because it failed to exhaust its administrative remedies on the issue before the Agency. c. Agency’s Obligation Under Item 2f Having determined that item 2f was the only portion of Plaintiffs request that sought research data from the Zhang Study’s grantees, the Court now considers whether Defendants fulfilled their obligations under Circular A-110. Because the data in item 2f was already fully incorporated in the Zhang Study, which Defendants had made publicly available through their website, their refusal to request that data from the study’s grantees was proper. Under FOIA, an agency need not search “for copies of documents where the agency itself has [already] provided an alternative form of access.” Tax Analysts v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 845 F.2d 1060, 1065-67 (D.C.Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>) (emphasis in original). Defendants themselves
holding that copies of defendants convictions contained in pen packet were admissible under public records exception holding that copies of responses to a governmentsponsored prevailing wage survey were not public records under the act holding that copies of court records only had to be made available in an agency reading room the agency is not required by statute to mail copies of the records  nor even to provide a requesterconvenient location for access holding that statute making child welfare agency records confidential but disclosable pursuant to a court order did not create an absolute privilege for such records recognizing that intent of public records act is to provide all citizens with access to the records of all public governmental bodies