the targeted UASI allocations based on DHS’ relative 
risk assessment. States and Urban Areas should focus their Investments based on 
the targeted allocation and submit applications for up to 110 percent of the targeted 
allocation. Subsequently, when determining the final allocation, DHS may increase 
or decrease the targeted UASI allocations by up to 10 percent based on the results 
of the effectiveness analysis. 

21 



FY 2009 UASI Target Allocations 

Urban Area 
FY 2009 Target 
Allocation 
Law Enforcement 
Terrorism 
Prevention Activities 
Minimum 
Bay Area $40,638,250 $10,159,563 California 
Los Angeles/Long Beach Area $68,290,450 $17,072,613 
District of Columbia National Capital Region $58,006,500 $14,501,625 
Illinois Chicago Area $52,320,650 $13,080,163 
New Jersey Jersey City/Newark Area $35,298,150 $8,824,538 
New York New York City Area $145,137,750 $36,284,438 
TIER 
1 
Texas Houston Area $39,555,450 $9,888,863 
Phoenix Area $10,984,400 $2,746,100 Arizona 
Tucson Area $4,515,350 $1,128,838 
Anaheim/Santa Ana Area $12,753,750 $3,188,438 
Riverside Area $5,277,100 $1,319,275 
Sacramento Area $3,938,300 $984,575 
San Diego Area $14,735,000 $3,683,750 
California 
Oxnard Area $2,502,950 $625,738 
Colorado Denver Area $7,233,800 $1,808,450 
Bridgeport Area $2,807,300 $701,825 Connecticut 
Hartford Area $2,747,000 $686,750 
Fort Lauderdale Area $6,063,400 $1,515,850 
Jacksonville Area $5,436,850 $1,359,213 
Miami Area $11,039,500 $2,759,875 
Orlando Area $5,160,400 $1,290,100 
Florida 
Tampa Area $7,933,950 $1,983,488 
Georgia Atlanta Area $13,509,000 $3,377,250 
Hawaii Honolulu Area $4,754,750 $1,188,688 
Indiana Indianapolis Area $7,104,600 $1,776,150 
Kentucky Louisville Area $2,198,500 $549,625 
Baton Rouge Area $3,048,900 $762,225 Louisiana 
New Orleans Area $5,429,600 $1,357,400 
Maryland Baltimore Area $10,974,900 $2,743,725 
Massachusetts Boston Area $14,564,400 $3,641,100 
Michigan Detroit Area $13,481,450 $3,370,363 
Minnesota Twin Cities Area $8,248,000 $2,062,000 
Kansas City Area $7,694,550 $1,923,638 Missouri 
St. Louis Area $8,532,900 $2,133,225 
Nevada Las Vegas Area $8,579,000 $2,144,750 
Albany Area $1,924,250 $481,063 
Buffalo Area $5,040,700 $1,260,175 
Rochester Area $2,342,900 $585,725 
New York 
Syracuse Area $1,869,300 $467,325 
North Carolina Charlotte Area $4,579,950 $1,144,988 
Cincinnati Area $4,969,150 $1,242,288 
Cleveland Area $5,086,800 $1,271,700 
TIER 
2 
Ohio 
Columbus Area $4,349,600 $1,087,400 
22 



Urban Area 
FY 2009 Target 
Allocation 
Law Enforcement 
Terrorism 
Prevention Activities 
Minimum 
Toledo Area $2,287,550 $571,888 
Oklahoma City Area $4,404,700 $1,101,175 Oklahoma 
Tulsa Area $2,160,450 $540,113 
Oregon Portland Area $7,178,700 $1,794,675 
Philadelphia Area $17,950,450 $4,487,613 Pennsylvania 
Pittsburgh Area $6,395,400 $1,598,850 
Puerto Rico San Juan Area $3,183,250 $795,813 
Rhode Island Providence Area $4,764,250 $1,191,063 
Memphis Area $4,229,900 $1,057,475 Tennessee 
Nashville Area $2,986,200 $746,550 
Austin Area $2,922,550 $730,638 
Dallas/Fort Worth/Arlington Area $19,305,450 $4,826,363 
El Paso Area $5,381,750 $1,345,438 
Texas 
San Antonio Area $6,220,150 $1,555,038 
Utah Salt Lake City Area $2,938,300 $734,575 
Norfolk Area $7,372,000 $1,843,000 Virginia 
Richmond Area $2,710,700 $677,675 
Washington Seattle Area $11,313,600 $2,828,400 
Wisconsin Milwaukee Area $4,266,450 $1,066,613 
Total $798,631,250 $199,657,826 
Urban Area 
FY 2009 Target 
Allocation 
Law Enforcement 
Terrorism 
Prevention Activities 
Minimum 
Toledo Area $2,287,550 $571,888 
Oklahoma City Area $4,404,700 $1,101,175 Oklahoma 
Tulsa Area $2,160,450 $540,113 
Oregon Portland Area $7,178,700 $1,794,675 
Philadelphia Area $17,950,450 $4,487,613 Pennsylvania 
Pittsburgh Area $6,395,400 $1,598,850 
Puerto Rico San Juan Area $3,183,250 $795,813 
Rhode Island Providence Area $4,764,250 $1,191,063 
Memphis Area $4,229,900 $1,057,475 Tennessee 
Nashville Area $2,986,200 $746,550 
Austin Area $2,922,550 $730,638 
Dallas/Fort Worth/Arlington Area $19,305,450 $4,826,363 
El Paso Area $5,381,750 $1,345,438 
Texas 
San Antonio Area $6,220,150 $1,555,038 
Utah Salt Lake City Area $2,938,300 $734,575 
Norfolk Area $7,372,000 $1,843,000 Virginia 
Richmond Area $2,710,700 $677,675 
Washington Seattle Area $11,313,600 $2,828,400 
Wisconsin Milwaukee Area $4,266,450 $1,066,613 
Total $798,631,250 $199,657,826 
3. FY 2009 MMRS Allocation. 
FY 2009 MMRS funding will be divided evenly among 
the 124 MMRS jurisdictions listed below. 
FY 2009 MMRS Funding Allocations 

State 
Alabama 
MMRS Jurisdictions 
Birmingham, Huntsville, Mobile, and Montgomery 
State Total 
$1,284,884 
Alaska Anchorage and Juneau $642,442 
Arizona Glendale, Mesa, Phoenix, and Tucson $1,284,884 
Arkansas Little Rock $321,221 
California 
Anaheim, Bakersfield, Fremont, Fresno, Glendale, Huntington 
Beach, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Modesto, Oakland, Riverside, 
Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Francisco, San 
Jose, Santa Ana, and Stockton 
$5,781,978 
Colorado Aurora, Colorado Springs, and Denver $963,663 
Connecticut Hartford $321,221 
Florida 
Fort Lauderdale, Hialeah, Jacksonville, Miami, Orlando, St. 
Petersburg, and Tampa $2,248,547 
Georgia Atlanta and Columbus $642,442 
Hawaii Honolulu $321,221 
Illinois Chicago $321,221 
Indiana Ft. Wayne and Indianapolis $642,442 
Iowa Des Moines $321,221 
Kansas Kansas City and Wichita $642,442 
Kentucky Lexington/Fayette and Louisville $642,442 
Louisiana Baton Rouge, Jefferson Parish, New Orleans, and Shreveport $1,284,884 

23 



Maryland Baltimore $321,221 
Massachusetts Boston, Springfield, and Worcester $963,663 
Michigan Detroit, Grand Rapids, and Warren $963,663 
Minnesota Minneapolis and St. Paul $642,442 
Mississippi Jackson $321,221 
Missouri Kansas City and St. Louis $642,442 
Nebraska Lincoln and Omaha $642,442 
Nevada Las Vegas $321,221 
New Hampshire Northern New England MMRS $321,221 
New Jersey Jersey City and Newark $642,442 
New Mexico Albuquerque $321,221 
New York Buffalo, New York City, Rochester, Syracuse, and Yonkers $1,606,105 
North Carolina Charlotte, Greensboro, and Raleigh $963,663 
Ohio Akron, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, and Toledo $1,927,326 
Oklahoma Oklahoma City and Tulsa $642,442 
Oregon Portland $321,221 
Pennsylvania Allegheny County and Philadelphia $642,442 
Rhode Island Providence $321,221 
South Carolina Columbia $321,221 
Tennessee Chattanooga, Knoxville, Memphis, and Nashville $1,284,884 
Texas 
Amarillo, Arlington, Austin, Corpus Christi, Dallas, El Paso, Fort 
Worth, Garland, Houston, Irving, Lubbock, San Antonio, and 
Southern Rio Grande 
$4,175,873 
Utah Salt Lake City $321,221 
Virginia Arlington County, Chesapeake, Newport News, Norfolk, Richmond, 
and Virginia Beach $1,927,326 
Washington Seattle, Spokane, and Tacoma $963,663 
Wisconsin 
Total 
Madison and Milwaukee $642,442 
$39,831,404 

4. FY 2009 CCP Allocations. 
CCP allocations are determined using the USA 
PATRIOT Act (Public Law 107-56) formula, which specifies that all 50 States, the 
District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico will receive a minimum of 0.75 percent of the 
total available grant funding, and that four territories (American Samoa, Guam, the 
Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands) will receive a minimum of 
0.25 percent of the total available grant funding. The balance of CCP funds are 
distributed on a population-share basis. In addition to CCP allocations, States and 
Urban Areas are encouraged to fully leverage all HSGP resources to accomplish the 
Citizen Corps mission. 
FY 2009 CCP Funding Allocations 

State/Territory Allocation State/Territory Allocation 
Alabama $241,527 Nevada $182,596 
Alaska $128,823 New Hampshire $146,892 
Arizona $290,414 New Jersey $357,481 
Arkansas $190,294 New Mexico $165,581 
California $1,153,746 New York $660,697 
Colorado $248,204 North Carolina $368,199 
Connecticut $209,367 North Dakota $127,573 
Delaware $134,003 Ohio $436,943 
District of Columbia $126,103 Oklahoma $212,653 
Florida $630,795 Oregon $216,372 

24 



Georgia $382,020 Pennsylvania $464,542 
Hawaii $145,965 Rhode Island $139,520 
Idaho $152,137 South Carolina $235,237 
Illinois $476,536 South Dakota $132,044 
Indiana $290,601 Tennessee $285,213 
Iowa $194,673 Texas $792,325 
Kansas $188,614 Utah $184,880 
Kentucky $230,487 Vermont $127,045 
Louisiana $231,965 Virginia $329,655 
Maine $146,931 Washington $294,119 
Maryland $269,829 West Virginia $161,070 
Massachusetts $293,586 Wisconsin $269,352 
Michigan $397,081 Wyoming $124,233 
Minnesota $257,808 Puerto Rico $221,941 
Mississippi $192,694 U.S. Virgin Islands $39,570 
Missouri $277,260 American Samoa $38,284 
Montana $136,658 Guam $41,457 
Nebraska $159,999 Northern Mariana Islands $38,906 
Total $14,572,500 

25 



PART III. 

ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION 


A. Eligible Applicants 
The Governor of each State and territory is required to designate a State Administrative 
Agency (SAA) to apply for and administer the funds awarded under HSGP. The SAA is 
the only entity eligible to apply to FEMA for HSGP funds. 

To be eligible to receive FY 2009 HSGP funding, applicants must meet NIMS 
compliance requirements. The NIMSCAST will be the required means to report FY 
2008 NIMS compliance for FY 2009 preparedness award eligibility. All State and 
territory grantees were required to submit their compliance assessment via the 
NIMSCAST by September 30, 2008 in order to be eligible for FY 2009 preparedness 
programs. The State or territory department/agency grantee reserves the right to 
determine compliance reporting requirements of their sub-awardees (locals) in order to 
disperse funds at the local level. 

For FY 2009 there are no new NIMS compliance objectives. If FY 2008 NIMS 
compliance was reported using NIMSCAST and the grantee has met all NIMS 
compliance requirements, then NIMSCAST will only require an update in FY 2009. 
Additional information on achieving compliance is available through the FEMA National 
Integration Center (NIC) at http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/. 

B. Cost Sharing 
In FY 2009, there is an optional cash or in-kind cost share. 

C. Restrictions 
Please see Part IV.E. for HSGP Priorities Threshold, Law Enforcement Terrorism 
Prevention, Management & Administration (M&A) limits, and allowable/unallowable 
costs guidance. 

26 



PART IV. 

APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION 
INFORMATION 


A. Address to Request Application Package 
DHS participates in the Administration’s e-government initiative. As part of that 
initiative, all applications must be filed using the Administration’s common electronic 
“storefront” --grants.gov. Eligible SAAs must apply for funding through this portal, 
accessible on the Internet at http://www.grants.gov. To access application forms and 
instructions, select “Apply for Grants,” and then select “Download Application Package.” 
Enter the CFDA and/or the funding opportunity number located on the cover of this 
announcement. Select “Download Application Package,” and then follow the prompts to 
download the application package. To download the instructions, go to “Download 
Application Package” and select “Instructions.” If you experience difficulties or have any 
questions, please call the grants.gov customer support hotline at (800) 518-4726. 

B. Content and Form of Application 
1. On-line application. 
The on-line application must be completed and submitted 
using grants.gov after Central Contractor Registry (CCR) registration is confirmed. 
The on-line application includes the following required forms and submissions: 
• 
Investment Justification Report from the Grants Reporting Tool (see Part IV.F. 
below for more information) 
• 
For grantees with UASI Urban Areas: an overview of the UAWG structure 
and a list of members and their associated jurisdictions 
• 
Standard Form 424, Application for Federal Assistance 
• 
Standard Form 424A, Budget Information 
• 
Standard Form 424B Assurances 
• 
Standard Form LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities 
• 
Standard Form 424C, Budget Information – Construction Form (if applicable) 
• 
Standard Form 424D, Assurances – Construction Programs (if applicable) 
The program title listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) is 

“Homeland Security Grant Program.” The CFDA number is 97.067. 

2. Application via grants.gov. FEMA participates in the Administration’s e-
government initiative. As part of that initiative, all applicants must file their 
applications using the Administration’s common electronic “storefront” --grants.gov. 
27 



Eligible SAAs must apply for funding through this portal, accessible on the Internet at 

http://www.grants.gov. 

3. DUNS number. The applicant must provide a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal 
Numbering System (DUNS) number with their application. This number is a required 
field within grants.gov and for CCR Registration. Organizations should verify that 
they have a DUNS number, or take the steps necessary to obtain one, as soon as 
possible. Applicants can receive a DUNS number at no cost by calling the dedicated 
toll-free DUNS Number request line at (866) 705-5711. 
4. Valid Central Contractor Registry (CCR) Registration. 
The application process 
also involves an updated and current registration by the applicant. Eligible 
applicants must confirm CCR registration at http://www.ccr.gov, as well as apply for 
funding through grants.gov. 
5. Investment Justification. 
As part of the FY 2009 HSGP application process, 
applicants must develop a formal Investment Justification that addresses each 
Investment being proposed for funding. The Investment Justification must 
demonstrate how proposed projects address gaps and deficiencies in current 
programs and capabilities. The Investment Justification must demonstrate the ability 
to provide enhancements consistent with the purpose of the program and guidance 
provided by FEMA. Applicants must ensure that the Investment Justification is 
consistent with all applicable requirements outlined in this application kit. 
For new Urban Areas, Investment Justification technical assistance is available; 
please consult your SAA for requesting assistance services from FEMA. 

Applicants may propose up to 15 Investments within their Investment Justification, 
including multi-applicant Investments that support regional initiatives. States, 
territories, and Urban Areas are required to use the web-based Investment 
Justification submission module provided by FEMA in the Grants Reporting Tool 
(GRT) for their FY 2009 HSGP submission. The web-based Investment Justification 
submission module in the GRT will be available on January 1, 2009. In the 
meantime, applicants may use the standalone, Word-based Investment Planning 
Worksheet (or Multi-Applicant Planning Worksheet for multi-applicant Investments); 
the Worksheet is available at http://www.fema.gov/grants along with the overall 
FY 2009 HSGP guidance materials. Again, however, States, territories, and Urban 
Areas are required to use the web-based Investment Justification submission 
module provided by FEMA in the Grants Reporting Tool (GRT) for their FY 2009 
HSGP submission. 

Specific instructions for submitting and completing Investments are included in Part 
IV.F., as well as in the FY 2009 HSGP Investment Justification Reference Guide. 

28 



Multi-Applicant Investments 

States, territories, and Urban Areas may propose Multi-Applicant Investments, which 
represent a shared interest between two or more States and territories, or a shared 
interest between two or more Urban Areas, as one (or more) of their 15 Investment 
submissions. Urban Areas cannot submit a Multi-Applicant Investment in 
partnership with the State in which they are located. Each participating State or 
Urban Area must outline the specific components of the Multi-Applicant Investment 
for which it would be responsible and include that Investment in its own submission. 

Investment Justification Questions and Scoring Criteria 

HSGP applicants must provide information in the following categories for each 
proposed Investment. The table below includes scoring criteria for each section and 
the weights that will be applied to reinforce priority areas. 

Investment Justification Outline 

Question Scoring Criteria 
OVERALL 
Overall Investment Justification 
Question: Describe your understanding of 
the spectrum of terrorism and natural hazard 
risks your State/territory/Urban Area faces. 
Explain how this understanding influenced 
development of this Investment Justification. 
States applying for HSGP funding must also 
include a description of how they plan to 
allocate grant funds to local units of 
government within 45 days of award. 
The information provided is not scored 
as an individual section; however, it is 
considered in the Portfolio Score, and 
should demonstrate the relationship 
between the individual Investments and 
the applicant’s understanding of risk 
Management & Administrative Costs: 
States, territories and Urban Areas must 
provide a brief overall summary of planned 
management and administrative (M&A) 
expenditures that support the 
implementation of the Investments proposed 
in this Investment Justification. 
The information provided is not scored 
as an individual section; however, it is 
considered in the Portfolio Score 

29 



Question Scoring Criteria 
Project Management: Describe the The information provided is not scored 
management team’s roles and as an individual section; however, it is 
responsibilities, governance structures, and considered in the Portfolio Score and 
subject matter expertise specifically required should demonstrate the team’s ability to 
for all of the Investments included in this manage the Investments listed in the 
Investment Justification. application 
BASELINE 
Investment Heading: 
• State/territory name 
• 
Urban Area name (if applicable) 
• Investment name 
• 
Total FY 2009 HSGP estimated funding 
• 
Investment Phase – Ongoing or New 
• 
Multi-Applicant Investment – Yes or No 
The information provided is not scored 
I.A. Baseline – Previous HSGP Request 
Name and Funding: If the Investment was 
included in a previous HSGP request, 
please provide the name of the Investment 
and the total amount of HSGP funding that 
was dedicated to this Investment, if any. 
The information provided is not scored 
as an individual section; however, it is 
considered in the Comprehensive 
Investment Score and should establish 
the Investment’s background and 
progress made to date 
I.B. Baseline – Purpose Statement: 
Describe, at a high-level, what activities will 
be implemented and what will be 
accomplished by this Investment. 
I.C. Baseline – Description: Provide a 
description of the current state of this 
Investment, its objectives, and any 
accomplishments that will be completed 
prior to the application of FY 2009 HSGP 
funds. Include in this description whether 
this is a new or ongoing Investment. 
Describe the capability gap(s) that this 
Investment is intended to address. 

30 



Question Scoring Criteria 
STRATEGY (15%) 
II.A. Strategy – State Preparedness 
Report: Explain how this Investment 
supports Initiatives in the State 
Preparedness Report. Please reference 
relevant page numbers in the State 
Preparedness Report. 
• 
Response provides linkage 
between the Investment and 
Initiatives from the State 
Preparedness Report 
• 
Response demonstrates how the 
Investment will contribute to 
reaching State Preparedness 
Report targets 
II.B. Strategy – Homeland Security 
Strategy goals and objectives: Explain 
how this Investment supports the 
State/territory/Urban Area Homeland 
Security Strategy goals and objectives. 
Please reference relevant goal and objective 
numbers in the State/territory/Urban Area 
Homeland Security Strategy. 
• 
Response provides linkage 
between the Investment and 
Homeland Security Strategy 
goals and objectives 
• 
Response demonstrates how the 
Investment will support the 
Homeland Security Strategy 
goals and objectives 
II.C. Strategy – Target Capabilities: From 
the drop-down boxes, select one primary 
and up to four secondary Target Capabilities 
that this Investment supports. For the 
primary Target Capability selected, provide 
an explanation of how it is supported by this 
Investment. 
• 
Response provides linkage 
between the Investment and the 
selected primary Target 
Capability 
• 
Response demonstrates how the 
Investment will support the 
selected primary Target 
Capability 
II.D. Strategy – National Priorities: From 
the drop-down boxes, select the National 
Priority(ies) that this Investment supports; 
up to four may be selected. 
The information provided is not scored 
as an individual section; however, it is 
considered in the Comprehensive 
Investment Score 

31 



Question Scoring Criteria 
FUNDING PLAN (15%) 
III.A. Funding Plan: Provide the total 
estimated cost to implement this Investment 
during the three year, FY 2009 HSGP period 
of performance by completing the following 
table: 
• 
For each solution area that has an 
associated FY 2009 HSGP cost, 
provide a brief summary of the 
planned expenditures (including 
personnel) 
• 
If this Investment includes an optional 
cost share, provide the cash or in-
kind funding amounts in the 
appropriate section of the funding 
table and describe how those funds 
will be applied 
• 
Other sources of funding should be 
identified and described appropriately 
• 
Response references the 
appropriate activities, services, 
or products for the solution area 
• 
Response describes how the 
estimated HSGP costs will be 
used specifically towards this 
Investment 
• 
The optional cash and in-kind 
cost share identified are 
considered in the effectiveness 
analysis 
ACCOMPLISHMENTS, CHALLENGE MITIGATION (35%) 
III.B. Accomplishments: Identify up to five 
accomplishments that will be achieved 
within the three year, FY 2009 HSGP period 
of performance. For each accomplishment: 
• 
Identify the planned end date for 
when the accomplishment will occur 
• 
Identify at least one milestone that 
will indicate the Investment is 
progressing towards the 
accomplishment 
• 
Identify at least one challenge that 
may impede the achievement of the 
accomplishment within the period of 
performance 
• 
Each response provides a clear 
description of the Investment’s 
accomplishments 
• 
Milestones collectively present a 
clear sequence of events that will 
lead to the associated 
accomplishment 
• 
Challenges should describe 
potential barriers to both the 
successful implementation of the 
proposed Investment and the 
completion of the associated 
accomplishments within the FY 
2009 HSGP period of 
performance 

32 



Question Scoring Criteria 
III.C. Challenge Mitigation: Explain how 
the management team described in the 
Overall section will mitigate challenges and 
ensure that the expected accomplishments 
and milestones for this Investment will be 
achieved within the three year, FY 2009 
HSGP period of performance. 
• 
Response describes how the 
management team will mitigate 
challenges to meet milestones in 
order to achieve the 
accomplishments for the 
proposed Investment 
IMPACT (35%) 
IV.A. Impact on Identified Risk: Describe 
how achieving this Investment’s 
accomplishments will reduce your identified 
risk as described in the Overall Investment 
Justification question. 
• 
Response describes how the 
accomplishments will reduce 
risks outlined in the Overall 
Investment Justification question 
IV.B. Sustainability: Describe the long-term 
approach to sustaining the capabilities 
created or enhanced by this Investment, or 
explain why this Investment will not be 
sustained. 
• 
Response describes how the 
capabilities developed by this 
Investment will be 
maintained/sustained beyond the 
three year FY 2009 HSGP period 
of performance, or 
• 
Response describes why the 
Investment will not be 
maintained/sustained long-term 

Multi-Applicant Questions and Scoring Criteria 

Multi-Applicant Investments will use the same questions and scoring criteria indicated in 
the table above, but will also highlight the benefits of regional collaboration. 

The FY 2009 HSGP Investment Justification Reference Guide will outline how partners 
should coordinate to complete the Multi-Applicant Investment. 

C. Submission Dates and Times 
Completed applications must be submitted electronically through www.grants.gov no 
later than 11:59 PM EDT, March 20, 2009. Late applications will neither be considered 
nor reviewed. Upon successful submission, a confirmation e-mail message will be sent 
with a grants.gov tracking number, which is needed to track the status of the 
application. 

33 



D. Intergovernmental Review 
Executive Order 12372 requires applicants from State and local units of government or 
other organizations providing services within a State to submit a copy of the application 
to the State Single Point of Contact (SPOC), if one exists, and if this program has been 
selected for review by the State. Applicants must contact their State SPOC to 
determine if the program has been selected for State review. Executive Order 12372 
can be referenced at http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executiveorder/
12372.html. The names and addresses of the SPOCs are listed on OMB’s home 
page available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html. 

E. Funding Restrictions 
The applicable SAAs will be responsible for administration of the FY 2009 HSGP. In 
administering the program, the SAA must work with the eligible applicants to comply 
with the following general requirements: 

1. HSGP Priorities Threshold. 
As noted before, FY 2009 HSGP will focus on six 
objectives as its highest priorities, of which at least 25 percent of HSGP funds must 
be dedicated to Strengthening Preparedness Planning. 
2. Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention. 
Per the 9/11 Act and Consolidated 
Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act of 2009 (Public 
Law 110-329), FY 2009 HSGP will not contain a separate line-item Law 
Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program (LETPP). However, States are still 
required to ensure that at least 25 percent of their SHSP award funds and 25 
percent of their UASI award funds are dedicated towards law enforcement terrorism 
prevention-oriented planning, organization, training, exercise, and equipment 
activities. 
3. Management and Administration (M&A) Limits. 
A maximum of up to three 
percent (3%) of funds awarded may be retained by the State, and any funds retained 
are to be used solely for management and administrative purposes associated with 
the HSGP award. States may pass through a portion of the State M&A allocation to 
local subgrantees to support local management and administration activities; the 
overall subgrantee M&A amount may not equal more than three percent (3%). 
4. Allowable Costs. 
A crosswalk of allowable costs across the HSGP programs can 
be found in Part VIII of this Guidance package, along with additional detail on 
Planning, Equipment, Training, and Exercises costs. The following pages outline 
global allowable costs guidance applicable to all programs included in the HSGP. 
Allowable Investments made in support of the HSGP Priorities as well as other 
capability-enhancing projects must fall into the categories of Planning, Organization, 
Equipment, Training, or Exercises. Additional detail about each of these allowable 
expense categories, as well as sections on additional activities including explicitly 
unallowable costs is provided. In general, grantees should consult their FEMA 
34 



Program Analyst prior to making any Investment that does not clearly meet the 
allowable expense criteria established by the guidance. 

Planning Activities 

States and Urban Areas are strongly encouraged to use FY 2009 HSGP funds for 
planning efforts that enable them to prioritize needs, build capabilities, update 
preparedness strategies, allocate resources, and deliver preparedness programs 
across disciplines (e.g., law enforcement, fire, emergency medical service (EMS), 
public health, behavioral health, public works, agriculture, and information 
technology) and levels of government. Planning activities should focus on the four 
homeland security mission areas of prevention, protection, response, and recovery. 
All jurisdictions are encouraged to work through Citizen Corps Councils, 
nongovernmental entities, and the general public in planning activities.3 

Organizational Activities (SHSP and UASI only) 

Section 2008 of the Homeland Security Act, as amended by the 9/11 Act, includes 
the following allowable activities: 

• 
Responding to an increase in the threat level under the Homeland Security 
Advisory System, or needs resulting from a National Special Security Event 
• 
Establishing, enhancing, and staffing State, local, and regional fusion centers 
• 
Paying salaries and benefits for personnel to serve as qualified intelligence 
analysts 
States and Urban Areas must justify proposed expenditures of SHSP or UASI funds 
to support organization activities within their Investment Justification submission by 
using historical data or other analysis.4 All States are allowed to utilize up to 50 
percent of their FY 2009 SHSP funding and all Urban Areas are allowed up to 50 
percent of their FY 2009 UASI funding for Organizational activities5. At the request 
of a recipient of a grant, the Administrator may grant a waiver of the limitation noted 
above (50 percent). 

• 
Overtime Costs -- Overtime costs are allowable for personnel to participate in 
information, investigative, and intelligence sharing activities specifically related to 
homeland security and specifically requested by a Federal agency. Allowable 
costs are limited to overtime associated with Federally requested participation in 
eligible fusion activities including anti-terrorism task forces, Joint Terrorism Task 
Forces (JTTFs), Area Maritime Security Committees (as required by the Maritime 
Transportation Security Act of 2002), DHS Border Enforcement Security Task 
3 Nongovernmental entities include the private sector and private nonprofit, faith-based, community, volunteer and other 
nongovernmental organizations. 

4 The effectiveness of a request for the use of funds for allowable organizational costs will be judged on the Investment Justification 
to illustrate the need for such resources to effectively achieve a capability that will have a meaningful impact in the reduction of risk. 

5 Note: Both organizational costs (e.g., intel analysts, operational overtime) and planning, equipment, training, exercise personnel 
costs are applied towards the 50 percent personnel cap. 

35 



Forces, and Integrated Border Enforcement Teams. Tribes must submit to DHS 
a written letter from a Federal agency which explicitly requests tribal staff 
participation in an eligible activity or illustrates how the activities support the roles 
and responsibilities of fusion centers as noted in Appendix 1 of the National 
Strategy for Information Sharing and provides an estimate of the size of the 
request in man-hours. Grant funding can only be used in proportion to the 
Federal man-hour estimate, and only after funding for these activities from other 
Federal sources (i.e. FBI JTTF payments to State and local agencies) has been 
exhausted. Under no circumstances should DHS grant funding be used to pay 
for costs already supported by funding from another Federal source. 

• 
Intelligence Analysts – Per the Personnel Reimbursement for Intelligence 
Cooperation and Enhancement (PRICE) of Homeland Security Act (Public Law 
110-412), SHSP and UASI funds may be used to hire new staff and/or contractor 
positions to serve as intelligence analysts to enable information/intelligence 
sharing capabilities, as well as support existing intelligence analysts previously 
covered by SHSP or UASI funding. In order to be hired as an intelligence 
analyst, staff and/or contractor personnel must meet at least one of the following 
criteria: 
o 
Successfully complete training to ensure baseline proficiency in intelligence 
analysis and production within six months of being hired; and/or, 
o 
Previously served as an intelligence analyst for a minimum of two years 
either in a Federal intelligence agency, the military, or State and/or local law 
enforcement intelligence unit 
All intelligence analyst training should be in accordance with Global’s Minimum 
Criminal Intelligence Training Standards for Law Enforcement and Other Criminal 
Justice Agencies in the United States, which outlines the minimum categories of 
training needed for intelligence analysts. These include subject-matter expertise, 
analytic methodologies, customer-service ethics, information handling and 
processing skills, critical thinking skills, computer literacy, and objectivity and 
intellectual honesty. A certificate of completion of such training must be on file 
with the tribe and must be made available to FEMA Program Analysts upon 
request. 

• 
Operational Overtime Costs. In support of efforts to enhance capabilities for 
detecting, deterring, disrupting, and preventing acts of terrorism, operational 
overtime costs are allowable for increased security measures at critical 
infrastructure sites during DHS-declared periods of Orange or Red threat levels. 
Subject to these elevated threat level conditions, FY 2009 SHSP or UASI funds 
for organizational costs may be used to support select operational expenses 
associated with increased security measures at critical infrastructure sites in the 
following authorized categories: 
36 



• 
Backfill and overtime expenses (as defined in this guidance) for staffing 
State or local fusion centers 
• 
Hiring of contracted security for critical infrastructure sites 
• 
Public safety overtime (as defined in this guidance) 
• 
National Guard deployments to protect critical infrastructure sites, 
including all resources that are part of the standard National Guard 
deployment package 
• 
Increased border security activities in coordination with US Customs and 
Border Protection (CBP), as outlined in Information Bulletin #135 
Consumable costs, such as fuel expenses, are not allowed except as part of the 
standard National Guard deployment package. 

Note: States with UASI jurisdictions can use funds retained at the State level to 
reimburse eligible operational overtime expenses incurred by the State (per the 
above guidance limitations and up to a maximum of 50 percent of the State share 
of the UASI grant). Any UASI funds retained by the State must be used in direct 
support of the Urban Area. States must provide documentation to the UAWG 
and FEMA upon request demonstrating how any UASI funds retained by the 
State would directly support the Urban Area. 

Equipment Activities 

The 21 allowable prevention, protection, response, and recovery equipment 
categories and equipment standards for FY 2009 HSGP are listed on the web-based 
version of the Authorized Equipment List (AEL) on the Responder Knowledge Base 
(RKB), at https://www.rkb.us. The Standardized Equipment List (SEL) is located on 
this site as well. In some cases, items on the SEL are not allowable under HSGP or 
will not be eligible for purchase unless specific conditions are met. 

Unless otherwise stated, equipment must meet all mandatory regulatory and/or 
DHS-adopted standards to be eligible for purchase using these funds. In addition, 
agencies will be responsible for obtaining and maintaining all necessary 
certifications and licenses for the requested equipment. 

Training Activities 

States, territories, and Urban Areas are strongly encouraged to use HSGP funds to 
develop a State/territory homeland security training program. Allowable training-
related costs under HSGP include the establishment, support, conduct, and 
attendance of training specifically identified under the SHSP, UASI, MMRS, and 
CCP grant programs. Allowable training topics include, but are not limited to, 
CBRNE terrorism, cyber/agriculture/food security, intelligence gathering and 
analysis, NIMS related training, citizen and community preparedness, and training 
for volunteers. 

Training conducted using HSGP funds should address a performance gap identified 
through an After Action Report/Improvement Plan (AAR/IP) or contribute to building 

37 



a capability that will be evaluated through an exercise. Exercises should be used to 
provide the opportunity to demonstrate and validate skills learned in training, as well 
as to identify training gaps. Any training or training gaps should be identified in the 
AAR/IP and addressed in the State or Urban Area training cycle. All training and 
exercises conducted with HSGP funds should support the development and testing 
of the jurisdiction’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) or specific annexes, where 
applicable. 

Exercise Activities 

Exercises conducted with FEMA support must be managed and executed in 
accordance with the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP). 
HSEEP Volumes One, Two, and Three contain guidance for exercise design, 
development, conduct, evaluation, and improvement planning. HSEEP Volume Four 
provides sample exercise materials, and HSEEP Volume Five: Prevention Exercises 
contains guidance and recommendations for designing, developing, conducting, and 
evaluating prevention-focused exercises. All volumes can be found at 

http://hseep.dhs.gov. 

All exercises using HSGP funding must be NIMS compliant. More information is 
available online at the NIMS Integration Center, 

http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/index.shtm. 

All Urban Areas are required to develop a Multi-year Training and Exercise Plan and 
submit it to FEMA on an annual basis. This plan must tie into the Multi-year Training 
and Exercise Plan developed by the State and aligns with the Urban Area Homeland 
Security Strategy. Further, Urban Areas are encouraged to develop a Multi-year 
Plan and Schedule that takes into consideration anticipated training needs of the 
Urban Area for at least the immediate year, with exercises being timed to provide 
responders the opportunity to utilize training received. Further guidance concerning 
Training and Exercise Plan Workshops can be found in the HSEEP Volumes. 

Urban Areas are eligible to apply for exercise direct support, but must do so in 
coordination with the SAA. Direct support exercises provided to Urban Areas will 
count against the amount of direct support allotted to the State for FY 2009. 

Personnel Activities 

Personnel hiring, overtime, and backfill expenses are permitted under this grant in 
order to perform allowable FY 2009 HSGP planning, training, exercise, and 
equipment activities. 

• 
A personnel cap of up to 50 percent of total program funds may be used for 
personnel and personnel-related activities as directed by the Personnel 
Reimbursement for Intelligence Cooperation and Enhancement (PRICE) of 
Homeland Security Act (Public Law 110-412). Grantees who wish to seek a 
waiver from the personnel cap must provide documentation explaining why the 
cap is unacceptable; waiver requests will be considered only under extreme 
38 



circumstances. In general, the use of HSGP grant funding to pay for staff and/or 
contractor regular time or overtime/backfill is considered a personnel cost. 
Activities that are considered “personnel” and “personnel-related”, and therefore 
count against the personnel cap of 50 percent include, but are not limited to: 

• 
Operational overtime 
• 
Overtime/backfill to participate in approved training or exercise deliveries 
• 
Salaries and personnel costs of intelligence analysts 
• 
Overtime to participate in intelligence sharing activities 
• 
Salaries and personnel costs of planners, equipment managers, exercise 
coordinators, and/or training coordinators 
• 
Salaries and personnel costs under the M&A category 
• 
Contractor costs associated with performing the above activities 
These activities are also subject to the funding and eligibility requirements 
detailed under the allowable cost categories. For further details, SAAs should 
contact their FEMA GPD Program Analyst. 

• 
Neither MMRS nor CCP have a personnel cap. 
• 
For MMRS, hiring, overtime, backfill and professional development expenses are 
allowable only for dedicated MMRS Leadership personnel to perform 
programmatic activities and that are deemed allowable under existing guidance. 
Supplanting, however, is not allowed. 
FY 2009 HSGP funds may not be used to support the hiring of any personnel for the 
purposes of fulfilling traditional public health and safety duties or to supplant 
traditional public health and safety positions and responsibilities. 

The following are definitions for the terms as used in this grant guidance: 

• 
Hiring – State and local entities may use grant funding to cover the salary of 
newly hired personnel who are exclusively undertaking allowable FEMA program 
activities as specified in this guidance. This may not include new personnel who 
are hired to fulfill any non-FEMA program activities under any circumstances. 
Hiring will always result in a net increase of FTEs. 
• 
Overtime – These expenses are limited to the additional costs which result from 
personnel working over and above 40 hours of weekly work time as a direct 
result of their performance of FEMA-approved activities specified in this 
guidance. Overtime associated with any other activity is not eligible. 
• 
Backfill-related Overtime – Also called “Overtime as Backfill,” these expenses 
are limited to overtime costs which result from personnel who are working 
overtime (as identified above) to perform the duties of other personnel who are 
temporarily assigned to FEMA-approved activities outside their core 
responsibilities. Neither overtime nor backfill expenses are the result of an 
increase of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) employees. 
39 



• 
Supplanting – Grant funds will be used to supplement existing funds, and will 
not replace (supplant) funds that have been appropriated for the same purpose. 
Applicants or grantees may be required to supply documentation certifying that a 
reduction in non-Federal resources occurred for reasons other than the receipt or 
expected receipt of Federal funds. 
Construction and Renovation 

Use of HSGP funds for construction and renovation is generally prohibited except as 
outlined below. Such construction and renovation shall be strictly limited and 
allowable only when it is a necessary component of a security system at critical 
infrastructure facilities. CCP and MMRS funds may not be used for any type of 
construction or renovation. 

Project construction and renovation not exceeding $1,000,000 is allowable, as 
deemed necessary. The following types of projects are considered to constitute 
construction or renovation, and must be submitted to FEMA for compliance review 
under Federal environmental planning and historic preservation (EHP) laws and 
requirements prior to initiation of the project: 

• 
Construction and renovation of guard facilities 
• 
Renovation of and modifications, including the installation of security and 
communication equipment, to buildings and structures that are 50 years old or 
older 
• 
Any other construction or renovation efforts that change or expand the footprint 
of a facility or structure, including security enhancements to improve perimeter 
security. 
• 
Physical security enhancements, including but not limited to: 
o 
Lighting 
o 
Fencing 
o 
Closed-circuit television (CCTV) systems 
o 
Motion detection systems 
o 
Barriers, doors, gates and related security enhancements 
In addition, the erection of communications towers that are included in a 
jurisdiction’s interoperable communications plan is allowed, subject to all 
applicable laws, regulations, and licensing provisions. Communication tower 
projects must be submitted to FEMA for EHP review. Per the Consolidated 
Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act of 2009 
(Public Law 110-329), communications towers are not subject to the 
$1,000,000 construction and renovation cap. 

In order to draw down funds for construction and renovation costs under HSGP, 
grantees must provide to FEMA: 

• 
A description of the asset or facility, asset location, whether the infrastructure is 
publicly or privately owned, and the construction or renovation project 
40 



• 
Certification that a facility vulnerability assessment has been conducted 
• 
An outline addressing how the construction or renovation project will address the 
identified vulnerabilities from the assessment 
• 
Consequences of not implementing the construction or renovation project 
• 
Any additional information requested by FEMA to ensure compliance with 
Federal environmental and historic preservation requirements 
Grantees should refer to FEMA’s Information Bulletin #271, Environmental and 
Planning and Historic Preservation Requirements for Grants. Additional information 
may also be found on the FEMA’s website located at http://www.fema.gov/plan/ehp/. 

Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention-Oriented Allowable Costs 

Section 2006 of the Homeland Security Act, as amended by the 9/11 Act, includes 
the following allowable activities: 

• 
Overtime expenses consistent with a State homeland security plan, including 
enhanced operations in support of federal agencies, including border security 
and border crossing enforcement; 
• 
Establishing, enhancing and staffing State, local and regional fusion centers; 
• 
Paying salaries and benefits for personnel to serve as qualified intelligence 
analysts; 
• 
Any other terrorism prevention activity authorized by the Administrator 
• 
Provisions from Section 2008 also apply 
The broad parameters of the historical LETPP program are still allowable under 
SHSP and UASI. These include the following activities: 

• 
Information sharing and analysis 
• 
Target hardening 
• 
Threat recognition 
• 
Terrorist interdiction 
• 
Subject to the limitations on Organization and Personnel Costs outlined above, 
overtime expenses consistent with a State Homeland Security Plan, including for 
the provision of enhanced law enforcement operations in support of Federal 
agencies, including for increased border security and border crossing 
enforcement 
• 
Subject to the limitations on Organization and Personnel Costs outlined above, 
establishing, enhancing, and staffing State, local, and regional fusion centers 
with appropriately qualified personnel 
• 
Subject to the limitations on Organization and Personnel Costs outlined above, 
paying salaries and benefits for personnel, including individuals employed by the 
grant recipient on the date of the relevant grant application, to serve as qualified 
intelligence analysts 
41 



Secure Identification 

In addition to the expenditures outlined above, SHSP funds may be used to support 
the Department’s efforts to enhance secure identification. Activities that facilitate 
secure identification, including IT enhancements for identification management and 
verification systems, are a priority. DHS is currently developing and implementing a 
number of high profile screening programs in which secure identification credentials 
figure prominently. These include the REAL ID program which aims to enhance the 
security, integrity and protection of licensing and identification systems across the 
country; the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) program which 
promotes tamper-resistant biometric credentials for workers who require unescorted 
access to secure areas of ports, vessels, outer continental shelf facilities and all 
credentialed merchant mariners; and the credentialing of First Responders which 
entails enhancing real-time electronic authentication of identity and attribute(s) 
(qualification, certification, authorization, and/or privilege) of emergency 
response/critical government personnel responding to terrorist attacks or other 
catastrophic events. 

 REAL ID specific allowable activities include: planning activities related to REAL ID 
compliance, related personal identification verification systems enhancements; 
personnel and management costs related to REAL ID compliance activities; and 
acquisitions for hardware and software related to ensuring compatibility with REAL 
ID technologies. 

As to TWIC, specific allowable activities include: projects that involve new 
installations or upgrades to access control and identity management systems that 
exhibit compliance with TWIC standards and program specifications. 

As to credentialing of First Responders, specific allowable activities include: 
development of standards-based technologies, policies, protocols, and practices for 
portable and functional solutions to first responder identification issues. 

Note: Secure Identification projects requested and funded under SHSP must directly 
support SHSP mission goals and cannot supplant projects/activities funded under 
the REAL ID Grant Program. 

F. Other Submission Requirements 
The FY 2009 Investment Justification for HSGP will be web-based. The Investment 
Justification will be completed by applicants using the Grants Reporting Tool (GRT). 
Once Investment Justifications are marked ‘complete’ in GRT by applicants, the SAA 
will then need to submit the final application through grants.gov. 

Please allow enough time before (or no later than 11:59 PM EDT) March 20, 2009 
to complete the Investment Justification in GRT and submit the required 
application materials in grants.gov. 

42 



The following steps must be completed to submit an Investment Justification to FEMA 
GPD: 

1. Log into the GRT 
On January 1, 2009 users will be directed to log into the GRT to begin their 

completion of the online Investment Justification. 

In order to complete the Investment Justification, applicants should direct their web 
browser to https://www.reporting.odp.dhs.gov/. To login, all users must have active 
GRT accounts and permission from their “SAA Admin” (as identified in the GRT) to 
edit and submit the online Investment Justification. SAA Admin users are asked to 
grant permissions to all State and local users that need applicable access to the 
Investment Justification Submission module. If you are an SAA responsible for the 
completion and submission of your Investment Justification and do not have a GRT 
account, please contact your FEMA Program Analyst. Once access has been 
granted, users may enter the Investment Justification Submission module, via the 
GRT, and complete their online Investment Justification. 

2. Complete the Investment Justification in the GRT 
The purpose of the Investment Justification Submission Module is to provide users 
the ability to complete and submit their FY 2009 Investment Justification online. A 
MS Word worksheet has been provided by FEMA to users so that they may begin 
completing their Investments prior to inputting the data into GRT. 

Users can create up to 15 Investments and will have the opportunity to designate 
one or more of those Investments as a Multi-Applicant Investment (based on a 
submitting partner). Once finished entering Investment Justification information, 
State and local users can mark their Investments ‘complete’ and notify their SAA 
Admin of their Investment status. 

Upon completion of all Investments, the SAA Admin is then required to make the 

final submission to FEMA through grants.gov (see Step 3). 

3. Submit Investment Justification through grants.gov 
After the Investment Justification application has been marked ‘complete’ in the 
GRT, SAAs on behalf of applicants thereafter must also apply through grants.gov at 
http://www.grants.gov to complete the submission process. 

Please allow enough time before (or no later than 11:59 PM EDT) March 20, 2009: 

• 
Complete the Investment Justification in the GRT first: and 
• 
Upload the required application materials into grants.gov. 
Additional technical information regarding GRT Investment Justification Submission will 
be available to all users in the GRT IJ Submission Technical User’s Guide. 
43 



PART V. 

APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION 


A. Review Criteria 
FY 2009 HSGP will use risk-based prioritization for SHSP and UASI consistent with 
DHS policy outlined in this guidance document. Each applicant’s targeted allocation will 
be determined using a combination of the results of the risk and effectiveness analyses. 

Applications will be evaluated through a State and local peer review process for 
completeness, adherence to programmatic guidelines, feasibility, and how well the 
proposed Investment addresses the identified need(s) or capability shortfall(s). The 
Investment Justification requires narrative on strategic alignment, funding plan, 
milestones, project management, potential challenges, impact, and sustainability for 
each Investment. This information will be used to evaluate the anticipated effectiveness 
of all proposed Investments. Please refer to Section IV.B. for the Investment 
Justification questions and scoring criteria. 

B. Review and Selection Process 
The following process will be used to make awards under the program: 

• 
FEMA will verify compliance with all administrative and eligibility criteria identified 
in the application kit, to include the required submission of Investment 
Justification by the established due dates. 
• 
Eligible applications will be reviewed and scored through a State and local peer 
review process to analyze the anticipated effectiveness of proposed Investments. 
State and Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies and State Preparedness 
Reports will be reviewed by the peer review panels for context, but will not be 
scored. 
• 
FEMA will use the results of both the risk analysis and the peer review to make 
recommendations for targeted funding to the Secretary of Homeland Security. 
Note: Upon award, the recipient may only fund Investments that were included in 
the FY 2009 Investment Justification that was submitted to FEMA and evaluated 
through the peer review process. In addition, release of targeted HSGP funding is 
subject to successful completion and approval of Investment Justifications. 

Funds Transfer Restriction. The recipient is prohibited from transferring funds 
between programs (SHSP, UASI, MMRS, and CCP). 

44 



Fusion Centers. The recipient agrees that funds utilized to establish or enhance 
designated state and Urban Area fusion centers must support the development of a 
statewide fusion process that corresponds with the Global Justice/Homeland Security 
Advisory Council (HSAC) Fusion Center Guidelines and the National Strategy for 
Information Sharing, and achievement of a baseline level of capability as defined by 
Global’s Baseline Capabilities for State and Major Urban Area Fusion Centers, a 
supplement to the Fusion Center Guidelines, located at 
http://www.it.ojp.gov/documents/baselinecapabilitiesa.pdf. 

Multi-State Investments. The recipient agrees to fund any multi-state or multi-urban 
area Investments that were included in the FY 2009 Investment Justification that was 
submitted to FEMA and received a bonus in the effectiveness analysis. 

C. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates 
FEMA will evaluate and act on applications within 90 days following close of the 
application period, consistent with the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and 
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 110-329). Awards will be made on or 
before September 30, 2009. 

45 



PART VI. 


AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION 


A. Notice of Award 
Upon approval of an application, the grant will be awarded to the grant recipient. The 
date that this is done is the “award date.” Notification of award approval is made 
through the Grants Management System (GMS). Once an award has been approved, a 
notice is sent to the authorized grantee official. Follow the directions in the notification 
and log into GMS to access the award documents. The authorized grantee official 
should carefully read the award and special condition documents. If you do not receive 
a notification, please contact your Program Analyst for your award number. Once you 
have the award number, contact the GMS Help Desk at (888) 549-9901, option 3, to 
obtain the username and password associated with the new award. 

Awards made to SAAs for the HSGP carry additional pass-through requirements. Pass-
through is defined as an obligation on the part of the States to make funds available to 
local units of government6, combinations of local units, or other specific groups or 
organizations. The State’s pass-through period must be met within 45 days of the 
award date for the HSGP7. Four requirements must be met to pass-through grant 
funds: 

• 
There must be some action to establish a firm commitment on the part of the 
awarding entity. 
• 
The action must be unconditional (i.e., no contingencies for availability of SAA 
funds) on the part of the awarding entity. 
• 
There must be documentary evidence of the commitment. 
• 
The award terms must be communicated to the official grantee. 
The SAA must obligate at least 80 percent of the funds awarded under SHSP and UASI 
to local units of government within 45 days of receipt of the funds. For Puerto Rico, the 
SAA must also obligate at least 80 percent of the funds to local units of government 

6 As defined in the House Report (H. Rept. 110-862) and the Senate Report (S. Rept. 110-396) 
accompanying the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act of 
2009 (Public Law 110-329), the term “local unit of government” means “any county, city, village, town, 
district, borough, parish, port authority, transit authority, intercity rail provider, commuter rail system, 
freight rail provider, water district, regional planning commission, council of government, Indian tribe with 
jurisdiction over Indian country, authorized Tribal organization, Alaska Native village, independent 
authority, special district, or other political subdivision of any State.” 

7 For purposes of the FY 2009 HSGP, receipt of funds means the date on which funds are available for 
expenditure (e.g., all special conditions prohibiting obligation, expenditure and draw down have been 
removed). 

46 



within 45 days of receipt of the funds. Additionally, no pass-through requirements will 
be applied to the District of Columbia, Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, 
and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. Any UASI funds retained by 
the SAA must be used to directly support the designated Urban Areas in the State. 

States must obligate at least 97 percent of MMRS grant funds within 45 days of receipt. 

There are no obligation requirements for CCP. However, if funds are retained, 
consultation with local Citizen Corps Councils is required to ensure funds are expended 
in a manner that supports local or statewide efforts to educate, train, and involve 
citizens. Jurisdictions are encouraged to leverage available funding resources to 
support community preparedness and participation. 

For SHSP and UASI programs involving obligation of funds, the State may retain some 
of the allocation of grant funds for expenditures made by the State on behalf of the local 
unit of government or Urban Area jurisdiction. This may occur only with the written 
consent of the local unit of government or Urban Area jurisdiction, with the written 
consent specifying the amount of funds to be retained and the intended use of funds. If 
a written consent agreement is already in place from previous fiscal years, FEMA will 
continue to recognize it for FY 2009. If any modifications to the existing agreement are 
necessary to reflect new initiatives, States should contact their assigned Program 
Analyst. 

FEMA will track the congressionally-mandated obligation of funds to local units of 
government through each State’s Initial Strategy Implementation Plan. In addition, 
FEMA strongly encourages the timely obligation of funds from local units of government 
to other subgrantees, as appropriate. 

The period of performance is 36 months. Any unobligated funds will be deobligated at 
the end of the 90 day close-out period. Extensions to the period of performance will be 
considered only through formal requests to FEMA with specific and compelling 
justifications why an extension is required. 

B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements 
1. State Preparedness Report. 
The Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform 
Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-295) requires any State that receives Federal 
preparedness assistance to submit a State Preparedness Report to DHS. FEMA will 
provide additional guidance on the requirements for updating State Preparedness 
Reports. Receipt of this report is a prerequisite for applicants to receive any 
FY 2009 DHS preparedness grant funding. 
2. Standard Financial Requirements. 
The grantee and any subgrantee shall comply 
with all applicable laws and regulations. A non-exclusive list of regulations 
commonly applicable to DHS grants are listed below: 
47 



2.1 -- Administrative Requirements. 
• 
44 CFR Part 13, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and 
Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments 
• 
2 CFR Part 215, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and 
Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other 
Non-Profit Organizations (OMB Circular A-110) 
2.2 -- Cost Principles. 
• 
2 CFR Part 225, Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal 
Governments (OMB Circular A-87) 
• 
2 CFR Part 220, Cost Principles for Educational Institutions (OMB Circular 
A-21) 
• 
2 CFR Part 230, Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations (OMB 
Circular A-122) 
• 
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), Part 31.2 Contract Cost Principles 
and Procedures, Contracts with Commercial Organizations 
2.3 -- Audit Requirements. 
• 
OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit 
Organizations 
2.4 -- Duplication of Benefits. There may not be a duplication of any federal 
assistance, per A-87, Basic Guidelines Section C.3 (c), which states: Any cost 
allocable to a particular Federal award or cost objective under the principles 
provided for in this Circular may not be charged to other Federal awards to 
overcome fund deficiencies, to avoid restrictions imposed by law or terms of the 
Federal awards, or for other reasons. However, this prohibition would not 
preclude governmental units from shifting costs that are allowable under two or 
more awards in accordance with existing program agreements. 
3. Non-supplanting Requirement. 
Grant funds will be used to supplement existing 
funds, and will not replace (supplant) funds that have been appropriated for the 
same purpose. Applicants or grantees may be required to supply documentation 
certifying that a reduction in non-Federal resources occurred for reasons other than 
the receipt or expected receipt of Federal funds. 
4. Technology Requirements. 
4.1 -- National Information Exchange Model (NIEM). FEMA requires all 
grantees to use the latest NIEM specifications and guidelines regarding the use 
of Extensible Markup Language (XML) for all grant awards. Further information 
about the required use of NIEM specifications and guidelines is available at 
http://www.niem.gov. 

4.2 -- Geospatial Guidance. Geospatial technologies capture, store, analyze, 
transmit, and/or display location-based information (i.e., information that can be 
linked to a latitude and longitude). FEMA encourages grantees to align any 
48 



geospatial activities with the guidance available on the FEMA website at 

http://www.fema.gov/grants. 

4.3 -- 28 CFR Part 23 guidance. FEMA requires that any information 
technology system funded or supported by these funds comply with 28 CFR Part 
23, Criminal Intelligence Systems Operating Policies, if this regulation is 
determined to be applicable. 
5. Administrative Requirements. 
5.1 -- Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). FEMA recognizes that much of the 
information submitted in the course of applying for funding under this program or 
provided in the course of its grant management activities may be considered law 
enforcement sensitive or otherwise important to national security interests. While 
this information under Federal control is subject to requests made pursuant to the 
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. §552, all determinations concerning 
the release of information of this nature are made on a case-by-case basis by the 
FEMA FOIA Office, and may likely fall within one or more of the available 
exemptions under the Act. The applicant is encouraged to consult its own State 
and local laws and regulations regarding the release of information, which should 
be considered when reporting sensitive matters in the grant application, needs 
assessment and strategic planning process. The applicant may also consult 
FEMA regarding concerns or questions about the release of information under 
State and local laws. The grantee should be familiar with the regulations 
governing Sensitive Security Information (49 CFR Part 1520),