Sex Trafficking of Children in the United
States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Kristin M. Finklea
Specialist in Domestic Security
Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara
Specialist in Social Policy
Alison Siskin
Specialist in Immigration Policy
August 15, 2012
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R41878
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Summary
The trafficking of individuals within U.S borders is commonly referred to as domestic human
trafficking, and it occurs in every state of the nation. One form of domestic human trafficking is
sex trafficking. Research indicates that most victims of sex trafficking into and within the United
States are women and children, and the victims include U.S. citizens and noncitizens alike.
Recently, Congress has focused attention on domestic sex trafficking, including the prostitution of
children, which is the focus of this report.
Federal law does not define sex trafficking per se. However, the term “severe forms of trafficking
in persons,” as defined in the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA,
P.L. 106-386) encompasses sex trafficking. “Severe forms of trafficking in persons” refers, in
part, to “[s]ex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or
in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age....” Experts
generally agree that the trafficking term applies to minors whether the child’s actions were forced
or appear to be voluntary.
The exact number of child victims of sex trafficking in the United States is unknown because
comprehensive research and scientific data are lacking. Sex trafficking of children appears to be
fueled by a variety of environmental and situational variables ranging from poverty or the use of
prostitution by runaway and “thrown-away” children to provide for their subsistence needs to the
recruitment of children by organized crime units for prostitution.
The TVPA has been the primary vehicle authorizing services to victims of trafficking. Several
agencies have programs or administer grants to other entities to provide specific services to
trafficking victims. Despite language that authorizes services for citizen, lawful permanent
resident, and noncitizen victims, appropriations for trafficking victims’ services have primarily
been used to serve noncitizen victims. U.S. citizen victims are also eligible for certain crime
victim benefits and public benefit entitlement programs, though these services are not tailored to
trafficking victims. Of note, specialized services and support for minor victims of sex trafficking
are limited. Nationwide, organizations specializing in support for these victims collectively have
fewer than 50 beds. Other facilities, such as runaway and homeless youth shelters and foster care
homes, may not be able to adequately meet the needs of victims or keep them from pimps/
traffickers and other abusers.
In addition, it has been suggested that minor victims of sex trafficking—while too young to
consent to sexual activity with adults—may at times be labeled as prostitutes or juvenile
delinquents and treated as criminals rather than being identified and treated as trafficking victims.
These children who are arrested may be placed in juvenile detention facilities instead of
environments where they can receive needed social and protective services.
Finally, experts widely agree that any efforts to reduce the prevalence of child sex trafficking—as
well as other forms of trafficking—should address not only the supply, but also the demand.
Congress may consider demand reduction strategies such as increasing public awareness and
prevention as well as bolstering investigations and prosecutions of those who buy illegal
commercial sex (“johns”). In addition, policy makers may deliberate enhancing services for
victims of trafficking. Congress may address these and other issues if policy makers choose to
take up the reauthorization of the TVPA, which expired at the end of FY2011.
Congressional Research Service

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Contents
Overview of Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States........................................................ 1
Conceptualizing Sex Trafficking of Children .................................................................................. 5
Sex Trafficking of Children: Vulnerable Populations................................................................ 5
Traffickers and Buyers .............................................................................................................. 7
Current Law............................................................................................................................... 8
Federal Response to Sex Trafficking of Children............................................................................ 8
Investigations of Child Sex Trafficking Offenses.................................................................... 14
Department of Justice (DOJ)............................................................................................. 16
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ........................................................................ 17
Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center ....................................................................... 18
Services for Child Victims of Sex Trafficking......................................................................... 18
Selected Issues ............................................................................................................................... 21
Funding and Authority to Assist U.S. Citizen and LPR Victims of Trafficking...................... 21
Resources for Trafficking Victims’ Services ........................................................................... 23
Lack of Adequate Shelter and Services ................................................................................... 24
Response by Child Protective Services (CPS) ........................................................................ 26
Trafficking Victims Treated as Criminals or Delinquents ....................................................... 28
Reducing Demand for Minor Sex Trafficking in the United States......................................... 30
Data on Victims and Perpetrators ............................................................................................ 31

Tables
Table 1. Programs Authorized by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, as Amended,
That Could Address Sex Trafficking of Children within the United States................................ 10
Table A-1. Number of Suspected Child Sex Trafficking Victims in Selected Locations............... 35

Appendixes
Appendix A. Selected Studies Measuring Sex Trafficking of Children......................................... 33
Appendix B. Trafficking Victim Services for Noncitizens ............................................................ 37
Appendix C. Other Possible Federal Responses to Sex Trafficking of Minors ............................. 41

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 44

Congressional Research Service

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Overview of Sex Trafficking of Children in the
United States
Human trafficking involves the exploitation of individuals for forced labor or commercial sex.
The trafficking of individuals within U.S borders is commonly referred to as domestic human
trafficking, and it occurs in every state in the nation.1 Of those individuals who are victims of sex
trafficking, research indicates that most victims coming into and within the United States are
women and children, and the victims include U.S. citizens and noncitizens alike. This report
focuses on the sex trafficking of children in the United States.
The investigation and prosecution of human trafficking has often been carried out by the states,
and the majority of states outlaw human trafficking, including sex trafficking in children.2
Congress has focused recent attention on domestic sex trafficking of children, which includes
commercial sex acts involving children under the age of 18.3 Under the Victims of Trafficking
and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA), the primary law that addresses trafficking, sex
trafficking of children is a federal crime—even if a child is not removed from his or her
community.4 Further, regardless of whether a child is believed to have consented to sex or
whether the child represents himself/herself as an adult,5 the child is considered a trafficking
victim under federal law.
The exact number of child victims of sex trafficking in the United States is unknown because
comprehensive research and scientific data are lacking.6 U.S. citizens—adults and children
alike—are more often victims of sex trafficking than labor trafficking.7 One snapshot of the child
victim population, albeit incomplete, comes from the Department of Justice (DOJ)-funded
Human Trafficking Reporting System (HTRS). Data in the HTRS come from investigations

1 For more information about trafficking generally, see U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June
2012, http://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/2012/. See also CRS Report RL34317, Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy
and Issues for Congress, by Alison Siskin and Liana Sun Wyler.
2 See, for example, Ala. Code §13A-6-152; Ala. Code §13A-6-151(7); Alaska Stat. §§11-41-360 to 11-41-370; Ariz.
Rev. Stat. Ann. §13-1307; Ark. Code Ann. §5-11-108; and Cal. Penal Code §§236.1 to 237.
3 In the 112th Congress, legislation on sex trafficking of minors in the United States (e.g., S. 596) has been introduced.
In the 111th Congress, policy makers convened hearings on the topic, including a February 24, 2010, hearing, “Child
Prostitution and Sex Trafficking,” for the Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law;
and a September 15, 2010, hearing, “Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking,” for the House Judiciary Committee,
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
4 P.L. 106-386. This act is also called the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. The TVPA is codified under 22 U.S.C.
§7101 et seq., 42 U.S.C. §14044 et seq., and 18 U.S.C. §1591 et seq. (the criminal statute pertaining to sex trafficking
of children). Of note, sex trafficking may encompass a range of activities including prostitution, pornography, and
stripping. However, for purposes of this report, sex trafficking is discussed primarily in terms of prostitution. Further,
federal agencies have recently discussed sex trafficking in the context of the prostitution of children. For instance, see
U.S. Department of Justice, The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction: A Report to
Congress, August 2010, pp. 34-35, http://www.justice.gov/ag/annualreports/tr2009/agreporthumantrafficking2009.pdf.
(Hereinafter, U.S. Department of Justice, The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction.)
5 The law provides that in prosecutions involving a child victim, the government is not required to prove that the
defendant knew that the person was under the age of 18. See 18 U.S.C. §1591(c).
6 U.S. Department of Justice, Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Child Prostitution: Domestic Sex Trafficking
of Minors, http://www.justice.gov/criminal/ceos/prostitution.html.
7 U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2011, http://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/2011/.
Conversely, noncitizens are more likely to be victims of labor trafficking than of sex trafficking.
Congressional Research Service
1

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

opened by federally funded human trafficking task forces, and do not represent all incidences of
human trafficking nationwide. In January 2008, the task forces began entering data into HTRS.
Between January 1, 2008, and June 30, 2010, the task forces opened 2,515 investigations of
human trafficking; 82% of these were classified as sex trafficking.8 Of these sex trafficking cases,
83% involved U.S. citizen victims and 40% involved prostitution or sexual exploitation of a
child.
Demand for prostitution (and other forms of commercial sexual exploitation) of children is
steady, and profit to sex traffickers, or pimps, has increased.9 Together, these factors have helped
fuel sex trafficking of children. Pimps/traffickers prey on vulnerable youth (primarily girls) and
groom their victims to enter “the life” of prostitution.10 They manipulate and abuse—physically,
mentally, and emotionally—their victims to maintain control. Additionally, technological
advances such as cellular telephones and the Internet have facilitated the demand for child sex
trafficking. These technologies can rapidly connect buyers of commercial sex with trafficking
victims while simultaneously distancing the perpetrator from the criminal transactions.11 The
individuals who purchase sexual services from pimps/traffickers are known as clients or “johns.”
The johns may or may not be aware that the individuals with whom they are engaging in sex are
children or trafficking victims.
Commercial sexual exploitation of children appears to be fueled by a variety of environmental
and situational variables. The scholarly literature has identified those factors as including
• the use of prostitution by runaway and “thrown-away”12 children to provide for
their subsistence needs;

8 Duren Banks and Tracey Kyckelhahn, Characteristics of Suspected Human Trafficking Incidents, 2008-2010,
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, Washington, DC, April
2011, http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cshti0810.pdf. (Hereinafter Banks and Kyckelhahn, Characteristics of
Suspected Human Trafficking Incidents, 2008-2010.) Subject to appropriations, the Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-164 §201) required the Attorney General to use available data to perform a
comprehensive analysis of the incidence of sex trafficking and unlawful commercial sex acts within the United States.
In response to this requirement, DOJ funded the creation of the HTRS. These are the most recent data available.
9 U.S. Department of Justice, The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction, pp. 32-33,
http://www.justice.gov/ag/annualreports/tr2009/agreporthumantrafficking2009.pdf. For the purposes of this report, the
terms “pimp” and “trafficker” are used interchangeably when referring to the sex trafficking of minors.
10 Richard J. Estes and Neil Alan Weiner, Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in the U.S., Canada and
Mexico, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, September 19, 2001 (revised February 20, 2002), p. 16.
(Hereinafter, Estes and Weiner, Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in the U.S., Canada and Mexico.) Still,
boys appear to be just as likely to be victims of sex trafficking, even if they are not under the control of a pimp. See
Taya Moxley-Goldsmith, “Boys in the Basement: Male Victims of Commercial Sexual Exploitation,” Update, vol. 2,
no. 1, U.S. District Attorneys Association, American Prosecutors Research Institute, 2005. Traffickers may be part of a
criminal network or ring or they may operate independently. They can be strangers, acquaintances, or family members.
11 U.S. Department of Justice, The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction. See also
Shared Hope International, DEMAND. A Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica, Japan,
the Netherlands, and the United States, Arlington, VA, July 2007. (Hereinafter, Shared Hope International, DEMAND.
A Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica, Japan, the Netherlands, and the United
States.) Note: The Shared Hope report was supported by a grant from the Department of State, Office to Monitor and
Combat Trafficking in Persons. Shared Hope is a nonprofit advocacy and policy organization founded by former
Congresswoman Linda Smith.
12 A “thrown-away” child is a child who is asked or told to leave home by a parent or other adult in a household, no
adequate alternative care is arranged for the child, and the child is out of the household overnight; or a child who has
run away and is prevented from returning home. Heather Hammer, David Finkelhor, and Andrea J. Sedlak,
“Runaway/Thrownaway Children: National Estimates and Characteristics,” U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
2

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

• the presence of pre-existing adult prostitution markets in the communities where
large numbers of street youth are concentrated;
• prior history of child sexual abuse and child sexual assault;
• poverty;
• the presence of large numbers of unattached and transient males in
communities—including military personnel, truckers, conventioneers, and sex
tourists, among others;
• for some girls, membership in gangs;
• the promotion of juvenile prostitution by parents, older siblings, and boyfriends;
• the recruitment of children by organized crime units for prostitution; and
• the illegal trafficking of children for sexual purposes to the United States from
developing countries.13
Notably, studies have found that sex trafficking (and commercial sexual exploitation) is supply-
driven as well as demand-driven.14 However, federal legislation has focused more extensively on
penalizing the pimps/traffickers and has placed less emphasis on the buyers of commercial sex.
Experts generally agree that any efforts to reduce the prevalence of sex trafficking—as well as
other forms of trafficking—should address not only the supply, but also the demand.15
The TVPA, most recently amended and reauthorized in 2008, has been the primary legislative
vehicle authorizing services to victims of trafficking. The TVPA historically focused on providing
shelter and support services to victims within the United States—particularly noncitizens.16 This
may have been, in part, because noncitizens were not eligible for those services—including
healthcare, housing, education, and legal assistance—to which U.S. citizen and lawful permanent
residents (LPR) victims had access.17 U.S. citizen victims are eligible for certain crime victim
benefits and public benefit entitlement programs, though these services are not tailored to
trafficking victims. Further, “there is currently little data to assess the extent to which U.S. citizen
trafficking victims are accessing the benefits for which they are eligible.”18

(...continued)
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, OJJDP NISMART Bulletin, October 2002, http://www.missingkids.com/
en_US/documents/nismart2_runaway.pdf.
13 Estes and Weiner, Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in the U.S., Canada and Mexico, p. 1.
14 Polaris Project, Why Trafficking Exists, http://www.polarisproject.org/human-trafficking/overview/why-trafficking-
exists. The Polaris Project is a nonprofit organization that works on human trafficking issues. See also Shared Hope
International, DEMAND. A Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica, Japan, the
Netherlands, and the United States.
15 Ibid. See also Iris Yen, “Of Vice and Men: A New Approach to Eradicating Sex Trafficking by Reducing Male
Demand Through Educational Programs and Abolitionist Legislation,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, vol.
98, no. 2 (Winter 2008).
16 For more information on the history of the TVPA, see CRS Report RL34317, Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and
Issues for Congress, by Alison Siskin and Liana Sun Wyler. Services authorized by the TVPA are available to victims
of both labor and sex trafficking.
17 H.Rept. 106-487 to accompany H.R. 3244 outlined these services as necessary for the “safe reintegration of domestic
trafficking victims into the larger society.”
18 U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat
Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, December 2011, p. 28, http://www.justice.gov/ag/annualreports/tr2010/
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
3

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Since its enactment in 2000, the TVPA has been reauthorized three times—in 2003 (P.L. 108-
193), 2006 (P.L. 109-164), and 2008 (P.L. 110-457). Through reauthorizations in 2006 and 2008,
Congress increased focus on U.S. citizen and LPR victims and authorized services specifically to
address sex trafficking of children within the United States. In addition, Congress requested a
report, through P.L. 110-457, detailing any differences in services provided to noncitizens and
citizens.
In practice, services authorized through the TVPA for trafficking victims, which are provided
primarily by the Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services (HHS), continue to aid
primarily the noncitizen victim population.19 This may be a result of several factors. For one,
while Congress has expanded authorized funding to include victim services for trafficking victims
in the United States—irrespective of immigration status—appropriations for trafficking victims
services have simultaneously remained relatively stable since the TVPA passed in 2000. In other
words, Congress has not appropriated additional funds for services that target a broader spectrum
of victims that have been subsequently authorized.20 Further, appropriations have not specified
which services should be funded, and program funding has been an administrative decision within
DOJ and HHS. Exploring the adequacy of victim services for all victims of sex trafficking in the
United States may be of interest for Congress if policy makers choose to take up the
reauthorization of the TVPA, which expired at the end of FY2011.
Another issue Congress may consider is the lack of specialized support for minor victims of sex
trafficking in the United States. Organizations in the United States that specialize in serving child
victims of prostitution and other forms of sex trafficking collectively have fewer than 50 beds.21
Other facilities, such as runaway and homeless youth shelters as well as foster care homes, do not
appear to be adequate for meeting the needs of victims or keeping them secure from
pimps/traffickers and other abusers.22 Further, victims of trafficking may come to the attention of
child protective services (CPS), but CPS may not be able to adequately respond to the needs of
sex trafficking victims if workers are not knowledgeable about human trafficking, the trafficking
laws, or how to handle cases involving child victims.23 Child victims may also be arrested and

(...continued)
agreporthumantrafficking2010.pdf.
19 It appears that one program, DOJ Grants for Victim Services, has used funding specifically to serve U.S. citizen and
LPR victims. See Appendix B for further information about services for noncitizen victims. See also CRS Report
RL34317, Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress, by Alison Siskin and Liana Sun Wyler. Other
federal programs provide services to certain vulnerable populations such as children who have run away and/or are
sexually exploited. These programs, described in Appendix C, do not target minor victims of sex trafficking per se but
serve a broad population.
20 For funding information, see CRS Report RL34317, Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress, by
Alison Siskin and Liana Sun Wyler.
21 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law, Child Prostitution
and Sex Trafficking, testimony of Rachel Lloyd, Executive Director and Founder of Girls Educational & Mentoring
Services (GEMS), 111th Cong., 2nd sess., February 24, 2010.
22 Heather J. Clawson and Lisa Goldblatt Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential Facilities for Minor Victims
of Domestic Sex Trafficking, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Planning and Evaluation, September 2007, http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/07/humantrafficking/ResFac/ib.htm. (Hereinafter,
Clawson and Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential Facilities for Minor Victims of Domestic Sex Trafficking.)
23 Loyola University Chicago, Center for the Human Rights of Children and the International Organization for
Adolescents (IOFA), Building Child Welfare Response to Child Trafficking, 2011, http://www.luc.edu/chrc/pdfs/
BCWR_Handbook_Final1_for_posting_1.pdf (hereinafter, Loyola University Chicago, Center for the Human Rights of
Children and the International Organization for Adolescents (IOFA), Building Child Welfare Response to Child
Trafficking).
Congressional Research Service
4

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

placed in juvenile detention facilities because they are perceived to be responsible for prostitution
(and other types of commercial sex acts) and/or because they often need protection from sex
traffickers.24
This report provides an overview of sex trafficking of children in the United States. It first
conceptualizes the issue, discussing the victims and perpetrators involved. It then outlines the
federal response to investigating and prosecuting perpetrators as well as providing services to
victims. The report concludes with a discussion of select issues concerning the federal response to
sex trafficking of minors in the United States.
Conceptualizing Sex Trafficking of Children
Federal law does not define sex trafficking per se. However, the term “severe forms of trafficking
in persons,” as defined in the TVPA, includes sex trafficking. “Severe forms of trafficking in
persons” refers to
(A) sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or
in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age; or
(B) the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or
services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to
involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.25
As part of this definition, a “commercial sex act” means “any sex act, on account of which
anything of value is given to or received by any person.”26 The commercial aspect of the sexual
exploitation separates trafficking from other crimes such as molestation, sexual assault, and rape.
There appears to be a consensus among experts that the prostitution of minors fits the definition
of “severe forms of human trafficking.”27 In the case of minors, there is general agreement in the
United States and much of the international community that the trafficking term applies to
children, regardless of whether the child’s actions are believed to be forced or voluntary.28
Sex Trafficking of Children: Vulnerable Populations
As mentioned, the exact number of children who are victims of sex trafficking does not exist
because comprehensive research is lacking. However, several studies have attempted to measure
the extent of the problem.29 Notably, the studies are not comparable, do not measure the same

24 Clawson and Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential Facilities for Minor Victims of Domestic Sex
Trafficking.
25 Section 103(8) of Div. A of P.L. 106-386, Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000; approved
October 28, 2000; 22 U.S.C. §7102. The remainder of the definition section relates to labor trafficking.
26 Examples include money, drugs, shelter, and food. P.L. 106-386, §103(3); 22 U.S.C. §7102. The money or item of
value given for the sex act does not need to be received by the child (i.e., can be received by a pimp/trafficker).
27 Child pornography for profit and stripping also fall under the definition of severe forms of trafficking.
28 Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, “The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children,” p. iv.
29 The 2012 U.S. Department of State Trafficking in Persons Report notes that the FBI has continued to develop
“technology to incorporate human trafficking offenses in the annual statistics collected from police forces nationwide”
and that this data is on track to be collected and reported starting in 2013. P.L. 109-164 (§201) requires biennial
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
5

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

populations, and do not use consistent terminology.30 For a discussion of studies that aim to
evaluate the scope of the commercial sexual exploitation and prostitution of children, see
Appendix A.
Runaways are particularly vulnerable to becoming victims of sex trafficking. A federally funded
study found that approximately 1.7 million youth had run away from home or were forced to
leave their homes at some point in 1999.31 While away from home, an estimated 38,600 (2.2%) of
these youth were sexually assaulted, were in the company of someone known to be sexually
abusive, or were engaged in sexual activity in exchange for money, drugs, food, or shelter.
Runaways may be perceived as easy targets for pimps/traffickers because they often cannot go
home and have few resources. One study involving a nationally representative sample of shelter
youth and interviews of street youth in multiple cities indicated that approximately 28% of street
youth and 10% of youth in shelters reported selling sex to generate money for basic needs (often
referred to as survival sex).32 Those youth under the age of 18 would be considered victims of sex
trafficking if they had sex with an adult in exchange for basic provisions. The study also pointed
out that the odds of engaging in survival sex increased for youth who had been victimized
(emotionally or physically),33 had participated in criminal behavior, had a history of substance
abuse, had attempted suicide, had a sexually transmitted disease (STD), or had been pregnant.
The Dallas Police Department also found a strong correlation between sex trafficking and
runaway status: the more times a child runs away, the greater the likelihood that he or she will be
victimized.34 The department also found that other risk factors among child trafficking victims
include their young ages, whether they had previously been sexually exploited, and whether they
had previously been victims of prostitution. Other research, including studies examining the

(...continued)
reporting on human trafficking, using available data from state and local authorities. As previously mentioned, in
response to this requirement, DOJ funded the creation of the Human Trafficking Reporting System (HTRS).
30 Some have argued that the lack of reliable estimates is the result of (1) the hidden nature of the problem, (2) the
questionable methodologies of the studies, and (3) the lack of sufficient attention to the issue. Michelle Stransky and
David Finkelhor, How Many Juveniles are Involved in Prostitution in the U.S.?, Crimes Against Children Research
Center, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, 2008, http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/prostitution/
Juvenile_Prostitution_factsheet.pdf. (Hereinafter, Stansky and Finkelhor, How Many Juveniles are Involved in
Prostitution in the U.S.?)
31 Heather Hammer, David Finkelhor, and Andrea J. Sedlak, “Runaway/Thrownaway Children: National Estimates and
Characteristics,” U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, OJJDP
NISMART Bulletin, October 2002, http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/documents/nismart2_runaway.pdf. These are
the most recent survey data available. For purposes of this study, a runaway episode is one that meets any one of the
following criteria: a child leaves home without permission and stays away overnight; a child 14 years old or younger
(or older and mentally incompetent), who is away from home, chooses not to come home when expected to and stays
away overnight; and a child 15 years old or older who is away from home, chooses not to come home, and stays away
two nights. Nearly all (99%) of the children returned home, and most (58%) did so within one week.
32 Jody M. Greene, Susan T. Ennett, and Christopher Ringwalt, “Prevalence and Correlates of Survival Sex Among
Runaway and Homeless Youth,” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 89, no. 9 (September 1999), p. 1406. These
youth were ages 12 to 21 and spent at least one night in the previous year in a youth or adult shelter, an improvised
shelter, or with a stranger. Youth under age 18 who had spent one night in the past year away from home without the
permission of their parents or legal guardians were also sampled.
33 This includes having been victims of assault or robbery.
34 Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children, p. 34.
Congressional Research Service
6

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

histories of prostitutes in Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco, has found that the majority of
prostituted women were runaways.35
According to a study funded by HHS, between 21% and 42% of runaway and homeless youth
were victims of sexual abuse before they left their homes.36 In the general youth population, this
prevalence is 1% to 3%. The Letot Center, a juvenile justice facility in Dallas that cares for youth
victims, has indicated that about nine out of 10 youth in the Center had previously been
physically or sexually abused. Further, 10% of the youth had previously been involved with child
protective services (CPS).37 In addition to runaway and homeless youth, foster youth may also
fall prey to traffickers. According to anecdotal reports, it appears that traffickers target group
homes and other settings where foster youth congregate.38
Traffickers and Buyers
Victims of sex trafficking are exploited by pimps/traffickers who may operate alone or as part of
a criminal network. In the United States, traffickers range from teenage boys, young men, and
men and women who work for older male pimps to organized criminal syndicates operating both
within and across state and national lines.39 Pimps/traffickers profit by receiving cash or other
benefits in exchange for the sexual use of an individual by another person. It is more profitable
for a trafficker to prostitute a child than to commit other crimes such as dealing in drugs.40 For
one, the commodity (child) is reusable. In addition, technological innovation has allowed
traffickers to reach a wider client base and connect more quickly with buyers. Of note, when
referring to the trafficking of minors, the terms “pimp” and “trafficker” are synonymous. This
does not necessarily hold true when referring to the trafficking of adults. In the context of adults,
a pimp who does not use force, fraud, or coercion to induce adults to prostitute themselves would
not be considered a trafficker. However, this distinction is moot when the prostituted individuals
are minors, with whom a pimp need not use force, fraud, or coercion to be considered a
trafficker.41

35 Heather J. Clawson and Lisa Goldblatt Grace, Human Trafficking Into and Within the United States: Review of the
Literature, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Evaluation, August 2009, http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/07/HumanTrafficking/LitRev/index.shtml.
36 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on
Children, Youth, and Families, Commissioner’s Office of Research & Evaluation and the Family and Youth Services
Bureau, “Sexual Abuse Among Homeless Adolescents: Prevalence, Correlates, and Sequelae,” November 2002,
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/fys/sex_abuse/reports/sexabuse_hmless/sex_abuse_hmless.pdf. (Hereinafter,
HHS, “Sexual Abuse Among Homeless Adolescents: Prevalence, Correlates, and Sequelae.”)
37 Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children, p. 35.
38 Ibid.
39 See Federal Bureau of Investigation press releases regarding domestic minor sex trafficking cases involving
individual perpetrators (e.g., http://atlanta.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel10/at042110.htm) and perpetrators acting within
criminal organizations (e.g., http://newyork.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel10/nyfo042010.htm). For more information on
organized crime in the United States, see CRS Report R41547, Organized Crime: An Evolving Challenge for U.S. Law
Enforcement, by Jerome P. Bjelopera and Kristin M. Finklea. See also Shared Hope International, DEMAND: A
Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica, Japan, the Netherlands, and the United States,
p. 4.
40 U.S. Department of Justice, The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction, p. 33.
41 Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center, Domestic Human Trafficking—An Internal Issue, December 2008, p. 5,
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/113612.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
7

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

There is no single profile of a buyer of commercial sex with a minor, making buyers particularly
difficult to identify. Research has suggested that these predators are often encouraged by online
solicitations, temptations, and exploitation.42 In addition to those actively seeking out sex with
minors, some buyers may engage in sex with minors unknowingly. The perpetrators may assume
that a prostituted individual is an adult. Alternatively, they may or may not inquire about the age
of that individual and may still decide to engage in a sex act even if she or he is a minor.43
Current Law
Before 2000, U.S. laws were widely believed to be inadequate for dealing with trafficking in
women and children or for protecting and assisting victims. Anti-trafficking legislation and
programs have since been implemented with the goal of improving the situation. The Victims of
Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA, P.L. 106-386) was enacted on October
28, 2000. The TVPA sought to punish traffickers and provide support for victims within U.S.
borders.
Congress reauthorized the TVPA in 2003 (P.L. 108-193), in 2006 (P.L. 109-164), and most
recently in 2008 (P.L. 110-457). Of note, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act
of 2005 (P.L. 109-164), signed into law on January 10, 2006, sought to address the special needs
of child victims, as well as the plight of American victims trafficked within the United States. The
act sought to remedy a perceived inequality between the services available to foreign and
domestic victims by creating grant programs specifically to address the needs of U.S. citizen and
LPR victims.44 The William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of
2008 (P.L. 110-457)45 created a new grant program for U.S. citizen and LPR victims, and it
required a study identifying any gaps between services provided to U.S. citizen and noncitizen
victims of trafficking. According to the Department of Justice, the TVPA is considered the
seminal piece of legislation in the fight against the commercial sexual exploitation of children.46
The grant programs authorized under the TVPA expired at the end of FY2011.
Federal Response to Sex Trafficking of Children
The federal government investigates and prosecutes trafficking crimes and provides services to
victims, including those who are sex trafficked. While the State Department’s 2010 Trafficking in
Persons Report indicated that the U.S. government was in full compliance with minimum
standards to eliminate trafficking, it also noted that “government services for trafficked U.S.
citizen children were not well coordinated; they were dispersed through existing child protection
and juvenile justice structures.”47 As such, the State Department has recommended increasing

42 Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children, p. 17.
43 Ibid.
44 See U.S. Congress, Report to Accompany H.R. 972, 109th Cong., 1st sess., November 18, 2005, H.Rept. 109-317, p.
11.
45 P.L. 110-457 was signed into law on December 23, 2008.
46 William Adams, Colleen Owens, and Kevonne Small, Effects of Federal Legislation on the Commercial Sexual
Exploitation of Children, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, Washington, DC, July 2010, p. 1.
47 U.S. Department of State, Trafficking Persons Report, June 2010, p. 338, http://www.state.gov/documents/
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
8

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

government efforts to identify and assist U.S. citizen victims. Further, the most recent Trafficking
in Persons report recommends that the United States, among other things, “offer comprehensive
victim services to all identified, eligible victims, including U.S. citizens....”48
As part of the response to punishing traffickers, the Departments of Justice and Homeland
Security (DHS) have primary responsibility for investigating and prosecuting trafficking cases.
Multiple federal statutes, including those enacted and amended by the TVPA, outlaw sex
trafficking of minors and include penalties for individuals who are found guilty. The federal
government also funds services for victims of trafficking. The TVPA, as amended, is the major
federal legislation that authorizes these services, which are provided primarily by DOJ and HHS.
There has been confusion regarding whether U.S. citizen, LPR, and noncitizen victims are
equally eligible to receive these services. In practice, these services tend to be targeted to aiding
noncitizen victims.49 However, it appears that one program, DOJ Grants for Victim Services, has
used funding specifically to serve U.S. citizen and LPR minor victims of sex trafficking. Table 1
summarizes programs authorized by the TVPA to combat and respond to trafficking of children in
the United States. The majority of programs appear to be able to address the trafficking of U.S.
citizen, LPR, and noncitizen victims alike. The programs include grants to law enforcement for
investigations and prosecutions as well as to social services and other providers of victims’
services. Only selected programs, including DOJ Grants for Victim Services and HHS’ Victims’
Assistance program, have actually been funded. While both of these programs have served
noncitizen victims, only the DOJ Grants for Victim Services—and only in FY2009—has used
money to serve U.S. citizen and LPR victims.

(...continued)
organization/142979.pdf.
48 U.S. Department of State, Trafficking Persons Report, June 2012, http://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/2012/
192368.htm.
49 See Appendix B for further information about services for noncitizen victims. See also CRS Report RL34317,
Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress, by Alison Siskin and Liana Sun Wyler. Other federal
programs provide services to certain vulnerable populations such as children who have run away and/or are sexually
exploited. These programs, described in Appendix C, do not target youth victims of sex trafficking per se.
Congressional Research Service
9

Table 1. Programs Authorized by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, as Amended,
That Could Address Sex Trafficking of Children within the United States
Appropriations for FY2011
(P.L. 112-10)a and for
Agency, Program, and
Authorization of
FY2012 (P.L. 112-55 and
Population Served
Authorizing Statute
Description
Appropriations
P.L. 112-74)b
(Directly or Indirectly)
Grants for Law Enforcement
Department of Justice (DOJ):
DOJ may award grants to state and
$20.0 million for each of
FY2011: No funds appropriated.
U.S. citizen and LPR victims of
Grants to State and Local
local law enforcement for programs
FY2008 through FY2011.
trafficking.
Law Enforcement for Anti-
to investigate and prosecute the
FY2012: No funds appropriated.
trafficking Programs
domestic trafficking of U.S. citizens
(P.L. 109-164, §204;
and lawful permanent residents
42 U.S.C. §14044c)
(LPRs). Funds may also be used to
investigate and prosecute those who
purchase commercial sex and to
educate those individuals who have
been convicted of these and related
offenses. Funds may be used to train
law enforcement to work
specifically with trafficking victims.
DOJ: Grants for Law
DOJ may award grants to state and
$10.0 million for each of
FY2011: No funds appropriated.
Victims of trafficking generally.
Enforcement Training
local governments to assist law
FY2007 through FY2011.
Programs
enforcement in identifying and
FY2012: No funds appropriated.
(P.L. 109-162 §111;
protecting victims of trafficking.
42 U.S.C. §14044f)
Funds may be used to train
prosecutors to identify, investigate,
or prosecute trafficking as well as to
utilize and develop laws to prohibit
trafficking.
CRS-10

Appropriations for FY2011
(P.L. 112-10)a and for
Agency, Program, and
Authorization of
FY2012 (P.L. 112-55 and
Population Served
Authorizing Statute
Description
Appropriations
P.L. 112-74)b
(Directly or Indirectly)
HHS: Pilot Program for
HHS is to establish and carry out a
$5.0 million for each of
FY2011: No funds appropriated.
Individuals under the age of 18
Residential Treatment
pilot program to establish residential FY2008 through FY2011.
who are victims of trafficking.
Facilities for Juveniles in the
treatment facilities in the U.S. for
FY2012: No funds appropriated.
U.S.
juveniles subject to trafficking. The
(P.L. 109-164, §203;
program is to provide benefits and
42 U.S.C. §14044b)
services to juveniles at facilities (and
to assess the benefits and most
efficient and cost-effective means of
providing these facilities) that
provide shelter, psychological
counseling, and assistance in
developing individual living skills; and
to assess the need for and feasibility
of establishing additional facilities.
HHS is to provide grants to
organizations that have relevant
expertise in providing services to
juveniles who have been subjected
to sexual abuse or commercial
sexual exploitation or have entered
into partnerships with other
organizations with this expertise.
Source: Congressional Research Service.
Note: It is unclear whether the funds appropriated to HHS and DOJ for the grant programs above could be used to fund other grant programs. For example, the language
in the appropriations act for HHS says that the funding “shall be available to carry out the Victims of Trafficking Act of 2000.” The language in the appropriations act for
DOJ says that it includes “funding for victims services programs for victims of trafficking” as authorized under the Victims of Trafficking Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-386) and
under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-164).
a. The Department of Defense and Ful -Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (P.L. 112-10) appropriated funding at the FY2010 level, with an across-the-board
rescission of 0.2%.
b. Department of Justice programs and activities are funded under the Consolidated and Further Appropriations Act, 2012 (P.L. 112-55). Department of Health and
Human Services programs and activities are funded under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (P.L. 112-74). P.L. 112-74 appropriated funding at the FY2011
level, with an across-the-board rescission of 0.189%. FY2012 funding for HHS’ Victims Assistance is an estimate.
c. The Department of Defense and Ful -Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (P.L. 112-10) required a reduction in funding to be applied proportionately to each
program funded under the account that contains this appropriation in FY2010. Thus, CRS calculates that each grant program funded under this account was reduced
17.0%, and from that amount the 0.2% across-the-board rescission is applied. For more on this reduction, see CRS Report R41161, Commerce, Justice, Science, and
Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations, coordinated by Nathan James, Oscar R. Gonzales, and Jennifer D. Williams.
CRS-13

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Investigations of Child Sex Trafficking Offenses50
Investigations of human trafficking (including sex trafficking) are often complicated by language
barriers and humanitarian issues (e.g., the victim has been traumatized and is unable to aid in the
investigation), as well as logistical challenges and difficulties (e.g., transporting, housing, and
processing the victims). Moreover, unlike drug trafficking cases where the contraband itself is
proof of the illegal activity, the successful prosecution of trafficking in persons cases relies on the
availability of witnesses who may refuse to testify for various reasons, including fear of
retribution against themselves or their families.51
As mentioned, the investigation and prosecution of child prostitution is most often a matter of
state law. Every state outlaws the prostitution of children.52 The vast majority also outlaw human
trafficking in terms sufficient to encompass sex trafficking in children.53 Within the federal
government, DHS and DOJ have primary responsibility for investigating and prosecuting sex
traffickers, including those who traffic children. The majority of the cases are investigated by
agents in DHS’s Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or DOJ’s Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), who coordinate as appropriate.54 In addition, DOJ, through the
Child Exploitation and Obscenities Section (CEOS) in the Criminal Division and the Human
Trafficking Prosecution Unit (HTPU) in the Civil Rights Division, works with the U.S. Attorneys’
Offices to prosecute individuals who violate federal laws relating not only to trafficking, but also
to child pornography, child prostitution, obscenity, child sex tourism, and international parental
kidnapping. CEOS prosecutes sex traffickers under the TVPA and other laws relating to child
sexual exploitation. With specific respect to prosecuting the domestic sex trafficking of minors,
perpetrators are often prosecuted for violations of the Mann Act,55 the Racketeer Influenced and

50 This section is based on information in the U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2012; U.S.
Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of
Labor, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and U.S. Agency of International Development, Assessment of U.S.
Government Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons, September 2007; and U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney
General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year
2010, December 2011.
51 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Combating Alien Smuggling, Opportunities Exist to Improve the
Federal Response, GAO-05-305, May 2005, p. 10. (Hereinafter cited as GAO, Combating Alien Smuggling,
Opportunities Exist to Improve the Federal Response.)
52 U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2012.
53 For example, Ala. Code §13A-6-152 (“(a) A person commits the crime of human trafficking in the first degree if: (1)
He or she knowingly subjects another person to ... sexual servitude through use of coercion or deception. (2) He or she
knowingly obtains, recruits, entices, solicits, induces, threatens, isolates, harbors, holds, restrains, transports, provides,
or maintains any minor for the purpose of causing a minor to engage in sexual servitude.... ”); Ala. Code §13A-6-
151(7)(“Sexual servitude [is] ... any sexual conduct ... for which anything of value is directly or indirectly given,
promised to, or received by any person, which conduct is induced or obtained by coercion or deception form a
person.... ”); see also, Alaska Stat. §§11-41-360 to 11-41-370; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §13-1307; Ark. Code Ann. §5-11-
108; Cal. Penal Code §§236.1 to 237.
54 The division of responsibilities between these two agencies is not clearly delineated, which may lead to a lack of
coordination between the agencies and possibly to some duplicative efforts. In addition, according to an ICE Office of
Investigations (OI) official, the Border Patrol only has a minor role in alien smuggling and trafficking investigations
and is required to coordinate with OI before initiating anti-smuggling investigations. U.S. Government Accountability
Office, Immigration Enforcement: DHS, GAO-05-66 Has Incorporated Immigration Enforcement Objectives and Is
Addressing Future Planning Requirements, 2004, p. 9.
55 The Mann Act is codified at 18 U.S.C. § 2421 et seq. The Mann Act was enacted in 1910 to fight against forced
prostitution. As currently written, the Mann Act makes it a felony to knowingly transport “an individual who has not
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
14

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Corrupt Organization Act (RICO),56 or the TVPA.57 Specific statues available to prosecute such
crimes include, but are not limited to, the following:
• 18 U.S.C. §1591—Recruiting, enticing, or obtaining (including via force, fraud,
or coercion) individuals to engage in commercial sex acts, or benefiting from
such activities;
• 18 U.S.C. §2421—Transporting individuals across state or international lines for
prostitution or other unlawful sexual activities;
• 18 U.S.C. §2422—Enticing or coercing an individual to cross a state or
international line for prostitution or other unlawful sexual activities;
• 18 U.S.C. §2423—Transporting a minor across state or international lines for
prostitution or other unlawful sexual activities;
• 18 U.S.C. §2424—Keeping an alien in a house or place of prostitution; and
• 18 U.S.C. §2241(c)—Engaging in interstate travel for sexual activities with a
child under age 12, and sexual activities with a child under age 16.
Of these, only 18 U.S.C. §1591 is an anti-trafficking statute created in the TVPA. The provisions
created in other federal laws often reference that the crime is prosecutable so long as the victim is
brought across states lines; however, under the TVPA, victims do not have to be removed from
their communities in order for the crime to be considered eligible for prosecution. Further, the
majority of statutes used to prosecute trafficking offenses focus on prosecuting the traffickers, and
not as much focus has been placed on prosecuting the clients or “johns.” Another difference
between the prosecution of traffickers and the prosecution of buyers appears to be that traffickers
can be prosecuted whether or not a victim is brought across state lines. On the other hand, federal
statutes generally used to prosecute buyers appear to require that either the buyer crosses state
lines or that she/he entices the victim to cross state lines. In short, there may be more flexibility
and options for federal prosecutors to prosecute traffickers than to prosecute johns.
The following sections discuss efforts by DOJ and DHS to combat trafficking, including
prostitution and other forms of child sex trafficking.

(...continued)
attained the age of 18 years in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States,
with intent that such individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged
with a criminal offence.” The FBI investigates possible Mann Act violations and refers them to the U.S. Attorneys.
CEOS supervises the prosecution of these cases. William Adams, Colleen Owens, and Kevonne Small, Effects of
Federal Legislation on the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Washington, DC, July 2010, p. 3.
56 RICO is codified at 18 U.S.C. §1961-1968 and is Title IX of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-
452). RICO allows for the prosecution of anyone who participates or conspires to participate in a criminal
enterprise/organization through two acts of “racketeering activity” within a 10-year period of time. The predicate
offenses for racketeering include various state and federal crimes listed in the U.S. Code. For more information on
RICO, CRS Report 96-950, RICO: A Brief Sketch, by Charles Doyle.
57 U.S. Department of Justice, The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction, pp. 33-34.
Congressional Research Service
15

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Department of Justice (DOJ)
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Civil Rights Unit
The Civil Rights Unit (CRU) of the FBI is responsible for investigating cases of domestic minor
sex trafficking as well as other trafficking offenses. The CRU coordinates with other FBI units,
such as the Organized Crime and Crimes Against Children units to investigate these sex
trafficking cases. In 2005, the FBI launched the Human Trafficking Initiative. This initiative
employs the FBI field offices to use a threat assessment to determine the existence and scope of
trafficking in their region, participate in an anti-trafficking task force (discussed below), and
conduct investigations and report significant case developments to the CRU. According to the
most recent data, in FY2010 the FBI opened 126 human trafficking cases and obtained 79
convictions in human trafficking cases.58 The data do not, however, identify the proportion of
arrests that were made for violations related to minors or adults, the proportion of arrests for sex
trafficking or labor trafficking, or the proportion of cases involving domestic or international
victims. In FY2010, the FBI also reported rescuing 13 minor victims of trafficking and
dismantling 14 human trafficking organizations.59
The FBI, along with the Child Exploitation and Obscenities Section of DOJ and the National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) (both discussed below), participates in the
Innocence Lost Initiative, an initiative dedicated specifically to combating sex trafficking of
minors within the United States. The FBI has established 47 Innocence Lost task forces and
working groups around the country.60 This has led to the conviction of over 1,010 perpetrators as
well as the rescue of 2,100 children.61
Anti-Trafficking Task Forces
Through the Anti-Human Trafficking Task Force Initiative, DOJ (via the Bureau of Justice
Assistance) funds 42 anti-trafficking task forces nationwide.62 These task forces are composed of
federal, state, and local law enforcement investigators and prosecutors and NGO victims service
providers. The task forces coordinate cases and conduct law enforcement training on the
identification, investigation, and prosecution of human trafficking cases. Research has reportedly
shown that locales with task forces are more likely to identify and prosecute trafficking cases.63

58 U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat
Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, pp. 54-55. The arrest, indictment, and conviction statistics are in trafficking
cases. Not every arrest, indictment, or conviction is for a trafficking charge; rather, they occurred in a case opened
based on an allegation of trafficking.
59 Ibid., p. 55.
60 These data are current as of June 2012. For more information, see http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/
vc_majorthefts/cac/innocencelost.
61 Ibid.
62 U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Report on the Tenth Anniversary of the Trafficking Victims
Protection Act, October 29, 2010, pp. 9-10, http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/trafficking_newsletter/
tvpaanniversaryreport.pdf. For more information on the Initiative, see http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/grant/httf.html.
63 The number of investigations and prosecutions among the task forces varies widely. More investigations are for sex
trafficking than labor trafficking, which may be a result of law enforcement’s ability to rely upon pre-existing vice
units devoted to prosecution enforcement. U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2010, p. 340.
Congressional Research Service
16

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force Program64
The Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force program was first funded in 1998 to
provide federal support for state and local law enforcement agencies to combat online enticement
of children and the proliferation of pornography.65 To date, 61 regional task forces have been
created, each of which are comprised of multiple affiliated organizations (most of which are city
and county law enforcement agencies).66
Since the ICAC program started in 1998, over 338,000 individuals—law enforcement officers,
prosecutors, and professionals in the United States and at least 17 other countries—have been
trained to investigate and prosecute cases involving Internet crimes against children.67 ICAC task
forces have reviewed over 277,000 complaints and arrested over 29,000 individuals (over 5,700
in FY2011) suspected of involvement in sexually victimizing children.68 In FY2011, $30 million
in ICAC funding was appropriated to support ICAC task forces, training, technical assistance, and
research.69 For FY2012, $20 million is allocated to the ICAC program.70
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
The Human Smuggling and Trafficking Unit (HSTU) in ICE is primarily responsible for sex
trafficking investigations within DHS. HSTU coordinates with other units within ICE—such as
the Cyber Crimes Center; the Law Enforcement Support Center; and the Financial, Narcotics, and
Public Safety Division—and units in other agencies to combat this form of trafficking. In
FY2010, ICE arrested 300 individuals for human trafficking offenses, nearly three times the 101
arrests in FY2005.71 The data, however, do not distinguish the proportion of arrests for sex

64 For more information on the task force program, see CRS Report RL34050, Missing and Exploited Children:
Background, Policies, and Issues, by Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara.
65 The program was formally authorized by the PROTECT Our Children Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-401). As outlined in the
law, program purpose areas include (1) increasing investigative capabilities of state and local law enforcement officers
in the detection, investigation, and apprehension of internet crimes against children offenses or offenders—including
technology-facilitated child exploitation offenses; (2) conducting proactive and reactive internet crimes against children
investigations; (3) providing training and technical assistance to ICAC task forces and other law enforcement agencies
for investigations, forensics, prosecutions, community outreach, and capacity building, using recognized experts to
assist in the development and delivery of training programs; (4) increasing investigations and prosecutions of internet
crimes against children offenses; and (5) developing and delivering public awareness and prevention programs
regarding internet crimes against children, among other purposes.
66 U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2010.
67 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,
Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program: Program Summary, http://ojjdp.gov/programs/
ProgSummary.asp?pi=3&ti=&si=&kw=&PreviousPage=ProgResults.
68 U.S. Department of Justice, FY2013 Performance Budget: Office of Justice Programs, February 2012, p. 18,
http://www.justice.gov/jmd/2013justification/pdf/fy13-ojp-justification.pdf.
69 Ibid.
70 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 2012 Program Plan: Resources for the Criminal Justice,
Juvenile Justice and Victims’ Services Fields, pp. 16-17, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ProgramPlan/
2012OJPProgramPlan.pdf.
71 U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat
Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, pp. 56.
Congressional Research Service
17

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

trafficking or labor trafficking, nor do they distinguish the proportion of cases involving domestic
or international victims. They also do not distinguish the proportion of arrests that were made for
violations related to minors or adults.
Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center
In July 2004, the Attorney General and the Secretaries of the Departments of State (DOS) and
Homeland Security signed a charter to establish the Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center
(HSTC). The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Protection Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458, §7202),
signed into law on December 17, 2004, formalized the HSTC. The HSTC serves as the federal
government’s information clearinghouse and intelligence center for all federal agencies
addressing human smuggling, human trafficking, and the potential use of smuggling routes by
terrorists. It is unclear how much of the HSTC’s resources are focused on minor victims of sex
trafficking. While the HSTC is the information repository for matters including trafficking, there
is no centralized database housing information on trafficking perpetrators, victims, outreach, and
other matters—although Congress mandated the creation of such a database in the TVPA
reauthorization of 2008.72 The most recent Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S.
Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons indicates that the initial program plan
design has taken place and that the creation of a database is currently underway.73
Services for Child Victims of Sex Trafficking
As referenced in Table 1, the TVPA, as amended, authorizes services (primarily through DOJ and
HHS) to assist victims of trafficking within the United States. Some of these programs are aimed
at child victims of trafficking, particularly sex trafficking.74 In practice, funds appropriated to
HHS and DOJ for trafficking have been used to carry out those programs authorized under 22
U.S.C. §7105(b) and 22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(2). Under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b), it appears that HHS may
provide assistance to two distinct categories of victims: (1) any victim under the age of 18 and (2)
any adult who HHS has certified75 as a victim—a noncitizen adult victim.76 The statute does not
specify the citizenship of children. In practice, HHS provides services to noncitizen children.
Although noncitizen trafficking victims under the age of 18 do not have to be certified to receive
benefits and services, it is HHS policy to issue eligibility letters to such victims.
Because adult domestic victims do not go through the process of certification, there is some
confusion over whether U.S. citizens are eligible for services provided by HHS and other federal
agencies (including, as referenced under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b), the Department of Labor, the Legal
Services Corporation, and other federal agencies). Adult U.S. citizen and LPR trafficking victims

72 Ibid., p. 58.
73 Ibid.
74 These statutes include 22 U.S.C. §7105(b), 22 U.S.C. §7105(f), 42 U.S.C. §14044a, 42 U.S.C. §14044b, 42 U.S.C.
§14044c, and 42 U.S.C. §14044f.
75 For more information on victim certification, see Appendix B. Certification of adult victims by HHS appears to be a
necessary condition of receiving trafficking victims’ services from HHS under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b).
76 22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(1)(C). The statute specifies that HHS, Department of Labor (DOL), the Legal Services
Corporation (LSC), and other federal agencies are to “expand benefits and services to victims of severe forms of
trafficking in persons,” defined as individuals who are under the age of 18 and adults who are the subject of
certification. For further information on services provided by DOL and LSC, see CRS Report RL34317, Trafficking in
Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress, by Alison Siskin and Liana Sun Wyler.
Congressional Research Service
18

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

are not required to be certified by HHS, and indeed would not meet the criteria to be certified
because certification applies only to foreign nationals who need an immigration status (e.g., T
status or continued presence)77 to remain in the United States. Nonetheless, a 2007 report by the
Senior Policy Operating Group on Trafficking in Persons (SPOG) states, “there are not many
differences in trafficking victims’ eligibility for the services we reviewed when one looks at the
relevant statutes.” However, the report does note that U.S. citizen victims may have less intensive
case management services compared to noncitizens.78 In addition, only noncitizen trafficking
victims are eligible for refugee-specific programs.79
For services authorized under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(2), DOJ can use funds to provide services to
“victims of trafficking,” which appears to include both citizens and noncitizens as well as both
adults and minors. Of the money it has received to combat trafficking in persons, DOJ has
targeted funds toward the Grants for Victim Services. These grants are used to provide emergency
services to victims as soon as they have been identified, prior to certification by HHS (for more
information, see Appendix B). Under the umbrella of this program, DOJ has used some funding
to serve domestic minor victims of sex trafficking through a program called Services for
Domestic Minor Victims of Human Trafficking.80 In FY2009, DOJ’s Office for Victims of Crime
awarded cooperative agreements, each for $800,000, for a period of three years to three
organizations that work with domestic minor victims of sex trafficking.81 Three additional
organizations have received DOJ support through other programs for these same purposes.82 The
purposes of the grant are to (1) provide a comprehensive array of timely and high-quality
services, including intensive case management and shelter, to victims of sex and labor trafficking
who are U.S. citizens or LPRs under the age of 18; (2) develop, enhance, or expand the
community response to domestic minor victims of all forms of human trafficking; and (3)

77 TVPA of 2000 created a new nonimmigrant category, known as T status or T-visa, for aliens who are victims of
severe forms of human trafficking. Federal law enforcement officials who encounter victims of severe forms of
trafficking and are potential witnesses to that trafficking may request that DHS grant the continued presence of the
alien in the United States. Historically, the Attorney General has had the discretionary authority to use a variety of
statutory and administrative mechanisms to ensure the alien’s continued presence. For more on immigration relief for
trafficking victims, see CRS Report RL34317, Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress, by Alison
Siskin and Liana Sun Wyler.
78 Senior Policy Operating Group on Trafficking in Persons: Subcommittee on Domestic Trafficking, Final Report and
Recommendations, Washington, DC, August 2007, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/trafficking/SPOGReport-Final9-5-07.pdf.
79 CRS correspondence with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and
Families, Congressional Affairs, April 2, 2007.
80 The grant is authorized under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(2)(A), pertaining to grants made by the Attorney General to
develop, expand, or strengthen victim service programs for victims of trafficking in the United States.
81 The three organizations were Safe Horizon, a youth-service provider for runaway and homeless youth and other
vulnerable youth in New York; Salvation Army in Chicago, which seeks to combat sex trafficking of children; and
Standing Against Global Exploitation (SAGE), a provider of services to minor and adult victims of commercial sexual
exploitation in San Francisco. As part of their grant applications, the grantees demonstrated how comprehensive
services will be provided to both male and female victims of sex and labor trafficking, and documented how the
grantees will work collaboratively with juvenile justice system professionals, child welfare service providers, and other
youth-serving organizations to ensure that a comprehensive array of services are provided to victims. U.S. Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime, “Announcing the Awardees from OVC’s Services
for Domestic Minor Victims,” press release, 2009; and U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office
for Victims of Crime, OVC FY09 Services for Domestic Minor Victims of Human Trafficking Funding Announcement,
2009.
82 These other organizations are Girls Educational and Mentoring Services, Inc. (GEMS) and the Seattle Police
Department/Prostituted Youth Advocacy Project. See U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime, Grants
& Funding: OVC-Funded Grantee Programs To Help Victims of Trafficking, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/grants/
traffickingmatrix.html.
Congressional Research Service
19

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

produce a final report about the implementation of the project so that OVC may disseminate
lessons to the trafficking victims’ services field.83
While other HHS and DOJ programs authorized under TVPA (and referenced in Table 1) could
provide services to minor victims of sex trafficking, it does not appear that these programs have
received funding. For instance, the act directs the Secretary of HHS to carry out a grant program
for states, tribal governments, local governments, and nonprofit nongovernmental victims’ service
organizations to establish, develop, expand, and strengthen assistance programs for U.S. citizens
or LPRs who are the subject of sex trafficking or severe forms of trafficking in persons that occur,
in whole or in part, within the United States.84 The act further directs the Secretary of HHS to
establish a pilot program to establish residential treatment facilities in the United States for
juveniles subjected to trafficking within the United States.85 The William Wilberforce Trafficking
Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-457) reauthorized the two programs
through FY2011.86 In addition, the act also created a new grant program to be administered
jointly by the Secretary of HHS and the Attorney General to provide services to U.S. citizen
victims of severe forms of trafficking.87 These programs, however, have not received
appropriations. Other programs, outside of the TVPA, that may provide assistance to minor
victims of sex trafficking (but are not directed to do so in authorizing statute or elsewhere) in the
United States are discussed in Appendix C.

83 Between January 1, 2010, and June 30, 2010, these projects served 45 youths (both male and female) identified as
victims or potential victims of human trafficking and trained 2,623 service professionals. Referrals for services came
from law enforcement and community-based organizations. The majority of youth identified were victims of sex
trafficking; however, the sites continue to work in their communities to raise awareness about the possibility of labor
trafficking of youth who are U.S. citizens or LPRs. U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to
Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, p. 43.
84 §202, 42 U.S.C. §14044a. In authorizing this program, Congress emphasized the importance of serving U.S. citizen
and LPR victims: “The Committee notes that, as a result of the TVPA, foreign victims of severe forms of trafficking in
the United States are legally required to be treated as victims, rather than as criminals. The same should be true for
American citizens. Nonetheless, a nongovernmental organization which advocates for exploited children, ECPAT-
USA, issued a 2005 report (Who Is There to Help Us? How the System Fails Sexually Exploited Girls in the United
States), which concluded, in relevant part, that ‘the implementation of the TVPA to date, both in terms of services and
prosecutions, has assisted girls from abroad while ignoring girls in similar situations from the U.S.’” Ibid., p. 24.
85 §203, 42 U.S.C. §14044b. In authorizing this program, Congress emphasized the importance of serving U.S. citizen
and LPR victims: “The Committee has learned from both governmental and nongovernmental sources who work with
trafficked children in the United States that a lack of housing options for such children is a debilitating impediment to
providing effective rehabilitative and restorative help to escape commercial sexual exploitation. This section [of the
law] responds to that need.”
86 The authorization levels for each year, FY2008 through FY2011, were $8 million for HHS grants for victims’
services for U.S. citizens and LPRs, $5 million for the residential treatment pilot program, and $20 million to DOJ
grants for law enforcement.
87 P.L. 110-457, §213, 22 U.S.C. §7105(f).
Congressional Research Service
20

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Selected Issues
Funding and Authority to Assist U.S. Citizen and LPR Victims
of Trafficking
One overriding issue concerning minor victims of sex trafficking is the extent to which federal
agencies can and do provide services to U.S. citizen and lawful permanent resident (LPR)
trafficking victims. Originally, the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000
(TVPA, P.L. 106-386) primarily targeted services toward noncitizen victims because they were
not eligible for existing federal human service programs for which U.S. citizen and LPR victims
may have been eligible. As mentioned, U.S. citizen victims are eligible for certain crime victim
benefits and public benefit entitlement programs, though these services are not tailored to
trafficking victims. Further, the extent to which U.S. citizen victims rely upon these services is
unknown.
There has been disagreement over whether the services and programs authorized by the TVPA are
available to all victims, regardless of citizenship status. A recent U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ) report noted that U.S. citizen and foreign national victims of trafficking are treated
differently when they are identified, characterized, and offered services.88 In addition, service
providers and advocates report that federal legislation on commercial sexual exploitation often
focuses on foreign victims; as a result, providers often have difficultly securing social services for
U.S. citizen victims.89 Contributing to this concern may be the limited response provided by
agencies such as child protective services (CPS) that many may assume would be able to serve
these U.S. victims—discussed in detail below.
In response to perceived inequities between services provided to U.S. citizen and noncitizen
trafficking victims,90 the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-
164) enacted policies to assist U.S. citizen and LPR victims.91 In the conference report to
accompany the law, Congress highlighted concerns with the commercial sexual exploitation of
U.S. and LPR children in particular:
The United States not only faces an influx of international victims of sex and labor
trafficking, but also has a problem of internal trafficking (also referred to as domestic
trafficking), particularly of minors, for the purpose of commercial sexual exploitation. In
consultation with the committees of jurisdiction over domestic programs, the Committee
amended Title II of the bill, which addresses trafficking in persons that occurs within the

88 William Adams, Colleen Owens, and Kevonne Small, Effects of Federal Legislation on the Commercial Sexual
Exploitation of Children, Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, Washington, DC, July 2010, p. 4. This information comes from DOJ meetings with commercial child
sexual exploitation service providers.
89 Ibid., p. 7.
90 See, for example, Sarah Ann Friedman, Who Is There to Help Us? How the System Fails Sexually Exploited Girls in
the United States, ECPAT-USA, 2005, http://ecpatusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Who-Is-There-to-Help-Us.pdf.
91 The law also sought to encourage prosecutions of trafficking of U.S. citizens and LPRs. P.L. 109-164 directs the
Attorney General (as described in Table 2) to make grants to state and local law enforcement agencies to establish,
develop, expand, or strengthen programs to investigate and prosecute acts of severe forms of trafficking in persons that
involve United States citizens, or LPRs, and that occur in the United States, including investigating and prosecuting
persons who engage in the purchase of commercial sex acts. §204, 22 U.S.C. §7105(f).
Congressional Research Service
21

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

borders of the United States and victimizes United States citizens or permanent residents….
Among youth living on the streets in the United States, involvement in commercial sex
activity is a problem of epidemic proportion…. The Committee is concerned about U.S.
persons who become subjects of trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation and
encourages the law enforcement community at the State and local levels to focus efforts on
prosecuting individuals who exploit others through prostitution and trafficking. New
strategies and attention are needed to prevent the victimization of U.S. persons through
domestic trafficking.92
As mentioned, P.L. 109-164 authorized two programs specifically to provide services to minor
victims, one of which targets U.S. citizen and LPR trafficking victims. Despite explicit language
in the TVPA, as amended, regarding assistance to U.S. citizen and LPR victims, appropriations
language has been unclear as to whether funds are available for this purpose. Each year since
FY2008, Congress has appropriated approximately $10 million to DOJ for programs for victims
of trafficking and approximately $10 million to the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) to “carry out the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000.” DOJ funds have been used
by the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) to provide services to noncitizens before they are
certified and, beginning in FY2009, to carry out the Services for Domestic Minor Victims of
Human Trafficking program.93 Funds have also been used to support the Anti-Human Trafficking
Task Forces. HHS funds have been used by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) to provide
certification and victim services and to carry out a public awareness campaign about trafficking.94
ORR has said that services are not provided for U.S. citizens and LPRs because it believes that
Congress has not provided funding specifically for this purpose. In fact, HHS funding to combat
trafficking has remained stable at approximately $10 million since FY2002: appropriated funding
did not increase after Congress authorized additional programs for minor victims of sex
trafficking, including U.S. citizens and LPRs.
Further, the FY2010 Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government
Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons states, “the funds provided under the TVPA by the
federal government for direct services to victims are dedicated to assist non-U.S. citizen victims
and may not be used to assist U.S. citizen victims.”95 However, it appears likely that the funding
may be available for benefits and programs for U.S. citizens and LPRs, given that the TVPA
authorizes services for these victims. In fact, DOJ began funding a three-year grant in FY2009,
Services for Domestic Minor Victims of Human Trafficking,96 for U.S. citizen and LPR victims.97

92 U.S. Congress, House Committee on International Relations, Trafficking Victims Protection Act Reauthorization of
2005, committee print, 105th Cong., November 18, 2005, H.Rept. 109-317, p. 23.
93 P.L. 112-10, P.L. 111-117, P.L. 111-8, P.L. 110-161. See Appendix B for further information about the pre-
certification services.
94 See Appendix B for further information. ORR also provides services for victims of torture, certain U.S. citizens
seeking to repatriate to the U, unaccompanied alien children, and unaccompanied refugee minors. For further
information on the programs pertaining to children, see CRS Report RL33896, Unaccompanied Alien Children:
Policies and Issues; and CRS Report RL34414, Unaccompanied Refugee Minors.
95 U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat
Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, p. 28.
96 DOJ also funded two projects for case management assistance to children found in prostitution, and one training and
technical assistance project targeted at 10 youth service organizations assisting children found in prostitution. It is
unclear if funding for these grant programs came from appropriations for the TVPA. U.S. Department of State,
Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2010.
97 The grant is authorized under §22 U.S.C. 7105(b)(2)(A), which pertains to grants made by the Attorney General to
develop, expand, or strengthen victim service programs for victims of trafficking in the United States. It is a program
that was in the TVPA as enacted in 2000. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
22

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

According to DOJ, this grant is authorized under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(2)(A), which was included
in the TVPA as enacted in 2000. The authorizing language of this grant program does not appear
to differentiate between U.S. citizen and noncitizen victims:
IN GENERAL.—Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Attorney General may
make grants to States, Indian tribes, units of local government, and nonprofit,
nongovernmental victims’ service organizations to develop, expand, or strengthen victim
service programs for victims of trafficking.98
Authorized funding for this grant appears to be inconsistent with the statement in the FY2008
Attorney General’s report that the funds appropriated under the TVPA can only be used for
noncitizen victims. Due to the apparent confusion over the authority and funding available to
provide services to U.S. citizen trafficking victims, Congress may choose to clarify the authorities
to provide services to these victims under the TVPA.
Resources for Trafficking Victims’ Services
A corollary issue is the overall breadth of funding for victims’ services. It has been estimated that
there are approximately 14,000 noncitizens trafficked into the United States each year.99 And this
estimate does not include U.S. citizen and LPR victims. In addition, it is estimated that the
number of child victims of sex trafficking in the United States could be in the hundreds of
thousands. As the focus on sex trafficking has broadened to include victims of child prostitution,
funding has increasingly become an issue. In FY2012, Congress appropriated to HHS and DOJ
approximately $20.3 million for services to trafficking victims. For information on current
authorizations and appropriations for trafficking victims’ services through HHS and DOJ, see
Table 1.
This raises several questions. For one, are the resources for trafficking victims, both citizen and
noncitizens, adequate? The State Department’s 2012 Trafficking in Persons Report recommends
that the U.S. government “increase funding for victims services,” among other things, to more
effectively combat trafficking in persons.100 If funds were allocated based on estimated citizen
populations and noncitizen populations, would certain victims have more difficulty obtaining
services? To what extent are the needs of U.S. citizen and noncitizen victims similar, and to what
extent do they differ? As mentioned U.S. citizen and LPRs are more likely to be victims of sex
trafficking and noncitizens are more likely to be victims of labor trafficking. As such, should
funding for victims of trafficking generally be targeted to serve specific populations based on
immigration status, or should it be targeted to providing specialized services for victims of a
particular form of trafficking (sex or labor trafficking) without regard to immigration status?

(...continued)
Crime, “Announcing the Awardees from OVC’s Services for Domestic Minor Victims,” press release, 2009.
98 22 U.S.C §7105(b)(2)(A).
99 U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of State, U.S.
Department of Labor, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and U.S. Agency of International Development,
Assessment of U.S. Government Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons, June 2004, p. 4. This is the most recent
estimate of noncitizens trafficked into the United States.
100 U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2012.
Congressional Research Service
23

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Lack of Adequate Shelter and Services
At a 2010 hearing before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Human Rights
and the Law, a social service provider for sex-trafficked youth stated that 12 organizations
throughout the country specialize in providing services for minor victims of sex trafficking, and
collectively they have fewer than 50 beds for victims.101 In its 2009 report on domestic child sex
trafficking, Shared Hope International identified five residential facilities nationwide that provide
protective shelter, defined as a facility with the ability to separate a victim from a pimp/trafficker
and provide the victim with a restorative home.102 According to the report, the facilities are able
to provide youth protection because they often are isolated from major transportation centers and
common trafficking/pimping areas. They also have a high ratio of staff to minors that can help
keep youth from being re-trafficked and/or from running away. Such facilities also have security
systems, including outdoor and indoor cameras that can hinder outsiders from entering and can
discourage youth from running away.
As part of HHS’s work on sex trafficking of minors within the United States, contracted
researchers have identified—based on discussions with shelter providers, law enforcement
officials, case workers, and directors and staff of four residential facilities that serve minor
victims of domestic sex trafficking—promising elements for residential facilities for victims:
• Residential facilities should be designed to serve homogenous populations of
trafficking victims. Victims may benefit from smaller, more intimate settings so
they can develop relationships more easily with staff and other victims.
• Facilities must be secure in order to establish physical and emotional safety, and
should include an undisclosed location, security cameras and alarm systems, 24-
hour staffing and presence of security guards, unannounced room searchers and
drug screens, and limited phone use.
• Services must be available to trafficking victims, including basic needs such as
clothing, food, and shelter; intensive case management; mental health counseling
and treatment; medical screenings and routine care; life skills and job training
programs; youth development programming; educational programming; and
services to assist youth in reunifying with their families or other appropriate
support persons, as appropriate.103
Other facilities, such as runaway and homeless youth shelters, child welfare group homes, and
other foster care settings, do not appear to be able to adequately meet the needs of youth or keep

101 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law, Child
Prostitution and Sex Trafficking, testimony of Rachel Lloyd, Executive Director and Founder of Girls Educational &
Mentoring Services (GEMS), 111th Cong., 2nd sess., February 24, 2010.
102 Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, “The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children,” p. 67.
103 Clawson and Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential Facilities for Minor Victims of Domestic Sex
Trafficking. At the time of the study in 2007, the researchers identified only four facilities specific to the population
across the country: Girls Educational and Mentoring Services (GEMS) Transition to Independent Living (TIL) program
in New York; Standing Against Global Exploitation (SAGE) Safe House in San Francisco; Children of the Night in Los
Angeles County; and Angela’s House in a rural community outside Atlanta. At least a few other organizations provide
housing and other services for child victims of sex trafficking in the United States, including YouthCare in Seattle,
WA.
Congressional Research Service
24

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

them from pimps/traffickers and other abusers.104 In addition, these settings are often not
equipped to provide intensive services for victims or recognize the trauma they have experienced.
Runaway shelters often have time restrictions on the length of stay imposed by funding sources,
which, given their unique needs, makes serving victims of sex trafficking difficult. Runaway
shelter providers and other providers may not recognize the signs of sex trafficking or that
trafficking is a crime. Even if they do, youth may choose to leave, given that shelter providers are
required to report suspected abuse and neglect, including sexual exploitation.105 In one HHS
study, contractors with the department found that HHS-funded Runaway and Homeless Youth
(RHY) providers tended to report that they served no sex trafficking victims, citizen or
noncitizen, and often equated trafficking victims with being foreign born.106
Congress may wish to consider explicitly designating trafficking or alternate funds for victims’
services, or amending current law to further specify that funds under the existing (and unfunded)
pilot program for residential facilities are available for these victims.107 Historical examples
appear to exist in which individuals were specifically classified as victims in order to receive
shelter and other services. For example, before the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was
enacted, law enforcement officials generally did not know how to adequately respond to victims
of domestic violence and often did not protect victims from their abusers. With VAWA, law
enforcement officials received training on domestic violence, and the law authorized federal
funding for domestic violence shelters. Similarly, prior to the enactment of the Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA), runaways were generally processed through the
juvenile justice system instead of being referred for social services to address the reasons they ran
away and to provide needed services.
Efforts are underway at the state level to provide unique responses to victims of sex trafficking,
particularly prostitution. These responses seek to extend greater social service support to youth
victims, in combination with assistance from other stakeholders, including law enforcement. At
least a few states, including Illinois, New York, and Washington, have passed a law that would
provide certain protections for child victims of prostitution.108 For example, New York’s Safe
Harbor for Exploited Children Act requires that children under age 18 who engage in prostitution
be considered victims of sexual exploitation.109 This presumption permits the child to avoid
criminal charges of prostitution and instead be considered a person in need of supervision by the
state. The statute also provides support and services to sexually exploited youth. These services
include safe houses, crisis intervention programs, community-based programs, and law
enforcement training to help officers identify sexually exploited youth.110

104 Clawson and Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential Facilities for Minor Victims of Domestic Sex
Trafficking, pp. 2-4, 9.
105 Heather J. Clawson et al., Study of HHS Programs Serving Human Trafficking Victims, U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, December 2009, p. iv,
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/07/HumanTrafficking/Final/index.pdf.
106 Ibid.
107 This program is authorized at 42 U.S.C. §14044b.
108 For further information, see ECPAT-USA, “Resource by State: State Efforts to Pass Legal Reform,”
http://ecpatusa.org/what-we-do/helping-children-in-america/law-project/state-law-project/.
109 Sections 447-a and 447-b of the New York State Social Services Law.
110 Legislation has been introduced in the 112th Congress to assist states in providing services to minor victims of sex
trafficking in the United States. For instance, S. 596 would authorize the Assistant Attorney General for DOJ’s Office
of Justice Programs, in consultation with the Assistant Secretary for Children and Families in HHS, to award one-year
grants to six eligible entities in different regions of the United States to combat the sex trafficking of children in the
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
25

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Response by Child Protective Services (CPS)
Child victims of trafficking may come to the attention of child protective services (CPS).
However, as discussed above, CPS may not be able to fully respond to the needs of sex
trafficking victims. Research of CPS workers in a small number of cities found that these workers
are not familiar with human trafficking terms and laws or how to handle cases involving
trafficking of children.111
Reports of abuse and neglect can be screened in and referred for investigation by CPS only if they
concern actions that meet the state statutory definition of abuse and neglect. States that receive
state grant funds under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) must define
“child abuse and neglect” to be consistent with this federal definition of abuse and neglect under
CAPTA: “at a minimum, any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker, which
results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation, or an act or
failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm.”112 The law also expands on the
term “sexual abuse,” which refers to “the employment, use, persuasion, inducement, enticement,
or coercion of any child to engage in, or assist any other person to engage in, any sexually explicit
conduct or simulation of such conduct for the purpose of producing a visual depiction of such
conduct; or the rape, and in cases of caretaker or inter-familial relationships, statutory rape,
molestation, prostitution, or other forms of sexual exploitation of children, or incest with
children.”113 The law does not, however, define “parent” or “caretaker.”
While some states refer to sexual abuse in general terms, others refer to more specific types of
abuse, including sexual exploitation.114 Forms of sexual exploitation include the production of
child pornography or allowing a child to engage in prostitution. Several states also define persons
who can be reported to CPS as perpetrators. These are individuals who have a relationship with or
regular responsibility for the child and generally include parents, guardians, foster parents,
relatives, or other caregivers responsible for the child’s welfare. It appears that in some cases, this

(...continued)
United States. Under the bill, some of the grants would be allocated to non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to
provide counseling, legal services, shelter, clothing and other social services to minor victims of sex trafficking. Funds
could also be used for training for law enforcement; investigative and prosecution expenses; case management; salaries
for law enforcement officers and state and local prosecutors; and outreach, education, and treatment programs, all
related to cases involving the sex trafficking of children in the United States.
111 Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, “The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children; ” Loyola University Chicago, Center for the Human Rights of Children and the International Organization for
Adolescents (IOFA), Building Child Welfare Response to Child Trafficking, 2011, http://www.luc.edu/chrc/pdfs/
BCWR_Handbook_Final1_for_posting_1.pdf (hereinafter, Loyola University Chicago, Center for the Human Rights of
Children and the International Organization for Adolescents (IOFA), Building Child Welfare Response to Child
Trafficking).
112 Section 111(2) of CAPTA, 42 U.S.C. §65101 et seq.
113 Section 111(4) of CAPTA, 42 U.S.C. §5106g. All states receive CAPTA state grants. For further information about
CAPTA, see CRS Report R40899, The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA): Background, Programs,
and Funding, by Emilie Stoltzfus.
114 For further information about state definitions of abuse and neglect and procedures for screening abuse and neglect,
see Child Welfare Information Gateway, Definitions of Child Abuse and Neglect: Summary of State Laws (current
through July 2009), http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/define.pdf; and Child Welfare
Information Gateway, Making and Screening Reports of Child Abuse and Neglect: Summary of State Laws (current
through January 2009, http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/repproc.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
26

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

could mean an adult over the age of 18 who is living with the child, but it is unclear whether a
pimp/trafficker could be included in this definition.
Despite challenges with involving CPS in these types of cases, some states have recently taken
steps to track commercial sexual exploitation and/or prostitution cases under the broader category
of sexual abuse.115 Further, some states and localities have begun to provide specialized foster
care services for victims of sex trafficking. For example, in August 2010 the Illinois Safe
Children Act was enacted, which makes all children (under the age of 18) in Illinois immune from
prosecution for prostitution, under any circumstances, and requires these children to be
considered “abused” for purposes of being screened in by the state child welfare agency. In
Georgia, the Governor’s Office for Children and Families provides case management, referrals,
and funding for all children identified as victims of commercial sexual exploitation.116 Leveraging
funds from private organizations, the office also helps to place children in residential facilities
that are equipped to address sex trafficking. In addition, the office provides training to law
enforcement officials and others (e.g., mental health providers) about sex trafficking of children.
One policy response could be to encourage or require state child welfare agencies to screen in
reports of commercial sex trafficking, including child prostitution, as a form of sexual abuse,
regardless of whether this abuse is perpetrated or facilitated by a parent or guardian. This would
enable states to track cases involving commercial sex trafficking. States could additionally be
required to have in place policies to respond to children who are victims of child prostitution,
including while they are in care. The federal government could compel states to make these
changes through amendments to federal child welfare programs (under Titles IV-B and IV-E of
the Social Security Act or CAPTA), which provide funding for state child welfare programs.
Requiring state child welfare agencies to respond to child victims of commercial sexual
exploitation would raise questions about how to fund this response and how best to prepare child
welfare workers to meet the needs of these children. Federal law does not appear to prohibit the
use of federal foster care dollars for specialized services for victims of commercial sexual
exploitation who have contact with CPS, including foster care placements. However, Congress
may consider clarifying that foster care funding could be used specifically for this purpose.
Alternatively, Congress could provide funding through other sources that may not restrict services
to a specific population, such as select programs under Title IV-B of the Social Security Act
(notably, the Title IV-E federal foster care program is available only for children who meet certain
family income and other criteria). Regardless of whether the federal government provides
additional funding, states may face challenges in collecting data on victims of commercial sexual
exploitation who are under the control of a pimp/trafficker. States could also have difficulties in
placing children in specialized foster or group homes, given that few facilities exist for victims
generally.
Further, given the lack of awareness in the child welfare field about trafficking, the federal
government could compel or require states to provide training to CPS workers on this topic.
Loyola University Chicago’s Center for the Human Rights for Children and the International
Organization for Adolescents issued a publication in 2011 that provides guidance to the Illinois

115 Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children, pp. 72-73; and U.S. House of Representatives, Congressional Foster Youth Caucus and Victims’ Rights
Caucus, “Strengthening the Child Welfare Response to Human Trafficking,” briefing, July 18, 2012.
116 For further information, see Georgia Governor’s Office for Children and Families, Georgia Care Connection Office,
http://www.georgiacareconnection.com/Index.html.
Congressional Research Service
27

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Department of Children and Family Services, the state child welfare agency, on trafficking.
Specifically, the publication seeks to increase identification of trafficking cases overall; ensure
that victims receive full access to protections and services, including foster care, public benefits,
assistance in the criminal justice system, and restitution; and prevent further child trafficking.117
The publication provides guidance on procedures for identifying and investigating cases of
trafficking, providing case management, addressing criminal justice procedures and issues, and
referring children to other resources.
Trafficking Victims Treated as Criminals or Delinquents
Through the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, Congress legislated, essentially, that
juveniles who are involved in commercial sexual crimes are to be considered the victims of these
crimes.118 However, researchers have cited disparities in the ways that exploited children are
labeled at the state and local levels. It has been suggested that victims of child sexual
exploitation—even though these children are too young to consent to sexual activity with
adults—may at times be labeled as child prostitutes or juvenile delinquents and treated as
criminals rather than being labeled and treated as victims. These children who are arrested may
then be placed in juvenile detention facilities with juveniles who have committed serious crimes
instead of in environments where they can receive needed social and protective services.119 As
Shared Hope International observes, “while this sometimes is viewed as the only option available
to arresting officers, it is a practice that pulls the victim deeper into the juvenile justice system,
re-victimizes [the young person], and hinders access to service.”120 Like runaway and homeless
youth shelters, juvenile detention facilities provide treatment and services (in this instance,
services aligned with a youth’s pending charges) that are often unrelated to sex trafficking.
Consequently, these services may be ineffective at addressing the deeper issues facing victims.121
Further, victims may enter into the juvenile justice system in situations where law enforcement
does not know that the juvenile is a trafficking victim as well as in situations where law
enforcement is aware that the juvenile is a victim. For instance, a law enforcement officer who
has not been trained in identifying children as victims of commercial sexual exploitation may
mistakenly charge these children with a crime. Children may hide their identities by using fake
identification cards to protect the pimp, further reducing the likelihood that the children will be
identified as victims or that that the pimp will be prosecuted. On the other hand, an officer who
recognizes that an individual is a victim may charge the individual with a crime so as to place the
victim into one of the only available safe and secure environments—a detention facility within
the juvenile justice system. As mentioned previously, there are few safe facilities for child victims
of sex trafficking.

117 Loyola University Chicago, Center for the Human Rights of Children and the International Organization for
Adolescents (IOFA), Building Child Welfare Response to Child Trafficking, http://www.luc.edu/chrc/pdfs/
BCWR_Handbook_Final1_for_posting_1.pdf.
118 See remarks by Senator Richard Durbin, Hearing before the U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on the Judiciary,
Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law, In Our Own Backyard: Child Prostitution and Sex Trafficking in the
United States, 111th Cong., 1st sess., February 24, 2010.
119 Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, “The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children.”
120 Clawson and Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential Facilities for Minor Victims of Domestic Sex
Trafficking.
121 Ibid., p. 2.
Congressional Research Service
28

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Results from the 2009 study conducted by Shared Hope International suggest that, in nine out of
10 U.S. cities evaluated with respect to prostitution and other forms of commercial sexual
exploitation, victims had been placed in juvenile detention centers.122 There are no comprehensive
data, however, that address the number of prostituted or otherwise sexually trafficked juveniles
who are treated as offenders. Two studies do provide some insight into this number and how law
enforcement agencies process children who are prostituted. One of the only studies that has
attempted to gather this data relies on National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS)123 data
from 76 law enforcement agencies in 13 states. Findings from this study, conducted by the
Department of Justice, reveal that 229 juveniles were implicated as offenders in prostitution
incidents, and arrests were made in about 74% of those cases between 1997 and 2000.124
Although the percentage of juveniles involved in prostitution who were arrested is lower than the
percentage of adult prostitutes arrested (90%),125 this nonetheless suggests that in the sample
examined, juveniles were more likely to be treated as offenders than as victims.
In addition, as part of the National Juvenile Prostitution Study,126 juveniles were categorized as
victims, as delinquents, or as both victims and delinquents based on how they were treated by
police. Juveniles were categorized as being treated as victims if (1) only the exploiter was
arrested or (2) the juvenile and exploiter were arrested but the charge against the juvenile was not
a prostitution-related charge (e.g., disturbing the peace or a drug charge). Juveniles were
categorized as being treated as delinquents if they were the only ones arrested or detained. They
were categorized as being treated as both victims and delinquents if the exploiter was arrested on
a charge specific to a sexual assault against a minor and the juvenile was also arrested on a
prostitution-related charge. Based on this classification, 53% of juveniles were classified as
victims, 31% as delinquents, and 16% as both victims and delinquents. For the cases where a
child was classified as both a victim and delinquent, researchers examined the case summaries
more carefully to see whether they could be classified more accurately as victims or as
delinquents. In all cases, researchers were prompted to change the status to victim only because
either (1) the initial charges were dropped or (2) there was a specific comment from the
investigator that the only reason the juvenile was charged was so they could get needed services.
Overall, 69% of juveniles were ultimately classified as victims and 31% as delinquents.
The study found a strong and significant association between how the case came to the police’s
attention and how the juvenile was treated by law enforcement. Cases that began through a police
report (i.e., a report by the juvenile, a family member, a social service provider, or others) were
almost eight times more likely to result in the juvenile being treated as a victim than those cases
that began through action taken by the police (i.e., surveillance or undercover operations).

122 Ibid., p. 54.
123 NIBRS is part of the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program. Although both NIBRS and UCR are
incident-based reporting systems, NIBRS presents more detailed information about crime incidents than does the UCR.
NIBRS does not have as widespread of participation from state and local police, and the FBI has indicated that the data
are not sufficiently robust to make broad generalizations about crime in the United States. See the FBI’s website at
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm#nibrs. For more information about UCR and NIBRS, see archived CRS Report
RL34309, How Crime in the United States Is Measured, by Nathan James and Logan Rishard Council.
124 David Finkelhor and Richard Ormrod, Prostitution of Juveniles: Patterns From NIBRS, U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, June 2004, p. 5.
125 Ibid.
126 Mitchell, Finklehor, and Wolak, “Conceptualizing Juvenile Prostitution as Child Maltreatment: Findings from the
National Juvenile Prostitution Study.”
Congressional Research Service
29

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Juveniles were also more likely to be treated as victims if they were younger, female, frightened,
or were dirty or had body odor at the time of the initial encounter with police.
Congress provides grants to states for juvenile justice through several avenues such as grants
within the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) and the Juvenile
Accountability Block Grant (JABG) program.127 These grant programs provide funding for an
array of purposes including counseling, mentoring, and training programs; community-based
programs and services; after school programs; education programs; substance and drug abuse
prevention programs; mental health services; gang-involvement prevention programs; and
coordinating local service delivery among the different agencies involved, among other purposes.
However, none of the purposes directly specify services for victims of trafficking or commercial
sexual exploitation. As such, if victims of trafficking continue to be placed into the juvenile
justice systems, policy makers may consider whether to expand or specify the list of purpose
areas for which states may utilize juvenile justice grant funding.
Several policy options exist to address the issues in labeling victims of trafficking as perpetrators
of crimes. For example, Congress may consider whether to provide grant money for the purposes
of researching or establishing alternatives to detention for victims of child sex trafficking. A
related question that may arise is whether these alternatives should be available for domestic
victims and/or international victims, or whether this distinction should be made at all. Another
option Congress may consider is whether to provide funding for programs to train law
enforcement and social service providers to recognize possible indicators of trafficking and
subsequently identify the victims. If Congress decided to appropriate funds for these types of
programs, research would be needed to assess the reliability and validity of any trainings
utilized.128
Reducing Demand for Minor Sex Trafficking in the United States
It is widely agreed upon that any efforts to reduce the prevalence of child sex trafficking—as well
as other forms of trafficking—must include efforts to reduce not only the supply, but also the
demand.129 Research has identified various factors that contribute to the demand for commercial
sex. One such factor contributing to the demand for younger girls is that buyers believe they are
less likely to contract a sexually transmitted disease from a younger girl.130 Another factor
influencing the demand for commercial sex is the technology boom; commercial sex is advertised

127 The JJDPA was enacted by P.L. 90-415 and was most recently reauthorized by P.L. 107-273. JABG was codified
within the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796ee); as such it resides outside the
immediate purview of the JJDPA despite the fact that it is administered by the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention. For more information on these programs, see CRS Report RL33947, Juvenile Justice:
Legislative History and Current Legislative Issues, by Kristin M. Finklea.
128 For instance, according to Shared Hope International, after receiving training on identifiers of domestic minor sex
trafficking, one runaway youth shelter in Louisiana identified 57% of the youth in the shelter as trafficking victims.
Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, “The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children,” p. 50. It is unknown, however, how these results may generalize to other social service and law enforcement
agencies that may receive such training.
129 One grant program under the TVPA (P.L. 109-164, 42 U.S.C. 14044c) includes strengthening demand reduction as
one of the allowable activities. This program would assist state and law enforcement to enhance their anti-trafficking
efforts, but the program has not been funded.
130 Shared Hope International, Demand: A Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica,
Japan, the Netherlands, and the United States, p. 5.
Congressional Research Service
30

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

extensively on the Internet, and buyers are connected with victims through cell phones—allowing
traffickers to conduct business quickly and anonymously over the phone rather than face-to-face.
Experts have provided recommendations for demand reduction strategies that involve increasing
public awareness and prevention as well as bolstering investigations and prosecutions of those
buying illegal commercial sex. The federal government has already taken steps to address
demand reduction. For example, DOJ’s Office of Justice Programs is funding a national
assessment of sex trafficking reduction efforts. This program plans to sample over 435 national
sites that have engaged in some form of demand reduction programs and will conduct an
intensive case study of 20 sites in order to assess their effectiveness and inform future
programs.131
Policy makers may consider other policy options to reduce the demand for commercial sex with
minors. For instance, Congress may consider whether to provide further grant money designated
specifically for campaigns to increase public awareness of the issue. Also, some researchers have
suggested that increasing the age of consent in all commercial sex activities would be an effective
means of reducing the risk of misidentifying a minor as an adult.132 Congress may debate whether
this would also decrease the rate at which johns seek out minors for commercial sex or whether it
would only decrease the genuine misidentification of a minor as an adult. Yet another option that
Congress may consider is whether strengthening the federal anti-trafficking laws, particularly
with respect to the investigation and prosecution of buyers of commercial sex with minors. As
mentioned, one distinction between the prosecution of traffickers and the prosecution of buyers
appears to be that traffickers can be prosecuted whether or not a victim is brought across state
lines. On the other hand, federal statutes generally used to prosecute the buyers of commercial
sex appear to require that either the buyer crosses state lines or that he entices the victim to cross
state lines. Congress may also consider whether encouraging states to strengthen their laws to
provide harsher penalties for engaging in commercial sex activities with minors would deter
individuals from doing so. Policy makers may also debate whether providing funding to assist
states with investigations and prosecutions of these crimes would in turn reduce the prevalence of
buyers who are willing to engage in commercial sex with minors.
Data on Victims and Perpetrators
Studies of sex trafficking, including those involving sex trafficking of children in the United
States, are scarce. Those studies that do provide insight into the number of victims of child sexual
exploitation, such as those conducted by Estes and Weiner and Shared Hope International (see
Appendix A), provide estimates based on the number of youth who are at risk of trafficking or
were identified as victims in a small number of cities. Given the nature of sex trafficking,
estimating the number and characteristics of victims, pimps/traffickers, and johns is difficult.
Nonetheless, the TVPA requires that the Department of Justice provide demographic and other
information related to sex trafficking in reports to Congress.133 Specifically, the act requires
“review and analysis of sex trafficking and unlawful commercial sex acts in the United States” in
two reports. One of the two reports is to address severe forms of trafficking in persons, including

131 U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to
Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, p. 177.
132 Shared Hope International, Demand: A Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica,
Japan, the Netherlands, and the United States, p. 148.
133 42 U.S.C §14044(a)(1).
Congressional Research Service
31

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

the estimated number and demographic characteristics of persons engaged in severe forms of
trafficking. The other report is to address sex trafficking, including the number and demographic
characteristics of persons engaged in sex trafficking and those who purchase sex acts; the
estimated value in dollars of the “commercial sex economy,” and the number of investigations,
arrests, and incarcerations of persons engaged in sex trafficking, including purchasers of sex
trafficking. The TVPA authorizes up to $1.5 million annually for the studies. DOJ has completed
studies of severe forms of trafficking in persons by using a data system known as the Human
Trafficking Reporting System (HTRS), discussed above.134 These data are based on human
trafficking incidents that were opened for investigation by state and local trafficking task forces.
Approximately 40% of all incidents opened for investigation involved children who were sex
trafficked. It does not appear that DOJ has carried out the second report on sex trafficking.

134 Banks and Kyckelhahn, Characteristics of Suspected Human Trafficking Incidents, 2008-2010.
Congressional Research Service
32

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Appendix A. Selected Studies Measuring Sex
Trafficking of Children
Estes-Weiner Study
Richard J. Estes and Neil Alan Weiner estimated in their 2001 study that more than 244,000 youth
in the United States were at risk of becoming victims of prostitution and other forms of
trafficking.135 Importantly, the authors noted that this number did not reflect the actual number of
child exploitation cases. The study noted that the majority of victims tended to be runaway or
thrown-away youth who lived on the streets and became victims of prostitution. Generally, these
children came from homes where they had been abused or abandoned and often became involved
in prostitution as a way to support themselves.136
Estes and Weiner found that approximately 55% of girls living on the streets in the United States
engaged in formal prostitution, and of these girls, approximately 75% worked for a
pimp/trafficker.137 The average age at which girls first entered into prostitution was between 12
and 14 years, and the average age of entry into prostitution for boys was between 11 and 13 years.
The researchers also estimated that in the United States, approximately 156,200 homeless youth
were at risk of commercial sexual exploitation.138
National Juvenile Prostitution Study
The National Juvenile Prostitution Study surveyed nearly 2,600 law enforcement agencies
regarding individuals involved in juvenile prostitution in 2005. Data were collected on whether
agencies arrested or detained—in conjunction with a juvenile prostitution case—(1) youth under
age 18 or (2) adults ages 18 and older.139 In total, the study calculated 1,450 arrests and detentions

135 The study was revised in 2002. The researchers use the term commercial sexual exploitation. Their definition of
commercial sexual exploitation of children includes child pornography, juvenile prostitution, and trafficking in
children. Estes and Weiner estimated that 244,000 children in the United States are at risk of becoming victims of sex
trafficking, but then reduced the estimate by 25% to minimize duplications in the counts of runaway and thrown-away
youth. Estes and Weiner, Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in the U.S., Canada and Mexico, pp. 10, 144-
151. This study has been criticized because, among other issues, the authors lack any evidence on how many of the “at
risk” youth actually become involved in prostitution. In addition, some have noted that there is duplication among the
counts of “at risk” youth. Michelle Stansky and David Finkelhor, How Many Juveniles are Involved in Prostitution in
the U.S.?, Crimes Against Children Research Center, University of New Hampshire, 2008, http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/
prostitution/Juvenile_Prostitution_factsheet.pdf. (Hereinafter, Stransky and Finkelhor, How Many Juveniles are
Involved in Prostitution in the U.S.?)
136 Ibid., pp. 2-4.
137 Ibid., p. 60.
138 To calculate this estimate, the researchers used findings from their field research that 30% of shelter youth and 70%
of homeless youth are victims of commercial sexual exploitation. This study has been criticized because, among other
issues, the authors lack any evidence on how many of the “at risk” youth actually become involved in prostitution. In
addition, some have noted that there is duplication among the counts of “at risk” youth. Stransky and Finkelhor, How
Many Juveniles are Involved in Prostitution in the U.S.?
139 Kimberly J. Mitchell, David Finklehor, and Janis Wolak, “Conceptualizing Juvenile Prostitution as Child
Maltreatment: Findings from the National Juvenile Prostitution Study,” Child Maltreatment, vol. 15, no. 1 (February
2010), http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/Mitchell%202010%20conceptualizing.pdf. (Hereinafter, Mitchell, Finklehor, and
Wolak, “Conceptualizing Juvenile Prostitution as Child Maltreatment: Findings from the National Juvenile Prostitution
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
33

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

for crimes related to juvenile prostitution that year, including crimes committed by adults. The
study further found that 95% of the law enforcement agencies sampled made no arrests in cases
involving juvenile prostitution; in large jurisdictions where researchers assumed such cases would
be most likely, 56% of agencies reported no arrests or detentions. Based on these findings, the
researchers suggested that, at least in larger communities, police were not doing enough to
address the problem of child prostitution in particular.140
To gather more information and data on victim characteristics, researchers followed up with law
enforcement officials from agencies that had reported arrests or detentions in juvenile prostitution
cases. They randomly sampled these agencies and spoke with case investigators for 138 cases.
Cases were classified under three categories: third-party exploiters, solo juveniles, and child
sexual abuse (CSA) cases with payment. Most of the cases (57%) were classified as third-party
exploiters. This category involved pimps or others who profit financially from selling juveniles
for sex, and included small-time or less formal operations and well-organized criminal and
commercial enterprises, such as massage parlors. The solo juvenile category, which involved 31%
of the cases, encompassed juveniles who offered themselves for sexual services (including
pornography production), typically to people they did not know, for money or other items of
monetary value.141 This group included juveniles who lacked a stable residence and juveniles
living in a home or institution, such as a foster home. Finally, the remaining 12% of youth were
engaged in CSA with payment cases, whereby children were sexually abused by family members,
acquaintances, and caretakers and who were paid money as inducements to engage in or continue
these sexual acts. Researchers found that of the entire sample, nine out of 10 youth were female
and more than half (55%) were ages 16 or 17. Most (60%) had a history of running away; in 12%
of the cases, officials did not know about the runaway history.
Shared Hope International Study
In 2006, Shared Hope International, a nonprofit organization that seeks to prevent and eradicate
sex trafficking, began working with 10 Department of Justice-funded human trafficking task
forces142 to assess the scope of sex trafficking of children. The study defined domestic minor sex
trafficking (DMST) as the commercial sexual exploitation of American children within U.S.
borders, which includes prostitution, pornography, and/or stripping.143 While the study used a
broad definition of DMST, it focused primarily on the prostitution of children.144 Researchers
requested that the 10 task forces identify the number of minors who qualified as DMST victims.

(...continued)
Study.”)
140 The fact that many police agencies are not actively arresting juveniles for prostitution means data related to
prostitution arrests cannot fully characterize the problem of juvenile prostitution. For a detailed discussion of this
argument, see Stansky and Finkelhor, How Many Juveniles are Involved in Prostitution in the U.S.?
141 Although police did not find evidence for a third-party exploiter, some of these youth may have been exploited by a
commercial operator.
142 There are 42 task forces in total. The Department of Justice makes awards to law enforcement agencies to form
these victim-centered human trafficking task forces. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to
Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2009, June 2010.
143 In other words, foreign children are not included in their definition of DMST victims. Smith, Vardaman, and Snow,
The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted Children, p. iv.
144 Ibid., p. 11. Focusing on other aspects of DMST, such as pornography, may increase the number of suspected
victims in a given area.
Congressional Research Service
34

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

No further information was provided about how victims were identified, except to say that an
accurate count of the number of victims was not available due to many factors, including a lack of
protocols to track victims and misidentification of victims. Table A-1 presents the findings from
the 10 study sites. Notably, the data collected are not uniform and represent different time
periods.
Table A-1. Number of Suspected Child Sex Trafficking Victims in Selected Locations
Shared Hope International Study
Number of
Suspected
Research Site
State/Territory
DMSTa Victims
Time Period
Dal as Texas
150
2007
San Antonio/Bexar County
Texas
3-4
2005-2008
Fort Worth/Tarrant County
Texas
29
2000-2008
Las Vegas
Nevada
5,122
1994-2007
Independence/Kansas City area
Missouri
227
2000-2008
Baton Rouge/New Orleans area
Louisiana
105
2000-2007
Saipan/Rota/Tinian
Northern Mariana Islands
1
2008
Salt Lake City
Utah
83
1996-2008
Buffalo/Erie County
New York
74-84
2000-2008
Clearwater/Tampa Bay area
Florida
36
2000-2008
Source: Linda A. Smith, Samantha Healy Vardaman, and Melissa A. Snow, “The National Report on Domestic
Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted Children,” Shared Hope International, May 2009, p. 11.
Notes: Due to a lack of formal tracking protocols, some DMST victims may be duplicated within a city and
some may not have been included in the counts. These numbers were obtained through an interview process in
addition to official government records.
a. Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking (DMST)
Ohio Trafficking in Persons Study Commission
In 2009, Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray tasked the Ohio Trafficking in Persons Study
Commission to explore the scope of human trafficking within Ohio. Using methodologies
developed in other studies—including the Estes and Weiner study discussed above—the
Commission estimated that of the American-born youth in Ohio, nearly 3,000 (2,879) were at risk
for sex trafficking, or prostitution. Further, 1,078 Ohio youth were estimated to have been victims
of sex trafficking over the course of one year.145 The researchers also estimated that 3,437
foreign-born persons (adults and juveniles) in Ohio were at risk for sex or labor trafficking, of
which 783 were estimated to be trafficking victims.146 Additionally, they estimated that 945

145 Celia Williamson, Sharvari Karandikar-Chheda, and Jeff Barrows, et al., Report on the Prevalence of Human
Trafficking in Ohio To Attorney General Richard Cordray, Ohio Trafficking in Persons Study Commission, Research
and Analysis Sub-Committee, Toledo, OH, February 10, 2010, http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/TraffickingReport.
146 Ibid., p. 5. The researchers identified four factors that may increase a child’s risk of becoming a victim of sex
trafficking in the United States: (1) Ohio’s weak response to trafficking victims; (2) evidence that first responders to
sex trafficking incidents in Ohio are unaware and unprepared; (3) customers who purchase services from youth receive
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
35

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

homeless youth in Ohio may be at risk for trafficking.147 Importantly, the report states, “due to the
very nature of human trafficking, it is virtually impossible to determine the exact number of
victims in Ohio at any given time and with any degree of certainty.”148
Prostitution of Juveniles: Patterns from the National
Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS)
In 2004, DOJ’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention published a report
examining characteristics of juvenile prostitution incidents that had come to the attention of law
enforcement.149 Data referenced in the report are from the National Incident-Based Reporting
System (NIBRS), years 1997–2000. With the caveat that the data included in this study were
limited,150 findings suggest that juvenile prostitution and adult prostitution are distinctive.
Compared to adult prostitution, the prostitution of juveniles was more likely to occur indoors, to
occur in large cities, and to involve multiple offenders. Within the category of juvenile
prostitution, the study also noted differences between boys and girls. Male juvenile prostitutes
were often older than female juvenile prostitutes, and they were more likely to operate outdoors.
When arresting juveniles for prostitution, law enforcement more often arrested males than
females. Researchers also found that police were more likely to characterize juveniles engaged in
prostitution as offenders rather than as victims of crime. However, those characterized as victims
were more likely to be younger and female.

(...continued)
minimal charges and are rarely prosecuted, and traffickers suffer minimal consequences; and (4) the high rates of
vulnerable youth in Ohio.
147 Ibid., p. 42.
148 Ibid., p. 7.
149 David Finkelhor and Richard Ormrod, Prostitution of Juveniles: Patterns from NIBRS, U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Juvenile Justice Bulletin,
Washington, DC, June 2004, http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/203946.pdf.
150 The data in this study are from a limited number of cases (13,814 prostitution incidents involving identified
offenders—both adults and juveniles) and from only 76 agencies in 13 states. The NIBRS collects data, including data
on offense(s), offender(s), victim(s), arrestee(s), and any property involved in an offense, for 46 different Group A
offenses (those that include data on victims, offenders, circumstances, etc.) and 11 different Group B offenses (those
that include data only on the arrestee). Despite the detailed crime data that the NIBRS can provide, nationwide
implementation of the program has been slow, for a variety of reasons, including cost considerations. For more
information, see archived CRS Report RL34309, How Crime in the United States Is Measured, by Nathan James and
Logan Rishard Council. See also http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/frequently-asked-questions/nibrs_faqs.
Congressional Research Service
36

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Appendix B. Trafficking Victim Services
for Noncitizens
The TVPA, as amended, is the major federal legislation that authorizes these services, which are
provided primarily by the Departments of Justice (DOJ) and Health and Human Services (HHS).
In practice, these services tend to be targeted to noncitizen victims.
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Office for Victims of Crime (OVC)
The TVPA of 2000 created a grant program administered by the Attorney General to provide
grants to states, Indian tribes, local governments, and nonprofit victims’ services organizations to
develop, expand, or strengthen victims’ service programs for trafficking victims.151 This grant
program, known as the Services for Victims of Human Trafficking Program, is administered
through DOJ’s Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) and provides emergency services—including
temporary housing, medical care, crisis counseling, and legal assistance—to victims as soon as
they have been identified, prior to certification by HHS. OVC awards grants to organizations to
(1) provide timely, professional, and culturally competent services to foreign national
victims of severe forms of human trafficking; and (2) build community capacity in
addressing the needs of [trafficking in persons] TIP victims by enhancing interagency
collaboration and supporting coordinated victim responses.152
This program provides services to pre-certified victims of human trafficking, and since FY2010,
OVC has also allowed grantees to provide ongoing support to all certified victims of
trafficking.153
In addition, in FY2010, OVC and the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) jointly funded a grant to
fund a comprehensive approach to countering trafficking—sex trafficking as well as labor
trafficking of both foreign and domestic victims. BJA’s contribution to the grant program
supported law enforcement agencies in three sites with anti-human trafficking task forces; the
agencies coordinated task force efforts with local U.S. Attorneys and victim service providers.

151 P.L. 106-386, §107(b)(2); 22 U.S.C §7105(b)(2)(A).
152 U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to
Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, p. 40.
153 Because this program has provided services to pre-certified and certified victims of trafficking, this would imply
that only noncitizens may eligible for this grant program. However, since certification is not a requirement to receive
services through DOJ, U.S. citizens, LPRs, and noncitizens may all be eligible for services. In fact, using the same
authority provided for the Trafficking Victims Discretionary Grant Program (22 U.S.C §7105(b)(2)(A)), DOJ has
funded a grant for child victims of sex trafficking—Services for Domestic Minor Victims of Human Trafficking. The
grant is authorized under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(2)(A), pertaining to grants made by the Attorney General to develop,
expand, or strengthen victim service programs for victims of trafficking in the United States. Additionally, U.S. citizen
and LPR trafficking victims may be eligible for victims’ assistance and compensation from OVC through the Crime
Victims Fund. This fund provides a direct reimbursement for crime-related expenses, including medical costs, mental
health counseling, lost wages or loss of support, and funeral or burial costs.
Congressional Research Service
37

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

OVC’s contribution to the grant program funded victim service organizations to coordinate
comprehensive victim services.154
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
In practice, HHS administers grant programs to nonprofit and other organizations that directly
serve noncitizen trafficking victims and provides information to the public about trafficking. The
grants for victims’ services, as well as certain benefits solely for noncitizen victims, are provided
by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) in the Administration of Children and Families.
According to ORR, the office does not provide any services to U.S. citizen victims of trafficking
even though such services are authorized under TVPA. ORR notes that this is because Congress
has not appropriated any money specifically for these services.155
Certification
To receive benefits and services through HHS under the TVPA (22 U.S.C. §7105(b)), victims of
severe forms of trafficking who are at least 18 years of age must be certified by the Secretary of
HHS, after consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security.156 Certified victims must be
willing to assist in every reasonable way in the investigation and prosecution of severe forms of
trafficking. They must have made a bona fide application for a T-visa (that has not been denied).
Further, they must have been granted continued presence in the United States in order to
effectuate the prosecution of traffickers in persons.157 ORR provides certification and eligibility
letters for victims.
Under the law, noncitizen trafficking victims under the age of 18 do not have to be certified to
receive benefits and services, but it is HHS policy to issue eligibility letters to such victims. As
discussed in this report, the concept of certification does not apply to U.S. citizen and LPR
victims.
Victims’ Services Through the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR)
Once trafficking victims are certified, they may be eligible for certain victims’ services through
ORR.158 ORR funds and facilitates a variety of programs to help refugees achieve “economic and
social self-sufficiency in their new homes in the United States.” These programs are intended to

154 U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to
Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, p. 42.
155 CRS correspondence with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and
Families, Office of Refugee Resettlement, June 17, 2011.
156 The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (HSA; P.L. 107-296) abolished the Immigration and Naturalization Service
(INS) and transferred most of its functions to various bureaus in the newly created Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) effective March 1, 2003. In addition, due to HSA much of the Attorney General’s authority in immigration law
is currently vested in or shared with the Secretary of Homeland Security. For more information on the role of the
Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security in immigration law, see archived CRS Report RL31997,
Authority to Enforce the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) in the Wake of the Homeland Security Act: Legal
Issues, by Stephen R. Vina.
157 TVPA §107(b)(1)(E); 22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(1)(E).
158 For more information, see CRS Report R41570, U.S. Refugee Resettlement Assistance, by Andorra Bruno.
Congressional Research Service
38

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

help needy refugees who are ineligible to receive benefits under two federal programs available to
U.S. citizens: Temporary Aid for Needy Families (TANF) and Medicaid.159
For trafficking victims, ORR also provides grants to organizations that render assistance specific
to the needs of these victims, such as temporary housing, independent living skills, cultural
orientation, transportation needs, access to appropriate educational programs, and legal assistance
and referrals. ORR may also supply trafficking victims with intensive case management programs
to help the victim find housing and employment, and provide mental health counseling and
specialized foster care programs for children. These services are not currently available to U.S.
citizen trafficking victims.160
Rescue and Restore Victims of Human Trafficking Campaign
HHS, through ORR, also conducts outreach to inform victims of available services and to educate
the public about trafficking.161 HHS established the Rescue and Restore Victims of Human
Trafficking public awareness campaign, which promotes public awareness about trafficking and
the protections available for trafficking victims. The goal of the campaign is to help communities
identify and serve victims of trafficking and support them in coming forward to receive services
and aid law enforcement. HHS funds three contracts to “intermediary” organizations to foster
connections between the Rescue and Restore campaign and local service providers. These
intermediaries serve as the focal points for regional public awareness campaign activities and aid
in victim identification.
In addition to promoting public awareness about trafficking, HHS, through the Rescue and
Restore campaign, has established anti-trafficking coalitions.162 These coalitions are intended to
increase the number of trafficking victims who are identified and assisted. Coalition members
include social service providers, local government officials, health care professionals, leaders of
faith-based and ethnic organizations, and law enforcement personnel. Along with identifying and
assisting victims, coalition members use the Rescue and Restore campaign messages to educate
the general public about human trafficking.
Another component of the campaign is the creation of a toll-free National Human Trafficking
Resource Center (NHTRC) available for advice and victim-care referrals 24-hours a day.163 In

159 For a discussion of the eligibility of trafficking victims for state and federal means-tested benefits, see CRS Report
RL33809, Noncitizen Eligibility for Federal Public Assistance: Policy Overview and Trends, by Ruth Ellen Wasem.
160 In FY2008 and FY2009, ORR piloted a program in which community outreach workers who located a U.S.
citizen/LPR child or adult victim of sex trafficking were given a letter from ORR stating that the individual may be a
victim of human trafficking and might qualify for services as such. Nonetheless, ORR does not provide any services to
U.S. citizen or LPR child victims of trafficking. U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to
Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2008, p. 19. U.S. Department
of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in
Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, p. 11. CRS correspondence with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Administration for Children and Families, Office of Refugee Resettlement, June 17, 2011.
161 U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to
Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010.
162 DOJ, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in
Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, p. 96.
163 The NHTRC is carried out by the Polaris Project, a nonprofit organization that works on human trafficking issues.
U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat
Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, p. 35.
Congressional Research Service
39

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

FY2010, the NHTRC received 11,381 phone calls (a 57% increase from FY2010). These calls
included 2,078 requests for general human trafficking information; 1,173 tips for possible human
trafficking; 911 requests for victim-care referrals; 382 requests for training and technical
assistance; and 121 calls involving individuals in crisis. It is unknown how many of the calls to
NHTRC were related to situations involving child prostitution or other forms of sex trafficking.164

164 U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2010, p. 343.
Congressional Research Service
40

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Appendix C. Other Possible Federal Responses
to Sex Trafficking of Minors
Policy makers and researchers have begun viewing commercial child sexual exploitation as a
form of human trafficking. Nonetheless, while anti-trafficking statutes are fairly new, having first
been enacted in 2000, the issue of commercial child sexual exploitation is not. Thus, there are
other laws and programs that attempt to address the issues surrounding the commercial sexual
exploitation of children, some of which have been in existence for several decades. While these
laws and programs target exploited children, they do not focus exclusively on trafficking victims.
This Appendix contains a discussion of selected programs.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Runaway and Homeless Youth Program165
As discussed, runaway youth are particularly at risk of becoming victims of sex trafficking. The
Runaway and Homeless Youth (RHY) program, administered by the Family and Youth Services
Bureau (FYSB) of HHS, includes three programs to assist runaway and homeless youth. For
FY2012, Congress appropriated $115.3 million for the program. Two of the programs—the Basic
Center program (BCP) and Transitional Living program (TLP)—provide shelter, counseling, and
related services to youth.166 While the BCP and TLP generally do not specialize in services for
runaway and homeless victims of prostitution and other forms of sexual exploitation, a small
number of BCP and TLP grantees provide services for these victims. For example, YouthCare, a
TLP grantee in Seattle, provides beds and services specifically for runaway and homeless youth
who are victims of commercial sexual exploitation.167
The third RHY program, the Street Outreach program (SOP), provides street-based outreach and
education, including treatment, counseling, provision of information, and referrals for runaway,
homeless, and street youth who have been subjected to or are at risk of being subjected to sexual
abuse and exploitation. Trained workers, some of whom are employed by BCPs and TLPs (and
other runaway and homeless youth shelters that are not federally funded), visit youth on the street
to provide these services and referrals.168

165 For further information, see CRS Report RL33785, Runaway and Homeless Youth: Demographics and Programs,
by Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara.
166 Congress appropriated $97.5 million for the two programs in FY2011, which funded 341 BCP shelters and 215
TLPs in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, and Puerto Rico. U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Children and Families Services Program Justification
of Estimates for Appropriations Committees, pp. 109-110.
167 CRS correspondence with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and
Families, Administration on Children, Youth, and Families, Family and Youth Services Bureau, March 2010.
168 Approximately $18.0 million was appropriated to fund 155 grantees in FY2011, many of which operate in
coordination with the two shelter programs. Most of these received written materials about referral services, health and
hygiene products, and food and drink items. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for
Children and Families, Children and Families Services Program Justification of Estimates for Appropriations
Committees, p. 115.
Congressional Research Service
41

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

The RHY program also funds the National Runaway Switchboard (NRS), which serves as the
national communication system for runaway and homeless youth. The NRS mission is to keep
runaway and at-risk youth safe and off the streets. NRS operates a 24-hour hotline to provide
crisis intervention, referrals to community resources, and family reunification. NRS staff are
trained on issues involving child sexual exploitation and provide training to RHY and other
grantees about the forms of sexual exploitation among runaway and homeless youth.169
Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) and Family and Youth Services Bureau
(FYSB) Coordination
In 2008, staff from the Family and Youth Services Bureau and Office of Refugee Resettlement
provided training to five RHY grantee sites.170 The grantees were funded under the BCP, TLP,
and/or SOP. According to HHS, the training familiarized ORR staff with the work of FYSB
grantees. Further, the training developed and tested a training module for new ORR and FYSB
grantees on ORR procedures in processing or certifying trafficked youth. The training highlighted
the differences between domestic and foreign trafficking victims, the different services they can
receive, and emerging issues related to providing services to these youth—including the labeling
of youth as victims or offenders as well as defining trafficking.
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Missing and Exploited Children’s Program171
The Missing Children’s Assistance Act (P.L. 98-473), as amended, authorizes funding for the
Missing and Exploited Children’s (MEC) program. The act is the centerpiece of federal efforts to
prevent the abduction and sexual exploitation of children, and to recover those children who go
missing.172 Since 1984, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) has
served as a national resource center and has carried out many of the objectives of the act in
collaboration with OJJDP. NCMEC operates the CyberTipline, which allows the public and
electronic communication service providers (e.g., search engines and email providers) to report
child victims of prostitution, enticement of children for sexual acts, child sexual molestation
occurring outside the family, child pornography, and sex tourism involving children. NCMEC
analysts from the Exploited Children’s Unit send verified reports to the appropriate Internet
Crimes Against Children Task Forces (see discussion elsewhere in this report) or, when
appropriate, the local police agencies. The CyberTipline also accepts reports of misleading
domain names and unsolicited materials sent to children, which are then referred to the Child

169 CRS correspondence with the National Runaway Switchboard, April 2010.
170 The sites were in San Diego, CA; and Austin, Galveston, and San Antonio in Texas. CRS correspondence with the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on
Children, Youth, and Families, Family and Youth Services Bureau, March 2010.
171 For further information, see CRS Report RL34050, Missing and Exploited Children: Background, Policies, and
Issues, by Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara.
172 The act directed DOJ’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) to establish both a toll-free
number to report missing and exploited children and a national resource center for missing and exploited children;
coordinate public and private missing and exploited children’s programs; provide training and technical assistance to
recover missing children; and assist law enforcement entities in combating child exploitation. For FY2011, Congress
appropriated $70 million for the MEC program.
Congressional Research Service
42

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

Exploitation and Obscenities Section (CEOS) of DOJ. Federal law enforcement agents and
analysts co-located at NCMEC prepare and serve subpoenas based on leads from the
CyberTipline, and reported leads are referred to field offices.173 The FBI uses CyberTipline
reports to gain leads for their Innocence Lost Project on domestic child trafficking. Between
March 1998 (when the CyberTipline began) and March 2012, nearly 1.4 million (1,392,700)
reports were received, of which less than 1% (0.8%, n=11,462) were for child prostitution.174 The
majority (over 91%) of reports were for child pornography.
The MEC program also supports the Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force
program to assist state and local law enforcement cyber units in investigating possible incidents
of online child sexual exploitation (discussed above). The MEC also provides technical assistance
for the AMBER Alert system, which coordinates state efforts to broadcast bulletins in the most
serious child abduction cases. In some years, the MEC program supports, or has supported,
additional activities. For example, in FY2009 the program funded grants for researching and
combating child sexual exploitation and promoting child safety in general.
In addition to funding its major components (the National Center for Missing and Exploited
Children, the ICAC Task Force Program, etc.), the Missing and Exploited Children’s program
provides funding for smaller grant programs, some of which have targeted victims of commercial
sexual exploitation. According to the funding announcement for the grants, commercial sexual
exploitation describes a range of crimes of a sexual nature committed against victims younger
than age 18, primarily or entirely for financial or other economic reasons, including trafficking
for sexual purposes, prostitution, sex tourism, mail-order bride trades and early marriage,
pornography, stripping, and performances in sexual venues such as peep shows or clubs.175
In FY2009, DOJ allocated funding for two competitive grant programs that address commercial
sexual exploitation. One of the grants provided funding to three communities to assist in
developing policies and procedures for identifying victims of commercial sexual exploitation.176
Another grant, Research on the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children, is used to support
research on the scope and consequence of the commercial sexual exploitation of children and
youth.177 For FY2011, the MEC program provided funding through a grant, the Technical
Assistance Program to Address Commercial Sexual Exploitation/Domestic Minor Sex
Trafficking. The program will fund a grantee to provide training and technical assistance to
OJJDP grantee organizations and other entities to implement or enhance efforts to identify youth
at risk of commercial sexual exploitation (defined above) and domestic minor sex trafficking (not

173 Federal law enforcement officials from five agencies (FBI, U.S. Postal Inspection Service, U.S. Marshals Service,
Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, and the State Department) work full- or part-time at NCMEC
investigating missing and exploited children cases, as they pertain to their federal jurisdiction.
174 National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, CyberTipline Fact Sheet, http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/
documents/CyberTiplineFactSheet.pdf. In FY2011, nearly 280,000 reports were received. Information provided to CRS
by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, December 2011.
175 See, for example, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, FY 09 Improving Community Response to the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children
and Research on the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children, Funding Announcements, 2009.
176 The grantees are Multnomah County, OR; Alameda County, CA; and Kristi House, a child advocacy center for
sexually abused children, in Miami, FL. An FY2009 technical assistance grant through the ICAC program awarded
funds to the Girls Education and Mentoring Services (GEMS) to provide technical assistance to the grantees.
177 The grantee is the Fund for the City of New York, a nonprofit organization that funds projects to advance the
“functioning of government and nonprofit organizations in New York and beyond.”
Congressional Research Service
43

Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress

defined); develop or enhance mentoring service models for youth at risk; provide an array of
services for youth victims; and develop and deliver prevention programming in a variety of
community settings.

Author Contact Information

Kristin M. Finklea
Alison Siskin
Specialist in Domestic Security
Specialist in Immigration Policy
kfinklea@crs.loc.gov, 7-6259
asiskin@crs.loc.gov, 7-0260
Adrienne L. Fernandes-Alcantara

Specialist in Social Policy
afernandes@crs.loc.gov, 7-9005

Congressional Research Service
44