PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 23, 2013
Grant Reform and New Transparency Act of 2013 or the GRANT Act - Establishes new standards for awarding federal grants. Requires executive agencies to use merit-based selection procedures in awarding grants and to conduct an evaluation of the ability of a prospective grantee to successfully carry out a grant before awarding it.
Requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to: (1) upgrade any public website for finding federal grant opportunities so that such website serves as a central point of information for competitive grants, (2) issue and disseminate guidance to aid agencies in establishing merit-based selection procedures for grant programs and in identifying amounts of undisbursed funding remaining in grant accounts, and (3) submit a plan to improve the single audit process for auditing the financial statements and federal awards of a non-federal entity. Sets forth the information required to be included in the public grant website, including grant funds availability and grant award information. Requires agencies to explain to grant applicants the basis for award decisions involving grants exceeding $100,000.
People & committees
Rep. Lankford, James [R-OK-5] · R–OK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 19 - 15.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3316 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3316 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3316 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3316 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.