Contents

• Introduction
• Financing of the Crime Victims Fund
• Deposits to the CVF
• Caps on the CVF
• Carryover Balance of the CVF
• Distribution of the Crime Victims Fund
• Children's Justice Act Program
• Executive Office offor U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA)
• Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
• The Victim Notification System
• Victim Compensation and Assistance
• Victim Compensation Formula Grant Program
• Victim Assistance Formula Grant Program
• Discretionary Grants
• Antiterrorism EmergencySurvivors' Bill of Rights Act of 2016
• Antiterrorism Emergency Reserve
Child Pornography Victims Reserve
• Selected Issues
• Issues in Considering the Balance of the Fund
• Issues in Considering Amendments to VOCA
• VOCA Support and American Indian Tribes
• Fairness for Crime Victims Act of 2017

Summary

In 1984, the Crime Victims Fund (CVF, or the Fund) was established by the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA, P.L. 98-473) to provide funding for state victim compensation and assistance programs. Since 1984, VOCA has been amended several times to support additional victim-related activities. These amendments established within the CVF including (1) discretionary grants for private organizations, (2) the Federal Victim Notification System, (3) funding for victim assistance staff within the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys, (4) funding for the Children's Justice Act Program, and (5) assistance and compensation for victims of terrorism, (6) funding for sexual assault survivors' notification grants and ensuring rights of sexual assault survivors, and (7) restitution for victims of child pornography.

In 1988, the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) was formally established within the Department of Justice (DOJ) to administer the CVFVOCA programs. As authorized by VOCA, the OVC awards CVF money through grants to states, local units of government, individuals, and other entities. The OVC also distributes CVF money to specially designated programs, such as the Children's Justice Act Program and the Federal Victim Notification System.

Deposits to the CVF come from criminal fines, forfeited appearance bonds, penalties and special assessments collected by the U.S. Attorneys' Offices, federal courts, and Federal Bureau of Prisons. Since 2002, Congress has allowed gifts, bequests, and donations from private entities to be deposited into the CVF. Of note, the largest source of deposits into the CVF is criminal fines. At the end of FY2016FY2019, the CVF had a balance of more than $9$6.353 billion.

When the CVF was created in 1984, Congress placed a cap on how much money could be deposited into the CVF each fiscal year. Congress eliminated the cap for deposits in 1993. From FY1985 to FY1998, deposits collected in each fiscal year were distributed in the following fiscal year to support crime victim services. In FY2000, Congress established an annual obligation cap on CVF funds available for distribution to reduce the impacteffects of fluctuating deposits and to ensure the stability of funds for crime victims programs and activities. Since 2000, Congress has established the annual obligation cap in appropriations law.

In FY2015, Congress set the CVF obligation cap at $2.361 billion, a 216.9more than 200% increase over the FY2014 cap. In FY2016, Congress set the cap at $3.042 billion, a further increase to previous caps; however, $379 million was transferred ($745 million). In the following years, Congress maintained (more or less) the increased cap, but also directed DOJ to use funds from the CVF for purposes not authorized by VOCA. From FY2015 to FY2020, Congress transferred funds from the CVF to the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW; for purposes outside of VOCA) and $10 million was designated for the DOJ Office of the Inspector General for oversight and auditing purposes. In FY2017, however, Congress set the cap at $2.573 billion, a 15.4% decrease compared to the FY2016 cap. From this amount, $326 million was transferred to OVW (again for purposes outside of VOCA) and $10 million was designated for the DOJ Office of the Inspector General for oversight and auditing purposes.

Over the past few years, Congress has taken a number of unprecedented ) for programs authorized under the Violence Against Women Act (P.L. 103-322, as amended) and DOJ's Office of the Inspector General (OIG). From FY2018 to FY2020, Congress set aside 3%, 5%, and 5% (respectively) of the amount made available for obligation for tribal assistance grants. The cap has also decreased for two consecutive years, from a record high of $4.436 billion in FY2018, to $3.353 billion in FY2019, and down to $2.641 billion in FY2020. In FY2020, the tribal assistance grant amount was $132 million, the OVW transfer was $435 million, and the OIG transfer was $10 million. The amount made available for VOCA-authorized programs in FY2020 was $2.064 billion. Over the past few years, Congress has taken a number of actions involving the CVF. In the 114^th Congress, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (P.L. 114-74) included a provision (§702) that required the rescission and permanent cancellation of $1.5 billion from the balance of the Crime Victims Fund. In addition, in FY2017 Congress calculatedfrom FY2017 to FY2020 Congress opted to calculate the obligation cap based on a three-year average of collectionsdeposits into the CVF.

In considering the CVF allocation and future caps, there are several issues on which policymakers may deliberate. Congress may consider whether to adjust the manner in which the CVF is allocated, amend VOCA to accommodate additional victim activities or groups, further adjust the cap and allow use offunds from the CVF to be used for grant programs other than those explicitly authorized by VOCA (as they did for FY2016 and FY2017), or make other adjustments to the CVF cap—such as eliminateeliminating the cap altogether.

---

Introduction

In 1984, the Crime Victims Fund (CVF, or the Fund) was established by the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA, P.L. 98-473) to provide funding for state victim compensation and assistance programs.¹ Since 1984, VOCA has been amended several times to support additional victim-related activities. These amendments established withinthat the CVF

• be used for discretionary grants for private organizations;^,2
• the Federal Victim Notification System;^,3
• funding for victim assistance staff in the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA);^,4
• funding for the Children's Justice Act Program;^,5 and
• assistance and compensation for victims of terrorism,⁶
• sexual assault survivors' notification grants and ensuring rights of sexual assault survivors,⁷ and
• restitution for victims of child pornography.⁸
.⁶

In 1988, the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) was formally established within the Department of Justice (DOJ) to administer the CVF.⁷9 As authorized by VOCA, the OVC awards CVF money through formula and discretionary grants to states, local units of government, individuals, and other entities. The OVC also distributes CVF money to specially designated programs, such as the Children's Justice Act Program and the Federal Victim Notification System (see Figure 1).⁸

10

The OVC's mission is to enhance the nation's capacity to assist crime victims and to improve attitudes, policies, and practices that promote justice and help victims. According to the OVC, this mission is accomplished by (1) administering the CVF, (2) supporting direct services for victims, (3) providing training programs for service providers, (4) sponsoring the development of best practices for service providers, and (5) producing reports on best practices.⁹11 The OVC funds victim-support programs in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, tribes, and the territories.¹⁰

12

Notably, Congress has amended VOCA several times to provide support for victims of terrorism.¹¹13 These amendments established CVF-funded programs for (1) assistance to victims of terrorism¹²14 who are injured or killed as a result of a terrorist act outside the United States, (2) compensation and assistance to victims of terrorism within the United States, and (3) an antiterrorism emergency reserve fund to support victims of terrorism.

This report provides background and funding information for VOCA programs and the CVF. It describes the process through which CVF fundsfunds in the CVF are allocated and explains how the CVF impactsaffects the annual budget for DOJ. It then provides an analysis of selected issues that Congress may consider regarding the CVF and the federal budget.

Financing of the Crime Victims Fund

Deposits to the CVF

The CVF does not receive appropriated funding.¹³15 Rather, deposits to the CVF come from a number of sources including criminal fines, forfeited bail bonds, penalties, and special assessments collected by the U.S. Attorneys' Offices, federal courts, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons from offenders convicted of federal crimes.¹⁴16 In 2001, the USA PATRIOT Act (P.L. 107-56) established that gifts, bequests, or donations from private entities could also be deposited to the CVF.

The largest source of deposits into the CVF is criminal fines.¹⁵17 Large criminal fines, if collected, can have a significant effect on deposits into receipts for the CVF. For example, from FY1996 through FY2004, fines collected from 12 defendants in federal courts accounted for 45% of all deposits to the CVF during this time period.¹⁶18 Table 1 provides the amounts deposited into the CVF in each fiscal year from 1985 through 2016FY1985 to FY2019.

Fluctuation in Deposits and Growth of the Fund

As Table 1 illustrates, since 2000FY2000 there has been considerable fluctuation in the amounts deposited each fiscal year. For example, from FY2013 to FY2014 the monetary amount collected rose by over 140.0% and then decreased by approximately 26.0% in FY2015. This was followed by a 43.7% decrease in FY2016, and then a 443.0% increase in FY2017. Table 1 provides the annual amounts collected from FY1985 through FY2016FY2019.

During the last decade, over $20approximately $24 billion has been deposited into the CVF. Large criminal fines levied in cases of financial fraud and other white collar crimes likely contributed to the sizeable growth of the Fund.¹⁷19 Although OVC had expected deposits to remain high due to major fines levied against federal offenders (in particular, against corporate violators of federal law),¹⁸20 deposits into the Fund fluctuate from year to year and sometimes decrease, as they did from FY2015 to FY2016. Further, DOJ has identified the prosecution of violent offenders as a priority.¹⁹21 While this does not mean that prosecutions against corporate offenders that pay substantial criminal fines will decline, if these prosecutions were to decline it may effect a further decline in the deposit amounts to the CVF.

Caps on the CVF

In the history of the CVF, two caps have affected the balance and distribution of the Fund: a cap on deposits and an obligation cap.

Cap on Deposits

In 1984, Congress placed a cap on how much could be deposited into the CVF for the first eight yearseach fiscal year. As shown in Table 1, from FY1985 through FY1992, the annual cap on deposits ranged from $100 million to $150 million. In 1993, Congress lifted the cap on deposits, establishing that allall criminal fines, special assessments, and forfeited bail bonds could be deposited into the CVF.

Obligation Cap

From FY1985 to FY1998, deposits collected in each fiscal year were distributed in the following fiscal year to support crime victimsvictim services. In 2000, Congress established an annual obligation cap on the amount of CVF funds available for distribution to reduce the impacteffect of fluctuating deposits and ensure the stability of funds for related programs and activities. Congress establishes the CVF cap each year as a part of the appropriations for DOJ.

Recent Changes to the CVF Obligation Cap

In FY2015, Congress set the CVF obligation cap at $2.361 billion, a 216.9% increase over the FY2014 cap. Congress did not specify directions for the increase in CVF funds, which were (see Table 1). Unlike subsequent fiscal years, Congress did not direct DOJ to use any of the additional funding for purposes other than those specified in VOCA, which was distributed to crime victims programs according to the formula established by VOCA. In FY2016, Congress set the cap at $3.042 billion, a further increase to the capfurther increased the obligation cap to $3.042 billion; however, $379 million was transferred to the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) for purposes outside of VOCA and $10 million was designated for the DOJ Office of the Inspector General (OIG) for oversight and auditing purposes.²² After deducting these amounts specified inthe transfers required by P.L. 114-113, the obligation cap was equal to $2.653 billion, a 12.4% increase over the FY2015 cap. In FY2017, however, Congress set the cap at $2.573 billion, a 15.4% decrease compared to the FY2016 cap. From this amount, $326 million was transferred to OVW (again for purposes outside of VOCA) and $10 million was again designated for the DOJ OIG for oversight and auditing purposes. Of note, the Administration's FY2018 budget request specifies that $610 million be transferred from the CVF to OVW and agencies within the Office of Justice Programs for non-VOCA grant programs.²⁰

In the accompanying explanatory statement for the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017 (Division B, P.L. 115-31), Congress explains that collectionsexplained that deposits into the CVF havehad slowed, and to ensure solvency of the Fund the FY2017 obligation cap was calculated based on the three-year average of collectionsdeposits into the CVF. In the years since, Congress has continued to calculate the annual obligation cap in this manner.

From FY2018 to FY2020, Congress continued to transfer funds from the CVF to OVW and OIG. In addition, in FY2018 Congress set aside 3% of the cap (off the top before any other funds are allocated) for tribal assistance grants. In FY2019 and FY2020, Congress set aside 5% of the cap for these grants.

Carryover Balance of the CVF Funding for a current fiscal year's grants is provided by the previous fiscal into the CVF.²¹

Appropriations Riders and the CVF Cap

Language restricting the use of certain funds, particularly as they relate to abortions,²² is commonly included in appropriations language. Appropriations riders may or may not apply to the programs authorized by the CVF, depending on how those riders are framed. Amounts in the CVF are not appropriated; rather, the CVF is funded through fines and penalties as specified in VOCA.

Carryover Balance of the CVF

Funding for a current year's grants is provided by the previous year's deposits to the CVF, and the OVC is authorized to use the capped amount for grant awards in a given fiscal year. After the yearly allocations are distributed, the remaining balance in the CVF is retained for future expendituresobligation. The difference between the fund's balance and the capped amount due to the obligation limitationobligation limit is scored as a reduction oran offset (i.e., as a Change in Mandatory Program or CHIMP) in the DOJDOJ's total discretionary spending in a given fiscal year.²³24 Moreover, that offset also affects the discretionary spending total in measures reported in the Commerce, Justice, and Science appropriations bill.²⁴

the annual Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) appropriations act.²⁵

VOCA law requires that all sums deposited in a fiscal year that are not obligated must remain in the CVF for obligation in future fiscal years.²⁵26 If collections in a previous year exceed the obligation cap, amounts over the cap are credited to the CVF, also referred to as the "rainy day" fund, for future program benefits. For example, in FY2000 funding for the year was cappedthe obligation limit was set at $500 million despite the fact that collectionsdeposits were over $985 million in FY1999. In FY2000, approximately $485 million remained in the CVF and was credited for future use.²⁶27 Table 1 provides the balances that remain credited to the CVF at the end of each fiscal year from FY2000 through FY2016FY2019.

Distribution of the Crime Victims Fund

As previously stateddiscussed, the OVC awards CVF money through formula and discretionary grants to states, local units of government, individuals, and other entities. The OVC also awards CVF money to specially designated programs. Grants are allocated according to statuteas required by VOCA (see Figure 1) established by the VOCA. The programs supported with funding from the CVF are discussed in more detail below.

Figure 1. Annual VOCA-Authorized Distribution of the Crime Victims Fund

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime, Crime Victims Fund, Figure 2, httphttps://www.ojp.usdojovc.gov/ovc/pubs/crimevictimsfundfs/intro.html; and U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of CommunicationsLegislative Affairs. Notes: : This figure illustrates the annual distribution process as authorized under VOCA. From FY2018 to FY2020, Congress set aside 3%, 5%, and 5%, respectively, of the annual cap (off the top) for tribal assistance grants. Beginning in FY2012, OJP assessed management and administrativeadministration (M&A) costs for programs funded by the CVF. OJP does not assess M&A costs for the Children's Justice Act Program and state victim compensation grants. In FY2012, state victim assistance grants were assessed 11.6% in M&A costs and all other CVF-funded grants were assessed 8.1% in M&A costs. In FY2013, state victim assistance grants were assessed 9.9% in M&A costs and all other CVF-funded grants were assessed 7.4% in M&A costs. In FY2014, CVF grants were assessed a 7.9% M&A costs. In FY2015, CVF grants were assessed 2.7% ($59.96 million) in M&A costs. OJP reduced the percentage for FY2015 due to the substantial increase in the obligation cap for that year, and has generally kept a similar percentage over the last several years. From FY2016 through FY2020. In FY2016, CVF grants were assessed 3.1% ($78.06 million) in M&A costs$78.06 million, $92.01 million, $82.16 million, $80.90 million, and $81.77 million, respectively. a. As of FY2016FY2020, there were 213192 Victim Witness Coordinators supported by the CVF. b. As of FY2016FY2020, there were 192186 Victim Witness Specialists supported by the CVF.

Children's Justice Act Program

The OVC and the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) manage the Children's Justice Act Program, a grant program designed to improve the investigation, handling, and prosecution of child abuse cases. Up to $20 million must be distributed annually to the Children's Justice Act Program.²⁷28 Of the designated funds, ACF receives up to $17 million to manage this program for the states, while the OVC distributes up to $3 million for tribal populations.²⁸29 In FY2016FY2020, the ACF received $17.36 million from the CVF to fund the Children's Justice Act Program. Table 2 provides funding data from FY2012 through FY2016.

FY2016 to FY2020.

Executive Office offor U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA)

The OVC provides annual funding to support victim-witness coordinators within each of the 93 U.S. Attorney's Offices and 12 victim-witness coordinators exclusively serving Indian Country.³⁰.²⁹ In accordance with the Attorney General Guidelines for Victim and Witness Assistance,³⁰31 these personnel provide direct support for victims of federal crime by assisting victims in criminal proceedings and advising victimsthem of their rights, such as their right to make oral and written victim impact statements at an offender's sentencing hearing. Table 3 provides the number of full-time employees supported with CVF funding and the amount of CVF funding that the EOUSA victim-witness coordinator program has received from the OVC from FY2012 through FY2016FY2016 to FY2020.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

The OVC provides annual funding to support victim witness specialists within the 56 FBI field offices.³¹32 These specialists, or coordinators, personally assist victims of federal crime and provide information on criminal cases throughout case development and court proceedings.³²33 Table 4 provides the amount of CVF funding that the FBI's Victim Witness Program has received from the OVC in FY2012-FY2016from FY2016 to FY2020.

The Victim Notification System

The OVC provides annual funding to support the Victim Notification System (VNS), a program administered by the EOUSA and jointly operated by the FBI, EOUSA, OVC, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons.³³34 VNS is the vehicle through which victims of federal crime³⁵ are notified of major case events relating to the offender, such as the release or detention status of the offender.³⁴36 Table 5 provides the amount of CVF funding that the VNS has received from the OVC in FY2012-FY2016from FY2016 to FY2020.

Victim Compensation and Assistance

After the Children's Justice Act, victim witness, and VNS programs are funded, remaining CVF money under the obligation cap is distributed as follows: Victim Compensation Formula Grants (47.5%); Victim Assistance Formula Grants (47.5%); and OVC Discretionary Grants (5%).³⁵37 Amounts not used for state compensation grants are made available for state victim assistance formula grants. As shown in Figure 1, while both compensation and assistance grants are allotted the same percentage of the remaining balance, the state victim assistance grant program receives 47.5% of the remaining balance plus any funds not needed to reimburse victim compensation programs at the statutorily established rate.

Victim Compensation Formula Grant Program

As mentioned, 47.5% of the remaining annual CVF money is for grant awards to state crime victim compensation programs.³⁶38 All 50 states, the District of Columbia, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and Puerto Rico have victim compensation programs.³⁷39 The OVC awards each state 60% of the total amount the state paid (from state funding sources) to victims in the prior fiscal year.³⁸40

According to VOCA, a state is eligible to receive a victim compensation formula grant if the state program meets the following requirements: (1) promotes victim cooperation with requests of law enforcement authorities, (2) certifies that grants received will not be used to supplant state funds, (3) ensures that non-resident victims receive compensation awards on the same basis as victims residing within the state, (4) ensures that compensation provided to victims of federal crimes is given on the same basis as the compensation given to victims of state crime, and (5) provides compensation to residents of the state who are victims of crimes occurring outside the state.³⁹

The formula grants41 Grant funds may be used to reimburse crime victims for out-of-pocket expenses such as medical and mental health counseling expenses, lost wages, funeral and burial costs, and other costs (except property loss, with limited exceptions)⁴²)⁴⁰ authorized in a state's compensation statute. Victims are reimbursed for crime-related expenses that are not covered by other resources, such as private insurance. SinceFrom FY1999 to FY2016, medical and dental services have accounted for close to half of the total payout in annual compensation expenses.⁴¹43 In FY2015, 45.2%FY2017, 37.0%, or $136.67 million, of the total payments were for medical and dental expenses.⁴²

44 According to OVC data, assault victims represent the highest percentage of victims receiving compensation each year.⁴³45 Victims of assault represented 39.336.0% all claims filedpaid⁴⁶ during FY2015. Nearly half of assault claims for FY2015 were "domestic and family violence-related."⁴⁴

FY2017.

Table 6 provides the amount of CVF funding that was allottedallocated to OVC's Victim Compensation Program from FY2012 through FY2016.

FY2015 to FY2019.

Victim Assistance Formula Grant Program

The other 47.5% of the remaining annual CVF money (see Figure 1) is for the Victim Assistance Formula Grants Program. Amounts not used for state compensation grants are made available for the Victim Assistance Formula Grants Program. This program provides grants to state crime victim assistance programs to administer funds for state and community-based victim service program operations.⁴⁵47 The grants support direct services to crime victims including information and referral services, crisis counseling, temporary housing, criminal justice advocacy support, and other assistance needs.

Assistance grants are distributed by states according to guidelines established by VOCA. States are required to prioritize the following groups: (1) underserved populations of victims of violent crime,⁴⁶48 (2) victims of child abuse, (3) victims of sexual assault, and (4) victims of spousal abuse.⁴⁷49 States may not use federal funds to supplant state and local funds otherwise available for crime victim assistance. The time period in which states must use their annual award includes the year it was given to the state plus three years.⁴⁸

VOCA establishes the amount of funds allocated to each state and territory. Each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico receive a base amount of $500,000 each year.⁴⁹50 The territories of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and American Samoa receive a base amount of $200,000 each year.⁵⁰51 The remaining funds are distributed based on U.S. census population data. Table 7 provides the amount of CVF funding that the OVC allottedallocated for the Victim Assistance Grant Program from FY2012 through FY2016FY2015 to FY2019.

According to the OVC, victims of domestic violence make up the largest number of victimsdomestic or family violence victimizations made up the largest victimization type among those receiving services under the Victim Assistance Formula Grants Program. In FY2015, 47.8% of the 3,716,668 in FY2017; 43.0% of the 5,088,858 victims served by these grants were victims ofreported family or domestic violence victimization.⁵².⁵¹ This percentage has remained relatively stable, although it has declined slightly since 2000, when 50.1% of all victims served by the victim assistance grants were victims of domestic or family violence.⁵²

53

Discretionary Grants

Five percent of the CVF money available annually (after the specially designated program allocations have been made; (see Figure 1) is for discretionary grants.⁵³54 According to VOCA, discretionary grants must be distributed for (1) demonstration projects, program evaluation, compliance efforts, and training and technical assistance services to crime victim assistance programs; (2) financial support of services to victims of federal crime; and (3) nonprofit victim service organizations and coalitions to improve outreach and services to victims of crime.⁵⁴55 The OVC awards discretionary grants each year through a competitive application process.⁵⁵

56

Table 8 provides the amount of CVF funding that the OVC allotted for discretionary grants from FY2012 through FY2016FY2016 to FY2020.

Antiterrorism Emergency Reserve

The Antiterrorism Emergency Reserve was established inunder P.L. 104-132 to meet the immediate and long-term needs of victims of terrorism and mass violence.⁵⁶59 The OVC accomplishes this mission by providing supplemental grants to statesstate and local jurisdictions (where an incident has occurred) for victim compensation and assistance and also by providing direct compensation to victims (U.S. nationals or officers or employees of the U.S. government, including Foreign Service Nationals working for the U.S. government) of terrorist acts that occur abroad.

The Director of the OVC is authorized to set aside $50 million of CVF money in the Antiterrorism Emergency Reserve to respond to the needs of victims of the September 11 terrorist attacks, and subsequently, to replenish any amounts expended so that not more than $50 million is reserved in any fiscal year for any future victims of terrorism.⁵⁷60 After funding all other program areas, as listed above, the funds retained in the CVF may be used to replenish the Antiterrorism Emergency Reserve.⁵⁸61 This reserve fund supports the following programs:

• Antiterrorism and Emergency Assistance Program (AEAP),
• International Terrorism Victim Expense Reimbursement Program,
• Crime Victim Emergency Assistance Fund at the FBI, and
• Victim Reunification Program.

Table 9 provides the amounts of funding that OVC has committed from the Antiterrorism Emergency Reserve from FY2015 to FY2019. Table 9. Funds Obligated from the Antiterrorism Emergency Reserve

(dollars in millions)

 

FY2015

FY2016

FY2017

FY2018

FY2019

Obligations for Programs Funded by the Antiterrorism Emergency Reserve

$8.01

$12.32

$36.57

$7.29

$26.79

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legislative Affairs.

Notes: Funds may be obligated to the following programs that are funded by the Antiterrorism Emergency Reserve: the Antiterrorism and Emergency Assistance Program, International Terrorism Victim Expense Reimbursement Program, Crime Victim Emergency Assistance Fund at the FBI, and Victim Reunification Program. For grant award data, see U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, OJP Award Data, https://www.ojp.gov/funding/explore/ojp-award-data.

Assistance for Victims of Terrorism and Mass Violence

Over the past fewAssistance for Victims of Terrorism and Mass Violence

Over the past two years, the OVC has responded to several incidents of terrorism and/or mass violence in the United States with grants from the AEAP. Following incidents of terrorism or mass violence, jurisdictions⁵⁹62 may apply for AEAP funds to be used for crisis response, criminal justice support, crime victim compensation, and training and technical assistance expenses. In January 2014, OVC announced the award of $8.4 million to assist victims, witnesses, and first responders of the Boston Marathon bombings, an incident that resulted in the deaths of three spectators and a police officer, and the injuries of hundreds more. The grant award was received by the Massachusetts Office for Victim Assistance to assist organizations with "costs, both incurred and anticipated, for organizations providing crisis intervention services and trauma-informed care, continuum of care, socioeconomic support, wrap-around legal services and other victim assistance."⁶⁰ In 2013, AEAP funds were also used to support victims of mass shootings in Newtown, CT;⁶¹ Oak Creek, WI;⁶² and Aurora, CO.⁶³

2019, for example, OVC awarded $16.7 million to the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services and $8.4 million to the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board to support victims of the mass violence shooting at the Route 91 Harvest Festival in Las Vegas on October 1, 2017.⁶³ A gunman killed 58 people and injured at least 622 others. Funding supported "supplemental crisis response and consequence management services to help victims continue to heal and cope with probable re-traumatization."⁶⁴

Assistance for Victims of 9/11

In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the OVC used money available in the Antiterrorism Emergency Reserve account to immediately respond to the needs of victims. The OVC awarded $3.1 million in victim assistance funding and $13.5 million in victim compensation funding⁶⁴65 to the states of New York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania.⁶⁵66 The funds were used by these states to coordinate and provide emergency assistance to victims in the form of crisis counseling and other direct services, and to offset out-of-pocket expenses for medical and mental health services, funeral costs, and lost wages.

In addition to providing funds to states, the OVC provided other assistance and services to victims, including the following:

• OVC staff worked to identify the short- and long-term needs of victims and related costs, as well as to coordinate its efforts with other federal agencies such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
• Immediately following the attacks, the OVC set up a call center that offered a 24-hour, toll-free telephone line for collecting victim information and providing referrals for financial, housing, and counseling assistance. Approximately 37,000 victims and family members received assistance and referrals through the call center.⁶⁶67
• The OVC also established a Victim and Family Travel Assistance Center, which handled all logistical arrangements and paid travel and lodging costs for 1,800 family members traveling to funerals and memorial services.⁶⁷68
• The OVC designed and operated a special "Hope and Remembrance" website to provide victims with answers to frequently asked questions, official messages from U.S. government sources, news releases, etc.⁶⁸

69Child Pornography Victims Reserve

The Child Pornography Victims Reserve was established under the Amy, Vicky, and Andy Child Pornography Victim Assistance Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-299).⁷⁰ Among other changes, the act authorized a one-time $35,000 payment (adjusted for inflation) to victims of child pornography trafficking offenses. The Child Pornography Victims Reserve was established within the Crime Victims Fund to provide funding for these payments. Courts must impose additional assessments on persons convicted of child pornography offenses,⁷¹ and the additional assessments must be deposited into the Child Pornography Victims Reserve.

The Director of OVC may set aside up to $10 million of the amounts remaining in the CVF in any fiscal year (after distributing the amounts for VOCA programs listed in Figure 1) for the Child Pornography Victims Reserve, which may be used by the Attorney General for payments under 18 U.S.C. Section 2259(d). Amounts in the reserve may be carried over from fiscal year to fiscal year, but the total amount of the reserve shall not exceed $10 million.⁷² As of February 29, 2020, $52,075 had been collected into the reserve fund, and no receipts had been used yet on OVC programs.⁷³ Selected Issues

Congress may confront several issues when considering the balance of the CVF, the annual obligation cap on the CVF, and possible amendments to VOCA. These issues include using the CVF for purposes other than those explicitly authorized by VOCA, making adjustments to the CVF cap such as eliminating thethe solvency of the Fund, eliminating the annual obligation cap, and amending VOCA to accommodate new programs or to adjust the allocation formula. Congress may also consider the purposes for which certain pools of victim services monies can be used.

Issues in Considering the Balance of the Fund

Because the CVF balance remains significantly larger than the amount distributed to victims each year, there are several issues Congress may consider, and in some cases already has considered, regarding the balance of the Fund. One is whether to use receipts from the CVF to fund grant programs that are not authorized by VOCA. In the past, Congress has passed legislation that made CVF money available to support programs authorized outside of VOCA.⁶⁹74 For example, the National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 110-181) included a provision mandating that the Attorney General transfer from the emergency reserve of the CVF "such funds as may be required" to cover the costs of special masters appointed by U.S. district courts in civil cases brought against state sponsors of terrorism. Until FY2016, CVF money had not been used to fund grant programs outside of those authorized by VOCA; however, in the FY2016 and FY2017through FY2020 CJS appropriations acts,⁷⁰75 CVF funds were transferred to the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW)OVW to be used for specified grant programs authorized under the Violence Against Women Act.⁷¹ The Administration's FY2018 budget request proposes to use the CVF to fund multiple DOJ accounts not authorized by VOCA, including those that address domestic violence, sex offenders, trafficking victims, and child abuse.⁷²

76

While it could be argued that funds for the non-VOCA grant programs go todescribed above still support crime victims, it raises a question about whether these actions might pave the way for the CVF to be used to support grant programs that mightare not be victim-focused. On the other hand, the CVF has a balance of more than $96 billion, which indicates that receipts to the fundFund, for certain years, exceededexceed the congressionally specified cap; however and that the extra funds could be used for other justice system needs. However, as mentioned, Congress already substantially increased the cap in FY2015 and increased it further in FY2016more or less sustained the increased level since then (see Table 1). In addition, deposits into the Fund decreased by approximately 44% from FY2015 to FY2016have decreased over the last two years. In a time of fiscal constraint, the CVF might provide an avenue to fund some DOJ grant programs while reducing DOJ's discretionary appropriation (i.e., grants funded through transfers from the CVF do not have to be funded through discretionary appropriations); however, as shown by the drop in CVF deposits in FY2016over the last couple of years, there is no guarantee that receipts going into the CVF will be consistent from one year to the nextwould be able to sustain a higher obligation cap. Therefore, if Congress were to further increase the cap and continue to useor expand funding from the CVF for non-VOCA programs, it may not be possible to ensure that there will be a consistent level of funding to support these programs in future budget cyclesfiscal years.

Congress may also decide to rescind funds from the balance of the CVF, as it did in November 2015 through the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (P.L. 114-74). This law required the rescission and permanent cancellation of $1.5 billion from the balance of the CVF.⁷³ This unprecedented rescission and 77 This cancellation did not carry any specification as to any redirection for the funds, but rather was treated as a general offset. This action did not impact, at least not directly, the annual obligation cap on the CVF.

Congress could decide to eliminate the cap on the Crime Victims Fund altogether. If Congress should decide to eliminate the cap and allow all collected funds to be distributed in a given fiscal year, it could possibly have significant consequences for the DOJDOJ's budget. As mentioned, the capped amount and remaining balance in the CVF are considered part of the DOJ budget total. These amounts impact the DOJ appropriation, are used to offset spending limits for DOJ programs, and are included in the overall budget score for DOJ. If Congress were to eliminate the cap, it would have to make up the amount of the CVF through offsetsdifference between the obligation cap and the balance on the CVF is treated as a CHIMP and is scored as a credit against DOJs discretionary appropriations. Therefore, if Congress were to eliminate the cap, it would no longer have the CHIMP to offset some discretionary appropriations and this might result in Congress having to reduce discretionary funding for some DOJ programs (assuming that Congress did not increase the discretionary spending limit for CJS to offset eliminating the CHIMP). Moreover, Congress may consider whether VOCA programs would be able to use all the money in the fund if the obligation cap were eliminated.

Deposits into the Fund

Some victim advocates have expressed concern that funds collected from deferred and non-prosecution agreements between DOJ and defendants are not being deposited into the CVF, resulting in fewer deposits into the Fund.⁷⁸ While criminal fines are deposited into the CVF, penalty assessments collected as part of a deferred or non-prosecution agreement between DOJ and defendants are not deposited into the CVF. For example, in December 2019 HSBC Private Bank (Suisse) SA (HSBC Switzerland) admitted to helping U.S. taxpayers conceal income and assets from the United States, and agreed to pay $192.4 million as part of a deferred prosecution agreement with DOJ. The $192.4 million penalty had three parts. First, $60.6 million was for restitution to the Internal Revenue Service, which represented the unpaid taxes resulting from HSBC Switzerland's participation in the conspiracy. Second, HSBC Switzerland forfeited $71.9 million to the United States, which represented gross fees (not profits) that the bank earned on its undeclared accounts between 2000 and 2010. Finally, HSBC Switzerland agreed to pay a penalty of $59.9 million.⁷⁹ None of these funds went to the CVF. If DOJ had instead sought a criminal conviction involving the collection of criminal fines, those funds would have been deposited into the CVF.

According to DOJ, "in certain instances, it may be appropriate to resolve a corporate criminal case by means other than indictment. Non-prosecution and deferred prosecution agreements, for example, occupy an important middle ground between declining prosecution and obtaining the conviction of a corporation."⁸⁰ It is unclear if DOJ has increased use of deferred and non-prosecution agreements in recent years. If Congress prefers that assessments collected as a result of deferred and non-prosecution agreements be deposited into the CVF, then it may amend VOCA to require this action.

Issues in Considering Amendments to VOCA While VOCA may be amended in many possible ways, this report presents two options (beyond what has been discussed thus far) that Congress may choose to consider. Congress may decide to reassess the allocation formula of the CVF (see Figure 1) or consider adding new programs to be supported through the CVF.

VOCA Assistance Administrators have voiced concern that fluctuations in annual obligations can directly affect fund availability for victim assistance formula grants and, to a lesser extent, discretionary grants. The addition of new programs, increases in funding to other programs funded by the CVF, and new management and administration costs cause a reduction in funding available for victim assistance formula grants and discretionary grants. Congress may choose to review the allocation formula to determine if changes should be made to reduce the effect of fluctuations in obligated funds on these grants.

Since 1984, VOCA has been amended several times to support additional victim-related activities and accommodate the needs of specific groups of victims, such as child abuse victims and victims of terrorist acts. Congress may choose to continue amending VOCA to further accommodate the needs of additional special populations, such as victims of elder abuse and rural victims. While support for victims of elder abuse is an allowable use of the Fund, as the "baby boom" generation ages, it is possible that elder abuse will continue to grow as a social concern.⁸¹ For example, Congress may wish to consider expanding allowable uses of compensation funds to include property loss compensation for elder victims of financial fraud. Currently, VOCA funds may not be used to compensate for property loss (with limited exceptions). Similarly, victims in rural areas are supported through VOCA programs, but they face unique barriers to assistance such as lack of qualified service professionals and higher costs and limited availability of transportation to obtain services.⁸² Other populations with unique risks and needs may present themselves, and Congress may choose to use VOCA as one potential vehicle to address those risks and needs.

Author Contact Information

Footnotes

1. P.L. 98-473, Title II, Chapter XIV, Victims of Crime Act of 1984, October 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2170. VOCA is codified at 34 U.S.C. §20101money in the fund if the obligation cap were eliminated.

Issues in Considering Amendments to VOCA

While VOCA may be amended in many possible ways, this report presents two options that Congress may choose to consider. Congress may decide to reassess the allocation formula of the CVF (see Figure 1) or consider the addition of new programs to be supported through the CVF.

VOCA Assistance Administrators have voiced concern that fluctuations in annual obligations can directly impact fund availability for victim assistance formula grants and, to a lesser extent, discretionary grants. The addition of new programs, increases in funding to other programs funded by the CVF, and new management and administration costs cause a reduction in funding available for victim assistance formula grants and discretionary grants.⁷⁴ Congress may choose to review the allocation formula to determine if changes should be made to reduce the impact of fluctuations in obligated funds on these grants.

Since 1984, VOCA has been amended several times to support additional victim-related activities and accommodate the needs of specific groups of victims, such as child abuse victims and victims of terrorist acts. Congress may choose to continue amending VOCA to further accommodate the needs of additional special populations, such as victims of elder abuse and rural victims. While support for victims of elder abuse is an allowable use of the Fund, as the "baby boom" generation ages, it is possible that elder abuse will grow as a social concern.⁷⁵ Similarly, victims in rural areas are supported through VOCA programs, but they face unique barriers to assistance such as lack of qualified service professionals and higher costs and availability of transportation to obtain services.⁷⁶ Other populations with unique risks and needs may present themselves, and Congress may choose to use VOCA as one potential vehicle to address those risks and needs.

VOCA Support and American Indian Tribes

Currently, the VOCA formula does not incorporate American Indian tribal governments for its two largest programs; the victim assistance and victim compensation formula grant programs. While tribal governments are eligible to receive assistance and compensation funds from their respective state victim programs (e.g., in the form of sub-grants), some have argued that there should be a dedicated amount from the Crime Victims Fund directed to American Indian tribes each year.⁷⁷ In the 114^th Congress, the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs marked up the Securing Urgent Resources Vital to Indian Victim Empowerment Act (SURVIVE Act; S. 1704), which would have amended VOCA to create a special allotment (5% of the annual obligation capped amount) for tribes. These funds would have been used to create a new grant program⁷⁸ for tribal crime victims services and compensation to be administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior.

The Administration's FY2018 budget request proposes to set aside 5% of the FY2018 obligation cap for grants and assistance to American Indian tribes "to improve services and justice for victims of crime."⁷⁹

Fairness for Crime Victims Act of 2017

Federal spending can be divided into the budget categories of discretionary spending, mandatory spending, and net interest. In certain circumstances, reductions in mandatory spending can generate offsets that allow higher levels of discretionary spending than would otherwise be permitted under congressional budget rules or under statutory caps on discretionary spending. Changes in mandatory spending (CHIMPs) are provisions in appropriations acts that reduce or constrain mandatory spending, and they can provide offsets to discretionary spending. The obligation limitation on the CVF has been the CHIMP item that has generated the largest offset of discretionary spending in recent years.⁸⁰

In the 115^th Congress, the Fairness for Crime Victims Act of 2017 (H.R. 275) has been introduced, and if enacted would adjust the way CHIMPs affect the CVF and how it is used as an offset of discretionary spending. Also, the bill is intended to ensure that the CVF annual obligation cap is never less than the average amount of deposits into the CVF of the previous three fiscal years. As mentioned, the FY2017 obligation cap was calculated based on a three-year average of collections into the CVF.

Footnotes

P.L. 100-690, Title VII, Subtitle D.

25. 36. 48. 59. 65. See table note f in Table 1. 77. 81.

1.	P.L. 98-473, Title II, Chapter XIV, Victims of Crime Act of 1984, October 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2170. VOCA is codified at 42 U.S.C. §10601 et seq.
2.	P.L. 109-162, Title XI, Subtitle B, §1132, January 5, 2006, 119 Stat. 3107.
3.	P.L. 107-77, Title I, §111, November 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 765.
4.	P.L. 106-553, §1(a)(2), Title I, §113, December 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2762, 2762A-68; P.L. 106-554, §1(a)(4), Division A, §213(a)(2), December 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-179; and P.L. 106-113, Division B, §1000(a)(1) [H.R. 3421, Title I, §119], November 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1535, 1501A-22.
5.	P.L. 106-177, Title I, §104(a), Child Abuse Prevention and Enforcement Act, March 10, 2000, 114 Stat. 36.
6.	P.L. 104-132, Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Title II, Subtitle C; P.L. 107-56, USA PATRIOT Act, Title VI, §621(a) to (d).
7.	P.L. 114-236
8.	P.L. 115-299.
9.
810.	Grants are distributed according to a formula established by VOCA.
911.	For more information on OVC and its mission, see httphttps://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/gov/about/offices/office-victims-crime-ovc.
1012.	For information on OVC grant allocations, see http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/grants/index.html.
1113.	P.L. 104-132, Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act of 1996, April 24, 1996, 110 Stat. 1243; P.L. 106-386, Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000, October 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 1543; and P.L. 107-56, USA PATRIOT Act, Title VI, §621(a) to (d), October 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 370.
1214.	Victims who are eligible for assistance include nationals of the United States and employees of the U.S. government.
1315.	In January 2002, Congress enacted a one-time appropriation of $68.1 million for the Crime Victims Fund to assist in providing relief to 9/11 victims (P.L. 107-117, 115 Stat. 2294).
1416.	See 4234 U.S.C. §1060120101.
1517.	CRS communications with U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,Legislative Affairs, in March 2020. Also, see Office for Victims of Crime, 2011 OVC Report to the Nation, p. 2, http://www.ovc.gov/pubs/reporttonation2011/ReporttoNation2011.pdf (hereinafter, 2011 OVC Report to the Nation).
1618.	Steve Derene, Crime Victims Fund Report: Past, Present, and Future, National Association of VOCA Assistance Administrators, March 2005, p. 3, http://www.navaa.org/budget/CVFReport/CrimeVictimsReport.pdf (hereinafter Crime Victims Fund Report).
1719.	See Table 1 for receipts, and. For examples of these large criminal fines, see U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, Attorney General Holder Announces Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force Executive Director, December 7, 2011, https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-holder-announces-financial-fraud-enforcement-task-force-executive-director; and U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Attorney's Office, Eastern District of Michigan, Volkswagen AG Agrees to Plead Guilty and Pay $4.3 Billion in Criminal and Civil Penalties and Six Volkswagen Executives and Employees Are Indicted in Connection with Conspiracy to Cheat U.S. Emissions Tests, January 11, 2017..
1820.	U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime, 2015 OVC Report to the Nation: Fiscal Years 2013-2014, http://www.ovc.gov/pubs/reporttonation2015/ (hereinafter, 2015 Report to the Nation); and 2013 OVC Report to the Nation: Fiscal Years 2011-2012, The Crime Victims Fund, http://www.ovc.gov/pubs/reporttonation2013/.
1921.	Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, Memorandum for all Federal Prosecutors: Commitment to Targeting Violent Crime, March 8, 2017, https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/946771/download.
2022.	U.S. Department of Justice, FY2018 Performance Budget Office of Justice Programs, May 2017, p. 63, https://www.justice.gov/file/969001/download. Congress did not specify beyond general OIG oversight and auditing purposes.
2123.	D. Andrew Austin, CRS Analyst in Economic Policy, contributed this text box.
24.	For the FY2020 DOJ Summary of Budget Authority by Appropriation, see https://www.justice.gov/doj/page/file/1246636/download.
In the 115th Congress, the Fairness for Crime Victims Act of 2017 (H.R. 275), which, among other things, would ensure that the CVF annual obligation cap amount is never less than the average amount of deposits into the CVF of the previous three fiscal years was introduced and referred to the House Committee on Rules and the House Committee on the Budget.
22.	For more information, see CRS Report RL33467, Abortion: Judicial History and Legislative Response, by [author name scrubbed].
23.	For the DOJ Summary of Budget Authority by Appropriation, see http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/pages/attachments/2015/01/30/1_summary_of_budget_authority_by_appr.pdf.
24.	While some may assume that the program that has its funding reducedincreased would be a DOJ program, this report does not assume this and recognizes that the program could also be from another agency or department aside from DOJ. Of note, the Fairness for Crime Victims Act of 2017 (H.R. 275 ), if enacted, would adjust the way changes in mandatory spending affect the CVF and how it is used as an offset of discretionary spending.
2526.	4234 U.S.C. §1060120101(c); U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime, 2009 OVC Report to the Nation, p. 11, https://www.ncjrs.gov/ovc_archives/reporttonation2009/ReporttoNation09Part1.pdf.
2627.	Crime Victims Fund Report, p.16.
2728.	4234 U.S.C. §1060120101(d)(2).
2829.	For more information regarding the Children's Justice Act Program, see CRS Report R40899, The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA): Background, Programs, and Funding, by [author name scrubbed].
2930.	4234 U.S.C. §1060120101(d)(3).
3031.	U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General Guidelines for Victim and Witness Assistance, http://www.justice.gov/olp/pdf/ag_guidelines2012.pdf.
3132.	4234 U.S.C. §1060120101(d)(3).
3233.	For more information on the FBI Victim Assistance Program, see http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/victim_assistance/overview/field-officehttps://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-victim-assistance-program.pdf.
3334.	4234 U.S.C. §1060120101(d)(3).
3435.	Notifications may include whether the case is being referred to state or local authorities.	For more information on VNS, see https://www.notify.usdoj.gov/.
3537.	4234 U.S.C. §1060120101(d)(4).
3638.	Ibid.
3739.	Territories and the District of Columbia are treated as states for grant eligibility and distribution purposes. See 4234 U.S.C. §10602(d)(4). 20101(d)(4). The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa do not have victim compensation programs.
3840.	4234 U.S.C. §1060220101(a).
3941.	4234 U.S.C. §10602(b).
4020101(b). Under VOCA victim compensation grant guidelines, for residents victimized outside their own state "[a] state must provide compensation to state residents who are victims of crimes occurring outside the state if the crimes would be compensable crimes had they occurred inside that state and the crimes (1) occurred in a state without an eligible VOCA crime victim compensation program, or (2) in cases of terrorism, occurred outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. The state must make these awards according to the same criteria used to make awards to those who are victimized while in the state." For nonresidents of a state, "the state, in making awards for compensable crimes occurring within the state, must make compensation awards to nonresidents of the state on the basis of the same criteria used to make awards to victims who are residents of the state." See U.S. Department of Justice, "Victims of Crime Act Victim Compensation Program," 66 Federal Register 27162, May 16, 2001. 42.	The Final Guidelines for the VOCA Victim Compensation Grant Program clarify that states may not include property replacement or repair cost as compensable expenses, except for replacement or repair of locks and windows, and replacement of bedding and clothing held as evidence, in their annual certification of payments. See Section IV. B.2 (b) (ii) 4 & 5.
4143.	Medical and dental services do not include mental health services. OVC records these mental health costs in a separate category. For additional compensation data, as well as the number of victims served, by victim types and service categories, see U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime, VOCA Nationwide Performance Reports, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/grants/vocareps.html.
4244.	Office for Victims of Crime, Victims of Crime Act Victim Compensation Formula Grant Program, , Fiscal Year 20152017 Data Analysis Report, March 2017, https://ojp.gov/ovc/grants/vocanpr_vc15www.ovc.gov/grants/vocanpr_vc17_508.pdf (hereinafter, VOCA Victim Compensation Program, FY2015FY2017).
4345.	U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime, VOCA Nationwide Performance Reports, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/grants/vocareps.html.
44.	VOCA Victim Compensation Program, FY2015, pp. 22-26. OVC states the following regarding family and domestic violence: "[b]y terming this victimization type 'domestic and family violence,' the revised State Performance Report questionnaire clarifies that this category includes all types of domestic abuse, not just intimate partner violence" (see p. 26).
45.	42 U.S.C. §10603(c).
46 The 16 crimes for which grantees provided funding to claimants are assault, sexual assault, stalking, child sexual abuse, child pornography, homicide, child physical abuse/neglect, driving under the influence, other vehicular crimes, arson, burglary, fraud/financial crimes, robbery, human trafficking, kidnapping, and terrorism. See VOCA Victim Compensation Program, FY2017, p.11.
46.	Of the total applications paid that indicated that a victimization type was related to a crime.
47.	34 U.S.C. §20103(c).
States have flexibility in determining the populations of victims of violent crimes that may be underserved in their respective states.
4749.	4234 U.S.C. §1060320103(a).
48.	For additional guidance, see U.S. Department of Justice, 2015 DOJ Grants Financial Guide, p. 33.
4950.	4234 U.S.C. §1060320103(a)(5)(A).
5051.	4234 U.S.C. §1060320103(a)(5)(B).
5152.	U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime, 20152017 Victims of Crime Act Performance Report, State Assistance Program, https://ojp.gov/ovc/grants/vocanpr_va15.pdf. www.ovc.gov/grants/vocanpr_va17.pdf. Victims served could report more than one type of victimization. Of the more than 5 million victims, 1,111,304 reported multiple victimization types.
5253.	U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime, 2000 Victims of Crime Act Performance Report, State Assistance Program, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/grants/vocanpr_va00.html. For additional annual reports on the Victim Assistance Formula Grants Program, see http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/grants/vocareps.html.
5354.	4234 U.S.C. §1060120101(d)(4).
5455.	4234 U.S.C. §1060320103(c).
5556.	For more information on discretionary programs, see http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/grants/types.html#discretionarygrants.
5657.	18 U.S.C. §3772. These rights include (1) not being prevented from receiving a forensic medical examination and not being charged for an examination; (2) having a sexual assault evidence collection kit (i.e., a rape kit) preserved for 20 years or the maximum applicable statute of limitations, whichever is shorter; (3) receiving written notification prior to destruction or disposal of a rape kit; and (4) being informed of these rights and policies.
58.	34 U.S.C. §20101(d)(3).
P.L. 104-132, Title II, Subtitle C.
5760.	4234 U.S.C. §1060120101(d)(5). The OVC also received a one-time $68.1 million appropriation in the FY2002 Department of Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 107-117, 115 Stat. 2294) to assist in its work of providing relief to 9/11 victims (USA PATRIOT Act, P.L. 107-56, 115 Stat. 371).
5861.	These funds do not fall under the annual cap of the CVF.
5962.	Eligible applicants include state victim assistance and victim compensation programs, U.S. Attorneys' offices, victim service and nongovernmental organizations, and federal, state, and local governments.
6063.	U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Detailed information for award 2019-V7-GX-0001 and Detailed information for award 2019-V7-GX-0002.
64.	Ibid.
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, Attorney General Announces $8.3 Million to Support Victims of Boston Marathon Bombings, Justice News, January 13, 2014, http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2014/January/14-ag-039.html.
61.	In December 2013, OVC announced a $1.5 million AEAP grant to support victims of the mass shooting that took place at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT, on December 14, 2012. For more information, see U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Attorney General Holder Announces $1.5 Million to Reimburse Support Efforts to Victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting, press release, December 17, 2013, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/2013/ojppr121713.pdf.
62.	In August 2013, OVC announced a $512,730 AEAP grant award to support victims of the August 2012 mass shooting at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, WI. For more information, see U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime Announces $512,730 Grant to Support Victims of the Sikh Temple Attack in Oak Creek, Wis., press release, August 2, 2013.
63.	In February 2013, OVC announced a $2.9 million AEAP grant award to support victims of the July 2012 movie theater shooting in Aurora, CO. For more information, see U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime Announces $2.9 Million Grant to Support Victims in Aurora, Colo., press release, February 13, 2013, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/2013/ojppr021313.pdf.
64.	Emergency funds were disbursed under the authority of the 2001 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States (P.L. 107-38). The Antiterrorism Emergency Reserve was later reimbursed under the Department of Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 107-117).
6566.	U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime, Meeting the Needs of the Victims of the September 11th Terrorist Attacks: Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2002, Report to Congress, April 2003, p. 4, https://www.ncjrs.gov/ovc_archives/reports/911victimsreptocongress03/meetingneedssept11.pdf.
6667.	Ibid, p. 5.
6768.	Ibid, p. 5.
6869.	Ibid, p. 5.
6970.	For expenditure guidelines, see 42 U.S.C. §10601(dThe Child Pornography Victims Reserve was established under Section 1402(d)(6) of VOCA (34 U.S.C. 20101(d)).
7071.	See the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 (P.L. 114-113) and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 115-31).
71.	For more information on grant programs authorized under the Violence Against Women Act, see CRS Report R42499, The Violence Against Women Act: Overview, Legislation, and Federal Funding, by [author name scrubbed].
72.	U.S. Department of Justice, FY2018 Performance Budget Office of Justice Programs, May 2017, p. 63, https://www.justice.gov/file/969001/download.
73These offenses include conduct proscribed by 18 U.S.C. Sections 2251(d), 2252, 2252A(a)(1) through (5), 2252A(g)(in cases in which the series of felony violations exclusively involves violations of Sections 2251(d), 2252, 2252A(a)(1) through (5), or 2260(b)), or 2260(b).
72.	34 U.S.C. §20101(d)(6).
73.	U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legislative Affairs.
74.	For expenditure guidelines, see 34 U.S.C. §20101(d).
75.
76.	For more information on grant programs authorized under the Violence Against Women Act, see CRS Report R45410, The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA): Historical Overview, Funding, and Reauthorization.
For guidance on rescission and cancellation of funds, see Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, Circular No. A-11: Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget, July 2016, Section 20.
7478.	Ibid; National Association of VOCA Assistance Administrators, Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) Crime Victims Fund: Briefing Background, p. 4, http://www.navaa.org/budget/13/docs/VOCA_Backgrounder%202013.pdf.
75David Dayen, "The Forgotten Victims," The New Republic, November 17, 2016.
79.	U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, Justice Department Announces Deferred Prosecution Agreement with HSBC Private Bank (Suisse) SA, December 10, 2019, https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-deferred-prosecution-agreement-hsbc-private-bank-suisse-sa.
80.	U.S. Department of Justice, Justice Manual, 9-28.200 - General Considerations of Corporate Liability, 2015.
Martin J. Gorbien and Amy R. Eisenstein, "Elder Abuse and Neglect: An Overview," Clinics in Geriatric Medicine, vol. 2 (May 21, 2005).
76.	U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime, Vision 21, Transforming Victim Services: Final Report, May 2013, p. 27, https://ovc.ncjrs.gov/vision21/pdfs/Vision21_Report.pdf.
77.	S.Rept. 114-172.
78; and Karl Pillemer, Marie-Therese Connolly, and Risa Breckman et al., "Elder Mistreatment: Priorities for Consideration by the White House Conference on Aging," The Gerontologist, vol. 55, no. 2 (February 18, 2015), pp. 320-327. 82.	S. 1704 would have amended the Indian Tribal Justice Act to create this new grant program.
79.	U.S. Department of Justice, FY2018 Performance Budget Office of Justice Programs, May 2017, p. 63, https://www.justice.gov/file/969001/download.
80.	[author name scrubbed], Analyst in Economic Policy, contributed to this sectionU.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime, Vision 21, Transforming Victim Services: Final Report, May 2013, p. 27, https://ovc.ncjrs.gov/vision21/pdfs/Vision21_Report.pdf.