The federal government has implemented a number of initiatives to address sexual violence or mitigate its effects. For example, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office on Violence Against Women (OVW), created in 1995 in order to help implement the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), sponsors grant programs for local law enforcement agencies, prosecutors and judges, health care providers, and other organizations that assist victims of sexual violence by providing, for example, forensic medical services in sexual violence cases in rural areas and specialized counseling services for victims from underserved populations. Another office within DOJ, the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC), convened crime victim advocates and experts in 2013 as part of the Vision 21 Initiative and recommended in their report, among other things, that federal agencies collaborate and expand the collection and analysis of data on all forms of criminal victimization. The Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Family Violence Prevention and Services Program supports two national resource centers on domestic violence and special-issue and culturally-specific resource centers. In addition, HHS’s College Sexual Assault Policy and Prevention Initiative was launched in 2016 and is intended to provide support for organizations that are implementing policies and practices at postsecondary schools to prevent sexual assault on their campuses. The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) issued guidance to colleges and universities, one in 2011 and another in 2014, concerning the responsibilities of those institutions under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 with regard to addressing sexual violence against students. OCR’s guidance sets standards for the grievance procedures institutions must adopt and publish to promptly and equitably resolve complaints brought by students alleging sex discrimination (including acts of sexual violence and sexual harassment), and recommends preventive education and training programs designed to reduce the occurrence of sexual violence on campus and improve institutions’ responses to sexual violence on campus when it does occur. In 2004, Congress passed a law that required the Secretary of Defense to develop, among other things, a comprehensive policy for the Department of Defense (DOD) on the prevention of sexual assaults involving servicemembers. In response to that statutory requirement, DOD established its sexual-assault prevention and response program in 2005, and in 2008, DOD published its first sexual assault prevention strategy. Several of the federal government’s responses to sexual violence involve data collection on the occurrence of sexual violence. For example, the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) of 2003 directed DOJ to carry out studies of the incidence and effects of prison rape. The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act, as amended by VAWA in 2013, requires that all institutions of higher education that participate in federal student financial assistance programs disclose statistics on certain crimes, including those related to sexual violence, to the Department of Education (Education). Since 2005, National Defense Authorization Acts have directed DOD to, among other things, collect and report information on sexual assaults against service members. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is charged with improving the efficiency and effectiveness of federal information resources, which includes functions relating to statistical policy and coordination. Specifically, with regard to statistics, OMB’s responsibilities include: Oversight and approval of data collection: OMB reviews statistical information collections as part of its responsibility under the PRA to approve all federal agency information collections that will be administered to 10 or more people to ensure adherence with PRA standards for minimizing information collection burdens and maximizing the practical utility of information collected by federal agencies, including eliminating unnecessary duplication. Guidance and standards: OMB develops and oversees governmentwide policies, principles, standards, and guidelines for collecting and disseminating statistical information. Coordination: OMB coordinates the activities of the federal statistical system, including ensuring the integrity, objectivity, and utility of federal statistics. Oversight of budgets: OMB ensures that statistical agencies’ budget proposals are consistent with systemwide priorities for maintaining and improving the quality of federal statistics. Other entities also provide guidance to agencies that conduct statistical work. For example, the National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT) publishes Principles and Practices for a Federal Statistical Agency for newly appointed cabinet secretaries at the beginning of each presidential administration. Principles and Practices outlines basic principles for statistical agencies to carry out their missions effectively, as well as practices designed to help implement them. Different entities use federal data on sexual violence, including, for example victim advocacy groups, other special interest groups, and other federal agencies. Officials at victim advocacy groups we spoke with publish reports on topics related to sexual violence and lobby Congress for laws and programs designed to address the needs of victims. Other groups include law enforcement associations and campus safety groups that provide training and educational materials for law enforcement and campus safety personnel. Federal agencies also use data on sexual violence, for example to inform grant making decisions regarding research and program development. Four federal agencies manage at least 10 data collection efforts that include data on sexual violence, among other things. Some of these data collection efforts focus on a target population that the agency serves. For example, Education’s Clery Act data collection effort obtains information on the occurrence of sexual violence at institutions of higher education. DOD’s Defense Sexual Assault Incident Database (DSAID) and the Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members (WGRA) include and collect data on sexual violence involving military service members. Others, such as the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program (UCR) data collection efforts compile data from law enforcement agencies on the general population. Those data collection efforts that include information from the general population differ in terms of the ages of respondents or individuals from whom reports of sexual violence are taken. For example, the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) collects data from individuals who are 18 and older while the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) collects data on household members who are 12 and older; both the Uniform Crime Reporting Program-Summary Reporting System (UCR-SRS) and the Uniform Crime Reporting Program-National Incident-Based Reporting System (UCR-NIBRS) include data from law enforcement agencies on criminal incidents involving people of all ages. Table 1 includes information about each of the 10 data collections discussed in this report, including their respective target populations. Data collection efforts that are focused on target populations—such as, the military population, institutions of higher education, and the incarcerated population—provide information on the problem of sexual violence within those groups and thus may be helpful for informing policy affecting those groups. For example, Education officials told us that Education’s Office of Federal Student Aid administers inquiries to specific campuses if Clery Act data show unusually high incidences of certain crimes, including rape. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) reports that the National Inmate Survey (NIS) and the Survey of Sexual Victimization (SSV) data provide helpful information for understanding and addressing the problem of sexual violence in prisons, jails, and juvenile correctional facilities. In March 2015, we reported on the importance of using military data on sexual violence to inform program decisionmaking. The 5 data collection efforts whose target population is a segment of the national population are the result of specific congressional mandates, while the 5 data collection efforts that focus on the general population are discretionary initiatives arising from broad agency missions. For example, BJS is mandated under the terms of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) of 2003 to collect data on sexual violence in prisons, jails, and other detention facilities. BJS conducts both the NIS and SSV in response to that mandate. In contrast, according to HHS’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) officials, the agency launched NISVS as part of its public health mission, and with support from the National Institute of Justice and DOD as a result of requests from organizations in the field of sexual violence prevention. The extent to which the data collection efforts focus on sexual violence also varies. Some of the data collection efforts collect information solely or primarily on the occurrence of sexual violence, such as the SSV or DSAID. Other data collection efforts have a larger focus. For example, the UCR-SRS, UCR-NIBRS, and NCVS include information on a broad spectrum of crimes, and the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System–All Injury Program (NEISS-AIP) includes information on a wide variety of types of injuries. Data collection efforts use a range of terms to describe sexual violence in publicly-available agency documentation. Specifically, the 10 data collection efforts use a total of 23 different terms to describe sexual violence. Table 2 shows the terms that data collection efforts use to describe sexual violence. Given the variation in terminology, data collection efforts may characterize the same sex act using different terms. For example, regarding sexual violence involving vaginal penetration of a victim, 6 data collection efforts include this act of sexual violence in their measurement of “rape,” 2 include it in their measurements of “nonconsensual sexual acts” or “staff sexual misconduct,” 2 include it in their measurements of “sexual assault” or “assault-sexual,” 1 includes it in its measurement of “sexual coercion,” 1 includes it in its measurement of “penetrative sexual assault,” and 1 includes it in its measurement of “sexual assault with an object.” See tables 5 through 7 in app. II for additional information on acts of sexual violence included in measurements of sexual violence by data collection effort. It is also the case that one data collection effort may use multiple terms to characterize a particular act of sexual violence, depending on the contextual factors that may be involved, such as whether the perpetrator used physical force.