As of January 2017, there were 567 federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native tribes and villages. According to the Department of the Interior’s (DOI) Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), there are approximately 326 Indian land areas in the United States that are administered as federal Indian reservations or other tribal lands. According to the 2010 Census, 5.2 million people in the United States identified as Native American, either alone or in combination with one or more other races. Out of this total, 2.9 million people—0.9 percent of the U.S. population at the time—identified as Native American alone. At the time of the 2010 Census, more than 1.1 million Native Americans resided on tribal lands. Several components within the Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and DOI have responsibility for investigating and prosecuting human trafficking crimes in Indian country. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), within DOJ, has investigative responsibilities in Indian country where the federal government has criminal jurisdiction. The FBI has assigned more than 100 agents and 40 victim assistance staff, located in 19 of its 56 field offices, to work Indian country cases full time. BIA is statutorily responsible for enforcing federal law and, with the consent of the tribe, tribal law in Indian country. BIA supports tribes in their efforts to ensure public safety and administer justice within Indian country, as well as to provide related services directly or to enter into contracts or compacts with federally recognized tribes to administer the law enforcement program. To that end, BIA’s Office of Justice Services (OJS) provides direct law enforcement services for 40 tribes. Unlike FBI and BIA, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)—a DHS component—is not generally involved in criminal investigations in Indian country but may assist with criminal investigations at the request of the tribe, according to DHS officials. Forty-nine of DOJ’s 94 U.S. Attorneys’ Offices (USAO) include Indian country within their jurisdiction. Each of these USAOs has at least one Assistant U.S. Attorney appointed as Tribal Liaison. Each Tribal Liaison is responsible for most dealings with tribes in their district. According to Executive Office for United States Attorneys officials, some districts with large amounts of Indian country have more than one Assistant U.S. Attorney assigned to the position of Tribal Liaison. In addition to investigating and prosecuting human trafficking crimes, federal agencies, primarily DOJ and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), support efforts to combat human trafficking and assist victims. Several components within DOJ, including the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) and the Office of Justice Programs, which includes the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC), the Bureau of Justice Assistance, and the National Institute of Justice, provide grants to help state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies combat human trafficking and to support nongovernmental organizations and others in assisting trafficking victims or conducting research on human trafficking in the United States. HHS provides grant funding to entities to provide services and support for trafficking victims, primarily through the Administration for Children and Families, which includes the Office on Trafficking in Persons, the Children’s Bureau, the Family and Youth Services Bureau, and the Administration for Native Americans. In March 2017, we reported that all four federal agencies that investigate or prosecute human trafficking in Indian country—the FBI, BIA, ICE, and the USAO—are required to record in their case management systems whether a human trafficking offense was involved in the case. With the exception of ICE, these agencies are also required to record in their case management systems whether the crime took place in Indian country. ICE officials explained that the agency does not record this information because, unlike BIA and the FBI, ICE is not generally involved in criminal investigations in Indian country. According to information provided to us by federal agencies that investigate or prosecute human trafficking in Indian country, there were 14 federal investigations and 2 federal prosecutions of human trafficking offenses in Indian country from fiscal years 2013 through 2016. From fiscal years 2013 through 2015, there were over 6,100 federal human trafficking investigations and approximately 1,000 federal human trafficking prosecutions, overall. In certain circumstances, state or tribal law enforcement may have jurisdiction to investigate crimes in Indian country; therefore, these figures likely do not represent the total number of human trafficking-related cases in Indian country. Also, considering that human trafficking is known to be an underreported crime, it is unlikely that these figures, or any other investigative or prosecutorial data, represent the full extent to which human trafficking is occurring in Indian country. Three of the four federal agencies that investigate or prosecute human trafficking-related crimes do not require their agents or attorneys to consistently collect or record the race or ethnicity, including Native American status, of victims in their cases. Therefore, the total number of federal human trafficking investigations and prosecutions that involved Native American victims is unknown. Agents and attorneys may voluntarily collect this information and record it in their case management systems when there is a designated data field. The FBI and USAOs that have Indian country in their jurisdiction are statutorily required to collect and report information on victims’ Native American status when they decline to refer or prosecute an Indian country case, but not otherwise. According to the limited data that were available, federal agencies initiated at least 6 human trafficking investigations that involved Native American victims from fiscal years 2013 to 2016—the FBI Civil Rights Unit initiated 5 investigations and BIA initiated 1. Federal investigative and prosecutorial agencies provided two primary reasons why they generally do not collect information on the Native American status of victims. First, according to officials from DOJ’s Executive Office for United States Attorneys, Native American status has no impact on whether the federal government can investigate or prosecute cases outside of Indian country. Officials told us that Native American status of victims is only relevant for Indian country cases because it is necessary for establishing which law enforcement agency has jurisdiction over the case. Similarly, FBI officials reported that they only collect information that is necessary for the investigation, which does not include the victim’s race or Native American status. Further, officials from all of the investigative and prosecutorial agencies raised concerns related to either the sensitivity of asking victims about their race or Native American status or collecting additional personal information about the victim that could make them identifiable to the defendant or others during the discovery phase of a criminal trial. In our report released in July 2017, we found that of the 132 tribal LEAs that responded to our survey, 27 reported that they initiated investigations they considered to have involved human trafficking from 2014 to 2016, as shown in figure 1. Of the 27 tribal LEAs that reported initiating investigations involving human trafficking from 2014 to 2016, 24 provided the number of investigations that they conducted during that period. Those 24 reported a total of 70 human trafficking investigations from 2014 to 2016, ranging from 0 to 8 investigations for each tribal LEA in each year. Additionally, 22 of the 24 tribal LEAs reported a total of 58 victims from 2014 to 2016. The number of victims encountered by each LEA ranged from 0 to 7 victims in each investigation. Few major city LEAs reported that they encountered human trafficking from 2014 to 2016 that involved Native American victims. Specifically, 6 of the 61 major city LEAs that responded to our survey reported initiating human trafficking investigations that involved at least one Native American victim during that period, as shown in figure 2. Of the 6 major city LEAs that reported initiating any human trafficking investigations involving Native American victims, 5 also identified the number of investigations and victims involved. Those 5 LEAs reported a total of 60 investigations involving 81 Native American victims from 2014 to 2016. For each investigation, the number of Native American victims ranged from 0 to 31. Of those 5 LEAs, one respondent—the Minneapolis Police Department—reported the majority of investigations and victims. Specifically, the Minneapolis Police Department reported 49 of the 60 total investigations and 70 of the 81 total victims from 2014 to 2016. In meetings with officials from the Minneapolis Police Department, they stated that they made a concerted effort, starting in 2012, to meet with tribal elders and service providers who worked with the Native American population to demonstrate their willingness to investigate human trafficking crimes. The officials stated that, following those meetings, the number of human trafficking crimes involving Native American victims that were reported to the department increased. Nearly half of tribal LEA respondents (60 of 132) reported that they believe human trafficking is occurring on tribal land in their jurisdictions beyond what had been brought to their attention. Officials from two tribal LEAs told us during in-person meetings that in their experience some victims do not come forward to report their victimization because they are embarrassed or feel ashamed. Several survey respondents also indicated that they suspect there is more human trafficking than what has been reported to them because of the presence of casinos on their land (14 of 60). For example, officials from one tribal LEA explained that the tribal casino hotel may be used as a venue for sex trafficking. Some respondents (13 of 60) suspect that sex trafficking may be occurring as part of some of the drug crimes that they investigate. Officials from one county LEA we visited near a tribal community told us that officers may not recognize that human trafficking is taking place, particularly when it occurs alongside another crime like drug trafficking. Most major city LEA respondents (51 of 61) indicated that they did not suspect or did not know whether more human trafficking of Native Americans is occurring in their jurisdiction, beyond what has been reported to them. Of those 51 that responded, 24 explained that this was the consequence of having few, if any, Native Americans in their jurisdiction. Ten of the 61 major city LEAs reported that they believe more human trafficking of Native Americans is occurring and cited possible reasons for the lack of reporting.