I searched/skimmed through the full text of the bill, and it doesn't seem that it applies to data used/generated by grant-based research (or other projects). The language of the bill is heavily focused on executive agencies.
That would be ideal, although a large portion of grant funding goes to medical research (e.g. via NIH), where it would be difficult to anonymize the data. They could require that it be sanitized (differential privacy, etc.), but I don't know how that could be verified effectively/efficiently. The grants process is quite time-consuming for the grantees (and the grantors) without this requirement.
Data generated by a researcher on a government grant generally includes a provision in the grant that says the govt owns the data, doesn't it?
And if the govt owns it, this seems to indicate it should be open...
I'm not really knowledgeable enough on policy to know how this might interact with the new law. But based on my reading, it seems that institutions conducting federally-funded research are required to retain any data generated by the research, but not necessarily that the government "owns" it, per se. There was a change in policy in 1999 that required the ability for the public to use FOIA to access grant-funded research data, with some limitations.
"To balance the need for public access while protecting the research process, OMB’s revision
limits the kinds of data that will be made accessible (it excludes personal and business-related
confidential data) and limits applicability to federally funded data relating to published research
findings produced under a federal award and used in developing an agency action that has the
force and effect of law."
That would be ideal, although a large portion of grant funding goes to medical research (e.g. via NIH), where it would be difficult to anonymize the data. They could require that it be sanitized (differential privacy, etc.), but I don't know how that could be verified effectively/efficiently. The grants process is quite time-consuming for the grantees (and the grantors) without this requirement.
*not a lawyer