COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICES

Defender ServicesSUMMARY STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT REQUIREMENTS

Fiscal Year 2024 Assumed Appropriation 

Fiscal Year 2025 Appropriation Request  Requested Increase from Fiscal Year 2024 Assumed Appropriation 

APPROPRIATION LANGUAGECOURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICESDEFENDER SERVICES

(H.R. 4664 and S. 2309 - Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill, 2024, updated to reflect the judiciary's fiscal year 2024 assumed appropriatio For the operation of Federal Defender organizations; the compensation and reimbursement of expenses of attorneys appointed to represent persons under 18 U.SU.S.C. § 3599, and for the compensation and reimbursement of expenses of persons furnishing investigative, expert, and other services for such representations as authcompensation (in accordance with the maximums under 18 U.S.C. § 3006A) and reimbursement of expenses of attorneys appointed to assist the court in criminal cases has waived representation by counsel; the compensation and reimbursement of expenses of attorneys appointed to represent jurors in civil actions for the protection of authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1875(d)(1); the compensation and reimbursement of expenses of attorneys appointed under 18 U.S.C. § 983(b)(1) in connection with certain forfeiture proceedings; the compensation and reimbursement of travel expenses of guardians ad litem appointed under 18 U.S.C. § 4100(b); and for necessary training administrative expenses, [$1,411,116,000]$1,690,024,000, to remain available until expended.
Fiscal Year 2025 Resource Requirements:

Page 

Less:

Adjustments to Base to Maintain Current Services:

A. PERSONNELPay and Benefit Adjustments

5.27 1. Proposed 2025 pay adjustments

5.28 2. Annualization of 2024 pay adjustments5.29 5.29 4. Benefits increases

B. OTHER ADJUSTMENTSGeneral Inflationary Adjustments

5.30 

5.30 

Fiscal Year 2024 Assumed Appropriation ........................................................................................................................................

a. Federal pay adjustment (5.2% for three months) .....................................................................................................................

Fiscal Year 2024 Assumed Obligations Excluding Encumbered Carryforward ............................................................................Fiscal Year 2024 Assumed Obligations ............................................................................................................................................. Less encumbered carryforward from FY 2023 into FY 2024 ............................................................................................................. Unencumbered available carryforward from FY 2023 into FY 2024 .................................................................................................

a. Federal pay adjustment (2.0% for nine months) .....................................................................................................................b. Panel attorney capital rate adjustment (from $220 per hour to $223 per hour, effective January 1, 2025) ..............................c. Panel attorney non-capital rate adjustment (from $172 per hour to $175 per hour, effective January 1, 2025) ........................

SUMMARY OF REQUEST

DEFENDER SERVICES

FISCAL YEAR 2025

(Dollar amounts in thousands)

3. Promotions and within-grade increases .......................................................................................................................................

a. Health benefits ........................................................................................................................................................................c. Panel attorney non-capital rate adjustment (from $164 per hour to $172 per hour) .................................................................b. Panel attorney capital rate adjustment (from $210 per hour to $220 per hour) ........................................................................

5. Inflationary increases for contracts, services, supplies, and equipment ........................................................................................6. Inflationary increase in GSA space rental costs ...........................................................................................................................

b. FICA adjustment ....................................................................................................................................................................
Page 

5.305.31 8. Increase in appropriation needed to maintain FY 2024 requirements due to a decrease

C. PROGRAM CHANGES:

5.32 9. Change in positions for projected workload5.325.33 5.33 5.33 5.34 5.34 5.34 

D. FINANCING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 REQUEST:

5.35 

a. Multi-year plan requirements ..................................................................................................................................................b. Other requirements ................................................................................................................................................................

 in carryover funding .................................................................................................................................................................... Subtotal, Adjustments to Base to maintain current services ................................................................................................Total Current Services Appropriation Required .............................................................................................................................

a. Change in projected panel attorney workload .........................................................................................................................b. Restoration of FY 2024 panel attorney payment base ............................................................................................................c. Panel attorney deferred payments from FY 2024 ....................................................................................................................

7. Change in projected panel attorney requirements

Workload and Financing AdjustmentsEstimated Obligations, Fiscal Year 2025 ..........................................................................................................................................

10. Information Technology (IT), cybersecurity, and IT modernization requirements .....................................................................

Total Fiscal Year 2025 Appropriation Required ..............................................................................................................................Total Appropriation Increase, Fiscal Year 2024 Assumed to Fiscal Year 2025 .............................................................................Total Appropriation Required ...........................................................................................................................................................

17. Anticipated carryforward from FY 2024 and prior years into FY 2025 ......................................................................................

 Subtotal, Program changes .....................................................................................................................................................

14. Additional fellowship program costs ..........................................................................................................................................15. Training operations ....................................................................................................................................................................16. Reimbursable positions ..............................................................................................................................................................

a. FDO staffing formula changes ................................................................................................................................................b. National position ...................................................................................................................................................................

11. Transcript rate increase ...............................................................................................................................................................12. Coordinating discovery attorney contract ...................................................................................................................................13. Major physical infrastructure requirements ................................................................................................................................
FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025

Activity Actual Assumed Request

CJA Representation & Related Expenses Obligations 1,418,621 1,478,134 1,685,771Program Administration Obligations 17,917 21,038 24,253Direct Obligations 1,436,538 1,499,172 1,710,024Unencumbered Unobligated Balance, Start of Year (110,830) (84,066) (20,000Encumbered Unobligated Balance, Start of Year (13,476) (3,990) 0Total Unobligated Balance, Start of Year: (124,306) (88,056) (20,000Deposits and Other Adjustments:

Prior Year Recoveries (17,609) (8,000) 0Anticipated Financial Plan Savings 0 (12,000) 0Unobligated Balance, End of Year: 88,056 20,000 0

Less Offsetting Collections 0 0 0Appropriation 1,382,680 1,411,116 1,690,024

COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICES

DEFENDER SERVICES

Obligations by Activity ($000)
FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025

Actual Assumed Request

11.1 Full-time permanent 424,876 460,554 484,56811.3 Other than full-time permanent 8,446 10,259 10,66411.5 Other personnel compensation 627 710 77211.9 Personnel compensation subtotal 433,949 471,523 496,00412.1 Personnel benefits 162,788 173,897 183,30313.0 Benefits for former personnel 791 908 1,10321.0 Travel 14,699 16,059 17,37822.0 Transportation of things 280 424 44023.1 Rental payments to GSA 49,584 52,112 54,77223.2 Rental payments to others 722 1,184 1,20923.3 Communications, utilities, and miscellaneous charges 19,470 15,764 16,68024.0 Printing and reproduction 71 134 14025.0 Other Services 520,031 521,017 671,02326.0 Supplies and materials 1,833 2,162 2,25631.0 Equipment 32,252 31,977 38,43241.0 Grant payments 200,068 212,011 227,28442.0 Insurance claims and indemnities 0 0 0Direct Obligations 1,436,538 1,499,172 1,710,024

FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025

Actual Assumed Request

CJA Representation & Related Expenses1 3,287 3,358 3,435

Program Administration 10 11 11Total FTE 3,297 3,369 3,446

1 The FTE listed are attributable to Federal Public Defender Organization staff.

Activity

Description

Obligations by Budget Object Class ($000)

Full-time Equivalents (FTE) by Activity
FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025

Actual Assumed Request

Direct obligations 1,436,538 1,499,172 1,710,024Obligated balance, start of year 95,431 105,783 128,455Recoveries of prior year unpaid obligations (17,609) (8,000) (8,000)Change in uncollected payments 000Obligated balance, end of year (105,783) (128,455) (143,979)

Total Outlays 1,408,577 1,468,500 1,686,500

Less Offsets (2,076) (5,000) (5,000)

COURTS OF APPEALS, DISTRICT COURTS, AND OTHER JUDICIAL SERVICES

DEFENDER SERVICES

Relation of Obligations to Outlays ($000)

Net Outlays 1,406,501 1,463,500 1,681,500
GENERAL STATEMENT AND INFORMATION

The right to effective assistance of counsel for persons financially unable to obtain adequate representation is constitutionally

mandated. It is a critical component of the criminal justice system and a foundation of liberty in America. The Defender Services 

appropriation supports the appointment of counsel and other related services required to be provided under the United States 

Constitution; the Criminal Justice Act (CJA), 18 U.S.C. § 3006A; and other statutes. It also provides for the continuing education and 

training of persons who furnish representational services under the CJA. 

The constitutional right to the assistance of counsel is a cornerstone of the criminal justice system. In Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 

335, 344 (1963), the United States Supreme Court wrote: “The right of one charged with [a] crime to counsel may not be deemed 

fundamental and essential to fair trials in some countries, but it is in ours.” The mission of the Defender Services program is to ensure 

that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel is available to those who cannot afford to retain counsel and other necessary defense 

services.

The goals of the Defender Services program are to: 

1. provide timely counsel services to all eligible persons;

2. provide appointed counsel services consistent with the best practices of the legal profession;

3. provide cost-effective services; and

4. protect the independence of the defense function performed by appointed counsel so that the rights of individual defendants are

safeguarded and enforced.

By fulfilling its mission, the Defender Services program helps to: 

• ensure the successful operation of the constitutionally based adversarial system of justice by which both federal criminal laws

and federally guaranteed rights are enforced; and

• maintain public confidence in the nation’s commitment to equal justice under law.

The Defender Services account funds the operations of federal defender organizations (FDOs), payments to private attorneys

appointed under the CJA, and program administration costs. The fiscal year (FY) 2025 appropriation request of $1,690.0 million will

enable FDOs and private attorneys to accept CJA appointments; retain necessary expert services; and undertake case-related travel. 

5.7
The FY 2025 request will support: 

• 238 additional FDO staffing formula positions (the equivalent of 95% of full formula requirements under the most recent

federal defender staffing formulas);

• major physical infrastructure requirements;

• information technology (IT) requirements, including cybersecurity and IT infrastructure modernization;

• additional training;

• transcript rate increases;

• an additional coordinating discovery attorney contract;

• additional fellowship program costs; and

• three additional reimbursable positions (Administrative Office (AO) positions funded through the Defender Services

appropriation).

TYPES OF COUNSEL

The CJA authorizes the appointment of counsel, who are: 

• attorneys employed by an FDO, or

• private attorneys appointed to represent clients (these private attorneys are known as “panel attorneys”). Each is described

below.

Federal Defender Organizations 

The CJA authorizes two types of FDOs: 

• federal public defender organizations (FPDOs), which are part of the judiciary; and

• community defender organizations (CDOs), which are private, state-chartered, non-profit corporations funded by annual

federal judiciary grants.

An FDO (whether an FPDO or a CDO) may be established in any district (or combination of districts) in which at least 200 CJA 

appointments are made annually. There are 82 FDOs authorized to serve 92 of the 94 judicial districts. Until recently, the District of 

the Northern Mariana Islands was one of three districts not served by an FDO (the remaining two are the Eastern District of Kentucky 

5.8
and the Southern District of Georgia who meet the requisite number of appointments but have chosen not to establish an FDO). On

August 23, 2023, the Ninth Circuit Judicial Council approved amended CJA plans for the District of Guam and the District of the 

Northern Mariana Islands (NMI).

1

 Both plans recognize the establishment of a combined-district FPDO serving both districts and 

managed by one federal public defender.2 

FDOs are the flagship of federal criminal defense, delivering high-quality representation at reasonable costs while safeguarding the 

rights of individuals under the Constitution. They recruit, train, and retain lawyers with skills comparable to those who prosecute 

criminal matters in U.S. Attorney’s Offices (USAOs). Because of their expertise and efficiencies, FDOs provide cost-effective 

defense services consistent with the best practices of the legal profession. 

FDO attorneys are available for appointment on short notice, ensuring that the rights of the accused are protected and that court 

operations are not disrupted. FDOs also optimize national resources by sharing their expertise and best practices with other FDOs and 

panel attorneys. 

FDO staff improve the overall quality of CJA representation within the districts they serve by providing expert advice, training, and 

other assistance to panel attorneys in complex legal and technical areas, such as sentencing, mitigation, litigation support, and cases 

involving death penalty issues. 

Panel Attorneys

A panel attorney is a private lawyer who serves on a panel of qualified counsel maintained by the district or appellate court and is 

appointed by the court to represent eligible individuals under the CJA. The CJA specifies that in all judicial districts (including those 

served by an FDO), private attorneys shall be appointed “in a substantial proportion of the cases.” 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(3). 

1

The amended CJA plans are in effect and the Guam FPDO is available to take NMI cases and assist NMI panel attorneys. The Administrative Office plans to 

submit Congressional notification for the establishment of the combined-district FPDO and the opening of the physical office in Saipan in the spring of 2024. 

The Defender Services Committee will then approve a budget for the district. Both of these actions will be completed before a physical office is opened on the 

Island of Saipan in the Northern Mariana Islands. 2

The CJA provides that when a district, such as the District of the Northern Mariana Islands, does not meet the statutorily required 200 or more persons needing 

appointment each year, two adjacent districts may aggregate the number of persons required to be represented to establish eligibility for an FDO to serve both 

areas. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(g)(1).

5.9
Panel attorneys are also utilized for three primary reasons. 

(1) Ethical standards prohibit appointing FDOs in conflict-of-interest situations (e.g., an FDO is precluded from representing more

than one defendant in a multi-defendant case and is disqualified from accepting a new appointment that may present a conflict

with the interests of represented clients).

(2) The workload demands in some FDOs periodically limit the ability of that FDO to accept new representations and

maintain professional ethical standards.

(3) The district is not served by an FDO.

The CJA provides these attorneys shall be reimbursed for their expenses and compensated for their services at authorized hourly rates. 

There are many factors which influence panel attorney representation costs, such as the increased complexity of federal cases, 

electronic discovery (e-discovery), and high rates of pretrial detention. 

CJA CASELOAD AND WORKLOAD TRENDS 

Attorneys appointed under the CJA (FDO and private panel attorneys) provide constitutionally required defense services in a wide 

variety of complex criminal cases, such as international and domestic terrorism; cybercrime; child exploitation and obscenity; 

complex fraud cases (health care, identity theft, public corruption, and bank and investment fraud); environmental crimes; drug cases; 

immigration matters; human trafficking; and all other federal crimes. 

To determine FY 2025 FDO staffing requirements, a three-year statistical average is used that includes actual caseload data from 2022 

and 2023 and projected caseload for 2024.3

 As shown in the following chart, FDO weighted representations4 increased significantly 

between statistical years5 (SYs) 2017 and 2019 and remained at a high level in 2020. Caseload totals briefly fell off historical trends 

3

FDO workload forecasts, as with all other judiciary workload projections, are prepared by the AO’s’ Judiciary Data and Analysis Office. 4

Since FY 2016, the Defender Services program has used a comprehensive set of staffing formulas to determine FDO staffing requirements. Instead of using 

raw, or unweighted case numbers, the formula uses a three-statistical-year average of FDO weighted representations to calculate the number of positions for each 

office. The FDO staffing formulas were revised for FY 2024 as part of a periodic review. For a discussion on FDO’s refreshed staffing formulas, see Updated 

FDO Staffing Formulas on pages 5.15 – 5.16. 5

An FDO statistical year runs from April 1 through March 31, with most months taking place in the preceding calendar year. For example, statistical year 2020 

ran from April 1, 2019, through March 31, 2020. 

5.10
because of the COVID-19 pandemic, captured in the significantly lower weighted representation count in statistical year (SY) 2021.6

 

However, data for 2022 and 2023 suggest a new equilibrium that is also captured in the forecasted totals for 2024. 

FDO Weighted Representations by Statistical Year

Workload Factor 

2017

Actual

2018

Actual

2019

Actual

2020

Actual

2021

Actual

2022

Actual

2023

Actual

2024

Projected

2025

Projected

FDO Weighted 

Representations – Non-capital 131,024 142,750 152,496 151,025 116,721 130,062 127,152 129,350 136,400 

FDO Weighted 

Representations – Capital 

Prosecution

2,752 2,101 1,174 1,019 663 1,019 918 1,000 1,000 

Total FDO Weighted 

Representations 133,776 144,851 153,670 152,044 117,384 131,081 128,070 130,350 137,400 

Year-to-Year Change 8.3% 6.1% -1.1% -22.8% 11.7% -2.3% 1.8% 5.4%

Changes in technology, legislation, sentencing policy, and case law all add to the challenge of providing representation to eligible 

individuals in federal courts. The Defender Services program must respond to changes in case law, such as those resulting from 

Supreme Court decisions, changes in the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, statutory changes, and federal law enforcement priority 

initiatives such as the ongoing opioid crisis, violent crimes, and pandemic fraud. 

A specific example of how federal law enforcement priorities impact resource requirements in the Defender Services program is the 

cases stemming from the events of January 6, 2021, at the United States Capitol, which resulted in the largest federal prosecution in 

the nation’s history, both in the number of defendants prosecuted and the volume of the evidence. There are defendants in every 

federal circuit and from over 40 states. The United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia reports that more than 1,140 

individuals across the nation have faced criminal charges, ranging from trespass and theft to assault on a federal law enforcement 

officer and conspiracy.7

 The Federal Public Defender for the District of Columbia reports that most of the defendants have relied on 

FDOs or CJA panel attorneys for their defense.

6

The COVID-related nationwide shutdowns coincide very closely with the start of statistical year 2021 (The final month of SY 2020 was March 2020, when 

many closures took place). 

7

U.S. Department of Justice. Capitol Breach Cases. District of Columbia | Capitol Breach Cases | United States Department of Justice Accessed January 31, 2024.

5.11
The prosecutions continue to involve an unprecedented volume of electronically stored information (ESI), including thousands of 

hours of surveillance and body-worn camera footage, data from hundreds of smartphones and social media as well as from 

overlapping layers of law enforcement investigations. Individuals who have been charged from these events have been arrested all 

over the United States, and many are being represented by their local FDOs or CJA panels before and even after their transfer to the 

U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. There are far too many cases for the District of Columbia FDO and local panel to 

support so the lawyers appointed in the locations where the defendants were arrested frequently will continue to provide 

representation. More than half of the defendants charged thus far have resolved their cases; however, more than 370 cases (both 

single and multidefendant) are still pending. These cases will likely be similarly geographically dispersed and continue to require 

resources from CJA counsel from around the country in 2024 and beyond. 

In 2023, the United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) submitted amendments to the federal sentencing guidelines, including 

Amendment 821, which took effect on November 1, 2023. Amendment 821 affects a client’s Criminal History by giving retroactive 

effect to Part A and subpart 1 of Part B. In its July 2023 Impact Analysis, the USSC estimated that retroactive application could have 

a meaningful impact for over 18,700 individuals who are incarcerated and will have a lower sentencing range. Additional individuals 

may also require counsel, and nearly all potentially eligible individuals are incarcerated and qualify for appointed counsel. 

Historically, FDOs have litigated the vast majority of retroactive sentencing guidelines cases, opening thousands of cases in the 

respective statistical years, and creating increases in the national totals for those years. In response to these recent amendments, in 

November and December 2023, FDOs opened approximately 6,000 Sentencing Guidelines Retroactivity (SGR) cases, and thousands 

more are expected in the coming months. Many districts have standing orders appointing FDOs to all such cases. These new SGR 

cases, together with the January 6th cases, are illustrative of how the Defender Services program is reactive to the prosecutorial 

initiatives and changes in legislation and/or sentencing guidelines, which can require substantial FDO staff time and resources. 

Federal defender organizations nationwide face significant challenges in managing existing caseloads. With the inflow of new SGR 

cases and the continued representation required for data intensive, complex cases such as the January 6th cases driven by the wellequipped USAOs and other investigative agencies, FDOs will need to redirect limited resources absent additional support. As a result, 

the quality of representation for those most in need will be at risk. Given these challenges, it is imperative that the Defender Services 

program be funded at the requested level. 

5.12
The chart below summarizes the number of panel attorney representations in which panel attorneys were or are projected to be paid.8

 

Like the FDOs, panel attorney representations were increasing before SY 2021 but decreased due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The 

slowdown in prosecutions related to COVID-19, combined with a decline in immigration prosecutions, resulted in a decrease in the 

number of panel attorney representations in the years following 2020. To determine FY 2025 panel attorney requirements, SY 2025 

projected workload was used (70,100 representations). 

Panel Attorney Representations by Statistical Year

Workload Factor 2017

Actual

2018

Actual

2019

Actual

2020

Actual

2021

Actual

2022

Actual

2023

Actual

2024

Projected

2025

Projected

Panel Attorney 

Representations 79,352 77,130 89,079 93,189 64,326 62,866 62,970 67,900 70,100 

Year-to-Year Change -2.8% 15.5% 4.6% -31.0% -2.3% 0.2% 7.8% 3.2%

The following chart reflects panel attorney representations and payments by fiscal year. Panel attorney payments increased by $27.2 

million (6.6 percent) from $414.2 million in FY 2022 to $441.4 million in FY 2023. Total panel attorney representations increased by 

2,471 (4.1 percent) from 60,739 in FY 2022 to 63,210 in FY 2023. 

It is informative to compare changes in payments to changes in representations. Most offense types remained relatively stable from 

FY 2022 to 2023 except for immigration cases which increased by 2,990 (44.2 percent). This change largely explains the overall 

FY 2023 representations increase. 

In FY 2023, the $27.2 million increase in panel attorney payments is mostly due to immigration (total representations increased by 

2,990, and costs by $6.0 million) and the change in the cost per representation for several other major non-capital case categories:

8

CJA Panel representations are based on vouchers paid during the 12-month period. If no voucher was paid, no representation is counted. The judiciary relies on 

a forecast of unweighted representations for estimating the panel attorney portion of the appropriation request. This projection is based on one representation for 

each case, regardless of the case type. 

5.13
drugs and weapons each increased by approximately $800 (from $7,900 to $8,700 for drugs and from $7,700 to $8,500 for weapons) 

and fraud increased by $1,700 (from $10,700 to $12,400). 

Offense Type FY 2022 Reps FY 2022 Payments

($ in millions) FY 2023 Reps FY 2023 Payments($ in millions)

Capital Prosecutions 647 $40.0 594 $38.3

Drugs 18,119 $143.5 17,534 $153.9

Immigration 6,761 $18.6 9,751 $24.6

Fraud 2.777 $29.6 2,833 $35.4

Weapons 4,784 $36.4 4,702 $40.0

Capital Habeas 284 $12.2 280 $12.2

Appeals 4,184 $28.0 4,334 $29.5

Criminal-Other 23,183 $105.9 23,182 $107.5

Total 60,739 $414.2 63,210 $441.4

In accordance with the anticipated employment cost index (ECI) increase, FY 2025 panel attorney hourly non-capital and capital rates 

are projected to increase from $172 to $175 and $220 to $223, respectively.

FISCAL YEAR 2024 APPROPRIATIONS

The judiciary built the FY 2025 budget request for the Defender Services appropriation on the FY 2024 assumed House mark, which 

is $1,411.1 million. For bill language, the judiciary used the language from H.R. 4664 and S. 2309 - Financial Services and General 

Government appropriations bill, 2024, which are identical, as the closest approximation of the eventual enacted FY 2024 

appropriations language, updated with the assumed level as described above. 

The assumed FY 2024 Defender Services funding level is $94.7 million below the judiciary’s FY 2024 appeal ($1,505.8 million). The 

following FY 2024 requirements are assumed not funded: $40.4 million in FDO staffing (assumes 92.5% of the new staffing formula 

is funded), $40.3 million in panel attorney payments that have been deferred to FY 2025, $11.5 million in information technology and 

cybersecurity needs, $2.2 million in training enhancements, and $0.3 million for three Defender Services Office reimbursable 

positions. 

5.14
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 

Impact of No-Year Funds and Carryforward Balance on the FY 2025 Request 

The judiciary has been able to reduce its Defender Services appropriation request using unobligated no-year funds carried forward in 

this account from prior fiscal years. In FY 2024, $84.1 million in prior year unobligated balances were used to finance the FY 2024 

requirements. This level of carryforward into FY 2024 was greater than first projected due in large part to the emergency cost-savings 

measures the judiciary initiated in July 2023 in response to low FY 2024 congressional marks from both the House and Senate 

appropriations committees. While helpful to supporting FY 2024 requirements, this larger carryforward must be replaced by 

appropriated funds in FY 2025 in order to sustain the obligations that were supported by one-time carryforward funds in FY 2024. 

This necessity to address the changing carryforward level is a major driver behind this account’s proposed 19.8 percent appropriation 

increase from FY 2024 into FY 2025. 

The judiciary is very appreciative of the Congress’s support of the Defender Services’ program, in particular its understanding of the 

impact carryforward has on the need for appropriated funds from one year to the next. 

In developing the FY 2025 request, the judiciary assumes $20 million will carry forward from FY 2024 and prior years into FY 2025 

and be available to finance FY 2025 requirements. Because the judiciary anticipates having less in carryforward funding available in 

FY 2025, it is imperative that $64.1 million in funding to substitute direct appropriations for base expenses previously funded from 

carryforward balances be restored. 

Without adequate funding, the Defender Services program could face catastrophic layoffs, unpaid furloughs, or panel attorney 

payment deferments that could seriously damage the federal criminal system and the clients served. The judiciary will advise 

appropriations subcommittee staff of any changes to this estimate. 

Updated FDO Staffing Formulas 

In March 2023, a work measurement study was completed that identified issues with the existing estimation of FDO staffing 

requirements and recommended important updates. By September 2023, the FDO staffing formulas were updated to estimate staffing 

5.15
requirements more accurately in budget requests, support containment of costs, and ensure an equitable distribution of resources 

among the judiciary’s different offices and locations. 

The new FDO staffing formulas incorporate several improvements such as: 

• use of a consistent timeframe for workload drivers across formulas (three-statistical-year average); 

• use of a new module to calculate panel management requirements for FDOs with those responsibilities; and

• use of a new module to calculate organizational and IT support requirements separately from operational/legal work. 

Additionally, for offices that would otherwise grow or shrink by more than a threshold amount of staffing due to the new formulas, the 

new formulas will be phased in over FYs 2024 and 2025. Finally, the Northern and Eastern Districts of Oklahoma are currently 

excluded from the new formulas due to the unique workload conditions in those two districts resulting from the Supreme Court’s 2020 

decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma. 

Using the newly implemented formulas, the FY 2025 budget requests 238 additional FDO positions. Of the 238 positions, 237 are 

formula generated positions (176 are for FPDOs and 61 are for CDOs). This represents 95% of full formula requirements as calculated 

by the updated formulas. In addition, there is one new national position based on the National Information Technology Operations 

and Applications Development (NITOAD) branch formula. These staffing increases are needed to ensure that federal defender 

organizations meet their constitutional mandate to provide effective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment. 

Major Physical Infrastructure Requirements 

All FDOs must obtain the AO’s Defender Services Office (DSO) approval to acquire office space. In addition, FPDOs must also 

obtain approval for space from their respective circuit judicial council. After the FPDO obtains approval from the DSO and the 

appropriate circuit judicial council, the process to obtain the approved space begins. FPDOs are required to use the General Services 

Administration (GSA) as their leasing agent for all space procurements. GSA conducts a competitive process to select space, 

negotiates terms with the lessor and is party to the rental contract. Two large FPDOs have leases expiring within the near-term budget 

window (Los Angeles, CA and Las Vegas, NV). GSA initiates work on lease renewals three years prior to expiration of current 

leases. 

Due to building management and infrastructure issues, it is anticipated that both FPDOs will move to new buildings during the lease 

procurement process. The Ninth Circuit Assistant Circuit Executive for Space and Facilities and GSA are assisting with the planning 

5.16
for these projects. GSA is currently in the process of assigning staff to work on these projects. Once assigned, formal project 

initiation will begin including verifying the requirements; then project execution will begin. 

When moving to new space, a significant portion of the expense to configure or build out the space must be paid to GSA via a 

reimbursable work authorization (RWA) before GSA will sign a lease with a property owner. The FY 2025 request includes $16.8 

million for half of the current GSA estimated costs for two major projects. The RWA requirements in this request are estimates; the 

actual amount will not be known until finalized by GSA. The funding created by this request will then be used in future fiscal years to 

fund the remainder of these two projects and establish a base amount for future build-out projects. 

Additional information about both projects is provided below: 

Central District of California – Los Angeles, CA 

The Los Angeles staff for the FPDO in the Central District of California are currently housed in two separate buildings located across 

the street from each other, four blocks from the United States courthouse. FPDO management has reported multiple issues with the 

current buildings that appear to be related to the age of the structures and lack of maintenance and upkeep by building management, 

including major HVAC issues, window leaks, and plumbing issues. 

The two leases are due to expire in December of 2026 and April of 2027. Together the two buildings house 189 staff. Workload 

projections for FY 2024 estimate a need for 226 staff. Leases for the current two buildings cover a total of 66,981 useable square feet 

(USF). The new space procurement will be reduced to 57,558 USF, with plans to make use of modern efficiencies and workplace 

changes, including reduced space for the office library and paper files storage. GSA will attempt to find space for the entire staff in a 

single building. 

After amortizing the maximum amount of build-out costs allowed, GSA estimates a total RWA of $21.1 million for build-out of the 

interior office space once a new location has been identified. This is based on a rough order of magnitude estimate that GSA uses 

prior to selection of the exact building. 

District of Nevada – Las Vegas, NV

FPDO management has reported multiple building issues including long term elevator outages, building leaks, and lack of support 

from the lessor. GSA has sent multiple lease deficiency letters to the lessor, but problems remain. 

5.17
The Las Vegas lease for the FPDO in the District of Nevada is due to expire in August of 2025. A short extension will likely be 

needed to facilitate a lease procurement. The Las Vegas FPDO location currently has 114 staff. The current lease for the FPDO space 

is 40,353 USF. The new space procurement will be reduced slightly to 39,618 USF by making use of modern efficiencies and 

workplace changes. After amortizing the maximum amount of build-out costs allowed, GSA is estimating a total RWA of $12.4 

million for build-out of the interior office space once a new location has been identified. This is based on a rough order of magnitude 

estimate that GSA uses prior to selection of the exact building.

Information Technology, Cybersecurity, and IT Modernization Requirements 

Consistent with the rest of the judiciary, the Defender Services program is implementing a multi-year initiative for comprehensive 

system modernization and IT services and security improvements. This plan, which covers FYs 2022-2027, has been submitted to 

Congress and the resources associated with each year of the plan are included in the judiciary’s annual budget requests. 

Multi-year Plan Requirements ($12.8 million) 

As shown in the chart below, this request assumes that there is $12.5 million in the FY 2024 base for ongoing costs associated with IT 

multi-year infrastructure requirements and requests an additional $12.8 million in FY 2025, for a total of $25.3 million. 

Defender Services, Multi-year Infrastructure Plan Requirements, $25.3 million ($ in millions)

Base Funding Dollars ($) FY 2025 Request Dollars ($) Total in FY 2025 

Request

FY 2022 Approved $4.5 FY 2024 (assumed not funded) $9.9

FY 2023 Approved $8.0 FY 2025 New Request $2.9

FY 2025 Base $12.5 FY 2025 Additional Request $12.8 $25.3

5.18
FY 2025 Portion of the Multi-year Plan ($2.85 million) 

$2.85 million is requested to fund the Defender Services’ FY 2025 portion of the judiciary’s cybersecurity and IT modernization plan, 

including $1.40 million for web contract support to continue to implement and maintain the two-phase design and implementation 

SharePoint9

 plan. SharePoint sites allow for collaboration between FDO groups and other judiciary entities (e.g., among assistant 

federal defenders, paralegals, investigators, computer systems administrators, and DSO and other AO staff). 

In addition, this request includes $1.31 million to expand the contract for managed security services for FDOs which will enable the 

current managed security operations center (SOC) to provide 24/7 monitoring of additional portions of the network, including cloud 

security logs, and $0.14 million for a commercial public key infrastructure10 to improve judiciary network security by enabling FDO 

users to positively identify the security of FDO applications. 

FY 2024 Multi-year Plan Requirements Assumed Unfunded ($9.9 million) 

The $9.9 million FY 2024 multi-year plan requirements assumed unfunded will support critical requirements in several areas ($4.6 

million for the Defender Wide Area Network (DWAN), $4.6 million for data security, and $0.7 million for a security controls 

assessment). The request includes $4.6 million to modernize the current DWAN infrastructure including virtual private network 

(VPN) remote access used by FDO staff. Of this $4.6 million, $3.3 million will allow Defender Services to engage industry experts to 

help design and implement a modern DWAN structure which will serve as a foundation for improved security controls. Additionally, 

the modern network will improve connectivity to FDO cloud services, such as Office 365, by establishing a private connection which 

can be used to limit access from the public internet. This will help security teams to better identify connections from legitimate FDO 

sources and monitor for suspicious activity. The request also includes $0.8 million to improve the current secure remote access 

solution used by FDO staff and extend it to FDO cloud resources. Ensuring a secure, encrypted connection to both the DWAN and 

FDO cloud data will help protect the confidentiality and integrity of sensitive information. Lastly, $0.5 million will be used to renew 

software and support licensing for all firewall security devices used by every FDO office. These firewall devices provide insight to 

and control of network traffic traversing the DWAN. 

9

SharePoint is a web-based collaborative platform that integrates with Microsoft 365. It is primarily a document management and storage system. 10A public key infrastructure is a system for the creation, storage, and distribution of digital certificates which are used to verify that a particular public key 

belongs to a certain entity.

5.19
The request also includes $4.6 million for data security management and improvement, including $2.5 million to allow Defender 

Services to seek a new backup solution--to replace a backup solution purchased in 2010--that can better protect sensitive data from 

security threats such as ransomware. The remaining $2.1 million requested will help Defender Services upgrade its server and 

database software systems. The current version of the database software has memory limitations which are quickly being approached 

as the amount of FDO data grows. Upgrading to the enterprise editions of the software will remove these limitations and ensure 

proper security logs for analysis and review. 

Finally, the request includes $0.7 million to engage outside security experts to assess the security controls currently implemented and 

recommend any changes or remediations based on the findings. This evaluation will include both the internal network and national 

FDO cloud applications, such as Office 365. As the FDOs move more services and data to the cloud, it is critical that the security 

controls configured on cloud services are consistent with judiciary standards and practices. 

Other IT Requirements ($5.2 million) 

A total of $5.2 million is requested for other IT requirements beyond the scope of the multi-year cybersecurity and modernization 

plan. Of this total, $3.7 million is a new request, and the remaining $1.5 million is the FY 2024 amount assumed unfunded. 

FY 2025 Other IT Requirements ($3.7 million) 

Of the $3.7 million, $0.5 million is for a contract to improve the availability and reporting on Defender Services programmatic data 

using the judiciary’s Enterprise Data Warehouse (EDW). The project has successfully integrated multiple systems and enabled better 

tracking of FDO spending, staffing and financial projections. Funding is requested to support ongoing operations and maintenance, 

and continued development and enhancements. 

In addition, $3.2 million for other IT projects includes: 

• $0.5 million for automated optical character reader (OCR) processing software, courtroom presentation software and digital 

forensic tools; 

• $0.3 million for an update of the RAND corporation studies to develop and analyze FDO case weights; 

• $0.7 million for cybersecurity projects related to cloud storage backup; 

• $0.7 million for national log and event management tools; 

5.20
• $0.5 million to support a contract to allow for a secure, private FDO connection to cloud services when transferring electronic 

discovery through cloud file storage services over unsecure public internet connections; and 

• $0.5 million is for software and services to maintain knowledge on emerging technology research to promote best practices 

regarding implementation of new technologies, and for additional costs for the computer-assisted legal research (CALR) 

contract renewal. 

FY 2024 Other IT Requirements Assumed Unfunded ($1.5 million) 

This $1.5 million increase includes: 

• $1.0 million for the Defender Services Data Management System which is used to collect and integrate data from multiple 

sources into a single database for various uses; 

• $0.3 million for a secondary investigative database tool for FDOs to verify and cross-check LexisNexis Accurint information, 

which would result in more comprehensive and accurate investigations; 

• $0.1 million for a body-worn camera footage management system, which would provide software and hosting services 

comparable to the Department of Justice (DOJ), and would assist FDOs in sorting, reviewing, and tagging video files while 

reviewing these voluminous recordings; and 

• $0.1 million for contract management requirements.

5.21
COST CONTAINMENT INITIATIVES

The judiciary has implemented various cost-containment initiatives across the Defender Services program to reduce costs, where 

appropriate, without compromising its constitutional mandate. Funding decisions balance a keen awareness of the federal budget 

challenges, the need for continuous assessment of existing and potential cost-containment measures across the Defender Services 

program, and the dedication to supporting effective representation by FDOs and CJA panel attorneys. Key cost-containment 

initiatives include, but are not limited to: 

• promoting the use of case budgeting to control expenditures in capital and other high-cost CJA panel attorney representations; 

• identifying more cost-effective means of handling increasingly large and complex discovery in CJA representations; 

• improving DOJ procedures related to death-eligible cases;

• providing robust distance learning; and

• coordinating with other judiciary and DOJ components regarding remote detention of pretrial detainees. 

Case Budgeting of CJA Panel Attorney Representations 

Defender Services funding continues to support 11 circuit case-budgeting attorney positions. These attorneys are assigned to federal 

judicial circuits across the country and identify cost drivers, monitor case expenditures, assist the courts and CJA panel attorneys with 

individual case budgeting and voucher review, and, in line with the Defender Services program’s goals, promote representation 

consistent with the best practices of the legal profession. 

Discovery Costs 

Each year, the data associated with individual CJA representations expands in size and complexity. There are several critical issues 

defense counsel must address to adequately manage and review e-discovery, including the large volume of information, the variety of 

sources from a multitude of digital devices and locations, proprietary formats, hidden information such as metadata and embedded 

data, and software and hardware limitations.

Federal defenders and panel attorneys require litigation resources, including national staff, to meet the challenge presented by DOJ’s 

e-discovery and litigation support capabilities. Even in “simple,” single defendant prosecutions, discovery includes ESI or ediscovery extracted from client mobile devices and computers. Law enforcement officers review social media sites, like Facebook, 

Instagram, and X (formerly known as Twitter), to capture possible incriminating materials. Video discovery is common and may 

5.22
include months of pole-camera recordings, business security videos, and hours of concealed camera footage. Additional discovery 

may include data from cell phone wiretaps, body wires, and GPS tracking devices.

To illustrate the volume and complexity of information in a recent multidefendant case, 40 people were charged with murder, drug 

trafficking, money laundering and wire fraud. The U.S. attorney prosecuting the case provided rolling discovery of 27 separate 

productions over the course of two years. The discovery totaled over 9 terabytes of data, with over 550,000 files in the e-discovery 

review database created for the defense teams. Over a hundred of those files each consisted of 10,000 plus page documents. Besides 

the voluminous number of investigative reports, grand jury materials, witness interviews, and search warrant pleadings, the discovery 

also included forensic images and reports from 80 digital devices seized by law enforcement, totaling 8.1 terabytes. 

Three major initiatives are in place to address e-discovery issues: 

(1) The DOJ/AO Joint Working Group on Electronic Technology in the Criminal Justice System (JETWG) addresses 

various issues related to e-discovery and discovery production between the prosecution and the attorneys for defendants 

charged in federal criminal cases. Members from this group are currently working on an update to the Criminal 

eDiscovery: A Pocket Guide for Judges. In addition, Defender Services program’s NLST have worked with DOJ to 

improve discovery management in federal cases. The most recent example is the efforts to coordinate with DOJ to 

manage the voluminous discovery associated with the January 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol mentioned 

previously. 

(2) Contracts with five national coordinating discovery attorneys (CDAs) are in place to advise panel attorneys and 

defender organizations on cost-effective ways to manage large volumes of documents in the most complex cases to 

increase the quality of representation. As of October 2023, CDAs had been appointed by federal courts to assist CJA 

counsel in over 122 active cases in more than 47 districts, with at least one case in each circuit. Because most of these 

cases are large, multi-defendant prosecutions, CDAs are providing services to over 1,300 CJA clients. 

(3) The Defender Services program has procured national licenses for software applications and tools to allow for the more 

efficient capture, organization, analysis, review, and management of case-related electronic data by CJA panel 

attorneys and FDO staff, thereby generally avoiding the higher cost alternative of purchasing software for multiple 

individual cases year after year.

5.23
Improvement in DOJ Procedures for Making Decisions Not to Seek the Death Penalty in Death-Eligible Cases 

Federal death penalty litigation remains active and federal prosecutors continue to file new cases in which the death penalty may be 

sought. During the first 32 months of the Biden Administration, federal capital trial resource counsel identified 219 new death-eligible 

case filings, compared to 324 new death-eligible case filings in the first 32 months of the Trump Administration. As of October 30, 

2023, five individuals remained authorized11 for a federal capital prosecution and were pending trial or resentencing, and resource 

counsel identified approximately 177 other individuals who could face a federal capital prosecution, including: 

• 106 defendants with death-eligible indictments awaiting a decision by the Attorney General regarding whether a capital 

prosecution will be authorized; 

• 26 defendants pending superseding indictments in which capital charges could be filed; and 

• 45 Bureau of Prisons (BOP) homicides in which capital charges could be filed. 

The judiciary continues to urge DOJ to streamline its procedures for evaluating and making decisions not to seek the death penalty in 

cases where the government can quickly conclude that the death penalty is inappropriate. Until DOJ formally notifies counsel and the 

court that it does not intend to seek the death penalty for a death-eligible defendant, which can take years to determine, defense 

counsel must assume that the death penalty will be pursued. Pending DOJ’s decision, the judiciary is obligated to bear the substantial 

cost of the statutorily-required two capital-qualified defense counsel – compensated at the higher capital panel attorney hourly rate of 

$220, as of January 1, 2024– who must undertake the intensive, time-consuming work required to attempt to persuade the government 

not to seek the death penalty, as well as prepare for a capital trial and sentencing proceeding. An early decision by the Attorney 

General not to seek the death penalty could achieve significant cost savings for the Defender Services program, DOJ, and the courts. 

DOJ has made some modifications to its Death Penalty Authorization Protocol to streamline and accelerate the process by which DOJ 

makes a formal determination that the death penalty will not be sought in cases where the local U.S. attorney recommends against 

seeking the death penalty, as well as other changes. The Defender Services program will continue to collaborate with DOJ and support 

these and other efforts that could reduce costs in federal capital prosecution cases.

11For any federal death-eligible case to proceed as a death penalty case, the U.S. Attorney General must decide whether to seek the death penalty. After a case is 

approved by the Attorney General to proceed as a capital case, it is considered “authorized.”

5.24
Distance Learning 

While webinars are an important way to offer timely, interactive training on rapidly evolving areas of the law and have long-been part 

of DSO’s Training Division’s portfolio, during the COVID-19 pandemic the Training Division increased the frequency of live 

webinars, presenting 26 in FY 2020, 23 in FY 2021, 16 in FY 2022, and 11 in FY 2023 which were viewed by 3,658 virtual attendees. 

The FY 2023 webinars provided quality training on a variety of criminal defense topics including attorney client ethics, Federal 

Evidence, Opinion Testimony, Pretrial Detention, updated Second Amendment claims after Bruen, and the Judiciary Sentencing 

Information (JSIN) Pilot Program. 

Along with other training materials, 208 training videos are available for on-demand viewing through the Training Division’s website 

(www.fd.org), which is accessible to CJA panel attorneys and federal defender staff. The training made available through distance 

learning provides an additional resource to improve the quality of representation provided by CJA counsel and enables live training 

programs to have a greater impact nationally. For example, FDOs are using the webinars as part of their local panel attorney training, 

which increases the availability of training without incurring additional costs. Though virtual programming cannot replace the inperson and hands-on training experience, it is a useful tool that will continue to be a prominent part of the Training Division’s 

portfolio. 

Federal defender staff also have access to the Judiciary Online University (JOU). FDO personnel accessed the JOU approximately 

858 times in FY 2017, 1,488 times in FY 2018, 815 times in FY 2019, 1,246 times in FY 2020, 1,055 times in FY 2021, 901 times in 

FY 2022, and 1,162 times in FY 2023. In addition, DSO staff use distance-learning formats to provide contemporaneous, interactive 

training to FDO personnel on new management systems and requirements (e.g., implementation of case weights, budget preparation, 

monthly status reports, and timekeeping programs) and workforce management options. 

Remote Detention Working Group 

A joint AO/DOJ Remote Detention Working Group (RDWG) was established to enhance the lines of communication between the 

judiciary and components of the DOJ, including the United States Marshals Service (USMS) and the BOP, around problems created 

by the remote pretrial detention of individuals charged with federal criminal offenses. Housing individuals detained pretrial at 

significant distances from defense counsel and federal courthouses has substantial operational and cost implications for the Defender 

Services program. 

5.25
Additionally, remote pretrial detention raises fundamental concerns about the quality of representation provided under the CJA 

because often defense counsel is unable to meet and effectively communicate with their clients when facilities have inadequate 

confidential meeting spaces, telephone lines, video-technology, or means for reviewing e-discovery. Remote pretrial detention also 

results in increased costs for the Defender Services program when CJA counsel and members of the defense team must spend 

substantial time travelling long distances to meet with clients. While the use of remote technologies can be a supplemental tool for 

defense counsel, in-person client meetings remain the standard of practice necessary for effective representation under the CJA.

5.26
JUSTIFICATION OF CHANGES

The FY 2025 request for the Defender Services account is 

$1,690.0 million, an increase of $278.9 million, or 19.8 

percent, over the FY 2024 assumed appropriations level of 

$1,411.1 million. Of the $278.9 million increase, $64.1 million 

(23.0 percent) is needed to maintain FY 2024 requirements due 

to a projected decrease in carryforward funding. 

The request will fund adjustments to base and staffing for the 

FDO program to support 238 additional staffing formula 

positions (95% of full requirements). This staffing allows the 

judiciary to support workload demands and implement CJArelated policies approved by the Judicial Conference. 

This request also funds major physical infrastructure projects, 

transcript rate increases, an additional coordinating discovery 

attorney contract, training, additional fellowship program costs, 

reimbursable positions, and information technology 

requirements, including cybersecurity and IT infrastructure 

modernization for the Defender Services program. 

ADJUSTMENTS TO BASE TO MAINTAIN CURRENT 

SERVICES

A. PERSONNEL 

Pay and Benefit Adjustments

1. Proposed 2025 pay adjustments

 a. Federal pay adjustment

Requested Increase: $9,138,000 

Consistent with guidance from the Office of Management and 

Budget, the judiciary is assuming federal pay rates will 

increase in January 2025 by 2.0 percent, of which 1.5 percent is 

for an across-the-board increase and 0.5 percent is for a locality 

increase. The requested increase provides for the cost of nine 

months of the anticipated pay raise in FY 2025, from January 

2025 to September 2025. (If the pay adjustment included in 

the President’s FY 2025 budget request is different from this 

2.0 percent guidance, the judiciary will revise this line item in 

its FY 2025 budget re-estimate.)

5.27
 b. Panel attorney capital rate adjustment 

Requested Increase: $320,000 

The requested funding would increase the capital panel 

attorney hourly rate by an assumed employment cost index 

(ECI) increase of 1.5 percent. (Panel attorneys do not receive 

locality pay.) This would increase the hourly rate from $220 

per hour to an estimated $223 per hour, effective January 1, 

2025. There is a time delay between when the rate increase is 

implemented and when vouchers are submitted with the higher 

rate. Therefore, the requested increase provides for the cost of 

six months of the rate increase in FY 2025. (If the ECI pay 

adjustment included in the President’s FY 2025 budget request 

is different from this 1.5 percent guidance, the judiciary will 

revise this line item in its FY 2025 budget re-estimate.)

 c. Panel attorney non-capital rate 

adjustment

Requested Increase: $923,000 

The requested funding would increase the non-capital panel 

attorney hourly rate by an assumed ECI increase of 1.5 percent. 

(Panel attorneys do not receive locality pay). This would 

increase the hourly rate from $172 per hour to an estimated 

$175 per hour, effective January 1, 2025. There is a time delay 

between when the rate increase is implemented and when 

vouchers are submitted with the higher rate. Therefore, the 

requested increase provides for the cost of three months of the 

adjustment in FY 2025. (If the ECI pay adjustment included in 

the President’s FY 2025 budget request is different from this 

1.5 percent guidance, the judiciary will revise this line item in 

its FY 2025 budget re-estimate.)

 2. Annualization of 2024 pay adjustments 

 a. Federal pay adjustment

Requested Increase: $7,918,000

The requested increase provides for the annualized costs of the 

2024 pay adjustment of 5.2 percent, associated with ECI and 

locality pay, effective as of January 2024. The requested 

increase provides for the cost of three months (from October 

2024 to December 2024) of the 2024 pay increase in FY 2025. 

5.28
b. Panel attorney capital rate adjustment 

Requested Increase: $1,077,000

The requested funding annualizes the FY 2024 panel attorney 

capital ECI rate increase from $210 to $220 per hour. An 

increase to the capital hourly rate impacts six months of costs 

in FY 2024. The requested increase annualizes this rate 

increase for the first six months of FY 2025. 

 c. Panel attorney non-capital rate 

adjustment

Requested Increase: $16,702,000

The requested increase annualizes the FY 2024 panel attorney 

non-capital ECI rate increase from $164 to $172 per hour. An 

increase to the non-capital hourly rate impacts three months of 

costs in FY 2024. The requested increase annualizes this rate 

increase for the first nine months of FY 2025. 

 3. Promotions and within-grade increases

Requested Increase: $4,569,000

The requested increase provides for promotions and withingrade increases for personnel. The FDO salary plans provide 

for periodic within-grade increases for staff who receive at 

least a satisfactory performance rating. 

 4. Benefits increases 

 a. Health benefits

Requested Increase: $3,193,000 

Based on information from the Office of Personnel 

Management, health benefit premium contributions are 

projected to increase by an average of 5.0 percent both in

January 2024 and January 2025. The requested increase 

annualizes the 2024 premium increase and includes a ninemonth provision for the increase anticipated for FY 2025.

 b. FICA adjustment

Requested Increase: $791,000 

Based on information from the Social Security Administration, 

employer contributions to the Old Age, Survivor, and 

Disability Insurance (OASDI) portion of the FICA tax will 

increase in 2024. The salary cap for OASDI increased from 

$160,200 to $168,600 in January 2024. The requested amount 

is needed to pay the agency’s contribution in FY 2025.

5.29
B. OTHER ADJUSTMENTS

General Inflationary Adjustments

5. Inflationary increases for contracts, services, 

 supplies, and equipment

Requested Increase: $8,741,000 

Consistent with guidance from the Office of Management and 

Budget, this request of $8,741,000 is required to fund 

inflationary increases of 2.2 percent for operating expenses 

such as travel, communications, contractual services, supplies 

and materials, and furniture and equipment. 

 6. Inflationary increase in GSA space rental 

costs

Requested Increase: $1,346,000 

The request represents a 2.0 percent inflationary increase and 

adjustments in the cost of GSA space rental charges for space 

for FY 2025. 

Workload and Financing Adjustments 

 7. Change in projected panel attorney 

requirements 

 a. Change in projected panel attorney 

workload 

Requested Increase: $14,045,000

The projected increase is due to a projected change in panel 

attorney caseload. Panel attorney representations are projected 

to increase from 67,900 in SY 2024 to 70,100 in SY 2025. 

Caseload and panel attorney payments are subject to variation 

due to prosecutorial priorities and case complexities. As the

projected caseload and payment trends change, the judiciary 

will advise the appropriations subcommittee staff of any 

changes to this estimate in the FY 2025 budget re-estimate 

process. 

5.30
b. Restoration of FY 2024 panel attorney 

payment base 

Requested Increase: $40,275,000

The FY 2024 assumed funding level (obligations) provides 

$433.8 million for panel attorney payments, which is $40.3 

million below FY 2024 requirements. The projected workload 

for FY 2025 requires the FY 2024 base funding to be restored 

to meet panel attorney requirements in FY 2025. 

 c. Panel attorney deferred payments 

from FY 2024

Requested Increase: $40,275,000

The FY 2024 assumed funding level (obligations) estimates a 

panel attorney payment shortfall in the amount of $40.3 

million. This shortfall would cause the judiciary to defer panel 

attorney payments for approximately one month at the end of 

FY 2024. The amount requested will allow the judiciary to 

make the deferred payments from FY 2024 in FY 2025 without 

causing an adverse impact to the amount needed in FY 2025 

for panel attorney payments. 

 8. Increase in appropriation needed to maintain 

FY 2024 requirements due to a decrease in 

carryover funding

Requested Increase: $64,066,000 

The judiciary has been able to reduce its Defender Services 

appropriation request using unobligated no-year funds carried 

forward in this account from prior fiscal years. In FY 2024, 

$84.1 million in prior year unobligated balances was used to 

finance the FY 2024 requirements. In developing the FY 2025 

request, the judiciary assumes $20 million from FY 2024 will 

carry forward into FY 2025 to finance FY 2025 requirements. 

Because the judiciary anticipates having less carryforward 

funding available, it requests $64.1 million in funding to 

substitute direct appropriations for base expenses previously 

funded from carryforward balances. The judiciary will advise 

appropriations subcommittee staff of any changes to this 

estimate. 

5.31
C. PROGRAM CHANGES

9. Change in positions for projected workload 

 a. FDO staffing formula changes FTE: 76 

Requested Increase: $25,805,000

The requested increase supports the continued implementation

of the revised FDO staffing formula that was approved by the 

Judicial Conference in September 2023. The request is for 237 

additional FDO staff for six months. The increase will restore 

positions assumed lost in FY 2024 and will allow for additional 

staffing to address critical workload requirements up to 95% of 

the current staffing formula. Additional information on the 

FDO staffing formulas is on pages 5.15 – 5.16. 

b. National position FTE: 0.5 

Requested Increase: $121,000

The requested increase supports one information technology 

(IT) staffing formula position. The major workload driver of 

the IT staffing formula is the total number of FDO FTE. The 

IT position will help to address cybersecurity and other IT 

requirements by ensuring defender IT systems are missioncapable at or above judiciary standards. 

10. Information Technology (IT), cybersecurity, 

and IT modernization requirements 

a. Multi-year plan requirements

Requested Increase: $12,777,000 

This $12.8 million increase will support the judiciary’s multiyear cyber-security and IT modernization plan. Of this 

increase, $9.9 million is the FY 2024 portion that is assumed 

not funded, and the remaining $2.9 million would address 

additional FY 2025 requirements. Additional information on 

this information technology multi-year plan is on pages 5.18 – 

5.20. 

 b. Other requirements

Requested Increase: $5,241,000 

The requested increase will support $3.7 million of other FY 

2025 information technology requirements, and $1.5 million of 

FY 2024 requirements that are assumed not funded. Additional 

5.32
information on the other information technology requirements 

is on pages 5.20 – 5.21. 

11. Transcript rate increase 

Requested Increase: $1,320,000 

In September 2022, the Judicial Conference approved an 

increase to the judiciary’s transcript fee rates (approximately 

20 percent) to enable the courts to retain and recruit qualified 

court reporters. This would fund the impact this rate increase 

is expected to have on the Defender Services program. 

12. Coordinating discovery attorney contract 

Requested Increase: $730,000 

Coordinating discovery attorneys work with defense counsel 

on cases in which there are numerous defendants, voluminous 

discovery, or complicated electronic discovery issues. This 

contract funding would address the increased demand for these 

types of services and improve the defense team’s efficiency 

and effectiveness in reviewing discovery. 

13. Major physical infrastructure requirements 

Requested Increase: $16,750,000 

Two large FDOs have leases expiring soon (Los Angeles, CA 

and Las Vegas, NV) and due to building management and 

infrastructure issues, such as plumbing and HVAC problems 

and Americans with Disabilities Act violations, it is anticipated

that both will move to new buildings. When moving to new 

space, a significant portion of the expense to reconfigure the 

space must be paid prior to the lease award. 

The total cost of these two projects is projected to be at least 

$33.5 million ($21.1 million for Los Angeles; $12.4 million for 

Las Vegas). The funding in this request, in addition to funding 

generally available each fiscal year within existing funds, 

would be used to fund the Los Angeles or the Las Vegas 

infrastructure requirements. The base funding created by this 

request will then be used in future fiscal years to fund any 

additional costs of these specific projects and regularly 

occurring build-out projects each fiscal year. 

Pages 5.16 - 5.18 provides more details about these projects. 

5.33
14. Additional fellowship program costs 

Requested Increase: $236,000 

The requested funds for the fellowship program would provide 

additional substantive training for the fellows, recruitment 

software, evaluation assistance, and operational costs. 

15. Training operations 

Requested Increase: $2,233,000 

This request is a requirement from FY 2024 that is assumed 

unfunded. It will support the following three initiatives: 

1. 21st Century Training Operations ($852,000) 

2. Training Post-COVID ($758,000) 

3. Additional Training Requirements ($623,000) 

The 21st Century training operations includes funding for an 

updated Event Management System which would provide fullservice on-site attendee management. In addition, two other 

programs would be utilized: Learning Management System (to 

support the administration, documentation, tracking, reporting, 

automation and delivery of educational courses and training 

programs to manage all its electronic learning) and a real-time 

polling/survey platform. 

Additional resources are also needed to meet the demand for 

hybrid (in-person and virtual) training in the post-pandemic 

world. 

This request will also support expanded training programs on 

case management, mental health, representing clients with 

intellectual disabilities, and provide FDO budget, procurement, 

and financial training materials.

 16. Reimbursable positions

Requested Increase: $316,000 

This request supports three additional positions at the AO’s 

Defender Services Office funded by the Defender Services 

appropriation that are assumed unfunded in FY 2024. These 

positions will support program reviews and budgetary/financial 

operations support to federal defenders and their staff in the 

areas of audit preparation, financial management, internal 

controls, procurement, and accountable officer liability. 

5.34
D. FINANCING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 REQUEST

17. Anticipated carryforward from FY 2024 and 

prior years into FY 2025 

Estimated funds available: $20,000,000 

The judiciary projects $20 million will be available through 

anticipated carryforward from FY 2024 and prior years into 

FY 2025 to offset the FY 2025 appropriation request for the 

Defender Services program. The judiciary will advise the 

appropriations subcommittee staff of any changes to this 

estimate. 

5.35