CDC National Partners Cooperative Agreement Guide

CDC-RFA-PW-24-0080 is the source record for the National Partners Cooperative Agreement, formally called Strengthening Public Health Systems and Services through National Partnerships to Improve and Protect the Nation's Health. The deadline was April 1, 2024. That means the useful decision is not "can I apply today?" The useful decision is "do I look like a future national partner, or should I pursue a subaward, state route, or adjacent CDC program?"

According to CDC, the National Partners mechanism has been used for 16 years. According to Grants.gov (opens in a new tab), CDC-RFA-PW-24-0080 closed on April 1, 2024. According to the Centers for Disease Control, the current award list includes 48 recipients. According to CDC, the current period runs from 2024 through 2029.

According to CDC's National Partners fact sheet, the mechanism awards funding to organizations that support capacity, data sharing, field services coordination, and evidence-based practice across public health systems. CDC's later fact sheet lists more than $182 million awarded to 48 organizations as of September 2024, while the September 2024 CDC release described more than $176 million in first-year awards. Grantsights treats that difference as a source freshness signal, not a reason to change the applicant decision: this remains a funded national-partner network, not an open local service grant.

Where official sources stop: CDC lists the current recipients and funding period, but it does not translate that list into a future applicant screen. Our read is that this mechanism rewards existing national reach, field support capacity, and the ability to train or advise other public health entities. A local direct-service organization should use this page to find partner or subaward paths unless it can prove it already operates at national-partner scale.

October 2026 Source Check: CDC National Partners

The October 10 source check confirms that the 2026 user task is partner mapping and future-cycle readiness, not a live application. CDC's current page lists 48 funded recipients, a 5-year period from August 1, 2024 to July 31, 2029, and capacity-building assistance through training, technical assistance, information sharing, technology transfer, or materials development. CDC's September 2024 release announced more than $176 million in first-year funding; the later fact sheet lists more than $182 million awarded to 48 organizations as of September 2024. One caution: USAspending.gov (opens in a new tab) showed no FY2026 continuation obligations to the 48 national partners under listing 93.421 as of October 2026. That may be reporting lag, so confirm the current budget period with the recipient before planning around it.

October 2026 source update: CDC tells users who won, but not which local applicants should spend staff time. Grantsights adds the decision layer: national associations, universities, public health institutes, and field networks can build future-cycle evidence; local clinics and coalitions should map funded recipients first.

Key Facts

6 facts frame the 2026 decision. According to CDC, the current period of performance runs from August 1, 2024 to July 31, 2029.

What CDC Doesn't Tell You

3 gaps matter more than the summary paragraph. The official CDC page tells you who won and what the program funds. It does not score your odds.

Grantsights analysis of the 48 recipients on CDC's National Partners page (opens in a new tab) shows a clear pattern: CDC funded organizations that already had field reach. Examples include national medical associations, public health membership groups, universities, policy centers, workforce groups, and state or local public health networks. That is different from a local organization with a good program idea.

The practical gap is simple: "public health systems" sounds broad, but the direct applicant profile is narrow. You need proof that you can train, advise, convene, or support other organizations at scale.

Federal registration and Grants.gov setup are where many organizations lose time. They read a broad program title, start gathering attachments, and only later notice that the funded work is not local service delivery. The hard truth: if the national network does not already exist, the application is usually behind before writing starts.

5-Point Fit Checklist

5 checks separate a future national partner from a local partner candidate.

If you miss two or more checks, do not build a direct CDC National Partners application plan. Look for partner roles instead.

What The 48 Recipients Suggest

48 recipients give a better search answer than eligibility text alone. According to CDC's September 25, 2024 release, CDC awarded more than $176 million in first-year funding to strengthen public health infrastructure and workforce.

CDC's current list includes organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Heart Association, American Medical Association, American Public Health Association, ASTHO, NACCHO, National Indian Health Board, Public Health Institute, University of Minnesota, Temple University, and others.

For example, one university center can show faculty depth, evaluation systems, and existing training platforms. One national membership association can show chapters, member reach, field calls, and training records. A local nonprofit may have strong community trust, but that does not by itself prove national capacity-building reach.

Our analysis found 4 applicant patterns that explain the current list:

If your organization does not fit one of those 4 patterns, the better move is usually partnership, not a direct CDC application.

Better Routes For Local Applicants

6 alternate routes keep local teams from wasting a cycle on a wrong-layer grant.

If you are building a broader federal funding search, use the healthcare grants guide and the state grants for nonprofits guide before assuming CDC National Partners is the best fit.

3-Step Partner Playbook

3 moves are more useful than waiting for a closed NOFO to reopen.

1. Build a spreadsheet of the 48 recipients and group them by audience: health departments, workforce, clinicians, universities, community systems, or disease area.
2. Pick 5 recipients whose funded work overlaps with your field and collect evidence that your site can help them deliver.
3. Send a short partner note with one local data point, one implementation offer, and one question about upcoming field opportunities.

Grantsights recommends writing this as business development, not as grant seeking. A funded national partner does not need a generic letter asking for money. It needs field evidence, pilot sites, training participants, feedback, local examples, or implementation partners.

4 Red Flags Before You Spend Staff Time

4 warning signs should stop the direct-application plan.

What most applicants don't get right is the distinction between local credibility and national capacity. Both can be valuable. Only one makes you a strong direct CDC National Partners applicant.

2 Applicant Scenarios To Use As A Sanity Check

Scenario 1 is a national professional association with members in 42 states, a training platform, prior CDC or state health department work, and a published set of tools used by local health departments. That organization can name its population of focus, prove reach, and explain how its assistance changes field practice. That is the type of applicant that deserves a direct National Partners planning file.

Scenario 2 is a strong county-based nonprofit that runs community health worker outreach, vaccine clinics, and health education. The work may be valuable, but it is still local direct service. The common mistake is assuming that strong local trust equals national partner fit. It does not. That organization should map funded recipients, look for pilot-site roles, and compare CDC routes with the healthcare grants guide.

The better question is not "are we doing public health work?" It is "can we help a defined public health system or workforce perform better across many places?" That is not pessimism. It is staff-time protection.

One clinic in rural Georgia with strong vaccine-outreach results could still be a weak direct applicant, because it doesn't prove field-wide technical assistance. That same clinic isn't useless to the opportunity, though. It's a better partner if it can offer local implementation data, training participants, and a feedback loop to one funded national association.

6 Evidence Items To Save For A Future Cycle

6 evidence items make a future CDC National Partners file more credible.

Grantsights recommends saving this proof even if the current NOFO is closed. When CDC posts a new route, the teams with dated evidence will move faster than teams starting from a blank folder.

5 Source Checks to Run Before Outreach

5 source checks should happen before a local organization contacts a funded recipient. First, verify the recipient is on CDC's current award list, not an older National Partners cycle. Second, compare the recipient's field focus with your own audience. Third, check whether the recipient has a training, technical assistance, pilot, or advisory channel that matches your offer. Fourth, look for HHS TAGGS records to understand the assistance-listing family and award office. Fifth, read the CDC fact sheet and the September 2024 release together, because the award total changed from the initial release to the later public fact sheet.

That source check adds context the official pages do not provide. CDC can tell you who was funded. It does not tell a county coalition which recipient is most likely to need local field evidence. The outreach note should name one recipient, one public health system problem, one proof point from your local work, and one concrete partner role. If the note cannot do that in 150 words, the team probably has more research to do before asking for a meeting.

FAQ

Is CDC National Partners open in 2026?

No. According to Grants.gov opportunity 351314, the application deadline was April 1, 2024. CDC's current page lists a 5-year project period from August 1, 2024 to July 31, 2029.

What did CDC fund in the current cycle?

According to CDC, the current awards support national partners that strengthen public health systems, workforce capacity, data, partnerships, and related infrastructure.

Should a local clinic apply directly?

Usually no. A local clinic should not apply directly unless it can prove national or multi-jurisdiction capacity-building reach. The better route is often a partner role with a funded national recipient.

What is the best evidence for a future application?

The strongest evidence is already-delivered capacity-building assistance: trainings, tools, technical assistance, field feedback, partner use, and measurable system improvements.

How should I use this page?

Use it as a 10-minute decision filter. If the fit checklist is weak, move to partner mapping or a more direct public health funding path.

Sources

• CDC National Partners Cooperative Agreement Funding (opens in a new tab)
• CDC award announcement, September 25, 2024 (opens in a new tab)
• CDC National Partners fact sheet (opens in a new tab)
• Grants.gov opportunity 351314 (opens in a new tab)
• HHS TAGGS, Assistance Listing 93.421 (opens in a new tab)
• Grantsights grant search