effective representation in State capital cases in 
accordance with section 422(b)(1)(A); 
(B) developed and implemented appro-
priate standards and qualifications for State 
and local prosecutors who litigate State capital 
cases in accordance with section 422(b)(1)(B); 
(C) assessed the performance of State and 
local prosecutors who litigate State capital cases 
in accordance with section 422(b)(1)(C); 
(D) identified and implemented any poten-
tial legal reforms that may be appropriate to 
minimize the potential for error in the trial of 
capital 
cases 
in 
accordance 
with 
section 
422(b)(1)(D); 
(E) established a program under which 
State and local prosecutors conduct a system-
atic review of cases in which a death sentence 
was imposed in order to identify cases in which 
post-conviction DNA testing may be appro-
priate in accordance with section 422(b)(1)(E); 
and 
(F) provided support and assistance to the 
families of murder victims; and
(3) a statement confirming that the funds have 
not been used to fund the prosecution of specific 
capital cases or to supplant non-Federal funds. 
(d) PUBLIC DISCLOSURE OF ANNUAL STATE RE-
PORTS.—The annual reports to the Attorney General sub-
mitted by any State under this section shall be made avail-
able to the public. 
SEC. 425. EVALUATIONS BY INSPECTOR GENERAL AND AD-
MINISTRATIVE REMEDIES. 
(a) EVALUATION BY INSPECTOR GENERAL.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—As soon as practicable after 
the end of the first fiscal year for which a State re-
ceives funds under a grant made under this title, the 
Inspector General of the Department of Justice (in 
this section referred to as the ‘‘Inspector General’’) 
shall— 
(A) after affording an opportunity for any 
person to provide comments on a report sub-
mitted under section 424, submit to Congress 
and to the Attorney General a report evaluating 
the compliance by the State with the terms and 
conditions of the grant; and 
(B) if the Inspector General concludes that 
the State is not in compliance with the terms 
and conditions of the grant, specify any defi-
ciencies and make recommendations for correc-
tive action. 
(2) 
PRIORITY.—In 
conducting 
evaluations 
under this subsection, the Inspector General shall 
give priority to States that the Inspector General de-
termines, based on information submitted by the 
State and other comments provided by any other 
person, to be at the highest risk of noncompliance. 
(3) DETERMINATION FOR STATUTORY PROCE-
DURE STATES.—For each State that employs a stat-
utory procedure described in section 421(d)(1)(C), 
the Inspector General shall submit to Congress and 
to the Attorney General, not later than the end of 
the first fiscal year for which such State receives 
funds, after affording an opportunity for any person 
to provide comments on a certification submitted 
under section 423(b)(2)(D), a determination as to 
whether the State is in substantial compliance with 
the requirements of the applicable State statute. 
(b) ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW.— 
(1) COMMENT.—Upon receiving the report 
under subsection (a)(1) or the determination under 
subsection (a)(3), the Attorney General shall provide 
the State with an opportunity to comment regarding
the findings and conclusions of the report or the de-
termination. 
(2) CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN.—If the Attor-
ney General, after reviewing the report under sub-
section (a)(1) or the determination under subsection 
(a)(3), determines that a State is not in compliance 
with the terms and conditions of the grant, the At-
torney General shall consult with the appropriate 
State authorities to enter into a plan for corrective 
action. If the State does not agree to a plan for cor-
rective action that has been approved by the Attor-
ney General within 90 days after the submission of 
the report under subsection (a)(1) or the determina-
tion under subsection (a)(3), the Attorney General 
shall, within 30 days, direct the State to take correc-
tive action to bring the State into compliance. 
(3) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 90 
days after the earlier of the implementation of a cor-
rective action plan or a directive to implement such 
a plan under paragraph (2), the Attorney General 
shall submit a report to Congress as to whether the 
State has taken corrective action and is in compli-
ance with the terms and conditions of the grant. 
(c) PENALTIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE.—If the State 
fails to take the prescribed corrective action under sub-
section (b) and is not in compliance with the terms and 
conditions of the grant, the Attorney General shall dis-
continue all further funding under sections 421 and 422 
and require the State to return the funds granted under 
such sections for that fiscal year. Nothing in this para-
graph shall prevent a State which has been subject to pen-
alties for noncompliance from reapplying for a grant under 
this subtitle in another fiscal year. 
(d) PERIODIC REPORTS.—During the grant period, 
the Inspector General shall periodically review the compli-
ance of each State with the terms and conditions of the 
grant. 
(e) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—Not less than 2.5 per-
cent of the funds appropriated to carry out this subtitle 
for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2009 shall be made 
available to the Inspector General for purposes of carrying 
out this section. Such sums shall remain available until 
expended. 
(f) SPECIAL RULE FOR ‘‘STATUTORY PROCEDURE’’ 
STATES NOT IN SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH STAT-
UTORY PROCEDURES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—In the case of a State that 
employs a statutory procedure described in section 
421(d)(1)(C), if the Inspector General submits a de-
termination under subsection (a)(3) that the State is