BJA Rebranded Justice Reinvestment as a War on Wasteful Spending. The $12.67M, 3-6 Award Competition Now Runs Through a 1373 Certification

On October 7, 2026, the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) released the FY 2026 Justice Reinvestment Initiative: Strengthening State and Local Operations to Reduce Crime and Recidivism notice of funding opportunity, O-BJA-2026-172770.

The basic terms:

The money is real and the competition is small. With 3 to 6 awards and a $4 million ceiling, a few full-ceiling grants would use up most of the pool. The NOFO's framing, however, would be hard to recognize for anyone who knew this program five years ago.

What justice reinvestment used to mean

The Justice Reinvestment Initiative started in 2010 as a public-private partnership between BJA and The Pew Charitable Trusts. The model was the same everywhere. A state formed a bipartisan working group. Technical assistance providers, most often the Council of State Governments Justice Center and the Crime and Justice Institute, analyzed the state's prison population drivers. The working group then passed legislation to reduce prison growth, mostly through sentencing changes for lower-level offenses and stronger community supervision, and "reinvested" the averted prison costs in treatment, supervision and victim services. More than 30 states went through some version of this process.

The FY 2026 NOFO keeps the mechanics: use data to find inefficiency, then redirect resources. It changes what counts as inefficiency and where the money should go.

The 2026 version: cut waste, redirect funds toward crime reduction

BJA now describes the program as supporting efforts "to reduce wasteful spending and inefficient uses of funds across justice system operations and redirect that funding to target crime and other public safety and/or justice system challenges." Applicants should refocus resources "on the strategies and populations most likely to reduce crime."

The NOFO's list of example projects shows the new emphasis:

• Correctional officer shortages.
• Fortifying correctional environments against contraband such as drugs, weapons and other prohibited items.
• Advanced technology to increase efficiency, with "artificial intelligence, facial recognition, scanners, counter-drone" named specifically.
• Court processing and docket management.
• Pretrial systems.
• High system utilization by people with mental health or substance use issues.
• Information sharing, including "a unique, universal, statewide identification number" to improve crime and recidivism data.
• Prosecutor data tracking to "understand relationships between violent crime and charging and adjudication decisions."
• Alternative responses to mental health crises and forensic evidence backlogs.
• "Prioritizing confinement resources and bed space to incarcerate serious, chronic, or violent offenders."

The last example shows the shift most clearly. Early JRI projects tried to reduce the number of people in prison. The 2026 version asks jurisdictions to decide who should occupy prison beds, with violent and chronic offenders first. Several items fit either version, including pretrial reform, high utilizers, information sharing and court efficiency, and those are where reform-minded jurisdictions and enforcement-minded jurisdictions can both write competitive applications.

The certification: required, signed under penalty of perjury

This is the most consequential change, and it is an eligibility gate, not a scoring factor.

State and local government applicants must submit the "Certification by the Chief Executive Officer (or senior official) of the Applicant Government" using only the template in Appendix 1. In it, the governor, mayor, county executive or a senior official with authority to bind the jurisdiction certifies "under penalty of perjury" that the applicant and every subrecipient at any tier will comply with 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644. Those provisions bar state and local governments from restricting the sharing of citizenship and immigration status information with DHS.

The NOFO states that this is a basic minimum requirement: "applications from applicants that are required to submit it and fail to do so, will be denied." The template cites potential criminal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 and 1621 and civil liability under the False Claims Act for false statements.

Tribal governments are exempt from the certification, and so are educational organizations. For a tribal justice system interested in this program, that removes the biggest administrative obstacle.

For cities and counties with sanctuary or "welcoming" policies, the decision has nothing to do with grant writing. Their counsel has to decide whether local policy permits a truthful certification. That decision will take longer than drafting the 10-page narrative, so begin it this week. The same certification appears in other FY 2026 OJP solicitations, including the Integrity in American Elections program and the ANGEL grant. Jurisdictions that already signed one for another FY 2026 OJP application have most of the legal analysis finished.

Three layers of priority consideration

The NOFO describes priority consideration in three layers:

1. Standard OJP priorities. Directly supporting law enforcement operations (including immigration enforcement), combating violent crime, supporting services to American citizens, protecting American children, supporting American victims of trafficking and sexual assault, and (f) state and local enforcement coordinated with federal enforcement. Item (f) is shown at minimum by § 1373 compliance plus policies that give federal agents access to correctional facilities and that honor DHS detainer notification requests.

2. The "Ending Crime and Disorder" inventory. Priority for jurisdictions that actively:

• enforce prohibitions on open illicit drug use;
• enforce prohibitions on urban camping and loitering;
• enforce prohibitions on urban squatting;
• enforce or adopt standards for civil commitment or assisted outpatient treatment for people with serious mental illness or substance use disorder who cannot care for themselves; or
• for states, comply with Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act obligations, especially for registrants without a fixed address.

Applicants claim these by completing the "Agency Funding Priorities Inventory – Ending Crime and Disorder" in JustGrants. Meeting one criterion appears to be enough to claim the priority.

3. 287(g) and Homeland Security Task Force participation. Priority for jurisdictions that participate, or commit to participate, in a 287(g) partnership or a Homeland Security Task Force. HSTFs are the joint federal-state-local task forces created by executive order in January 2025. This layer has documentation requirements: a letter of support from the U.S. Attorney's Office's Lead HSTF Attorney, or documentary evidence of an existing 287(g) agreement or a "bona fide commitment" to enter one.

The NOFO repeats that priority "does not guarantee funding." With only 3 to 6 awards available, though, a priority can easily decide the outcome between two technically similar applications.

Scoring: capacity is weighted almost as heavily as design

The narrative is limited to 10 pages, compared with 30 for most NIJ research solicitations. The weights:

Capabilities and Competencies at 30% is unusually high. The NOFO asks applicants to "provide examples of intergovernmental collaboration using data for the named partners or, demonstrate commitment from all relevant parties to initiate collaboration." Reviewers want evidence that the agencies involved (corrections, probation, courts, the sheriff, the prosecutor and the state data agency) already share data, or have signed commitments to start. The required MOUs with each project partner support this criterion. Unsigned drafts are acceptable if a cover page explains why they are unsigned.

The Design and Implementation section must follow the JRI sequence: engage stakeholders, analyze data to find "the cause, scope, and impediments," develop strategies, implement and adjust, and measure outcomes. A good application uses that sequence as its outline.

Two other requirements: a Timeline with milestones by month is required, and E.O. 12372 intergovernmental review applies. Check whether your state has a single point of contact that needs to see the application.

Building a competitive $4M application in ten pages

Lead with a dollar figure. The program is now framed around waste, so quantify it. Examples: "Our jail spends $X annually on overtime because of a 22% officer vacancy rate." "Median time from arrest to disposition for violent felonies is 14 months, and 31% of jail bed-days are pretrial detainees charged with misdemeanors." Then show where the recovered money would go.

Choose challenges that serve both goals. Information sharing, pretrial efficiency, high utilizers and forensic backlogs reduce cost and also target violent crime. These projects are the easiest to defend in review and the easiest to sustain if political priorities change during the 36-month award.

Budget a data function. BJA expects ongoing measurement. A data analyst, a data integration contractor or a research partner (counted as a subrecipient and named in the Appendix 2 disclosure) should be a substantial budget line. A $3-4 million request with no data capacity will not match the Capabilities criterion.

Use technology carefully. AI, facial recognition and counter-drone systems are named in the NOFO, so they are in scope. A budget that spends most of the award on equipment with little analysis behind it is a weaker JRI proposal, though. Present technology as part of a measured efficiency strategy, not as the strategy itself.

Tribal governments have an advantage. Tribes are exempt from the certification and are eligible to apply. A tribal court and corrections system with a documented case-processing backlog and a partnership with the state or county could compete well.

Calendar

• Now to October 31: Counsel decides whether the chief executive can sign the Appendix 1 certification. If the answer is no, stop and move resources to other programs.
• By November 5: Complete SAM.gov renewal.
• Week of November 9: Complete data analysis showing need and cost. Circulate draft MOUs to partner agencies. If you are claiming the HSTF priority, request the letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office now, since that office has its own approval process.
• By November 18: Submit the SF-424 in Grants.gov, two days before the November 20 deadline.
• By November 25: Have the narrative, budget, timeline, MOUs, certification and subrecipient disclosure complete.
• December 1, 8:59 p.m. ET: JustGrants deadline. Submit at least a day earlier.

Bottom line

This is a small competition for large awards, open only to governments, that has abandoned the original JRI focus on reducing prison populations in favor of efficiency and crime reduction. Jurisdictions that can sign the § 1373 certification, show existing cross-agency data sharing and attach a dollar figure to an operational inefficiency have a realistic chance at a $4 million, three-year grant with no match. Jurisdictions that cannot sign the certification are not eligible, however good their application.

To find other state and local criminal justice funding open this fall, search current BJA and OJP opportunities on Granted. For the related reentry and behavioral health programs from earlier this cycle, see our analysis of BJA's five reentry and behavioral health solicitations.