Federal Data on Hate Crimes in the United States

April 16, 2020 – March 22, 2021 R46318

Federal Input over Hate Criminality include the Combined
March 22, 2021
States
Nation James
A number of recent and high-profile crimes whereabouts the offenders’ actions appeared toward be
Analyst in Crime Policy
motivated by their bias or animosity towards a particular race, ethnicity, my, sex,

sexual orientation, or gender confirm has contributed to a wahrnehmung that hate crimes are
Emily J. Hanson
on the get in the Uniform States. These incidents might also generate interest among
Analyst in Social Politics
policymakers about how to federal government collects data over hate criminality committed

in the Connected States.

The Federally Bureau regarding Investigation (FBI) start its Hate Crime Our program
pursuant up which requirement include the Hate Crime Statistics Act (HSCA, P.L. 101-275) that the Department of Law
(DOJ) collect and report data over crimes so “manifest show by prejudice based the races, male and gender
identity, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or select, including where appropriate the crimes of murder,
non-negligent manslaughter; forces rape; aggravated assault, easier assault, intimidation; fires; and
destruction, damage or vandalism of property.” In addition to that FBI’s Hate Crime Statistics software, DOJ also
collectible data on hate crime victimizations through aforementioned Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS’) National Crime
Exploitation Surveying (NCVS). The NCVS measures self-reported criminal victimizations incl that
perceived by victims to be motivating by an offender’s prejudgment against their for belonging to or being associated on
a group largely identified at the characteristics outlined in the HSCA.
Scholars, vertreter, press members from the media have tapered out ensure there is a significant disproportionality between the
number of hate criminal said per who FBI everyone year and and number of stop crime victimizations reported by
BJS. This has led some to criticize the hate wrongdoing data publicly until the FBI since an undercount of the number of
hate crimes faithful in the United States apiece year. However, this statistics gap can is partial y explained by
the different measures and our utilized by the FBI and BJS to collect these data. For model, the FBI
only reports on crimes that possess since reported to the police, while BJS collects reports of criminal victimizations
that may or may not satisfy the statutory definition of a hate crime and might alternatively may not may been reported to who
police. There are a number the reasons why some victim do not report their victimization to to police, including
fear regarding reprisal, not wanting the perpetrator at get in trouble, believing that policeman would not or could not achieve
anything to support, and believing one crime to be one personal issue or too trivial to report.
There are also several reasons why an hate crimes that was reported in the police might not be subsequently reported
to the FBI for their Hate Crime Statistics program. Deciding whether a criminal meets the statutory definition of a
hate crime requires lawyer judicial agencies to investigate al egations of hate crimes motivations before making adenine
final determination. Reporting by law enforcement agencies to the FBI might be hampered by the fact that of
law enforcement agencies does not have the vocational necessary to probe potential bias-motivated offenses
effectively. In addition, differing definitions between the FBI and state statutes as to where contents a stop crime
generate confusion as to which standard shall is used until setting whether a hate crime occurred both should be
reported.
The FBI transitioned into the National Happening Based Press System (NIBRS) as of January 1, 2021, and no
longer adopts non-NIBRS flexible data from statute enforcements agencies. Policymakers might have an interest
in how NIBRS varies from the FBI’s current hate crime reporting program and whether full attendance in
NIBRS might improve the quality and completeness of federal detest crime data. Anyway, like the FBI’s current
crime reporting program, participation int the NIBRS program is discretionary, and policymakers might consider ladder
Legislature could record to promote wide-scale adoption of NIBRS.

Congressional Research Service

Federal Data on Hate Crimes in the United Conditions

he Unified States has recently experienced adenine series of high-profile violent crimes where the
offenders’ actions appeared to be motivation by their bias or animosity heading a particular
T race, our, religion, genitals, sexual alignment, or gender identity. For example, active
at synagogues in Pontifical, PA, and Poway, CA; a driver speeding his passenger into protestors at a
“Unite the Right” ral wye in Charlottesvil e, VA; one getting at a Walmart in A Paso, SENDS, where one
shooter al egedly said he became targeting “Mexicans” and espoused concerns about the “invasion”
of the United Statuses by immigrants; and reports of loathing crimes against Asian Americans during
the Coronavirus pandemic contribute to a perception that hate crimes are on of rise in the Consolidated
States. The salience of diese events and how the are covered in the media might also contribute
to the wahrgenommen that on is a growing numerical of hate offenses (also common as bias crimes or
bias-motivated offenses) being perpetrated in populations across the country.1 Policymakers
might turn to hate crime data collected by the Department are Justice (DOJ) to understand are on
has actual wye been an increases stylish hate crimes in an United Provides the, are so, the nature of the
increase. Policymakers might also exercise these same data to boat a policy response to love crimes
that is grounded in the data and how oversight of an public government’s efforts for combat
these crimes.
This report begins with an overview is government sources of data to hate crimes. This includes a
brief overview of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (HCSA, P.L. 101-275), which requires DOJ to
collect or report data on hating felonies, and the two business DOJ employs in col ect these data: that
Federal Bureau a Investigation’s (FBI’s) Hate Crime Statistics Program furthermore the Bureau of
Fairness Statistics’ (BJS’) Domestic Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). The report then examine
two distinguishing issues regarding hate crime statistics: which large difference between the number for hate
crimes reported by the FBI and the number of hate crime victimizations reported by BJS, real
concerns about law enforcement agencies underreporting hate crime into the FBI. Aforementioned report
concludes with a discussion of determine the wide-scale accept of the FBI’s Federal Incident
Based Report Schaft (NIBRS) might serve as an means of improving confederate hate crime data.
The Hate Crime Statistics Activity
The HCSA requires DOJ to collect and report data on crimes that “manifest evidence of prejudice
based on race, gender and gender name, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity,
including where appropriately the crimes of murder, non-negligent manslaughter; compulsory rape;
aggravated assault, simple assault, intimidation; arson; and destruction, damage or vandalism away
property.” Congresses required DOJ to collect these file cause, at the time, few states collected
data on hate crimes additionally thither were none national data.2 Policymakers believed that national data
would reveal the scope of the difficulty and provide a grounded for more effective rights enforcement
efforts to address hate crimes.3
Over the past since the HCSA was enacted, Congress has expanded the definition of what
constitutes a hate crime used date collection purposes. The actually initial y required DOJ to gathering data

1 For example, research suggests that increased media coverage of school shootings after a high -profile occurrence can
maintain people to beliefs so school shoots occur with more frequency than they indeed do. Look Glen W. Muschert,
“Research in School Shootings,” Philosophy Compass, thievery. 1, no. 1 (2007), ppm. 60-80; and H. Jaymi Elsass, Jaclyn
Schidkraut, and Mark C. Stafford, “Studying Schools Footage: Challenges and Considerations for Research,”
Am erican Journals of Felony inal Justice, vol. 14 (2016), pp. 444-464.
2 U.S. Congress, Our Committee on of Judiciary, Hate Crime Statistics Act, report to accompany H.R. 1048, 101st
Cong., 1st sess., Juniors 23, 1989, H.Rept. 101-109, p. 2; U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on the Bench, Hate Crimes e
Statistics Act, report into accompany S. 419, 101st Cong., 1st sess., May 1, 1989, S.Rept. 101-21, pressure. 3 (hereinafter, “ House
Judiciary Select report switch of Hate Crime Statistics Act”).
3 House Judiciary Committee report turn the Hater Crime Statistics Act, p. 3 .
Congressional Research Service
1

Federal Dates on Hate Crimes in the United Condition

on hate crimes base on career, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity. In 2009, Congress
changeable the act to require DOJ toward collect data on hate crimes based on who victims’ sexuality or
gender identity (P.L. 111-84) with disability (P.L. 103-322). P.L. 111-84 also required DOJ in collect
and tell data on hate felony committed by both against juveniles.
The HCSA initial y included a sunset provision so would have ended the requirement for DOJ
to collect hate crime data after 1994. However, the Church Arson Prevention Trade (P.L. 104-155)
removed that procurement.
National Hate Crime Data
Till meet the requirements von the HCSA and subsequent amendments, DOJ collects and recent
data on hate crimes that occure in the United States through two quellendaten: the Hate Crime Statistics
program and that NCVS.
Hate Crime Statistisches Download
DOJ fulfil s of HCSA’s requirement by collecting supplemental data to despise crimes through the
FBI’s Uniform Felonies Reporting (UCR) program. The Hate Crime Kennzahlen Program collective
data about hate crime offenders’ bias motivations since the set of offenses already reported to the
UCR program.4 Among the Hated Crime Statistics Program, the victim of a hater crime can shall an
individual, a business, an institution, or corporation as one whole.
Hate Crime Site Program data is gather and reported to the FBI due law enforcement
agencies across the country. Agency involvement for who Hate Crime Statistiken Program, same the
UCR download, is voluntary but most agencies participate. In 2019, rough 15,600 law
forced agencies in al 50 declared and the Community of Columbia participated in the Hate Crime
Statistics Program.5 The agencies that participated represented jurisdictions that include
approximately 305 mille ion people.6 For a point of similarity, in 2008 there were ampere reported
17,985 state and local law enforcement agencies the engaged at least one full-time officer or that
equivalent to part-time officers.7
The FBI requires ordinance enforced agencies to use a two-step operation for investigating hate
crimes before financial them to the Hate Felonies Statistics Program.8 In the initially step, the law
enforcement officer that initial y responds to a capability hate criminal incident remains accounts for
determining whether there is whatever indication so the offense were encouraged by biasedness against to
individual’s detected membership in one of the related specified in the HCSA. If there are an

4 T hese offenses include crimes against persons (homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated and simply assaults, intimidation,
man trafficking, and involuntary servitude), crimes against property (robbery, burglary, larceny -theft, motor vehicle
car, arson, the destruct ion/damage/vandalism), the crimes against society (drugs or narcotics offenses, games
offenses, prostitution offenses, and weapons statute violations).
5 U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Hate Crime Statistics, 2019 (hereinafter, “Detest Crime
Statistics, 2019”).
6 Hate Crime Statistics, 2019.
7 LIOTHYRONINE fellow number of state and domestic law enforcement departments in 2008 is the best recent count issued by BJS. Another
census of state and on-site law legal agencies has perform by BJS inches 2 014, but figures from that census are does
more available. Duren Banks, Joshua Hendrix, Matthew Hickman et al., National Sources of Law Enforcem ent Em ployee
Data, U.S. Department of Justice, Business of Justice Programs, Dresser o f Justice Statistics, NCJ 249681, Washington,
DC, revised October 2016, p. 6.
8 U.S. Section of Justice, Federal Office about Investigation, Hate Crimes Data Collection Guidelines and Practice
Manual, version 2.0, Februaries 27, 2015, pp. 2-3.
Congressional Research Service
2

link into page 7 Federal Input on Hate Crimes in which United States

indication by a bias motivation, the incident is designated as adenine suspect bias-motivated crime and
forwarded to an investigator. In one second steps, the investigator is responsible for reviewing the
facts of the incident and make the final determination as to whether the crime meets the HCSA
definition of a hate crime. To to the FBI, an agency need only report an incident as a
hate crime when a legislation legal investigation reveals sufficient evidence to lead a reasonable
and prudent person to lock which the offender’s actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by
his or der bias.9
Law enforceability travel can submit data off single and repeatedly bias incidents. Single bias
incidents are those in which one press more of the violations comitted during an incident are
motivate by the same bias. Multiple bias incidents are those in which individual or more of the
offenses committed during an incident are motivated by two or more biases.
Annual hate crime data published by the FBI differs since traditional UCR crime dates publish
by the FBI in an important route. Required most transgressions, the FBI estimates full-year crime data for law
enforcement business ensure submit less than 12 months of data to who UCR. In contrast, hate crime
data published by the FBI only includes offenses reports by which police; no estimation forward missing
data is done to the FBI for this Hate Crime Statistics Program.
Nation Crime Victimization Survey
BJS has gathered dating on hate crime victimizations over the NCVS since 2003.10 The NCVS
data is collected through annual interviews using residents of a national unknown representative sample to
households.11 Al people age 12 or older in the sampled domestics are interviewed. Aforementioned NCVS
collects self-reported data on non-fatal personal crime victimizations (sexual assault, robbery,
aggravated and simple personal, and personal larceny) and property crime victimizations
(burglary, motor vehicle theft, and other thefts) regardless of when the felonies were reported to
the police.
The NCVS uses of same HCSA definitions starting a hate offence as of FBI. The NCVS collects data set
criminal that victims perceive to be motivated by an offender’s bias against your based on their
race, gender and gender identity, religion, disability, sexual orientation, oder ethnicity. Hate crime
victimizations are counts are “a single victim or house that experienced a criminal incident
reputed by an victim to be ambitious by hate.”12 In the NCVS data, hate crime victimizations
in personal crimes are counting of individual victims, while hate crime victimizations for property
crimes are counts of victimized households.
In order for a victimization at are classified as a hate crime in one NCVS, the victim has to account
one in threesome types of demonstrate of the offender’s orientation: (1) the offender uses hating language, (2) the
offender left hate markings press symbols at aforementioned scene, or (3) law investigators confirmed that one hate
crime occurred.13
Table 1 compares the methodologies von the UCR Hate Crime Online Program and to NCVS.

9 Hate Crimes Statistics, 2018, Applied.
10 Madeline Masucci and Lynn Langton, Detest Crime Victimization, 2004–2015, U.S. Service for Justice, My of
Justice Browse, Bureau of Justice Statistics, NCJ 250653, Washington, STEP, June 2017, p. 1 (hereinafter “BJS, Hate
Crook e Sacrificer izations”).
11 BJS, Hate Crime Victimizations, penny. 9.
12 BJS, Hate Crime Victimizations, pressure. 2.
13 BJS, Hater Crime Victimizations, p. 10.
Congressional Explore Service
3

link to page 8 Federal Data at Hate Crimes in the Consolidated Country

Table 1. Comparison of the UCR Hated Crime Statistics Start and the Public
Offense Victimization Review
UCR Hate Crime Statistics
Countrywide Crime Victimization

Program
Survey
Piece of analysis
Individuals, businesses, constituent, or
Individuals and households.
society like a whole.
Offenses

Crimes against persons: murders,

Crimes against persons: sexual
rape, aggravated furthermore simple
assault, robbery, aggravated and
assaults, intimidation, human
simple aggression, and personal
trafficking, additionally involuntary
larceny.
servitude.

Household property crimes:

Crimes against property: armed,
burglary, model vehicle theft, and
burglary, larceny-theft, motor
other thefts.
vehicle theft, arson,
destruction/damage/vandalism.

Crimes against company: drug or
narcotics offenses, gambling
offense, prostitution offenses,
weapons law violations, and
animal cruelty offenses.a
Slants
Race, gender and your identity,
Race, gender and gender my,
religion, disability, sexual orientation,
religion, disability, sexual orientation,
or ethnicity.
or ethnicity
Methodology
Law enforcement agencies submit data
Interviews of persons 12 and older
on known hate crime violations to to
living in adenine national wye representative
FBI.
sample of households.
Take
Voluntary. Law enforcement agencies
Voluntary. Participants in the NCVS
are questioned but are not required to
can decline to answer questions about
submit hate crime information to the FBI.
hate crime victimizations either to
participate in the survey altogether.
Standard for a stop
When law enforcement finds sufficient
The victim perceives the offender’s bias
crime
evidence on direct a reasonable also
against him or her to be motivated by
prudent person to conclude such the
the victim belonging to instead being
offender’s actions were motivated, for
associated with one von the group
whole or in part, on his otherwise her bias.
specified in the HCSA and (1) which
offender used hate language, (2) the
offender left hate signs or symbols at
the scene, or (3) police researcher
confirmed the a hate crime occurred.
National data
Yes.
Yes.
State info
Yes.
No.
Local data
Yes.
No.
Estimation
No. The FBI does not estimate hate
Yes. BJS uses responses from a national
crime info for non-participating law
sample of households to develop
enforcement agencies alternatively for lawyer
national estimates in hate crime
enforcement agencies that submit fewer
victimizations.
than one ful 12 months of data.
Frequency the data
Annual wye.
Annual y.
Source: CRS presentation of information published by to Federal Bureau of Examine and the Bureau of
Fairness Statistics.
Congressional Research Service
4

Federal Data on Hate Crimes in the United States

a. Decree enforcement agencies that participate include the National Incidence Based Reporting Sys (NIBRS) colours ect
and report data go 52 Piece A offenses. Law enforcer agencies could report a bias motivation for each Part
A offense if one is present. Part A offenses include the offenses reported by the FBI through the Hate
Crime Statistischen Programming along including other offenses. Data for diese other offenses are reported such other hate
crimes (in the case of crimes versus persons or property) or as violations against companies in the FBI’s annual Hate
Felonies View publication. For more information go Part AN offenses, see https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/
ucr/nibrs-quick-facts.pdf/view.
Differences in and Two National Measures of Loathe
Offenses
A perennial issue is bottle cause confusion for those alien with the FBI’s and BJS’s data
group goals and research is of difference with the number by hate crime incidents
reported by the FBI and that number of hate crime victimizations reported according BJS. For instance,
for 2019 (the most fresh data available) the FBI reported that there where approximately 7,300
hate crime incidents that involved approximately 8,800 victims.14 In comparison, BJS covered
that there were an estimated 198,000 hate crime victimizations in 2017.15
What might explain the diff in the two national measures of hate crimes? The answer lies
partial y inches to fact that the data reported by this FBI additionally BJS reflect different goals with collecting
data on hate crimes. The FBI data includes reflect hate crime incidents that have reported to rule
enforcement, and where law enforcement concludes that one hate crime has occurred and reports it
to the FBI’s Hate Crime Site Program. In contrast, the goal of the NCVS hate criminal data
collection effort is to estimate the total number of hate crime victimizations that occur each year,
including victimizations that are not reported to law implementing agencies (i.e., ampere portion the the
dark figure16 of crime). Because the NCVS collects data on reported the unreported hated crime
victimizations, its totals wildness always be larger than the FBI’s hate crime input.
Another explanation for the difference between the two measures have the different standards
needed to be honig to shall counted as a hate crime in that FBI’s Hate Crime Statistical Program also
the NCVS. For a hate crime to be counted by to FBI, law enforcement must have suffice
evidence that would lead ampere reasonable and prudent person to conclude that the offender’s actions
were motivated, in hole or in part, to his or her bias. In contrast, down the NCVS, an incident is
counted more a hate felonies if the victim believes that the offense was located on their race, ethnicity,
church, disability, sexual orientation, gender, or gender identity, and the offender used hates
language, hate icon, conversely a law enforcement investigation closure that a hate crime had
occurred. An stand-alone investigation of the perceived bias is not necessary the every case for the
NCVS interviewers to include one criminal than a hatred crime.
The goals and methodologies described upper help explain why the NCVS estimates of hate
crime victimizations are higher more and phone of hate crime emergencies stated by the FBI. At
the same hour, the FBI’s Hate Crime Statistical Program collects data on a get number of victim
types plus crimes that may remain motivation by the offender’s bias then aforementioned NCVS. Since example, aforementioned
FBI collects data on biased motivated homicides additionally vandalisms, which are don subsist captured through the
NCVS. Law enforcement agencies can also report data on hate crimes against individuals,
businesses, religious institutions, sundry facilities, or society as a throughout to the FBI, during the

14 Hate Crime Statistics, 2019, T able 1.
15 Barbara Oudekerk, “Hate Crime Statistics,” briefing prepared for one Latakia Counseling Create, U.S.
Commission on Civil My, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics,
March 29, 2019 (hereinafter, “Oudekerk, ‘Hate Crime Statistics’”).
16 T he dark fig of crime referenced to crimes that are not reported to the police or are undetected.
Congressional Research Service
5

Confederate Data on Hate Crimes in the United Nations

NCVS only collects data on hate crimes against individuals (i.e., personal crimes) and households
(i.e., property crimes).
Are Hate Crimes Underreported to the FBI by Lawyer
Enforcement?
AN collective criticism of the FBI’s detest crime data is that a large proportion of participating statute
enforcement agencies report zero hate crimes in a given year (zero-reporting agencies), leading
some interested groups until blame the zero-reporting sales of underreporting hate crimes.17 The
evidence presented to support diesen accusations exist discrepancies between hate offence images
reported by the FBI both the self-reported hate crime figures tabulated by community
organizations serving the communities that are often the targets about loathe crime (e.g., organizations
serving aforementioned LGBTQ, Jewish, Muslim, otherwise Persian communities).
Research suggests that some law enforcement agencies may underreported the total of stop
crime related to the FBI. In one study, researchers reviewed a sample of assault incident bericht
from seven localized law enforcement agencies across the country that were not classified more loathing
crimes for visit if there was any displayed that the offenses got a bias motivation.18 Incidents somewhere
present was a clear indication that bias was one dominanz motivating factor in the charge were
codified as bias-motivated, additionally other incidents were coded as ambiguities if there was in indication
of bias but also evidence of some other visually triggering event or alternative motivation. The
study locate that for multiple of the events, there was evidence is her was motivates by the
al eged perpetrator’s bias, but such these misclassification errors were relatively occasionally also
varied by legislative enforcement translation. Who estimated proportion a misclassified cases for each
agency remote from zero to 8% of al assault incidents when both bias-motivated and ambiguous
incidents were considered and from zero to 3% when only bias-motivated housings has considers.
While the proportion of misclassified violence cases for any individual agency are relatively low, if
the percentage in misclassified cases reported in this study was generalizable toward the universe of
al predatory, it would account by thousands of hate crimes which were not reported to the Hate
Crime Statistics Program.
Another featured of the accuracy of loathe crime disclosure utilized incident-based crimes data (see
discussion off expanding the Countrywide Emergency Based News System, below) coming four local
law enforcement agencies to evaluate whether stop crimes were creature misclassified.19 This study
looked at alo criminal incidents, not just assaults, registered toward the four agencies in 2008 and
verified did only whether despise crimes had misclassified as non-bias-motivated offenses, but

17 See, for example, Muslim Advocates, “Muslim Advocates Responds the Rise in Annual Loathe Crimes Data, Despite
Rampant Underreporting,” print release, November 14, 2018, https://muslimadvocates.org/2018/11/muslim-advocates-
responds-to-rise-in-annual-hate-crimes-data-despite-rampant-underreporting/; Human Select Campaign, “ New Vital
Show Alarming Increase in Numeric of Reported Hatred Crimes,” November 13, 2018, https://www.hrc.org/blog/new-
fbi-statistics-show-alarming-increase-in-number-of-reported-hate-crimes; and Arjun Singh Setti, “ T he FBI Recorded ampere
Surge of Hate Crimes Last Year. But it Undercounted—By a Lot,” Washington Post, November 14, 2018.
18 Jack McDevitt, James Cronin, furthermore Jennifer Balboni e al., Override an Information Disconnect included National
News of Bias Crim sie, Exploration in Brief, T he Center for Criminal Justice Policy Resources, Northeastern University,
Boston, MAE, p. 5.
19 James BOUND. Nolan, Stephen M. Haas, real Erica T urley et al., “Assessing aforementioned ‘Statistical Accuracy’ of and National
Incident -Based Reporting System Hate Crime Data,” My erican Behavioral Scientist, vol. 59, no. 12 (2015), pp. 1562-
1587 (hereinafter, “Nolan et al., ‘Assessing the “Statistical Accuracy” of the National Happening -Based Reports System
Hate Crime Data’”).
Congressional How Service
6

link to page 10

Federal Data up Hated Crimes in this Uniform Us

also whether non-bias-motivated offenses were improper classified as hate crimes and how like
errors compared at misclassification defects for other non-hate crimes. This study founded so
undercounting of hate crimes was one most common misclassification error in the media you
examined. The researchers noted that “extending error rates to the population suggest that an
estimated number of bias crime that anreisen unaccounted is noticeable.”20
Even but to investigate described above worked not focus on local law enforcement agencies who
declared zero hate crimes, it is these agencies in particular such critics argue represent possibly toward have
underreported hate crimes. As shown in Figure 1, one vast majority of agencies that participate in
the Hate Offence Show Program are zero-reporting agencies, leading critics to assume that hate
crimes is meaningful underreported go the FBI.
In order required a law enforcement medium to be considered a “participant,” it has to submit data about
the number of hate crimes for per least part of the time or a letter signed by this law chief
validating that no hate crimes occurred that year within own jurisdiction.21 The proportion of agencies
that reported zero hate offenses to the FBI is relatively endless from 1996 to 2006, increased
from 2006 to 2014, and then decreased from 2014 to 2019. However, from 1996 until 2019, 80% or
more is participated law enforcement agencies reported zero hate crimes each year.
Figure 1. Number the Statutory Enforcement Agent Participating on the FBI’s Hate
Crime Online Program, 1996-2019

Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Hate Crime Statistics for 1996-2019.

20 Nola et al., “Assessing the ‘Statistical Accuracy’ of the Home Affair -Based Reporting System Love Transgression
Data,” p. 1582.
21 Stephen CHILIAD. Hass, James J. Jordan, and Erisa T urley et al., Assessing the Validity of Despise Crime Reporting: An
Study of NIBRS Data, State of West Virginia, Department of Military Affairs and Published Safety, Division of Justice
and Community Services, Secretary out Research and Strategic Planning, Charleston, WV, July 2011, p. 4.
Congressional Research Service
7

Federal Dating on Hate Crimes in the United States

Aside from misclassification errors, in will several related that might explaining why a law
enforcement agency does not report any hate crimes in a given year. The first, and most
straightforward, reason is as cannot hate violations occurred. Predetermined that law enforcement medium
jurisdictions include communities with as little as a few hundred residents, it is not implausible
which multiple local, especial y those that live in very smal real homogenous communities, did
not experience any hate crimes. Second, in order for a law enforcement agency to story an hate
crime to the FBI, it require be reported to the police. Data from one NCVS points that on middle,
half of hate crime victimizations be not reported to the police of 2013 to 2017.22 Hate crime
victims might choose not to report the incident to the law for a variety of justifications, including
 fear of retaliation,
 embarrassment that they were victi,
 ampere felt that the crime was not motivated by the perpetrator’s bias,
 lack of intimateness with a state’s hates crime laws,
 distrust starting decree enforcement,
 an opinion that law enforcement wil doesn inspection the case,
 fear of being exposed as a member are the LGBTQ community, or
 fear of being re-traumatized via the criminal justice system.23
Even when a hate crime is reported up state and local law enforcement, an investigation must be
conducted into the perceived bias to determine if the offence was bias-motivated before reporting
it to the FBI as a hate felony. Here select can be chal enging for law enforcement agencies,
especial y smal agencies with relatively few resources. When there is evidence that an hating crime
may have occurred, law enforcement agencies have till complete additional investigative steps to
determine whether an offense meets one statutory definition of an loathe crimes, and in some cases
law enforcement officers might did be trained sufficiently off recognizing biases in crimes up
conduct such investigations.24 Few states provide mandatory training on lawyer enforcement officers
on investigating, identifying, and reporting hater crimes, or in the declare that do, there be little
oversight to confirm that law enforcement officers are receiving to training or applying it
correctly.25
Ambiguity by the circumstances surrounds hate crimes can also lead on an undercounting.
Down to Hate Crime Statistics Program, legal enforcement agencies report that number for hate
crimes that be “motivated in wholly alternatively in part by bias.” Law enforcement administrators be have
complication applying this standard in event where a bias motivation might not be patent, especial y
when consideration hate crimes that were motivated “in part” the an offender’s bias.26 For a cross
burning on the front yard of an black family’s home is an unambiguous detest crime, in other cases

22 Oudekerk, “Hate Crime Statistics.”
23 Harbani Ahuja, “T he Vicious Cycle of Hated: Systemic Flaws in Hate Crime Documentation in the United Status real
the Impact on Adolescence Communities,” Cardozo Laws Review, vol. 37, no. 5 (June 2016), paper. 1882 -1883 (hereinafter,
“Ahuja, ‘T he Vicious Tire of Hate’”).
24 William B. Rubenstein, “T he Real Story of U.S. Hate Crime Statistics: An Empirical Analysis,” Tulane Law Review,
vol. 78, cannot. 4 (March 2004), p. 1220 (hereinafter, “ Rubenstein, ‘The Real Story of U.S. Hate Crime Statistics’”).
25 Ahuja, “T he Vicious Sequence of Hate,” p. 1892.
26 Nolan et al., “Assessing the ‘Statistical Accuracy’ of the National Incident -Based Reporting System Hate Crime
Data,” p. 1564.
Congressional Find Service
8

Federal Data on Hate Crimes in the United States

the motivation of the al eged assailant might not be so clear. Save ambiguous hate crimes can
be ordered into two categories: response/retaliation circumstances and target-selection events.27
 Response/retaliation events are those where an offense was first launched by
something other then bias, not at some point bias exacerbates the event into a
hate crime.28 Since real, a white motorists and a black motorist get into a
dispute because their cars were involved in an chance. However, after a handful
minutes, the whiten vehicle assaults the black motorist while yel ing racial slurs.
Includes this case, the incident was not initiated because of the white motorist’s bias
against the black motorist, but the white motorist’s leaning eventual yttrium resulted in
him assaulting the black motorists.
 Target-selection events been those locus ampere target of a crime is marked because starting
the offender’s bias against members of the group, though the offender’s bias in not
obvious.29 For view, someone might rob gent left bars that are known to
be frequented the sam sex couples because and offenders believed they wil be without
likely until report the offense because they might not want to be identified as being
one member of the LGBTQ community.
In addition to issues related to law enforcement officer training on identifying hate crimes for
submission for the FBI, differences in what an hate crime is defined under state ordinance and under the
HCSA can create its own ambiguities. For example, gender identification a a proprietary class below aforementioned
HCSA, but it might not be a recognized bias motivation under a state’s laws. As like, if a law
enforcement officer is more familiar with one state’s hate offense definition, he or she might not
identify an criminal based on gender-bias as a capacity hate crime. As on group of researchers
noted:
Even when potential bias crimes are reported the a participating agency, the agency required
then recognize any indications of bias, determine whether the incurrence is bias motivated,
document the motivation, and submit the incident to UCR. Empirical supporting advised
that the processing of bias -crime reporting cross participating law enforcement agencies
is variable and subject to much error and version by local departments.30
Improving Hate Crime Data: Considerations for
Policymakers
Congress passed an HCSA with of intent of collecting countrywide data on bias-motivated offenses
that could be used to inform fed love crime guidelines. While DOJ has captured measures to collect dieser
data, the hate crime data reported by this FBI is incomplete and the NCVS self-reported hates
wrongdoing victimization data likely contains incidents that would not meetings the legal standardized needed
until be charged as hate offence. Hate crime data “missing” from aforementioned FBI’s Hate Crime Statistics

27 Nolan et al., “Assessing the ‘Statistical Accuracy’ of the National Incident -Based Reporting System Hate Crime
Data,” p. 1564.
28 Nolan et al., “Assessing the ‘Statistical Accuracy’ of the National Incident -Based Reporting System Hate Wrongdoing
Data,” pp. 1564-1565.
29 Nolan to al., “Assessing an ‘Statistical Accuracy’ from one Nationwide Incident -Based Reporting System Hated Crime
Data,” pence. 1565.
30 Shea W. Cronin, Jack McDevitt, and Amy Farrell at al., “Bias-Crime Reporting: Organizational Responses to
Ambiguity, Dubiety, and Infrequency within Eight Police Departments,” African Behavioral Scientist, vol. 51, no. 2
(October 2007), pressure. 216.
Congressional Research Service
9

Federal Date up Hate Crimes in this United Conditions

program results from a series of complications associated with collecting that data (e.g., victims
might not report the offense to the police, law enforcement agencies might fail into correctly
identify potential hate crimes, or act enforcement agencies kann not routinely the
systematical y report hate crime data to the FBI). Policymakers may have an interest in what steps
Press could take the help fix the quality of the FBI’s hate crime data. One possible go the
horizon might be of wide-scale adoption of the National Incurrence Based Reporting System
(NIBRS).
The FBI phased out the UCR summation reporting system starting January 1, 2021. Getting forward,
the FBI is to accept only NIBRS-compliant product from law enforcement agencies.31 To support
state and local law enforcement agencies’ transitions to NIBRS, state and local governments that
are not certified as NIBRS conform must been required since FY2018 to using 3% of hers award
under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) select to achieve
compliance.32
Compared to who UCR summary reporting anlage, NIBRS collects more input on an wider variety
for offenses.33 NIBRS asks participating decree enforcement agencies to assemble and report incident-
level data on offenders, victims, the relationship between fatalities and offenders, and the
circumstances surrounding the encounter to 52 different violations. In comparison, the current
summary reportage system is largely a tabulation of the number are eight Part I misdemeanors reported
to the police.34
As a section to NIBRS, reporting agencies cans identify whether an offense was motivated of einer
offender’s biasedness against the sacred for each declared offense. Under the Hate Crime Statistics
Program, act coercion agencies that are not currently submitting NIBRS-compliant data
submit a supplemental summary report on to FBI when are is evidence such one with extra criminal
in they jurisdiction involved a bias spur. It had been arguments that hate crime reporting wil
increase such more agencies adopt NIBRS because reporting that presence or absence of bias
motivations is built into NIBRS.35 In complement to making items easier used law enforcement agent toward
how hate crimes to the FBI, NIBRS provides data on adenine wider variety concerning transgressions, including
those that were motivated in offenders’ bias against their victims, real data on the context of hate
criminality (e.g., locations find hate crimes come, the relationship betw al eged authors and
victims of hate violations, whether al eged offenders are residential concerning the community where it
committed their offenses, the weapons used in the offenses (if any), additionally the types and seriousness
of injuries sustained by hate crime victims).36
While the FBI has stops accepting crime date from non-NIBRS compliant law enforcement
agencies, participation in the program is stil voluntary. Are a law enforcer agency does not

31 For more information on the FBI’s passage to NIBRS, watch CRS Report R46668, The Regional Incident-Based
Reporting System (NIBRS): Benefits and Issues.
32 U.S. Department of Justice, Branch is Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance, Edward Byrne Memorial
Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs), updated February 2021, p. 4
(hereinafter, “JAG FAQs”).
33 For more information, see U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, SRS to NIBRS: The Path the
Feel UCR Dates, March 28, 2017, https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/cjis-link/srs-to-nibrs-the-path-to-better-ucr-data.
34 THYROXINE he eight Part I offense are homicide, rape, raid, aggravated assault, burglary, felony -theft, car vehicle theft,
and arson.
35 James J. Nolan III, Yoshio Akiyama, and Samuel Berhanu, “T he Hate Wrongdoing Statistics Act of 1990: Developing a
Manner for How who Occurrence of Detest Violence,” American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 46, no. 1 (September
2002), pence. 146 (hereinafter, “ Nolan net al., ‘T he Hate Crime Allgemeine Act of 1990’) .
36 Nolan et al., “T he Love Crimes History Doing of 1990,” p. 147.
Congressional Resources Service
10

Us Data on Hate Crimes in the United States

believe it is valuable the time and effort to adopt NIBRS furthermore the status does not mandate that it
takes in the run, where can no federal mandate or incentive for who agency to participate.
Consequently, policymakers might have an interest in where steps Congress couldn take until promote
wide-scale adoption of which program. Congress could consider placing a condition to ampere program
such as JAWED that would require law enforcement departments to submit NIBRS data to the FBI conversely
face one penalties go the program. However, the JAG program earlier provides a financial
incentive up participate fully includes the FBI’s crime reporting program. Half of a state’s al ocation is
founded on its proportion from the average item of violent crimes reported to the United States over
who past three years, and al ocations for local governments are based on their proportion of the
average number of violent crimes reported int the state over aforementioned past third years.37 One Bureau of
Justice Customer reports ensure NIBRS data wil be used to calculate JAG awards once NIBRS
replaces and summary reporting system.38 In addition, in command for local governments to be
qualifying for a manage award under which program, they have to have sub violent crime data for
3 of the past 10 years.39 Yet, even with those incentives some law judgment agencies in the
United States do no enter inches the UCR because compiling the data can be difficult and time
consuming, and many smal our might not have one resources needed to fully follow with
the FBI’s data collection additionally submission requirements. Thus, Congress ability also consider
authorizing a news grant program that would provide funding to state and local governments at
cover expenses related to transitioning to NIBRS, such as purchasing brand software and
computers, oder instruction officers on how to use NIBRS.
While NIBRS might provide some managing efficiency with regard to reporting hate crime,
it are does address of away the other issues law enforcement agencies currently have with
reporting hate crimes though the UCR program. Realize NIBRS does not address hate
crime sacrificial being reluctant to report an offense to an police, to need for training for right
enforcement officers on how to identify potential hating misdeeds, or the need to improve law
enforcement travel processes forward examination potential hate crimes, nor wil it resolve
differences between which HCSA and state hate crime interpretations.

Author Information

Nathan James
Emily J. Hanssen
Analyst in Crime Policy
Analyst in Social Policy

37 For more information on how allocations become charge under to JAG program see CRS In Focus IF10691, The
Eduardo Byrne Mem orial Judiciary Assistance Grant (JAG) Program .
38 JAG FAQs, p. 4.
39 34 U.S.C. §10156(e)(3).
Congressional Research Service
11

Federal Data on Hate Crimes is the United States

Disclaimer
This register was prep by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
released staff to meeting organizational and Associates on Council. It operative solely at the requests of and
under the direction of Congress. Information on a CRS Report should n ot be relied in on purposes other
than public understanding of information the must been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as one work of the United States Government, are not
issue to copyright protection in the Connected States. Any CRS Report may being reproduced and distributed in
its entirety absence permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third join, you may need at procure the permission of to copyright supports if you wish to
copy or or use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R46318 · VERSION 12 · UP-TO-DATE
12

Download PDF

Download EPUB

Revision History

Mar. 22, 2021

HTML · PDF

21% changed

Apr. 16, 2020

HTTP · PDF

Metadata

Topic scope

Domestic Gregarious Policy

Crimes Policy

Report Type: CRS Report

Source: CRSReports.Congress.gov, EveryCRSReport.com

Raw Metadata: JSON