Digital Opportunity Foundation Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-7]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- May 20, 2026
Bottom line
The bill creates a new public-private foundation to drive digital equity and literacy initiatives across the United States by leveraging diverse funding and partnerships.
What it actually does
This bill establishes the Foundation for Digital Opportunity, a new nonprofit corporation designed to supplement the work of federal agencies like the NTIA and FCC in promoting digital inclusion and literacy. It outlines the Foundation's mission to raise and leverage funding from diverse sources, develop programs and partnerships, and support the adoption of broadband and digital technologies for covered populations across the United States.
Proponents argue
Supporters would argue that the Foundation will fill critical gaps in digital opportunity by fostering collaboration among various sectors, attracting private and philanthropic funding, and developing innovative, evidence-based programs to address broadband adoption and digital literacy for underserved populations. They would emphasize its role in supplementing, not supplanting, existing federal efforts, and its ability to act with greater flexibility than traditional government agencies.
Opponents contend
Potential opponents might raise concerns about creating a new quasi-governmental entity, its potential for mission creep, or the efficiency of channeling funds through a new foundation rather than expanding existing federal agency capacities. They might also question the oversight mechanisms or the potential for conflicts of interest arising from the Foundation's for-profit subsidiaries.
The bill is moderately complex but its structure is clear, making it accessible for an informed reader to evaluate its core provisions within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2(b) and (c)
Establishment of the Foundation for Digital Opportunity
This provision establishes a new nonprofit corporation called the 'Foundation for Digital Opportunity.' Its core mission is to enhance digital inclusion and literacy across the United States by complementing the work of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The Foundation is tasked with raising funds from various non-federal entities and developing programs to increase broadband adoption and digital literacy among underserved communities.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that establishing a flexible, non-governmental entity allows for greater agility in attracting diverse funding and fostering innovative partnerships, thereby enhancing digital inclusion efforts beyond what direct federal appropriations alone can achieve.
Critics contend
Opponents might question the necessity of creating a new entity, suggesting that expanding the capacities of existing federal agencies could be more efficient and avoid potential bureaucratic overlap.
Tradeoffs
The bill balances the desire for a flexible, non-governmental approach to digital equity with the need for accountability and coordination with existing federal programs.
Section 2(d)
Governance by a Board of Directors
This section details the structure and composition of the Foundation's governing Board of Directors. It mandates a diverse Board comprising non-voting ex officio federal members (including the Secretaries of Commerce and Treasury, and the FCC Chairman) and at least 15 appointed voting members. These appointed members must represent a broad cross-section of stakeholders, including academia, industry, nonprofits, community practitioners, and various levels of government, ensuring a wide range of expertise and perspectives in guiding the Foundation's activities.
Section 2(e)(2)
Grant-Making Authority and Selection Criteria
This provision grants the Foundation the authority to award grants for activities aimed at improving information technology capacity, digital literacy, and digital adoption within local communities. The selection of grant recipients must be based on a comparative assessment of the proposed projects' merits, their potential impact on digital literacy and inclusion, and their alignment with the Foundation's overall goals, including geographical diversity, the specific needs addressed, and cost-effectiveness.
Section 2(e)(6)
Establishment of For-Profit Subsidiaries
This provision authorizes the Foundation to establish one or more for-profit subsidiaries, including an impact investment fund. The purpose of these subsidiaries is to stimulate economic development activities aligned with the Foundation's mission and to attract for-profit investment partners for digital inclusion and literacy initiatives. These entities can engage in partnerships with economic development corporations, fund business incubators, and provide capital to startups.
Section 2(f)(3) and (4)
Strategic Planning and Reporting Requirements
This provision mandates that the Foundation submit a comprehensive strategic plan to Congress within one year of the bill's enactment. This plan must detail the Foundation's initial focus areas, its transparency protocols (including grant awards and priorities), its financial goals for a ten-year period, and how it will ensure complementarity and avoid redundancy with existing federal investments. Additionally, the Foundation is required to make biennial public reports on its activities, financial accounting, and summaries of grant evaluations.
Section 2(f)(7)
Integrity and Conflict of Interest Standards
This provision requires the Foundation's Board to develop and enforce strict procedures related to standards of conduct, financial disclosure, and conflicts of interest for all employees, officers, and Board members. It specifically prohibits any individual from participating in Foundation deliberations on matters that would directly or predictably affect their own financial interests, those of their relatives, or any business entity with which they are negotiating employment, ensuring ethical operation and public trust.
The Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information (who heads NTIA) is granted the authority to abrogate, add to, or modify the Foundation's bylaws by rule, if deemed necessary or appropriate for fair administration, conformity with other rules, or to further the purposes of this section.
Section 2(d)(7)(C)
Why it matters:This provision provides a mechanism for direct federal control over the Foundation's operational rules, which could be seen as a way to maintain federal influence over a nominally independent nonprofit without making that control overtly prominent.
Case for: Proponents would argue this ensures the Foundation remains aligned with federal policy goals and can be quickly adapted if issues arise, thereby maintaining accountability to the public interest and preventing mission drift.
Case against: Critics might argue this undermines the Foundation's independence and flexibility, making it less distinct from a federal agency and potentially deterring private sector or philanthropic engagement seeking true autonomy.
Estimated impact: High, as it provides a mechanism for direct federal control over the Foundation's fundamental operational rules and governance.
This provision explicitly states that Chapter 10 of title 5, United States Code, commonly known as the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), shall not apply to the Foundation.
Section 2(f)(10)
Why it matters:FACA imposes strict requirements on transparency, public meetings, and reporting for groups advising the federal government. Exempting the Foundation allows it greater operational flexibility and potentially more private discussions, which might be seen as a deliberate choice to avoid FACA's administrative burdens and foster more agile operations.
Case for: Proponents would argue that FACA's requirements are overly burdensome for a non-governmental entity like the Foundation, hindering its ability to convene stakeholders and operate efficiently. Exemption allows for more agile and private discussions, which can be crucial for innovative partnerships.
Case against: Opponents might contend that exempting the Foundation from FACA reduces transparency and public accountability, especially given its mission to supplement federal work and the presence of federal ex officio board members. This could lead to less public input and oversight in its decision-making processes.
Estimated impact: Medium, as it significantly affects the transparency and operational style of the Foundation, impacting public access to its deliberations and records.