A Special Report from the

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CRIME VICTIM COMPENSATION BOARDS

Victim Compensation in America:
The State-Federal Partnership
Victim compensation in America has been a state government initiative and function from the very
beginning, starting with the first program in California in 1965. Unlike in other countries, such as GreatBritain, European Union nations, and Asian‐Pacific nations, where federal governments created and still
operate crime victim compensation programs for their entire nations, the federal government in the UnitedStates played no role at all in establishing programs to compensate victims of violence. It was not until
1984, nearly 20 years after California established the first program, and after 40 states were operating fully
funded and functioning programs, that Congress adopted the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (VOCA). It was
1986 when VOCA grants first went out to State Victim Compensation Programs.
When Congress enacted VOCA, its purpose wassimple: to provide supplemental funding tostates to ensure they could pay sufficient
benefits; to guarantee that victims of federal
crimes were covered (since there was no federal
compensation program); and to set someminimal conditions for states to qualify for
grants. That funding initially provided about 15%of the money necessary to operate each State
Compensation Program, counting both benefits
and administrative costs. Today, that amount has
doubled to about 30% of state costs forcompensating victims and running programs.

Congress’s minimal grant standards have been
met by all states for more than 40 years, andthose Congressionally‐set conditions have notchanged substantially in 20 years. In fact, theVOCA Fix Act of 2021 contained only one change
to those standards, and it was minimal: the law
lifted existing language from the 2001 OVC
Guidelines with regard to state independence inenforcing the Congressional mandate to“promote cooperation with the reasonable
requests of law enforcement,” and placed it in
the VOCA statute. That language gives states
explicit authority to meet that “promote
cooperation with law enforcement” requirement
by, in each state’s discretion, taking into accountvictims’ health and safety concerns, as well asage, and cultural and linguistic factors, andanything else the state deems appropriate. Thisis exactly the authority given to states in the 2001
Guidelines. The only other change made to VOCA
in the past 20 years came in a separate billenacted by Congress in 2022, and that simply
requires states not to foreclose filing
opportunities for victims whose forensic sexualassault exams have been delayed in processing inpolice labs.

The financial burden for victim compensation in
America always has been borne largely bystates. So has the responsibility for setting
eligibility and operational rules. In enacting clear
statutory conditions for receiving supplemental
grants, Congress gave no general rule‐making
authority to the entity created to administer
VOCA, the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC).
Congress recognized that the states already wereoperating effective programs, so state
governments remained in charge of the basic
rules regarding reporting and cooperation withlaw enforcement, filing and application
procedures, and other eligibility conditions.
1Any federal rule making done by the executive
agency charged with handling grant functions
must stay squarely within the parameters of its
statute. Without explicit authorization from
Congress, federal officials and employees are notallowed to make up their own minds about how agrant program should be run, or, in this situation,
how state governments should operate a state
program. To do otherwise would allow federal
laws to be interpreted and filtered by whatever
opinions or beliefs any Administration might
have, as carried through by its appointed agency
heads and staff, and as driven by whateverinterest groups and lobbyists are invited toprovide views. That is not the way democracy inAmerica works. Congress sets the rules in law;federal agencies administer them, creating
regulations to enforce what the statute provides.
(This well‐established approach was recently
reinforced in a U.S. Supreme Court decision, West
Virginia v. EPA.)

residents, e.g., tourists; though nearly
every state covers tourists andundocumented aliens, anyway – in fact,
there are only 3 states that do not).
5. Cover victims of federal crimes the sameas victims of State crimes, i.e., as if thecrime had occurred under Statejurisdiction.
6. Not pay benefits if a federal benefit
program would cover the cost; this last‐payer provision applies only to federal
benefit programs, not generally to private
insurance or donations, which Statesremain free to view as collateral
resources.
7. Not pay benefits to any victim who owes
federal criminal debt, fines, or restitution.
This provision is not currently active; it issuspended until the U.S. court systemestablishes a database readily accessible
to State Crime Victim Compensation
Programs.
8. Not use VOCA funds to pay for property
damage, except medical prosthetics andlocks, doors, and security devices.
9. Avoid supplanting State funds with federal
funds.
10. Use only 5% of each annual federal grant
for administrative purposes; using grant
funds for administrative costs reduces
amounts available to pay benefits.

What are the federal VOCA grant conditions
Congress placed in VOCA?
A State Crime Victim Compensation Program
must do the following ten things:
1. Offer compensation to victims andsurvivors of criminal violence, including
drunk driving and domestic violence.
2. Pay for medical care, mental healthcounseling, lost wages attributable tophysical injury, and funerals.
3. Promote victim cooperation with thereasonable requests of law enforcement
authorities. In enforcing this statutory
requirement, State Programs may, in theirown discretion, take into account thevictim’s age, psychological condition,
health, and safety, as well as cultural andlinguistic factors.
4. Cover any U.S. resident victimized within
the State, regardless of their State ofresidence. (This does not apply to non‐U.S.

Other rules and procedures are not covered in
VOCA; Congress left those to the States.
Congress also placed no requirements on thestates with regard to processing times or any
mandated outreach. (State Programs average
between 30‐90 days in processing claims; all ofthem have detailed Websites and make regular
outreach to their partners in victim services andlaw enforcement.)2State Crime Victim Compensation Program rules
shared by all states are as follows:










Application filing, with time limits
averaging 2 years, and good‐cause
waivers.
Reporting and cooperation with law
enforcement, with exceptions andwaivers, especially for victims of sexualassault, domestic violence, humantrafficking, and child abuse.
Contributory conduct, requiring a look at
criminal activity on the part of the victim
that directly causes the injury or death,and reduction and/or denial of benefits if
the victim is responsible for their own
injury or death. (Note: only 4 states look at
criminal records and have the discretion todeny if the victim has a substantial recent
violent criminal history.)
Collateral sources – last payer with regard
to public and private sources, to preserve
scarce funds for victims not covered by
Medicaid, insurance, etc.

Less than 0.5% of claims are denied for
failure to meet a filing deadline;
Less than 2% are denied for failure toreport to police, and 2.2% for lack ofcooperation with law enforcement; andLess than 1.5% are denied for criminal
activity and contributory conduct.

Data published annually by OVC shows that the
programs are effective in these ways:

Victims of domestic violence comprisenearly half of all assault claims paid.
Programs pay 19,000 applications onbehalf of families in homicides; there areapproximately 24,000 murders in the U.S.
each year.
Programs are paying $57 million annuallyto cover the costs of forensic exams insexual assaults, or nearly one‐fifth of all
costs paid.

In summary, the State‐Federal partnershipcreated by VOCA brings State Crime Victim
Compensation Programs and the U.S.
Government together to achieve a common
purpose: To help victims of violent crime in themost efficient and effective manner possible.
Congress did not set up a national crime victim
compensation program (except for victims ofinternational terrorism). Instead, it left to thestates what they were already doing and paying
for; and it provided valuable supplemental
funding to accomplish their missions.

Every state legislature enacted these into law
when the programs were created. Again, VOCA
touches on only two of then – (1) reinforcing that
States must promote cooperation with law
enforcement, with allowances for the physicaland mental health of victims, their safety, andcultural/linguistic issues, and c; and (2) that states
must not pay benefits to a victim if a federal
benefit program covers those costs.
How do these State and Federal rules impact
victims’ access to compensation?

[We should note that VOCA Compensation isentirely unlike VOCA Assistance, the other grant
program administered by OVC. VOCA Assistanceprograms are entirely federally funded, and 100%
operated under federal law and regulations.
Congress gave OVC explicit authority to set therules.]

According to OVC data submitted by the states,
these rules are extremely rare reasons fordenying or reducing claims:

3

KEY FINDINGSState Victim Compensation
Programs pay for medical andmental health costs for nearly
250,000 victims annually, as well as
funerals, lost wages and support,
relocation, forensic exams, crime‐
scene cleanup, and other expenses.

Minorities apply for compensation in
numbers twice their proportion of
the general population. For example,
African‐Americans comprise 13.5%of the U.S. population; they are 26%of the applicants for victim
compensation.

About 500,000 victims, or 10% of allviolent crime victims, sustain injuries
serious enough to warrant medical
attention, according to DOJ’s
National Crime Victimization Survey.
And close to 90% have a private
insurance source, or Medicaid or
Medicare, to cover their medical andmental health needs, so they may notneed to access victim compensation
programs. (The NCVS shows that 70%
of violent crimes are attempts, notcompleted crimes, and the majority
of completed crimes do not result ininjuries requiring medical care.)Nearly 50% of the aggravatedassault claims paid are for victims ofdomestic violence. About 19,000
claims from families of homicide
victims are paid annually (there are
24,000 murders each year in theU.S.) State Compensation Programs
now pay $60 million annually forforensic exams in sexual assault, thefourth largest expense category.

Eligibility rules in statecompensation laws do not result insignificant numbers of denials:‐‐Less than one‐half of 1% of
applications are denied for late filing‐‐Only 2% are denied for failure toreport to police; 2% are denied for
failing to cooperate‐‐About 1.5% are denied for victims’
own criminal activity causing theirinjury/death.

States fund 70% of the costs for
operating Crime Victim
Compensation Programs, including
benefits and operating expenses.
State Victim Compensation Programs
are governed by state laws and rules.
Congress sets minimal conditions for
eligibility for supplemental VOCA
grant funds; these conditions havebeen met by all states for the past 40
years. Congress did not grant OVC
any general rule‐making authority.
The VOCA Fix Act of 2021 did not change or
add any conditions, other than to confirm
the states’ existing authority to consider
victims’ health, safety, and other factors inpromoting cooperation with police.

Victim Compensation in America: The State‐Federal Partnership

FAQs: Victim Compensation in America
1. Who pays for crime victim compensation in America?
States pay for the large majority of victim compensation benefits and the administrative costsof operating a program.
While victim compensation in America is definitely a State‐Federal partnership, states pay forabout two‐thirds of the costs, and the federal government covers about 30%. States get VOCA
grants calculated at 75% of their state‐dollar payout, which they spend alongside their state
funds (not in replacement of those). This means a state spending $17.5 million a year inbenefits uses $10 million in state funds, and $7.5 million in VOCA funds – an approximate 60% ‐40% State/federal split.
Plus – States bear the entire burden of administrative costs – staff salaries and benefits, officespace, desks and computers, tech‐vendor costs, etc. These costs can add another 20‐40% tothe bill of operating a compensation program and paying benefits; meaning the real costs areapproximately 60‐75% for state funding, and 25‐40% for the federal government. Note – if astate chooses to use 5% of its VOCA grant for administrative costs, this sum must be taken fromwhat the state otherwise would spend on benefits to victims. There is no additional
administrative allowance.

2. Are large numbers of claims denied for failure to file within a specified
limit; or for not reporting to police and cooperating in an investigation of
the crime; or for the victim committing criminal acts that cause thevictim’s injury or death?
No. OVC statistics show that extremely small numbers of claims are denied for failure to meetbasic eligibility requirements.
Those OVC statistics, gathered annually from the states, show the following:Less than 0.5% of applications are denied for late filing.
Less than 1.5% of applications are denied for victims’ responsibility for the crime.
About 2% of applications are denied for non‐reporting to police, and 2% are denied for
failure to cooperate with law enforcement authorities.

In total, these factors account for about 6% of all applications to not be paid. Most programs
waive in nearly every application that doesn’t come in within a statutory timeframe, which now
averages 2 years among all States. They deny only the most obvious and worst cases when it
comes to the contributory conduct of criminals who engage in crimes that result in their own
injury or death. A substantial majority of compensation programs no longer require victims ofsexual assault, domestic violence, human trafficking or child abuse to fully cooperate with law
Victim Compensation in America: The State‐Federal Partnershipenforcement authorities; and many use alternatives to police reports to document that a crimein fact took place.

3. How effective are State Crime Victim Compensation Programs?
The answer is simple: State Crime Victim Compensation Programs are reaching a large
percentage of victims who have incurred expenses and do not have another resource, likeprivate medical insurance or Medicaid, to cover those costs.
Two basic factors determine whether a victim needs and gets compensation – (a) Did the victim
suffer an injury serious enough to require medical treatment and incur costs; and (b) Is thevictim’s expense covered by another source, like private medical insurance or Medicaid,
Medicare, and Indian Health Services?
The National Crime Victimization Survey conducted annually by the DOJ Bureau of Justice
Statistics shows that there are approximately 5 million victimizations each year, both reported
and unreported. But “63% were attempted rather than completed crimes, and even among
the completed crimes, most of the victims sustained no injury severe enough to require
medical treatment,” according to a National Institute of Justice report analyzing the data. NIJ
researchers estimated that well under 1,000,000 victims of all compensable offenses might
have an injury resulting in medical care and expenses.
And 90% of the nation’s population now has private or public medical‐insurance coverage,
according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Even considering co‐pays and deductibles, NIJ
researchers found that less than 400,000 victims would need help paying for medical care andother costs.
Taking these factors into account, it’s clear that State Crime Victim Compensation Programs arecovering a very large percentage of violent crime victims who (a) have incurred medical orother expenses; and (b) do not have another source to pay for their recovery. Crime victim
compensation programs pay on approximately 200,000 applications annually, plus another
70,000 claims for forensic rape examinations (FREs).
Simply to assert that a huge percentage of crime victims do not get compensation is misleading,since it fails to take into account the factors that go into compensating victims: first, that they
have a compensable cost, like a medical bill; and second, that they actually will be out‐of‐pocket if they do. And if the reporting‐to‐police requirement is factored in (a requirement thatstates interpret flexibly), with nearly half of the 5 million victimizations recorded by the NCVS
going unreported, we would find compensation programs are even more effective in helping
eligible victims.

Victim Compensation in America: The State‐Federal Partnership4. What about homicides, and gun violence victims?
The data is clear that State Crime Victim Compensation Programs are very effective in helping
victims of homicide and gun violence.
There are approximately 24,000 homicides in America annually, many of them the result of gun
violence. State Crime Victim Compensation Programs pay more than 19,000 applications eachyear from families whose loved ones have been murdered. Some homicides are committed bycriminals targeting other criminals, and may not be eligible, and in others, no family members
come forward. But it’s very clear that homicide victimization is one category in which State
Crime Victim Compensation Programs reach a very large percentage of the families who suffer
these tragedies.

5. Do State Compensation Programs serve victims of sexual assault anddomestic violence?
Forty‐six percent of all claims paid annually are for adult sexual assault and child sexual abuse
victims. Adult sexual assault and child sexual abuse claims are paid at the rate of $88 million
annually, which is 22% of all compensation paid in a year. Fully 14% of all compensation
payments are to cover forensic‐exam costs, making exam payment the fourth largest category
among all expense types (following medical, lost wages, and funerals). Domestic violence
victims comprise 43% of all aggravated‐assault victims receiving compensation (14% of theoverall claims‐paid).
Compensation programs and their managers, many of whom come from victim service
backgrounds, recognize that victims of domestic violence and sexual assault face challenges inreporting and cooperating with law enforcement. Many of them now accept alternatives, suchas protection orders, and forensic‐rape exams, and counselors’ confirmation in lieu oftraditional criminal justice participation.

6. What about minority access to crime victim compensation?
OVC demographic data shows that minority groups apply in numbers twice their proportionof the population.
African Americans, for example, comprise 13% of the U.S. population; their proportion of
applications nationally is 26%. This data is seen in state after state: in California, the Black
proportion of the population is 5.5%; applications from Blacks are 13.5% of the total received.
In Texas, the figures 12.3% of the population are African‐Americans, and 22.6% of the claims
are from that minority group. New York: 14.4% of the population compared to 28.7% of theclaims; Florida: 15.5% of the population, and 32% of the claims are from African‐Americans; andin Iowa, 4.1% of the population is African‐American, but they file 12.7% of the claims.

Victim Compensation in America: The State‐Federal Partnership7. Do states deny applications because a victim is an undocumented alien?
No. Fifty states treat claims from undocumented aliens like any other application.
Only 3 states deny applications if the victim is not a legal resident, and one of those (Alabama)
is under Federal court order to deny those claims. There is no statutory basis in 50 states toeven look at a victim’s legal status, and none of the states consider crossing a border illegally as
contributory conduct causing a victimization.

8. Who controls the rules for how State Crime Victim Compensation
Programs operate?
State legislatures and elected officials (e.g., governors and attorneys general).
State Crime Victim Compensation Programs operate under detailed state statutory andregulatory frameworks. These were in existence in more than 40 states well before VOCA wasenacted in 1984. VOCA did not change those laws; Congress established certain minimal
conditions that nearly every state already met, and which every state has met for more than 40
years.

9. What authorization does OVC have from Congress to set the rules forState Crime Victim Compensation Programs?
Congress did not grant OVC general rule‐making authority.
Congress set specific but minimal conditions in VOCA for State Victim Compensation Programs
to qualify for grants. These standards and parameters primarily ensure that (a) federal victims
would be covered like state victims; and (b) that U.S. residents traveling to states other thantheir own would be covered. Congress also wanted to ensure that basic components, alreadymandated by state laws, also were included for VOCA grant eligibility: coverage of medical andmental health costs; eligibility for victims of domestic violence and drunk driving; and arequirement to promote cooperation with law enforcement.
Congress left the states to determine operational rules relating to filing procedures and time
limits; reporting and cooperation with law enforcement; assessments of criminal activity
causing victimizations; and collateral resources (other than to require federal benefit programs
like Medicaid and Social Security to pay first on any expenses covered by those federal
programs.
Congress also placed no requirements on the states with regard to processing times or any
mandated outreach. States average between 30‐90 days in processing claims; all have detailed
Websites and make regular outreach to their partners in victim services and law enforcement.

Victim Compensation in America: The State‐Federal Partnership10. Has Congress added any new grant conditions since the OVC Guidelines
were last revised in 2001?
Yes. Congress took existing language in the 2001 Guidelines and placed it in the law.
Congress took existing language in the 2001 Guidelines, which gave states thediscretion to consider the victim’s age, health, safety, and cultural and linguistic
factors in the program’s obligation to promote cooperation with law enforcement,
and placed it in the statute. This is not a mandate; instead it makes statutorily
explicit what the current Guidelines already allow: complete State Program
discretion and flexibility in meeting the VOCA police‐cooperation requirement. In
other words, this is not really a change to how states operate; they’ve been
operating with this flexible language for more than two decades.
States cannot deny eligibility to a victim who files a late claim (past the filing period)
if the reason for that failure is a delay in a police lab processing a forensic‐exam kit.
Most states already would waive such claims in.

No other changes have been made in the past 22 years.

Sources:National Crime Victimization Survey, Bureau of Justice Statistics
Office for Victims of Crime, Victim Compensation Formula Grant Program Data Analysis
Report, FY 2019
Office for Victims of Crime, State Performance Management Tool Annual Summaries, FY 2020
Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, Compensating Crime Victims: A
Summary of Policies and Practice, 1992
The Kaiser Family Foundation, Key Facts About the Uninsured Population, December 2022

National Association of
Crime Victim Compensation Boards
August 2023
Victim Compensation in America: The State‐Federal Partnership