CRS Report – Data.gov: Implementation and Perspectives on Its Functions. P.L.115-435 Publication Date: 05/21/2026. “…The OPEN Government Data Act defines data as “recorded information” and data asset as “a collection of data elements or data sets that may be grouped together.” However, OMB’s definition from implementation guidance in Memorandum M-25-05 interpreted the act’s definition of the term data asset more narrowly to mean data that are both structured (e.g., organized into columns and rows and a database of digital images) and logically grouped (e.g., with a shared function or purpose). These definitions and others contained in the statute may permit agencies a level of discretion in determining which data assets are included and which are excluded from Data.gov’s federal data catalog. The OPEN Government Data Act differs markedly from previous administrative and legislative efforts to make federal data available to the public in that it requires agencies to use the statutory framework for data access built by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to determine which data should be included and made available on Data.gov. In many ways, Data.gov is situated at a nexus of different perspectives and competing priorities seeking to influence policy on how to make federal data available. Policymakers and stakeholders have variously emphasized different aspects of information policy, and Congress may continue to weigh in on what aspects the federal government should value. These considerations include how long data should be kept, what types of data should be stored (and in what formats), whether and how data should be made more available or secure, who should gain access to data and when, and what type and quality of data should be applied for particular purposes. This report provides an overview of the operations of Data.gov, including how they continue to be influenced by past administrative decisions. It also discusses six perspectives toward information availability that continue to influence Data.gov’s operations and poses questions raised by each viewpoint that policymakers might consider regarding the website’s present and future development. The report then examines several related issues that Congress may wish to consider. These include the ability of Data.gov to serve varied audiences, transparency of data asset inclusion and reporting procedures, and the persistence of data access over time. Lastly, the report discusses debates regarding whether Data.gov, as home of the federal data catalog, should function as either a registry for locating data or a repository for hosting federal data…”