Center for Federal Accountability

HHS proposes cutting the Administration for Native Americans' remaining grant rules from five sections to three

A proposed HHS rule would shrink what remains of the Native American Programs Act regulations to three sections, route all ineligibility and funding appeals to the Departmental Appeals Board, and drop the regulatory 20 percent match language as duplicative of the statute. CFA notes that its authority citation does not match the statute the preamble names and that the docket it gives differs from the Federal Register's comment link. Comments close November 13, 2026.

2026-10-15 · Administration for Native Americans, Administration for Children and Families, Health and Human Services Department · Information · Docket ACF-2026-0826

On October 14, 2026, the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), part of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), proposed rewriting the regulations for the Administration for Native Americans (ANA) at 45 CFR part 1336 (91 FR 65154, FR Doc. 2026-21004, RIN 0970-AD50). The proposal gives docket number ACF-2026-0826. Comments are due by November 13, 2026. As of the Federal Register record's regulations.gov check on October 14, no comments had been posted.

## What would change

ANA makes competitive grants under the Native American Programs Act of 1974 to Tribes, Alaska Native villages and regional corporations, and public and nonprofit groups serving Native Hawaiians and other Native communities. In fiscal year 2025 it awarded $50,738,495 in new and continuing grants (91 FR 65155).

This is the second round of cuts this year. ACF says a final rule published in June 2026 (91 FR 36756) repealed all of part 1336 except five sections: Definitions, Notice of ineligibility, Appeal of ineligibility, Financial and administrative requirements, and Appeals. ACF calls what remains "fragmented" and says much of it repeats the statute (91 FR 65155). The new proposal would fold those five sections into three: section 1336.1 (definitions), section 1336.2 (notices of ineligibility and appeals) and section 1336.3 (financial and administrative requirements) (91 FR 65157-65158).

## The details that matter

Ineligibility notices. Today the regulation spells out what ANA's letter to a rejected applicant must contain, including a copy of part 1336 and a template paragraph. ACF would keep only the duty to tell the applicant of the decision and "the legal and factual grounds" for it. It says the template is unnecessary and that the office address in the current text is no longer ANA's (91 FR 65155).

Appeals. The two current appeal sections would be removed. ACF says the ineligibility appeal process in section 1336.35 "conflicts with" the Departmental Appeals Board procedures in 45 CFR part 16, and that the funding appeal process in section 1336.52 duplicates them. Under the new section 1336.2(b), both rejected applicants and grantees whose funding is suspended, terminated or not continued under 2 CFR 200.339-200.343 would appeal to the Board under part 16 (91 FR 65155-65157).

Matching share and waivers. The regulatory statement that grantees must provide a 20 percent non-federal match would be removed as duplicative of 42 U.S.C. 2991b(c). The waiver process would stay. An applicant seeking a waiver must still file a revised SF-424A and a written justification, and must document its inability to pay through "an institutional audit if available, or a full disclosure of applicant's or recipient's total assets and liabilities," along with evidence that it tried and failed to raise third-party contributions (91 FR 65157-65158). ACF would drop two sentences listing examples of acceptable documentation, which it describes as examples rather than requirements (91 FR 65156).

Other changes. The definition of "economic and social self-sufficiency" would be dropped, the definition of ANA would no longer place it in the former Office of Human Development Services, and the list of grant rules that apply to grantees would be removed because those rules apply anyway. ACF says it would provide training and technical assistance so grantees know which rules apply (91 FR 65155-65156).

## CFA's observations

These are CFA's observations from the published text, not findings about ACF's intent.

The authority citation does not match the preamble. Section I says the rule is issued under the Native American Programs Act, 42 U.S.C. 2991 et seq. The amendatory text says the authority citation for part 1336 "continues to read" 42 U.S.C. 618, 9858 et seq. (91 FR 65155, 65157). Those sections of title 42 fall outside the Native American Programs Act's 2991 series. The proposal does not explain the difference.

The docket is listed two ways. The proposal tells commenters to use docket ACF-2026-0826. The Federal Register record lists no docket, and its regulations.gov comment link points to document ACF_FRDOC_0001-0172 in ACF's general "Recently Posted ACF Rules and Notices" docket.

The regulatory text has only one numbered amendatory instruction, the one for the authority citation. In the text CFA read, there is no instruction removing the current sections 1336.10, 1336.34, 1336.35, 1336.50 and 1336.52 or redesignating them, though the preamble describes those steps (91 FR 65155-65157). The preamble also titles the new section 1336.2 "Notices of ineligibility and appeals," while the regulatory text says "Notice of ineligibility and appeals."

The Paperwork Reduction Act section says the proposal "does not contain any information collections requiring OMB approval" (91 FR 65156). The waiver documentation in section 1336.3, including the audit or full asset and liability disclosure, carries over from the current rule, so the statement is consistent with the proposal not adding new requirements. The proposal does not say which OMB-approved collection covers that documentation.

ACF reports that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs found the proposal significant under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 (91 FR 65156). The regulatory impact section gives no cost or savings estimate and does not say how the rule is counted under Executive Order 14192. The proposal does not explain what part of the current ineligibility appeal process conflicts with part 16, or how deadlines or hearing rights for rejected applicants would differ.

## CFA's records on HHS

HHS holds a "Minor" grade on CFA's agency scoreboard, with a composite score of 81.36 based on 4 of the areas CFA scores (period beginning October 1, 2026). The grade does not measure grant administration or tribal programs. CFA's privacy notice and assessment linkage report for the Administration for Children and Families lists 87 Federal Register documents and no crawled privacy impact assessment pages. That count includes this proposal, which is not a system of records notice, so it is not a pure count of privacy notices.

## What to watch

Whether the final rule corrects the authority citation to the Native American Programs Act or explains why 42 U.S.C. 618 and 9858 are cited.

Whether the final rule adds the amendatory instructions that remove and redesignate the current sections.

Whether ACF explains how moving ineligibility appeals to the part 16 process changes deadlines or hearing rights for applicants.

Whether Tribes and grantees raise concerns in this comment period. ACF says commenters at its August 2026 Tribal consultation panel on "Reducing Administrative Burden" expressed "general support for de-regulation" (91 FR 65157).

## How to comment

Comments are due November 13, 2026, and should cite docket ACF-2026-0826 or RIN 0970-AD50. They can be filed through regulations.gov or sent by email to the address given in the proposal, with the docket or RIN in the subject line. Comments and the names of those who submit them are posted publicly. Because the docket number in the proposal and the Federal Register's comment link differ, commenters may want to confirm on regulations.gov that their comment is filed against this proposal.

Authorities