VOCA Victim Assistance Program, 52877-52893 [2013-20426]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
■
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA–
2013–0701; Directorate Identifier 2013–
NM–073–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by October 11,
2013.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to all The Boeing
Company Model 727, 727C, 727–100, 727–
100C, 727–200, and 727–200F series
airplanes, certificated in any category.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America
Code 57, Wings.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD is intended to complete certain
mandated programs intended to support the
airplane reaching its limit of validity (LOV)
of the engineering data that support the
established structural maintenance program.
We are issuing this AD to prevent cracks in
the rib upper chord, which could result in
the inability of the wing structure to support
the limit load condition, and consequent loss
of structural integrity of the wing.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Post-Repair Inspection
For any small repair that has been done as
specified in Boeing 727 Service Bulletin 57–
112; or Part III of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 727–
57–0112: Within 3,500 flight cycles after the
small repair was installed or inspected as
specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 727–57–
0112, or within 18 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs latest, do
a high frequency eddy current inspection for
cracking of the vertical flange of the rib chord
from the inboard side, and do a detailed
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
(close visual) inspection for cracking along
the upper fillet radius of the rib chord, in
accordance with Part III of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Service Bulletin 727–57–0112, Revision 5,
dated July 31, 1997. Repeat the inspections
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,500
flight cycles until accomplishment of the
repair or modification specified in paragraph
(i) or (j) of this AD.
(h) Inspection Definition
For the purposes of this AD, a detailed
inspection is an intensive examination of a
specific item, installation, or assembly to
detect damage, failure, or irregularity.
Available lighting is normally supplemented
with a direct source of good lighting at an
intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection
aids such as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc.,
may be necessary. Surface cleaning and
elaborate procedures may be required.
(i) Corrective Action for Cracks
If any crack is found during any inspection
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, before
further flight, do either action specified in
paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD.
Accomplishment of either action terminates
the requirements of paragraphs (g) and (h) of
this AD.
(1) Do a large repair, in accordance with
Part IV of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Service Bulletin 727–57–0112,
Revision 5, dated July 31, 1997.
(2) Do a preventive modification, in
accordance with Part V of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Service Bulletin 727–57–0112, Revision 5,
dated July 31, 1997.
(j) Optional Terminating Action
Accomplishment of the actions specified in
either paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD
terminates the requirements of paragraphs
(g), (h), and (i) of this AD.
(1) A large repair, in accordance with Part
IV of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Service Bulletin 727–57–0112,
Revision 5, dated July 31, 1997. Any crack
found must be repaired before further flight
using a method approved in accordance with
the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of
this AD.
(2) A preventive modification, in
accordance with Part V of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Service Bulletin 727–57–0112, Revision 5,
dated July 31, 1997. Any crack found must
be repaired before further flight using a
method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this
AD.
(k) Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph provides credit for the
inspections, large repair, and modification
specified in this AD, if those actions were
performed before the effective date of this AD
using Boeing Service Bulletin 727–57–0112,
Revision 4, dated October 29, 1992.
(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52877
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the
Related Information section of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair
required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has
been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(m) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Galib Abumeri, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
3960 Paramount Blvd., Suite 100, Lakewood,
CA 90712–4137; phone: 562–627–5324; fax:
562–672–5210; email: galib.abumeri@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65,
Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206–
544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680;
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You
may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call
425–227–1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August
16, 2013.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–20840 Filed 8–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Part 94
[Docket No. OJP (OVC) 1523]
RIN 1121–AA69
VOCA Victim Assistance Program
Office for Victims of Crime,
Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Office for Victims of
Crime (‘‘OVC’’) of the U.S. Department
of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs
(‘‘OJP’’), proposes this rule to
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
52878
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
implement the victim assistance
formula grant program (‘‘Victim
Assistance Program’’) authorized by the
Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (‘‘VOCA’’).
Generally speaking, this law authorizes
OVC to provide an annual grant from
the Crime Victims Fund to each State
and eligible territory for the financial
support of services to victims of crime
by eligible crime victim assistance
programs. The proposed rule would
codify and update the existing VOCA
Victim Assistance Program Guidelines
(‘‘Guidelines’’) to reflect changes in
OVC policy, needs of the crime victims
services field, and VOCA itself.
DATES: Comments must be received by
no later than 11:59 p.m., E.T., on
October 28, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may view an electronic
version of this proposed rule at https://
www.regulations.gov, and you may also
comment by using the
www.regulations.gov form for this
regulation. OVC prefers to receive
comments via www.regulations.gov
where possible. When submitting
comments electronically, you should
include OJP Docket No. 1523 in the
subject box. Additionally, comments
may also be submitted via U.S. mail, to:
Toni Thomas, State Compensation and
Assistance Division, Office for Victims
of Crime, Office of Justice Programs,
U.S. Department of Justice, 810 7th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20531; or
by telefacsimile transmission, to: Toni
Thomas, at (202) 305–2440. To ensure
proper handling, please reference OJP
Docket No. 1523 on your
correspondence.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni
Thomas, State Compensation and
Assistance Division, Office for Victims
of Crime, at (202) 307–5983.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Posting of Public Comments
Please note that all comments
received are considered part of the
public record and made available for
public inspection online at https://
www.regulations.gov. Such information
includes personal identifying
information (such as your name,
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter.
If you wish to submit personal
identifying information (such as your
name, address, etc.) as part of your
comment, but do not wish for it to be
posted online, you must include the
phrase ‘‘PERSONAL IDENTIFYING
INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph
of your comment. You must also locate
all the personal identifying information
you do not want posted online in the
first paragraph of your comment and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
identify what information you want
redacted.
If you wish to submit confidential
business information as part of your
comment but do not wish it to be posted
online, you must include the phrase
‘‘CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS
INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph
of your comment. You must also
prominently identify confidential
business information to be redacted
within the comment. If a comment has
so much confidential business
information that it cannot be effectively
redacted, all or part of that comment
may not be posted on https://
www.regulations.gov.
Personal identifying information
identified and located as set forth above
will be placed in the agency’s public
docket file, but not posted online.
Confidential business information
identified and located as set forth above
will not be placed in the agency’s public
docket file, nor will it be posted online.
If you wish to inspect the agency’s
public docket file in person by
appointment, please see the ‘‘For
Further Information Contact’’ paragraph.
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Proposed Regulatory
Action
The Victims of Crime Act of 1984
(VOCA) authorizes OVC to provide an
annual formula grant from the Crime
Victims Fund to each State and eligible
territory. These annual Victim
Assistance Program formula grants are
used by the States and territories to
provide financial support to eligible
crime victim assistance programs. See
42 U.S.C. 10603. OVC proposes this rule
pursuant to the rulemaking authority
granted to the OVC Director by 42
U.S.C. 10604(a). The proposed rule
would codify and update the existing
program Guidelines to reflect changes in
OVC policy, the needs of the crime
victim services field, and VOCA itself.
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of
the Proposed Regulatory Action
OVC proposes some substantive
departure from the Guidelines; however,
the majority of provisions in the
proposed rule are the same as the
corresponding provisions of the
Guidelines. The proposed rule would
reorganize the program rules into five
major parts: (1) General Provisions; (2)
State Administering Agency Program
Requirements; (3) State Administering
Agency Use of VOCA Funds for
Administration and Training; (4) SubRecipient Program Requirements; and
(5) Sub-Recipient Allowable/
Unallowable Costs.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The rules proposed in the General
Provisions part would not substantively
depart from the Guidelines. The
definitions section in this part proposes
to define frequently used terms,
including ‘‘crime victim’’, ‘‘State
administering agency’’, ‘‘victim of child
abuse’’, and ‘‘direct services’’. These
proposed definitions are consistent in
substance with the definitions in the
Guidelines. OVC proposes a new
definition of the undefined statutory
term ‘‘child abuse’’ that is intended to
make patent OVC’s existing flexible
approach of allowing States to address
a broad variety of harm to children.
The State Administering Agency
Program Requirements part proposes a
basic statement of the purpose of Statelevel VOCA funding, and summarizes
the statutory eligibility and certification
requirements. OVC proposes to clarify
that the existing practice (presently
allowed by OVC, but not acknowledged
in the existing Guidelines) in some
States of passing funds along to another
entity to administer the State’s victim
assistance program is permissible, and
to set out rules for administering
funding in this way. OVC proposes a
section clearly setting forth how States
must allocate VOCA funding among
various types of victim service programs
(e.g., those serving priority crime victim
categories, and previously underserved
victims), but does not propose any
changes to the allocation percentages set
out in the Guidelines. OVC proposes a
new mandate that State administering
agencies compete subawards every five
years; as well as a provision allowing
States to use alternative risk-based
monitoring procedures instead of the
standard biennial on-site monitoring of
all subawards required by the
Guidelines. OVC believes that
competition of subawards will lead to
better and more cost-effective services;
while allowing States to propose
alternative monitoring strategies would
allow States to use innovative and more
cost-effective monitoring practices. This
part also proposes other situationspecific rules that State administering
agencies must follow when overseeing
subawards; these provisions largely
track the Guidelines.
The State Administering Agency Use
of VOCA Funds for Administration and
Training part proposes to clarify and
bring the existing guideline provisions
setting out maximum amounts for
administration and training costs into
harmony with more recent statutory
changes. The proposed part would list
allowable administrative and training
costs, all of which would be consistent
with those set out in the Guidelines.
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
The Sub-Recipient Program
Requirements part proposes a concise
statement of the purpose of VOCA subawards, and summarizes the statutory
eligibility requirements for subrecipients. OVC proposes maintaining
the existing project match provisions
that require most sub-recipients to
provide a twenty percent match for the
purpose of leveraging and augmenting
assistance funding. As in the existing
Guidelines, sub-recipients in U.S.
territories and possessions would not be
subject to match. OVC proposes to
eliminate the match requirement,
currently at five percent, for American
Indian and tribal organizations. These
entities, like those in U.S. territories and
possessions, often have difficulty
accessing matching resources—a match
requirement in such circumstances can
be counterproductive and lead to fewer
victim services in those already
underserved jurisdictions.
The Sub-Recipient Allowable/
Unallowable Costs part proposes a list
of activities that sub-recipients may
undertake using VOCA funding. The
majority of the listed costs are
substantively the same as those listed in
the existing Guidelines. OVC does,
however, propose a few substantive
changes: OVC proposes to allow States
more flexibility to support legal services
for victims. The existing Guidelines
allow legal services for victims, but only
in the emergency context. OVC has
received feedback from victim service
providers indicating that there is a
significant need for legal services for
victims outside of the emergency
context (e.g., asserting rights in the
criminal justice process, support for
human trafficking victims with a myriad
of complicated issues). Allowing States
to provide such services will lead to
better outcomes for many victims. OVC
also proposes to allow States to support
services to incarcerated victims (e.g.,
victims of sexual assault in prison) in
most circumstances. The existing
Guidelines do not allow such services;
however, the change is consistent with
the recommendations of the 2009 report
by the National Prison Rape Elimination
Commission, discussed in more detail
below. OVC also proposes allowing
States greater flexibility to support
transitional housing and relocation
expenses using VOCA funds, as such
services can lead to better outcomes for
many victims (e.g., those abused by a
caretaker). OVC proposes allowing
States to permit sub-recipients to use
VOCA funds for coordination activities,
which often allow local organizations to
more effectively leverage community
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
resources and provide better and more
cost-effective services.
C. Cost and Benefits
As discussed in more detail under the
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563—
Regulatory Review section below, the
proposed rule would clarify and update
the existing Guidelines, but would not
alter the existing program structure at
all. Updating the existing Guidelines to
clearly and accurately reflect the
statutory parameters will facilitate State
compliance with VOCA requirements,
and thus avoid potentially costly noncompliance findings. The proposed rule
would make only a few substantive
changes to the existing Guidelines, and
these would be of a permissive, not
mandatory, nature. Some changes, like
allowing more flexibility to coordinate
and leverage community resources, and
adopt alternative monitoring strategies,
would impose no costs but will
potentially allow States to use existing
funding more efficiently. Other
proposed changes that allow States to
allocate funding to services not
presently allowable, could change the
allocation of VOCA funding amongst
victim services provided by subrecipient organizations, and amongst
victim service organizations. Such
reallocations of funding, however, are
not mandated and each State and
territory would make the ultimate
decision with regard to whether to
change its current funding allocations, if
it chooses to do so at all. This is not a
change from the present discretion that
States have to allocate funding
according to State priorities. OVC
anticipates that most States will
continue to allocate the majority of
VOCA funding to victim services for
certain types of crimes (intimate partner
violence, sexual assault, child abuse) at
consistent levels. Any potential
reallocations would be relatively minor
(even when taken in aggregate across
States) in comparison to the overall mix
of allowable victim services, and thus
they are unlikely to create new costs or
significant fund transfers. In any event,
the real benefits of additional allowable
services for currently underserved and
un-served victims are significant.
III. Background
A. Overview
OVC proposes this rule to implement
its Victim Assistance Program, a
formula grant program authorized by
Section 1404 of the Victims of Crime
Act of 1984, Public Law 98–473,
codified at 42 U.S.C. 10603. This section
of VOCA authorizes OVC to provide an
annual grant from the Crime Victims
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52879
Fund to each State and eligible territory
for the financial support of services to
victims of crime by eligible crime victim
assistance programs.
OVC’s Victim Assistance Program is
funded out of the Crime Victims Fund.
The Fund receives Federal criminal
fines, penalties, and assessments, as
well as certain gifts and bequests, but
does not receive any general tax
revenue. The Crime Victims Fund is
administered by OVC and amounts that
may be obligated therefrom are allocated
each year according to the VOCA
formula at 42 U.S.C. 10601. In recent
years, the amount available for
obligation via the VOCA formula
allocations has been capped by law at
less than the total amount available in
the Fund. The VOCA formula specifies
that (in most years) the first $20M
available in the Fund for that year will
go toward child abuse prevention and
treatment programs, with a certain
amount to be carved out for programs to
address child abuse in Indian Country.
After that, such sums as may be
necessary are available to the Federal
Bureau of Investigation and the U.S.
Attorneys Offices to improve services to
victims of Federal crime, and to operate
a victim notification system. Whatever
is left is allocated as follows: 47.5% for
OVC’s Victim Compensation Program,
47.5% for OVC’s Victim Assistance
Program, and the remaining 5% for the
OVC Director to distribute in
discretionary awards in certain
statutorily defined categories. Generally,
under the distribution rules for the
Victim Compensation Program, if a
portion of the 47.5% available for
Compensation is not needed for that
purpose, it is (per formula) made
available to augment the Victim
Assistance Program. The Victim
Assistance Program distributes funds to
the States and eligible territories as
mandated by VOCA in 42 U.S.C. 10603.
The VOCA statutory distribution
formula provides each State with a base
amount (presently $500,000 for each
State; $200,000 for each eligible
territory), and distributes the remainder
proportionately based on the State
populations.
The proposed rule would supersede
the existing VOCA Victim Assistance
Program Guidelines that were published
in the Federal Register on April 22,
1997, at 62 FR 19607. It reflects changes
in OVC policy, in the needs of the crime
victim services field, and in VOCA
itself. OVC invites and welcomes
comments from States and territories,
organizations and individuals involved
in the victim services field, and any
other members of the interested public,
on any aspects of this proposed
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
52880
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
rulemaking. All comments will be
considered prior to publication of a final
rule.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
B. History of This Rulemaking
OVC published the Final Program
Guidelines, Victims of Crime Act, FY
1997 Victim Assistance Program on
April 22, 1997. Those Guidelines were
based on OVC experience with the
Victim Assistance Program, legal
opinions rendered since the inception of
the program in 1986, and comments
from the field on the Proposed Program
Guidelines published in the Federal
Register on February 18, 1997. On
September 3, 2002, OVC published a
notice of Proposed Program Guide at 67
FR 56444, seeking comments to refine
the administration of the Victim
Assistance Program further; thereafter,
however, OVC chose not to issue final
guidance to supersede the 1997
Guidelines. After receiving comments
on the 2002 proposed guide, OVC
instead decided to pursue the
publication of codified program
regulations rather than merely revise the
guideline document. In anticipation of
re-starting this rulemaking process,
throughout 2010 OVC sought
preliminary input from the field
regarding improving victim services and
potential modifications to the Victim
Assistance Program rules that would
facilitate such improvement.
C. Discussion of Changes Proposed in
This Notice
The 1997 Guidelines have served to
assist and guide OVC, State
administering agencies, and direct
service providers, in administering,
distributing, and using VOCA funds to
assist victims of crime nationwide. As
mentioned above, however, over the
sixteen years since their promulgation,
the existing Guidelines have been
overtaken by changes in the VOCA
statute itself, developments in the crime
victim services field, as well as
technological advancements, and new
approaches to State administration of
VOCA funding. For example, OVC,
through its funding of nationwide
training and technical assistance for
victim service organizations and the
findings of its Vision 21 initiative,
which examined the state of the victim
services field, as well as through reports
of other organizations, such as the
Prison Rape Elimination Commission,
has become aware of a need for certain
types of services and gaps in services for
certain types of victims. In particular,
OVC wishes to address the need for
increased legal services for victims,
which is particularly important for
human trafficking victims, but also for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
victims of domestic abuse, identity
theft, and other crimes as well. OVC has
funded programs providing services for
human trafficking victims for more than
a decade under the authority of the
Trafficking Victims Protection Act of
2000, and, through various evaluation
efforts, has gained significant
experience in providing effective
services for this victim population. OVC
wishes to incorporate this experience
into the proposed rule to allow States to
effectively assist these victims.
Likewise, the findings of the Prison
Rape Elimination Commission
illuminated an acute need for increased
victim services for incarcerated victims,
and OVC wishes to allow States to
address this gap in services. In addition,
information technology has advanced
significantly since 1997, and the
proposed rule would allow victim
service providers greater flexibility to
use VOCA funding to leverage
technology to enhance victim services.
For example, informational and
outreach efforts via online forums and
social networking may be effective and
relatively inexpensive ways to reach
certain victim populations. In addition,
podcasting and digital video sharing
enable victim service providers to
continually reach victims with enriched
information. Videoconferencing using
real-time audio and video technology
services, administered through a secure,
encrypted connection, can deliver
confidential, face-to-face assistance.
OVC’s intent for this proposed rule is to
account for developments over the last
decade, and to reflect program
parameters applicable to each
participating entity accurately. In so
doing, OVC hopes to allow
administering agencies and victim
service providers to fully leverage the
progress that the field has made over the
last decade in knowledge of victim
needs, victim service strategies, and
efficient program administration, with
the end goal of assisting crime victims
more effectively.
As a technical and structural matter,
the existing Victim Assistance Program
Guidelines are not in a format suitable
for publication in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), and therefore have
been re-formatted in this notice to
conform to CFR formatting
requirements. Moreover, the existing
Guidelines are not ideally structured in
terms of readability and ease of
reference. The proposed rule below
attempts to remedy these deficiencies by
creating manageable units of
information, reorganizing related
concepts and rules together more
logically, and attempting to use
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
consistent terminology throughout the
document.
In addition, the existing Guidelines
contain extended repetition of the
VOCA statutory language. OVC notes
that in several instances this has caused
confusion as certain statutory language
was changed in subsequent laws (for
example, the provisions regarding the
percentage of funds that a State may use
for training and administration), thereby
making obsolete and inaccurate the
existing guideline’s recitation of the
superseded law (as statutory language
obviously supersedes an agency’s
contrary guidance or rule on the same
subject pronounced through guideline
or regulation). The proposed rule omits
repetition of statutory language, except
where needed for context and ease of
use. OVC notes that the proposed rule
is drafted to be read in conjunction with
the rules and definitions in the
applicable section of VOCA (42 U.S.C.
10603).
OVC here proposes several
substantive changes to the program
Guidelines, although many of the
provisions for the Victim Assistance
Program set out in the existing
Guidelines have been retained in
substance. (It should be noted that, as
explained above, the text of such
provisions may have been reformatted
as needed to accommodate the
regulatory process and to improve the
overall clarity of the document.) The
most significant of these substantive
proposed changes are discussed below
in the order that they appear in the
revised document, and with reference to
the applicable section of the proposed
rule. Cross-references to corresponding
sections of the existing Guidelines are
provided where possible for ease of
comparison.
General Provisions
The proposed rule contains several
terms and definitions that are used
throughout the document. These are set
out in section 94.102 for ease of
reference. Notably—
• The definitions of crime victim (or
victim of crime) remains unchanged
from the existing guideline; it is meant
to be a broad definition, taking into
account many kinds of harm resulting
from criminal acts.
• The term State administering
agency (‘‘SAA’’) is used to refer to the
State or territorial entity receiving
victim assistance program funds directly
from OVC. This terminology is more
descriptive than ‘‘direct grantee’’ or
‘‘State grantee’’ and is more consistent
with terminology used in other formula
programs administered by OJP entities.
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
• OVC has added a definition of the
term ‘‘spousal abuse’’ that clarifies that
the term includes intimate partner
violence and dating violence. Spousal
abuse was the terminology used in
VOCA in the 1980s, but has since fallen
out of use in the victim service field.
OVC retains the term in the proposed
rule because it is still in the statute, but
clarifies that OVC understands it to
encompass the concepts of intimate
partner and dating violence.
• OVC has added a definition of
‘‘victim of child abuse’’, to clarify that
the term covers a broad variety of harm
to children. Child abuse victims are a
statutorily mandated priority category,
and the clarification will ensure that
VOCA-funded State victim assistance
programs may support a broad variety of
victim assistance projects that address
the abuse of children. Many child
victims experience poly-victimization,
meaning several different kinds of direct
victimization or indirect exposure to
violence (either as an eyewitness or
through other knowledge) over a period
of time. Poly-victimization greatly
increases children’s vulnerability to
mental health, behavioral, school
performance, and other problems, and
can contribute to lifelong challenges for
the affected children. In addition,
children’s exposure to violence—in
their homes, schools, or communities—
as victims or witnesses, is often
associated with long-term physical,
psychological, and emotional harm, and
can contribute to behavioral problems,
including substance abuse, and negative
health outcomes. VOCA-funded victim
assistance programs may use funding to
address these various forms of child
abuse. In addition, the definition
clarifies that child pornography related
offenses are a form of child abuse. OVC
intends to permit States the flexibility to
fund programs to help these victims,
whose needs may arise immediately
after the abuse, or much later—for
example, upon distribution of images of
the abuse. OVC views distribution of
such images as a form of revictimization that States and victim
advocates are struggling to address, and
seeks comments on this provision.
• The definition of direct services
remains largely unchanged, except for
formatting.
State Administering Agency Program
Requirements
Purpose and State administering
agency eligibility. Section 94.103(a) is
self-explanatory, in that it proposes the
purpose of OVC’s annual VOCA formula
grants to the States and territories.
Section 94.103(b) proposes the general
rules for State eligibility certifications
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
required by VOCA. It is anticipated that
OVC will require that such certifications
be submitted along with each State
administering agency’s annual
application for funding (as is the current
practice). Reporting and technical
requirements specific to a given fiscal
year are generally set out in the annual
program solicitation, or in supplemental
OVC communications if time does not
permit publication in the solicitation.
Section 94.103(c) clarifies that a State
administering agency may award its
VOCA funds to another organization to
distribute (pass-through administration),
and highlights a State administering
agency’s obligations with regard to use
of administrative and training funds,
monitoring, and reporting should this
method be used.
Eligible sub-recipient programs.
Section 94.104 proposes what a State
must require of an entity to consider the
entity an ‘‘eligible crime victim
assistance program.’’ The criteria for an
‘‘eligible crime victim assistance
program’’ are largely set out in VOCA,
and the proposed rule merely provides
clarifying interpretation needed for
practical implementation. The section
proposes the types of eligible entities;
criteria for determining the
organizational capacity of the entity’s
program; project match requirements
that the SAA must require the entity to
meet; and mandated use of volunteers
(with provision for waiver). An eligible
entity must meet the organizational
capacity requirements of VOCA, which
requires that an eligible entity either
have a history of providing direct
services to victims in an effective
manner and support from non-VOCA
funding, or be able to show substantial
support from non-VOCA funding.
Entities previously not funded with
VOCA funding are eligible to apply for
VOCA funding. What constitutes an
‘‘effective manner’’ will vary depending
on the State and community served, the
type of victim the entity’s services
address, the type of services provided,
best practices within that service field,
and the characteristics of the entity (e.g.
small, specialized service provider;
larger, comprehensive service provider).
The States will determine whether an
entity has a history of providing services
in an effective manner for each eligible
program and should be able to articulate
the basis for their determinations. OVC
proposes several non-exclusive
considerations (which are consistent
with the existing Guidelines) that States
may wish to take into account in making
such determinations. The proposed rule,
at 94.104(h), clarifies that the statutory
VOCA non-discrimination provisions
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52881
that apply to any VOCA-funded
undertaking, including victim assistance
programs, are administered in
accordance with the Department of
Justice’s regulations implementing nondiscrimination requirements and the
guidance provided by the Office of Civil
Rights within the Office of Justice
Programs.
SAA Allocation of Subawards.
Section 94.105 proposes how State
administering agencies must allocate
their subawards. OVC’s authority to
direct the allocation of a portion of each
State administering agency’s formula
assistance award derives from the
VOCA requirements (42 U.S.C.
10603(a)(2)(A) and (B)) that the chief
executive of each State certify that
priority shall be given to eligible
programs that assist certain victim
populations (specifically victims of
sexual assault, spousal abuse, or child
abuse), and certify that funds shall be
made available for programs that serve
underserved populations. Note that the
allocations set out in the proposed rule
are substantially the same as those set
out in the existing guideline (see
Guideline IV.A.3 and 4); the phrasing of
these requirements has merely been reworked for clarity. Under the proposed
rule SAAs must identify underserved
categories of victims by the type of
crime they experience (such as victims
of elder abuse) as well as the
characteristics of the victim (such as
victims of violent crime in high crime
urban areas or Lesbian Gay Bisexual
Transgender Queer (LGBTQ) victims).
More information about types of crime
victim populations will allow OVC and
SAAs to better tailor their training and
technical assistance and victim
assistance programs to the needs of each
community and victim population. The
proposed rule provides for several
exceptions to the required allocations.
OVC especially seeks comment on
whether the allocation amounts for
priority categories, and the allocation
amount and method of determining
previously underserved populations,
remain appropriate.
Section 94.105(e) proposes to require
State administrative agencies to fund
eligible sub-entities through a
competitive process. This is an
important new requirement that will
support innovation at the direct service
level through regular review of
approaches to victim assistance
services.
SAA Reporting Requirements. Section
94.106 proposes the State administering
agency’s reporting requirements under
OVC’s Victim Assistance Program. OVC
will continue to require States to submit
sub-grant award reports and
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
52882
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
performance reports, as well as other
reports that are required under Federal
grant rules. (Other reports, for example,
would include the requirements of the
Federal Funding Accounting and
Transparency Act, which requires
reporting on sub-recipient expenditures
where such sub-recipient receives more
than $25,000 in grant funds. This
reporting is independent of OVC’s subgrant award reports.) As Federal grant
rules and technology are constantly in
flux, the proposed rule does not specify
time or manner in which these reports
are to be submitted—it is anticipated
that OVC will communicate the
technical details of each year’s reporting
requirements to grantees via annual
program solicitations and supplemental
guidance.
SAA Monitoring Plans. Section 94.107
sets out the State administering agency’s
obligation to monitor its sub-awards. In
addition to the current monitoring plans
adopted by a State administering agency
(which includes regular desk
monitoring of all sub-awards and on-site
monitoring of all sub-recipients at least
every two years), the proposed rule will
permit, upon OVC review and approval,
alternative monitoring procedures from
State administering agencies. An
example of an alternative procedure that
has been implemented at the Federal
level is a risk assessment model to
determine the level of monitoring
necessary for various sub-recipients.
OVC recognizes that certain subrecipients may have a long established
history of appropriately administering a
sub-award and may therefore require
less intensive scrutiny than a relatively
new sub-recipient or an established subrecipient providing new services.
Programmatic oversight. Section
94.108 proposes the State administrative
agency’s responsibilities with regard to
programmatic oversight of sub-awards.
This section proposes to consolidate
various rules and considerations that are
currently found throughout the existing
guideline. Among the topics addressed
are the following:
• Leasing vehicles. The SAA may
authorize sub-recipients to lease
vehicles, but only upon a showing that
each such vehicle is essential for the
delivery of victim services.
• Faith-based and neighborhood
organizations. Faith-based and
neighborhood organizations are valued
partners for government. They support
and assist victims in countless ways. In
keeping with our values and our laws,
the Federal Government has issued
specific guidance for programs in which
faith-based and neighborhood
organizations may receive Federal aid to
ensure that those programs are
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
implemented in accordance with the
Establishment Clause and the Free
Exercise Clause of the First Amendment
to the United States Constitution. The
proposed rule provides a reference to
the Department of Justice regulation that
implements this guidance and that
applies to entities funded through this
program.
• Crime victim compensation
agencies. A State may use victim
assistance funding for services provided
by its State victim compensation staff
where such services are direct services
and outside of that staff’s normal duties.
• SAA use of VOCA funds to provide
direct services, and limits on the
amount of funds that SAAs may use for
these purposes.
• Funding victim service programs
located in adjacent States.
Program income. Section 94.109
proposes the rules that State
administering agencies must use when
considering whether sub-recipients may
generate program income. It is OVC’s
longstanding view that victim services
provided with VOCA funds should be
free of charge for victims where
possible, though OVC recognizes that in
some situations a service provider may
be justified in charging for services or
otherwise generating program income.
State Administering Agency Use of
VOCA Funds for Administration and
Training
The existing Guidelines are inaccurate
with regard to the allocation of VOCA
grant funds for SAA administration and
training purposes, as VOCA was
amended after the issuance of the 1997
guidance. VOCA now prohibits grantees
from using more than five percent of
their annual OVC Victim Assistance
Program funds for administrative and
training purposes. This means that
SAAs must allocate this five percent
between both administration and
training purposes; SAAs are not allowed
to use five percent for administration
and an additional five percent for
training. Sections 94.110 through 94.113
detail allowable uses of and necessary
recordkeeping for, administration and
training funds. These sections also
address non-supplantation requirements
as applicable to administrative and
training funds, as well as indirect cost
rates.
Sub-Recipient Program Requirements
Purpose. Section 94.114 proposes the
purpose of VOCA sub-awards.
Sub-recipient requirements. Section
94.115 proposes the requirements to
which sub-recipients must adhere.
These requirements include—
• Using volunteers
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Promotion of community efforts to
aid crime victims
• Assistance to victims in applying
for compensation
• Compliance with all State
requirements
• Providing services at no charge
unless permitted by the SAA to generate
program income
Sub-recipient project match
requirements. Section 94.116 proposes
the project match requirements
applicable to activities undertaken by
sub-recipients of VOCA formula victim
assistance funds. These proposed match
requirements are the same as those in
the existing Guidelines. Each subrecipient must contribute at least twenty
percent of the total cost of each project,
unless an exception applies. Requiring
sub-recipients to provide matching
funds serves to ensure that subrecipients are invested and engaged in
the project strategy. U.S. territories and
possessions are exempt from match, as
resources in these communities are
often not available for match, and
therefore a match requirement is
counterproductive to the goal of
increasing the availability of victim
services in a community. OVC proposes
to eliminate the current 5% match
requirement for American Indian and
tribal organizations for the same reason.
OVC specifically seeks comment on
whether this amount of minimum match
(20%) for sub-recipients and no match
requirement for possessions, territories,
and tribal sub-recipients is reasonable
and beneficial to the goal of developing
effective and financially stable victim
services. OVC also specifically seeks
comment on professional services used
as match and how such services should
be valued for reporting purposes.
Sub-Recipient Allowable and
Unallowable Costs
Allowable costs. Section 94.117
proposes allowable costs for which subrecipient entities may obligate and
expend VOCA formula victim assistance
funds when providing direct services.
Most of these allowable costs (and the
parameters under which the direct
services may be provided) are
essentially the same as those in the
existing Guidelines. The following
activities, however, have been added or
significantly modified in the proposed
rule:
• Legal assistance for victims. The
proposed rule leaves unchanged the
provision in the current Guidelines
allowing sub-recipients to use VOCA
funds for emergency legal assistance to
ensure a victim’s immediate physical
and psychological health and safety—
including, but not limited to, assistance
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
filing for restraining orders, protective
orders, and obtaining emergency
custody orders and visitation rights. The
proposed rule would add a provision
under the sub-recipient allowable and
unallowable costs provisions, also
allowing VOCA funds to be used
outside of the context of an emergency,
for reasonable legal assistance services
where the need for such arises as a
direct result of a person’s victimization.
The proposed rule contemplates two
contexts where this may occur—legal
assistance to assert a victim’s rights or
protect a victim’s safety, privacy, or
other interests, in a criminal proceeding
directly related to the person’s
victimization; and civil legal assistance
where the need for such assistance
arises as a direct result of a person’s
victimization.
The proposed rule offers several
examples of circumstances under which
legal services may be appropriate as
victim assistance and supported with
VOCA funding. It also clarifies that
criminal defense, tort suits, and divorce
proceedings generally are not allowable
costs. It is important to note that the
proposed rule merely permits the use of
VOCA funding for legal services—it
does not mandate that such services be
provided. OVC recognizes that the
available resources in each State and
territory differ, and, therefore, each
jurisdiction retains broad discretion to
set limits on the type and scope of legal
services that it allows its sub-recipients
to provide with VOCA funding. OVC
seeks comments addressing any aspect
of permitting or not permitting the use
of VOCA funds for legal services for
victims, and the scope of such services.
• Services to incarcerated
individuals. The existing Guidelines do
not allow OVC Victim Assistance
Program funds to be used for
rehabilitative services or support
services to incarcerated individuals (see
Guidelines, section IV.E.3.b). In 2003,
however, the Prison Rape Elimination
Act (PREA) established an independent
commission to examine the issue of
prison rape in prisons, jails, and
juvenile detention facilities nationwide,
and to recommend actions for reducing
rates of prison rape. The National Prison
Rape Elimination Commission’s report
was released in 2009. One of the
recommendations was that the
prohibition on providing VOCA-funded
victim services to incarcerated victims
be removed, so that incarcerated victims
of sexual assault in detention/
correctional facilities might have
additional resources available to address
victimization-related needs.
With this in mind, OVC is proposing
a provision specifically allowing for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
VOCA-funded victim service providers
to serve incarcerated individuals,
provided that the incarcerated
individual is a victim, the service
addresses issues directly arising from
the victimization, and the need for such
services does not directly arise from the
crime for which that individual was
incarcerated. For example, under the
proposed rule a State could choose to
fund a service provider to provide
mental health services to an individual
incarcerated for illegal distribution of
drugs who is a victim of sexual assault
while so incarcerated. By contrast,
VOCA funding could not be used to
support medical or mental health
services relating to a pre-incarceration
assault of that individual by a coconspirator for not dividing up in an
equitable manner the proceeds from
sales of illegal drugs.
It is important to note that a person
who is targeted and victimized while
incarcerated because of the crime for
which he is incarcerated (e.g., a person
imprisoned for child abuse who is
subsequently sexually assaulted by
other inmates) would not be excluded
from receiving VOCA-funded assistance.
In addition, VOCA victim assistance
does not cover non-emergency medical
costs—therefore, it is anticipated that
the majority of any costs incurred for
services to incarcerated victims would
be related to forensic exams for sexual
assault victims and mental health
services to address the consequences of
a victimization.
Finally, the rule does not mandate
that States make funding available for
services to incarcerated victims, but
rather, merely permits them to do so.
OVC anticipates that State
administering agencies will make their
own determinations regarding the
appropriate delegation of responsibility
(and fiscal burden) between victim
service agencies/organizations and
detention/correctional facilities with
regard to caring for this victim
population. OVC welcomes comments
on any aspect of this proposed rule
provision.
• Transitional housing. OVC
recognizes that transitional housing is a
necessary victim expense for certain
types of victims—for example, victims
of human trafficking, victims with a
disability abused by caretakers, and
victims of domestic violence and their
dependents. The existing guideline
limits VOCA funding for transitional
housing (see Guidelines sections
IV.E.1.a and IV.E.3.i). The proposed rule
would allow States the flexibility to
permit sub-recipients to provide
transitional housing to victims, and
would permit the State to set limits on
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52883
time and types of victims that might be
eligible for such housing. Under the
proposed rule, States may use VOCA
funds for housing and shelter purposes
to the extent that such housing is related
to the individual’s victimization. For
example, shelters for victims of
domestic violence or human trafficking
would be allowable uses of VOCA funds
because the victims have been taken
away from or forced out of their housing
by the nature of their victimization.
States would be allowed to use VOCA
funds to support transitional housing
expenses, including travel; rental
assistance; first month deposit; utilities;
support services, such as childcare; and
counseling. To the extent State
administering agencies choose to permit
VOCA funds to be used for transitional
housing purposes, OVC anticipates that
these agencies would focus on those
victims with the most need, such as
victims of human trafficking, minor
victims, victims with disabilities, and
victims of domestic violence.
• Relocation expenses. The rule
proposes to allow States to use VOCA
funding to pay relocation expenses for
victims to preserve life, safety and wellbeing of victims, including, but not
limited to, domestic violence victims,
children, victims of sexual assault,
victims of stalking, and victims of
trafficking. Relocation expenses for
crime victims must be reasonable, and
may include, but are not limited to,
moving expenses, security deposits on
housing, rental and mortgage assistance,
and utility startup.
• Traditional/Alternative Healing.
The proposed rule would allow subrecipients to provide traditional/
alternative healing methods, and
participation in Native American
traditional healing ceremonies, if
allowed by the State administering
agency.
Costs to Support Direct Services.
Section 94.118 proposes certain
activities that support direct services for
crime victims and that are expenses for
which sub-recipients may obligate and
expend VOCA funds. Generally, under
VOCA (42 U.S.C. 10603(b)(2)), OVC
formula victim assistance funding may
only be used by sub-recipients for
services to victims of crime. The
existing Guidelines hold to this general
rule somewhat strictly, in that they limit
the use of funds available for
coordination and oversight at the subrecipient level. Over the last decade,
however, it has become apparent that
coordination and oversight activities are
desirable and may in many cases
improve the provision of direct victim
services. The proposed rule reflects this
recognition, and gives State
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
52884
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
administering agencies the latitude to
allow sub-recipients to use VOCA funds
for coordination activities, including
supervisory coordinator positions,
supervising staff where necessary and
permitted by the State administering
agency, and the support of costs to
facilitate multi-system/interagency/
multi-disciplinary responses to crime
victims. In contrast to the existing
guideline, this section also permits subrecipients to contract for professional
services not available within the subrecipient organization, as well as for
automated systems and technology,
where these contracts, systems, and
technology support delivery of direct
services to victims. The proposed rule
also allows for the use of direct service
funding in certain circumstances to
train direct service providers, including
Court Appointed Special Advocate
(CASA) volunteers and clinical social
workers. The proposed rule clarifies that
use of direct service funds for such
trainings are permissible when the
funded entity provides direct services
predominantly through the use of
volunteers (as opposed to paid staff).
The use of direct service funds to
support training and coordination of
volunteer services in such
circumstances is appropriate, as it
typically allows funded organizations to
cost-effectively leverage the available
funds and volunteer efforts to provide
more direct services for victims. The
rule provides examples of permissible
uses within each such category so that
State administering agencies will be
able to more easily make allowability
determinations by analogy. Finally, the
proposed rule allows sub-recipient
direct costs to include emergency costs
of non-prescription and prescription
medicine, prophylactic treatment to
prevent HIV/AIDS infection, durable
medical devices and equipment, and
other health care items, if those items
cannot be funded through an alternative
source within 48 hours of the crime.
Allowable Sub-recipient
Administrative Costs. Section 94.119
proposes allowable sub-recipient
administrative costs. These costs should
be substantively the same as those in the
existing Guidelines.
Unallowable costs. Section 94.120
proposes non-allowable sub-recipients
costs. The majority of these are the same
as those in the existing Guidelines, with
the following exceptions:
• Perpetrator rehabilitation and
counseling. The rule prohibiting use of
VOCA funds for perpetrator
rehabilitation and counseling has been
modified to reflect that certain
incarcerated individuals who have
perpetrated criminal acts may also have
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
pre-existing victim service needs
unrelated to their crime, or may become
victims while incarcerated. (This is a
corresponding change reflecting the
proposed rule in section 94.117 that
would permit VOCA funding to be used
for victim services for incarcerated
individuals where the need for services
does not directly arise from the
individual’s criminal acts.) As indicated
above, OVC specifically seeks comment
on this aspect of the proposed rule.
• Victim attendance at conferences.
The structure of the rule should better
address the concern that States are
prohibited from funding victim
attendance at crime victim service
related conferences. The proposed rule
would only prohibit sub-recipient
organizations from obligating and
expending funds for this purpose—a
State administering agency that chooses
to hold a training conference at which
a victim is invited to speak would not
be prohibited from using VOCA funds to
pay for the travel costs of that
individual, provided that such travel is
allowable under the State rules and the
expense is counted against the State’s
training and administrative set-aside.
III. Regulatory Certifications
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the
Office for Victims of Crime has
reviewed this regulation and, by
approving it, certifies that it will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The OVC Victim Assistance Program
distributes funding to States and eligible
territories pursuant to the VOCA
formula, a statutory provision, which is
not affected by this regulation. The
VOCA formula sets out the allocation of
grant funds among States and territories,
and designates the States and territories
that will receive grant funds—the
regulation alters neither the allocation
of Federal funding, nor the designation
of which entities will receive annual
funding pursuant to that allocation.
Moreover, VOCA affords substantial
latitude to the States and territories in
determining where to allocate the
formula funding within each
jurisdiction. This rule, to the extent that
it creates certain set asides and
permissible areas of emphasis for State
victim assistance programs, only applies
to federally provided funding. As a rule
governing a Federal grant program to
States and major U.S. territories, the
only economic impact on small entities
is that of potential financial assistance,
as the rule would not apply to any
entity that was not a recipient of VOCA
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
funding under this program. This
regulation, therefore, will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563—
Regulatory Review
This regulation has been drafted and
reviewed in accordance with Executive
Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and
Review’’ section 1(b), Principles of
Regulation, and in accordance with
Executive Order 13563 ‘‘Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review’’
section 1(b), General Principles of
Regulation.
The Office of Justice Programs has
determined that this rule is a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
Executive Order 12866, section 3(f),
Regulatory Planning and Review, and
accordingly this rule has been reviewed
by the Office of Management and
Budget.
Executive Order 13563 directs
agencies to propose or adopt a
regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that its benefits justify its
costs; tailor the regulation to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining the regulatory objectives; and,
in choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, select those
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Executive Order 13563 recognizes that
some benefits and costs are difficult to
quantify and provides that, where
appropriate and permitted by law,
agencies may consider and discuss
qualitative values that are difficult or
impossible to quantify, including
equity, human dignity, fairness, and
distributive impacts.
The proposed rule would clarify and
update the existing Guidelines, but
would not alter the existing program
structure at all. Updating the existing
Guidelines to clearly and accurately
reflect the statutory parameters will
facilitate State compliance with VOCA
requirements, and thus avoid
potentially costly non-compliance
findings. The proposed rule would
make only a few substantive changes to
the existing Guidelines, and these
would be of a permissive, not
mandatory, nature. Some changes, like
allowing more flexibility to coordinate
and leverage community resources, and
adopt alternative monitoring strategies,
would impose no costs but will
potentially allow States to use existing
funding more efficiently. Other
proposed changes that allow States to
allocate funding to services not
presently allowable, could change the
allocation of VOCA funding amongst
victim services provided by subrecipient organizations, and amongst
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
victim service organizations. Such
reallocations of funding, however, are
not mandated and each State and
territory would make the ultimate
decision with regard to whether to
change its current funding allocations, if
it chooses to do so at all. This is not a
change from the present discretion that
States have to allocate funding
according to State priorities. Any
potential reallocations would be
relatively minor (even when taken in
aggregate across States) in comparison
to the overall mix of allowable victim
services, and thus they are unlikely to
create new costs or significant fund
transfers. In any event, the benefits of
additional services for underserved and
un-served victims are significant.
The proposed requirement to
periodically compete subawards may
impose minimal costs associated with
administering a competition at least
every five years, but these costs are
outweighed by the gains in both
program effectiveness and cost
efficiency that competition would
create. The proposed provision allowing
alternative risk-based monitoring
procedures imposes no new costs on
States that choose to retain their existing
procedures, but will allow States that
wish to implement more cost effective
alternatives to do so.
The proposed elimination of match
for American Indian and tribal
organizations will permit victim service
organizations in these communities,
many of which do not have the
resources to provide matching funds,
the ability to more easily seek VOCA
funding for victim services. This will
benefit victims in these communities,
many of whom are underserved. This
change is unlikely to impose new costs
on States or territories, as there is no
requirement that the administering
agencies fund American Indian or tribal
organizations at a particular level, and
the amount of funding allocated to these
organizations is a very small percentage
of overall VOCA funding.
All of the proposed changes to the
provisions governing allowable and
unallowable costs are in the nature of
granting States additional flexibility to
fund certain activities. None of the
changes would require States to expend
additional funding in any area, or
change funding allocations. Moreover,
the changes, while important, are
relatively minor when compared to the
entire scope of costs allowable with
VOCA funding. Consequently, to the
extent that States choose to fund the
newly allowable victim services (e.g.,
increased time allowed in transitional
housing), the reallocation of funding
will not result in a significant
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
reallocation of overall funding, given
the small number of newly allowable
services when compared to the overall
mix of allowable victim services. In
addition, it is not certain which States
will permit what additional services if
given the flexibility to do so, and to
what extent, as these decisions typically
are often made through State legislative
or administrative processes and address
considerations unique to each State. The
important benefit of such potential
minor reallocations of resources,
whether within organizations that
presently receive VOCA funding and
will provide augmented services, or (in
the less common case) to new
organization, would be that previously
underserved or un-served victims would
receive needed assistance.
Executive Order 13132—Federalism
This rule will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as the relationship
between the States and territories and
the national government, for purposes of
this program, is set out primarily in the
statutory law, not this regulation.
Therefore, in accordance with Executive
Order No. 13132, it is determined that
this rule does not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Executive Order 12988—Civil Justice
Reform
This rule meets the applicable
standards set forth in sections 3(a) &
(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988.
Pursuant to section 3(b)(1)(I) of the
Executive Order, nothing in this or any
previous rule (or in any administrative
policy, directive, ruling, notice,
guideline, guidance, or writing) directly
relating to the Program that is the
subject of this rule is intended to create
any legal or procedural rights
enforceable against the United States,
except as the same may be contained
within subpart B of part 94 of title 28
of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This rule will not result in the
expenditure by State, local and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more
in any one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The VOCA Victim
Assistance Program is a formula grant
program that provides funds to States to
provide financial support to eligible
crime victim assistance programs.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52885
Therefore, no actions were deemed
necessary under the provisions of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as
defined by section 804 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996. This rule will not
result in an annual effect on the
economy of $100,000,000 or more; a
major increase in costs or prices; or
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and
export markets.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule does not propose
any new, or changes to existing,
‘‘collection[s] of information’’ as defined
by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) and its
implementing regulations at 5 CFR Part
1320. The existing collections (VOCA
Victim Assistance Grant Program State
Performance Report, 1121–0115, and
OVC Subgrant Award Report, 1121–
0142) have both been cleared by the
Office of Management and Budget.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 94
Administrative practice and
procedure, victim assistance, formula
grant program, Victims of Crime Act
(VOCA) of 1984.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth
in the preamble, part 94 of chapter I of
Title 28 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is proposed to be amended
as follows:
PART 94—CRIME VICTIM SERVICES
1. The authority citation for part 94 is
revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 10603, 10603c,
10604(a), 10605.
■
2. Add subpart B to read as follows:
Subpart B—VOCA Victim Assistance
Program
General Provisions
Sec.
94.101 Purpose; future guidance;
construction and severability.
94.102 Definitions.
State Administering Agency Program
Requirements
94.103 Purpose of State-level VOCA
funding; State administering agency
eligibility.
94.104 Eligible crime victim assistance
programs.
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
52886
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
94.105 Allocation of subawards.
94.106 Reporting requirements.
94.107 Monitoring requirements.
94.108 Programmatic oversight of
subawards.
94.109 Sub-recipient program income.
§ 94.102
State Administering Agency Use of VOCA
Funds for Administration and Training
94.110 Administration and training.
94.111 Special considerations for
administrative costs.
94.112 Allowable administrative costs.
94.113 Allowable training costs.
Sub-Recipient Program Requirements
94.114 Purpose of VOCA sub-awards.
94.115 Sub-recipient program requirements.
94.116 Project match requirements.
Sub-Recipient Allowable/Unallowable Costs
94.117 Direct service costs.
94.118 Other costs for activities supporting
direct services.
94.119 Sub-recipient administrative costs.
94.120 Expressly non-allowable subrecipient costs.
General Provisions
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
§ 94.101 Purpose; future guidance;
construction and severability
(a) Purpose. The purpose of this
subpart is to implement and interpret
the provisions of VOCA, at 42 U.S.C.
10603, which, as of the date of this
regulation, authorizes the Director to
make annual grants to the chief
executive of each State and eligible
territory for the financial support of
eligible crime victim assistance
programs. VOCA sets out the statutory
requirements governing this financial
support to such programs, and should
be read in conjunction with this
regulation.
(b) Future guidance. Pursuant to
VOCA at 42 U.S.C. 10604(a), the
Director may establish such rules,
regulations, Guidelines, and procedures
as are necessary to carry out any
function of the Director under VOCA.
Pursuant to this authority, the Director
may from time to time prescribe
clarifying guidance for VOCA grant
recipients and sub-recipients on the
application of these regulations.
(c) Construction and severability. Any
provision of this subpart held to be
invalid or unenforceable by its terms, or
as applied to any person or
circumstance, shall be construed so as
to give it the maximum effect permitted
by law, unless such holding shall be one
of utter invalidity or unenforceability, in
which event such provision shall be
deemed severable from this part and
shall not affect the remainder thereof or
the application of such provision to
other persons not similarly situated or
to other, dissimilar circumstances.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
Definitions
Crime victim or victim of crime means
a person who has suffered physical,
sexual, financial, or emotional harm as
a result of the commission of a crime.
Director means the Director of OVC.
Direct services are efforts that—
(1) Respond to the emotional and
physical needs of crime victims;
(2) Assist victims of crime to stabilize
their lives after victimization;
(3) Assist victims to understand and
participate in the criminal justice
system; or
(4) Restore a measure of security and
safety for the victim (for example, by
replacing or repairing broken windows,
doors, and locks).
OVC means the Office for Victims of
Crime, within the United States
Department of Justice’s Office of Justice
Programs.
Spousal abuse includes intimate
partner violence and dating violence.
State administering agency or SAA is
the governmental unit designated by the
chief executive of a State or territory to
administer VOCA funds.
Victim of child abuse means a victim
of crime, where such crime involved an
act or omission considered child abuse
under the law of the jurisdiction of the
relevant State administering agency. In
addition, for purposes of this program,
victims of child abuse may include, but
are not limited to, victims of crime
involving child physical, sexual, or
emotional abuse; victims of child
pornography related offenses; victims of
child neglect; victims of commercial
sexual exploitation of children; and
children who are exposed to or witness
violence.
VOCA means the Victims of Crime
Act of 1984, Public Law 98–473 (Oct.
12, 1984), as amended.
State Administering Agency Program
Requirements
§ 94.103 Purpose of State-level VOCA
funding; State administering agency
eligibility.
(a) Direct services. VOCA funds shall
be available to the State administering
agency only for subawards to eligible
crime victim assistance programs that
provide direct services to victims of
crime, unless such funds are otherwise
available to the State administering
agency for training or administrative
costs, or for its own direct service
programs, as allowable under this
subpart.
(b) State administering agency
eligibility. State administering agencies
must meet the criteria set forth in
VOCA, at 42 U.S.C. 10603(a)(2).
Generally, these criteria require that the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
chief executive of the State or territory
(or a designee, under VOCA, at 42
U.S.C. 10603(d)(5)) certify (as set out in
VOCA, at 42 U.S.C. 10603(a)(2)) that—
(1) Priority will be given to programs
providing assistance to victims of sexual
assault, spousal abuse, or child abuse;
(2) Funds will be made available to
programs serving previously
underserved victims; and
(3) VOCA funding will not supplant
State and local funds otherwise
available for crime victim assistance.
Such certifications shall be submitted
annually in such form and manner as
may be specified by the Director from
time to time. In making their
certifications, State administering
agencies shall follow the rules regarding
priority areas, underserved victims, and
non-supplantation set out below.
(c) Pass-through administration. State
administering agencies have broad
latitude in structuring their
administration of VOCA funding. VOCA
funding may be administered by the
State administering agency itself, or by
other means, including using passthrough entities (such as coalitions of
victim service providers) to make
determinations regarding award
distribution and to administer funding.
State administering agencies that choose
to use a pass-through mechanism shall
ensure that such a mechanism does not
bypass the statutory limitation on use of
administrative and training funds, that
reporting of activities at the direct
service level is equivalent to what
would be provided if the State
administering agency were directly
overseeing sub-awards, and that an
effective system of monitoring subawards is used.
§ 94.104 Eligible crime victim assistance
programs.
(a) In general. Eligible crime victim
assistance programs include those that
provide services to victims of crime, and
meet the requirements of VOCA, at 42
U.S.C. 10603(b)(1)(A) through (F), as
provided in this section.
(b) Types of entities. State
administering agencies may fund
subawards only to programs operated by
public agencies or nonprofit
organizations (including tribal public
agencies and tribal nonprofit
organizations), or by combinations
thereof.
(c) Organizational capacity of the
program. State administering agencies
shall require that each crime victim
assistance program demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the State administering
agency that it has either a record of
effective services to victims of crime
and support from non-VOCA funds, or
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
substantial financial support from nonVOCA funds.
(d) Record of effective services to
victims of crime and support from nonVOCA funds. For purposes of this
section, in determining whether a
program has demonstrated a record of
effective services to victims of crime
and has support from non-VOCA funds,
State administering agencies may take
into account considerations such as (but
not limited to)—
(1) The support and approval of a
program’s services by the community;
(2) The program’s history of providing
direct services in a cost-effective
manner; and
(3) Financial support from sources
other than VOCA.
(e) Substantial financial support from
non-VOCA funds. For purposes of this
section, a program has substantial
financial support from non-VOCA funds
when at least twenty-five percent of the
program’s funding in the year of, or the
year preceding, the award consists of
non-VOCA funds. Substantial financial
support may include support from other
Federal funding programs. A program
may count the funding used to
demonstrate non-VOCA substantial
financial support toward its project
match requirement, provided that this
funding is non-Federal (or meets the
OJP Financial Guide exceptions for
using Federal funding for match).
(f) Project match requirement. State
administering agencies shall require that
crime victim assistance programs agree
to, and meet, the project match
requirements set out in § 94.116, unless
a program falls under one of that
section’s exceptions to match, or that
program is given written approval from
OVC to deviate from the match
requirements (upon a request from or
with the concurrence of the State
administering agency to OVC).
(g) Mandated use of volunteers;
waiver. State administering agencies
shall require that crime victim
assistance programs utilize volunteers
(to the extent determined by the State
administering agency) in order to be
eligible for VOCA victim assistance
funds. The chief executive of the State
(who may act through the State
administering agency) may waive this
requirement, provided that the program
submits written documentation of its
efforts to recruit and maintain
volunteers, or otherwise demonstrate
why circumstances prohibit the use of
volunteers, to the satisfaction of the
chief executive.
(h) Discrimination prohibited. The
VOCA non-discrimination provisions
specified at 42 U.S.C. 10604(e) shall be
implemented in accordance with 28
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
CFR part 42, and guidance from the
Office for Civil Rights within the Office
of Justice Programs.
§ 94.105
Allocation of subawards.
(a) Directed allocation of forty percent
overall. State administering agencies
shall set aside an overall total of forty
percent of each year’s VOCA grant for
subawards to eligible crime victim
assistance programs that serve priority
categories of crime victims and
previously-underserved categories of
crime victims, as specified below in
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section,
unless the Director permits the State
administering agency to deviate from all
or part of these allocations under one of
the exceptions in paragraph (d) of this
section.
(b) Priority Categories of Crime
Victims (thirty percent total). State
administering agencies shall allocate a
minimum of ten percent of each year’s
VOCA grant to each of the three
categories of victims specified in the
certification requirement in VOCA, at 42
U.S.C. 10603(a)(2)(A), which, as of the
date of this regulation, includes victims
of
(1) Sexual assault,
(2) Spousal abuse, and
(3) Child abuse.
(c) Previously underserved category
(ten percent total). State administering
agencies shall allocate a minimum of
ten percent of each Federal fiscal year’s
VOCA grant to underserved victims of
violent crime, as specified in VOCA, at
42 U.S.C. 10603(a)(2)(B). To meet the
underserved requirement, State
administering agencies shall identify
crime victims by the type of crime they
have experienced as well as the
characteristics of the victim. These
underserved victims may include, but
are not limited to, victims of Driving
Under the Influence (DUI)/Driving
While Intoxicated (DWI) crashes;
survivors of homicide victims; victims
of physical assault; adults molested as
children; victims of elder abuse,
robbery, hate and bias crimes,
kidnapping; child victims and adult
survivors of child pornography; child
victims of sex trafficking; victims of
violent crime in high crime areas; and
LGBTQ victims.
(d) Exceptions to required allocations.
Each State administering agency shall
allocate each Federal fiscal year’s VOCA
grant as specified above, unless the
Director approves a different allocation,
pursuant to a written request from the
agency that demonstrates (to the
satisfaction of the Director) that—
(1) A priority category is currently
receiving significant amounts of
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52887
financial assistance from the State or
other sources;
(2) A smaller amount of financial
assistance, or no assistance, is needed
for a particular priority category or
previously underserved victims from
the VOCA victim assistance grant
program; or
(3) Crime rates for a priority category
do not justify the required allocation.
(e) Mandate to compete funding to
sub-recipients. Each State administering
agency shall award funds through a
competitive process, including longterm and/or ongoing projects. All
subawards for victim assistance projects
funded by VOCA should be re-competed
at least every five years.
§ 94.106
Reporting requirements.
(a) Subgrant award reports. State
administering agencies shall submit (in
such form and manner as may be
specified by the Director from time to
time) a Subgrant Award Report (SAR) to
OVC for each project that receives
VOCA funds, within ninety days of the
subaward date. If SAR information
changes before the end of the project
period, the State administering agency
shall revise and resubmit the SAR
within thirty days of the change.
(b) Performance report. State
administering agencies shall submit (in
such form and manner as may be
specified by the Director from time to
time) a Performance Report to OVC by
the date specified by OVC. The
Performance Report shall cover the
previous Federal fiscal year’s active
grants.
(c) Other reports. OVC may from time
to time request that State administering
agencies submit supplemental
information or reports, as it may
determine to be advisable.
§ 94.107
Monitoring requirements.
(a) Monitoring plan. Except as
provided in paragraph (d) of this
section, State administering agencies
shall develop a monitoring plan in
accordance with the requirements of
this section.
(b) Monitoring frequency. State
administering agencies shall conduct
regular desk monitoring of all
subawards. In addition, agencies shall
conduct on-site monitoring of all subrecipients a minimum of once every two
years during the grant cycle.
(c) Recordkeeping. State
administering agencies shall maintain a
copy of site visit results and other
documents related to compliance.
(d) Alternative monitoring procedure.
State administering agencies may
submit to OVC for approval an
alternative monitoring plan that differs
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
52888
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
from that described in paragraph (a) of
this section. Such monitoring plan may
use risk assessment to determine the
level of scrutiny and priority for
conducting monitoring of subrecipients. Any alternative monitoring
plan must be approved by OVC prior to
implementation.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
§ 94.108 Programmatic oversight of
subawards.
State administering agencies shall
ensure that VOCA sub-recipients
obligate and expend funds in
accordance with §§ 94.117 through
94.120, which set out allowable and
unallowable costs under VOCA
subawards. In addition, State
administering agencies shall refer to the
following rules when overseeing
subawards that involve the following
entities or activities:
(a) Leasing vehicles. No State
administering agency may authorize a
sub-recipient to lease vehicles using
VOCA funds unless the sub-recipient
substantiates an essential need for the
expenditure to deliver services to crime
victims.
(b) Faith-based and neighborhood
organizations. State administering
agencies shall ensure that sub-recipients
comply with all applicable Federal rules
governing use of Federal funding by
faith-based and neighborhood
organizations, including 28 CFR part 38.
(c) Crime victim compensation
programs. State administering agencies
may provide VOCA victim assistance
funding to compensation programs only
for the purpose of providing direct
services to crime victims that extend
beyond the essential duties of the staff
administering the compensation
program. These services may include
crisis intervention; counseling; and
providing information, referrals, and
follow-up for crime victims.
(d) Direct-service programs run by
State administering agencies. A State
administering agency may use no more
than ten percent of its annual VOCA
grant to operate its own program that
provides direct services to victims of
crime, unless the Director approves a
different allocation in writing. The State
administering agency’s direct-services
program shall adhere to the allowable/
unallowable cost rules in §§ 94.117
through 94.120. VOCA funds used
under this paragraph remain subject to
the rules for State administering agency
use of VOCA funds for administration
and training in VOCA, at 42 U.S.C.
10603(b)(3), and in §§ 94.110 through
94.113.
(e) Victim service organizations
located in an adjacent State. State
administering agencies may award
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
VOCA victim assistance funds to
otherwise eligible crime victim
assistance programs that are physically
located in an adjacent State. In making
such awards, the State administering
agency shall—
(1) Ensure that any such award is an
efficient and cost-effective way to
provide services to victims who reside
in the awarding State;
(2) Ensure that the amount of the
award is proportionate to the number of
victims in the awarding State that will
be served by the adjacent State program;
and
(3) Enter into an interstate agreement
with the adjacent State to address
provision of services, monitoring,
auditing Federal funds, overseeing
compliance, and reporting.
§ 94.109
Sub-recipient program income.
(a) Prior authorization required.
Services provided by VOCA subrecipients shall be provided at no charge
to victims served, unless the State
administering agency grants prior
authorization to the sub-recipient to
generate program income.
(b) Consideration for authorization of
program income. The State
administering agency should weigh the
following considerations prior to
permitting a sub-recipient to charge fees
or otherwise generate program income:
(1) The sub-recipient’s justification for
charging for services or otherwise
generating program income in light of
the particular project’s objectives, and
the overall purpose of victim assistance
programs; and
(2) The sub-recipient’s ability to track
program income generated in
accordance with Federal financial
accounting requirements.
(c) Uses of program income. State
administering agencies shall ensure that
each sub-recipients’ VOCA-funded
program income be restricted to the
same uses as the VOCA grant, and that
the resulting income be obligated and
expended during the grant period in
which the income is generated.
State Administering Agency Use of
VOCA Funds for Administration and
Training
§ 94.110
Administration and training.
(a) Amount. A State administering
agency may not use more than the
amount prescribed by VOCA for training
and administration. At the time of this
regulation, the amount was five percent
of a State’s annual VOCA award.
(b) Notification. State administering
agencies shall notify OVC of their
decision to use VOCA funding for
administrative or training costs at the
time of application for VOCA grant
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
funds, or within thirty days of a
decision to use such funds. Such
notification shall indicate what portion
of the five percent allowance will be
allocated for training and what portion
for administration.
(c) Availability. State administering
agencies shall ensure that each training
and administering activity funded by
the VOCA award occurs within the
project period.
(d) Documentation. State
administering agencies shall maintain
sufficient records to substantiate the
expenditure of administrative and
training funds.
§ 94.111 Special considerations for
administrative costs.
(a) Proportionate allocation of costs to
the VOCA grant. Any administrative
costs (e.g., equipment purchases by the
State administrative agency) charged to
the VOCA award may be charged only
in proportion to the percentage of use
that may be allocated to the State’s
crime victim assistance program. This
rule applies only to State administering
agencies, not to sub-recipients.
(b) Baseline for administrative costs. If
a State administering agency uses VOCA
funds for administrative costs, it shall—
(1) Establish and document a baseline
level of non-VOCA funding required to
administer the State victim assistance
program prior to expending VOCA
funds for administrative costs; and
(2) Notify OVC if there is a decrease
in the State’s financial commitment to
the cost of administering the State’s
crime victim assistance program.
(c) Non-supplantation requirement. In
keeping with VOCA, at 42 U.S.C.
10603(a)(2)(C) (prohibiting
supplantation of State funds with the
Federal grant), a State will be
understood to have supplanted if it
decreases its previous financial
commitment toward the administration
of its victim assistance program, and
Federal funds are used to maintain the
baseline level of administrative funding.
States will not be in violation of the
prohibition on supplanting where—
(1) A serious loss of State revenue
results in across-the-board budget
restrictions, or
(2) A State decreases the number of
State-supported staff positions used to
meet the State’s maintenance of effort in
administering the VOCA grant program.
(d) Indirect cost rates. The State
administrative agency may charge a
federally-approved indirect cost rate to
this grant, provided it does not exceed
the five percent statutory cap on
administrative (and training) costs for
the State administering agency.
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
§ 94.112
Allowable administrative costs.
State administering agencies may use
VOCA funds to support administrative
costs as provided in VOCA, at 42 U.S.C.
10603(b)(3). Only those costs directly
associated with administering the State
administering agency’s program and
training its staff, enhancing overall
program operations, and ensuring
compliance with Federal requirements
may be reimbursed with administrative
grant funds. These costs generally
include the following:
(a) Salaries and benefits. Salaries and
benefits for State administering agency
staff and consultants to administer and
manage the financial and programmatic
aspects of the VOCA victim assistance
grant. As noted above, administrative
funds may only be used to support the
portion of staff time that is devoted to
the State-level VOCA assistance
program.
(b) Training. Travel, registration fees,
and other expenses associated with
State administering agency staff
attendance at OVC-sponsored and other
technical assistance meetings and
conferences that address issues and
concerns to State administration of
victim assistance programs.
(c) Monitoring compliance. State
administering agencies use of
administrative funds to monitor
compliance of VOCA sub-recipients
with Federal and State requirements,
provide technical assistance, and/or
evaluation and assessment of program
activities, including travel, mileage, and
other associated expenses.
(d) Reporting. State activities
necessary to meet Federal and State
reporting requirements concerning the
VOCA victim assistance grant program.
(e) Program evaluation. Surveys or
studies that inform the grantee of the
impact or outcome of services received
by crime victims.
(f) Program audit costs. State
activities necessary to meet Federal
audit requirements concerning the
VOCA victim assistance grant program.
(g) Technology. Including the study,
design, and implementation of grant
management systems, Web page
construction and maintenance,
Geographic Information Systems, and
other automated systems that further the
administration of VOCA victim
assistance funds; purchase and
maintenance of equipment for the State
administering agency, including
computers, software, fax machines,
copying machines, and TTY/TDDs; and
services required to support technology.
(h) Memberships. Memberships in
crime victims organizations and the
purchase of victim-related materials
such as curricula, literature, and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
protocols; memberships in organizations
that support the management and
administration of the VOCA victim
assistance grant program are also
allowable.
(i) Strategic planning. Development of
strategic plans, both service and
financial, including conducting surveys
and needs assessments.
(j) Coordination and collaboration
efforts. Coordination and collaboration
efforts made on behalf of crime victims
with appropriate groups such as
systems-based providers, criminal
justice, victim advocacy, human
services, financial assistance (including
crime victim compensation), OJP
bureaus and offices, and other
appropriate Federal, State, and local
agencies and organizations.
(k) Publications. Purchasing, printing,
and developing training materials,
victim services directories, brochures,
and other relevant publications.
52889
State administering agencies may use
VOCA funds to support training costs as
provided in VOCA, at 42 U.S.C.
10603(b)(3). Allowable training costs
generally include the following:
(a) Statewide/regional trainings.
Providing statewide or regional training
of personnel providing direct assistance.
Statewide or regional training supported
with training funds shall target a diverse
audience of victim service providers
and allied professionals, including
VOCA funded and non-VOCA funded
personnel.
(b) Training academies. Supporting
State victim assistance training
academies.
and private efforts to aid crime victims.
Such coordination may include, but is
not limited to, serving on Federal, State,
local, or American Indian tribal task
forces, work groups, committees,
commissions, or coalitions, to develop
written agreements and protocols,
overseeing and recommending
improvements to community responses
to crime victims.
(c) Assistance to victims in applying
for compensation. Sub-recipients shall,
pursuant to VOCA, at 42 U.S.C.
10603(b)(1)(E), assist victims in
applying for crime victim compensation
benefits. Such assistance may include
identifying and notifying crime victims
of the availability of compensation,
assisting them with application forms
and procedures, obtaining necessary
documentation, monitoring claim status,
and intervening on behalf of the victim
with the crime victims’ compensation
program.
(d) Compliance with State criteria.
Sub-recipients shall abide by any
additional eligibility or service criteria
established by the State administering
agency.
(e) Cost of services. Sub-recipients
shall provide services funded by VOCA
to crime victims at no charge, unless the
sub-recipient requests (and the State
administering agency provides prior
approval of) a waiver, pursuant to
§ 94.109, allowing the sub-recipient to
generate program income. If a subrecipient receives a waiver, any program
income shall be restricted to the same
uses as the VOCA funds and any
program income shall be expended
during the grant period in which the
income is generated.
Sub-Recipient Program Requirements
§ 94.116
§ 94.114
(a) Project match amount. Subrecipients shall contribute (i.e., match)
not less than twenty percent (cash or inkind) of the total cost of each VOCAfunded project, except as provided in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) Exceptions to project match. The
following are exceptions to the project
match rules set out in this section:
(1) American Indian tribes and tribal
organizations. Sub-recipients that are
federally-recognized American Indian or
Alaska Native tribes, or projects that
operate on reservations of federallyrecognized tribes, are not required to
contribute to the total cost of a VOCAfunded project.
(2) Territories and possessions of the
United States. Sub-recipients that are
territories or possessions of the United
States (except for the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico), or projects that operate in
such a territory or possession (except for
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico) are
§ 94.113
Allowable training costs.
Purpose of VOCA sub-awards.
VOCA funds shall be available to subrecipients only to provide direct
services to victims of crime (unless such
funds are otherwise available to the subrecipient for administrative or other
costs as allowable under this subpart).
§ 94.115 Sub-recipient program
requirements.
Sub-recipients shall adhere to the
following rules in undertaking activities
using VOCA funds:
(a) Use of volunteers. Sub-recipients
shall use volunteers where practicable
to do so unless the chief executive of
that State (who may act through the
State administering agency) waives this
requirement pursuant to § 94.104(g).
(b) Promotion of community efforts to
aid crime victims. Sub-recipients shall,
pursuant to VOCA, at 42 U.S.C.
10603(b)(1)(D), promote within the
community served coordinated public
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
Project match requirements.
27AUP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
52890
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
not required to contribute to the total
cost of a VOCA-funded project.
(3) OVC-approved exceptions. Subrecipients other than those listed in
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section,
may deviate from the match rules set
out in this section only upon OVC
approval of a written request submitted
to OVC by (or with the concurrence of)
the State administering agency.
(c) Sources of project match.
Matching funds shall be derived from
non-Federal sources, except as may be
provided in the OJP Financial Guide,
and may include the following:
(1) Cash. The value of direct nonFederal funding (or Federal funds,
where permitted by the OJP Financial
Guide) contributed to the project.
(2) Volunteered professional or
personal services. The value placed on
volunteer services shall be consistent
with the rate of compensation paid for
similar work in the sub-recipient’s
organization. If the required skills are
not found in the sub-recipient’s
organization, the rate of compensation
shall be consistent with the labor
market. If services are provided at a
discounted rate, the difference between
the rate charged the sub-recipient and
the rate ordinarily charged shall be
included in the valuation. Fringe
benefits may be included in the
valuation.
(3) Materials/Equipment. The value
placed on loaned or donated equipment
shall not exceed its fair market value.
(4) Space. The value of donated space
shall not exceed the fair rental value of
comparable space as established by an
independent appraisal of comparable
space and facilities in a privately-owned
building in the same locality.
(5) Non-VOCA funded victim
assistance activities. Match may include
victim assistance activities (including
but not limited to performing direct
victim service activities, coordinating or
supervising those activities, training
victim assistance providers, or
advocating for victims) that are funded
by non-VOCA and non-Federal sources,
including, but not limited to, other nonFederal Governmental funding sources.
(d) Use of match funds. All funds
designated as match are restricted to the
same uses, and timing deadlines for
obligation and expenditure, as the
project’s VOCA funding.
(e) Recordkeeping for match. Each
sub-recipient shall maintain records that
clearly show the source, amount, and
period of time for which the match was
allocated. The basis for determining the
value of personal services, materials,
equipment, and space shall be
documented. Any reduction or discount
provided to the sub-recipient shall be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
the difference of what the sub-recipient
paid from what is the provider’s
nominal or fair market value for the
good or service. Volunteer services shall
be substantiated by the same methods
used by the sub-recipient for its paid
employees (generally, this should
include timesheets substantiating time
worked on the project).
Sub-Recipient Allowable/Unallowable
Costs
§ 94.117
Direct service costs.
(a) The following are allowable direct
service costs for which sub-recipients
may use VOCA funds:
(1) Immediate physical and
psychological health and safety.
Services that respond to the immediate
emotional, psychological and physical
needs (excluding medical care except as
allowed under paragraph (a)(1((ix) of
this section) of crime victims are
allowable. These services include, but
are not limited to:
(i) Crisis intervention services;
(ii) Accompaniment to hospitals for
medical examinations;
(iii) Hotline counseling;
(iv) Safety planning;
(v) Emergency food, shelter, clothing,
and transportation;
(vi) Short-term (up to 45 days) inhome care and supervision services for
children and adults who remain in their
own homes when the offender/caregiver
is removed;
(vii) Short-term (up to 45 days)
nursing home, adult foster care, or
group home placement for adults for
whom no other safe, short-term
residence is available;
(viii) Window, door, and lock
replacement or repair;
(ix) Emergency costs of nonprescription and prescription medicine,
prophylactic treatment to prevent HIV/
AIDS infection, durable medical
equipment (such as wheel chairs,
crutches, hearing aids, eyeglasses), and
other health care items are allowed
when the State’s compensation program,
the victim’s (or in the case of a minor
child, the victim’s parent’s or
guardian’s) health insurance plan,
Medicaid, or other health care funding
source cannot provide for these
expenses within 48 hours of the crime;
and
(x) Emergency legal assistance such as
filing restraining or protective orders,
and obtaining emergency custody orders
and visitation rights.
(2) Personal advocacy and emotional
support. Personal advocacy and
emotional support services include(i) Working with a victim to assess the
impact of the crime;
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(ii) Identify needs;
(iii) Case management;
(iv) Manage practical problems
created by the victimization;
(v) Identify resources;
(vi) Provide information, referrals,
advocacy, and follow-up contact for
continued services, as needed; and
(vii) Traditional, cultural and/or
alternative therapy/healing (e.g., art
therapy, yoga).
(3) Mental health counseling and
care. Mental health counseling and care
includes out-patient therapy/
counseling, including referral to
substance abuse treatment, provided by
a person who meets professional
standards to provide these services in
the jurisdiction in which the care is
administered.
(4) Peer support. Peer support
includes activities that provide
opportunities for victims to meet other
victims, share experiences, and provide
self-help, information, and emotional
support.
(5) Facilitation of participation in
criminal justice proceedings. Such
facilitation generally involves the
provision of services and payment of
costs that help victims participate in the
criminal justice system, and includes(i) Advocacy on behalf of crime
victims;
(ii) Accompaniment to criminal
justice offices and court;
(iii) Transportation, meals, and
lodging to allow victims who are not
witnesses to participate in the criminal
justice system;
(iv) Interpreters for victims who are
hearing-impaired, or with limited
English proficiency, when they are not
witnesses;
(v) Child care and respite care to
enable a victim who is a caregiver to
attend criminal justice activities related
to the case;
(vi) Notification to victims regarding
trial dates, case disposition,
incarceration, and parole hearings;
(vii) Assistance with victim impact
statements; and
(viii) Assistance in recovering
property that was retained as evidence
and projects devoted to restitution
advocacy on behalf of crime victims.
(6) Legal assistance. Costs for legal
assistance services are allowable where
reasonable and where the need for such
services arises as a direct result of the
victimization.
(i) Legal services (including, but not
limited to, those provided by pro bono
legal clinics) that help victims assert
their rights as victims or protect their
safety, privacy, or other interests, in a
criminal proceeding directly related to
the victimization, are allowable.
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
(ii) Civil legal services for victims
where the need for such services arises
as a direct result of the victimization,
are allowable.
(iii) The following are examples
(which are merely illustrative, and not
meant to be a comprehensive listing) of
some circumstances where civil legal
services may be appropriate: Protective
and restraining orders against a stalker
or abuser; campus administrative
protection or stay away order
proceedings; family, custody, contract,
housing, and dependency matters for
victims of intimate partner violence,
child abuse, sexual assault, and elder
abuse; immigration assistance for
victims of human trafficking and
domestic abuse victims; intervention
with creditors, law enforcement (e.g., to
obtain police reports), and other entities
on behalf of victims of identity theft and
financial fraud; intervention with
administrative agencies, schools/
colleges, tribal entities, and other
circumstances where legal advice or
intervention would assist in addressing
the consequences of a person’s
victimization.
(iv) OVC encourages State
administering agencies to set reasonable
limits on the amount and duration of
funding, and the types of legal services
that are provided by their subrecipients.
(v) In general, legal services for
divorce proceedings, alteration of child
support payments, criminal defense,
and tort lawsuits are not an appropriate
use of VOCA funding.
(7) Forensic medical evidence
collection examinations. Forensic
medical evidence collection
examinations for adult and child
victims are allowable to the extent that
other funding sources such as State
appropriations are insufficient. These
costs may be covered if the examination
meets standards established by the
State, and appropriate crisis counseling
and/or other types of victim services are
offered to the victim in conjunction
with the examination.
(8) Forensic interviews. VOCA
funding may be used for forensic
interviews of children and adults only
when—
(i) Results of the interview will be
used not only for law enforcement and
prosecution purposes, but also for
identification of needs such as social
services, personal advocacy, case
management, substance abuse
treatment, and mental health services;
(ii) Interviews are conducted in the
context of a multidisciplinary
investigation and diagnostic team, or in
a specialized setting such as a child
advocacy center;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
(iii) The interviewer is trained to
conduct forensic interviews appropriate
to the developmental age and abilities of
children, or the developmental,
cognitive, and physical or
communication disabilities presented
by adults; and
(iv) VOCA victim assistance funds are
not used to supplant other State and
local public funding available for
forensic interviews, including criminal
justice funding.
(9) Transportation. Transportation is
allowable for victims to receive services
and to participate in criminal justice
proceedings.
(10) Public awareness. Public
awareness and education presentations
that are made in schools, community
centers, and other public forums, and
that are designed to inform crime
victims of specific rights and services
and provide or refer them to needed
services and assistance are allowable.
Costs related to these activities include
the development of presentation
materials, brochures, newspaper
notices, and public service
announcements.
(11) Services to incarcerated
individuals. Services that respond to the
needs of an incarcerated crime victim,
whether arising from a victimization
occurring before or during incarceration,
are allowable where the need for such
services does not directly arise from the
crime for which that individual was
incarcerated. Such services may include
psychological or medical forensic
services. The need for victim assistance
services does not directly arise from the
crime for which a person is incarcerated
merely because that person, while
incarcerated, is victimized, even where
the person is targeted and victimized for
having committed that crime.
(12) Transitional housing. The cost of
transitional housing for victims is
allowable, subject to any restrictions on
amount, length of time, and eligible
crimes, set by the State administering
agency. Generally, transitional housing
is appropriate for victims of human
trafficking, victims with disabilities
abused by caretakers, victims of
domestic violence and their dependents,
and other victims who have a particular
need for transitional housing, and who
cannot (or should not) return to their
previous housing situation due to the
circumstances of their victimization.
(13) Relocation. The cost of relocation
of victims is allowable, subject to any
restrictions on amount, length of time,
and eligible crimes, set by the State
administering agency. Generally,
relocation is appropriate where needed
for the safety and well being of a victim,
particularly for domestic violence
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52891
victims, victims of sexual assault, and
victims of human trafficking. Such costs
must be reasonable and may include,
but are not limited to, moving expenses,
security deposits on housing, rental and
mortgage assistance, and utility startup.
(b) [Reserved].
§ 94.118 Other costs for activities
supporting direct services.
The following are other allowable
victim-service-related costs for which
sub-recipients may use VOCA funds:
(a) Coordination of activities.
Activities that facilitate the provision of
direct services are allowable, including
but not limited to, statewide
coordination for victim notification
systems, crisis response teams,
multidisciplinary teams, and other such
programs. VOCA funds may be used to
support the salaries and benefits of such
coordinators.
(b) Supervision of direct service
providers. VOCA funds may be used to
support the costs of supervisory staff
costs in a VOCA-funded project, when
the State administering agency
determines that such supervision of
direct service providers is necessary and
essential to providing direct services to
crime victims.
(c) Multisystem, interagency,
multidisciplinary response to crime
victims. VOCA funds may be used for
activities that support a coordinated and
comprehensive response to crime
victims by direct service providers.
Examples include direct service staff
serving on child and adult abuse
multidisciplinary investigation and
treatment teams; coordinating with
Federal agencies to provide services to
victims of Federal crimes; and/or
participation on statewide or other task
forces, work groups, and committees to
develop protocols, interagency, and
other working agreements.
(d) Contracts for professional services.
Sub-recipients may use VOCA funds to
contract for specialized professional
services that are not available within the
organization. Examples of such services
include, but are not limited to,
psychological or psychiatric
consultation; legal consultation for
victim advocates who assist victims in
using appropriate legal avenues to
alleviate danger and in exercising their
rights as victims; and interpreters for
victims who are hearing impaired or
with limited English proficiency. Subrecipients generally should not use
VOCA funds for contracted services that
charge for administrative overhead or
other indirect costs on an hourly or
daily rate.
(e) Automated systems and
technology. VOCA funds may be used
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
52892
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
for automated systems and technology
that support delivery of direct services
to victims. Examples are automated
information and referral systems, email
systems that allow communications
among victim service providers,
automated case-tracking and
management systems, and victim
notification systems. Costs may include
personnel, hardware, and other
expenses, as determined by the State
administering agency.
(f) Court Appointed Special
Advocates (CASA) and other similar
volunteer trainings. VOCA direct service
funds may be used to provide
instruction to CASA volunteers on how
to be an advocate. VOCA funds may also
be used to instruct volunteers on how to
provide direct services when such
services will be provided predominantly
by volunteers.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
§ 94.119
costs.
Sub-recipient administrative
The following are allowable
administrative costs for which subrecipients may use VOCA funds:
(a) Personnel costs. VOCA funds may
be used to support personnel costs that
are directly related to providing direct
services and other allowable victimrelated services, such as staff and
coordinator salaries and fringe benefits,
including a prorated share of liability
insurance.
(b) Skills training for staff. VOCA
funds designated for skills training shall
be used exclusively for developing the
skills of direct service providers,
including paid staff and volunteers, so
that they are better able to offer quality
services to crime victims. These VOCA
funds may be used for training both
VOCA-funded and non-VOCA-funded
service providers who work within a
VOCA recipient organization. VOCA
funds may be used to pay for manuals,
books, videoconferencing, and other
materials and training methods.
(c) Training-related travel. VOCA
funds may support costs such as travel,
meals, lodging, and registration fees for
VOCA-funded direct service staff in a
VOCA sub-recipient organization. These
expenses may be funded for training inState, regionally, and nationally.
(d) Office costs. Office costs that are
necessary and essential to providing
direct services and other allowable
victim services are allowable. These
costs include but are not limited to the
prorated costs of rent; utilities; local
travel expenses for service providers;
and required minor building
adaptations needed to meet the
Department of Justice standards
implementing the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
(e) Equipment and furniture. VOCA
funds may be used to purchase furniture
and equipment that facilitate the
delivery of direct services to crime
victims. Examples of allowable costs are
telephones; Braille and TTY/TDD
equipment; computers and printers;
beepers; video cameras and recorders
for documenting and reviewing
interviews with children; two-way
mirrors; colposcopes; and equipment
and furniture for shelters, work spaces,
victim waiting rooms, and children’s
play areas. VOCA funds may support
only the prorated share of an item that
is not used exclusively for victimrelated activities.
(f) Operating costs. Operating costs
include but are not limited to(1) Supplies;
(2) Equipment use fees, when
supported by adequate documentation;
(3) Prorated costs of property
insurance;
(4) Printing, photocopying, and
postage;
(5) Courier services;
(6) Brochures that describe available
services;
(7) Books and other victim-related
materials;
(8) Computer backup files/tapes and
storage; and
(9) Security systems.
(g) VOCA administrative time.
Administrative time spent performing
the following activities is an allowable
cost(1) Completing VOCA-required time
and attendance sheets and
programmatic documentation, reports,
and statistics;
(2) Collecting and maintaining crime
victims records;
(3) Conducting victim satisfaction
surveys and needs assessments to
improve victim services delivery in the
VOCA-funded project; and
(4) Funding the prorated share of
audit costs.
(h) Leasing vehicles. Leasing vehicles,
provided that the State administering
agency grants prior approval, is an
allowable cost. The sub-recipient shall
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
State administering agency that the
vehicle is essential to delivering
services to crime victims.
(i) Maintenance, repair, or
replacement of essential items. VOCA
funds may be used for maintenance, and
repair or replacement of items that
contribute to maintaining a healthy or
safe environment for crime victims,
such as a furnace in a shelter. Routine
maintenance, repair costs, and
automobile insurance are allowable for
leased vehicles. State administering
agencies shall review each sub-recipient
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
request to ensure that other sources of
funding are not available, and that the
cost of maintenance, repair, or
replacement is reasonable.
(j) Project evaluation. Sub-recipients
may use VOCA funds to support
evaluations of specific victim service
projects.
§ 94.120 Expressly non-allowable subrecipient costs.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of this subpart, VOCA funds shall not be
used to fund or support the following:
(a) Lobbying. Lobbying or
administrative advocacy activities on
legislation or administrative change to
regulation or administrative policy (cf.
18 U.S.C. 1913), whether conducted
directly or indirectly, are unallowable.
(b) Perpetrator rehabilitation and
counseling. Funds may not be used for
perpetrator rehabilitation and
counseling except where directly arising
from the victimization of an
incarcerated individual whose need for
victim assistance services does not
directly arise from the crime for which
that individual was incarcerated, or as
provided in § 94.117(a)(11).
(c) Research and studies. Research
and studies on crime victim issues are
an unallowable use of VOCA funds, as
these funds should be used primarily for
direct services. Note: Evaluation of
specific victim service projects to
determine the effectiveness of such a
program is an allowable use of VOCA
funds.
(d) Criminal justice system
improvement. Activities directed at
prosecuting an offender or improving
the criminal justice system’s
effectiveness and efficiency, except that
forensic interviews and examinations
may be funded in some instances, as set
forth in § 94.117(a)(7) and (8).
(e) Fundraising. Any activities or
other costs related to fundraising (with
the exception of fee-based, or similar,
program income as permitted by the
State administering agency under these
rules).
(f) Capital expenses. Capital
improvements, liability insurance on
buildings; body guards; property losses
and expenses; real estate purchases;
mortgage payments; and construction,
except as allowable under § 94.117(a)(1)
or § 94.119.
(g) Compensation for victims of crime.
Reimbursement to crime victims for
expenses incurred as a result of a crime,
except as allowable property loss
expenses under § 94.117(1).
(h) Most medical care. Except as
allowed under § 94.117(a)(1)(ix).
(i) Salaries and expenses of
management. Salaries, benefits, fees,
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 27, 2013 / Proposed Rules
furniture, equipment, and other
expenses of executive directors, board
members, and other administrators,
except as allowable under § 94.118 or
§ 94.119.
(j) Victim attendance at conferences.
The attendance of individual crime
victims at conferences.
(k) Funding other organizations. The
purchase of equipment for another
organization or individual to perform a
victim-related service.
(l) Purchasing vehicles. Purchasing of
vehicles (as distinct from the leasing of
vehicles.
(m) Crime prevention. Crime
prevention activities.
ACTION:
Dated: August 14, 2013.
Karol V. Mason,
Assistant Attorney General.
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2013–0446 by mail to: Michael
Jay, Environmental Protection Agency,
Air Planning and Development Branch,
11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa,
Kansas 66219. Comments may also be
submitted electronically or through
hand delivery/courier by following the
detailed instructions in the ADDRESSES
section of the direct final rule located in
the rules section of this Federal
Register.
BILLING CODE 4410–18–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 50, 51, 70 and 71
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0885, FRL–9810–3]
RIN 2060–AR34
Michael Jay at (913) 551–7460, or by
email at jay.michael@epa.gov
In proposed rule document 2013–
13233 appearing on pages 34178
through 34239 in the issue of Thursday,
June 6, 2013, make the following
correction.
1. On page 34234, in the first column,
on the twenty-fifth line from the bottom,
‘‘PART 50—NATIONAL PRIMARY
AND SECONDARY AXVYGH9’’ is
corrected to appear as set forth below:
PART 50—NATIONAL PRIMARY AND
SECONDARY AMBIENT AIR QUALITY
STANDARDS [CORRECTED]
[FR Doc. C1–2013–13233 Filed 8–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2013–0446; FRL 9900–38–
Region 7]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of Iowa
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
Jkt 229001
In the
final rules section of the Federal
Register, EPA is approving the state’s
SIP revision as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
revision amendment and anticipates no
relevant adverse comments to this
action. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no relevant adverse comments
are received in response to this action,
no further activity is contemplated in
relation to this action. If EPA receives
relevant adverse comments, the direct
final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed action. EPA will
not institute a second comment period
on this action. Any parties interested in
commenting on this action should do so
at this time. Please note that if EPA
receives adverse comment on part of
this rule and if that part can be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may
adopt as final those parts of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment. For additional information,
see the direct final rule which is located
in the rules section of this Federal
Register.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Correction
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Comments on this proposed
action must be received in writing by
September 26, 2013.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Implementation of the 2008 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Ozone: State Implementation Plan
Requirements
13:35 Aug 26, 2013
EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the State Implementation
Plan (SIP) for the state of Iowa. The
purpose of these revisions is to update
the Polk County Board of Health Rules
and Regulations. These proposed
revisions reflect updates to the Iowa
statewide rules previously approved by
EPA and will ensure consistency
between the applicable local agency
rules and Federally-approved rules.
SUMMARY:
ADDRESSES:
[FR Doc. 2013–20426 Filed 8–26–13; 8:45 am]
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Proposed rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
52893
Dated: August 1, 2013.
Mark Hague,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2013–20752 Filed 8–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 1, 2 and 95
[ET Docket No. 03–137; Report No. 2988]
Petition for Reconsideration of Action
in Rulemaking Proceeding
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Petition for reconsideration.
AGENCY:
In this document, a Petition
for Reconsideration has been filed in the
Commission’s Rulemaking proceeding
by Ivanna Yang on behalf of American
Association for Justice.
DATES: Oppositions to the Petitions
must be filed on or before September 11,
2013. Replies to an opposition must be
filed on or before September 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Martin Doczkat, Office of Engineering
and Technology, 202–418–2435,
Martin.Doczkat@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of Commission’s document,
Report No. 2988, released July 31, 2013.
The full text of Report No. 2988 is
available for viewing and copying in
Room CY–B402, 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington, DC or may be purchased
from the Commission’s copy contractor,
Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI) (1–
800–378–3160). The Commission will
not send a copy of this Notice pursuant
to the Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because this Notice
does not have an impact on any rules of
particular applicability.
Subjects: Proposed Changes in the
Commission’s Rules Regarding Human
Exposure to Radiofrequency
Electromagnetic Fields, FCC 13–39,
published at 78 FR 33634, June 4, 2013,
in ET Docket No. 03–137, published
pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). See also
section 1.4(b)(1) of the Commission’s
rules.
Number of Petitions Filed: 1.
SUMMARY:
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Office of
Managing Director.
[FR Doc. 2013–20695 Filed 8–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM
27AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 27, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52877-52893]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20426]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Part 94
[Docket No. OJP (OVC) 1523]
RIN 1121-AA69
VOCA Victim Assistance Program
AGENCY: Office for Victims of Crime, Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office for Victims of Crime (``OVC'') of the U.S.
Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs (``OJP''), proposes
this rule to
[[Page 52878]]
implement the victim assistance formula grant program (``Victim
Assistance Program'') authorized by the Victims of Crime Act of 1984
(``VOCA''). Generally speaking, this law authorizes OVC to provide an
annual grant from the Crime Victims Fund to each State and eligible
territory for the financial support of services to victims of crime by
eligible crime victim assistance programs. The proposed rule would
codify and update the existing VOCA Victim Assistance Program
Guidelines (``Guidelines'') to reflect changes in OVC policy, needs of
the crime victims services field, and VOCA itself.
DATES: Comments must be received by no later than 11:59 p.m., E.T., on
October 28, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may view an electronic version of this proposed rule at
https://www.regulations.gov, and you may also comment by using the
www.regulations.gov form for this regulation. OVC prefers to receive
comments via www.regulations.gov where possible. When submitting
comments electronically, you should include OJP Docket No. 1523 in the
subject box. Additionally, comments may also be submitted via U.S.
mail, to: Toni Thomas, State Compensation and Assistance Division,
Office for Victims of Crime, Office of Justice Programs, U.S.
Department of Justice, 810 7th Street NW., Washington, DC 20531; or by
telefacsimile transmission, to: Toni Thomas, at (202) 305-2440. To
ensure proper handling, please reference OJP Docket No. 1523 on your
correspondence.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni Thomas, State Compensation and
Assistance Division, Office for Victims of Crime, at (202) 307-5983.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Posting of Public Comments
Please note that all comments received are considered part of the
public record and made available for public inspection online at https://www.regulations.gov. Such information includes personal identifying
information (such as your name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter.
If you wish to submit personal identifying information (such as
your name, address, etc.) as part of your comment, but do not wish for
it to be posted online, you must include the phrase ``PERSONAL
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION'' in the first paragraph of your comment. You
must also locate all the personal identifying information you do not
want posted online in the first paragraph of your comment and identify
what information you want redacted.
If you wish to submit confidential business information as part of
your comment but do not wish it to be posted online, you must include
the phrase ``CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION'' in the first paragraph
of your comment. You must also prominently identify confidential
business information to be redacted within the comment. If a comment
has so much confidential business information that it cannot be
effectively redacted, all or part of that comment may not be posted on
https://www.regulations.gov.
Personal identifying information identified and located as set
forth above will be placed in the agency's public docket file, but not
posted online. Confidential business information identified and located
as set forth above will not be placed in the agency's public docket
file, nor will it be posted online. If you wish to inspect the agency's
public docket file in person by appointment, please see the ``For
Further Information Contact'' paragraph.
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Proposed Regulatory Action
The Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (VOCA) authorizes OVC to provide
an annual formula grant from the Crime Victims Fund to each State and
eligible territory. These annual Victim Assistance Program formula
grants are used by the States and territories to provide financial
support to eligible crime victim assistance programs. See 42 U.S.C.
10603. OVC proposes this rule pursuant to the rulemaking authority
granted to the OVC Director by 42 U.S.C. 10604(a). The proposed rule
would codify and update the existing program Guidelines to reflect
changes in OVC policy, the needs of the crime victim services field,
and VOCA itself.
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Proposed Regulatory Action
OVC proposes some substantive departure from the Guidelines;
however, the majority of provisions in the proposed rule are the same
as the corresponding provisions of the Guidelines. The proposed rule
would reorganize the program rules into five major parts: (1) General
Provisions; (2) State Administering Agency Program Requirements; (3)
State Administering Agency Use of VOCA Funds for Administration and
Training; (4) Sub-Recipient Program Requirements; and (5) Sub-Recipient
Allowable/Unallowable Costs.
The rules proposed in the General Provisions part would not
substantively depart from the Guidelines. The definitions section in
this part proposes to define frequently used terms, including ``crime
victim'', ``State administering agency'', ``victim of child abuse'',
and ``direct services''. These proposed definitions are consistent in
substance with the definitions in the Guidelines. OVC proposes a new
definition of the undefined statutory term ``child abuse'' that is
intended to make patent OVC's existing flexible approach of allowing
States to address a broad variety of harm to children.
The State Administering Agency Program Requirements part proposes a
basic statement of the purpose of State-level VOCA funding, and
summarizes the statutory eligibility and certification requirements.
OVC proposes to clarify that the existing practice (presently allowed
by OVC, but not acknowledged in the existing Guidelines) in some States
of passing funds along to another entity to administer the State's
victim assistance program is permissible, and to set out rules for
administering funding in this way. OVC proposes a section clearly
setting forth how States must allocate VOCA funding among various types
of victim service programs (e.g., those serving priority crime victim
categories, and previously underserved victims), but does not propose
any changes to the allocation percentages set out in the Guidelines.
OVC proposes a new mandate that State administering agencies compete
subawards every five years; as well as a provision allowing States to
use alternative risk-based monitoring procedures instead of the
standard biennial on-site monitoring of all subawards required by the
Guidelines. OVC believes that competition of subawards will lead to
better and more cost-effective services; while allowing States to
propose alternative monitoring strategies would allow States to use
innovative and more cost-effective monitoring practices. This part also
proposes other situation-specific rules that State administering
agencies must follow when overseeing subawards; these provisions
largely track the Guidelines.
The State Administering Agency Use of VOCA Funds for Administration
and Training part proposes to clarify and bring the existing guideline
provisions setting out maximum amounts for administration and training
costs into harmony with more recent statutory changes. The proposed
part would list allowable administrative and training costs, all of
which would be consistent with those set out in the Guidelines.
[[Page 52879]]
The Sub-Recipient Program Requirements part proposes a concise
statement of the purpose of VOCA sub-awards, and summarizes the
statutory eligibility requirements for sub-recipients. OVC proposes
maintaining the existing project match provisions that require most
sub-recipients to provide a twenty percent match for the purpose of
leveraging and augmenting assistance funding. As in the existing
Guidelines, sub-recipients in U.S. territories and possessions would
not be subject to match. OVC proposes to eliminate the match
requirement, currently at five percent, for American Indian and tribal
organizations. These entities, like those in U.S. territories and
possessions, often have difficulty accessing matching resources--a
match requirement in such circumstances can be counterproductive and
lead to fewer victim services in those already underserved
jurisdictions.
The Sub-Recipient Allowable/Unallowable Costs part proposes a list
of activities that sub-recipients may undertake using VOCA funding. The
majority of the listed costs are substantively the same as those listed
in the existing Guidelines. OVC does, however, propose a few
substantive changes: OVC proposes to allow States more flexibility to
support legal services for victims. The existing Guidelines allow legal
services for victims, but only in the emergency context. OVC has
received feedback from victim service providers indicating that there
is a significant need for legal services for victims outside of the
emergency context (e.g., asserting rights in the criminal justice
process, support for human trafficking victims with a myriad of
complicated issues). Allowing States to provide such services will lead
to better outcomes for many victims. OVC also proposes to allow States
to support services to incarcerated victims (e.g., victims of sexual
assault in prison) in most circumstances. The existing Guidelines do
not allow such services; however, the change is consistent with the
recommendations of the 2009 report by the National Prison Rape
Elimination Commission, discussed in more detail below. OVC also
proposes allowing States greater flexibility to support transitional
housing and relocation expenses using VOCA funds, as such services can
lead to better outcomes for many victims (e.g., those abused by a
caretaker). OVC proposes allowing States to permit sub-recipients to
use VOCA funds for coordination activities, which often allow local
organizations to more effectively leverage community resources and
provide better and more cost-effective services.
C. Cost and Benefits
As discussed in more detail under the Executive Orders 12866 and
13563--Regulatory Review section below, the proposed rule would clarify
and update the existing Guidelines, but would not alter the existing
program structure at all. Updating the existing Guidelines to clearly
and accurately reflect the statutory parameters will facilitate State
compliance with VOCA requirements, and thus avoid potentially costly
non-compliance findings. The proposed rule would make only a few
substantive changes to the existing Guidelines, and these would be of a
permissive, not mandatory, nature. Some changes, like allowing more
flexibility to coordinate and leverage community resources, and adopt
alternative monitoring strategies, would impose no costs but will
potentially allow States to use existing funding more efficiently.
Other proposed changes that allow States to allocate funding to
services not presently allowable, could change the allocation of VOCA
funding amongst victim services provided by sub-recipient
organizations, and amongst victim service organizations. Such
reallocations of funding, however, are not mandated and each State and
territory would make the ultimate decision with regard to whether to
change its current funding allocations, if it chooses to do so at all.
This is not a change from the present discretion that States have to
allocate funding according to State priorities. OVC anticipates that
most States will continue to allocate the majority of VOCA funding to
victim services for certain types of crimes (intimate partner violence,
sexual assault, child abuse) at consistent levels. Any potential
reallocations would be relatively minor (even when taken in aggregate
across States) in comparison to the overall mix of allowable victim
services, and thus they are unlikely to create new costs or significant
fund transfers. In any event, the real benefits of additional allowable
services for currently underserved and un-served victims are
significant.
III. Background
A. Overview
OVC proposes this rule to implement its Victim Assistance Program,
a formula grant program authorized by Section 1404 of the Victims of
Crime Act of 1984, Public Law 98-473, codified at 42 U.S.C. 10603. This
section of VOCA authorizes OVC to provide an annual grant from the
Crime Victims Fund to each State and eligible territory for the
financial support of services to victims of crime by eligible crime
victim assistance programs.
OVC's Victim Assistance Program is funded out of the Crime Victims
Fund. The Fund receives Federal criminal fines, penalties, and
assessments, as well as certain gifts and bequests, but does not
receive any general tax revenue. The Crime Victims Fund is administered
by OVC and amounts that may be obligated therefrom are allocated each
year according to the VOCA formula at 42 U.S.C. 10601. In recent years,
the amount available for obligation via the VOCA formula allocations
has been capped by law at less than the total amount available in the
Fund. The VOCA formula specifies that (in most years) the first $20M
available in the Fund for that year will go toward child abuse
prevention and treatment programs, with a certain amount to be carved
out for programs to address child abuse in Indian Country. After that,
such sums as may be necessary are available to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation and the U.S. Attorneys Offices to improve services to
victims of Federal crime, and to operate a victim notification system.
Whatever is left is allocated as follows: 47.5% for OVC's Victim
Compensation Program, 47.5% for OVC's Victim Assistance Program, and
the remaining 5% for the OVC Director to distribute in discretionary
awards in certain statutorily defined categories. Generally, under the
distribution rules for the Victim Compensation Program, if a portion of
the 47.5% available for Compensation is not needed for that purpose, it
is (per formula) made available to augment the Victim Assistance
Program. The Victim Assistance Program distributes funds to the States
and eligible territories as mandated by VOCA in 42 U.S.C. 10603. The
VOCA statutory distribution formula provides each State with a base
amount (presently $500,000 for each State; $200,000 for each eligible
territory), and distributes the remainder proportionately based on the
State populations.
The proposed rule would supersede the existing VOCA Victim
Assistance Program Guidelines that were published in the Federal
Register on April 22, 1997, at 62 FR 19607. It reflects changes in OVC
policy, in the needs of the crime victim services field, and in VOCA
itself. OVC invites and welcomes comments from States and territories,
organizations and individuals involved in the victim services field,
and any other members of the interested public, on any aspects of this
proposed
[[Page 52880]]
rulemaking. All comments will be considered prior to publication of a
final rule.
B. History of This Rulemaking
OVC published the Final Program Guidelines, Victims of Crime Act,
FY 1997 Victim Assistance Program on April 22, 1997. Those Guidelines
were based on OVC experience with the Victim Assistance Program, legal
opinions rendered since the inception of the program in 1986, and
comments from the field on the Proposed Program Guidelines published in
the Federal Register on February 18, 1997. On September 3, 2002, OVC
published a notice of Proposed Program Guide at 67 FR 56444, seeking
comments to refine the administration of the Victim Assistance Program
further; thereafter, however, OVC chose not to issue final guidance to
supersede the 1997 Guidelines. After receiving comments on the 2002
proposed guide, OVC instead decided to pursue the publication of
codified program regulations rather than merely revise the guideline
document. In anticipation of re-starting this rulemaking process,
throughout 2010 OVC sought preliminary input from the field regarding
improving victim services and potential modifications to the Victim
Assistance Program rules that would facilitate such improvement.
C. Discussion of Changes Proposed in This Notice
The 1997 Guidelines have served to assist and guide OVC, State
administering agencies, and direct service providers, in administering,
distributing, and using VOCA funds to assist victims of crime
nationwide. As mentioned above, however, over the sixteen years since
their promulgation, the existing Guidelines have been overtaken by
changes in the VOCA statute itself, developments in the crime victim
services field, as well as technological advancements, and new
approaches to State administration of VOCA funding. For example, OVC,
through its funding of nationwide training and technical assistance for
victim service organizations and the findings of its Vision 21
initiative, which examined the state of the victim services field, as
well as through reports of other organizations, such as the Prison Rape
Elimination Commission, has become aware of a need for certain types of
services and gaps in services for certain types of victims. In
particular, OVC wishes to address the need for increased legal services
for victims, which is particularly important for human trafficking
victims, but also for victims of domestic abuse, identity theft, and
other crimes as well. OVC has funded programs providing services for
human trafficking victims for more than a decade under the authority of
the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, and, through various
evaluation efforts, has gained significant experience in providing
effective services for this victim population. OVC wishes to
incorporate this experience into the proposed rule to allow States to
effectively assist these victims. Likewise, the findings of the Prison
Rape Elimination Commission illuminated an acute need for increased
victim services for incarcerated victims, and OVC wishes to allow
States to address this gap in services. In addition, information
technology has advanced significantly since 1997, and the proposed rule
would allow victim service providers greater flexibility to use VOCA
funding to leverage technology to enhance victim services. For example,
informational and outreach efforts via online forums and social
networking may be effective and relatively inexpensive ways to reach
certain victim populations. In addition, podcasting and digital video
sharing enable victim service providers to continually reach victims
with enriched information. Videoconferencing using real-time audio and
video technology services, administered through a secure, encrypted
connection, can deliver confidential, face-to-face assistance. OVC's
intent for this proposed rule is to account for developments over the
last decade, and to reflect program parameters applicable to each
participating entity accurately. In so doing, OVC hopes to allow
administering agencies and victim service providers to fully leverage
the progress that the field has made over the last decade in knowledge
of victim needs, victim service strategies, and efficient program
administration, with the end goal of assisting crime victims more
effectively.
As a technical and structural matter, the existing Victim
Assistance Program Guidelines are not in a format suitable for
publication in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), and therefore
have been re-formatted in this notice to conform to CFR formatting
requirements. Moreover, the existing Guidelines are not ideally
structured in terms of readability and ease of reference. The proposed
rule below attempts to remedy these deficiencies by creating manageable
units of information, reorganizing related concepts and rules together
more logically, and attempting to use consistent terminology throughout
the document.
In addition, the existing Guidelines contain extended repetition of
the VOCA statutory language. OVC notes that in several instances this
has caused confusion as certain statutory language was changed in
subsequent laws (for example, the provisions regarding the percentage
of funds that a State may use for training and administration), thereby
making obsolete and inaccurate the existing guideline's recitation of
the superseded law (as statutory language obviously supersedes an
agency's contrary guidance or rule on the same subject pronounced
through guideline or regulation). The proposed rule omits repetition of
statutory language, except where needed for context and ease of use.
OVC notes that the proposed rule is drafted to be read in conjunction
with the rules and definitions in the applicable section of VOCA (42
U.S.C. 10603).
OVC here proposes several substantive changes to the program
Guidelines, although many of the provisions for the Victim Assistance
Program set out in the existing Guidelines have been retained in
substance. (It should be noted that, as explained above, the text of
such provisions may have been reformatted as needed to accommodate the
regulatory process and to improve the overall clarity of the document.)
The most significant of these substantive proposed changes are
discussed below in the order that they appear in the revised document,
and with reference to the applicable section of the proposed rule.
Cross-references to corresponding sections of the existing Guidelines
are provided where possible for ease of comparison.
General Provisions
The proposed rule contains several terms and definitions that are
used throughout the document. These are set out in section 94.102 for
ease of reference. Notably--
The definitions of crime victim (or victim of crime)
remains unchanged from the existing guideline; it is meant to be a
broad definition, taking into account many kinds of harm resulting from
criminal acts.
The term State administering agency (``SAA'') is used to
refer to the State or territorial entity receiving victim assistance
program funds directly from OVC. This terminology is more descriptive
than ``direct grantee'' or ``State grantee'' and is more consistent
with terminology used in other formula programs administered by OJP
entities.
[[Page 52881]]
OVC has added a definition of the term ``spousal abuse''
that clarifies that the term includes intimate partner violence and
dating violence. Spousal abuse was the terminology used in VOCA in the
1980s, but has since fallen out of use in the victim service field. OVC
retains the term in the proposed rule because it is still in the
statute, but clarifies that OVC understands it to encompass the
concepts of intimate partner and dating violence.
OVC has added a definition of ``victim of child abuse'',
to clarify that the term covers a broad variety of harm to children.
Child abuse victims are a statutorily mandated priority category, and
the clarification will ensure that VOCA-funded State victim assistance
programs may support a broad variety of victim assistance projects that
address the abuse of children. Many child victims experience poly-
victimization, meaning several different kinds of direct victimization
or indirect exposure to violence (either as an eyewitness or through
other knowledge) over a period of time. Poly-victimization greatly
increases children's vulnerability to mental health, behavioral, school
performance, and other problems, and can contribute to lifelong
challenges for the affected children. In addition, children's exposure
to violence--in their homes, schools, or communities--as victims or
witnesses, is often associated with long-term physical, psychological,
and emotional harm, and can contribute to behavioral problems,
including substance abuse, and negative health outcomes. VOCA-funded
victim assistance programs may use funding to address these various
forms of child abuse. In addition, the definition clarifies that child
pornography related offenses are a form of child abuse. OVC intends to
permit States the flexibility to fund programs to help these victims,
whose needs may arise immediately after the abuse, or much later--for
example, upon distribution of images of the abuse. OVC views
distribution of such images as a form of re-victimization that States
and victim advocates are struggling to address, and seeks comments on
this provision.
The definition of direct services remains largely
unchanged, except for formatting.
State Administering Agency Program Requirements
Purpose and State administering agency eligibility. Section
94.103(a) is self-explanatory, in that it proposes the purpose of OVC's
annual VOCA formula grants to the States and territories. Section
94.103(b) proposes the general rules for State eligibility
certifications required by VOCA. It is anticipated that OVC will
require that such certifications be submitted along with each State
administering agency's annual application for funding (as is the
current practice). Reporting and technical requirements specific to a
given fiscal year are generally set out in the annual program
solicitation, or in supplemental OVC communications if time does not
permit publication in the solicitation. Section 94.103(c) clarifies
that a State administering agency may award its VOCA funds to another
organization to distribute (pass-through administration), and
highlights a State administering agency's obligations with regard to
use of administrative and training funds, monitoring, and reporting
should this method be used.
Eligible sub-recipient programs. Section 94.104 proposes what a
State must require of an entity to consider the entity an ``eligible
crime victim assistance program.'' The criteria for an ``eligible crime
victim assistance program'' are largely set out in VOCA, and the
proposed rule merely provides clarifying interpretation needed for
practical implementation. The section proposes the types of eligible
entities; criteria for determining the organizational capacity of the
entity's program; project match requirements that the SAA must require
the entity to meet; and mandated use of volunteers (with provision for
waiver). An eligible entity must meet the organizational capacity
requirements of VOCA, which requires that an eligible entity either
have a history of providing direct services to victims in an effective
manner and support from non-VOCA funding, or be able to show
substantial support from non-VOCA funding. Entities previously not
funded with VOCA funding are eligible to apply for VOCA funding. What
constitutes an ``effective manner'' will vary depending on the State
and community served, the type of victim the entity's services address,
the type of services provided, best practices within that service
field, and the characteristics of the entity (e.g. small, specialized
service provider; larger, comprehensive service provider). The States
will determine whether an entity has a history of providing services in
an effective manner for each eligible program and should be able to
articulate the basis for their determinations. OVC proposes several
non-exclusive considerations (which are consistent with the existing
Guidelines) that States may wish to take into account in making such
determinations. The proposed rule, at 94.104(h), clarifies that the
statutory VOCA non-discrimination provisions that apply to any VOCA-
funded undertaking, including victim assistance programs, are
administered in accordance with the Department of Justice's regulations
implementing non-discrimination requirements and the guidance provided
by the Office of Civil Rights within the Office of Justice Programs.
SAA Allocation of Subawards. Section 94.105 proposes how State
administering agencies must allocate their subawards. OVC's authority
to direct the allocation of a portion of each State administering
agency's formula assistance award derives from the VOCA requirements
(42 U.S.C. 10603(a)(2)(A) and (B)) that the chief executive of each
State certify that priority shall be given to eligible programs that
assist certain victim populations (specifically victims of sexual
assault, spousal abuse, or child abuse), and certify that funds shall
be made available for programs that serve underserved populations. Note
that the allocations set out in the proposed rule are substantially the
same as those set out in the existing guideline (see Guideline IV.A.3
and 4); the phrasing of these requirements has merely been re-worked
for clarity. Under the proposed rule SAAs must identify underserved
categories of victims by the type of crime they experience (such as
victims of elder abuse) as well as the characteristics of the victim
(such as victims of violent crime in high crime urban areas or Lesbian
Gay Bisexual Transgender Queer (LGBTQ) victims). More information about
types of crime victim populations will allow OVC and SAAs to better
tailor their training and technical assistance and victim assistance
programs to the needs of each community and victim population. The
proposed rule provides for several exceptions to the required
allocations. OVC especially seeks comment on whether the allocation
amounts for priority categories, and the allocation amount and method
of determining previously underserved populations, remain appropriate.
Section 94.105(e) proposes to require State administrative agencies
to fund eligible sub-entities through a competitive process. This is an
important new requirement that will support innovation at the direct
service level through regular review of approaches to victim assistance
services.
SAA Reporting Requirements. Section 94.106 proposes the State
administering agency's reporting requirements under OVC's Victim
Assistance Program. OVC will continue to require States to submit sub-
grant award reports and
[[Page 52882]]
performance reports, as well as other reports that are required under
Federal grant rules. (Other reports, for example, would include the
requirements of the Federal Funding Accounting and Transparency Act,
which requires reporting on sub-recipient expenditures where such sub-
recipient receives more than $25,000 in grant funds. This reporting is
independent of OVC's sub-grant award reports.) As Federal grant rules
and technology are constantly in flux, the proposed rule does not
specify time or manner in which these reports are to be submitted--it
is anticipated that OVC will communicate the technical details of each
year's reporting requirements to grantees via annual program
solicitations and supplemental guidance.
SAA Monitoring Plans. Section 94.107 sets out the State
administering agency's obligation to monitor its sub-awards. In
addition to the current monitoring plans adopted by a State
administering agency (which includes regular desk monitoring of all
sub-awards and on-site monitoring of all sub-recipients at least every
two years), the proposed rule will permit, upon OVC review and
approval, alternative monitoring procedures from State administering
agencies. An example of an alternative procedure that has been
implemented at the Federal level is a risk assessment model to
determine the level of monitoring necessary for various sub-recipients.
OVC recognizes that certain sub-recipients may have a long established
history of appropriately administering a sub-award and may therefore
require less intensive scrutiny than a relatively new sub-recipient or
an established sub-recipient providing new services.
Programmatic oversight. Section 94.108 proposes the State
administrative agency's responsibilities with regard to programmatic
oversight of sub-awards. This section proposes to consolidate various
rules and considerations that are currently found throughout the
existing guideline. Among the topics addressed are the following:
Leasing vehicles. The SAA may authorize sub-recipients to
lease vehicles, but only upon a showing that each such vehicle is
essential for the delivery of victim services.
Faith-based and neighborhood organizations. Faith-based
and neighborhood organizations are valued partners for government. They
support and assist victims in countless ways. In keeping with our
values and our laws, the Federal Government has issued specific
guidance for programs in which faith-based and neighborhood
organizations may receive Federal aid to ensure that those programs are
implemented in accordance with the Establishment Clause and the Free
Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States
Constitution. The proposed rule provides a reference to the Department
of Justice regulation that implements this guidance and that applies to
entities funded through this program.
Crime victim compensation agencies. A State may use victim
assistance funding for services provided by its State victim
compensation staff where such services are direct services and outside
of that staff's normal duties.
SAA use of VOCA funds to provide direct services, and
limits on the amount of funds that SAAs may use for these purposes.
Funding victim service programs located in adjacent
States.
Program income. Section 94.109 proposes the rules that State
administering agencies must use when considering whether sub-recipients
may generate program income. It is OVC's longstanding view that victim
services provided with VOCA funds should be free of charge for victims
where possible, though OVC recognizes that in some situations a service
provider may be justified in charging for services or otherwise
generating program income.
State Administering Agency Use of VOCA Funds for Administration and
Training
The existing Guidelines are inaccurate with regard to the
allocation of VOCA grant funds for SAA administration and training
purposes, as VOCA was amended after the issuance of the 1997 guidance.
VOCA now prohibits grantees from using more than five percent of their
annual OVC Victim Assistance Program funds for administrative and
training purposes. This means that SAAs must allocate this five percent
between both administration and training purposes; SAAs are not allowed
to use five percent for administration and an additional five percent
for training. Sections 94.110 through 94.113 detail allowable uses of
and necessary recordkeeping for, administration and training funds.
These sections also address non-supplantation requirements as
applicable to administrative and training funds, as well as indirect
cost rates.
Sub-Recipient Program Requirements
Purpose. Section 94.114 proposes the purpose of VOCA sub-awards.
Sub-recipient requirements. Section 94.115 proposes the
requirements to which sub-recipients must adhere. These requirements
include--
Using volunteers
Promotion of community efforts to aid crime victims
Assistance to victims in applying for compensation
Compliance with all State requirements
Providing services at no charge unless permitted by the
SAA to generate program income
Sub-recipient project match requirements. Section 94.116 proposes
the project match requirements applicable to activities undertaken by
sub-recipients of VOCA formula victim assistance funds. These proposed
match requirements are the same as those in the existing Guidelines.
Each sub-recipient must contribute at least twenty percent of the total
cost of each project, unless an exception applies. Requiring sub-
recipients to provide matching funds serves to ensure that sub-
recipients are invested and engaged in the project strategy. U.S.
territories and possessions are exempt from match, as resources in
these communities are often not available for match, and therefore a
match requirement is counterproductive to the goal of increasing the
availability of victim services in a community. OVC proposes to
eliminate the current 5% match requirement for American Indian and
tribal organizations for the same reason. OVC specifically seeks
comment on whether this amount of minimum match (20%) for sub-
recipients and no match requirement for possessions, territories, and
tribal sub-recipients is reasonable and beneficial to the goal of
developing effective and financially stable victim services. OVC also
specifically seeks comment on professional services used as match and
how such services should be valued for reporting purposes.
Sub-Recipient Allowable and Unallowable Costs
Allowable costs. Section 94.117 proposes allowable costs for which
sub-recipient entities may obligate and expend VOCA formula victim
assistance funds when providing direct services. Most of these
allowable costs (and the parameters under which the direct services may
be provided) are essentially the same as those in the existing
Guidelines. The following activities, however, have been added or
significantly modified in the proposed rule:
Legal assistance for victims. The proposed rule leaves
unchanged the provision in the current Guidelines allowing sub-
recipients to use VOCA funds for emergency legal assistance to ensure a
victim's immediate physical and psychological health and safety--
including, but not limited to, assistance
[[Page 52883]]
filing for restraining orders, protective orders, and obtaining
emergency custody orders and visitation rights. The proposed rule would
add a provision under the sub-recipient allowable and unallowable costs
provisions, also allowing VOCA funds to be used outside of the context
of an emergency, for reasonable legal assistance services where the
need for such arises as a direct result of a person's victimization.
The proposed rule contemplates two contexts where this may occur--legal
assistance to assert a victim's rights or protect a victim's safety,
privacy, or other interests, in a criminal proceeding directly related
to the person's victimization; and civil legal assistance where the
need for such assistance arises as a direct result of a person's
victimization.
The proposed rule offers several examples of circumstances under
which legal services may be appropriate as victim assistance and
supported with VOCA funding. It also clarifies that criminal defense,
tort suits, and divorce proceedings generally are not allowable costs.
It is important to note that the proposed rule merely permits the use
of VOCA funding for legal services--it does not mandate that such
services be provided. OVC recognizes that the available resources in
each State and territory differ, and, therefore, each jurisdiction
retains broad discretion to set limits on the type and scope of legal
services that it allows its sub-recipients to provide with VOCA
funding. OVC seeks comments addressing any aspect of permitting or not
permitting the use of VOCA funds for legal services for victims, and
the scope of such services.
Services to incarcerated individuals. The existing
Guidelines do not allow OVC Victim Assistance Program funds to be used
for rehabilitative services or support services to incarcerated
individuals (see Guidelines, section IV.E.3.b). In 2003, however, the
Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) established an independent
commission to examine the issue of prison rape in prisons, jails, and
juvenile detention facilities nationwide, and to recommend actions for
reducing rates of prison rape. The National Prison Rape Elimination
Commission's report was released in 2009. One of the recommendations
was that the prohibition on providing VOCA-funded victim services to
incarcerated victims be removed, so that incarcerated victims of sexual
assault in detention/correctional facilities might have additional
resources available to address victimization-related needs.
With this in mind, OVC is proposing a provision specifically
allowing for VOCA-funded victim service providers to serve incarcerated
individuals, provided that the incarcerated individual is a victim, the
service addresses issues directly arising from the victimization, and
the need for such services does not directly arise from the crime for
which that individual was incarcerated. For example, under the proposed
rule a State could choose to fund a service provider to provide mental
health services to an individual incarcerated for illegal distribution
of drugs who is a victim of sexual assault while so incarcerated. By
contrast, VOCA funding could not be used to support medical or mental
health services relating to a pre-incarceration assault of that
individual by a co-conspirator for not dividing up in an equitable
manner the proceeds from sales of illegal drugs.
It is important to note that a person who is targeted and
victimized while incarcerated because of the crime for which he is
incarcerated (e.g., a person imprisoned for child abuse who is
subsequently sexually assaulted by other inmates) would not be excluded
from receiving VOCA-funded assistance.
In addition, VOCA victim assistance does not cover non-emergency
medical costs--therefore, it is anticipated that the majority of any
costs incurred for services to incarcerated victims would be related to
forensic exams for sexual assault victims and mental health services to
address the consequences of a victimization.
Finally, the rule does not mandate that States make funding
available for services to incarcerated victims, but rather, merely
permits them to do so. OVC anticipates that State administering
agencies will make their own determinations regarding the appropriate
delegation of responsibility (and fiscal burden) between victim service
agencies/organizations and detention/correctional facilities with
regard to caring for this victim population. OVC welcomes comments on
any aspect of this proposed rule provision.
Transitional housing. OVC recognizes that transitional
housing is a necessary victim expense for certain types of victims--for
example, victims of human trafficking, victims with a disability abused
by caretakers, and victims of domestic violence and their dependents.
The existing guideline limits VOCA funding for transitional housing
(see Guidelines sections IV.E.1.a and IV.E.3.i). The proposed rule
would allow States the flexibility to permit sub-recipients to provide
transitional housing to victims, and would permit the State to set
limits on time and types of victims that might be eligible for such
housing. Under the proposed rule, States may use VOCA funds for housing
and shelter purposes to the extent that such housing is related to the
individual's victimization. For example, shelters for victims of
domestic violence or human trafficking would be allowable uses of VOCA
funds because the victims have been taken away from or forced out of
their housing by the nature of their victimization. States would be
allowed to use VOCA funds to support transitional housing expenses,
including travel; rental assistance; first month deposit; utilities;
support services, such as childcare; and counseling. To the extent
State administering agencies choose to permit VOCA funds to be used for
transitional housing purposes, OVC anticipates that these agencies
would focus on those victims with the most need, such as victims of
human trafficking, minor victims, victims with disabilities, and
victims of domestic violence.
Relocation expenses. The rule proposes to allow States to
use VOCA funding to pay relocation expenses for victims to preserve
life, safety and well-being of victims, including, but not limited to,
domestic violence victims, children, victims of sexual assault, victims
of stalking, and victims of trafficking. Relocation expenses for crime
victims must be reasonable, and may include, but are not limited to,
moving expenses, security deposits on housing, rental and mortgage
assistance, and utility startup.
Traditional/Alternative Healing. The proposed rule would
allow sub-recipients to provide traditional/alternative healing
methods, and participation in Native American traditional healing
ceremonies, if allowed by the State administering agency.
Costs to Support Direct Services. Section 94.118 proposes certain
activities that support direct services for crime victims and that are
expenses for which sub-recipients may obligate and expend VOCA funds.
Generally, under VOCA (42 U.S.C. 10603(b)(2)), OVC formula victim
assistance funding may only be used by sub-recipients for services to
victims of crime. The existing Guidelines hold to this general rule
somewhat strictly, in that they limit the use of funds available for
coordination and oversight at the sub-recipient level. Over the last
decade, however, it has become apparent that coordination and oversight
activities are desirable and may in many cases improve the provision of
direct victim services. The proposed rule reflects this recognition,
and gives State
[[Page 52884]]
administering agencies the latitude to allow sub-recipients to use VOCA
funds for coordination activities, including supervisory coordinator
positions, supervising staff where necessary and permitted by the State
administering agency, and the support of costs to facilitate multi-
system/interagency/multi-disciplinary responses to crime victims. In
contrast to the existing guideline, this section also permits sub-
recipients to contract for professional services not available within
the sub-recipient organization, as well as for automated systems and
technology, where these contracts, systems, and technology support
delivery of direct services to victims. The proposed rule also allows
for the use of direct service funding in certain circumstances to train
direct service providers, including Court Appointed Special Advocate
(CASA) volunteers and clinical social workers. The proposed rule
clarifies that use of direct service funds for such trainings are
permissible when the funded entity provides direct services
predominantly through the use of volunteers (as opposed to paid staff).
The use of direct service funds to support training and coordination of
volunteer services in such circumstances is appropriate, as it
typically allows funded organizations to cost-effectively leverage the
available funds and volunteer efforts to provide more direct services
for victims. The rule provides examples of permissible uses within each
such category so that State administering agencies will be able to more
easily make allowability determinations by analogy. Finally, the
proposed rule allows sub-recipient direct costs to include emergency
costs of non-prescription and prescription medicine, prophylactic
treatment to prevent HIV/AIDS infection, durable medical devices and
equipment, and other health care items, if those items cannot be funded
through an alternative source within 48 hours of the crime.
Allowable Sub-recipient Administrative Costs. Section 94.119
proposes allowable sub-recipient administrative costs. These costs
should be substantively the same as those in the existing Guidelines.
Unallowable costs. Section 94.120 proposes non-allowable sub-
recipients costs. The majority of these are the same as those in the
existing Guidelines, with the following exceptions:
Perpetrator rehabilitation and counseling. The rule
prohibiting use of VOCA funds for perpetrator rehabilitation and
counseling has been modified to reflect that certain incarcerated
individuals who have perpetrated criminal acts may also have pre-
existing victim service needs unrelated to their crime, or may become
victims while incarcerated. (This is a corresponding change reflecting
the proposed rule in section 94.117 that would permit VOCA funding to
be used for victim services for incarcerated individuals where the need
for services does not directly arise from the individual's criminal
acts.) As indicated above, OVC specifically seeks comment on this
aspect of the proposed rule.
Victim attendance at conferences. The structure of the
rule should better address the concern that States are prohibited from
funding victim attendance at crime victim service related conferences.
The proposed rule would only prohibit sub-recipient organizations from
obligating and expending funds for this purpose--a State administering
agency that chooses to hold a training conference at which a victim is
invited to speak would not be prohibited from using VOCA funds to pay
for the travel costs of that individual, provided that such travel is
allowable under the State rules and the expense is counted against the
State's training and administrative set-aside.
III. Regulatory Certifications
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
605(b)), the Office for Victims of Crime has reviewed this regulation
and, by approving it, certifies that it will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The OVC
Victim Assistance Program distributes funding to States and eligible
territories pursuant to the VOCA formula, a statutory provision, which
is not affected by this regulation. The VOCA formula sets out the
allocation of grant funds among States and territories, and designates
the States and territories that will receive grant funds--the
regulation alters neither the allocation of Federal funding, nor the
designation of which entities will receive annual funding pursuant to
that allocation. Moreover, VOCA affords substantial latitude to the
States and territories in determining where to allocate the formula
funding within each jurisdiction. This rule, to the extent that it
creates certain set asides and permissible areas of emphasis for State
victim assistance programs, only applies to federally provided funding.
As a rule governing a Federal grant program to States and major U.S.
territories, the only economic impact on small entities is that of
potential financial assistance, as the rule would not apply to any
entity that was not a recipient of VOCA funding under this program.
This regulation, therefore, will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563--Regulatory Review
This regulation has been drafted and reviewed in accordance with
Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' section 1(b),
Principles of Regulation, and in accordance with Executive Order 13563
``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'' section 1(b), General
Principles of Regulation.
The Office of Justice Programs has determined that this rule is a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, section
3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review, and accordingly this rule has
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
Executive Order 13563 directs agencies to propose or adopt a
regulation only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits justify
its costs; tailor the regulation to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining the regulatory objectives; and, in choosing
among alternative regulatory approaches, select those approaches that
maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13563 recognizes that some
benefits and costs are difficult to quantify and provides that, where
appropriate and permitted by law, agencies may consider and discuss
qualitative values that are difficult or impossible to quantify,
including equity, human dignity, fairness, and distributive impacts.
The proposed rule would clarify and update the existing Guidelines,
but would not alter the existing program structure at all. Updating the
existing Guidelines to clearly and accurately reflect the statutory
parameters will facilitate State compliance with VOCA requirements, and
thus avoid potentially costly non-compliance findings. The proposed
rule would make only a few substantive changes to the existing
Guidelines, and these would be of a permissive, not mandatory, nature.
Some changes, like allowing more flexibility to coordinate and leverage
community resources, and adopt alternative monitoring strategies, would
impose no costs but will potentially allow States to use existing
funding more efficiently. Other proposed changes that allow States to
allocate funding to services not presently allowable, could change the
allocation of VOCA funding amongst victim services provided by sub-
recipient organizations, and amongst
[[Page 52885]]
victim service organizations. Such reallocations of funding, however,
are not mandated and each State and territory would make the ultimate
decision with regard to whether to change its current funding
allocations, if it chooses to do so at all. This is not a change from
the present discretion that States have to allocate funding according
to State priorities. Any potential reallocations would be relatively
minor (even when taken in aggregate across States) in comparison to the
overall mix of allowable victim services, and thus they are unlikely to
create new costs or significant fund transfers. In any event, the
benefits of additional services for underserved and un-served victims
are significant.
The proposed requirement to periodically compete subawards may
impose minimal costs associated with administering a competition at
least every five years, but these costs are outweighed by the gains in
both program effectiveness and cost efficiency that competition would
create. The proposed provision allowing alternative risk-based
monitoring procedures imposes no new costs on States that choose to
retain their existing procedures, but will allow States that wish to
implement more cost effective alternatives to do so.
The proposed elimination of match for American Indian and tribal
organizations will permit victim service organizations in these
communities, many of which do not have the resources to provide
matching funds, the ability to more easily seek VOCA funding for victim
services. This will benefit victims in these communities, many of whom
are underserved. This change is unlikely to impose new costs on States
or territories, as there is no requirement that the administering
agencies fund American Indian or tribal organizations at a particular
level, and the amount of funding allocated to these organizations is a
very small percentage of overall VOCA funding.
All of the proposed changes to the provisions governing allowable
and unallowable costs are in the nature of granting States additional
flexibility to fund certain activities. None of the changes would
require States to expend additional funding in any area, or change
funding allocations. Moreover, the changes, while important, are
relatively minor when compared to the entire scope of costs allowable
with VOCA funding. Consequently, to the extent that States choose to
fund the newly allowable victim services (e.g., increased time allowed
in transitional housing), the reallocation of funding will not result
in a significant reallocation of overall funding, given the small
number of newly allowable services when compared to the overall mix of
allowable victim services. In addition, it is not certain which States
will permit what additional services if given the flexibility to do so,
and to what extent, as these decisions typically are often made through
State legislative or administrative processes and address
considerations unique to each State. The important benefit of such
potential minor reallocations of resources, whether within
organizations that presently receive VOCA funding and will provide
augmented services, or (in the less common case) to new organization,
would be that previously underserved or un-served victims would receive
needed assistance.
Executive Order 13132--Federalism
This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government, as the relationship between the States and territories
and the national government, for purposes of this program, is set out
primarily in the statutory law, not this regulation. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order No. 13132, it is determined that this
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Executive Order 12988--Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a)
& (b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988. Pursuant to section 3(b)(1)(I)
of the Executive Order, nothing in this or any previous rule (or in any
administrative policy, directive, ruling, notice, guideline, guidance,
or writing) directly relating to the Program that is the subject of
this rule is intended to create any legal or procedural rights
enforceable against the United States, except as the same may be
contained within subpart B of part 94 of title 28 of the Code of
Federal Regulations.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100,000,000 or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. The VOCA Victim Assistance Program
is a formula grant program that provides funds to States to provide
financial support to eligible crime victim assistance programs.
Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by section 804 of the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This rule
will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or
more; a major increase in costs or prices; or significant adverse
effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or on the ability of United States-based companies to
compete with foreign-based companies in domestic and export markets.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule does not propose any new, or changes to
existing, ``collection[s] of information'' as defined by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) and its implementing
regulations at 5 CFR Part 1320. The existing collections (VOCA Victim
Assistance Grant Program State Performance Report, 1121-0115, and OVC
Subgrant Award Report, 1121-0142) have both been cleared by the Office
of Management and Budget.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 94
Administrative practice and procedure, victim assistance, formula
grant program, Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) of 1984.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 94 of
chapter I of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to
be amended as follows:
PART 94--CRIME VICTIM SERVICES
0
1. The authority citation for part 94 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 10603, 10603c, 10604(a), 10605.
0
2. Add subpart B to read as follows:
Subpart B--VOCA Victim Assistance Program
General Provisions
Sec.
94.101 Purpose; future guidance; construction and severability.
94.102 Definitions.
State Administering Agency Program Requirements
94.103 Purpose of State-level VOCA funding; State administering
agency eligibility.
94.104 Eligible crime victim assistance programs.
[[Page 52886]]
94.105 Allocation of subawards.
94.106 Reporting requirements.
94.107 Monitoring requirements.
94.108 Programmatic oversight of subawards.
94.109 Sub-recipient program income.
State Administering Agency Use of VOCA Funds for Administration and
Training
94.110 Administration and training.
94.111 Special considerations for administrative costs.
94.112 Allowable administrative costs.
94.113 Allowable training costs.
Sub-Recipient Program Requirements
94.114 Purpose of VOCA sub-awards.
94.115 Sub-recipient program requirements.
94.116 Project match requirements.
Sub-Recipient Allowable/Unallowable Costs
94.117 Direct service costs.
94.118 Other costs for activities supporting direct services.
94.119 Sub-recipient administrative costs.
94.120 Expressly non-allowable sub-recipient costs.
General Provisions
Sec. 94.101 Purpose; future guidance; construction and severability
(a) Purpose. The purpose of this subpart is to implement and
interpret the provisions of VOCA, at 42 U.S.C. 10603, which, as of the
date of this regulation, authorizes the Director to make annual grants
to the chief executive of each State and eligible territory for the
financial support of eligible crime victim assistance programs. VOCA
sets out the statutory requirements governing this financial support to
such programs, and should be read in conjunction with this regulation.
(b) Future guidance. Pursuant to VOCA at 42 U.S.C. 10604(a), the
Director may establish such rules, regulations, Guidelines, and
procedures as are necessary to carry out any function of the Director
under VOCA. Pursuant to this authority, the Director may from time to
time prescribe clarifying guidance for VOCA grant recipients and sub-
recipients on the application of these regulations.
(c) Construction and severability. Any provision of this subpart
held to be invalid or unenforceable by its terms, or as applied to any
person or circumstance, shall be construed so as to give it the maximum
effect permitted by law, unless such holding shall be one of utter
invalidity or unenforceability, in which event such provision shall be
deemed severable from this part and shall not affect the remainder
thereof or the application of such provision to other persons not
similarly situated or to other, dissimilar circumstances.
Sec. 94.102 Definitions
Crime victim or victim of crime means a person who has suffered
physical, sexual, financial, or emotional harm as a result of the
commission of a crime.
Director means the Director of OVC.
Direct services are efforts that--
(1) Respond to the emotional and physical needs of crime victims;
(2) Assist victims of crime to stabilize their lives after
victimization;
(3) Assist victims to understand and participate in the criminal
justice system; or
(4) Restore a measure of security and safety for the victim (for
example, by replacing or repairing broken windows, doors, and locks).
OVC means the Office for Victims of Crime, within the United States
Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs.
Spousal abuse includes intimate partner violence and dating
violence.
State administering agency or SAA is the governmental unit
designated by the chief executive of a State or territory to administer
VOCA funds.
Victim of child abuse means a victim of crime, where such crime
involved an act or omission considered child abuse under the law of the
jurisdiction of the relevant State administering agency. In addition,
for purposes of this program, victims of child abuse may include, but
are not limited to, victims of crime involving child physical, sexual,
or emotional abuse; victims of child pornography related offenses;
victims of child neglect; victims of commercial sexual exploitation of
children; and children who are exposed to or witness violence.
VOCA means the Victims of Crime Act of 1984, Public Law 98-473
(Oct. 12, 1984), as amended.
State Administering Agency Program Requirements
Sec. 94.103 Purpose of State-level VOCA funding; State administering
agency eligibility.
(a) Direct services. VOCA funds shall be available to the State
administering agency only for subawards to eligible crime victim
assistance programs that provide direct services to victims of crime,
unless such funds are otherwise available to the State administering
agency for training or administrative costs, or for its own direct
service programs, as allowable under this subpart.
(b) State administering agency eligibility. State administering
agencies must meet the criteria set forth in VOCA, at 42 U.S.C.
10603(a)(2). Generally, these criteria require that the chief executive
of the State or territory (or a designee, under VOCA, at 42 U.S.C.
10603(d)(5)) certify (as set out in VOCA, at 42 U.S.C. 10603(a)(2))
that--
(1) Priority will be given to programs providing assistance to
victims of sexual assault, spousal abuse, or child abuse;
(2) Funds will be made available to programs serving previously
underserved victims; and
(3) VOCA funding will not supplant State and local funds otherwise
available for crime victim assistance.
Such certifications shall be submitted annually in such form and manner
as may be specified by the Director from time to time. In making their
certifications, State administering agencies shall follow the rules
regarding priority areas, underserved victims, and non-supplantation
set out below.
(c) Pass-through administration. State administering agencies have
broad latitude in structuring their administration of VOCA funding.
VOCA funding may be administered by the State administering agency
itself, or by other means, including using pass-through entities (such
as coalitions of victim service providers) to make determinations
regarding award distribution and to administer funding. State
administering agencies that choose to use a pass-through mechanism
shall ensure that such a mechanism does not bypass the statutory
limitation on use of administrative and training funds, that reporting
of activities at the direct service level is equivalent to what would
be provided if the State administering agency were directly overseeing
sub-awards, and that an effective system of monitoring sub-awards is
used.
Sec. 94.104 Eligible crime victim assistance programs.
(a) In general. Eligible crime victim assistance programs include
those that provide services to victims of crime, and meet the
requirements of VOCA, at 42 U.S.C. 10603(b)(1)(A) through (F), as
provided in this section.
(b) Types of entities. State administering agencies may fund
subawards only to programs operated by public agencies or nonprofit
organizations (including tribal public agencies and tribal nonprofit
organizations), or by combinations thereof.
(c) Organizational capacity of the program. State administering
agencies shall require that each crime victim assistance program
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the State administering agency that
it has either a record of effective services to victims of crime and
support from non-VOCA funds, or
[[Page 52887]]
substantial financial support from non-VOCA funds.
(d) Record of effective services to victims of crime and support
from non-VOCA funds. For purposes of this section, in determining
whether a program has demonstrated a record of effective services to
victims of crime and has support from non-VOCA funds, State
administering agencies may take into account considerations such as
(but not limited to)--
(1) The support and approval of a program's services by the
community;
(2) The program's history of providing direct services in a cost-
effective manner; and
(3) Financial support from sources other than VOCA.
(e) Substantial financial support from non-VOCA funds. For purposes
of this section, a program has substantial financial support from non-
VOCA funds when at least twenty-five percent of the program's funding
in the year of, or the year preceding, the award consists of non-VOCA
funds. Substantial financial support may include support from other
Federal funding programs. A program may count the funding used to
demonstrate non-VOCA substantial financial support toward its project
match requirement, provided that this funding is non-Federal (or meets
the OJP Financial Guide exceptions for using Federal funding for
match).
(f) Project match requirement. State administering agencies shall
require that crime victim assistance programs agree to, and meet, the
project match requirements set out in Sec. 94.116, unless a program
falls under one of that section's exceptions to match, or that program
is given written approval from OVC to deviate from the match
requirements (upon a request from or with the concurrence of the State
administering agency to OVC).
(g) Mandated use of volunteers; waiver. State administering
agencies shall require that crime victim assistance programs utilize
volunteers (to the extent determined by the State administering agency)
in order to be eligible for VOCA victim assistance funds. The chief
executive of the State (who may act through the State administering
agency) may waive this requirement, provided that the program submits
written documentation of its efforts to recruit and maintain
volunteers, or otherwise demonstrate why circumstances prohibit the use
of volunteers, to the satisfaction of the chief executive.
(h) Discrimination prohibited. The VOCA non-discrimination
provisions specified at 42 U.S.C. 10604(e) shall be implemented in
accordance with 28 CFR part 42, and guidance from the Office for Civil
Rights within the Office of Justice Programs.
Sec. 94.105 Allocation of subawards.
(a) Directed allocation of forty percent overall. State
administering agencies shall set aside an overall total of forty
percent of each year's VOCA grant for subawards to eligible crime
victim assistance programs that serve priority categories of crime
victims and previously-underserved categories of crime victims, as
specified below in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, unless the
Director permits the State administering agency to deviate from all or
part of these allocations under one of the exceptions in paragraph (d)
of this section.
(b) Priority Categories of Crime Victims (thirty percent total).
State administering agencies shall allocate a minimum of ten percent of
each year's VOCA grant to each of the three categories of victims
specified in the certification requirement in VOCA, at 42 U.S.C.
10603(a)(2)(A), which, as of the date of this regulation, includes
victims of
(1) Sexual assault,
(2) Spousal abuse, and
(3) Child abuse.
(c) Previously underserved category (ten percent total). State
administering agencies shall allocate a minimum of ten percent of each
Federal fiscal year's VOCA grant to underserved victims of violent
crime, as specified in VOCA, at 42 U.S.C. 10603(a)(2)(B). To meet the
underserved requirement, State administering agencies shall identify
crime victims by the type of crime they have experienced as well as the
characteristics of the victim. These underserved victims may include,
but are not limited to, victims of Driving Under the Influence (DUI)/
Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) crashes; survivors of homicide victims;
victims of physical assault; adults molested as children; victims of
elder abuse, robbery, hate and bias crimes, kidnapping; child victims
and adult survivors of child pornography; child victims of sex
trafficking; victims of violent crime in high crime areas; and LGBTQ
victims.
(d) Exceptions to required allocations. Each State administering
agency shall allocate each Federal fiscal year's VOCA grant as
specified above, unless the Director approves a different allocation,
pursuant to a written request from the agency that demonstrates (to the
satisfaction of the Director) that--
(1) A priority category is currently receiving significant amounts
of financial assistance from the State or other sources;
(2) A smaller amount of financial assistance, or no assistance, is
needed for a particular priority category or previously underserved
victims from the VOCA victim assistance grant program; or
(3) Crime rates for a priority category do not justify the required
allocation.
(e) Mandate to compete funding to sub-recipients. Each State
administering agency shall award funds through a competitive process,
including long-term and/or ongoing projects. All subawards for victim
assistance projects funded by VOCA should be re-competed at least every
five years.
Sec. 94.106 Reporting requirements.
(a) Subgrant award reports. State administering agencies shall
submit (in such form and manner as may be specified by the Director
from time to time) a Subgrant Award Report (SAR) to OVC for each
project that receives VOCA funds, within ninety days of the subaward
date. If SAR information changes before the end of the project period,
the State administering agency shall revise and resubmit the SAR within
thirty days of the change.
(b) Performance report. State administering agencies shall submit
(in such form and manner as may be specified by the Director from time
to time) a Performance Report to OVC by the date specified by OVC. The
Performance Report shall cover the previous Federal fiscal year's
active grants.
(c) Other reports. OVC may from time to time request that State
administering agencies submit supplemental information or reports, as
it may determine to be advisable.
Sec. 94.107 Monitoring requirements.
(a) Monitoring plan. Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this
section, State administering agencies shall develop a monitoring plan
in accordance with the requirements of this section.
(b) Monitoring frequency. State administering agencies shall
conduct regular desk monitoring of all subawards. In addition, agencies
shall conduct on-site monitoring of all sub-recipients a minimum of
once every two years during the grant cycle.
(c) Recordkeeping. State administering agencies shall maintain a
copy of site visit results and other documents related to compliance.
(d) Alternative monitoring procedure. State administering agencies
may submit to OVC for approval an alternative monitoring plan that
differs
[[Page 52888]]
from that described in paragraph (a) of this section. Such monitoring
plan may use risk assessment to determine the level of scrutiny and
priority for conducting monitoring of sub-recipients. Any alternative
monitoring plan must be approved by OVC prior to implementation.
Sec. 94.108 Programmatic oversight of subawards.
State administering agencies shall ensure that VOCA sub-recipients
obligate and expend funds in accordance with Sec. Sec. 94.117 through
94.120, which set out allowable and unallowable costs under VOCA
subawards. In addition, State administering agencies shall refer to the
following rules when overseeing subawards that involve the following
entities or activities:
(a) Leasing vehicles. No State administering agency may authorize a
sub-recipient to lease vehicles using VOCA funds unless the sub-
recipient substantiates an essential need for the expenditure to
deliver services to crime victims.
(b) Faith-based and neighborhood organizations. State administering
agencies shall ensure that sub-recipients comply with all applicable
Federal rules governing use of Federal funding by faith-based and
neighborhood organizations, including 28 CFR part 38.
(c) Crime victim compensation programs. State administering
agencies may provide VOCA victim assistance funding to compensation
programs only for the purpose of providing direct services to crime
victims that extend beyond the essential duties of the staff
administering the compensation program. These services may include
crisis intervention; counseling; and providing information, referrals,
and follow-up for crime victims.
(d) Direct-service programs run by State administering agencies. A
State administering agency may use no more than ten percent of its
annual VOCA grant to operate its own program that provides direct
services to victims of crime, unless the Director approves a different
allocation in writing. The State administering agency's direct-services
program shall adhere to the allowable/unallowable cost rules in
Sec. Sec. 94.117 through 94.120. VOCA funds used under this paragraph
remain subject to the rules for State administering agency use of VOCA
funds for administration and training in VOCA, at 42 U.S.C.
10603(b)(3), and in Sec. Sec. 94.110 through 94.113.
(e) Victim service organizations located in an adjacent State.
State administering agencies may award VOCA victim assistance funds to
otherwise eligible crime victim assistance programs that are physically
located in an adjacent State. In making such awards, the State
administering agency shall--
(1) Ensure that any such award is an efficient and cost-effective
way to provide services to victims who reside in the awarding State;
(2) Ensure that the amount of the award is proportionate to the
number of victims in the awarding State that will be served by the
adjacent State program; and
(3) Enter into an interstate agreement with the adjacent State to
address provision of services, monitoring, auditing Federal funds,
overseeing compliance, and reporting.
Sec. 94.109 Sub-recipient program income.
(a) Prior authorization required. Services provided by VOCA sub-
recipients shall be provided at no charge to victims served, unless the
State administering agency grants prior authorization to the sub-
recipient to generate program income.
(b) Consideration for authorization of program income. The State
administering agency should weigh the following considerations prior to
permitting a sub-recipient to charge fees or otherwise generate program
income:
(1) The sub-recipient's justification for charging for services or
otherwise generating program income in light of the particular
project's objectives, and the overall purpose of victim assistance
programs; and
(2) The sub-recipient's ability to track program income generated
in accordance with Federal financial accounting requirements.
(c) Uses of program income. State administering agencies shall
ensure that each sub-recipients' VOCA-funded program income be
restricted to the same uses as the VOCA grant, and that the resulting
income be obligated and expended during the grant period in which the
income is generated.
State Administering Agency Use of VOCA Funds for Administration and
Training
Sec. 94.110 Administration and training.
(a) Amount. A State administering agency may not use more than the
amount prescribed by VOCA for training and administration. At the time
of this regulation, the amount was five percent of a State's annual
VOCA award.
(b) Notification. State administering agencies shall notify OVC of
their decision to use VOCA funding for administrative or training costs
at the time of application for VOCA grant funds, or within thirty days
of a decision to use such funds. Such notification shall indicate what
portion of the five percent allowance will be allocated for training
and what portion for administration.
(c) Availability. State administering agencies shall ensure that
each training and administering activity funded by the VOCA award
occurs within the project period.
(d) Documentation. State administering agencies shall maintain
sufficient records to substantiate the expenditure of administrative
and training funds.
Sec. 94.111 Special considerations for administrative costs.
(a) Proportionate allocation of costs to the VOCA grant. Any
administrative costs (e.g., equipment purchases by the State
administrative agency) charged to the VOCA award may be charged only in
proportion to the percentage of use that may be allocated to the
State's crime victim assistance program. This rule applies only to
State administering agencies, not to sub-recipients.
(b) Baseline for administrative costs. If a State administering
agency uses VOCA funds for administrative costs, it shall--
(1) Establish and document a baseline level of non-VOCA funding
required to administer the State victim assistance program prior to
expending VOCA funds for administrative costs; and
(2) Notify OVC if there is a decrease in the State's financial
commitment to the cost of administering the State's crime victim
assistance program.
(c) Non-supplantation requirement. In keeping with VOCA, at 42
U.S.C. 10603(a)(2)(C) (prohibiting supplantation of State funds with
the Federal grant), a State will be understood to have supplanted if it
decreases its previous financial commitment toward the administration
of its victim assistance program, and Federal funds are used to
maintain the baseline level of administrative funding. States will not
be in violation of the prohibition on supplanting where--
(1) A serious loss of State revenue results in across-the-board
budget restrictions, or
(2) A State decreases the number of State-supported staff positions
used to meet the State's maintenance of effort in administering the
VOCA grant program.
(d) Indirect cost rates. The State administrative agency may charge
a federally-approved indirect cost rate to this grant, provided it does
not exceed the five percent statutory cap on administrative (and
training) costs for the State administering agency.
[[Page 52889]]
Sec. 94.112 Allowable administrative costs.
State administering agencies may use VOCA funds to support
administrative costs as provided in VOCA, at 42 U.S.C. 10603(b)(3).
Only those costs directly associated with administering the State
administering agency's program and training its staff, enhancing
overall program operations, and ensuring compliance with Federal
requirements may be reimbursed with administrative grant funds. These
costs generally include the following:
(a) Salaries and benefits. Salaries and benefits for State
administering agency staff and consultants to administer and manage the
financial and programmatic aspects of the VOCA victim assistance grant.
As noted above, administrative funds may only be used to support the
portion of staff time that is devoted to the State-level VOCA
assistance program.
(b) Training. Travel, registration fees, and other expenses
associated with State administering agency staff attendance at OVC-
sponsored and other technical assistance meetings and conferences that
address issues and concerns to State administration of victim
assistance programs.
(c) Monitoring compliance. State administering agencies use of
administrative funds to monitor compliance of VOCA sub-recipients with
Federal and State requirements, provide technical assistance, and/or
evaluation and assessment of program activities, including travel,
mileage, and other associated expenses.
(d) Reporting. State activities necessary to meet Federal and State
reporting requirements concerning the VOCA victim assistance grant
program.
(e) Program evaluation. Surveys or studies that inform the grantee
of the impact or outcome of services received by crime victims.
(f) Program audit costs. State activities necessary to meet Federal
audit requirements concerning the VOCA victim assistance grant program.
(g) Technology. Including the study, design, and implementation of
grant management systems, Web page construction and maintenance,
Geographic Information Systems, and other automated systems that
further the administration of VOCA victim assistance funds; purchase
and maintenance of equipment for the State administering agency,
including computers, software, fax machines, copying machines, and TTY/
TDDs; and services required to support technology.
(h) Memberships. Memberships in crime victims organizations and the
purchase of victim-related materials such as curricula, literature, and
protocols; memberships in organizations that support the management and
administration of the VOCA victim assistance grant program are also
allowable.
(i) Strategic planning. Development of strategic plans, both
service and financial, including conducting surveys and needs
assessments.
(j) Coordination and collaboration efforts. Coordination and
collaboration efforts made on behalf of crime victims with appropriate
groups such as systems-based providers, criminal justice, victim
advocacy, human services, financial assistance (including crime victim
compensation), OJP bureaus and offices, and other appropriate Federal,
State, and local agencies and organizations.
(k) Publications. Purchasing, printing, and developing training
materials, victim services directories, brochures, and other relevant
publications.
Sec. 94.113 Allowable training costs.
State administering agencies may use VOCA funds to support training
costs as provided in VOCA, at 42 U.S.C. 10603(b)(3). Allowable training
costs generally include the following:
(a) Statewide/regional trainings. Providing statewide or regional
training of personnel providing direct assistance. Statewide or
regional training supported with training funds shall target a diverse
audience of victim service providers and allied professionals,
including VOCA funded and non-VOCA funded personnel.
(b) Training academies. Supporting State victim assistance training
academies.
Sub-Recipient Program Requirements
Sec. 94.114 Purpose of VOCA sub-awards.
VOCA funds shall be available to sub-recipients only to provide
direct services to victims of crime (unless such funds are otherwise
available to the sub-recipient for administrative or other costs as
allowable under this subpart).
Sec. 94.115 Sub-recipient program requirements.
Sub-recipients shall adhere to the following rules in undertaking
activities using VOCA funds:
(a) Use of volunteers. Sub-recipients shall use volunteers where
practicable to do so unless the chief executive of that State (who may
act through the State administering agency) waives this requirement
pursuant to Sec. 94.104(g).
(b) Promotion of community efforts to aid crime victims. Sub-
recipients shall, pursuant to VOCA, at 42 U.S.C. 10603(b)(1)(D),
promote within the community served coordinated public and private
efforts to aid crime victims. Such coordination may include, but is not
limited to, serving on Federal, State, local, or American Indian tribal
task forces, work groups, committees, commissions, or coalitions, to
develop written agreements and protocols, overseeing and recommending
improvements to community responses to crime victims.
(c) Assistance to victims in applying for compensation. Sub-
recipients shall, pursuant to VOCA, at 42 U.S.C. 10603(b)(1)(E), assist
victims in applying for crime victim compensation benefits. Such
assistance may include identifying and notifying crime victims of the
availability of compensation, assisting them with application forms and
procedures, obtaining necessary documentation, monitoring claim status,
and intervening on behalf of the victim with the crime victims'
compensation program.
(d) Compliance with State criteria. Sub-recipients shall abide by
any additional eligibility or service criteria established by the State
administering agency.
(e) Cost of services. Sub-recipients shall provide services funded
by VOCA to crime victims at no charge, unless the sub-recipient
requests (and the State administering agency provides prior approval
of) a waiver, pursuant to Sec. 94.109, allowing the sub-recipient to
generate program income. If a sub-recipient receives a waiver, any
program income shall be restricted to the same uses as the VOCA funds
and any program income shall be expended during the grant period in
which the income is generated.
Sec. 94.116 Project match requirements.
(a) Project match amount. Sub-recipients shall contribute (i.e.,
match) not less than twenty percent (cash or in-kind) of the total cost
of each VOCA-funded project, except as provided in paragraph (b) of
this section.
(b) Exceptions to project match. The following are exceptions to
the project match rules set out in this section:
(1) American Indian tribes and tribal organizations. Sub-recipients
that are federally-recognized American Indian or Alaska Native tribes,
or projects that operate on reservations of federally-recognized
tribes, are not required to contribute to the total cost of a VOCA-
funded project.
(2) Territories and possessions of the United States. Sub-
recipients that are territories or possessions of the United States
(except for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico), or projects that operate
in such a territory or possession (except for the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico) are
[[Page 52890]]
not required to contribute to the total cost of a VOCA-funded project.
(3) OVC-approved exceptions. Sub-recipients other than those listed
in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section, may deviate from the
match rules set out in this section only upon OVC approval of a written
request submitted to OVC by (or with the concurrence of) the State
administering agency.
(c) Sources of project match. Matching funds shall be derived from
non-Federal sources, except as may be provided in the OJP Financial
Guide, and may include the following:
(1) Cash. The value of direct non-Federal funding (or Federal
funds, where permitted by the OJP Financial Guide) contributed to the
project.
(2) Volunteered professional or personal services. The value placed
on volunteer services shall be consistent with the rate of compensation
paid for similar work in the sub-recipient's organization. If the
required skills are not found in the sub-recipient's organization, the
rate of compensation shall be consistent with the labor market. If
services are provided at a discounted rate, the difference between the
rate charged the sub-recipient and the rate ordinarily charged shall be
included in the valuation. Fringe benefits may be included in the
valuation.
(3) Materials/Equipment. The value placed on loaned or donated
equipment shall not exceed its fair market value.
(4) Space. The value of donated space shall not exceed the fair
rental value of comparable space as established by an independent
appraisal of comparable space and facilities in a privately-owned
building in the same locality.
(5) Non-VOCA funded victim assistance activities. Match may include
victim assistance activities (including but not limited to performing
direct victim service activities, coordinating or supervising those
activities, training victim assistance providers, or advocating for
victims) that are funded by non-VOCA and non-Federal sources,
including, but not limited to, other non-Federal Governmental funding
sources.
(d) Use of match funds. All funds designated as match are
restricted to the same uses, and timing deadlines for obligation and
expenditure, as the project's VOCA funding.
(e) Recordkeeping for match. Each sub-recipient shall maintain
records that clearly show the source, amount, and period of time for
which the match was allocated. The basis for determining the value of
personal services, materials, equipment, and space shall be documented.
Any reduction or discount provided to the sub-recipient shall be the
difference of what the sub-recipient paid from what is the provider's
nominal or fair market value for the good or service. Volunteer
services shall be substantiated by the same methods used by the sub-
recipient for its paid employees (generally, this should include
timesheets substantiating time worked on the project).
Sub-Recipient Allowable/Unallowable Costs
Sec. 94.117 Direct service costs.
(a) The following are allowable direct service costs for which sub-
recipients may use VOCA funds:
(1) Immediate physical and psychological health and safety.
Services that respond to the immediate emotional, psychological and
physical needs (excluding medical care except as allowed under
paragraph (a)(1((ix) of this section) of crime victims are allowable.
These services include, but are not limited to:
(i) Crisis intervention services;
(ii) Accompaniment to hospitals for medical examinations;
(iii) Hotline counseling;
(iv) Safety planning;
(v) Emergency food, shelter, clothing, and transportation;
(vi) Short-term (up to 45 days) in-home care and supervision
services for children and adults who remain in their own homes when the
offender/caregiver is removed;
(vii) Short-term (up to 45 days) nursing home, adult foster care,
or group home placement for adults for whom no other safe, short-term
residence is available;
(viii) Window, door, and lock replacement or repair;
(ix) Emergency costs of non-prescription and prescription medicine,
prophylactic treatment to prevent HIV/AIDS infection, durable medical
equipment (such as wheel chairs, crutches, hearing aids, eyeglasses),
and other health care items are allowed when the State's compensation
program, the victim's (or in the case of a minor child, the victim's
parent's or guardian's) health insurance plan, Medicaid, or other
health care funding source cannot provide for these expenses within 48
hours of the crime; and
(x) Emergency legal assistance such as filing restraining or
protective orders, and obtaining emergency custody orders and
visitation rights.
(2) Personal advocacy and emotional support. Personal advocacy and
emotional support services include-
(i) Working with a victim to assess the impact of the crime;
(ii) Identify needs;
(iii) Case management;
(iv) Manage practical problems created by the victimization;
(v) Identify resources;
(vi) Provide information, referrals, advocacy, and follow-up
contact for continued services, as needed; and
(vii) Traditional, cultural and/or alternative therapy/healing
(e.g., art therapy, yoga).
(3) Mental health counseling and care. Mental health counseling and
care includes out-patient therapy/counseling, including referral to
substance abuse treatment, provided by a person who meets professional
standards to provide these services in the jurisdiction in which the
care is administered.
(4) Peer support. Peer support includes activities that provide
opportunities for victims to meet other victims, share experiences, and
provide self-help, information, and emotional support.
(5) Facilitation of participation in criminal justice proceedings.
Such facilitation generally involves the provision of services and
payment of costs that help victims participate in the criminal justice
system, and includes-
(i) Advocacy on behalf of crime victims;
(ii) Accompaniment to criminal justice offices and court;
(iii) Transportation, meals, and lodging to allow victims who are
not witnesses to participate in the criminal justice system;
(iv) Interpreters for victims who are hearing-impaired, or with
limited English proficiency, when they are not witnesses;
(v) Child care and respite care to enable a victim who is a
caregiver to attend criminal justice activities related to the case;
(vi) Notification to victims regarding trial dates, case
disposition, incarceration, and parole hearings;
(vii) Assistance with victim impact statements; and
(viii) Assistance in recovering property that was retained as
evidence and projects devoted to restitution advocacy on behalf of
crime victims.
(6) Legal assistance. Costs for legal assistance services are
allowable where reasonable and where the need for such services arises
as a direct result of the victimization.
(i) Legal services (including, but not limited to, those provided
by pro bono legal clinics) that help victims assert their rights as
victims or protect their safety, privacy, or other interests, in a
criminal proceeding directly related to the victimization, are
allowable.
[[Page 52891]]
(ii) Civil legal services for victims where the need for such
services arises as a direct result of the victimization, are allowable.
(iii) The following are examples (which are merely illustrative,
and not meant to be a comprehensive listing) of some circumstances
where civil legal services may be appropriate: Protective and
restraining orders against a stalker or abuser; campus administrative
protection or stay away order proceedings; family, custody, contract,
housing, and dependency matters for victims of intimate partner
violence, child abuse, sexual assault, and elder abuse; immigration
assistance for victims of human trafficking and domestic abuse victims;
intervention with creditors, law enforcement (e.g., to obtain police
reports), and other entities on behalf of victims of identity theft and
financial fraud; intervention with administrative agencies, schools/
colleges, tribal entities, and other circumstances where legal advice
or intervention would assist in addressing the consequences of a
person's victimization.
(iv) OVC encourages State administering agencies to set reasonable
limits on the amount and duration of funding, and the types of legal
services that are provided by their sub-recipients.
(v) In general, legal services for divorce proceedings, alteration
of child support payments, criminal defense, and tort lawsuits are not
an appropriate use of VOCA funding.
(7) Forensic medical evidence collection examinations. Forensic
medical evidence collection examinations for adult and child victims
are allowable to the extent that other funding sources such as State
appropriations are insufficient. These costs may be covered if the
examination meets standards established by the State, and appropriate
crisis counseling and/or other types of victim services are offered to
the victim in conjunction with the examination.
(8) Forensic interviews. VOCA funding may be used for forensic
interviews of children and adults only when--
(i) Results of the interview will be used not only for law
enforcement and prosecution purposes, but also for identification of
needs such as social services, personal advocacy, case management,
substance abuse treatment, and mental health services;
(ii) Interviews are conducted in the context of a multidisciplinary
investigation and diagnostic team, or in a specialized setting such as
a child advocacy center;
(iii) The interviewer is trained to conduct forensic interviews
appropriate to the developmental age and abilities of children, or the
developmental, cognitive, and physical or communication disabilities
presented by adults; and
(iv) VOCA victim assistance funds are not used to supplant other
State and local public funding available for forensic interviews,
including criminal justice funding.
(9) Transportation. Transportation is allowable for victims to
receive services and to participate in criminal justice proceedings.
(10) Public awareness. Public awareness and education presentations
that are made in schools, community centers, and other public forums,
and that are designed to inform crime victims of specific rights and
services and provide or refer them to needed services and assistance
are allowable. Costs related to these activities include the
development of presentation materials, brochures, newspaper notices,
and public service announcements.
(11) Services to incarcerated individuals. Services that respond to
the needs of an incarcerated crime victim, whether arising from a
victimization occurring before or during incarceration, are allowable
where the need for such services does not directly arise from the crime
for which that individual was incarcerated. Such services may include
psychological or medical forensic services. The need for victim
assistance services does not directly arise from the crime for which a
person is incarcerated merely because that person, while incarcerated,
is victimized, even where the person is targeted and victimized for
having committed that crime.
(12) Transitional housing. The cost of transitional housing for
victims is allowable, subject to any restrictions on amount, length of
time, and eligible crimes, set by the State administering agency.
Generally, transitional housing is appropriate for victims of human
trafficking, victims with disabilities abused by caretakers, victims of
domestic violence and their dependents, and other victims who have a
particular need for transitional housing, and who cannot (or should
not) return to their previous housing situation due to the
circumstances of their victimization.
(13) Relocation. The cost of relocation of victims is allowable,
subject to any restrictions on amount, length of time, and eligible
crimes, set by the State administering agency. Generally, relocation is
appropriate where needed for the safety and well being of a victim,
particularly for domestic violence victims, victims of sexual assault,
and victims of human trafficking. Such costs must be reasonable and may
include, but are not limited to, moving expenses, security deposits on
housing, rental and mortgage assistance, and utility startup.
(b) [Reserved].
Sec. 94.118 Other costs for activities supporting direct services.
The following are other allowable victim-service-related costs for
which sub-recipients may use VOCA funds:
(a) Coordination of activities. Activities that facilitate the
provision of direct services are allowable, including but not limited
to, statewide coordination for victim notification systems, crisis
response teams, multidisciplinary teams, and other such programs. VOCA
funds may be used to support the salaries and benefits of such
coordinators.
(b) Supervision of direct service providers. VOCA funds may be used
to support the costs of supervisory staff costs in a VOCA-funded
project, when the State administering agency determines that such
supervision of direct service providers is necessary and essential to
providing direct services to crime victims.
(c) Multisystem, interagency, multidisciplinary response to crime
victims. VOCA funds may be used for activities that support a
coordinated and comprehensive response to crime victims by direct
service providers. Examples include direct service staff serving on
child and adult abuse multidisciplinary investigation and treatment
teams; coordinating with Federal agencies to provide services to
victims of Federal crimes; and/or participation on statewide or other
task forces, work groups, and committees to develop protocols,
interagency, and other working agreements.
(d) Contracts for professional services. Sub-recipients may use
VOCA funds to contract for specialized professional services that are
not available within the organization. Examples of such services
include, but are not limited to, psychological or psychiatric
consultation; legal consultation for victim advocates who assist
victims in using appropriate legal avenues to alleviate danger and in
exercising their rights as victims; and interpreters for victims who
are hearing impaired or with limited English proficiency. Sub-
recipients generally should not use VOCA funds for contracted services
that charge for administrative overhead or other indirect costs on an
hourly or daily rate.
(e) Automated systems and technology. VOCA funds may be used
[[Page 52892]]
for automated systems and technology that support delivery of direct
services to victims. Examples are automated information and referral
systems, email systems that allow communications among victim service
providers, automated case-tracking and management systems, and victim
notification systems. Costs may include personnel, hardware, and other
expenses, as determined by the State administering agency.
(f) Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) and other similar
volunteer trainings. VOCA direct service funds may be used to provide
instruction to CASA volunteers on how to be an advocate. VOCA funds may
also be used to instruct volunteers on how to provide direct services
when such services will be provided predominantly by volunteers.
Sec. 94.119 Sub-recipient administrative costs.
The following are allowable administrative costs for which sub-
recipients may use VOCA funds:
(a) Personnel costs. VOCA funds may be used to support personnel
costs that are directly related to providing direct services and other
allowable victim-related services, such as staff and coordinator
salaries and fringe benefits, including a prorated share of liability
insurance.
(b) Skills training for staff. VOCA funds designated for skills
training shall be used exclusively for developing the skills of direct
service providers, including paid staff and volunteers, so that they
are better able to offer quality services to crime victims. These VOCA
funds may be used for training both VOCA-funded and non-VOCA-funded
service providers who work within a VOCA recipient organization. VOCA
funds may be used to pay for manuals, books, videoconferencing, and
other materials and training methods.
(c) Training-related travel. VOCA funds may support costs such as
travel, meals, lodging, and registration fees for VOCA-funded direct
service staff in a VOCA sub-recipient organization. These expenses may
be funded for training in-State, regionally, and nationally.
(d) Office costs. Office costs that are necessary and essential to
providing direct services and other allowable victim services are
allowable. These costs include but are not limited to the prorated
costs of rent; utilities; local travel expenses for service providers;
and required minor building adaptations needed to meet the Department
of Justice standards implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act.
(e) Equipment and furniture. VOCA funds may be used to purchase
furniture and equipment that facilitate the delivery of direct services
to crime victims. Examples of allowable costs are telephones; Braille
and TTY/TDD equipment; computers and printers; beepers; video cameras
and recorders for documenting and reviewing interviews with children;
two-way mirrors; colposcopes; and equipment and furniture for shelters,
work spaces, victim waiting rooms, and children's play areas. VOCA
funds may support only the prorated share of an item that is not used
exclusively for victim-related activities.
(f) Operating costs. Operating costs include but are not limited
to-
(1) Supplies;
(2) Equipment use fees, when supported by adequate documentation;
(3) Prorated costs of property insurance;
(4) Printing, photocopying, and postage;
(5) Courier services;
(6) Brochures that describe available services;
(7) Books and other victim-related materials;
(8) Computer backup files/tapes and storage; and
(9) Security systems.
(g) VOCA administrative time. Administrative time spent performing
the following activities is an allowable cost-
(1) Completing VOCA-required time and attendance sheets and
programmatic documentation, reports, and statistics;
(2) Collecting and maintaining crime victims records;
(3) Conducting victim satisfaction surveys and needs assessments to
improve victim services delivery in the VOCA-funded project; and
(4) Funding the prorated share of audit costs.
(h) Leasing vehicles. Leasing vehicles, provided that the State
administering agency grants prior approval, is an allowable cost. The
sub-recipient shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the State
administering agency that the vehicle is essential to delivering
services to crime victims.
(i) Maintenance, repair, or replacement of essential items. VOCA
funds may be used for maintenance, and repair or replacement of items
that contribute to maintaining a healthy or safe environment for crime
victims, such as a furnace in a shelter. Routine maintenance, repair
costs, and automobile insurance are allowable for leased vehicles.
State administering agencies shall review each sub-recipient request to
ensure that other sources of funding are not available, and that the
cost of maintenance, repair, or replacement is reasonable.
(j) Project evaluation. Sub-recipients may use VOCA funds to
support evaluations of specific victim service projects.
Sec. 94.120 Expressly non-allowable sub-recipient costs.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this subpart, VOCA funds
shall not be used to fund or support the following:
(a) Lobbying. Lobbying or administrative advocacy activities on
legislation or administrative change to regulation or administrative
policy (cf. 18 U.S.C. 1913), whether conducted directly or indirectly,
are unallowable.
(b) Perpetrator rehabilitation and counseling. Funds may not be
used for perpetrator rehabilitation and counseling except where
directly arising from the victimization of an incarcerated individual
whose need for victim assistance services does not directly arise from
the crime for which that individual was incarcerated, or as provided in
Sec. 94.117(a)(11).
(c) Research and studies. Research and studies on crime victim
issues are an unallowable use of VOCA funds, as these funds should be
used primarily for direct services. Note: Evaluation of specific victim
service projects to determine the effectiveness of such a program is an
allowable use of VOCA funds.
(d) Criminal justice system improvement. Activities directed at
prosecuting an offender or improving the criminal justice system's
effectiveness and efficiency, except that forensic interviews and
examinations may be funded in some instances, as set forth in Sec.
94.117(a)(7) and (8).
(e) Fundraising. Any activities or other costs related to
fundraising (with the exception of fee-based, or similar, program
income as permitted by the State administering agency under these
rules).
(f) Capital expenses. Capital improvements, liability insurance on
buildings; body guards; property losses and expenses; real estate
purchases; mortgage payments; and construction, except as allowable
under Sec. 94.117(a)(1) or Sec. 94.119.
(g) Compensation for victims of crime. Reimbursement to crime
victims for expenses incurred as a result of a crime, except as
allowable property loss expenses under Sec. 94.117(1).
(h) Most medical care. Except as allowed under Sec.
94.117(a)(1)(ix).
(i) Salaries and expenses of management. Salaries, benefits, fees,
[[Page 52893]]
furniture, equipment, and other expenses of executive directors, board
members, and other administrators, except as allowable under Sec.
94.118 or Sec. 94.119.
(j) Victim attendance at conferences. The attendance of individual
crime victims at conferences.
(k) Funding other organizations. The purchase of equipment for
another organization or individual to perform a victim-related service.
(l) Purchasing vehicles. Purchasing of vehicles (as distinct from
the leasing of vehicles.
(m) Crime prevention. Crime prevention activities.
Dated: August 14, 2013.
Karol V. Mason,
Assistant Attorney General.
[FR Doc. 2013-20426 Filed 8-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-18-P