BILL NUMBER: S4584
SPONSOR: SALAZAR
 
TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the executive law, in relation to reports and awards by
the office of victim services
 
PURPOSE:
To expand access to and facilitate equitable administration of New York
victim compensation funds by requiring public reporting on program
performance; increasing the cap on burial expenses; adjusting compen-
sation payor-of-last resort obligations; and eliminating contributory
conduct assessments from claim decisions.
 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
Section 1 amends subdivision 19 of section 623 of the Executive Law by
introducing a duty of publicization for the Office of Victim Services,
which requires the office to promote the existence of state victim
compensation via criminal justice agencies, victim service providers,
and other public and private agencies serving crime victims.
Section 1 amends subdivision 21 of section 623 of the Executive Law by
introducing paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d), each of which require the
Office of Victim Services to disclose specific content and data regard-
ing the funding of crime victim service programs, victim compensation
performance measures, victimization reporting, and publicization of
victim compensation benefits.
Section 2 amends paragraph k and introduces a new paragraph (1) to
section 624 of the Executive Law by simplifying language regarding
sibling and stepsibling eligibility and expanding crime scene cleanup
coverage for Office of Victim Services Awards.
Section 3 amends subdivisions 1 and 1-a of section 625-A of the Execu-
tive Law by clarifying the Office of Victim Services' statutory obli-
gation to distribute information to criminal justice agencies, hospitals
and other appropriate locations concerning the existence of state
compensation benefits.
Section 4 amends subdivision 2 of section 631 of the Executive Law by
increasing the statutory cap on burial expenses from six thousand to
twelve thousand dollars.
Section 4 amends subdivision 4 of section 631 of the Executive Law by
providing the Office of Victim Services the discretion to disregard
certain collateral sources, such as private insurance, that are not
federal or federally financed state and local programs. Additionally,
Section 2 eliminates private donations as a collateral source that the
Office of Victim Services may consider when determining the amount of a
victim compensation award.
Section 4 amends subdivision 5 of section 631 by removing the require-
ment that the Office of Victim Services determine whether a victim of a
crime contributed to the infliction of their own injury.
 
JUSTIFICATION: In 1984, Congress established the Victims of Crime Act
(VOCA) to provide federal oversight and support to state-administered
victim compensation programs. Under VOCA, the Department of Justice's
Office for Victims of Crime (DOJ OVC) was created to administer the
Crime Victims Fund, which consists of dollars collected via fines, fees,
and settlement agreements associated with federal crimes. A significant
percentage of these funds directly compensates crime victims for their
financial losses resulting from victimization, such as medical and coun-
seling expenses, lost wages, burial costs, and temporary housing.
Victims and survivors of crime must satisfy eligibility criteria that
vary across the states, but generally there are a few core requirements:
(1) physical injury; (2) reporting of the crime; (3) a lack of direct or
contributory involvement in the subject crime; and (4) the absence of
collateral sources that might otherwise compensate for victim and survi-
vor expenses. Though victim compensation programs are intended, to
assist in the practical consequences of victimization, current statutory
and regulatory regimes do not adequately meet the needs of victims. For
example, only one in five crime survivors is aware that post-victimiza-
tion funds exist, according to the National Alliance of Trauma Recovery
Centers. Further, only one in twelve crime survivors actually receive
compensation to recover from their victimization, according to the Alli-
ance for Safety and Justice. This overwhelming lack of awareness and
access to victim compensation strongly indicates that program promotion
has not been prioritized.
Even in those circumstances when a crime survivor does receive compen-
sation, certain expense caps fall short of the costs that victims actu-
ally incur. Currently, the State of New York may pay a maximum of six-
thousand dollars under a victim compensation claim for burial expenses.
This six-thousand dollar cap, however, does not account for economic
inflation and the actual average cost of a funeral. The New York City
Bar Association, for instance, reported that the average price of a
funeral is around ten-thousand dollars. Additionally, the National
Funeral Directors Association found that the costs of funerals have
risen six percent since 2021 alone. Thus, the current statutory cap is
insufficient to appropriately meet the needs of victims and survivors.
These statutory and regulatory inadequacies are worsened by substantive
contributory conduct provisions that force programs to assess a victim's
behavior before and during their victimization. Contributory conduct
assessments follow an opaque process and are often subjective in nature,
informed by the biases of different actors throughout the criminal
justice system. According to the Associated Press, for instance, Black
applicants in the State of New York are more likely to be denied under
the logic that their own behavior provoked victimization. Indeed, when a
crime survivor is denied pursuant to contributory conduct in New York,
the victim is told that they are not an "innocent victim of crime" and
therefore cannot be eligible for compensation. Conspicuously, there is
no federal victim compensation provision that mandate such contributory
conduct assessments.
Federal law, however, does require state victim compensation programs to
be the "payor-of-last resort," meaning federal and federally financed
state programs must be considered collateral sources where they would
otherwise cover expenses eligible for state compensation. Despite
VOCA's specific prescription on collateral sources, some compensation
programs take an expansive view of the payor-of-last resort obligation,
extending their consideration of collateral sources to include private
donations and crowdfunding. DOJ OVC in particular has issued clarifying
guidance that discusses the unfairness of using crowdfunding for collat-
eral source assessments, noting that consideration of such private
donations is functionally similar to means testing, which VOCA does not
require. DOJ OVC further added that crowdfunding campaigns are frequent-
ly not controlled by the benefitting victims and survivors, nor are they
always organized to pay for expenses that victim compensation would
cover. Federal law is therefore more permissive on the payor-of-last
resort obligations that it imposes as a condition of receiving compen-
sation funding from DOJ OVC. Accordingly, this bill would reconcile New
York's compensation statute with the more limited requirements of feder-
al law and eliminate consideration of private donations as a collateral
source.
 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: New bill.  
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.
 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
Immediately.

Statutes affected:
S4584: 623 executive law, 623(20) executive law, 631 executive law, 631(2) executive law