U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Technical Report Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program, 1996-2004 September 2004, NCJ 205988 -------------------------------------------------------------- This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.wk1) and the full report including tables and graphics in .pdf format are available from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/llebgp04.htm -------------------------------------------------------------- Lynn Bauer BJS Statistician In the 104th Congress, the House of Representatives passed the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Act (H.R. 728) of 1995. This amended the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 to establish the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) Program. The Fiscal Year 1996 Appropriations Act (Public Law 104-034) instructed the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) to make funds available to units of general purpose local government under the LLEBG Program pursuant to H.R. 728. The grants were to be based on a jurisdiction's number of Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) Part I violent crimes reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The LLEBG program provides funds to units of local government to reduce crime and improve public safety (see box on page 2). Each year since 1996 Congress has appropriated funds to continue the program. This report describes the LLEBG formula calculation stages, including the determination of how funds are distributed, and provides an example of the award process. Program trends Since the LLEBG program began in FY 1996, the total award has decreased from $424 million to $115 million in 2004 (figure 1). As a result, the minimum allocation amount (de minimus) to a State in 2004 was $286,882, a decrease of 72% from 1996 ($1,060,000). Twelve States received the minimum allocation in 2004. In FY 2004 Alaska received the lowest award amount ($291,401). California received the largest ($16,428,618), followed by Florida, Texas, New York, Illinois, and Michigan (table 1). The percentage change in the total State allocation between FY 1996 and FY 2004 was greatest in Puerto Rico (-84%), followed by New York (-81%), Kentucky (-80%) and California (-77%) (table 2). The decrease in program funds has also affected eligibility for local governments. Over 1,200 local governments that received a FY 2003 award were ineligible for an allocation in FY 2004 (figure 2). Formula calculation process The formula calculation process for distributing funds in the LLEBG program is completed in two stages: Stage I: State allocation In the first stage, State allocations are calculated proportionate to each State's average annual number of UCR Part I violent crimes compared with that for all other States for the three most recent calendar years of data from the FBI dating back to 1992. The program mandates, however, that each State must receive a minimum award (the de minimus) of 0.25% of the total amount available under the LLEBG program. The de minimus funds are subtracted from the total LLEBG allocation and the new total is then distributed to the remaining non- de minimus States. See Example of award process on page 4 for more complete description of the de minimus process. Stage II: Local allocation In the second stage, local awards are made proportionate to each reporting local jurisdiction's average annual number of UCR Part I violent crimes compared with that for all other local jurisdictions in the State for the three most recent calendars years. Only those jurisdictions which qualify for an award of $10,000 or more are eligible to receive an allocation. If a unit of local government is allocated less than $10,000 for the payment period, the amount is not awarded but transferred to the chief executive officer of the State. These funds must then be distributed amon State police departments that provide law enforcement services to units of local government and to units of local government whose award is less than what is reasonable to reduce crime and improve public safety. Local governments who do not report to the UCR program are not eligible for LLEBG funding.{Footnote 1: As defined in H.R. 728, section 104(b)(7)}. The District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and Guam are treated as independent States with no requirement to distribute funds to units of local government. {Footnote 2: As defined by Public Law 108-7, Guam is considered as a State for all purposes under H.R. 728, retroactive to October 1, 2000}. The Virgin Islands receives the amount of one de minimus award, and American Somoa and the Northern Mariana Islands receive a percentage of one de minimus award, 33% and 17%, respectively. To be considered eligible for the LLEBG program, a jurisdiction must be a general purpose unit of the local government that carries out substantial governmental duties. The unit of local government must report, via its law enforcement agency or agencies, to the UCR program of the FBI. ----------------------------------------------------------------- States vary widely in how the allocations are distributed to localities In FY 2004 over 90% of allocation amounts went to local governments within California (93%), Florida (93%), Hawaii (97%) and Nevada (92%). The balance of those allocations were to remain at the State government level. States with the lowest percent allocation to local governments were Montana (45%), Maine (34%), New Hampshire (33%), Vermont (33%), and West Virginia (24%). ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Amounts paid to a unit of local government are authorized for use by the unit for reducing crime and improving public safety, including but not limited to, one or more of the following purposes: * Hiring, training, and employing on a continuing basis new, additional law enforcement officers and necessary support personnel * Paying overtime to presently employed law enforcement officers and necessary support personnel for the purpose of increasing the number of hours worked by such personnel * Procuring equipment, technology, and other material directly related to basic law enforcement functions * Enhancing security measures in and around schools and in and around any other facility or location which is considered by the unit of local government to have a special risk for incidents of crime * Establishing crime prevention programs that may, though not exclusively, involve law enforcement officials and that are intended to discourage, disrupt, or interfere with the commission of criminal activity, including neighborhood watch and citizen patrol programs, sexual assault and domestic violence programs, and programs intended to prevent juvenile crime * Establishing or supporting drug courts * Establishing early intervention and prevention programs for juveniles to reduce or eliminate crime * Enhancing the adjudication process of cases involving violent offenders, including the adjudication process of cases involving violent juvenile offenders. * Enhancing programs under subpart 1 of part E of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 * Establishing cooperative task forces between adjoining units of local government to work cooperatively to prevent and combat criminal activity, particularly criminal activity that is exacerbated by drug or gang-related involvement * Establishing a multi-jurisdictional task force, particularly in rural areas, composed of law enforcement officials representing units of local government that works with Federal law enforcement officials to prevent and control crime. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Disparate jurisdictions In some cases, a disparity may exist between funding eligibility of a county and associated municipalities. {Footnote 3: LLEBG disparate certification process .} By statute, a potential disparity exists when -- 1. "an associated municipality's eligible funding amount is greater by legislatively prescribed standards than the funding amount of the county (a unit of local government's share cannot exceed 200 percent of the adjacent county's for a single municipality; 400 percent for multiple municipalities)," and; 2. "the county bears more than 50 percent of prosecution or incarceration costs for UCR Part I violent crimes reported by the corresponding municipality's police department." If a county is disparate with multiple municipalities, the county must show that funding allocation to those municipalities will likely threaten the efficient administration of justice. To qualify for payment, the unit of local government, together with any such specified geographically contiguous local government, is required to submit a joint application for the aggregate of funds allocated to the units of local government. An agreement must be reached with the State attorney general in order for the disparate local and county jurisdictions to receive funds. Example of award process As discussed in stage 1, each State receives a de minimus or 0.25% of the total LLEBG. For LLEBG 2003 this amount was $286,882. Any State with a 3-year violent crime average that results in an allocation less than $286,882, received the de minimus award instead of what they would have received based on crime alone. The total de minimus award of $286,882 is not added to the crime-based award amount. Rather, the difference between what each State would have received based on crime and the de minimus amount for that year is added to the crime-based award to total the de minimus. This is referred to as the "de minimus bonus." For example, for the 2004 LLEBG calculation (using violent crime data from 1999-2001), North Dakota's 3-year UCR violent crime average was 484, which is 0.03% of the total number of UCR violent crimes reported by the 50 States, District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the combined territories (American Samoa and Northern Mariana Islands). This amounts to an initial UCR-based formula award of $38,481. Because this is less than the de minimus that each State is required to receive, North Dakota will receive the difference between their UCR-based crime award ($38,481) and the de minimus ($286,882), which amounts to $248,401 (de minimus bonus). The de minimus bonus is added to their crime award of $38,481 (to equal $286,882). After all de minimus States are calculated, the total de minimus award is deducted from the total LLEBG award ($115,000,000 - $3,514,310 = $111,485,690). (Note that the violent crime averages and crime-based awards for de minimus States are removed from the basis for calculating allocations for remaining States). Following calculation of the de minimus awards, the awards for other States need to be calculated. The percentage of 3-year violent crime averages for each non-de minimus State is recomputed in proportion to the total violent crime averages for all non-de minimus States. A final State award is made based on the newly recalculated percentage of violent crime average proportionate to the new LLEBG amount of $111,485,690. In FY 2004 Alabama was a non-de minimus State, receiving an initial total State award of $1,659,652 based on their 3-year UCR violent crime average of 20,874. This is 1.45% of the total UCR 3-year violent crime averages reported by the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the combined territories. After all de minimus States received their awards and were removed from the formula, Alabama's percentage of the total average UCR violent crime was recomputed to 1.47%, but this was based on $111,485,690, not the original LLEBG award of $115 million. Therefore, the final award C after a proportional reduction for this non-de minimus State C was less, $1,629,758, than what it was ($1,659,652) prior to the de minimus States receiving their awards. Methodology The data used to calculate the allocation amounts are collected from numerous sources including the most recently available UCR Part I Violent Crime data from the FBI's Crime in the United States (CIUS) and county, municipal, and township data from the Census Bureau. Data collection The most recent State-level violent crime data are obtained from the FBI's CIUS on an annual basis. Data for local jurisdictions are obtained in an electronic format directly from the FBI. For FY 2004, data from 1999 to 2001 were used. The total LLEBG Program annual allocation is determined by congressional appropriation. Limitations of data The sum of the UCR violent crimes for all local governments within a State will not equal the amount reported by that State in the FBI's annual publication. BJS uses the published UCR State figures, which represent official FBI estimates of crime in a State. The FBI imputes crime data to compensate for nonreporting local agencies. These imputed values attributed to nonreporting local jurisdictions do not appear on the electronic datafile provided to BJS and therefore are not used in the formula calculation. Definition of terms Allocation - an amount designated by formula calculation. Award - an amount actually received by a State or locality. Geographically contiguous unit of local government - a unit of local government that has jurisdiction over areas located within the boundaries of an area over which a unit of local government has jurisdiction. Non-de minimus States - The District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and Guam are treated as independent States; that is, there is no distribution of funds to units of local government. The Virgin Islands receive one de minimus award. American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands share a half of a single de minimus award, 33% and 17%, respectively. Reporting unit of local government - any unit of local government that reported Part 1 violent crimes to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for the 3 most recent calendar years for which such data are available. Unit of local government - counties, towns, townships, villages, cities, parishes, Indian tribes, Alaska Native villages, and parish sheriffs in Louisiana that carry out substantial governmental duties. Sources of additional information For more information about the LLEBG Formula Block Grant Program and application process, refer to the Bureau of Justice Assistance website at . For H.R. 728 Local Government Law Enforcement Block Grants Act of 1995, see . For public Law 108-7, Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003, refer to the Library of Congress website at . See the section "Office of Justice Programs, State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance" in the public law. The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. Lawrence A. Greenfeld is director. Lynn Bauer, Statistician in the Law Enforcement, Adjudication, and Federal Statistics Unit at BJS, wrote this Technical Report under the supervision of Steven K. Smith. Tina Dorsey and Tom Hester edited the report. September 2004, NCJ 203096 End of file 9/3/04 pm