The Federal Grant And Cooperative Agreement Act Of 1977 Defines A Grant As

Are the websites funded in whole or in part by grants/cooperation agreements subject to the requirements of FISMA, Section 508, Privacy Act and the associated OMB Memorandum such as OMB Memo M-17-06? In third-party situations, the question arises as to whether it is possible to provide a grant to an organization that, although not a member of the class, is entitled to direct government assistance, but performs a function that contributes to providing federal assistance to a legitimate recipient. The argument that agencies can use grants in third-party situations depends on the view that these agreements are not “directly useful or useful to the federal government,” given that third parties are used by agencies to pass on benefits to recipients. This view is supported by the following excerpt from the genesis: `Subsection 4, paragraph 2, it is stated: `Whenever an executive agency finds, in a given case, that the use of a contract is appropriate`. This subsection takes into account situations in which an agency finds that certain public needs can best be met through the procurement process. For example, paragraph 4(2) would cover the two-stage situation in which a federal authority may procure medicinal products which it then “allocates” to non-federal hospitals. This subsection does not allow agencies to ignore sections 5 and 6. Compliance with the provisions of Sections 4, 5 and 6 requires a deliberate and deliberate decision by the Agency as to the choice of instrument to be used.┬áS. Rep., id at 9. We believe that the problem can be solved, but that it should be solved by OMB. In order to do so, it is necessary to determine whether the language `direct benefit or use of the Federal Government` in Article 4(1) of the FGCA Law applies to third parties who, at the request of the Government, provide assistance to the Agency`s legal beneficiaries. In these situations, an organization is used to help the government fulfill its support function.

If that is the case, we think it could be argued that the government provides a service for its own use, because the provision of assistance, as approved by the program statutes, is a government function. Government support for the performance of its own functions is not “support”, as provided for by the FGCA, but a purchasing relationship. . . .