In 1999 Congress passed the Federal Financial Assistance Management Improvement Act of 1999, requiring federal agencies to develop common grant application and reporting procedures. Many nonprofits are frustrated with the administrative burdens imposed on receipt of federal funds, including different reports to multiple agencies for essentially the same programs. Moreover, nonprofits are also frustrated with different types of grant application forms for essentially the same program or type of program. But help should be on the way. The Federal Financial Assistance Management Improvement Act of 1999 (P.L. 106-107) covers all domestic "federal financial assistance" programs. This means all programs, including entitlements, that provide resources (e.g., grants, contracts, loans, in-kind contributions) to states, localities, organizations, or individuals. Since it is limited to domestic programs, it does not cover foreign aid or assistance used in non-domestic situations. The law requires OMB to work with other federal agencies to establish, when consistent with existing law: · A uniform application for financial assistance (e.g., grant applications) from multiple programs across multiple federal agencies; · Ways to simplify reporting requirements and administrative procedures, including uniformity and standardization of rules affecting funding from multiple programs; · Electronic methods for applying for, managing, and reporting of financial assistance funds; · Improved approaches for the collection and sharing of data pertaining to financial assistance programs, and efforts to strengthen the information management capacity of state, local, and tribal government and nonprofit organizations. This includes the development of a release form to be used by grantees for the sharing of information across multiple federal financial assistance programs. Presumably, the data sharing requirements could include a wide range of information, from program performance data to information about people receiving services (e.g., clients); and · Specific annual goals and objectives to achieve these items. OMB may exempt a federal agency from these requirements if OMB determines that the agency does not have a "significant number" of financial assistance programs. All other agencies must designate a lead official who will work on the tasks required by the bill. Agencies are to develop a plan for implementation of the tasks, which are to be published in the Federal Register for public comment. To the extent practicable, agencies are to hold public hearings or "related public forums" on the plan. Additionally, the designated lead official is to consult "regularly... during development of the plan" with state, local, and tribal governments, and nonprofit organizations. The final plan is to be submitted to OMB and Congress. On an annual basis, the agency is to evaluate its performance in meeting the goals and objectives of the law. Within three years, OMB is to report to Congress on overall implementation of the law. Additionally, OMB is to initiate a contract with the National Academy of Public Administration to evaluate the effectiveness of the law. The evaluation, which is to be completed within four years, is to: · Assess the effectiveness of the law and make recommendations for improvements; · Evaluate agency performance in carrying out the tasks required by the bill; and · Assess the level of cooperation of OMB, federal agencies, state, local and tribal governments, and nonprofit organizations in implementing this law. Former Sen. John Glenn of Ohio developed the legislation after participating in a series of briefings sponsored by the Ohio Association of Nonprofit Organizations and OMB Watch. Following the briefings, there was an eight week online conference to discuss devolution and grant management issues. The legislation attempted to address some of the concerns expressed during the online conference. The law, however, does not deal with the problem that nonprofits face with regard to different application and reporting requirements mandated by local, state, and federal governments. Legislation may still be needed to improve intergovernmental grants management rules and procedures. The legislation also does not develop procedures for improving the integration of different reporting requirements that nonprofits already face (e.g., IRS Form 990, grant reports, annual organizational reports). At least one state, Tennessee, has successfully experimented with such integration. Despite these shortcomings, the law is a step in the right direction.