In the first year of the Trump administration, the federal grant landscape underwent major changes. As most administrations do, the Trump administration repealed many Biden-era Executive Orders (EOs) on day one, including Executive Order 13985 (Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government), Executive Order 14052 (Implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act), and Executive Order 14082 (Implementation of the Energy and Infrastructure Provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022).
However, the Trump administration went a step further in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Memo M-25-13, pausing disbursement of all federal funding. Although rescinded within a few days, the repeal of previous EOs and the initiation of an aggressive new set of orders under the Trump administration set a tone for a new era of federal funding.
At the beginning of February 2025, there were approximately 2,400 opportunities on grants.gov, the central platform for federal government grants. Of those 2,400 opportunities, approximately 1,850 were posted and 550 were forecasted, i.e., notifications of forthcoming postings.
In February 2026, there are approximately 1,600 opportunities, a 33% decrease year over year. This is mostly driven by the reduction in posted opportunities, which hover around 900 – an over 50% decrease. Conversely, the number of forecasted grants has risen by about 25%. This is due to agencies forecasting opportunities that are yet to be posted.
Over the last year, when opportunities do get posted, they tend to be open, i.e., accepting applications, for much shorter periods of time. Grants that were open for over six months in previous rounds are now only open for weeks. Years long grants have been reduced to months long openings. With shorter application runways, it is imperative for grant applicants to be as proactive as possible.
New grant opportunities more closely mirror the language of the authorizing statutes. Where a program’s authorizing framework does not align with Administration priorities, agencies continued to implement the program in good faith but narrowed Notices of Funding Opportunity (NOFOs) to reflect the minimum legal requirements of the statute rather than advancing broader policy objectives not explicitly required by law. For example, certain NOFOs remove merit criteria and language associated with the rescinded Biden EOs, including references to DEI, underserved communities, environmental justice and climate change. In turn, recent NOFOs prioritize Trump administration priorities, such as workforce development, AI initiatives, beautification of infrastructure and deregulation efforts.
Further, recent NOFOs reflect EOs released by the Trump administration, including Executive Order 14332 (Improving Oversight of Federal Grantmaking), which directs agencies to further include political appointees in grantmaking processes and award decisions, as well as to prioritize applicants that have not received federal funding before. Further, the EO included a directive for OMB to amend the Uniform Guidance of the Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200), which provides the framework for federal grantmaking, to include language that would make it easier to terminate grant awards. Grant programs have been used to implement many of the Trump administration EOs, including Executive Order 14179 (Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence), the Executive Order 14363 (Launching the Genesis Mission), Executive Order 14154 (Unleashing American Energy), Executive Order 14151 (Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing), Executive Order 14159 (Protecting the American People Against Invasion) and Executive Order 14303 (Restoring Gold Standard Science).
Separately, through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and other avenues, the Trump administration canceled thousands of award agreements, leading to litigation in state and federal court.
In general, the courts have found the termination of entire grant programs to be illegal but grant cancelations on a case-by-case basis is permitted. Adding conditions to grants, such as compliance with federal immigration agents to access funding, has received mixed decisions, with victories for both the government and plaintiffs. Often, judges have stated that the proper forum for litigating grants terminations is the Court of Federal Claims (CFC), the federal court for monetary disputes; however, the CFC has yet to rule on any grant termination cases. The Supreme Court has stepped in multiple times to make emergency rulings, such as in the case over SNAP funding during the October government shutdown, but it has also been hesitant to set large precedent.
Funding left over from canceled awards generally needs to be recompeted, i.e., put back up for competition via a new NOFO. Furthermore, since Congress has passed 11 of 12 appropriation bills for FY26, this funding could be competed alongside FY26 programmatic funding.
Despite a tumultuous 2025, there are still grants released almost daily that present viable avenues to support your goals. Cornerstone is well positioned to help prospective grant applicants successfully navigate the evolving landscape in 2026. Our team provides comprehensive support across all steps in the federal grants process—from proactive opportunity identification and strategic monitoring to project ideation and positioning to drafting and refining narratives that align closely with agency priorities and merit review criteria. We work with clients to help translate policy changes, appropriations trends and programmatic guidance into a bespoke and actionable funding strategy.
Interested in learning more? Connect with our Grants Consulting team here.