PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 21, 2016
Global Development Lab Act of 2016
(Sec. 3) This bill establishes in the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) the United States Global Development Lab, the duties of which shall include:
increasing the application of science, technology, innovation, and partnerships to develop new solutions to end extreme poverty;
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
discovering and testing innovations to increase cost effectiveness and support U.S. foreign policy and development goals;
leveraging the expertise and resources of businesses, nongovernmental organizations, science and research organizations, and universities to increase program impact; and
supporting USAID missions and bureaus in applying science, technology, innovation, and partnership approaches to decision making, procurement, and program design.
USAID may (1) provide innovation incentive awards; and (2) use certain funds for each of FY2017-FY2021 to employ up to 30 individuals on a limited term basis.
(Sec. 4) "Innovation incentive award" means the provision of funding on a competitive basis that: (1) encourages the development of solutions for a particular, well-defined problem relating to the alleviation of poverty; or (2) helps identify and promote a broad range of ideas and practices facilitating third party development of an idea or practice.
People & committees
Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5787-5788)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5787-5788)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3924.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5787-5789)
Mr. Royce moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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: Apr 7, 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.3924 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.3924 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.3924 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.3924 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.