Violence in the home is not a new phenomenon. Jeffrey L. Edleson, a researcher who hasstudied domestic violence extensively, dates it back to the Roman Empire, and reports that theincidence of family violence has not changed over the years as much as its visibility. (1) Edleson, who is the directorof the Minnesota Center Against Violence and Abuse, observes that the most recent victims offamily violence to receive attention are children who witness violence between adults in their homes. Carla Smith Stover of the Yale University Child Study Center noted in an overview of domesticviolence research that a large body of studies have indicated that exposure to domestic violence hasharmful effects on children's emotional and behavioral development. Some researchers havereported data demonstrating that childhood exposure to such violence is associated with coexistingand potential indications of child behavioral and psychiatric problems. (2) Stover reported that someresearchers believe that exposure to such violence can "affect children's cognitive functioning,initiative, personality style, self-esteem, and impulse control." (3) Furthermore, such childrenmay be at greater risk for child abuse and neglect. Stover cited research that found an estimated 60%to 75% of families in homes where such violence occurred had children who also were physicallyabused. (4) The impact on children of domestic violence was an issue of interest in the 109th Congress.The first session of the 109th Congress ended with the passage of the Violence Against Women andDepartment of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005 ( P.L. 109-162 ), which contained new initiativesto address concerns about children and youth exposed to and victimized by domestic violence. Thisreport discusses existing federal programs and initiatives that have been established to assist suchchildren and youth, and new provisions enacted in P.L. 109-162 . Since 1999, several federal programs and initiatives have been created specifically to addressconcerns related to children who witness domestic violence. The programs include the Safe StartProgram (administered by the Department of Justice's (DOJ's) Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention, or OJJDP), Safe Havens for Children Program (sponsored by DOJ's Officeof Violence Against Women, or VAWO), and the Safe and Bright Futures for Children Initiative andthe Demonstration of Enhanced Services to Children and Youth Who Have Been Exposed toDomestic Violence (both administered by the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS). The latter two programs are partially funded through proceeds from the Stop Family Violencepostage stamp that was created through the Stamp Out Domestic Violence Act of 2001, Section 653of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 2002 ( P.L. 107-67 ). The U.S. PostalService was directed to issue a semi-postal stamp in order to allow the public a direct and tangibleway to contribute to domestic violence funding. The stamp was issued for sale on October 8, 2003. To date, proceeds from the stamp have generated $3.03 million. Stamps will not be issued afterDecember 31, 2006. (5) In addition, the Greenbook Initiative is a federal multi-agency demonstration project thatimplements the suggested guidelines for policy and practice of the National Council of Juvenile andFamily Court Judges "Greenbook" designed to assist child welfare, domestic violence agencies, andfamily courts to respond more effectively when domestic violence and child maltreatment occursimultaneously. The federal assistance programs and the Greenbook Initiative are discussed below. The Safe Start Program was authorized by the Omnibus Consolidated and EmergencySupplemental Appropriations Act of 1999 ( P.L. 105-277 ), and was created because of the concernabout a high level of violence in 1998 that affected the lives of children (for example, multipleschool shootings that had occurred). President Bill Clinton initiated the Children Exposed toViolence Initiative, sponsored by DOJ and directed by Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder. (6) On June 22, 1999, throughthe leadership of the Deputy Attorney General, 150 practitioners and policymakers attended aNational Summit on Children Exposed to Violence to consider the issue and establish a nationalblueprint for action. The National Advisory Council on Violence Against Women also attended thesummit. (7) In FY1999, of the $283 million Violence Against Women Act appropriation provided toDOJ, $10 million was designated for the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention toadminister the Safe Start Program. (8) The purpose of the program was to support communities inpreventing and reducing the impact of family and community violence on young children (primarilyfrom birth to age six) and their families, and to help communities expand their partnerships withservice providers (such as law enforcement agencies, mental health and health providers, earlychildhood education, and others) to establish a general service delivery system. (9) Eligible lead applicants for a Safe Start grant (that is, a cooperative agreement), had to becollaborative groups of two or more public agencies (including state agencies, units of localgovernment, tribal governments, and public colleges and universities), and/or private organizations(including nonprofit, for-profit, and faith-based groups) agreeing to waive any profit or fee, whoworked jointly to prevent and address the effects of witnessing violence on children. (10) Applicants could use cooperative agreement funds to create and extend local prevention,intervention, and treatment services for young children who had witnessed or were at risk ofwitnessing violence, to develop effective rules and procedures among agencies regarding how toassist such children, and to coordinate services in order to expand a community-wide system formeeting the needs of such children. (11) The goal of the project was to establish a far-reaching servicedelivery system to improve access, delivery, and quality of services for young children who wereexposed to or at risk of exposure to violence. This effort was to be accomplished by expandingexisting community partnerships between service providers in key fields such as law enforcement,health, mental health, early childhood education, child welfare, substance abuse prevention andtreatment, domestic violence crisis interventions, and others. (12) The Safe Start Demonstration Project was a 5Â½-year effort conducted in three phases --planning and assessment, initial implementation, and full implementation. (13) Initially, nine Safe Startdemonstration program sites were selected competitively in 1999 and 2000. Those sites wereBaltimore, Maryland; Bridgeport, Connecticut; Chatham County, North Carolina; Chicago, Illinois;Rochester, New York; Pinellas County, Florida; San Francisco, California; Spokane, Washington;and Washington County, Maine. In 2001, two tribal sites were selected -- the Pueblo Tribe of Zuni,New Mexico, and the Sitka Tribe of Alaska. (14) The 11 sites represented urban, rural, and tribal communitiesinvolved in addressing problems faced by young children exposed to violence in their homes,schools, and communities. (15) A national evaluation of the Safe Start Demonstration Project assessing the period fromJanuary through December 2004 that was conducted noted the accomplishments and challengesexperienced across the demonstration sites. (16) Safe Start Promising Approaches. Phase II ofSafe Start, now under way, is called the Safe Start Promising Approaches for Children Exposed toViolence Pilot Project (Safe Start Promising Approaches). OJJDP stated that the target populationfor the program was children exposed to violence, but it specified that "children" included infantsto persons 18 years of age. Emphasis would continue, however, to be placed upon young childrenfrom infants to six years of age and their families. OJJDP noted that the reason for this particularemphasis was twofold -- research indicated that younger children were at the greatest risk of harmfrom exposure to violence, and because the exposure of younger children was often unrecognized. Furthermore, the number of developmentally specific services as well as the number of resourcesand points of entry into services and support for young children were limited. (17) The local sites funded for the initial Safe Start Demonstration Project, listed above, were noteligible to apply for Safe Start Promising Approaches grants. (18) In August 2005, DOJawarded $6.2 million for the Safe Start Promising Approaches grants (a four-year pilot project) thatwould not only support children exposed to domestic violence, but also those who experienced andwitnessed violent crime, sexual and physical assault, and child abuse. The grants were awarded to15 community sites (19) that would operate through summer/fall of 2009. (20) The 15 community sites are Kalamazoo, Michigan; Chelsea,Massachusetts; Miami, Florida; New York, New York; the Bronx, New York; Erie, Pennsylvania;San Diego, California; Toledo, Ohio; San Francisco, California; Dallas, Texas; Providence, RhodeIsland; Oakland, California; Portland, Oregon; Pompano Beach, Florida; and Dayton, Ohio. (21) Those projects willattempt to provide evidence that promising practices and programs prove effective in reducing theharmful effects on children who witness intimate partner violence of one of their parents. OJJDP awarded $996,721 to the Rand Corporation for a national evaluation of the Safe StartPromising Approaches program. (22) The goals of the evaluation are to identify the best practices thateffectively reduce the negative impact on children's exposure to violence, and to distribute thoseresults so that other communities may duplicate the positive outcomes. (23) Funding for the Safe Start Program. Congressappropriated Safe Start funds at the $10 million level from FY1999 through FY2006. Table 1 presents the actual appropriation figures after required rescissions from FY2003 through FY2006. The President did not propose FY2007 funding for the Safe Start Program because it was a pilotprogram that the Administration believed had achieved its stated goals. (24) Neither the HouseAppropriations Committee on Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related Agencies (SSJC, H.Rept. 109-520 ) nor the full House (which passed the legislation) recommended FY2007 funding forthe Safe Start Program. The Senate Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS)Committee report ( S. Rept. 109-280 ) language does not identify the Safe Start Program. Safe Startwas funded in FY2006 as a set-aside within the Services, Training, Officers, and Prosecutors (STOP)grant program, and funding for the STOP grant continues under a continuing resolution (CR, P.L.109-383 ) that expires on February 15, 2007. Table 1. Safe Start Program, Appropriations History,FY2003-FY2007 ($ in millions) Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Congressional and PublicAffairs, June 24, 2005, and P.L 109-108, Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related AgenciesAppropriations Act, 2006, 119 Stat. 2299. a. Figure reflects a 1% across-the-board rescission required by FY2006 discretionary budgetauthority. The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (Title IV of the Violent Crime Control and LawEnforcement Act of 1994, P.L. 103-322 ), the primary federal legislation that provides assistance forbattered women, was amended in 2000 to create the Safe Havens for Children Pilot Program (as TitleIII, Sec. 1301, Limiting the Effects of Violence on Children, P.L. 106-386 ), to provide supervisedand safe visitation exchange of children by and between parents in situations involving domesticviolence, child abuse, sexual assault, or stalking. The Safe Havens for Children Program is alsoreferred to as the Supervised Visitation Program. On January 6, 2006, the President signed the Violence Against Women and Department ofJustice Reauthorization Act of 2005 ( P.L. 109-162 ). Title III of VAWA was amended, and the SafeHavens for Children Program was reauthorized at an annual level of $20 million for FY2007 throughFY2011. The legislation also established additional purposes for the program: (1) to protectchildren from the trauma of witnessing domestic or dating violence, or from experiencing abduction,injury, or death during parent and child visitation exchanges; (2) to protect parents or caretakers whoare victims of domestic and dating violence from experiencing further violence, abuse, and threatsduring child visitation exchanges; and (3) to protect children from the trauma of experiencing sexualassault or other forms of physical assault or abuse during parent and child visitation and visitationexchanges. Safe Havens for Children is administered by DOJ's Office on Violence Against Women. Theobjective of the program is to help communities support supervised visits and safe exchanges ofchildren in situations involving domestic and dating violence, child abuse, sexual assault, andstalking. Grants are available to states, Indian tribal governments, and local units of government thatagree to make contracts with or expand existing contracts and cooperative agreements with publicor private entities to carry out the provisions of the Safe Havens for Children program. (25) As amended most recently, the law requires the Attorney General to set aside not less than7% of funds for tribal governments or tribal organizations, to use not more than 3% of the funds forevaluation, monitoring, site visits, grantee conferences, and other administrative costs, and to setaside no more than 8% for technical assistance and training. Such training is to be provided bynationally recognized groups with expertise in designing safe and secure supervised visitationprograms, and visitation exchange of children in situations related to domestic and dating violence,sexual assault, or stalking. Grantees must collaborate and work with state or local courts and anonprofit, nongovernmental entity in the local community being served. (26) Grants will fund up to100% of the program costs, and a match is not required. Grantees are encouraged, however, tocontribute to the costs of their projects with supplemental contributions that may be cash, in-kindservices, or a combination of both. (27) Funding for Safe Havens. Congress initiallyauthorized $15 million to be appropriated for this program for FY2001 and FY2002 only, stipulatingthat 5% of the funds provided for those fiscal years would be made available for grants to Indiantribal governments. Congress began appropriating funding for the program in FY2002, and, as notedabove, the program has now been reauthorized through FY2011, with a requirement that 7% of fundsbe reserved for Indian tribes and organizations. For FY2007, the House-passed recommendation was$13.894 million for the program. The Senate CJS Appropriations Committee recommended $14.766million for FY2007, but the full Senate did not act on the legislation. The Safe Havens programoperates under a CR until February 15, 2007. Table 2 below provides a funding history for the Safe Havens Program. Table 2. Safe Havens: Supervised Visitation and Safe ExchangeGrant Program, Appropriations History, FY2002-FY2007 ($ in millions) Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Legislative Affairs, June 2, 2006; Dept. of Justice, Officeof Violence Against Women, July 6, 2005, "Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and RelatedAgencies Appropriations Act. 2006" ( P.L. 109-108 ), and U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office on ViolenceAgainst Women, Violence Against Women Prevention and Prosecution Programs, The Budget ofthe United States Government, Fiscal Year 2007 -- Appendix , p. 712. a. This figure reflects a 1% across-the-board rescission required by P.L. 109-148 . The Safe and Bright Futures for Children Initiative (SBFC) was established in 2004 by HHSto assist children and youth who witness domestic violence by reducing the harmful impact of suchviolence on them, and to end the cycle of domestic violence. The program is administered by theHHS Office of Public Health and Science (OPHS) under the leadership of the Assistant Secretaryfor Health. HHS states that "this initiative seeks to encourage communities to plan for, develop,implement and sustain a coordinated system of prevention, intervention, treatment, andfollow-through services for children who have witnessed or been exposed to domestic violence andtheir families." (28) Although there was no specific mandate authorizing the SBFC Initiative, as previously stated,funding for the program was to be drawn from the Stop Family Violence postage stamp proceeds. According to HHS, the original SBFC initiative was intended to consist of two phases -- acompetitive phase one for planning and a tentative phase two for implementation based upon keyelements and lessons learned from the planning phase. (29) Phase I consisted of two years of strategic planning intended toresult in a realistic coordinated service system to assist children and youth who witness or areexposed to domestic violence, with enhancements to increase its effectiveness. In FY2004,competitive strategic-planning grants totaling approximately $3.2 million were awarded to 22communities across the nation for the two-year project period at about $75,000 per year. (30) HHS reported thatproceeds from the Stop Family Violence postage stamp to fund the program provided less revenuethan was expected; consequently, phase two of the program (the implementation stage) wascanceled. (31) On July 17and 18, 2006, a final meeting was held of all grantees involved in phase one. (32) The Director of the SBFC program indicated that at the end of the two-year grant period,HHS would evaluate the program. Grantees were required to evaluate their individual programs aswell. (33) To be eligible for a grant, applicants had to be a public or private nonprofit entity, whichcould include but was not limited to a local government agency that served children and/or teenagers,a community-based or faith-based group located in a state or U.S. territory, or a federally recognizedtribe or tribal group. (34) Grantees had to plan and put in place a continuous and coordinated system to identify, protect, andcare for children and youth who witnessed or were exposed to domestic violence. (35) In addition, HHSstipulated that, to the extent applicable, SBFC grantees had to prove that they were linked with aDOJ-sponsored Family Justice Center. (36) The Family Justice Center Initiative was established in 2003 tobetter assist domestic violence victims. When seeking help in many communities, such victims hadto travel to several different places and discuss their problems with many different people -- and inmany instances, did not receive the needed services. To remedy the problem, the President's FamilyJustice Center Initiative was created to provide comprehensive services for domestic violencevictims in one location, including medical care, counseling, social services, law enforcement,housing, and employment assistance. (37) In October 2003, the Attorney General announced that DOJwould lead a $20 million program to develop the Family Justice Center Initiative by supporting 12communities across the nation. In 2006, Family Justice Centers function in various cities throughoutthe nation. In FY2005, the HHS Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Family and YouthServices Bureau offered grants for the demonstration of enhanced services for children and youthwho had been exposed to domestic violence. The purpose of the demonstration is to supportchildren and youth who have been exposed to domestic violence by easing the impact of witnessingsuch violence, and increasing opportunities that could lead to healthy, nonviolent, and safe lives forthem as adults. Authorization for creating the grants came through the Family Violence Prevention andServices Act (FVPSA), which is Title III, Sections 301-313, of the Child Abuse Amendments of1984 ( P.L. 98-457 ). FVPSA was most recently reauthorized and amended by the Keeping Childrenand Families Safe Act of 2003 (KCFSA, P.L. 108-36 ). The Keeping Children and Families Safe Act stipulated that when funds appropriated forstate Family Violence Prevention (FVP) grants exceeded $130 million in a fiscal year, the HHSSecretary must use a portion of those surplus funds to assist children who have witnessed domesticviolence. Under those circumstances, the Secretary could award grants for demonstration programsthat would provide multisystem interventions and services for such children, and training foragencies, providers, and other groups that work (either directly or by referral) with those children. To date, funding levels for FVP grants have not exceeded $130 million. Congress appropriated$125,648,000 for the grants for FY2004, $125,630,000 for FY2005, and $124,731,000 million forFY2006. (38) Consequently, no funding has been available to assist children exposed to domestic violence throughFVPSA. Despite this situation, however, a funding opportunity occurred for assistance programsthrough proceeds received from the Stop Family Violence postage stamp. The demonstration is required to operate as a collaborative effort among eligible applicants,which include state governments, (39) federally recognized tribal governments, and nonprofits havingtax-exempt status with the Internal Revenue Service, but not higher education institutions. Consequently, faith-based and community-based groups are eligible to apply for a grant. At aminimum, eligible applicants are required to collaborate with the state domestic violence coalitionand state organization managing the family violence program. The collaboration may be led by thestate domestic violence coalition and also may include other helping services such as a child welfareagency, or an Indian tribal group that serves as a local child welfare organization. Other privatenonprofit groups or public agencies may participate in the collaborations if they have proof of pastwork concerning the impact of domestic violence on children, and can document their nonprofitstatus. (40) ACF indicates that there are four issues that must be addressed by demonstration granteesand all programs providing services that focus on assisting children who are exposed to domesticviolence. Those issues are (1) ensuring that no stigma will be attached to participation in theprogram and services, and that exposure to domestic violence is not defined as child abuse orneglect; (2) guaranteeing that programming and services provided will be linguistically and culturallycompetent and developmentally and age-appropriate; (3) guaranteeing that all professional workersin the program receive the necessary training to respond appropriately to children exposed todomestic violence; and (4) addressing the safety of the non-abusing parents and supporting theircontinuing caregiving abilities. (41) Initiative Funding. Initially, ACF planned to use$650,000 from the Stop Family Violence Postage Stamp proceeds to award about five grants toeligible applicants for the demonstration. (42) The Director of the Family Violence Prevention and Servicesprogram stated, however, that $1.1 million was received for the demonstration from postage stampproceeds. Consequently, in September 2005, 11 projects were awarded at about $130,000 each fora three-year grant period. The Director anticipated that $900,000 would be raised through the stampto cover the remaining grant needs. (43) To date, $2.3 million from postage stamp proceeds have beenawarded to the demonstration grant recipients. Nearly $700,000 remains to be spent for the program. ACF anticipates that the program will receive a final installment from FVPS proceeds sometime inspring of 2007, to be used in addition to the $700,000. (44) Applicants must agree to cooperate and participate in FVPS program evaluation efforts todetermine the impact and effectiveness of the collaborations, interventions, and services on childrenand youth who have witnessed violence among their parents or caregivers. (45) The Effective Intervention in Domestic Violence and Child Maltreatment Cases: Guidelinesfor Policy and Practice (commonly known as the Greenbook) is a list of recommendations (46) that attempt to assistdependency courts, child welfare, and domestic violence service agencies in more effectively servingfamilies experiencing violence. The Greenbook recommendations are intended to ensure thatbatterers are held accountable for their actions, and that non-abusing parents are not furthervictimized. (47) Therecommendations were developed over several months by a diverse, expert committee establishedby the Family Violence Department of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges(NCJFCJ) (48) andpublished in 1999. The Greenbook guidelines serve as a structure for the federal demonstration initiative entitled"Collaborations to Address Domestic Violence and Child Maltreatment." The federal demonstrationproject is referred to as the Greenbook Initiative, and is funded by four components of DOJ -- theNational Institute of Justice (NIJ), VAWO, the Office for Victims of Crime, and OJJDP; and fourcomponents of HHS -- the Children's Bureau and the Office of Community Services (both withinthe Administration for Children and Families), the Family and Intimate Violence PreventionProgram at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Injury Preventionand Control, and the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. (49) Since FY2001, six communities have been funded through the federal GreenbookDemonstration Initiative: Santa Clara County, California; San Francisco, California; Lane County,Oregon; El Paso County, Colorado; St. Louis County, Missouri; and Grafton County, NewHampshire. To help the sites reach their goals, funding is provided for the sites, for a nationalevaluation, and for technical assistance. Grants for the six communities were made by VAWO(including funds for technical assistance), the Children's Bureau, and NIJ (funds forevaluation). (50) Supportfor each community totals $1.05 million, or $210,000 annually, over a five-year period forimplementing the Greenbook's guidelines. (51) An interim report -- The Greenbook Demonstration Initiative: Interim Evaluation Report ( The Interim Evaluation Report ) -- evaluating the Greenbook Initiative focused on progress at themidpoint of the initiative. In the report, the Evaluation Team indicated that the six community siteshad moved from the planning to the implementation phase. The report indicated that the next phaseof the evaluation will furnish measurable evidence to determine whether changes actually occurredwithin several areas in the dependency courts, child welfare, and domestic violence service agenciesin the demonstration communities. (52) As noted earlier, the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice ReauthorizationAct of 2005 (VAWA 2005, P.L. 109-162 ) reauthorized the Safe Havens for Children program. Inaddition to reauthorizing the Safe Havens program, VAWA 2005 created several new programsintended to serve youth victims of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Theseprograms are all included in Titles III and IV of P.L. 109-162 . (53) The Attorney General, in consultation with HHS, is authorized to award grants to eligibleentities to operate programs to assist youth who are victims of domestic and dating violence, sexualassault, and stalking. To receive such a grant, an eligible entity must be a nonprofit,nongovernmental group with the primary purpose of providing services that assist teen and youngadult victims of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking; a community-based groupspecializing in intervention and prevention services for such youth; a tribe or tribal organization thatprovides services primarily to assist tribal youth or tribal victims of such violence; or a nonprofit,nongovernmental organization that provides services for runaway or homeless youth affected bydomestic or sexual abuse. Grantees must use funds for designing or duplicating and implementing programs andservices using intervention models for domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking toaddress the needs of youth who are victims of such violence. Programs must include directcounseling and advocacy, and linguistically, culturally, and community-relevant services forunderserved populations (or linkages to such services), and may also include mental health, legaladvocacy, work with public officials to help reduce or eliminate violence, and (subject to a 25%limit) additional services such as child care, transportation, educational assistance, and respite care. Not less than 7% of the program funds must be available for three-year grants to Indian tribesor tribal groups. The Attorney General must use no more than 2.5% of appropriated funds in anyyear for administration, monitoring, and grant evaluations; and use not less than 5% of appropriatedfunds in any year for technical assistance. VAWA 2005 authorizes $15 million to be appropriated for each of fiscal years 2007 through2011 for program grants. The Attorney General, through the Director of VAWO, is authorized to make two-year grantsto eligible entities to assist young victims of dating and domestic violence, sexual assault, andstalking who are between the ages of 12 and 24. The purpose of the grant is to encourage the courts,domestic violence and sexual assault service providers, youth groups and service providers, violenceprevention programs, and law enforcement agencies to cross-train and collaborate so thatcommunities can create and carry out procedures to protect and more generally and efficiently serveyoung victims. Also, grantees are encouraged, where necessary, to work with other entities such ascommunity-based supports that address the safety, health, mental health, social service, housing, andeconomic needs of youth who are victims of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, andstalking. To be eligible for a grant, an applicant must collaborate with a victim service provider thathas a documented history of effective work regarding domestic and dating violence, sexual assault,or stalking, and the impact of such violence on young people; and must partner with a court or lawenforcement agency. Collaborations also may include batterer intervention or sex offender treatmentprograms with specified knowledge about and experience working with youth offenders;community-based youth groups that address specific concerns and problems youth face; schools orschool-based programs intended to furnish intervention and prevention services to young peopleexperiencing problems; faith-based groups that address problems faced by youth; health care entities(that are eligible to be reimbursed under Medicaid), including providers that focus on the specialneeds of youth; education programs targeted toward informing teens about HIV and other sexuallytransmitted diseases; Indian Health Service, tribal child protective services, the Bureau of IndianAffairs, or the Federal Bureau of Investigation; or may include law enforcement agencies connectedwith the Bureau of Indian Affairs that provide tribal law enforcement. Eligible entities must use grant funds to assess and analyze available services for teen andyoung adult victims. Entities must determine pertinent barriers to such services in a particular area,and work jointly to develop community protocols to address the problems. Furthermore, eligibleentities must use funds to create and enhance connections and collaborations between domesticviolence and sexual assault service providers and, where appropriate, law enforcement agencies,courts, federal agencies, and other groups addressing the safety, health, mental health, social service,housing, and economic needs of young victims of abuse. When awarding grants, the VAWO Director must give priority to groups submittingapplications in partnership with community organizations and service providers that primarily workwith young people, particularly teens, and have shown a commitment to working jointly with othergroups to cooperatively solve problems related to domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, andstalking in youth populations. Not less than 10% of appropriated funds in any year must be available to Indian tribalgovernments to create and sustain collaborations among pertinent tribal justice and social servicesdepartments, or domestic violence or sexual assault service providers, to provide culturallyappropriate services to Indian women or youth. The VAWO Director must not use more than 2.5%of funds in any year to monitor and evaluate grants, or more than 2.5% of funds in any year foradministration. Up to 8% of funds in any given year must be available for technical assistance toprograms. No later than one year after the grant period ends, the VAWO Director must prepare, submitto Congress, and make widely available summaries containing information about the activitiesimplemented by the grantees, and related initiatives the VAWO Director conducted to draw attentionto dating and domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking, and how they affect young victims. VAWA 2005 authorizes $5 million in each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 for the programgrants. This new program is intended to support efforts by providers of services for domestic ordating violence victims, courts, law enforcement, child welfare agencies, and other pertinentprofessionals and community groups to develop collaborative responses and services, and providecross-training to improve community responses to families that experience such violence. The HHSSecretary, through the Family and Youth Services Bureau and in consultation with VAWO, mustaward two-year competitive grants to eligible entities to carry out the grant purpose. VAWA 2005 authorizes $5 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 for thesegrants. For each fiscal year, the HHS Secretary must use no more than 3% of the funds forevaluation, monitoring, site visits, grantee conferences, and other administrative costs. Also, theSecretary must set aside no more than 7% for grants to Indian tribes to develop programs addressingchild maltreatment and domestic or dating violence that are operated by, or in partnership with, atribal group; and set aside up to 8% of funds for technical assistance and training to be conductedby groups that have demonstrated expertise in forming collaborations for community and systemresponses to families experiencing both child maltreatment and domestic or dating violence. TheSecretary also must consider the needs of underserved populations (54) when awarding grants. To be eligible for a grant, an entity must collaborate with a state or local child welfare agencyor Indian tribe, a provider of domestic or dating violence victim services, or a law enforcementagency or Bureau of Indian Affairs providing tribal law enforcement. Also, an entity may includea court and any other such agencies or private nonprofit groups and faith-based groups with theability to effectively assist the child and adult victims served by the collaboration. The Attorney General, through the VAWO Director, is authorized to award three-yearcompetitive grants under what is termed the "Supporting Teens Through Education and ProtectionAct of 2005," or STEP Act, to middle schools and high schools that work with domestic violenceand sexual assault experts. Such grants are intended to empower schools to train schooladministrators, faculty, counselors, coaches, health care providers, security employees and other staffregarding the needs, concerns of, and impact on students who experience domestic and datingviolence, sexual assault, or stalking; to develop and implement policies for students eitherexperiencing or who are perpetrators of such violence; to provide support services for students andschool staff for developing and enhancing effective prevention and intervention methods for studentsand personnel experiencing such violence; to provide students with developmentally appropriateeducation programs regarding such violence and the effects of experiencing those forms of violenceby adjusting the existing curricula activities to the relevant student population; to work with existingmentoring programs and develop strong mentoring programs to assist students in understandingviolence and recognizing violent behavior and how to prevent it, and how to address their feelingsappropriately; and to conduct evaluations assessing the effects of such programs and policies so thatdeveloping the programs can be enhanced. The VAWO Director must distribute to middle and high schools any existing DOJ, HHS, andEducation Department policy guidance and curricula concerning the prevention of domestic anddating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, and the effect of such violence on children and youth. To be eligible to receive a grant, entities must be in a partnership that includes a public,charter, tribal, or nationally accredited private middle or secondary school, a Department ofDefense-administered school under 10 U.S.C. 2164 or 20 U.S.C. 921, (55) a group of schools or aschool district; a domestic violence victim service provider with a history of working on domesticviolence that also understands the effects of violence on children and youth; and a sexual assaultvictim service provider (such as a rape crisis center, a program serving tribal sexual assault victims,or a coalition or other nonprofit nongovernmental group conducting a community-based sexualassault program) with a history of successful work regarding sexual assault that also understands theimpact of such violence on children and youth. Partnerships also may include a law enforcementagency; the state, tribal, territorial or local court; nonprofit nongovernmental groups and serviceproviders addressing sexual harassment, bullying, or gang-related violence in schools; and any othersuch agencies or nonprofit nongovernmental groups with the ability to effectively assist adult, youth,and minor victims. When awarding grants, the Director must give priority to entities that have submittedapplications in partnership with relevant courts and law enforcement organizations. Entities that aremembers of partnerships must jointly prepare and submit a report to the Director every 18 monthswith details about activities they have undertaken with grant funds, and any additional informationrequired. Within nine months after the first full grant cycle is completed, the Director must publiclydistribute (including through electronic means) model policies and procedures that were developedand implemented by grantees in middle and secondary schools. VAWA 2005 authorizes $5 million to be appropriated for each of fiscal years 2007 through2011 for program grants. The funds will remain available until expended. The Attorney General is authorized to make grants to higher education institutions orconsortia for developing and strengthening security and investigation methods to fight domestic anddating violence, sexual assault, and stalking on campuses, and for developing and strengtheningvictim services for women on campuses. Consortia may consist of campus personnel, studentgroups, campus administrators, security personnel, and regional crisis centers allied with theinstitutions. The Attorney General must award three-year competitive grants and contracts, through theVAWO Director, in amounts of not more than $500,000 for individual higher education institutions,and not more than $1 million for consortia of such institutions. The Attorney General must makeevery effort to guarantee equitable participation of public and private higher education institutionsin grant activities; ensure fair geographic grant distribution among the various regions of the nation;and ensure unbiased grant distribution to tribal colleges and universities and traditionally Blackcolleges and universities. VAWA 2005 authorizes $12 million for FY2007, and $15 million for each of fiscal years2008 through 2011 for this effort. Grantees may use funds for personnel, training, technical assistance, data collection, andother equipment; training of campus administrators, security personnel, and staff who serve oncampus disciplinary or judicial boards that develop and put into practice procedures and services tomore efficiently identify and respond to domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalkingcrimes; implementing and operating violence education programs to prevent domestic and datingviolence, sexual assault, and stalking; developing, augmenting, and strengthening victim servicesprograms on campuses; establishing and distributing or otherwise providing assistance andinformation about options for victims to take punitive or other legal action; developing, installing,or enlarging data collection and communication systems related to domestic and dating violence,sexual assault, and stalking crimes on campus; making capital improvements on campus to addresssuch crimes; and improving coordination among campus administrators, security personnel, andlocal law enforcement. Each grantee must submit a biennial performance report to the Attorney General, or fundingwill be suspended. Furthermore, when the grant period is completed, the institution must file aperformance report with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Education about the activitiesundertaken and an assessment of the effectiveness of those activities in achieving the purposes listedabove. In addition, the Attorney General must submit a report to Congress no later than six monthsafter the end of the fiscal year for which grants were awarded. The report must summarizeinformation about the number of grants and amounts awarded, and provide an evaluation of theprogress made under the grants, a statistical summary of the people served, and an assessment of theeffectiveness of programs funded. The Attorney General is authorized, through the VAWO Director and in consultation withthe Secretary of HHS, to make two-year competitive grants to eligible entities for alleviating theimpact of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking on children exposed to suchviolence, and for reducing the risk of becoming future victims of such violence. VAWA 2005authorizes $20 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 for this effort. When awarding grants, the VAWO Director must consider the needs of underservedpopulations, and must not award less than 10% of funds to Indian tribes for funding of tribal projects,up to 8% for technical assistance programs, and not less than 66% to programs for assisting childrenexposed to domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking; or for training, coordinating,and advocating for programs that serve such children and youth. To be eligible for a grant, an entity must be a victim service provider; tribal nonprofitorganization or community-based group with a documented history of successful work concerningchildren and youth exposed to domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking; or a state,territorial, tribal, or local government agency that is partnered with such entities. Grantees must prepare and submit an application to the Director containing whateverinformation is required, and at a minimum, describe the policies and procedures the entity has orplans to adopt to increase and guarantee the safety of children and their nonabusing parent who havebeen or are experiencing exposure to violence, and also such individuals who are alreadyexperiencing domestic and/or dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking; and guaranteelinguistically, culturally, and community-relevant services to underserved populations. The Attorney General, through the VAWO Director and in consultation with the Secretaryof HHS, must make two-year competitive grants to home visitation programs, jointly working withvictim services providers to develop and implement model policies and steps to train home visitationservice providers about addressing domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalkingsituations in families experiencing such violence or that are at risk of violence, in order to reduce theeffects of that violence on children, preserve safety, improve parenting skills, and put an end tointergenerational cycles of violence. The Director must consider the needs of underserved populations, award not less than 7%of appropriated funds for tribal projects, and award up to 8% of funds for technical assistanceprograms. VAWA 2005 authorizes $7 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 for eligibleentities to conduct the programs. To receive a grant, an eligible entity must be a national, federal, state, local, territorial, ortribal home visitation program that provides services to pregnant women or young children and theirparent or primary caregiver in their permanent or temporary home or other familiar surroundings;or a victim services group or agency that works together with a national, federal, state, local,territorial, or tribal home visitation program. Grantees must prepare and submit an appropriate application to the Director in the mannerrequired, describing the policies and procedures they intend to adopt to improve upon or guaranteethe safety and security of children and their nonabusing parent in homes experiencing domestic anddating violence, sexual assault, or stalking; guarantee linguistically, culturally, andcommunity-relevant services for underserved communities; ensure adequate training by victimservice providers to home visitation program staff; and guarantee that relevant state and local victimservice providers and coalitions are aware of the activities of groups receiving grants and areincluded as training partners, where possible. The Attorney General, through the VAWO Director and in consultation with the Secretaryof HHS, must make two-year competitive grants to eligible entities for the purpose of developingand increasing programs to get men and youth to participate in preventing domestic and datingviolence, sexual assault, and stalking by helping them develop mutually respectful and nonviolentrelationships. When awarding grants, the Director must consider the needs of underserved population,award not less than 10% of funds to Indian tribes, and award up to 8% of funds for technicalassistance to grantees and non-grantees working in this area. VAWA 2005 authorizes $10 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 for the grantprograms. Eligible entities include nonprofit, nongovernmental victim service providers or coalitions;community-based child or youth services groups that have demonstrated experience and skill inaddressing the needs and concerns of youth; and state, territorial, tribal, or local government unitspartnered with either of those organizations just mentioned, or a program providing culturallyspecific services. Eligible entities must use funds to develop or improve upon community-based projects,including gender-specific programs that encourage children and youth to seek nonviolentrelationships to reduce the risk of becoming either victims or perpetrators of domestic and datingviolence, sexual assault, or stalking; or such entities with experience in conducting public educationcampaigns addressing domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking must establish publiceducation and community efforts to encourage men and boys to become allies with women and girlsto prevent violence against females. Grantees can use no more than 40% of the funds to create and disseminate media materials. The HHS Secretary, acting through the National Center for Injury Prevention and Controlat the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is authorized to make grants to entities forsupporting research to study prevention and intervention programs to foster the understanding ofsexual and domestic violence committed by and against adults, youth, and children. Such entitiesmust include sexual assault coalitions and programs, research groups, tribal organizations, andacademic institutions. Research must include evaluating and studying best practices for reducingand preventing violence against women and children, including through strategies focused onunderserved communities. VAWA 2005 authorizes $2 million for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2011 to carry outthis study. The Attorney General, through VAWO, is authorized to make grants to states for conductinga campaign to increase public awareness about issues related to domestic violence against pregnantwomen. VAWA 2005 authorizes such sums as necessary to carry out this effort for each of fiscalyears 2006 through 2010.

Summary: Violence between domestic partners is not a new phenomenon. Children who witness suchviolence, however, have increasingly become a concern of policymakers. Since 1999, several federalprograms and initiatives have been created to address the problems of children who witness domesticviolence, and several new initiatives were enacted in the 109th Congress. The Safe Start Initiative was authorized by legislation in 1999 ( P.L. 105-277 ) to prevent andreduce the effects of family and community violence on young children from birth to age six. In2000, Congress reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act and created the Safe Havens forChildren Pilot Program to provide supervised and safe visitation exchange of children by andbetween parents in situations involving domestic violence. In 2001, the Stop Family Violencepostage stamp was created, directing the U.S. Postal Service to issue a semi-postal stamp to allowthe public an opportunity to contribute toward domestic violence funding. Proceeds from the saleswere transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for domestic violenceprevention programs, specifically the Safe and Bright Futures for Children Program, and theDemonstration of Enhanced Services to Children and Youth Who Have Been Exposed to DomesticViolence. To date, proceeds from the stamp have generated $3.0 million. Furthermore, funds havebeen authorized under the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act to assist children exposedto domestic violence, if appropriations exceed $130 million in a fiscal year. To date, appropriationshave not exceeded that amount. The Greenbook Initiative is a federal multi-agency demonstration project that implementsthe suggested guidelines for policy and practice of the National Council of Juvenile and FamilyCourt Judges, and is designed to assist child welfare, domestic violence agencies, and family courtsin responding more effectively when domestic violence and child maltreatment occursimultaneously. Since FY2001, six communities have been funded through the federal GreenbookDemonstration Initiative. The impact on children of exposure to domestic violence was an issue in the 109th Congress. At the end of the first session, Congress passed the Violence Against Women and Department ofJustice Reauthorization Act of 2005 ( P.L. 109-162 ), which contained a series of new initiatives. New programs would provide services to assist youth who have been victims of domestic and datingviolence, sexual assault, and stalking; support training and collaborative efforts of service providerswho assist families in which domestic violence and child maltreatment occur simultaneously; enablemiddle and high schools to train relevant school personnel to assist student victims of such violence,holding perpetrators accountable; and combat such violence on college campuses.