Community Oriented Policing Services
(COPS): Background and FundingIn Brief
Nathan James
Analyst in Crime Policy
February 6, 2014January 13, 2015
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL33308
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and FundingIn Brief
Summary
The Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program was created by Title I of the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-322). The mission of the COPS
program is to advance community policing in all jurisdictions across the United States. The
Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-162)
reauthorized the COPS program through for FY2006-FY2009 and changed it from a multi-grant program
to a
single-grant program.
Between FY1995 and FY1996 single-grant program. Even though the COPS program is not currently authorized, Congress
has continued to appropriate funding for it.
Between FY1995 and FY1999, the annual appropriation for the COPS program averaged more
than nearly
$1.4 billion. The relatively high levels of funding during this time period were largely the
result result
of Congress’s and the Clinton Administration’s efforts to place 100,000 new law
enforcement officers on the street. Appropriations for the program started to wane in FY2002
before increasing again for the four-year period between FY2007 and FY2010. Congress started
to reduce funding for the COPS program as it enforcement
officers on the street. After the initial push to fund 100,000 new law enforcement officers through
COPS grants, Congress moved away from providing funding for hiring new
law enforcement
officers and changed COPS into a conduit for providing federal assistance to
support local law enforcement agencies. Starting in FY1998, an increasing portion of the annual
appropriation for COPS was dedicated to programs to help law enforcement agencies purchase
new equipment, combat methamphetamine production, upgrade criminal records, and improve
forensic sciences. Funding for the COPS program decreased in both FY2011 and FY2012, which
can be attributed to reduced funding for the COPS Hiring Program, the congressional earmark
ban, and Congress moving appropriations for programs that were traditionally funded under the
COPS account to other accounts. Funding for the COPS program has been fairly stable (around
$200 million) since FY2012 now that Congress has started to consistently fund the same
programs through the COPS account. One issue Congress might consider is whether the federal
government should continue to provide grants to state and local law enforcement agencies to hire
additional officers at a time of historically low crime rates.
Congressional Research Service
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
Contents
Background ...................................................................................................................................... 1
COPS Funding ................................................................................................................................. 3
Figures
Figure 1. COPS Funding, FY1995-FY2014 .................................................................................... 4
Figure 2. Funding for the COPS Hiring Program, FY1995-FY2014............................................... 5
Tables
Table A-1. COPS’ Requested Funding, Total Enacted Funding, Funding for Hiring
Programs, and Authorized Appropriation, FY1995-FY2014........................................................ 7
Table A-2. COPS Funding, by Program, FY2005-FY2014 ............................................................. 9
Appendixes
Appendix. COPS Funding History .................................................................................................. 7
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 11
Congressional Research Service
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
Background
The Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program was created by Title I of the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 19941 (the ‘94 Crime Act). The mission of the COPS
program is to advance community policing in all jurisdictions across the United States.2 The
COPS program awards grants to state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies to advance the
practice of community policing.3 COPS grants are managed by the COPS Office, which was
created in 1994 by Department of Justice (DOJ) to oversee the COPS program.
Authorized funding for the COPS program expired in FY2009. There are several issues Congress
might consider if it chooses to consider legislation to reauthorize the program. These issues are
the subject of another CRS report.4 Another issue Congress might consider is the appropriate
funding level for COPS, especially in light of concerns about federal spending and possible
reductions to appropriations for DOJ.
As originally authorized under Title I of the ‘94 Crime Act, the COPS program had three separate
grant programs. Under the first program, the Attorney General was authorized to make grants to
states, units of local government, Indian tribal governments, other public and private entities, and
multi-jurisdictional or regional consortia to increase the number of police officers and focus the
officers’ efforts on community policing. Grant funds under this program could have been used to
•
hire new police officers;
•
rehire police officers who have been laid off; and
•
obtain equipment or support systems and provide overtime pay, if it results in an
increase of the number of officers deployed in community-oriented policing.
Grant funds under a second program could have been used to hire former members of the armed
services to serve as career law enforcement officers engaged in community policing.
Grant funds under a third program could have also been used for other non-hiring purposes
such as
•
training law enforcement officers in crime prevention and community policing
techniques;
•
developing technologies that emphasize crime prevention;
•
linking community organizations and residents with law enforcement;
enforcement agencies. Decreasing appropriations for hiring programs resulted in decreased
funding for the COPS program overall. Appropriations for hiring programs were almost nonexistent from FY2005 to FY2008, but for FY2009 Congress provided $1 billion for hiring
programs under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5).
Appropriations for hiring programs for FY2009-FY2012 were the result of Congress’s efforts to
help local law enforcement agencies facing budget cuts as a result of the recession either hire new
law enforcement officers or retain officers they might have to lay off. Congress has continued to
provide appropriations for hiring programs even though the effects of the recession have waned
over the past few fiscal years.
Authorized funding for the COPS program expired in FY2009. There are several issues policy
makers might consider if they take up legislation to reauthorize or fund the COPS program. One
potential policy question might be whether the federal government should continue to provide
grants to state and local law enforcement agencies to hire additional officers at a time of
historically low crime rates. Policy makers might also consider whether Congress should
appropriate funding for the COPS program so that law enforcement agencies could take
advantage of the current single grant program authorization, or if Congress should continue to
appropriate funding for individual programs under the COPS account.
Congressional Research Service
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): In Brief
Contents
A Brief Legislative History ....................................................................................................... 1
COPS Funding ........................................................................................................................... 1
Select Issues............................................................................................................................... 3
Figures
Figure 1. COPS Funding, FY1995-FY2015 .................................................................................... 3
Tables
Table A-1. COPS’ Requested Funding, Total Enacted Funding, Funding for Hiring
Programs, and Authorized Appropriation, FY1995-FY2015........................................................ 6
Table A-2. COPS Funding, by Program, FY2006-FY2015 ............................................................. 8
Appendixes
Appendix. COPS Funding History .................................................................................................. 6
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 10
Congressional Research Service
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): In Brief
T
he Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program was created by Title I of the
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 19941 (the 1994 Crime Act). The
mission of the COPS program is to advance community policing in all jurisdictions across
the United States.2 The COPS program awards grants to state, local, and tribal law enforcement
agencies to advance the practice of community policing.3 COPS grants are managed by the COPS
Office, which was created in 1994 by Department of Justice (DOJ) to oversee the COPS program.
A Brief Legislative History
Under the initial authorization for the COPS program, grants could be awarded for (1) hiring new
police officers or rehiring police officers who have been laid off to engage in community
policing; (2) hiring former members of the armed services to serve as career law enforcement
officers engaged in community policing; and (3) supporting non-hiring initiatives, such as
training law enforcement officers in crime prevention and community policing techniques or
developing technologies that emphasize crime prevention. The 1994 Crime Act authorized
funding for the COPS program through FY2000 (see Table A-1 for authorized appropriations).
The COPS program was reauthorized by the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice
Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-162). The act reauthorized appropriations for the COPS
program for FY2006-FY2009 (see Table A-1). When Congress reauthorized the COPS program it
changed it from a multi-grant program to a single grant program. As currently authorized, state or
local law enforcement agencies are theoretically eligible to apply for a “COPS grant,” which
could be used for a litany of purposes, including hiring or re-hiring community policing officers;4
procuring equipment, technology, or support systems; or establishing school-based partnerships
between local law enforcement agencies and local school systems.5
COPS Funding
As shown in Figure 1, between FY1995 and FY1999, the annual appropriation for the COPS
program averaged nearly $1.4 billion. The relatively high levels of funding during this time
period were largely the result of Congress’s and the Clinton Administration’s efforts to place
100,000 new law enforcement officers on the street.
After the initial push to fund 100,000 new law enforcement officers through COPS grants,
Congress moved away from providing funding for hiring new law enforcement officers and
changed COPS into a conduit for providing federal assistance to support local law enforcement
1
P.L. 103-322; 42 U.S.C. §3796dd.
While there are different definitions of “community policing” the COPS Office defines “community policing” as “a
philosophy that promotes organizational strategies, which support the systematic use of partnerships and problemsolving techniques, to proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime,
social disorder, and fear of crime.” U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services Office,
Community Policing Defined, p. 3, this document is on file with the author.
3
U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services Office, About Community Oriented Policing
Services Office, http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/Default.asp?Item=35.
4
See CRS Report R40709, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Current Legislative Issues, by Nathan
James.
2
Congressional Research Service
1
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
•
supporting the purchase of weapons for police officers;
•
decreasing the amount of time police must spend away from the community
while awaiting court appearances; and
•
facilitating the establishment of community-oriented policing as an organizationwide philosophy.5
In 1998, P.L. 105-302 amended the ‘94 Crime Act to allow COPS funding to be used for school
resource officers. In 2003, P.L. 108-216 also amended the ‘94 Crime Act to allow COPS funding
to be used for assisting states to enforce sex offender registration laws.7
The ‘94 Crime Act authorized funding for the COPS program through FY2000. Debate on Title I
of the ‘94 Crime Act focused on whether the COPS program would be able to meet its goal of
putting 100,000 new police officers on the beat by the end of FY2000.8 Starting in 1999,
Congress turned its attention to reauthorizing the COPS program. There was support from some
Members of Congress for continuing the COPS program.9 During this period, Congress discussed
using COPS hiring programs to put another 50,000 police officers on the streets.10 After COPS
initial authorization expired, several bills were introduced in Congress that would have
5
This list represents the types of activities that were originally authorized in P.L. 103-322, which also included (1)
hiring programs such as Universal Hiring Program and Making Officer Redeployment Effective (MORE), and (2) other
activities such as Police Corps, methamphetamine “hot spot” clean-up, law enforcement technology, and tribal law
enforcement grants.
6
See §341 of the Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to End the Exploitation of Children Today Act (PROTECT)
of 2003 (P.L. 108-21).
7
For additional information on sex offender registering laws, see CRS Report RL32800, Sex Offender Registration and
Community Notification Law: Recent Legislation and Issues, by Garrine P. Laney (available upon request).
8
See Senate debate, “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994—Conference Report,” Congressional
Record, vol. 140 (August 25, 1994), pp. S12496-S12557; Rep. Manzullo, “Examining the Centerpiece of the Crime
Bill,” Congressional Record, vol. 140 (August 18, 1994), pp. H8691-H8694; Sen. Orrin Hatch, “The Signing of the
Crime Bill,” Congressional Record, vol. 140 (September 13, 1994), p. S12799; Rep. William J. Coyne, “The Right
Tools for Fighting Crime—Extension of Remarks,” Congressional Record, vol. 140 (August 26, 1994), p. E1808;
Senate debate, “The Crime Bill,” Congressional Record, vol. 140 (August 22, 1994), pp. S12285-S12288; Senate
debate, “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994,” Congressional Record, vol. 140 (August 22,
1994), pp. S12250-S12284.
9
See Senate debate, “Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary and Related Agencies Appropriation
Act,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (July 22, 1999), pp. S8988-S9014; Rep. Bart Stupak, “COPS Program Good for
Communities,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (May 12, 1999), p. H3070; Rep. Rush Holt, “Reauthorize COPS
Program,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (May 12, 1999), p. H3003; Senate debate, “Concurrent Resolution on the
Budget for Fiscal Year 2000,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (March 24, 1999) pp. S3301-S3308; Senate debate,
“Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2000,”
Congressional Record, vol. 145 (July 21, 1999), pp. S8940-S8947.
10
See U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs, Making America’s
Streets Safer: The Future of the COPS Program, 107th Cong., 1st sess., December 5, 2001 (Washington: GPO, 2002);
Senate debate, “Statement on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (January 19,
1999), pp. S345-S470; House debate, “Democratic Legislative Agenda Held Hostage by Do-nothing/Do-wrong
Republican Congress,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (November 3, 1999) pp. H11452-H11459; U.S. Congress,
House Committee on Appropriations, Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Bill, Fiscal Year 2001, report to accompany H.R. 4690, 106th Cong., 2nd sess., H.Rept. 106680 (Washington, GPO, 2000), p. 8; House debate, “Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2002,” Congressional Record, vol. 147 (July 18, 2001), pp. H4167-H4202;
Senate debate, “Statement on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (March 25,
1999), pp. S3440-S3457; Sen. Orrin Hatch, “Hatch Amendment No. 246,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (April 12,
1999), p. S3600.
Congressional Research Service
2
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
reauthorized the COPS program; however, Congress continued to appropriate funding for the
program through FY2006, when reauthorizing legislation was enacted (see discussion below).
On January 5, 2006, the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act
of 2005 (P.L. 109-162) was signed into law. The act reauthorized the COPS program through
FY2009. Along with reauthorizing the COPS program, the act amended current law11 to change
the COPS program into a single-grant program. When Congress reauthorized COPS, it took many
of the purposes for which COPS grants could be awarded (see above) and made them program
purpose areas under the new single grant program. As currently authorized, state or local law
enforcement agencies may apply for a “COPS grant,” which could be used to hire or re-hire
community policing officers or fund non-hiring programs.12
COPS Funding
This section of the report only discusses the new budget authority enacted for the COPS program
in the annual appropriation bills. Between FY1998 and FY2002, Congress directed the COPS
Office to use unobligated balances from previous fiscal years to fund grant programs, which
included grants for hiring, school safety, law enforcement technology, combating
methamphetamine, armor vests for law enforcement officers, improving tribal law enforcement,
and combating domestic violence.
As shown in Figure 1, between FY1995 and FY1996, the annual appropriation for the COPS
program averaged more than $1.4 billion. The relatively high levels of funding during this time
period were largely the result of Congress’s and the Clinton Administration’s efforts to place
100,000 new law enforcement officers on the street. Appropriations for the program started to
wane in FY2002 (the average annual appropriation for COPS between FY2002 and FY2006 was
$780.4 million) before increasing again for the four-year period between FY2007 and FY2010.
Congress started to reduce funding for the COPS program as it moved away from providing
funding for hiring new law enforcement officers and changed COPS into a conduit for providing
federal assistance to support local law enforcement agencies. Starting in FY1998, an increasing
portion of the annual appropriation for COPS was dedicated to programs to help law enforcement
agencies purchase new equipment, combat methamphetamine production, upgrade criminal
records, and improve forensic sciences. As shown below, the reduction in overall COPS funding
between FY2002 and FY2006 roughly coincides with reduced funding for the COPS Hiring
Program (CHP). On the other hand, overall funding for COPS increased in both FY2009 and
FY2010 when Congress started to provide funding for the CHP.
Funding for the COPS program decreased in both FY2011 and FY2012, which again coincided
with decreased funding for the CHP. However, decreases in overall funding for COPS can also be
attributed to two trends: the congressional earmark ban and Congress restructuring the COPS
account (see Table A-2). Congress implemented a ban on earmarks starting with appropriations
for FY2011. This ban substantially decreased funding for the Law Enforcement Technology and
11
42 U.S.C. §3796dd(d).
Even though current law states that law enforcement agencies that receive a COPS grant could use the funding for
hiring or re-hiring law enforcement officers, the authority for the Attorney General to make grants for hiring or rehiring law enforcement officer ended on September 13, 2000 (42 U.S.C. §3796dd(i)).
12
Congressional Research Service
3
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
the Methamphetamine Clean-up programs. By FY2012, Congress did not appropriate any funding
for Even though current law states that law enforcement agencies that receive a COPS grant could use the funding for
hiring or re-hiring law enforcement officers, the authority for the Attorney General to make grants for hiring or rehiring law enforcement officer ended on September 13, 2000 (42 U.S.C. §3796dd(i)).
5
See 42 U.S.C. §3796dd(b).
2
Congressional Research Service
1
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): In Brief
agencies. Starting in FY1998, an increasing portion of the annual appropriation for COPS was
dedicated to programs to help law enforcement agencies purchase new equipment, combat
methamphetamine production, upgrade criminal records, and improve forensic sciences.
However, the overall appropriations for the COPS program started to decrease as Congress
appropriated less funding for hiring law enforcement officers.
In the early years of the COPS program, a majority of the program’s enacted appropriations went
to grant programs specifically aimed at hiring more law enforcement officers. Beginning in
FY1998, however, enacted appropriations for the hiring programs began to decline, and by
FY2005, appropriations for hiring programs were nearly non-existent. Funding was revived when
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) provided $1 billion for COPS
hiring programs. Appropriations for hiring programs in FY2009-FY2012 were the result of
Congress’s efforts to help local law enforcement agencies facing budget cuts as a result of the
recession either hire new law enforcement officers or retain officers they might have to lay off.
Congress has continued to provide appropriations for hiring programs even though the effects of
the recession have waned over the past few fiscal years.
There is a notable decrease in funding for the COPS starting in FY2011, which can be attributed
to two trends: the congressional earmark ban and Congress restructuring the COPS account (see
Table A-2). Congress implemented a ban on earmarks starting with appropriations for FY2011.
This ban substantially decreased funding for the Law Enforcement Technology and the
Methamphetamine Clean-up programs. By FY2012, Congress did not appropriate any funding for
the Law Enforcement Technology program and the only funding remaining for the
Methamphetamine Clean-up program was transferred to the Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA) to assist with the clean-up of clandestine methamphetamine laboratories.
Between FY2010 and FY2012, Congress moved appropriations for programs that were
traditionally funded under the COPS account—such as Project Safe Neighborhoods, DNA
backlog reduction initiatives, Paul Coverdell grants, offender reentry programs, the National
Criminal History Improvement program, and the Bulletproof Vest Grant program—to the State
and Local Law Enforcement Assistance (S&LLEA) account. As shown in Table A-2,
appropriations for programs that were moved to the S&LLEA account starting in FY2010 were
traditionally transferred to the Office of Justice Programs.
Funding for the COPS account has been fairly stable (around $200 million) for the past three
fiscal years now that Congress has started to consistently fund the same programs through the
COPS account.
Congressional Research Service
2
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): In Brief
Figure 1. COPS Funding, FY1995-FY2014FY2015
Appropriations in millions of dollars
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
0
Fiscal Year
Appropriations
Carryover
ARRA
Hiring
Source: FY1995 through FY2011 enacted amounts were provided by the U.S. Department of Justice,
Community Oriented Policing Services; FY2012 enacted amount was taken from H.Rept. 112-284; FY2013
enacted amount was provided by the U.S. Department of Justice; FY2014 amount was taken from the joint
explanatory statement to accompany P.L. 113-76, printed in the January 15, 2014, Congressional Record (pp. H507H532); FY2015 amount was taken from the joint explanatory statement to accompany P.L. 113-235, printed in
the December 12, 2014, Congressional Record (pp. H9342-H9363).
Notes: “ARRA” is the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5). The FY2013 enacted
amount includes the amount sequestered per the Budget Control Act of 2011(P.L. 112-25).
Congressional Research Service
4
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
In the early years of the COPS program, a majority of the program’s enacted appropriations went
to grant programs specifically aimed at hiring more police officers (see Figure 2). Beginning in
FY1998, however, enacted appropriations for the CHP began to decline, whereas non-hiring
grants started to see an increase in appropriations. Congress has traditionally specified what
amounts of the COPS appropriation each fiscal year are to be used for hiring grants and nonhiring grants. In FY2008, Congress appropriated $20 million for the CHP; this was the first time
Congress appropriated funding for hiring grants since FY2005. The American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) included $1 billion for the CHP, the most funding
Congress appropriated for hiring grants since FY1999. For FY2010, Congress included $298
million for the CHP as a part of the annual COPS appropriation. Congress continued its support
for the CHP, albeit at a reduced rate, by appropriating $247 million for FY2011 and $141 million
for FY2012. Appropriations for hiring programs in FY2009-FY2012 were the result of
Congress’s efforts to help local law enforcement agencies facing budget cuts as a result of the
recession either hire new law enforcement officers or retain officers they might have to layoff.
Appropriations for the hiring program since FY2012 have been around $150 million per fiscal
year.
Figure 2. Funding for the COPS Hiring Program, FY1995-FY2014
Appropriations in millions of dollars
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
0
Fiscal Year
Annual Appropriation
ARRA
Source: Appropriations for the COPS Hiring Program for FY1995 to FY2011 were provided by the U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services; FY2012 appropriation for the hiring
program was taken from H.Rept. 112-284; the FY2013 appropriation for the hiring program was provided the
U.S. Department of Justice; the FY2014 appropriation for the hiring program was taken from the joint
explanatory statement to accompany P.L. 113-76, printed in the January 15, 2014, Congressional Record (pp. H507H532).
Congressional Research Service
5
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
Notes: “ARRA” is the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5). The FY2013 enacted
amount includes the amount sequestered per the Budget Control Act of 2011(P.L. 112-25).
One potential question facing Congress as it considers the annual appropriation for the COPS
program is whether the federal government should continue to provide grants to state and local
law enforcement agencies to hire additional officers at a time of historically low crime rates.
Opponents of the program stress that state and local governments, not the federal government,
should be responsible for providing funding for police forces.13 They also argue that the purported
effect of COPS hiring grants on crime rates in the 1990s is questionable.14 They maintain that it is
not prudent to increase funding for the program at a time when crime is decreasing and the
federal government is facing annual deficits.15
Proponents of the COPS program assert that COPS hiring grants contributed to the decreasing
crime rate in the 1990s.16 Proponents believe that the federal government has a role to play in
supporting local law enforcement because it is the federal government’s responsibility to provide
for the security of U.S. citizens, which means protecting citizens from crime.17 They also
maintain that the federal government should support local law enforcement because it has become
more involved in homeland security and immigration enforcement.18
13
U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Markup of H.R. 1139, the “COPS Improvement Act of 2009,”
and H.R. 985, the “Free Flow of Information Act of 2009,” 111th Cong., 1st sess., March 25, 2009, pp. 20-21,
hereinafter “March 25 Markup of H.R. 1139.”
14
March 25 Markup of H.R. 1139, pp. 7-9. U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Markup of: H.R. 1107,
to Enact Certain Laws Relating to Public Contracts as Title 41, United States Code, “Public Contracts;” H.R. 1139,
the “COPS Improvement Act of 2009;” and H.R. 1575, the “The End GREED Act,” 111th Cong., 1st sess., March 18,
2009, p. 47, hereinafter “March 18 Markup of H.R. 1139.”
15
Ibid.
16
Rep. Conyers et al., “COPS Improvement Act of 2007,” House Debate, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol.
153 (May 15, 2007), pp. H4985-H4995.
17
March 18 Markup of H.R. 1139, p. 52.
18
Rep. Conyers et al., “COPS Improvement Act of 2007,” House Debate, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol.
153 (May 15, 2007), pp. H4985-H4995. March 25 Markup of H.R. 1139, p. 7
Congressional Research Service
6
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
Appendix. COPS Funding History
Table A-1. COPS’ Requested Funding,Total Enacted Funding, Funding for Hiring
Programs, and Authorized Appropriation, FY1995-FY2014
Amounts in millions of dollars
President’s
Request
New Budget
Authority
Carryover
(from prior
fiscal years)
Total
Hiring
Programs
Authorized
1995
$1,720
$1,300
$—
$1,300
$1,057
$1,332
1996
1,903
1,400
—
1,400
1,128
1,850
1997
1,976
1,420
—
1,420
1,339
1,950
1998
1,545
1,430
203
1,633
1,338
1,700
1999
1,420
1,430
90
1,520
1,201
1,700
2000
1,275
595
318
913
481
268
2001
1,335
1,037
5
1,042
408
—
2002
855
1,050
55
1,105
385
—
2003
1,382
978a
—
978
199
—
2004
164
748b
—
748
114
—
2005
97
598c
—
598
10
—
2006
118
472d
—
472
—
1,047
2007
102
542e
—
542
—
1,047
2008
32
587f
—
587
20
1,047
2009
—g
551h
—
551
1,000i
1,047
761
792j
—
792
298
—
2011
690
495k
—
495
247
—
2012
670
199l
—
199
141
—
2013
290
210m
—
210
155
—
2014
440
214n
—
214
151
—
Fiscal
Year
2010 Between FY1998
and FY2002, Congress directed the COPS Office to use unobligated balances from previous fiscal years to fund
grant programs, which included grants for hiring, school safety, law enforcement technology, combating
methamphetamine, armor vests for law enforcement officers, improving tribal law enforcement, and combating
domestic violence.
Select Issues
Authorized funding for the COPS program expired in FY2009. There are several issues policy
makers might consider if they take up legislation to reauthorize or fund the COPS program.
One potential question facing Congress is whether the federal government should continue to
provide grants to state and local law enforcement agencies to hire additional officers at a time of
historically low crime rates. The Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that the violent crime
Congressional Research Service
3
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): In Brief
rate for 2013 was 368 violent crimes per 100,000 people, the lowest violent crime rate since
1969.6 Opponents of the program stress that state and local governments, not the federal
government, should be responsible for providing funding for police forces.7 They also argue that
the purported effect of COPS hiring grants on crime rates in the 1990s is questionable.8 They
maintain that it is not prudent to increase funding for the program at a time when crime is
decreasing and the federal government is facing annual deficits.9
Proponents of the COPS program assert that COPS hiring grants contributed to the decreasing
crime rate in the 1990s.10 Three studies identified by CRS attempted to quantify the impact that
COPS grants had on crime rates from the mid-1990s to 2001. In general, the studies suggest that
COPS grants had a negative impact on crime rates, but the impact was not universal.11 The
studies suggest that COPS grants might not have been as effective at reducing crime in cities with
populations of more than 250,000 people. Proponents believe that the federal government has a
role to play in supporting local law enforcement because it is the federal government’s
responsibility to provide for the security of U.S. citizens, which means protecting citizens from
crime.12 Some policy makers might also be interested in using COPS hiring grants to promote
community policing activities after the fallout from recent civilian deaths at the hands of law
enforcement officers in Ferguson, MO, and Staten Island, NY.
As discussed above, the COPS program is currently authorized as a single-grant program,
whereby law enforcement agencies can apply for a “COPS grant” that they can use for one or
more of several programs outlined in current law. However, Congress has continued to
appropriate funding for specific grant programs under the COPS account in the Commerce,
Justice, Science and Related Agencies (CJS) appropriations act (see Table A-2).
Appropriations for the COPS account do not provide law enforcement agencies with the
flexibility envisioned in the current authorizing legislation. Instead of being able to apply for one
grant to use for one or more programs, law enforcement agencies must apply for funding under
several different programs. Law enforcement agencies are also limited to using their grants for the
programs specified by Congress in the annual CJS appropriations act.
6
Violent crime rates for the years 1960-2012 can be found in University at Albany, School of Criminal Justice,
Hindelang Criminal Justice Research Center, Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics (online), Table 3.106.2012. The
violent crime rate for 2013 can be found in Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States, 2013, Table 1.
7
U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Markup of: H.R. 1139, the “COPS Improvement Act of 2009” and
H.R. 985, the “Free Flow of Information Act of 2009,” 111th Cong., 1st sess., March 25, 2009, pp. 20-21, hereinafter
“March 25 Markup of H.R. 1139.”
8
March 25 Markup of H.R. 1139, pp. 7-9. U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Markup of: H.R. 1107, to
Enact Certain Laws Relating to Public Contracts as Title 41, United States Code, “Public Contracts;” H.R. 1139, the
“COPS Improvement Act of 2009;” and H.R. 1575, the “The End GREED Act,” 111th Cong., 1st sess., March 18, 2009,
p. 47, hereinafter “March 18 Markup of H.R. 1139.”
9
Ibid.
10
Rep. Conyers et al., “COPS Improvement Act of 2007,” House Debate, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol.
153 (May 15, 2007), pp. H4985-H4995.
11
U.S. Government Accountability Office, Community Policing Grants: COPS Grants Were a Modest Contributor to
Declines in Crime in the 1990s, GAO-06-104, October 2005; William N. Evans and Emily G. Owens, “COPS and
Crime,” Journal of Public Economics, vol. 91 (2007), pp. 181-201; and David B. Muhlhausen, Impact Evaluation of
COPS Grants in Large Cities, The Heritage Foundation, CDA06-03, Washington, DC, May 26, 2006.
12
March 18 Markup of H.R. 1139, p. 52.
Congressional Research Service
4
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): In Brief
Congress might consider whether in the future it should fund COPS as a single-grant program or
if it should continue to appropriate funds for individual programs. If Congress chooses to fund
COPS as a single-grant program, it could relieve the administrative burden on local law
enforcement agencies because they would have to apply for and manage only one grant award
rather than applying for grants under different programs. A single-grant program would provide
law enforcement agencies with a degree of freedom to expend their grant funds on programs that
address the needs of their communities. However, if Congress chooses to fund COPS as a singlegrant program, it would lose some control over how COPS funds are spent, and hence the impact
that the grant funding has on shaping state and local policies. A single-grant program would mean
that Congress could not ensure that a certain amount of funding was spent on hiring law
enforcement officers or used to upgrade law enforcement’s use of new technology. In addition,
awarding COPS grants under a single-grant program might make it more difficult to monitor
program performance because there would most likely be a wide variety of programs.
Congressional Research Service
5
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): In Brief
Appendix. COPS Funding History
Table A-1. COPS’ Requested Funding,Total Enacted Funding, Funding for Hiring
Programs, and Authorized Appropriation, FY1995-FY2015
Amounts in millions of dollars
Fiscal
Year
President’s
Request
New Budget
Authority
1995
$1,720
$1,300
1996
1,903
1997
Carryover
(from prior
fiscal years)
Total
Hiring
Programs
Authorized
—
$1,300
$1,057
$1,332
1,400
—
1,400
1,128
1,850
1,976
1,420
—
1,420
1,339
1,950
1998
1,545
1,430
203
1,633
1,338
1,700
1999
1,420
1,430
90
1,520
1,201
1,700
2000
1,275
595
318
913
481
268
2001
1,335
1,037
5
1,042
408
—
2002
855
1,050
55
1,105
385
—
2003
1,382
978a
—
978
199
—
2004
164
748
—
748
114
—
2005
97
598
—
598
10
—
2006
118
472
—
472
—
1,047
2007
102
542b
—
542
—
1,047
2008
32
587
—
587
20
1,047
2009
—c
551
—
551
1,000d
1,047
2010
761
792
—
792
298
—
2011
690
495
—
495
247
—
2012
670
199
—
199
141
—
2013
290
210
—
210
155
—
2014
440
214
—
214
151
—
2015
274
208
—
208
135
—
Source: CRS presentation of the Administration’s budget requests for the respective years. FY1995-FY2011
appropriations were provided by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing
Services; FY2012 appropriation was taken from H.Rept. 112-284; FY2013 appropriation was provided by the U.S.
Department of Justice; the FY2014 appropriation was taken from the joint explanatory statement to accompany
P.L. 113-76, printed in the January 15, 2014, Congressional Record (pp. H507-H532); FY2015 amount was taken
from the joint explanatory statement to accompany P.L. 113-235, printed in the December 12, 2014,
Congressional Record (pp. H9342-H9363). Authorized funding taken from P.L. 103-322 and P.L. 109-162.
Notes: New budget authority does not include any rescissions of unobligated balances. The FY2013 enacted
amount includes the amount sequestered per the Budget Control Act of 2011(P.L. 112-25).
a.
Includes a $929 million appropriation and a $55 million supplemental appropriation.
b). Authorized funding taken
from P.L. 103-322 and P.L. 109-162.
a.
Includes a $929 million appropriation and a $55 million supplemental appropriation.
b.
Does not include a $6.4 million rescission of unobligated balances.
c.
Does not include a $99 million rescission of unobligated balances.
d.
Does not include $86.5 million rescission of unobligated balances.
e.
Does not include an across-the-board rescission of 0.5% to OJP and COPS programs to fund the Office of
Audit, Assessment and Management (OAAM).
Congressional Research Service
76
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
f.
Does not include $87.5 million rescission of unobligated balances, or a $10.3 million rescission of
appropriations for the COPS program that were appropriated from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust
Fund.
gIn Brief
c.
For FY2009, the Administration did not request funding for any specific COPS grant program. Rather, the
Administration requested $4 million for community police training and technical assistance under the State
and Local Law Enforcement Assistance account in the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
appropriations bill.
h.
Does not include $100 million rescission of unobligated balances.
id.
The $1 billion COPS received for hiring grants for FY2009 was appropriated under the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5).
j.
Does not include $40 million rescission of unobligated balances.
k.
Does not include $10.2 million rescission of unobligated balances.
l.
Does not include $23.6 million rescission of unobligated balances.
m.
The FY2013 enacted amount includes the amount sequestered per the Budget Control Act of
2011(P.L. 112-25). The FY2013 appropriation does not include a $12.2 million rescission of
unobligated balances.
n.
The FY2014 enacted amount does not include a $26 million rescission of unobligated balances.
Congressional Research Service
8Congressional Research Service
7
Table A-2. COPS Funding, by Program, FY2005-FY2014FY2006-FY2015
Amounts in thousands of dollars
Law Enforcement Technology Program
Community Policing Development
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013a
FY2014
$136,764FY2015
$128,245
$166,145
$205,366
$187,000
$170,223
$1,243
—
—
—
14,800
3,949
9,546
3,760
4,000
12,000
9,940
10,000
9,405
7,500
7,500
32,914c
33,000d
33,000
Tribal Law Enforcement Programs
19,733
14,808
15,808
15,040
20,000
40,000
33,134
35,000b
Methamphetamine Enforcement and Clean-up
51,854
62,778
70,000
61,187
39,500
40,385
12,425
12,500
12,241
10,000
9,8667,000
COPS Hiring Program
—
—
20,000
—
298,000
246,845
141,000
155,170
151,000
—134,500
COPS Hiring Recovery Program
—
—
—
1,000,000
—
—
—
—
—
Interoperable Communications Technology
98,664—
9,872
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
COPS Management & Administration
29,599
—
1,541
28,200
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Police Integrity Program
7,399—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
School Safety Initiatives/ Secure Our Schools
Act
4,267
—
—
—
16,000
16,000
13,253
—
—
—
—
Training and Technical Assistance on the
Collaborative Reform Model
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—5,000
5,000
Anti-methamphetamine Task Forces
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
7,5007,500
7,000
Anti-heroin Task Forces
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
7,000
Regional Gang Task Forces
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
7,000
Child Sexual Predator Elimination/Sex
Offender Management
—
—
—
15,608
18,000
24,000
19,880
—
—
—
—
Sex Offender Management
—
—
—
(4,162)
(5,000)
(11,000)
(9,112)
—
—
—
—
National Sex Offender Registry
—
—
—
(850)
(1,000)
(1,000)
(828)
—
—
—
—
Bullet-proof Vest Program
24,666
29,617
29,617
25,850
25,000
30,000
24,850
—
—
—
—
Crime Identification Technology Programs
28,070407
28,407
28,407—
—
—
—
—
—
—
National Criminal History Improvement
Program
24,666—
Interoperable Communications Technology
CRS-8
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013a
9,872
9,872
9,400
10,000
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
10,000
—
—
—
—
—
COPS Hiring Program
COPS Hiring Recovery Program
NICS Improvement
CRS-9
—
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013a
108,531—
DNA Backlog Reduction Programs
107,145
112,145
152,272
156,000
161,000
133,363
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
14,780Coverdell Forensic Science Grants
18,264
18,264
18,800
25,000
—
—
—
—
—
—
Project Safe Neighborhoods
—
14,808
20,613
20,000
15,000
—
—
—
—
—
—
Offender Re-entry Program
9,866
4,936
14,879
11,750
25,000
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
14,800
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—Anti-gang Program
39,489
45,000
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
598,346—
Total
472,191
541,838
587,233
1,550,500
791,608
494,933
198,500
209,730
214,000
DNA Backlog Reduction Programs
Crime Lab Improvement Grants
Coverdell Forensic Science Grants
Project Sentry
Police Corps
Anti-gang Program
Total
FY2014
208,000
National Criminal History Improvement
Program
NICS Improvement
FY2014
FY2015
Source: FY2004-FY2011 appropriations were provided by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services; FY2012 appropriation was
taken from H.Rept. 112-284; FY2013 appropriation provided by the U.S. Department of Justice; the FY2014 appropriation for the hiring program was taken from the
joint explanatory statement to
accompany P.L. 113-76, printed in the January 15, 2014, Congressional Record (pp. H507-H532); FY2015 appropriation was taken from the joint explanatory statement to
accompany P.L. 113-235, printed in the December 12, 2014, Congressional Record (pp. H9342-H9363).
Notes: Amounts in bold were transferred to the Office of Justice Programs.
CRS-109
a.
The FY2013 enacted amount also includes the amount sequestered per the Budget Control Act of 2011(P.L. 112-25).
b.
This amount includes $15.0 million that was transferred from the appropriation for the COPS Hiring Program.
c.
This amount includes $14.1 million that was transferred from the appropriation for the COPS Hiring Program.
d.
This amount includes $16.5 million that was transferred from the appropriation for the COPS Hiring Program.
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and FundingIn Brief
Author Contact Information
Nathan James
Analyst in Crime Policy
njames@crs.loc.gov, 7-0264
Congressional Research Service
1110