Sponsors (2)
Want the short version? I can break this bill down for you
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Amends the federal grant allocation rules that fund services for victims of human trafficking by raising several percentage caps used to set aside or distribute those grant dollars. The change increases some small set‑aside caps (for example, from 3% to up to 7% and from 5% to up to 10%) and replaces other specified percentages with 75% and 95%; portions of the inserted text were not provided in the excerpt. The result is a reallocation of how grant funds may be reserved or distributed among categories (administration, program types, or recipients), which will affect grantees, service providers, and victims depending on how the new percentages are applied in practice.
Amend Section 107(b)(2) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (22 U.S.C. 7105(b)(2)) — general amendment of subparagraph (B).
In subparagraph (B), in the matter preceding clause (i), directs to strike specified text and insert new text (the new inserted text is not present in this excerpt).
In subparagraph (B), clause (i): strike “three percent” and insert “up to 7 percent.”
In subparagraph (B), clause (ii)(i): strike “5 percent” and insert “up to 10 percent.”
In subparagraph (B), clause (ii)(ii): directs to insert text after a semicolon (the exact inserted text is not shown in this excerpt).
Primary impacts will fall on victims of human trafficking (the intended beneficiaries), nonprofit service providers, and other grantees that receive federal trafficking victim assistance funding. By raising percentage caps, the amendment allows a larger share of program resources to be reserved or used for the categories tied to those caps (for example, administrative costs, training, capacity-building, or designated program components), depending on how the new percentages are mapped in the full statutory text. This can increase grantee flexibility and support for overhead and program development, but may also reduce the proportion of funds available for direct victim services if agencies and grantees choose to use higher set-asides. Federal and state agencies that administer or subaward these grants will need to update application guidance, award terms, and reporting procedures. The exact distributional consequences cannot be fully assessed from the excerpt because some inserted language was not provided; that missing text will determine which specific funding categories the 75% and 95% figures apply to and how funds are reallocated across recipient types.
Expand sections to see detailed analysis
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced February 3, 2025 by Thomas Jonathan Ossoff · Last progress February 3, 2025
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate