CCBHC Grants 2026: PDI vs IA and Medicaid PPS

Full answer: This guide is for behavioral health nonprofits, local government behavioral health authorities, and qualifying tribal or Urban Indian organizations researching CCBHC grants in 2026. Both federal application routes are closed: SAMHSA posted CCBHC-PDI notice SM-26-014 and CCBHC-IA notice SM-26-015 on June 17, 2026, with an August 17, 2026 deadline. Each offered up to $1 million per year for up to four years with no match. PDI was the new-clinic route; IA was the existing-clinic route. Neither grant automatically creates a state Medicaid Prospective Payment System rate.

CCBHC Grants 2026: PDI and IA Routes After the Deadline

Data note: Grantsights checked the two FY2026 SAMHSA notices, the 2023 CCBHC criteria, SAMHSA's pathway guidance, and current Medicaid demonstration and PPS pages on September 10, 2026. Dollar figures below are notice ceilings, not a promise of funding or clinic revenue. State certification and payment rules vary.

The useful question now isn't "Which FY2026 application can we submit?" Both rounds have passed. The useful question is "Which CCBHC route fits our current status, and what evidence should we build before another route opens?" That distinction protects a clinic from spending months on an ineligible track or treating a temporary federal grant as proof of long-term Medicaid payment.

This guide separates four things that are often blended together: a CCBHC-PDI grant, a CCBHC-IA grant, state certification, and Medicaid CCBHC payment. It also turns the official criteria into a readiness file a clinic can build without guessing the next application date.

Last updated: October 9, 2026.

2026 CCBHC Grant Status at a Glance

SAMHSA split its FY2026 expansion funding into two notices. The agency's CCBHC-IA notice says that IA supports existing CCBHCs. The CCBHC-PDI notice says that PDI supports the development and establishment of new CCBHCs. A third FY2026 notice, SM-26-016 (CCBHC Planning Grants, an estimated $12,000,000 with the same June 17 to August 17, 2026 window), went to states planning for the Medicaid demonstration rather than to clinics, according to its Grants.gov listing.

According to SAMHSA, the IA notice anticipated $117,160,647 across 117 awards. According to the PDI notice, that track anticipated $94 million across 94 awards. Those figures imply an anticipated $1 million average only because both programs used a $1 million annual ceiling and expected award counts matching the total millions. They don't prove every selected applicant will receive the ceiling in every project year. Continuation funding also depends on available funds, progress, reporting, award terms, and current federal priorities.

Don't use the closed notices as a calendar prediction. They establish what SAMHSA required in this round, not when or whether a later round will appear. Monitor the SAMHSA grants dashboard and Grants.gov for a new notice. A forecast, archive, prior award, or old application package isn't an open application route.

Choose PDI or IA Before You Design the Project

The first route decision is organizational status, not which list of activities sounds more attractive.

Choose the PDI evidence lane if the organization is building a new CCBHC and can document a credible path to the criteria. Choose the IA evidence lane if the organization already operates as a CCBHC and can show how the proposed work will sustain or improve that model. If the status is unclear, ask SAMHSA the eligibility question before drafting a narrative. The FY2026 IA page lists ccbhcnofo@samhsa.hhs.gov for program and eligibility questions.

An eligible applicant in both FY2026 notices had to fall within the statutory categories stated by SAMHSA: a community-based behavioral health nonprofit, part of a local government behavioral health authority, an organization operated under Indian Health Service, tribal, or tribal-organization authority, or a qualifying Urban Indian Organization. A generic nonprofit label isn't enough if the organization doesn't meet the behavioral health and organizational limits in the controlling notice.

For wider SAMHSA opportunity research, compare the SAMHSA grant programs guide, the SAMHSA mental health grants guide, and Grantsights' behavioral health grant database. Those pages help locate adjacent routes, but the exact new notice remains the authority for an application.

What SAMHSA Doesn't Tell You: A Grant Is Not a PPS Rate

The most expensive misunderstanding is treating "CCBHC funding" as one program. It isn't.

SAMHSA expansion grants are competitive, time-limited awards to providers. The Section 223 demonstration is a Medicaid program implemented through participating states. SAMHSA's CCBHC criteria FAQs say a clinic must be a demonstration CCBHC certified by a demonstration state to receive the demonstration PPS. The Medicaid CCBHC demonstration page identifies participating states and current federal guidance.

That means an expansion award does not, by itself:

• place a state in the Medicaid demonstration;
• certify a clinic for a state demonstration;
• establish the clinic's PPS methodology or rate;
• guarantee a state plan payment route; or
• prove that grant-funded positions are sustainable after the award.

According to Medicaid.gov, the current PPS and quality bonus guidance describes four demonstration methods: PPS-1 and PPS-3 pay on a daily basis, while PPS-2 and PPS-4 pay on a monthly basis. The page says participating states select the method and develop clinic-specific rates intended to pay expected CCBHC service costs. It doesn't publish one national visit rate, one monthly rate, or one revenue outcome that every clinic can use.

So don't place a generic $250 per visit, $1,200 per member, or $30 million annual revenue figure into a board model. Build the model from the applicable state's written route, clinic cost report, Medicaid population assumptions, service volume, quality requirements, and timing. Until the state confirms those elements, label Medicaid payment as an unresolved dependency.

Based on our analysis, the best early finance question is: "Which named state authority could pay this clinic for CCBHC services after the federal award, and what written source supports that answer?" If the team can't answer it, the proposal may still be eligible, but its sustainability case isn't finished.

The Six Criteria Areas and Nine Service Categories

According to SAMHSA, the 2023 CCBHC Certification Criteria organize the model into six program areas: staffing; availability and accessibility; care coordination; scope of services; quality and other reporting; and organizational authority and governance. The criteria overview also provides a compliance checklist.

Within the scope-of-services area, a CCBHC is responsible for nine categories:

1. Crisis services.
2. Screening, assessment, and diagnosis, including risk assessment.
3. Person-centered and family-centered treatment planning.
4. Outpatient mental health and substance use services.
5. Outpatient clinic primary care screening and monitoring.
6. Targeted case management.
7. Psychiatric rehabilitation services.
8. Peer support, counselor services, and family support services.
9. Intensive community-based mental health care for members of the armed forces and veterans.

Some services may involve a Designated Collaborating Organization. That doesn't transfer the CCBHC's responsibility for ensuring access to all nine categories. SAMHSA's FAQs say a formal signed agreement is required for a DCO relationship, and the CCBHC remains responsible for ensuring people receive the required services.

A service inventory should therefore do more than mark "yes" or "no." For each category, record the direct provider or DCO, hours, geographic access, responsible leader, workforce capacity, written policy, data field, current baseline, and unresolved gap. Link each conclusion to the exact criteria section. That file becomes useful across grant drafting, state review, budgeting, contracting, and implementation.

Build a CCBHC Readiness File Before the Next Notice

A clinic doesn't need to invent a future deadline to make progress. It can assemble six source-linked files now.

1. Route and authority memo

Name the intended federal grant lane, current clinic status, state certification authority, state Medicaid authority, and possible payment path. Include the URLs, dates checked, contacts, and any unanswered question. Separate confirmed facts from assumptions.

2. Criteria crosswalk

Map every requirement in the current criteria to a policy, workflow, staff owner, contract, report, or gap. Avoid a self-score with no evidence. A useful row identifies the source requirement, current proof, missing proof, correction owner, target date, and cost.

3. Community needs file

Keep the service area, population, access barriers, demand measures, disparities, crisis patterns, and current capacity in one documented set. Each statistic should have a source, geography, period, numerator, denominator, and retrieval date. A county figure shouldn't silently stand in for a multi-county service area.

4. Partner and DCO file

List the entities needed for care coordination or service delivery, the required relationship, current agreement status, referral workflow, information-sharing limit, and accountable owner. A friendly support letter isn't the same as an executable DCO agreement.

5. Workforce and access file

Connect the needs assessment to staffing roles, coverage, supervision, licensing, training, recruitment risk, and access measures. Include 24/7 crisis access and timely service requirements from the current criteria. Don't promise a staffing model before checking state scope-of-practice rules and the labor market.

6. Finance and continuation file

Build year-by-year grant costs, other confirmed funding, unconfirmed funding assumptions, state payment dependencies, and a post-award scenario. Mark each position or contract as start-up, grant-period, or recurring. If the plan depends on a Medicaid route, cite the state source and show the sensitivity to enrollment, volume, timing, and cost.

For related proposal design, use the community mental health grants guide and behavioral health workforce grants guide. Clinics building crisis capacity should also compare the crisis intervention grants guide. These are adjacent funding lanes, not substitutes for CCBHC eligibility.

A Four-Gate Apply-or-Wait Decision

Use four gates before assigning a full application team.

Gate 1: Route. Is there an open notice, and does the organization's documented status match PDI or IA? If no notice is open, prepare evidence and alerts rather than an application.

Gate 2: Criteria. Can the organization show a source-linked plan for all six areas and nine service categories? If major gaps lack owners, dates, partners, or costs, keep working.

Gate 3: State path. Has the team identified the applicable certification and payment authority? If not, the grant budget may be sound while the continuation model remains speculative.

Gate 4: Measurement. Can the clinic produce the required baseline, performance, and quality data from accountable systems? If data ownership or definitions are unresolved, fix those dependencies before promising outcomes.

The honest friction is that a strong behavioral health provider can still be a weak CCBHC applicant. The model adds access, coordination, quality, governance, and reporting duties that go beyond a good outpatient program. A clinic shouldn't pursue the label solely because the grant ceiling is attractive.

Two Planning Examples

These are planning examples, not accounts of real applicants or awards.

Example A: a nonprofit developing a new clinic. For example, one clinic in California could confirm that its community behavioral health nonprofit meets the applicant category and does not yet operate the proposed site as a CCBHC. Its crosswalk might show outpatient and peer services are in place, but crisis coverage, veteran screening, and primary care monitoring need defined workflows. The team would use the PDI lane, price each gap, secure partner commitments, and ask the state about certification and payment. It would not claim future PPS revenue in the base budget until the state route is documented.

Example B: an existing CCBHC improving access. A local government behavioral health authority documents its existing CCBHC status, current wait-time baseline, referral loss points, and quality-reporting process. It uses the IA lane to connect a defined access problem to staffing, workflow, technology, and measured outcomes. Its proposal does not spend pages re-proving why a new clinic should exist; it shows the existing model, specific gap, planned change, and continuation owner.

The examples have the same lesson: choose the route from verified status, then design the work. Reversing that order creates avoidable eligibility and sustainability errors.

Common CCBHC Grant Mistakes

Calling a closed notice open. The FY2026 deadline was August 17, 2026. An archived package can help preparation, but it can't accept a timely new application.

Using PDI and IA interchangeably. PDI establishes new CCBHCs; IA sustains and improves existing ones. The chosen route needs status evidence.

Treating a grant as state certification. The exact certification result depends on the applicable pathway. Use SAMHSA's CCBHC pathways fact sheet to identify the federal and state distinctions, then confirm the current state rule.

Publishing a universal PPS rate. CMS describes multiple state-selected methods and clinic-specific rates. A national rate range without a defined source unit can mislead a budget decision.

Counting partners without agreements. A referral list doesn't prove the relationship needed for care coordination or DCO delivery.

Budgeting only the grant period. A four-year federal request still needs a defensible continuation analysis. Separate confirmed revenue from a hoped-for state payment change.

Assuming a prior cadence. A past annual release doesn't guarantee the next notice date. Let a new agency notice supply the schedule.

Sources

Source review by Grantsights

We reviewed the sources below on September 10, 2026. The primary source unit for deadline, ceiling, duration, eligibility, and match is each FY2026 notice. The criteria source owns service and operating requirements. Medicaid.gov owns demonstration payment guidance. No single source proves an individual clinic's state certification, PPS rate, or future revenue.

What Grantsights adds is the route-and-authority memo, six-file readiness package, and four-gate decision. Official pages describe their respective programs. A clinic still needs one record that identifies which authority controls each decision and which claims remain unverified.

The maintenance rule is to recheck both notice URLs, the SAMHSA criteria page, and the applicable state Medicaid route whenever SAMHSA posts a new notice or the state changes certification or payment guidance. A new notice replaces the closed-round status and application rules; it does not erase the dated FY2026 history.

What to Do Next

If you're considering a future PDI or IA application, start with the route memo and criteria crosswalk. Subscribe to the official SAMHSA and Grants.gov notices, but don't let alert setup replace readiness work. Review the current criteria, contact the state Medicaid and behavioral health agencies, and price the unresolved service and data gaps.

Then use Grantsights to monitor related behavioral health opportunities. Compare the substance abuse treatment grants guide, youth mental health grants guide, and suicide prevention grants guide when a narrower project could proceed without waiting for a CCBHC round.

The best next action isn't to recycle the FY2026 application. It is to leave the organization with a documented route, an evidence-backed criteria gap list, and a finance model that still works when unsupported payment assumptions are removed.