[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 170 (Monday, November 18, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H6032-H6033]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     GRANT TRANSPARENCY ACT OF 2023

  Mr. FRY. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 5536) to require transparency in notices of funding opportunity, 
and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 5536

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Grant Transparency Act of 
     2023''.

     SEC. 2. NOTICES OF FUNDING OPPORTUNITY TRANSPARENCY.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Agency.--The term ``agency''--
       (A) has the meaning given the term ``Executive agency'' in 
     section 105 of title 5, United States Code; and
       (B) does not include the Government Accountability Office.
       (2) Competitive grant.--The term ``competitive grant'' 
     means a discretionary award (as defined in section 200.1 of 
     title 2, Code of Federal Regulations) awarded by an agency--
       (A) through a grant agreement or cooperative agreement 
     under which the agency makes payment in cash or in kind to a 
     recipient to carry out a public purpose authorized by law; 
     and
       (B) the recipient of which is selected from a pool of 
     applicants through the use of merit-based selection 
     procedures for the purpose of allocating funds authorized 
     under a grant program of the agency.
       (3) Evaluation or selection criteria.--The term 
     ``evaluation or selection criteria'' means standards or 
     principles for judging, evaluating, or selecting an 
     application for a competitive grant.
       (4) Notice of funding opportunity.--The term ``notice of 
     funding opportunity'' has the meaning given the term in 
     section 200.1 of title 2, Code of Federal Regulations.
       (5) Rating system.--The term ``rating system''--
       (A) means a system of evaluation of competitive grant 
     applications to determine how such applications advance 
     through the selection process; and
       (B) includes--
       (i) a merit criteria rating rubric;
       (ii) an evaluation of merit criteria;
       (iii) a methodology to evaluate and rate based on a point 
     scale; and
       (iv) an evaluation to determine whether a competitive grant 
     application meets evaluation or selection criteria.
       (b) Transparency Requirements.--Each notice of funding 
     opportunity issued by an agency for a competitive grant shall 
     include--
       (1) a description of any rating system and evaluation and 
     selection criteria the agency uses to assess applications for 
     the competitive grant;
       (2) a statement of whether the agency uses a weighted 
     scoring method and a description of any weighted scoring 
     method the agency uses for the competitive grant, including 
     the amount by which the agency weights each criterion; and
       (3) any other qualitative or quantitative merit-based 
     approach the agency uses to evaluate an application for the 
     competitive grant.
       (c) Applications; Data Elements.--
       (1) In general.--The Director of the Office of Management 
     and Budget, in coordination with the Executive department 
     designated under section 6402(a)(1) of title 31, United 
     States Code, shall develop data elements relating to grant 
     applications to ensure common reporting by each agency with 
     respect to applications received in response to each notice 
     of funding opportunity of the agency.
       (2) Contents.--The data elements developed under paragraph 
     (1) shall include--
       (A) the number of applications received; and
       (B) the city and State of each organization that submitted 
     an application.
       (d) Rule of Construction.--With respect to a particular 
     competitive grant, nothing in this Act shall be construed to 
     supersede any requirement with respect to a notice of funding 
     opportunity for the competitive grant in a law that 
     authorizes the competitive grant.
       (e) No Additional Funds.--No additional funds are 
     authorized to be appropriated for the purpose of carrying out 
     this Act.
       (f) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--This Act shall take effect on the date 
     that is 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (2) No retroactive effect.--This Act shall not apply to a 
     notice of funding opportunity issued before the date of 
     enactment of this Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Fry) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Porter) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.


                             General Leave

  Mr. FRY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on this measure.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from South Carolina?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. FRY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, before serving in Congress, I served in the South 
Carolina State legislature. Now, here in Washington, I am passionate 
about ensuring that State, local, and Federal Governments all work 
together and work together well.
  During my time in office, I have heard from many of our local 
governments, and particularly in my district in those rural 
communities, that applying for Federal grant money can be a complicated 
and often confusing process.
  In big cities, you often have professional staff that do this. In a 
small town, it is the mayor or his spouse that is doing this.
  After putting time and effort into filling out a competitive grant 
application, applicants are left wondering why

[[Page H6033]]

they were not chosen to be awarded Federal grant money, especially if 
they met all of the criteria listed when applying. This leads to grant 
applicants feeling as though the decisions are made behind closed 
doors. I think we can all agree that navigating the bureaucratic 
labyrinth known as Washington, D.C., can be complicated for local 
governments and for organizations.
  Grant writers and applicant staff may even be unaware of which 
selection criteria are weighted more heavily when filling out 
applications.
  The Grant Transparency Act requires Federal Government agencies to 
shine a light on their decisionmaking process when awarding competitive 
Federal grant money. With this legislation, Federal Government agencies 
would be required to disclose their selection methods when awarding 
competitive grants.
  Specifically, the bill requires that notice of funding opportunities 
for all Federal competitive grants to have: one, a description of any 
rating system, evaluation, and selection criteria the agency uses to 
assess the grant application; two, a statement on whether the agency 
uses a weighted scoring method and a description of that method; and, 
three, any other qualitative or quantitative merit-based approach the 
agency may use to evaluate applications.
  State and local governments across South Carolina's Seventh 
Congressional District and nationwide compete for Federal grant money 
on a continual basis. Federal grant money allows investment to come to 
our communities and improve the daily lives of our constituents, 
ranging from sewer and wastewater systems to airports, fire stations, 
and recreational facilities.
  These are all things that Americans rely on and utilize in their 
daily lives. The Grant Transparency Act would help out our local 
governments and organizations when they fill out applications to 
compete for that funding. They deserve this transparency from their 
Federal Government.
  Today, let's empower grant applicants to put their best foot forward 
and bring those Federal dollars home. I thank my Oversight Committee 
colleague Jasmine Crockett for co-leading on this bill. This simple 
bill has the potential to make a very meaningful impact in countless 
communities and nonprofits nationwide.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this straightforward, 
bipartisan bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise in support of H.R. 5536 and applaud Representatives Russell 
Fry and Jasmine Crockett for their bipartisan leadership on this bill.
  H.R. 5536 aims to increase transparency in the Federal grantmaking 
review and award process. It does so by strengthening agency compliance 
with title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which describes the 
contents that notices of funding opportunities must include.
  It requires that each notice of funding opportunity for a competitive 
Federal grant to include specific information about how applications 
will be assessed, providing all applicants with greater access to the 
information they need to submit competitive applications.
  The Biden-Harris administration has taken important steps to 
strengthen transparency in and improve accessibility to the Federal 
grantmaking process.
  For example, in April 2024, the Office of Management and Budget 
announced significant updates to the Uniform Grants Guidance, which 
governs how agencies make grants and provide other forms of financial 
assistance. The updates focused on reducing compliance costs, removing 
barriers to entry and accessibility, and making Federal funds easier to 
track.
  H.R. 5536 is aligned with these goals, and I urge my colleagues to 
support it today.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FRY. Madam Speaker, I encourage all my colleagues to support this 
commonsense and bipartisan bill to make the application process for 
competitive grants much more transparent on our local governments and 
nonprofits.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PORTER. Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Fry) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5536, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________