The regulation of artificial intelligence is happening now, at federal, state, and local levels, and nonprofits' voices are largely absent from these critical policy discussions. Yet nonprofits are profoundly affected by AI governance decisions: how AI systems are regulated shapes the tools nonprofits can access, the requirements they must meet, the risks they must manage, and the communities they serve. Without active nonprofit participation in policy formation, AI regulations risk being designed by and for corporations and governments, overlooking the unique needs, constraints, and opportunities of mission-driven organizations.
This lesson prepares you to engage effectively with policymakers on AI regulation, representing nonprofit perspectives and advocating for policies that support nonprofit mission delivery while ensuring responsible AI use. Whether through direct testimony, policy briefings, coalition participation, or media engagement, grant professionals and nonprofit leaders can shape the AI policy landscape.
AI policy is developing across multiple governance levels simultaneously. At the federal level, Congress is considering comprehensive AI legislation while regulatory agencies (FTC, SEC, NIST, EEOC, and others) are issuing guidance and rules on specific AI applications. At the state level, governors and legislatures are enacting AI transparency laws, biometric privacy regulations, and consumer protection rules. At the local level, city governments are regulating AI use by municipal agencies and setting expectations for AI governance by vendors and contractors. Understanding this multi-level landscape is essential to identifying where nonprofit voices can have greatest impact.
Federal AI policy developments are concentrated in several agencies and congressional committees. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), covered in an earlier lesson, sets technical standards. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforces consumer protection laws and authority over unfair and deceptive practices, including AI systems. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) addresses discrimination in AI-based hiring systems. The Department of Justice addresses civil rights implications of AI. Other agencies—NIH, USDA, DOD, State Department—develop AI policies relevant to their specific jurisdictions.
Congressional committees with jurisdiction over AI include the Energy and Commerce Committee (consumer protection), the Judiciary Committee (antitrust and emerging technology), the Science, Space, and Technology Committee (research and development), and others. Different committees address different AI applications (e.g., healthcare AI, employment AI, criminal justice AI, autonomous vehicles). Understanding which congressional committees address issues relevant to your nonprofit's work helps target your advocacy effectively.
To engage effectively with policymakers, you need to understand how different regulatory bodies and legislatures operate. Congress operates through committee hearings, markup sessions, and floor votes. Committee hearings are public events where Congress invites expert witnesses to provide testimony on emerging issues. These hearings, often lasting several hours, feature panels of 4-6 witnesses (corporate executives, researchers, advocacy organizations, government officials) who deliver prepared remarks followed by questions from committee members. Submitting written testimony that becomes part of the official congressional record is another mechanism for influence.
Federal regulatory agencies (like the FTC or EEOC) develop rules through an Administrative Procedure Act (APA) process. Agencies propose rules (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking), allow public comment periods (typically 30-60 days), review comments, revise rules, and issue final rules. Unlike congressional testimony, which is time-bound and rarely leads to immediate legislative action, regulatory comment periods directly inform the final rules agencies adopt. Well-developed, evidence-based comments submitted during regulatory proceedings substantially influence final outcomes.
State legislatures operate similarly to Congress, with committees, hearings, and voting procedures. State governors also have significant authority to direct state agencies' AI policies through executive orders and administrative guidance. Many state-level AI policy innovations emerge from executive action rather than legislation, making governors and their policy advisors important engagement targets.
AI policy is developing across multiple levels (federal agencies, Congress, state legislatures, local governments) and through multiple mechanisms (legislation, regulation, executive action, guidance). Understanding which policy forums address your nonprofit's interests is the first step to effective engagement.
Effective policy advocacy requires understanding who makes decisions at each level. At the federal level, legislative and regulatory staff members, not elected officials, often make critical decisions about which policy issues to prioritize. Congressional committee staff develop legislative proposals, guide hearing agendas, and shape responses to public input. Similarly, regulatory agency staff propose rules and summarize public comments for decision-makers. Building relationships with these staff members is often more influential than engaging with elected officials.
Policy actors also include: congressional representatives and their legislative directors; regulatory agency leadership and midlevel policy staff; state legislators and their policy staff; governors and gubernatorial policy advisors; city councils and mayors; appointed board members of government agencies or special commissions; research organizations and think tanks that advise policymakers; industry associations and advocacy organizations that lobby on policy; and media outlets that shape public understanding of policy issues.
Understanding how these different actors interact is critical. Federal agencies rely on congressional funding, making congressional support necessary for new initiatives. Regulatory agencies are constrained by statutes Congress has enacted, making legislative change necessary if agencies cannot address issues within existing statutory authority. Politicians respond to constituent input, meaning broad-based nonprofit engagement signals political priority.
With policy activity occurring across multiple levels and agencies, the first task is identifying which policy decisions are relevant to your nonprofit and where windows of opportunity exist for influence. Several strategies help identify relevant policy activity: (1) Subscribe to policy monitoring services tracking AI regulation (organizations like the Future of Privacy Forum, Center for Democracy and Technology, and sector-specific associations provide policy alerts); (2) Monitor congressional and agency websites for proposed legislation and regulatory notices; (3) Follow relevant committees and agencies on social media; (4) Participate in professional associations that monitor policy activity; (5) Engage with policy consultants or government relations professionals who track policy activity; (6) Establish relationships with policymakers and staff who alert you to upcoming opportunities.
Once you've identified relevant policy activity, assess the window of opportunity. Policy windows open during several moments: when legislation is first introduced (early engagement shapes initial proposals); during committee markup (amendments and modifications are possible); during public comment periods on proposed rules (detailed input influences final regulations); before regulatory agencies take enforcement action (proactive guidance is more influential than reactive enforcement); and during implementation of newly enacted policies (guidance on interpretation influences real-world impacts).
Effective policy advocacy depends on relationships. Policymakers and their staff are more receptive to input from organizations they know and trust. Building these relationships happens over time through multiple interactions. Start by introducing yourself and your organization to relevant congressional offices, agency officials, and legislative staff. Share your nonprofit's expertise and perspective on issues within their jurisdiction. Respond promptly to requests for input. Maintain regular contact even when you're not seeking specific favors.
Effective relationship-building practices include: (1) scheduling regular meetings with key policymakers and staff to brief them on your nonprofit's work; (2) providing data and evidence from your nonprofit's programs that inform policy discussions; (3) inviting policymakers to visit your programs or events; (4) offering your nonprofit as a resource for pilot programs testing new policies; (5) maintaining professional, nonpartisan engagement even across political disagreements; (6) recognizing and thanking policymakers when they advance your nonprofit's interests; (7) being honest about disagreements while respecting their authority to make final decisions.
Identify the federal agency, congressional committee, and state/local government body most relevant to your nonprofit's work. Research the key staff and elected officials in these bodies. Schedule informational meetings to introduce your nonprofit, discuss your work, and understand their policy priorities. Provide a brief written background on your nonprofit's perspective on key AI policy issues.
Many policymakers lack deep understanding of nonprofit operations, constraints, and needs. Educating them about the unique nonprofit context is essential if you want policies that work for your sector. Policymakers often design AI policies assuming well-resourced corporate contexts. They may not understand that nonprofit budgets are constrained, that nonprofits serve vulnerable populations requiring special protections, or that nonprofits have different incentives and risk tolerance than profit-seeking corporations.
Effective nonprofit education includes: (1) concrete examples from your nonprofit's programs showing how AI policies affect mission delivery; (2) data on nonprofit resources and constraints (e.g., median nonprofit IT budgets, staff sizes, technology adoption rates); (3) evidence on nonprofit practices regarding AI, data governance, and ethical considerations; (4) examples of innovative nonprofit approaches to AI governance that regulations should enable rather than restrict; (5) stories from beneficiaries showing how nonprofit use of AI benefits communities; (6) honest discussion of nonprofit challenges and failures, building trust that you're not simply advocating for deregulation but for thoughtful, nuanced policies.
Congressional testimony is perhaps the highest-profile mechanism for nonprofit input on policy. Congressional committees invite expert witnesses to testify on emerging issues. If your nonprofit has significant expertise relevant to a congressional hearing, you can request an invitation to testify through your professional association, congressional offices, or advocacy networks.
Effective testimony includes: (1) a clear, compelling opening statement (2-3 minutes) highlighting your organization and key message; (2) specific, evidence-based recommendations (not vague calls for "more funding" or "less regulation"); (3) concrete examples from your nonprofit's work illustrating key points; (4) acknowledgment of legitimate concerns underlying proposed policies even if you disagree with specific approaches; (5) clear, accessible language avoiding jargon; (6) prepared remarks that you can deliver within time limits.
Regulatory agency comment periods offer equally important opportunities. Public comments on proposed rules directly inform final regulations. Effective regulatory comments include: (1) specific references to sections of proposed rules; (2) evidence-based analysis of how rules would affect nonprofits; (3) proposed modifications or alternative language; (4) coordination with other nonprofits to demonstrate broad-based support for your position; (5) formal submission before comment period deadlines.
Policy briefs and white papers are effective tools for educating policymakers and building the evidence base for policy recommendations. Policy briefs (2-4 pages) synthesize research, evidence, and recommendations into accessible formats for busy policymakers. White papers (10-30 pages) provide more detailed analysis, often serving as resources for policymakers and advocacy organizations.
Effective policy briefs include: (1) clear executive summary stating problem and recommendations; (2) data and evidence supporting the analysis; (3) specific policy recommendations with concrete language that could be incorporated into legislation; (4) acknowledgment of tradeoffs and alternative perspectives; (5) professional design and layout increasing likelihood of being read.
Public opinion influences policymakers. Op-eds in major newspapers and magazines can shape public understanding of AI policy issues and signal to policymakers that nonprofit perspectives matter. Media engagement also raises your organization's profile, helping attract donors, partners, and talent.
Effective op-eds: (1) address timely policy issues currently in the news; (2) provide a clear perspective or argument, not merely describing a problem; (3) include specific examples and evidence; (4) are written in accessible language for general audiences; (5) are submitted to major publications (New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal) or influential publications in your sector; (6) are 600-800 words, fitting publication length requirements; (7) are timely, submitted while policy issues are actively being debated.
Coalition building amplifies nonprofit voices. Coordinating with peer nonprofits, academic institutions, civil rights organizations, and other stakeholders to present united positions on AI policy is more influential than individual organizational efforts. Coalitions signal to policymakers that proposed policies affect diverse constituencies. They also enable resource sharing, coordinating research and advocacy efforts across multiple organizations.
Effective coalition building for policy includes: (1) identifying shared interests among potential coalition members; (2) establishing clear coalition governance and decision-making processes; (3) developing joint policy recommendations all members can endorse; (4) coordinating public comment submissions, with multiple organizations submitting tailored comments supporting coalition positions; (5) presenting jointly at hearings or with media; (6) sharing coalition resources and amplifying each member's work through coalition channels; (7) managing coalition dynamics when members disagree on specific issues while maintaining unified positions on core concerns.
Coalition participation can limit your organization's autonomy. Before joining a coalition, clarify governance, decision-making authority, and what positions you're committing to support. Ensure coalition participation aligns with your organization's mission and values. You can withdraw from coalitions if your views diverge.
Policy change is not linear or predictable. Windows of opportunity open and close based on political dynamics, media attention, crises, and regulatory timing. Understanding and capitalizing on these windows is essential to effective advocacy. Windows open when: major events (data breaches, algorithmic failures) heighten public attention to policy issues; new administrations take office with commitment to particular policy areas; congressional committee chairs with policy interests assume leadership; proposed legislation gains momentum; regulatory agencies announce intention to develop new rules.
Effective advocacy requires flexibility and responsiveness. Organizations with policy monitoring systems and relationships can identify windows quickly and mobilize resources. This may mean shifting staff time to focus on emerging policy opportunities, rapidly convening coalitions, and producing policy briefs or testimony on short notice.
While much AI policy discussion focuses on corporate AI use, nonprofits should advocate for policies specifically addressing nonprofit contexts. Examples include: (1) Nonprofit carve-outs or tailored requirements for organizations serving specific missions (e.g., educational, health, social service nonprofits); (2) Support for nonprofit capacity building in AI governance, cybersecurity, and data protection; (3) Funding for research on AI use in nonprofit contexts; (4) Liability limitations recognizing nonprofit resource constraints while maintaining accountability; (5) Interoperability requirements enabling nonprofits to choose AI systems without vendor lock-in; (6) Data governance rules protecting beneficiary privacy while enabling nonprofits to use data for mission delivery; (7) Public funding or tax incentives for nonprofit development of AI tools addressing social challenges.
AI regulation globally influences U.S. policy. The European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), while focused on data protection, establishes principles increasingly referenced in AI regulation discussions worldwide. Understanding international approaches to AI governance helps U.S. nonprofits anticipate future U.S. policies and engage more effectively with multinational partners.
The EU's proposed AI Act, when finalized, will influence how international companies and organizations approach AI governance. Nonprofits operating internationally or working with international partners should monitor these developments. Additionally, emerging standards in other democracies (Canada, Australia, Singapore, Japan) provide models for approaches that might be adopted in the U.S.
Continue building your expertise in AI governance, standards, and nonprofit leadership with the CAGP Level 5 certification program.
Explore the Program