Human Trafficking: Agencies Have Taken Steps to Assess Prevalence, Address Victim Issues, and Avoid Grant Duplication
Released: 2016-06-28T00:00:00

Letter

Background

Federal law generally recognizes two forms of human trafficking—sex trafficking and labor trafficking. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA), as amended, defines human trafficking under the term “severe forms of trafficking in persons.” Pursuant to the TVPA, as amended, sex trafficking is the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act. Sex trafficking is a “severe” form of trafficking where it involves force, fraud or coercion, or where the victim has not attained 18 years of age, in which case force, fraud or coercion are not necessary elements. In the case of sex trafficking, a perpetrator—which could be a pimp, intimate partner or relative of the victim—generally forces the victim to engage in commercial sexual activity. For instance, victims may be forced to act as hostesses in a “cantina,” which is a bar at which payment for drinks includes the company of women. Additional payment can be made for sexual contact, and officials told us that many cantinas may contain rooms for the purpose of sexual acts, while others pay for the transaction at the bar and then engage in the sexual act in a nearby hotel. The TVPA defines labor related trafficking generally as the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery. Labor trafficking can take various forms, such as debt bondage, domestic servitude, and forced labor. For example, in one case, workers from Thailand were brought to the United States with the understanding that they would have highly-paid work as welders. However, once they arrived in the country, they were forced to work in restaurants without pay, had their passports confiscated, and were confined to cramped apartments without any electricity, water, or gas.

Federal and State Laws to Combat Human Trafficking

Federal efforts to combat and prevent human trafficking in the United States have evolved over time, including various laws that have established federal agencies’ roles in these efforts. During the 1990s, the United States began to take steps to address human trafficking at home and abroad. DOJ prosecuted trafficking cases under several federal criminal statutes, including the involuntary servitude statutes, the Mann Act, and labor laws on workplace conditions and compensation. However, involuntary servitude was restricted to cases of physical abuse including force, or threats of force, or threats of legal coercion, and did not include psychological coercion, which is often used by today’s traffickers. These statutes spread enforcement authority across the federal government and resulted in different case outcomes, depending on the charges brought or which agency learned of the allegations of abuse.

Over the past few decades, Congress has taken numerous legislative actions to help combat human trafficking and ensure that victims have access to needed services. In October 2000, the TVPA was enacted to combat trafficking in persons, ensure just and effective punishment of traffickers and protect trafficking victims. Among other things, the TVPA, as amended, makes it illegal to knowingly or recklessly use force, fraud, or coercion to recruit, entice, harbor, transport, provide, obtain, advertise, maintain, patronize, or solicit any person to engage in a commercial sex act. The TVPA also makes it illegal to take the above actions, and thus cause a person under 18 years of age to engage in a commercial sex act, with or without the use of force, fraud, or coercion. In addition, the TVPA criminalizes the use of certain means, including force, threats of force, physical restraint, or serious harm or threats of such harm to knowingly provide or obtain persons for any labor or services, such as working in farms, factories, and households. The act also updated and supplemented existing involuntary servitude statutes used to prosecute trafficking crimes, enhanced the penalties for trafficking crimes, and provided a range of new protections and assistance for victims of trafficking. The TVPA provided for the creation of the Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking, now known as the President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, as a cabinet-level entity that convenes routinely to advance and coordinate both federal policies and the implementation of the TVPA.

As amended by the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2003, the TVPA also established the Senior Policy Operating Group (SPOG), consisting of senior officials from 14 federal agencies and the White House National Security Council and the Domestic Policy Council, to coordinate activities of federal departments and agencies regarding policies (including grants and grant policies) involving international human trafficking and the implementation of the TVPA. This multidisciplinary approach includes the enforcement of criminal and labor law, development of victim-centered identification and protection measures, support for innovations in data gathering and research, education and public awareness, enhanced partnerships and research opportunities, and strategically linked foreign assistance and diplomatic engagement. Congress also reauthorized the TVPA in 2005 and 2008; and, in 2013, further amended provisions of the act, its reauthorizations, and other related laws.

In 2015, the President signed into law the JVTA, which, among other things, required the Attorney General to ensure that law enforcement officers and federal prosecutors receive anti-trafficking training; required the Federal Judicial Center, the research and education agency of the federal judicial system, to provide training for judges on ordering restitution for victims of certain trafficking-related offenses under chapter 77 of title 18, U.S. Code; mandated that the Secretary of Homeland Security implement a human trafficking training program for department personnel; and required the Attorney General to implement and maintain a national strategy for combating human trafficking.

In addition to the federal statutes, the 50 states and the District of Columbia have laws that address human trafficking to some degree, whether explicitly under a “human trafficking” statute or pursuant to other relevant laws. State laws differ and may include various features that criminalize sex or labor trafficking or other related conduct; require training for law enforcement; lower the burden of proof for sex trafficking of minors by not requiring force, fraud or coercion as elements of the offense; and provide victim assistance, among other things.

Federal Agency Roles and Responsibilities to Combat Human Trafficking in the United States and Assist Victims

Several components within DOJ, DHS, Defense, Labor, and State have responsibility for investigating and prosecuting human trafficking crimes, as shown in figure 1.

In addition to federal investigative and prosecutorial agencies, other agencies play a role in helping to identify human trafficking, such as the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and Coast Guard. These agencies may also encounter human trafficking victims in their daily operations, including at airports, land borders, and seaports. EEOC and Labor’s Wage and Hour Division may encounter human trafficking when conducting investigations related to their statutory authority. For example, EEOC investigates alleged violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibiting employment discrimination based on, race, color, religion, sex, and national origin, which in certain circumstances involve human trafficking victims.

In addition to investigating and prosecuting human trafficking crimes, federal agencies, primarily DOJ and HHS, support state and local efforts to combat human trafficking and assist victims. Several components within DOJ’s Office of Justice Programs, including the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office for Victims of Crime (OVC), Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), and National Institute of Justice (NIJ), administer grants to help support state and local law enforcement in combating human trafficking and to support nongovernmental organizations and others in assisting trafficking victims or conducting research on human trafficking in the United States. HHS also provides grant funding to entities to provide services and support for trafficking victims, primarily through components of the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), including the Children’s Bureau, Family and Youth Services Bureau, Administration for Native Americans. Further, ACF established the Office on Trafficking in Persons in 2015 to coordinate anti-trafficking responses across multiple systems of care. Specifically, HHS supports health care providers, child welfare, social service providers and other first responders likely to interact with potential victims of trafficking through a variety of grant programs. These efforts include integrated and tailored services for victims of trafficking, training and technical assistance to communities serving high-risk populations, and capacity-building to strengthen coordinated regional and local responses to human trafficking. HHS also established the HHS Task Force to Prevent and End Human Trafficking in 2015 to strengthen the health and well-being of victims of trafficking through strategic initiatives and policies.

Examples of Federal Collaboration Efforts to Combat Human Trafficking in the United States

The federal government has a number of efforts underway to combat human trafficking and assist victims in the United States, including task forces, working groups, as well as training and public awareness campaigns. In 2011, partly in response to a 2007 GAO report that recommended a federal coordinating body to combat human trafficking, DOJ, in collaboration with DHS and Labor, established Anti-trafficking Coordination Teams (ACTeams). The teams are located in six U.S. cities and are comprised of federal investigators and prosecutors from the USAO, FBI, ICE HSI, and Labor’s Inspector General and Wage and Hour Division. The Federal Enforcement Working Group, which oversees the ACTeams, selected these cities based on the agencies’ commitment to combat human trafficking and to reflect a diversity of city size, federal agency staffing levels, nature of human trafficking threats, and federal agency experience with human trafficking investigations and prosecutions. The purpose of the ACTeams is to coordinate federal criminal human trafficking investigations and prosecutions to protect the rights of human trafficking victims, bring traffickers to justice, and dismantle human trafficking networks.

Pursuing trafficking investigations and prosecutions also involves the support of state and local law enforcement, which may be in the best position to find trafficking victims because of their familiarity with their respective jurisdictions; and nongovernmental organizations, where victims may more readily seek assistance. Moreover, victim service organizations assist human trafficking victims by providing assistance to address their short-term and long-term needs—such as legal and immigration services, housing, employment, education, food, clothing, job training, medical care, and child care. Since 2004, OVC and BJA have partnered to support multidisciplinary task forces that bring together law enforcement and victim service providers. This partnership supports a state, local, or tribal law enforcement agency and a victim service provider. OVC awards support the provision of a comprehensive array of culturally and linguistically appropriate direct services to trafficking victims, while BJA awards support the coordinated efforts of local, state, federal, and tribal law enforcement to investigate and prosecute traffickers. In fiscal year 2014, OVC and BJA undertook an analysis of the enhanced collaborative model and examined how well the funded task forces were operating. Based on both qualitative and quantitative analyses, program improvements were made, and a new solicitation incorporating these improvements was issued in fiscal year 2015. During fiscal year 2015, OVC and BJA provided nearly $22.7 million to 16 task forces in 14 states.

Another key federal effort to combat human trafficking in the United States is DHS’s Blue Campaign, which the department describes as the unified voice for DHS’s efforts to combat human trafficking. The Blue Campaign raises public awareness about human trafficking, leveraging partnerships to educate the public to recognize human trafficking and report suspected instances. The Blue Campaign also offers training to law enforcement and others to increase detection and investigation of human trafficking, and to protect victims and bring suspected traffickers to justice.

Federal Agencies Have Initiated Efforts to Determine Prevalence of Human Trafficking; Existing Trafficking Data Rely on Information Reported to Authorities

Federal Agencies Have Made Efforts to Determine Prevalence of Human Trafficking in the United States and Are Taking Steps to Improve Data Collection

Federal agencies have begun efforts to assess the prevalence of human trafficking in the United States and develop data standards and definitions to help facilitate prevalence studies. The Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center (HSTC) is an interagency federal effort designed to be an all source clearinghouse and information center for human trafficking, smuggling, and terrorism information. The HSTC disseminates information, conducts strategic assessments, and identifies issues needing facilitation among multiple agencies. In July 2014, HSTC completed a Human Trafficking National Assessment, which focused on identifying federal data sources useful for human trafficking analysis and provided some initial assessment of the data for the purposes of identifying trends and patterns. HSTC officials noted, however, that they faced challenges understanding the landscape of the data collected, assessing the quality of the data, and identifying the gaps in data collection. As a result, the officials were unable to infer high levels of human trafficking in areas with high numbers of victims or cases or prosecution. Thus, several member agencies expressed concern over the methodology, data collected, and data analysis used in the assessment, and because HSTC products require the approval of all of the member agencies, the report was not released. HSTC has released other assessments of human trafficking, including regional assessments and industry assessments for particular industries where human trafficking may occur, including fishing, agriculture, garment, and sex tourism.

In addition, HHS’s Office on Trafficking in Persons, which is part of the Administration for Children and Families, and the Office on Women’s Health are sponsoring the Human Trafficking Data Collection Project. The purpose of the project is to inform the development of an integrated data collection platform regarding human trafficking victimization; establish baseline knowledge of human trafficking and victim needs; and support effective prevention and intervention responses. According to HHS officials, the project takes a public health approach to human trafficking in order to (1) better collect data from federal and state data systems and national surveys to support analysis that will uncover specific risk factors for human trafficking among high-risk populations; (2) improve coordination of data collection on human trafficking across multiple health and human service systems such as refugee resettlement, child welfare, runaway and homeless youth, community health, and domestic violence programs; and (3) explore new data collection strategies, through public health methodologies, for compiling prevalence estimates. HHS, in consultation with key stakeholders, has developed draft data fields and definitions for human trafficking and expects to begin piloting the data collection effort in fall 2016.

Further, NIJ has focused its resources on improving the science that lies behind prevalence estimates of human trafficking in the United States, among other topics. NIJ has awarded grants for the development and testing of methodologies that could be used to calculate human trafficking prevalence. In fiscal year 2015, NIJ awarded two grants for nationwide research on the prevalence of human trafficking. Abt Associates was awarded $996,870 to conduct a study on “Advancing Human Trafficking Prevalence Estimation,” and Northeastern University was awarded $462,973 for a study on “Capturing Human Trafficking Victimization through Crime Reporting”. According to Abt Associates, the study being performed by Abt Associates will not give numbers on the prevalence of human trafficking; rather, it will provide a methodology to calculate prevalence.

Federal Agencies and Other Entities Maintain Data on Human Trafficking Activity Reported to Law Enforcement and Others; Data Vary in Scope and Comprehensiveness

In addition to federal efforts designed to determine the prevalence of human trafficking in the United States, federal agencies and federally- funded entities maintain data that, although not specifically intended to do so, could give an indication of human trafficking and where it is occurring across the country. However, considering that human trafficking is likely underreported, as with most clandestine crimes, and most of these data are based on information reported to law enforcement authorities or hotlines, these data cannot be used to assess prevalence.

In 2008, Office of Justice Programs’ Bureau of Justice Statistics, in partnership with BJA, established the Human Trafficking Reporting System, which is a database used to collect data on human trafficking cases from OVC- and BJA-funded anti-trafficking task forces. However, these task forces represent a small percentage of law enforcement agencies. Further, these task forces are unlikely to be a representative sample of human trafficking in the United States since areas with high trafficking are more likely to have a task force.

Since 2012, OVC also requires victim service providers that receive OVC grant funding under the trafficking victims services grants to biannually report the number of human trafficking victims that received services as a result of that funding. OVC maintains this data in the Trafficking Information Management System. According to OVC, in 2015, 54 grantees across 3 grant programs were required to report information. OVC grantees reported providing services to 3,889 human trafficking victims from July 2014 to June 2015. However, OVC grantees likely represent a small subset of service providers working with human trafficking victims.

ACF also requires victim service providers that receive ACF funding under the trafficking victim service grants to report the number of human trafficking victims and eligible family members who received services as a result of that funding. According to ACF, in 2015, grantees reported providing services to 1,726 individual clients through the Trafficking Victim Assistance Program.

In January 2013, the FBI, through its Uniform Crime Reporting Program, began collecting data on human trafficking in the United States, and in 2014, the FBI reported 443 offenses that involved human trafficking. However, because the Uniform Crime Reporting Program primarily collects data on crime-related incidents that have been reported to state, local, and tribal police that have the ability to report the data to the Uniform Crime Reporting Program, the FBI’s human trafficking report does not include unreported incidents.

The Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys maintains data on the number of human trafficking matters received by each of the 94 USAOs, as well as matters that are ultimately prosecuted. In fiscal year 2015, the 94 USAOs reported prosecuting a total of 252 human trafficking cases. Other DOJ prosecuting units, including the Civil Rights Division, also maintain data on human trafficking prosecutions. In addition, federal investigative agencies, including FBI and ICE HSI, keep data on investigations and arrests. See appendix II for federal human trafficking prosecution and investigation data from fiscal years 2013 to 2015.

Other federally-funded entities also collect human trafficking data based on victim reports that may not be referred to law enforcement, which may also provide an indication of human trafficking. For example, funded through an HHS grant, the NHTRC is a national anti-trafficking hotline and resource center serving victims and survivors of human trafficking and the anti-trafficking community in the United States. The NHTRC collects human trafficking data through its website and is based on aggregated information learned through signals—phone calls, emails, and online tip reports—received by the hotline. In 2015, NHTRC identified 5,544 potential trafficking cases. The NHTRC determined that 4,136 were related to sex trafficking, 721 were related to labor trafficking, and 178 were related to both sex and labor trafficking. The type of trafficking was not specified for 509 of the tips. Further, NHTRC was able to determine that 4,683 of the reports involved a female victim, 574 involved a male victim, 3,559 involved an adult victim and 1,621 involved a minor. Further, 1,660 involved U.S. citizen victims and 1,041 involved foreign national victims. However, the data do not define the totality of human trafficking or of a trafficking network in any given area.

NCMEC is a private, nonprofit corporation supported by federal grant funding, as well as corporate in-kind and private donations, whose mission is to help find missing children, reduce child sexual exploitation and prevent future victimization. To advance its mission, NCMEC operates the CyberTipline in which the public and electronic service providers can report suspected child sexual exploitation, including child sex trafficking. NCMEC makes the CyberTipline reports available to international and domestic law enforcement agencies, including the FBI Child Exploitation Task Forces and the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Forces. From July 1, 2014 through March 31, 2016, NCMEC received 13,529 reports related to child sex trafficking.

Based on the data collected by federal agencies and federally-funded entities, there was some consistency with respect to states that have had the most reported human trafficking activity. For example, 9 states— Arizona, California, Florida, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, and Washington—were in the top one-third with respect to investigations referred by law enforcement agencies to the USAOs for federal prosecution and calls and tips related to human trafficking. We found that federal law enforcement efforts and grant funding have been targeted in these locations, as discussed later in this report.

Selected Law Enforcement Officials and Prosecutors Reported Lack of Victim Cooperation, Limited Services, and Difficulty Detecting Victims as Challenges, and Have Taken Steps to Mitigate Them

According to federal, state, and local law enforcement officials and prosecutors we interviewed, investigating and prosecuting human trafficking crimes is challenging for multiple reasons, including a lack of victim cooperation, limited availability of victim services, difficulty identifying human trafficking, and others. Federal, state and local agencies have taken or are taking some actions to address these challenges, such as increasing the availability of services, primarily by providing funding through grants.

Limited Victim Cooperation and Victim Services Hinder Investigations and Prosecutions of Human Trafficking

Limited Victim Cooperation

Officials in 25 of the 32 interviews we conducted with law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies reported that they faced challenges with victim cooperation. In general, officials stated that obtaining the victim’s cooperation is important for human trafficking investigations and prosecutions because the victim is generally the primary witness and source of evidence. The officials told us that human trafficking victims may be unable or unwilling to cooperate with the investigation or prosecution because they distrust law enforcement, may be traumatized by abuse or addicted to drugs, have a sentimental attachment to the trafficker, do not see themselves as victims, or fear retaliation from the trafficker. For example, some victims may not cooperate because the trafficker is holding or threatening the victim’s family abroad. Officials also stated that juvenile victims can present challenges because they may come from troubled homes or foster care and may feel that they are better cared for by the trafficker than at home and do not want to receive any help.

Law enforcement are to use a victim centered approach when combating human trafficking that may help improve the victim’s ability and willingness to cooperate. This approach seeks to minimize retraumatization associated with the criminal justice process by providing the support of victim advocates and service providers, empowering survivors as engaged participants in the process, and providing survivors an opportunity to play a role in seeing their traffickers brought to justice. Such an approach places value on the identification and stabilization of victims and providing immigration relief, as well as the investigation and prosecution of traffickers. Identifying, not criminalizing, victims is the first step in adopting a victim-centered strategy and to achieve this goal, officers must be committed to helping victims feel safe, secure, and stable. Officials in 12 of the 32 interviews we conducted with law enforcement and prosecutors told us there are strategies that may help improve the victim’s ability and willingness to cooperate, such as facilitating access to immigration relief and protecting the victim’s family abroad for foreign victims, or providing services to both foreign and domestic victims.

Immigration relief: T visa, U visa, or Continued Presence. According to USCIS, immigration relief options encourage victims to report crimes and work with law enforcement. Trafficking victims may seek immigration relief in the form of T nonimmigrant status (T visa) for victims of a severe form of trafficking who meet certain criteria and U nonimmigrant status (U visa) for victims of qualifying criminal activity, including human trafficking and fraud in foreign labor contracting, who satisfy U visa-specific criteria. The T visa and U visa allow the victims to remain in the country, for up to 4 years, which may be extended under certain circumstances, so they can assist with the investigation or prosecution of human trafficking or qualifying crimes, respectively. Individuals with T or U visas are authorized for employment incident to their nonimmigrant status, and U visa applicants may receive work authorization while their application is still pending. U visa holders may be eligible for lawful permanent residence if, among other things, they have been physically present in the United States continuously for at least 3 years since admission as a U nonimmigrant. For T visa holders, the physical presence requirement may be satisfied by demonstrating continuous physical presence either for 3 years since the date of admission as a T nonimmigrant, or during the investigation or prosecution of trafficking, whichever period of time is less. Further, ICE can grant Continued Presence, which is a temporary form of protection available to foreign national victims of human trafficking without lawful immigration status if they are potential witnesses to that trafficking, and upon the application by federal law enforcement officials to DHS. Continued Presence allows victims to remain and work in the country temporarily, for 1 year, and may be renewed in 1 year increments, during the ongoing investigation into the human trafficking-related crimes committed against them. See appendix II for information on T and U visa applications and petitions, and Continued Presence approvals and denials for fiscal years 2013 through 2015. Further, working through ICE and FBI personnel stationed at U.S. embassies, U.S. investigative and prosecutorial agencies have protected U.S. trafficking victims’ family members in a foreign country.

Victim services. Federal agencies have victim service coordinators who help navigate the victim through the criminal justice process and connect the victim with appropriate services. Additionally, OVC and ACF provide grants for comprehensive and specialized victim service programs to non- governmental organizations and others. These organizations utilize grant funding to provide services such as shelters, medical services, substance abuse treatment, legal services, food and clothing, mental health, literacy education, job training, interpreter and translation services, support groups, and mentoring programs for human trafficking victims. Officials in 9 of the 32 of interviews we conducted with law enforcement and prosecutors reported that providing these services helps stabilize victims and encourages them to cooperate. For example, the officials reported that mental health and substance abuse services are vital to stabilize the victim so that they can provide an accurate recount of the trafficking situation and may help them to testify.

Limited Victim Services

While victim services may help victims recover and possibly cooperate more fully, the availability of services is limited. Officials in 15 of the 32 interviews we conducted with law enforcement officials and prosecutors reported limited availability of services in their area of responsibility.

Below are examples of the types of limitations in services for human trafficking victims.

Short-term assistance. Of the 15 officials who reported limited availability of services in their area of responsibility, 8 told us that short-term assistance, particularly shelters were needed. According to officials, many victim assistance service providers that typically serve other populations may not be prepared or willing to deal with human trafficking victims as very few shelters specialize in services for human trafficking victims. For example, in some cases these shelters are designed to address the needs of survivors of domestic violence, such as resources to become financially stable and access to government services and childcare, whereas, trafficking victims need medical and psychological assistance tailored to meet their unique needs. Further, officials told us that shelters may not accept human trafficking victims because they fear that the victim will recruit women from the shelter for the trafficker.

Long-term assistance. Of the 15 officials who reported limited availability of services in their area of responsibility, 7 told us that there is insufficient long-term assistance, including housing, mental health services, and drug rehabilitation, available for trafficking victims. For example, law enforcement officials in one of our site visits told us that their areas of responsibility are ill-equipped to provide long-term services to human trafficking victims. As a result, victims are sent to other states to receive services. In addition, a service provider told us that finding long-term housing presents a challenge when the victim has a criminal background or bad credit history. Further, other officials told us that in some circumstances services are more limited for U.S. citizens than for foreign victims. The officials explained that, historically, the federal government’s efforts to combat human trafficking in the United States and assist victims have been focused primarily on foreign nationals. While the TVPA of 2000 included certain provisions for services for victims of human trafficking in the United States, its reauthorization in the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 established a program specifically to assist U.S. citizen and lawful permanent resident victims of trafficking.

In recent years, DOJ, HHS, and some states, including those within the scope of our review, have taken steps to increase the availability of services, primarily by providing funding through grants. Two of the six service providers we spoke with told us that in some instances no one service provider can provide all the services a human trafficking victim needs and organizations must work together to help victims. Further, 5 of the 6 service providers we spoke with reported that victim services are limited for human trafficking victims; in particular, they reported difficulty finding shelter or housing options for victims. When asked about actions the federal government could take to address this challenge, 2 of 6 service providers noted that it would be helpful if the federal government increased funding. In 2015, DOJ increased funding to support services specifically for human trafficking victims by $13.5 million, compared to the previous year. Specifically, in fiscal year 2014, DOJ awarded $13.1 million through two grant programs and, in fiscal year 2015, $26.6 million through four grant programs. HHS officials reported that in fiscal year 2015, the agency increased funding by $1.54 million to support services specifically for human trafficking victims. Specifically, officials reported that this included a $1.44 million increase for domestic victims of trafficking and $0.1 million for foreign victims of trafficking compared to fiscal year 2014. Further, multiple states, including those within the scope of our review, as well as the District of Columbia, have enacted laws to facilitate the provision of services to victims of trafficking. Laws in these selected jurisdictions are designed to, for example, develop plans to identify and assist trafficking victims, establish a program to address the rehabilitation and treatment needs of juvenile victims of sex trafficking, or create funding mechanisms for victim services.

Law Enforcement and the Public Face Challenges in Identifying and Distinguishing Human Trafficking from Other Crimes, and Have Taken Steps to Enhance Training and Public Awareness

Officials in 9 of the 32 interviews we conducted with law enforcement and prosecutors reported challenges with identifying and distinguishing human trafficking from other crimes, or even from legal activities. Further, officials from 3 of the 6 service providers we met with reported distinguishing human trafficking from prostitution as a challenge. On the surface, human trafficking may appear to be voluntary prostitution or an undocumented laborer working under his or her own volition. Therefore, in these instances, individuals who are actually victims may instead be treated as criminals—prostitutes or undocumented workers. For example, officials and service providers in one of our selected areas told us that human trafficking is common in the area, but that it is difficult for local law enforcement to distinguish this illicit activity from voluntary prostitution. Further, of the 9 officials who reported challenges identifying human trafficking, 7 told us that it is more difficult to identify and detect labor trafficking compared to sex trafficking. According to these officials, sex trafficking takes place out in the open and is often advertised online, making it easier for law enforcement to identify the crime. However, labor trafficking often occurs behind closed doors—including sweatshops, massage parlors, agriculture, restaurants, hotels and households— making it harder to identify. For example, officials told us about one 2015 labor trafficking case that involved a nanny from Nigeria. According to officials, the victim had a contract with her trafficker which stipulated $100 per month to take care of five children. However, she had not been paid since she moved to the United States and was being physically and psychologically abused. The victim fled and sought shelter with a neighbor.

Federal agencies, and state and local agencies in the locations we visited, have several training and public awareness initiatives underway that are intended to help identify, investigate and prosecute human trafficking, including the following: Federal Agency Initiatives. Each of the federal law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies with whom we met provide training to their employees and other law enforcement officials on how to identify human trafficking, among other things. For example, ICE HSI provides a human trafficking training course that uses video scenarios and group discussions to teach its agents how to identify human trafficking, how to distinguish human trafficking from smuggling, and how to conduct victim-centered investigations, among other things.

The FBI provides annual specialized training in the commercial sexual exploitation of children and dealing with victims of child sex trafficking. This course teaches law enforcement personnel investigative strategies to address the child sex trafficking threat, and methods in understanding the various types of victims in these cases, how to interact with them, and victim services available to them. The FBI also published a law enforcement sensitive investigative guide on sex trafficking of juveniles.

The Attorney General has provided guidance to USAOs for developing strategic anti-trafficking plans, including recommended practices for identifying, investigating, prosecuting, and tracking human trafficking offenses. The Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys also provided USAOs with guidance for establishing and coordinating human trafficking task forces.

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, in coordination with the Blue Campaign, offers a web-based human trafficking training course that teaches law enforcement officers at the federal, state, local, and tribal levels how to recognize human trafficking encountered during routine duties, how to protect victims, and how to initiate human trafficking investigations. In addition, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center provides human trafficking training to federal officers and agents as part of its basic training program. In fiscal year 2015, 128 law enforcement officers took the training. Further, since July 2015, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center has provided human trafficking awareness training by text or video to 3,007 students in basic training programs.

In addition, federal agencies provide training to state and local agencies, as well as the public, regarding human trafficking, including the following:

FBI field offices conducted approximately 672 human trafficking training sessions in fiscal year 2014 to various groups, including, but not limited to, state and local law enforcement, social workers, healthcare providers, hotel workers, faith based groups, non- governmental organizations, students and educators.

HHS piloted the Stop. Observe. Ask. Respond (SOAR) to Health and Wellness program, a human trafficking training program to help health care providers identify potential victims and appropriately refer them for services, in fiscal year 2014. According to HHS officials, the department will expand the training to social workers, substance abuse and mental health providers, and public health professionals in fiscal year 2016. In addition, the officials said that in fiscal year 2015, 15,265 professionals and first responders likely to interact with victims of trafficking were trained through a network of several HHS-funded anti-trafficking grantees.

The Blue Campaign, in collaboration with the ICE HSI Victim Assistance Program and other DHS components, provided human trafficking awareness training to government, nongovernment, and private industries, including those in hospitality, health care, and education.

Other federal agencies, whose employees may come across human trafficking victims in their day-to-day operations—including U.S. Customs and Border Protection, TSA, USCIS, and the U.S. Coast Guard—also provide human trafficking training to their employees. Further, Labor’s Wage and Hour Division and the EEOC also look for human trafficking indicators when conducting their own investigative and enforcement work. According to officials, these agencies are to refer potential human trafficking cases to the appropriate law enforcement agencies for further investigation. For example, TSA officials we met with told us that from March 2015 to February 2016, they referred six reports of suspected human trafficking to ICE HSI. Figure 2 shows an example of a resource available to agencies and the public to help them identify human trafficking.

Further, some federal agencies also have efforts related to public awareness of human trafficking. For example, in January 2016, OVC released resources to raise awareness and serve victims, including a video series called “The Faces of Human Trafficking” and posters to be used for outreach and education efforts of service providers, law enforcement, prosecutors, and others in the community. The series includes information about sex and labor trafficking, multidisciplinary approaches to serving victims of human trafficking, effective victim services, victims' legal needs, and voices of survivors. Since 2010, DHS, through the Blue Campaign, reported it has worked to raise public awareness about human trafficking, leveraging partnerships with select government and nongovernmental entities to educate the public to recognize human trafficking and report suspected instances. According to DHS officials, Blue Campaign posters are displayed in public locations including airports and bus stops. Figures 3 and 4 show examples of resources used as part of these initiatives, which are available online, or by request, for public distribution.

In addition, HHS established the “Look Beneath the Surface” public awareness campaign through its Rescue and Restore Victims of Human Trafficking program. According to HHS officials, in fiscal year 2015, the department distributed over 883,000 pieces of material publicizing the NHTRC. These materials, which included posters, brochures, fact sheets, and cards with tips on identifying victims, were available in eight languages. According to HHS officials, in fiscal year 2016, the department is updating its public awareness campaign materials to be complementary to other federal resources. Figure 5 shows an example of resources used as part of this initiative.

Federal Judicial Center Initiatives. In accordance with the JVTA, the Federal Judicial Center provided training to federal judges and judicial branch attorneys, including judicial law clerks, on human trafficking through a webinar in August 2015. The training walked participants through the provisions of the JVTA and addressed how child exploitation manifests in human trafficking cases, among other things. According to Federal Judicial Center officials we spoke with, 1,300 registered viewers participated in the webinar, which is now available for on-demand viewing on the Federal Judicial Center website. They also told us that, in April 2016, 198 district judges attended a workshop in which, among other topics, a human trafficking sentencing scenario was discussed. According to Federal Judicial Center officials, adjudicating human trafficking cases can be challenging for judges because they have to determine the role the victim played in the trafficking situation and it may be difficult to determine what kept the victims from escaping, and led them to instead obey the trafficker.

State and Local Initiatives. The states and jurisdictions included in our review also provide for training of law enforcement personnel on human trafficking-related issues. Some of the states also have laws related to ensuring public awareness of human trafficking. For example:

Virginia’s Department of Social Services is required to develop a plan providing for, among other things, preparation and dissemination of educational and training programs and materials to increase awareness of human trafficking and services available to victims among local departments of social services, public and private agencies and service providers, and the public; and

North Dakota’s Department of Transportation is required to display in every transportation station, rest area, and welcome center, a public- awareness sign that contains state or local human trafficking resource information as well as the NHTRC Hotline number.

Law Enforcement Officials and Prosecutors Reported Other Challenges in Combating Human Trafficking

Additional challenges reported by law enforcement officials and prosecutors we spoke with include the amount of time it may take for a USAO to decide whether federal charges will be pursued in certain human trafficking cases. USAOs would be expected to take the time that is needed to exercise prosecutorial discretion in a reasoned manner, considering the relevant laws and facts. However, one of the four state prosecutors we interviewed said that the length of time it takes the USAO to decide whether to accept or decline the case, which has taken over a year in certain instances, can make it difficult for them to obtain evidence once the case is referred to them. Human trafficking-related prosecutions can occur at both the federal and state level. Law enforcement officials told us that, in most instances, they refer cases to the state prosecutor when the USAO declines to prosecute the case. Based on our review of data provided by the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, the most common reasons that USAOs reported declining human trafficking cases were “insufficient evidence” and “matters being referred to another jurisdiction.”(See appendix II for additional information on declinations.) Two of the four state prosecutors we interviewed reported working with the USAO to make a joint decision on whether to prosecute the case at the federal or state level, which may help address this challenge.

Additionally, officials from FBI, ICE HSI and Bureau of Diplomatic Security whose area of responsibility includes North Dakota identified challenges such as having to drive long distances, sometimes under hazardous driving conditions, to do their investigative work and meet with victims. These officials told us that there has been an increase in human trafficking and other criminal activity in the Bakken area—a relatively remote area—due to the oil boom. According to FBI and ICE HSI officials, the agencies are taking steps to address this challenge. FBI officials told us that the agency opened a field office in spring 2016 in western North Dakota, which is closer to the area where crime, in general, has increased. FBI and ICE HSI officials also told us that the agencies are working together to station some ICE HSI agents in the FBI’s new facility.

DOJ and HHS Administer Human Trafficking Grants to Promote Stakeholder Collaboration and Provide Victim Services, and They Have Processes to Minimize Grant Duplication

At Least 42 Federal Grant Programs Are Available to Combat Human Trafficking in the United States and Assist Victims

We identified 42 grant programs for which the federal government awarded funding in 2014 and 2015 that may be used to combat human trafficking or to assist victims of human trafficking (see appendix IV for a list of the grant programs and their objectives). Fifteen grant programs administered by DOJ and HHS are intended solely to combat human trafficking or assist victims. In fiscal years 2014 and 2015, 123 organizations were awarded funds under these grant programs. These initiatives include programs that provide training and technical assistance to service providers and law enforcement agencies; support multi- disciplinary task forces to ensure victim-centered responses to human trafficking; and provide services directly to victims of human trafficking. Further, each grant program may be used for more than one of these purposes. More specifically, the 15 grant programs can be used for: Collaboration and partnerships. 12 of the grant programs allow funds to be used for collaboration between or within law enforcement and service providers through mechanisms such as task forces, coalitions, and partnerships. For example, the Enhanced Collaborative Model grant program, administered by OVC and BJA, supports the development and enhancement of multidisciplinary human trafficking task forces. These task forces implement collaborative approaches to involve both law enforcement and service providers in implementing a victim-centered approach to human trafficking investigations, prosecutions, and assistance.

Data, research, and evaluation: 3 of the grant programs include an element of data collection on human trafficking cases, research on human trafficking, or evaluation of best practices. For instance, the Research and Evaluation on Trafficking in Persons grant program, administered by NIJ, has supported nine research projects evaluating, among other things, the prevalence of human trafficking in the United States, and victim experiences with law enforcement and service providers.

Victim services: 9 of the grant programs can be used to provide services directly to victims of human trafficking, including provision of housing, health care, mental health and substance abuse services, and legal services. For example, HHS administers the Trafficking Victims Assistance grant program, which provides comprehensive services for foreign victims of human trafficking in the United States.

Public awareness: 8 of the grants may be used to raise public awareness of trafficking, which is intended to help the public recognize human trafficking and report suspected cases.

Training and technical assistance: 13 of the grant programs may be used to provide training and technical assistance to service providers or law enforcement stakeholders on elements of identifying and serving victims of human trafficking. For example, one grantee funded under HHS’s Rescue and Restore grant program provides peer-to-peer training in order to further develop coordinated, effective multidisciplinary coalitions to address human trafficking throughout its state.

An additional twenty-seven grant programs are not specifically for human trafficking, but may be used to combat trafficking or assist victims. For instance, DOJ’s Vision 21 Innovation Grants support training, technical assistance, capacity building, assessment, or strategic planning for eight issue areas, one of which was related to human trafficking in the fiscal year 2015 solicitation. Similarly, HHS’s Refugee and Entrant Assistance grant programs are intended primarily for refugees in the United States, but individuals who have been certified as victims of human trafficking by HHS’s Office of Refugee Resettlement or the Office on Trafficking in Persons are also eligible for services through these programs.

Overlap Exists Across Grant Programs Intended Solely to Combat Human Trafficking, but Processes Exist to Help Avoid Duplication, Both Within and Between Agencies

As shown in table 1 above, each of the 15 grant programs that are intended solely for human trafficking contains at least some potential overlap with other human trafficking grant programs in authorized uses. For instance, with the exception of the Research and Evaluation on Trafficking in Persons grant program, funding under each of the remaining 14 grant programs can be used for either collaboration or training purposes. Similarly, 9 of the 15 grant programs provide support for direct services to victims of human trafficking. As described earlier, according to our prior work addressing overlap and duplication, overlap among programs occurs when multiple programs engage in similar activities or strategies, as many of the human trafficking grants do.

Of the 123 organizations that were awarded grants specific to human trafficking in fiscal years 2014 or 2015, 13 received multiple human trafficking grants for either victim services or for collaboration, training, and technical assistance from DOJ and HHS. HHS officials stated that additional overlap may exist among sub-grantees, although we did not include subgrantees in our duplication analysis. Of the 13, 7 had multiple grants that could be used for victim services, and 3 had multiple grants that could be used for collaboration, training, and technical assistance. For instance, two organizations received a grant for Services to Victims of Human Trafficking in 2014 and a grant for the Enhanced Collaborative Model in 2015, both from DOJ. Both grants can be used to provide direct services to victims of human trafficking. Another organization received similar grants for victim services from DOJ and HHS in 2014, and a third grant to establish a task force and provide services in 2015. HHS officials noted that they were comfortable with awarding multiple services grants to this organization because different populations were served under each grant application. DOJ officials noted that the same organization received the task force grant because they had submitted a strong application and they believed a task force would benefit the area in which the organization worked.

DOJ officials noted that geographical distribution is an important factor when making award decisions, and that they would not generally award two grants in a location that may be duplicative, such as two Enhanced Collaborative Model awards in the same city. However, they noted that they may award funds under the same grant program to multiple service providers in cities that may have a high need for services or have a high number of identified trafficking victims. HHS officials told us that they do attempt to achieve geographic dispersion when awarding grants under the Rescue and Restore program, Trafficking Victim Assistance Program, and Demonstration Grants for Domestic Victims of Human Trafficking. Officials from both agencies said that they do not consider the locations of grants awarded by other agencies when awarding grants. Five cities have multiple organizations located in their cities that have been awarded the same DOJ grants as one another, but in those cases, each organization serves a different population or provides different services, according to DOJ officials. Based on our analysis of DOJ and HHS grant data, over half of all grants were awarded in the 9 states that are in the top one-third with respect to matters referred for federal prosecution and calls and tips related to human trafficking. Figure 6 shows the number of human trafficking grants awarded within the United States by city.

Move mouse over city, county, or state names for grant information. For noninteractive version see appendix V.

Grant awards are categorized by the main city in the area in which they are being implemented. The map does not include grants that provide services throughout the United States or that provide services in multiple states.

DOJ and HHS each have intra-agency processes in place to prevent unnecessary duplication. According to DOJ and HHS officials, each agency operates an internal working group to allow the components administering human trafficking grants to communicate on a regular basis. HHS officials indicated that offices that administer human trafficking grant programs meet monthly to exchange information, which may include grant-related announcements and coordination of anti- trafficking activities. Similarly, DOJ officials told us that all DOJ components that address human trafficking meet on a quarterly basis with the goal of ensuring coordination in policy and grant-making. Further, DOJ has taken action to implement recommendations from a prior GAO report to identify overlapping grant programs and mitigate the risk of unnecessary grant award duplication in its programs. In response to these recommendations, DOJ also requires grant applicants to identify in their applications any federal grants they are currently operating under as well as federal grants for which they have applied. Finally, in response to recommendations in the same GAO report, DOJ has conducted two studies of overlap and duplication among fiscal year 2012 grant programs administered by the Office of Justice Programs, the Office on Violence against Women, and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

DOJ and HHS officials also reported that they routinely share grant announcements with one another in an informal manner. For instance, officials from both agencies said they coordinate on grant-related activities through the implementation of the Federal Strategic Action Plan on Services for Victims of Human Trafficking in the United States, a government-wide plan which lays out a 5-year path for further strengthening coordination, collaboration, and capacity across governmental and nongovernmental entities. DOJ and HHS officials told us that they conduct regular meetings to monitor progress in advancing the goals laid out in the strategic plan, one of which is to coordinate victim services effectively through collaboration across multiple service sectors to, among other things, reduce duplication of efforts. In addition, HHS officials noted that DOJ and HHS meet bi-weekly during co-chair meetings for the SPOG Victim Services Committee and both agencies participate in the SPOG Grantmaking Committee meetings, which provide additional opportunities to share information for the purposes of coordination and collaboration. According to HHS officials, this coordination prevents duplication because they are aware of the actions of all of the agencies involved in administering grants targeted at human trafficking. Officials from DOJ and HHS also told us that the agencies are working together to develop guidance for grantees that have been awarded human trafficking grants from both agencies so that grantees can avoid using grant funds for duplicative activities. HHS officials noted that the first set of guidance, for serving foreign victims of human trafficking, would be released in summer 2016. Finally, the officials noted that the community of individuals who administer human trafficking grants is small, and that there is frequent formal communication through respective agency grantee calls and informal communication over e-mail regarding the grants between the two agencies.

In addition to HHS’s and DOJ’s internal and intra-agency processes for addressing potential duplication, since November 2006, the SPOG has provided a formal mechanism for all agencies administering human trafficking grants to communicate with one another. SPOG guidance was updated in March 2016, and according to officials who administer the SPOG Grantmaking Committee, the updated guidance encourages enhanced information sharing among participating agencies. Specifically, the updated guidance directs participating agencies to share information with members of the Grantmaking Committee prior to final decisions in at least one of the following ways: (1) share plans for programs containing anti-trafficking components during the grant program development process; (2) notify the SPOG of grant solicitations within a reasonable time after they are issued; or (3) notify SPOG partner agencies of proposed funding recipients prior to announcing the award. In each case, SPOG agencies are allotted 5 days for comment on the information. Further, agencies are also to share information with members of the Grantmaking Committee after final decisions are made.

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report for review and comment to the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Justice, Labor, and State; the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. We received technical comments from the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Justice, and State; and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, which we incorporated as appropriate. The Department of Labor and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission did not provide comments.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional committees, the Attorney General; the Secretaries of Defense, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Labor and State; the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; and the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. In addition, the report is available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-8777 or goodwing@gao.gov . Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report are listed in appendix VI.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and Methodology

The Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act (JVTA) of 2015 includes a provision for GAO to report on federal and selected state efforts to combat human trafficking in the United States, as well as identify federal grant programs that can be used to assist victims of trafficking. This report addresses the following questions: 1. What federal efforts have been made to determine the prevalence of human trafficking in the United States? 2. What challenges, if any, do federal and selected state law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies face when combating human trafficking in the United States, and what actions have they and others taken to address identified challenges? 3. What federal grant programs are intended to combat human trafficking and assist victims within the United States, and what steps have federal agencies taken, if any, to reduce the potential for duplication among grant programs?

For purposes of this report, we focused on human trafficking within the United States, which includes U.S. citizens or nationals, or those with or without lawful immigration status who are trafficked within the United States, as well as foreign persons who are brought to the United States from abroad for the purpose of trafficking.

To address the first objective, we reviewed prior GAO human trafficking reports, the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015 and other federal laws related to human trafficking, and we interviewed Department of Justice (DOJ), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) officials, to learn whether their component agencies had efforts underway to collect human tracking data that could be used to determine the prevalence of human trafficking in the United States. We also reviewed documentation issued by the President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking to learn about additional federal efforts to collect information on the prevalence of human trafficking. We obtained and analyzed data from federal investigative and prosecutorial agencies and federally- funded entities that, while not specifically intended to do so, could give an indication of where human trafficking is occurring in the United States. We assessed the reliability of the data the agencies and other entities provided by questioning knowledgeable officials and reviewing the data for obvious errors and anomalies. We determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our reporting objectives. We identified potential sources of human trafficking information, including National Human Trafficking Resource Center (NHTRC) and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). We received data related to calls, tips, and reports received by NHTRC and NCMEC and interviewed officials to determine how the information was collected and what criteria were used to determine whether a call or report was categorized as related to human trafficking. We also obtained prosecution and investigations data from DOJ, DHS, Department of Labor (Labor), and Department of State (State). Further, we reviewed DOJ’s grants to identify studies funded to assess human trafficking in the United States. We also interviewed DOJ grantees to understand their ongoing research to quantify human trafficking.

To identify challenges federal and selected state law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies face when combating human trafficking and efforts undertaken to address these challenges, we identified relevant federal law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies based on our previous work and review of legislation related to human trafficking. We then interviewed headquarters officials from the Department of Defense, DOJ, DHS, Labor, State, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) who are responsible for identifying or investigating human trafficking and other unlawful activities, or prosecuting or litigating cases involving human trafficking-related violations. At DOJ, we interviewed officials from the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Civil Rights Division/Criminal Section, Criminal Division/Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, and the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys. At DHS, we interviewed officials from the Office of the Deputy Secretary, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), Transportation Security Administration, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and U.S. Coast Guard. At Labor, we interviewed officials from the Wage and Hour Division and Office of the Inspector General, and at State we interviewed officials from the Bureau of Diplomatic Security. For the FBI, U.S. Attorney’s Office (USAO), ICE HSI, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, and EEOC, we interviewed investigators and prosecutors (or litigators) located in field offices that cover four jurisdictions—Washington, DC/ Northern Virginia; Houston, Texas; Los Angeles, California; and Bismarck, North Dakota.

We selected these four jurisdictions because they are located in states that are among the top 10 in terms of human trafficking tips, per capita, that were sent to the NHTRC or to NCMEC. We also selected these jurisdictions because they reflect a variation in geography and receipt of federal funding to establish or continue a human trafficking task force through the Enhanced Collaborative Model to Combat Human Trafficking during fiscal year 2015. In addition, all of the jurisdictions we selected are within geographic priority areas identified by DHS through the Blue Campaign. The purpose of the Blue Campaign is to provide training and raise public awareness about human trafficking, among other things. The campaign has identified priority geographic areas and populations to focus its outreach efforts during fiscal year 2016.

We conducted 32 interviews with federal, state and local law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies who were part of the identified task forces in these jurisdictions. During the interviews, we asked officials whether they experienced any challenges in carrying out their duties related to combating human trafficking and to identify any efforts that have been or could be taken to address challenges. Officials identified challenges when we explicitly asked them to identify them or during the course of our discussion. When we report the number of agencies that identified a particular challenge, this does not necessarily mean that the remaining agencies did not also experience the challenge. It means that those stakeholders did not raise the challenge during the course of our interviews. While these officials’ perspectives cannot be generalized to all jurisdictions, they provided insights into federal, state, and local efforts to combat human trafficking. We also interviewed representatives from six non-governmental organizations that provide services to human trafficking victims in the selected jurisdictions. In addition, we interviewed officials from the Federal Judicial Center and the federal judge who conducted the required training for federal judges as mandated by the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act, and the National Association of Attorneys General to further understand challenges faced when combating human trafficking.

To address our third objective, we asked the DHS, DOJ, HHS, Labor and State, which had been identified in a prior study as agencies administering grant programs related to human trafficking, to each provide us a list of grant programs that could be used to combat human trafficking in the United States or assist victims. We corroborated agencies’ lists with online resources, such as grants.gov, and also followed up with interviews at which we requested additional information and ensured that we were aware of all grant programs that could be used to address human trafficking. We identified a total of 42 grant programs that could be used to address human trafficking, although because services for human trafficking victims may be one of many allowable uses for some grant programs, it is possible that there are some programs that were not identified by granting agencies or by our analysis of public records. However, we limited our duplication analysis to the 15 that were intended solely for human trafficking purposes, because we determined that there would most likely be duplication across these grant programs as they were created to address the same issue. Using the established GAO framework for addressing overlap and duplication, we use the following definitions for purposes of assessing human trafficking grant programs:

Overlap occurs when multiple granting agencies or grant programs have similar goals, engage in similar activities or strategies to achieve these goals, or target the same or similar beneficiaries. Overlap may result from statutory or other limitations beyond an agency’s control.

Duplication occurs on multiple levels. It occurs when a single grantee uses grant funds from different federal sources to pay for the exact same expenditure. Duplication also occurs when two or more granting agencies or grant programs engage in the same or similar activities or provide funding to support the same or similar services to the same beneficiaries. Duplication thus stems from overlap. When granting agencies do not identify overlap, assess its impact, or coordinate their activities in acknowledgment of the overlap, there is a heightened risk of unnecessary duplication because one granting agency may not be knowledgeable of the ways in which its funding decision duplicates another’s. At times, federal funding is leveraged by design to achieve a single purpose through multiple federal funding streams. These funding arrangements are not characterized as unnecessary duplication for purposes of this review so long as federal agencies are aware of them or have deliberately planned for grant programs to be complementary.

To assess the possibility for overlap among the 15 grant programs intended solely to address human trafficking, we reviewed grant solicitations from fiscal years 2014 and 2015, the most recent two years in which grants had been awarded, to identify similarities and differences between the allowable activities and target beneficiaries. We divided allowable activities into five categories to determine how many of the grant programs could be used for the same purpose. We then examined the grant awards for each program to assess whether any organizations that had been awarded human trafficking grants were or could be using the grants to provide the same services to the same or similar groups of beneficiaries. We identified 14 organizations that were awarded multiple human trafficking grants in 2014 or 2015. To determine whether duplication was actually occurring, we interviewed officials responsible for administering grant programs at the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime in DOJ and the Administration for Children and Families in HHS about the specific organizations that had received multiple grants. We also spoke with three of the organizations regarding how they ensure that funds from each grant are being used for the approved purposes. We selected the organizations based on the number and similarity of grants they were awarded and whether the grants were from both federal agencies.

To evaluate what efforts, if any, have been made to prevent unnecessary duplication among human trafficking grants, we reviewed documentation on collaboration efforts, including the Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress and Assessment of U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons and guidance from the Senior Policy Operating Group’s (SPOG) Grantmaking Committee. We also interviewed federal agency officials, including members of the SPOG and officials responsible for administering grant programs from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime in DOJ and the Administration for Children and Families in HHS regarding formal and informal mechanisms for coordinating with one another to prevent overlap among grants and duplication among grant awards.

We conducted this performance audit from July 2015 to June 2016 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

Appendix II: Federal Human Trafficking Investigation and Prosecution Data

Responsibility for addressing human trafficking crimes falls to multiple federal agencies. These agencies reported data on the investigations, prosecutions, indictments, and arrests related to trafficking crimes for fiscal years 2013 to 2015. These data are a general indicator of the level of agency effort on trafficking in persons, although they are limited by a number of factors. Because trafficking in persons is a hidden crime and victims are hesitant to come forward, it is difficult to estimate the extent of trafficking in persons crimes. Moreover, because prosecutors may charge traffickers with other crimes (e.g., kidnapping, the Mann Act, immigration violations, or money laundering) for strategic or tactical reasons, data on the number of trafficking in persons investigations and prosecutions do not provide a complete picture of the number of traffickers who have been thwarted. The data systems agencies use are primarily case management systems, which may not be able to extract trafficking data if trafficking was not listed as a charge. Additionally, if an investigation on smuggling later reveals a trafficking violation, some data systems will continue to store investigative data under the smuggling classification.

The complexity of the investigations and the limitations of data systems make providing data on human trafficking a labor-intensive effort for agencies. Therefore, these data are not comparable across the agencies and it is not possible to associate arrest and indictment data with a particular case because of differences in agency data systems. Moreover, agency officials noted that investigations do not always lead to prosecutions, because situations that appear to be trafficking may prove to be alien smuggling or prostitution accompanied by abuse and, therefore, do not meet the criteria to be prosecuted as trafficking cases. This appendix provides data on federal agencies’ investigations and prosecutions of human trafficking during fiscal years 2013 to 2015.

Human Trafficking Investigations

Within the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has jurisdiction to investigate a broad range of violations of federal law including human trafficking. Within the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) investigates human trafficking as well as a range of cross-border and immigration-related criminal activity. Other agencies, also conduct human trafficking investigations as they relate to their statutory authority. Department of State’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security examines trafficking cases involving visa and passport fraud. Department of Labor’s Inspector General investigates human trafficking offenses that are discovered during investigations involving the Department of Labor’s Foreign Labor Certification programs. Department of Defense’s Defense Criminal Investigative Service, Army Criminal Investigation Command, Naval Criminal Investigative Service, and Air Force Office of Special Investigations investigate allegations of sex and labor trafficking involving service members, departmental contractors and civilians.

The data for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 related to investigations, indictments, arrests, and convictions of human trafficking offenses provided by the ICE HSI and the FBI are shown in tables 2, 3, and 4. The arrests, indictments, and convictions associated with ICE HSI and the FBI investigations could have occurred at either the federal, state, or local level.

The data related to investigations of human trafficking conducted by the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the Department of Labor Inspector General, and the Department of Defense during fiscal years 2013-2015 are shown in tables 5, 6, and 7.

Human Trafficking Prosecutions

Within the Department of Justice, the U.S. Attorney’s Offices, along with the Criminal Division and Civil Rights Division, prosecute human trafficking crimes. The Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit (HTPU) in the Civil Rights Division prosecutes labor trafficking and sex trafficking of adults. Within the Criminal Division, the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, prosecutes child sex trafficking cases.

The data for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 related to matters initiated, cases prosecuted, defendants charged, and defendants convicted of human trafficking offenses provided by the Criminal Division, Civil Rights Division and U.S Attorney’s Offices are shown in tables 8, 9, and 10.

Prosecutorial agencies may decline a matter for prosecution for many reasons. For fiscal years 2014 and 2015 the main reason for the U.S. Attorney’s Offices to decline to prosecute a case was insufficient evidence. Table 11 presents the declination statistics and reasons for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for years 2014 and 2015.

Appendix III: Extent to which Human Trafficking Victims Were Granted T-visas, U- visas, and Continued Presence

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) provides immigration relief to foreign victims of human trafficking and other crimes by adjudicating applications for T nonimmigrant status (T visa) for victims of a severe form of trafficking who meet certain criteria and petitions for U nonimmigrant status (U visa) for victims of qualifying criminal activity, including human trafficking and fraud in foreign labor contracting, who satisfy U visa-specific criteria. The T visa and U visa allow the victims to remain in the country, for up to a 4 year period, which may be extended under certain circumstances, so they can assist with the investigation or prosecution of human trafficking or qualifying crimes, respectively. Further, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) can grant Continued Presence, which is a temporary form of protection available to foreign national victims of human trafficking without lawful immigration status if they are potential witnesses to that trafficking, and upon the application by federal law enforcement officials to DHS. Continued Presence allows victims to remain and work in the country temporarily, for 1 year and may be renewed in 1 year increments, during the ongoing investigation into the human trafficking-related crimes committed against them.

T nonimmigrant status may be available for victims of severe forms of trafficking who meet the following criteria: physical presence in the United States on account of such trafficking; compliance with any reasonable request for assistance by law enforcement in the investigation or prosecution of the trafficking (unless the victim is unable to cooperate due to physical or psychological trauma, or is under 18 years of age); and would suffer extreme hardship involving unusual and severe harm if removed from the United States.The number of T visas that may be granted each fiscal year is limited by statute to 5,000 for victims. To obtain a T visa a victim must submit an application, which may include law enforcement certification that the applicant has been a victim of trafficking, to USCIS for review. Victims may also request a derivative T visas for family members, such as the spouse, children or other eligible family members. Derivative family members do not count towards the 5,000 statutory cap. Tables 12 and 13 present the number of T visa applications filed with USCIS for victims and their families for fiscal years 2013-2015.

U nonimmigrant status may be available for victims of qualifying criminal activity who have suffered substantial physical or mental abuse as a result of being a victim of the qualifying crime, possess information about the qualifying crime, and have been, are being, or are likely to be helpful to law enforcement or government officials in the investigation or prosecution of the qualifying criminal activity, including trafficking and fraud in foreign labor contracting. The number of U visas that may be granted to principal petitioners each fiscal year is limited by law to 10,000. However, derivative family members do not count towards the 10,000 statutory cap. To obtain a U visa a victim must submit a petition, including a law enforcement certification that the petitioner has been a victim of a qualifying crime, to USCIS for review. See table 14 for the number of U visa petitions filed with USCIS for victims in human trafficking related cases.

Continued Presence allows victims of human trafficking to remain in the United States temporarily during the ongoing investigation into the human trafficking-related crimes committed against them. For a victim to obtain Continued Presence federal law enforcement officials or prosecutors must submit an application to ICE for review. Continued Presence is initially granted for 1 year and may be renewed in 1-year increments. Table 15 present the number of Continued Presence applications filed with ICE for fiscal years 2013-2015.

Appendix IV: Grant Programs for Human Trafficking

We identified 42 federal grant programs that can be used for the purpose of combating human trafficking or assisting victims of human trafficking in the United States. Fifteen are intended solely for these purposes. Each of the grant programs is administered by a component of the Departments of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, or Justice.

Appendix V: Data from Interactive Map

This appendix contains the data used in figure 5 of this report, Human Trafficking Grants Awarded within the United States, Fiscal Years 2014- 2015. As in the map, each grant program may have multiple purposes, but their main purpose is identified in the table. In addition, grant awards are categorized by the main city or area in which they are being implemented. The table does not include grants that provide services throughout the United States or that provide services in multiple states, or information on sub-recipients of Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) grantees.

Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Staff Acknowledgements

In addition to the contact named above, Kristy Love, Assistant Director; Kisha Clark, Analyst-in Charge; Marycella Mierez; Miriam Hill; Jon Najmi and Michele Fejfar made significant contributions to the work.