Content warning: This article contains references to sexual assault.

Victims of Crime Act funding is the backbone of crime response services for survivors’ needs, nationwide. In California, VOCA substantially funds programs that serve survivors of intimate partner violence, rape, human trafficking and child abuse, sustaining services such as shelter, counseling and legal advocacy.  

VOCA funds come from monetary penalties from federal criminal convictions, a domain that is subject to significant change. The fund has dwindled precipitously in recent years, paralleling a steady decline in federal white-collar crime prosecution. For the 2024 fiscal year, VOCA funding has been cut nearly in half at the federal level.

VOCA cuts have devastated individual states. Earlier this year, California announced that it would only be including $87 million in its crime services budget, a 43% reduction from the $153.8 million allocation last year. Due to arduous advocacy efforts from nonprofit organizations and survivor activists, California passed legislation supplementing VOCA funding.

Daily headlines, sent straight to your inbox.

Subscribe to our newsletter to keep up with the latest at and around USC.

This increased the crime services budget to $103 million, but survivors are still suffering consequences. VOCA substantially funds several grant programs in California, including domestic violence assistance, rape crisis centers, child advocacy centers, human trafficking services and transitional housing. 

Since 2023, I have been volunteering at Peace Over Violence, an organization that serves survivors of sexual violence and is a beneficiary of VOCA funding. In my role as a counselor-advocate, I have witnessed the impact that the lack of funding has on survivors.  

Due to emergency housing shortages, survivors are not always able to leave their dangerous living situations. Reductions in legal services make it difficult for survivors to pursue prosecution, restraining orders and immigration relief. Backlogged psychotherapy services prevent survivors from receiving consistent mental help.

Sometimes, there are not enough counselors to pick up every crisis hotline call. Most consequentially, there are not always enough advocates to accompany survivors during sexual assault forensic exams, even though this essential support is a survivor’s right.

These difficulties create additional burdens to the already existing plight of survivors. Survivors of relationship violence commonly experience emotional abuse, low levels of self-esteem and a weakened or nonexistent support system. Oftentimes, in intimate partner violence, child sexual abuse and human trafficking, the survivor may experience a cycle of violence that keeps them trapped in the relationship. 

Social isolation and financial exploitation are underrecognized tactics of abuse — abusers may surveil the survivor’s activities, prevent them from engaging with supportive figures and take control of their finances, preventing survivors from establishing independence. Abusers also maintain control over survivors by using children to evoke guilt around the idea of leaving a relationship.  

Abusers may make threats, harm pets and display violence toward objects, in addition to inflicting sexual, physical and emotional violence onto survivors. Survivors may place blame on themselves for the abuse, and victim-blaming culture does not help in alleviating the social stigma around navigating sexual violence. It is no surprise that it takes a survivor an average of seven attempts to leave an abusive relationship.

The decision to seek help is an important step for survivors, and it does not come without risks.  A majority of intimate partner violence homicides occur during or after separation. Coming forward about abuse or attempting to leave a relationship can be the most dangerous time in a survivor’s life. Explaining budget cuts, wait times and alternative resources to survivors under these circumstances is heartbreaking.

Nonprofits that serve survivors experience low morale and compassion fatigue when faced with budget cuts. With fewer funds and staff — but not any fewer survivors — organizations are forced to spread themselves thin to continue essential services. 

This results in employee and volunteer burnout, high turnover rates and an overall inability to serve survivors to our best ability. Outreach programs that educate the community on healthy relationships take a back seat, and we are not able to do the preventative work that is necessary in creating a future with less violence.

The consequences of VOCA cuts are a reminder of the direct impact that policies have on individual members of society. It is nonsensical to base funding for survivor services on how many federal criminals are prosecuted, and the fluctuations in funding caused by this model highlight an urgent need for change. 

While the passage of AB 1956 helps to supplement VOCA funding in California in emergencies, we must advocate harder for a permanent, sustainable financial model that prioritizes the reality of survivors.