State Department Reopens Its Global Religious Freedom Grants: $1M to $3M Awards, Up to 50 of Them, Statements of Interest Due December 7, 2026

On October 26, 2026, the State Department's Office of International Religious Freedom (DRL/IRF) posted DFOP0019929, the "FY26 DRL/IRF Global Request for Statements of Interest." It is an open, global competition for programs that "address restrictions on religious freedom" and are "in line with the U.S. Government's foreign policy goals."

The Grants.gov listing sets out these terms:

• Award floor: $1,000,000. Award ceiling: $3,000,000.
• Up to 50 awards listed (no total program funding is published)
• Up to five statements of interest (SOIs) per organization as prime applicant
• Single-country or multi-country projects, anywhere in the world
• No cost share required, and offering one earns no extra points
• Eligible applicants: U.S. and foreign nonprofits/NGOs (with or without 501(c)(3) status), public international organizations, U.S. and foreign colleges and universities, and for-profit firms
• Deadline: December 7, 2026
• Assistance Listing 19.345, International Programs to Support Democracy, Human Rights and Labor
• Contact: IRFGrants@state.gov

The size of this call matters. Fifty awards of $1 million to $3 million each is a large portfolio for an office whose grants were largely frozen and then partly terminated in 2025. Fifty is a maximum, not a promise, but the listing indicates the office has funds to obligate and wants a wide pipeline of ideas to choose from.

Why this call matters now

The International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 created the IRF office, led by an Ambassador at Large, inside the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. In 2019 the office was moved up to report directly to the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights. According to the Congressional Research Service, the 2025 State Department reorganization eliminated that under secretary position and moved the IRF office back under DRL.

The reorganization was the less disruptive change. In early 2025 the foreign assistance review paused almost all U.S. foreign aid, and CRS cites the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom's finding that "a significant portion of programs that utilized funds directed by Congress to promote IRF" were terminated. Implementers lost staff and partners, and in some cases left the country they worked in.

Leadership remains unsettled. Mark Walker's nomination as Ambassador at Large was never confirmed and was returned to the President at the end of the first session of the 119th Congress. He then served as Principal Advisor for Global Religious Freedom until he left in April 2026, and no new nominee has been named. The State Department has not issued a full Country of Particular Concern (CPC) list since December 2023, when it named Burma, China, Cuba, Eritrea, Iran, Nicaragua, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan. Its only new designation since then is Nigeria, announced on October 31, 2025.

Congress, by contrast, has kept funding the issue. The FY2026 National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs appropriations act passed with about $50 billion in discretionary funding. Advocacy groups that tracked it, including the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, say it included strong IRF funding and set-asides for people facing religious persecution. Funds Congress directs to IRF must eventually be obligated, and a global RSOI with up to 50 slots is how an understaffed office does that efficiently.

Applicants should take two things from this. First, the money is real and backed by Congress. Second, policy direction will come from the bureau and from congressional priorities, not from an ambassador at large. Proposals that fit what Congress and the administration currently say about religious persecution, especially of Christians, Yazidis, Uyghurs, Ahmadis, Baha'is, and other minorities in CPC and Special Watch List countries, will look most relevant.

Where to aim: the country map

The RSOI is global, but reviewers score "relevance to IRF's mission" and fit with "U.S. Government's foreign policy goals." The two official lists are the best guide to that.

USCIRF's 2026 recommended CPCs (18): Afghanistan, Burma, China, Cuba, Eritrea, India, Iran, Libya, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Vietnam.

USCIRF's 2026 recommended Special Watch List (11): Algeria, Azerbaijan, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia, Qatar, Turkey, Uzbekistan.

Some practical points about these countries:

• Nigeria is the only new executive-branch designation since 2023, and House appropriators publicly praised it. A project on Nigeria that is well designed and has local partners operating safely in the Middle Belt or the northeast fits current policy closely.
• Closed countries (North Korea, Eritrea, Turkmenistan) usually need remote or diaspora-adjacent designs, such as documentation, digital security, or broadcast. The PSI's requirement for a security plan and independent IT security audits of any web platform is aimed at these projects.
• Burma projects require a one-page Burma Due Diligence Assessment describing how you vet beneficiaries.
• Syria and Iraq are moving targets. Projects on minority protection and religious-property restitution in post-Assad Syria, or on the return of Yazidi and Christian populations in Iraq, are timely but must show their risks are managed.
• India and Vietnam are recommended CPCs that the State Department has not designated, for diplomatic reasons. They are allowed, but a design built on engaging with government will be easier to defend than one built on confrontation.

What the application package requires

The posting attaches only the IRF Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for Applications, updated May 2026. That 39-page document governs full proposals. The RSOI is a statement-of-interest round, so expect the usual DRL two-step process: a short concept first, then a full proposal for those invited. Check MyGrants for the SOI format before drafting. The PSI is still worth reading now, because invited applicants will have little time and it lists everything the office will eventually ask for:

• SF-424, SF-424A, SF-424B (and SF-LLL if you lobby)
• One-page cover page, one-page executive summary, one-page table of contents
• A 10-page proposal narrative
• An Excel budget with request, cost-share, and total columns, plus a budget narrative
• Most recent audit (Single Audit or GAGAS-compliant)
• Logic model
• Monitoring and evaluation narrative (four pages) and, if the NOFO requires it, an M&E plan with baselines and quarterly targets
• Risk analysis, a two-page key personnel section, a one-page timeline
• Security plan, contingency plan, and psychosocial support for staff where the NOFO requires them

The executive summary must state three things outright: the problem statement, research-based evidence for your approach, and measurable outcomes. Put all three in your SOI as well. That sentence structure is what reviewers look for first.

How IRF scores proposals

The PSI lists seven criteria in order of importance and asks applicants not to organize their proposals around them:

1. Quality of Project Idea. The project should be original, specific to the country context, and not duplicate other donors' work. IRF "prefers new approaches." Expanding an existing project is acceptable if you explain how the new work complements it.
2. Project Planning / Ability to Achieve Objectives. Reviewers want a monthly work plan, a logic model consistent with the narrative, named local partners with letters of support, and a risk analysis that addresses real risks.
3. Institution's Record and Capacity. Past federal awards matter. Applicants with no federal award history "may be subject to limited funding on a pilot basis," so a newcomer applying for $3 million may receive a smaller award.
4. Rights-Based Approach. Show how the work improves respect for persecuted communities at the societal or governmental level.
5. Cost Effectiveness. Overhead should be low and justified. Cost share is welcome but earns no points.
6. Multiplier Effect / Sustainability. Use train-the-trainer models, help partners raise funds from other donors, and leave institutions behind when the grant ends.
7. Monitoring and Evaluation. Indicators must match the logic model, with a reference sheet, baselines, and data disaggregated by religion, sex, disability, ethnicity, and age where relevant.

Compliance terms to plan for

• Anti-discrimination certification. If any work takes place in the United States, you must certify that you run no DEI programs that violate federal anti-discrimination law, and that this compliance is material under the False Claims Act. Most IRF projects take place overseas, but U.S.-based training or convenings would trigger the certification.
• Terrorism vetting. Selected applicants submit DS-4184 information on the organization and key personnel. Subrecipients, and sometimes beneficiaries, may be vetted as well.
• Leahy Law. Any participant from a foreign security force must be vetted. Projects that directly benefit militaries or paramilitaries are not eligible.
• Indirect costs. Use your NICRA, or the 15% de minimis rate on modified total direct costs if you have never had a negotiated rate.
• Profit. For-profit firms are eligible but may not earn a profit, and IRF says it prefers nonprofits. A for-profit applicant should explain why it is the best organization for the work.
• Identity protection. The PSI allows a case-by-case SAM.gov exemption when registering would put the organization, its staff, or the people it serves at risk. Request it by email at least two weeks before the deadline.
• Duration. With non-competitive continuations, an award can run up to 54 months.

Strategy: using the five-SOI limit

An organization can submit up to five SOIs, so the main decision is which concepts to send.

• Vary geography and approach. Five concepts for the same country compete with one another. A stronger set might include one Nigeria project, one Central Asia legal-reform project, one closed-country documentation project, and one South or Southeast Asia societal-respect project.
• Match the budget to your track record. If your largest federal award so far was $400,000, a $3 million request invites the "pilot basis" outcome. Asking for $1.2 million with a clear plan to grow is more credible.
• Name your local partner. IRF's eligibility language requires existing or developing partnerships with in-country groups. An SOI that names a specific partner organization, and explains the division of work where safe to do so, scores better than one that refers to "local civil society."
• Address duplication. If USCIRF, other governments, or private foundations already fund similar work in your country, say so and explain how your project differs. Reviewers are directed to check.
• Put evidence in the first paragraph. State the problem, the evidence supporting your approach, and your measurable outcomes.
• Submit early. Grants.gov lists the closing date only as December 7, 2026, without a time. Treat Friday, December 4 as your actual deadline. MyGrants requires an Okta account with smartphone-based multi-factor authentication, which can take time for partners outside the U.S. to set up, and SAM.gov registration can take four to eight weeks. An organization that is not registered today may not be able to complete registration before December 7.

The short version

DFOP0019929 is a global IRF solicitation with awards of $1 million to $3 million, up to 50 awards, and up to five statements of interest per organization, due December 7, 2026. U.S. and foreign nonprofits, universities, international organizations, and for-profit firms can apply, and no cost share is required. Congressional funding drives it more than ambassadorial leadership does, so build concepts around the USCIRF CPC and Special Watch List countries, especially Nigeria. Name your local partners, show evidence for your approach, and plan for security. Start SAM.gov and MyGrants registration this week.

Sources: the Grants.gov listing for DFOP0019929 and its attached IRF Proposal Submission Instructions (May 2026); the Congressional Research Service brief Global Human Rights: International Religious Freedom Policy; and USCIRF's 2026 recommendations. For other recent DRL solicitations, see our analyses of the DRL Global Rapid Response Fund and the DRL transnational repression coalition NOFO.

If you are developing several IRF concepts, Granted can help you test each one against the seven review criteria, draft the logic model, and write the problem, evidence, and outcomes statement reviewers read first.