Community Oriented Policing Services
(COPS): Background and Funding
Nathan James
Analyst in Crime Policy
May 14, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL33308
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
Summary
The Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program was created by Title I of the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-322). The mission of the COPS
program is to advance community policing in all jurisdictions across the United States. The
Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-162)
reauthorized the COPS program through FY2009 and changed it from a multi-grant program to a
single-grant program.
Between FY1995 and FY1996, the annual appropriation for the COPS program averaged more
than $1.4 billion. The relatively high levels of funding during this time period were largely the
result of Congress’s and the Clinton Administration’s efforts to place 100,000 new law
enforcement officers on the street. Appropriations for the program started to wane in FY2002
before increasing again for the four-year period between FY2007 and FY2010. Congress started
to reduce funding for the COPS program as it moved away from providing funding for hiring new
law enforcement officers and changed COPS into a conduit for providing federal assistance to
support local law enforcement agencies. Starting in FY1998, an increasing portion of the annual
appropriation for COPS was dedicated to programs to help law enforcement agencies purchase
new equipment, combat methamphetamine production, upgrade criminal records, and improve
forensic sciences. Funding for the COPS program decreased in both FY2011 and FY2012, which
can be attributed to reduced funding for the COPS Hiring Program, the congressional earmark
ban, and Congress moving appropriations for programs that were traditionally funded under the
COPS account to other accounts. Funding for the COPS program did increase slightly in FY2013,
even after sequestration. One issue Congress might consider is whether the federal government
should continue to provide grants to state and local law enforcement agencies to hire additional
officers at a time of historically low crime rates.
Congressional Research Service
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
Contents
Background ...................................................................................................................................... 1
COPS Funding ................................................................................................................................. 3
Figures
Figure 1. COPS Funding, FY1995-FY2013 .................................................................................... 4
Figure 2. Funding for the COPS Hiring Program, FY1995-FY2013............................................... 5
Tables
Table A-1. COPS’ Requested Funding, Total Enacted Funding, Funding for Hiring
Programs, and Authorized Appropriation, FY1995-FY2013 ........................................................ 7
Table A-2. COPS Funding, by Program, FY2004-FY2013 ............................................................. 9
Appendixes
Appendix. COPS Funding History .................................................................................................. 7
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 11
Congressional Research Service
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
Background
The Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program was created by Title I of the Violent
Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 19941 (the ‘94 Crime Act). The mission of the COPS
program is to advance community policing in all jurisdictions across the United States.2 The
COPS program awards grants to state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies throughout the
United States so they can hire and train law enforcement officers to participate in community
policing, purchase and deploy new crime-fighting technologies, and develop and test new and
innovative policing strategies.3 COPS grants are managed by the COPS Office, which was created
in 1994 by Department of Justice (DOJ) to oversee the COPS program.
Authorized funding for the COPS program expired in FY2009. There are several issues Congress
might consider if it chooses to consider legislation to reauthorize the program. These issues are
the subject of another CRS report.4 Another issue Congress might consider is the appropriate
funding level for COPS, especially in light of concerns about federal spending and possible
reductions to appropriations for DOJ.
As originally authorized under Title I of the ‘94 Crime Act, the COPS program had three separate
grant programs. Under the first program, the Attorney General was authorized to make grants to
states, units of local government, Indian tribal governments, other public and private entities, and
multi-jurisdictional or regional consortia to increase the number of police officers and focus the
officers’ efforts on community policing. Grant funds under this program could have been used to
• hire new police officers;
• rehire police officers who have been laid off; and
• obtain equipment or support systems and provide overtime pay, if it results in an
increase of the number of officers deployed in community-oriented policing.
Grant funds under a second program could have been used to hire former members of the armed
services to serve as career law enforcement officers engaged in community policing.
Grant funds under a third program could have also been used for other non-hiring purposes
such as
• training law enforcement officers in crime prevention and community policing
techniques;
• developing technologies that emphasize crime prevention;
1 P.L. 103-322; 42 U.S.C. §3796dd.
2 While there are different definitions of “community policing” the COPS Office defines “community policing” as “ ...
a philosophy that promotes organizational strategies, which support the systematic use of partnerships and problem-
solving techniques, to proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime,
social disorder, and fear of crime.” U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services Office,
Community Policing Defined, http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/default.asp?Item=36.
3 U.S. Department of Justice, Community Oriented Policing Services Office, About Community Oriented Policing
Services Office, http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/Default.asp?Item=35.
4 See CRS Report R40709, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Current Legislative Issues, by Nathan
James.
Congressional Research Service
1
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
• linking community organizations and residents with law enforcement;
• supporting the purchase of weapons for police officers;
• decreasing the amount of time police must spend away from the community
while awaiting court appearances; and
• facilitating the establishment of community-oriented policing as an organization-
wide philosophy.5
In 1998, P.L. 105-302 amended the ‘94 Crime Act to allow COPS funding to be used for school
resource officers. In 2003, P.L. 108-216 also amended the ‘94 Crime Act to allow COPS funding
to be used for assisting states to enforce sex offender registration laws.7
The ‘94 Crime Act authorized funding for the COPS program through FY2000. Debate on Title I
of the ‘94 Crime Act focused on whether the COPS program would be able to meet its goal of
putting 100,000 new police officers on the beat by the end of FY2000.8 Starting in 1999,
Congress turned its attention to reauthorizing the COPS program. There was support from some
Members of Congress for continuing the COPS program.9 During this period, Congress discussed
using COPS hiring programs to put another 50,000 police officers on the streets.10 After COPS
5 This list represents the types of activities that were originally authorized in P.L. 103-322, which also included (1)
hiring programs such as Universal Hiring Program and Making Officer Redeployment Effective (MORE), and (2) other
activities such as Police Corps, methamphetamine “hot spot” clean-up, law enforcement technology, and tribal law
enforcement grants.
6 See §341 of the Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to End the Exploitation of Children Today Act (PROTECT)
of 2003 (P.L. 108-21).
7 For additional information on sex offender registering laws, see CRS Report RL32800, Sex Offender Registration and
Community Notification Law: Recent Legislation and Issues, by Garrine P. Laney (available upon request).
8 See Senate debate, “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994—Conference Report,” Congressional
Record, vol. 140 (August 25, 1994), pp. S12496-S12557; Rep. Manzullo, “Examining the Centerpiece of the Crime
Bill,” Congressional Record, vol. 140 (August 18, 1994), pp. H8691-H8694; Sen. Orrin Hatch, “The Signing of the
Crime Bill,” Congressional Record, vol. 140 (September 13, 1994), p. S12799; Rep. William J. Coyne, “The Right
Tools for Fighting Crime—Extension of Remarks,” Congressional Record, vol. 140 (August 26, 1994), p. E1808;
Senate debate, “The Crime Bill,” Congressional Record, vol. 140 (August 22, 1994), pp. S12285-S12288; Senate
debate, “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994,” Congressional Record, vol. 140 (August 22,
1994), pp. S12250-S12284.
9 See Senate debate, “Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary and Related Agencies Appropriation
Act,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (July 22, 1999), pp. S8988-S9014; Rep. Bart Stupak, “COPS Program Good for
Communities,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (May 12, 1999), p. H3070; Rep. Rush Holt, “Reauthorize COPS
Program,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (May 12, 1999), p. H3003; Senate debate, “Concurrent Resolution on the
Budget for Fiscal Year 2000,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (March 24, 1999) pp. S3301-S3308; Senate debate,
“Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2000,”
Congressional Record, vol. 145 (July 21, 1999), pp. S8940-S8947.
10 See U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs, Making America’s
Streets Safer: The Future of the COPS Program, 107th Cong., 1st sess., December 5, 2001 (Washington: GPO, 2002);
Senate debate, “Statement on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (January 19,
1999), pp. S345-S470; House debate, “Democratic Legislative Agenda Held Hostage by Do-nothing/Do-wrong
Republican Congress,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (November 3, 1999) pp. H11452-H11459; U.S. Congress,
House Committee on Appropriations, Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Bill, Fiscal Year 2001, report to accompany H.R. 4690, 106th Cong., 2nd sess., H.Rept. 106-
680 (Washington, GPO, 2000), p. 8; House debate, “Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2002,” Congressional Record, vol. 147 (July 18, 2001), pp. H4167-H4202;
Senate debate, “Statement on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (March 25,
1999), pp. S3440-S3457; Sen. Orrin Hatch, “Hatch Amendment No. 246,” Congressional Record, vol. 145 (April 12,
1999), p. S3600.
Congressional Research Service
2
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
initial authorization expired, several bills were introduced in Congress that would have
reauthorized the COPS program; however, Congress continued to appropriate funding for the
program through FY2006, when reauthorizing legislation was enacted (see discussion below).
On January 5, 2006, the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act
of 2005 (P.L. 109-162) was signed into law. The act reauthorized the COPS program through
FY2009. Along with reauthorizing the COPS program, the act amended current law11 to change
the COPS program into a single-grant program. When Congress reauthorized COPS, it took many
of the purposes for which COPS grants could be awarded (see above) and made them program
purpose areas under the new single grant program. As currently authorized, state or local law
enforcement agencies may apply for a “COPS grant,” which could be used to hire or re-hire
community policing officers or fund non-hiring programs.12
COPS Funding
This section of the report only discusses the new budget authority enacted for the COPS program
in the annual appropriation bills. Between FY1998 and FY2002, Congress directed the COPS
Office to use unobligated balances from previous fiscal years to fund grant programs, which
included grants for hiring, school safety, law enforcement technology, combating
methamphetamine, armor vests for law enforcement officers, improving tribal law enforcement,
and combating domestic violence.
As shown in Figure 1, between FY1995 and FY1996, the annual appropriation for the COPS
program averaged more than $1.4 billion. The relatively high levels of funding during this time
period were largely the result of Congress’s and the Clinton Administration’s efforts to place
100,000 new law enforcement officers on the street. Appropriations for the program started to
wane in FY2002 (the average annual appropriation for COPS between FY2002 and FY2006 was
$780.4 million) before increasing again for the four-year period between FY2007 and FY2010.
Congress started to reduce funding for the COPS program as it moved away from providing
funding for hiring new law enforcement officers and changed COPS into a conduit for providing
federal assistance to support local law enforcement agencies. Starting in FY1998, an increasing
portion of the annual appropriation for COPS was dedicated to programs to help law enforcement
agencies purchase new equipment, combat methamphetamine production, upgrade criminal
records, and improve forensic sciences. As shown below, the reduction in overall COPS funding
between FY2002 and FY2006 roughly coincides with reduced funding for the COPS Hiring
Program (CHP). On the other hand, overall funding for COPS increased in both FY2009 and
FY2010 when Congress started to provide funding for the CHP.
Funding for the COPS program decreased in both FY2011 and FY2012, which again coincided
with decreased funding for the CHP. However, decreases in overall funding for COPS can also be
attributed to two trends: the congressional earmark ban and Congress restructuring the COPS
account (see Table A-2). Congress implemented a ban on earmarks starting with appropriations
11 42 U.S.C. §3796dd(d).
12 Even though current law states that law enforcement agencies that receive a COPS grant could use the funding for
hiring or re-hiring law enforcement officers, the authority for the Attorney General to make grants for hiring or re-
hiring law enforcement officer ended on September 13, 2000 (42 U.S.C. §3796dd(i)).
Congressional Research Service
3
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
for FY2011. This ban substantially decreased funding for the Law Enforcement Technology and
the Methamphetamine Clean-up programs. By FY2012, Congress did not appropriate any funding
for the Law Enforcement Technology program and the only funding remaining for the
Methamphetamine Clean-up program was transferred to the Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA) to assist with the clean-up of clandestine methamphetamine laboratories.
Between FY2010 and FY2012, Congress moved appropriations for programs that were
traditionally funded under the COPS account—such as Project Safe Neighborhoods, DNA
backlog reduction initiatives, Paul Coverdell grants, offender reentry programs, the National
Criminal History Improvement program, and the Bulletproof Vest Grant program—to the State
and Local Law Enforcement Assistance (S&LLEA) account. As shown in Table A-2,
appropriations for programs that were moved to the S&LLEA account starting in FY2010 were
traditionally transferred to the Office of Justice Programs.
In a reversal of recent trends, now that Congress has restructured the funding of the COPS
account by moving appropriations for several programs to the S&LLEA account, funds for the
hiring program now comprise a large proportion of the total appropriation for the COPS account.
Appropriations for the COPS account increased slightly in FY2013, which was the result of
Congress appropriating additional funding for the CHP.
Figure 1. COPS Funding, FY1995-FY2013
Appropriations in millions of dollars
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
Fiscal Year
Appropriations
Carryover
ARRA
Source: FY1995 through FY2011 enacted amounts provided by the U.S. Department of Justice, Community
Oriented Policing Services; FY2012 enacted amount was taken from H.Rept. 112-284; FY2013 enacted amount
provided by the U.S. Department of Justice.
Congressional Research Service
4
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
Notes: “ARRA” is the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5). The FY2013 enacted
amount includes a rescission of 1.877% rescission per section 3001 of P.L. 113-6 and a 0.2% rescission ordered
by the Office of Management and Budget per section 3004 of P.L. 113-6. The FY2013 enacted amount also
includes the amount sequestered per the Budget Control Act of 2011(P.L. 112-25).
In the early years of the COPS program, a majority of the program’s enacted appropriations went
to grant programs specifically aimed at hiring more police officers (see Figure 2). Beginning in
FY1998, however, enacted appropriations for the CHP began to decline, whereas non-hiring
grants started to see an increase in appropriations. Congress has traditionally specified what
amounts of the COPS appropriation each fiscal year are to be used for hiring grants and non-
hiring grants. In FY2008, Congress appropriated $20 million for the CHP; this was the first time
Congress appropriated funding for hiring grants since FY2005. The American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) included $1 billion for the CHP, the most funding
Congress appropriated for hiring grants since FY1999. For FY2010, Congress included $298
million for the CHP as a part of the annual COPS appropriation. Congress continued its support
for the CHP, albeit at a reduced rate, by appropriating $247 million for FY2011 and $141 million
for FY2012. Appropriations for the CHP increased slightly in FY2013 to $178.7 million.
Appropriations for hiring programs in FY2009-FY2012 were the result of Congress’s efforts to
help local law enforcement agencies facing budget cuts as a result of the recession either hire new
law enforcement officers or retain officers they might have to layoff.
Figure 2. Funding for the COPS Hiring Program, FY1995-FY2013
Appropriations in millions of dollars
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
Fiscal Year
Annual Appropriation
ARRA
Source: Appropriations for the COPS Hiring Program for FY1995 to FY2011 were provided by the U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services; FY2012 appropriation for the hiring
program was taken from H.Rept. 112-284; the FY2013 appropriation for the hiring program was provided the
U.S. Department of Justice.
Congressional Research Service
5
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
Notes: “ARRA” is the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5). The FY2013 enacted
amount includes a rescission of 1.877% rescission per section 3001 of P.L. 113-6 and a 0.2% rescission ordered
by the Office of Management and Budget per section 3004 of P.L. 113-6. The FY2013 enacted amount also
includes the amount sequestered per the Budget Control Act of 2011(P.L. 112-25).
One potential question facing Congress as it considers the annual appropriation for the COPS
program is whether the federal government should continue to provide grants to state and local
law enforcement agencies to hire additional officers at a time of historically low crime rates.
Opponents of the program stress that state and local governments, not the federal government,
should be responsible for providing funding for police forces.13 They also argue that the purported
effect of COPS hiring grants on crime rates in the 1990s is questionable.14 They maintain that it is
not prudent to increase funding for the program at a time when crime is decreasing and the
federal government is facing annual deficits.15
Proponents of the COPS program assert that COPS hiring grants contributed to the decreasing
crime rate in the 1990s.16 They contend that the federal government might need to provide
temporary aid to local government because law enforcement agencies might have to lay off
officers due to the recession. Proponents believe that the federal government has a role to play in
supporting local law enforcement because it is the federal government’s responsibility to provide
for the security of U.S. citizens, which means protecting citizens from crime.17 They also
maintain that the federal government should support local law enforcement because it has become
more involved in homeland security and immigration enforcement.18
13 U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Markup of H.R. 1139, the “COPS Improvement Act of 2009,”
and H.R. 985, the “Free Flow of Information Act of 2009,” 111th Cong., 1st sess., March 25, 2009, pp. 20-21, hereafter
“March 25 Markup of H.R. 1139.”
14 March 25 Markup of H.R. 1139, pp. 7-9. U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Markup of: H.R. 1107,
to Enact Certain Laws Relating to Public Contracts as Title 41, United States Code, “Public Contracts;” H.R. 1139,
the “COPS Improvement Act of 2009;” and H.R. 1575, the “The End GREED Act,” 111th Cong., 1st sess., March 18,
2009, p. 47, hereafter “March 18 Markup of H.R. 1139.”
15 Ibid.
16 Rep. Conyers et al., “COPS Improvement Act of 2007,” House Debate, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol.
153 (May 15, 2007), pp. H4985-H4995.
17 March 18 Markup of H.R. 1139, p. 52.
18 Rep. Conyers et al., “COPS Improvement Act of 2007,” House Debate, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol.
153 (May 15, 2007), pp. H4985-H4995. March 25 Markup of H.R. 1139, p. 7
Congressional Research Service
6
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
Appendix. COPS Funding History
Table A-1. COPS’ Requested Funding, Total Enacted Funding, Funding for Hiring
Programs, and Authorized Appropriation, FY1995-FY2013
Amounts in millions of dollars
Carryover
Fiscal
President’s
New Budget
(from prior
Hiring
Year
Request
Authority
fiscal years)
Total
Programs
Authorized
1995
$1,720 $1,300 $— $1,300 $1,057 $1,332
1996
1,903 1,400 — 1,400 1,128 1,850
1997
1,976 1,420 — 1,420 1,339 1,950
1998
1,545 1,430 203 1,633 1,338 1,700
1999
1,420 1,430 90 1,520 1,201 1,700
2000
1,275 595 318 913 481 268
2001 1,335 1,037
5
1,042
408
—
2002 855 1,050
55 1,105 385
—
2003 1,382
978a — 978 199 —
2004 164b 748c — 748 114 —
2005 97d 598e — 598 10 —
2006 118f 472g — 472 —
1,047
2007 102h 542i — 542 —
1,047
2008 32j 587k — 587
20
1,047
2009 —l 551m — 551
1,000n 1,047
2010 761o 792p — 792 298 —
2011 690q 495r — 495 247 —
2012 670s 199t — 199 141 —
2013 290u 210v — 210 155 —
Source: CRS presentation of the Administration’s budget requests for the respective years. FY1995-FY2011
appropriations provided by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services;
FY2012 appropriation taken from H.Rept. 112-284; FY2013 appropriation provided by the U.S. Department of
Justice. Authorized funding taken from P.L. 103-322 and P.L. 109-162.
a. Includes a $929 million appropriation and a $55 million supplemental appropriation.
b. The Administration proposed a $6.4 million rescission of unobligated balances.
c. Does not include a $6.4 million rescission of unobligated balances.
d. The Administration proposed a $53.5 million rescission of unobligated balances.
e. Does not include a $99 million rescission of unobligated balances.
f.
The Administration request proposed a $99.5 million rescission of unobligated balances.
g. Does not include $86.5 million rescission of unobligated balances.
h. The Administration proposed a $127.5 million rescission of unobligated balances.
Congressional Research Service
7
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
i.
Does not include an across-the-board rescission of 0.5% to OJP and COPS programs to fund the Office of
Audit, Assessment and Management (OAAM).
j.
The Administration proposed $87.5 million rescission of unobligated balances.
k. Does not include $87.5 million rescission of unobligated balances, or a $10.3 million rescission of
appropriations for the COPS program that were appropriated from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust
Fund.
l.
For FY2009, the Administration did not request funding for any specific COPS grant program. Rather, the
Administration requested $4 million for community police training and technical assistance under the State
and Local Law Enforcement Assistance account in the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
appropriations bill.
m. Does not include $100 million rescission of unobligated balances.
n. The $1 billion COPS received for hiring grants for FY2009 was appropriated under the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5).
o. The Administration proposed $40 million rescission of unobligated balances.
p. Does not include $40 million rescission of unobligated balances.
q. The Administration proposed $10.2 million rescission of unobligated balances.
r. Does not include $10.2 million rescission of unobligated balances.
s. The Administration proposed $10.2 million rescission of unobligated balances.
t.
Does not include $23.6 million rescission of unobligated balances.
u. The Administration proposed $12.2 million rescission of unobligated balances.
v. The FY2013 enacted amount includes a 1.877% rescission per section 3001 of P.L. 113-6 and a 0.2%
rescission ordered by the Office of Management and Budget per section 3004 of P.L. 113-6. The FY2013
enacted amount also includes the amount sequestered per the Budget Control Act of 2011(P.L. 112-25).
The FY2013 appropriation does not include a $12.2 million rescission of unobligated balances.
Congressional Research Service
8
Table A-2. COPS Funding, by Program, FY2004-FY2013
Click here and type the subtitle, or delete this paragraph
FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013a
Law
Enforcement
Technology
Program
$156,740 $136,764 $128,245 $166,145 $205,366 $187,000 $170,223 $1,243
—
—
Community Policing Development/Training
4,947 14,800 3,949 9,546 3,760 4,000 12,000 9,940
10,000 9,405
and Technical Assistance
Tribal
Law
Enforcement
Programs
24,737 19,733 14,808 15,808 15,040 20,000 40,000 33,134 35,000b 32,914c
Methamphetamine
Enforcement
and
Clean-up 53,481 51,854 62,778 70,000 61,187 39,500 40,385 12,425 12,500 12,241
COPS Hiring Program
113,790
9,866
—
—
20,000
—
298,000
246,845
141,000
155,170
COPS
Hiring
Recovery
Program
— — — — —
1,000,000 — — — —
Interoperable Communications Technology
74,620
98,664
9,872
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
COPS Management & Administration
29,684
29,599
—
1,541
28,200
—
—
—
—
—
Police
Integrity
Program
9,895
7,399 — — — — — — — —
School Safety Initiatives/ Secure Our Schools
4,552
4,267 — — —
16,000
16,000
13,253 — —
Act
Child Sexual Predator Elimination/Sex
— — — —
15,608
18,000
24,000
19,880 — —
Offender Management
Sex
Offender
Management
— — — —
(4,162) (5,000) (11,000)
(9,112)
—
—
National Sex Offender Registry
—
—
—
—
(850) (1,000) (1,000)
(828)
—
—
Bullet-proof Vest Program
24,737
24,666
29,617
29,617
25,850 25,000 30,000
24,850
—
—
Crime Identification Technology Programs
23,971
28,070
28,407
28,407
— — — — —
National Criminal History Improvement
29,684
24,666
9,872
9,872
9,400 10,000
—
—
—
—
Program
NICS Improvement
— — — — —
10,000 —
—
—
—
DNA Backlog Reduction Programs
98,948
108,531
107,145
112,145
152,272 156,000 161,000
133,363
—
—
Crime Lab Improvement Grants
— — — — — — —
—
—
—
CRS-9
FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013a
Coverdell Forensic Science Grants
9,895
14,780
18,264
18,264
18,800 25,000
—
—
—
—
Project Safe Neighborhoods
59,369 —
14,808
20,613
20,000
15,000 —
—
—
—
Offender Re-entry Program
4,947
9,866
4,936
14,879
11,750 25,000
—
—
—
—
Project Sentry
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Police Corps
14,842
14,800
— — — — — — — —
Anti-gang Program
— —
39,489
45,000
— — — — — —
Total 748,325
598,346
472,191
541,838
587,233
1,550,500
791,608
494,933
198,500
209,730
Source: FY2004-FY2011 appropriations provided by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services; FY2012 appropriation taken from
H.Rept. 112-284; FY2013 appropriation provided by the U.S. Department of Justice.
Notes: Amounts in bold were transferred to the Office of Justice Programs.
a. The FY2013 enacted amount includes a 1.877% rescission per section 3001 of P.L. 113-6 and a 0.2% rescission ordered by the Office of Management and Budget per
section 3004 of P.L. 113-6. The FY2013 enacted amount also includes the amount sequestered per the Budget Control Act of 2011(P.L. 112-25).
b. This amount includes $15.0 million that was transferred from the appropriation for the COPS Hiring Program.
c. This amount includes $14.1 million that was transferred from the appropriation for the COPS Hiring Program.
CRS-10
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS): Background and Funding
Author Contact Information
Nathan James
Analyst in Crime Policy
njames@crs.loc.gov, 7-0264
Congressional Research Service
11