Specifically, we identified 13  grant programs that DOJ administered from fiscal years 2005 through  2010 that recipients could use for this purpose. Unless Required, Few Recipients Allocated or Planned to Use Any Federal Funding for Indigent Defense, in Part Due to Competing Priorities

Recipients of the four grant programs requiring funds to be used in whole  or in part for indigent defense from fiscal years 2005 through 2010  allocated or planned to use $13.3 million out of $21.2 million—or 63  percent—of available funds for state, local, and tribal indigent defense. When Recipients Allocated Funding for Indigent Defense, in General, the Amount Was Small Relative to the Total Award and Funding Was Used for Personnel and Training

Those recipients who chose to allocate or use funding for indigent  defense generally reported providing a small amount of funding for  indigent defense relative to their total awards. DOJ Could More Consistently Collect Data on the Amount of Funding Allocated for Indigent Defense When Programs Identify It as a Priority

For grant programs that require funding be used at least in part for  indigent defense, DOJ collects data on whether recipients have allocated  funding for indigent defense and the allocation amounts, which allows  DOJ to determine if funding was used in accordance with grant  requirements. DOJ Assesses the Impact of Indigent Defense Grant Funding and Has Mechanisms to Help Indigent Defense Providers Evaluate Services

		DOJ Has Measures to Assess the Impact of Indigent Defense-Related Grant Funding

According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), performance  measurement indicates what a program is accomplishing and whether  results are being achieved. We found that all nine of the DOJ grant programs that required or  prioritized funding for indigent defense included output measures that  described the level of grant activity. In addition, seven of the nine grant  programs included outcome-oriented performance measures that  described the intended results of the program. Indigent Defense Providers Generally Reported That Evaluations of Their Services Have Not Been Conducted; DOJ Has Mechanisms to Support Such Evaluations

With its indigent defense-related performance measures, DOJ can assess  the impact of a grantee’s use of funds, such as whether the funding  resulted in an increase in the number of defenders hired. Of the 118 public  defender offices or agencies that responded to our survey, 9 provided us  with copies of evaluations that they had conducted of their office or  agency or that another entity conducted, such as a consultant or  oversight body.oversight committee for a local jurisdiction’s indigent defense services— collected data and used it to assess compliance with local indigent  defense standards. Respondents who reported reasons for not  conducting an evaluation most frequently cited lack of personnel (46  percent, 29 of 63) and lack of expertise and/or the need for technical  assistance (43 percent, 27 of 63) as the reasons. Specifically, by increasing awareness  among JAG, JABG, and JJDP grantees, as well as indigent defense  providers, that funding is available for indigent defense, DOJ could be in a  better position to ensure that eligible grantees are aware that they can  access federal funding to help address their needs. Recommendations for Executive Action

To ensure that OJP is best positioned to identify and address critical  needs in the indigent defense community, determine whether it has met  its commitment to indigent defense, and improve accountability in grants  administration, we recommend that the Assistant Attorney General of  OJP take the following three actions:  take steps to increase JAG, JABG, and JJDP grantees’ awareness  that funding can be allocated for indigent defense;  inform indigent defense providers about grants for which they are  eligible to apply; and  take steps to collect data on allocations and spending for indigent  defense in the JABG and TJADG programs. In its written  comments, DOJ concurred with the recommendations in this report. Collecting such data would position DOJ  to better assess if it is meeting its commitment to indigent defense. 2. 3. 4. To what extent does DOJ collect data on indigent defense funding  when the grant program specifies that funds be allocated or awarded  for this purpose or highlights it as a priority? 5. To determine the extent to which state, local, and tribal governments  allocated federal funding for indigent defense, the factors that influenced  their decisions, and the amounts allocated, we conducted separate Web- based surveys of all recipients of fiscal year 2005 through 2010 DOJ  formula grants that could be allocated for indigent defense—the JAG,  JJDP, and JABG grants—and tribal governments that received BIA Tribal  Courts TPA distributions from fiscal years 2005 through 2010.develop the survey questionnaires, we reviewed existing literature about  the provision of indigent defense, and interviewed state JAG, JABG, and  JJDP recipients, local JAG recipients, and tribes. We drew a stratified sample of 253 of the 841 public defenders  nationwide. However, the responses provide insights into the  factors that influence public defenders’ decisions to apply for federal  funding. We also reviewed DOJ’s guidance to recipients to determine the  extent to which DOJ communicated that funding could be used for  indigent defense programs. For  grants in which we found that it was, we spoke with DOJ officials about  why they chose to do so.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees every person accused of a crime the right to counsel. States and localities generally fund indigent defense services, and the Department of Justice (DOJ) also provides funding that can be used for these services. GAO was asked to review federal support for indigent defendants. This report addresses, for fiscal years 2005 through 2010, the (1) types of support DOJ provided for indigent defense; (2) extent to which eligible DOJ funding was allocated or awarded for indigent defense, the factors affecting these decisions, and DOJs actions to address them; (3) percentage of DOJ funding allocated for indigent defense and how it was used; (4) extent to which DOJ collects data on indigent defense funding; and (5) extent to which DOJ assesses the impacts of indigent defense grants, indigent defense programs have been evaluated, and DOJ has supported evaluation efforts. GAO surveyed (1) all 4,229 grant recipients about funding allocations and (2) a sample of 253 public defender offices about factors influencing their decisions to apply for funding. Though not all survey results are generalizable, they provide insights. GAO also analyzed grant related documents and interviewed relevant officials.

What GAO Found

The Department of Justice (DOJ) administered 13 grant programs from fiscal years 2005 through 2010 that recipients could use to support indigent defense, 4 of which required recipients to use all or part of the funding for this purpose. DOJ also provides training to indigent defense providers, among other things.
From fiscal years 2005 through 2010, recipients of the 4 grants that required spending for indigent defense allocated or planned to use $13.3 million out of $21.2 million in current dollars for indigent defense. However, among the 9 grants that did not require allocations or awards for indigent defense, two-thirds or more of state, local, and tribal respondents to GAOs surveys reported that they did not use funds for this purpose, partly due to competing priorities. DOJ has listed the grants on its website. However, no more than 54 percent of grantees or public defender offices responding to GAOs surveys were aware that such funding could be used to support indigent defense. Taking steps to increase awareness would better position DOJ to help ensure that eligible grantees are aware that they can access federal funding to help address their needs. DOJ officials acknowledged that opportunities exist to enhance grantees awareness.
When recipients allocated funding for indigent defense, the amount was generally small relative to the total award and most commonly used for personnel and training. For instance, among grant recipients who reported in GAOs surveys that they had allocated funding for indigent defense, allocations as a percentage of total awards ranged from 2 percent to 14 percent.
DOJ generally collects data on funding allocated for indigent defense when the grant program requires such funding or identifies it as a grant priority, but does not do so in two juvenile-focused grants. According to DOJ, it does not collect such data in these two programs because indigent defense is 1 of 17 purposes for which grant funds can be used. GAO has previously reported that agencies should collect data to support decision making, and the Attorney General has committed to focusing on indigent defense issues. Collecting data on the amount of funding from these two grants that is used to support indigent defense would position DOJ to better assess if it is meeting the Attorney Generals commitment.
DOJ assesses the impact of indigent defense grant funding and has mechanisms to help indigent defense providers evaluate services. All 9 of the DOJ grant programs that required or prioritized funding to be used for indigent defense included output measures that described the level of grant activity, such as the number of defenders hired, and 7 of the 9 included outcome measures that described the intended results of the funds, such as the percent increase in defendants served. Nine of the 118 public defender offices or agencies that responded to GAOs survey provided GAO with a copy of an evaluation that had been conducted of their office; those that did not most frequently cited lack of personnel (28 of 62) and lack of expertise or the need for technical assistance (26 of 62) as the reasons. DOJ has mechanisms that could address these challenges. For instance, DOJ provides technical assistance through a website.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOJ increase grantees awareness that funding can be allocated for indigent defense and collect data on such funding.
DOJ concurred with the recommendations.