Resources
FFUNDORA INSTITUTE™Advancing the science of funding All insights
Regulatory analysis

OMB has proposed the biggest Uniform Guidance overhaul yet. Here is what to do before October.

OMB published a proposed rule on 29 May 2026 that would substantially revise 2 CFR Part 200. Nothing is final. Here is what is actually on the table, and the four things a grant-funded organization should do now.

August 15, 20268 min readMarcelo FernandezInsights

If you manage federal awards, the rulebook underneath your compliance program may be about to change — and the timing is tight enough that waiting for certainty is itself a decision.

On 29 May 2026, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget published a proposed rule in the Federal Register that would substantially revise the government-wide regulations for federal financial assistance, including the Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR Part 200. The comment period ran 45 days, closing 13 July 2026. OMB has signalled a proposed effective date of 1 October 2026, aligned with the start of federal fiscal year 2027, and has said it intends to issue a final rule by that date.

First, the part everyone gets wrong

Nothing has changed yet. As of today there is no final rule. The 2024 revision of the Uniform Guidance, effective 1 October 2024, remains the regulation in force. Every threshold your organization operates under today still applies.

We are stating that plainly because the opposite error is already circulating. In the weeks after a proposed rule appears, it is common to see summaries describing proposed changes in the present tense, as though they were live requirements. Acting on a proposal that has not been finalized — or worse, telling an auditor you did — creates the exact compliance exposure you were trying to avoid.

So the correct posture is neither “ignore it until October” nor “implement it now.” It is prepare to move quickly, on the assumption that something ships.

What is actually on the table

OMB organized the proposed revisions around three stated objectives: improving transparency, accountability, and oversight; clarifying the regulatory status of the 2 CFR text; and reducing the burden carried by award recipients.

That third objective deserves a note of caution. “Reducing burden” is the stated intent of nearly every regulatory revision, and it rarely means less work in year one. A rule that simplifies a requirement still forces every recipient to re-read its policies, retrain its staff, and re-document its procedures against the new text. Simplification has a transition cost, and the transition cost lands on you.

This proposal is more ambitious in scope than the 2024 revision, which itself was the most significant rewrite since the Uniform Guidance was consolidated. Two consecutive overhauls inside three years is unusual, and it tells you something structural: the compliance baseline for federal funding is no longer a stable thing you learn once.

The four things worth doing now

None of these require knowing the final text. All of them pay off whether the rule ships in October, slips, or changes materially in response to comments.

1. Know which thresholds you are actually sitting near. The revisions of recent years have moved specific numbers — the equipment capitalization threshold, the de minimis indirect cost rate, the subaward exclusion in the modified total direct cost base, the Single Audit trigger. If your organization sits comfortably inside a threshold, a change is administrative. If you sit within ten percent of one, a change is a project. Find out which category you are in before you are told.

2. Locate every place your policies quote the regulation verbatim. This is the hidden cost of a rewrite. Organizations that paraphrase the Uniform Guidance in their procurement, travel, and cost-allowability policies can absorb a revision with a light edit. Organizations that quote section numbers and dollar figures directly have to hunt through every document. Run that inventory now, while it is a calm afternoon’s work rather than a deadline.

3. Decide who owns the change. Most compliance failures after a regulatory update are not failures of knowledge — they are failures of ownership. Somebody read the update; nobody was accountable for translating it into revised policies, retrained staff, and updated templates. Name that person before October.

4. Ask your auditor what they expect. Your Single Audit firm is already tracking this, and their read on transition treatment for awards that straddle the effective date is worth more than any published summary — including this one.

What we will do

We will publish an analysis of the final rule when it is issued, mapping what changed against the specific control points our readers use. If the rule lands as proposed, the compliance chapters of The Grant Playbook™ will be revised and the update will be made available to readers.

Until then, the honest answer is the boring one: the 2024 revision governs, the proposal is a proposal, and the organizations that come through a regulatory change well are the ones that were organized before it arrived — not the ones that read the fastest afterward.

That is not a compliance insight. It is the whole argument of the book.

Sources

The full body of knowledge

Every article here draws on the same system set out in The Grant Playbook™ — 26 chapters, 583 pages, the complete encyclopedia of grant funding.

See the book

Free tools

The Grant Readiness Audit™ Master Checklist: 204 control points across twelve pillars.

Free tools