Frequently Asked Questions

Adopting the BD4D Standard is a self-guided process, and we have detailed the steps for adoption in the BD4D Playbook. We recommend reviewing the Readiness Questions, then following the steps in the Implementation Guide once you’re ready to do so. Once you’ve completed the process, you should link to or post the BD4D Commitments on your website or in your app so that your data stakeholders know that you have committed to trustworthy data practices as a BD4D Adopter. We would also love to hear from you! You can tell us about how your organization has implemented BD4D in practice, and share any feedback you might have on how it can be improved, via this short form.

A BD4D Endorser is an individual, company, or nonprofit organization that recognizes that the social sector needs a better deal for data, and believes that the BD4D Standard provides an important, shared foundation for ethical and trustworthy data practices. Anybody that nonprofits look to for advice or leadership on best practices in nonprofit management, data governance, research, software, or technology should consider endorsing the BD4D Standard. This can include organizations that have become BD4D Adopters (which is an implicit endorsement), organizations that might not be ready or able to fully implement the BD4D Standard in their operations, for-profit companies, as well as organizations and individuals that don’t actually collect nonpublic or sensitive data (such as many foundations and nonprofit associations).

A BD4D Endorser does not need to take any action beyond agreeing to put their name and/or organization name behind responsible data governance and the BD4D Standard. If that’s you, please join us by selecting “Yes! I agree to be publicly acknowledged as a BD4D Endorser” on our contact form!

BD4D Endorsers have put their name behind the Better Deal for Data movement, recommending that all nonprofits consider adopting the BD4D Standard. BD4D Adopters have actually implemented the BD4D Standard in their day-to-day operations. Organizations can be BD4D Endorsers, or Adopters, or both. Some organizations that are planning to adopt the BD4D Standard may become an Endorser as a first step in the process of becoming a full BD4D Adopter. Our goal is to improve the understanding and adoption of ethical data practices across the social sector, and we welcome public support in this mission.

“Your Data” is defined as data and information where your data stakeholders–the individuals or organizations that you serve and whose data you touch–would have an expectation that the data would not be made public. This includes nonpublic, personal, or sensitive information which is collected from, and about, individuals, and could be reasonably linked to them or their household. Your Data applies to both analog (paper) and digital data.

The Monetization commitment prohibits selling or exchanging confidential, personal, or sensitive information about your stakeholders (beneficiaries, donors, employees, etc.) for money or similar consideration. Organizations adopting the Better Deal for Data can continue fundraising, accepting donations, generating revenue for their nonprofit activities, and reporting on their impact–as long as any data included in reporting does not reveal someone’s confidential, personal, or sensitive information (unless they have provided explicit consent for that specific use). After all, most nonprofit organizations which handle data do still need to find the money to pay for their staff and technology. On the other hand, trading or selling donor lists to a data broker would generally not comply. Monetization is a complex subject, and we’ve published an issue paper exploring the question of good monetization and bad monetization.

The Binding commitment provides accountability to the BD4D Standard by reinforcing the promise you make to your stakeholders that your data practices fully align to all of the Commitments in the Standard. While it does not explicitly require you to redo your legal agreements in order to adopt the BD4D Standard, it does require that, if you share confidential, personal, or sensitive information about your stakeholders (defined as “Your Data” in the BD4D Standard) with an organization that has not adopted BD4D, you should have a data sharing agreement that contractually aligns with the BD4D Standard.

When an organization adopts the Better Deal for Data, it should reassure data subjects that their data will be stewarded ethically, responsibly, and transparently. There should be no surprises in the way their data is used!

Influencing funding practices is definitely a long range goal. We envision a time when any funder supporting projects that collect or use data from individuals and communities will require their grantees to adopt the Commitments or an equivalent data governance mechanism. Today, no organization working with children can be funded without an adequate child safeguarding plan: it is a prerequisite for donor funding in this field. Adoption of standards such as the Better Deal for Data will ensure that the data uses being funded are ethical ones, in all social service fields.

No, although we do think that data trusts are usually a very good way to implement the Better Deal. Trusts are not a practical option for most nonprofits and businesses to establish themselves. Instead, organizations setting up a data commons or a data trust should consider adopting the BD4D Standard as foundational to their governing terms.

Supporting nonprofit, philanthropic, and social enterprise fields has been a key inspiration for the project. Funders who use impact data to confirm the effectiveness of their funding should not need (or want) confidential, sensitive, or personal data. We believe that impact data can be an excellent example of a beneficial use of data collection for social good, as long as it respects and safeguards sensitive data – a strong use case for the Better Deal for Data!

It’s exciting to see the advance of open approaches to data, software, and science! Much data, however, should not be open, for a wide variety of practical, ethical and legal reasons, and it is this data that requires a different approach to data governance. We are exploring, and plan to encourage, downstream and open uses of datasets collected under the Better Deal as long as the raw data have been appropriately anonymized without the risk of re-identification. If there is a presumption that all data in a project will be made open, however, then the Better Deal probably isn’t needed.

No. While we believe that a commitment to the Better Deal for Data would make an application for IRB approval stronger for projects which already require an IRB review, the IRB process considers a much broader scope of issues than the data governance addressed by the Better Deal. Note: IRBs are typically established at major universities or research institutions to govern the conduct of research on human subjects.

It depends. If an AI company trains their models on data submitted in a prompt or the information its tools are summarizing, using those tools to process confidential, sensitive, or personal data would not be compliant with the Better Deal. However, if the companies behind the tools offer products that do not retain that data, and the data is processed in a privacy-preserving way, it is likely to be compliant.

The Better Deal is a set of binding promises between organizations that hold nonpublic data, and the people and organizations that data is about. As a result, the primary enforcement of the BD4D Standard is based on legally binding terms in an organization’s agreements with those constituents. We also expect that there will be other sources of pressure on organizations that publicly commit to the Better Deal principles but don’t actually comply with them.

While we are not setting up a certification program at this early stage, let us know if you think that there should be one.

If you feel that an organization is failing to meet its responsibility as a BD4D Adopter, your first step should be to raise your concerns to that organization, clearly explaining how the BD4D Commitments are being breached. An important pillar of the Better Deal is community engagement, and an organization that adopts it should be prepared to respond and rectify the situation, either correcting its practice, or removing your data upon request. As the BD4D author and maintainer, we do not intervene in the relationship between an organization and its data stakeholders. However, if you’ve requested removal of Your Data from a BD4D Adopter, and they refuse to do so, we would like to know.

BD4D is a voluntary standard, and we expect that all organizations adopting Better Deal do so in good faith. Given its newness, we realize that there may be areas for improvement in how the Standard is written, and how it is put into practice, and invite your feedback on both.

The BD4D Standard and Playbook do not provide template legal agreements. There is such a wide variety of laws and regulations across regions, countries, and sectors that it would be impractical to propose a single, standardized data sharing agreement, license, privacy policy, or terms of service. That said, we have successfully implemented the Commitments in the Tech Matters Privacy Policy. And, we do believe that it should be possible to implement the Commitments in the great majority of jurisdictions.

The short answer is yes. The BD4D Standard offers a foundation for broad stakeholder engagement and data governance that these laws do not provide. It requires certain practices not addressed by these laws, for example prohibiting monetization of nonpublic data, or making research reports available to the people whose data contributed to the research.

At the same time, these laws often have other stringent requirements that are not addressed by the Better Deal. And we think that’s a good thing: there should be no problem with doing more than what BD4D requires when it comes to protecting your stakeholder data.